A Blunted Sickle - Thread II

[DracoLazarus]

Man, I need to write another update - you guys'll be making cheesegrater jokes soon as this rate! Unfortunately, I'm off to the US for the next two weeks (1 week NJ, 1 week SC) with no PC so that isn't likely.
In the meantime, to hopefully calm down a couple of controversies:

1. Nothing is firmly decided about ABM yet - I have some ideas and the rough outline of how technology will develop ITTL plotted out, but nothing is fixed yet.
2. Just because I haven't written about Stalin yet, doesn't mean he doesn't know what's going on. Writing a timeline this big makes keeping track of everything very hard - and the less I write about, the easier that job becomes. The first we'll hear from Stalin is when he makes a decision and issues some orders, not what his is told and when. One will happen long before the other.

Ah, because a cheesegrater in French is rape ?

 

[naraht]

Stalin knows one of his enemies has knocked over another of his enemies.

Forward with Socialism in One Country !

Which reminds me, with the Nationalist Chinese getting more supplies, any change in the status of Mao and such?

 

[Chris S]

Again. Timing and who tells what when, and when does it go up the line.

Ignoring you're reading this 'voice from God' stuff. When did the Hungarians take Vienna ? And when was this certain ?

Remember, if you send worthless rumours and unchecked scuttlebutt up the line, you can get a free trip to Siberia.

Despite a lack of answers to any questions of mine posed, let's answer yours in sequence:

1.

When did the Hungarians take Vienna ?

December 29th, 1941 is when they completely captured it. December 24th is when they declared war and invaded Poland (one should expect by December 25th for Stalin to have been heard of the declaration of war and Hungarian move into Poland). They first reached the outskirts of Vienna on December 26th and began moving into Vienna in force on December 27th.

2.

And when was this certain ?

Using actual historical events (including the Cronkite CBS reports on the fall of Paris and German radio broadcasts on their own defeat at Stalingrad) from OTL as a guide I would reckon December 30th or December 31st at the latest is when pretty much everyone knows about it.

Remember, if you send worthless rumours and unchecked scuttlebutt up the line, you can get a free trip to Siberia.

As much as that is the popular image (or rather caricature), things were far more complex than that. For example Zhukov once had a disagreement with Stalin. Was he sent to Siberia? No. Rather as BBC notes:

In January 1941, Joseph Stalin appointed Zhukov chief of the army general staff. He was dismissed six months later after a disagreement with Stalin, but was retained in the army headquarters.

As we are all aware, Red Army headquarters was not in Siberia.

And as noted here, even before Barbarossa Stalin's advisers would tell him things that went contrary to what he believed or thought (otherwise why begin to argue that a German invasion in 1941 was much more likely rather than accept Stalin's view that summer 1942 was the date set in stone?):

Stalin believed that Germany would not invade the Soviet Union until Britain and France had been conquered. From Stalin's own calculations, this would not be until the summer of 1942. Some of his closest advisers began to argue that 1941 would be a much more likely date. The surrender of France in June, 1940, also cast doubts on Stalin's calculations.

Operation Barbarossa

Stalin's response to France's defeat was to send Vyacheslav Molotov to Berlin for more discussions. Molotov was instructed to draw out these talks for as long as possible. Stalin knew that if Adolf Hitler did not attack the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941, he would have to wait until 1942. No one, not even someone as rash as Hitler, would invade the Soviet Union in the winter, he argued.

Germany was now in a strong negotiating position and Molotov found it impossible to agree to Hitler's demands. As soon as talks broke-up, Hitler ordered his military leaders to prepare for Operation Barbarossa. The plan was for the invasion of the Soviet Union to start on the 15th May, 1941. Hitler believed that this would give the German Army enough time to take control of the country before the harsh Soviet winter set in.

Information on the proposed invasion came to Stalin from various sources. Richard Sorge, an agent working for the Red Orchestra in Japan, obtained information about the proposed invasion as early as December, 1940. Winston Churchill sent a personal message to Stalin in April, 1941, explaining how German troop movements suggested that they were about to attack the Soviet Union. However, Stalin was still suspicious of the British and thought that Churchill was trying to trick him into declaring war on Germany.

