Pity the Aussie ex pat going into a shop and asking for a roll of Durex.
Sir John Valentine Carden survives.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
- Status
Although the POM doing the same in Sydney is going to be very confused. And frustrated
allanpcameron
Donor
The linguistic differences within the English speaking world, in my humble opinion, have probably been discussed enough already.
Allan.
Allan.
On reflection you are quite right.
on topic- forgive me for the daft question, but for dust suppression why not use seawater? Sure the salt content would, over time, cause problems, but surely these wouldn’t be worse than having widespread problems with dust destroying vehicles?
allanpcameron
Donor
I'm not really sure, it has been @diesal who has been keen on this. I haven't read anything on how it was solved OTL.
Allan
marathag
Banned
For dust control of the era in US graveled roads, was calcium chloride or magnesium chloride brine spayed on the roadway, in roughly a 1/3 mix.
Sodium chloride, from seawater, wouldn't be at the recommended density, so many more applications of seawater would be needed.
used or contaminated motor oils could also be used.
allanpcameron
Donor
The table below is OTL. As you can see production speeds up dramatically in 1941. If the majority of the tanks produced are Valiants (Infantry and Cruiser) as opposed to Covenanters, Crusaders and (early) Churchills then production is probably fine. The problem with OTL was that the Covenanter couldn't be sent abroad and the Churchills needed to be almost rebuilt to be much use. The early Crusaders were also unreliable. So speeding up production is less important if what is being produced is a half-decent tank. I have been working on production picking up earlier and being a bit better (~10%) than OTL. The other change will be the earlier awarding tank and tank gun manufacturing to be at the same level of priority as aircraft were at this point.
Allan
Production of tanks to December 1941
| TABLE 25 | Units | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Cruiser | Infantry | Light | |||
| Pre-war | 1,148 | 79 | 67 | 1,002 | ||
| 1939: | September–December | 314 | 71 | 63 | 180 | |
| 1940: | January–March | 218 | 92 | 46 | 80 | |
| April–June | 340 | 159 | 121 | 60 | ||
| July–September | 392 | 147 | 227 | 18 | ||
| October–December | 449 | 78 | 354 | 17 | ||
| Total deliveries September 1939 to December 1940 | 1,713 | |||||
| 1941: | January–March | 653 | 184 | 469 | nil | |
| April–June | 943 | 347 | 566 | 30 | ||
| July–September | 1,368 | 406 | 942 | 20 | ||
| October–December | 1,877 | 479 | 1,375 | 23 | ||
| Total deliveries September 1939 to December 1941 | 6,554 | |||||
| Total deliveries including pre-war | 7,702 | |||||
| Total required by 30th November 1941 (Z + 27)—as estimated August 1940 | 9,926 |
Well then a third tier power shouldn't have taken on the second most powerful country in the world then I guess? OTL the Italian's held long enough for the Nazi's to show up and cause trouble but their own African campaign can be best described as a complete failure. Here they won't hold anywhere near as well and even if they don't get tumbled out of North Africa completely hopefully the position will be bad enough even Rommel can't salvage it and Britain also doesn't make the mistake of diverting forces this time.
Ramp-Rat
Monthly Donor
Did the British army have to relearn all the lessons it had learnt during WWI?
To which the answer is both yes and no, yes it had to relearn some of the skills it had had, but no the lessons were all there in standard operating procedures, it’s just that no one had had the opportunity to practice them except on paper during the inter war years. People often forget just how unique the British. Army was in comparison to the other armies of advanced nations was. Among the advanced nations there were only three that had fully professional armies, Britain, the United States and the German Republic. All the others had a conscript army, or with the European colonial powers, a conscript army for home service, and a separate professional army for colonial service. Off the three professional armies, the US was small and had very little money spent on it during the inter war years, it didn’t have a large internal police role, that function was provided by the National Guard. Not that this didn’t stop the government using the Regular Army when it was expedient, ie the Bonus Riots of 1932. The German Army was as a result of the restrictions placed upon it by The Versailles Treaty, both the most professional army in the world, the one that could not preform any useful task that an army is designed for, and the worst equipped. The provisions of Versailles, prevented it from having heavy artillery, armoured vehicles, and much of the equipment vital to a European army. Thus during the period between the end of WWI and the establishment of the Nazi government, it concentrated on running military exercises, with the aim of learning how to fight the next war.
