WI: The battle of Dogger Bank leads to open war between Britain and Russia?

LordKalvert

Banned
Are you suggesting that Russia would abandon its aspirations in Asia? No, they would continue to pour scarce resources into a conflict where logistics would bleed its economy and military dry. If Russia abandons its Asian aspirations and a blue water port, after bleeding itself dry - then the UK retains or even enhances its dominant position in Asia.

Really got a source for this? There already was talk about solving the Japanese War by threatening India. Since this scenario has Britain at war with Russia, why not concentrate on the easier enemy?

The Sultan's opinion of the British and Russians is largely academic, but in order to secure the defence of the Straights, wandering eyes would need to be prevented from identifying the disposition of the defences (minefields etc). Accordingly, closure of the straights (even to prevent British agents) was a prudent precaution. Even if the Sultan was fundamentally ill disposed towards the British, it was no secret the Russians coveted control of the Straights.

As mentioned earlier- a big so what The British can cut off Russian trade far in the Mediterranean. They can also cut the Baltic trade off at the Sound. Its not doing them a lick of good if the Germans aren't in the war and Willie shows every intention of letting Britain and Russia fight it out amongst themselves rather than risk his Empire. Now, if you offered him France, he might start thinking about it

Not 'the best', but a jaw breaker for the price of a postage stamp. Russian infrastructure increased dramatically before 1914, but demonstrated its inability to support industry when NOTHING could be exported in WW1. Suggesting a grossly inferior network, supporting multiple war fronts, could happily cope with such a dramatic re-orientation is dubious, at best.

Totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand- short of a German DOW, Russia will be able to trade with her neighbors (where most of her trade goes anyway). Try again

Two weeks? - channelling Cheney again? Even the British could match 10K - I vaguely recall 100K was an estimate of potential Russian strength in the great game.

Look at a map of Persia, Russia and India. The Russians have the Caspian Sea, the only real military force in Persia and, yes, Tehran would fall in two weeks. Now how the British march there, across thousands of kilometers of dessert, mountains and do it without any rail support at all, is something we can expect you to demonstrate for us


Yep - the Russians demonstrated that to the Japanese - no wait...

Read what I wrote- that the Russians were vulnerable in the Far East but that no decisive results could be achieved there. Absolute worse outcome for the Russians would be a retreat behind Lake Baikal- but what would the loss of the Far East mean? Not much

Good to know?

Yes it is- care to explain what the British can do to the Russians in the Baltic? Because they aren't going to try an invasion

Yes, I stated a blockade would not be effective on the military, but it would seriously hurt Russians economically. OTL Russia never defeated Japan on the battlefield.

And as has been pointed out repeatedly- there is no great harm done to the Russian economy unless the land border with Germany is closed


The 200,000,000 rubles of exports that go by way of the Straits is not going to hurt the Russian economy one twittle- its about what Russia is spending on tea (52,000,000) foreign travel (69,000,000) hearing (14,000,000) silk (20,000,000) coffee (5,00,000) wine and tobacco (10,00,000). And since they have an extra 20,00,000 tons of grain, they won't be needing to import much wool since they can feed their sheep grain (44,000,000)

So, no, closing the straits isn't going to bring the Russian economy down
 
Last edited:
Are we ignoring the context of the 1905 Revolution that would be greatly exacerbated by the economic downturn a war with Britain would entail? Russia is in no state internally to wage a another war, especially with a great power that can stifle its trade. And the idea of Russia seriously threatening India at this time is pretty farcical, the infrastructure doesn't exist for Russia to do any meaningful damage to Britain in Asia.
 
Last edited:
Lets not discuss if it COUDL happen, assume it did ;)
It definitely could have happened.

Imagine a solitary British protected cruiser is transiting the Dogger Bank, friendly waving off passing trawlers. Suddenly the nearby trawlers come under fire. General quarters is called on the cruiser, W/T msg sent that British trawler fleet under fire. RN cruiser races to investigate and as the fog lifts finds herself surrounded by Russian battleships, the RN cruiser W/Ts that "under fire from Russian fleet, trawlers under threat, moving to engage." Cruiser is sunk, but not before message is received by all surrounding British warships.
 

Ryan

Donor
It definitely could have happened.

