That’s true i guess, but it’s the only real sign we’ve got. I mean in otl by now the signs that stuff is about to go down are showing up at this point, but in this timeline we’ve got nothing so far. But yeah you’re definitely right.
- 1
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I fear that somebody is going to begin to play with toy CVEs like the Audacity...
- 1
Agree on all except the last point. Most of the other powers have long since resigned themselves to Britain having bases and dockyards virtually everywhere, the proposed works are about expanding existing drydocks not building new bases. It's more maintenance of the status quo for the new generation of larger ships, not a significant change to the balance of power.
Japan may want to complain, but it will be tricky. After all the British don't really want to operate in the Deep Pacific (Guam, Wake, Hawaii, etc) so there's no direct threat or anything that nearby, no-one is going to suggest a major drydock in Hong Kong as it's just too vulnerable. All the other British Empire bases are so far away Japan has no reason to object, unless they want to openly admit their ambitions and they were never quite that blatant.
That has been very much my position, diversions from the plot and terrifying levels of detail are two of the key pillars of the Butterfly Effect.
Very probably. Predicted end date is presently somewhere in the mid-2120s at the current majestic rate of progress, so assuming current life expectancies it's looking like being El Pip the 4th who will be reaching the end of this book and starting work on the sequel. If that Pip is in a generational ship to Alpha Centauri or not, the important thing is that the work continues.
I am treading a narrow line on this one. I do want the actual war to be something of a surprise, if everyone 'knows' what is going to happen then it can get a bit boring/frustrating doing the build up. But I don't want it to be a complete random shock, there are almost always deep roots to conflicts, even if they don't make immediate sense to outsiders they did make sense to those involved.
So there are a few breadcrumbs scattered in previous updates, some straws in the wind to indicate what is coming. Nothing too obvious at this stage, but things will hopefully become a bit clearer in... some number of updates time.
Nothing quite as extreme as that, no-one in the Admiralty is that desperate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Audacity
Basically a smallish German banana boat given an absolute bare minimum conversion to escort carrier (CVE). And I do mean minimum, no hangars at all, just a flat flight deck welded on top and a tiny magazine and fuel store below. Interestingly the main concern wasn't actually U-boats, well not directly, it was the Condor aircraft that directed the U-boats to the convoy and occasionally bombed them. Hence why Audacity only embarked fighters during her brief career.
- 1
That thing is madness! It doesn't even have a hanger! At that point you may as well have made it a Seaplane tender...
Last edited:
- 1
Do you mean someone had the audacity to call that glorified metal strip with engines a carrier?
...
You do get it, yes?
...
I can't help it, I just love bad puns.
- 1
- 1
Pip, as this nice post reminded me:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...sh-interwar-fleet.476952/page-4#post-19649611
What are the plans for modernising/refiting old BB's and BC's? I remember it was said (I believe only in comments) some ships (like Hood) got some upgrading done while war damage was being fixed, but what are the general plans regarding that? With the amount of butterflies so far it can't be OTL schedule.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...sh-interwar-fleet.476952/page-4#post-19649611
What are the plans for modernising/refiting old BB's and BC's? I remember it was said (I believe only in comments) some ships (like Hood) got some upgrading done while war damage was being fixed, but what are the general plans regarding that? With the amount of butterflies so far it can't be OTL schedule.
- 1
It's a big deal though, the whole world is going to be interested given how the british final design and layout may well end up being the default dockyard for the next several decades at least across the entire empire and south America. Since everyone else has to enlarge and modernise their own ports and dockyards at some point, everyone's going to look to the british team for their mistakes, learning experiences and the eventual final result. I'm imagining the british are going to end up serving as the R&D team for the rest of the world in this case.
So that's how I imagined the rest of the world being involved...and maybe they send spies to various sites to look at stuff or steal things. Colossal engineering project being what it is, the navy or some other department is bound to leave something important somewhere that it shouldn't be...
- 1
you say that, but British were quite good when it came to hiding things from other powers that be when it came to naval development and buildup.
And Japanese did do similar efforts when constructing Yamato for example, and it was kept hidden well into its construction despite how massive the ship was. So if British decide to begin construction of something akin to Vanguard with absolute secrecy kept in mind, I could see the Brits be able to keep it hidden, atleast halfway into its development.