The British Army, was in many ways the only working army in the world, that was in continuous service throughout the entire inter war years. But this came at a cost, the army was split between the very small home force that was dedicated to fighting a full scale war, the remainder of the home force, that was preparing for colonial service, or returning from colonial service. And the active force serving overseas, and engaged in on going campaigns duties. While it did provide the majority of junior officers some experienced in controlling men in combat, and skills in managing low scale combat. It failed to address the needs of junior officers in training for large scale high intensity war, or the ability of the British Army to carry out the sort intensive investigative exercises that the Germans did. While the British officer corps did have available all the details of how to conduct a full scale war, most didn’t have the inclination, drive or time to really study, how to conduct such a major conflict. And the British army didn’t have the spare personal that the Continental conscript armies did to man units on the off chance that they might be needed. The British Army in the inter war years had no need for a single field bakery unit, as at home they could source their bread from the large commercial bakeries, once war broke out suddenly there was a need.
The British Army had no need for a unit able to drill bore holes, not at home or overseas, but once again suddenly there is a need. Nor did it need port handling companies during peace time, as this was dealt with by commercial companies. Other than a very small military railway unit and a few reserve units, railways were just the local railway company. The RAF didn’t need airfield construction companies of its own, and the Royal Engineers didn’t build airfields. If the RAF, wanted a new airfield , there was a process, which was long and involved numerous departments , tenders to the construction industry, and final approval. Now the RE are expected to build in days, what would have taken years to plan for, and mostly by hand, as they don’t have the construction equipment. The British Army had since 1937, due to changes in government policy, but without the advantages of having conscription until 1939, been playing catch-up. The change from a mostly infantry based force designed for colonial policing, to one that requires all of the multitude of specialist units required to fight a major war, takes time. The British knew what to do, and what they needed to do it with, but finding the men and equipment, and training them would have been a major problem, without the retreat from France, and the entry of Italy in to the war.
RR.
To which the answer is both yes and no, yes it had to relearn some of the skills it had had, but no the lessons were all there in standard operating procedures, it’s just that no one had had the opportunity to practice them except on paper during the inter war years. People often forget just how unique the British. Army was in comparison to the other armies of advanced nations was. Among the advanced nations there were only three that had fully professional armies, Britain, the United States and the German Republic. All the others had a conscript army, or with the European colonial powers, a conscript army for home service, and a separate professional army for colonial service. Off the three professional armies, the US was small and had very little money spent on it during the inter war years, it didn’t have a large internal police role, that function was provided by the National Guard. Not that this didn’t stop the government using the Regular Army when it was expedient, ie the Bonus Riots of 1932. The German Army was as a result of the restrictions placed upon it by The Versailles Treaty, both the most professional army in the world, the one that could not preform any useful task that an army is designed for, and the worst equipped. The provisions of Versailles, prevented it from having heavy artillery, armoured vehicles, and much of the equipment vital to a European army. Thus during the period between the end of WWI and the establishment of the Nazi government, it concentrated on running military exercises, with the aim of learning how to fight the next war.
The British Army, was in many ways the only working army in the world, that was in continuous service throughout the entire inter war years. But this came at a cost, the army was split between the very small home force that was dedicated to fighting a full scale war, the remainder of the home force, that was preparing for colonial service, or returning from colonial service. And the active force serving overseas, and engaged in on going campaigns duties. While it did provide the majority of junior officers some experienced in controlling men in combat, and skills in managing low scale combat. It failed to address the needs of junior officers in training for large scale high intensity war, or the ability of the British Army to carry out the sort intensive investigative exercises that the Germans did. While the British officer corps did have available all the details of how to conduct a full scale war, most didn’t have the inclination, drive or time to really study, how to conduct such a major conflict. And the British army didn’t have the spare personal that the Continental conscript armies did to man units on the off chance that they might be needed. The British Army in the inter war years had no need for a single field bakery unit, as at home they could source their bread from the large commercial bakeries, once war broke out suddenly there was a need.
The British Army had no need for a unit able to drill bore holes, not at home or overseas, but once again suddenly there is a need. Nor did it need port handling companies during peace time, as this was dealt with by commercial companies. Other than a very small military railway unit and a few reserve units, railways were just the local railway company. The RAF didn’t need airfield construction companies of its own, and the Royal Engineers didn’t build airfields. If the RAF, wanted a new airfield , there was a process, which was long and involved numerous departments , tenders to the construction industry, and final approval. Now the RE are expected to build in days, what would have taken years to plan for, and mostly by hand, as they don’t have the construction equipment. The British Army had since 1937, due to changes in government policy, but without the advantages of having conscription until 1939, been playing catch-up. The change from a mostly infantry based force designed for colonial policing, to one that requires all of the multitude of specialist units required to fight a major war, takes time. The British knew what to do, and what they needed to do it with, but finding the men and equipment, and training them would have been a major problem, without the retreat from France, and the entry of Italy in to the war.
