To be fair if the automotive industry was more advanced, then the 30s tanks probably would be better in that TL. Didn’t they try to use as many existing parts as possible in tanks to keep the cost down?
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
Yes, the restrictions on British diesel engines for lorries come to mind. I don't know how much power was expected if those restrictions had been lifted but even getting an engine in the class of the Valentine's diesel AEC, or 150-170hp without an undue increase in space requirements in 1935-36 would have been a huge boon to the early British tanks, as would 100-110hp diesels of the same size as those that went into the Matilda II.
In fact automotive technology may be the most important factor for tank design.
Last edited:
I would think an earlier switch to using aircraft engines in tanks is the solution to more power.
It's the better solution yes but automobile/lorry engines were a possibly more important factor since they tend to be cheaper, more available, easier to adapt to tracked vehicles and more in line with the lightweight cheap tanks of the interwar. So they are more valuable in that period. Aircraft engines are better for wartime however.
in order to get enough HP from an auto engine you end up with something like Chryslers A57........5 engines going to a single transmission weighing 5700 pounds and requiring a larger engine compartment.
Even in a best case scenario of Britain kicking the Germans and Italians out of North Africa by May or June 1941 any potential invasion of Greece or Sicily could not happen until 1942. The troops who just fought in North Africa would need to rest and re-equip and the logistical build up would take months and that is before you think about planning for any seaborne invasion. Best case scenario you are looking at 12 months and in that time the pressure to release Australian and New Zealand troops to go back east to deter Japan would be pretty large. Also it would make sense for Britain to not only send those troops east but some of their own. Mainly to act as a deterrent to Japan, the logic of playing a strong hand now after a swift victory will deter Japan and secure the East would make a lot of sense to the decision makers at the time. In addition it won't be worth the political capital of fighting the relocation as Britain will have more pressing issues whilst no immediate need for the troops. Let them go then call them back when needed.
The underlying Logic of your argument is sound, Churchill will get ideas. Sicily is the most likely as it fully secures the Med and if Britain has held Crete, it also could lead onto Sardinia and Corsica which will be on the minds of some decision makers. The issue will just be the time required to set anything in pace will mean immediate operations can't happen.
I mean that Britain for example wanted to make tanks on the cheap so under 20 tons with lorry engines and over taht with two lorry engines. The Interwar wasn't kind to heavy mobile monsters, unless you don't give a shit like the USSR.
That's pretty much what they did and they were still rather slow.The valentine making all of 15mph on roads and the Matilda making 16
Loyd didn't leave Vickers until several years after Carden's death OTL. Here Carden is still alive, so Loyd might still be there.Try some research before asking questions.
Loyd Carrier - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
There have been no drivers to change development of Lloyd and Bren carriers until Arras.
There's been IIRC at least one proposal to turn one of the light tanks into an infantry carrier. I would have thought Vivian Loyd's staying on or not, to have been, if not directly related, then at least near enough to be with a mention or two prior. Just a thought.
Tanks and trailers, as mentioned, don't go together.
Last edited:
Just to add a little depth to the "Tank Development" discussion....
For those of us who don't know (of which I am one), what are the challenges in simply "scaling up" smaller displacement engines where more power is required? I had originally asked myself this question in the context of why the British tried to develop an H-24 cylinder design for fighter aircraft instead of simply scaling up the Merlin, but the same question would most certainly apply to tank engines (diesel and petrol) as well.
marathag
Banned
They did, for aircraft. Went from the 1650ci Merlin to 2240 Griffon.
But not for tanks, didn't go for the Soviet method of a big V-12 for the V2 installed on the KV and T-34
That's an easy retcon though. Do a post talking about the slow development of the APC. Loyd has been doing the work with Vickers. The first prototype was a re-purposed A9 or somethat was a bit disappointing so it was back to the drawing board. Thats why we haven't heard about it so far.
Oh and the loyd carrier is the Vickers Loyd carrier ITTL, just shortened to Loyd carrier by most people.
29 November 1940. Malta.
allanpcameron
Donor
29 November 1940. Malta.
The men of what had formerly been the 42nd Bn RTR, having taken possession of their 17 Matilda II and single Vickers Mark VIC tank, were now duly rechristened 1st Independent Squadron RTR in Malta Command.
The rest of the 42nd Bn RTR had also left British shores for far flung places. B Squadron had come here to Malta, a troop of A Squadron were on Gibraltar, while the rest of that Squadron, with C and HQ Squadrons had been sent to East Africa.
The tanks had arrived in Valetta in a convoy that had included the equipment for then men who’d arrived on board Royal Navy ships earlier in the month. The transport and heavy equipment for an infantry battalion, two 25-pdr field batteries, and one light and two heavy anti-aircraft batteries had all been unloaded and, like the Independent Squadron RTR, these units were all busy getting themselves sorted out.