When Sorge's prediction that Germany would invade in May, 1941, did not take place, Stalin became even more convinced that the war would not start until 1942. The reason for this delay was that Germany had invaded Yugoslavia in April. Adolf Hitler had expected the Yugoslavs to surrender immediately but because of stubborn resistance, Hitler had to postpone Operation Barbarossa for a few weeks.

On 21st June, 1941, a German sergeant deserted to the Soviet forces. He informed them that the German Army would attack at dawn the following morning. Stalin was reluctant to believe the soldier's story and it was not until the German attack took place that he finally accepted that his attempts to avoid war with Germany until 1942 had failed.

And note that a German sergeant deserts on June 21st and clearly within the same day Stalin is informed of the soldier's claim that the attack would come next morning.

 

[pdf27]

Ah, because a cheesegrater in French is rape ?

No, I'm just thinking of what happens whenever Cymraeg doesn't update Robb Returns fast enough!

 

[Ian_W]

For example Zhukov once had a disagreement with Stalin. Was he sent to Siberia? No.

There's a difference between can and will.

 

[Chris S]

There's a difference between can and will.

Indeed there is and you are quite correct! You might also have noted where I used the words "for example" which should have indicated just as much that I wasn't implying in all cases that persons wouldn't be exiled (or worse, killed) for not singing from the same hymn sheet as Stalin.

 

[ngf]

Although the Stalin may not have a clear handle on the extent of the Entente's advance in Germany, he almost certainly will be aware of the capture of Vienna by the Hungarians within a day of its occurrence. Vienna is major world city and in addition to the Hungarians loudly announcing its capture, there will be multiple independent reporting from the city of its fall. It will not be a secret. This news will be flashed in all of the major newspapers and radio news broadcasts throughout the world.

Besides radio bulletins and spies, there are two other sources of information that should not be discounted. The first is diplomatic reporting. The Soviets are likely to have a consulate in Vienna, which will report the news. It is less likely that the Soviets will have a consulate in Hamburg, but other countries will and the news of British move into the southern half of the city is likely to have spread widely in diplomatic circles.

The other source of information is simply the telephone, which will probably still be functioning when the first Entente troops move into various German towns. German citizens are likely to report the news of the arrival British and French troops to their towns to relatives in Berlin. Similar telephone reports would come from the local police to officials in Berlin. While the details may often be contradictory, there will be no way to hide the fact that the British are moving quickly across northern Germany from the average Berliner. This news undoubtedly will be sent on to Moscow (as well as to other parts unknown).

 

[Jonathansouth]

well it is true that Stalin may know what most of what is happening it will take time to react mobilizing troops is a major logistical operation even if they are on a war footing and have plans (having spent years working in military logistics makes me terrified of the logistical nightmare that would be the Soviets trying to react to the fast changing events) and any move would take at east a week to get going especially with the quite primitive logistics of the Soviet Army

 

[SsgtC]

well it is true that Stalin may know what most of what is happening it will take time to react mobilizing troops is a major logistical operation even if they are on a war footing and have plans (having spent years working in military logistics makes me terrified of the logistical nightmare that would be the Soviets trying to react to the fast changing events) and any move would take at east a week to get going especially with the quite primitive logistics of the Soviet Army

Don't forget either, the Soviets sold almost all the trucks assigned to their divisions to the Germans. I doubt they've fully reequipped yet.

 

[Jonathansouth]

Don't forget either, the Soviets sold almost all the trucks assigned to their divisions to the Germans. I doubt they've fully reequipped yet.

not just trucks a major question is how would they give the orders do they have radios, are they using field telephones motor bike riders and dispatch runners etc as all the methods of communication have massive effects on rapidity of movement The IRL battle of France showed how weak various forms of command and control were when faced by a rapidly changing situation as Stalin would be keen to avoid a incident were they accidently engage Allied troops and without detailed up to date infomation and a real time command and control system i.e radios for every unit the Soviets would be forced to move very slowly. It was amazing the level of coordination needed in 1939 when the Germans were handing areas over to the Soviets in Poland to prevent accidental contact between the units. This was als a major concern in 1945 and required a lot of communication to prevent potential fire fights between the Soviets and the Western Allies when they were racing across Berlin.

