Contemporary Crusades

[Radish]

Get into the swing, my boy, get into it!!  

[Daryl J.]

Radish,

Building a DH-2 would be more like ''getting into the string of it."   I put my sewing thread away after a valiant, but feeble, attempt at building a Gloucester Schooner out of a 2X4, some dowels, and a Fred Meyer receipt.   Invested a total of $US.19.  Yep...19 cents.....  


Somehow, a modified Pfalz needs to be included and be called the Pfalz Prophet.  As to which side it would serve, I'm leaving that *completely* out of the picture.  It's just the pun I'm after.  


Daryl J.

[Radish]

The Pfaltz is a beautiful aircraft.....quite the looker, better, I think, than the Albatross D.V. Wasn't capable of living up to its looks, but so what.
I believe Eduard do a Weekend (ie cheap) kit...must get a couple.
Yes......Pfaltz Prophet....I like it.  

[NARSES2]

Joining you on your tangent they could be fighting off the Mongol Invasions and then invading Korea ? Or just the wars of the Shogunate ? Then the Portugese come along and give one side jet engines ?? Ok I'll get my coat  :dum:

Somewhere I've seen a photo of a Japanese plane with a small "Rising Sun" flag mounted on the radio mask - in he air !!!

Chris

[Radish]

That, of course, introduces the Naval Forces of the various Crusader Orders.

Off we go again!!!
Battlewagons too            

[Radish]

Geoff, I've a few Crusader models in progress, most nearing completion and some just awaiting paint.
So far....6 aircraft and one tank. Another tank (Academy M48A5...1/35th) will be on the way soon.
I've also one of my "S" tanks dedicated for Crusader ranks.
All are "bright" in appearance!!
Have you checked the other thread in the Alternative History section?

Rockin' baby  

[jcf]

Shogunate Monitors up the Yangste?

Junk Force (USN - MRF's) style but with modern gun casements? Or a Katusha on the foredeck.

That would be kinda cool...especially as the later standardised junks, the Yabutas, were actually a Japanese fishing boat design.

The Junk Force was Vietnamese Navy BTW, not USN...although USN personnel were assigned to the boats and they worked closely with the USN.

A modernized Korean Turtle Ship could also be a possibility.



Turtle Ship

Or US Civil War Mississippi river ironclads redux.
Such as the USS Cairo(pronounced Kay-row BTW):


or the Choctaw:


Cheers, Jon

[SebastianP]

This whole concept is rather cool, but I kind of disagree a little with the entire concopt of uniformly equipped units if we're going to do the "flying knights" thing...

A knight is a man ahorse, coming from a family of landowners but not neccessarily being the heir himself. It's the whole "can afford to send son-and-horse to war" thing that makes for knights, really.

So, we turn the horse into an aircraft. The knight himself always flies the aircraft - he's the knight, he rides his steed into battle. His squire handles the maintenance, together with the footmen - in case of twinseaters (uncommon!), a squire flies in the other seat.

There are no uniform requirements for aircraft in a unit - each knight brings what he can afford. Some orders may have minimum requirements, such as having at least so and so for armament, or being so fast, but if someone's family pulls out all the stops and get their son an F-22, the order won't complain. They'll be a mite jealous, though...

Since aircraft would be sold in very small lots - singles mostly, sometimes a handful for a knight who wants to keep a spare or several knights buying together to get a bargain, horse breeders (errrm, aircraft manufacturers) will sell to anyone with the dough unless they're politically opposed. Trade fairs would be just as common as they are now - and a lot more concepts would actually get built, seeing as there are so many more actual buyers.

Considering the ethos of the liveried knight charging into battle, it is doubtful whether  missile armament would ever be in vogue, nor would electronic warfare or stealth. The knight flies out to display himself and his courage, taunting his foes into combat range.

Some aircraft manufacturers will specialize in fast, light aircraft for light cavalry units - they'll be able to build them fast and cheap, but they won't stand up in one-on-one against a knight in his heavy fighter.

There also will be very bombers and pure attack aircraft - knights fight knights, not infantry, mostly.

(This whole concept also applies to tanks - each knight buys and commands his own tank, which is operated by himself and his squires...)

SP

[BlackOps]

Sounds reasonable to me Sebastion. I need to get to work on my Spitfire soon, don't want to let this idea slip away from me.

