Get Göring removed, build a proper naval air arm for long range maritime commerce interdiction, and to support u-boats. Small fleet-in-being is enough to tie down some British ships, but aircraft carriers are a complete waste of resources for Germany if the plan is not to invade Iceland. FW-200 was quite good already for early war, but purpose built fast torpedo bomber would add some impact. Airplanes and coastal artillery are also sufficient to keep the shores safe.
There are several obstacles for Germany to build a politically/strategically useful navy beyond saving more as a fleet in being (imagine T&B + graf zeppelin in Norway).
However, if we are working under the strategic mission at the time, the raider concept, I’d like to put forward an important technical one. The propulsion.
Long range at reasonable speed is an absolute requirement, and diesel is the only solution for that.
Surviving as a raider would require speed, (ideally high pressure) steam is the solution.
What to do? The solution need to be ready in time.
IOTL they did increase the efficiency of the diesels and ended with long range destroyer designs. Could the breakthroughs have been achieved much earlier?
They did have CODOS (combined diesel or steam) on their earlier light cruisers, but the viable solution is CODAS (combined diesel and steam). As I read up on it, it requires some complex gearing, but it is not unknown technology going into it. Eg. If the Germans decide to go codas, it might just work, but it is off course a risk. IOTL they took a similar risk on high pressure steam....
Any thoughts on this subject?
PS. An upside of the CODAS system is that the wear and tear on the possibly still chosen high pressure steam might be reduced if they run diesel only most of the time.
There are several obstacles for Germany to build a politically/strategically useful navy beyond saving more as a fleet in being (imagine T&B + graf zeppelin in Norway).
However, if we are working under the strategic mission at the time, the raider concept, I’d like to put forward an important technical one. The propulsion.
Long range at reasonable speed is an absolute requirement, and diesel is the only solution for that.
Surviving as a raider would require speed, (ideally high pressure) steam is the solution.
What to do? The solution need to be ready in time.
IOTL they did increase the efficiency of the diesels and ended with long range destroyer designs. Could the breakthroughs have been achieved much earlier?
They did have CODOS (combined diesel or steam) on their earlier light cruisers, but the viable solution is CODAS (combined diesel and steam). As I read up on it, it requires some complex gearing, but it is not unknown technology going into it. Eg. If the Germans decide to go codas, it might just work, but it is off course a risk. IOTL they took a similar risk on high pressure steam....
Any thoughts on this subject?
PS. An upside of the CODAS system is that the wear and tear on the possibly still chosen high pressure steam might be reduced if they run diesel only most of the time.
With the caveat that the BB’s were effective as a fleet in being, the large cruisers that could outgun a RN cruiser and spahkreuzer’s would seem an effective combo.But the large cruiser need the range.do not know if their hybrid system could be made to work as you project? my speculative fleet was for Admiral Hipper-class (sized) ships at the largest end (with 11" guns) and Spahkreuzer (sized) ships (instead of historical destroyers) with the hybrid steam-diesel. but was operating on the assumption they would operate as in OTL?
(was also assuming they build the supply/tankers which carry fuel oil and diesel, and, luckily, can tow disabled ships!)
perhaps they finish 5 of the "Hipper-class" my suggestion is not to send the Panzerschiff overseas, then you would have 4 sets of ships with 11" guns in Germany and Norway, with couple dozen cruiser sized escorts?
leave a question mark over carriers but they certainly should not have attempted larger than Hipper-sized vessel?
that would be a decent fleet and save all the cemented armor used on the larger BBs they built historically?
do not know if their hybrid system could be made to work as you project? my speculative fleet was for Admiral Hipper-class (sized) ships at the largest end (with 11" guns) and Spahkreuzer (sized) ships (instead of historical destroyers) with the hybrid steam-diesel. but was operating on the assumption they would operate as in OTL?
(was also assuming they build the supply/tankers which carry fuel oil and diesel, and, luckily, can tow disabled ships!)
perhaps they finish 5 of the "Hipper-class" my suggestion is not to send the Panzerschiff overseas, then you would have 4 sets of ships with 11" guns in Germany and Norway, with couple dozen cruiser sized escorts?
leave a question mark over carriers but they certainly should not have attempted larger than Hipper-sized vessel?
With the caveat that the BB’s were effective as a fleet in being, the large cruisers that could outgun a RN cruiser and spahkreuzer’s would seem an effective combo.But the large cruiser need the range.