RR.
To be fair, having to fight a war in the middle of nowhere with basically no infrastructure didn't exactly help.
As you said, the assumption was a fight in Europe, so even if abroad there would be a large and sophisticated support structure, which while not perfect would handle the majority of needs.
None of which is in the Western desert.
As you said, the assumption was a fight in Europe, so even if abroad there would be a large and sophisticated support structure, which while not perfect would handle the majority of needs.
None of which is in the Western desert.
What's stopped the British, as I OTL is the logistics, or rather, lack of it at this point.
4 February 1941. Chertsey, England.
allanpcameron
Donor
4 February 1941. Chertsey, England.
From the after-action reports of Operation Compass, a list of suggestions had been made regarding British tanks in general and the Valiant in particular. The management team at Vickers were working their way through these trying to sort out what could be done about it.
The issue of preparing the tanks for Egypt before they left Britain, and made sure that they were properly prepared for a lengthy sea journey had already been received and was being applied. Among the other recommendations was the need for a greater number of spare parts to shipped along with the tanks. Parts for the engines, gears, cooling system and tracks were highest on the list. In addition, both the main gun and co-axial machine gun needed spares, as did the sighting telescopes. Vision blocks and periscopes had been damaged by Italian artillery fire, as had the external storage boxes. More replacement parts for these were needed.
The question of availability of spares was something of an on-going dispute. The need for more and more tanks to be produced as quickly as possible meant that the numbers of spare parts available was never going to be enough. Parts could either be used to build tanks, or be kept as spares. If the availability of spare parts was to be increased, then the production of complete tanks would need to be reduced. The army couldn’t have it both ways. The suppliers of the various parts of the tanks were doing their best to fulfil their orders. Now that Britain had been at war for over a year, industrial capacity was continuing to increase, but demand continued to outstrip supply.
One of the specific recommendations noted was that something was needed to allow the tanks and the infantry to communicate better. Better radio communications would help, having a radio system that was common to the infantry, artillery and tanks would be a good place to start. The death of a number of tank commanders and infantry officers and NCOs had occurred when coordination was required between the tank and the infantry. This was done by an infantry officer or NCO having to mount the tank, bang on the commander’s hatch and then have the commander stick his head out in the midst of an on-going action.
The types of radio that were issued to the various part of the armed forces wasn’t something that Vickers was involved in. Fixing some kind of communication device between the outside and inside of the tank wasn’t beyond the mind of man. A few ideas and been considered and rejected, but the easiest solution would be to put some kind of powered phone onto the tank, probably on the rear hull for safety’s sake. Running a wire from the back into the turret would be possible, and putting a phone into the turret for the commander wouldn’t be difficult. A team at Newcastle-upon-Tyne were given the task to see how it would work, and answer the question whether it could be retro-fitted to existing tanks as well as put into new tanks.
The success of the Close Support tanks, with their HE rounds, available because of the 3.7-inch ammunition, was noted and emphasised in the after-action reports. The absence of an effective HE round for the main 2-pdr gun was noted again. The success of the A11 armed with the 2-inch pompom gun at Sidi Barrani was recalled. As previously at Arras, the presence of an effective, even if limited, HE round was an essential tool for tanks, who had had very little experience of taking on enemy tanks, and much more of trying to unseat the enemy from prepared defences.
A number of requests for more pompom armed tanks had been received, but the Royal Navy just weren’t going let anyone have any of ‘their guns’. It was noted that once production of the Vanguard with the Bofors gun was begun in earnest, these could well be used against ground as well as aerial targets. The development of an HE round of the 6-pdr had been done, and the whole point of the 3-inch gun for the Victor was to provide a decent dual-purpose gun.
As to the Close Support variants, the new 3-inch tank howitzer, replacing the 3.7-inch tank mortar, did have an HE round as well as smoke, so presumably the Armoured Divisions would make sure adequate numbers of these were loaded. There was also something to be said for the Tank Brigades to increase the numbers of Close Support tanks from six to at least twelve. Harland & Wolff were concentrating on the Close Support variant of the Valiant. If necessary, Vickers could also increase their numbers, but it would depend on enough guns being available.
