WesWorld

October 2, 1932 - Berlin

A bill has been introduced in the Reichstag by Foreign Minister Stresseman calling for an embargo on purchasing goods from or selling goods to Canada. "Certainly it will have little to no affect on the Canadian economy," he answered when asked, "or on the German economy. It is a gesture, a way of expressing our displeasure with the abrogation of their responsibilities under the Cleito Treaty. If the Canadian government had persons without the power to do so sign the Treaty, they should have amended this mistake. Certainly the Treaty was available to be signed, I myself did so in Cleito some years ago when Germany agreed to join. Instead, the Canadians let someone without the authority to do so sign, purporting to be an authorized representative of the Canadian Government."


October 15, 1932 - Grafenwohr

The Heer has requested proposals from industry for a larger panzer than the Christie M1931s or the new Panzer I. The request is for armored vehicles capable of mounting a 50mm gun or a 75mm howitzer in it's turret, along with 2 coaxial MGs. Crew is expected to be four men.

Australia used the same loophole. ¬¬

Is this the point where countries start saying "sorry, the previous government in power signed this treaty. It doesn't count any more because we didn't sign it." ?

That's the best suggestion I have heard so far. :-)
"Sorry, the previous Shogun signed this treaty. It doesn't count any more because I didn't sign it." Bring out the big battleships!!
... and she didn't sign in 1929. No one did.

The German decision would seem to have poor timing as they were the only ones to benifit from the treaty's modifications, particularily when all involved feel the treaty is merely a farce at this point. I'd expect embargoes from Nordmark, Japan and the U.S. but a nation half way round the world?

I wouldn't expect Canada and Australia to stay in the treaty if there is indeed a glaring loophole in it while having neighbours openly seeking to distroy it.

Japan is already building battleships, just under the veil of foreign ownership. They had their chance to see Russia reduce hulls but refused to budge on their own limits, everyone else was willing to limit future BB building and hull numbers.

I don't blame Canada one bit for exploiting a loophole....

That said I wouldn't be surprised if Nordmark gets agitated by these events but Cest la Vie.

True, Australia has said they will follow the same course. When they lay down ships that exceed their allocations, then Germany will have to respond to that as well.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Instead, the Canadians let someone without the authority to do so sign, purporting to be an authorized representative of the Canadian Government."

Technically, it's London's fault for the original treaty...

It's not just a matter of 'the previous government' having signed it; it's a matter of the previous government didn't sign, legally at least. Like I said, I didn't twig on this issue until long after Copenhagen, or I would've had it fixed there. When I took over Canada, I warned you about the perils of an ignorant American being in charge

Canada plans to build within her limits; albiet the limits they offered to join under at Cowes.

IC, in an official note:
If the German Government has any specific concerns they feel need to be addressed, the Dominion of Canada is perfectly willing to hear them and discuss the issues.

Quoted

When I took over Canada, I warned you about the perils of an ignorant American being in charge

Just makes things more interesting. :-)

October 16, 1932 - Berlin

The official response of the German government to the government of Canada is that the cause for concern on the part of the German government is the laying down of two new battleships by the Canadian government, the completion of which will put Canada in excess of their allocation under the Treaty as signed by representatives of the Canadian government. Since the German government doubts that the Canadian government will cancel these vessels, the cause for concern will remain in place. Disagreeing with various provisions of the Treaty, in particular with ones allocations, is not, in Germany's opinion, reason to break the signing government's word.


October 19, 1932 - Grafenwohr

The Heer has released more detailed specifications of what it desires in a new battle tank. The vehicle shall weigh no more than 24,000 kg in fully-loaded configuration, have a crew of 5 men (driver, commander, gunner, loader, and radio operator), be armed with either a 50mm gun or a 75mm howitzer (alternate versions), with 2 coaxial 7.92mm machineguns. Road speed shall be a minimum of 40 km/h, and range shall be no less than 150 km at that speed.


October 25, 1932 - Dresden

The 7x40mm semi-auto rifle competition has opened, with the competing teams showing their rifles and introducing the judges to their weapons. The Pedersen and Garand rifles are seen as probably the most polished of the submissions, which should surprise no one since those weapons, in their 7x51mm Pedersen chambering, have been under development for a number of years and are in the final stages of their competition for the US Army. The Mauser and Walther submissions were well-received, though they clearly are not as developed as the American weapons. The Solothurn and FN weapons are wild cards, being new and untried but appearing to have potential. The American weapons both use the en-bloc clip shown when the Pedersen was on-hand during the cartridge competition last year, with each clip holding 8 rounds. The European weapons are different, most (the Mauser, Walther, and FN rifles) using a 10-round integral magazine loaded by standard 5-round Mauser stripper clips, and the Solothurn having a removeable 15-round magazine that can be loaded while on the weapon via stripper clips.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson

October 25, 1932 - Dresden

The 7x40mm semi-auto rifle competition has opened, with the competing teams showing their rifles and introducing the judges to their weapons. The Pedersen and Garand rifles are seen as probably the most polished of the submissions, which should surprise no one since those weapons, in their 7.62x51mm Pedersen chambering, have been under development for a number of years and are in the final stages of their competition for the US Army. The Mauser and Walther submissions were well-received, though they clearly are not as developed as the American weapons. The Solothurn and FN weapons are wild cards, being new and untried but appearing to have potential. The American weapons both use the en-bloc clip shown when the Pedersen was on-hand during the cartridge competition last year, with each clip holding 8 rounds. The European weapons are different, most (the Mauser, Walther, and FN rifles) using an integral magazine loaded by standard 5-round Mauser stripper clips, and the Solothurn having a removeable 15-round magazine that can be loaded while on the weapon via stripper clips.

