Or, as OTL, give the Cruiser Tanks 'C' Names. Covenanter, Crusader, Cromwell, Chariot... Centurion, Chieftain, Challenger...
Would they? There would be the construction of sites and buildings domestically but a lot of the technical machinery will likely have to be imported, and then what? After the initial set-up it only adds to the local economy if the Dominion governments are spending on defence – something which they were fairly disinclined, or in Australia's case highly resistant, to doing in our timeline.Were they offered a deal that they could borrow £Xm in return for investing three quarters of it in building up their arms industry for specific items and the remainder on other industrial projects. With UK guaranteeing that portion of the debt or at least the interest payments for a decade... I suspect they would be a bit more willing to go along with this.
Well that's the justification for the Mobile force in Egypt, not sure it stretches to an expansion of Indian industrial capability as well.The threat to the Suez Canal from the Italians would provide the justification.
Stick them in the back of lorries and job done. Since standard organisation seems to be an armoured division alongside two infantry divisions to form a corps even if it's assumed the India will be providing troops as per usual I doubt anyone is going to consider it necessary to look at mechanising them en masse.If trouble came the Indian Army would be expected to send forces to the Middle East in support of the British Army. Those forces have to be as mobile as the British of they're useless.
Indeed. Frustratingly I can't remember the source but book I read mentioned one of the German generals or field marshals being fairly stunned at the amount of equipment and number of vehicles the BEF had and was forced to leave behind when shown them in the aftermath of the Dunkirk evacuation.They may use more carriers, they had a HUGE number in OTL...
That seems very out of character, I mean just look at the names they used in our timeline. If you want something a bit more martial how about the earlier use of general's names?The Vickers Viper sounds rather nice, but is it too militaristic?
No, I specifically don't want to use an OTL tank name, if you do people assume its the same tank even when it isn't. New names reduce this confusionOr, as OTL, give the Cruiser Tanks 'C' Names. Covenanter, Crusader, Cromwell, Chariot... Centurion, Chieftain, Challenger...
At which point the French introduce the new Hastings tank.Of course, one other possibility is after famous battles.. Agincourt, Crecy, Waterloo..
Types of dogs? After all, fast WW1 tank was a Whippet.No, I specifically don't want to use an OTL tank name, if you do people assume its the same tank even when it isn't. New names reduce this confusion
You just know troops are going to call broken down tanks "This useless F-ing mutt".Types of dogs? After all, fast WW1 tank was a Whippet.
Nuffield Newfoundland, Morris Malamute, Mastiff, Leyland Labrador, Lurcher ...
"This tanks a dog"You just know troops are going to call broken down tanks "This useless F-ing mutt".
They will anyway, so might as well make it official.You just know troops are going to call broken down tanks "This useless F-ing mutt".
The tank the troops don't swear about or at because there are no words vile enough to fully express their feelings about it.They will anyway, so might as well make it official.
And for TTL covanenter ...
"She took an 88 through the engine block Corporal Smith, we had to put her down." - Every tank engineer ITTL ever.You just know troops are going to call broken down tanks "This useless F-ing mutt".
Considering how many tankers in the war ended up naming their tank, setting the precedent of dog names is only going to encourage your crews to give a personalized moniker to 'Fido'.Types of dogs? After all, fast WW1 tank was a Whippet.
Nuffield Newfoundland, Morris Malamute, Mastiff, Leyland Labrador, Lurcher ...
Maybe the Navy's Engine and Turbine could have a crack at it?The tank the troops don't swear about or at because there are no words vile enough to fully express their feelings about it.
No, I specifically don't want to use an OTL tank name, if you do people assume its the same tank even when it isn't. New names reduce this confusion
The Spring Czech crisis
Of course, one other possibility is after famous battles.. Agincourt, Crecy, Waterloo..
For the Cavalry's usage the "Spaniel" would fit best - races around barking brainlessly and then jumps into the nearest fetid pond...Types of dogs? After all, fast WW1 tank was a Whippet.
Nuffield Newfoundland, Morris Malamute, Mastiff, Leyland Labrador, Lurcher ...
I was thinking the other night about how - with my rudimentary but likely still better than the average person understanding - perhaps Chamberlain's appeasement approach was at least in part driven by the fact Britain just wasn't prepared for war. And if you look at the actions that followed, efforts were made, were they not, to correct this?
That's entirely what it was driven by. He knew full well that radar wasn't ready, Fighter Command wasn't ready and the Army wasn't ready.