So by these build schedules, The RN would have 84 dreadnoughts and the KM 48 by 1924!
World War I starts in 1924: state of military technology and the military balance of power
In mid 1914, the RN was already looking at manning requirements for 90 capital ships by 1920 The Austro-German naval plan was to run the RN out of Blue Jackets and force peace-time conscription on GB. With a HSF of 40 Battleships and 20 large cruisers the RN would be in the vicinity of 90+ capital ships. The requirement would probably be closer to 100. 8 Squadrons to 5 (64:40) and then about 20BC to 12BC in the North Sea and 16BC:8BC (2:1) on overseas commitments so 64+20+16 is 100.
With armoured cruisers recognized as obsolete, I would expect Germany to station a pair of battlecruisers at Tsingtao as the core of the East Asiatic Squadron. That would want some watching, although Japan would be expected to still be a party to the Anglo-Japanese Naval Treaty, and they will have 4 Kongos plus 3 or 4 Amagis.
With the overseas deployment of HSF capital ships, senior leadership had noticed that this drew off a disproportionate number of RN ships from the North Sea. The Naval Law required 8 large cruisers on overseas deployment and in 1914 this was just 3 so you could probably see an eventual force level of perhaps 2 in the Pacific, 4 in the Med and 2 elsewhere, perhaps East Africa. In early 1914, Tirpitz was thinking about a 'flying squadron' for the Atlantic. Perhaps this could be the destination of the 'Seydlitz sized' cruisers for later in the building program. Coupled with diesel engines and electric drive (Tirpitz was observing USN trials and Germany was the largest producer of electric motors in the world) for sprint they could be a real pain to the RN on the trade routes.
What kind of aircraft would the carriers have? Recon and spotters are obvious choices, torpedo bombers are likelysince they are too useful not to have some. Fighters would be interesting - agile short range point interceptors or heavy fighters with longer range (a 1920s biplane fulmar equivalent) to deter scouts and zeppelins? My suspicion is that the heavier pre-fulmar would be good enough against bombers as well, and could probably make a good armed scout plane for when actively looking for trouble and would be preferred due to versatility. I suspect conventional bombers would miss out unless the pre-swordfish could switch between bomb or torpedo load according to mission.
Without wartime experience, there is scope for some strange designs and philosophies to emerge.
No ww1 in 1914 would indeed mean a faster adaptation not only of metal airraft but an acceleration of accademic educated aircraft engineers like professor Junkers who also had a commercial understanding. Producing much earlier advanced aircraft and engines. Instead of half a decade of aircraft pioneers/adventurers who contruct their aircraft more on trial and error than on science and research.The World’s First All Metal Aircraft – The Junkers J1 | Junkers.de
A revolution in aircraft manufacturing was under way when on December 12, 1915, at the Döberitz airfield west of Berlin, the Junkers J1 took off for her maiden flight. The J1 was the first aircraft built completely of metal - other than all contemporary planes which were manufactured of wood...web.archive.org
The World’s First All Metal Aircraft – The Junkers J1
A revolution in aircraft manufacturing was under way when on December 12, 1915, at the Döberitz airfield west of Berlin, the Junkers J1 took off for her maiden flight. The J1 was the first aircraft built completely of metal - other than all contemporary planes which were manufactured of wood, struts, tension wires, and canvas. It was the era of biplanes, of those ‘flying boxes” and their death-defying pilots, and all experts of the time believed that aircraft could only be constructed of light material, and not of a heavy material like metal. Their opinion: “There’s no way metal can fly.” Yet one visionary saw the future of aviation differently: In the opinion of Professor Hugo Junkers (1859-1935) the future of aircraft not only consisted of aerial competitions and air battles, but in the transport of passengers and goods. And only a metal aircraft could achieve that.
The J1 was the world’s first aircraft to also feature another innovation: an unbraced, cantilever monoplane wing with a thick profile guaranteeing the wing’s inner stability. Already in 1910 Professor Junkers had received a patent for his concept of the “thick wing.” In his own wind tunnel he then tested a multitude of wing profiles, confirming his expectation that a thick wing resulted in no more resistance than the thin, curved wing profiles common at the time. Instead, the thick wing allowed for a much better uplift and could carry additional load. Both Junkers’ innovations - the metal construction and the self-supporting thick wing - are influencing aircraft manufacturing still today.
As duralumin, a particularly strong aluminum alloy, had only just been invented and was difficult to obtain, the Junkers J1 was still built of steel. However, Junkers’ employees at his Dessau plant, where Junkers gas heaters were built, were experts in processing extremely thin sheets of metal, with a thickness of only 0.1 to 0.2 millimeters. The smooth exterior of the aircraft was reinforced internally by corrugated iron. This modern structure was later also used in other aircraft, like the Boeing B-17 in 1935.
