Red Ice Box

[GPMG]

This is Russia (Alaska) ...when winter comes, there are no roads without ploughs and salt. Sometimes no roads full stop. As your countrymen learned, winter is an unforgiving teacher. Either have tracks or be cheap and have trucks. Ahhh...you are thinking like a German. The Regiment is a Bn sized element per the British and not a Regimenter. Being Russian, the Squadrons could well be weak.. I am assuming Russia sided with the Allies during WWII....in a bizzaro situation of finding themsleves fighting on the same side as the Reds after sending volunteers to fight them in Spain and Finland. Semyon

I've been thinking about the period between the end of the Russian Revolution and the End of WWII

Assumptions: -Russian Americas¹ military strenght had been increased following the failed attempt to sell Russian America. This included more units, forts and stores of arms and munitions.

- There is little fighting in Russian America and any Communist supporters are suppresed.

- Russian America gains control of most of the Russian Pacific Fleet.

I imagine that the navy will be very important to defend Russian America, land spies and sabators, carry out raids by naval forces and Naval Infantry. As I see it the Navy would be the first line of defence with its own naval infantry to hold Islands on defence, and to provide an amphibous capacity on the attack. Next would be the Coastal Artillary around significant Harbours, costal towns and cities. Finaly if a landing was successfully made would be Garrison Troops and Field Force. Garrison Troops would be Rifle Troops² and Artilery holding fortified towns and cities while Field Force consisting of Field Artillary, Calvary, Russian America Cossacks³ and Rifle Troops which manovers and attacks the landing force. As the first line of defence the Navy gets the lions share of defence funding with a mainly full time professional force, next comes Coastal Artillary which would be maintained at a higher level of readness than Garrison Troops and Field Force.

For the Spanish Civil War I'm thinking about a White Russian Legion of volunteers plus serving Officers as 'Observers' and the secret sale of arms and ammunition. This gives the opertunity to halt the spread of Communism, to evaluate new weapons and tactics being used, and to provide a combat experance for young soldiers. Also old used weapons can be sold at inflated prices to help fund the purchase of new arms. It seems to me that having fought alongside the Condor Legion the 'Observers' would have reconised the increased importance of airpower both in combat and logistics/support roles. They would have seen that bi-planes fighters were clearly obsolete and enclosed monoplanes were the way of the future. The German MG34 would have been seen as supperior to the Alaskan Maxium Machine Guns in the assult role. The dule role use of the 88mm AA guns would have impressed. The increased utillity of the Tank would have been reconised with the proviso that Alaska dosn't look to be good tank country.

 

 

Due to the short period of the Winter War (105 days) only limited numbers of volunteers and 'observers' made it into combat before the end of hostilities. However Observers reports give a good idea of how the Red Army performed and which tactics the Finns found most usefull. Observers report that both the Light Machine Gun and Submachine Gun were important contributers to the success of Finnish highly mobile units. The Communist DP-27 LMG was reported to be a robust simple design which was prefered by the Finns to their own LS-26 due to its reliabulity. The Finnish Suomi KP-31 was reported to be a reliable SMG that the Communists had no counter part for. The Communist SVT-38 Self Loading Rifle was reported to be an intresting design with some problems in terms lenght and complexity to maintain. Examples of these weapons were procured and returned to Russian America. It was also reported that the Communists had deployed tanks in support of their attacks and that due to the freezing temperature they could move more easily over frozen terrain and bodies of water, rather than being immobilised in swamps and mud.

The Continuation War again saw Russian American volunteers and 'observers' fighting on the Finnish side, as well as some Russian American voluteers who served with the Germans. The Russian American 'observers' were soon removed under presure from Britian and the treat of an invasion from the Canadian boarder.⁴ Following the Japanese invasion of the Aleutian Islands the Russian American Goverment activly moved to stop any more volunteers leaving to fight for the Finns or Germans. At the end of WWII the number of POWs held by the Western Allies who were Russians who had served in the German army and who claimed to be Russian American volunteers far exceeded the actual number of volunteers. Some of these POWs managed to convince the Western authorities to repatriate them to Russian America. These POWs were seen by Russian American intelligence as a huge gold mine of informaton and also as a potentil threat as any one of them could be a Soviet agent.

