Miscellaneous >1900 (Alternate) History Thread

Part of my reason for putting this timeline forward was to do with the fate of these vessels and the other being the OTL state of the RCN, so I figured why not kill two birds with one stone and give the RCN a bit more of a bite. I will admit that a part of me is thinking of the Almaz being made into a Coast Guard or Fisheries Protection Vessel after a limited modernization, mainly to bring her speed up and refit her for handling Canadian waters. The Destroyers I imagine would be a mixed bag, some would have likely been worn out and in rough condition post internment but regardless of their conditions they would be more Destroyer hulls to patrol Canadian waters. The gunboats would probably join the Almaz as Fisheries Protection vessels, the Submarines however would probably either be used as training vessels for a future breed of Canadian submariners or taken apart to see if they could make their own submarines.

This is all just my thoughts.
 
There is nothing that says that Canada could not simply send the ships over to the US or UK for refit, more likely the UK during the period. However if it became a source of pride there is also nothing that says that Canada could not build up the local industry needed to do the work on the ships themselves, although it would likely cost as much as several brand new battleships to build up the yards and industry needed to do so.
I have no doubt that the technical capacity could be attempted, (Witness the Ross rifle example and remember it.), but I doubt the political, manpower, and economic base of highly perishable skills would be available in such a small country without massive assistance. And this effort is for one battleship.

The technical problems of the battleship come in two major flavors. Engine plant and armament.

The engine plant can be handled by anyone in Canada familiar with Yarrow type boilers and Brown-Curtis turbines. The main armament, however, is FRENCH and it is 30.5 cm and "weird". That includes not only the gun barrels and the slides and pits installed, but also the hoists, lifts, rams AND THE ENTIRE FIRE CONTROL SYSTEM (except the "computer element" which is "British"). None of it follows "British" logic or manufacturing practices right down to the size of the screw threads and gearing which is either in Russian or metric units. A lot of the hydraulics and electrical systems that power those artillery systems and the fire control is GERMAN. The secondary battery is 13 cm and that is "French" as well.

When the optics degrade, do the Canadians go for Barr and Stroud, Zeiss, Loudzhou or do they go for Bausch and Lomb? How about when the electric motors and generators pack it in? Vickers or General Electric or Siemens? What about the hoists? Do they use the British Vickers single car? Do they use the French two car as installed, or do they use the armored chain chute American system? Do they use piston hydraulic rammers as the British do or do they use the French hydraulic-electric types? Or do they go Pratt and Whitney? Choices galore. Or do the Canadians fuck it all up and mix and match as the Russians did?

By the way, the "Fire Control Computer" of the era installed is a version of the Argo Clock. Nobody else uses it, except in several examples, the Royal Navy. Who can fix it, when THAT system breaks? Italy. Yes... Italy. They tried it out and developed their own version. Of course the Canadians could be smart and rip it out for an Admiralty Table system evolved from the Dreyer Table system.

Where will Canada calibrate the guns to the new Royal Navy type fire control system? Maybe the USN weapon proof center at Aberdeen is available?

How about the boilers and turbines of the battleship? If they are smart, they rip out the John Brown/Curtis plant and go for Babcock and Wilcox and WESTINGHOUSE. COTS, local and can be purchased next door or built in Canada through their subsidiaries.
And honestly the ships would doubtlessly need to go through a major overhaul at some point. The Russian Dreadnoughts were perfectly capable vessels when commissioned (and awesome looking ships IMO) but would have probably fallen into disrepair during their internment and in need of major work. And the uniquely Russian mishmash of components would mean that a simple effort to fix what was broke would get you nowhere.
See previous remarks.
If the Canadian government had the determination I could see the ships (really only the General Alekseyev and General Kornilov would be of much use IMO) going through a major refit and overhaul in the early to mid 30s. Receiving new boilers, turbines, secondary and flak batteries, sights, fire directors, and a superstructure. The ships emerging as an odd looking cross between the latter refits of the Soviet Dreadnoughts and the refit RN QEs.
Think more like Warspite. And EXPENSIVE, very expensive.
 
Were deathtraps and engineering disasters. Nothing can be learned from those abominations except how to die a gruesome death. Buy British or FRENCH.
If nothing else I presume the Canadians could learn what not to do. And really the subs were dated by the point anyway so there would doubtlessly be little point in keeping them. Generally though saying there is nothing to be learned is a mistake though as if you try hard enough there are plenty of lessons you can draw from any scenario.
 
