The Forge of Weyland
- Thread starter Astrodragon
- Start date
It wasn't really a secret that Castle Bromwich wasn't going as well as was hoped, though things didn't really get to a head until they started missing their promised delivery dates. I don't see a significant driver for that to change in this timeline, but it's not impossible that some perturbation or other gets someone to look into it earlier and nip things in the bud (Nuffeld, the man behind it, is involved in making tanks, so that's one point of contact).
Sounds like wish fulfillment to me. If there's no significant driver, then it's not realistic within the timeline.
There is the nuffield connection , maybe have him fix the issues himself somehow or be willing to pawn it off to the air ministry to focus on tanks and other vechicles for some reason but this option isnt very likely,
And yes i ment that factory , i think if it was delivering as promised it could have manufactured 1000 extra freaking spitfires by battle of britain. This was one of the main british mistakes in ww2 , wich is saying something .
I think it shouldnt be a right now thing but maybe late 39/early 40 when war starts it gets mentioned for some reason and the army inquire to air ministry about it. Who decide to humor them and do a inspection to disprove the nonsense complaint but things turn out even worse than the rumors mentioned. Maybe mention the horrific trade unions as the problem as soviets were near enemys for 39/40 for brits and the french as another angle of how it gets found out? ? S
The problem was noticed 1940 may in otl by the air ministry and supermarine thought the issue was management altough they knew there were problems there.Production went like 10 in june , 23 in july , 37 in august and 56 in septemeber according to wikipedia. It was supposed to build 60 a week starting april , wich is like 250 a month .
Apparently that factory ended up building about half the spitfires the british built and is still being used by jaguar to this day .
And yes i ment that factory , i think if it was delivering as promised it could have manufactured 1000 extra freaking spitfires by battle of britain. This was one of the main british mistakes in ww2 , wich is saying something .
I think it shouldnt be a right now thing but maybe late 39/early 40 when war starts it gets mentioned for some reason and the army inquire to air ministry about it. Who decide to humor them and do a inspection to disprove the nonsense complaint but things turn out even worse than the rumors mentioned. Maybe mention the horrific trade unions as the problem as soviets were near enemys for 39/40 for brits and the french as another angle of how it gets found out? ? S
The problem was noticed 1940 may in otl by the air ministry and supermarine thought the issue was management altough they knew there were problems there.Production went like 10 in june , 23 in july , 37 in august and 56 in septemeber according to wikipedia. It was supposed to build 60 a week starting april , wich is like 250 a month .
Apparently that factory ended up building about half the spitfires the british built and is still being used by jaguar to this day .
Last edited:
I gave them their one freebie, due to changes in meetings Carden misses his plane.
Anything else has to follow on logically from the PoD
Anything else has to follow on logically from the PoD
What I was getting at is that I don't think the author wants to make this a Brit wank. (I mean, yes, any improved performance for any nation runs the risk of being called a "wank", but in this one - and with this author - there's a strong sense of keeping it all realistic.) When you start throwing around ideas like "oh, maybe they can also fix this, and fix that", it just reads like you are happy for it to be like that, but, personally, I find it's a better read when it doesn't go down some "fix everything" course.
OK this is a real stretch and a bit tounge in cheek.
ITTL Nufeild Nech and Areo is not in as good a possition as OTL. Their offerings in the tank area are rather more meh that OTL. Indeed there are drivers already in play that point to potentially very limited orders of their early to mid war tanks. This forcing them to rethink (and by doing so delay production) their designs.
With less tank diversions to keep his fertile mind busy, William Morris personally focuses a little more on the Castle Bromwich complex. His personal interventions improve the productivity sooner increasing production pre BoB. Although the downside being that this never really gets up to the OTL levels once the factory changed management.
ITTL During his interventions at Castle Bromwich, Morris realises that the Merlin they are stuffing into Spitfires would make a really good tank engine much like the Liberty he'd wanted to stuff into tanks. Nuffield convinces RR to go into a joint design project in late 1939 to develope the Meteor engine.
