Central Powers Aircraft after negotiated peace

[wiking]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Modern Yes easily.

The question is based what you mean by large. Evidence and ideas:

1) Ottomans purchased two dreadnoughts, so they should be able to crew 4.

2) German prewar navy was 100K men. So Ottoman with 2-4 dreadnoughts and lots of smaller stuff is probably under 25K in a population of 25,000K or 1 in 1000 people. Of those, most don't require college degrees or even high school. Take a 1500 man BB. Probably 70 officers, college degree and maybe another 30 required for technical areas. So call it 1 in 15. Seems doable.

3) And I was looking at the careers of some of the German U-boat commanders. It is not uncommon to see that they joined the Military, then went back to college. Ottomans can do this too. After two year in Navy, bright men are given chance to climb social ladder by going to German engineering school.

4) The German Naval Airforce was 20K in ww1. This feels about right for the 1930 Ottoman Airforce size. Again seems manageable. The Ottomans have limited goals. They will never force Hormuz, Gibraltar or Suez by sea. So they have to really just own Black Sea until a couple of Double track RR are built for supplies towards the Russian border. And they have to keep ships off their coast.

5) All of this will be paid for by oil for weapons. German built items, German instructors. I wish people like AHP were still around. It might be that the Ottomans would just use the German military schools if national pride allows.


6) Now all this being said, with less than 1/3 the population of the third Reich and a much lower industrial base and probably no big push for war, the Ottomans airforce is probably 10% of the size of the Luftwaffe at its max, unless it is a war of national survival. But it could be a powerful regional force.

Education was far more developed in Germany, which was enabled too by developed infrastructure. The Ottomans wouldn't be able to achieve that same level of basic education development throughout the empire, let alone in Turkey, especially after the vast destruction inflicted on Anatolia during WW1; this doesn't even focus on infrastructure development either, which is critical to developing a strong education system.
By the 1930's the infrastructure is being developed as the oil money flows in, but education is only then really just about to be able to be funded properly and that infrastructure built up.

Remember too that the population mostly doesn't have access to modern technology like is available in Europe, so won't have a base of mechanics or many people familiar with electronics or modern machinery in general (as they lack a manufacturing base in most of Turkey and the Empire), which means the oil industry will be staffed mostly by Europeans and Americans....

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by wiking

Education was far more developed in Germany, which was enabled too by developed infrastructure. The Ottomans wouldn't be able to achieve that same level of basic education development throughout the empire, let alone in Turkey, especially after the vast destruction inflicted on Anatolia during WW1; this doesn't even focus on infrastructure development either, which is critical to developing a strong education system.
By the 1930's the infrastructure is being developed as the oil money flows in, but education is only then really just about to be able to be funded properly and that infrastructure built up.

Remember too that the population mostly doesn't have access to modern technology like is available in Europe, so won't have a base of mechanics or many people familiar with electronics or modern machinery in general (as they lack a manufacturing base in most of Turkey and the Empire), which means the oil industry will be staffed mostly by Europeans and Americans....

True, but lets assume a total Air + Navy of 50K men. We need then.

1) 5K as educated officers.
2) 5K technical schools and/or college educated enlisted.
3) 5K high school.
4) Rest is general population.

Now yes, a lot of the jobs require technical skill/education. But a lot don't. Ammo humpers in warships, workers around airfields. And this possibly with some help with German contractors/liaison positions. Germany would love to an Ottoman military that has to have German help to function well, it sort of makes them a willing vassal state.

And I think you are overestimating the required skill to run 1940 heavy equipment. My granddad had an 8th grade education from one room schools, and he was a sergeant that built airbases and operated other combat engineer equipment. For a lot of the jobs, you will need an officer (college education) and first sergeant (high school) and 4 sergeants (8th grade) education to work and 40 enlisted men.

Now this may not work with a conscription, so you may need to have a higher paid volunteer forces and you may need 5+ year enlistment periods, but it is doable. The question is will the Ottomans want to, and for that, I can't give a good answer. There is certainly a good argument for the army first, supplied by RR outside of BB gun range military strategy.

Or put another way, I think you can find the 5K to 10K well educated men to run the navy air force, especially if you are willing to train them. It is a matter of will, not ability.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by wiking

Education was far more developed in Germany, which was enabled too by developed infrastructure. The Ottomans wouldn't be able to achieve that same level of basic education development throughout the empire, let alone in Turkey, especially after the vast destruction inflicted on Anatolia during WW1; this doesn't even focus on infrastructure development either, which is critical to developing a strong education system.
By the 1930's the infrastructure is being developed as the oil money flows in, but education is only then really just about to be able to be funded properly and that infrastructure built up.

The British conquered Jerusalem in December 1917 (That´s why I felt sure that the Ottoman Empire would at least be in possession of the Kirkuk oil fields after the war.). And the Russians came as far as Trapzon. Erzincan and Van in East Anatolia. Add Galipoli if you want.
But I wouldn´t call that "vast destruction on Anatolia" yet? The real destruction happened after WW1 (Mustafa Kemal, founding of Turkey).

But you are certainly right that the infrastructure - especially railways and schools - are under-developed.
That will probably be a main focus post-war.

[wiking]

Originally Posted by Detlef

The British conquered Jerusalem in December 1917 (That´s why I felt sure that the Ottoman Empire would at least be in possession of the Kirkuk oil fields after the war.). And the Russians came as far as Trapzon. Erzincan and Van in East Anatolia. Add Galipoli if you want.
But I wouldn´t call that "vast destruction on Anatolia" yet? The real destruction happened after WW1 (Mustafa Kemal, founding of Turkey).

But you are certainly right that the infrastructure - especially railways and schools - are under-developed.
That will probably be a main focus post-war.

Apparently over 30% of the population of Anatolia was dead by 1918 and the war left Anatolia by 1917...
Of course this involved the deaths of the Armenians, local Turks, Kurds, etc.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...el_Caucaso.png
The Persian frontier was also used by Russian cavalry to move into Turkey and the Russians had a bad reputation of targeting civilians. The Armenians also were fighting the local Muslims of any ethnicity, so there was widespread bloodshed. And the Black Seas Fleet was shelling and attacking the coast, helping to uproot much of the population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Of...el_Caucaso.png

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by wiking

Yeah, but they really didn't see any action other than mining operations. I see Albion happening here to put pressure on the Russians, but keep in mind that the Russians were already in revolution and weren't really fighting back. Even the Germans said Albion would have been a failure if not for the Russians barely fighting back and either running or surrendering.
The heavy units there were not necessary to the success of the operation and fire support could have been given by cruisers and aircraft, especially by the 1930's.

Well, Prince Henry and the Baltic fleet command were proposing an invasion of the islands as early as 1915 (when they were less well defended). And you´re right that it probably would have been a failure without the Russian army already in disarray in late 1917. The Germans knew it, the operation in 1917 was mainly a try to finally force Russia out of the war.
Still the operation was planned in a very short time. And between forces (navy, army) that before had no experience working together in an amphibious assault. Given that it worked pretty well.

Not so sure about fire support by cruisers and airplanes only.
If there are fortifications with coastal guns, cruisers guns might be a bit small. And aircraft - even with air superiority - still have to deal with anti-air guns. Battleship guns are large and have the range to even hit targets farther inland.
There´s a reason why the Allies used them in the fire support role in WW2.

Besides the people in your TL have to plan with what they know now.
In the early 1920s that means knowing that airplanes have potential but not knowing the capabilities of airplanes 10-20 years later.

Originally Posted by wiking

I never said that the navy would give up constructing a surface fleet, but would take the Raeder approach: its first mission is to be powerful enough to defend Germany's coastline. More than that isn't really necessary, as even reaching Norway is doable with aircraft, subs, and smaller surface ships, as is denying the Baltic to the British.
But you are right in your analysis IMHO.

The Admiral Karl Galster approach of 1907/1908.
That´s probably what was confusing me.
For coastal defense you only need coastal guns, mines, submarines and torpedo boats. With some cruisers thrown in for merchant raids. Keep the number of capital ships low enough to not worry Britain.

The problem is that the HSF already has more than enough ships to defend the German coastline. And Raeder (like Galster) wasn´t opposed to capital ships (see Z-Plan 1938/39).

