I Blame Communism
Banned
I'd presume it is. "Hengst" is just the English word, being used in a paragraph written in English, surely?
"Fight and be Right"
- Thread starter EdT
- Start date
I'd presume it is. "Hengst" is just the English word, being used in a paragraph written in English, surely?
The Ottomans are involved, but I'm not saying on which side.
The evolution of the tank is rather different ITTL, coming mostly from steadily up-gunned armoured cars rather than the trench-crossers of OTL. Hence "Hengst", which happens to be the name of a particularly ubiquitous German design. The British come at things from a different route, as the Royal Artillery experiment with mounting guns on steam tractors to improve manouvrability. This leads to an even more pronounced Infrantry/Cruiser tank split than OTL.
Yep, "Hengst" isn't actually used by the Russians as a direct loan from the German; they use "Жеребец" or "Zherebec", which means Stallion, but in Russian. This is why the PZ-6 has the "PZ" prefix- translated into the latin alphabet, it's the Pekhota Zherebec 6 or Infantry Tank 6- It's the same principle as the BT tanks IOTL, only in that case they were termed "Bystrokhodny tank" or fast tank.
That seems to be the case. Let's also note that the Russians seem not to have loaned the German word in its German form, but have translated it as zherebets "stallion", as the the words written in Cyrillic on the illustration read pekhotnyj zherebets, i.e. "infantry stallion = infantry tank".
(Oh, I see Ed has already responded while I was posting on my snail-like connection. That's life!)
Last edited:
Something from Popular Mechanics, circa May 1940. The bomber is courtesy of Spaiento, and fans of timeline convergence may recognise it from something posted on the Alternative Weapons thread. This is a complete coincidence
Ooo, I like it. Def a different design, and I also like how the article is somehow able to shoe-horn in mention of civilian possibilities for an alternate Flying Fortress!
I Blame Communism
Banned
Something from Popular Mechanics, circa May 1940. The bomber is courtesy of Sapiento, and fans of timeline convergence may recognise it from something posted on the Alternative Weapons thread. This is a complete coincidence
Magnificent! So I was wrong about 1939. Makes sense, really, since Britain seemed pretty well done for in the prologue, but it does raise the questions of why 1939 and 1940 are significant.
And as to the post-war world, I find it interesting that an American publication doesn't seem at all worried about the bomber, but instead appears to be talking about American civilian use.
I believe you said earlier that America was broadly pro-German or at least anti-British, but had no strong feelings. German victory and the rise of the FWR seem likely to solidify a good German-American relationship.
Thande
Donor
Something from Popular Mechanics, circa May 1940. The bomber is courtesy of Sapiento, and fans of timeline convergence may recognise it from something posted on the Alternative Weapons thread. This is a complete coincidence
The CGI of the Luftwaffe, sorry, Luftstreitkräfte, strikes again
That's an odd choice of range-map, unless it's just supposed to be for American audiences to visualise the distances...
I'd assume that's the reason for that type of map; after all, it is an American publication (dating back to 1902 IOTL); I've seen similar types of range-map or the like coming up through school, especially in terms of the Hiroshima bombing, seeing maps using New York and Chicago as targets to explain just how far the blast's impact was felt.
Thande
Donor
I was going to say that OTL reports of this type I've seen usually show the bombing range as from e.g. Heligoland, but then I suppose those were always for British audiences who'd actually be being bombed rather than Americans.
I guess it could also show America's foreign policy attitude, since even though it's a European bomber they mention it without really seeming threatened, talk about how this war machine could be modified for civilian commercial use, and show the flight range over the US (and surrounding areas too). Could maybe be a hint to that zone talked about in the Prologue?
I must say, Ed must be constently provided with laughs and headscraches reading some of the attempts we make to piece things together haha
Very interesting EdT. I am interested in particular by the last line, stating that the era of heavier-than-air transport is only just arriving.Something from Popular Mechanics, circa May 1940. The bomber is courtesy of Sapiento, and fans of timeline convergence may recognise it from something posted on the Alternative Weapons thread. This is a complete coincidence
That can only mean one thing: the Airship strikes again!
Very interesting EdT. I like it and I think the way you presented is pretty unique. Kudos to you!
Although I must say such a plane would be extremely back heavy. I hate to be the pilot trying to land that thing with all its weight in the back and he sitting way up front in the cockpit.
Although I must say such a plane would be extremely back heavy. I hate to be the pilot trying to land that thing with all its weight in the back and he sitting way up front in the cockpit.
I Blame Communism
Banned
A random thought just hit me: the flag-sheet is missing San Marino, Monaco, Andorra, Liechtenstein, and Vatican City. Is this "cunning foreshadowing" or "honestly, who cares"?
If the former, Liechtenstein is pretty easy to account for: monarchist federal Greater Germany is in a good position to swallow it. A different Italian government or Pope could avoid signing a Concordat. The others are puzzling, though.
If the former, Liechtenstein is pretty easy to account for: monarchist federal Greater Germany is in a good position to swallow it. A different Italian government or Pope could avoid signing a Concordat. The others are puzzling, though.
maverick
Banned
Liechtenstein was not independant until the fall of the Habsburg Monarchy IOTL, and ITTL I assume that the Greater German Reich absorbs all legal responsibilities of the Austrian lands.
I assume that with no Concordant and Latern Treaties, the Vatican is unrecognized, as you said...
I assume that with no Concordant and Latern Treaties, the Vatican is unrecognized, as you said...
True, the flag sheet does lack them. However, I'm not so sure that that's a sign of anything really - I have an old atlas from 1899 who's flag section does not include those nations. Even textbook maps from the 1980s that we used in my school failed to include places like Monaco and San Marino. While it could mean they no longer exist, I'm tending to side more with the belief that the ATL publisher determined that they weren't significant enough for inclusion.
Well, we will see who is right.
Sadly, the PoV did not occur earlier which would make your funny theory non-impossible.
At least, Russia lost against the true Central Powers of Europe and Asia, Germany and China and the lack of Caucasian flags and the simultaneous existence of an independent Kurdistan indicate no russian territorial losses but russian gains in South-West Asia.
The FaT-posters are really great.
I bet one of them will win the next Turtledove Award (Category-Poster).
Liechtenstein was a formally sovereign state since 1806.
Seconded.
Thande
Donor
While we're on the subject of the flags, I notice that there are some independent Indian states around the periphery, but not enough to account for the whole shebang, so unless things have gone very badly wrong indeed I assume the remainder is still a colony, presumably part of some "British Empire without Britain" alliance. The only other option I can see is that it could have become a German colony, which seems rather unlikely.