Is the FN rifle similar to OTL Savoie designed rifle? If so the Dutch should be keeping an eye on this trials. The Solothurn sounds like a very revolutionary weapon, especially due to the size of the magazine and the magazine being removable making a heavier volume of fire capable.

Quoted

Is the FN rifle similar to OTL Savoie designed rifle? If so the Dutch should be keeping an eye on this trials. The Solothurn sounds like a very revolutionary weapon, especially due to the size of the magazine and the magazine being removable making a heavier volume of fire capable.

The FN weapon is not the SAFN, though there are some similarities, it's certainly not as developed as the SAFN-49.

The Solothurn is an interesting weapon, but it may be too advanced for it's own good at this point in time. It's heavier than the others (when loaded), and hasn't had a lot of development time. Of course, if it's issued with 10 round magazines, then the weight issue is alleviated (and the option remains for larger magazines).

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson

Quoted

Is the FN rifle similar to OTL Savoie designed rifle? If so the Dutch should be keeping an eye on this trials. The Solothurn sounds like a very revolutionary weapon, especially due to the size of the magazine and the magazine being removable making a heavier volume of fire capable.

The FN weapon is not the SAFN, though there are some similarities, it's certainly not as developed as the SAFN-49.

The Solothurn is an interesting weapon, but it may be too advanced for it's own good at this point in time. It's heavier than the others (when loaded), and hasn't had a lot of development time. Of course, if it's issued with 10 round magazines, then the weight issue is alleviated (and the option remains for larger magazines).

Yes, I noticed the difference in the magazine capacity of the FN entry and OTL SAFN-49. But even if if doesn't win the German competition IMO the Dutch should keep an eye on this design or maybe improve it further.

I see your point in regard to the Solothurn. Maybe too advanced to their own good and many nations at the time were worried about fire discipline, too much ammo and the troops will waste it. But of course that is not a problem for the highly trained German Heer. :-)

Quoted

I see your point in regard to the Solothurn. Maybe too advanced to their own good and many nations at the time were worried about fire discipline, too much ammo and the troops will waste it. But of course that is not a problem for the highly trained German Heer. :-)

Hah! The quartermaster corps, and the bean-counters in the Reichstag staff, are none too thrilled at the whole idea of a semi-automatic rifle, and the associated costs for the rifle and its ammunition. But there's a certain amount of momentum behind the idea, and the fact that the US is almost sure to adopt either the Garand or the Pedersen soon is helping to push things along.


[Whoops: forgot one competitor: the ZH-29. entered by it's inventor Emmanuel Holek from Czechoslovakia. It is like the Solothurn in that it has a detachable magazine but can also use standard stripper clips.]

Quoted

The German decision would seem to have poor timing as they were the only ones to benifit from the treaty's modifications, particularily when all involved feel the treaty is merely a farce at this point. I'd expect embargoes from Nordmark, Japan and the U.S. but a nation half way round the world?

Well my News is running very late, so I'd hold on there.

Quoted

True, Australia has said they will follow the same course. When they lay down ships that exceed their allocations, then Germany will have to respond to that as well.

Oh s***! Southern Cross has Mercedez Benz engines. I'm going to have to reverse engineer the engines.

Or buy Allisons...

Or the German diesels that Britain already has a license for.

October 30, 1932 - Dresden

The various competing rifles began the trials with field-stripping exercises and training, acquainting the Heer personnel with their traits. One change from the cartridge competition was clear from the examination of the Pedersen entry: it had been modified so that the waxed cartridges were no longer needed. That was an issue expressed by the personnel that examined it before, it was very heartening (and good for its chances) to see that this had been changed as requested.


October 31, 1932 - Dresden

In an unrelated development, Heinrich Vollmer of MauserWerke demonstrated a new machinegun that was based on the MG31. Unlike the MG31, though, this weapon fed from either a belt or a side-mounted drum. General Rommel, head of the Infantry School, was reported to be ecstatic, exclaiming "This is what we need, this is what we want!"

It sounds like you're already working on Panzer III/IVs, MG42s and semiauto rifles.. it's well written, so I can't protest really, but a little fast?

Not MG42s, MG34s, so they'll only be a year ahead of schedule, and Germany got out of Versailles 4 or so years ahead of time. No reason, at this time, to go to the cost-reduced MG42, there won't be so many in production that that's seen as necessary.

The Pz-III specs were laid down in January of 1934, historically so again, not too badly ahead of time, especially when you consider the end of Versailles in 1929 and the purchase of the Christies.

The semi-auto rifle COULD have been done anytime during the 20s or 30s, at least once Versailles was abrogated, but with the Nazi army buildup it wasn't a priority. WW Germany is not going to be building the army up as fast (and is going to be slowing it's growth for at least a couple years starting in 1933, barring events of course), so there's more capability to look into this.