Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
Did they need one? I'm sorry but decisions were not made in a vacuum. If the US was lend-leasing good enough, better to spent finite resources on more needed things. Now if Germany/Italy had a carrier threat it may be different, but the FAA was always going to rank after the RAF in design focus.
Unfortunately the Seafire gets the reputation from a single operation when they had to operate from slow escort carriers where there was literally no wind
At the time there was no other carrier based fighter that had the performance to have any real chance to intercept the latest German Bombers
The F4F-4 was far far better at Landing on but thats no good if its too slow and cannot climb fast enough to intercept the German attackers!
If they had started development back when the Navy had first wanted it which was pretty much when Dowding showed his brother, also a Dowding, who was an admiral in the Navy the Spitfire doing its thing in 1938.
3 plus extra years of development would have overcome many of the issues experienced during the invasion of Italy
Within the context of European development, they were more than adequate. The Seafire was not noted as having any problems with durability and stability.
Not nevessarily so. The Firefly was exceptional, as was the Sea Hornet.
Well enough to be adopted in sufficient numbers.
It is not like Wildcat/Martlet is not good enough for the task, and unless we have some major changes to the TL, I do not think that we will something other then the OTL types in FAA service.
Frankly speaking, there is no such thing as a silver bullet in war, and I do think we are a bit too focused on technology. Its not the weapons, its the Moral Force, moral will, ability to organise and deploy resources, to train and organise military formations, discipline, competence and experience which actually count.
Frankly speaking, there is no such thing as a silver bullet in war, and I do think we are a bit too focused on technology. Its not the weapons, its the Moral Force, moral will, ability to organise and deploy resources, to train and organise military formations, discipline, competence and experience which actually count.
French North Africa is a real puzzler for the WAllies. On one hand leaving it be allows extends Vichy's life and avoids the risk that the Germans can acquire the French Fleet in Toulon which while not enormous is still pretty strong. On the other if it can be brought under Free French control either via invasion or by defection it increases the military potential of Free France by an order of magnitude.
It's borderline competent using defensive tactics designed to keep a lower performance fighter alive against the Zero, the Wildcat is definitely not good enough against European airforce at this point, it doesn't have the speed or ceiling to cope against Luftwaffe or Italian bombers or fighters, hence using Seafires off escorts carriers in the Mediterranean landings.
Agree, and I would like to add to the question on whether the political prisoners on the Dutch East Indies (that were freed by the Japanese IOTL) are still held there, since there were some plans of transfering at least one person to Australia before the invasion throw away those plans.
marathag
Banned
1940, the French and their Curtiss Hawk 75A did very well against Luftwaffe Fighers and Bombers.
Wildcat performance was not far off from the Hawk, both with single stage superchargers.
The Wildcat with the two stage supercharger were not common thru the first half of 1942, and the F6F was right around the corner.
Makes me wonder about twin-engined piston-engine aircraft on something like a Midway or a similar size carrier; since the USN found that the Midways' CAGs were too large to effectively control with a full load of standard WWII-size carrier aircraft...
Yeah, I ran into that problem of wank/butterflies as well with Keynes Cruisers... once the Mediterranean is not a black hole of resources, the RN gets a lot of flexibility.
Sea Mosquito was somewhat a step too far, given the aircraft had significant take off swing and was dangerous on one engine. Yeah, Brown landed one on a carrier but he wasn't an average pilot and neither were the 618 sqn ones who did test flying off Implacable, something they'd done a great deal of training for.
Gloster F5/34 is by far the best option for a cut price carrier fighter, iirc, one was drawn up and to have been powered by a Bristol Perseus with additional fuel built in. Cancel the Sea Gladiators and order a navalised F5/34 instead. MB2 was primitive and the Dagger was not a good engine (see the HP Hereford). Miles M20 was not a good aircraft on land and even worse on a carrier.
Gloster F5/34 is by far the best option for a cut price carrier fighter, iirc, one was drawn up and to have been powered by a Bristol Perseus with additional fuel built in. Cancel the Sea Gladiators and order a navalised F5/34 instead. MB2 was primitive and the Dagger was not a good engine (see the HP Hereford). Miles M20 was not a good aircraft on land and even worse on a carrier.
The Gladiator order was a stop gap due to the delay in producing the Fulmar. Thus they had to be a type already in service, or at least production. Now if you have managed to replace the gladiator with the F5/34 a couple years early then great. Otherwise you are probably not getting them in place of the Gladiator.
You are correct, Brown was an exceptional pilot. The problem with a twin engine propeller aircraft is when it loses an engine while landing the aircraft tends to torque in. It is because the propeller is off set from the centre line. Brown himself pointed this out.