Following the Japanese invasion of the Aleutian Island Russian America went to war with Japan but not Germany. More time in the Aleutian campain was spent fighting the weather and searching for the enemy than fighting. It was more of an air and naval campain than a ground campain.

 

¹The Russian name for Alaska before it was sold to the USA and renamed Alaska.

²According to wikipedia Rifle Troops is a more accurate translation of the Russian term for Infantry.

³Mostly not accually Cossaks but light calvary recruited from hunters, trappers and the native population. Used for recon and raiding, use of horses is terrain dependent.

⁴The Canadian boarder defences were stripped during the Russian Civil War and were never properly re-enforced as defence of the coast was always seen as more important.

[Simon Tan]

2-Streltsi. Rifles were regarded as a honorific.

3-Cossacks are cultural. In Russia (Alaska) it may be retained for traditional and cultural reasons but would be weakened. Military service in lieu.

I suspect Russia would have a much larger population than Alaska becuase it would naturally attract the White disapora. They may well go there, see it and leave but that assumes they have the resources.

With Russian America, the Russian Pacific Fleet would be split between Eastern and Western Flotillas.

Post-WWII, I would imagine that the Russians would replace their hodge podge stocks of Moisins and whatever domestic LMG with MAP Garands, BARs and M1919s.

[BansheeOne]

Are the Coastal Arty Bns special purpose or do they also get used for general support?

They are lacking a over the water surveillance and targeting capability.

 

You do not need an artillery obs bn. Your orgs are very staff and top heavy......

 

Frankly, I would like to be both the FH-70 and M107 battalions to be dual purpose land/sea; I have no firepower to waste in a small force like this. The observation battalions are supposed to bring the necessary capabilities for that, but I'm not very informed on actual necessities. Hence my somewhat diffuse reference to "artillery radars", though this would include counterbattery radars. I will probably need more sets.

 

If I'm staff-heavy, I'm doing at least one very un-German thing ...

 

The additional thoughts on the pre-1945 history are interesting. I would love to increase the manpower proportion of the Navy and Air Force due to the previously-mentioned rationale that everything they destroy at sea, the Army doesn't need to fight on land. The problem is they're eating up my professionals and thus increase my problem of having enough cadres to train and lead my conscripts in the Army.

 

However, something has been bugging me about the latter anyway; I've distributed my infantry forces equally between the four regional commands, but RC East covers less than ten percent of my population, and as stated before, the panhandle area is far away from likely deployment areas and only connected by air and sea.

 

My first response was moving one inactive brigade from RC East and West (which is mostly meant to lead forces dispatched to defend or retake the Aleutians) each to RC Center and North where most of the conscripts will live. But a bigger reorganisation might be in order, based upon GPMG's thoughts; in particular, allocating more conscripts to the Homeguard with its rather low cadre requirements, and focussing the regular Army more on quick-reaction, mobile and hard-hitting forces.

 

Back on page 2 I already outlined the progression of small arms, initial replacement of old Russian stocks having been Johnson rifles and LMGs due to Garand production being directed to US forces after the Japanese invasion in the Aleutians. By now I've pretty much decided that the follow-on for infantry squads ca. 1960 will be the AR-10 and MAG in the light role.

[BansheeOne]

Okay, let's put the Cold War on hold for a moment and back up to find the Russian roots of our forces.

 

As stated previously, the US planned coastal fortifications in Dutch Harbor, Kodiak, Seward and Sitka (Novoarkhangelsk) during WW II. I have to assume some thought went into chosing those locations, and the Russians would have seen the same reasons back in imperial times, and after the Russo-Japanese War the latest. Questions: What would a fairly typical Russian coastal defense fort of that time have looked like? How would it have been manned, and by what branch of the armed forces? I understand the Soviets had coastal artillery handled by the Navy.

 

Also stated before, Alaska had a population of about 64,000 in 1910. Let's assume it would have been the same number of voluntary inhabitants under the Russians and disregard my putative katorga deportees. Now the question is whether this would include or exclude Russian military personnel; as far as I have found, the US had no meaningful military presence there before 1939, so it would probably be the latter. Question: What would be a sensible number of ground troops based there in addition to the coastal artillery forces? Would those be Army or Marines? I find the Russian Navy's Marines were not just shipboard detachments, but had a strength of two brigades (comprising what units?) following the Russo-Japanese War; would rule over Russian America warrant the creation of additional forces?