Generally, criticism of the Valiant tanks was limited to cosmetic matters, such as the need for more and better external stowage boxes. What had become apparent however, was the need for an efficient way to clear mines and to bridge gaps, like the anti-tank ditches at Bardia and Tobruk. The need for Royal Engineers to go in ahead of the tanks to remove mines by hand and dig out ramps for the tanks to cross the ditches had slowed the assault.
The Coulter Plough and the Fowler Rollers had already been tested as possible mine-clearance devices. The plough had shown the most promise, but it wasn’t clear how effective it would be on the kind of ground experienced in the desert. The roller system had proven too fragile to stand up to a number of mines being detonated under it. Once parts of the roller were blown off, it was meant to be jettisoned, but that wasn’t easy in the middle of a minefield in the middle of a battle. A joint Vickers/Royal Engineers team were tasked with coming up with ideas. These could either be something attached to a normal gun tank, or be designed as a dedicated armoured vehicle.
Bridging equipment carried on tanks was a well-known and tested capability. During the Great War a 21 feet canal lock bridge, that could carry a load of 35 tonnes had been developed, though not in time to be used during the war. The tank launched Inglis Mark II Assault Bridge, the Batemans Assault Bridge, the Scissor Assault Bridge and the Wild Assault Bridge had all been tested, but lack of funds had left them unproduced. Of all of these, the No 1 30-foot scissors bridge was considered the best option, so another team were given responsibility to work with the Experimental Bridging Establishment to get a working example for full testing, then, if successful, ready for production.
Two other ideas that had come back from the fighting in Libya were firstly, the need for more bulldozers, especially in dealing with the anti-tank ditches. Attaching a bulldozer blade to the front of a tank that could be lifted and lowered into position didn’t look too difficult a challenge, so yet another joint Vickers/Royal Engineers team were given the task of making it happen. Secondly, it was also important for tanks damaged by mines or other reasons, to be able to be recovered as quickly as possible. The RAOC’s tractors were too precious and vulnerable to do this while the battle was continuing. Having an armoured recovery vehicle to tow out damaged tanks would be useful. In the short term, having each tank equipped with a length of steel cable to enable towing was also recommended.
Lastly some Italian Light tanks had been captured which had a flame-thrower capability. For dealing with bunkers and entrenched positions this would be a terrifying weapon. To design such a weapon was task that would take some thought and work. More information about the Italian tanks was requested to see if they had come up with simple solutions to complex problems, rather than the Vickers team having to begin with a blank piece of paper.
One of the questions that all of these types of specialist tanks raised was whether these should be issued to the Royal Engineer’s Field Squadrons attached to each Armoured Division, or whether the Royal Engineers would be better off having their own specific Armoured Brigade, perhaps called an ‘Assault Brigade’. At some point the British Army would need to consider how to invade Europe. All these different types of armoured vehicles, and more, would be required. Putting together a team to discuss all of this was recommended to the War Office, which agreed. General Percy Hobart had been pestering friends and acquaintances in the War Officer for a job since he had come back from Egypt and retired. Someone in the War Office saw this as a perfect opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.
NB None of this is OTL, at least, not as early as this. The various experiments with bridges and mine clearance systems had been done before the war, so this is just speeding things along a bit.
From the after-action reports of Operation Compass, a list of suggestions had been made regarding British tanks in general and the Valiant in particular. The management team at Vickers were working their way through these trying to sort out what could be done about it.
The issue of preparing the tanks for Egypt before they left Britain, and made sure that they were properly prepared for a lengthy sea journey had already been received and was being applied. Among the other recommendations was the need for a greater number of spare parts to shipped along with the tanks. Parts for the engines, gears, cooling system and tracks were highest on the list. In addition, both the main gun and co-axial machine gun needed spares, as did the sighting telescopes. Vision blocks and periscopes had been damaged by Italian artillery fire, as had the external storage boxes. More replacement parts for these were needed.
The question of availability of spares was something of an on-going dispute. The need for more and more tanks to be produced as quickly as possible meant that the numbers of spare parts available was never going to be enough. Parts could either be used to build tanks, or be kept as spares. If the availability of spare parts was to be increased, then the production of complete tanks would need to be reduced. The army couldn’t have it both ways. The suppliers of the various parts of the tanks were doing their best to fulfil their orders. Now that Britain had been at war for over a year, industrial capacity was continuing to increase, but demand continued to outstrip supply.
