Because not eveyone knows all the details of every campaign, and if you just put up the changed bits it gets hellishly confusing. It also helps stabilise the timeline.
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
Fair enough. I just feel that - were it me - I'd be trying to move the story along with each update. That said, this is being updated so often it's not like we'll be kept waiting long.
The thing is I can see Britain moving away from the split role tanks sooner in TTL. OTL I believe it was 1943 that a Universal tank as a concept was officially made and that was in relation to carrying on and looking at stop gaps until the Universal could come along.
TTL you already have the Universal by 43, or more likely some time in 42
17 pounder wont happen TTL, something else bigger probably will come along later on in the war however, more on that later. The problem with designing the tanks for the 17 pounder, other than it not existing at all ITTL is the fact that even in OTL id did not exist at all at this point. The first thoughts on a new gun were being considered but specs were only laid down in 41.
Those niche tanks never went anywhere OTL and that was with all the rubbish Britain was building, TTL they would have no chance.
The idea of converting the A15 to a light tank is a good one but wont realistically happen. It would take too much back tracking after the failures to make a Cruiser tank and then you are having to re-do a whole bunch of work.
And you could do AA units , gun tractors and other funnies on the a15 hull like it did in otl i guess so vickers doesnt get distracted as part of their otl numbers maybe to get use of the hull altough preferably without liberty engines to be honest.
I do agree that there wont be that many crusaders as otl for sure. Maybe as lend lease to the soviets they might make sense altough the atrocious mechanical issues have to be solved to be honest . And they could produce carriers instead if they dont want to do victors or maybe be the assault gun producer for the army ?
I still think that a late mark churchill or even a improved black prince that is attached to infantry divisons is a decent idea to do and keep the victors as main battle tanks in the armored divisions and brigades atleast for ww2 , probably not after tough since a improved centurion makes it pointless but for the war it would be somewhat useful . Preferably with a big diesel engines that have been discussed earlier maybe in the updates?
I do agree that there wont be that many crusaders as otl for sure. Maybe as lend lease to the soviets they might make sense altough the atrocious mechanical issues have to be solved to be honest . And they could produce carriers instead if they dont want to do victors or maybe be the assault gun producer for the army ?
I still think that a late mark churchill or even a improved black prince that is attached to infantry divisons is a decent idea to do and keep the victors as main battle tanks in the armored divisions and brigades atleast for ww2 , probably not after tough since a improved centurion makes it pointless but for the war it would be somewhat useful . Preferably with a big diesel engines that have been discussed earlier maybe in the updates?
Last edited:
You sense of entitlement is showing here. Your last two criticisms have been 'nothing new to see here' and 'hurry up and update'. All couched in a positive sense, but the intent is clear. What next, 'how about longer updates so at least some of each post is altered history?'
None of this offers improvement to the plot nor writing style as far as I can see. A high bar to set under the circumstances, but comments should be constructive, not just (sort of) positive. You might mention that although nothing changes sometimes, the author could still show why changes don't reach that far and where that is different to the impacted areas. The events are the same, but the context differs through the perspective of contrast. I don't know if that is an important point to make, but it is at least a critique.
allanpcameron
Donor
You'd hope so.
Part of OTL programme was that there didn't seem to be much collaboration between the various parent firms, and the Tank Board didn't seem to have any useful role. The probably needed a Beaverbrooke style Ministry of Air Production revolution.
Black Prince 50 ton tank 350hp, 10 mph. Centurian 51 ton tank 650hp, and as the next quote says 21.5mph.
It is really interesting isn't it that all the enthusiasm for the Christie Suspension and the 30+mph top speed before the war, by the end of the war 21.5mph is entirely satisfactory.
Therein lies Nuffield's problem, and why the Crusader might well become the Covenanter of TTL.
This is the heart of the Timeline. The Valentine filled a niche that wasn't Cruiser or Infantry, but was reliable and 'would do' in the circumstances. Make the Valentine better and suddenly the whole OTL the Great British Tank Scandal becomes a different kettle of fish.
