Search results

Can't be done with the same amount of armour protection and/or speed. Quick and dirty done in springsharp, prolly several faults, but it bloats to 45K tons for a 3x3 16" gun ship Scharnhorst, Germany Scharnhorst-class laid down 1935 Displacement: 40 136 t light; 42 734 t standard; 45 275 t...

No you misunderstood, those are the three reasons why no serious attempts were made at knocking out the German fleet. Two attempts were made to damage it early in the war with bombing but both were ..... failures, or more accuratly disasters.

1) Mines 2) Aircrafts 3) Enemy submarines

Well GRU and KGB defectors claim that both their organisations successfully influenced the peace movement in the west. Granted this is a longer game then what the Nazis would be attempting.

They're always late to the fight ;)

Divine intervention. And by that I mean that the Emperor personaly gets involved, which he wouldn't. Potentially, if Japan manges to get a 5:5:3,5 ratio in the Washington Naval Treaty instead of the historical 5:5:3 they got, there is a possibility they'll go for a 4x3 16.1" gun build instead...

Why would the Japanese do this? The Nagato-class already has a four-five knot advantage over the US battlefleet. what possible advantage would another knot give? You need hindsight for the Japanese (or any other nations) admirals to come to the conclusion that you need the battleships to give...

If it is deemed more efficent and cheaper then extermination it might be considered.

First of all I'd say that it isn't an established fact that "addictive personalites" actually exists. There is still quite a debate going on wheter or not it does. So your entire premise may be flawed from the start. Second of all I'm not sure I'd agree that even if "addictive personalities"...

That is if you assume that the central-pacific advance was needed in the first place.

Why would you need carriers for that? The Pacific War was won the US silent service.

The USA physically couldn't build any more ships then it did OTL, there were no available space on the slipways. And by implying "spamming" only carriers you assume hindsight, because in the late -30ies and first years of the -40ies everyone except a few fringe nutjobs "knew" that battles were...

A) Adopt a convoy system from the start. B) Build more cheap escorts, preferably from wood which can use the merchant yards instead of the naval yards. C) Fortify the pacific holdings from the start instead of waiting until a few weeks before a suspected invasion. D) A clear submarine doctrine...

At least in regards to the USA, on or slightly after September 5th 1905.

Bismarck 197M Rm Tirpitz 181M Rm Scharnhorst 146M Rm Gneisenau 143M Rm Hipper 86M Rm Blücher 87M Rm Prinz Eugen105M Rm Flugzeugträger 92M Rm Graff Zeppelin 93M Rm Type VIIA 4.189.000 to 4.439.000 Rm Type VIIC 1.983.000 RM Type IXB 6.163.000 to 6.448.000 Rm Type XB 6.350.000 Rm Type XI...

Sure, but you're thinking of the earlier decision wheter or not to go to war. After the decision had been made to acquire the European colonies the army wanted to attack Malaya, the Dutch East Indies and then the Phillippines, in that order. The Navy on the other hand argued that Malaya and the...

The decision to involve the USA in the war was done by the Japanese Navy, the Japanese Army didn't want to attack the USA.

300 U-boats in summer of -40? That would close down the Atlantic, hard. There were what 15-20 U-boats at sea at any one time at most? 300 U-boats would at least quintuple that figure (1/3 at sea, 1/3 moving to or from their patrol zone and 1/3 in port). The convoy losses would be massive...

No, don't know, the numbers are for crude oil I have no numbers of refined oil.

Leauge of Nations statistical yearbook 1938-1939