If this timeline came to fruition, what changes would it make to the RCN come 1939 when War breaks out?

Also if we were to take the Dreadnought, the 2nd-class Cruiser, the Protected Cruiser, The Bespokoiny, and the Tserigo as the basics as for what the RCN walked away with then what kind of refits/rebuilds could these ships look forward to in the years leading up to 1939?

What would be some possible names would they could receive following their adoption into the RCN?
 
If this timeline came to fruition, what changes would it make to the RCN come 1939 when War breaks out?

Also if we were to take the Dreadnought, the 2nd-class Cruiser, the Protected Cruiser, The Bespokoiny, and the Tserigo as the basics as for what the RCN walked away with then what kind of refits/rebuilds could these ships look forward to in the years leading up to 1939?

What would be some possible names would they could receive following their adoption into the RCN?
Hmm...when I'm near my computer I have an idea.
 
Having looked into the relevant pages over on Wikipedia, I think most the Russian Destroyers would have been mostly retired from use with maybe one or two sticking around, meanwhile the two cruisers would probably stick around as at the time the White fleet is absorbed into the RCN they would likely make up 2/3 of the RCN Cruiser fleet, and of course that Dreadnought would be the biggest vessel in the fleet. You know the more I think of it, the presence of the Dreadnought would mean Canada would need to create the infrastructure to maintain and repair the ship which would probably make it possible for RN Capital ships to get repairs in Canada during the war. Noting like the shipyards of Great Britain but maybe enough to get any battlewagon that sails into Canadian back in fighting form and ready to cross the pond to get a proper work over
 
There was a big fear of an "Imperial Nixon" by authors such as George Lucas and Phillip K. Dick. Could this have really happened (say if Nixon was more careful about covering his tracks, therefore Watergate doesn't happen).
 
Pop-culture POD--Seth MacFarlane doesn't miss his flight on 9/11/2001 and dies in the hijackings. Family Guy remembered as a cult hit cut tragically short while adult animation in the late 2000s and 2010s probably looks very different.
 
Pop-culture POD--Seth MacFarlane doesn't miss his flight on 9/11/2001 and dies in the hijackings. Family Guy remembered as a cult hit cut tragically short while adult animation in the late 2000s and 2010s probably looks very different.
Every time I read this I'm reminded of Martin Goodman and the Hindenburg and amazed at how much Stan Lee's career is dependent on the existence of Marvel Comics.
 
Pop-culture POD--Seth MacFarlane doesn't miss his flight on 9/11/2001 and dies in the hijackings. Family Guy remembered as a cult hit cut tragically short while adult animation in the late 2000s and 2010s probably looks very different.
Damn, I loved The Orville
 
I have an archaeology themed question. The tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamun was opened in 1923 and became an international sensation as the only intact Pharaoh’s tomb from ancient Egypt. Is it plausible that the tomb could have been discovered at a different time, and if so what kind of effects could it have on modern culture and our attitudes towards ancient Egypt? And what would have happened to the artifacts removed from the tomb?

Could the discovery be delayed until a later time in the 20th century? If it was made say in the 1950s or 60s would the treatment of the tomb and its contents be significantly different?

What about earlier? Could the tomb have been discovered in some time between 1900 and 1910? If so who would be the likely discoverer and what might happen? This idea in particular is something I am curious about. A while ago I was reading about J. P. Morgan (who died in 1913) and – like a lot of the tycoons of the period – he loved collecting art treasures and antiquities, and particularly ancient Egyptian antiquities. So it made me wonder what would happen if King Tut’s tomb was discovered at the time of the Gilded Age and the colonial era. Would the rich and powerful bid for the treasures, or rival colonial governments claim ownership over them? Would they be lost to the public and end up in private collections? Were there laws or international agreements to cover such an issue?
 
Martin Goodman
It is possible someone else from the pulp era publishing similar magazines/comics draws in Stan Lee, Josh Kirby etc and Marvel still happens as there were a lots of publishers in it at the time, however it’s more likely we would see D.C. competing with one of the many OTL lost comic companies maybe Charlton or Fawcett?
 
I have an archaeology themed question. The tomb of Pharaoh Tutankhamun was opened in 1923 and became an international sensation as the only intact Pharaoh’s tomb from ancient Egypt. Is it plausible that the tomb could have been discovered at a different time, and if so what kind of effects could it have on modern culture and our attitudes towards ancient Egypt? And what would have happened to the artifacts removed from the tomb?