The J1 was not intended for mass production, but rather served to demonstrate these new technologies. Less than two years later, in 1917, Junkers introduced the J7, the first monoplane made of corrugated duralumin which would become typical for all subsequent Junkers aircraft.. Four years after the J1, in 1919, the Junkers F 13 started for her maiden flight. The F 13 was the world’s first all-metal transport aircraft, and it became a huge commercial success. Over the next decade, a whole family of passenger and freight planes followed, such as the W 33 and W 34, the three-engine aircraft G 24 and G 31, the four-engine G 38, and finally the legendary three-engine Ju 52, nicknamed “Tante Ju” [Aunt Ju].
Considered a milestone in aviation technology, the Ju 1 was exhibited from 1926 at the Deutsches Museum in Munich, Germany. In December 1944 it was destroyed during a World War II bombing raid. 100 years after the first flight of the J1, the Junkers Technology Museum in Dessau, Germany, intends to build a full-scale replica of this pioneering aircraft, financed through a crowd funding campaign at Kickstarter. For more information on the campaign and how to support it, visit www.J1-project.com. For information on the life and work of Prof. Hugo Junkers, as well as on his aircraft and other products, visit www.junkers.de.
Specifications of the Junkers J1
Engine: 1 x Daimler DII with 88 kW (120 hp) Wingspan: 12,95 m Length: 8,62 m Height: 3,11 m Empty weight: 900 kg Loading capacity: 180 kg Take-off Weight: 1,080 kg Top speed: 170 km / h
Driftless
Donor
The commercial path would probably get the main pile of development cash (i.e. think of the moneys plugged into very long range sea-crossing aircraft, especially by the French, Germans, Dutch, British, and later the US.) Also, while not strictly commercial aviation as we consider it, think of the piles of cash plugged into racing planes by both private and governmental sources pre-OTL WW1 and post-war.
Still, the shade-tree mechanics and aviators would be puttering away, mostly on dead-end ideas, but they may still come up with a saleable nugget too.
marathag
Banned
No WWI, and Glenn Curtiss probably makes money on his flying boats, depending how the patent infringement cases go between him and Wright in US Courts.
OTL they were muted by joining the War, where the US kind of nationalized all the aeronautical patents and let all companies build from them, for small royalty fee
Driftless
Donor
That's Curtis. I was thinking more of the well funded several French and British racing planes pre-WW1 and then post-war with the Italians jumping into the mix. Also, the Interwar work (which for this OP should occur earlier, without a massive glut of dime-a-dozen surplus warplanes hitting the private market) by the French and Germans bankrolling transatlantic planes of varying success, the British companies and private capital bankrolling both transatlantic planes and Empire hoppers.
without the driver of trench stalemate - albeit that the signs were already there from Russo-Japanese war - a 1920s army would look like a more mechanised version of the 1914 army. Artillery wouldnt be the queen of the battlefield, manoeuvre warfare would be still high in the minds of people. I'd tend to agree with many of the posters above that cavalry would still be there although maybe a mix of horsed for close recce and armoured cars for 'distant' recce alongside planes
Well 1924 would be an interesting start date, though it assumes that Europe survives another3-5 crises before things kick off.
Strategically France will have to reduce it's army size somewhat, due to manning considerations.
The Anglo-German naval race will have ended and relations will be somewhat more relaxed.
Russia may have recovered from the inevitable crises of Tsarist incompetence and returned to being a significant player. Or it may have collapsed entirely.
Germany will be far more mechanised, they had excellent pre-war systems and plans and a very capable automotive industry. Relations between them and the Ottomans will be an interesting matter, regarding a British perceived threat to their Mid-East holdings and oil supply for Germany.
Will there have been another Bankan war? Quite possibly. This might have an interesting effect on Austria-Hungary. And that brings me to A-H; Franz Josef will be dead and (probably) Franz Ferdinand will be emperor, the country may be more efficiently ruled (or may have collapsed or fragmented) and significantly militarily stronger.
Britain will have had time to resolve The Matter of Ireland, removing an obstacle to becoming embroiled in a European war.
Strategically France will have to reduce it's army size somewhat, due to manning considerations.
The Anglo-German naval race will have ended and relations will be somewhat more relaxed.
Russia may have recovered from the inevitable crises of Tsarist incompetence and returned to being a significant player. Or it may have collapsed entirely.
Germany will be far more mechanised, they had excellent pre-war systems and plans and a very capable automotive industry. Relations between them and the Ottomans will be an interesting matter, regarding a British perceived threat to their Mid-East holdings and oil supply for Germany.
