Search this Topic:
Mar 3 17 5:12 PM
ChrisPat wrote:So the RN didn't get the MkXI? It was a better gun / mounting / shell than the Italian or Russian systems?
Mar 3 17 6:29 PM
Mar 3 17 6:37 PM
Mar 3 17 6:47 PM
Mar 3 17 6:49 PM
mike1880 wrote:And yet the 15in is the exact point where Britain's technological and industrial deficiencies, which had been looming for more than 10 years, finally caught up with her. WW1 and the WNT saved the RN from plunging into crippling technological inferiority against its rivals.
Mar 3 17 6:54 PM
Mar 3 17 6:59 PM
Mar 3 17 7:00 PM
Mar 3 17 7:01 PM
Mudfladdy wrote:Phil Gollin wrote:.
You are reliably silly.Well, i could say the same about you.
But - enlighten me - why?
the british Admirality was in that time a bunch of lords and aristocrats.
Now - timetraveling ASB-stuff aside, a newcomer come in and tell em fully nonsense about flying machines replacing battleships.
You could achive something in the USA - maybe get in contact with some more modern scientists and then do an approach to the the navy.
Or - as written - contact Kaiser WIlhelm, who - if he likes you- could do wonders.
But for the british admirality, you need to be a Lord yourself.
The whole plot is silly - no timetravelling is possible - but what exactly do you critizise (or is it just "that evil kraut wrote something")
So, i say you are silly cause you don´t judge stuff but persons. That is silly
Phil Gollin wrote:.
You are reliably silly.
Mar 4 17 11:43 AM
Mar 4 17 1:20 PM
Dupplin Muir wrote:As has been pointed out in the past (notably by the estimable Maciej) that the RN had higher standards than other navies. Guns that were considered inaccurate by British standards would have been seen as very accurate by other navies.
Mar 4 17 5:06 PM
dorknought wrote:You'd want to end up being Chief Technical Officer for the RN, working with industry to bring the right innovative technology to the Fleet and guiding development. Or perhaps replace Basil Zaharoff at Vickers.
Mar 4 17 6:03 PM
Mar 4 17 6:19 PM
don4331 wrote:I’m not sure I can even get a job as an engineer at Vickers. That’s biggest challenge Day 1 – how can you take your 21st century skill set and make it marketable in early 20th century. While I have played with a slide rule and have cranked out hundreds of engineering drawing, it has been 3 decades since I put ink on vellum(drafting kind not the calfskin). My prototypes are manufactured on CNC equipment/assembled with off the shelf components (of known properties). I can’t just order a 3/8” NF hex head grade 8 bolt in 1906 – neither the material nor the standard exists yet. (How do you get a letter to Jackie Fisher that isn't intercepted by his AA and filed in circular folder as a crank note?)
IMHO, you need some credibility/cash before people take you seriously. While “new money” might be a handicap, there are a lot of individuals who would be willing to make their fortune relieving you of yours.
Something like submarine takes up too much capital (£300k + R&D) and you will need at least 3 development cycles before you will have a product which is ready for mass production (RN took 6 from Holland to E) Aircraft are simpler and development cycles shorter (doesn’t take a year to build a prototype). Tanks are simpler still.
And you don’t need them 1/Aug/’14. Not having tank ready until Dec. /’14 might actually help. Same for ASW solution. ASW howitzer challenge was it was only single shot, so you had to accurately know where the sub was; advantage, you didn’t have to be real close. Hedgehog is opposite, you have the shotgun pattern, but you need to be close. Given limitations of WWI ASDIC, you will need to be close. Designing depth charge which worked was challenge – it was ’18 before they were available in volume. And even then you didn’t know if you were successful. At least with Hedgehog/howitzer, you knew if you hit the target.
Yes, there would still be some duds – FCS/ASDIC might still be too complex for Hedgehog/air dropped torpedo/twin of sufficient range. But one starts with simpler solution -single engine dive bomber of 200 nm range you can get a proven product to production. (challenge is not to spread oneself too thin). One advantage from 21st century – we don’t assume our design is automatically going to work in field. We will test it and have corrected the glaring issues.Another individual coming back on CP side is sounding like a WWI version of WWII "The Foresight War" by the board's esteemed AGWilliams.
Mar 4 17 6:52 PM
Mar 4 17 8:05 PM
Mar 4 17 11:19 PM
HMS Vanguard wrote:The conceptually easiest thing one can do to enormously change the outcome of WWI is make Britain introduce conscription in 1905.
Mar 5 17 10:44 AM
Mar 5 17 4:53 PM
stevep59 wrote:don4331 wrote:.... Another individual coming back on CP side is sounding like a WWI version of WWII "The Foresight War" by the board's esteemed AGWilliams.a) That is a problem with trying to contract him direct but it may be worth a try or you may be able to bypass such interference in some way. Although you would need to do it quickly before too many butterflies occurs. .....
don4331 wrote:.... Another individual coming back on CP side is sounding like a WWI version of WWII "The Foresight War" by the board's esteemed AGWilliams.
Mar 5 17 6:11 PM
Phil Gollin wrote:stevep59 wrote:don4331 wrote:.... Another individual coming back on CP side is sounding like a WWI version of WWII "The Foresight War" by the board's esteemed AGWilliams.a) That is a problem with trying to contract him direct but it may be worth a try or you may be able to bypass such interference in some way. Although you would need to do it quickly before too many butterflies occurs. .....A G Williams is also known as "Autogun" on the Military Guns and Ammunition Websitehttp://forums.delphiforums.com/n/main.asp?webtag=autogun&nav=messages&prettyurl=%2Fautogun%2Fmessages%2F&gid=156016527( You may need to join / Log in to Delphi to see/join )There are specific threads there on ALL his books and they have regular discussions on various "what-ifs".
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.