Oops, that was embarrassing...
Oh right! I should pay closer attention.
When is KGV joining the fleet?
*Slaps forehead*
No Mechelen Incident!
Last edited:
Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles
- Thread starter Lascaris
- Start date
When is KGV joining the fleet?
No Mechelen Incident!
I think by the end of 1940 (I assume fully worked up?) and her two sisters shortly after.
While greece is not very impressive when it comes to arms production i hope ammunition wise greece is doing better
Last edited:
I thought the same, but I couldn't find any info on his political leanings, nor on his activity during the war, else than he was an important theoretician of naval warfare and geoplitics and retired in 1939, though his views in geopolitics concerning the colonial question were not too dissimilar with de Gaulle's.
Hopefully the Deutschland incident can help push the French fleet to join the Allies, assuming France still falls? I don't know enough to comment, but a joint action against the Germans should help moral and inter-service cooperation. And given the impressive state of the Dunkerque Class, it'd be a shame for them to all wind up at the bottom of the sea at Mers-el-Kebir.
European capital ship construction March 1940
Probably a table is in order... if for no other reason for me not to forget things.
Everything with a ? ahead of it is tentative as it may well be affected one way or another by future events.
| Ship | Laid Down | Launched | Completed |
| Littorio | 28/3/1934 | 22/1/1937 | 6/12/1939 |
| Vittorio Veneto | 28/3/1934 | 23/12/1936 | 15/12/1939 |
| Roma | 18/5/1938 | 9/2/1940 | ? 14/2/1942 |
| Impero | 14/5/1938 | 15/11/1940 | ? |
| King George V | 1/1/1937 | 21/2/1939 | ? 1/10/1940 |
| Prince of Wales | 1/1/1937 | 3/5/1939 | ? 19/1/1941 |
| Duke of York | 5/5/1937 | 28/2/1940 | ? 19/8/1941 |
| Anson | 20/7/1937 | 24/2/1940 | ? 14/2/1942 |
| Howe | 1/6/1937 | 9/4/1940 | ? 17/6/1942 |
| Lion | 28/2/1939 | 22/11/1943 | ? 11/11/1944 |
| Temeraine | 1/7/1939 | ? | ? |
| Dunkerque | 24/12/1932 | 2/4/1935 | 31/12/1936 |
| Strasbourg | 24/11/1933 | 12/12/1935 | 15/9/1937 |
| Richelieu | 22/4/1935 | 17/7/1938 | 15/3/1940 |
| Jean Bart | 12/9/1936 | 6/12/1939 | ? 86% 6/1940 |
| Clemenceau | 17/7/1938 | ? 20% 5/1940 | ? |
| Joffre | 26/11/1937 | 1/8/1939 | ? 66.4% 6/1940 |
| Sharnhorst | 15/5/1935 | 3/9/1936 | 7/12/1938 |
| Gneisenau | 6/4/1935 | 8/11/1938 | 21/4/1939 |
| Bismarck | 1/4/1936 | 14/11/1938 | ? 24/5/1940 |
| Tirpitz | 2/7/1936 | 1/12/1938 | ? 25/10/1940 |
| Graf Zeppelin | 28/11/1936 | 8/11/1938 | ? 87.7% 9/1939 |
I would actually argue that your KGV unit delivery dates are later than they should be. The RN hasn't had to design a twin 14" turret which delayed them some OTL, plus with the experience of building the Greek BB I would expect the British companies producing guns and armor to be in better shape (maybe some of the gunpits/armor producers that closed OTL even stay open and make that bottleneck a bit better) and at least more experienced. Plus PoW getting hit by a bomb delaying her completion is easy to butterfly just like Carden's plane not crashing.Probably a table is in order... if for no other reason for me not to forget things.
Everything with a ? ahead of it is tentative as it may well be affected one way or another by future events.
Ship Laid Down Launched Completed Littorio Vittorio Veneto Roma ? 14/2/1942 Impero ? King George V ? 1/10/1940 Prince of Wales ? 19/1/1941 Duke of York ? 19/8/1941 Anson ? 14/2/1942 Howe ? 17/6/1942 Lion ? 11/11/1944 Temeraine ? ? Dunkerque Strasbourg Richelieu Jean Bart ? 86% 6/1940 Clemenceau ? 20% 5/1940 ? Joffre ? 66.4% 6/1940 Sharnhorst Gneisenau Bismarck ? 24/5/1940 Tirpitz ? 25/10/1940 Graf Zeppelin ? 87.7% 9/1939
I'm operating under the assumption British gun pits have remained the same, ir up to 7 turrets a year, building just a pair of additional turrets in 1934 should not lead to any significant capacity increase.