 

Next, the Navy proper. We can assume there would be some sort of naval basing at the same locations defended by coastal forts (or vice versa). How many and what kind of navy vessels might be homeported there? How many personnel might be stationed there to provide support for them and visiting vessels?

 

Now on to the civil war. I have already postulated that Wrangel's Fleet eventually ends up in Alaska rather than Tunisia. It comprised two battleships and cruisers each, ten destroyers, four submarines and five gunboats plus various auxiliaries for a total of about 60. I find no information about personnel except that they brought along 4,500 civilian refugees, but can add the same number for crews of the combat units alone. Prior to their last cruise, they evacuated another 150,000 defeated Whites from the Crimean, though no more of 30,000 could have been soldiers.

 

Finally, the Pacific Fleet and Whites fighting in the Far East. In 1914, it consisted of two cruisers, 25 destroyers, 13 submarines and a gunboat, though the loyalities of the crews seems to have been mostly on the Red side in the revolution. I don't know how many ships eventually remained to be taken away by the Whites and Entente forces, or how many ground forces were evacuated.

 

The above would form the basis for the independent Russian American forces. To look at it, the Navy - including marines and coastal artillery - would probably have a proportion far in excess of the 20 percent in my Cold War OOB. The creation of the Air Force would presumably cut into both original services. Any additional information would be welcome, particularly personnel numbers.

[Simon Tan]

Coastal fortresses would be manned by naval personnel, much like Kronshtadt. I suspect you have to choose ONE location to develop as a naval hub, in keeping with their tradition. It will probably be whichever is the largest population/political center. The secondary locations may well have some sort of fortifications but probably quite limited in scale and nature, glorified coaling stations.

 

As far as home ported forces, I suspect they will be light, simply becuase of the demands of all the other directions closer to Russia after the debacle of Tsushima. Maybe a squadron of destroyers/torpedoboat destroyers? Probably no submarines given the difficulty in getting them across the Bering Sea and ditto many of the light forces. One does wonder if they would just have vessels built in the US.......with Russian ordnance no doubt. (possibly contracted in the US too! Howls of outsourcing.......)

 

The Noviks would be a good bet but they came on later and seemed to have been given priority to Baltic and Black Sea Fleets.

 

I suspect that in the 20s and 30s, all the Russian ships would have been binned because of support issues and the Russian navy would be made up of surplus 4-stackers available in bulk and for a song from Uncle Sam. This is unless of course the agent for Yarrow was particularly adept and could convince the Russians to buy his destroyers.

 

ETA:- You can of course strip off all the guns and torps for coastal defences, which can still be seen today!

 

The only things that might survive were prestige vessels like BBs.....but the problems with support and manning would be enormous.

Given the risk of Soviet forces getting over being nil, one would suspect that the Navy would quite rapidly resize to be manageable.

Edited September 10, 2012 by Simon Tan

[BansheeOne]

Similiar to my thoughts. I looked at the Arctic Sea Flotilla for comparison, but found it comprised actually about 90 ships, including one pre-dreadnought, two cruisers, six destroyers and three submarines; apparently what remained operable after the Civil War was also taken by the Whites, presumably to end up in Russian America in our scenario. Rather than cruisers (except maybe for a flotilla leader) and submarines, you'll probably have gunboats based there to police troublesome natives, and the equivalent of a battleship crew in torpedo boats.

 

I was not going to turn the ports into Kronstadt. The US garrisoned Kodiak with three 152 mm and two 90 mm batteries, later some 203 mm. For Sitka (Novoarkhangelsk), Seward (Baranov) and Dutch Harbor (Unalaska), probably two or three batteries apiece. I agree those would probably be reinforced by the Whites through guns taken off ships no longer serviceable due to materiél breakdown or manpower shortage.

 

Still, at a rough glance, about 60,000 Army and 30,000 Navy personnel might end up in Russian America. Unsustainable in the long run, but with Marines and coastal artillery as part of the latter, the 1:2 ratio is likely to remain until the creation of the Air Force.