Part of the problem I've created by having captured German tanks to examine, is that the Pz III and IV in May 1940 aren't much to write home about, the A13MkIV in comparison isn't too bad, except for the spaced armour. Put an A15 (2-pdr) up against the captured early Pz III and it looks pretty good. Put it up against a 1941-42 later Pz III or IV and suddenly its behind the curve. What if the A15 Crusader in early is forced by competition with the Valiant to become an early A27 (Centaur/Cromwell) by 1942?
I hadn't considered that, that's interesting.
Not offended, always happy to take positive criticism. Part of writing these stories for me is learning stuff I didn't know. So I have a tendency to share that with you, whether you want it or not. Sometimes the I feel the painting needs the frame in place. So that tends to be my thinking, here's the frame, so we can focus on the picture/story. I hope that makes sense.
Hopefully, but a lot of water is still to go under that particular bridge. Compass will be the first chance to compare the Valiant I and I*, and that'll be important for the development of Cruiser/Infantry or Universal.
Not so sure I agree that it won't happen. The 6-pdr had to be made because British tank armour in the Matilda was too much for the 2-pdr. The 17-pdr had to be made because the Churchill couldn't be dealt with by the 6-pdr. If that was true of British tanks, then the presumption was it would be true of German tanks, proven correct with the appearance of the Tiger in Tunisia. While I've alluded to Vickers looking at the follow up to the 6-pdr (with HE capability) The Royal Arsenal will also be doing their own thing, which I believe not much will change. What might not happen OTL is the Firefly, trying to squeeze the 17-pdr into a tank not designed for it. This time, hopefully, tanks will be designed with big guns in mind. OTL the 17-pdr was concieved in September 1940, April 41 specificated and August agreed, and September 500 ordered. All before the 6-pdr is in full production!
All possible, though the Liberty will stay. My nightmare is Nuffield builds a Valiant IA* with a Liberty engine!
Soviets rejected the Crusader OTL can't see them wanting it here.
I suppose that somewhere in the back of someone's twisted mind, looking at you Hobart, an invasion of the continent from southern England will have to happen at some point. So what kind of tanks are going to be needed against first class German opposition? The whole TOG thing happened because of the thought of attacking the Siegfried Line. So an assault tank will still be contemplated.
You're reading into my comments far more than I was meaning. No sense of entitlement here.
On the subject of the Soviets will Churchill make his same ill advised promise to them? I mean they really didn't like the British Kit they got sent when compared to the American stuff. I mean the tanks are better but they will be still be getting a lot of the same stuff which they took issue with like the ammunition boots.
Wouldn't it be more likely for the British to jump past the 17-pdr (from the 3-inch gun in development that's to be mounted on the Victor) straight to the Ordnance QF-25-pdr? The QF-25-pdr is, despite it's slow start in production, already in production in 1940 after all.
Ordnance QF 25-pounder - Wikipedia
allanpcameron
Donor
Good question, but I doubt it. The problem is that the 25-pdr is a field gun, and while could and was used in an anti-tank capacity, it didn't have the muzzle velocity that the British idea of an anti-tank gun should have. If they jump past the 17-pdr then it'll be more likely the OTL 20-pdr or even the 32-pdr, using the 3.7-inch AA gun as the basis.Wouldn't it be more likely for the British to jump past the 17-pdr (from the 3-inch gun in development that's to be mounted on the Victor) straight to the Ordnance QF-25-pdr? The QF-25-pdr is, despite it's slow start in production, already in production in 1940 after all.
Ordnance QF 25-pounder - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The QF 25 pdr is the gun you put in the next generation of Close Support tank it doesn't have the muzzle velocity for anti tank work against late war tanks.
Derek Pullem
Donor
In a way this is a Vickers tank wank but that is saying the OTL was a Rolls Royce Merlin wank for aircraft engines.
It absolutely follows that is the Valliant is good enough as a cruiser and an infantry tank then there is no reason why it couldn't be used for both. Changing the "doctrine" of infantry and cruiser tanks may be somewhat more difficult to shift in the army formations themselves but at least the spares are compatible!
Agree entirely on the 6pdr / 3" / 17 pdr observations - the 3" is an analogue of the L/48 KwK40 75mm on the German sides. it's a good gun but not good enough to face off against later model Tigers and Panthers. Whether the 17 pdr makes it into a Victor II or a completely new tank is designed around the 17 pdr (or 77mm HV) I don't know but I'd guess it will be in service at the latest in 1944. The British may be content to take their time if the 3" Vickers is providing good service.
marathag
Banned
For the British.
