Why the Chinese play cricket (an Imperial Federation timeline)
- Thread starter Miss Construction
- Start date
For those interested, I've updated the RN fleet lists to reflect Tyron's purge which took out 15 ships on those lists and another 35 earlier ships. And FYI Fisher will purge even more in 1904.
LOL more like millimetering, the Federation is still probably decades away. But this year has seen some important turning points. The acceptance of a common internal tariff scheme, the tentative creation of a permanent body to deal with imperial concerns (even if its decisions are non-binding) and most importantly Dominion representation in the British cabinet. The driving force for unity is shifting from security to economics, a much more powerful force.
Fair enough, but every single milimiter and changes, no matters how small, counts
The key to the creation of an Imperial Federation which is any way believable is it has to be done very slowly, over several generations. ITTL, the first generation such as Forster, Carnarvon, Kimberley, William Harcourt and Trevelyan is all but gone, only Lord Salisbury remains and he'll out in a few years. The second generation such as Joseph Chamberlain, Lord Rosebery, Charles Tupper and Randolph Churchill are also on the way out. or gone. We're now seeing the emergence of a third generation, Asquith, Lloyd George, Seddon, Smuts, Edmund Barton, Winston Churchill, Balfour etc.
Possibly "portion"
"attached". It was a long-held myth that the German Army in 1914 had more MGs than others. In fact, they had the same number (24) per division as the BEF - but they were formed into MG companies, permitting much more tactical flexibility.
You need to do a global replace of this with "Tyron".
The naval historian Geoffrey Bennett, himself a four striper, thought that Tryon was suffering from a progressive mental disorder, based on his letters, which were always slightly garbled. Certainly his temper and manners were worsening.
I recommended Andrew Gordon's brilliant The Rules of the Game in the last thread: I'll repeat this, a wonderful book on RN command ethos (and other things).
thank you
Changed the first to "organically attached" and the second to "specialist units allocated." The difference was the Germans attached 6 to each 3 bn regiment while the British put 2 to each bn. Gave the same number (24 per division), but as you point 6 to each rgt was more flexible. But IITL, the British have gone with a mix of both. One per bn plus a number of independent 4 gun troops sent where required. The problem is those independent troops are part of the Royal Artillery which doesn't employ them as well as they could. The British have also just rejected moving to 1 to 2 guns per bn on grounds of cost. With some 184 regular bn plus 238 militia and volunteer bn at £200 per maxim that's a lot of money, even if you only equip the regulars.
Done. Tryon is interesting. Definitely a reformer, though no Fisher. However his TA system will have a major impact on initiative and flexibility. But he will go sometime between 1897 and 1899. Be interesting to see how long Battenberg lasts.
Lmao, now there's a problem I can identify with. But I figured what you meant and they all got changed to Tyron.
I wonder if the changes made could lead to Dreadnought being built early? Or Britain developing aircraft, and by extension a airforce sooner.
Lol couple of days ago I posted a set of fleet lists for the RN covering construction 1870-1905. Might be worth looking at.
Why the Chinese play cricket (an Imperial Federation timeline)
Index of all threadmarked posts
www.alternatehistory.com
Last edited:
Holy crapola, there's a lot going on during the early 1900s ITTL. Both 1900 and 1901 come in over 5K words, I haven't finished 1902 but its already pushing 5K. Not to mention each year now requires a lot of development time, both in research (you should see my library now haha) and simply working out what in heavens name should happen. To keep people's interest and due to my love of naval matters I'm about to post another fleet list, but it includes a fairly big spoiler for a major change from the OTL (hint hint)
Qing Chinese Navy 1870 to 1904
The Qing Navy was to all intents and purposes destroyed during the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95, with every single modern warship lost except six weak cruisers stationed in Southern China. A slow rebuilding program was begun by the Guangxu Emperor, however his primary focus was on building support facilities rather than purchasing new vessels with only two small cruisers and eight destroyers ordered prior to his brief assumption of direct rule in 1898 which saw the order of two armoured cruisers as the first step toward rebuilding an effective fleet. However Dowager Empress Cixi's coup in late 1898, along with the subsequent Boxer war of 1900 and outbreak of the Chinese Civil War in 1901 prevented any further development. The Qing Navy stayed well out of the Boxer War and the bulk remained loyal to the Guangxu Emperor during the following civil war, when it would play a vital role in the defence on Nanjing in 1902.
