And thats another argument for my U-Boots and E/S-Boots.
German Battleships and convoy hunting.
- Thread starter carpenoctem1689
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I think all arguments point towards a considerable U-boat fleet while reducing the surface vessels to a minimum. More importantly no capital ships as the Royal Navy made short work of any of those that sailed, even if each sinking is a massive story these days.
Agreed
E-boats couldn't sail in the Atlantic, but they did operate in the North Sea. Their main operation centers were the North Sea, English Channel and French coast. They were useful against convoys moving to the Soviet Union but weren't a massive threat to supply from the U.S going to the U.K - that threat came from the U-boats.
The actual surface vessels of the Kriegsmarine, while famous did not actually cause too much trouble for the Royal Navy. Take, for example, the sinking of HMS Hood. It's a famous story and the hunt was certainly on for the Bismarck but that one 1919 Battlecruiser was hardly a massive blow to the strength of the Royal Navy.
The actual surface vessels of the Kriegsmarine, while famous did not actually cause too much trouble for the Royal Navy. Take, for example, the sinking of HMS Hood. It's a famous story and the hunt was certainly on for the Bismarck but that one 1919 Battlecruiser was hardly a massive blow to the strength of the Royal Navy.
Erich
the old Sage
we should include the Baltic and the Black Sea as well as the Adriatic for the S-boot arm.
most likely in my opinion besides enlarging the S-boots was to increase knowledge and production of the Walter diesel boots with XXI and beyond boots but of course the protection of the manufacturing/holding factories via Kiel and Hamburg from RAF/US air strikes
most likely in my opinion besides enlarging the S-boots was to increase knowledge and production of the Walter diesel boots with XXI and beyond boots but of course the protection of the manufacturing/holding factories via Kiel and Hamburg from RAF/US air strikes
syscom3
Pacific Historian
It never happened, but Id like to have seen the Tirpitz one on one aginst one of the US fast battleships. The Tirpitz would have been creamed.
The Kriegsmarine against any of the great naval powers (Japan, Great Britain and U.S.A) in full force would have been soundly defeated. The only reason the Kriegsmarine stood anything near a chance against the Royal Navy was because the Royal Navy was fighting the Japanese and Italian navies at the same time as it was fighting the Kriegsmarine!
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
A Walter Diesel boat? Never heard of it.
Either a Walter boat (Typ XXVI/VII for example) or a Type XXI and XXIII conventional electric boat (both got operational but the later succeeded in sinking ships).
By 1940 and 41 as well, the surface raiders were very effective because of various reasons:
1.) They were not very easy to detect (Scheer, Lutzow and prinz Eugen remained undetected even with allied forces in high alert) as long as they were operating alone or dually (like Scharnhorst/Gneisenau).
2.) They had a huge range (even in the case of Bismarck, the hunting ships proved to have an invalid endurance for this short task) and once in open waters they can move freely for weeks
3.) If not engaging enemy heavy surface ships (Bismarck was the fist to do so) but concentrating on merchants they sunk a lot of merchant shipping and beeing able to disengage on their own initiative (Bismarck could achieve 30.8 kts at 47.000 tons, this means it would do 30 kts at 50.000 tons or even 31 kts. at 45.000 tons, Scharnhorst is even better. There are no allied ships in this timeframe to keep up with them on equal terms)
4.) -Most important- The Kriegsmarine had quite a good understanding of the effects of raiders. they are not decisive in a strategical means but as a weapon of beeing, they succesfully binded a large part of the Royal Navy, ships which could be active on other theatres (again the example of the Bismarck: Drawing Force H back from the Mediterranean theatre greatly improved the chances to take Crete. Had Ark Royal and others supported it´s defense (what they originally should) the invasion of Crete would become very critical if not (more probable) impossible.
Either a Walter boat (Typ XXVI/VII for example) or a Type XXI and XXIII conventional electric boat (both got operational but the later succeeded in sinking ships).
