Kleine Wirbelwind

Having received the aid and tools needed to help revive his country's armored forces and Air Force, Franco wanted to improve his Navy. In mid-October an agreement is signed between Italy and Spain. 3 battleships will be constructed in Spain to a modified Littorio design. The ships Carlos I, Felipe II and Cristobal Colon are 47,000 ton ships. They would look like the Littorio class with an additional turret added. Estimated time for the first ship to be completed was October '48. Along with Turkey, Franco agrees to construct Marconi class submarines.
 
Last edited:
Taking advantage of the rivalry between the Balkan nations, Hungary vs. Romania, Romania vs. Bulgaria, the Germans sign agreements to have modification complexes built in Finland, Bulgaria and Croatia to help in the conversation of obsolete AFVs into more useful designs. German and Italian occupied Serbia was placed under Bulgarian occupation to free up troops at the front.
 
In Mid-October another 150 AFVs reach the Italian troops in Egypt, a mix of PzKw IIIM, PzKw IIIN and StuG III, Spanish sources complete a German-Japanese deal delivering plans for the Type 95 torpedo, a Long Lance than can be fired from the standard 21" torpedo tube. Spanish ships had delivered in September PzKw IIIM, PzKw IIIN, StuG III and Pak 97/38 to Japan.
 
I'm working on a TL where Hitler and the Nazis were not so stupid when it came to helping their allies with heavy weapons. So in 1942 for example the Finn's, Hungarians, Italians and Romanians start to manufacture the PzKw IIIM/N instead of things like the 40M Turan or M14/41. The PzKw III in late 1942 could still deal with the American M4 or British Crusader. As time progresses the need for AA tanks increases so a PzKw III with it's turret replaced with a turret of the Wirbelwind AA tank is produced. The Kleine Wirbelwind. Other weapons and what happens will soon follow.
Had Germany been more willing to share it's welding technology the tank designs of Italy and Hungary would have been much more viable. A M14/41 that didn't kill its crew upon the first glancing blow wouldn't be too much worse than a Panzer 3.
 
Had Germany been more willing to share it's welding technology the tank designs of Italy and Hungary would have been much more viable. A M14/41 that didn't kill its crew upon the first glancing blow wouldn't be too much worse than a Panzer 3.

Lucky for us, the German leadership was ot to bright in their dealings with their allies. The Americans and British collaborated very well with each other. For the most part supplied their Western Allies fairly. Look at Lend Lease and British designs built in US. ITTL the Germans work better with their allies but not up to Western Standards. Italy, Hungary, Romania and Finland in total have less than 25% of Germany's industrial base, taking advantage of that will make a big difference for the German allies.
 
Deciding to take advantage of the many captured Soviet tanks, two were refurbished with the turret that would be installed on the SD.Kfz. 234/2 Puma. The Puma would not enter production until '43, but manufacturing of the turret began in '42. The Soviet tans chosen were the BT-7 and T-26. Also placed into production was a new PzKw 38(t)H. This tank also with the Puma turret allowed 4 tanks with 50mm guns. The turret also installed in the SD.Kfz. 250/13 made it hard to identify what vehicles the Axis were using when only glimpses of the turret could be seen behind a rise in the land.
 
Deciding to take advantage of the many captured Soviet tanks, two were refurbished with the turret that would be installed on the SD.Kfz. 234/2 Puma. The Puma would not enter production until '43, but manufacturing of the turret began in '42. The Soviet tans chosen were the BT-7 and T-26. Also placed into production was a new PzKw 38(t)H. This tank also with the Puma turret allowed 4 tanks with 50mm guns. The turret also installed in the SD.Kfz. 250/13 made it hard to identify what vehicles the Axis were using when only glimpses of the turret could be seen behind a rise in the land.
Do these all have more-or-less compatible turret ring sizes, or is this less of a problem than I've been led to believe?
 
It can be a major problem. In WW2, the US M4 Sherman, M26 Pershing, M10 Wolverine, M18 Hellcat and M36 Jackson all had 69" turret rings. If the turret ring is similar in size it is not to difficult. Today the M60 Patton and the M1 Abrams both have 85" turret rings.
Quite familiar with the turret ring dimensions you quote, but, my question concerns the assorted junkers referenced by Claymore. You know, with all the interest in such things and the number of times similar questions come up, you'd think there'd be a "turretringdiameter.com" site or similar out there somewhere...
 
