AHC & WI: British Asia-Pacific possessions are transferred to Australia pre-WWII

[Flocculencio]

Okay, that's earlier than I thought. Also, Australia's way too far away to reliably govern Malaysia. I wonder though, could Darwin be built up any to maybe act as a second port for the Eastern Fleet?

That's a but weird- far away from Malaya as compared to London? :-D

Perth is about the same distance from Malaya as Delhi is.

 

[SenatorChickpea]

Well, if Fiji joins Australia at Federation- unlikely, but it was both possible and on the table - then there could be precedent for the islands being a natural part of the Dominion.

Especially if NZ joins as well, so it's less an Australian Dominion as the Dominion of the South East possessions.

 

[Lord Brisbane]

could Darwin be built up any to maybe act as a second port for the Eastern Fleet?

Short answer no following reasons:

-Darwin would require massive investment of both civil and military infrastructure on its port and infrastructure as practically everything had to be brought in by sea. Just look at the design of the Darwin pier (a dogleg!)
-This means less money for investment elsewhere.
-It is to easily isolated from the rest of Australia by land. Even if the Commonwealth government got behind the QLD gov and built the missing link railway from Dajarra to Birdum or behind the SA gov from Alice Springs, it would still be a massive undertaking, never profitable and very suceptable to the elements in the rainy season. For the QLD option, this would mean upgrading the Mt Isa line so that it could take at least a C17 locomotive and at least 10 TAL (something that wasn't done until the 1950s).
-Belief in Singapore as the lynchpin for defence
-The geographic location of Darwin. Its to far away from key points in the Far East to make a decent alternative location for the fleet.
-Somehow change the Australian governments view on defence spending in the 1930s
-All weather defence roads into the interior as touted by Forgan Smith in 1939 - however I doubt they would extent to Darwin without commonwealth money (which wasn't given anyway).

There was a very good thread about this some time ago about this.

 

[MattII]

That's a but weird- far away from Malaya as compared to London? :-D

Britain was an industrialised country, it could afford the kind of communication line actually ruling a place at that distance required, Australia, not so much.

Perth is about the same distance from Malaya as Delhi is.

Perth in 1933 had a population of below 1/4 million, and was itself a long distance from the national capital.

Short answer no...

Fair enough.

 

[HARRY]

[In 1909, the British Parliament authorized an additional four capital ships, holding out hope Germany would be willing to negotiate a treaty about battleship numbers. If no such solution could be found, an additional four ships would be laid down in 1910. Even this compromise solution meant (when taken together with some social reforms) raising taxes enough to prompt a constitutional crisis in the United Kingdom in 1909–10. In 1910, the British eight-ship construction plan went ahead, including four Orion (1910)-class super-dreadnoughts, and augmented by battlecruisers purchased by Australia and New Zealand/QUOTE]

During the Anglo-German arms race prior to WWI would be the most likely period to "Gift" the British Pacific possessions into the care of Australia/New Zealand. It would mean they would need to build a bigger combined navy or navies (Buy British ships) the colonies feel they are being rewarded for doing their bit for the Empire and it fosters co-operation between them. With the Pacific Solution in place the cost of the Dreadnought contruction maybe covered without additional taxes.

 

[Some Bloke]

Well if not Malaya and Singapore, how about as much as possible?

 

[Julius Vogel]

Short answer no following reasons:

-Darwin would require massive investment of both civil and military infrastructure on its port and infrastructure as practically everything had to be brought in by sea. Just look at the design of the Darwin pier (a dogleg!)
-This means less money for investment elsewhere.
-It is to easily isolated from the rest of Australia by land. Even if the Commonwealth government got behind the QLD gov and built the missing link railway from Dajarra to Birdum or behind the SA gov from Alice Springs, it would still be a massive undertaking, never profitable and very suceptable to the elements in the rainy season. For the QLD option, this would mean upgrading the Mt Isa line so that it could take at least a C17 locomotive and at least 10 TAL (something that wasn't done until the 1950s).
-Belief in Singapore as the lynchpin for defence
-The geographic location of Darwin. Its to far away from key points in the Far East to make a decent alternative location for the fleet.
-Somehow change the Australian governments view on defence spending in the 1930s
-All weather defence roads into the interior as touted by Forgan Smith in 1939 - however I doubt they would extent to Darwin without commonwealth money (which wasn't given anyway).


There was a very good thread about this some time ago about this.

How about building a big depot/port analogue somewhere else in the NW? Would *Darwin be better suited to be placed somewhere else?

 

[Lord Brisbane]

How about building a big depot/port analogue somewhere else in the NW? Would *Darwin be better suited to be placed somewhere else?

There simply isn't anywhere else that would be worth the effort and resources in Northern Australia - it has to be Darwin if there is to be a Northern Australia option for the fleet. Darwin does have an excellent natural harbour however but it has drawbacks.

That being said, in the 30's, Forgan Smith, the Queensland premier lobbied hard for increased defence spending in the state but was rejected by the Loans Council:
-The railway link from Dajarra.
-All weather inland roads into the interior.
-Naval facilities in Brisbane that could accomodate anything up to the size of County Class cruisers plus support facilties.

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=117168

 

[Julius Vogel]

There simply isn't anywhere else that would be worth the effort and resources in Northern Australia - it has to be Darwin if there is to be a Northern Australia option for the fleet. Darwin does have an excellent natural harbour however but it has drawbacks.

That being said, in the 30's, Forgan Smith, the Queensland premier lobbied hard for increased defence spending in the state but was rejected by the Loans Council:
-The railway link from Dajarra.
-All weather inland roads into the interior.
-Naval facilities in Brisbane that could accomodate anything up to the size of County Class cruisers plus support facilties.

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=117168

Thanks. I see I even posted on that thread!

So you think that there would be no use developing an alternative port along Pr Hedland/Broome/etc way, at least so far as improving the strategic position goes anyway?