On the other hand the British HAVE benefited compared to OTL, there is a reason Lion is actually being built TTL (in short the British being able to start building the 15in turrets from the KGVs at least 6 months early as it's obvious to all that no treaty reduction of gun calibre is likely... and 54 guns being enough for 6 ships at 9 guns per ship). No Vanguard of course but I find the exchange more than fair)
What's clear is that he was not on friendly terms with Darlan, after all in 1937 he was the other candidate for the top position. To quote from here:
"This hostility came to a head with the outbreak of war. On 6 October 1939, in his capacity as Admiral Nord, Castex addressed a personal letter to Darlan in which, beyond matters of a purely naval nature, he was severely critical of the level of land forces deployed to protect the northeast of France. The Empire, he noted, was absorbing too much of the country’s strength and the northern flank was dangerously exposed. In a reply on 11 October, Darlan swept aside his subordinate’s fears and concluded with a scarcely veiled threat to the effect that if the northern defenses proved insufficient, the Admiral Nord would find himself surplus to requirements. Castex nonetheless reoriented his defenses to face the eastern border rather than the sea, much to Darlan’s chagrin, who plainly considered this an affront to his authority as Commander-in-Chief of French Maritime Forces. He invited Castex to take his place in the ranks of reserve officers."
TTL someone has to command the Constantinople squadron and Castex was a favourite of Venizelos (well I first encountered him by Venizelos quoting him in parliament) so "hey we get rid of him and the Greeks seem to like him!" Plus of course the French high commissioner in Constantinople is admiral Durand-Viel, Darlan's predecessor who probably has his own reasons not to be entirely happy with Darlan (who in OTL did not allow him to return to the navy when war start)
Post that neither Castex nor Durand-Viel joined Vichy in OTL but neither did they join Free France...
I am wondering about a problem in the not-so distant future. There are troops of both France and Italy in Constantinople. What happens when Italy attacks France? Greece can be dragged in the war at June 1940 through a clusterufck in Constantinople.
Frankly, it won't be that bad for Greece (with hindsight): Italy is focused on the Alpine Front and there are fewer italian units in Albania compared to October 1940. In OTL October there were 6 infantry, 1 alpine and 1 armoured division in the whole Albania. In June 20th, if this OOB is correct, there were 3 infantry, 1 alpine and 1 armoured divisions. Moreover, there is less time to build infrastructure and fortifications. Since the Greeks already control the upper Aoos valley and Tepelene, they can quickly grab Valona and then everything becomes much easier.
Frankly, it won't be that bad for Greece (with hindsight): Italy is focused on the Alpine Front and there are fewer italian units in Albania compared to October 1940. In OTL October there were 6 infantry, 1 alpine and 1 armoured division in the whole Albania. In June 20th, if this OOB is correct, there were 3 infantry, 1 alpine and 1 armoured divisions. Moreover, there is less time to build infrastructure and fortifications. Since the Greeks already control the upper Aoos valley and Tepelene, they can quickly grab Valona and then everything becomes much easier.
Well if greece will fight Italy alone yes then is an advantage but let's not forget Bulgaria or turkey.. Greece in this ttl will have a hard time
Exactly!
To be fair, without hindsight i believe most policy makers would prefer to avoid war as long as possible since Greece will be attacked by opponents who enjoy incredible superiority in numbers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
To be honest, even in the best plausible case Greece will get a significant part of her territory occupied and a portion of its population ethnic cleansed. In the worst plausible case, all mainland Greece will fall and Anatolian Greeks will face genocide. However, under these new conditions, I sincerely doubt that Crete can fall, even in the worst case. My hunch though, is that part of mainland Greece will hold. Either with a Pindus-Olympus Line or a Thermopylae Line.
Lets add another factor that tends to be forgotten. If the Greeks join the war in June for example, they go to war against BOTH Germany and Italy, Germany will be just sitting idle when the Greeks declared war against its ally? Why it will be doing so?
If that happens in June 1940, Germany will likely declare war but it will not have yet troops in Romania and Bulgaria . Yugoslavia is more Allied leaning. And Romania will likely be more resistant to Soviet (and German) threats when the nearest allied troops are in Constantinople (instead of Cyprus or Egypt) . In fact, we could see a Romanian war plus a Soviet surprise naval attack in Constantinople long before there is a direct attack of Germany against Greece (with the exception of some aerial attacks) .