So I could see (1918-1925?):

Battleships:
- Selling or scrapping all surviving 21 pre-dreadnoughts immediately after the war
- Selling or scrapping the 4 Nassau class battleships immediately after the war
- Undecided about the 4 Helgoland class battleships (selling, mothballed for now?)
- Modernizing the 5 Kaiser class battleships (afterwards partly active / reserve fleet / training ships?)
- Modernizing the 4 König class battleships (active)
- Building and completing the 4 Bayern class battleships (active)
- New battleships in the 1920s (slowly built) in return Kaiser class battleships are being sold or scrapped

Battle cruisers:
- Moltke sold to the Ottoman Empire (they already have the sister ship Goeben)
- Seydlitz sold or scrapped
- 3 Derfflinger class battle cruisers (active)
- 2 Mackensen class (Mackensen, Graf Spee) completed (active)
- 2 Mackensen class not launched yet (Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Fürst Bismarck) either stopped or - if a buyer available - completed and sold

Afterwards I could see them using the Yorck class battle cruiser design as the basis for a fast battleship being build in the 1920s. The guns of scrapped ships could be used as coastal artillery in Germany or the colonies.

Armored cruisers:
- 9 remaining armored cruisers either sold or scrapped immediately after the war

Small (light) cruisers /destroyers / torpedo boats:
Everything with 3cyl /4cyl triple expansion engines either sold or scrapped immediately after the war. That´s dozens of ships (12 cruisers, around 150 mostly smaller torpedo boats).
Build GTB (large torpedo boat) 1916 as destroyers, torpedo boat 1916 as coastal torpedo boats and Cöln II class small cruisers as light cruisers. And then sell or scrap all the older still remaining turbine powered cruisers and destroyers / torpedo boats.

U-boats:
Keep the U 93 class ocean going submarines and the U-cruisers. Plus the coastal UB III (torpedo attack) and UC III (mine-layers) submarines

So I´m definitely okay with getting rid of around 200+ surface ships plus older submarines.
Reducing the cost of the navy. The result might be a more balanced fleet.

Originally Posted by wiking

True, so there would be something likely following, especially if Germany gets colonies in Africa, just as you and BlondieBC suggest.

If Germany isn´t defeated in WW1 they´ll want some colonies back. If only for prestige. And given that in OTL WW1 Germany occupied parts of France and most of Belgium I´d expect them to get some colonies back.
Britain (and Belgium) are a lot more interested in a free and independent Belgium than in some African colonies. Likewise France would be a lot more interested in keeping sacred French land than some colonies.

The Japanese occupied colonies in the Pacific ocean are probably lost.
Germany perhaps, just perhaps might get back the parts occupied by British Empire forces. Although Australia and New Zealand won´t be happy.
For prestige reasons German East Africa is a must. Lettow-Vorbeck and his force is still undefeated.
German South West Africa is difficult, occupied by South Africa. Might be compensated by something else.
Cameroon and Togo should be easy to get back. Maybe even slightly enlarged.

Originally Posted by wiking

Naval Air Arms have different mission profiles and require a different focus, plus the tradition is to have land operations be with the army and naval ops to be with the navy. IOTL the army decided the Luftwaffe needed to be its own organization because it was too different from the army and required specialists, while the navy felt that their air units were too closely integrated into their operations to be separate, which was correct. In fact the only reason that IOTL the Luftwaffe got the naval air arm was because of the Nazi state favoring Goering over professional soldiers (airmen, and sailors).

So land focused operations would see the Luftwaffe handling it, while the navy keeps its air arm integrated into its force structure. There would still be major coordination between the two air services, just as in OTL. The air ministry (which I guarantee there will be one) will handling procurement/production for both services and basic training will be integrated and diverge for specialist training.

Oh, I don´t disagree at all.
I just seem to remember the problems of the British Fleet air arm in the inter-war period? Squeezed from both the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force. Budget wise?
And remember that in the 1920s the real potential of airplanes - especially in the naval role - wasn´t yet really known.

So I feel the German naval air arm will constantly keep an eye on the political situation. And really try to show the difference between "them" and the land based air force. Carriers would help here I think.
Just imagine a parliament faced with budget cuts. The temptation to fold a land based naval air arm into the air force will be there. Especially without the prospect of an immediate war threat.

So basically I agree with you totally.
I simply say that given that your proposed TL (end of WW1 in late 1917) the German naval air in the 1920s will try their very best to show the German parliament (Reichstag) the difference between them and the air force.

Originally Posted by wiking

1918-1930's. There will be much more in the way of aviation and avionics research and industrial development. Look at how much the RAF and Luftwaffe sunk into their buildup in the 1930's. Hell the strategic bomber fleet during WW2 bankrupted Britain so badly that for 3 years after the war the British people still had rationing.

Military research and equipment is very different than civilian in close to every; OTL the Germans had civilian aircraft, engines, and research, but it didn't prepare them for military aircraft. It took 2-3 generations and Billions of Marks to make the Luftwaffe a viable force and even then it was only in breadth, not depth.

In our TL the London ultimatum May 5, 1921 forbade the construction of all civilian airplanes in Germany (The Versailles Treaty already forbade military airplanes). Civilian airplanes already constructed had to be destroyed. That restriction was lifted in 1922. It was followed by the "nine rules".
- Maximum speed of 170 km/h at 2000 meters
- They could only transport 600 kg including the crew
- A range of around 300 km
- Maximum ceiling of 4000 meters
- Engines capable of reaching a higher ceiling were forbidden
- Any aircraft / engine violating one of the rules was classified as military and therefore forbidden
These rules for civilian aircraft were only lifted in 1926.

Followed in 1929 by the Great Depression.
So actually German companies lost 10-15 years of airplane and engine construction in our TL. Saying that "the Germans had civilian aircraft, engines, and research, but it didn't prepare them for military aircraft" therefore is simply wrong. For most of the 1920s restrictions existed.

In your TL these restrictions wouldn´t exist.
So both military and private money over the years would gradually push for more powerful engines, more range, more transport capacity.
Spreading the money over 10-20 years (including private money) instead of building the Nazi Luftwaffe in 7 years (1933-1939).

[wiking]

Originally Posted by Detlef

Well, Prince Henry and the Baltic fleet command were proposing an invasion of the islands as early as 1915 (when they were less well defended). And you´re right that it probably would have been a failure without the Russian army already in disarray in late 1917. The Germans knew it, the operation in 1917 was mainly a try to finally force Russia out of the war.
Still the operation was planned in a very short time. And between forces (navy, army) that before had no experience working together in an amphibious assault. Given that it worked pretty well.

Not so sure about fire support by cruisers and airplanes only.
If there are fortifications with coastal guns, cruisers guns might be a bit small. And aircraft - even with air superiority - still have to deal with anti-air guns. Battleship guns are large and have the range to even hit targets farther inland.
There´s a reason why the Allies used them in the fire support role in WW2.

Besides the people in your TL have to plan with what they know now.
In the early 1920s that means knowing that airplanes have potential but not knowing the capabilities of airplanes 10-20 years later.



The Admiral Karl Galster approach of 1907/1908.
That´s probably what was confusing me.
For coastal defense you only need coastal guns, mines, submarines and torpedo boats. With some cruisers thrown in for merchant raids. Keep the number of capital ships low enough to not worry Britain.

The problem is that the HSF already has more than enough ships to defend the German coastline. And Raeder (like Galster) wasn´t opposed to capital ships (see Z-Plan 1938/39).

So I could see (1918-1925?):

Battleships:
- Selling or scrapping all surviving 21 pre-dreadnoughts immediately after the war
- Selling or scrapping the 4 Nassau class battleships immediately after the war
- Undecided about the 4 Helgoland class battleships (selling, mothballed for now?)
- Modernizing the 5 Kaiser class battleships (afterwards partly active / reserve fleet / training ships?)
- Modernizing the 4 König class battleships (active)
- Building and completing the 4 Bayern class battleships (active)
- New battleships in the 1920s (slowly built) in return Kaiser class battleships are being sold or scrapped

Battle cruisers:
- Moltke sold to the Ottoman Empire (they already have the sister ship Goeben)
- Seydlitz sold or scrapped
- 3 Derfflinger class battle cruisers (active)
- 2 Mackensen class (Mackensen, Graf Spee) completed (active)
- 2 Mackensen class not launched yet (Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Fürst Bismarck) either stopped or - if a buyer available - completed and sold

Afterwards I could see them using the Yorck class battle cruiser design as the basis for a fast battleship being build in the 1920s. The guns of scrapped ships could be used as coastal artillery in Germany or the colonies.

Armored cruisers:
- 9 remaining armored cruisers either sold or scrapped immediately after the war

Small (light) cruisers /destroyers / torpedo boats:
Everything with 3cyl /4cyl triple expansion engines either sold or scrapped immediately after the war. That´s dozens of ships (12 cruisers, around 150 mostly smaller torpedo boats).
Build GTB (large torpedo boat) 1916 as destroyers, torpedo boat 1916 as coastal torpedo boats and Cöln II class small cruisers as light cruisers. And then sell or scrap all the older still remaining turbine powered cruisers and destroyers / torpedo boats.

