Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.

[MattII]

Do the British have anything else which can climb hills as well as the Original Timeline Churchill?
Because at some point the British are going to be going up hills and something which takes Axis troops by surprise and has them going 'how the heck did that get up here?' before surrendering is going to be useful.
(Wikipedia claims the Germans had a 'oh ****, we're in deep trouble aren't we?' reaction to Churchills turning up during the original timeline (2nd) Battle of Longstop Hill in Tunisia, which I think may be some of the work in 'hilly terrain' that your reference book is referring to?)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Longstop_Hill

I've never been able to find anyone who can definitely tell me whether it's solely the presence of the Merritt-Brown gearbox, or if the type of suspension it has contributed anything to that ability.

22 were required to be in british loading gauge, which in TTL there wouldn't be this restriction. so the designer can widen the tank by at least 10". This is TTL A22 not OTL A22.

Vickers threw out the loading0gauge requirement with the Victor, but the Victor doesn't have an A-number designation AFAIK, while the A22 does. In addition, the design of the A22 was started in June of 1940, long before detailed plans of the Victor could be drawn up, so Vickers' decision to disregard the loading-gauge requirement wouldn't really have an effect on it.

25 pdr is a good HE gun and a mediocre AT capability (without HEAT). 75mm HV will have a good AT capability and a moderate HE capability.

Most of what tanks fire at in this period aren't other tanks. In addition, tank-carrier HEAT shells have been known about since 1940, as they captured some German ones. HESH ought to be viable too.

We haven't got to the stage in tank gun design where you can have the best of both worlds and probably won't until the 105mm L7 equivalent comes out.

The '75mm' HV will probably come close.

90% of the time you won't need a Victor to carry out a fire support mission and the cheaper Jumbuck is a good option. It's made in different factories using proven parts and doesn't really cut in to the production of Victors. Better to have one more armoured division of Victors and a few regiments of Jumbucks for PBI than take front line tanks away from the armoured divisions

Yep. Heck, except for the ammunition you could probably put the Jumbuck in with the Valiant units, provide some heavy anti-emplacement firepower.

 

[yulzari1]

I merely wish to mention that the 25 Pounder was put on the Valentine hull as the Bishop but it could not reach the full range due to the breech not being able to get low enough in the hull to take advantage of the full elevation of the 25 Pounder on it’s normal trail mounting. So there is more to making good use of 25 Pounders than being able to fit it in a turret or casement. A HV tank gun has no need of huge amounts of elevation but a howitzer does.

 

[weNEEDlove]

Vickers threw out the loading0gauge requirement with the Victor, but the Victor doesn't have an A-number designation AFAIK, while the A22 does. In addition, the design of the A22 was started in June of 1940, long before detailed plans of the Victor could be drawn up, so Vickers' decision to disregard the loading-gauge requirement wouldn't really have an effect on it.

Threadmarks 1 May 1940. London, England.

He had been given the War Office specification A23 and now he offered a first look at the design for this specification.

The second part of the Vickers’ report was a detailed drawing of the design of what they described as the Valiant Mark III, or ‘Victor’ as they called it.

First quote talk about the Victor getting A23 Spec. "the design for this specification" is the half the May 1 1940 thread btw, so the they already had detailed plan for the victor by May 1.
Second quote(and the second half of that Threadmark) talk about Vicker report and detailed plan and drawing of the Victor. which was ready in May 1.

its May 1, one whole month before the Churchill A22 started design in June.

 

[one13]

Considering that the timeline involves Ricardo even more than OTL in tank powerplants and promotes diesels, the most viable way to compete with petrol engines with diesels is to support Ricardo's OTL proposal for compact H-16 and H-24 tank diesels. They are the only ones in Britain that come remotely close to Meteor in power density. He worked on them in 1940 and 1941 so the timeline is suitable for deployment on the Victor or Venom (latter would be viable if supercharged).

I have never heard of the H-16 & H-24 engines before,do you have a source for this info as I would like to learn more, thank you.