16 January 1942. London, England.
allanpcameron
Donor
16 January 1942. London, England.
On a visit to London, Carden had lunch with the American Colonel George Green. Green was one of the Americans in the Harriman Mission sent by the President to coordinate with the British regarding Lend-Lease and other matters. Green had been invited to sit on the Tank Board and act as Liaison Officer regarding design and production issues on Armoured Fighting Vehicles.
Carden had been told that the American was an Army Reserve Officer, but had been Vice-President in one of General Motors subsidiaries (Yellow Truck and Coach Manufacturing). Green had also been vice-chairman of the Advisory Committee of the Ordnance Department, and Carden had been impressed by him. Green wanted to know more about Carden’s work and was particularly interested in the Birch Gun. Green had been spending some time with 6th Armoured Division, who were the first to be equipped with both the Birch Self-Propelled Gun and also the Vanguard SPAAG.
The American army were experimenting with a ‘Howitzer Motor Carriage’ based on the hull of an M3 Medium tank carrying the standard M1A2 105mm howitzer. Green had thanked Carden as a Birch SPG had been sent over to America for evaluation and had helped those working on the T32 project a great deal. The Vanguard SPAAG had also been evaluated by the Americans and was provoking a lot of interest.
The fact of the matter was that, with the run down of Valiant II production about to begin, moving over to Victor tanks, the Birch and Vanguard SPGs were being redesigned using the Crusader hull built by the Nuffield Group of companies. It was possible that some of the Valiant I hulls might be used for the Birch and Vanguard once their use as tanks was no longer needed. In Carden’s opinion the Nuffield designs for a SPG and SPAAG weren’t quite as good as his own, but the War Office had to have its way.
Colonel Green had seen some of the design work and thought that the American M7 was probably the better choice than Nuffield’s. He had to admit that as the M7 was using the American 105mm gun, rather than the British 25-pdr, he didn’t believe that the War Office would want it. Carden accepted that that was the probability, with things going the way they were in North Africa, production of British built AFVs was just about meeting War Office needs.
The Canadians were making progress with their Ram tank, and since it would likely be armed with the 25-pdr as standard, there was the possibility that some of their Valiant I production would be turned over onto Birch and Vanguard SPGs. Carden also knew that the Canadian production of the Valiant II was likely to be allocated to Russia on completion of their own army’s needs. It certainly made some kind of sense to load up a ship in Halifax, then sail it via two convoys to Murmansk, rather than unload it in Liverpool, then load another ship in Liverpool with British made Valiant IIs and then sail to Murmansk.
Colonel Green asked Carden what he thought about the Tank Destroyer idea that the T12 had developed into the M3 Gun Motor Carriage. Carden smiled as he realised the M3 Gun Motor Carriage had nothing to do with the M3 Light or Medium tanks, but was a half-track with a 75mm gun on it. The old British system of tanks with names like A10, A11, A12 etc seemed child’s play compared to the American desire to call all sorts of things the same M-something. As to the concept of the tank destroyer he noted Leslie Little’s idea to mount a 6-pdr gun in a low profile hull based on the Tetrarch. So far, as far as Carden could see from German developments, they were using armoured hulls to carry infantry support weapons, though there had been a couple of panzerjägers captured which had some merit for anti-tank regiments being mobile enough to keep up with an armoured division.
The idea of a dedicated ‘tank destroyer’ was, as far as Carden was concerned, unnecessary because the best destroyer of other tanks was a tank. Having a good tank with a good gun that could take on enemy tanks, and support the infantry with HE shells, was all that was necessary. He called it the ‘universal tank’. One tank with good speed, armour and gun would be enough to win the war. By all means, have a family of Armoured Fighting Vehicles based on the same hull/engine for the various SPGs, Engineering tasks, the kind of things Percy Hobart was working on, but one kind of tank would do. The Infantry vs Cruiser idea would be obsolete with a universal tank.
Carden told Green that that was why he liked what he’d seen of the new M4 Medium tank. It wasn’t perfect, but its speed and gun were fine, he did think it could do with a bit more armour. He could also see that it had room for development, the turret ring size meant that it could take a bigger gun if that became necessary. He could see it taking its place in both Armoured Divisions and Tank Brigades (to use the British distinction). Carden was surprised that its designers had organised the engine driving the forward sprocket which made the hull much taller than it had to be. The British tended to like a lower profile, the Victor would be about a foot lower than the M4. Carden suggested that was why the M3 Grants were going to the Australians and Indians who’d probably be up against the Japanese whose tanks weren’t up to much.
