The Whale has Wings

Status
Not open for further replies.

Derek Pullem

Kicked
Donor
If the Japanese strike south fizzles then the Nationalist movements will struggle to gain the position they achieved in OTL as there will not be a power vacuum at the end of the war (Indochina is an exception here).

There will still be demands for independence but they are more likely to be along the lines of the Dominion route.

It would be interesting to see if the "Quit India" campaign has quite as much impact without the Japanese at the gates - a slower, more measured Indian independence (say self governing Dominion status at the end/ during war, leading to de facto independence a la Australia and Canada within five years). With India following this route you could see a far tighter "Commonwealth" being formed perhaps butterflying away Britain's need to integrate with the EEC/EU
 

Hyperion

Banned
Hyperion, there are no battleships available to the USN save for the two North Carolina class (1) which, with the destruction of any serious ETO surface naval threats, will be available to the Pacific immediately (that is, NOW). The old WWI BBs are still without escort and will be until 1943. They are simply too slow to be of any use except for shore bombardment, as OTL.

1) Unless they were the ships you were referring to?:eek::confused:

The North Carolina and South Dakota class where the main ones I was referring to.

Considering how few ships Nimitz had to work with in OTL, just the North Carolina would be a huge boost in surface capability.

That and it would take pressure off the carriers.

On the idea of ships coming to the Pacific sooner, any chance of the Sangammon class light carriers making their way west sooner than OTL? Seeing as their main use in Europe was supporting of Operation Torch, and that campaign has been butterflied away, they're capable ships, but they've currently got nothing to do when they commission.
 
Hyperion

OK. I didn't bring up the South Dakota class as they are still in the pipeline. Even the South Dakota herself is still working out her extensive teething problems and will not be available for some time considering the timespan of TTL, say middle to late 1942?

The Sangamon class could see their arrival in the Pacific three months sooner, but still not until around the time of November 1942.
 
UK economy

Yes there are people that think the UK will be better off post war

Though the political bit not so much.

The argument runs something like this.

Through TTL war the UK has spent less outside the sterling zone. Some of the purchases available to the European allies have been made with French Gold from Dakar, others have been avoided entirely e.g. Burma rice being available requires no substitution with US wheat. Faster liberation of NA = ore imports from Morocco (and probably Spain) rather than US. Less Material losses newer/better equipment. UK/Empire exports to the US (rubber, tin, POL when the US actually deploys) and licences (cavity magnetron etc.).

Malaya is critical in this as the single largest pre war $ earner is Malayan tin and rubber. The loss in the war leads to the development of new and otherwise unprofitable industries. TTL not only is Malaya likely to benefit from new technology early but would remain a $ earner presumably this applies to the DEI as well.

There is also the fact that the UK is in fact and perceives itself to be in a stronger position through 40/41 than OTL This reduces the desperate need for the UK to liquidate overseas assets to finance the war I.e. sell them to north americans during the same period. The net liquidation of assets is in the 000’s of millions.

At the same time the US position is slightly weakened vs. OTL as it does not acquire the assets or make such a large volume of sales. I would not want to overstate this but say the US full war economy is 350-380% of UK rather than 400% OTL. Personally I think it would be closer to 350% - larger UK/Imperial economy slightly smaller US. Its actually the size of the UK economy that’s the more important and the debt levels for this argument.

The barrier to UK economic expansion through the war is manpower and that only becomes material in 43 so lower early war casualties allow = sized late war forces and continued expansion of industry post 43.

In fact the UK economy grows significantly (doubles in GDP terms) from 38 - 43 then basically stays constant till 47 so to significantly improve overall performance the focus is on the years 43-47 and any actual increase in that time improves the relative UK position, This is UK only data but I think the principle applies to any of the UK dependent colonies (Africa/Carribean in particular) and probably also to Aus and NZ, less to Canada.

If the UK wealthier in 47 and more productive it is likely to benefit in 47-51 as an exporter to Europe or as being less of an import competitor and from 51 on the whole of the European economy begins to take off.

As an example the UK deaths in the OTL North African campaign are 35000 (not at that level TTL) in north west Europe 44-5 OTL 41000, with a far higher number of folk lost to the economy as POW in 40-42 (80k POW at Singapore for example). In particular it allows greater manpower into export or mining, mining in particular (coal) is very significant to UK balance of payments as is the size of the merchant marine - OTL at end of the war it was 30% lower than 1939. Lower TTL losses and increased UK production of LST (which are easily convertible to merchant use post war) improve that. As does availability of manpower in mining and industry generally.

