Play out the events of 1921 to the mid 1950s a hundred times.
I'm interested in everyone's commentary on the two extreme but not impossible scenarios:
1) events, actions, politics develop in a way that is very anti-battleship, much more so than as historical. E.g. aerial bombing trials are much more conclusive, plausible more accelerated development of torpedos and torpedo attack and dive bombing techniques (and aircraft), more capable submarines, and Taranto, PoW & Repulse, Pearl Harbour, Bismarck chase etc... go even worse (for battleships) than as historical
2) the opposite scenario - events, actions are much more pro-battleship - some pivotal actions like the above result in fewer or no battleship losses (especially as pertains to aerial or submarine attacks e.g. Barham, Royal Oak)
I acknowledge and ask for forbearance as to fuzziness of how changes snowball over time and the impossibility of changing some things without considering everything about how that could come about... but acknowledging those limitations, still interested in how differently people think battleships could be positioned by late 40s or early 50s...
You can pick a different time period: rationale here was starting with the controversial Ostfriesland bombing trials in 1921, to the early - mid 1950s, where even the most ardent battleship fan in OTL starts to struggle to make the case for battleships being useful beyond bombardment duties (heavy weather operations against Soviets before all-weather operation off carriers?).
I'm interested in everyone's commentary on the two extreme but not impossible scenarios:
1) events, actions, politics develop in a way that is very anti-battleship, much more so than as historical. E.g. aerial bombing trials are much more conclusive, plausible more accelerated development of torpedos and torpedo attack and dive bombing techniques (and aircraft), more capable submarines, and Taranto, PoW & Repulse, Pearl Harbour, Bismarck chase etc... go even worse (for battleships) than as historical
2) the opposite scenario - events, actions are much more pro-battleship - some pivotal actions like the above result in fewer or no battleship losses (especially as pertains to aerial or submarine attacks e.g. Barham, Royal Oak)
I acknowledge and ask for forbearance as to fuzziness of how changes snowball over time and the impossibility of changing some things without considering everything about how that could come about... but acknowledging those limitations, still interested in how differently people think battleships could be positioned by late 40s or early 50s...
You can pick a different time period: rationale here was starting with the controversial Ostfriesland bombing trials in 1921, to the early - mid 1950s, where even the most ardent battleship fan in OTL starts to struggle to make the case for battleships being useful beyond bombardment duties (heavy weather operations against Soviets before all-weather operation off carriers?).
statistics: Posted by michaelmilford — 11:52 AM - 1 day ago — Replies 14 — Views 446