[Simon Tan]

Kronshtadt is an example. The Russians were keen on their fortifications especially after General Todleben...but also tended no concentrate their fleets behind these. Kodiak would be a weird place even with a peace time garrison and guard ships given how teeny tiny it was. I think it would be very difficult to actually move much of the White fleet to Alaska after the Civil War. I would suggest that the bulk of the fleet is actually interned elsewhere while the bulk of the troops are actually employed as labour to build up the cities etc. I suspect many would slip off to Canada and the US....and most of the upper class would be in San Francisco if not in Europe.

 

I suspect the only way to keep men in Alaska is to import women and ditribute land.Both will rapidly reduce the available manpower pool.

[thekirk]

Kronshtadt is an example. The Russians were keen on their fortifications especially after General Todleben...but also tended no concentrate their fleets behind these. Kodiak would be a weird place even with a peace time garrison and guard ships given how teeny tiny it was. I think it would be very difficult to actually move much of the White fleet to Alaska after the Civil War. I would suggest that the bulk of the fleet is actually interned elsewhere while the bulk of the troops are actually employed as labour to build up the cities etc. I suspect many would slip off to Canada and the US....and most of the upper class would be in San Francisco if not in Europe.

 

I suspect the only way to keep men in Alaska is to import women and ditribute land.Both will rapidly reduce the available manpower pool.

 

Simon, I think you're underestimating the effect that keeping the colony would have had.

 

If Russia chose to keep Russian Alaska (or, whatever they'd have called it...) it would have been a paramount goal to make the place pay for itself. Thus, Russia keeps the place, Russia has to develop it better. And, if they do, a lot of our assumptions go out the window about population, etc. I think it's entirely possible that if the Yukon gold strikes had happened, you'd have seen a huge amount of attention and money shifted towards the place, if only to keep it out of the hands of the Japanese. And, if you do go looking, there are a lot of very good natural harbors all along the inside passage that would have served as great naval bases, provided they were developed.

 

Seward's folly was in 1867. Thirty-odd years of continued Russian possession could have meant continued stasis, or it could have meant massive development.

 

I think that I mentioned this before, but I believe that one reasonable point of divergence from our own history is to imagine the result of an earlier warming trend, and an opening up of the Northeast Passage. With even seasonal access, a lot of things become possible--And, with that warming coming earlier, the Russians would have been wealthier, and more interested in things. Don't forget that sea-borne travel is a hell of a lot cheaper than land, so everything in Alaska is more accessible than much of what's in Siberia. Right there, you'd have a reason to want to keep control--Export of timber, and other Alaskan resources would have financed a lot of the growth, and I could see an analogous situation in Alaska to what happened in Texas and Mexico. There would have likely have been a lot of tension between American expats living in Alaska and trying to develop the place vs. the entrenched Russians. The tension could have led to war, or it could have led to a lessening of the Tsar's autocracy.

 

You've got damn near a half-century of time, there--Things could have gone very, very differently than in our timeline in that period.

[BansheeOne]

For the moment, I'm chasing down ships which could have made the trip. I'm excluding anything older than 30 years in 1922, or below 300 tons.

 

- BB General Alekseyev (commissioned 1917). Not dissimiliar to the Italian Andrea Dorias; like the latter, as the sole battleship and obvious flagship of the Russian American Navy, she could be thoroughly modernized in the late 30s, likely in a US yard. With new engines, her speed would be brought up from 21 to 27 knots, the 18 casemated 130 mm and four 76 mm AA guns replaced by twelve 127 mm L/38 DP twin mounts, eight Bofors 40 mm twins and 16 Oerlikon 20 mm singles added and the four submerged 450 mm torpedo tubes removed. Her full load displacement would grow by 3,000 tons, her complement by 250. In that guise, she would shell Japanese positions in the Aleutians and possibly participate in the Battle of the Komandorski Islands, her light AA armament growing throughout WW II. Post-war she would continue to serve mostly as a training vessel until ca. 1960.

 

- CL General Kornilov (commissioned 1902). Old protected cruiser; her sister ship Pamiat' Merkuria was used as training ship Komintern by the Soviets after extensive repairs and scuttled as a breakwater in 1942 after damaged by German air attacks. Kornilov is likely to serve in a similiar role and be decommissioned after WW II, Alekseyev taking over training duties.

