AHC: Maximum RN 1941

With a starting point of 1900 and a finishing point of December 7 1941 build the most powerful Royal Navy possible in terms of size, capability and technology. You can butterfly away any event you want such as WW1 or the Depression and wank stuff as far as you want but no plain making shit up.
 
With a POD that early there are a thousand things you can do to get a truly vast RN. One of the major problems for the RN was it was only paid for by the UK of GB&I, so;

Step 1: Have Imperial Federation with Aus, NZ and Canada sometime pre-WW1 maybe as part of Home Rule for Ireland. You now have 25% more taxpayers (40 million in the UK of GB & I in 1901 plus 5 million Canadians, 4 million Australians, 1 million NZers). While there were some contributions made towards the RN in OTL this will significantly boost them.

Step 2: Counter-intuitively improve relations with Germany and reduce the scale of the German Navy laws. There is still going to be a Dreadnought race but have it slower and less focused against Germany and more general (i.e. including the US, France, Russia etc.).

Step 3: Give Franz Ferdinand better luck. Some kind of general European War is probably inevitable but by delaying it 3 or 4 years you force Germany to switch to an East first strategy meaning no violation of Belgium.

Step 4: With better relations and less of an arms race plus no invasion of Belgium have Britain stay out of the European war and have Germany win a short, sharp war against France and Russia, say in 1920.

Step 5: With France and Russia humbled the UK is both safer, the Great Game in Central Asia is over and its main rival in Africa and South-East Asia is humbled but an emboldened and victorious Germany now has an overseas Empire. In the 1920's Germany is too busy in Eastern and Southern Europe and too tired to start off an arms race but relation deteriorate.

Step 6: 1930: Germany has paid off a good chunk of its war debts and Britain is increasingly nervous about its size, strength and its colonial Empire. There is a rapprochement with Russia and France and increased tensions with Germany. A naval arms race starts. The British Federation (or whatever) only has about 2/3rds the population of Germany (possibly including Austria by now) but its got a higher per capita income, spends more on the Navy and has an Empire to take some of the burden (India and South Africa mostly).

Step 7: Over 11 years the RN completes Plan 1940, a Z-plan like build up resulting in:

BB's
6x 16" gunned alt Lion's
6x 15" gunned alt KGV's
10x 14" gunned, modernized QE's
10x Battlecruisers (no Jutland means more new build battlecruisers)

CV's (inevitable)
6x alt Ark Royals
3x Older 1st Gen carriers

etc.....
 
Have no WW I at all (it's not inevitable, despite what people say), and have the Belle Epoque continue for a few more years. By 1918, the Germans will know that Russia is so strong that it will mobilise before they can knock out France, and realise that it can't win a war against the Entente fast enough for it matter.

Fast forward a few years, and the Social Democrats will take enough power and neutralise German as an aggressive threat. Then, during the 30s, have Chinese implosion proceed, and manipulate events so that the awakening US and Britain end up in a stand-off over access to Chinese markets. Then, kick off an Anglo-American naval race throughout the decade.

Without WW I, Britain is much wealthier than it would be otherwise, and it is a vastly more efficient warship building industry than the the US. It also has a history of innovation that the post WW I retrenchment won't have destroyed.

The US will have vast economic and industrial potential, although without the stimulus of WW I, it will be much less realised than iOTL.
 
For me the RN's biggest weakness going into WWII was the paucity of the Fleet Air Arm in terms of it's size, numbers of modern carriers and the outdated aircraft. This was largely down to the RAF being given control of naval aviation by the Smuts Committee, largely neglecting it during the inter wars and failing to develop modern aircraft types.