U-boats:
Keep the U 93 class ocean going submarines and the U-cruisers. Plus the coastal UB III (torpedo attack) and UC III (mine-layers) submarines

So I´m definitely okay with getting rid of around 200+ surface ships plus older submarines.
Reducing the cost of the navy. The result might be a more balanced fleet.



If Germany isn´t defeated in WW1 they´ll want some colonies back. If only for prestige. And given that in OTL WW1 Germany occupied parts of France and most of Belgium I´d expect them to get some colonies back.
Britain (and Belgium) are a lot more interested in a free and independent Belgium than in some African colonies. Likewise France would be a lot more interested in keeping sacred French land than some colonies.

The Japanese occupied colonies in the Pacific ocean are probably lost.
Germany perhaps, just perhaps might get back the parts occupied by British Empire forces. Although Australia and New Zealand won´t be happy.
For prestige reasons German East Africa is a must. Lettow-Vorbeck and his force is still undefeated.
German South West Africa is difficult, occupied by South Africa. Might be compensated by something else.
Cameroon and Togo should be easy to get back. Maybe even slightly enlarged.



Oh, I don´t disagree at all.
I just seem to remember the problems of the British Fleet air arm in the inter-war period? Squeezed from both the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force. Budget wise?
And remember that in the 1920s the real potential of airplanes - especially in the naval role - wasn´t yet really known.

So I feel the German naval air arm will constantly keep an eye on the political situation. And really try to show the difference between "them" and the land based air force. Carriers would help here I think.
Just imagine a parliament faced with budget cuts. The temptation to fold a land based naval air arm into the air force will be there. Especially without the prospect of an immediate war threat.

So basically I agree with you totally.
I simply say that given that your proposed TL (end of WW1 in late 1917) the German naval air in the 1920s will try their very best to show the German parliament (Reichstag) the difference between them and the air force.



In our TL the London ultimatum May 5, 1921 forbade the construction of all civilian airplanes in Germany (The Versailles Treaty already forbade military airplanes). Civilian airplanes already constructed had to be destroyed. That restriction was lifted in 1922. It was followed by the "nine rules".
- Maximum speed of 170 km/h at 2000 meters
- They could only transport 600 kg including the crew
- A range of around 300 km
- Maximum ceiling of 4000 meters
- Engines capable of reaching a higher ceiling were forbidden
- Any aircraft / engine violating one of the rules was classified as military and therefore forbidden
These rules for civilian aircraft were only lifted in 1926.

Followed in 1929 by the Great Depression.
So actually German companies lost 10-15 years of airplane and engine construction in our TL. Saying that "the Germans had civilian aircraft, engines, and research, but it didn't prepare them for military aircraft" therefore is simply wrong. For most of the 1920s restrictions existed.

In your TL these restrictions wouldn´t exist.
So both military and private money over the years would gradually push for more powerful engines, more range, more transport capacity.
Spreading the money over 10-20 years (including private money) instead of building the Nazi Luftwaffe in 7 years (1933-1939).

I pretty much agree with everything and learned something at the end. Maybe we should work out a TL?

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

Not so sure about fire support by cruisers and airplanes only.
If there are fortifications with coastal guns, cruisers guns might be a bit small. And aircraft - even with air superiority - still have to deal with anti-air guns. Battleship guns are large and have the range to even hit targets farther inland.
There´s a reason why the Allies used them in the fire support role in WW2.

You can't. They were getting larger Russian guns, that will be one hit, one kill type events. You can't use pre-dreads. You need the speed to help avoid being hit. Older ships suffer here. The UK did test with 15" guns, and on pre-dreads, they penetrate the armor at all ranges at all angles. The 13.5" have similar performance. Sources a bit less clear on this. So basically if not using the newer ships, each shell goes about 42 feet into the enemy ship and explodes a 50 to 150 pound charge. You are often looking at something like a magazine that will end catastrophically or something critical like the engines. Once you lose speed, you will die. There will be no, we took 10-20 hits and came back to port. It will be 1-3 hits and everyone dies.

People also misunderstand the power of coastal naval artillery. You generally don't destroy the gun, you either bury it with dirt or it runs out of ammo. The odds of physically destroying the tube is low. Either of these can be repaired/resupplied. Looking at Gallipoli, a lot of the kills were buried with dirt. You need bigger shells to throw more dirt. There is a reason that we used rangers to take out 6" or so guns in Normandy instead of the cruisers or battleship. Hard to quickly take out fortified guns.

Basically in days before airpower, you have to use your newest, best dreadnoughts to fight.

So I could see (1918-1925?):

Battleships:
- Selling or scrapping all surviving 21 pre-dreadnoughts immediately after the war
- Selling or scrapping the 4 Nassau class battleships immediately after the war
- Undecided about the 4 Helgoland class battleships (selling, mothballed for now?)
- Modernizing the 5 Kaiser class battleships (afterwards partly active / reserve fleet / training ships?)
- Modernizing the 4 König class battleships (active)
- Building and completing the 4 Bayern class battleships (active)
- New battleships in the 1920s (slowly built) in return Kaiser class battleships are being sold or scrapped

Battle cruisers:
- Moltke sold to the Ottoman Empire (they already have the sister ship Goeben)
- Seydlitz sold or scrapped
- 3 Derfflinger class battle cruisers (active)
- 2 Mackensen class (Mackensen, Graf Spee) completed (active)
- 2 Mackensen class not launched yet (Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Fürst Bismarck) either stopped or - if a buyer available - completed and sold

Afterwards I could see them using the Yorck class battle cruiser design as the basis for a fast battleship being build in the 1920s. The guns of scrapped ships could be used as coastal artillery in Germany or the colonies.

Armored cruisers:
- 9 remaining armored cruisers either sold or scrapped immediately after the war

Small (light) cruisers /destroyers / torpedo boats:
Everything with 3cyl /4cyl triple expansion engines either sold or scrapped immediately after the war. That´s dozens of ships (12 cruisers, around 150 mostly smaller torpedo boats).
Build GTB (large torpedo boat) 1916 as destroyers, torpedo boat 1916 as coastal torpedo boats and Cöln II class small cruisers as light cruisers. And then sell or scrap all the older still remaining turbine powered cruisers and destroyers / torpedo boats.

U-boats:
Keep the U 93 class ocean going submarines and the U-cruisers. Plus the coastal UB III (torpedo attack) and UC III (mine-layers) submarines

So I´m definitely okay with getting rid of around 200+ surface ships plus older submarines.
Reducing the cost of the navy. The result might be a more balanced fleet.

If you look at the pre-dreads, some were used as depot ships (U-boats or sea planes) for Germany. UK did same plus transport ships. And with so much merchant tonnage lost, there is a good bit of post war work for the yards. It will be a much longer period (10+ years to scrap all of them). We also lost or overseas fleet. So assuming we have colonies, it will be the following. The ones convert IOTL to depot ships for German coast remain on duty or reserve at that location. Some of the newer predreads will be sent to Africa as depot ships for U-boat, seaplanes, gunboat, torpedo boats. The guns are stripped for coast artillery. And some of the predreads are scrapped.

Nassau are too new to admit they are obsolete. And Germany had 20 or so pre-dreads in reserve. These ships go in reserve fleet, with off chance of overseas deployment as flag ship or sold to Ottomans at good price. Admitting you can't build ships that are effective for 10 years is bad PR. Better PR is we crushed Russia and keep these ships in reserve as trainers and 1/6 crew. They are replacing pre-dreads without weapons.

Helgoland is reserve under Wiking lower budget world, active in my type win world. Kaiser are the same but may be retired 5 years later. When Kaiser go in reserve, Helgoland may be scrapped. We will keep at least full flotilla (8 ships) in reserve.

Bayern will be finished, followed by EY type ships built at one per two years, Wiking lower budget levels. One new BB every 2 years for about 10-13 capital ships is about right.

BC list sounds about right. Ottomans are logical buyer for ships. Also possible Ottomans buy some Bayern, Germans keep more BC.

AC might go to as colonial flag ships if BC are not sent. The make ok 5-10 stop gap measure.

Cruisers need upgrade cycle, so do torpedo boats. Likely a lot of focus here.

All those U-boats have a real issue. Too shallow a dive depth. Second issue, too small a torpedo to defeat passive Torpedo Defense system. You need similar ships, but with a much greater dive depth and a 4" larger torpedo. Need to start replacement cycle within couple of years of end of war.

