A really well written and thought provoking time line. I too think a Turtledove nomination in the offing. Congratulations vpsoccer, very impressive I just wish you would indulge us and take this story further. I suppose sometimes 'Less is Moore' (pun intended). ITTL perhaps Admiral More might get a VC. at Jutland!
England Expects that Every Man....
- Thread starter vpsoccer
- Start date
I'd have hoped the timeline would continue at least a little bit more as to show us any potential future butterflies. With somewhat fewer losses than OTL and more confidence in the Royal Navy, might the British have more money to spend on top-of-the-line ships after the war? Without a victory at Jutland, whatever regime takes over in Germany after this timeline's equivalent of the Wall Street crash might decide to forego naval spending entirely, considering that a dead duck.
Presumably, if Moore survives he will be one of the lords of the Admiralty during the interbellum, while he might well get a medal and a capital ship named after him if he does not (though I'd suggest a carrier rather than a battleship, as befitting his reputation as an innovator)
Seconded!
Presumably, if Moore survives he will be one of the lords of the Admiralty during the interbellum, while he might well get a medal and a capital ship named after him if he does not (though I'd suggest a carrier rather than a battleship, as befitting his reputation as an innovator)
Seconded!
I concur, an excellent TL and very well drawn!
Or, given the potential for analysis to reveal the fundamental difference was one of communication capabilities maybe the next regime decides to place more stress on Radio development (and therefore, perhaps, Radar). Superior German Radar in the next war could have massive ramifications all around and not just at sea.
You know one of the Pre Dreadnoughts at Jutland was the Deutschland and several Pre Dreadnoughts were lost needless to say loosing a ship named after Germany in such a disastrous battle would nuke the nation's morale
I like it (and of course I "Liked" it.) Really a great way to end the TL.
It would appear the the RN lost
2 BC
1 BB + 1-3 BB possible
2 AC
While the HSF lost
2 BC + 2 BC possible
3 BB + 4 BB possible
2 PDB
In capital ships:
RN 3-6 lost
HSF 5-11 lost
2 BC
1 BB + 1-3 BB possible
2 AC
While the HSF lost
2 BC + 2 BC possible
3 BB + 4 BB possible
2 PDB
In capital ships:
RN 3-6 lost
HSF 5-11 lost
Coulsdon Eagle
Monthly Donor
So, from the RN perspective, best case is a smashing victory, worst case is a slightly better than OTL tactical defeat / strategic victory.
Jutland was an RN Victory , tactical and strategic, its not just casualties that decide who won ( in a lot of sieges for example the attacker takes more casualties win or lose ) , the HSF failed its objectives and fled the field , that's a loss no matter how you dress it up.
Off site and unable to reply at length.
Thanks for the tally.
Losses marked as possible (?25%?) are really probables (+50%).
And +2 HSF pre-dreds +2 probable. They got 6 bushwhacked by a squadron of 8 dreds that was still under command and organization. !!
RN at least 2 dreds lost by the end of it, plus possibles. Total unknown.
Both sides more DD and CL than historical because of extended melee and desperate charges by her torpedo boats.
Thanks for continuing kind words. If if if there is ever any further extension it will not be soon. But I will look back to points raised IF it happens.
Last edited:
And be remembered as the naval hero of the war. That also tends to be part of the tradition
If we take the authors hint that "possible" losses are in fact "probable" then the German losses in "large" ships were barely twice that of the British
( 4BC vs 2, 6BB vs 4 , 5 PDB vs 2 AC)
Given that the starting odds against the Germans were in that same ratio
(BC 5:9, BB 16:28 , PDB/AC 6:8 OTL figures, iTTL the Germans seem to have more PDB)
then the outcome was no more than could reasonably be expected with roughly equivalent performance by men and machines.
AIUI German losses in lighter ships seem to be almost equal British sinkings again reflecting the OTL odds (OTL CL 11:28 , TB/DD 61:78)
which confirms that basic assessment.
Therefore, while the TTL outcome is very much better in both absolute and relative terms for the British than OTL
IMHO this ATL battle does not demonstrate any significant superiority of the RN over the IGN
(on a 1:1 basis at least)
More significantly it does not alter the strategic situation at all from OTL.
Even with the greater losses and greater damage the German High Seas Fleet retains a solid core of 12+ dreadnoughts with suitable escorts that are repairable within months.
In light of the combat performance at TTL Jutland, the British must conclude they need to maintain a Grand Fleet of 24+ dreadnoughts at Scapa with ~100 escorts. Even though the German "fast wing" has been especially hard hit, the British must base many more mid and light weight vessels in the North Sea and Channel approaches and patrol hard (leaving them vulnerable to U-boats and mines).