Assuming that WWI can't be avoided my first POD is to have the Christmas 1914 Cuxhaven Raid be a complete success, destroying the zeppelin sheds and the zeppelins within them. This is a huge morale boost for Britain and delighted with the success the Admiralty decides that ship based aircraft represent the future of naval power and accelerates development of the first true aircraft carriers. By War's end, the RN has 2 or 3 of these ships in commission and has carried out more and larger raids than Cuxhaven against the HSF in it's ports and against other German industrial targets. IOTL the RNAS was the largest and most innovative naval air service by 1918 and also had sizeable numbers of land based fighters and bombers.

If the Smuts Committee still happens, the next POD is that the RN agrees to give up the land based planes to the nascent RAF in return for being allowed to keep the ship based aircraft. With restrictions on battleship construction during the 1920's as a result of WNT the RN follows the example of the Japanese and Americans and builds carriers instead, these are larger and more capable than those that existed at the time, which would probably be relegated to training or trade protection duties. Without the rivalry between the RN and RAF over carrier aviation, the RN is able to get approval for more capable aircraft during this period so no Swordfish in 1939 but modern fighters, the Hawker Venom has been suggested in similar threads, together with a better dive bomber following joint exercises with the USN.

The RN also builds a second Ark Royal and Britain also realises earlier that war is inevitable so it stops following the Treaty restrictions earlier allowing the first of the Illustrious class to be in service by 1939. Finally don't carelessly throw away the still highly capable Courageous and Glorious within the first year of the year. Had these measures been done then the RN would have been a much more formidable proposition in the War's early years. This would have had big implications for Norway, as a potent carrier based force could have secured air superiority over the North and beaten up the Kreigsmarine even more than IOTL. If Italy still enters the War then the RN can have 3 carriers with more capable aircraft available making Taranto more like Pearl Harbour, carrier based fighters could also have shot down the planes carrying paratroops to Crete possibly allowing the Allies to hold the island, Malta could also be defended better. Finally the RN could have sent 2 carriers East to give Force Z a better chance.
 
Aracnid

A good summary of ideas although as you say there are many options with a POD 40 years before the decision date. A couple of points:

a) The one down side of not having British involvement in WWI is that it lacks the experience gained in that conflict. A big fleet is little good if the standard is faulty. Thinking of things like the faulty doctrine with ammo handling and the lack of training for gunnery.

b) You're going for a large big gun fleet. I could see a probably larger one and probably better ships but by 1940 there is a strong argument that carriers are going to be a key factor and also the a/c and doctrine for their use.

c) The other point is, other than avoiding the war, you don't mention any social or cultural changes that could substantially boost British capability. [Sorry, do also mention the imperial federation which is a big factor]. However think that possibly there could be other changes. By 1940 you might also stand including other territories into the imperial core, although probably unlikely in this time-frame.

However generally agree a good summary of the key points.:D

Steve

With a POD that early there are a thousand things you can do to get a truly vast RN. One of the major problems for the RN was it was only paid for by the UK of GB&I, so;

Step 1: Have Imperial Federation with Aus, NZ and Canada sometime pre-WW1 maybe as part of Home Rule for Ireland. You now have 25% more taxpayers (40 million in the UK of GB & I in 1901 plus 5 million Canadians, 4 million Australians, 1 million NZers). While there were some contributions made towards the RN in OTL this will significantly boost them.

Step 2: Counter-intuitively improve relations with Germany and reduce the scale of the German Navy laws. There is still going to be a Dreadnought race but have it slower and less focused against Germany and more general (i.e. including the US, France, Russia etc.).

Step 3: Give Franz Ferdinand better luck. Some kind of general European War is probably inevitable but by delaying it 3 or 4 years you force Germany to switch to an East first strategy meaning no violation of Belgium.

Step 4: With better relations and less of an arms race plus no invasion of Belgium have Britain stay out of the European war and have Germany win a short, sharp war against France and Russia, say in 1920.

Step 5: With France and Russia humbled the UK is both safer, the Great Game in Central Asia is over and its main rival in Africa and South-East Asia is humbled but an emboldened and victorious Germany now has an overseas Empire. In the 1920's Germany is too busy in Eastern and Southern Europe and too tired to start off an arms race but relation deteriorate.