 

- CL Varyag (commissioned 1901). Another protected cruiser, sunk in the Russo-Japanese War, salvaged by the Japanese and transferred back to Russia in WW I, seized by the Royal Navy in 1917 and in reality sold for scrap in 1920, but run aground off the Scottish coast enroute to Germany. She would probably be in bad shape either way you cut it, and decommissioned prior to WW II.

 

- CL Askold (commissioned 1900). Half-sister to Varyag, seized by the Royal Navy in 1918, used as depot ship HMS Glory IV and in reality offered back to the Soviets in 1922, but rejected due to her poor state. She could serve on for a few years alongside Varyag, but would probably be decommissioned with her.

 

- CL Almaz (commissioned 1903). Unprotected cruiser built as a yacht for the Russian naval minister, later reclassified as an aviso and finally as a seaplane tender in 1914. She may serve on in the last role until WW II if there are any seaplanes to tend to.

 

- DD Tserigo (commissioned 1917). Came via Wrangel's Fleet. Could serve as flotilla leader for the similiar, but smaller Derzky class destroyers.

 

- DD Avtroil (commissioned 1916). Similiar to but slightly larger than Tserigo, captured by the Royal Navy in 1919 and in reality given to Estonia as Lennuk, which sold it on to Peru in 1933 as the Almirante Guise, scrapped only in 1954. If we could get her, she would make a good companion to Tserigo.

 

- DD Kapitan I ranga Miklucha Maklai (commissioned 1915). Same story as Avtroil; renamed Spartak by the Bolsheviks, captured by the Royal Navy and given to Estonia as Vambola, scrapped in Peru as Almirante Villar in 1954.

 

- 6 x Derzky class DD (commissioned 1913/14). Part of Wrangel's fleet; we'll assume that Schastlivy didn't run aground being towed to internment in Tunisia. They seem to have been good, fast if somewhat small ships and could still be active for coastal patrol duties in WW II.

 

- SS AG-22 (commissioned 1916). American Holland design, quite small at 355 tons, so barely made my size threshold; arrived with Wrangel's fleet in Tunisia and could be shipped as deck freight from there if considered not fit to cross the Atlantic under its own power. Five of the class remained under Soviet control, were modernized in the 30s and stayed in service until ca. 1950. Six more were not delivered due to the 1917 revolution, stored disassembled at Vancouver and taken over by the US Navy in 1918 as the H class along with three of their own; one wrecked in 1920, the rest sold for scrap in 1931-33. In our scenario, they could go to the Russian American Navy instead.

 

- 2 x Bars class SS (commissioned 1915-17). Seized by the Germans and transferred to the Whites in 1918. Design with various shortcomings; boats remaining under Soviet control were modernized after the Civil War, but still four were lost in accidents, four were stricken or hulked in 1936, and the last converted to a harbor training vessel in 1941.

 

- SS Tyulen (commissioned 1913). Another survivor of Wrangel's fleet, similiar to the Bars design with the same faults; her sister Nerpa was decommissioned by the Soviets in 1930.

 

There are more, but I need to run some Russian pages through Google Translate.

Edited September 11, 2012 by BansheeOne

[Marek Tucan]

A bit into the olden days, but... If there was an option of Russian Alaska, may it make it easier for Tzar to leave Russia during the revolution? (or atleast some noteworthy members of the family), along wiht the government etc.

 

Whuile before the gold was found, posting there would be more of a punishment detail, after resources became apparent Russia would probably send at least some of the best and brightest there. Natural bastion...

[BansheeOne]

- TB Kapitan Saken (commissioned 1907). Came with Wrangel's Fleet, in reality returned to the Soviets and broken up in 1924.

 

- 3 x Z class TB (commissioned 1903/04). Old small boats of dubious value; the ones which remained under Soviet control were also broken up in 1924.

 

- 2 x Grozny class GB (commissioned 1918-20). 1,120 tons, Grozny has two 120 mm and 102 mm guns each plus a 47 mm, Strazh two 152 and one 45 mm.

 

Undetermined types:

 

- 1 x gunboat

 

- 1 x aviso

 

- 2 x minesweeper

 

- 2 x training ship

 

- 1 x repair ship

 

- 1 x submarine tender

 

- 1 x water tanker (unfinished)

 

- 1x steamliner

 

- 4 x icebreaker (three armed)

 

- 2 x survey ship

 

- 1 x salvage ship

 

- 3 x tug

 

- 19 x transport

Edited September 11, 2012 by BansheeOne

[Colin]

Life up there is not easy, even with an improvement in the weather, storms are significant and sea states would make most early torpedo boat unusable. Waters that appear protected are subject to funnel winds and exiting arctic air.