If the UK is wealthier in 44- 47 and more productive it is likely to benefit in 45-51 as an exporter to Europe or as being less of an import competitor (and make money on shipping) and from 51 on benefit as the European economy begins to take off

This also has three financial effects. First one the 1946 US loan was taken out as HMT believed that without it only one of the Beveridge reforms and military commitments could be done and the govt wanted both. Second is that one of the conditions of the loan was convertability of sterling which swapped a sterling debt for a dollar debt followed by a devaluation which effectively doubled the size of the debt in $. Third is that the assests liquidated included US based assets that will benefit from the improving Us economy. Keep these and avoid the loan and/or the terms and the UK does not face massive dollar debts in the 50’s and preserves a larger sterling zone allowing for greater control over the actual debt levels in real terms.

At the same time the US would have less of a monopoly position immediately post war and much of the trade structure and £ that flowed from the internal empire trade would remain - and does remain during the war TTL.


As to the Politics - I think decolonisation would happen more or less on schedule (1960’s) if Britain is left to its own devices but with improved African economies through the 40’s and 50’s may lead to more economically stable independent entities. It’s the French relationship that would affect this more than the US. The biggy is India which will be independent earlier but in what form and with what policies. A more controlled independence and a greater respect for the power of both the RN and Indian Army as an intervention force east of Suez may lead to closer UK/Indian cooperation. Anything that butterflys away the India/Pakistan hostility will make India more inclined to cooperate with wider regional defence and security, A stronger RN and RAF would make that more possible. After all the IA was/is a lead player in UN operations post war.
 
:rolleyes: Be nice. You really don't want to start bringing up OTL American early war naval air performance. You just might force me to be mean:mad: and start bringing up details of OTL FAA early war naval air performance.:p

It's true that empty fuel tanks splashed more aircraft than the enemy at Midway, but it wasn't the fault of the pilots

It wasn't pilot navigation that screwed things up at Midway. It was the incompetence of Halsey's (inherited by Spruance) air operations staff in determining where the aerial strike force should target to hit Nagumo. The PBY search aircraft could give approximate locations (when they weren't dodging Zeroes or being forced to return for refueling), but the staff officers under Spruance were a train wreck in determining where Nagumo would be once the strike force arrived over target.

Actually that was what I was alluding to; though if what I've been reading of the navigational skills of Stanhope Ring is accurate he might well have taken them in the wrong direction.:) The planning on Hornet appears to have been shocking, and it's almost as bad that no one seems to have sought or offered any explanation in the aftermath.

Fletcher's staff, at least, were mostly spot on in finding Nagumo, but in their case (and Spruance's squadrons as well) coordination of squadron strikes were also a train wreck.:( Ironically, it was individual initiative shown by squadron commanders (1) ignoring the estimates of staff officers that led to their being more successful at finding the enemy.:rolleyes:
The Yorktown also refutes the notion that the US was lucky at Midway. If they had been lucky Fletcher would have gotten intel that the four Kido Butai carriers were together and sent out Scouting 5 along with Bombing 5 and either that or the arrival of the Hornet divebombers would probably have taken care of Hiryu at the same time as the others and spared Yorktown.



Exactly. Additional carriers are pointless since they will never be used anyway. Indeed, though I now understand the difficulty that would have been had by going so, having Enterprise at Coral Sea COULD have allowed the loss of the Shokaku outright (and maybe even prevented serious damage to the Yorktown), as opposed to her simply being badly damaged.

But I can't see Nimitz allowing it. After all, if the raid had gone off as planned, Halsey's task force would have come well within range of Japan itself, and the risk of enemy attack would have been far greater. To have NOT sent the Enterprise would have meant telling Doolittle that the raid was a planned suicide run from the beginning.:(
I agree that a third carrier at Coral Sea would be the best use, so how about Hornet and Ticonderoga carry out the Tokyo Raid while Yorktown, Lexington and Enterprise go to Coral Sea?

1) Only the initiative shown by the Hornet's fighter and dive bomber squadrons backfired, as when they found only empty ocean, they turned southeast to Midway to refuel.

2) I am very anxious to see how Astrodragon balances the hysteria of the Japanese over the Doolittle Raid ITTL compared to OTL.

OTL, the Imperial Army General Staff was fighting against Yamamoto's Combined Fleet plan of Operation MI. Instead, they wanted continued operations against China, completion of operations against Burma, or even a renewed attempt against the USSR:eek: should they start to collapse during the 1942 German offensive.

