THE RED GAMBIT SERIES

I'm about halfway done with Breakthrough and am enjoying it, although it needs a good coypy edit to catch all the typos. Like Seafire F/VX, should be F. Mark XV

Don't capitalize sir unless at the beginning of a sentence.

My experience is with the modern American Army, but nobody salutes inside a HQ as there's too much real work to be done.

822 Squadron was equipped with Fairey Barracuda II (ASH) in August, not the Fairey FR. I Fireflies they received the following month. Conversion times between different aircraft generally required a month or more. Certainly more than a week or so, especially for carrier aircraft.

The Royal Navy's air arm is called the Fleet Air Arm.

HMS Argus had been an accommodation ship since December '44 and it would take more than a week to refit her for active service. And I'd doubt that they'd bother since there were a ton of escort carriers available. Pick one that was in the Atlantic instead.

848 Squadron had Avenger Mk Is, not III. More importantly, it was aboard HMS Formidable in the Pacific.

853 Squadron had been disbanded in May and likely wouldn't not have been reformed in just a week, especially with a new type of aircraft as most Corsair pilots were in the Pacific. Carrier qualifications alone would probably take more than a week. Pick a different squadron that was in the UK in August.

HMS Unicorn was an aircraft repair carrier and never left Manaus until after VJ-Day, so it would have little point in stooging around Japan in this timeline. Use an American CVE or CVL instead.

I have real problems with your postulated Japanese attack on the American island bases. I can't see any American commander allowing Soviet-flagged ships into his Area of Responsibility especially since there was no real reason for any "goodwill tours" or any other such nonsense. I'm OK with retaking Kiska and Attu since the standard US-Vladivostok Lend-Lease run wasn't very far away, but there's no way that a Soviet freighter is going to visit the Marianas or Ulithi even claiming an engineering casualty or similar excuse. Similarly I can't buy any major diversion of resources away from Europe as a result of the Japanese and Soviet offensives into China since that theater always sucked hind tit resource-wise throughout the war. Europe is the highest priority once the Soviets attack, especially since the Pacific theater is building up for the invasion of Kyushu and active ground fighting has mostly stopped north of New Guinea.

They only made 2 T-44-100s because the turret was very cramped with the large D-10 gun. The T-34-100 would have a more likely variant to introduce into production as it required only moderate modifications to the turret design and the hull. Historically the Soviets didn't pursue it because they wanted a modern design for their new medium tank reflecting combat experience, not yet another upgraded version of a 5 year-old design. The T-44A with its new powertrain was exceedingly unreliable and the bugs took a couple of years to work out in the T-54 that used the same chassis and powertrain. I really doubt that they could be solved in a couple of months.

Panzerpioniere were combat engineers, not mechanics.

HMS Trafalgar only commissioned on 23 July and would likely still be working up, even in these conditions.

More in this thread as I find more to comment on.

Given that Queen was merely an escort carrier and that she'd been conducting operations for several days and thus expended a fair proportion of her ordnance and avgas, I find it very hard to believe that she'd take down Magpie with her. A full-sized fleet carrier, possibly, but a puny CVE, no way.

The 315th and 522nd Field Artillery battalions had 105 and 155 mm guns, so where are the 8" shells coming from?

Fix this: The grinning Master-Sergeant’s grin said

The real designation of the Nisei infantry regiment is the 442nd Infantry Regiment (Nisei) which may or may not be organized as a Regimental Combat Team during this tiem. And the 100th follows the same naming pattern.

Luftwaffe fighter units would be designated as 16./Jagdgeschader 53. Separate jagdstaffels were used during WWI

Berezin B-20 cannon.

Battlefield analyses conducted after Normandy, etc. showed that rocket-firing fighters rarely hit armored targets, but were very effective against soft-targets.

Now I did wonder if the ‘coypy’ was a deliberate thingy, but I just reckon it will serve as an example of how easy it is to make mistakes.

As you have labored so long and hard to make your points, I will set aside the book for an hour or two, reply in kind and deal with your issues in turn.

The VX should be XV as you point out. A simple error that few will spot and less will worry about but one that I will correct.

I have no experience with the modern army of any country, except listening to war stories. However, I am aware that in some circumstances saluting was discouraged, especially if close in harm’s way. I am also aware that in other circumstances saluting was encouraged. From what I can make out that was often based on the ego of the commander, although I’m probably thinking the default would be to salute to avoid unnecessary complications.

