Maybe, the initial troops trials showed problems with fouling and cooking off and the P13 and .276 Enfield were not cleared for introduction into service. If you delay the war the British Army will keep working at it but it will be a few years before SMLE production can be irreversibly stopped in favour of the .276.
How would a World War I which breaks out in 1917 look like?
- Thread starter CaliGuy
- Start date
Maybe, the initial troops trials showed problems with fouling and cooking off and the P13 and .276 Enfield were not cleared for introduction into service. If you delay the war the British Army will keep working at it but it will be a few years before SMLE production can be irreversibly stopped in favour of the .276.
Thomas1195
Banned
Not sure how British BB construction would be between 1914-1914 without a war in 1914?
BooNZ
Banned
Scary: yes. Effective: not so much.
OTL Imperial Russia had pushed its luck in the far east, which resulted in the Russo-Japanese war. Since 1904 Imperial Russia had been sponsoring Serbian-Bulgarian re-alignment, which resulted in the First Balkan war. In could be argued that Imperial Russian duplicity resulted in the second Balkan war. Imperial Russia had threatened both A-H and the Ottomans with war prior to 1914 and Imperial Russia giving Serbia a blank cheque in 1914 contributed to the outbreak of WW1.
If OTL WW1 is averted, Imperial Russia is likely to be still pursuing: Pan-Slavism, control of the straights, concessions in Persia and perhaps a rematch in the far east.
Deleted member 94680
Sean McMeekin's Russian Origins of the First World War (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Russian-Origins-First-World-War/dp/0674072332) makes many of these points. Russian diplomacy is often overlooked in it's contribution to the July Crisis leading to War. Alexander Watson's Ring of Steel (https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Ring-Steel-Germany-Austria-Hungary-1914-1918/0141042036), which I've only just started, also makes the point that the Russian Full Mobilisation made many in Germany to feel their country was under the threat of invasion, galvanising support for the War.
In this ATL, Russian agression coupled with Serbian nationalism (Trialism having done nothing to assuage Belgrade's desire for Balkan preeminence) would still be the most likely cause of a War IMHO.
Derek Pullem
Donor
All 8 of the R class would have been completed as battleships and possible a sister to HMS Tiger or a sixth QE class fast battleship. Fishers's follies would not be in existence.
Hood and her three sisters would have been laid down and would probably be the only additional war time construction.
Deleted member 94680
Fisher wouldn't be at the Admiralty in this TL, would he? OTL he was brought back by Churchill once War broke out IIRC.
HMS Hood and the rest of the "Admirals" would be battleships - improved QEs as was originally designed. Wartime construction would start after 1917, so is hard for us to predict.
CaliGuy
Banned
Wouldn't the desire to recapture Alsace-Lorraine be a powerful motivating factor for France to enter this war even without Britain, though? After all, it's not like France will have many opportunities to recapture Alsace-Lorraine.
CaliGuy
Banned
Did Franz Ferdinand actually want trialism as opposed to universal suffrage in Hungary, though?
So there was absolutely no risk of a Hungarian secession in 1917?
Good point.
Agreed. Also, though, did A-H have any military modernization plans which were going to go into effect between 1914 and 1917?
Couldn't Russia and France offer Italy huge territorial concessions in Austria-Hungary in this TL in exchange for Italian entry into World War I on the Franco-Russian side, though?[/QUOTE]
Deleted member 94680
To be honest no-one really knows what FF wanted, as he never got the chance to implement it. I'm not sure he'd push as far as universal suffrage and most things I've seen are just about limiting the Magyar Noble's power - the method to do this is always hinted at but never specified. FF was by many accounts an authoritarian in waiting so I suspect he would simply empower another small group to play off against the Magyars or reduce the size of the 'Hungarian' part of A-H and limit their power that way. IMHO, as FF had a reputation as a 'reformer' (at the least as a man wanting to change the way the Empire operated) any historic plans for changing the way A-H was constituted - trialism, federalism, suffrage laws, boundary changes to the Kronlande - tend to be attributed to FF or his 'party'.
