TL-191: Yankee Joe - Uniforms, Weapons, and Vehicles of the U.S. Armed Forces

Discussion in 'Alternate History Books and Media' started by Alterwright, Sep 30, 2018.

  1. pattontank12 Better Dead than Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Location:
    Southern Idaho
    How about these for American fighters and bombers respectively?
    yn_83_karakovic_by_jflaxman-d30aay8.jpg AU1mFuu.jpg
     
  2. cortz#9 Obrltnt of Kampfgruppe Seelöw

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    They're very cool looking but they also look more advanced that what was around IOTL and TL-191 always seemed less advanced than OTL.
    They would probably work in the Drakaverse.
     
    Alpha-King98760 likes this.
  3. RamscoopRaider Some Sort of Were-Orca, probably an Akhlut Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Location:
    Newtown, CT
    In some ways less, in some more. 191 got nukes a year or so ahead of OTL remember. Apart from that Jet aircraft saw large scale use earlier, same with long range rockets
     
  4. pattontank12 Better Dead than Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Location:
    Southern Idaho
    I'm wondering if the Concord analogue could have been the result of a joint project between the Germans and Americans, following the second Great War.

    They do seem to be somewhat ahead in those areas.
     
  5. Polish Eagle AntiFa Supersoldier

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Location:
    Where the skies are so blue
    I doubt it. Each of them are stronger powers than Britain and France were IOTL, and have correspondingly strong domestic aviation industries. They’d rather award supersonic transport contracts to local providers than try to figure out a joint metric-US Customary airliner.

    There’s also the question of markets. While Germany can fly supersonic planes to its colonies in Africa across the Sahara without bothering too many people, the US will have the same sonic boom issues as IOTL—so the disincentive for American supersonic liners still exists.

    Japan, actually, might be one of the few markets where this does make sense, with their far-flung island empire.

    So I’d expect supersonic airliners from Mitsubishi and Junkers, not so much from Boeing.
     
    Whiteshore, cortz#9 and pattontank12 like this.
  6. cortz#9 Obrltnt of Kampfgruppe Seelöw

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    The fact that both the US and the CSA got The Bomb and got it earlier than OTL was the most implausible thing about TL-191 for me.
     
  7. RamscoopRaider Some Sort of Were-Orca, probably an Akhlut Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Location:
    Newtown, CT
    It's not at all implausible for the US to get it earlier given the POD. WWI was a year shorter so the scientific community gets back to normal a year earlier. Move up relevant discoveries a year earlier and you can seriously start looking at it in 1938 as opposed to 1939 and have more prewar time to work on it. This makes things even easier as scientists share needed research between countries, rather than everyone having to develop everything on their own

    The CSA, yeah
     
  8. cortz#9 Obrltnt of Kampfgruppe Seelöw

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    IOTL the US had more resources and a lot of extra scientist who left Europe to escape Nazism and Fascism.
     
  9. RamscoopRaider Some Sort of Were-Orca, probably an Akhlut Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Location:
    Newtown, CT
    More time helps in that regard. Extra year of peacetime, couple years in fact as the European War did not start much earlier than the North American one, means that effectively the US has all those scientists free for a few years as until the war starts publishing is relatively uncensored and everybody gets it. Plus you have to consider that OTL Manhattan was a shotgun approach, throw everything to the wall and see what sticks. If you have more knowledge going in, then you can take a much more focused course and avoid a lot of wasteful spending, which is how everybody but the US managed it much cheaper
     
    pattontank12 likes this.
  10. pattontank12 Better Dead than Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Location:
    Southern Idaho
    Feels like something both the CS and US would use.
     
  11. Kevin Renner Well-Known Member


    Oh mein Gott. Der USA in der TL-191 ist Milvaukee
     
    pattontank12 likes this.
  12. Kevin Renner Well-Known Member

    US small arms IMO will tend to be heavily influenced by German small arms. The Springfield '03 is a Mauser after all. Pistols unless the US Army has the experience of the Phillippines will likely still be .38/9mm. Most likely Parabellum if they go the semi auto route. Any carbine I could see being a juiced up 9mm. Maybe a 9 x 30 or 9 x 35 cartridge. For LMGs anything from JMB is off the table IMO. But maybe we see some German firearms designers immigrate to the US. Maybe something along the lines of a belt fed FG-42. Or Lewis Gun descendants. That is provided Lewis even exists or goes into firearms design. That's the problem with the whole TL-191 series. HT just took historical events and changed the names to protect the innocent.
    I can see various German industrial concerns setting US subsideries. Ala say BMW LTD USA. Or Daimler-Bemz US. Or joint concerns. Bethlehem-Krupp. Ford building Jumo or D-B aero engines under license. Nash/Auto Union. If any of these companies exist in the timeline. We might well see the Bain Wagon Company along with Studebaker making the jump into car/truck production. nother consequence of TL-191 is Cincinatti will not be the industrial power house it became especially in the Machine Tool Industry. In fact I see very little industry in the US being in range of potential artillery range of the CSA.
     