By 1940 and 41 as well, the surface raiders were very effective because of various reasons:
1.) They were not very easy to detect (Scheer, Lutzow and prinz Eugen remained undetected even with allied forces in high alert) as long as they were operating alone or dually (like Scharnhorst/Gneisenau).
2.) They had a huge range (even in the case of Bismarck, the hunting ships proved to have an invalid endurance for this short task) and once in open waters they can move freely for weeks
3.) If not engaging enemy heavy surface ships (Bismarck was the fist to do so) but concentrating on merchants they sunk a lot of merchant shipping and beeing able to disengage on their own initiative (Bismarck could achieve 30.8 kts at 47.000 tons, this means it would do 30 kts at 50.000 tons or even 31 kts. at 45.000 tons, Scharnhorst is even better. There are no allied ships in this timeframe to keep up with them on equal terms)
4.) -Most important- The Kriegsmarine had quite a good understanding of the effects of raiders. they are not decisive in a strategical means but as a weapon of beeing, they succesfully binded a large part of the Royal Navy, ships which could be active on other theatres (again the example of the Bismarck: Drawing Force H back from the Mediterranean theatre greatly improved the chances to take Crete. Had Ark Royal and others supported it´s defense (what they originally should) the invasion of Crete would become very critical if not (more probable) impossible.
Erich
the old Sage
Del, you are very correct, I made my post to hastily and connected all the boots that were on my mind. The XXIC and XXIII and the future XXVI in numbers but of course it was not the case, the U-boots were frittered away. The KM seems to have been on the last of the listings for priorities with available funds and it is really surprising the KM ships - surface lasted as long as they did. The Luftwaffe could not be everywhere at once and had to play the land game so connection with the KM was on a verynlow end except for the useage of Fw 200's and Ju 290's in air recon roles. The surface fleet although did prove itself quite able in 1945 to eliminate any Soviet ground spearhead or consolidated spot if the "heavier ships were involved" -- the Baltic.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Yes, Erich. It´s quite surprising that the KM was in 1945 still able to perform coastal bombardments in the Baltic and such a large scale evacuation as they did.
The type XXI boats -surprisingly- weren´t rushed into combat (unlike most other new stuff) but crews were trained extensively with them. Of the over 100 boats commisioned by the KM only the first two (U-2511 beeing the better known) were at VE-day on active duty in the north atlantic (resp. enruote to partol positions). I always wondered how Dönitz managed that Hitler did not involved that much in his plans.
The type XXI boats -surprisingly- weren´t rushed into combat (unlike most other new stuff) but crews were trained extensively with them. Of the over 100 boats commisioned by the KM only the first two (U-2511 beeing the better known) were at VE-day on active duty in the north atlantic (resp. enruote to partol positions). I always wondered how Dönitz managed that Hitler did not involved that much in his plans.
syscom3 said:
I would not go as far as saying that the Tirpitz would have been creamed. She and her sistership the Bismark were equals to anything on the sea. They were great and magnificant ships. Not until the Iowa class would I say she was outright outmatched.
Erich
the old Sage
without going way off topic as this is about surface fleets, but the latter marks of U-boot were never caught by the Allies except upon discovery at wars termination as far as I am aware. Seems odd in some ways that the heavier KM surface ships met an unglorious end in port and bombed without a fighting mans death at sea. Of course the Prinz proud to it's end surrenedered in one piece after subjecting the Soviets to some pretty heavy punishment as well as some lighter KM Zerstörers aiding German ground forces in the same areas.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Tirpitz vs. Iowa was a possible encounter in early 1943. Iowa was in patrol position in the north atlantic to counter a possible Tirpitz raid from Norway. By that time I would bet my money on the Tirpitz, later on the Iowa. It´s hard to say that Bismarck was totally outclassed by the Iowas. In early 43 in the north Atlantic....its a very equal encountering.
I believe the Prinz Eugen was the most successful German surface ship, was it not.
Erich
the old Sage
good question. The fact that it made it till wars end without being sunk is important but it remained idle for awhile during the 'barbara' refit - replacement with newer 3.7 and 4.0 cm quick firing AA weapons. the same goes for the Hipper too and several others. 1943 and earlier was definately the hey-day for the surface vessels, thennit was a matter of protecting themselves as surviving the air onslaughts.