One of the specific recommendations noted was that something was needed to allow the tanks and the infantry to communicate better. Better radio communications would help, having a radio system that was common to the infantry, artillery and tanks would be a good place to start. The death of a number of tank commanders and infantry officers and NCOs had occurred when coordination was required between the tank and the infantry. This was done by an infantry officer or NCO having to mount the tank, bang on the commander’s hatch and then have the commander stick his head out in the midst of an on-going action.
The types of radio that were issued to the various part of the armed forces wasn’t something that Vickers was involved in. Fixing some kind of communication device between the outside and inside of the tank wasn’t beyond the mind of man. A few ideas and been considered and rejected, but the easiest solution would be to put some kind of powered phone onto the tank, probably on the rear hull for safety’s sake. Running a wire from the back into the turret would be possible, and putting a phone into the turret for the commander wouldn’t be difficult. A team at Newcastle-upon-Tyne were given the task to see how it would work, and answer the question whether it could be retro-fitted to existing tanks as well as put into new tanks.
The success of the Close Support tanks, with their HE rounds, available because of the 3.7-inch ammunition, was noted and emphasised in the after-action reports. The absence of an effective HE round for the main 2-pdr gun was noted again. The success of the A11 armed with the 2-inch pompom gun at Sidi Barrani was recalled. As previously at Arras, the presence of an effective, even if limited, HE round was an essential tool for tanks, who had had very little experience of taking on enemy tanks, and much more of trying to unseat the enemy from prepared defences.
A number of requests for more pompom armed tanks had been received, but the Royal Navy just weren’t going let anyone have any of ‘their guns’. It was noted that once production of the Vanguard with the Bofors gun was begun in earnest, these could well be used against ground as well as aerial targets. The development of an HE round of the 6-pdr had been done, and the whole point of the 3-inch gun for the Victor was to provide a decent dual-purpose gun.
As to the Close Support variants, the new 3-inch tank howitzer, replacing the 3.7-inch tank mortar, did have an HE round as well as smoke, so presumably the Armoured Divisions would make sure adequate numbers of these were loaded. There was also something to be said for the Tank Brigades to increase the numbers of Close Support tanks from six to at least twelve. Harland & Wolff were concentrating on the Close Support variant of the Valiant. If necessary, Vickers could also increase their numbers, but it would depend on enough guns being available.
Generally, criticism of the Valiant tanks was limited to cosmetic matters, such as the need for more and better external stowage boxes. What had become apparent however, was the need for an efficient way to clear mines and to bridge gaps, like the anti-tank ditches at Bardia and Tobruk. The need for Royal Engineers to go in ahead of the tanks to remove mines by hand and dig out ramps for the tanks to cross the ditches had slowed the assault.
The Coulter Plough and the Fowler Rollers had already been tested as possible mine-clearance devices. The plough had shown the most promise, but it wasn’t clear how effective it would be on the kind of ground experienced in the desert. The roller system had proven too fragile to stand up to a number of mines being detonated under it. Once parts of the roller were blown off, it was meant to be jettisoned, but that wasn’t easy in the middle of a minefield in the middle of a battle. A joint Vickers/Royal Engineers team were tasked with coming up with ideas. These could either be something attached to a normal gun tank, or be designed as a dedicated armoured vehicle.
Bridging equipment carried on tanks was a well-known and tested capability. During the Great War a 21 feet canal lock bridge, that could carry a load of 35 tonnes had been developed, though not in time to be used during the war. The tank launched Inglis Mark II Assault Bridge, the Batemans Assault Bridge, the Scissor Assault Bridge and the Wild Assault Bridge had all been tested, but lack of funds had left them unproduced. Of all of these, the No 1 30-foot scissors bridge was considered the best option, so another team were given responsibility to work with the Experimental Bridging Establishment to get a working example for full testing, then, if successful, ready for production.
Two other ideas that had come back from the fighting in Libya were firstly, the need for more bulldozers, especially in dealing with the anti-tank ditches. Attaching a bulldozer blade to the front of a tank that could be lifted and lowered into position didn’t look too difficult a challenge, so yet another joint Vickers/Royal Engineers team were given the task of making it happen. Secondly, it was also important for tanks damaged by mines or other reasons, to be able to be recovered as quickly as possible. The RAOC’s tractors were too precious and vulnerable to do this while the battle was continuing. Having an armoured recovery vehicle to tow out damaged tanks would be useful. In the short term, having each tank equipped with a length of steel cable to enable towing was also recommended.
