[paganel]

But then you'd also lose the capability of making diesel engines for good, and, again, they're not used only for tanks when it comes to warfare.

Just look at the hole the US has dug for itself when it stopped producing civilian sea-ships, nowadays the cost of producing or even repairing its war-oriented sea-ships is way too high. And not only that, but it doesn't have the people with the knowhow to build those ships anymore, no matter the money thrown at the problem.

[ndsipa_pomu]

That doesn't make much sense as military technology typically comes first before any civilian application. Also, it would imply that we should already have lost the capability of making tank tracks as civilian vehicles don't use them.

[paganel]

> have lost the capability of making tank tracks

Western Europe has certainly lost the capability of making even artillery shells at scale, let alone tank tracks, just look where we're at it now.

> as military technology typically comes first before any civilian application.

Diesel himself wasn't involved in any military thing, as far as I know, so I think you're wrong on that one.

The thing is that without a strong civilian industrial base focused on things adjacent to warfare (like the steel industry when it comes to building ships or artillery shells) any big power is going to come very short-handed in the next big war (assuming the war doesn't get nuclear, which is another discussion). So, if your country can't make diesel engines at scale, for whatever reason, then you can say goodbye to your logistics lines because you need lots and lots of trucks for said logistics as part of a continental war, i.e. forget the tanks.

[ndsipa_pomu]

> Western Europe has certainly lost the capability of making even artillery shells at scale

Must be due to the lack of demand for civilian artillery shells, right?