Now under Wiking budget limits (I assume 60% of 1910-1913 average), you can't fund this, and the naval aviation, and the overseas bases, and Zeppelins, and the marines. Something else that is need has to be canceled, and this is more a Reichstag type issue.

If Germany isn´t defeated in WW1 they´ll want some colonies back. If only for prestige. And given that in OTL WW1 Germany occupied parts of France and most of Belgium I´d expect them to get some colonies back.
Britain (and Belgium) are a lot more interested in a free and independent Belgium than in some African colonies. Likewise France would be a lot more interested in keeping sacred French land than some colonies.

The Japanese occupied colonies in the Pacific ocean are probably lost.
Germany perhaps, just perhaps might get back the parts occupied by British Empire forces. Although Australia and New Zealand won´t be happy.
For prestige reasons German East Africa is a must. Lettow-Vorbeck and his force is still undefeated.
German South West Africa is difficult, occupied by South Africa. Might be compensated by something else.
Cameroon and Togo should be easy to get back. Maybe even slightly enlarged.

Largely agreed.

SWA seems manageable, the UK will give up something somewhere else. Nigerian border adjustment, split Angola with Germans, Sudan Border Adjustment (Today South Sudan).

And we are to the difference in discussing POD and TL. There are probably 100 possible TL, all plausible. Some choices.


1) Budget level (60%,80%, 100% of prewar) 3 options.

2) German Naval land based air absorbed by Luftwaffe - Yes, No, 2 options.

3) Fund new U-boats right after war.

4) Fast or Slow BB

5) 15" or 17" BB

6) Fund or not fund guide weapons.

7) Serious colonial naval bases. Yes, No, Some.

8) Fund new DD right after war or keep using old ones.

9) Fund developing new Mines or keep using existing tech.

10) Fund radar, yes/no.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by wiking

I pretty much agree with everything and learned something at the end. Maybe we should work out a TL?

That might be fun.
I should tell you though that till now I haven´t tried to create a TL myself. I don´t know how much I could contribute?
On the other hand I´m a German and was always interested in German history. So sometimes I managed to find contemporary sources interesting for other TLs.
I´m interested in airplanes (WW2 and earlier) and somewhat in naval ships (WW2 and earlier) so why not give it a try?

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

If you look at the pre-dreads, some were used as depot ships (U-boats or sea planes) for Germany. UK did same plus transport ships. And with so much merchant tonnage lost, there is a good bit of post war work for the yards. It will be a much longer period (10+ years to scrap all of them). We also lost or overseas fleet. So assuming we have colonies, it will be the following. The ones convert IOTL to depot ships for German coast remain on duty or reserve at that location. Some of the newer predreads will be sent to Africa as depot ships for U-boat, seaplanes, gunboat, torpedo boats. The guns are stripped for coast artillery. And some of the predreads are scrapped.

You make several good points here:

- Scrapping older ships will take longer
That´s a good point. No way you can scrap 100-200 older naval ships in 1-2 years. it will take longer. It´ll be a budget question though how many of them will be kept in serviceable (is that the right word?) condition during that time.

- Losses of the German merchant navy
That depends on the TL. For example did the USA and South American countries enter the war? This discussion thread deals with German merchant losses during and after WW1. The USA and Chile alone account for almost 1 million BRT of German merchant ships.
And what are the conditions of the peace treaty?

- Use of pre-dreadnoughts as depot ships
Not sure about that. It really depends on merchant losses (see above). If they are high then yes, using pre-dreadnoughts as a temporary solution makes sense. If not then a freighter fitted out as a depot ship makes a lot more sense?

- Loss of German overseas fleet
That were 2 armored cruisers, a handful of small (light) cruisers plus gunboats. Not sure if sending some of the newer pre-dreads to Africa as depot ships with the guns removed there as coastal defense makes sense?
Even a somewhat smaller freighter could probably transport more supplies than a pre-dread?

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Nassau are too new to admit they are obsolete. And Germany had 20 or so pre-dreads in reserve. These ships go in reserve fleet, with off chance of overseas deployment as flag ship or sold to Ottomans at good price. Admitting you can't build ships that are effective for 10 years is bad PR. Better PR is we crushed Russia and keep these ships in reserve as trainers and 1/6 crew. They are replacing pre-dreads without weapons.

That´s another good point.
What would the Ottoman Empire buy post-war given a good price? After all even if oil exploration in the Kirkuk region is started immediately after the war, it´ll take several years before the Ottoman Empire sees some serious money. Meaning it´ll take some years before they can seriously consider buying anything than second-hand ships and equipment.

They already got Goeben so buying Moltke (same battle cruiser class) would make sense.
Do they stop here or buy 1-2 additional capital ships?
If buying one additional ship then the battle cruiser Seydlitz would make sense (same guns as Goeben and Moltke). If buying two, then maybe 2 Nassau class ships would make sense (same gun caliber)?

There´s also South America to consider. At good prices some ships might be sold there?

A lot really depends on which countries have entered the war in this TL.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Helgoland is reserve under Wiking lower budget world, active in my type win world. Kaiser are the same but may be retired 5 years later. When Kaiser go in reserve, Helgoland may be scrapped. We will keep at least full flotilla (8 ships) in reserve.

Given that I was undecided here that´s acceptable.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Bayern will be finished, followed by EY type ships built at one per two years, Wiking lower budget levels. One new BB every 2 years for about 10-13 capital ships is about right.

Agree with the Bayern class being finished.
That would leave the German navy - even with my desire fulfilled to get rid of the Nassaus - with 22 capital ships (some of them in reserve). More - much more - than enough.
If anyone wants to buy one or more Helgoland class ships I´d agree in a heartbeat.
The same for older cruisers, torpedo boats and submarines.

Concerning the Yorck class ships I would take a step back. Re-think the design, incorporate the latest lessons.
The Yorck design is the logical basis for creating a fast battleship. So let´s do it right.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

BC list sounds about right. Ottomans are logical buyer for ships. Also possible Ottomans buy some Bayern, Germans keep more BC.

See above.
The Ottomans probably could afford buying "second-hand" ships now. It´ll take some time before they can afford to buy new modern ships.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

AC might go to as colonial flag ships if BC are not sent. The make ok 5-10 stop gap measure.

I´m really undecided here.
The most modern armored cruisers (Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Blücher) were all lost during the war already.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Cruisers need upgrade cycle, so do torpedo boats. Likely a lot of focus here.

The problem is that a lot of the older "larger" German torpedo boats had bad sea-going abilities. Not to mention the smaller even older torpedo boats built before 1900 here.
That´s why I mentioned the GTB (large torpedo boat = destroyer) 1916 class as destroyers and the torpedo boat 1916 as coastal torpedo boats. Building destroyers and torpedo boats is relatively cheap so I thought that getting rid of inadequate "small ships" would be easier.

The Cöln II class small cruisers too are already designed from the start to carry 8 5.9" guns and H8 (23.6") torpedoes.
The old Gazelle class and Bremen class small cruisers simply can´t be upgraded to these standards.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

All those U-boats have a real issue. Too shallow a dive depth. Second issue, too small a torpedo to defeat passive Torpedo Defense system. You need similar ships, but with a much greater dive depth and a 4" larger torpedo. Need to start replacement cycle within couple of years of end of war.

No disagreement here.
Which is why I proposed to keep only the most modern German submarines for now. Training has to continue.
Research on metallurgy / production methods and torpedoes is definitely needed.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Now under Wiking budget limits (I assume 60% of 1910-1913 average), you can't fund this, and the naval aviation, and the overseas bases, and Zeppelins, and the marines. Something else that is need has to be canceled, and this is more a Reichstag type issue.

That´s an unknown right now.
The war ends in late 1917. Who is involved, who are the neutrals?
What are the conditions of the peace treaty here?

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

SWA seems manageable, the UK will give up something somewhere else. Nigerian border adjustment, split Angola with Germans, Sudan Border Adjustment (Today South Sudan).

Essentially I see:
- German Togo and Cameroon with some border adjustments
- Getting some parts of Nigeria - especially coastal regions - would be nice given hindsight (oil fields)
- German East Africa
- Maybe the German parts of the Pacific colonies occupied by the British

Around 1920-1925 (not directly after the war) I can see:
- some money for a secondary or tertiary naval base in both Douala (German Cameroon) and Daressallam (German East Africa).
Some coastal guns (from the pre-dreadnoughts) and mines. Some older submarines and torpedo boats deployed there. A battalion of German marines. A supply depot. Maybe some machine shops to repair small damages. Maybe a few cruisers as the new overseas squadron.
- if the Germans get back German New Guinea and the Bismarck archipelago, maybe a tertiary naval base at Rabaul?
Some guns, some mines, some supplies. With the understanding that it would be lost pretty fast in a war against the British Empire?