Step 6: 1930: Germany has paid off a good chunk of its war debts and Britain is increasingly nervous about its size, strength and its colonial Empire. There is a rapprochement with Russia and France and increased tensions with Germany. A naval arms race starts. The British Federation (or whatever) only has about 2/3rds the population of Germany (possibly including Austria by now) but its got a higher per capita income, spends more on the Navy and has an Empire to take some of the burden (India and South Africa mostly).

Step 7: Over 11 years the RN completes Plan 1940, a Z-plan like build up resulting in:

BB's
6x 16" gunned alt Lion's
6x 15" gunned alt KGV's
10x 14" gunned, modernized QE's
10x Battlecruisers (no Jutland means more new build battlecruisers)

CV's (inevitable)
6x alt Ark Royals
3x Older 1st Gen carriers

etc.....
 
a) The one down side of not having British involvement in WWI is that it lacks the experience gained in that conflict. A big fleet is little good if the standard is faulty. Thinking of things like the faulty doctrine with ammo handling and the lack of training for gunnery.

I agree though I assume there will have been some naval conflict in our hypothetical "WW1" so some lessons will have been learned. Look at the USN in OTL despite not really being involved in the naval aspects of WW1 it still developed its doctrine based on it. Still you are right, with a lack of first hand experience and less naval conflict in the alt WW1 that will mean the RN has worse doctrine, but so will everyone else.

b) You're going for a large big gun fleet. I could see a probably larger one and probably better ships but by 1940 there is a strong argument that carriers are going to be a key factor and also the a/c and doctrine for their use.

I am going for a balance. In the absence of Washington and war time experience I think the world will be less carrier focused meaning more big guns, but you are right carriers are inevitable.
What I'm trying to suggest is that in 1930 you have a similar sized to OTL battlefleet made up of R-class, QE-class and QE follow on's. With a smaller pre-war arms race and the absence of a major threat in the last 10 years the RN is quite small. Then as Germany gets more threatening the RN starts pumping out 1930's era ships so maybe swap the KGV's for Nelson's but in the absence of Washington no precise equivalent to the Nelson's would be built. It also starts pumping out carriers (Ark-Royals) at this point as they are cheap(er) and the potential of air power is evident.
I think I've got the numbers of main fleet units right as throughout the era the RN put the smallest percentage of its resources into that area because it needed so many cruisers, destroyers etc. for its vast responsibilities. I think this is going to be true in this scenario. What I'm suggesting is a RN that while 1/3rd bigger than the Hoch See Flotte actually has a similar sized battleline due to its much bigger international responsibilities.

c) The other point is, other than avoiding the war, you don't mention any social or cultural changes that could substantially boost British capability. [Sorry, do also mention the imperial federation which is a big factor]. However think that possibly there could be other changes. By 1940 you might also stand including other territories into the imperial core, although probably unlikely in this time-frame.

However generally agree a good summary of the key points.:D

Steve

I think letting non-white majority areas in the Imperial Federation is a no-go. While South Africa probably has something equivalent to Dominion status and India wants it I don't think either would be a good fit due to to the problems of either having large scale disfranchisement inside the Federation or lots of "darkies" in parliament.
As for the other cultural and economic effects this is a post to respond to a challenge, not a tl.
 
With a starting point of 1900 and a finishing point of December 7 1941 build the most powerful Royal Navy possible in terms of size, capability and technology. You can butterfly away any event you want such as WW1 or the Depression and wank stuff as far as you want but no plain making shit up.

Maybe the Tories winning the 1905 election and butterflying away the Liberal government which was caught in a dilemma about spending more money on welfare or Imperial Defence. A Tory government would be more keen on spending money on Dreadnoughts and Battlecruisers although not having Churchill at the admiralty might mean no Queen Elizabeths.