Quite familiar with the turret ring dimensions you quote, but, my question concerns the assorted junkers referenced by Claymore. You know, with all the interest in such things and the number of times similar questions come up, you'd think there'd be a "turretringdiameter.com" site or similar out there somewhere...

For some extent, you can modify the diameter of the original hull. Either by enlarging or even decreasing the diameter. Of course, it means more work, but should the difference be small (some centimeters/inches) its doable easily.
 
Had Germany been more willing to share it's welding technology the tank designs of Italy and Hungary would have been much more viable. A M14/41 that didn't kill its crew upon the first glancing blow wouldn't be too much worse than a Panzer 3.

Its not really the technology, but the equipment/material and the germans themselves had shortages with that.

Deciding to take advantage of the many captured Soviet tanks, two were refurbished with the turret that would be installed on the SD.Kfz. 234/2 Puma. The Puma would not enter production until '43, but manufacturing of the turret began in '42. The Soviet tans chosen were the BT-7 and T-26. Also placed into production was a new PzKw 38(t)H. This tank also with the Puma turret allowed 4 tanks with 50mm guns. The turret also installed in the SD.Kfz. 250/13 made it hard to identify what vehicles the Axis were using when only glimpses of the turret could be seen behind a rise in the land.

The 50mm gun with the puma turret would have been not that much of an improvement. Its a 2-man turret, thin armor and the gun would simply not suffice. At least for hungary, what the army wanted, the army needed was a good, solid 75mm with a reasonable size (the bofors 80mms were simply too big).
 
Quite familiar with the turret ring dimensions you quote, but, my question concerns the assorted junkers referenced by Claymore. You know, with all the interest in such things and the number of times similar questions come up, you'd think there'd be a "turretringdiameter.com" site or similar out there somewhere...
I really wish there was such a thing as "turretringdiameter.com", both Claymore and myself would get a lot of use out of it.
There are quite few sites with the dimensions for different tanks and armoured vehicles around but none that I've ever come across had the turret ring dimensions.
 
Lots of things here that totally ignore logistics , realistic time needed to train workers up ( when Italy was given plans for German engines it took over a year to get working ones ) or in the timeline sections, OTL realities like Money and what the resources were being used for OTL. For instance Franco is basically broke and Spain still ruined from the Civil War. He can no more build battleships than walk on water, just feeding the people is a worry. Similar issues apply to a lot of the other ideas , there are not any spare machine tools lying around , the existing ones were being overused as it was. Sometimes things were done the way they were for good reason. As for putting German turrets on Russian tanks , words fail. Issues with spares , maintenance , shoddy workmanship etc mean its a none starter, Russian tanks were built fast not well.
 
Ah, I see. Was there anyway for the Axis to acquire more of these materials or does their geography/40s technology prevent that from being possible?

Well, probably not. Bear in mind, i have a rather vague knowledge about the issue, only that the germans (and the hungarians) have welding material shortages.
 
Quite familiar with the turret ring dimensions you quote, but, my question concerns the assorted junkers referenced by Claymore. You know, with all the interest in such things and the number of times similar questions come up, you'd think there'd be a "turretringdiameter.com" site or similar out there somewhere...

Here is what I've collected over the years

T-34/76 had a turret ring diameter of 1420mm (76mm of 31 then 41 caliber)

T-34/85 had a diameter of 1590mm (85mm of 54 caliber)

T-44 1700mm

T-44B 1800mm for 100mm D-10 prototypes

T-54 1815mm

JS-II 1850mm Soviet source 1800


Leopard 1,2 1980mm


Somua S35 1130mm APX1CE(chemin élargi) turret, 40mm armor , 1.5 :) man turret

Char B1 1022m (APX4 turret, 60mm armor)

R35 900 or 1020mm

Renault D1 1022mm with ST2 turret


Churchill 1378mm

Matilda 1378mm (adaptor to fit larger centaur turret

A9/A10 1384mm

Crusader III 1410mm

Cromwell 1448mm

Centaur 1453

Valentine Mk XI had a ring diameter of 1466mm (75mmL40)