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

And we are to the difference in discussing POD and TL. There are probably 100 possible TL, all plausible. Some choices.

1) Budget level (60%,80%, 100% of prewar) 3 options.

2) German Naval land based air absorbed by Luftwaffe - Yes, No, 2 options.

3) Fund new U-boats right after war.

4) Fast or Slow BB

5) 15" or 17" BB

6) Fund or not fund guide weapons.

7) Serious colonial naval bases. Yes, No, Some.

8) Fund new DD right after war or keep using old ones.

9) Fund developing new Mines or keep using existing tech.

10) Fund radar, yes/no.

1) The budget level probably will be somewhere between 60-80%.

2) German naval air should stay independent. Not absorbed by the Luftwaffe.

3) Unknown right now.
Is metallurgy and technology advanced enough to build more advanced submarines right after the war? If so, why weren´t these submarines built during the war? During a war, money tends to take a back seat?

4) Fast BB.
Use the Yorck class design as a basis and develop a fast battleship.
(Older and slower capital ships in the 1920s / 1930s might be still used in the Baltic Sea. Given that the Soviet Union Baltic fleet is bottled up in the Gulf of Finland.

5) 15" guns are enough to really hurt an opponent.

6) Definitely fund guided weapons. It´s the best chance for Germany to hurt British capital ships.

7) No serious colonial bases.
Some surplus heavy guns from pre-dreadnoughts. Some mines. Some light forces plus some supplies.

8) Definitely new DDs. Cheap compared to capital ships.

9) Use existing mines. Fund some research and development for the next 10-20 years?

10) Fund some research and development for the next 10-20 years?

[Bosemacher]

Estimated Ottoman literacy rate prior to WWI is 15-20%. This should allow for adequate numbers of technicians and mechanics to be trained.


Late Ottoman education
http://www.cssaame.com/issues/21/fortna.pdf


http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/cgi/...t=econ_wpapers


"The Ottomans lifted the ban on the printing press in 1726, giving exclusive rights to certain individuals to print in Arabic characters.
Following a shaky, intermittent, and heavily regulated presence in the eighteenth century, during
which only 33 books were published, the industry grew fast in the nineteenth century. The ban
on Islamic subjects was lifted in 1802, and the lithographic press was adopted soon after its
invention in Germany. In the decade following the creation of Takvimhane-i Âmire in 1831 to
print the first official newspaper, six new presses were founded, publishing a total of 278 books.
Sixty (22%) of these books were on religious subjects. Thirteen new presses were launched in
the next decade, altogether publishing a total of 394 books (31% on religious subjects).12 The
industry was well-established by mid-nineteenth century, the state getting actively involved
through school books, official newspapers, and various administrative publications."

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

- Scrapping older ships will take longer
That´s a good point. No way you can scrap 100-200 older naval ships in 1-2 years. it will take longer. It´ll be a budget question though how many of them will be kept in serviceable (is that the right word?) condition during that time.

You may be looking for the word "Mothballed".

I haven't done the budget work either.

- Use of pre-dreadnoughts as depot ships
Not sure about that. It really depends on merchant losses (see above). If they are high then yes, using pre-dreadnoughts as a temporary solution makes sense. If not then a freighter fitted out as a depot ship makes a lot more sense?

I am not certain either, but when I go ships by ship on the pre-dreads, I see some used as "depot" ships in places like Danzig. Danzig had a port, had buildings, and their are plenty of ideal freighters in German harbors, so their has to be some perceived value. Some guess on why.

1) Navy property, not civilian. Ship good enough.
2) Machine shops on ship?
3) The secondary armament and armor. The big guns seem to have been removed during the war for coastal defense.
4) More prestige for commander than using civilian ships? I would assume a depot ship for a flotilla of U-boats to be a commodore or rear admiral. Even for group of Seaplanes, a Captain is not unreasonable.
5) Safer. Better internal water tight door system in case of bomb or torpedo.

So I guess it could go either way, but when doing things for TL, I tend to repeat the pattern unless I understand why it was done. There are reason for most strange decisions, even if just political.

- Loss of German overseas fleet
That were 2 armored cruisers, a handful of small (light) cruisers plus gunboats. Not sure if sending some of the newer pre-dreads to Africa as depot ships with the guns removed there as coastal defense makes sense?
Even a somewhat smaller freighter could probably transport more supplies than a pre-dread?

I can see it either way. For my TL, I went with freighters until dedicated submarine tenders can be built. In a win, it could be a very long time until you get a hull up ship. It seems like the UK may have used either a converted cruiser or pre-dreads as a submarine tender.

Sending either predreads or the older dreads could make sense as a stop gap measure, and with budget issues, it could drag on for many years. And the Germans lost the far east squadron, which was schedule to have a BC as flag. It is really a political call, and could go many ways.

I went back and looked at the AC list again, and the available ones are quite old, probably too old (The newer ones survived in my TL, so they are set to have fairly long career). The predreads are death traps, only fit for coastal work or depot ships, and really, the guns are better used as coastal defense. The 11" guns is bit light, and this was know after Jutland. The High Seas fleet needs a few (3-5) BC/fast battleships. Not an easy call. You might try to use a old dreadnought as a flag ship, but I don't think this is likely. I would go with

Since were using Goeben as East Asian command ship, I think you send the Derfflinger class as the flag ship of the main fleet, wherever you put the base. The rest of the fleet is problematic, since Germany is so light on the number of cruisers. If Russia loses most of its Baltic coast, you might send some of the newer cruisers. Otherwise it is real tough to find what you need, and it will be one capital ship as flag ships with older ships (AC may have to go), torpedo boats, U-boats, gunboats. In some ways, the main base in 1920 will have weaker fleet than what Tsingtao was schedule to have in 1916. Your monitor idea may not be a bad short term solution. Scrap some predreads, and built some two gun shallow draft monitors to help out.

Looking at the list again, you have to keep building fast battleships (BC) for the next 3-5 capital ships due to losses.

That´s another good point.
What would the Ottoman Empire buy post-war given a good price? After all even if oil exploration in the Kirkuk region is started immediately after the war, it´ll take several years before the Ottoman Empire sees some serious money. Meaning it´ll take some years before they can seriously consider buying anything than second-hand ships and equipment.

They already got Goeben so buying Moltke (same battle cruiser class) would make sense.
Do they stop here or buy 1-2 additional capital ships?
If buying one additional ship then the battle cruiser Seydlitz would make sense (same guns as Goeben and Moltke). If buying two, then maybe 2 Nassau class ships would make sense (same gun caliber)?

The Ottomans were renouncing treaties and concessions by the end of the war. I see something more like the Germans get an oil concession in exchange for the Moltke. And the Seydlitz makes some sense too. I think they may stop here assuming the dreadnought (Russian) still explodes in port as OTL and Russia still falls into chaos. With 2-3 of the 11" BC, the Ottomans would be the clearly dominant power in the Black Sea and be able to stand down Greece. It takes a lot of ships to be able to challenge the Italians or RN. Once Russia looks stronger or maybe after 5-10, they may look at newer 15" type ships.

As the Ottomans, I would be tempted to rent a base to the German Navy. A twenty year lease on Haifa or Rhodes in exchange for the Moltke makes sense for both sides. Unfortunately, people very knowledgeable about the Ottoman empire have been banned, so I am bit blind on the Ottoman perspective.

I think the RN has give a golden chance to the Germans to sell to South America. Also Jutland makes UK ships looking inferior (they like to go boom). I would try to sell some newer 15" ships to South Americans to generate cash.

Split for length.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

Agree with the Bayern class being finished.
That would leave the German navy - even with my desire fulfilled to get rid of the Nassaus - with 22 capital ships (some of them in reserve). More - much more - than enough.
If anyone wants to buy one or more Helgoland class ships I´d agree in a heartbeat.
The same for older cruisers, torpedo boats and submarines.

Concerning the Yorck class ships I would take a step back. Re-think the design, incorporate the latest lessons.
The Yorck design is the logical basis for creating a fast battleship. So let´s do it right.

First on BC. We are supposed to have 8 by 1917, and we had 5 at start of war. Assuming Ottomans take the Moltke and the Seydlitz is either also sold or put in reserve (it had taken many hits), then we only the 3 Derfflinger. So we could get away with finishing just the 4 Mackensens and scrap the EY.

Or we could scrap the two less completed Mackensens (Prinz EY and Furst B) and finish the EY.