ITTL Nufeild Nech and Areo is not in as good a possition as OTL. Their offerings in the tank area are rather more meh that OTL. Indeed there are drivers already in play that point to potentially very limited orders of their early to mid war tanks. This forcing them to rethink (and by doing so delay production) their designs.
With less tank diversions to keep his fertile mind busy, William Morris personally focuses a little more on the Castle Bromwich complex. His personal interventions improve the productivity sooner increasing production pre BoB. Although the downside being that this never really gets up to the OTL levels once the factory changed management.
ITTL During his interventions at Castle Bromwich, Morris realises that the Merlin they are stuffing into Spitfires would make a really good tank engine much like the Liberty he'd wanted to stuff into tanks. Nuffield convinces RR to go into a joint design project in late 1939 to develope the Meteor engine.
A bit more on point.
I don't think TTL's BoF is going to be similar to OTL's at all.
The French have now experienced a mobile opponent (curtsy of the joint Anglo-French exercises). They have realised thant their C&C is a bit pants. By May 1940 I'd expect to see a lot more radios in French formations especially Armoured ones. They've also identified that better tank recovery is a simple fix and are working more that OTL to improve their tanks. Another element they should have noted is the speed at which a mechanised foe can operate. This should reduce the Panzer Shock of OTL and make some key changes (no doubt supported by a vocal British Command). Primarily that a large concentrated mobile researve is required to defend against armoured break throughs. Ideally British First Armoured Division becomes part of a Anglo French Corps de chase. Such a force would be able to engage the German Panzer spearhead before the germans reach the sea. Even if this doesn't happen the French are going to do a little bit better than OTL. OTL was a lot closer than people often realise. If the Germans have a slightly harder time in a number of relatively minor engagements with French Forces than the defeat of the Allies is much less likely.
Another possibility is the use of British Armour. My interpretation of the changes Astro has made are that the infantry act as a shield (made stronger by the tanks not using the 2 pounder so there's more of these available for thr foot sloggers) and the armour the sword. In the offence the Army Tank brigades smash a hole in the defence for the sword to penetrate. On the defence the sword waits behind the shield for the opertunity to counter attack. Therefore there is going to be a powerful mobile British formation ready to redeploy south as soon as the Battle of Sedan (if not before) indicates where the Germans are makingnthier main effort. This again allows a sooner and more meaningful British counter attack before OTL's Battle at Arras.
I don't think TTL's BoF is going to be similar to OTL's at all.
The French have now experienced a mobile opponent (curtsy of the joint Anglo-French exercises). They have realised thant their C&C is a bit pants. By May 1940 I'd expect to see a lot more radios in French formations especially Armoured ones. They've also identified that better tank recovery is a simple fix and are working more that OTL to improve their tanks. Another element they should have noted is the speed at which a mechanised foe can operate. This should reduce the Panzer Shock of OTL and make some key changes (no doubt supported by a vocal British Command). Primarily that a large concentrated mobile researve is required to defend against armoured break throughs. Ideally British First Armoured Division becomes part of a Anglo French Corps de chase. Such a force would be able to engage the German Panzer spearhead before the germans reach the sea. Even if this doesn't happen the French are going to do a little bit better than OTL. OTL was a lot closer than people often realise. If the Germans have a slightly harder time in a number of relatively minor engagements with French Forces than the defeat of the Allies is much less likely.
Another possibility is the use of British Armour. My interpretation of the changes Astro has made are that the infantry act as a shield (made stronger by the tanks not using the 2 pounder so there's more of these available for thr foot sloggers) and the armour the sword. In the offence the Army Tank brigades smash a hole in the defence for the sword to penetrate. On the defence the sword waits behind the shield for the opertunity to counter attack. Therefore there is going to be a powerful mobile British formation ready to redeploy south as soon as the Battle of Sedan (if not before) indicates where the Germans are makingnthier main effort. This again allows a sooner and more meaningful British counter attack before OTL's Battle at Arras.