 

[allanpcameron]

2 March 1942. Salisbury Plain, England.

Oliver Leese, (GOC Guards Armoured Division), with his Brigade Commanders (Allan Adair, William Fox-Pitt and Lionel Manners-Smith) hosted General Alan Brooke, CIGS with Q Martell (GOC Royal Armoured Corps). Since the Guards Armoured Division had been created, Major-General Leese had been trying to make sure that his Division would maintain the ’elite’ status that the Brigade of Guards enjoyed. For the last couple of months his officers and men had undergone intense training on top of learning whole new skills.

As originally constituted the Division had conformed to the same basic organisation as all British Armoured Divisions: two Armoured Brigades and a Support Group. Following the example of what had happened in North Africa during Operation Compass, Leese was now showing Brooke and Martel his proposed revised organisation.

The 2nd Bn Household Cavalry Regiment in Humber Armoured Cars provided the Divisional Reconnaissance Regiment. Brigadier Fox-Pitt’s 5th Guards Armoured Brigade, three armoured Battalions (2nd Grenadier Guards, 1st Coldstream Guards, 2nd Irish Guards). The 1st Grenadier Guards provided the motorised infantry Battalion. Instead of a Support Group, the 32nd Guards Infantry Brigade (6 Coldstream, 3 Irish and 3 Welsh Guards) had been assigned to the Division. There were two Royal Artillery field regiments and one Royal Horse Artillery regiment with Birch SPGs. There was also an anti-tank and Light anti-aircraft regiments, Signals, Royal Engineer field squadrons and a Bridging troop of ‘funnies’ based on the Crusader hull.

The other Guards Armoured Brigade (6th GAB) were acting as an independent Brigade for the purposes of the forthcoming exercise. Brigadier Alan Adair had been testing out the idea of a ‘Mixed Division’ of one Tank Brigade and two Infantry Brigades. For the purposes of the exercise, the Guards Armoured Division would act as the enemy force confronting XII Corps. Adair’s 6th GAB was attached to

46th (North Midland) Infantry Division, while the rest of XII Corps 43rd (Wessex) Infantry Division, 53rd (Welsh) Division, along with 25th Tank Brigade were acting as the defending force.

Lieutenant General Bernard Montgomery, GOC XII Corps, had ordered his Divisional Commanders to make sure that the Guards Armoured Division were given no chance to ‘win’ the exercise. The choice of the umpires was one of the ways that he was trying to achieve his objective, and with his Corp’s overwhelming artillery advantage was another.

The exercise was proposing that 46th Mixed Division, with 6th GAB replacing 137th Infantry Brigade, had broken through an enemy position, and the Guards Armoured Division was a counter-attacking force. The rest of XII Corps would complete the breakthrough, should 46th Mixed Division successfully hold off the counter-attack. Major-General Harry Freeman-Attwood (GOC 46th Div) had had long chats with Brigadier Adair regarding the best use of the armoured Brigade.

The exercise would take place over a few days, and Leese had an inkling that Montgomery would try to do everything in his power to win the exercise, but Leese had some ideas of his own. There had been plenty of time to examine the German tactics in both France and North Africa. Leese had noted particularly the speed of German communications that had allowed the flexibility to counter the pre-prepared French and British movements. Looking at the German radios in the captured panzers, Leese had organised the use of extra command tanks for each of his units.

The command tanks were normal Valiant IIs but with a mock gun. This provided more space for both radios to communicate between the armoured, artillery and infantry units. The Royal Signals had been very busy teaching the Guards officers the best and most secure methods of using their radios. One of the things that Lieutenant-General O’Connor had suspected was that the Germans had been attempting to intercept British transmissions. Leese had persuaded his senior Royal Signals officer to attempt to listen into Montgomery’s communications. This was to be done without the Umpires attached to Leese’s HQ knowing.

