Well, the Ju 87s did quite well in the channel, the RN stopped sending convoys during the day due to them.
The Germans build carriers, instead of battleships, prior to WW2
- Thread starter ravenscroft
- Start date
Well, the Ju 87s did quite well in the channel, the RN stopped sending convoys during the day due to them.
Garrison
Donor
They did that not because the Stukas were especially effective, but because there was a readily available alternative and they wanted to conserve RAF strength for the defence of Southern England. And the losses the Luftwaffe inflicted were a function of constricted waters and convenient land bases that could easily be resupplied on a regular basis. A very different proposition from sending Kriegsmarine carriers into the Atlantic, ships which would require escorts the Kriegsmarine couldn't provide since the ship that was supposed to fulfil that role was utterly terrible.
F-class escort ship - Wikipedia
The Luftwaffe then stopped sending the JU87 death traps against Britain due to the Hurricane and Spitfire. (The convoys were also mostly pointless carrying low value bulk goods that could just as well be sent by rail)
They did that not because the Stukas were especially effective, but because there was a readily available alternative and they wanted to conserve RAF strength for the defence of Southern England. And the losses the Luftwaffe inflicted were a function of constricted waters and convenient land bases that could easily be resupplied on a regular basis. A very different proposition from sending Kriegsmarine carriers into the Atlantic, ships which would require escorts the Kriegsmarine couldn't provide since the ship that was supposed to fulfil that role was utterly terrible.
F-class escort ship - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Yeah, the Ju 87 did not have any navigational aids AS BUILT, it was not an anti-shipping weapon, nor were the pilots trained to be. And yet they were indeed a threat which is why daylight traffic was suspended, and when one RN DD disobeyed the order it was detected by radar and sunk by a Stuka squadron. The RN also withdrew its modern destroyers from Dunkirk after losing several of them.
Raiders are raiders, they dont require nor can afford escorts due to logistical reasons.
That has been debunked long ago...
Last edited:
Garrison
Donor
But carriers make terrible raiders. You seem determined to not only have the Kriegsmarine build a carrier, not implausible, but fleet of them with work beginning in the mid 1930s when the Kriegsmarine barely existed and then having them operating as successful unescorted raiders in the Atlantic, which is into the realms of a flight of fancy I'm afraid.
Please provide a source for that claim, because that is precisely what the British did do.
The contracts for BOTH carriers were signed in November 1935, they were delayed because the KM chose to give priority to the BBs. IF the KM has a real interest on carriers they could have had more and earlier, but at the very least the 2 they ordered.
No, I would pair them with a Scharnhorst, but that is it, anything else is logistically unsound for a raider.
Save for a couple occasions in which the escort didnt show up, Stuka losses were low, that is reality. What happened was, the Germans made exaggerated claims about the Stuka for propaganda purposes, and thereafter the allies did they same for the same reason.
That is it.
Last edited:
To put the above in context, and yes I know Wikipedia isn't the best source but I think the quote is relevant.
From
en.wikipedia.org
Steady losses had occurred throughout their participation in the battle. On 18 August, known as the Hardest Day because both sides suffered heavy losses, the Stuka was withdrawn after 16 were destroyed and many others damaged.[128] According to the Generalquartiermeister der Luftwaffe, 59 Stukas had been destroyed and 33 damaged to varying degrees in six weeks of operations. Over 20% of the total Stuka strength had been lost between 8 and 18 August;[129] and the myth of the Stuka shattered.[129][130]
From
Junkers Ju 87 - Wikipedia
Steady losses had occurred throughout their participation in the battle. On 18 August, known as the Hardest Day because both sides suffered heavy losses, the Stuka was withdrawn after 16 were destroyed and many others damaged.[128] According to the Generalquartiermeister der Luftwaffe, 59 Stukas had been destroyed and 33 damaged to varying degrees in six weeks of operations. Over 20% of the total Stuka strength had been lost between 8 and 18 August;[129] and the myth of the Stuka shattered.[129][130]
To put the above in context, and yes I know Wikipedia isn't the best source but I think the quote is relevant.
From
Junkers Ju 87 - Wikipedia
Steady losses had occurred throughout their participation in the battle. On 18 August, known as the Hardest Day because both sides suffered heavy losses, the Stuka was withdrawn after 16 were destroyed and many others damaged.[128] According to the Generalquartiermeister der Luftwaffe, 59 Stukas had been destroyed and 33 damaged to varying degrees in six weeks of operations. Over 20% of the total Stuka strength had been lost between 8 and 18 August;[129] and the myth of the Stuka shattered.[129][130]
Thank you for proving my point about propaganda, whoever wrote that on wikipedia has eaten a steady diet of it.
Stuka parties and all.