That's more or less when the debacle was discovered and attacked IOTL, so this would...basically not constitute a change.
On the French :
Yes, they have noted some things that really need attention. (The British too!). The snag is the time and resources to fix them arent just something they can order up. Things wont be there, people will resist changes.. but at least some things are pointing in a better direction now.
The New Nuffield Tank
22nd May 1939
The Italian Foreign Minister Count Ciano and the German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop sign a ten-year political and military alliance between the two countries, which will be dubbed 'The Pact of Steel'. It guarantees support for each other in the event of war.
This causes the British to re-evaluate the defence of Egypt and the Canal zone. This had been slowly built up since the scare over the Italian invasion of Abyssinia, but needs elsewhere had limited this. Contingency plans are put into action to bring in reinforcements.
1st June 1939 - The new Nuffield Tank
Given that the A13 Scimitar was the Nuffield Organisations first foray into designing a tank, they felt they'd done a pretty good job. However it now seemed that the rapid changes in tank design would be better served by a new design, based on the successful parts of the A13, would be a better way forward. They'd also learnt from Vickers to treat Ministry Specifications more as guidelines than rules.
The big difference was the engine. There had been a lot of heating issues with the Liberty engine, as well as the issue of its cost, and for this tank a new engine had been provided for, a new flat 12 of over 300hp. If that didn't work out, the Liberty could be used with fairly minor modifications. The VVSS Horstman suspension had proven to work very well on the A13 - so well in fact it was being copied by Vickers for their next heavy tanks - and while the transmission and mechanicals had needed changing, it has been possible to base much of them on the A13, which had made a big reduction in the time needed to get the prototype working.
The tank was the first designed in Britain that exceeded the recommended track gauge for the railways, at 9'3" wide. This had been found necessary to fit the engine and its cooling system in - the engine was flat, which was good (it meant a lower tank profile), but also wide. As it was by now obvious that these tanks would be travelling around the Continental railway system, with its more generous width restriction, this had been accepted by the Army. While it would require checking before shipping them around Britain, in practice there weren't many bottlenecks that would affect it, and any that were an issue could be handled by routing accordingly.
The width had also allowed a wide turret ring. Vickers had built their two current models with a 60" turret ring, to allow both the 6/18pdr close support weapon, and if needed a larger high velocity gun. While the Nuffield engineers had their own ideas about the shape and layout of the turret, it had been decided to copy this. They could actually have made it slightly wider, but a common diameter seemed a sensible thing. The prototype mounted the HV3pdr, but they pointed out it could also take the 6/18pdr if the Army wanted a close support version. There had been a suggestion that a narrower ring could be used, and shape the turret to allow more space, but in the end a simpler shape was used. This way they could fit the preferred 5 man crew into the tank. The changes from the old A13 turret were fairly small, the most obvious being the extra room of the wider turret, aided by using the new mechanical elevation control, pushing the gun further forward.
The biggest change from the A13 was the weight. The Army had actually been quite reluctant to suggest a weight, merely saying that the all-up weight should be less than 24 tons to make it easy for the Army's current equipment to handle. The mild steel prototype came in at 21 tons, and they expected the final version to be closer to 22tons. They had used welding - this had been considered for the A13, but time constraints had made them decide on riveted construction for that tank - and that gave them over 4% weight reduction They had increased the size of the fuel tank - the tank could now achieve 180 miles range on the road, better than the current Vickers tanks, and their first trial had clocked it at 25mph on the road and 15 on rough terrain, making it suitable for the cruiser role if needed.
With the changes, particular the all-welded hull, Nuffield had decided to build the tank in a different factory to the A13. They expected to be able to produce 20 tanks a month 9 months after a contract was approved, and could expand into another of their factories if more were needed - the main limitation was the funding. This also let them carry on producing the A13, which was still considered an acceptable tank, one which would be soon equipping the armoured force protecting the Suez Canal.
5th July 1939, MEE Farnborough.
