Not possible. The only net result of a British victory at sea here would be the Brits escaping the siege when the allied army arrived. An army which outnumbered them by a little more than two-to-one.
Quite frankly, the American-French Army wasn't even at Yorktown until September 28th. The naval battle? September 5th.
The two events, in light of a French loss at sea? Unrelated.
Lordganon 17:40, July 21, 2011 (UTC)
- I just made this history, the French defeat at sea is only a part of the POD; I am expecting to make it go back further, but I need to research Revolutionary war battles a little more. Riley.Konner 20:32, July 21, 2011 (UTC)
- Until it is made plausible, it is ASB. End of Discussion. Lordganon 03:44, July 22, 2011 (UTC)
That's even worse. The French never fought in the Ohio Valley, nor was any real number of troops from the main theater of war brought or came from there. Aside from the failed Siege of Savannah, where the Brits held onto the city even with French support, and a failed attempt to capture Newport, RH, which the Brits eventually abandoned months later anyways, the French did nothing in North America outside of the Battle of Yorktown. Their being smaller in number has no impact at all outside of Yorktown, and even that is minimal.
Again, it is impossible to capture Washington like that. They would still have been able to besiege Cornwallis, sort of, because even if you cut out half the French troops like you suggest, the allied army still outnumbers Cornwallis. The only net result is the Revolution takes slightly longer with the lack of French troops, and Cornwallis and his men, as was the plan until the French fleet came along, would have retreated by sea.
Lordganon 04:44, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
- Better now? Since the French army isn't part of the main POD. I'm trying to keep this timeline different from most revolutionary war TL's; I don't want it to be a "death of George Washington timeline". Riley.Konner 23:01, July 22 (UTC)
Nope, not really. Greene's death, while it may have had a negative impact in the south, would not, in all likelihood, meant the loss of the south. While he had masterminded the plan, it was an obvious one to follow, and in fact, was one he came up with alongside his unit commanders, one of which would have gotten the command in the event of his death. And, he only led one wing of the army in the area after that - his colonels led the others. Even otl under Greene, the Americans never managed to win in the region - Cornwallis retreated northwards for resupply and abandoned the region, having been unable to get supplies because of guerrillas, privateers, and the Americans' allies. Mostly the guerrillas.
Daniel Morgan, who was the winner of a pair of battles that halted the advance otl - not Greene - would have likely been put in charge, and if not, one of the aforementioned colonels would have been. Net result is the same as otl. Gates would definitely have not been left in command.
As I said before, given the position of the American Army under Washington, and the Brits, there is no way that Cornwallis can defeat them, let along make them surrender. With the British Fleet intact, they would have just left.
And, overall, despite what may have been taught in US schools, the won was already over by then. Note that after Yorktown otl, there was no activity in the colonies any longer. Just some isolated frontier fighting, that was entirely independent of events in the colonies.
Lordganon 06:44, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
Overhaul[]
I have decided to overhaul this timeline and possibly make it similar to Viva California I'm thinking. It might be a timeline involving Jon Riley, and Irish settlement of California. I expect the overhaul to happen by the end of the week when I'm more sure of what I'll be doing. Riley.Konner 17:14, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
Sounds interesting. Look forward to seeing more. Lordganon 01:53, July 28, 2011 (UTC)