Lastly some Italian Light tanks had been captured which had a flame-thrower capability. For dealing with bunkers and entrenched positions this would be a terrifying weapon. To design such a weapon was task that would take some thought and work. More information about the Italian tanks was requested to see if they had come up with simple solutions to complex problems, rather than the Vickers team having to begin with a blank piece of paper.
One of the questions that all of these types of specialist tanks raised was whether these should be issued to the Royal Engineer’s Field Squadrons attached to each Armoured Division, or whether the Royal Engineers would be better off having their own specific Armoured Brigade, perhaps called an ‘Assault Brigade’. At some point the British Army would need to consider how to invade Europe. All these different types of armoured vehicles, and more, would be required. Putting together a team to discuss all of this was recommended to the War Office, which agreed. General Percy Hobart had been pestering friends and acquaintances in the War Officer for a job since he had come back from Egypt and retired. Someone in the War Office saw this as a perfect opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.
NB None of this is OTL, at least, not as early as this. The various experiments with bridges and mine clearance systems had been done before the war, so this is just speeding things along a bit.
Getting this looked at and sorted early is only a good thing but as mentioned the trade off between building tanks and building spares means you have to choose what gets built.
In time the problem will resolve itself as tank numbers increase and better performance means fewer break down or are lost to the enemy but that isn't an immediate or even medium term fix.
One way to look at fixing the issue quickly would be to get a new manufacturer into to the Valiant group to just make spare parts. The problem is there isn't an easy candidate for this who inst already building other tanks, except one, Vauxhall. Pragmatism could say stop the A22 and get Vauxhall to build spares but that is not a Vickers decision but a governmental one.
The sooner this can be sorted the better and should be an easy enough fix, the only issue will be adapting production to enable the phones to be fitted and possibly making space for new radio's.
Not much Vickers can do on this front beyond getting the 6pdr Valiant out the door as soon as possible in the short term. That should make the tankers happy in more ways than one and the fact Churchill has gotten involved makes it that much easier.
This is an important series of paragraphs. Work starting on AVRE type vehicles makes the later stages of the war so much easier. Plus the time being taken to get them right now means the final Vehicles should be a lot more capable.
Now this should be interesting. Will the project affect the Valiant or have to wait for the Victor? The prospect of a flamethrower tank is a good one but it needs looking at properly. The success of the Churchill Crocodile was in large part down to the fact you still had a main gun, something that wouldn't be possible in the Valiant due to the lack of a hull mounted MG. It would be possible to modify the Victor to have one so that a Crocodile could be built on that hull but making the change to the Valiant at this point in the war is probably too much. The other advantage the Victor will have is thicker armour so the attention it would inevitably get can be managed much more effectively.
The other option is the A22 as OTL but is it worth putting a tank into production for only a limited number of Flamethrower tanks too be built if the actual tank itself is deemed surplus to requirements?
Here comes Percy
All in all another good update, keep them coming. I also assume it was me who made the addition paragraph in the last update necessary, sorry.
Derek Pullem
Donor
Why waste a perfectly good tank on a flamethrower variant when you have hundreds of marginal use A15 hulls just waiting for a decent weapon? This also applies to AVRE vehicles - it would be nice to standardise on the Valiant / Victor line but if you already have the chassis in production why not use them.
not enough armour to get close enough for the flame to be effective.
Would it be possible to disperse some of the lighter parts to different areas of the empire I know it's not possible to make full tanks in large portions of the Empire but could other parts be put together in other areas of the Empire to increase the stockpiles of spares that the empire has in storage. It could ease up supply somewhat in some areas of spares that the tanks use.
A universal radio is going to be a major plus for the army as well as easing communication between the various arms, as well as preventing unneeded casualties, it will also simplify production and save on money in the long run since having one kind of radio means you won't have to waste time and resources on several different communication systems.
Armoured recovery vehicle would be highly useful heck could maybe base it on the valiant chassis create a series of engineering tanks it would save on having to develop a whole new tank chassis and is already fairly well received and well understood by the tankers who used them and a lot of the training has already been done on operating this tank. It also has people who understand how to set up the line and get the best out of it and assemble the bare bones of it quickly.
Huh, will be interesting to see what they do with this.
Well looks like they are putting Hobart to work will be interesting to see what funnies he will come up with in TTL.
Bolt some more on, you don't need the heavy turret just a casement.
- Status