Battleships
Ting Yuen class
8,000 tons, 2 (4)x 12' BL barbette, 4 (8) x 4.7' BL, 2 (4) x 14” TT, 16" Compound belt, 3" Compound deck, 15 knots SE FT Coal
- Ting Yuen, ordered 1881, commissioned 1886, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Chen Yuan, ordered 1881, commissioned 1886, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Chen class
11,000 tons, 4 x 10", 5 (10) x 6", 3 (7) x 14” TT 1 fwd, 12" Harvey belt, 2.5" Harvey deck, 18.5 knots TE FT Coal, shallow draft
- Hai Chen, ordered 1891, commissioned 1896, sold to Britain
- Hai Nan, ordered 1891, commissioned 1896, sold to Britain
Armoured Cruisers
Ping Yuen class
2,200 tons, 1 x 10" BL turret, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 8" Compound belt, 2" Compound deck, 10.5 knots TE FT Coal
- Ping Yuen, ordered 1884, commissioned 1890 (built at Fuzhou), lost Sino-Japanese War
King Yuan class
2,900 tons, 2 x 8" BL barbette, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 8" Compound belt, 1.5" Compound deck, 15 knots TE FT Coal
- King Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Lai Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Yung class
12,000 tons, 2 x 9.2", 6 (12) x 6”, 1 (2) x 18” TT, 6" belt, 3" deck, 21 knots TE WT Coal
- Hai Yung, ordered 1898, commissioned 1902
- Hai Chou, ordered 1898, commissioned 1902
Protected Cruisers
Chi Yuan class
3,000 tons, 2 x 8” BL, 3 (6) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 14” TT, 4" Compound slope, 3" Compound deck, 17 knots CE FT Coal
- Chi Yuan, ordered 1881, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
Chih Yuan class
2,300 tons, 2 x 8" BL, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 4" Compound slope, 2" Compound deck, 18 knots TE FT Coal
- Chih Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Ching Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Tien class
4,300 tons, 2 x 8" BL, 5 (10) x 4.7”, 2 (5) x 18” TT, 1 bow, 3" slope, 1.5" deck, 24 knots TE WT Coal
- Hai Tien, ordered 1896, commissioned 1899
- Hai Chi, ordered 1896, commissioned 1899
Unprotected Cruisers
Chao Yung class
1,400 tons, 2 x 10" BL turret, 2 (4) x 4.7” BL, 0" belt, 0.25" Steel deck, 16.5 knots SE FT Coal, low freeboard
- Chao Yung, ordered 1879, commissioned 1881, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Wang Wei, ordered 1879, commissioned 1881, lost Sino-Japanese War
Kai Che class
2,100 tons, 2 x 8.2" BL, 4 (7) x 4.7” BL, 1 (2) x 14” TT, 0" belt, 0" deck, 14.5 knots SE FT Coal
- Kai Che, ordered 1880, commissioned 1883 (built at Fuzhou), defected 1901
- King Chi'ng, ordered 1883, commissioned 1886 (built at Fuzhou), disarmed 1902
- Huan T'ai, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888 (built at Fuzhou), defected 1901
Nan Thin class
2,200 tons, 2 x 8.2" BL, 4 (8) x 4.7” BL, 1 (2) x 14” TT, 0" belt, 0" deck, 15 knots SE FT Coal
- Nan Thin, ordered 1881, commissioned 1884, defected 1901
- Nan Shuin, ordered 1882, commissioned 1885, disarmed 1902
- Fu Ch'ing, ordered 1889, commissioned 1893 (built at Fuzhou), sunk in storm 1898
The Qing Navy was to all intents and purposes destroyed during the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-95, with every single modern warship lost except six weak cruisers stationed in Southern China. A slow rebuilding program was begun by the Guangxu Emperor, however his primary focus was on building support facilities rather than purchasing new vessels with only two small cruisers and eight destroyers ordered prior to his brief assumption of direct rule in 1898 which saw the order of two armoured cruisers as the first step toward rebuilding an effective fleet. However Dowager Empress Cixi's coup in late 1898, along with the subsequent Boxer war of 1900 and outbreak of the Chinese Civil War in 1901 prevented any further development. The Qing Navy stayed well out of the Boxer War and the bulk remained loyal to the Guangxu Emperor during the following civil war, when it would play a vital role in the defence on Nanjing in 1902.