Will there have been another Bankan war? Quite possibly. This might have an interesting effect on Austria-Hungary. And that brings me to A-H; Franz Josef will be dead and (probably) Franz Ferdinand will be emperor, the country may be more efficiently ruled (or may have collapsed or fragmented) and significantly militarily stronger.
Britain will have had time to resolve The Matter of Ireland, removing an obstacle to becoming embroiled in a European war.
Two things you won't have before 1924 will be that WWI-induced blip that set the German economy behind the British in ternational rankings and that set Russia behind France, Italy and Japan from a PPP perspective.
OTL, Guderian was still arguing against use of cavalry for recon in 1935 despite the experiences of WW1 (and even in Achtung Panzer! he references preWW1staff work that argues against battlefield use of cavalry).
So it seems very likely that 1924 ideas on the use of cavalry ITTL will still look like OTL 1914 ones. That would make cavalry the main recon force though this could change rapidly as in OTL once combat starts.
Mechanisation levels will probably be similar to OTL 1920s, mostly for towing guns, supplies and troops but with MG armed armoured cars largely replacing the tracked tanks of OTL.
The need for LMGs and integral MG units won't have been identified in combat, and armoured cars will appear to provide a more versatile way to rapidly boost attack or defence. However, developments in semi automatics are likely to continue and these could be seen as ideal line cavalry weapons because higher fire rates will compensate for having 25% of the unit as horse holders and make them more effective as elite attacking units or for plugging defensive holes[1]. This would help maintain elite status for cavalry - while also providing opportunities for some major bone-headed decisions early in the war, as well as some striking successes.
Incidentally, I don't think I intended to argue the case for semi automatic rifle armed elite cavalry when I started this post!
[1] Giving a faster firing weapon to a small part of the army for a sensible reason is an easier sell, plus we'd have Lord Horsehead and his fellow club members arguing that the cavalry employs a better class of person who won't waste their ammunition like the commoners in the infantry would (which in the 1920s would carry more weight than it should).
Wouldn’t the Royal Navy just scrap the older Pre-Dreadnoughts and use the crew to man new Dreadnoughts?
Deleted member 6086
In Bulgaria, with no WWI there is likely to be a constitutional revolution against Tsar Ferdinand, either forcing him to abdicate as in OTL after WWI, or - more likely IMO - greatly reducing his powers in favor of the National Assembly/whatever strongman emerges from there.
He was widely blamed for starting and losing the Second Balkan War in 1913, which not only lost us a lot of territory, but left us in a much weaker position relative to Serbia and Greece relative to the pre-Balkan Wars era. In OTL jumping into WWI in 1915 allowed him to stay popular anger, but with a delayed WWI, I reckon he is neutered as a politically active monarch. This likely results in a much saner Bulgarian foreign policy for the rest of the 1910s, though we'd still be in a position of weakness.
He was widely blamed for starting and losing the Second Balkan War in 1913, which not only lost us a lot of territory, but left us in a much weaker position relative to Serbia and Greece relative to the pre-Balkan Wars era. In OTL jumping into WWI in 1915 allowed him to stay popular anger, but with a delayed WWI, I reckon he is neutered as a politically active monarch. This likely results in a much saner Bulgarian foreign policy for the rest of the 1910s, though we'd still be in a position of weakness.
Strictly speaking the balance of power will favor an expanded Russia/Allies though if Italy remains a member of the Central Powers, especially if Sweden can be brought in to join them, it becomes much more interesting.
en.m.wikipedia.org
www.key.aero
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
Fusil Automatique Modèle 1917 - Wikipedia
Oxygen use in WW1
G' day all again!:D :eek: How the hell did all these flyin lad's, Fly and do combat dogfightin, over 10,000 feet and even over 20,000 feet +, with out any Oxygen. I really have not heard or read of much ever used in that time..:confused:
Fokker D.VII - Wikipedia
Felixstowe F5L - Wikipedia
Breguet 14 - Wikipedia
Yes, this is what Churchill was proposing in 1914 but at the end of the day the HSF of 3 active squadrons needed to be countered by 5 RN squadrons and then a 6th will be needed for the Med leaving 2 squadrons in Reserve. The RN will either run out of manpower or find some other way to counter Germany in the North Sea and Austria in the Med.
I'm not convinced the RN will "run out of manpower" while they will certainly have to increase pay and conditions and expand the RNVR, including increasing their pay Britain has by far and away the largest Merchant Marine and will continue to do so making manning even this monster fleet possible.
Anti-aircraft gun quickly pushed into service as an anti-armored car gun.