AHC: Strong post-war Royal Navy?

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by King_Arthur, Dec 21, 2018.

  1. King_Arthur The Once and Present King Kicked

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    Location:
    Bolvangar
    With any POD after 10th May 1945, how can you keep the Royal Navy strong until the present day? A continous Carrier capability is a must.
     
  2. fester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Location:
    Raleigh-Durham North Carolina
    Big challenge is defining mission and role in an ever evolving security imperative with a devolving imperium.

    Second challenge is minimizing clusterfucks and dead ends on strategy, ideology and project management.
     
    Rath, Athelstane, ert44444 and 4 others like this.
  3. Thomas1195 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2016
    This challenge = Improving postwar British economic performance
     
    i8jello, sendô, trajen777 and 21 others like this.
  4. Riain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Straya
    Easy, Britain started from a high level and is/was one of the wealthiest countries in the world. A start in 1945 would be for the Admiralty to realise that it has too many ships rather than too few and stop maintaining ships in reserve while the active fleet had hardly any in commission.
     
  5. Johnrankins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    GB is still number 6 in the world so it isn't weak.http://listamaze.com/top-10-most-powerful-navies-in-the-world/ . To get it higher you could hold back India and China by having them not reform. If the Japanese aren't threatened by China their navy goes down the list. It could simply outspend Russia or India(barely) if it needed to and it doesn't have a prayer of equaling the US unless it goes isolationist after WWII. Basically it went down so far on the list because it isn't as relatively rich as it was. You either need larger economic growth in India or smaller growth elsewhere.
     
  6. StevoJH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    Newcastle, NSW
    Lovely list, I didn't know that the USS Essex LHD-2 belonged to the Indian Navy though.....Sorry that list has about zero credibility.
     
    SsgtC likes this.
  7. Johnrankins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    This one puts it at number 5 http://www.military-today.com/navy/top_10_navies.htm This one puts it at number 5 https://www.quora.com/Which-are-the-top-10-strongest-navies-in-the-world as does this http://listographic.com/top-10-navies so it is at least in the right ballpark. I knew it was in that range and it was the first that came up.
     
    King_Arthur likes this.
  8. ElMarquis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2017
    King_Arthur likes this.
  9. Pangur The Cat Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Location:
    Australia
    How long would have kept the battleships (in commission or reserve)?
     
  10. Riain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Straya
    Not long.

    The argument in 1945 was that only the battleship can deal with all threats in all weathers. The counter argument was no country had anything that required a battleship to deal with .

    The treasury kept saying that the RN didn't need more ships in 1945 than in 1939.
     
    Gladsome likes this.
  11. Pangur The Cat Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Location:
    Australia
    That would be how I would approached the matter, I may also have had the Malta class redesigned fully
     
  12. Barry Bull Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Wasn't that the case in Korean War?
     
  13. Gavp Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    They need to keep suez and their stranglehold on middle east oil (also try and control saudi oil, although his would be pre war pod) doing this would give them the finances and reason to have a strong navy to protect their shipping
     
    iani and King_Arthur like this.
  14. Jukra Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    Tuborg at Uborg
    I think a clear set of priorities is a must. IMHO, it has not been as much lack of money but lack of clear priorities which has shaped the RN for the post-1945 period. The real lost decade for RN seems to have been 1945-1955 when RN stuck with quantity over quality.

    Granted, managing decline is much harder than managing growth. RN has done much better than post-Soviet Russian Navy for example.
     
    PSL, highwayhoss, BlondieBC and 5 others like this.
  15. King_Arthur The Once and Present King Kicked

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2018
    Location:
    Bolvangar
    Can this be achieved by killing Nasser and Mossadegh in the late 40s? But Egypt was basically a time bomb and there is no way we could've kept it long term post-Israel.
     
  16. Ramontxo Believes San Mames is Heaven Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Location:
    San Sebastian Donostia
    This discussions always end with a "BAOR or Enhanced Fleet" choice. Whatever our opinions are (if the Reds are coming do you really need an Army Corps in their way before all of Northern Europe becomes the greatest mirror in the World?) The British Government made their one.
     
  17. Riain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    Straya
    Maybe by the late 60s that is the case, but there were a lot of options to not put Britain in that position between 1945 and 1968. Even by 1968 you don't have to withdraw 53,000 men from Germany to find 4000 for the Strike Fleet.
     
    PSL, Yes and King_Arthur like this.
  18. Barry Bull Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Why would the Brits want to kill Nasser who was a nobody in the 1940s?

    Also, people need to keep in mind that UK need to accomodate US and French interests for any acts in Middle East.
     
    SsgtC likes this.
  19. Barry Bull Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Where does the funding come from?
     
  20. Barry Bull Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I would said the RN has clear priorities as the UK strategic requirements changed over the decades of cold war and the RN changed accordingly to the political scenes.

    People need to remember that miitary forces, at the end of day, is a tool for and are dictated by political needs, not vice versa.

    I think it interesting AH.com members tends to ignore how domestic and international political scenes affect development of national militaries and try to come with solely technical arguments.