One of the things that the Royal Signals had noticed was the way in which some of the Guards Officers used codewords that weren’t very hard to decipher. Having been sternly warned to use only the approved codes, Leese’s command had practised their communication skills intensively until they were second nature. It had however given the Signals officers an idea. No 1 Special Wireless Section (Type C) from the Canadian Signal Reinforcements Unit, commanded by Lieutenant Cooper, was something of an oddity, and Cooper’s Section had been picked up by someone in Leese’s HQ staff as an ad-hoc ‘friendly-force’ monitoring element.

Unlike most of the Canadian Signals units, Cooper’s men hadn’t gone on the Special Operator’s Training Battalion at Trowbridge, Wiltshire. This involved four weeks of specialised training on German and Italian radio procedures, and methods to detect enemy signals. Instead, Cooper’s section had been practicing their skills listening to British units. This had brought them to the attention of Leese who saw a report that they had intercepted operational security violations. The most egregious violations were a couple of English operators who "mentioned in clear several names of places as well as names of officers up to the rank of Colonel, and described in detail an area defence scheme of which they were a part, giving locations of H.Q. and other security information.”

Leese suspected that just as Montgomery was likely to be trying to tip the scales against Leese’s Command, having a listening ear on the other side’s communications would even the odds even just a little.

(The photos here are from OTL Covenanter cruiser tanks of 2nd (Armoured) Irish Guards of British Guards Armoured Division during an inspection of Southern Command, England, United Kingdom, 3 Mar 1942)

 

[allanpcameron]

For its problems, the Covenanter looked the part.
Allan

 

[MattII]

Threadmarks 1 May 1940. London, England.


First quote talk about the Victor getting A23 Spec. "the design for this specification" is the half the May 1 1940 thread btw, so the they already had detailed plan for the victor by May 1.
Second quote(and the second half of that Threadmark) talk about Vicker report and detailed plan and drawing of the Victor. which was ready in May 1.

its May 1, one whole month before the Churchill A22 started design in June.

It's noted that Vickers decided to exceed the loading gauge width, not that it was part of the specification. Also, Vauxhall was given the A22 plans nearly six months prior:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...carden-survives.496447/page-119#post-21349047

I have never heard of the H-16 & H-24 engines before,do you have a source for this info as I would like to learn more, thank you.

Wikipedia has a page on them.

 

[weNEEDlove]

here come the OP tank. and a year earlier.
Welb i guess British internal security will be tighten up alot. One of the benefit of a break of short NA campaign.

 

[Garrison]

For its problems, the Covenanter looked the part.
Allan

If they had just been able to sort out the radiator issue.

 

[weNEEDlove]

It's noted that Vickers decided to exceed the loading gauge width, not that it was part of the specification. Also, Vauxhall was given the A22 plans nearly six months prior:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...carden-survives.496447/page-119#post-21349047

its was not part of the specification ye, but the specification also didn't disallow the width to be widen,.

huh, the A23 begin designing in late 1939 ITTL. That could* be better actually, as that added half a year to the Churchill Development. And when its 1 may 1940, maybe the engineered at Vauxhall see that the limit on the gauge is lifted and they decided to overhall the design to accommodate that? as it have only been 6 month that wouldn't be enough time to start prototyping yet, so the A22 design should only be paper (and a widen tank may solve alot of design challenge associated with narrow tank).

 

[weNEEDlove]

I have never heard of the H-16 & H-24 engines before,do you have a source for this info as I would like to learn more, thank you.

here some article about the H-24

Napier H-24 Sabre Aircraft Engine

The Naiper Sabre was the last H engine designed by Frank Halford. From a troubled start, the complex Sabre ultimately produced more power for its displacement than any other WWII aircraft engine.

oldmachinepress.com

 

[MarcH]

This timeline is now so far removed from OTL that OTL decision making can't really be any more than a general guide to the decisions that will be made ITTL.

The Churchill is a good example. While the tank did get a reprieve OTL due to good combat performance that can also be attributed to the lack of a real alternative. The Wallies in general and Britain in particular never really had anything come close to being a true universal tank. ITTL that is not the case and the Victor very much is in that position.
The question is, as I have said before, simple. Does this tank do anything that the Victor can not do, not does it do something better but something that it can not. If the Victor is only 70% as good at climbing hills as the Churchill for instance that does not justify deploying it let alone building it. Niche applications are just that, niche.

