Bismarck and Tirpitz canceled for more Scharnhorst-class

I question how effective the Adm. Hippers would be with the 11" guns. Certainly Graf Spee managed to out fight three cruisers, but she effectively suffered a mission kill.

Drop a Scharnhorst in her place (for the actual fight, mevermimd the logistics or practicality) and she would probably have taken the three them apart without much effort.

Cruisers alone would probably mean the British don't send battleships as escorts freeing them up for operations elsewhere, but Scharnhorsts might not mean a battleships with every convoy, and the ones without can be torn into with something close to impunity.

I would be careful with the statement that Graf Spee out fought 3 cruisers - given that the 2 light Cruisers ultimately chased her into a Neutral port and then remained on station ready for round 2 - as it was she was fortunate that she effectively silenced Exeter early in the battle as one of the two 8" shell hits that Exeter scored early in the fight caused the Panzerschiffe all sorts of problems - had HMS Cumberland (the 4th Cruiser of the hunting group not present at the battle) been on scene then its unlikely she would have made it to Montevideo!

And we must mind the Logistics and Practicality (as well as Geography) particulalrly when suggesting using a Fast Battleship as a raider!
 
think they could have built the 5 ships of Admiral Hipper-class with 11" guns and been just about as effective while saving tons (and tons) of armor plating and large caliber guns.

I question how effective the Adm. Hippers would be with the 11" guns. Certainly Graf Spee managed to out fight three cruisers, but she effectively suffered a mission kill.

they are certainly not going to fare as well as Scharnhost ... the question is what do you want to build ...

my scenario is that the 3 original Panzerschiffe and 2 dozen (or more) auxiliary cruisers operate as raiders, the 5 Adm. Hippers -class would be super fast warships for home waters along with re-built light cruisers.

(there is option of converting the 4 remaining WWI ships to monitor-type ships with 11" guns in which case you would have 12 equipped with 11" guns)
 
I would be careful with the statement that Graf Spee out fought 3 cruisers - given that the 2 light Cruisers ultimately chased her into a Neutral port and then remained on station ready for round 2 - as it was she was fortunate that she effectively silenced Exeter early in the battle as one of the two 8" shell hits that Exeter scored early in the fight caused the Panzerschiffe all sorts of problems - had HMS Cumberland (the 4th Cruiser of the hunting group not present at the battle) been on scene then its unlikely she would have made it to Montevideo!

And we must mind the Logistics and Practicality (as well as Geography) particulalrly when suggesting using a Fast Battleship as a raider!


maybe - maybe not

With two heavy cruisers & two light cruisers ; Langsdorff would have given cause for sober second thought and avoided combat altogether.

Anyway Panzerschiffe were a better bet than battleships with one source claiming the KM could have built 21 instead of the 4 BB & 5 CA.
 
With two heavy cruisers & two light cruisers ; Langsdorff would have given cause for sober second thought and avoided combat altogether.
Did Langsdorff not think it was 1 CA/CL and 2 DDs in OTL, once identified it wa to late due to the CAs/CL being faster?
Also Exeter (and her sister) where the weakest of the treaty Heavy Cruisers ever built with only 6 guns and she was silenced early losing much of armament early on.....

Anyway Panzerschiffe were a better bet than battleships with one source claiming the KM could have built 21 instead of the 4 BB & 5 CA.
But a 21 PB fleet only has one reason to exist, raiding against the RN.... It would have to be build from the start so by 1936 you would have to add up no AGNT and having 3+3(guns or 4 weight?) Panzerschiffe to Anglo-German relations I'm not sure that GB would really carry on reacting the same way as OTL if it was so obvious that they rather than just the small eastern European nations are being threatened by preparations for war?
 
maybe - maybe not

With two heavy cruisers & two light cruisers ; Langsdorff would have given cause for sober second thought and avoided combat altogether.

Anyway Panzerschiffe were a better bet than battleships with one source claiming the KM could have built 21 instead of the 4 BB & 5 CA.

Force G had a significant speed advantage over GF who had been at sea for many months and whose top speed at the time was not much above 24 knots (that's the max sustainable speed that she closed with the British Cruisers in the hope that she could sink/cripple them before they got up full steam for their turbines) - so the choice of avoiding combat was purely in the hands of the RN/RNZN squadron.

Once they found her - aircraft could have kept her in sight and the Squadron manoeuvred accordingly.

I agree on the raider approach over BBs - Only way for Germany to possibly win WW2 was to knock out Britain as early as possible by maritime blockade but also it would be far easier for Britain and France to react to these than to fast BBs

For example I would imagine that if Germany was building lots of Long range 8" or 11" armed Heavy Cruisers then what is going to be the Response?

Lots of 8" armed Towns I expect!
 
How about the force of lighter BCs and cruisers backed by an accelerated build of a carrier or two? Given the reduced resources to build the fleet up, some of the resources could be assigned to the Graf Zeppelin, completing her earlier, plus the higher number of hulls means she can be escorted easier.

However, there is still the "who owns the planes?" problem, plus having carrier compatible aircraft available....
 