Comet ring diameter of 1625mm (77mmL49) some say 1524mm

Charioteer 1626mm (high trunnions)

Challenger 1650mm

Comet 1626

Centurion 1880mm


M2A2 897mm left turret, 749 right turret

M2A1 1120mm

M2A4/M3 Stuart 1188mm

M1 Combat Car 1206mm

M22 1206mm

M8 GMC 1382mm

M3 Lee/Grant 1384mm some source 1448mm (37mm)

Ram I noted as 60" 1524mm 2 pdr 57mm

M24 Chaffee had a ring diameter of 1524mm (75mmL39)

M2/M3 Bradley 1524mm

M7 1626mm (57mm gun)

T18E2 Boarhound 1626mm

M4/M6/M10/M26/M36 1753mm

M47/ 1854mm

M6A2E1/T29/T32 2030mm

M103/M48/M1 2160mm


Pz I had diameter of 927mm

35(t) had diameter of 1267mm

PzIII had diameter of 1560mm (37mm-50mm-75mmL24)

PzIV had diameter of 1650mm (75mmL48)


Panther = 65" turret ring 1650mm

Tiger I = 72" turret ring 1830mm


Type 95 had diameter of 1000mm

Type 97 Chi-Ha had diameter of 1350mm

Type 3 Chi-Nu had diameter of 1700mm
 
Lots of things here that totally ignore logistics , realistic time needed to train workers up ( when Italy was given plans for German engines it took over a year to get working ones ) or in the timeline sections, OTL realities like Money and what the resources were being used for OTL. For instance Franco is basically broke and Spain still ruined from the Civil War. He can no more build battleships than walk on water, just feeding the people is a worry. Similar issues apply to a lot of the other ideas , there are not any spare machine tools lying around , the existing ones were being overused as it was. Sometimes things were done the way they were for good reason. As for putting German turrets on Russian tanks , words fail. Issues with spares , maintenance , shoddy workmanship etc mean its a none starter, Russian tanks were built fast not well.

A major problem with Italian production was self-imposed. All the other major powers could update and switch production faster. Compare how long it took the Americans to make a Merlin engine. It would take years for Franco to build Battleships but a plan is different than the actual doing. As too spare parts and tools many times a choice must be made. I can either use my resources to produce more things or to increase production. Increasing production in the long term will result in more but many politicians don't look at the long term. IOTL many point out that the German economy was running on full well before the war started but fail to notice it was not until '43 that the started to convert to war production allowing Britain to out produce them for 3 years on a smaller industrial base.

While the Puma turret and it's 50mm gun are not world beaters it is a fast improvement over the one man turrets many were still using. In '42 the Pak 38 could still defeat any Western tank. In the right circumstance it could defeat the T-34's armor. At this time between 1/3 and 1/4 of the Soviet tanks were light.
 
A major problem with Italian production was self-imposed. All the other major powers could update and switch production faster. Compare how long it took the Americans to make a Merlin engine. It would take years for Franco to build Battleships but a plan is different than the actual doing. As too spare parts and tools many times a choice must be made. I can either use my resources to produce more things or to increase production. Increasing production in the long term will result in more but many politicians don't look at the long term. IOTL many point out that the German economy was running on full well before the war started but fail to notice it was not until '43 that the started to convert to war production allowing Britain to out produce them for 3 years on a smaller industrial base.

While the Puma turret and it's 50mm gun are not world beaters it is a fast improvement over the one man turrets many were still using. In '42 the Pak 38 could still defeat any Western tank. In the right circumstance it could defeat the T-34's armor. At this time between 1/3 and 1/4 of the Soviet tanks were light.

Packard took from Sep 40 till Aug 41 to produce their first Merlin. That's with people better at mass production than the axis, engines are complicated beasts. You keep ignoring logistics , there is only so much steel/rubber/oil etc. The axis are resource limited in a bad way. As for a puma turret, its got tissue paper for armour, a tank turret is meant to be the thickest Armour for a reason, its the prime target. The PAK 38 has a poor HE shell , there was a good reason everyone shifted to 75mm, its as small as you can go for a decent dual purpose gun. The soviets used combined arms , the infantry/AT guns would slaughter your proposed tank.
 
Top