Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

[MattII]

T40 3" GMC from 1941, spiked by McNair
View attachment 615935

Original design for the M3 came this way, over the planned M2A1, that with the Fall of France, was decided to be totally unsuitable with the Germans having a 75mm armed tank
View attachment 615936View attachment 615937View attachment 615938

Now with better examples of British Armor, the M3 would likely be a very interim tank, hundreds, not thousands made by Chrysler before switching over to an earlier M4 Sherman

I look at that, and then I look at the M7 Priest:

It's worth crap as a tank, but as an SPG...

The article also notes attempts by the British to get their own designs built under contract. Now, sure, that failed OTL, but ITTL, I think the Valiant may stand a chance, given that it's, you know, the best tank in the world in 1940/1.

That's the handsome beast I was thinking of! Up-armour the superstructure and put the gun in a proper casement mount like the OTL M3 and I think you've got a fine 'rush' design in 1940/early 41 while the 'proper' tank is in development. Keep the T40 as-is to make a SPG on a common platform and the Americans are off to the races!

Just please, oh please have someone insist on having a transfer case on the radial engine so the turret basket doesn't have to be so high (I know, I know, it's a personal peeve of mine I keep bringing up but it's the one thing I genuinely don't like about the Sherman)!

That not going to help an awful lot. Take a look at the plans:

You can probably only drop the height of the hull a couple of inches due to the height of the radial engine. Now if you could get the US army looking at V engines in 1940, it's possible the M3 and M4 could be lower and longer, due to the damn things not being so tall.

 

[Spencersj345.346]

Hmmm I still wonder just what the US Army would have come up with it hadn't spent the 30s virtually broke and having the overwhelming majority of its manpower tied down helping run the Civilian Conservation Corps. When that is taken into consideration all things considered they did a pretty damn good job with what they came up with

 

[MattII]

Hmmm I still wonder just what the US Army would have come up with it hadn't spent the 30s virtually broke and having the overwhelming majority of its manpower tied down helping run the Civilian Conservation Corps. When that is taken into consideration all things considered they did a pretty damn good job with what they came up with

They had their priorities right when designing it, that's for sure. Putting reliability and ease-of-maintenance at the top of the list is always a good start. A tank, no matter how good the gun, or how thick the armour, is useless if it's stuck in a depot.

 

[Paul_Sussex]

...That not going to help an awful lot. Take a look at the plans:

You can probably only drop the height of the hull a couple of inches due to the height of the radial engine. Now if you could get the US army looking at V engines in 1940, it's possible the M3 and M4 could be lower and longer, due to the damn things not being so tall.

A bit off topic. but in comparison, the M18 with lowered drive shaft...

 

[bobbins]

There isn't a different head coach, or training regime, or playbook, or players. There are some improvements to the Matilda I. The changes at Arras are slightly heavier losses amongst 7th Pz Div tanks, and the two British Battalions withdrawing in better order. I have changed one RTR battalion for another at Calais. Other than the extra day's delay there were no more changes at Boulogne that would make any fundamental difference to the attack and defeat of the allied forces there. Later when we get to the fighting at the Somme there will be some extra A10s over OTL.

As I mentioned in my reply to fester I am sorry that I bothered writing the Boulogne episode, in fact at this point I am sorry that I bothered writing anything at all. Your advice is obviously something I have to learn to take, as I've never written very much on here before

I am sorry to have wasted you time. Please feel free not to bother reading it.

Please continue this - it’s excellent.

 

[Ramontxo]

Yes. Please keep on with the good job.

 

[MattII]

A bit off topic. but in comparison, the M18 with lowered drive shaft...
View attachment 616003

I stand corrected, you can get a tank of a decent height with a radial.

 

[Paul_Sussex]

Ann

I stand corrected, you can get a tank of a decent height with a radial.

Annoyingly, the only height I can find for the M18 includes the .50 and mount.

 

[MattII]

Ann

Annoyingly, the only height I can find for the M18 includes the .50 and mount.

Doesn't matter, the mount can't really be less than 5", so the overall height of the tank is below 8'

 

[Fred the Great]

Just to let you know I'm reading and enjoying. Thank you.

 

[Astrodragon]

I can see that you want to avoid this becoming a cascading wank, which is reasonable. But it feels like you're bending over backwards.

And to have big chunks of 1940 action happen unchanged? If a sports team had a different head coach, with different training regimen and different playbook, who brought in some different players... having a long segment of the Big Game happen exactly the same, right down to the individual passes and kicks and tackles and penalties and scores?

It feels wrong. I can see that it would be tons of work to generate a plausible faux-narrative at this level of detail. But that isn't necessary, if the overall outcome is about the same. Zoom in for a vignette where it matters - the performance of alt-equipment - but otherwise, just summarize and move on.