822 Squadron FAA was given 12 Barracuda II’s in June 1945. My definite error lies in misreading a page of information and, indeed, the Firefly was not issued until September 1945. However, as it’s an alternate history maybe I can be forgiven for the slight departure. As an aside, conversion times are laid down and are equally overridden by the requirements of the times. The times I write about would have placed a huge strain on resources and anything that could fight would have been committed.

The Royal Navy's air arm is indeed called the Fleet Air Arm, which is why I call it such and use the nomenclature FAA within the biographies. The initial use of RN was something I decided upon at the time. Within ‘Stalemate’ the squadrons are cited under the FAA indicator.

HMS Argus was not an accommodation ship until after March 1945, although the exact date is not available to me. None the less, given the circumstances of RG, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever in sending the venerable old lady to sea, if only as a slow moving floating airfield. I cannot now change the ship and am not inclined to do so as I see no need.

848 Squadron FAA is one I cannot answer. I clearly have it researched as being in the Pacific on Formidable and can only conclude that I somewhere lost the right number in my head. None the less, I doubt that the error has caused angst to many.

853 FAA was aboard HMS Queen for one of the last sea based air attacks of the European War, namely on a German base in Norway. HMS Queen was subsequently converted [intended for use bringing back soldiers from a successful Pacific campaign] and 853 disbanded, although my information clashes with yours on timing. A veteran of 853 categorically states the squadron was disbanded in mid-June and was still pretty much intact as a manpower group well into late July. I’m beginning to wonder what was in my mind when I did the FAA research, as I clearly record the use of Corsairs and not the Wildcat VI’s that now seem to suggest themselves. I don’t have access to my books at the moment as I am away from home, so the source of that error my not be apparent for a while.

HMS Unicorn was a light aircraft carrier and had the capacity to mount air operations, as well as conduct her other role as an aircraft repair ship. Remember, we are discussing an alternate history and so, once the shooting war starts, I have tried to deal with what could subsequently be possible. That Unicorn was at Manus in the real world does not exclude her presence where I require her in my alternate world. Please do not make the common mistake of expecting an alternate history to confine itself in such a way.

If you have problems with the sneak attacks then there is little I can do to allay your concerns. In my view, it would have been quite tricky for an Allied naval commander to refuse sanctuary to another Allied vessel, especially at a time when a state of war was still in existence. For sure, I would have more of a problem with the refusal. The vessels indicated were freighters, plying their trade, as well as American vessels that had been appropriated from the US supply effort into the Eastern USSR. In the timescale I operate in there is sufficient time for the Soviets to pull any number of deceits. However, the Pacific plays little part in RG.

Funnily enough, no-one is trying to convince anyone that resources would be diverted from Europe to the Pacific. Far from it in fact, as numerous units that were in fact cited for the Invasion of Japan are now en route or recently arrived in mainland Europe. The basic premise of the Pacific as I see it would become focused on mainland China, where the Japanese and Soviets had capacity to cause a lot of bother. The home islands would have been put on hold for sure.

Indeed, only two T44/100’s were produced and, thankfully, I have only spoken of one so far. They also had different versions of the 100mm; the D10 and the LB1. However, as this is an alternate history then the production of more may be possible. Indeed, I should say that the readers will need to prepare themselves for any number of extras or prototypes that get an outing on the battlefield, such as the Tortoise for instance. History plays a part, of course, but producing an old reliable tank train would have attractions for a Red Army involved in a blood-letting on the new battlefront, so producing the T44 would have been a very possible result of the tank losses in Germany during August-October 1945. However, for now, I stick with the two prototypes and do so safe in the knowledge that the Russians NEVER throw anything away and pretty much every prototype was thrown into action if the fighting was near enough and the situation demanded it.

The subject of Panzer-pioniere’s is more tricky. In essence you are correct. Panzer Pionieres are considered to be fighting troops within the engineer units in armoured or semi-armoured formations. However, the mechanical engineers within a werkstatt unit were often referred to as panzer pionieres. I have that from the horse’s mouth. Perhaps I am guilty of using unofficial speak but nothing more than that. None the less, I will telephone the last surviving gentleman with direct knowledge and ask him as soon as possible.

HMS Trafalgar was indeed commissioned on 23 July 1945 and, under normal circumstances might well have still been working up, even in the conditions of RG. I chose otherwise and see no reason to question it.

