- Jun 29, 2009
We seem to have two discussions going here.Presumably the Hippers would be designed to serve alongside the carriers. So, longer range and better AA for starters. As for Norway; two CVs (presuming both are in service), three Deutschlands, three (or five) Hippers, six CLs and two dozen destroyers will have to suffice, or die trying.
One, is the carrier discussion
The other is the idea of scrapping (not building) the surface fleet and building trucks instead. That is the one that gives a big boost to British interests.
Take the weight of Graf Zeppelin, 2xBismarck, 2xScharnhorst and 3xDeutschlands and put that steel, copper, money, time and manpower into an equal weight of 6x6 drive trucks for moving fuel, supplies and troops and
Now Historically you had two Deutschlands (Graf Spee is already lost) and only two Hippers for Norway. Prinz Eugen was not completed until Aug 1940 but without the Bismarck and Tirpitz sucking up dock workers she could have been finished early. Seydlitz maybe, Lutzow is a real stretch, she was laid down 16 months after the Prinz Eugen. Getting her built and with a trained crew in time (training after commissioning could take several months) doesn't look good. Lutzow was sold to the Russians to pay for raw materials.
They were very good cruisers in a North Sea fight, in part because they were considerably beyond the supposed displacement. They already had some of the best AA armament of the late 1930s. However they had low freeboard and lacked range even with the high pressure steam.
What do you sacrifice to get the extra range, better freeboard and better AA armament?
Die trying is a good way to put it. Even with the two sisters the Kriegsmarine just about died trying as it was. Granted some of the ships were hit at the end of the campaign.