The (potential) problem wasn't (and isn't) the mainland Greeks...it's the Greek Cypriots. Historically the Greek Cypriot community has been led by hotheads who just don't like Turks...and while the Turkish community on Cyprus sensibly wanted (and wants) to keep their heads down and stay out of trouble, a sizeable part of the mainland Turkish populace has always had iffy feelings toward Greece, and has been quite unwilling to accept Greek Cypriot rudeness and misbehavior.
Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.
- Thread starter allanpcameron
- Start date
This is an interesting point. Since Britain giving Rhodes to Turkey is pretty obviously not happening, might the Turks decide that the British retaining Rhodes and Cyprus is a preferable option to having Greece obtain either (or both) and push for such a result via soft power?
A slope 4inch plate of the victor would have a good chance to bounce the standard Long 88 AP round.
And that is hilariously funny.
And that is hilariously funny.
Last edited:
Wait… angled 4 inch armor!!!
That the same Hull armor as the T29 heavy tank! (Or 10mm thicker than the T44 armor)
Wow… the victor is going to be a monster to beat frontally. And with the 75mm gun… it’s can frontally pen almost anything
That the same Hull armor as the T29 heavy tank! (Or 10mm thicker than the T44 armor)
Wow… the victor is going to be a monster to beat frontally. And with the 75mm gun… it’s can frontally pen almost anything
Yeah, Victor is at Pershing levels of frontal protection. In fact, if I'm not misinterpreting the figures it might have better frontal protection than even the Tiger (100mm, but unsloped).
Given that the latter two are heavy tanks that'd astonishing capability on what is essentially a super-medium. The Panther is 20mm thinner than the 'British Beast'. The damn thing has more frontal armour than the OTL Centurion Mk1 if I'm not misreading for crying out loud.
4
4 inch is 101.6mm, so the actual thickness is a tiny bit thicker than the tiger.
29 April 1942. Tabriz, Iran.
allanpcameron
Donor
29 April 1942. Tabriz, Iran.
The 10th Armoured Division (f0rmerly 1st Cavalry Division) had spent much of the winter being equipped with a mixture of American M3 (Stuart) Light tanks and British A15 Crusaders. The two Armoured Brigades, once fully equipped had gone through an intense period of training. [9th Armoured Brigade (1st Household Cavalry Regiment (HCR), South Wiltshire and Warwick Yeomanry Regiments). 8th Armoured Brigade (Scots Greys, Nottinghamshire Yeomanry and Staffordshire Yeomanry)]. The two Armoured Brigades was completed by 10th Indian Motor Brigade (16th Light Cavalry, 9th Royal Deccan Horse, Probyn's Horse (5th King Edward VII's Own Lancers)).
The other Cavalry Brigade (Yorkshire Dragoons and Hussars, Nottinghamshire Yeomanry) had been the subject of much debate, but at the end General Wilson had persuaded the War Office to create an Army Tank Brigade, for which Churchill Infantry Tanks were being shipped out to equip them.
A general reorganisation of British forces was happening, as Generals Wavell and Auchinleck attempted to sort out finally the distinction between Middle East Command and India Command. General ‘Jumbo’ Wilson formerly known as GOC Palestine & Trans-Jordan was now known as GOC 9th Army, still under Wavell’s remit. Persia and Iraq, or PAIFORCE, was now 10th Army under the command of Lieutenant-General Edward Quinan, remained part of Auchinleck’s India remit.
10th Army was tasked with the protection of Persia and Iraq, with a particular concern for the possibility that the Germans might attempt to move into the Soviet oil production area of the Caucasus region. Lt-General Quinan had had a couple of meetings with his Soviet opposite number, Lt-General Dmitrii Tifomevich Kozlov, to discuss how the British 10th Army could be of help. Quinan had informally offered the 10th Armoured Division and 8th Indian Division, currently at Tabriz, to move forward towards Baku in Azerbaijan in the event of a successful German attack over the Don River, to free up Red Army forces. Kozlov, with his focus on the fighting on Crimea followed the party line that the Red Army would not need foreign forces to defend the Rodina.
The fact that Quinan had moved the two Divisions to Tabriz, was a clear sign to the Soviets that protection of the lines of communications between the Persian Gulf and the south of the Soviet Union was a British priority, and that preventing the Germans from continuing south into Persia and Iraq wasn’t being taken lightly. The other Indian Divisions (6th, 17th Infantry and 31st Armoured) under Quinan’s command were all along the main rail and road arteries, where they continued to train, while improving the links south to north.
