I often come up with alternate histories. The usual way of doing this
is to change some historical detail and then speculate about what
might have gone differently. In this case, I have a specific goal in
mind, so I'm trying various divergences to try to get to the state I
want.
The goal is simple: I want to wargame (using the Harpoon rules)
with various cancelled British military projects of the 1960s,
specifically including the CVA-01 Queen Elizabeth. (And the TSR-2,
of course.) For them to be built and in service with initial bugs
worked out, I'm looking at a point in time somewhere around 1975. I
could just say "well, for these games they didn't get cancelled", but
I want to extrapolate: just as the demise of the XB-70 meant that the
Pye Wacket missile would no longer be developed, what other ships and
aircraft that we don't now know about would have been ordered if
CVA-01 had gone ahead? What sort of trouble is the Royal Navy going to
be getting into, and what will their opposition be like? Am I going to
restrict myself to re-fighting the Falklands, or am I going to be more
flexible? (Well, you know me by now.)
So first, how can I stop those projects being cancelled? Politics
and money. Start the development of North Sea Oil a few years earlier
to have Britain feeling a little less poor, and throw the 1964
election (which was historically very close) to the Conservatives
instead of Labour – i.e. to the people who'd already put lots of money
into military projects rather than to the ones who were determined to
cut military expenditure. So a swing to the Roostic Party ("Vote
Roostic. Things can't get worse"; don't ask) causes ten key historical
Labour gains to be held by the Conservatives instead.
I also want these ships potentially fighting on their own and holding
up the West's end of the Cold War, rather than the big stuff
necessarily happening as part of an allied force led by the US Navy.
So let's do bad things to the USA.
In 1967, LBJ is persuaded to intervene actively in the Six-Day War.
OPEC starts its oil embargo against the US and Europe, early enough
for the UK to think carefully about just what's going to be done with
its own oil wealth.
Someone leaks the true facts of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and the
anti-war movement gets a substantial boost as the USA's international
credibility collapses. Race riots tear American cities apart through
the long hot summer of 1967. (Even more.)
In late 1967, Senator Eugene McCarthy (no relation) of Minnesota
enters the presidential race on an explicitly anti-war platform. He
gains the Democratic nomination, then the votes of a population tired
of sending their children off to die for no obvious benefit. The
American withdrawal from Vietnam is complete by the end of 1969, and
the country turns inwards, in an attempt to put right the problems in
its own house before telling others how to fix theirs. The four manned
lunar landings impress the world, but there's no sense of vigour and
no pressure to complete the series with Apollos 16-20. There may be a
backlash against McCarthy in 1972 or 1976, but by that time the
multipolar world is re-established, and the brief post-war "two
superpower" era is seen as an aberration from the normal state of
affairs.
NATO will still be NATO, but the powers that aren't the UK will be a
bit more reluctant to go out and do things. In particular, the US
regards it as it regards the UN: it'll grudgingly pay up eventually,
but it's not enthusiastic about it. As long as there aren't any Soviet
boots on American soil, the US is happy; it may well send "advisors",
but it won't commit regular forces overseas.
France remains doggedly independent, if anything more wary of a
British-led alliance than of an American one, but the rest of Europe
is still part of NATO. Nobody quite trusts the Germans to have their
own nuclear weapons yet, but the UK, France and Italy all have their
own nuclear arsenals, cruise or ballistic missiles launched from land,
sea, or (in the Italian case) airborne platforms. Everyone assumes
Sweden does, too, though she relies on her neutrality to avoid having
to make a formal declaration.
The USSR is still the USSR. It's ideologically committed to the spread
of international communism, but without the big push back from the USA
it's less aggressive about it. That doesn't mean that there won't
still be provocations.
This version of the RN isn't as committed to the North Atlantic convoy
protection mission as the historical USN: it's assumed that the
Americans will join the Third World War fashionably late as they did
the last two, and nobody's building ships round the assumption that
they will be on time to the party. Rather, in peacetime the RN is the
"policeman of the seas" again: keeping shipping lanes open, dealing
with smugglers and pirates, doing disaster relief, and so on; in war,
it's hunting SSBNs and arranging for air strikes against targets
either afloat or inconveniently far from RAF bases. The purpose of the
carrier is to get its Buccaneers to where they'll do some good;
everything else is to protect the carrier or hunt enemy ships/subs.
I'm going to try to stick to technological plausibility: my RN will be
better than the historical one because it's got more money, both for
ships and aircraft and for R&D, but I'll restrict myself to things
that could have been built at the time.
The tot, of course, continues.
(Next: France)
- Posted by Owen Smith at
05:02pm on
12 April 2014
A real shame to lose Apollo's 16 and 17, but I suppose it's the only way to shut Gene "last man on the moon" Cernan up :-). Ah well, Apollo 15 is my favourite Apollo mission anyway, at least your Apollo programme goes out on a high.
So what happens to Skylab in your chronology, there will be even more left over Apollo hardware to use (unless they stopped building stuff earlier). And presumably the Shuttle development is even more delayed and troubled than historically.
On the other hand with a reduced US military, NASA may not feel forced to take the military's money and may end up designing a much better shuttle as originally planned without the payload sapping features the military insisted on. The original design had straight wings, it would have looked very different.
- Posted by RogerBW at
07:46pm on
12 April 2014
Apparently Nixon seriously considered cancelling 16-17 as well as 18-20 but was talked out of it. With the national malaise in effect I can see McCarthy going for the "fix problems at home first" approach. (This never works, of course, partly because the sums of money needed for space exploration are trivial compared with other programmes.)
Haven't given a whole lot of thought to later space exploration. I suspect it's primarily unmanned; those big Soviet RORSATs (and some NATO equivalent of the Key Hole series) have to get into orbit to keep my Cold War scenarios vaguely recognisable, but that's basically spinoff from ICBMs. It might be that the US is prepared to launch satellites as a significant chunk of its contribution to NATO.
As I understand it that whole "USAF insisted on cross-range, hence wings" thing may be a blame-shifting exercise by NASA. It's not clear right now.
- Posted by John Dallman at
06:15pm on
13 April 2014
A few thoughts:
Presumably British governments since 1964 have avoided major screw-ups, like the Barber Boom, the three-day week, and so on?
There's definite scope for the Buccaneer to have been upgraded by 1975. The obvious things to add are more power for supersonic capability, better radars, and smarter weapons.
I have seen people playing Anglo-French naval conflicts set in the 1980s. It may be worth thinking more about what the French build.
- Posted by RogerBW at
06:33pm on
13 April 2014
Indeed; I don't want to go particularly far into the politics, but at the very least there has to be enough money to pay for all the neat toys and the will to spend it on them.
I'll have another poke at the British Secret Projects books and see what I can find about proposed Buccaneer developments.
The French will certainly have the Clemenceau and Foch, and maybe even a third carrier if she can be afforded (because after all they have to worry about the Anglais now), loaded with Super Etendards and Crusaders; they may even get that VTOL Mirage to work, though they'll have to downgrade it a bit from the rather optimistic prototype. I'll have a look at their historical fleet. If there's going to be another war that's politically if not geographically within Europe, France is the only non-NATO member; and there are traditions about these things as far as the RN is concerned.
Comments on this post are now closed. If you have particular grounds for adding a late comment, comment on a more recent post quoting the URL of this one.