What are the chances of having a WWI with 1930s technology?
Note that in this scenario, WWI doesn't need to happen exactly in 1914.
Note that in this scenario, WWI doesn't need to happen exactly in 1914.
Also, there'll be no tanks, though perhaps more armoured cars, and maybe even armoured trucks as primitive APCs.
If you delay the war until the 1930s then its 100% doable.What are the chances of having a WWI with 1930s technology?
Note that in this scenario, WWI doesn't need to happen exactly in 1914.
If you delay the war until the 1930s then its 100% doable.
I'm making a semantics argument here, by definition a war delayed to the 1930s is fought with 1930s tech, just not OTL 1930s tech, but the OP didn't specify that. I'm inclined to say that without WW1 and the expense in terms of money, destruction of land/property, reduced economic growth, and loss of life/potential scientists/engineers/workers, then technology would be more advanced than IOTL 1930s. Assuming a war 20 years later than IOTL Europe would be more advanced than OTL Europe was in 1934 due to all of the above factors and the economic problems of the 1920s-30s being avoided and higher birthrates. So ITTL the 1910s-30s would see a period of extensive growth in terms of technology, economies, and militaries as there would be reforms of political systems generations of people born and coming of age that otherwise wouldn't have existed, and a lot of military investment due to the arms race ramping up since 1905.No - many of the 1930 (military) technologies are result of the war fought.
While there might be technologies developed that are more advanced than OTL, some others will be delayed. Some tech will probably go in another direction.
Germany was denied some sorts of weapon after Versailles (and lost not a few patents). Skip WWI as weknow it until the 30s Germany will develop uninterrupted.
IN addition the 30s saw a leap in technology. For example biplanes were slowly cast away in favor of monoplanes
What IS 30s technology?
The issue being that tracks first developed thanks to having to cope with the muddy battlefields of the Western Front, in other places wheels would have been more effective. This isn't saying no armoured vehicles, simply no tanks.Well, maybe tanks. You could have the OTL 1905 Austrian proposal for a tank (with surprisingly modern characteristics - smaller tracks and a turret), the Burstyn Motogeschutz, be adopted by the Austrians (and a general switch towards armoured cars as a result of Austrian high command choosing that over armoured trains unlike OTL).
Precisely.No - many of the 1930 (military) technologies are result of the war fought.
While there might be technologies developed that are more advanced than OTL, some others will be delayed. Some tech will probably go in another direction.
It's not just Germany, everyone lost massive amounts of money and huge numbers of men, plus the post-war glut of equipment (particularly) aircraft saw a number of companies in financial difficulty, and that without the Great Depression.Germany was denied some sorts of weapon after Versailles (and lost not a few patents). Skip WWI as weknow it until the 30s Germany will develop uninterrupted.
I've asked that myself, and I'm yet to receive an answer.What IS 30s technology?
I would argue that this isn't true. Remember how badly Britain and France faired in the early part of WW2? this was mostly due to the doctrines developed during WW1 being imprinted in the brains of the senior officers. Take away WW1 and you're left with a situation where the upper echelons don't really know what the best way to fight is, so they'll actually try to figure it out, rather than making assumptions. What will suffer is NCO experience, which is just as bad, but in a different way.They'd have more trucks and aircraft overall, but less practical tactical/operational doctrine and organization due to no combat experience. It would make for an interesting TL or at least war game to figure out how things would have been and played out.
The issue being that tracks first developed thanks to having to cope with the muddy battlefields of the Western Front, in other places wheels would have been more effective. This isn't saying no armoured vehicles, simply no tanks.
Tactical realities. Tracks developed as they did because the Western Front degenerated into trench warfare. but with 1930s tech, everyone is much more mobile and so trench warfare is unlikely to develop. Also remember, tanks are comparatively high-maintenance beasties (more complex drivetrain and suspension, plus tracks), and they're slower (40 mph for the Tetrarch light tank vs 50 mph for the Humber armoured car). Oh you might eventually get tanks, in the same way as OTL, but I doubt you'd start out with them.See this below? 1905 proposal for a trench-crossing vehicle by Gunther Burstyn. Tracks - albeit small ones (also, turret). There's a scale model here. The two spars (actually, there's four, two on each side) were meant to aid in crossing trenches, but it's likely those would've been removed in time.
![]()
The idea for a tracked vehicle predated WWI, actually. Someone taking a chance could've very well resulted in tanks becoming part of national arsenals.
What IS 30s technology?
At what point in the decade? 1931? 1935? 1939? Those all produce drastically different results.
Let's start with 1930.
If you delay the war until the 1930s then its 100% doable.
Okay, good, that's a date at least. At this point it's possible to fly to America if you do it in several legs (Uk-Iceland-Greenland-Newfoundland-Canada). For best results, use seaplanes, at least then you have the possibility of surviving long enough to be rescued if you need to make an impromptu 'landing' (seaing?).Let's start with 1930.