The 10th Armoured Division (f0rmerly 1st Cavalry Division) had spent much of the winter being equipped with a mixture of American M3 (Stuart) Light tanks and British A15 Crusaders. The two Armoured Brigades, once fully equipped had gone through an intense period of training. [9th Armoured Brigade (1st Household Cavalry Regiment (HCR), South Wiltshire and Warwick Yeomanry Regiments). 8th Armoured Brigade (Scots Greys, Nottinghamshire Yeomanry and Staffordshire Yeomanry)]. The two Armoured Brigades was completed by 10th Indian Motor Brigade (16th Light Cavalry, 9th Royal Deccan Horse, Probyn's Horse (5th King Edward VII's Own Lancers)).
The other Cavalry Brigade (Yorkshire Dragoons and Hussars, Nottinghamshire Yeomanry) had been the subject of much debate, but at the end General Wilson had persuaded the War Office to create an Army Tank Brigade, for which Churchill Infantry Tanks were being shipped out to equip them.
A general reorganisation of British forces was happening, as Generals Wavell and Auchinleck attempted to sort out finally the distinction between Middle East Command and India Command. General ‘Jumbo’ Wilson formerly known as GOC Palestine & Trans-Jordan was now known as GOC 9th Army, still under Wavell’s remit. Persia and Iraq, or PAIFORCE, was now 10th Army under the command of Lieutenant-General Edward Quinan, remained part of Auchinleck’s India remit.
10th Army was tasked with the protection of Persia and Iraq, with a particular concern for the possibility that the Germans might attempt to move into the Soviet oil production area of the Caucasus region. Lt-General Quinan had had a couple of meetings with his Soviet opposite number, Lt-General Dmitrii Tifomevich Kozlov, to discuss how the British 10th Army could be of help. Quinan had informally offered the 10th Armoured Division and 8th Indian Division, currently at Tabriz, to move forward towards Baku in Azerbaijan in the event of a successful German attack over the Don River, to free up Red Army forces. Kozlov, with his focus on the fighting on Crimea followed the party line that the Red Army would not need foreign forces to defend the Rodina.
The fact that Quinan had moved the two Divisions to Tabriz, was a clear sign to the Soviets that protection of the lines of communications between the Persian Gulf and the south of the Soviet Union was a British priority, and that preventing the Germans from continuing south into Persia and Iraq wasn’t being taken lightly. The other Indian Divisions (6th, 17th Infantry and 31st Armoured) under Quinan’s command were all along the main rail and road arteries, where they continued to train, while improving the links south to north.
Is it the Nottinghamshire Yeomanry...the Sherwood Rangers.
Or
The Nottinghamshire Yeomanry..the South Notts Hussars ?
Im guessing its the former as the SNH converted to artillery in the early 1920s, however they could have converted back in the armoured expansion.
Or
The Nottinghamshire Yeomanry..the South Notts Hussars ?
Im guessing its the former as the SNH converted to artillery in the early 1920s, however they could have converted back in the armoured expansion.
With the resources freed up from supporting the Africa Korps I imagine the Germans will get a little bit further before they start to unravel. Though they still probably have the same issues as OTL like manpower heck if memory serves they will probably have the same number of Russian under arms in the German army and in Cossack Battalions.
Still though if the slight additions tip the battle of the Caucasus in the Germans favour enough then it will be rather bad for the Russians but it probably depends on Hitler not interfering.
Still though if the slight additions tip the battle of the Caucasus in the Germans favour enough then it will be rather bad for the Russians but it probably depends on Hitler not interfering.
Last edited:
They probably don't to any meaningful degree, those resources have to get to the front and the logistic pipes still have the same capacity and bottlenecks. That's what people seem to miss, the Germans stalled due to not being able to supply, not due to not having the supply in both 1941 and 42. Its only once they are getting pushed back that supply matters.
