Looking for a way to improve Naval Aviation prewar in the 1930's.

[Naval Aviation Fan]

Your spotting tower is:

1. a sitting duck
2. a tempting target
3. completely unnecessary
4. useless beyond LOS

If you've got radios with the troops, & they have maps (& you do), you've got as much accuracy as any arty gives you anywhere: call in fire, from wherever it originates. That means you can put down fire anywhere inside the battery's max range, without caring about LOS, & without making your spotter gunners' bait.

I'm also not convinced gun barges make enormous sense. Something like an LCT with a battery of 1000 or so 5" rockets, OTOH...

I have a very specific situation/disaster in mind here, that I am trying to justify preventing. Suffice it to say, the guys that made it to the beach had radios, and had several BB on call to provide NGS, and even landed arty on the beaches, but despite all of that, they were incapable of using the NGS effectively, because of the particular weather/visibility conditions, which caused the radio communications to fail, and the spotter aircraft to fail/fly straight into mountainsides, and the beached arty was all but useless because of the unusual terrain inland. Would my 'towers' be a perfect solution, even in this particular setting I have in mind? No, but they would have been a huge improvement over what historically did take place. Would they, though, by use of phone lines, be able to give army spotters an elevated view of the battlefield/beaches, and a means of reliably and effectively communicating with both the troops ashore and the crews of the ships that were to provide their NGS and supplies/reinforcements, and one that doesn't get all garbled and distorted like the radios historically did? Possibly. Would small offshore platforms, setup just off the beaches, have been capable of providing arty support, without the problems attendant to the jam packed beach head/land based arty getting bogged down and very hard to operate effectively due to the crowded and overloaded beaches be a possibility, were they too be connected by telephone lines/cables to the other batteries/towers? Maybe.

Additionally, I'm looking to provide a realistic/believable justification for a civilian force that has both the technical expertise, as well as actual hands on experience, of coordinating landings of equipment, supplies, vehicles and personnel on an otherwise deserted beach/coast, and maintaining effective communications between the folks ashore, those coming and going ashore, those on the ships, those on the planes, as well as those on whatever platforms are involved in a given particular challenge/adventure/project. Some things can only be learned done by doing them, and practice makes perfect as they say.

Can I write a story that has the US military, on its own dime and intentions, developing such expertise in the lead up to WWII? Possibly, but probably not, and most likely I could only at best get them to be slightly less incompetent/unprepared for the task at hand, if I want to keep things in the realm of somewhat plausible/believable. Now, if I can write a story where such expertise is not tied to the military/government bureaucracy/budgets, but rather to an eccentric millionaire, that develops such capabilities for the hell of it (and potentially with an eye to "making a buck" down the road), then military/government involvement isn't needed to develop said capabilities, but only rather to make use of such civilian expertise when it dawns on them that "Hey, didn't there used be something in the news about some rich playboy going and doing all sorts of interesting things, that just might be of use in military operations"?

 

[McPherson]

I have a very specific situation/disaster in mind here, that I am trying to justify preventing. Suffice it to say, the guys that made it to the beach had radios, and had several BB on call to provide NGS, and even landed arty on the beaches, but despite all of that, they were incapable of using the NGS effectively, because of the particular weather/visibility conditions, which caused the radio communications to fail, and the spotter aircraft to fail/fly straight into mountainsides, and the beached arty was all but useless because of the unusual terrain inland. Would my 'towers' be a perfect solution, even in this particular setting I have in mind? No, but they would have been a huge improvement over what historically did take place. Would they, though, by use of phone lines, be able to give army spotters an elevated view of the battlefield/beaches, and a means of reliably and effectively communicating with both the troops ashore and the crews of the ships that were to provide their NGS and supplies/reinforcements, and one that doesn't get all garbled and distorted like the radios historically did? Possibly. Would small offshore platforms, setup just off the beaches, have been capable of providing arty support, without the problems attendant to the jam packed beach head/land based arty getting bogged down and very hard to operate effectively due to the crowded and overloaded beaches be a possibility, were they too be connected by telephone lines/cables to the other batteries/towers? Maybe.

1. Towers on barges are howitzer bait.
2. If the radios don't work (Sounds like a British problem here.); then get radios that do. They exist and are American.
3. If the idiots flying Overwatch are bombing into mountains, then
a. they are not looking where they are going.
b. flying too low.
c. not flying parallel to terrain features as they are [supposedly] trained to do. (Again sounds like a British problem [RAF].). Might want to enroll some EATS candidates into USMC aviation to learn how to do it right?
4. Ship to shore comms is [American] solved in the radios and in the training [again.].)

