Tanks??

[phylo_roadking]

The improvement would be at consumption end - decreased horse need for fodder through decreased horse labor and horse numbers

It's a relatively minor saving on the domestic front - given that in normal crop rotation in the 20th century fields have to be left in grass anyway I.E. cut for hay Certainly not enough to warrant the initial investment.

Do you think that the care of traction horses is trivial?

Not trivial - but the German army would have a relatively high percentage of people from rural/agricultural backgrounds anyway...but the care and feeding of steam traction engines is as black an art ( ) as stoking/running the engine room of a steamship, or crewing a steam railway locomotive. It's a skill that needs to be taught/acquired, and developed.

A faster Axis advance means most of the Soviet tank industry would be overrun rather than evacuated. This means that there wouldn't be that many of those pesky rattly-shooty-tanky thingies, in particular of the 30+ and 40+ tonners that axis tankers found so annoying.

I'm afraid there would be - for don't forget that by the time of the fighting around Moscow...anything up to 25% of Russian tanks - particularly the heavier ones - weren't of Russian construction anyway

[BDV]

The improvement would be at consumption end - decreased horse need for fodder through decreased horse labor and horse numbers

It's a relatively minor saving on the domestic front - given that in normal crop rotation in the 20th century fields have to be left in grass anyway I.E. cut for hay Certainly not enough to warrant the initial investment.

Well, what can be expected from such a minor programme? One tractor/lorry per 10,000 germans, spread along a 5 year timeframe (1935 - 1940)?!

Cows and sheep transform grass into meat and milk much more efficiently than horses. So, no worries, there were uses for that hay.

As to it warranting the initial investment, IMO The 3rdR wold have been better off burning the money it spend on trying to crashbuild the Kriegsmarine. So why not steam machines?

Not trivial - but the German army would have a relatively high percentage of people from rural/agricultural backgrounds anyway...but the care and feeding of steam traction engines is as black an art ( ) as stoking/running the engine room of a steamship, or crewing a steam railway locomotive. It's a skill that needs to be taught/acquired, and developed.

Like the skill required to run a modern batleship... Plus Germany had, until about 1938 a reserve of goodwill in the german-dominated midwestern states of US (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, the Dakotas). 1-2000 "exchange workers" can be trained annually in the American Midwest, especially if the likes of Case Tractor Co. are making a buck on it.

don't forget that by the time of the fighting around Moscow...anything up to 25% of Russian tanks - particularly the heavier ones - weren't of Russian construction anyway

A gaggle of patched up BT2s and 5s, suplemmented by Matildas and Valentines) don't have the same panzer spearhead crushing potential as a gaggle of patched up T34s and KV1s, supplemented by Matildas and Valentines...

[phylo_roadking]

1-2000 "exchange workers" can be trained annually in the American Midwest, especially if the likes of Case Tractor Co. are making a buck on it

A prgramme that will not get off the ground....or if it does, be stopped immediately, under the U.S. Neutrality Laws in September 1939...

A gaggle of patched up BT2s and 5s, suplemmented by Matildas and Valentines) don't have the same panzer spearhead crushing potential as a gaggle of patched up T34s and KV1s, supplemented by Matildas and Valentines...

Ture - but you're forgetting that not all Soviet tank manufacturing facilities were moved East in a panic - the three facilities in Moscow were STILL churning out T34s and sending them straight to the front line - and they'll do so ATL as well. So there will still be T34s facing the Germans at Moscow until the city falls...

[Trackhead M2]

I have to agree with Christian, 1000 Tiger II's would have probably meant many more smoking hunks after the 56th fighter group got busy. Also having the tanks didn't mean too much if you couldn't transport or support them. Normandy was practicly isolated with the destruction of many of the bridges and rail roads in the area, and that is to say nothing about the Germany's continual fuel problems. Although 1000 Tigers would have made a pretty picture!

The Blue Max

Dear BM,
Wouldn't Quesada's FB pilots have had a little help from big guns on the water: USS Nevada comes to mind?
Strike Swiftly,
TH-M2

[Tim Smith]

If Germany were to have a heavy tank in production in 1939, it wouldn't be anything like the Tiger II. The hugely powerful engine, massive high-velocity gun, well-sloped armour and advanced chassis of the Tiger II had not been invented yet, by any nation. Plus, there was no need for such an advanced tank in 1939 - there was no enemy tank in existence which would need such a powerful gun to destroy it, nor was there any need for such thick sloped armour.

A 1939 German advanced heavy breakthrough tank would likely be one of the following:
Durchbruchwagen I
Durchbruchwagen II

Much less likely, as the project only started in 1939 - the ultimate in 1939 German tank design:
VK.6501(H)

For details see:
http://ww2armor.jexiste.fr/Files/Axis/A ... -VK.6501(H).htm

All of them basically look like enlarged Panzer IV's with different suspensions.

Images and specifications from above site:

Durchbruchwagen I:
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/DW/DW-1.htm

Durchbruchwagen II:
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/DW/DW-2.htm

VK.6501(H):
http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/1-Vehicles/Axis/1-Germany/03-sPanzers/VK.6501(H)/VK.6501(H).htm