No. None whatsoever. The Hungarians may have complained, but knew they gained far more from being part of A-H then they would independent of it. Say they forced their way out, what's to stop them being attacked by the Romanians and Serbs for their parts of Hungary? An independent Hungary would be weaker than the two combined and why would Austria do anything to help? What's to stop the Croatians making a break for it? Being part of A-H allowed Hungary the security to be master of their own part of the Empire, safe in the knowledge they (as part of A-H) were secure from the neighbours that coveted parts of their territory (Transylvania and the Banat, for example).
Thank you.
Not that I'm aware of. It was more a case of business as usual and make sure that the budget didn't get out of hand.
They could, for sure. But they didn't OTL, so why now? The Treaty of London was in 1915, after WWI had started, designed to tempt Italy in. It was only after A-H proved a tougher nut to crack and the French were coming close to buckling under German pressure that the Entente began casting around for extra Allies. Without the Treaty, one would assume Italy would carry on as they were - safe in neutrality, on the sidelines. IIRC the decision for Italy to enter the war was contentious domestically. They weren't exactly chomping at the bit to get stuck in, OTL.
In technical matters, Germany would have its 7.58 cm Leichte Minenwerfer in service by the start of the war, and Britain would have its 3.7 inch Mountain Howitzer in service at the start of the war as well. Other than that, Russia, France, Germany, and Britain's artillery parks would not be much different than their 1914 selves, just with more of the modern pieces. Austria-Hungary, on the other hand, would have a plethora of new artillery pieces in service that would not be in service otherwise, like the 7.5 cm M.15 mountain gun and its M.15 105 mm field gun. The US would also probably have the time to iron out issues with its 3-inch M1916 field gun (w/split trail), if they ever entered the war.
In terms of rifle caliber weapons, there would be much more difference. France would get its Meunier semi-automatic rifle into service, and Russia would probably get something similar to a Fedorov Avtomat (prototypes were in full-power 7.62x54R before the war) with similar results. Britain would have its Enfield M1913 in service, and Germany and Austria-Hungary would probably still be catching up by 1917, so they would still have their old rifles. Germany would, however, be able to tool up for the Parabellum MG14 machine gun, with that weapon replacing the much heavier MG08 by 1917 (at least on the production lines).
Aircraft are anyone's guess, but I suspect that without the war, the synchronization gear still wouldn't be developed by 1917, and neither would dedicated fighters- aircraft would still be limited to early bombers and reconnaissance aircraft.
Of course, by far the biggest technical difference was that by 1917, Germany would have the time to introduce the Haber process on a much larger scale than the 1 pilot plant they had in 1914. Thus, they would not have to choose between feeding their population and supplying their military with explosives with their limited supply of nitrates while they built up more capacity. This means that a British blockade would be much less effective in 1917. Also, many militaries would be much more motorized, most notably the French Army, which had begun this process before the war started. I'm not sure how this would affect the military campaigns, however. Armored cars would likely be in the early stages of employment by many militaries as well, but they would still be somewhat limited, as they would not have seen combat.
In terms of rifle caliber weapons, there would be much more difference. France would get its Meunier semi-automatic rifle into service, and Russia would probably get something similar to a Fedorov Avtomat (prototypes were in full-power 7.62x54R before the war) with similar results. Britain would have its Enfield M1913 in service, and Germany and Austria-Hungary would probably still be catching up by 1917, so they would still have their old rifles. Germany would, however, be able to tool up for the Parabellum MG14 machine gun, with that weapon replacing the much heavier MG08 by 1917 (at least on the production lines).
Aircraft are anyone's guess, but I suspect that without the war, the synchronization gear still wouldn't be developed by 1917, and neither would dedicated fighters- aircraft would still be limited to early bombers and reconnaissance aircraft.
Of course, by far the biggest technical difference was that by 1917, Germany would have the time to introduce the Haber process on a much larger scale than the 1 pilot plant they had in 1914. Thus, they would not have to choose between feeding their population and supplying their military with explosives with their limited supply of nitrates while they built up more capacity. This means that a British blockade would be much less effective in 1917. Also, many militaries would be much more motorized, most notably the French Army, which had begun this process before the war started. I'm not sure how this would affect the military campaigns, however. Armored cars would likely be in the early stages of employment by many militaries as well, but they would still be somewhat limited, as they would not have seen combat.
