Soviets realize the value of carriers waaaaaaaay sooner than OTL, keep Graf Zeppelin as a training ship, and include carriers in their first post-war naval construction plans.
AHC: Give a Nation a Multi-Carrier Navy
- Thread starter CV12Hornet
- Start date
Shocks the hell out of them and at least on the East Coast they start to worry the German's will sneak a raider past the RN and bombard THEIR homes.
I never said a German raiding mission on the west coast would lead to anything like the Germans marching through Ottawa or Toronto however, a German assault on Canadian soil especially on a place like Victoria or Vancouver would be the jerk the public needed to see the navy as more of a necessity. I'm well aware about the POD of this thread but I'm just stating that it would be relatively difficult to get a multi-carrier fleet for Canada without previous events outside of the POD.
As WW2 in Europe winds down the Soviets realise just how dominant the USN and RN are and that the Red Navy could never hope to match them in battle. They then spend the late 1940s being less confrontational in order to keep on the good side of the western Allies to get what naval support they can. Graf Zeppelin is taken to a ship yard in the Soviet Union and brought into service along with a couple of British carriers bought at the same time as we sold them jet engines (maybe one of the older Light Fleets and an Illustrious?). The Soviets then use them to learn about carriers before building their own class of proper carriers in the late 50s/early 60s.
I'm honestly surprised that Japan didn't go for aircraft carriers earlier. After all the Japanese Navy had a tradition in carriers to look back to. Maybe if the Soviets had, as Mike D proposed, buildt their own class of proper carriers in the late 50s/early 60s, and given the old hulls purchased from Britain to the PLAN, Japan might have felt the need to at least match the PLAN carrier-wise earlier. IOTL the Izumo-class helicopter destroyers will, once the conversions approved on 18 December 2018 are finished, become the first ship class in the JMSDF able to launch at least STOVL fixed wing aircraft.
AFAIK the defensive interpretation of the constitution was an "error" by the US when writing it. Japan might have got a more neutral constitution or been able to reinterpret it in a less defensive way earlier but that would lead to far greater changes than just having carriers. Pretty cool though
Those poor sheep!
U-boats made it all the way up the St.Lawrence in WW1, so the east coast of Canada had plenty to worry about at the time. I do agree a raid into the Strait of Georgia would scare the bowler hats off anyone who thought Vancouver was effectively immune to attack. Not sure if that feeling of vulnerability (and thus increased naval spending) could persist all the way through the 1950's though.
Australia has maintained a surprisingly large navy for most of its existence, being effectively isolated from direct support from Britain or (reasonably) friendly neighbour. If HMAS Australia (1930s version) was a light carrier instead of a heavy cruiser, it might convince the Aussies they need a couple more going forward, what with how things shook out in the war. Actually, a 'HMAS Australia as a carrier' could make an interesting timeline in and of itself if anyone's game.
If Japan asked its allies some time in the 60's on how ASW escort carriers counted towards the constitution, a reasonable cause could be made for the 'helicopter destroyer' to arrive earlier. The biggest hurdle might actually be Japan's own domestic politics, I understand that a good deal of Japan felt really strongly about upholding the spirit of the 'self-defense only' part of the constitution, only relaxing over the last couple of decades.
Well the sheep may not have been "ravished" per se. But ya have to maintain the honor of British Columbian sheep. Can't let foreigners start thinking that they're nothing but a pack of harlots and sluts.
There were attempts in the early days of the JMSDF, but the Tartar destroyers ate the budget.