Additionally, I'm looking to provide a realistic/believable justification for a civilian force that has both the technical expertise, as well as actual hands on experience, of coordinating landings of equipment, supplies, vehicles and personnel on an otherwise deserted beach/coast, and maintaining effective communications between the folks ashore, those coming and going ashore, those on the ships, those on the planes, as well as those on whatever platforms are involved in a given particular challenge/adventure/project. Some things can only be learned done by doing them, and practice makes perfect as they say.

Have Hughes develop the Damman oil fields. (History of the oil industry in Saudi Arabia). Well, that happened!

Can I write a story that has the US military, on its own dime and intentions, developing such expertise in the lead up to WWII? Possibly, but probably not, and most likely I could only at best get them to be slightly less incompetent/unprepared for the task at hand, if I want to keep things in the realm of somewhat plausible/believable. Now, if I can write a story where such expertise is not tied to the military/government bureaucracy/budgets, but rather to an eccentric millionaire, that develops such capabilities for the hell of it (and potentially with an eye to "making a buck" down the road), then military/government involvement isn't needed to develop said capabilities, but only rather to make use of such civilian expertise when it dawns on them that "Hey, didn't there used be something in the news about some rich playboy going and doing all sorts of interesting things, that just might be of use in military operations"?

Compared to the rest of the planet, the Americans are incompetent at amphibious assault in 1938? Are you kidding? The Americans are the gold standard.

 

[Spencersj345.346]

Compared to the rest of the planet, the Americans are incompetent at amphibious assault in 1938? Are you kidding? The Americans are the gold standard.

Which considering how many problems they had when they first put it into practice is saying a lot about how limited the world's amphibious assault capabilities were at the time

 

[Naval Aviation Fan]

1. Towers on barges are howitzer bait.

While they certianly could be arty bait, or rather, the platforms they sit on could be, there are a couple other factors not specifically pointed out with relation to this, that take that possibility down from near 100% to, well..., let's just say considerably less than that.

2. If the radios don't work (Sounds like a British problem here.); then get radios that do. They exist and are American.

The radios may have worked, had they been modified to accommodate historical conditions, or perhaps, simply operated by crews that had experience working with the equipment and other forces in theater, before historically. As it happened, there were severe issues that came up, and shouldn't have. No denying that the local conditions were severe and had an adverse effect on the equipment's performance, but I suspect that failures in training the separate forces to working together also had a large part in the historical debacle.

3. If the idiots flying Overwatch are bombing into mountains, then
a. they are not looking where they are going.
b. flying too low.
c. not flying parallel to terrain features as they are [supposedly] trained to do. (Again sounds like a British problem [RAF].). Might want to enroll some EATS candidates into USMC aviation to learn how to do it right?

Of course, it would likely have helped, if they could have actually seen the ground, but that is just part of the charm of the location this happened historically.

4. Ship to shore comms is [American] solved in the radios and in the training [again.].)

This I whole heartedly agree with. I just wish that it had happened that way instead of the way it did. I have no doubt that the disaster/debacle could have been handled, had the equipment been tested and trained upon, extensively, by all involved and before the landings actually took place. And this is what I am mainly after for this theater. Hopefully, when I finally get around to this particular episode, I can make it very well presented by earlier threads, so folks don't go calling ASB/ameriwank.

Have Hughes develop the Damman oil fields. (History of the oil industry in Saudi Arabia). Well, that happened!

Thank you sir, an unknown and potentially interesting link to more background information. I'll give that a look later tonight.

Compared to the rest of the planet, the Americans are incompetent at amphibious assault in 1938? Are you kidding? The Americans are the gold standard.

I do hope that is tongue in cheek humor.

Because if it isn't, I hate to think what the rest of the world's military forces would have achieved had they been assigned to play offence in this sad spectacle!

You know, that may be an interesting thread in it's own right!

 

[Naval Aviation Fan]

Which considering how many problems they had when they first put it into practice is saying a lot about how limited the world's amphibious assault capabilities were at the time

I have to second that! 11-30th May. A sad and avoidable debacle, had we only trained up the forces with a few practice landings in theater. Not all of the problems could have been solved that way, but surely many less deaths.

 

[phx1138]

Well... One reads about the exception that proves the rule. For example: the storming of Remagen bridge was covered by tank destroyers and tanks in the direct fire Arty role. Would SPGs and/or mortars and CAS to beat the defenders back opposite shore have been useful and much safer? Sure, but it was a "bounce on the run" operation with a lot of ad-hock and not much plan. Tanks and tank destroyers had to shoot just over the heads of the infantry and cover them as they crossed the bridge. Lots of mistakes, blue on blue and collaterals, but the bounce worked. Reminds me of what did not happen at Nijmegen or Pons. Sometimes the rushing way requires the "Russian weigh" of the odds.