Battleships
Ting Yuen class
8,000 tons, 2 (4)x 12' BL barbette, 4 (8) x 4.7' BL, 2 (4) x 14” TT, 16" Compound belt, 3" Compound deck, 15 knots SE FT Coal
- Ting Yuen, ordered 1881, commissioned 1886, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Chen Yuan, ordered 1881, commissioned 1886, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Chen class
11,000 tons, 4 x 10", 5 (10) x 6", 3 (7) x 14” TT 1 fwd, 12" Harvey belt, 2.5" Harvey deck, 18.5 knots TE FT Coal, shallow draft
- Hai Chen, ordered 1891, commissioned 1896, sold to Britain
- Hai Nan, ordered 1891, commissioned 1896, sold to Britain
Armoured Cruisers
Ping Yuen class
2,200 tons, 1 x 10" BL turret, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 8" Compound belt, 2" Compound deck, 10.5 knots TE FT Coal
- Ping Yuen, ordered 1884, commissioned 1890 (built at Fuzhou), lost Sino-Japanese War
King Yuan class
2,900 tons, 2 x 8" BL barbette, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 8" Compound belt, 1.5" Compound deck, 15 knots TE FT Coal
- King Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Lai Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Yung class
12,000 tons, 2 x 9.2", 6 (12) x 6”, 1 (2) x 18” TT, 6" belt, 3" deck, 21 knots TE WT Coal
- Hai Yung, ordered 1898, commissioned 1902
- Hai Chou, ordered 1898, commissioned 1902
Protected Cruisers
Chi Yuan class
3,000 tons, 2 x 8” BL, 3 (6) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 14” TT, 4" Compound slope, 3" Compound deck, 17 knots CE FT Coal
- Chi Yuan, ordered 1881, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
Chih Yuan class
2,300 tons, 2 x 8" BL, 1 (2) x 6” BL, 2 (4) x 18” TT, 4" Compound slope, 2" Compound deck, 18 knots TE FT Coal
- Chih Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Ching Yuan, ordered 1885, commissioned 1887, lost Sino-Japanese War
Hai Tien class
4,300 tons, 2 x 8" BL, 5 (10) x 4.7”, 2 (5) x 18” TT, 1 bow, 3" slope, 1.5" deck, 24 knots TE WT Coal
- Hai Tien, ordered 1896, commissioned 1899
- Hai Chi, ordered 1896, commissioned 1899
Unprotected Cruisers
Chao Yung class
1,400 tons, 2 x 10" BL turret, 2 (4) x 4.7” BL, 0" belt, 0.25" Steel deck, 16.5 knots SE FT Coal, low freeboard
- Chao Yung, ordered 1879, commissioned 1881, lost Sino-Japanese War
- Wang Wei, ordered 1879, commissioned 1881, lost Sino-Japanese War
Kai Che class
2,100 tons, 2 x 8.2" BL, 4 (7) x 4.7” BL, 1 (2) x 14” TT, 0" belt, 0" deck, 14.5 knots SE FT Coal
- Kai Che, ordered 1880, commissioned 1883 (built at Fuzhou), defected 1901
- King Chi'ng, ordered 1883, commissioned 1886 (built at Fuzhou), disarmed 1902
- Huan T'ai, ordered 1885, commissioned 1888 (built at Fuzhou), defected 1901
Nan Thin class
2,200 tons, 2 x 8.2" BL, 4 (8) x 4.7” BL, 1 (2) x 14” TT, 0" belt, 0" deck, 15 knots SE FT Coal
- Nan Thin, ordered 1881, commissioned 1884, defected 1901
- Nan Shuin, ordered 1882, commissioned 1885, disarmed 1902
- Fu Ch'ing, ordered 1889, commissioned 1893 (built at Fuzhou), sunk in storm 1898
Last edited:
I have to say all these restarts are paying off, the timeline really seems "real". So much details
Thank you. There are times I just want to scream as my brain starts to melt trying to keep track of all the threads running ITTL. ready by 1903 Brazil, Britain (naturally), Chile, China, France and the US have all significantly deviated from the OTL, with Japan just starting to go off course.
As an aside I think one of the biggest advantages of the date/event format I use over the almost universal storytelling format others use is the level of detail I can include. To my mind it would be very challenging to get the same level of detail in a storytelling format. Another big advantage I see is it's so much easier to see how the timeline develops because of the detail.
Of course the big disadvantage of date/event is the shear volume of information required to give all those details. It makes it hard to write and requires a lot of reading to understand lol.
Last edited:
Personally it’s one of my preferred formats along with a TL written as a historical text or as excerpts from multiple historical texts.