Could the discovery be delayed until a later time in the 20th century? If it was made say in the 1950s or 60s would the treatment of the tomb and its contents be significantly different?

What about earlier? Could the tomb have been discovered in some time between 1900 and 1910? If so who would be the likely discoverer and what might happen? This idea in particular is something I am curious about. A while ago I was reading about J. P. Morgan (who died in 1913) and – like a lot of the tycoons of the period – he loved collecting art treasures and antiquities, and particularly ancient Egyptian antiquities. So it made me wonder what would happen if King Tut’s tomb was discovered at the time of the Gilded Age and the colonial era. Would the rich and powerful bid for the treasures, or rival colonial governments claim ownership over them? Would they be lost to the public and end up in private collections? Were there laws or international agreements to cover such an issue?
All you need is a change to who backs Carter, when and with how much money. Lord Carnarvon was about to cut off Carter's funding when he found Tut's tomb, so a delay is quite possible, just by cutting off the money a year earlier. An earlier find is perhaps possible if permission is granted to dig in the Valley of the Kings earlier.

Just a note - the tomb wasn't intact, it had been looted a number of times - see here. The Egyptian government did declare that the tomb was intact, but from what I can find, this was to ensure that the finds would become the property of the government not Lord Carnarvon (from here).
The only intact tombs ever found were at Tanis, three tombs found in 1939 by Pierre Montet (see here). The Second World War resulted in this find not becoming as famous as Carter's, but if you read some of the reports (like this one) about the 'Ancient Egypt craze' surrounding the 'Gold of the Pharaohs' exhibition in 1988*, I think it's likely that if either these or Tut's tomb had been found after the 2WW, then there would something similar to that, even in the austere 1950s and certainly in the 60s.

* I went with my family just before going to university and I remember the huge queues/crowds. I've still got the guidebook somewhere and a couple of other souvenirs (badge, etc).
 
All you need is a change to who backs Carter, when and with how much money. Lord Carnarvon was about to cut off Carter's funding when he found Tut's tomb, so a delay is quite possible, just by cutting off the money a year earlier. An earlier find is perhaps possible if permission is granted to dig in the Valley of the Kings earlier.

Just a note - the tomb wasn't intact, it had been looted a number of times - see here. The Egyptian government did declare that the tomb was intact, but from what I can find, this was to ensure that the finds would become the property of the government not Lord Carnarvon (from here).
The only intact tombs ever found were at Tanis, three tombs found in 1939 by Pierre Montet (see here). The Second World War resulted in this find not becoming as famous as Carter's, but if you read some of the reports (like this one) about the 'Ancient Egypt craze' surrounding the 'Gold of the Pharaohs' exhibition in 1988*, I think it's likely that if either these or Tut's tomb had been found after the 2WW, then there would something similar to that, even in the austere 1950s and certainly in the 60s.

* I went with my family just before going to university and I remember the huge queues/crowds. I've still got the guidebook somewhere and a couple of other souvenirs (badge, etc).
Thank you FriendlyGhost, it's a subject I am not very familiar with so I appreciate your suggestions. I had never heard of those Tanis tombs but they look just as impressive as King Tut's. Maybe all it takes is a bit of good publicity, timing and luck to make the difference between sensation and obscurity.
 
It is possible someone else from the pulp era publishing similar magazines/comics draws in Stan Lee, Josh Kirby etc and Marvel still happens as there were a lots of publishers in it at the time, however it’s more likely we would see D.C. competing with one of the many OTL lost comic companies maybe Charlton or Fawcett?
Stan Lee got his job at Timely because of his uncle, Robert Solomon. Robert Solomon gets his job because he is Goodman's brother-in-law. With Goodman's death in 1937 his pulp magazine company most like goes out of business and Solomon isn't hired by another company. Stanley Lieber wants to become a writer and he has bragged about winning a newspaper contest three years straight in high school so he could go into journalism and become a reporter. He also had a job in the theatre so he could become a playwright, but him most likely career path ITTL is as a pulp author. As for Jack Kirby an Joe Simon they both probably stay at Fox Feature before going to National Publications and continuing their careers as OTL with the biggest change being that Captain America being a Fox Feature character. One question becomes who picks up Marvel Comics #1?
 
Top