Royal Navy and HSF vs USN 1918

[19kilo]

Britain and German alliance in 1896 and a quick war that crushes France. By 1918 the only "threat" appears to be US.....

[Karl Heidenreich]

Why the RN would need the HSF to defeat the USN?

[19kilo]

Probably should have been Britain and Germany vs US. I'm assuming maybe war would start in 1914.......Was wondering how it may have played out. US had a battle line, but little else. On the other hand, her industrial potential was huge. Just looking for some theories as to how a war tween Anglo-German alliance and USA would have gone.

[Bgile]

Well, obviously the UK/German fleet was tremendously superior to the US fleet. Either one alone was at least a match for the US fleet, so it seems a pointless idea to me. You might as well discuss whether the US could defeat Brasil's navy. As Karl implied, the UK alone had a more powerful fleet than the US.

[19kilo]

True.....but could they operate effectivly off the east coast of the US. I,m assuming most of the fighting would take place along the Canadian boarder. Getting troops from Europe to North America would pose an interesting challenge, especialy if there had been a two or three year period of hightened tensions that may have caused the US to increase it defence capability. Still......The RN would have had, what, 20-24 dreadnaughts, and the HSF another 13-16? The US would have had maybe 12, with 4 more (Rividavias and Pennsylvanias) on the way. I dont believe any fleet commander would offer battle with those odds. Would a blockade work?

[Djoser]

An interesting proposition to be sure, but far better in terms of balance and likelihood would be the US and German navies vs. Great Britain. It has been my understanding that there were elements of the US Naval high command who were not enamored of the British, so this is not as far-fetched as it might seem.

[19kilo]

Very interesting indeed, but a nonstarter if Germany didnt take an operating base on east coast on day one. A united Europe under an Anglo-German Alliance would be more doable.

[Gary]

BY 1918 the Royal Navy would have had 33 Dreadnoughts (and I've allowed for Vanguards explosion and Audacious's mine loss)

HSF had 19 (and thats assuming they only build 2 Bayerns)
33 + 19 = 52

USN has 16 with USS Idaho almost completed

Not looking to good for the USA is it? (and I havent even counted the British/German battlecruisers).

I wonder if Iceland would side with Britain/Germany thus giving the Europeans a mid-atlantic base?

[19kilo]

Would Germany and England have built up like that as allies, or, conversly(sp), in the years leading up to hostilities, would the US have felt threatened enough to increase its program? Or, would she have "aquired" the 2 Rividavias much like Britain got 3 "extra" battleships?

[Karl Heidenreich]

Historically the US, after WWI, considered an anti-British scenario. And the British considered an anti-US scenario and, even I believe, a Japanese alliance. Of course Germany was out of the question by then.

[RF]

Probably should have been Britain and Germany vs US. I'm assuming maybe war would start in 1914.......Was wondering how it may have played out. US had a battle line, but little else. On the other hand, her industrial potential was huge. Just looking for some theories as to how a war tween Anglo-German alliance and USA would have gone.

If France was crushed in 1896 it presumably loses the most valuable parts of its Empire, including the Caribean colonies, largely to the Germans. If Britain is in alliance with the Japanese also then there is a Pacific War, without carriers. And if Mexico is brought in on the Anglo-German side, the USA faces a multiple front war. There is also the prospect of Colombia being induced into the war with the recovery of Panama as a bribe - offering the RN and HSF the opportunity of neutralising the Panama Canal. But most of the conflict would focus on eastern and mid-West Canada and here much of US industry would be in the front line. Close blockade by German U-boats with surface warships just further out to sea could choke the US.

[tommy303]

what was the USA importing in 1918 that it could not produce for itself?

[lwd]

How well could WWI uboats actually blockade the US East coast let allone the Gulf coasts? Looks to me like the only advantage the US has here is that there will be little inclination to take the offensive at sea. If the US can take the Canadian ports the European fleet alhtough haveing the advantage in numbers and probably gunnery will have a huge disadvantage operating so far from their bases. I'm not sure the British or the Germans would have an easy time launching an offensive through Mexico that would be likely to have much of an impact early on and such a force would be liable to being cut off and destroyed.

[RF]

what was the USA importing in 1918 that it could not produce for itself?

If its industrial production was interdicted by the industrial centre's being a battlefield the US would have to import, especially in the short term.

[RF]

If the US can take the Canadian ports the European fleet alhtough haveing the advantage in numbers and probably gunnery will have a huge disadvantage operating so far from their bases. I'm not sure the British or the Germans would have an easy time launching an offensive through Mexico that would be likely to have much of an impact early on and such a force would be liable to being cut off and destroyed.

The British and Germans would have extensive bases in the Caribbean, and still have Bermuda and the Bahamas.