Three years to buy more artilary and machine guns,not to mention the Imperial Russian militarlly reforms.But Nicky being Nicky 50/50 chance he messes it up,I still see aristrocats in leadership positions.Germany might also be a little less inclined to bring America into the war.Willson probably won't get reelected, that's a good thing.
The end results more blood more quickly, the War lasts 3 years maximum before people start running out of infantry.
The end results more blood more quickly, the War lasts 3 years maximum before people start running out of infantry.
So with a kick off in 1917, it would be good to list the status of the relevant nations.
So for GB:
Naval:
-Basically the 1916 OOB but without HMS Erin, HMS Agincourt, and HMS Canada as their sale would have been completed. I think only the first 2 of the R-class as peacetime production and commissioning is a lot slower than during wartime.
-Army:
Half the peacetime army would be in Ireland trying to keep a lid on things. Leaving only 3 divisions for a possible the BEF.
-Politics everyone would be busy with Ireland and the massive fall out of having "English Loyalist" turn violent against the British Army.
-Industry still strong but slowly getting crushed under the combined competition of Germany and USA.
Germany:
Naval:
-Again OTL OOB of 1916 with Bayern and Baden in commissioning at the start of the war, and the other ships in the class still under construction but almost done. The Wittelsbach and Braunschweig class would have been send to the colonies, if the Germans are smart they would have beached them as shore defences around Der-El-Salam, Tsingtao, and Duala making these ports near unassailable.
-Army:
The compromise the SDP wanted was that conscription would be equal for all and no longer have the officers be only Junkers. This was partially done during the 1912 law and would have been completed with a second law in 1914. I also think they would have striped out the cavalry and but them in separate Korps. This would have increased the army by at least 7 Armeekorps and separated out 3 Kavallerie Korps. So 28 Armeekorps + 3 Bayern Armeekorps + 3 Kavallerie Korps + Guardkorps. For an army 4,25 million strong at kick off instead of 3,8 in 1914. Hopefully with lots of additional Rail troops.
-Politics:
As mentioned above the SPD would have just scored big with the reform of the conscription laws. And for 3 years having shown to all and sundry that the D really stands for Deutschland.
However you still got Willy running off at the mouth.
-Economics:
Going strong especially as the Colonies are starting to break even/make a profit. Also as mentioned the Faber process is eliminating the need for Nitrated imports something that would show in the balance of trade.
France:
Navy:
-Having just added the Bretagne class, the French navy now boasts of 7 Dreadnoughts and 6 Semi's. All are still posted in the Mediterranean.
-Army:
Difficult to say, if they had managed to continue the 3 year conscription the same size as 1914. There was no room for further growth, but a new class of heavy artillery is possible.
-Politics:
God only knows during the 3 years there could have been no less then 6 new governments this being the 3rd republic average. The big political issue is the 3 year conscription as mentioned above. Dreyfus would be old news, but I am pretty sure new scandals would have come to light.
-Economics:
Moaning under the cost of the Army, and the colonial area's. The French "wisely" chose some of planets earth least desirable land to colonize.
Russia:
-Navy:
Now strengthened by 4 Gangut's and 3 Imperatritsa Mariya it still sucks the big one.
-Army:
Massive in numbers, but so under equipped that its not even funny any more. The Russian army without GB industry is the prototypical glass canon. We are talking an army/mob without boots or sufficient rifles for all its men, nevermind fancy equipment like ammo or tents.
-Politics:
LETHAL and to the quick
-Economics:
In revolt or on strike, and I am guessing that the French are bitching about repayment of their loans by now.
-Austria-Hungary.
Navy:
Still as OTL but now with 2 or 3 of the Ersatz-Monarch class and a fourth on the slips.
Army:
-Fancy new artillery as mentioned before. But the real strenght is that the second FF take the crown, von Hötzendorf is out on his ass. This also adds 3 years for Diehl to be caught. However under the POD mentioned by OP, I am guessing at least 3/4 of the Honeved has gone with the rebelion. This is offcource balansed by the fact that both the Aurstian and the Comon army would be fully mobilized and in the field.
-Politics:
With a Hungarian rebellion ongoing and a new emperor this would be a mess.