The unit was pleased to see the first of the production A12 Matilda II tanks. They'd evaluated the prototypes, and it seemed to have taken an age for the final version to come off the production line. Normally they'd have gone to the training unit, but after all the delays the Army wanted to be sure everything was all right now. So they'd been sent the first four for a final evaluation before sending them on to the training unit, but so far everything looked good. It certainly looked the part, it just seemed a shame these had taken so long to get to them.
The Italian Foreign Minister Count Ciano and the German Foreign Minister von Ribbentrop sign a ten-year political and military alliance between the two countries, which will be dubbed 'The Pact of Steel'. It guarantees support for each other in the event of war.
This causes the British to re-evaluate the defence of Egypt and the Canal zone. This had been slowly built up since the scare over the Italian invasion of Abyssinia, but needs elsewhere had limited this. Contingency plans are put into action to bring in reinforcements.
1st June 1939 - The new Nuffield Tank
Given that the A13 Scimitar was the Nuffield Organisations first foray into designing a tank, they felt they'd done a pretty good job. However it now seemed that the rapid changes in tank design would be better served by a new design, based on the successful parts of the A13, would be a better way forward. They'd also learnt from Vickers to treat Ministry Specifications more as guidelines than rules.
The big difference was the engine. There had been a lot of heating issues with the Liberty engine, as well as the issue of its cost, and for this tank a new engine had been provided for, a new flat 12 of over 300hp. If that didn't work out, the Liberty could be used with fairly minor modifications. The VVSS Horstman suspension had proven to work very well on the A13 - so well in fact it was being copied by Vickers for their next heavy tanks - and while the transmission and mechanicals had needed changing, it has been possible to base much of them on the A13, which had made a big reduction in the time needed to get the prototype working.
The tank was the first designed in Britain that exceeded the recommended track gauge for the railways, at 9'3" wide. This had been found necessary to fit the engine and its cooling system in - the engine was flat, which was good (it meant a lower tank profile), but also wide. As it was by now obvious that these tanks would be travelling around the Continental railway system, with its more generous width restriction, this had been accepted by the Army. While it would require checking before shipping them around Britain, in practice there weren't many bottlenecks that would affect it, and any that were an issue could be handled by routing accordingly.
The width had also allowed a wide turret ring. Vickers had built their two current models with a 60" turret ring, to allow both the 6/18pdr close support weapon, and if needed a larger high velocity gun. While the Nuffield engineers had their own ideas about the shape and layout of the turret, it had been decided to copy this. They could actually have made it slightly wider, but a common diameter seemed a sensible thing. The prototype mounted the HV3pdr, but they pointed out it could also take the 6/18pdr if the Army wanted a close support version. There had been a suggestion that a narrower ring could be used, and shape the turret to allow more space, but in the end a simpler shape was used. This way they could fit the preferred 5 man crew into the tank. The changes from the old A13 turret were fairly small, the most obvious being the extra room of the wider turret, aided by using the new mechanical elevation control, pushing the gun further forward.
The biggest change from the A13 was the weight. The Army had actually been quite reluctant to suggest a weight, merely saying that the all-up weight should be less than 24 tons to make it easy for the Army's current equipment to handle. The mild steel prototype came in at 21 tons, and they expected the final version to be closer to 22tons. They had used welding - this had been considered for the A13, but time constraints had made them decide on riveted construction for that tank - and that gave them over 4% weight reduction They had increased the size of the fuel tank - the tank could now achieve 180 miles range on the road, better than the current Vickers tanks, and their first trial had clocked it at 25mph on the road and 15 on rough terrain, making it suitable for the cruiser role if needed.
With the changes, particular the all-welded hull, Nuffield had decided to build the tank in a different factory to the A13. They expected to be able to produce 20 tanks a month 9 months after a contract was approved, and could expand into another of their factories if more were needed - the main limitation was the funding. This also let them carry on producing the A13, which was still considered an acceptable tank, one which would be soon equipping the armoured force protecting the Suez Canal.
5th July 1939, MEE Farnborough.