 

[Triune Kingdom]

I am rather sure this has already been discussed several times on the two threads of this TL, but I do wonder how will small arms develop in this TL. It is possible that we will see something along the lines of OTL NATO standardisation, in regards to a single caliber used by several militaries, though any agreement is likely to be made on a much more equal footing then what happened in IOTL.

French 7.5 may be a strong contender, especially considering that MAS 40 semi automatic rifle is already in widespread service, and that may be enough for many smaller European nations. British are playing with SLEM in 6.5mm Swedish, though in rather small numbers when compared to other small arms already in use, and I do not think that we will see any postwar use of the round, since it is still a full size rifle round, if on a smaller end of the scale.

We may yet end up with some sort of intermediate rifle round, though without witnessing the STG44 in service, any intermediate round may come around later then IOTL. Something along the lines of .280 British is a possibility, perhaps more similar to its later, more powerful versions, if 6.5 Swedish proves to be a large influence on the postwar cartridge development.

Frankly, the more I think about it, it seems to me that Entante (and Entante aligned nations) may end up with a more conventional semi-automatic battle rifle, due to general draw down of military expenditures at the end of the war. Costs have to be taken into the account, and when presented with an either Good or Cheap options, goverments generally pick the Cheap option, and since French already have a semi-auto rifle in widespread service and production, with kinks worked out and development costs paid for, that may be the option most nations go for. When one tries to be rational about it, MAS 40 is the arguably the best standard issue rifle in the world at this point in time, with perhaps M1 Garand coming in as a very close second, and with benefit of hindsight, it does have another 30+ years of service left in it, even considering its limitations.

While it is certain that Entante nations will be immensely better off financially then they were IOTL, that does not mean that funds for military are unlimited, and there will be plenty to spend those same limited funds for. What I am trying to say is that firearms may be pushed to the side, declared good enough, and funds diverted to fund Atomic weapons, Jet Aircraft, AFVs or Warships.

Just some of my thoughts, so if anyone has better idea or info I would like to hear it.

 

[fhaessig]

since French already have a semi-auto rifle in widespread service and production, with kinks worked out and development costs paid for, that may be the option most nations go for. When one tries to be rational about it, MAS 40 is the arguably the best standard issue rifle in the world at this point in time, with perhaps M1 Garand coming in as a very close second, and with benefit of hindsight, it does have another 30+ years of service left in it, even considering its limitations..

Esp since it can be fitted with the 25-bullets magazine of the FM24/29 if necessary (note that this makes it difficult to fire when fully prone, however).

Edit: I could have sworn I put an image in...

I wonder, is there a way to transform the MAS40 into a full automatic?

 

[pdf27]

British are playing with SLEM in 6.5mm Swedish, though in rather small numbers when compared to other small arms already in use, and I do not think that we will see any postwar use of the round, since it is still a full size rifle round, if on a smaller end of the scale.

6.5mm Swedish is a very interesting round - the cartridge is oversized, but the muzzle energy/momentum is remarkably close to .280 British. Essentially the cartridge case is oversized because it was sized for a much lower performance propellant than is now available. Doing a Kurtz cartridge on it gets you to what is essentially .280 British with rather better long-range performance, particularly if they use a .303 style aluminium bullet tip to keep the ballistic coefficient high. Given that the UK has worldwide responsibilities, that's going to be of interest.

We may yet end up with some sort of intermediate rifle round, though without witnessing the STG44 in service, any intermediate round may come around later then IOTL. Something along the lines of .280 British is a possibility, perhaps more similar to its later, more powerful versions, if 6.5 Swedish proves to be a large influence on the postwar cartridge development.

The basic idea of doing a shortened cartridge isn't going away, and if they aren't developing a whole new rifle (the French certainly aren't, and the British will either adopt the MAS or a SLEM derivative).