Meanwhile the Imperial Navy General Staff had its own plans. They supported Yamamoto's plans, but only after their own operations were completed. They were pushing for the completion of the conquest of New Guinea (Port Morseby), and the occupation of the Solomons. This would then be followed by taking the (undefended) New Hebrides, then Fiji, Samoa, and finally New Caledonia. Thereby severing the supply lines and LOCs between America and Australia and New Zealand. Mind, everything on this hit list except Port Moresby and the Solomons were beyond Japanese land-based air range!:eek: The Imperial Japanese could certainly dream big.:p

Post-Doolittle, senior IJA officers suddenly starting talking like IJN War Planners, and speaking of great strategic sweeps in the Pacific. Beyond New Guinea, even the Naval General Staff had to put everything on the back burner except for the Coral Sea Campaign. The simply political truth was, neither the army nor the navy could face Hirohito without MI.

But how Astrodragon should choose to balance out these three competing political forces (IJA, IJN, Combined Fleet) in Imperial Japan IDNK.:confused:
Well the big question is what state will the IJN be in after the battle taking place of Java and the Coral Sea(the latter seems likely given the Japanese are hell bent on keeping their schedule. OTL Yamamoto had largely won the argument for the Midway operation before the Raid; here it might be the only thing that can push the Japanese into it; if they still have the resources to mount it...
 
Last edited:

Sorry for remaining off-topic, but i've remembered.

Depending on your viewpoint, the UK is even better off - less men are being killed in foreign places, more are coming home to have babies.

This'll increase the echoing boom effect, increasing the UK's population growth.
 
I suspect that if the UK has less war/bombing death in WW2, due to better performance, we would see more migration to the Colonies and North America, so there would be little long term gain

I was looking at this the other day, and according to the UK ONS , between 1901 to 1997, the UK had a net migration loss of about 15m, with a population increase from about 50m to 59m between 1950 to 2001.

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-111.pdf

While any increase in migration probably would not jolt the UK off course, whatever that may be, it would have other impacts, as even small amounts of migration can have a big change elsewhere. If say places like Rhodesia or Kenya received even a few more thousand migrants, that would have a marked impact on their domestic politics or fate. South Africa too could be slightly different too, with a slightly higher English speaking population.
 
Last edited:

Hyperion

Banned
Guys, guys, guys.

Last I checked, every US fleet carrier except Ranger is already in the Pacific, or in the case of the Hornet will be soon.

Hornet and another carrier for the Doolittle Raid.

That still leaves, Lexington, Wasp, Yorktown, and Ticonderoga for the Coral Sea or whatever.

And that is of course assuming the Japanese even attempt that campaign.
 
Julius - the problem is that between 21 and 61 the UK is a net Importer of migrants. The out migration is pre ww1 and 71-81. anything that has an economy growing will tend to suck in workforce so a better UK economy overall will lead to more migration into the UK.

Thinking about it if Italy surrenders all those Italian POW become neutral/allied citizens and are available for work on war related industry (which happened OTL).
 
Well, while most people like to stay at home, sure, remember that UK post war will still be a depressing place compared to say Canada, Australia, SA, the US and NZ. There will still be bombed out sites, housing shortages, rationing (although probably no where near as bad as OTL) etc.

People immigrate for all sorts of reasons too and a lot of young people will migrate at the drop of a hat. I know this because I am one of those people and am pretty friendly with many others who have done the same, despite coming from good places, with similar or better prospects. London and NZ are full of such immigrants and most of these people have migrated in pretty benign circumstances, as opposed to people wanting a fresh start after 6* years of long war and the preceding decade or so of Depression.

@Gannt - You may well be right, but net migration is a different concept from identity of migrants. Britain will still want to import labour from everywhere to rebuild and the Old Commonwealth will still want to principally import British labour from Britain.

One issue about post war ATL British migration is the place of Polish diaspora. Apparently about 200,000 Poles settled in the UK as a result of WW2 and depending on what Astro ends up doing, that figure may be radically different
 
In the absence of Burning Carriers.

Well the OTL the UK had a net population growth of ~2m 51 -61, UK & ireland had emigration to Aus was just over 400k from 49 -59, the £10 POM and was a long way short of the target. I have seen nothing yet to drive it up.