[Radish]

Get that Spitfire done!!  

[NARSES2]

Although I'm fully into the spirit of this thread and indeed am due to defend the honour of the Saracens in Tournament against "Sir Radish", or the "great belching man-women" as is he is known to my people   I thought I'd jot down my understanding of he "knight"

The modern view on what a "Knight" is almost totaly based on mid Victorian romantic novels and Holywood. In the beginning (whenever that was ?) the idea was possibly based on what we now consider to be Chivalrous conduct. Once open war set in then it changed. Knights were only ever Chivalrous to other knights an that was normally for purely financial reasons. Anybody else be they foot soldier, peasant or somebody of non "Catholic persuasion" was fair game.

As for knight fought knight in battle - well it did happen during meles when one knight would seek out another but not necessarily for knightly reasons - Richard III at Bosworth for instance. Normally the knights would simply crash into the infantry line - Hastings is a prime example. At Hastings they also used the "Eastern" tactic of a feigned retreat.

Once we get into the 100 Years War then in Major battles the English knights start fighting on foot (not always I admit) in "battles" formed of Knights and Sergents (men at arms - ie professional common soldiers) with archers on the flanks. Sometimes the archers would be inter mixed with the "battles". This proved so effective against the French in particular that they started to adopt "English tactics" . They did this to such an effect that by the end of the 100 Years War they had reclaimed most if not all of the territory gained by Henry V.

The "Wars of the Roses" although seeing the zenith of the mounted knight in England (in terms of equipment) were just a series of blood baths, no tactics, no chivalry.

On the continent the mounted knight had become the heavily armoured "Gendarme Ordanance" and fought as reasonably disciplined, unifiormed shock troops.

As for the crusades then on more then one occasion "Christian fought Christian", Christians formed alliances with "non- Christians" - the Mongols and most of the battles were more like bloody ambushes and running fights then the classic heavy cavalry charges heavy cavalry.

War at any time is war - bloody, messy and savage  

The only time when we see the "true knight" is at the huge tournaments which were organised on almost a professional tour basis, bit like a 15th Century "World Cup".

Chris

On the point of equipment then Seb P is entirely correct and a lot of early period "kights" would have had more then one combat aircraft, a couple of utility's/transports and a sports job for day to day use ? All dependent on what they could have afforded.

Latter on then goverment issue became more normal - the Burgundian Ordances for instance. So if the kinights and orders had continued into our time then I think equipment would be more standardised, not completely but more so.

[Radish]

Absolutely, and in the Orders, knights gave up personal belongings and property anyway.

But I build models chaps, so my current build, a Leopard 1A4 (Tamiya 1/35th) is to be of The Knights Who Say "Ni" Order, white turret with purple cross (a suitable back story for this development is in progress too), black hull and lots of, of course, weathering!!
My Teutonic Knights Reaper VB (Spitfire VB) will be finished too this week, ready for AVON.  

[SebastianP]

Heh. From what we've come up with so far, knights really are the ancestors of the modern fighter pilot crowd - except that no one buys his own aircraft anymore (they actually did that for a while prior to WWI, IIRC...), and candidates for pilot training are chosen not by birth but by ability. (of course, nepotism still exists - I wonder how many sons of flag officers who've gotten chances they wouldn't have, even if Daddy never ordered any such thing...)

I too have a tank I might do up as some kind of crusader thingy - an 1/72 M1A2 Abrams from Dragon that I haven't gotten around to assembling yet. If I'm lucky, I can score some decals down at the local Games Workshop - depends on whether someone is willing to part with some spare Bretonnian decals.

SP

[NARSES2]

Heh. From what we've come up with so far, knights really are the ancestors of the modern fighter pilot crowd -

Agree with you there Seb

Chris

[jcf]

Heh. From what we've come up with so far, knights really are the ancestors of the modern fighter pilot crowd -

Agree with you there Seb

Chris

Or such is the fantasy that the walking ego known as the "fighter-pilot" indulges.

In actuality the only relationship between fighter-pilots and knights are the titles born by the scions of the aristocratic classes and various royals that have gone into the air services.


For mesef I'm thinkin' about Samurai and Prester John's China Crusade.  


Cheers, Jon