M26 Heavy, 46 tons, 30mph
M47 Medium 48 tons, 30 mph
T-44 Medium 35 tons, 34mph
T-55 Medium 40 tons, 31mph
T-10 Heavy, 56 tons,23mph with T-10M back to 31
AMX-50 Heavy ,63 tons, 32mph
The relatively slow speed of the Centurion was more the consequence of not having anything better than a Meteor (or not wanting to delay construction by using a new engine) to power it than any doctrinal requirement, although the British were content with this speed.
The A45 and Conqueror weren't any better since they were way heavier. That said why their powerplant wasn't used in later production Centurions is beyond me. Maybe the perception that the Cent wasn't supposed to last long and post-Korean production requirements preventing major modifications in this area?
The A45 and Conqueror weren't any better since they were way heavier. That said why their powerplant wasn't used in later production Centurions is beyond me. Maybe the perception that the Cent wasn't supposed to last long and post-Korean production requirements preventing major modifications in this area?
6 November 1940. Gallabat, Sudan.
allanpcameron
Donor
6 November 1940. Gallabat, Sudan.
Captain Holdsworth, commanding B Squadron 51st Battalion Royal Tank Regiment tried to make sense of what he could see through his binoculars. The transition from night to morning in Africa was very different to dawn in Yorkshire. His first objective was Gallabat Fort, to reach it his tanks would have to cross over a mile of unexplored ground. The limited experience of the country, and the attempt to capture the Fort from the Italians with the element of surprise, meant that he wasn’t entirely sure if there was anything out there that could do his tanks some harm. The Fort was surrounded by field fortifications and if there was a minefield then he’d be in big trouble.
Brigadier Bill Slim was in charge of the operation. The 10th Indian Infantry Brigade, to which B Company was attached, had tried to do as much planning for the assault as possible. Slim was glad of the tank support, and listened carefully to Holdsworth’s explanation of the limitations of the tanks. The Italians were thought to number a battalion’s worth of colonial troops, with another two battalions at Metemma, which was the second objective. To get there, the tanks would have to cross a dry river bed, with steep banks, and Holdsworth kept thinking about the diminishing number of track pins he had.
The plan was already under way. During the night the 4th Battalion 10th Baluch Regiment had occupied a hill overlooking the fort, and would act as a flank guard. The operation would begin in earnest once the RAF bombed the fort, which was due to happen at sunrise. Holdsworth’s tanks would support 3rd Royal Garwhal Rifles who’d approach the fort while the field artillery bombarded it.
Sure enough, the RAF actually turned up on time and the six Wellesley bombers managed to drop bombs on the fort, knocking out its radio. That was the sign, and Holdsworth signalled his tanks forward. He himself was in one of the two Mark VI Light Tanks, and his driver followed the nine A11 Matildas at a walking pace. There hadn’t been much of a chance for the tanks and infantry to rehearse or train together, so a Lieutenant from the Garwhals had joined him in the turret of the tank, leaving the gunner to be attached to the Indian Battalion’s HQ, so that at least some communication could be made between the two elements of the attack.
The Indian troops reached Gallabat under the cover of the pompom fire of the tanks, and fought hand-to-hand with elements of the "Granatieri di Savoia" Division and some Eritrean troops in the fort. As feared the ground the tanks had to travel over was particularly rocky, and there were mines, but each tank had a section of infantry who walked ahead and tried to guide the tanks around the worst of the hazards. Despite their best efforts by the time the tanks reached the fort, one had thrown a track and another had been badly damaged by a mine.
At 08:00hrs the Italians counter-attacked and were repulsed, the pompom guns of the remaining seven A11 tanks giving them serious trouble. Now that the first objective had been achieved, the second would be a much more difficult nut to crack. The defenders at Boundary Khor were dug in behind fields of barbed wire and the Italians had called in air support. Italian bombers and fighters attacked all day. The ground was too hard and rocky to dig in and when Italian bombers made their biggest attack, the infantry had no cover. The fort itself was heavily damaged by the Italian aircraft, but the tanks continued the advance towards Metemma.