Or we Finish all of them by the early 1920's and have 11 fast battleships. Or sell 2 to South American and keep 9. Financially, it makes a lot of sense to finish any significantly completed ship and sell it.

A lot will depend on how Wiking has the war end. IMO, the Germans will spend/build at the maximum possible rate until the peace deal is signed to apply pressure to the UK not to change its mind. So a TL where the peace deal takes 6 months to negotiate and the blockade is lifted is a lot different from one where a peace offer is made on November 5, 1917 and signed 3 weeks later. But in either one, all the lessons are the war are fast battleships (BC) are the way for the Germans to go.

The problem is that a lot of the older "larger" German torpedo boats had bad sea-going abilities. Not to mention the smaller even older torpedo boats built before 1900 here.
That´s why I mentioned the GTB (large torpedo boat = destroyer) 1916 class as destroyers and the torpedo boat 1916 as coastal torpedo boats. Building destroyers and torpedo boats is relatively cheap so I thought that getting rid of inadequate "small ships" would be easier.

The Cöln II class small cruisers too are already designed from the start to carry 8 5.9" guns and H8 (23.6") torpedoes.
The old Gazelle class and Bremen class small cruisers simply can´t be upgraded to these standards.

Even in my win TL, this is a huge issue. A honest assessment of the German Navy is that basically you need to finish what is more than 35% complete, and do a 2 year redesign to build new ships with a rapid replacement cycle. WW1 had made many ships obsolete as technology was rapidly adopted. And even in a clear win with the Navy as the hero, the funds are not here.

If you write the TL with Wiking, I would recommend you design the Navy you think the Germans would believe they needed, then look at the budget. Set a total budget, then set an annual construction budget. I am sure many of these obsolete ships will still be on active duty or in reserve in 1935.

Around 1920-1925 (not directly after the war) I can see:
- some money for a secondary or tertiary naval base in both Douala (German Cameroon) and Daressallam (German East Africa).
Some coastal guns (from the pre-dreadnoughts) and mines. Some older submarines and torpedo boats deployed there. A battalion of German marines. A supply depot. Maybe some machine shops to repair small damages. Maybe a few cruisers as the new overseas squadron.
- if the Germans get back German New Guinea and the Bismarck archipelago, maybe a tertiary naval base at Rabaul?
Some guns, some mines, some supplies. With the understanding that it would be lost pretty fast in a war against the British Empire?

If using older guns as the predreads are retired, the cost of the coastal defense should be modest. My impression is also the German had a huge number of mines, so you just need to ship them down to the port and store them in a building. The depot ships appears fine for a HQ. IMO, it is more likely the base is established soon after the war, with the understanding that the needed ships (BC command ship plus long range cruisers plus escorts) will be at least 5 years away. If you don't build a lot of infrastructure or go lavish on the defense, the cost should be manageable. it is probably 10-20 million marks to setup you targeted budget of 300M to 400M. And the setting up costs are probably spread over 3-5 years. It can be done cheaper than this, if one is thinking more of a lightly defended anchorage.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

You may be looking for the word "Mothballed".

I haven't done the budget work either.

That´s the word! Thanks.
Well I suppose I could try and search for pre-war budget numbers first? Just to have a reference for possible post-war numbers.
If anyone has found any web sources I´d be grateful for a link.

Real post-war budget work of course makes only sense once we know the post-war situation.
- How and why did the war end in late 1917?
- Was the USA involved or neutral?
- Russian revolution yes or no?
- Conditions of peace treaty (for example German patents, trademarks in Entente countries)
- Size of wiking´s planned post-war German air force

Without that information we don´t know about the condition of the German economy after the war (retaining patents and trademarks etc. would help a lot). And without information about the end of the war we don´t know anything about the political situation after the war. Which will influence the priorities of the military budget.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

I am not certain either, but when I go ships by ship on the pre-dreads, I see some used as "depot" ships in places like Danzig. Danzig had a port, had buildings, and their are plenty of ideal freighters in German harbors, so their has to be some perceived value. Some guess on why.

1) Navy property, not civilian. Ship good enough.
2) Machine shops on ship?
3) The secondary armament and armor. The big guns seem to have been removed during the war for coastal defense.
4) More prestige for commander than using civilian ships? I would assume a depot ship for a flotilla of U-boats to be a commodore or rear admiral. Even for group of Seaplanes, a Captain is not unreasonable.
5) Safer. Better internal water tight door system in case of bomb or torpedo.

So I guess it could go either way, but when doing things for TL, I tend to repeat the pattern unless I understand why it was done. There are reason for most strange decisions, even if just political.

I just had to find an answer for this question!
So I looked into some naval books about German pre-dreadnoughts.
- Prestige probably plays a role. Can´t have the CO of a submarine or mine-hunter flotilla residing on a mere civilian freighter.
- Mobility probably too. Pre-dreads are naval ships with naval crews. Give an order and they deploy to a new base.
- But even more important and I only thought about it today. A pre-dread has a galley and food stores capable of dealing with a 700-800 men crew. A freighter doesn´t until converted. Stagger the meal times and you can feed - if needed - your flotilla too. You´re not depending on land-based infrastructure.
- A Deutschland class pre-dreadnought (according to diagrams in one book) has a small special machinery work shop, a general machine shop, a smithy and a special artillery work shop. Plus four storage rooms for machine parts. Add a special storage room each for painting material, electrical parts, carpenter material, torpedo parts and sails / ropes.
It´s not a fully equipped repair ship but for smaller repairs you don´t depend on land infrastructure.
- A Deutschland class pre-dreadnought too has a bakery with a bread storage room, a "Kühlraum" (translated a: refrigerated storage room) and something other which I didn´t think of: 2 large shower rooms for the coal haulers ("Heizerbad").
I feel sure submarine crews are in favor of shower rooms.

So using pre-dreadnoughts as depot ships actually does make sense. Especially if the flotilla gets deployed to civilian ports without land based naval infrastructure. A CO doesn´t have to worry about who´s going to cook the meals, shower rooms for the crews, machine shops for small repairs (and if they´re civilian, who´s going to pay?).
As long as you get regular supplies your flotilla is relatively independent and the crews stay concentrated around the depot ship.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

I can see it either way. For my TL, I went with freighters until dedicated submarine tenders can be built. In a win, it could be a very long time until you get a hull up ship. It seems like the UK may have used either a converted cruiser or pre-dreads as a submarine tender.

Sending either predreads or the older dreads could make sense as a stop gap measure, and with budget issues, it could drag on for many years. And the Germans lost the far east squadron, which was schedule to have a BC as flag. It is really a political call, and could go many ways.

I went back and looked at the AC list again, and the available ones are quite old, probably too old (The newer ones survived in my TL, so they are set to have fairly long career). The predreads are death traps, only fit for coastal work or depot ships, and really, the guns are better used as coastal defense. The 11" guns is bit light, and this was know after Jutland. The High Seas fleet needs a few (3-5) BC/fast battleships. Not an easy call. You might try to use a old dreadnought as a flag ship, but I don't think this is likely. I would go with

Since were using Goeben as East Asian command ship, I think you send the Derfflinger class as the flag ship of the main fleet, wherever you put the base. The rest of the fleet is problematic, since Germany is so light on the number of cruisers. If Russia loses most of its Baltic coast, you might send some of the newer cruisers. Otherwise it is real tough to find what you need, and it will be one capital ship as flag ships with older ships (AC may have to go), torpedo boats, U-boats, gunboats. In some ways, the main base in 1920 will have weaker fleet than what Tsingtao was schedule to have in 1916. Your monitor idea may not be a bad short term solution. Scrap some predreads, and built some two gun shallow draft monitors to help out.

Looking at the list again, you have to keep building fast battleships (BC) for the next 3-5 capital ships due to losses.

Definitely true.
Well, following my research above pre-dreadnoughts as depot ships seem to make a lot of sense. For a colonial naval base additional supplies would have to be transported by merchant ships and then stored on land. A pre-dreadnought depot ship simply can´t transport enough supplies on its own for extended deployments. The supply ship simply is the "anchor" to distribute supplies.

For all the rest a lot depends on the peace treaty and the immediate post war situation.
Late 1917 in the East from a German perspective would mean most of the Baltic states already "occupied / liberated" . The Baltic Islands (Dagö, Ösel, Moon) successfully invaded. With an independent Finland thrown in, any Russian Baltic fleet would be bottled up in the Gulf of Finland and easily contained. So the Baltic Sea should be pretty secure in such a scenario.
For the colonies the picture is unclear and depends on the peace treaty.
I already mentioned the colonies which I think most likely to stay German.