Frankly, the more I think about it, it seems to me that Entente (and Entente aligned nations) may end up with a more conventional semi-automatic battle rifle, due to general draw down of military expenditures at the end of the war. Costs have to be taken into the account, and when presented with an either Good or Cheap options, governments generally pick the Cheap option, and since French already have a semi-auto rifle in widespread service and production, with kinks worked out and development costs paid for, that may be the option most nations go for. When one tries to be rational about it, MAS 40 is the arguably the best standard issue rifle in the world at this point in time, with perhaps M1 Garand coming in as a very close second, and with benefit of hindsight, it does have another 30+ years of service left in it, even considering its limitations.

Any peace dividend depends on the colonial empires keeping quiet and no risk of war with either the Soviet Union or their proxies. Certainly in OTL the British were quite happy to spend the money to replace the SMLE, and I don't see that changing. The French are in a better place with the MAS, so that will probably stick around, possibly with modifications.

While it is certain that Entante nations will be immensely better off financially then they were IOTL, that does not mean that funds for military are unlimited, and there will be plenty to spend those same limited funds for. What I am trying to say is that firearms may be pushed to the side, declared good enough, and funds diverted to fund Atomic weapons, Jet Aircraft, AFVs or Warships.

Just some of my thoughts, so if anyone has better idea or info I would like to hear it.

Main comment is that small arms are relatively cheap compared to jet bombers, and they are both colonial powers with big empires. Since the empires aren't entirely tranquil, small arms actually have quite a big impact relative to their cost.

 

[vizzer]

For the talk of when Stalin might know what's happening in Germany, up to 2-3 days before it happened the British didn't know they'd be attacking!

 

[naraht]

not just trucks a major question is how would they give the orders do they have radios, are they using field telephones motor bike riders and dispatch runners etc as all the methods of communication have massive effects on rapidity of movement The IRL battle of France showed how weak various forms of command and control were when faced by a rapidly changing situation as Stalin would be keen to avoid a incident were they accidently engage Allied troops and without detailed up to date infomation and a real time command and control system i.e radios for every unit the Soviets would be forced to move very slowly. It was amazing the level of coordination needed in 1939 when the Germans were handing areas over to the Soviets in Poland to prevent accidental contact between the units. This was als a major concern in 1945 and required a lot of communication to prevent potential fire fights between the Soviets and the Western Allies when they were racing across Berlin.

And in both of these cases, the group on the other side of the "squish" is an ally who is willing to communicate by radio and who has at least somewhat agreed on where the line of demarcation with the group on the other side. Unless the Soviets unilaterally announce the area that they are invading and it is small (say the remainder of pre-war Lithuania), things could get very risky from Stalin's viewpoint.

 

[fhaessig]

Any peace dividend depends on the colonial empires keeping quiet and no risk of war with either the Soviet Union or their proxies. Certainly in OTL the British were quite happy to spend the money to replace the SMLE, and I don't see that changing. The French are in a better place with the MAS, so that will probably stick around, possibly with modifications.

.

So, something similar to OTL MAS49/56 ultimately?

 

[pdf27]

So, something similar to OTL MAS49/56 ultimately?

Yeah, but probably chambered in something like 7.5 x 42 rather than x 54.

 

[Triune Kingdom]

We could see MAS49/56 come about a bit earlier then IOTL, since France will have used the MAS 40 on a large scale, and in Mechanized warfare too, which means that people recognize the value of a shorter firearm for mechanized troops earlier. Now that pdf has mentioned the possible cartridge, TTL version of MAS does sound like a SKS rifle somewhat, especially when one considers the intermediate cartrige it could end up chambered in.

 

[ngf]

Shall we start a pool on when the British will enter Berlin?

 

[Jonathansouth]

i

And in both of these cases, the group on the other side of the "squish" is an ally who is willing to communicate by radio and who has at least somewhat agreed on where the line of demarcation with the group on the other side. Unless the Soviets unilaterally announce the area that they are invading and it is small (say the remainder of pre-war Lithuania), things could get very risky from Stalin's viewpoint.

completly agree it looks like Uncle Joe has missed the bus although this may be of benefit and might allow him to re-pivot to Asia and "liberate" Manchukuo from the Japanese