Fair though the lack of having to fight on two fronts in North Africa and out east as in OTL is a god send to British and Commonwealth logistics in a lot of areas
Ramp-Rat
Monthly Donor
The can be little doubt that the Victor once it enters service, will be the tank that all others in Europe are compared with for the remainder of the war. And while it will not be produced in the same numbers as the American Sherman or Soviet T34, will be the third most produced tank of the conflict, and the principle tank of the British/Commonwealth forces for the duration. Britain which IOTL, started the war and finished it, with what many considered to be the best tanks of their era, Matilda and Centurion. Has managed to retain thanks to the survival of one man its position as a leader in tank design. The basic problems IOTL, were a combination of the losses in men and equipment suffered during the first three years of the war, and the terrible doctrine and tactics adopted by British armoured formations. ITTL not only did the British start out with more and better tanks, but have also suffered fewer losses in men and equipment. This has allowed the various industries that have switched over from their peacetime production to gain experience in armoured vehicle production under far less pressure than they were IOTL. Plus the better tanks already in production have enabled the British to achieve significant success in the Middle East, without suffering the extensive losses that they did IOTL. They have also been able to spare far more forces and equipment for the defence of their Far East possessions, and by retaining them their access to oil, rice and rubber. And the lower losses and reduced commitments in the Mediterranean, have allowed the designers to take more time and by also examining captured enemy equipment in producing the next generation of tanks.
The British armoured forces have gained valuable experience against both the Germans and Italians, and have had the time to absorb and think about the lessons taught them. The pause in large scale fighting in the Mediterranean, and the return to Britain of some of the more experienced officers and senior NCO’s, is allowing their hard won knowledge to be shared. Large scale exercises have been conducted in the UK and North Africa, to try out the various theories of how an armoured division should be formed and used, which given the recent experience are far more realistic than those conducted previously. British industry is not under the same pressure to produce tanks any tanks even if they are not as capable as they could be, to replace the constant stream of losses. And the army has been given the time and opportunity to absorb the numerous lessons that it has learned the hard way, and begin to develop a coherent doctrine and tactics in regards to armoured warfare. By the end of the year Britain will be deploying armoured formations that are in every way superior to those that Germany can field. Their tanks will be as good if not measurably better than any that the Germans can field, and much more mechanical reliable. While the standard British armoured division will not contain more active tanks than its German equivalent. It’s reserve tank park, with its tank transporters will have enough tanks to replace one day’s casualties, and quickly move said casualties to either a front line repair depot or a second line depot, picking up a replacement at the same time. Other than large AA guns, none of its artillery will be towed, and it will have organic specialist armoured vehicles, or they will be allocated from a central pool for an assault.
A British armoured division will have all their infantry support carried in half tracks or fully tracked armoured vehicles. Plus they will have at least twice the number of support vehicles in their service tail, some of which will be tracked. And will have a vertualy unlimited supply for fuel, ammunition and food, only being forced to ration them if they outrun their supply lines. In Normandy IOTL American and British armoured formations could have 50% of their armoured vehicles rendered combat ineffective in a single day, only to have them all replaced within 48 hours, whereas German formations on the eastern front would be lucky to receive 10% of the replacements needed after an attack. The level of air support a British or American formation could expect to receive was much greater than a German formation received during the Battle of France. No way could the Germans call upon a thousand heavy bombers to carry out a pre attack bombardment, closely followed by an overwhelming number of heavy guns pounding the area. By the end of 1942, the British and to a lesser extent the Americans for now, will have armoured devisions and corps that are larger than the Germans, mostly because of the extent of their support services. That are equipped, trained and have tactics and doctrine, equal to the Germans and in many cases better. As for tanks the Victor will remain given various upgrades the principal tank for the British/Commonwealth forces in Europe, and for the various Free forces as well, with the exception of France who will be mostly using American equipment. This will give the time to design and build a tank, engine and gun that will provide post war a vehicle that is better than any other in the world, and which will remain capable until the mid sixties.
RR.
The British armoured forces have gained valuable experience against both the Germans and Italians, and have had the time to absorb and think about the lessons taught them. The pause in large scale fighting in the Mediterranean, and the return to Britain of some of the more experienced officers and senior NCO’s, is allowing their hard won knowledge to be shared. Large scale exercises have been conducted in the UK and North Africa, to try out the various theories of how an armoured division should be formed and used, which given the recent experience are far more realistic than those conducted previously. British industry is not under the same pressure to produce tanks any tanks even if they are not as capable as they could be, to replace the constant stream of losses. And the army has been given the time and opportunity to absorb the numerous lessons that it has learned the hard way, and begin to develop a coherent doctrine and tactics in regards to armoured warfare. By the end of the year Britain will be deploying armoured formations that are in every way superior to those that Germany can field. Their tanks will be as good if not measurably better than any that the Germans can field, and much more mechanical reliable. While the standard British armoured division will not contain more active tanks than its German equivalent. It’s reserve tank park, with its tank transporters will have enough tanks to replace one day’s casualties, and quickly move said casualties to either a front line repair depot or a second line depot, picking up a replacement at the same time. Other than large AA guns, none of its artillery will be towed, and it will have organic specialist armoured vehicles, or they will be allocated from a central pool for an assault.