We have to remember that ITTL Britain is in a significantly better position. No fighting in North Africa and the Far East going rather well all things considered as well. Their is no major shortage of tanks or equipment and no serious drain on them either. The need to build anything and everything that occurred in the OTL did not happen here and what shortages were around have nearly been made good. Britain can afford to sit back and make more long term choices and adding to the logistical complexity of their forces would not be a good long term choice.

Now that is not to say nothing could come from the Churchill. I believe 1200 have been ordered. Sending those to the far east would be plenty of tanks for quite a while in all likelihood. In addition using the hull as the basis of some heavier duty funnies could be a possibility. The issue with that is though, why not use the Victor hull? Any new Churchill hulls built for funnies could be Victors instead.

The trick is to avoid being bogged down or distracted by what I term "The tyranny of the OTL". By that I mean that decisions made in OTL were made based on the situation present in OTL that do not exist in TTL. Simply saying this was done OTL so I am doing it here for instance is wrong unless the scenario that lead to it can be replicated ITTL. We have IIRC already had posts examining the use of mixed Valliant's in North Africa and asking why two types were needed. That is already sewing the seeds of doctrinal change so falling back on OTL doctrine is flawed. That is not to say people ITTL will not consider it but that it will face greater scrutiny and pushback even before coming up against TTL specifics like the existence of what is for all intents and purposes the first MBT.

The Big reason that specialist tanks died of OTL was the existence of tanks that could do the role of the specialist nearly as well whilst doing other roles better. When it comes to the question of why build X or Y it must always be put up against instead of more Victor's. Given the Victor has a very good balance of Manoeuvrability, Armour and Firepower it will be hard to beat.

 

[MattII]

its was not part of the specification ye, but the specification also didn't disallow the width to be widen, so its the same as if the specification ask you to widen the track.

huh, the A23 begin designing in late 1939 ITTL. That could be better actually, as that added half a year to the Churchill Development. And when its 1 may 1940, mayb the engineered at Vauxhall see that the limit on the gauge is lifted and they decided to overhall the design to accommodate that? as it have only been 6 month that wouldn't be enough time to start prototyping yet, so the A22 design should only be paper (and a widen tank may solve alot of design challenge associated with smaller tank)

The A23 specification ITTL awarded to Vickers on 1 May 1940, while the A22 one is awarded to Vauxhall on 8 November 1939. Therefore, the A22 comes first. Also, Vauxhall has much less experience with armoured vehicles, so they're going to be much less likely to push the specifications than Carden.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

For its problems, the Covenanter looked the part.
Allan

I know it absorbed 1700 tanks worth of production but yeah I have a soft spot for it

 

[weNEEDlove]

The A23 specification ITTL awarded to Vickers on 1 May 1940, while the A22 one is awarded to Vauxhall on 8 November 1939. Therefore, the A22 comes first. Also, Vauxhall has much less experience with armoured vehicles, so they're going to be much less likely to push the specifications than Carden.

no the A23 specification was design finished in 1 May 1940, not awarded. we don't know when the A23 was awarded to Vicker ITTL.
but they can, and there will be a pull to widen the tank to make further designing the it potentially easier.

The Big reason that specialist tanks died of OTL was the existence of tanks that could do the role of the specialist nearly as well whilst doing other roles better. When it comes to the question of why build X or Y it must always be put up against instead of more Victor's. Given the Victor has a very good balance of Manoeuvrability, Armour and Firepower it will be hard to beat.

I am thinking more Early cold war of MBT/Heavy tank of US, UK and soviet, and thinking that the British might want a heavy tank to potentially deal with the 88mm found in NA, and future bigger AT gun as future proofing.
Even with a tank that can do most of the thing a heavy tank can, all party in early cold war still try to Continue with heavy tank design; And , at least with the soviet heavy tank design, was finally discontinue after high penetration ATGM become a thing.