The scharnhorst class battleship was a political compromise, as the Original proposal was for a more potent ship, armed with 38 cm guns in four twin turrets, like the later Bsiamrck clsass, though the difficulty to produce such a design, addapted to the time then, after a 20 years of buildingstop was too much for the german engineers, so a compromise was developped, using basically the dimensions of the last produced type fo capital ship, the Mackensen Class battlecruiser of 1914 design! Addapting the hull was a difficult proces, given the demand to put the new design engines and boilers in it, resulting in a larger space occupied internally for engines and boilers, resulting in the loss of a turret, ending with just 3 turrets, whcih were still expected to be 38cm in twinturrets, though as these guns were not ready in time another compromise was made to arm them interim with the tripple 28cm/56, which were already ordered for the canceled panzerschiffe following the Graf Spee.

So the Scharnhorst was not what the Kriegsmarine wanted actually. It wanted larger, more capable and touger heavily armed battleships, not undergunned slightly faster ships of more modest size. The goal was Always the Bismarck class as bare minimum, possibly even the never build larger H-class. Though the Scharnhorst was a good desing as such, it was politcally not what the German Navy wanted.
 
But a 21 PB fleet only has one reason to exist, raiding against the RN.... It would have to be build from the start so by 1936 you would have to add up no AGNT and having 3+3(guns or 4 weight?) Panzerschiffe to Anglo-German relations I'm not sure that GB would really carry on reacting the same way as OTL if it was so obvious that they rather than just the small eastern European nations are being threatened by preparations for war?
The most obvious reaction is British support for the French when Hitler reoccupies the Rhineland in May 1936 - since 21 PBs are a clear declaration of intent to fight a war with the UK. That means he scuttles back out again with his tail between his legs and gets couped shortly afterwards...
 
Anyway Panzerschiffe were a better bet than battleships with one source claiming the KM could have built 21 instead of the 4 BB & 5 CA.
Well it would be interesting to see a British response to the Germans building 31 Panzerschiffe. I assume that it would have happened during the preoccupation of the Rheinland, or Anschluss at the latest.

If such a reaction doesn't happen and Britain instead builds a fleet to counter I'm not sure if they would go for heavy cruisers (as the panzerschiffe was vulnerable to cruiser guns) or light battleships (30 knot+ battleships armed with lighter guns [12 inch/13.5 inch] and armour to shrug off hits in that range) or simply by getting more carriers 'a modern battleship can't be sunk by planes but an overgunned cruiser that will go down easy'.
 
Did Langsdorff not think it was 1 CA/CL and 2 DDs in OTL, once identified it wa to late due to the CAs/CL being faster?
Also Exeter (and her sister) where the weakest of the treaty Heavy Cruisers ever built with only 6 guns and she was silenced early losing much of armament early on.....

But a 21 PB fleet only has one reason to exist, raiding against the RN.... It would have to be build from the start so by 1936 you would have to add up no AGNT and having 3+3(guns or 4 weight?) Panzerschiffe to Anglo-German relations I'm not sure that GB would really carry on reacting the same way as OTL if it was so obvious that they rather than just the small eastern European nations are being threatened by preparations for war?

Raiding against the Royal Navy is impossible, as the Royal Navy does not transport cargo. Raiding against a convoy of cargoships is something different, than boldly attacking a larger and more powerful warfleet.
 
Well it would be interesting to see a British response to the Germans building 31 Panzerschiffe. I assume that it would have happened during the preoccupation of the Rheinland, or Anschluss at the latest.

If such a reaction doesn't happen and Britain instead builds a fleet to counter I'm not sure if they would go for heavy cruisers (as the panzerschiffe was vulnerable to cruiser guns) or light battleships (30 knot+ battleships armed with lighter guns [12 inch/13.5 inch] and armour to shrug off hits in that range) or simply by getting more carriers 'a modern battleship can't be sunk by planes but an overgunned cruiser that will go down easy'.

A fleet, any fleet needs a base to exist, which in the Kriegsmarine was a ballanced group of throw away units (U-Boote and light attack craft) and fleet in being units, that were to be preserved at all cost, to play a more political game (Capital ships of the past and SS(B)N's and CVN's of today). The Panzerschiffe was a sort of hybrid of both, so basically seen as expendable if needed, though the battleships were not. As long as a certin part of large, potentially powerful units existed, the political purpose would proceed in both peacetime and war.
 
Force G had a significant speed advantage over GF who had been at sea for many months and whose top speed at the time was not much above 24 knots (that's the max sustainable speed that she closed with the British Cruisers in the hope that she could sink/cripple them before they got up full steam for their turbines) - so the choice of avoiding combat was purely in the hands of the RN/RNZN squadron.

Once they found her - aircraft could have kept her in sight and the Squadron manoeuvred accordingly.!

Harwood's ships only had enough fuel for part of a days fuel pursuit before they would run -out so Langsdorff only had to fight them off with LR 11" fire....and make for Antarctic waters

Langsdorff might have thought twice about facing two CL & DD.
 
21 PBC would be to help combined wolfpack/MPB find and attack convoys .

Twins were to get 35cm guns not 38cm guns.

Best British response would be to build all CL from mid 1930s on to mount 3-4 twin 8" guns instead of triple 6" gun turrets.
 