Generally I think for the first years after the war any deployments of German naval ships to the colonies will be more "show the flag". For a regular deployment you´d need some minimum repair and maintenance facilities there which will take time.

Once those facilities exist I wonder if it wouldn´t be easier and less expensive to leave "small ships" (submarines, torpedo boats) there and just exchange crews? A flotilla of 8 ships (crews between 50-80) would amount to 400-700 sailors. Easily transported by just one small / mid sized passenger ship. You could even throw in a depot ship and one passenger ship would still be enough.
(I mean German naval laws pre-war already had the 1.5 crews per ship deployed overseas rule. So going for 2 crews for small ships doesn´t seem outlandish?)
All larger ships starting with destroyers would return home after their deployment.

OH, and instead of the 3 Seebataillons (3 battalions of naval infantry) pre-war I´d like to keep at least 1 division post-war.
The Naval Corps Flanders in our TL during the war consisted of 2 divisions of nominally naval infantry. Post-war it would help in the colonies and in a future war in Europe most of the units would still be there and available.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

The Ottomans were renouncing treaties and concessions by the end of the war. I see something more like the Germans get an oil concession in exchange for the Moltke. And the Seydlitz makes some sense too. I think they may stop here assuming the dreadnought (Russian) still explodes in port as OTL and Russia still falls into chaos. With 2-3 of the 11" BC, the Ottomans would be the clearly dominant power in the Black Sea and be able to stand down Greece. It takes a lot of ships to be able to challenge the Italians or RN. Once Russia looks stronger or maybe after 5-10, they may look at newer 15" type ships.

As the Ottomans, I would be tempted to rent a base to the German Navy. A twenty year lease on Haifa or Rhodes in exchange for the Moltke makes sense for both sides. Unfortunately, people very knowledgeable about the Ottoman empire have been banned, so I am bit blind on the Ottoman perspective.

Now that would make sense!
An older battle cruiser in return for a secure naval base in the Med. (Should Austria-Hungary survive Germany can offer them some anchorage there too. It would nullify Italian attempts to keep them in the Adriatic Sea.)

The "Turkish Petroleum Company" was already founded in 1911 for oil exploration in the Kirkuk area. I foresee that the British shares will be lost. Negotiated and divided between German companies and the Ottoman government?

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

I think the RN has give a golden chance to the Germans to sell to South America. Also Jutland makes UK ships looking inferior (they like to go boom). I would try to sell some newer 15" ships to South Americans to generate cash.

If they can afford it, definitely.
Especially since some governments might be slightly irritated that their ordered dreadnoughts were grabbed by the Royal Navy?
Germany also has some older dreadnoughts, not yet completed battle cruisers, and lot´s of older cruisers, torpedo boats and submarines available at a good price.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

First on BC. We are supposed to have 8 by 1917, and we had 5 at start of war. Assuming Ottomans take the Moltke and the Seydlitz is either also sold or put in reserve (it had taken many hits), then we only the 3 Derfflinger. So we could get away with finishing just the 4 Mackensens and scrap the EY.

Or we could scrap the two less completed Mackensens (Prinz EY and Furst B) and finish the EY.

Or we Finish all of them by the early 1920's and have 11 fast battleships. Or sell 2 to South American and keep 9. Financially, it makes a lot of sense to finish any significantly completed ship and sell it.

A lot will depend on how Wiking has the war end. IMO, the Germans will spend/build at the maximum possible rate until the peace deal is signed to apply pressure to the UK not to change its mind. So a TL where the peace deal takes 6 months to negotiate and the blockade is lifted is a lot different from one where a peace offer is made on November 5, 1917 and signed 3 weeks later. But in either one, all the lessons are the war are fast battleships (BC) are the way for the Germans to go.

That´s the real problem, isn´t it?
Conditions of the peace treaty and the political situation in the years following. Without knowing it, nobody could prioritize money for the army, navy and air force in post-war Germany.

Depending on the political situation (see above) in a best case scenario I´d happily give the battle cruisers Moltke and Seydlitz to the Ottoman Empire for a naval base and joint oil exploration rights in the Kirkuk region. Everything known pre-war said that this region should be a prime target for oil exploration. Mid- and long-term it´s a bargain for Germany. Especially if the Ottoman Empire keeps the Basra region too?

Likewise I´d happily sell all 4 Nassau and 4 Helgoland class battleships if the purchase price is invested back into the navy.
It´s pretty obvious even in 1916 that the German fleet doesn´t have enough cruisers and destroyers.

With a war won right now I think Germany does have a few years of breathing space.

So keep the 3 Derfllinger class battle cruisers and finish the 2 already launched Mackensen class battle cruisers.
(With Moltke and Seydlitz "sold" for a naval base and oil exploration rights to the Ottoman Empire.)

Sell the 2 laid down but not launched Mackensen if possible.
Stop construction of the Yorcks for now. Incorporate everything learned till now and launch them as fast battleships. With the war won Germany should have a few years breathing space.

If anyone (Dutch, Ottoman Empire, South America whoever) wants to buy a new Bayern class dreadnought or a Mackensen class battle cruiser. be my guest. Anyone who guarantees employment at a major German shipyard.

Quite simply put for a few years, Germany simply can´t afford everything:
- their already existing fleet
- the need to modernize their existing fleet
- the need to build modern ships
- the need to explore aircraft carriers

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

Even in my win TL, this is a huge issue. A honest assessment of the German Navy is that basically you need to finish what is more than 35% complete, and do a 2 year redesign to build new ships with a rapid replacement cycle. WW1 had made many ships obsolete as technology was rapidly adopted. And even in a clear win with the Navy as the hero, the funds are not here.

If you write the TL with Wiking, I would recommend you design the Navy you think the Germans would believe they needed, then look at the budget. Set a total budget, then set an annual construction budget. I am sure many of these obsolete ships will still be on active duty or in reserve in 1935.

Before WW1 the (private) German shipyards and the German Imperial navy shipyards quite simply had dozens of slips for capital ships and cruisers available.
Any money gained from selling older ships - assuming it stays with the navy will pay for some modern ships.

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

If using older guns as the predreads are retired, the cost of the coastal defense should be modest. My impression is also the German had a huge number of mines, so you just need to ship them down to the port and store them in a building. The depot ships appears fine for a HQ. IMO, it is more likely the base is established soon after the war, with the understanding that the needed ships (BC command ship plus long range cruisers plus escorts) will be at least 5 years away. If you don't build a lot of infrastructure or go lavish on the defense, the cost should be manageable. it is probably 10-20 million marks to setup you targeted budget of 300M to 400M. And the setting up costs are probably spread over 3-5 years. It can be done cheaper than this, if one is thinking more of a lightly defended anchorage.

See my comment above.
For the first post-war years German naval deployments to the colonies will be mainly "showing the flag".
You´re definitely right though that using older pre-dreadnought guns and mines as coastal defense are an easy and cheap way to fortify a future German naval base.

A few problems here though.
- In case of Douala (German Cameroon) the Germans quite simply need to grab / buy the Spanish owned island of Fernando Poo.
- In case of German East Africa who owns all the islands (blockading the coast)
- Even in a best case scenario Rabaul in German New Guinea will be only a tertiary base. Some supplies but accepted to be lost in a few weeks against the British Empire.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

That´s the word! Thanks.
Well I suppose I could try and search for pre-war budget numbers first? Just to have a reference for possible post-war numbers.
If anyone has found any web sources I´d be grateful for a link.

I don't have a source handy, but I have seen it pop up from time to time. From memory, 500 million marks navy (100,000 men) and 2,000 million marks for the army about 1912. Of that number, Germany never spent over 100 million on capital ships and no more than 50 million on other ships building. So at the 60% to 100% level, you are looking at 90-150 million marks to build with 120 as the number you like best. With capital ships already up to 60 million marks (3 million British pounds), it is pretty easy to see why about one capital ship per year is the right amount number. About 3 million is right for a U-boat (1/20th a capital ship). It is easy to find room for few Zeppelins. Very easy for planes of the era. Building enough cruisers is the tough part.

I have played around with these numbers for scenarios I like, and basically, you have to set the total budget, set the construction budget, then decide how many capital ships. Then the rest is just what you can afford. In my ATL, if i build few capital ships (one 15" per year, one 17" every other year), you have about 100 million left, and can do some funding of everything else such as 6 U-boat, 6 destroyers, 2 cruisers, 0.5 Zeppelins, 0.25-0.50 light carriers). Or put in total terms with 20 year life cycle, 10-15 capital ships (15" going to 17"), 120 Uboats, 120 destroyers, 60 cruisers/long range destroyers, 10 Zeppelins, and 6 carriers. And I will have multiple long range aviation attack planes. You will still have more needs than ships. This is why I have looked at so many odd ideas for postwar sips in my ATL. Budget will drive it. And this is part of the reason I built ship yards and smelters in Kamerun, the cost issues were obvious.