    pattontank12 likes this.
  13. pattontank12 Better Dead than Red!

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Location:
    Southern Idaho
    I'm thinking that the Custer would resemble the BT series tanks only with a different frontal plate and turret, mainly because I can see the US army adopting the Christie suspension system here. 9281808329_031505f388_b.jpg
     
  14. cortz#9 Obrltnt of Kampfgruppe Seelöw

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    I actually thought of having the CSA adopt the Christie suspension over on the "Featherston's Finest" thread because both the Russians and the British use the Christie and this could've been the biggest contribution the CSA made to the Allies.
    I regret not doing that now.
     
    Alpha-King98760 and pattontank12 like this.
  15. Matt Wiser Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    Auberry, CA
    Any thoughts on Naval Aviation as used by the U.S. in this timeline? I'm thinking that the analogs to the PBY Catalina and the PBB-1 Sea Ranger (the best flying boat OTL that the Navy never had, IMHO), would be in service. For carrier-based air, the F4F Wildcat, SBD Dauntless, and maybe the TBD would be in use at the start of the war, with the Hellcat and Helldiver (SB2C) getting in as the war progresses, with a toss-up between the TBF Avenger and the TBY Seawolf as the TBD replacement.

    Ship-based or land-based floatplanes would include the OS2U Kingfisher, the SOC Seagull, and possibly the Northrop N-3PB (which never saw USN use OTL, but was used by a Norwegian squadron in the RAF) Land-based Naval Air might include the PB4Y-1 Liberator and the PB4Y-2 Privateer later on.

    Comments?
     
  16. Thoresby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2012
    I think US naval aviation will be more backward and weaker than OTL. The fantastic quality and variety of late OTL war aircraft was a result of the simply absurd amounts of money the US was spending on R&D. In this tl the US is a smaller, poorer country spending a much higher than OTL proportion of it's military budget on the army. Also the US doesn't seem interested in trans oceanic operations. It's strategy seems to be about the Monro Doctrine but the US is not really projecting power all around the world to the same degree as OTL. So if US Naval Aviation is has a 1/4 of it's OTL budget it is doing very well. So I would take the OTL aircraft and delete half and push the remainders in service date back by a year or two.
     
  17. Polish Eagle AntiFa Supersoldier

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Location:
    Where the skies are so blue
    One of the differences in general American military aviation I expect in TL-191 is that the OTL Wright-Curtiss dispute about patent rights will get resolved a lot faster than IOTL--so the US will not lag behind the nations of Europe in airplane production the way it did IOTL. Combined with still having most of the same talent in aircraft design, I expect the US to be an aeronautical powerhouse in the Great War--the US Army and Navy will quickly understand the utility of scout planes. Of course, the breakdown of the OTL market when wartime surplus planes were dumped in large numbers will still occur ITTL--so a lot of companies will fall on hard times, though not to the OTL degree.

    And a lot of the big Naval Aviation companies should exist with only minor butterfly differences from OTL--Vought, Grumman, Brewster all got their start on Long Island, as did Curtiss, so they should still exist ITTL. The exceptions will be Republic Aviation (Seversky, Kartveli, and company will remain in Russia or settle in France or Britain rather than the US--or maybe CSA?) and Sikorsky (same story). Those won't exist in any recognizable form (unless one wants to postulate Confederate Thunderbolts).

    The US Navy has two main goals prior to the Great War--blockading the CSA and interdicting British trade in the Pacific and Atlantic. Curtiss was the early pioneer in American flying boats--I expect that to still be the case ITTL. Another early innovator was Grover Loening--whose Loening Aeronautical Engineering was IOTL bought out by Keystone, but a lot of whose engineers stayed in Long Island to form Grumman Aircraft. Since the TTL Navy is probably buying more floatplanes (the TTL US is not demilitarizing to the OTL degree, and probably buys more during its longer involvement in the Great War), maybe Loening stays around--and the planes we know as Grumman products are instead Loenings. Under the OTL US Navy aircraft designation system, their letter is L--so you'd see a *Wildcat named "F4L."