As we speak of British building programs, remember that Britain also has to be concerned with building programs elsewhere, Japan in particular, but also the USA, Italy, and France. Anything less than King George V class ships would have problems with Littorio and company.

I would expect follow-ups to Scharnhorst and Gneisneneau to be armed with twin 15" guns, and I would expect 3 of them to make it into service at best, not 4. Battleships take longer to build than any contemporary ship class.
 
As we speak of British building programs, remember that Britain also has to be concerned with building programs elsewhere, Japan in particular, but also the USA, Italy, and France. Anything less than King George V class ships would have problems with Littorio and company.

I would expect follow-ups to Scharnhorst and Gneisneneau to be armed with twin 15" guns, and I would expect 3 of them to make it into service at best, not 4. Battleships take longer to build than any contemporary ship class.

Yes of course - so they would build Towns with 3 x 3 x 8" instead of 4 x 3 x 6" and if Germany is building ships designed to exploit gaps in the Treaties.....oh dear what is that paper ripping sound???

When Germany had just the 3 Panzerschiffe - Britain had 15 CLs most with 8 x 8" and 2 with 6 x 8" guns - and we know what happens when Panzerschiffe meets 8" shell (2 such hits mission killed Graf Spee - 1 of the hits nigh on crippled her - and Exeter was pretty much knocked out in the opening 5 minutes of the battle) - a 5 to 1 advantage - later down to a 3 to 1 when the Hippers are commissioned which I guess they were okay with??? - But 23 such vessels?

I just don't see Germany being allowed to build 23 Heavy Cruisers during the 30s - not when the 1st LNT in 1930 gave the following international limits - Note: Heavy Cruiser was a vessel with an armament of no greater than 8" - Britain was permitted 15 with a total tonnage of 147,000, the U.S. 18 totalling 180,000, and the Japanese 12 totalling 108,000 tons
 
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...deration-from-the-start.421976/#post-15251820

Who cares what the British want....as I calculated on the above thread, if there was any value behind the British agreement to allow Germany 35% fleet , that would mean they were allowed to build

NAZI NAVAL FORCES 1939 [35% ALLOWED BY TREATY]
CV = O+1 [2+2]
BB/BC= 2+2 [ 5+ 2]
CA/CL 8+3 [23 + 11]
DD/FF= 22/14+8/17 [64+ 19]
UB 57+59 [21 +8 ]

Looks like 23 by 1939 with another 11 building....so short answer was yes they could build them and were allowed to build them by treaty....plus a lot more!
 

FBKampfer

Banned
I suppose if I were to redesign the KM from scratch, I'd go with the 4-6 Scharnhorsts from my OP but squeeze a bit more speed out of them, scale them down if needed, scrap the carrier entirely, scrap the Bismarcks.

Build the Hippers as OTL, and but build hybrid light cruisers/destroyers. Like a standardized 150mm twin gun turret that goes on everything and just crank them out. Three turrets per cruiser/destroyer, make sure they have AA shells.

Lots of subs.
 
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...deration-from-the-start.421976/#post-15251820

Who cares what the British want....as I calculated on the above thread, if there was any value behind the British agreement to allow Germany 35% fleet , that would mean they were allowed to build



Looks like 23 by 1939 with another 11 building....so short answer was yes they could build them and were allowed to build them by treaty....plus a lot more!
First off agna was by tonneage not by number of ships.

Secondly the categories were those agreed to by the major naval powers in their treaties.

This meant that anything with guns over 8 inches was a battleship.
 
Yes of course - so they would build Towns with 3 x 3 x 8" instead of 4 x 3 x 6" and if Germany is building ships designed to exploit gaps in the Treaties.....oh dear what is that paper ripping sound???

When Germany had just the 3 Panzerschiffe - Britain had 15 CLs most with 8 x 8" and 2 with 6 x 8" guns - and we know what happens when Panzerschiffe meets 8" shell (2 such hits mission killed Graf Spee - 1 of the hits nigh on crippled her - and Exeter was pretty much knocked out in the opening 5 minutes of the battle) - a 5 to 1 advantage - later down to a 3 to 1 when the Hippers are commissioned which I guess they were okay with??? - But 23 such vessels?

I just don't see Germany being allowed to build 23 Heavy Cruisers during the 30s - not when the 1st LNT in 1930 gave the following international limits - Note: Heavy Cruiser was a vessel with an armament of no greater than 8" - Britain was permitted 15 with a total tonnage of 147,000, the U.S. 18 totalling 180,000, and the Japanese 12 totalling 108,000 tons

Exploit treaties? If you implicate, that the Deutschland-class was an exploitation of any treaty, well, the ship designed according to the ToV. And you are right, the brits effectively ripped apart that treaty with their naval agreement. Which i found somewhat amusing.

As for the mission kill part... by how? The "common knowledge", hit on the diesel purification plant have no trace in the german AAR, the Uruguayian report or whatsoever. Battle damage was endurable.
Ammo stocks, general wear on machinery on the other hands...

Langsdorff IMHO did not killed himself without a reason. He made a serious row of bad calls right from the decision to turn towards Montevideo.
 
Top