On a visit to London, Carden had lunch with the American Colonel George Green. Green was one of the Americans in the Harriman Mission sent by the President to coordinate with the British regarding Lend-Lease and other matters. Green had been invited to sit on the Tank Board and act as Liaison Officer regarding design and production issues on Armoured Fighting Vehicles.
Carden had been told that the American was an Army Reserve Officer, but had been Vice-President in one of General Motors subsidiaries (Yellow Truck and Coach Manufacturing). Green had also been vice-chairman of the Advisory Committee of the Ordnance Department, and Carden had been impressed by him. Green wanted to know more about Carden’s work and was particularly interested in the Birch Gun. Green had been spending some time with 6th Armoured Division, who were the first to be equipped with both the Birch Self-Propelled Gun and also the Vanguard SPAAG.
The American army were experimenting with a ‘Howitzer Motor Carriage’ based on the hull of an M3 Medium tank carrying the standard M1A2 105mm howitzer. Green had thanked Carden as a Birch SPG had been sent over to America for evaluation and had helped those working on the T32 project a great deal. The Vanguard SPAAG had also been evaluated by the Americans and was provoking a lot of interest.
The fact of the matter was that, with the run down of Valiant II production about to begin, moving over to Victor tanks, the Birch and Vanguard SPGs were being redesigned using the Crusader hull built by the Nuffield Group of companies. It was possible that some of the Valiant I hulls might be used for the Birch and Vanguard once their use as tanks was no longer needed. In Carden’s opinion the Nuffield designs for a SPG and SPAAG weren’t quite as good as his own, but the War Office had to have its way.
Colonel Green had seen some of the design work and thought that the American M7 was probably the better choice than Nuffield’s. He had to admit that as the M7 was using the American 105mm gun, rather than the British 25-pdr, he didn’t believe that the War Office would want it. Carden accepted that that was the probability, with things going the way they were in North Africa, production of British built AFVs was just about meeting War Office needs.
The Canadians were making progress with their Ram tank, and since it would likely be armed with the 25-pdr as standard, there was the possibility that some of their Valiant I production would be turned over onto Birch and Vanguard SPGs. Carden also knew that the Canadian production of the Valiant II was likely to be allocated to Russia on completion of their own army’s needs. It certainly made some kind of sense to load up a ship in Halifax, then sail it via two convoys to Murmansk, rather than unload it in Liverpool, then load another ship in Liverpool with British made Valiant IIs and then sail to Murmansk.
Colonel Green asked Carden what he thought about the Tank Destroyer idea that the T12 had developed into the M3 Gun Motor Carriage. Carden smiled as he realised the M3 Gun Motor Carriage had nothing to do with the M3 Light or Medium tanks, but was a half-track with a 75mm gun on it. The old British system of tanks with names like A10, A11, A12 etc seemed child’s play compared to the American desire to call all sorts of things the same M-something. As to the concept of the tank destroyer he noted Leslie Little’s idea to mount a 6-pdr gun in a low profile hull based on the Tetrarch. So far, as far as Carden could see from German developments, they were using armoured hulls to carry infantry support weapons, though there had been a couple of panzerjägers captured which had some merit for anti-tank regiments being mobile enough to keep up with an armoured division.
The idea of a dedicated ‘tank destroyer’ was, as far as Carden was concerned, unnecessary because the best destroyer of other tanks was a tank. Having a good tank with a good gun that could take on enemy tanks, and support the infantry with HE shells, was all that was necessary. He called it the ‘universal tank’. One tank with good speed, armour and gun would be enough to win the war. By all means, have a family of Armoured Fighting Vehicles based on the same hull/engine for the various SPGs, Engineering tasks, the kind of things Percy Hobart was working on, but one kind of tank would do. The Infantry vs Cruiser idea would be obsolete with a universal tank.
Carden told Green that that was why he liked what he’d seen of the new M4 Medium tank. It wasn’t perfect, but its speed and gun were fine, he did think it could do with a bit more armour. He could also see that it had room for development, the turret ring size meant that it could take a bigger gun if that became necessary. He could see it taking its place in both Armoured Divisions and Tank Brigades (to use the British distinction). Carden was surprised that its designers had organised the engine driving the forward sprocket which made the hull much taller than it had to be. The British tended to like a lower profile, the Victor would be about a foot lower than the M4. Carden suggested that was why the M3 Grants were going to the Australians and Indians who’d probably be up against the Japanese whose tanks weren’t up to much.
marathag
Banned
Unlike OTL, the British have successfully demonstrated superiority with armor in battle, repeatedly, and have far better reputation in those matters.
While NIH is certainly still in effect, the British will have much more influence.
OTL, the Matilda II at Aberdeen failed to impress much at all, while the T-34/76 did, even with the terrible reliability that particular example had.