Last edited:
There is going to be some ground support for the Italians from the germans...
A Soviet attack on Constantinople would be IMHO exceedingly unlikely. Stalin no matter his other faults was a most cautious man to attack directly Britain and France.
In the hypothetical case of a German declaration of war in June everything of course depends on what is going on in France. If France is still fighting on, even if it is losing the Germans have much bigger fish to fry. If France goes down, then the German from July 1940 have about 150 divisions sitting around with very little to do for the time being. Romania will be in a bad position obviously, they are under Soviet pressure as well. Yugoslavia is closer to the allies TTL, the Germans will be noticing as much. So its options in the scenario of an early June war where France has fallen are to allow passage of German troops or be invaded from Austria and Hungary itself...
Oh and to add some fun to any calculations in OTL the Germans invaded in the spring of 1941 because weather conditions were making an earlier invasion through Bulgaria impractical as the passes of the Rhodope mountains would be mostly unusable. Well that's still true TTL but for evident geographic reasons not completely true anymore....
The Germans can't redeploy immediately that many divisions. Even if they win as IOTL, there will be significant casualties and more importantly, significant wear in materials. They did redeploy forces after the Balkan campaign (in just 1 month) towards Barbarossa IOTL, BUT the Balkan campaign was much less demanding than the Battle of France and of the Low Countries. Hell, their Panzer divisions didn't even have to face any Allied tank division! Yugoslavia collapsed in a week, Greece was utterly exhausted after 6 monts of fighting Italy and the British forces were too small and too poorly equipped to cause many casualties.
As for Stalin, he is already quite anxious about capitalistic Great Powers controliing the entrance to the Black Sea. Of course he won't attack Britain and France simultaneously, but if France falls (or if fight breaks out between the Allies and Italy in Constantinople), he could be tempted to intervene "to ensure the well-being and the rights of the workers of Constantinople" .
As for Stalin, he is already quite anxious about capitalistic Great Powers controliing the entrance to the Black Sea. Of course he won't attack Britain and France simultaneously, but if France falls (or if fight breaks out between the Allies and Italy in Constantinople), he could be tempted to intervene "to ensure the well-being and the rights of the workers of Constantinople" .
How exactly is Stalin going to intervene in Constantinople? The Soviets don't have the ability to project power across the Black Sea like that. And he'd certainly find no friend in Turkey when it comes to that.
Greece has a lot of back-up forts though. If they hold in fortress Smyrna they can fall back there as a last stand. Before that they can fall to Olympus-Aliakmon-Pindus line and after that to the narrow Boetia line and after that to the Peloponnese. Step by step ruining itself and chipping away at Axis forces. With a British and some Yugoslavian survivors, not to mention the Polish units that would be available because they would stay to defend The City more likely than not. Crete is indeed way better secured ITTL and if things go well the Dodecanese falls and cuts Turkey of Italy. Constantinople can be fortified and be hold due to a small and defendable front , although it would be bombed to oblivion. And of course the Turks inside would more likely than not revolt and make a mess.
Now that I think of it it maybe be better for Greece to hold against anyone that isn't Germany. Maybe go on an offensive against Turkey with everything cause Greece is falling , or at least large parts of it, so if they make a good surrender they can keep their infrastructure for after the war. Or more likely it gets raided and abused by the conquerors so it should fight to the bitter end and keep a second front to Germany with its dying body.
Now that I think of it it maybe be better for Greece to hold against anyone that isn't Germany. Maybe go on an offensive against Turkey with everything cause Greece is falling , or at least large parts of it, so if they make a good surrender they can keep their infrastructure for after the war. Or more likely it gets raided and abused by the conquerors so it should fight to the bitter end and keep a second front to Germany with its dying body.
The Soviet Black sea fleet is somewhat stronger than OTL, with a pair of thoroughly modernized battleships (as in Cavour style modernizations) but the basic military balance is arguable still bad for any kind of Soviet amphibious intervention against Constantinople. Leaving aside that it would mean direct conflict with Britain and when did Stalin ever start a fight with another great power, either the Greeks or the Turks would be liable to intervene and both can bring pretty quickly much larger forces than anything the Soviets can sealift, the Greek D corps alone would be upwards of 100,000 men. Which leaves aside the fact the TTL Greek navy would likely be a very rough customer for the Black sea fleet to handle...