The statistical problem is that the obligation was to stay for 2 years and no record of re-emigration back to the UK, and of course no record of Commonwealth to UK movements, except the existence of Clive James, As far as the UK is concerned all Commonwealth citizens are allowed to come with no visa up to 62, and there was considerable emigration to the UK of high skilled people (Drs, scientists, humourists).

The Poles are a big thing in the UK, and of course the hostility between Polish Armoured and all other Poles has to be seen to be believed. I am not sure that any play out Astro has in mind will affect the numbers that much immediately post war. Whatever else the UK will be a welcoming, undevastated (compared to Poland) and richer country looking for workers and with a feeling of obligation towards Poland. How long they stay is another matter.

Emigration from the UK to Africa, apart from some to South Africa is a non starter, UK population is basically urban and indiustrial, where is the work?

A possible big one for all the CW countries would be early Italian surrender. Not only does it make the POW available for a wider range of work but OTL italian emigration was quite large. Italians in East Africa I can see - closer to the agricultural system and displacement from Libya/Ethiopia. Or Greeks.
 
Gannt, it would be more along the lines of if there were more people alive ATL in Britain than OTL, then more people may immigrate.

Anyway, the driver for SA, Rhodesia or Kenya would be the same as OTL - more space, opportunity and better conditions for average people. The standard of living in those places, for Whites, up until recently (and still in many cases) was comparatively higher than for the UK and most of the West. Bigger houses, servants, land, protected work etc. The reason why I raised Rhodesia or Kenya was even a few thousand more immigrants, a very low figure, is a substantial increase in their White population whereas not so much for the other Commonwealth countries.

To give you a practical example of the post war benefits of migration, a good friend's grandfather was a WW2 orphan, who had been taught a trade in school in the East End of London. He had no close living family left in the UK and took a sponsored "Ten Pound Pom" trip to NZ not long after the war, when he became an adult. Anyway, when he married several years later he was able to get a brick villa (indoor toilets etc) on a 1/4acre section, provided by the State at a subsidised rate in my small rural town, till he purchased his own house. His children all went to university Now he could have got a good job in London, being a trained carpenter/builder, given the rebuilding, but by immigrating, he experienced a substantial, immediate improvement in his standard of living. This kind of thing happened a lot and many of my friend's expat grandparents or parents had similar experiences.
 

Derek Pullem

Kicked
Donor
Gannt, it would be more along the lines of if there were more people alive ATL in Britain than OTL, then more people may immigrate.

Anyway, the driver for SA, Rhodesia or Kenya would be the same as OTL - more space, opportunity and better conditions for average people. The standard of living in those places, for Whites, up until recently (and still in many cases) was comparatively higher than for the UK and most of the West. Bigger houses, servants, land, protected work etc. The reason why I raised Rhodesia or Kenya was even a few thousand more immigrants, a very low figure, is a substantial increase in their White population whereas not so much for the other Commonwealth countries.

To give you a practical example of the post war benefits of migration, a good friend's grandfather was a WW2 orphan, who had been taught a trade in school in the East End of London. He had no close living family left in the UK and took a sponsored "Ten Pound Pom" trip to NZ not long after the war, when he became an adult. Anyway, when he married several years later he was able to get a brick villa (indoor toilets etc) on a 1/4acre section, provided by the State at a subsidised rate in my small rural town, till he purchased his own house. His children all went to university Now he could have got a good job in London, being a trained carpenter/builder, given the rebuilding, but by immigrating, he experienced a substantial, immediate improvement in his standard of living. This kind of thing happened a lot and many of my friend's expat grandparents or parents had similar experiences.

.......but an awful lot of those £10 POM emmigrants came back as soon as the two years was up. Just because somewhere has a higher standardd of living it doesn't make it home.
 
.......but an awful lot of those £10 POM emmigrants came back as soon as the two years was up. Just because somewhere has a higher standardd of living it doesn't make it home.

Agreed. Immigrants, where there is an easy way home, will always be quite likely to return home. I plan to myself!

Perhaps we just leave this interesting diversion as it is and await Astro's next update of the battle.
 
**projecting the dragon signal on the clouds ***

dragonsignal2.gif
 
2) I am very anxious to see how Astrodragon balances the hysteria of the Japanese over the Doolittle Raid ITTL compared to OTL.

The timing is going to be the issue, but can you imagine the response in Tokyo if Japan were to suffer losing two carrier battles, a land defeat in Java, a British attack in Malaya, and Tokyo being bombed, all in the same week?
 
Last edited:
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top