Another opportunity woud be a more aggressive America post ww1 that refuses to sign the Washington Treaty and so the UK has to build the G3 and N3 ships. The US then backs down because the congress is not happy about spending too much money on a Navy that seems to be directed against Britain when most Americans didn't see Britain as a threat. However by this time the N3 and G3 are too far advanced to cancel.

Finally instead of spending money on a fortress at Singapore the money could be spent on more submarines for a far east fleet that could do more damage to the Japanese that static defences that were becoming obsolete.
 
I dont really think hostility with the US following an alt-WW1 is the way to go. British and US co-operation led to advancements in technology that benefitted both sides in WW2, and so unity in the face of a greater Japanese threat (or at least an absence of the Nazis so Britain keeps her eye on the ball in the Pacific) could have similar results. For a POD, is there anyway to have carrier air support change the fate of Gallipoli, or for there to be success at Gallipoli by any other method? The Navy gains even more prestige, relations with the Dominions dont decline as much, WW1 ends earlier, and Russia might keep its position as a foe to justify greater defence spending (and keep the UK and America closer?)
 
I dont really think hostility with the US following an alt-WW1 is the way to go. British and US co-operation led to advancements in technology that benefitted both sides in WW2, and so unity in the face of a greater Japanese threat (or at least an absence of the Nazis so Britain keeps her eye on the ball in the Pacific) could have similar results. For a POD, is there anyway to have carrier air support change the fate of Gallipoli, or for there to be success at Gallipoli by any other method? The Navy gains even more prestige, relations with the Dominions dont decline as much, WW1 ends earlier, and Russia might keep its position as a foe to justify greater defence spending (and keep the UK and America closer?)

But if relations with the US are too good then where's the point in a bigger and more powerful Royal navy than OTL. Japan is the only possible enemy until the 1930's that has a reasonably powerful navy but the OTL RN was enough until the German threat remerged.

Also why would Russia under the Czars become a serious threat again. Relations with Russia were fine (no worse than France). Also the Russian navy is easily containable in the Black sea and Baltic. The Japanese would deal with a Russian Pacific fleet.
 
Have a WW1 that ends in status quo ante bellum in the west and the world settling into 4 superpower blocs; USA, Greater German Mitteleuropa, USSR and the Anglo-French customs union. The tight alliance with France and the power of a more powerful Germany will give the RN a shitoad of power and the focus it needs not to play politics with the military. As for size, I don't know, perhaps a Washington style treaty will occur but with Germany and even the USSR involved at the insistence of Japan and Germany.
 
Also why would Russia under the Czars become a serious threat again. Relations with Russia were fine (no worse than France)..

Relations with Russia improved largely as a result of mutual fear of Germany, with the Germans out of the way I would be suprised if Anglo-Russian relations dont slide again, especially if Russia avoids revolution and continues its rapid economic growth. Russia could attempt to expand and take advantage of the instability in China, and may even come to terms with Japan to divide China into spheres of influence. A Russian-Japanese alliance would be reason enough to expand the Navy, and would likely bring the US, who had always favoured a more "open" China, onside. Theres also the possibility of Mussolini or a similar figure causing trouble in the Med, although I dont know likely this is with a quicker end to WW1
 
With a starting point of 1900 and a finishing point of December 7 1941 build the most powerful Royal Navy possible in terms of size, capability and technology. You can butterfly away any event you want such as WW1 or the Depression and wank stuff as far as you want but no plain making shit up.

Without invoking the G3 battlecruisers I will suggest:

1. The British launch Nelson and Rodney.
2. The R class is scrapped in the early 1930s.
3. The King George V is completed bearing 12-14in guns. The decision to develop a twin turret thru off the development of the 16in gun being designed for the following class. In the end construction fell so far being that the Duke of York class was merged with the King George V.
4. The Duke of York class is completed bearing 9-16in guns.
5. The Vanguard class is laid down to make use of turrets and guns removed from the R class.
6. Lion class, based on a refined Duke of York hull and bearing 9 16in guns, is ordered.
 