Note: the more intense fighting will also have resulted in many more damaged vessels with presumably greater repairs needed. This applies to both sides but ironically, I would expect more German cripples to have been sunk so the repair burden will be significantly greater on the British than OTL.
This will lengthen the time needed for the balance of 1:2 balance proposed above to be regained.
IOTL 1914-16 the HSF operated its "risk" strategy where it sortied in an attempt to attrite the GF
In 1916-18 the HSF reverted to a "fleet in being" strategy in where it only threatened a sortie
Therefore the longer pause for repair is not a significant POD
iTTL I would expect that the German Admirals will make the same decision ... probably more quickly and more certainly.
(If they are sensible, they may even conclude that a smaller HSF maintains the same level of threat and commit fewer resources for repair, upgrade and reinforcement)
Once "a (reduced)fleet in being" becomes the policy, the Germans will also arrive at the same conclusion as OTL and immediately step up the U-boat campaign, especially in the Atlantic.
That faster start ... and the much higher British losses in escort vessels at TTL Jutland ... may actually improve Germany's naval situation in late 1916 and 1917.
It might (just) see the Great War won by Germany before the USA can effectively intervene
( 4BC vs 2, 6BB vs 4 , 5 PDB vs 2 AC)
Given that the starting odds against the Germans were in that same ratio
(BC 5:9, BB 16:28 , PDB/AC 6:8 OTL figures, iTTL the Germans seem to have more PDB)
then the outcome was no more than could reasonably be expected with roughly equivalent performance by men and machines.
AIUI German losses in lighter ships seem to be almost equal British sinkings again reflecting the OTL odds (OTL CL 11:28 , TB/DD 61:78)
which confirms that basic assessment.
Therefore, while the TTL outcome is very much better in both absolute and relative terms for the British than OTL
IMHO this ATL battle does not demonstrate any significant superiority of the RN over the IGN
(on a 1:1 basis at least)
More significantly it does not alter the strategic situation at all from OTL.
Even with the greater losses and greater damage the German High Seas Fleet retains a solid core of 12+ dreadnoughts with suitable escorts that are repairable within months.
In light of the combat performance at TTL Jutland, the British must conclude they need to maintain a Grand Fleet of 24+ dreadnoughts at Scapa with ~100 escorts. Even though the German "fast wing" has been especially hard hit, the British must base many more mid and light weight vessels in the North Sea and Channel approaches and patrol hard (leaving them vulnerable to U-boats and mines).
Note: the more intense fighting will also have resulted in many more damaged vessels with presumably greater repairs needed. This applies to both sides but ironically, I would expect more German cripples to have been sunk so the repair burden will be significantly greater on the British than OTL.
This will lengthen the time needed for the balance of 1:2 balance proposed above to be regained.
IOTL 1914-16 the HSF operated its "risk" strategy where it sortied in an attempt to attrite the GF
In 1916-18 the HSF reverted to a "fleet in being" strategy in where it only threatened a sortie
Therefore the longer pause for repair is not a significant POD
iTTL I would expect that the German Admirals will make the same decision ... probably more quickly and more certainly.
(If they are sensible, they may even conclude that a smaller HSF maintains the same level of threat and commit fewer resources for repair, upgrade and reinforcement)
Once "a (reduced)fleet in being" becomes the policy, the Germans will also arrive at the same conclusion as OTL and immediately step up the U-boat campaign, especially in the Atlantic.
That faster start ... and the much higher British losses in escort vessels at TTL Jutland ... may actually improve Germany's naval situation in late 1916 and 1917.
It might (just) see the Great War won by Germany before the USA can effectively intervene
Last edited:
Thanks for discussion. The post above should [EDIT: It does. My hasty post when I had 5 minufes of login time was in error when I thought it did not. Good work.] consider probables as 50 or 60% not as absolute.
Precise numbers are less important and the fact that the Grand Fleet will report ready for sea in 48 hours whereas High Seas Fleet cannot consider that for at *least* 48 days. Yes it will be half or less of the Grand Fleet and with some vessels still carrying damage until they are relieved, but they will be at sea. That is what the world and the Germans will see. The Germans will need more time to get a [EDIT: half squadron] squadron ready for service. Remember that Jellicoe crossed their T and hit nearly every ship a few times, and the rest got slapped around in the night.
I somewhat regret my previous post because I was trying to be concise and there will be a tendency for the numbers to be taken too seriously. History here is not much different from OTL, and I don't think there will be much difference.