-Economics:
Pre Rebellion booming.
Belgium & Netherlands:
-Army:
Both countries reformed their army and conscription in 1912, so by 1917 they become rather too tough just to walk over. Also the Belgian Forts would have been renovated. This ends any idea of Schleifen after 1916.
I could accept a scenario where Hungary rebels, quickly followed by getting stomped by the Loyalist. However the Serbians thinking the AH is soft quickly enters on the side of the Hungars thinking to cut out all of Croatia. This would make the Austrians go defensive on the Serbian front will continuing to crush the Hungars as they start running out of everything.
It would also beg for an invasion of Hungary by the Romanians (probably with Austrian approval) and of Serbia by Bulgaria, voila a third Balkan War.
So the Serbian intervention would quickly spin out of control. And with the Bulgars approaching Nis the Serbians screams for help, enter Russia. However an entrance by the Russian army in the Balkans, will bring in Germany and the Ottomans.
So now we have two sides:
-Austria, Germany, Ottomans, Bulgarians, and Romanians.
-Russia, Hungary, and Serbia. Quickly followed by France and quite likely Italy.
But a stated because of the defensive strength of the Belgium and Netherlands no invasion/rape of Belgium. So no GB at first, and most likely not at all as the Naval race has puttered out, and with the QE and R classes coming online a clear win for GB.
It becomes quite hard to point with alarm at a navy you out number 2 to 1. Also the entire British Foreign Office would be cackling with glee, at the thought of the continental powers mutually destroying eachother.
So for GB:
Naval:
-Basically the 1916 OOB but without HMS Erin, HMS Agincourt, and HMS Canada as their sale would have been completed. I think only the first 2 of the R-class as peacetime production and commissioning is a lot slower than during wartime.
-Army:
Half the peacetime army would be in Ireland trying to keep a lid on things. Leaving only 3 divisions for a possible the BEF.
-Politics everyone would be busy with Ireland and the massive fall out of having "English Loyalist" turn violent against the British Army.
-Industry still strong but slowly getting crushed under the combined competition of Germany and USA.
Germany:
Naval:
-Again OTL OOB of 1916 with Bayern and Baden in commissioning at the start of the war, and the other ships in the class still under construction but almost done. The Wittelsbach and Braunschweig class would have been send to the colonies, if the Germans are smart they would have beached them as shore defences around Der-El-Salam, Tsingtao, and Duala making these ports near unassailable.
-Army:
The compromise the SDP wanted was that conscription would be equal for all and no longer have the officers be only Junkers. This was partially done during the 1912 law and would have been completed with a second law in 1914. I also think they would have striped out the cavalry and but them in separate Korps. This would have increased the army by at least 7 Armeekorps and separated out 3 Kavallerie Korps. So 28 Armeekorps + 3 Bayern Armeekorps + 3 Kavallerie Korps + Guardkorps. For an army 4,25 million strong at kick off instead of 3,8 in 1914. Hopefully with lots of additional Rail troops.
-Politics:
As mentioned above the SPD would have just scored big with the reform of the conscription laws. And for 3 years having shown to all and sundry that the D really stands for Deutschland.
However you still got Willy running off at the mouth.
-Economics:
Going strong especially as the Colonies are starting to break even/make a profit. Also as mentioned the Faber process is eliminating the need for Nitrated imports something that would show in the balance of trade.
France:
Navy:
-Having just added the Bretagne class, the French navy now boasts of 7 Dreadnoughts and 6 Semi's. All are still posted in the Mediterranean.
-Army:
Difficult to say, if they had managed to continue the 3 year conscription the same size as 1914. There was no room for further growth, but a new class of heavy artillery is possible.
-Politics:
God only knows during the 3 years there could have been no less then 6 new governments this being the 3rd republic average. The big political issue is the 3 year conscription as mentioned above. Dreyfus would be old news, but I am pretty sure new scandals would have come to light.
-Economics:
Moaning under the cost of the Army, and the colonial area's. The French "wisely" chose some of planets earth least desirable land to colonize.
Russia:
-Navy:
Now strengthened by 4 Gangut's and 3 Imperatritsa Mariya it still sucks the big one.