- 1
If you made it a proper carrier, then you defeat the whole "emergency quick build" part. 6 months from being put in hand to commissioning and first convoy escort doesn't leave time to do much. The best is the enemy of the good, the convoys needed something in service now rather than a good ship in 6 months. She filled a gap, proved the concept and shot a few Condors. Equally she saved several other convoys by just existing, once the Germans worked out what was happening Luftwaffe pilots started confusing standard merchant ships for an escort carrier and fled from non-existent fighters.
Nothing wrong with puns.
As discussed Hood is in for her 'Large Repair', pretty much the one planned for OTL but obviously a bit different. For the rest, well I started writing out some words and realised 'Hey, there's a good chapter in this probably.' So at some point it will emerge, but as you say very much not the OTL schedule.
I think the future drydock update will be a revelation to you. Dockyards are not quite what you imagine them to be.
You can hide the details of technology quite well and you can hide the specifics of ships, but people will know you are doing something. OTL the British invested a great deal of time and diplomatic effort into naval arms control, the politicians really did not want a naval arms race, so there was always plenty of notification about ships being laid down. Where things were treaty relevant, like main armament, they were up front about that as well, but like everyone where they didn't have to, they kept things quiet.
In a world with no treaties the political preference for no arms race still holds, but the tactics have to change. What those tactics become, very different question.
The exception was always ASDIC, there was a very complex game of bluff, counter-bluff and strategic disclosures between Germany and Britain about anti-submarine warfare and submarine capabilities. Incredible the influence both sides managed to have on the others thinking and doctrine.
- 1
I suppose them saying they are still clearly the most important things afloat means they have to put effort into them not sinking if only to avoid embarsment...
"Royal Navy Dockyards were harbour facilities where commissioned ships were either built or based, or where ships were overhauled and refitted."
Thanks wikipedia.
Two things here. One, they don't seem to exist anymore (which I was surprised about).
Two...this implies they are what I thought they were which was places the navy built stuff, stored stuff and fixed stuff.
Looking further down the page, it seems to be one of those labels that doesn't actually mean much because some dockyards didn't actually have a drydocks and some didn't have yards.
It also looks like the last proper expansion/interest in the yards was before ww1 during and after that weird battleship craze/race. Although given everything is from wikipedia, everything must be assumed at least partially incorrect or overly simplified.
I am interested to see what was really going on in the 30s concerning dockyards and ship building cos things seem to have gone wrong after ww2, at least in Britian.
- 1
Broadly speaking; No, sometimes, yes. But more on that in the update.
Post-WW2 it was the same thing that went wrong with everything - The Post-War Consensus was crap and bankrupted the country. There was no money to build new large ships, so no real reason for large dry docks, hence the old docks were always 'good enough'.
Inter-war and the 30s, now there is some interesting stuff. There was some money and ambition, so much to discuss.
This is the correct response from any true gentleman and scholar.
I may have got slightly distracted with British inter-war naval grand strategy, but some of it will make it's way into the update so it's all to the good. (The distraction of reading about German monetary policy has less relevance, but is macabrely fascinating...)
- 1
Also, always good to hear updates are in the works!
EDIT: The link: The 2019 Yearly AARland Year-end AwAARds
Last edited:
- 1
Just caught up on this AAR again and I love how much attention to detail there is.
- 1
Well there is now anyway. Depends a little on what gets changed in the redux but so far, GB is in prime condition for a massive and ambitious expansion of naval power.
1) a really popular and 'good' war won at sea against what was seen as an up and coming regional rival.
2) imperial preference being firmly established and seen as working not only establishes a massive line of credit for British financiers but also gives a series of reasons why a massive, global refit of naval assets is in order.
3) bit of a stretch this one but the British have no allies on the continent, which means they have no army obligations outside of home and colonial defence. This means at least in the public mind that the army is back to third wheeling behind the navy and the increasingly glamourous and long-ranged airforce supplementing the fleet. Now of course the government doesn't see it that way but that's an impression the public might have.
4) the british have just gotten a massive physical bullion injection and no need to keep it around unless they want to punish the remaining gold standard members a little.
All these in varying ways help push an 'empire building' mentality required for such far reaching, complicated and expensive naval projects that are required if the country wants a modern fleet operating in every major ocean of interest and a mission on every trade route.
On an unrelated note, if the US is dedicating itself to isolationism and cutting down government expense, how is it viewing its own amercian empire? The Philippines for example, and the Panama canal etc.