HSF likely to take that course but RN will have more resources and will be able to respond faster. GF has shown that a learning culture matters and so they will. RN preD s will be parked along with ACs and many crews available for escorts. Losses to DDs of double OTL still small vs. size of fleet.
Still on major project for 3 more weeks and unable to think and respond at length.
So just pour a pint and enjoy the story.
Precise numbers are less important and the fact that the Grand Fleet will report ready for sea in 48 hours whereas High Seas Fleet cannot consider that for at *least* 48 days. Yes it will be half or less of the Grand Fleet and with some vessels still carrying damage until they are relieved, but they will be at sea. That is what the world and the Germans will see. The Germans will need more time to get a [EDIT: half squadron] squadron ready for service. Remember that Jellicoe crossed their T and hit nearly every ship a few times, and the rest got slapped around in the night.
I somewhat regret my previous post because I was trying to be concise and there will be a tendency for the numbers to be taken too seriously. History here is not much different from OTL, and I don't think there will be much difference.
HSF likely to take that course but RN will have more resources and will be able to respond faster. GF has shown that a learning culture matters and so they will. RN preD s will be parked along with ACs and many crews available for escorts. Losses to DDs of double OTL still small vs. size of fleet.
Still on major project for 3 more weeks and unable to think and respond at length.
So just pour a pint and enjoy the story.
Last edited:
Coulsdon Eagle
Monthly Donor
Interesting view of Moore's actions in Ordnance in years leading up to the war.
Sumida in In Defence of Naval Superiority pretty much nails him of sabotaging the potential purchase of Pollen's fire control system in favour of the less capable Dreyer's.
Mind you, if I go through one more technical description of the next mark of Argo Range Clock I'm tempted to sabotage it too!
Sumida in In Defence of Naval Superiority pretty much nails him of sabotaging the potential purchase of Pollen's fire control system in favour of the less capable Dreyer's.
Mind you, if I go through one more technical description of the next mark of Argo Range Clock I'm tempted to sabotage it too!
As I recall Queen Mary was the only ship in the RN with a Pollen fire control system and she was considered one of the best shots in the fleet prewar(before she spent way too long doing no gunnery practice)
Thanks for this. Somehow I am not surprised! I made him a different kind of person in this story.
=== ===
Announcements - Good news and bad news.
Given previous comments (thank you!) I believe it will be perceived as good news that I plan to write a sequel to this story. The bad news is that I have not really begun research, so it will be quite a while before anything at all shows up. If you keep watch here, you will find the new one whenever it starts to come out. Although I think I will post it separately, it will be under a similar overall title: England Expects etc. etc.
That next story will be a jump ahead a bit in time. A content warning I can offer right now is that there will not be an analysis of Jutland, other than perhaps a casual mention here and there. It-will-not-happen. There is no need. The basic fact is that so much of the HSF was sunk* and the rest shot to pieces that it will be a long time before it can have close to enough power to challenge anything much more than a single RN Battle Squadron - and for two-three months after the battle it can't even sail enough heavy ships to meet half a squadron.** Even after that, and allowing new construction to continue, the HSF cannot build enough to catch up, and especially in battle cruisers where after major repairs they might have one survivor - or less.
From this time onward the GF is superior. If there is a need for constant vigilance, the GF can actually be divided in four (even three?) parts and stand down one part each week - and have a healthy superiority at notice for sea at all times. This will mean a lot for crew R&R and long-term viability, to say nothing of gunnery practice. I'm not saying they would, but they could.
And, I am planning to rewrite a small and unrelated morsel of fun that I wrote up a while back. It's less than four pages, so even with the redesign and rewrite it shouldn't be more than 5-8 pages, and thus not many posts. With luck, I will post Interception at Sea in series just before or during the holidays.
VP
*5-6-7 of 16 D-BB, 5-6 (of 6) PDB, 4(+?) of 5 BC
**The RN has ships in refit or working up which missed Jutland, and that can roughly match the available HSF for many weeks to come. IIRC Queen Elizabeth, Emperor of India, Royal Sovereign, and Australia are in refit or working up, and they could even recall the obsolescent Dreadnought from the Channel Fleet if required.
Well that’s bloody good news. This was an excellent tale well told, and I look forward to seeing where you take it next.
I have a feeling that the Anson Class are going to be considerably different in this timeline, they're probably going to be a couple of knots slower and plow all of that freed up displacement into a battleship-scale all-or-nothing armour scheme, which will play havoc with the Washington Treaty negotiations.