Quote:
Originally Posted by (E)
And the artillery would be more accurate with the aid of the gunnery tables generated by the difference engine...
|
Doesn't matter as much as you might think. IRL, tactical doctrine for the employment of artillery in WWI never quite caught up with what was technically possible. Increasing accuracy without improving doctrine would just be a waste.
Quote:
Would tanks have made it past the trial stages with better artillery to compete with?
|
I expect so: reliably killing tanks with artillery takes guided warheads or multiple submunitions, neither of which were technically feasible. Without that threat, the factors favoring the development of tanks remain much the same.
Quote:
I can see aircraft having an earlier advantage without the machine gun to shoot them down.
|
Advantage for what, though? Bombers would still be vulnerable to lighter, faster aircraft dropping (e.g.) grenades on them. Those pursuit aircraft are still vulnerable to sniper fire or free-flight rockets. You might not have dog-fighting, but an arms race in the air would still occur and limit the application of air power.