- 1
The Americans might be more willing in TTL to consider releasing the Philippines, but there's no way that they would ever turn over the Panama Canal. That's in our backyard, and Isolationist or no, the Western Hemisphere is ours. Even during the depths of the inter-war period, we had most of our interventions in Central America until the Cold War.
- 1
Wasn't really suggesting an action, more just what it means for everything they have not in the union.
Panama canal i would imagine wouldn't change, as would the control and focus on central amercia. South amercia though is much more open to outsiders considering the british and french already, and everything west of Hawaii is likewise presumbaly under various amounts of care.
- 1
You are doing fine work on promoting the awards and I feel the best way everyone can show their appreciation is by voting. Ideally for me, but for others if necessary.
Also, always good to hear updates are in the works!
EDIT: The link: The 2019 Yearly AARland Year-end AwAARds
It is a labour of love and terrifying obsession with obscure detail. I remain pleased and surprised that others appreciate it.
(1) That cuts both ways, it's just as much an argument that the current fleet is "good enough". To an extent that's the trap Bomber Command fell into, their claims that the fairly small Raid on Rome had a significant morale effect has undercut their demands for more bombers (clearly they don't need any more bombers if the existing fleet is so terrifying) while also promoting the cause of Fighter Command (we can't risk the enemy doing the same to us).
(2) Imperial preference and the upswing in intra-Empire/Sterling Zone trade does show why the fleet needs more assets for trade protection absolutely, but that is a different thing from a set piece naval battle. We are back to Corbett and Mahan again.
(3) I'd say this is actually the strongest. It's only the last couple of years I've realised how keen the British were to avoid any sort of fighting on the continent for almost the entire 30s. "Limited Liability" was the policy and the BEF earmarked for continental duties was two divisions until early 1939. The Abyssinian War was pretty much the conflict the Army was intended to fight; medium intensity, in a colonial theatre and leveraging sea power and the Royal Navy to overcome any shortage of troops. It's just going to reinforce the preferred policy option of most of the establishment.
(4) I think Britain does dump the Gold, maybe a portion is kept to offset reserves lost in 1931, but the Bank probably doesn't want too much in the vault or they end up being perceived as back on gold, plus of course they don't need the reserves as the current challenge is stopping Sterling rising too high compared to everyone else (none of who have devalued, unlike OTL). And as you say keeping large reserves will restrict supply, push up the price and wind up the Gold Bloc, whereas selling it will reduce the pressure on them and buy a bit of good will, while also providing a handy pile of cash.
OTL a large 'Re-armament Loan' was taken out, on the grounds re-armament it was a one-off expense. Here I think the loan is wholly or partially replaced by 'Proceeds from Treasury and Bank of England exchange rate management operations' (you don't want to be too public about how bad a deal Spain is getting on the gold-sterling exchange rate
).The Philippines were on the path to independence from about 1935 officially and a few years before hand in reality. I say independence, it would be Central/Latin American style - "You can chose any government you like, as long as it's pro-US and Washington approves". Maybe a bit worse TTL, they could make the Filipino Repatriation Act a bit worse perhaps? (Hard to imagine how, but I'm sure it could be done)
As @Wraith11B says, Panama is staying and the topic is not even to be considered for discussion. Wider South America was a heavily contested mess in the inter-war and the US commercial interests are too strong to ignore so I suspect that continues. As even US isolationists talked about 'the Americas' and 'Hemispheres' not just the US I believe that the American belief that it has the moral right, and duty, to interfere with it's southern neighbours is a powerful and enduring thing.
- 1
I think espeically with the great war being pulled back into the limelight with that army report, the navy might have a look back too, internally if at all possible (no one would want similar scrutiny the army got). The debate might be how to force a conclusive battle when not trapped in the med sea etc.
OTL a large 'Re-armament Loan' was taken out, on the grounds re-armament it was a one-off expense. Here I think the loan is wholly or partially replaced by 'Proceeds from Treasury and Bank of England exchange rate management operations' (you don't want to be too public about how bad a deal Spain is getting on the gold-sterling exchange rate
That's much better than a massive loan to be joined soon after by many other massive loans, none of which the british own...
Of course you do...
It makes sense given the classic if somewhat inaccurate 'no land fighting and no power blocs in europe unless we are running it' thing the british have been attempting for 500ish years.
Doesn't push for army build up and tech though really, especially armour classes above colonial light. It may well be the army's best chance of more funds and poltical points is bigging up the japanese army as much as possible...?
- 1