ThatGuyOverThere

Actually the British did try and use a/c as spotters for the naval attempts to force the straits. It was one of the reasons why the idea was thought practical as it would increase the ability to hit small hard targets. Unfortunately the combination of seaplanes [no land bases], heavy radios and the climatic conditions meant that the a/c could barely get off the ground [or rather sea:)] to perform their role. Possibly if there is a small break-through or so. It wouldn't even need the invention of a proper carrier, although that would probably be enough to make the attempt more successful. [Not saying it would still work but could shake the defenders up a lot more and as you say boost the prestige of the navy].

I would disagree about tension with the US being negative, especially if it was say fairly short-lived. If you can have the RN build the 4G3s in the early 20's it drastically boosts the modern strength of the navy. Also it enables much more of the shipyard capacity and skills to be maintained. By recycling money back into depressed areas of the economy it might even be useful economically. Coupled with possibly some tension with Japan and the lack of naval treaties by maintaining the capacity you could have a fleet that is probably no larger than OTL up til ~1935 up a lot more modern and capable plus much greater capacity to respond to the rising threats of the late 30's, presuming their not butterflied.

If you could also end WWI a little earlier you could have two big bonuses. Less casualties and economic devastation makes the country more willing and able to maintain the fleet especially and if you can butterfly the forming of the RAF then the fleet keeps the FAA and the expertise that was lost OTL. Also my only having two services you will cut the level of bureaucracy which could save a lot of funds and reduce the level of inter-service squabbling.

I'm not sure how much technological exchange occurred prior to WWII and especially prior to ~1930 when the USN still thought of the RN as it's prime threat. However that could still occur after a slightly longer/deeper period of tension and the larger spending on the fleet would definitely help with research.

I dont really think hostility with the US following an alt-WW1 is the way to go. British and US co-operation led to advancements in technology that benefitted both sides in WW2, and so unity in the face of a greater Japanese threat (or at least an absence of the Nazis so Britain keeps her eye on the ball in the Pacific) could have similar results. For a POD, is there anyway to have carrier air support change the fate of Gallipoli, or for there to be success at Gallipoli by any other method? The Navy gains even more prestige, relations with the Dominions dont decline as much, WW1 ends earlier, and Russia might keep its position as a foe to justify greater defence spending (and keep the UK and America closer?)
 
David

That's an option but you would need to prevent the 1930 continuation of the battleship building 'holiday', which would also avoid a lot of the destruction of ship-yard capacity. That would also enable the RN to go straight for triple 16" turrets, which would further save time and money compared to trying to develop the 14", especially with quad turrets.

That way if you started building say even one a year from ~1931 to replace the R's then pick up from say 1935 in response to events elsewhere you could have a fairly standard set of 9x16" class ships with also possibly a trimmed down set of Vanguards using the 15" guns. Did read once that it was even considered using not just the spares and the R's turrets, but when the 1st few were in service possibly even the guns from the Queens as they come out of service. Although that would give a very big fleet which would need a major threat if not a war for the will to be there.

Furthermore this way, especially since you would need more DDs and CLs to screen the fleet, there is the danger that the carrier arm and possibly other areas suffer even more than OTL. [Which might be less important if other powers, especially Japan, follow the same path].

Steve

Without invoking the G3 battlecruisers I will suggest:

1. The British launch Nelson and Rodney.
2. The R class is scrapped in the early 1930s.
3. The King George V is completed bearing 12-14in guns. The decision to develop a twin turret thru off the development of the 16in gun being designed for the following class. In the end construction fell so far being that the Duke of York class was merged with the King George V.
4. The Duke of York class is completed bearing 9-16in guns.
5. The Vanguard class is laid down to make use of turrets and guns removed from the R class.
6. Lion class, based on a refined Duke of York hull and bearing 9 16in guns, is ordered.
 
Top