-Army:
Massive in numbers, but so under equipped that its not even funny any more. The Russian army without GB industry is the prototypical glass canon. We are talking an army/mob without boots or sufficient rifles for all its men, nevermind fancy equipment like ammo or tents.
-Politics:
LETHAL and to the quick
-Economics:
In revolt or on strike, and I am guessing that the French are bitching about repayment of their loans by now.
-Austria-Hungary.
Navy:
Still as OTL but now with 2 or 3 of the Ersatz-Monarch class and a fourth on the slips.
Army:
-Fancy new artillery as mentioned before. But the real strenght is that the second FF take the crown, von Hötzendorf is out on his ass. This also adds 3 years for Diehl to be caught. However under the POD mentioned by OP, I am guessing at least 3/4 of the Honeved has gone with the rebelion. This is offcource balansed by the fact that both the Aurstian and the Comon army would be fully mobilized and in the field.
-Politics:
With a Hungarian rebellion ongoing and a new emperor this would be a mess.
-Economics:
Pre Rebellion booming.
Belgium & Netherlands:
-Army:
Both countries reformed their army and conscription in 1912, so by 1917 they become rather too tough just to walk over. Also the Belgian Forts would have been renovated. This ends any idea of Schleifen after 1916.
I could accept a scenario where Hungary rebels, quickly followed by getting stomped by the Loyalist. However the Serbians thinking the AH is soft quickly enters on the side of the Hungars thinking to cut out all of Croatia. This would make the Austrians go defensive on the Serbian front will continuing to crush the Hungars as they start running out of everything.
It would also beg for an invasion of Hungary by the Romanians (probably with Austrian approval) and of Serbia by Bulgaria, voila a third Balkan War.
So the Serbian intervention would quickly spin out of control. And with the Bulgars approaching Nis the Serbians screams for help, enter Russia. However an entrance by the Russian army in the Balkans, will bring in Germany and the Ottomans.
So now we have two sides:
-Austria, Germany, Ottomans, Bulgarians, and Romanians.
-Russia, Hungary, and Serbia. Quickly followed by France and quite likely Italy.
But a stated because of the defensive strength of the Belgium and Netherlands no invasion/rape of Belgium. So no GB at first, and most likely not at all as the Naval race has puttered out, and with the QE and R classes coming online a clear win for GB.
It becomes quite hard to point with alarm at a navy you out number 2 to 1. Also the entire British Foreign Office would be cackling with glee, at the thought of the continental powers mutually destroying eachother.
Deleted member 94680
Unlikely, as it would require Wartime experience to alter the design. They were designed to be cheaper than the QEs and mixed fuel due to concerns over supplies of oil.
Without the exigencies of War, there would be no motivation to change their design from OTL.
Derek Pullem
Donor
Actually the opposite - the construction of the R class was halted in 1914 as they thought they couldn't be finished before the war ended. I think you would have all the R class in service in 1917 absent a war
Your second point is correct though - but logic didn't seem to apply to naval construction pre WW1.
There is a difference between finished building, which from laying down to launching was about 18 months and commissioned (which could be another year on peacetime schedules). Fitting out was a complex process. So a 1917 War would see 2 or 3 Revenges in commission and assigned to the Grand Fleet while the other would still be works in progress
Britain was entirely logical in terms of it's building strategy pre-WW1. It needed to have a bigger fleet than any combination of powers in the Med and a bigger fleet than the Germans in the North Sea. Plus sufficient surplus to cover the rest of the globe. The 2 power standard (unlike the USN's 10 power standard) was fairly proportional.
CaliGuy
Banned
Please feel free to make whatever changes you think are necessary to make my scenario here more realistic.
Thomas1195
Banned
There would be 6 QEs rather than 5. HMS Agincourt (QE) was cancelled after the war broke out.
Derek Pullem
Donor
Since in OTL when construction of the Rs was slowed we had 5 Rs in service by September 1917 and the 2 Renown battlecruisers in service by late 1916 I don't think all * R class battleships by 1917 in a peacetime schedule is unrealistic.
As for the RNs "logic" it was built on faulty intelligence - the R class was never needed as at the outbreak of war the RN tonnage in dreadnoughts was equal to all the other European powers combined. But that didn't stop the Admirals from wanting more.