Having seventeen Matilda II gave the Malta garrison quite a boost. Their reputation during the fighting in France and Flanders had been well publicised. When the men had driven them from the docks to their depot the crowds of locals cheering them was a great boost to their morale, as just the tanks were a boost to the people’s.
Once the tanks arrived at their depot the process of getting the tanks ready for action had begun. All the efforts to protect the ships from the sea voyage had to be removed, then the tanks would need to be fully inspected, and taken to a range where they could sight their guns properly. The fact that the men of the Squadron had been on the island for a couple of weeks before the tanks arrived had given them a chance to get used to the new environment. Now they’d need to get their tanks ready for the same challenge. Once the tanks were ready, the training for defending the island against an invasion could begin in earnest.
NB text in italic differs from OTL. 44th Battalion OTL provided two troops consisting of four Matildas and two Mark VIs (a tank battalion troop being 3 tanks). Here it is 42nd because 44th have Valiants and are already in Egypt. Some tanks, I believe two or three were sent OTL to Gibraltar; and it was 4th Battalion RTR which sent a squadron to East Africa. East Africa will now get 37 tanks instead of OTL 16. This completes the overseas deployment of 21st Tank Brigade ITTL, OTL they arrived in North Africa as part of Operation Torch in 1942. Basically I've brought forward the OTL deployment of all of First Army Tank Brigade (4, 7 & 8th RTR) by about 6 months and swapped it for 21st Tank Brigade. Whether someone will think about putting a bulldozer blade on a Matilda to help extend Malta's runways I leave up to you. I know I mentioned keeping the Matildas for home defence, but the emergency of fighting the Italians has meant that some other places needed tanks desperately.
The men of what had formerly been the 42nd Bn RTR, having taken possession of their 17 Matilda II and single Vickers Mark VIC tank, were now duly rechristened 1st Independent Squadron RTR in Malta Command.
The rest of the 42nd Bn RTR had also left British shores for far flung places. B Squadron had come here to Malta, a troop of A Squadron were on Gibraltar, while the rest of that Squadron, with C and HQ Squadrons had been sent to East Africa.
The tanks had arrived in Valetta in a convoy that had included the equipment for then men who’d arrived on board Royal Navy ships earlier in the month. The transport and heavy equipment for an infantry battalion, two 25-pdr field batteries, and one light and two heavy anti-aircraft batteries had all been unloaded and, like the Independent Squadron RTR, these units were all busy getting themselves sorted out.
Having seventeen Matilda II gave the Malta garrison quite a boost. Their reputation during the fighting in France and Flanders had been well publicised. When the men had driven them from the docks to their depot the crowds of locals cheering them was a great boost to their morale, as just the tanks were a boost to the people’s.
Once the tanks arrived at their depot the process of getting the tanks ready for action had begun. All the efforts to protect the ships from the sea voyage had to be removed, then the tanks would need to be fully inspected, and taken to a range where they could sight their guns properly. The fact that the men of the Squadron had been on the island for a couple of weeks before the tanks arrived had given them a chance to get used to the new environment. Now they’d need to get their tanks ready for the same challenge. Once the tanks were ready, the training for defending the island against an invasion could begin in earnest.
NB text in italic differs from OTL. 44th Battalion OTL provided two troops consisting of four Matildas and two Mark VIs (a tank battalion troop being 3 tanks). Here it is 42nd because 44th have Valiants and are already in Egypt. Some tanks, I believe two or three were sent OTL to Gibraltar; and it was 4th Battalion RTR which sent a squadron to East Africa. East Africa will now get 37 tanks instead of OTL 16. This completes the overseas deployment of 21st Tank Brigade ITTL, OTL they arrived in North Africa as part of Operation Torch in 1942. Basically I've brought forward the OTL deployment of all of First Army Tank Brigade (4, 7 & 8th RTR) by about 6 months and swapped it for 21st Tank Brigade. Whether someone will think about putting a bulldozer blade on a Matilda to help extend Malta's runways I leave up to you. I know I mentioned keeping the Matildas for home defence, but the emergency of fighting the Italians has meant that some other places needed tanks desperately.
No it was done when the Centurion reversed. The Monotrailer was completely hidden, more or less behind the tank and it would catch on things and buckle under the vehicle. It was a good idea, in theory but badly created and used in practice. Much better to extend the vehicle's fuel tanks inside the hull and go for jettisonable fuel tanks a'la the Soviet style IMO.
Yes but before you come into contact with the enemy, you have to be able to manouvre your tank and that can include reversing it. The trailers were also badly designed/constructed in the case of the Monotrailer and bounced around and leaked fuel badly from the split rims.
Sending Matilda II's to places like Malta and Gibraltar makes sense to me. The powers that be know Britain is safe from invasion until Spring at the earliest. Add to that any preparations will give the game away so the prospect of any invasion is slim. Add to that the increased tank production over OTL and Britain can spare Matilda II's to defend certain key places.
I would have questioned them being sent to any combat zone.
- Status