Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Maybe not until after the Japanese attacked and then you have shipping time to get to SEA.After some early strong successes against the Italians, the British had an abysmal time in North Africa until 1942. Churchill finally asked his Chief of Staff, can't any of your generals win battles? Had the British army had greater success in 1940-41 they may have freed up units for the SEA campaign.
I agree for the most part, but the two Australian divisions may be ordered home before the Japanese attacked. I do wonder if an early British success in North Africa will give the Japanese pause.Maybe not until after the Japanese attacked and then you have shipping time to get to SEA.
This thread generates a whole bunch of questions starting with how does Britain win in North Africa in 1941 in the first place.I agree for the most part, but the two Australian divisions may be ordered home before the Japanese attacked. I do wonder if an early British success in North Africa will give the Japanese pause.
What's necessary for an earlier British success to come about? My thinking is the Brits prevent Rommel's Afrika Corps from crossing the Med in Jan 1941. Perhaps word of his movement gets to Britain in time for a RN submarine or surface attack. Manage this and the Italians will be defeated that Spring.
German General Erwin Rommel arrives in Africa | February 12, 1941 | HISTORY
German General Erwin Rommel arrives in Tripoli, Libya, with the newly formed Afrika Korps, to reinforce the beleaguered Italians’ position. In January 1941, Adolf Hitler established the Afrika Korps for the explicit purpose of helping his Italian Axis partner maintain territorial gains in North...www.history.com
Impossible given the strength of the Western Desert Force up to and including the Battle of Beda Fomm (5-7 Feb 1941). That still left the distance from El Agheila to Tripoli (500 miles or just less than it had already covered since 10 Dec 1940) and on to the Tunisian border (about 100 miles) to clear. Not to mention the logistics of such a move.I think Britain's best chance is to defeat Italy before the Germans can arrive.
I do not find it curious that by 1943 the USA, with several times the population and a safe and secure industrialised economy, could pump in so much resources in materials and men in the 18 months following them being forced into the war than Britain (with the support of the rest of the Commonwealth) could in the 18 months since it had just lost a major continental war and losing a great part of it's arms, training new recruits to bulk out larger forces whilst standing against a threat of home invasion and under air bombardment (and artillery to a very limited extent)
Just about anything the BEF had that was a bigger than a 25pdr was left over from WW I and refitted with rubber tires and brakes to make it suitable to be towed by motor vehicles.Can we send 'em M-777s?
Don't underestimate the significance of the losses in France in 1940 even if much of the artillery was not the latest kit. The worst loss was the 509 2pdr anti tank guns. Full details here and how it affected the British Army in June 1940.Just about anything the BEF had that was a bigger than a 25pdr was left over from WW I and refitted with rubber tires and brakes to make it suitable to be towed by motor vehicles.
And a fair number of the 25pdrs were not the classic 25pdr equipment but rebarreled late/post WW I 18pdrs.
and even further. Some divisions didn't have their full compliment of 25pdrs of either type and had one battalion (or one battery in each of the 25pdr battalions?) of 4.5in Howitzers to make up numbers and to provide high angle fire.
Max range of the 4.5in Howitzer was under 7000 yds.
What a difference 2 additional years of peace and another of limited US Army involvement on the battlefield made!
The mistake was not only to adopt the 57 mm, as it was of limited value against the new german tank generation....
''The US adopted one British design, the 57mm AT gun.
They designed one barrel to fit in a US carriage in order to use interchange ammo (a mistake and waste of effort) that saw limited use.
They provided some barrels to fit British ammo for a late war heavy artillery piece on the standard US artillery carriage, but all of those went to the British. ''
The 6pdr/57mm saga is a bit complicated. There was also a strange time factor.The mistake was not only to adopt the 57 mm, as it was of limited value against the new german tank generation.
The other error, from the US, was not adopting an explosive round along with the AP one.
The British were more clever, as the adopted an HE round for the AT 6 pounder, that could at least be use as a direct support infantry gun.
The 57 mm AT guns in armored infantry battalions AT platoons were sometimes purely deleted as useless and the platoon used as a 4th rifle platoon of the relevant company.
The Canadian built Valentines should have used the US M2 37mm rather than the 2 pounder. The US 37mm was available with HE and canister. This would be have useful when the Valentine fought the Japanese.Interestingly, the US Army Infantry Board… wanted to keep the 37mm.
Complicated to solution to a simple problem.The Canadian built Valentines should have used the US M2 37mm rather than the 2 pounder. The US 37mm was available with HE and canister. This would be have useful when the Valentine fought the Japanese.
They had US Diesel engines. Why not US guns? The British were already using the M2 in their Grant/Lee tanks.
Why?The Canadian built Valentines should have used the US M2 37mm rather than the 2 pounder. The US 37mm was available with HE and canister. This would be have useful when the Valentine fought the Japanese.
They had US Diesel engines. Why not US guns? The British were already using the M2 in their Grant/Lee tanks.
Churchill finally asked his Chief of Staff, can't any of your generals win battles?