I did not know they had any support whatever. (Serves me right trusting Hollywood. )

I do hope that is tongue in cheek humor.

\
It isn't. AFAIK, USMC was the only organization systematically studying the issues & finding solutions, then actually putting them into practise. They didn't have every detail worked out, as the lack of good LC, & (at first) poor gunnery support, shows--but nobody else (AFAIK) came even close. (Yes, that is a sad commentary on how bad the rest of the world was.)

 

[McPherson]

While they certianly could be arty bait, or rather, the platforms they sit on could be, there are a couple other factors not specifically pointed out with relation to this, that take that possibility down from near 100% to, well..., let's just say considerably less than that.

I hope you are not referring to this.

The radios may have worked, had they been modified to accommodate historical conditions, or perhaps, simply operated by crews that had experience working with the equipment and other forces in theater, before historically. As it happened, there were severe issues that came up, and shouldn't have. No denying that the local conditions were severe and had an adverse effect on the equipment's performance, but I suspect that failures in training the separate forces to working together also had a large part in the historical debacle.

Nothing on earth works 100% in the Aleutians, even today. Your best shot in 1943 is still American radios, POWERFUL ones. You will need a command ship or a sub.

Of course, it would likely have helped, if they could have actually seen the ground, but that is just part of the charm of the location this happened historically.

The air support was RCAF, which means the "British" training was wrong.

"The Battle for Kiska", Canadian Heroes, canadianheroes.org, 13 May 2002, Originally Published in Esprit de Corp Magazine, Volume 9 Issue 4 and Volume 9 Issue 5

Training...

This I whole heartedly agree with. I just wish that it had happened that way instead of the way it did. I have no doubt that the disaster/debacle could have been handled, had the equipment been tested and trained upon, extensively, by all involved and before the landings actually took place. And this is what I am mainly after for this theater. Hopefully, when I finally get around to this particular episode, I can make it very well presented by earlier threads, so folks don't go calling ASB/ameriwank.

How much of the "disaster" was the fact that the idiots who planned the operation used a division intended and equipped for desert warfare?

Oil in Araby.

Thank you sir, an unknown and potentially interesting link to more background information. I'll give that a look later tonight.

USMC work on amphibious assault. Recipient 7th INF DiV US Army. Nobody on earth could have landed on ATTU and fought there successfully besides the Americans and Canadians against the Japanese garrison. That means the British, Germans, Russians even in 1943 were clueless as to what it took.

I do hope that is tongue in cheek humor.

As bad as the operation was, nope.

Because if it isn't, I hate to think what the rest of the world's military forces would have achieved had they been assigned to play offence in this sad spectacle!

You know, that may be an interesting thread in it's own right!

Ever hear of Dieppe?

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Simple. (See map.)

View attachment 496171

mmmmmmm

Okay none of what you have said / shown makes any aspects of the op a bust

So nothing was a bust everything worked as intended/planned

I fully agree with Col. Caravaggio's thesis on the attack and have posted many times on here that an extra carrier (or 2) with far more aircraft should have been used (preferably Ark Royal but she was the wrong side of the straights) or the op delayed until one was available and we have Op Judgement with fekkin bells on it and more focus made on attacking the 2 Littorals and 3 modern Heavy Cruisers without which the Italians were stuffed in any surface action with the British at least for 6 months. And then followed up with reinforcing Malta to ensure that it remained a total PITA and the RN Running wild.

If anything make all of the 24 Swordfish - torpedo carrying (21 were serviceable on the day and 1 had to abort - and of those 20 aircraft only 11 were carrying torpedo's) and have them focus on the 2 Modern BBs - if things like fuel tanks need bombing get the RAF to do it with Wellingtons the next day (and carry out some farming while they are at it) or make the repeat visit the following night or the night after that as the weather allows.

But how many otherwise successful missions can we apply this critical brush to?

its like you favorite football team beating their arc rivals 3 nil but you wanted it to be 8 nil?

The actual op itself exceeded all then expectations of the day and this was the first time the idea of a major port raid using carrier aircraft had been put into effect

That it did not deliver the knock out blow to the level that we 77 years up time would have liked to have seen does not make any part of the op a Bust.

 

[McPherson]

I fully agree with Col. Caravaggio's thesis on the attack and have posted many times on here that an extra carrier (or 2) with far more aircraft should have been used (preferably Ark Royal but she was the wrong side of the straights) or the op delayed until one was available and we have Op Judgement with fekkin bells on it and more focus made on attacking the 2 Littorals and 3 modern Heavy Cruisers without which the Italians were stuffed in any surface action with the British at least for 6 months. And then followed up with reinforcing Malta to ensure that it remained a total PITA and the RN Running wild.