The unit was pleased to see the first of the production A12 Matilda II tanks. They'd evaluated the prototypes, and it seemed to have taken an age for the final version to come off the production line. Normally they'd have gone to the training unit, but after all the delays the Army wanted to be sure everything was all right now. So they'd been sent the first four for a final evaluation before sending them on to the training unit, but so far everything looked good. It certainly looked the part, it just seemed a shame these had taken so long to get to them.
If you were desperate to look at it , have industrial unrest at a tank plant cause the Army to go cap in hand to the RAF to ask how they are managing the unions at their shadow factories.
For a more civilian spin, have LMS or one of the other engineering firms newly involved with tank production try to leverage the lessons learned by Morris in the shadow factory transition.
A bit further afield, the labour unrest in Kingston in 1938 combines with the Army's desire for pom-poms and maybe 20mm AAA to make the RAF more nervous about similar issues arising in Malaya over rubber or... anywhere else in the Empire, really, over strategic materials like manganese or bauxite resulting in shortages of materials that the Army also requires. Then, in the environment of the RAF or AM looking at corporate/worker relations out in the Empire, a labour issue in British Guiana in Feb 1939, which was a source of bauxite for aluminium, might have stirred the RAF/AM into looking at the wider impact of labour unrest on aircraft production and just had a shufti at the management-labour interaction at all the places that might be important, and obviously Birmingham is easy to get to so it gets done first. That might get you 2-3 months of prewar production, hardly 1000 Spits by the time the panzers roll into Katowice, maybe another 200 available by September might make Dowding a bit happier to assign another wing of Hurricanes to the aerial component of the BEF?
Nuffield is providing a tank comparable to Vickers? If I didn't know better I would swear that were ASB. Very good prototype though, looking forward to it.
That would be an interesting point in most timelines. I don't know if it suits a British POD though. As a POD for a post-colonial timeline it sounds really good.
This is basically the Crusader without the Christie suspension and the Meadows engine (possibly; its a similar power to the Liberty anyway)
Sounds a reasonable tank for 1941 and very good if available in the Desert for late 1940.
Provided it's more reliable than the OTL A13 or Crusader.
On Allan's post, I was looking at a picture of a Matilda II and it looks like a fairly balanced tank , on the outside. It is probably ASB, but how hard would it be to do some slight improvements to the Matilda? Vickers was already helping Vulcan. My thought was a more powerful engine, diesel Lion, better tracks and an external mantlet.
There are hidden problems with the suspension and mechanicals.
Better to build a new tank, using the ideas of the Matilda that worked
marathag
Banned
The suspension was on par with German systems of being overcomplicated for what it did. a fast fix would be to bolt US VVSS bogies on the side, and that 16" wide track is two inches wider than the British track, which would improve ground pressure from 16.2 pounds sq.in to 14.2.
The British later did a test with a larger turret
so yeah, there was room for improvement, but they wanted vulcan to make as many as possible, so retooling the production line was out of the question.
The Soviet did their own thing too, grafrting a KV mantlet and 76mm gun to the existing turret
I imagine this really unbalanced the turret, and should have utilized a counterweight
Wouldn’t that make it HVSS (Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension) not VVSS (Vertical Volute Spring Suspension)? AIUI Horstman included a horizontal spring on two (sometimes more) wheel bogies.
The driver in that Soviet lash up would have trouble if he had to get out in a hurry and the turret gun was in its normal position.The suspension was on par with German systems of being overcomplicated for what it did. a fast fix would be to bolt US VVSS bogies on the side, and that 16" wide track is two inches wider than the British track, which would improve ground pressure from 16.2 pounds sq.in to 14.2.
The British later did a test with a larger turret
View attachment 621291
so yeah, there was room for improvement, but they wanted vulcan to make as many as possible, so retooling the production line was out of the question.
The Soviet did their own thing too, grafrting a KV mantlet and 76mm gun to the existing turret
I imagine this really unbalanced the turret, and should have utilized a counterweight