[Simon Tan]

Tsar gets shot with the family at Ekaterinburg. He did not bug out.

Anything smaller than a Novik is really not up to the Alaskan waters. Most of the Black Sea escapees will be scrapped or reduced to harbor duties.

I really would wonder why Russians would necessarily flock to Alaska when it was even further and crappier than Siberia. It would really require a visionary and a patron. If we look at Alaska, the gold rush did not really translate into real development from the get go.

[BansheeOne]

I have decided that the American Flotilla of 1914 included six destroyers of the original Novik type, commissioned in 1913/14, and four gunboats of the Khrabryy type, commissioned in 1897/98. All were built specifically for the American station in addition to actually existing ships, because they had the necessary size to handle sea conditions in the area. The Khrabryys were armored vessels of 1,735 tons standard and 2,100 tons full load, 72.3 meter length and 12.7 meter beam. They made 14 knots, were armed with two 203 mm L/45, one 152 mm L/45, five 47 mm L/43 and four 37 mm L/23 guns, a 450 mm bow torpedo tube and up to 20 mines; their complement was ca. 180. They were to act as coastal defense ships in the event of Japanese raids; all bigger combat units were redeployed to the European theater in 1914, just like it was the case with the Siberian Flotilla.

 

After the first decade of the break, the Russian American Navy could be expected to look roughly like this:

 

- Battleship General Alekseyev; necessary crew 1,150, but the admirals still dream of sailing her into Leningrad (soon to be renamed St. Petersburg again) to a triumphant reception by cheering crowds of Russians freshly liberated from the yoke of Bolshevism.

 

- 1st Cruiser Squadron with Askold, General Kornilov and Varyag. Necessary crew 1,740 total. They are old and run down, and rarely sortie anymore. There are hopeful plans to replace them by more modern ships with less manning requirements and maintenance cost, yet equal combat power; the government is in negotiations with British shipbuilders over a pair of minimal cruisers that would look much like the eventual Arethusa class, needing only half the crew overall.

 

- Unprotected cruiser Almaz, serving as a training vessel. Necessary crew 340.

 

- 1st Gunboat Squadron, comprising the four Khrabryys and two Groznys. Necessary crew 1,080 total. These solidly-built vessels are still slugging on reliably, but tie up rather a lot of personnel in relation to their remaining combat value and use a hodgepodge of ammunition types, some unique to them. It is planned to put them in reserve soon.

 

- 1st Destroyer Squadron, comprising the original six Noviks based here. Necessary crew 850 total.

 

- 2nd Destroyer Squadron with Avtroil, Maklai and Tserigo. Necessary crew 470 total.

 

- 3rd Destroyer Squadron with the six Derzkys. Necessary crew 750 total. Though the destroyers are aging, they are still considered good enough, because the admirals are rather fixated on capital ships.

 

- 1st Submarine Squadron with the seven Holland boats, a single remaing Bars used as a training vessel, and a submarine tender. Necessary crew 480 total. The other death traps have been retired. There are vague plans for more modern boats, but again, capital ships take precedence for the admirals.

 

- 1st Auxilliary Squadron with various support vessels and about 2,000 crew.

 

- 1st Naval Aviation Squadron with a motley collection of seaplanes and about 200 personnel.

 

- 1st and 2nd Sealift Squadron; they are in reserve for the glorious day when the Russian American Army will sail to free the Motherland. Crowds, cheers, flowers, etc.

 

- Coastal Artillery Brigade with four battalions and about 3,500 personnel.

 

- Naval Infantry Brigade with four line battalions and an artillery battalion, about 4,500 personnel.

 

- Various shorebased units, staff and port personnel, about 5,000 all told.

 

Comes out to about 22,000 total just for the Navy. This is with half the population of the 80s, but the armed forces have a much more offensive layout with an emphasis on present rather than reserve units. Both volunteers and conscripts serve about double the modern terms on average, with little thought on mobilization schemes; reservists are discharged and supposed to be a manpower pool which can be formed into units and trained up with ample advance notice for the eventual thrust towards Moscow. At this point, the country has not made the experience of invasion on its own soil, and obviously has not met the German advisors with their own experience of fighting the Soviets ...