An advantage was the S-boots since nearly all 1944-45 activities excluding Baltic evacs were done at night -stealth operations. Plan brought out an intersting point, the S-boot arm could not have shut down the British ports alone. Very true but again had their been three times the umber built and put into operations, mining the ports and sea lanes into and out of the ports, there may well have been a stalemate of sorts. simplifying this, the Kleine Boots und U-boots could not handle the load alone
An advantage was the S-boots since nearly all 1944-45 activities excluding Baltic evacs were done at night -stealth operations. Plan brought out an intersting point, the S-boot arm could not have shut down the British ports alone. Very true but again had their been three times the umber built and put into operations, mining the ports and sea lanes into and out of the ports, there may well have been a stalemate of sorts. simplifying this, the Kleine Boots und U-boots could not handle the load alone
delcyros said:
I agree with you. I just believe that by that time the Bismark/Tirpitz would have met there real equal in the Iowa class.
Erich said:
What happened to the Eugen and Hipper after the war?
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Indeed.
In 43 both ships would field comparable radar aiming tech, Tirpitz having the better optical rangefinder. The Iowa wouldn´t have the huge 1.3 tons shells, the heavy artillery of the Tirpitz is way better, shooting more frequently (18-22 sec. per salvo), more precisely and with a lower impact angle. The secondary artillery is also better, having a better punch with 5.9 inchers. The excellent protection of the Iowa would probaly secure it from critical hits beyond 11.000yrds but less than half of the waterline is protected, it´s possible to sink the ship without critical hits from any range. Under 11.000 yrds it would blew up after some critical hits. The Tirpirtz armor sheme covers 85% of the waterline and the Iowa wouldn´t even have a chance to get critical hits from point blanc range. It´s only chance would be to stay out of range with it´s better speed (the highest recorded speed was 32.5 kts. at unknown displacement), hoping that nothing hits the unprotected bow (which would reduce the speed so much) and trying to get hits with very high impact angle at distances further than 24.000yrds. Using this tactic (...what they couldn´t know, since the shortcomings of Bismarck/Tirpitz armor system weren´t known prior to years after wars end) the Iowa could get a critical hit and beeing safe. It should be noted that hits from this range are highly unprobable in ww2. The only recorded hits at open water in such a distance are Gneisenau vs. Glorius at 26.000yrds and RN Warspite vs. Reggiae Marinae BB at 25.000ft. Both hit no critical part of the ship.
In 43 both ships would field comparable radar aiming tech, Tirpitz having the better optical rangefinder. The Iowa wouldn´t have the huge 1.3 tons shells, the heavy artillery of the Tirpitz is way better, shooting more frequently (18-22 sec. per salvo), more precisely and with a lower impact angle. The secondary artillery is also better, having a better punch with 5.9 inchers. The excellent protection of the Iowa would probaly secure it from critical hits beyond 11.000yrds but less than half of the waterline is protected, it´s possible to sink the ship without critical hits from any range. Under 11.000 yrds it would blew up after some critical hits. The Tirpirtz armor sheme covers 85% of the waterline and the Iowa wouldn´t even have a chance to get critical hits from point blanc range. It´s only chance would be to stay out of range with it´s better speed (the highest recorded speed was 32.5 kts. at unknown displacement), hoping that nothing hits the unprotected bow (which would reduce the speed so much) and trying to get hits with very high impact angle at distances further than 24.000yrds. Using this tactic (...what they couldn´t know, since the shortcomings of Bismarck/Tirpitz armor system weren´t known prior to years after wars end) the Iowa could get a critical hit and beeing safe. It should be noted that hits from this range are highly unprobable in ww2. The only recorded hits at open water in such a distance are Gneisenau vs. Glorius at 26.000yrds and RN Warspite vs. Reggiae Marinae BB at 25.000ft. Both hit no critical part of the ship.
