If you had the choice in 1939

[seahawk]

But if we know enough to focus on it, we know enough to speed it up.  imo.

200923[/snapback]

 

Problem is the basics were published in 1939 by gemran scientists. So before that point, you can´t start and the US did start rather quickly after that anyway.

[Colin]

Create proper tank divisions in the French army using mediums with 3 man turrets and radio’s. Use them in mass formations with AA defences.

 

Replace Matilda I with Valentine tanks have decent stocks of HE and AP shells for them. Support them with 2pdrs and mortars mounted on carriers.

 

Start development on the 6-pdr tank gun right away, get Canada to start producing right away. Work on a SP 25pdr and start designing a APC.

 

Stop production of the light tanks and arm the remaining ones with the 15mm Besa. Place orders for the M3 Stuart tank right away.

 

In Canada start production of the RAM earlier, have them ready for N. Africa armed with a 6-pdr and get rid of the stupid mg turret.

 

Redesign the carrier so it has a front mounted engine, and add an extra roadwheel. This should make it more flexible.

 

Form convoys earlier, start building frigates sooner to replace the Corvette. Get Walker and tell him to form a hunter killer group right away, give him Asdic and radar equipped ships asap.

 

Scrap the Boultan Paul defiant

 

Did I mention shoot the tank board? Threaten to do the same to the RA leadership and tell them that everyone can play with HE.

[Colin Williams]

The problem is that by 1939 there was precious little anyone on the Allied side could do in the way of weapons acquisition to alter the events of 1940. The delays in rearmament and the mistakes in weapons procurement all occured in the mid-1930s. By 1939 both France and Britain were ramping up war production as quickly as possible and were trying to fix the most obvious problems with equipment. You can teleport yourself back to 1939 and ask for 1000 6-pdrs and 2000 Spitfires, but British industry was no more capable of supplying those by 1940 than A10 Warthogs and TOW missiles.

 

By and large, the latest British and French weapons systems of 1939 were up to the battlefield job of 1940. The Matilda 2, Char B1bis, and Somua S35 were the equal or superior of the best tanks on the German side. The 2pdr and 47mm were superior to the German 37mm AT gun, and the 25 pdr (albeit in the 18/25 pdr model) was a fine artillery piece. The Hurricane, Spitfire and De520 could handle the Me109. What was missing was quantity rather than quality, as most of these weapons systems had not yet replaced their obsolescent predecessors by the spring of 1940. Perhaps different procurement decisions in early 1939 would provide a few more modern fighters or a regiment of Valentines or a somewhat larger number of French AA guns, but I seriously doubt that any of these would have made a difference in 1940. Only by 1941 and beyond would changes in 1939 make a major impact on the war.

[Tony Williams]

The problem is that by 1939 there was precious little anyone on the Allied side could do in the way of weapons acquisition to alter the events of 1940. The delays in rearmament and the mistakes in weapons procurement all occured in the mid-1930s.

Which is why 'The Foresight War' starts in 1934

What was missing was quantity rather than quality, as most of these weapons systems had not yet replaced their obsolescent predecessors by the spring of 1940.

True for some items, but much more important IMO was that the British and (especially) the French lacked a clear concept of how best to use their weapons, compared with the Germans.

 

Given the choice between the Allies having better weapons but the same tactics and command and communications systems, or the same weapons but tactics, command and communications to match the Germans', I'd choose the latter without hesitation.

 

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

[hammerlock]

QUOTE(Colin Williams @ Fri 5 Aug 2005 1951)

The problem is that by 1939 there was precious little anyone on the Allied side could do in the way of weapons acquisition to alter the events of 1940. The delays in rearmament and the mistakes in weapons procurement all occured in the mid-1930s.

Which is why 'The Foresight War' starts in 1934 smile.gif

 

 

yeah but you miss the most important part of foresight, and that's france isn't doomed to fall in June 1940.  And with foresight you can change that.  Sorry tony I'm sure book is a great read, but everytime to sell you it, I'm going to point its main failure too. Even with foresight only back to 1939, The British and French and change their tactic and battle plan to stop the germans.  Going back to 1934 makes it even easier, send French to the Rhineland when German do.... Stopping Hitler in first step, no war.  And then the British and Frenchget to keep they empire. 

 

 

 

True for some items, but much more important IMO was that the British and (especially) the French lacked a clear concept of how best to use their weapons, compared with the Germans.

 

Given the choice between the Allies having better weapons but the same tactics and command and communications systems, or the same weapons but tactics, command and communications to match the Germans', I'd choose the latter without hesitation

 

I agree given the choices I would go with better tactics and C&C over new weapons. British and French weapons systems were fine for 1940. Everyone seems to forget that for battle france main battle tanks for German forces were Mk1 and Mk2, both the Mk3 and 4 will there but in very small numbers.

[Tony Williams]

yeah but you miss the most important part of foresight, and that's france isn't doomed to fall in June 1940.  And with foresight you can change that.  Sorry tony I'm sure book is a great read, but everytime to sell you it, I'm going to point its main failure too. Even with foresight only back to 1939, The British and French and change their tactic and battle plan to stop the germans.  Going back to 1934 makes it even easier, send French to the Rhineland when German do.... Stopping Hitler in first step, no war.  And then the British and Frenchget to keep they empire. 

 

You could certainly write a book with that as a plot, but there were logical reasons for the British in TFW making the decisions they did (they're explained in the first chapter which you can read online via my website ).

 

Alternative history novels do not have to identify what would have happened in changed circumsatnces - that's impossible anyway as no-one can ever know - but merely provide a reasonable case for a chain of events which could have happened.

 

And you are forgetting that in TFW the Germans were also acting with foresight, and were also far better prepared for the war...

 

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum