AHTL:A very British deterrence

But the $70M only buys the R&D not the bombs that's 1.1B$ more...... ie 165-225 M£ ............and developing the bomb earlier would likely be more expensive rather than less due to having to do more R&D (ok you could with total hindsight only use one of the many OTL routes)?

Yes, exactly. The R&D is not too much pain but the rest of the nuclear program is fabulously expensive and this still excludes the delivery system. If it's any help, the hook to hold the bomb in a B-29 came from the Lancaster.
 
Yes, exactly. The R&D is not too much pain but the rest of the nuclear program is fabulously expensive and this still excludes the delivery system. If it's any help, the hook to hold the bomb in a B-29 came from the Lancaster.

The delivery system would, thankfully, likely at least have a head start as a pleasant side effect of following a historical doctrine towards a grand strategy of heavy strategic bombing Britain embraced during the interwar years. At the very least, as you mentioned, the Lancaster is a solid step on the road to a superheavy bomber model.

Indeed, this could be a way to sneak in some "black budget" money to divert some civilian scrutiny. Ordinance development to increase the firepower per kilo of bombs wouldent be suspicious
 

hipper

Banned
Using http://www.historicalstatistics.org/Currencyconverter.html

King George V-class battleships ..... Cost: £7,393,134 v £164,852,642 or £225,458,311 so its more than a fleet...?

Even the R&D would be 10-14M£

um so $1.1 billion equals £225 million or £ 45 million per year, I was saying 1.8 billion equalled 300 million or 60 million a year.

British Defence spending grew from 136 million to 400 million between 1936 and 1939. you could easily sneak the R&D spending in pre war
 
If it's any help, the hook to hold the bomb in a B-29 came from the Lancaster.
At the very least, as you mentioned, the Lancaster is a solid step on the road to a superheavy bomber model.
Is that any help in the 30s when you start the project? Considering the date in service of the special Lancaster with hook (presumably only for the big med/late war time bombs) ?
 
um so $1.1 billion equals £225 million or £ 45 million per year, I was saying 1.8 billion equalled 300 million or 60 million a year.

British Defence spending grew from 136 million to 400 million between 1936 and 1939. you could easily sneak the R&D spending in pre war
Sneaking £10-14M into 30s R&D budget......!

60M£ a year is going to be massive.....
urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20160405031622807-0789:S0018246X00008463_eqnU1.gif

This is total spent not the amount spent on new kit so it includes lots of wages and peacetime bits that cant be reduced easily.

I would suggest that the 110-120 is the minimum floor so we can only change spending above that?
1935-6 140- 120 = £20M
36-37 183 -120 = £62M
37-38 255 -120 = £135M
38-39 469 -120 = £349M
Total 35-36 to 38-39 = £566M

Only 4 budget years pre war above the peacetime depression floor and I simply don't think you can dream of doing it on the budget as it will eat more than half of the reamament spending!
 
Is that any help in the 30s when you start the project? Considering the date in service of the special Lancaster with hook (presumably only for the big med/late war time bombs) ?

No. I'm saying there'd end up being synergy between the results of the two research departments that means, if you continue to pursue a heavy bomber policy, you won't also need to be going to be starting from the bottom to create the nessicery plane to deliver the payload. The two can compliment one anther as the process goes on
 
No. I'm saying there'd end up being synergy between the results of the two research departments that means, if you continue to pursue a heavy bomber policy, you won't also need to be going to be starting from the bottom to create the nessicery plane to deliver the payload. The two can compliment one anther as the process goes on
I was just trying to suggest that the synergy may be very small, especially to OTL program? Nuclear bombers would have to be far larger and faster than the majority of bombers that a 30s heavy bomber policy would provide. The nuclear program would be looking at a few hand built super planes that would need altitudes (potentially higher than even OTL B29 due to speed limits, unless you mandate parachutes from the start?) very different from the majority of OTL 30s bombers.
 

hipper

Banned
Sneaking £10-14M into 30s R&D budget......!

60M£ a year is going to be massive.....
urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20160405031622807-0789:S0018246X00008463_eqnU1.gif

This is total spent not the amount spent on new kit so it includes lots of wages and peacetime bits that cant be reduced easily.

I would suggest that the 110-120 is the minimum floor so we can only change spending above that?
1935-6 140- 120 = £20M
36-37 183 -120 = £62M
37-38 255 -120 = £135M
38-39 469 -120 = £349M
Total 35-36 to 38-39 = £566M

Only 4 budget years pre war above the peacetime depression floor and I simply don't think you can dream of doing it on the budget as it will eat more than half of the reamament spending!


It would be a far better investment than the OTL rearmament spending.
 
It would be a far better investment than the OTL rearmament spending.
Not sure it has huge issues,
- cant tell anybody about it so France/Poland/everybody might fold without a war?
- might not be ready by BoB and Sealion might actually work without any of the rearmament?
- required hindsight/ASB to go all in on that size of empire defining bet unless your a madman.....
 

hipper

Banned
Not sure it has huge issues,
- cant tell anybody about it so France/Poland/everybody might fold without a war?
- might not be ready by BoB and Sealion might actually work without any of the rearmament?
- required hindsight/ASB to go all in on that size of empire defining bet unless your a madman.....

Yes you would have to have hindsight to make the Choice in 1936, with that it’s doable.
I was interested in the Cost of the atomic bomb project half of pre war rearmament is an interesting number thanks!
 
Yes you would have to have hindsight to make the Choice in 1936, with that it’s doable.
With actual hindsight you should be able to cut the cost significantly as the Russian/British/every other bomb project did as well.
 
Cost wise , the Americans might be persuaded to loan the British the money in exchange for being brought in on the project.
Let's not forget that the Russians have infiltrated British intelligence in by late 1930s.
 

hipper

Banned
Cost wise , the Americans might be persuaded to loan the British the money in exchange for being brought in on the project.
Let's not forget that the Russians have infiltrated British intelligence in by late 1930s.

Loaning the UK money was against US law in the 30s so probably not.

I’m sure the father of Nuclear proliferation would be as helpful as he was in OTL
 
Top