Perhaps there will be some significant effects in the last part of the campaign, worthy of fine-grained narration. As it is, you're flooding the reader (well, this reader, anyway) with detail that doesn't advance the story, which is about British tank design and production. (I.e. gearboxes and turret rings and Vickers vs. Nuffield vs. Vulcan...)

I think you're reading things into the timeline that aren't actually there.
The British tank doctrine hasnt changed from OTL. The Valiant hasn't arrived yet (3 doesnt count!) and the only change is that the Matilda 1 is somewhat less useless. While doing a bit better at Arras and Calais/Dunkirk will help the British a little, its too little too late to stop a French collapse.
The point here is the British HAVEN'T changed doctrine and use - that will likely change now, and the Valiant will help - better tanks allow you to do things better, but first you have to work out how.

 

[ShortsBelfast]

Hugely enjoyable TL. Very well researched and written. Please don't let the critics get you down.

 

[L4a1]

Hugely enjoyable TL. Very well researched and written. Please don't let the critics get you down.

Seconded.

 

[tbonestime]

Seconded.

Here, here!

 

[Finbarr the Fair]

I think you're reading things into the timeline that aren't actually there.
The British tank doctrine hasnt changed from OTL. The Valiant hasn't arrived yet (3 doesnt count!) and the only change is that the Matilda 1 is somewhat less useless. While doing a bit better at Arras and Calais/Dunkirk will help the British a little, its too little too late to stop a French collapse.
The point here is the British HAVEN'T changed doctrine and use - that will likely change now, and the Valiant will help - better tanks allow you to do things better, but first you have to work out how.

Yep

I think Allan is capturing the confusion caused by the Germans getting inside the Allies Command and Control loop very well. The commanders are making what seem logical decisions but they are too slow to react and implement them.

And with both lack of resources and poor doctrine, the Second BEF will still be roughly handled during the Fall of France. Let's hope both BEFs get out a few more men and significantly more weapons.

And the lessons learned to change doctrine.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

And wasted on the Covenanter, over 1700 of them, that could have been armed with broomstick for the combat they did

A lot of the Covenantors were not armed (or indeed finished) until later in the 2 pounder production run - they were using the same turret as the Crusader (which did upgrade to 6 pounder once production was sorted) and that better tank had priority on the turret and 2 pounder weapon so the Covenantor as I understand it did not really impact 2 pounder production at that critical time (post Dunkirk and early 41).

By the time Covenanter production ramps up 2 pounder production is no longer an issue and 6 pounder production has started.

 

[MattII]

And with both lack of resources and poor doctrine, the Second BEF will still be roughly handled during the Fall of France. Let's hope both BEFs get out a few more men and significantly more weapons.

No more heavy weapons (aside some mortars), but maybe some expensive bits-and-pieces from the heavier ones.More men is very likely though, along with (I suspect) the majority of rifles and bren-guns.

And the lessons learned to change doctrine.

Well they're getting more experienced tankers back, so that will help.

A lot of the Covenantors were not armed (or indeed finished) until later in the 2 pounder production run - they were using the same turret as the Crusader (which did upgrade to 6 pounder once production was sorted) and that better tank had priority on the turret and 2 pounder weapon so the Covenantor as I understand it did not really impact 2 pounder production at that critical time (post Dunkirk and early 41).

By the time Covenanter production ramps up 2 pounder production is no longer an issue and 6 pounder production has started.

Well Vickers is looking at producing their own (L/43) 6-pounders for the Valiant (deliveries of said tank being likely to start very late in 1940, or early in 1941), so those will reduce the need for excess 2-pounders down the line.

 

[Derek Pullem]

Although Boulogne has fallen and Calais appears to be considered indefensible as part of the evacuation perimeter, with the extra days provided by the successes at Arras and around Calais, would it be possible to hold the Dunkirk perimeter such that the Eastern and Western Moles can be maintained for evacuation? This would have a massive impact on the ability of larger ships to load men and equipment. This relies on the potential of the moles being recognised before the bulk of the troops are located on the Eastern beaches.

 

[Astrodragon]

Although Boulogne has fallen and Calais appears to be considered indefensible as part of the evacuation perimeter, with the extra days provided by the successes at Arras and around Calais, would it be possible to hold the Dunkirk perimeter such that the Eastern and Western Moles can be maintained for evacuation? This would have a massive impact on the ability of larger ships to load men and equipment. This relies on the potential of the moles being recognised before the bulk of the troops are located on the Eastern beaches.

Problem with the Moles is they are a prime target for the LW and artillery

 

[Derek Pullem]

Problem with the Moles is they are a prime target for the LW and artillery

But IOTL over 70% of the troops evacuated from Dunkirk (240,000) did so via the Eastern Mole. So whilst they are prime targets they work alot better than wading out from the beach.

And since the LW and artillery failed to put the East mole out of action, forcing them to target both would make them even less effective.