Imagine a solitary British protected cruiser is transiting the Dogger Bank, friendly waving off passing trawlers. Suddenly the nearby trawlers come under fire. General quarters is called on the cruiser, W/T msg sent that British trawler fleet under fire. RN cruiser races to investigate and as the fog lifts finds herself surrounded by Russian battleships, the RN cruiser W/Ts that "under fire from Russian fleet, trawlers under threat, moving to engage." Cruiser is sunk, but not before message is received by all surrounding British warships.

That's asb :p
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Are we ignoring the context of the 1905 Revolution that would be greatly exacerbated by the economic downturn a war with Britain would entail? Russia is in no state internally to wage a another war, especially with a great power that can stifle its trade. And the idea of Russia seriously threatening India at this time is pretty farcical, the infrastructure doesn't exist for Russia to do any meaningful damage to Britain in Asia.

1) Yes, we are ignoring the Revolution of 1905 because the incident takes place in October of 1904

2) with a great power that can stifle its trade. That's kind of the point- Britain can't stifle Russia's trade (which isn't a serious part of her economy anyway) unless Germany and Austria close their land frontiers


3) the idea of Russia seriously threatening India at this time is pretty farcical Threaten India? No, threaten the approaches to India- Tibet, Afghanistan and Persia, yes. A war that leaves Tibet and Afghanistan in Russian hands and Vladivostok in Japanese hands isn't a great victory for Britain

There is no war because neither Britain or Russia wish one. The thread assumes otherwise and the question is how would they campaign against each other. Russia drove British policymakers mad because there is so little that Britain can do to Russia
 
Rubbish. It's not outlandish for the world's largest navy to have a single warship nearby that comes across the event.
I think it's the Russians actually sinking a RN cruiser that s/he thinks is ASB. Given the Russian gunnery at Dogger Bank this does seem realistic. Though a few hits and some dead sailors is possible.
 

Ryan

Donor
I think it's the Russians actually sinking a RN cruiser that s/he thinks is ASB. Given the Russian gunnery at Dogger Bank this does seem realistic. Though a few hits and some dead sailors is possible.

this, I was making a joke regarding the Russians actually managing to sink the cruiser.
 
It definitely could have happened.

Imagine a solitary British protected cruiser is transiting the Dogger Bank, friendly waving off passing trawlers. Suddenly the nearby trawlers come under fire. General quarters is called on the cruiser, W/T msg sent that British trawler fleet under fire. RN cruiser races to investigate and as the fog lifts finds herself surrounded by Russian battleships, the RN cruiser W/Ts that "under fire from Russian fleet, trawlers under threat, moving to engage." Cruiser is sunk, but not before message is received by all surrounding British warships.

I think you mean "The Cruiser runs out of ammunition and retires in good order after exhausting its magazines on the Russian Fleet without being hit once."
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Lets not discuss if it COUDL happen, assume it did ;)

THe REAL question is: How do the French react.

Do they side with Russia (Then Germany and Britain will be on good terms)

Do they stay neutral or are they even siding with the Brits (unlikely)? - Now the Franco Russian alliance is broken.

Ist a win-win Situation for Germany.
As is almost always the case the how is much more important. It would decide what every other country in Europe did, or didn't do.

Need the base reason for the POD or its rather pointless.
 
this, I was making a joke regarding the Russians actually managing to sink the cruiser.
Ah, got it, thanks for setting me straight there.

Warships of this era were not very hardy it seems, so I expect a single waterline hit from a Russian battleship could be deadly. So, there is a degree of ASB.

The fishing boats did take some damage, so someone was aiming their guns well enough...

doggerbank-damage.jpg
 
What I wanted to point out was, that in 1905 Russia was the prefered ally over Britain by Bülow and Wilhelm.
True but from what I've read the Germans' problem was that Russia had absolutely no interest in weakening their ties with France. Instead, the Franco-Russian alliance, while from the Russian POV not necessarily anti-German in nature, was still great leverage to negotiate with the Germans from a position of relative power.
 
1) Yes, we are ignoring the Revolution of 1905 because the incident takes place in October of 1904

You can't avoid the 1905 Revolution with a PoD in October 1904... Okay, maybe you could but it would be a question of delaying it a while. There had already been serious peasant uprisings in the years prior to the war and the poor Russian performance in the war was grating.