On the subject of HMS Queen, [merely an escort carrier would not be my preferred terminology], exploding and removing HMS Magpie, that is wholly possible. It is within a total certainty that empty fuel tanks are extremely dangerous things, where the right mixture of oxygen and fumes can be available for catastrophic explosions. On that issue, for sure, your point is not valid.

By the time I got to this point I’m sort of forming the opinion that you are sitting down with my book and a set of reference material with a view to finding fault. I’m actually unclear what it is that you are doing. From statements like ‘pick one that was here instead’ et al, I am wondering if you are missing the fact that the book is published and, whilst I will edit further, I will not change the substance. None the less I shall continue but add the standard codicil that the RG series is an alternate history and does not necessarily need to adhere rigidly to fact. It will run it very close but not in every department.

The 522nd Field Artillery possessed all three weapon types indicated. None the less, even if they didn’t in real life then the debacle of the Allied retreat could easily bring such weapons under the control of the 522nd. In this instance, such a device is not needed.

The Nisei went under many names in units from 442RCT, 522nd Field Artillery Battalion to 100th [Nisei] Infantry Battalion. I can’t see any naming that is inaccurate and not supportable by historical evidence.

I think you meant to say JagdGeschwader? Here you are missing the point. We are not talking about a fully-formed Luftwaffe. We are referring to an embryonic group of small units, dotted around Europe, as yet unformed into a whole. The 16th JagdStaffel is wholly appropriate as a title in this instance.

Berezin B-20 cannon? You name it but I’m not sure why.

French research on German tank losses during the Normandy Campaign indicates a maximum of 10% losses to aircraft attack. I would suspect that less than half of those were down to low-level rocket strikes. So, probably less than one in twenty of combat losses attributable to rockets. However, having discussed the matter with veterans of 21st Panzer, 2nd SS Panzer and 116th Panzer, I can safely say that those attacked by rockets were wholly indifferent to the apparent inaccuracy of same. Some tanks ended up crewless because of rocket attacks that missed completely, so I’m told  The veteran’s recollections indicate that a set of eight could miss their target by a hundred yards or more, with no effect upon armour or soft target, solely upon the minds of the intended targets. Equally, a few could hit their target, especially if it was a rich environment with numerous victims available, or if the pilot had nerve and skill, factoring in the efforts of any defending flak. Quite often the attacking aircraft would fire their rockets from distance, rather than risk the deadly 20mm quads that proliferated in the German formations. On the other hand, some pilots pressed home close, delivering their warheads with as much precision as their inaccurate nature permitted. Unless I am missing something vital, there is no claim over huge accuracy in the book[s]. There will be times they kill and times they don’t and the fickle finger of fate will decide who gets the call.

Finally, I’ve got to the end of your points and it has, unfortunately, cost me some writing time but I’m sure the rampant Aussies will understand.

In short, facts can be interpreted differently and information can be misread. Mistakes can occur and long held truths can be revealed for nothing more than someone else’s mistake many years ago.

The Red Gambit series is a work of fiction but I have tried very hard to give it as much fact as possible. For the most part, the readers are content but, as I suspected, some people like their I’s dotted and t’s crossed. Especially in the FAA area, you are quite right and I am unable to explain some issues. None the less, they will not detract from the books for the vast majority. In other areas, you are forgetting the alternate nature of the series. In others you are simply either misinformed or we are relying on research that simply offers us different answers. Unless we hold the same books in our hands, that may always be the case.

Thank you for pointing out the FAA errors that I have made and I will edit them out when time permits. The rest of the points are acknowledged but I will stick with my own knowledge and the research I did over many years. Please forgive any errors in this post as I was trying to be as swift as possible so I could get some proper work done lol

Jason, its a cracking read, its fiction, its not real, so just enjoy it, i couldnt care if 8" shells fell out of the sky from 3" mortars, i enjoy the book, not rivet count

Fair point on the FAA stuff though. I do seem to have had a mare with that.

What I would like readers to understand is that once the shooting war starts, everything is up for change and many things will not be as they were. I have tried to remain within the reams of possibility, such as a vessel that was in place A on 6/8/45 could not be five thousand miles away a day later. But if I want that vessel somewhere else 30 days later, provided it could steam that distance I will have it where I want it.

As time goes by there will be new units across the board, units that never even existed. I can do that as the requirements of the continued conflict would make it possible.

As you say, some people will count rivets and I have tried to satisfy them. I had not appreciated how difficult that would be in a few cases :-)