[Simon Tan]

Errrr...where do we actually put all these ships and men? Even if we send them to the US and Canada for maintenance, we still have the headache of actually berthing all these vessels in small ports. Unless of course someone went wild and built a huge base.....unlikel for many reasons not least of which is the lack of manpower to do it.

The Navy would be rapidly pared away...the BB and CAs to go first. Simply no way to man and sustain them. Look at the vast numbers of sailors vs. actual population of the port cities. Ridiculous.

 

ETA:- Some of the vessels will be refurbished and sold to Latin America etc. The big ships just get scrapped, starting with the cruisers but the BB will quickly follow.

What I do see happening is the establishment of Russian American Lines which actually makes use of the vast numbers of demobilizing sailors to become the preeminent shipping and passenger line in the Eastern Pacific and eventually trans-Pacific. The Salade Russe becomes a favorite from Kodiak to Santiago. These are of course intended to become troop carriers and AMCs for the Great Return.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Simon Tan

[BansheeOne]

As for berthing, remember that Russian America would not just have been a possible target for the Japanese in the late 19th century. US and Canadian trappers, loggers, miners, fishermen were encroaching onto the territory even before the sale in 1867, the treaties of 1824/25 notwithstanding; it would surely have gotten worse with the Yukon Goldrush.

 

It makes full sense that the Russian main base (probably Novoarkhangelsk, which was the capital from 1808) would have been developed to host much more than the permanent American Flotilla, in case conflicting economic interests led to military conflict with Britain (already an opponent in the Great Game) backing up the Hudson's Bay Company or the Monroe-doctrinal US (which had waged with Mexico and Spain and challenged Britain over Hawaii to gain substantial territory). Capacity to support a battle squadron would not be out of line.

 

That said, I agree it is way more than they actually can afford. Again, the country charitably has a population of 2.5 million at this point (early 30s). We can still run the same active personnel strength as later in the 80s by making soldiers serve longer and not caring too much about reserve organisation; it's a military dictatorship in this period after all. No doubt reality will catch up with the generals and admirals sooner or later however, and some of this is already apparent in the tentative thoughts above.

 

I presume there is a highly controversial concept of "Navy 40" which foresees only 20,000 sailors by the end of the decade and corresponding cuts in the Army. The brass is bitching that they'll never liberate the rodina with puny forces like that, but the pale little men with the spectacles and sleeve guards will just point to the endless narrow-written lines of numbers in their stacks of paper and say they can either have state with a smaller military, or else pick whether they want to have a state or a military.

 

Good idea about the Russian American lines though. I was thinking of putting the old navy transports to commercial use in a reserve merchant fleet scheme and thus have a lot of previous Navy sailors generate revenue.

 

And I think the new submarines will be built by Elco, similiar to the S class and later USS Mackarel.

[Marek Tucan]

One thing: WWII. Is there a possibility the RA govt will side u with the Axis in hopes of going back? More support to Japanese Northern plans? Japanese dreaming of installing a puppet state in Siberia? That would probably lead later on Allied occupation - with USSR pressing on the Allies to let it in.

 

Or will the military disctators of Alaska be bright enough to resist the temptation?

[RETAC21]

But if it went with the Axis, it wouldn't be the Red box anymore, we would be talking about... US Alaska.

[Simon Tan]

Could be the Canandian Alaskan Territories....

[GPMG]

One thing: WWII. Is there a possibility the RA govt will side u with the Axis in hopes of going back? More support to Japanese Northern plans? Japanese dreaming of installing a puppet state in Siberia? That would probably lead later on Allied occupation - with USSR pressing on the Allies to let it in.

 

Or will the military disctators of Alaska be bright enough to resist the temptation?

I think if we want to keep Russian America out of WWII on the Axis side when Germany and Finland invade then presure will need to be applied diplamaticly by the British while at the same time the Canadian Army conducts the Yukon and British Columbia manovers. Even if this keeps them out of an active role the existance of the Russian America threat is likely to keep the Siberian Divisions that were historicly transfered to the West during the winter in the East. Also I don't see much Lend-Lease being alowed through Russian American.