 

[MattII]

no the A23 specification was design finished in 1 May 1940, not awarded. we don't know when the A23 was awarded to Vicker ITTL.
but they can, and there will be a pull to widen the tank to make further designing the tank potentially easier.

We're both wrong. A rough design was offered with basic stats. That's not the same as a set of finished blueprints. And this was by Carden, a man already known for stretching the specifications (see inserting a pompom into a vehicle specified only for a machine gun). Asking the same of Vauxhall, a company with no history if designing armoured vehicles is asking too much IMO.

I am thinking more Early cold war of MBT/Heavy tank of US, UK and soviet, and thinking that the Britsh might want a heavy tank to potentially deal with the 88mm found in NA, and future bigger AT gun as future proofing.
Even with a tank that can do most of the thing a heavy tank can, all party in early cold war still try to Continue with heavy tank design; And , at least with the soviet heavy tank design, was finally discontinue after high penetration ATMG become a thing.

The Venom is already an upgraded Victor, probably something along the lines of a Centurion Mark 3 to go by what's been revealed thus far.

 

[weNEEDlove]

We're both wrong. A rough design was offered with basic stats. That's not the same as a set of finished blueprints. And this was by Carden, a man already known for stretching the specifications (see inserting a pompom into a vehicle specified only for a machine gun). Asking the same of Vauxhall, a company with no history if designing armoured vehicles is asking too much IMO.


The Venom is already an upgraded Victor, probably something along the lines of a Centurion Mark 3 to go by what's been revealed thus far.

right right...

if a centurion mk3, the venom is still is vulnerable to some 88 round and all long 88 round to hull front. maybe it will be unarmored? the victor have a 100mm angle plate after all, and that is better then the OTL Cen mk3 which only have angle 76mm.With that in mind Im thinking the venom might have 140mm face harden armor.
actually is the 100mm LOS thinkness or plate thickness?

 

[MattII]

right right...

if a centurion mk3, the venom is still is vulnerable to some 88 round and all long 88 round to hull front. maybe it will be unarmored? the victor have a 100mm angle plate after all, and that is better then the OTL Cen mk3 which only have angle 76mm.With that in mind Im thinking the venom might have 140mm face harden armor.
actually is the 100mm LOS thinkness or plate thickness?

Well Carden is looking at up to six inches of effective thickness for the Venom in the post that mentions it, a turret ring of at least 70 inches (probably more like 74 or 75 inches), a gun with a 3.7-inch bore, and an engine in the 1,000-1,200 hp range.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

This timeline is now so far removed from OTL that OTL decision making can't really be any more than a general guide to the decisions that will be made ITTL.

The Churchill is a good example. While the tank did get a reprieve OTL due to good combat performance that can also be attributed to the lack of a real alternative. The Wallies in general and Britain in particular never really had anything come close to being a true universal tank. ITTL that is not the case and the Victor very much is in that position.
The question is, as I have said before, simple. Does this tank do anything that the Victor can not do, not does it do something better but something that it can not. If the Victor is only 70% as good at climbing hills as the Churchill for instance that does not justify deploying it let alone building it. Niche applications are just that, niche...

Looking forward in the timeline to future amphibious action, there might be an issue of going up some slipways of the era off beaches.
Kind of embarrassing if you land a dozen tanks and then they can't get off the beach without being winched up the slipways.
I throw this out as a hypothetical though. I don't have any special knowledge of what the construction standards (including acceptable gradients) for beach slipways of the era were...

 

[MattII]

Looking forward in the timeline to future amphibious action, there might be an issue of going up some slipways of the era off beaches.
Kind of embarrassing if you land a dozen tanks and then they can't get off the beach without being winched up the slipways.
I throw this out as a hypothetical though. I don't have any special knowledge of what the construction standards (including acceptable gradients) for beach slipways of the era were...

The Victors use Merritt-Brown gearboxes, so they should be fine.