    Post-war, the US has the Sandwich Islands, and the Bahamas. Those will be bases for seaplanes and long-range land-based bombers--something analogous to the OTL schemes to fly B-17s out of the Philippines. Boeing is known to exist in TL-191, so maybe the planes are literally B-17s (there will be disputes between the Army and Navy as to whose planes they are, but since the purpose in the Sandwich Islands is to sink RN and IJN ships and the purpose in the Bahamas is to attack Confederate ports and shipping, I actually expect these to be US Navy planes--designation something like "B5B." There will be seaplanes for things like pilot rescue and running guns to black guerillas--something like the Catalina. The harsh reality of long-duration warfare and the Navy's need to maintain a presence despite Socialist budget-cutting might make Admirals more open to air power--for that matter, the Socialists might even get behind Naval aviation precisely because it's cheaper than a battleship fleet.

    The RN is still a threat, so there will be a significant force of torpedo bombers and carrier-based fighters--if Loening is as good as OTL Grumman at selling to the Navy, Avenger- and Hellcat-like planes will be prominent there.

    The remaining question is how much influence German designers have on the US, and vice-versa. Given the OTL US lead in aircraft design, I want to say that I actually expect to see lots of Loening and Vought and Curtiss planes built under license flying in the Kaiser's military--but who knows where the Germans would go ITTL?

    Another complicating factor is that, per the Turtledovism that war accelerates technological advancement, the entire world seems a little ahead of OTL as of 1944--with atomic bombs developed by IIRC 4 different countries and jet-powered fighters in frontline service in the US in 1944 (and the US was not as desperate as OTL Nazi Germany, so the design must have been a lot more mature than the OTL Me 262). So I'd counter the above point about the US being weaker by noting that technology seems no worse for it.

    As a side note, I actually expect the US Navy to use 88mm guns for antiaircraft once the Great War breaks out--there was no OTL 90mm-class gun in American use, while the 88mm was an antiaircraft gun in the Kaiser's navy, so I expect the US would just buy a license and clone it rather than build new tooling.

    Returning for a moment to the question of Seversky and Sikorsky, I actually could imagine them settling in the CS when Russia falls into civil war--and Featherston might be enthusiastic about ultra-fast fighters as a propaganda measure, so Seversky might appeal to him. So I actually could imagine the United Orange Company of Florida buying planes that look suspiciously like P-47s.
     
    pattontank12 likes this.
  18. Matt Wiser Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    Auberry, CA
    Douglas was in Southern California (Santa Monica, to be precise), Northrop's in Hawthorne, while Consolidated was in San Diego. So they wouldn't be affected that much-the SBD would still come off the lines there, Northrop would be building the P-61 analog for the AAF, and Consolidated would still be building PBYs (and starting B-24 production). Vought was in CT, so would they go with the Corsair, and farm out the TBU (as they did with the Seawolf and Consolidated, turning it into the TBY)? OTL's issues with the Sea Wolf meant that the Avenger saw combat, and the TBY didn't, though the Navy felt it was better than the TBF. (Vought turning production of the Sea Wolf over to Consolidated-hanky-panky with Consolidated Execs, of which two went to Federal Prison, delays in getting the factory built, and so on led to only a training squadron and two Fleet squadrons being formed-and only VT-154 was ready to deploy, but never did as the war ended OTL before they could go). Hopefully, TTL means that the Sea Wolf can get into Fleet service or at least, used by Marine air from land bases.
     
  19. RamscoopRaider Some Sort of Were-Orca, probably an Akhlut Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Location:
    Newtown, CT
    Not going to happen. Germans went with 88mm for AA because they had a bunch of old 88mm Anti torpedo boat guns lying around that they mounted as AA guns, when they actually built dedicated AA guns they used 105mm in WWI. The US used 3"/76mm and 4"/102mm for anti torpedo boat guns so that is what they would use for AA, unless butterflies changed US calibers around
     
    Polish Eagle likes this.
  20. Polish Eagle AntiFa Supersoldier

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2009
    Location:
    Where the skies are so blue
    I see. In that case, I agree, a mix of 3” and 4” is most likely.