See Map (again). Attacks launched from the Tyrhennian Sea are doable if somewhat risky (Shuttle bombing.). I have no issue with adding bells and whistles, if the bells and whistles contribute to the main objective. Scattering your forces out of mutual air support in an air operation is asking for defeat in detail if the enemy knows what he is doing (Midway Lesson #1.). Lyster was LUCKY. Like the Americans against the Japanese, (and the Pakistanis much later against the Indians.) the goof enemy commander(S) did nothing to seriously prepare against the actually EXPECTED surprise attack.

its like you favorite football team beating their arc rivals 3 nil but you wanted it to be 8 nil?

Why not? Annihilation opens exploits that allow for better effects further through the event chain. (Midway Lesson #2.)

 

[Owltiger]

Hey everybody, I'm looking at trying my hand at a few, brief atl, where, among other things, the US gets it's shit together with respect to combat readiness and inter-service cooperation. I'm also of a mind to improve naval aviation by circumventing the naval treaties, and stuff like that.

I don't want to end up writing an Ameriwank, but my goal going into to this is to get a better starting forces readiness over otl for the USA.

One thing I want to have as a common POD, is having Howard Hughes altered into someone that has interest in naval aviation, as well as float planes, seaplanes, and amphibious planes.

There was a thread recently that asked about something I had not previously heard of, something called a Flying Deck Cruiser and that inspired me to start thinking about alternatives to that.

So, in this first thread, I'm going to try to identify problems with the FDC, and get around those, and get us to a place where we can get better Naval Aviation training prewar.

So, a few of the common problems with any type of earlier/additional carriers, is that all of them are warships, and thus would count against the tonnage allotments allowed by treaty, and that they would cost money to build, maintain, upgrade/refit/rebuild and operate, all of which has to come out of the navies budget.

My proposed solution is to take a rich & famous American, Howard Hughes, and have him get an earlier start of the Hughes Aircraft Company of OTL, and marry that with my fictional Hughes Shipping Company & Hughes Shipbuilding Company, that builds really big, impressive merchantmen...

Before I get started on that, though, I need help finding a shipyard in the 1900-1925 time-frame, that might be suitable for purchase and construction of what I am looking for. What I am looking for is an 'ego class' project, one like "To build the largest Merchant ships in the World" type thing, as both Sr and Jr wanted to be the best at what they did.

From the Wiki, for the Liberty Ships, I have these specifications:

Since I have no knowledge about shipbuilding, I'm going to extrapolate from here...




So the values in red I need folks to discuss and post for themselves, the only dimension I really, really want to keep in the 100 ft beam, as this will allow for follow on classes to look very similar in scale.

We are naturally going into the whole 'converted merchantmen into cheap, barely survivable carrier trope', but here I am going to create a reason for such a historically huge merchant ship to come into existence, and be in ongoing production, in the early 1930's, as an ego boost for Jr.

So, tell me what you think, and please offer advice on any dimensions for the "Hughes Titan class cargo ship" For instance, as the ship is larger and wider than a liberty ship, I gave 4 more boilers, and and extra engine to these monsters, is that enough to maintain speed? I also took a stab at the increase in cargo capacity and displacement, are those numbers anywhere close to what they should be?

One thing I want to have as a common POD, is having Howard Hughes altered into someone that has interest in naval aviation, as well as float planes, seaplanes, and amphibious planes.

Sorry I'm late to this party but let me offer a few quick suggestions to deal with the two biggest problems (Isolationism and naval aircraft). The easiest way would be for Glenn Curtis, not the Wright Brothers to make the first flight. Without the Wright Brothers Curtiss (and others) would not have delayed building American planes for World War 1, which would have hastened Curtiss's Navy planes. He would have been in a position to hire Leroy Grumman when he graduated Cornell in 1916 or preferrably after the Navy reduced him following the war when he would have had more experience. Instead of going to Loening Aeronautical he could have become an engineer working with Curtis. The two of them working together could have become well known during the air races in the late 1920s and we could have seen the fighting cats (F4F, F6F, F8F) appear much earlier in the timeline. Igor Sikorski was also available to join the company at this time so you might get an early push on the S-42 flying boat.

As for the isolationism. I would expand on the argument of the Zimmerman Telegram from the first World War except you could use a German group operating out of Mexico that was spying on the United States and planning on building bases in Mexico prior to the invasion of Poland. Both German and especially the Soviet Union were spying on the US from the 1920s on and catching them might help your TL.