Tank Development if WWI Ends in 1916?

Old1812

Old1812

Assuming Woodrow Wilson successfully negotiates a peace ending World War I in late 1916-early 1917, what will tank development look like in the years to come?

The British are the only ones to deploy tanks in combat here, and then only the Mark I, but they have future designs in the works. The French would also be working on what would become the Renault FT, and the Germans are cautiously considering the idea themselves.
 

kham_coc

Banned
Tanks will still be seen as the next big thing, they really weren't decisive in ww1 anyway.
This might have big impacts on doctrine and so forth (wheter it's an Cav, Art, or Inf program).

What's going to have way more butterflies is the end to the war.
Which is going to have huge impacts - even if limited to tank development - because the strategic outlook of the relevant nations will be hugely impacted.
For example if France doesn't get AL back, will it still pretend it can?
If it does get it back, will it persist in its fantasies of being stronger than Germany?
(These were delusional otl, ittl there is no way that can be sustained).

Or will it try to improve Franco German relations, even if this means dumping the UK, and agreeing to be the junior partner with Germany?
All of this has an impact on what sort of tanks France and by proxy, Germany wants.

Then there is the question of what sort of Tanks Russia (USSR is unlikely) can afford, and what sort of lessons they draw in the probable civil war and then the inevitable reconquest wars.
 

Garrison

Donor
I would say the British and French probably keep tinkering with the idea but the Germans don't suffer the 'trauma' that made them so interested in tank warfare post war.
 

Carl Schwamberger

Ending the war in 1916 has so many knockoff effects tank development is difficult to predict. One line of investigation might be a review of all the weird and practical tracked and armored vehicle projects there were inter war. A portion of those could fit the circumstances crated by the PoD here.

Note that field artillery is profoundly effected as many of the fire control and command control doctrines are stillborn & have to be developed out of a peacetime environment, with all the false conclusions endemic there. So are infantry tactics. All the late war fire and maneuver of small sub company units, infiltration, fire support coordination, ect... are very embryonic. The combat experience with tanks stops at the 1916 level & there room for a huge number of good, bad, and plain weird ideas to enter post war doctrine thinking.
 
Old1812

Old1812

Carl Schwamberger said:
Ending the war in 1916 has so many knockoff effects tank development is difficult to predict. One line of investigation might be a review of all the weird and practical tracked and armored vehicle projects there were inter war. A portion of those could fit the circumstances crated by the PoD here.

Note that field artillery is profoundly effected as many of the fire control and command control doctrines are stillborn & have to be developed out of a peacetime environment, with all the false conclusions endemic there. So are infantry tactics. All the late war fire and maneuver of small sub company units, infiltration, fire support coordination, ect... are very embryonic. The combat experience with tanks stops at the 1916 level & there room for a huge number of good, bad, and plain weird ideas to enter post war doctrine thinking.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Wilson didn't get really get going on the peace path until November, so nearly all the development that would make place in 1916 has happened.
 

Tom_B

During the war Russia was experimenting with armored half-tracks using a system devised by a French engineer Kegresse. It is quite possible that these instead of tanks get used first in a postwar conflict.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top