The numbers I give are not too far from the prewar German Navy in size, and to me are below what the navy would viewed as "needed". To go down to 60 to 80% will imply hard choices and dropping programs, especially if the focus on building large ships first continues.

When you researched the converted pre-dreads, did it say what they did with the magazine spaces for the guns? Office space for the flotilla commander makes sense, but so does extra storage.

Also on the main guns, the simplest way is to remove the main gun, the just put the turret (top armor) back down. While it is too much work to change structural elements of the turret, you can save a lot of weight by replacing the turret with the lighter weight strength deck armor and removing the heavy equipment such as lifts for the shells. Did it say how this one done?

Generally I think for the first years after the war any deployments of German naval ships to the colonies will be more "show the flag". For a regular deployment you´d need some minimum repair and maintenance facilities there which will take time.

Show the flag is the easiest. Send down a converted pre-dread as tender. Set up regular freighter schedule which will helps the colony. Douala was 6-8 weeks between ships prewar OTL, so if you just boost to 3-4 with extra naval supplies, you have both helped the local economy and helped strategically. The small ships are the issue. Germany used its BC, AC and other cruiser much more actively than the big ships, and it shows in sinking. Without some improved ports (cranes and/or drydocks for repairs), it is hard to see any of the BC going down or the BB. If something big breaks, it is a long trip to Germany for repairs. The U-boats make some sense, but I think they will have issues with the heat. Part of the reason for moving my POD back for going to Africa is to give the Navy time to fix the issues over a decade. I think you are realistically looking at the mid range torpedo boats. Are they shallow enough to go up river? It might be valuable to have ships that can hide 50-100 mile inland or even put their base in that far.

Once those facilities exist I wonder if it wouldn´t be easier and less expensive to leave "small ships" (submarines, torpedo boats) there and just exchange crews? A flotilla of 8 ships (crews between 50-80) would amount to 400-700 sailors. Easily transported by just one small / mid sized passenger ship. You could even throw in a depot ship and one passenger ship would still be enough.
(I mean German naval laws pre-war already had the 1.5 crews per ship deployed overseas rule. So going for 2 crews for small ships doesn´t seem outlandish?)
All larger ships starting with destroyers would return home after their deployment.

I went with 2 full crews per ships for various reason such as malaria and West Africa was my test ground far from the prying eyes of the British Admirals and the true enemy, the German Surface admirals. This is why it is harder to send down the big ships, you might need 2000-2500 sailors for a EY in the mid-1920's. Then add on warehouse men, marines, etc. And families for some. IT gets to be a big number of men fast, and without improvement, Douala or Dar Es Salaam would be the armpit of the world to a German sailor. IOTL, you could literally hunt lion from the roof top of buildings in Dar Es Salaam when the first naval personnel arrived.

Due to the issues of travel time and lower labor, I assumed once a ship goes to Africa, it never comes back. This is why the cranes and stuff show up early in my ATL. I have the crews coming down on the monthly freighter, and will double crews, this should work fine. I figured a 3 year stay for most men.

A flotilla of something sounds right. So either something like 6 TB, 6 U-boats. OR 1 light cruisers, 6 TB, 3 U-boats. If a big ship goes down (BC), you obviously have to send more escorts.

I like the marines too, and it is doable if you allow it to be partially reserve. A regiment in Douala or your main base makes sense if you have it one BN active, two in reserve. You can either use native labor or you can allow the locals whites to enlist. Cash for reserve status should be popular in a colony where a mark goes a lot farther. And a certain % of your sailors will marry locals, if your racial policies allow it, and they would like to stay. Regiment active in Germany, regiment reserve. BN at secondary bases. Gets you right about a division at a workable cost level if you keep at light infantry.

The "Turkish Petroleum Company" was already founded in 1911 for oil exploration in the Kirkuk area. I foresee that the British shares will be lost. Negotiated and divided between German companies and the Ottoman government?

Since all sides seized foreign assets, I can see these seizer being formalized in the peace treaty. Go read the B-L treaty, many pages of trade and economic issues.

If they can afford it, definitely.
Especially since some governments might be slightly irritated that their ordered dreadnoughts were grabbed by the Royal Navy?
Germany also has some older dreadnoughts, not yet completed battle cruisers, and lot´s of older cruisers, torpedo boats and submarines available at a good price.

They can. Argentina and Brazil made a fortune in the war exporting. Likely Chile too on nitrates and copper.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

When you researched the converted pre-dreads, did it say what they did with the magazine spaces for the guns? Office space for the flotilla commander makes sense, but so does extra storage.

Also on the main guns, the simplest way is to remove the main gun, the just put the turret (top armor) back down. While it is too much work to change structural elements of the turret, you can save a lot of weight by replacing the turret with the lighter weight strength deck armor and removing the heavy equipment such as lifts for the shells. Did it say how this one done?

The shops and storage I mentioned were for a fully equipped pre-dreadnought.

Unfortunately they don´t say what happened with turrets and magazine spaces when the ships were no longer used as "fighting" ships.
Main use of pre-dreadnoughts seem to have been as floating barracks. A few were used as depot ships.
In almost all cases both the main guns and the secondary guns were removed. Quite a few of the main guns used as railway artillery. The secondary guns mostly put on gun carriages.

I found one photo of the SMS Preussen. Unfortunately only in the 1919 conversion. Not sure if the dark rectangle between the two rails is a main turret?

Anyway I would suspect that the Germans didn´t put much effort into converting the old pre-dreadnoughts. On most of them they probably only removed the guns.

Thanks for the numbers!
Something to play with.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

I found one photo of the SMS Preussen. Unfortunately only in the 1919 conversion. Not sure if the dark rectangle between the two rails is a main turret?

Anyway I would suspect that the Germans didn´t put much effort into converting the old pre-dreadnoughts. On most of them they probably only removed the guns.

Thanks for the numbers!
Something to play with.

The only things I see different is the guns are missing. Yes, I think the rectangle box is the turret box of the main guns. The added a steel frame on the weather deck, which i suspect was used as a frame for tents for more housing /office space. Much like building a 1-2 story building on the weather deck.

[Detlef]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

The only things I see different is the guns are missing. Yes, I think the rectangle box is the turret box of the main guns. The added a steel frame on the weather deck, which i suspect was used as a frame for tents for more housing /office space. Much like building a 1-2 story building on the weather deck.

You mean the two prominent "rails"? On both ship sides?
That´s part of the 1919 conversion.

As far as I can determine, during the war only only the main guns and secondary guns were removed from most pre-dreadnoughts. And the ships afterwards mainly used as "floating barracks with office rooms". Be it for submarine flotillas, mine hunter flotillas (using the old pre-1900 torpedo boats) and so on. And since the ships spent almost all of their time in German ports I suspect that ammunition and fuel supply was handled by the port.

In this case we´re talking about SMS Preussen. Last use as an "icebreaker" in the Baltic Sea in early 1917. Decommissioned May 1917. That´s when the guns were removed. The crew went to the new battle cruiser SMS Hindenburg (just commissioned). The ship afterwards stayed in Wilhelmshaven as the "Beischiff" (tender) of the III. submarine flotilla. Probably office / floating barrack. Unlikely that the ship would handle supplies while being in Germany´s largest naval base.

The steel frame / rails were added in 1919. When the ship was converted to a "mothership" for flat bottomed small mine sweepers. This website shows SMS Lothringen (same conversion after WW1) with some of the boats. There´s one boat fastened down on one rail / skid just below the first funnel. Loaded and unloaded with the ship cranes.

The website - which I found today - says too that during this conversion the turrets were removed too? Might make sense. 12-18 of these boats would weight a bit. In that case the rectangle box in place of the turret might be storage room (close to the boats) plus an access to the former magazines?

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Detlef

The website - which I found today - says too that during this conversion the turrets were removed too? Might make sense. 12-18 of these boats would weight a bit. In that case the rectangle box in place of the turret might be storage room (close to the boats) plus an access to the former magazines?

To me it looks like the same location as the old turret box. So I would guess the replaced the heavy armored turret with a lighter steel box. On the USS Mass, to get from the Turret cylinder directly to the deck requires one exit out a small door on the Turret, so if the space in the turret area (presumed stripped of equipment) is being used a living or office space, you would need to install the box so the people can quickly get from the turret cylinder to the deck to work on the boats.

Otherwise it is a long trip through the maze towards the other exits to the surface of the ships.