2) with a great power that can stifle its trade. That's kind of the point- Britain can't stifle Russia's trade (which isn't a serious part of her economy anyway) unless Germany and Austria close their land frontiers

Didn't Britain basically control the world financial markets? They could potentially cause havoc given the amount of debt the Russian government held.

3) the idea of Russia seriously threatening India at this time is pretty farcical Threaten India? No, threaten the approaches to India- Tibet, Afghanistan and Persia, yes. A war that leaves Tibet and Afghanistan in Russian hands and Vladivostok in Japanese hands isn't a great victory for Britain

The Russians are never going to be able to conquer Afghanistan or Persia, their logistical train would be too massive. If the British actually send troops to those areas, then it gets even worse. In contrast, the British can deploy troops basically wherever they want (provided it is close to the ocean). Afghanistan might be a problem but it is even worse for the Russians. An Anglo-Russian War in 1904/5 would allow Britain to fight a war in the exact way it likes - small numbers of troops being deployed, while also pouring money into an ally that is willing to pay the casualties.

teg
 

LordKalvert

Banned
You can't avoid the 1905 Revolution with a PoD in October 1904... Okay, maybe you could but it would be a question of delaying it a while. There had already been serious peasant uprisings in the years prior to the war and the poor Russian performance in the war was grating.

I was referring to the decision to go to war or not. Since Dogger is in October and the 1905 Revolution hasn't started, it can't enter into the decision

Didn't Britain basically control the world financial markets? They could potentially cause havoc given the amount of debt the Russian government held.
Not at all- Russia never borrowed on the London Market and had stockpiles of Gold to last a long time. Russia may leave the gold standard but everyone basically does in WWI. The Gold Standard had, rightfully, been seen as a mistake by the entire Russian government outside of Witte and Nicholas


The Russians are never going to be able to conquer Afghanistan or Persia, their logistical train would be too massive. If the British actually send troops to those areas, then it gets even worse. In contrast, the British can deploy troops basically wherever they want (provided it is close to the ocean). Afghanistan might be a problem but it is even worse for the Russians. An Anglo-Russian War in 1904/5 would allow Britain to fight a war in the exact way it likes - small numbers of troops being deployed, while also pouring money into an ally that is willing to pay the casualties.

teg

This is not the conclusion of the British.

First, the Russians aren't conquering Persia- just northern Persia which is the most important part. Same with Afghanistan and Tibet. The British military concluded that there was nothing to stop a Russian occupation of Tehran or Herat

Since the Russians had close ties to the Dali Lama and the latter was at war with Britain, its only a matter of sending weapons his way

I wasn't suggesting a Russian victory- more like a stalemate. The Japanese aren't likely to push much further and Tehran isn't bad trading material.

Look at a map and try and keep the Russians out of Tehran
 
See also

The Dogger Bank War (Multi-page thread 1 2)
teg

WI: Dogger Bank incident escalates (Multi-page thread 1 2)
Will Kürlich Kerl

Dogger Bank Incident (Multi-page thread 1 2 3)
Gaius Julius Magnus

WI: Dogger Bank Sparks a War (Multi-page thread 1 2)
QuoProQuid

Battle Of Dogger Bank
Peg Leg Pom

A more Serious Dogger Bank Incident
Nivek

Dogger Bank War
Thucydides

Dogger Bank incident triggers war
Roberto

Dogger Bank October 21st 1904
PMN1

Dogger Bank
MrP


Our Sacred Honour - British Intervention in the Russo-Japanese War (Multi-page thread 1 2 3 4 5 6 7)
diestormlie
(the only actual TL that went anywhere)
 

LordKalvert

Banned
They didn't hit a fishing boat they just missed their own ships and had some accidental fishing boat damage on the way

Nobody could hit anything especially at night back then. The Japanese gunners scored about 5% hits in broad daylight at pointblank range.

The Americans managed a wonderful 2.5% at Manila and even worse at Santiago

The Russians do about 1% in the Pacific War- without range finders and without telescopic lenses

So shooting blindly in the middle of the night, expecting many hits is silly. The Japanese manage to fire a couple thousand rounds at nothing when the Fuji goes down. Its combat- men panic, someone starts shooting, everyone joins in
 
Top