Part of the 1st Battalion Essex Regiment at the fort broke and ran under the air assault, but the Garwhals, with support from two companies of the Baluch Regiment, sent forward, continued accompanied by the tanks. The barbed wire and minefields continued to cause Holdsworth’s tanks problems, but Sappers from the 21st Field Company helped clear a way over the dry river bed, so that by late afternoon the Indian forces were in control of the objective. The artillery bombardment of Metemma had set off Italian ammunition dumps, adding to the Italian problems. With nothing to stop the British tanks the Italian colonial battalions melted away in front of them.
British casualties on 6 November were 42 men killed and 125 wounded. Three tanks were under repair, and the most badly damaged A11 was stripped to provide spares for the others. The 10th Indian Brigade, minus elements of the Essex Regiment, took up positions to repel any Italian counterattack, digging in as best they could to protect themselves from the expected aerial attacks the next day. No counter attack came, and the Italian air attack wasn’t as heavy as the day before, now that the position had been lost.
NB Text in italic differs from OTL. As mentioned previously the attack was supported B Sqd 6 RTR with 7 A9s and 7 Mark VI. One A9 was cannibalised in advance. "Preparations were made on 5 November" is what one of my sources says. I've extrapolated that in the paragraph about Slim listening to the concerns of the tankies. The RTR officers have ash sticks to this day. Started in WW1 probing the ground ahead of the tank to check it would take the weight of the tank. Here, the Indian troops are acting a bit like the ash sticks of old. OTL: "A Light Tank was left behind, one A9 and a Light Tank suffered broken tracks and another Light was ditched. Two Light tanks supported a separate attack, while five A9s and a single Light split into two groups and attacked the fort from opposite sides. Breaking through the outer barbed wire and crashing through the low walls, the circled around inside though most were stopped by broken tracks. Two were hit by a captured .55-inch Boys antitank rifle, and one was then attacked by an improvised Molotov cocktail. After the action was over, tracks were repaired using a variety of rods and barbed wire. Two Light tanks were recovered but one which could not was blown up, the Squadron Commander's A9 was hit by a bomb during a low level air attack the next day, and abandoned after its guns were removed. Four remaining A9 and the remaining Light tanks were moved to Doka." British Cruiser Tanks A9 & A10 by Peter Brown Model Centrum Progress, Poland 2017.
The Official History focusses less on the tanks. Two specific changes, first the Essex Bn breaking was partly because an ammunition lorry had been hit by Italian aircraft, so people thought the Italians were attacking from the rear. When the Essex men broke (after strong Italian air attack on the fort) and ran (some of their Motor Transport got a long way before they were stopped) they took some of the Indian troops with them. Second, the lorry carrying spare parts for the tanks was destroyed too, meaning the tanks couldn't be repaired to take the second objective. So Slim pulled his men back. Without all the broken tracks, the lorry doesn't come forward, so isn't destroyed. The sappers are mentioned for their role in destroying some Italian stuff at the fort before withdrawing. Here they are able to help the tanks across the dry river bed.
All pretty tenuous changes, but the advantage of using the A11s here is that their slower walking pace allows the guidance to avoid the worst of the hazards. Also the pompom rather than 2-pdr/MG combination of the A9 and Mark VI, once more proves the effectiveness of the (limited) HE shell. Notice also the difference between the Infantry tank, going with the infantry and covering them with their guns, while OTL, the Cruiser/Light combo hares off themselves and end up in the fort, without infantry support getting Molotov cocktails to deal with. Also the Boys rifle isn't much help against an A11.
Sorry the notes are getting as long as the update.
Captain Holdsworth, commanding B Squadron 51st Battalion Royal Tank Regiment tried to make sense of what he could see through his binoculars. The transition from night to morning in Africa was very different to dawn in Yorkshire. His first objective was Gallabat Fort, to reach it his tanks would have to cross over a mile of unexplored ground. The limited experience of the country, and the attempt to capture the Fort from the Italians with the element of surprise, meant that he wasn’t entirely sure if there was anything out there that could do his tanks some harm. The Fort was surrounded by field fortifications and if there was a minefield then he’d be in big trouble.
