Is this enough budget to start developing a new way to power ships using the splitting of atoms and have it ready by 1927?
Nowhere near and that would have to be a national endeavour with all hands on the pumps for that.
Is this enough budget to start developing a new way to power ships using the splitting of atoms and have it ready by 1927?
The FAA was not just limited by the RAF training all of their pilots and advising on aircraft. It was also limited to only those assets that could go on a ship. This means it had very few aircraft spares, a limited supply system (one warehouse IIRC), no bases to train from, no infrastructure support of any kind outside of what the RAF let them use. These were serious handicaps in the massive wartime expansion. Keeping Coastal Command with the Navy does not just improve Coastal Command (though it may well do that), it also basically fixes all of these issues at a stroke, making the FAA (or RNAS if you want to bring that back) a more complete, more resilient and more efficient organization all around.Not particularly, this part of naval aviation isn't as delicate as ship-borne aviation. Indeed as long as a reasonable wartime command structure is in place its better to have Coastal Command be a drain on the RAFs budget between the wars than the RNs.
A few thousand 50’ tall Royal Marines would definitely be useful….? Like, bigger or more of them?
How about a sniper platoon and then just pop Hitler.
I might be having one of my blond moments but do you mean UP? I though RP was the air-to-ground rocket.Oh! And one thing! The RP Projector and mounting.
ORWhen they slide that across your desk and go "We've got an idea!" have a suitable stick or sword in scabbard with which to whip them by and threaten with banishment to Penguin counting duties in the Falklands if it every crosses anyone's desks again.
BUT
What you could do is give it to the army and go "What if you put some HE in these things, would that be useful to you?"
? Like, bigger or more of them?
Basically, building plans should allow for simultaneous (or overlapping times) of conflict across the globe. Even with one hot war going on one front and a cold war going on another, the RN would need to project across the globe. No other navy needed to cover every major body of saltwater like the RN, so plenty of long endurance ships (range and accomodation) and plenty of basing facilities. Even with the US needing to cover both the vast Atlantic and Pacific, that's still not including the Med and Indian Oceans, or even much of the South Atlantic, and certainly not the North and Norwegian Seas, during the interwar period.(snip)
Honestly the big thing I would change with hindsight is building for a 3 power conflict rather than a 2 power conflict. That is going to force tough decisions and possibly redirect the navy to look at sea denial rather than control. It will also force innovation and could be a spur to costal command as well as the fleet air arm under navy control at a sensible date.
Based on the information provided by @tomo pauk and @steamboy might it be better if the Army sticks to the pom-pom instead of adopting the Bofors so we can reduce the types of gun that way?
DK Brown in his book Nelson to Vanguard (2001), had an idea about scraping the hulls of the S and T class destroyers and reusing the low mileage machinery in new, larger escort hulls. He implied that the S and T were too small and not seaworthy enoughWould mothballing the World War One S and T class destroyers, and keeping the entire V, W Parker and Shakespeare class destroyers and destroyer leaders be worthwhile, or were they just too small and old? Re-activating the S and T classes would give 120 or so 1000 ton hulls that were capable of 34-36 knots when built. It seems keeping them rather than scrapping them in the 20s and 30s would give escort numbers a leg up. They could be converted to the long range escorts like the V and W classes were.
A passing thought: Two heavies and any combo of light cruisers in the Graf Spee battle.Probably can build more counties pre LNT and ditch the Yorks as a idea with the bigger budget as well. Probably no where near the 40 Counties the RN originally wanted but ca. at least get a few more....albeit definitely not getting more than 20 laid down pre 1st LNT I suspect
I don't know. The RN, as noted by others, has global trade protection responsibilities. Pretty much by definition, they will always have a shortage of cruisers relative to missions where a cruiser would be useful. An extra 10-15% in budget authority for a decade solves a lot of problems but it does not solve the fundamental scope of mission relative to requirements. The RN will look at their mission set and resources and likely decide that minimalist trade protection cruisers of a given type might still be desirable to save on construction, manning and operational costs if that gives them a couple of extra hulls every two or three years in a building cycle. There is a place for Yorks and Aresthustras --- perhaps there is a place for a York +500 tons in survivability and habitability enhancements compared to OTL along with American boiler additives but the RN has as much a need for quantity (as long as it meets thresholds for quality) as it does for quality in each individual unit.Probably can build more counties pre LNT and ditch the Yorks as a idea with the bigger budget as well. Probably no where near the 40 Counties the RN originally wanted but ca. at least get a few more....albeit definitely not getting more than 20 laid down pre 1st LNT I suspect
Use this excuseYou'll also want to invest in heating and cooling for the ships, so if they're in the North atlantic they can keep their crews warm, and on the China station, keep them cool.
To be fair if the RN had had its way they would have gone ham on the Counties in the 20s. That being said could perhaps see them still building the Yorks and closer to the orginally planned class of 7(maybe 4 get built?)under the circumstances of my OP along with at least the 3 counties they ordered but canceled due to the OTL LNT. As for the Artheusas not that sure they were the best idea but if nothing else I suppose their hull design did majorly influence the Didos....
HMS Cumberland could have been at River Plate with a very minor POD. She was at the Falklands self-overhauling her engines IOTL.A passing thought: Two heavies and any combo of light cruisers in the Graf Spee battle.
Fortunately, there was a quadruple pom-pom. According to the Naval Weapons entry on the 2pdr QF Mk VIII it entered service in 1935-36. It also says that a twin was developed for the British Army and that 57 were built. This might have been the 2pdr designed for the Army before it decided to adopt the Bofors.