[BansheeOne]

The potential for getting too cozy with the Axis for their own good is certainly there. There were various White emigré organisations that fought on the German side after the attack on the Soviet Union in 1941 after all, like the Russian Liberation Movement. OTOH, you had groups which put nation above ideology, like the Whites fighting with the Soviets in the 1934 and 1937 affairs in Xinjiang.

 

Allying with the Nationalist side in the Spanish Civil War would have been very easy since it would be simply Godless Communists™ on the other side; some White emigrés actually fought there of course. As soon as it comes to fighting your compatriots-at-large, who may or may not be GLCs, feelings are bound to become somewhat muddled. This goes for Finland and the Soviet-Japanese skirmishes of 1939, too. Remember that the Russian American government at this point is made up of good old-fashioned Russian nationalists from the WW I era and before; they will probably think the Soviets have a pretty good point in either case, just the wrong leaders (which will not keep them from sending observers of course).

 

The Hitler-Stalin Pact is likely to piss them off, too, and a year after the break you have the Japanese invasion - which we've of course been taking for granted to occur, while in reality it was meant to be mostly a decoy operation to divert US forces in the Pacific. If we get really slick, we will have the US goad the Japanese into attacking the Aleutians to bring them into the Allied camp when they look like tipping to the wrong side. Just leak to Tokyo that Washington is in promising secret negotiations with Junograd to build bases for a flanking attack there. The amateur historians who think Roosevelt let Pearl Harbor happen will buy that immediately!

 

The question of lend-lease materiél going through Russian America is an interesting one I have not really given much thought to. You would probably have to bribe Junograd by giving them better stuff at the same time (since they have no use for more stuff), which opens up interesting perspectives of a certain most-favored-nation status when it comes to top-notch equipment. Even so, the Soviets and Russian Alaskans are likely to cringe at being on the same side, though wars have created stranger bedfellows. The latter will want to liberate Sakhalin and the Kuriles and keep them ever after, though, which would make matters more interesting post WW II.

Edited September 15, 2012 by BansheeOne

[Marek Tucan]

...and if US actually supplies Junograd with decent landing capacity (loaned or own), they may beat Soviets to some of these islands.

 

As for strange bedfellows, well, we have precedent of Chinese communists and nationalists or of the whole mess in Yugoslavia (Chetniks, Partysans, Italians and Germans doing all kinds of impromptu alliances).

 

The Alaska might play both sides, officially side with the US but unofficially letting Japanese occupy few Aleutians to play it safe on both sides.

[Simon Tan]

General, we always need MORE stuff.

We are Russians. We remember Port Arthur and Tsushima and will happily kill the Japanese first before dealing with the Bolsheviks.

You got that bass ackwards, Russian American Lines becomes a vital auxiliiary capacity in support of the USN.Once the Americans agree to our terms and conditions.

[thekirk]

I'm seeing the place turn into a virtual US puppet state, assuming things followed more-or-less the same course in our own history. Now that I think about it some more, it would probably be analogous to Texas, in a lot more ways than size.

 

Of course, much depends on precisely how all this comes to pass. I still think that a geologically earlier warming trend would have given the Russians a good reason to keep the place, but once that happens, where do the changes take us? Given the way personalities tend to influence history so much, what would have happened to Lenin and Stalin, in this timeline where the Russians kept Alaska? Instead of the Bolsheviks coming out on top, perhaps it would have been the Mensheviks, instead. What flows from that?

 

Change the history in 1867 so that the Russians keep Alaska, and any extrapolations you make past about 1880 stop making sense. Who knows where things would have ended? What if Stalin's family had emigrated to Russian Alaska? Care to wonder how that would have worked out, in the long run?

 

Hell, given the variables possible, imagine this one: The Whites are successful at beating back the Reds, everywhere but the penal colony of Russian Alaska, where Lenin and Stalin have been sentenced and held for years. Russian Alaska turns Red, and the resultant state is... What? Would the US have tolerated that on their doorstep, in the 1920s and 1930s? Would the influence of having an honest-to-God communist state on the North American continent have served as an effective warning, or an example to emulate?

[Simon Tan]

The end condition is a non-Communist Russian Alaska in 1980. How we get there is the discussion, mainly to determine what their ORBAT in 1980. Start with the end.......