Brigadier Bill Slim was in charge of the operation. The 10th Indian Infantry Brigade, to which B Company was attached, had tried to do as much planning for the assault as possible. Slim was glad of the tank support, and listened carefully to Holdsworth’s explanation of the limitations of the tanks. The Italians were thought to number a battalion’s worth of colonial troops, with another two battalions at Metemma, which was the second objective. To get there, the tanks would have to cross a dry river bed, with steep banks, and Holdsworth kept thinking about the diminishing number of track pins he had.
The plan was already under way. During the night the 4th Battalion 10th Baluch Regiment had occupied a hill overlooking the fort, and would act as a flank guard. The operation would begin in earnest once the RAF bombed the fort, which was due to happen at sunrise. Holdsworth’s tanks would support 3rd Royal Garwhal Rifles who’d approach the fort while the field artillery bombarded it.
Sure enough, the RAF actually turned up on time and the six Wellesley bombers managed to drop bombs on the fort, knocking out its radio. That was the sign, and Holdsworth signalled his tanks forward. He himself was in one of the two Mark VI Light Tanks, and his driver followed the nine A11 Matildas at a walking pace. There hadn’t been much of a chance for the tanks and infantry to rehearse or train together, so a Lieutenant from the Garwhals had joined him in the turret of the tank, leaving the gunner to be attached to the Indian Battalion’s HQ, so that at least some communication could be made between the two elements of the attack.
The Indian troops reached Gallabat under the cover of the pompom fire of the tanks, and fought hand-to-hand with elements of the "Granatieri di Savoia" Division and some Eritrean troops in the fort. As feared the ground the tanks had to travel over was particularly rocky, and there were mines, but each tank had a section of infantry who walked ahead and tried to guide the tanks around the worst of the hazards. Despite their best efforts by the time the tanks reached the fort, one had thrown a track and another had been badly damaged by a mine.
At 08:00hrs the Italians counter-attacked and were repulsed, the pompom guns of the remaining seven A11 tanks giving them serious trouble. Now that the first objective had been achieved, the second would be a much more difficult nut to crack. The defenders at Boundary Khor were dug in behind fields of barbed wire and the Italians had called in air support. Italian bombers and fighters attacked all day. The ground was too hard and rocky to dig in and when Italian bombers made their biggest attack, the infantry had no cover. The fort itself was heavily damaged by the Italian aircraft, but the tanks continued the advance towards Metemma.
Part of the 1st Battalion Essex Regiment at the fort broke and ran under the air assault, but the Garwhals, with support from two companies of the Baluch Regiment, sent forward, continued accompanied by the tanks. The barbed wire and minefields continued to cause Holdsworth’s tanks problems, but Sappers from the 21st Field Company helped clear a way over the dry river bed, so that by late afternoon the Indian forces were in control of the objective. The artillery bombardment of Metemma had set off Italian ammunition dumps, adding to the Italian problems. With nothing to stop the British tanks the Italian colonial battalions melted away in front of them.
British casualties on 6 November were 42 men killed and 125 wounded. Three tanks were under repair, and the most badly damaged A11 was stripped to provide spares for the others. The 10th Indian Brigade, minus elements of the Essex Regiment, took up positions to repel any Italian counterattack, digging in as best they could to protect themselves from the expected aerial attacks the next day. No counter attack came, and the Italian air attack wasn’t as heavy as the day before, now that the position had been lost.
NB Text in italic differs from OTL. As mentioned previously the attack was supported B Sqd 6 RTR with 7 A9s and 7 Mark VI. One A9 was cannibalised in advance. "Preparations were made on 5 November" is what one of my sources says. I've extrapolated that in the paragraph about Slim listening to the concerns of the tankies. The RTR officers have ash sticks to this day. Started in WW1 probing the ground ahead of the tank to check it would take the weight of the tank. Here, the Indian troops are acting a bit like the ash sticks of old. OTL: "A Light Tank was left behind, one A9 and a Light Tank suffered broken tracks and another Light was ditched. Two Light tanks supported a separate attack, while five A9s and a single Light split into two groups and attacked the fort from opposite sides. Breaking through the outer barbed wire and crashing through the low walls, the circled around inside though most were stopped by broken tracks. Two were hit by a captured .55-inch Boys antitank rifle, and one was then attacked by an improvised Molotov cocktail. After the action was over, tracks were repaired using a variety of rods and barbed wire. Two Light tanks were recovered but one which could not was blown up, the Squadron Commander's A9 was hit by a bomb during a low level air attack the next day, and abandoned after its guns were removed. Four remaining A9 and the remaining Light tanks were moved to Doka." British Cruiser Tanks A9 & A10 by Peter Brown Model Centrum Progress, Poland 2017.
