AHC/WI: Smokeless powder is never invented

What would it necessarily take to prevent the invention (or at least widespread adoption) of smokeless powder? What implications would this have?
 
Prevent modern chemistry. Or gunpowder warfare. Gun cotton as a precusor was developed independently by two different people shortly after eachother, before it became more or less widely known, and despite a number of spectacular failures in the early days experimentation with it never really stopped. Then in the 1880s within five years at least four different people developed useable smokeless powder variants. Now preventing one or the other solution might be possible, but as soon as there are serious scientists and a chemical industry they will look for the holy grail of 19th century military technology.
 
Prevent modern chemistry. Or gunpowder warfare. Gun cotton as a precusor was developed independently by two different people shortly after eachother, before it became more or less widely known, and despite a number of spectacular failures in the early days experimentation with it never really stopped. Then in the 1880s within five years at least four different people developed useable smokeless powder variants. Now preventing one or the other solution might be possible, but as soon as there are serious scientists and a chemical industry they will look for the holy grail of 19th century military technology.
Ya. What he said.

I can imagine a world where gunpowder isnt discovered until an industrial era. But once youve got modern chemistry, well, nitrocellulose WILL happen.

A world where guncotton is the first widely usable explosive, and gunpowder is discovered later is possible, although pretty unlikely.
 
Well then how might it be delayed? I was kinda hoping to do a WW1 circa 1910 with blackpowder.
 
Well then how might it be delayed? I was kinda hoping to do a WW1 circa 1910 with blackpowder.

They would have had to issue gas masks to the machine gun crews to keep them from choking on smoke that would be produced. Artillery spotters would have an easy time finding enemy positions during combat, and snipers would have a much less enviable job.

Other than that, I don't think this would change very much. The direction of the wind would be a bit more important in battle, and guns would have to be more thoroughly cleaned after each engagement, but probably not a game changer. They had already developed metallic cartridges before smokeless powder was invented, and while black-powder is less powerful that cordite, it is still quite efficient at propelling lead through flesh.
 
They would have had to issue gas masks to the machine gun crews to keep them from choking on smoke that would be produced. Artillery spotters would have an easy time finding enemy positions during combat, and snipers would have a much less enviable job.

Other than that, I don't think this would change very much. The direction of the wind would be a bit more important in battle, and guns would have to be more thoroughly cleaned after each engagement, but probably not a game changer. They had already developed metallic cartridges before smokeless powder was invented, and while black-powder is less powerful that cordite, it is still quite efficient at propelling lead through flesh.

Armies would still keep their colourful uniforms, as battlefield visibility remained an asset, not a liability.

Those all sound like appealing qualities to me for a TL I have in mind.

The best that I can think of to delay smokeless powder's invention is simply to have those working on it in OTL face untimely demises. Or major setbacks due to finances/more accidental explosions in their workhouses than they faced in OTL. Any other ideas?
 
could you even make a WW1 type machine gun with black powder? Or would the fouling clog it up so bad that it wouldn't last too long? The Gatling gun worked with it mainly because it used rotating barrels, IIRC...
 
Those all sound like appealing qualities to me for a TL I have in mind.

The best that I can think of to delay smokeless powder's invention is simply to have those working on it in OTL face untimely demises. Or major setbacks due to finances/more accidental explosions in their workhouses than they faced in OTL. Any other ideas?
As I said above there were a lot of people working on the problem indendently (Schönbein worked in Basel, Böttger in Frankfurt and both did beat Otto in Braunschweig only by a few month) and it is highly unlikely you can kill everybody involved. Thus that seems not feasible. More success you can have imo by delaying modern chemistry. Even Lavoisier might be a bit late, but afaik he worked unprecedently methodical in the field of chemistry and with that approache replaced the dominating, but false phlogiston theory with his proof of oxidation. Taking someone like him out of the picture might delay the chemical revolution of the 19th century by some decades.
 
Ya. What he said.

I can imagine a world where gunpowder isnt discovered until an industrial era. But once youve got modern chemistry, well, nitrocellulose WILL happen.

A world where guncotton is the first widely usable explosive, and gunpowder is discovered later is possible, although pretty unlikely.

I just realized that your right about nitrocellulose. I'd hate to create a world without chemistry so right now I think the kind of POD I need is one that makes nitric acid based explosives uneconomic to produce.

From what I recall reading in "The Alchemy of Air" by Thomas Hager, fixed nitrates used for fertilizer and explosives were mainly gathered from mined deposits or distilled from animal waste in the 1800s, and large quantities of it where dwindling in the later fourth of that centuary until nitrite stores in Chile began to be mined.

Perhaps a POD that prevents the economic mining and export of South American Nitrates could leave the use of nitrites for explosives uneconomically feasible when what remains could be better used for fertilizer. At least until an ATL equivalent of the Haber-Bosch process is created?
 
Last edited:
Top