A British armoured division will have all their infantry support carried in half tracks or fully tracked armoured vehicles. Plus they will have at least twice the number of support vehicles in their service tail, some of which will be tracked. And will have a vertualy unlimited supply for fuel, ammunition and food, only being forced to ration them if they outrun their supply lines. In Normandy IOTL American and British armoured formations could have 50% of their armoured vehicles rendered combat ineffective in a single day, only to have them all replaced within 48 hours, whereas German formations on the eastern front would be lucky to receive 10% of the replacements needed after an attack. The level of air support a British or American formation could expect to receive was much greater than a German formation received during the Battle of France. No way could the Germans call upon a thousand heavy bombers to carry out a pre attack bombardment, closely followed by an overwhelming number of heavy guns pounding the area. By the end of 1942, the British and to a lesser extent the Americans for now, will have armoured devisions and corps that are larger than the Germans, mostly because of the extent of their support services. That are equipped, trained and have tactics and doctrine, equal to the Germans and in many cases better. As for tanks the Victor will remain given various upgrades the principal tank for the British/Commonwealth forces in Europe, and for the various Free forces as well, with the exception of France who will be mostly using American equipment. This will give the time to design and build a tank, engine and gun that will provide post war a vehicle that is better than any other in the world, and which will remain capable until the mid sixties.
RR.
Honestly I have to wonder what impacts the Victor will have on American and Soviet tank development and design. Assuming the UK sends the Russians any Victors that is.
Well, the Victor is essentially a 'medium IS', so I'm sure the Soviets will take one look at it and feel very justified in the work they're putting into the KV's successor. Maybe they'll up the hull armour on the T-44, but that project is only a half-step behind the Victor as I understand it. Probably spur them on to fitting the 100mm cannon earlier, which means the -44 might actually see service before war's end.
As for the Americans I'm sure they'll hang their heads a little for how far they have to catch up, then spend the rest of the war coming up with something better than the Sherman-equivalent they're working on already but can't justify shifting production over because the tank they're making is 'good enough' and what's needed is plenty more of them.
So... probably not much change in the short term, really.
As for the Americans I'm sure they'll hang their heads a little for how far they have to catch up, then spend the rest of the war coming up with something better than the Sherman-equivalent they're working on already but can't justify shifting production over because the tank they're making is 'good enough' and what's needed is plenty more of them.
So... probably not much change in the short term, really.
the victor have the same armor than the IS2 iir
And the T44 armor is just* 10mm thinner.
Iirc if the US up the power of the still in progress Sherman’s suspension and start working on an enlarged turret early, they can have a jumbo 90mm as major serviced tank in mid 1944.
A 90mm Sherman 'jumbo' would be quite the ride through French bocage!
Not sure how they'd manage to fit it, but with a new turret I'm sure they could make it work, add a british-style bustle for space, perhaps?
Chrysler certainly thought they could pull it off OTL, with a lowered hull thanks to a rationalized drivetrain no less!
The Russians designed their tanks low and small by requiring tankers to be of short stature, even given that 1940 Russian young men were several inches shorter on average than Americans.
Britain and Germany were constrained in that regard because they didn't have enough short men.
American definitely didn't have enough short men. American tanks *had* to be larger inside than Russian ones, because American tankers had to fit.
When we see Chieftain videos of him folding his 6'-plus frame into a T34 and talking about how hard it would be to exit in a hurry, it needs to be kept in mind that getting out would be easier if you were 7 or 8 inches shorter.
Britain and Germany were constrained in that regard because they didn't have enough short men.
American definitely didn't have enough short men. American tanks *had* to be larger inside than Russian ones, because American tankers had to fit.
When we see Chieftain videos of him folding his 6'-plus frame into a T34 and talking about how hard it would be to exit in a hurry, it needs to be kept in mind that getting out would be easier if you were 7 or 8 inches shorter.
Only 25 years or so earlier the British were establishing ‘Bantam’ regiments to use up undersized soldiers. It suggests that they could have shunted the shortest soldiers into armour had they chosen to in WW2.