The Official History focusses less on the tanks. Two specific changes, first the Essex Bn breaking was partly because an ammunition lorry had been hit by Italian aircraft, so people thought the Italians were attacking from the rear. When the Essex men broke (after strong Italian air attack on the fort) and ran (some of their Motor Transport got a long way before they were stopped) they took some of the Indian troops with them. Second, the lorry carrying spare parts for the tanks was destroyed too, meaning the tanks couldn't be repaired to take the second objective. So Slim pulled his men back. Without all the broken tracks, the lorry doesn't come forward, so isn't destroyed. The sappers are mentioned for their role in destroying some Italian stuff at the fort before withdrawing. Here they are able to help the tanks across the dry river bed.
All pretty tenuous changes, but the advantage of using the A11s here is that their slower walking pace allows the guidance to avoid the worst of the hazards. Also the pompom rather than 2-pdr/MG combination of the A9 and Mark VI, once more proves the effectiveness of the (limited) HE shell. Notice also the difference between the Infantry tank, going with the infantry and covering them with their guns, while OTL, the Cruiser/Light combo hares off themselves and end up in the fort, without infantry support getting Molotov cocktails to deal with. Also the Boys rifle isn't much help against an A11.
Sorry the notes are getting as long as the update.
17pd will still happen as it's gestation is initiated to replace the 6pdr as the next wheeled anti tank gun, this driver is still in place irregardless of whether the Vickers 75mm gun is a success as a tank gun. The RA will want what they specified as an anti tank gun and ROF will give them what they want.
The A15 will still see service after its faults are rectified, a 6pdr armed Crusader with a well designed set of engine ancillaries is easily the match of anything the Axis produced until the Panther is seen in service in numbers, which may well be mid 1943 or more likely early 44 in Italy, if indeed the Italian campaign happens, ditto for the Churchill. Having two tanks in a battle that are good enough is better than having a great tank that isn't available for that encounter.
Posters advocating that everyone should make Valiants ignore the way that British procurement operated in WW2 and after, they never ordered from a single source and almost always had two models from differing suppliers running concurrently, even if one was clearly superior this allowed the use of separate supply chains meaning that if there was an issue with one component that stopped production on one tank, then the other tank is still in production.
We need to remember that the Valiant has seen one small action and that in itself is not enough data for sane men to throw everything behind one model and cancel everything else.
The A15 will still see service after its faults are rectified, a 6pdr armed Crusader with a well designed set of engine ancillaries is easily the match of anything the Axis produced until the Panther is seen in service in numbers, which may well be mid 1943 or more likely early 44 in Italy, if indeed the Italian campaign happens, ditto for the Churchill. Having two tanks in a battle that are good enough is better than having a great tank that isn't available for that encounter.
Posters advocating that everyone should make Valiants ignore the way that British procurement operated in WW2 and after, they never ordered from a single source and almost always had two models from differing suppliers running concurrently, even if one was clearly superior this allowed the use of separate supply chains meaning that if there was an issue with one component that stopped production on one tank, then the other tank is still in production.
We need to remember that the Valiant has seen one small action and that in itself is not enough data for sane men to throw everything behind one model and cancel everything else.
Good update Allan, once again the infantry tanks carry the day as they did in France.
Based on the information coming in from actions involving tanks for the British army then at the moment the heavily armoured infantry tank looks like the avenue to follow vs the Cruiser type that met with little success in the action it saw in France.
Now we know this will be challenged once the North Africa campaign starts, but for European operations the infantry type has a lot of advantages that offset it's slightly lower operational speed.
Based on the information coming in from actions involving tanks for the British army then at the moment the heavily armoured infantry tank looks like the avenue to follow vs the Cruiser type that met with little success in the action it saw in France.
Now we know this will be challenged once the North Africa campaign starts, but for European operations the infantry type has a lot of advantages that offset it's slightly lower operational speed.
- Status