A fleet carrier? Very debated but I think it would b highly valuable. Also as a fleet in being.
I foundation a link. The Koln Claus frigate is ofte credited with the first modern Codag system (alternative is alternating propellers). The first ship the germans made post wardo not know if their hybrid system could be made to work as you project? my speculative fleet was for Admiral Hipper-class (sized) ships at the largest end (with 11" guns) and Spahkreuzer (sized) ships (instead of historical destroyers) with the hybrid steam-diesel. but was operating on the assumption they would operate as in OTL?
I foundation a link. The Koln Claus frigate is ofte credited with the first modern Codag system (alternative is alternating propellers). The first ship the germans made post war
The Koln class is 2000 tons and not bigger than the destroyers of WW2.thanks for the link. not a ship designer, just do not know that they could fit the "plumbing" into smaller destroyer/cruiser sized ships and/or my speculative Hipper-sized battlecruiser for the diesel to be anything other than supplemental power?
my understanding the last two light cruisers built historically could use both type engines simultaneously? although the ships had to be brought to complete stop to engage (yikes!)
beyond the technical issues if the KM begins construction of entire range of diesel ships that is not lost on UK?
my view you would achieve most of the benefits with less negative with exactly the system they had installed on light cruisers. for example the Spahkreuzer design could make the trek to Narvik and depart if only "crawling" under diesel power?
I think the general expectations is that the OTL GZ design gave the germans (a lot) less than what they would get on a similar tonnage in other countries. Having said that, the aircrafts would have been effective dive bombers and torpedo bombers. Immense scouting capability from the Fi-167's. Would the pilots in the Bf109T manage? Thats an unknown and probably a case where some non-combat losses could be expected. Once airborne, not a bad carrier fighter.I ink whatever scenario you propose, the value of aircraft carries for the KM is suspect. They had 0 experience operating carriers and their associated airwings. They had no previous design experience in CV's (only token support from Japan). Even if they did manage to overcome the obstacles and get a handful of operational CV's in commission, they would be always outnumbered by the allies. Also each CV would need a dedicated group of ships for support (AA and AS ops) as well as at sea replenishment (something the KM did not have in great numbers)
Would the pilots in the Bf109T manage? Thats an unknown and probably a case where some non-combat losses could be expected. Once airborne, not a bad carrier fighter.
The Koln class is 2000 tons and not bigger than the destroyers of WW2.
The Leipzig and Nurnberg used 3 shafts and had diesel engines on the center shaft. Quite a simple solution, but the power was not too well balanced (12000 hp vs. 30000 on the outer shafts.
The Spahkreuzer was diesel only if I recall. Would have been more usefull than the OTL destroyers for sure.
You are off course right about the spahkreuzer. 3 shafts, 1 diesel. Take a look at this link.it seems a stretch for 1930's era to achieve what they did post-war (and then only in limited numbers?)
the (projected 1938) destroyers thru all Spahkreuzer to M-class cruisers all employed hybrid propulsion, all with the same power output ratios we have discussed.
the only exception was the O-class battlecruiser, which projects 176,000 shp, 116,000 from diesel, 60,000 from steam turbine. (of course this would have been in 35,000t ship so we have to consider that)
my understanding the destroyers used the steam turbines to operate all the ship systems, so in harbor they were burning fuel, this was somewhat corrected by having small diesels. (diesels not used for propulsion)
I ink whatever scenario you propose, the value of aircraft carries for the KM is suspect. They had 0 experience operating carriers and their associated airwings. They had no previous design experience in CV's (only token support from Japan). Even if they did manage to overcome the obstacles and get a handful of operational CV's in commission, they would be always outnumbered by the allies. Also each CV would need a dedicated group of ships for support (AA and AS ops) as well as at sea replenishment (something the KM did not have in great numbers)
Did any of the nations operating Carriers in WWII have no pre-War experience?'
I just can’t see one carrier with a mixed group of adapted planes (no specialists amongst its complement) having a great effect. The casualties that the British and Americans (as well presumably the Japanese) took pre-War in learning the basics of Carrier ops - let alone perfecting the craft - would be inflicted on the Germans during the War, whilst operating. A single carrier is a basis for gaining experience, not a weapon for inflicting damage on the enemy.