If Doenitz had his 300 U-Booats after the Fall of France?

If the Spanish are involved then the rule is that you cannot use the word 'secret' ;)

There's also the question of why on Earth would Spain agree to what would amount to an act of war against the British? I mean IOTL the Germans simply could not persuade the Spanish to join the Axis at any price, they certainly aren't going to make themselves an an enemy of the British for a scheme that is highly likely to bring the US into the war, the very thing Franco was convinced would spell Germany's doom.

As for the Italians where are these 'secret' supply ships going to operate from that allows them to avoid Malta and Gibraltar, not to mention that unless France doesn't fall the Italians will still declare war in June of 1940 anyway.
 
Right, completely unbiased assessment of course....


Why should it be unbiased? They were trying to make a point!

Since they were engineers involved in the whole process during -the war that makes them one step below a primary source [not being published during the war].


A lot more informed than internet posters nearly a century after the fact.
 
Why should it be unbiased? They were trying to make a point!

Since they were engineers involved in the whole process during -the war that makes them one step below a primary source [not being published during the war].


A lot more informed than internet posters nearly a century after the fact.


And yet as others have pointed out there was no place to build these U-Boats and no skilled labour force to do it with but somehow they were supposed to achieve production rates apparently superior to those of the wartime US shipyards? There is plentiful primary documentation of other German manufacturing programs and more than a few of them include ludicrous production estimates.
 
You mean posters who seem to know so little about German rearmament , that they have to compare it to American wartime production.

How many large and small warships did Germany laid down from 1933 up until the end of 1939?
 
PSL I take that personally. I could not on the spur of the moment find the average time for building a type VII U-Boat so used the data for a Gato class and adjusted that for the smaller boat and the lower level of equipment (German boats did not the have the air conditioning or refrigeration that Gato boats had due to the long patrols and tropical conditions they were expected to operate in). I make no claim for exact numbers but the reality is in 1933/34 there was no German submarine shipbuilding industry and had not been one since 1918. In fact the type VII was not even a set of blueprints until at least 1935 (VIIA). Getting 300 type VII boats by September 1939 would be impossible and 375 even more so. Even if Skippy had given them to Dönitz, manning them with adequately trained officers and crew would have been impossible (warm bodies maybe, adequately trained/experienced no).

Give me some time and I will be able to get exact numbers, although this would require archival research to be accurate. FYI I speak French and German in addition to English, and am a dissertator working on my PhD in military history and have a total of 37 years (intelligence then medical corps) USN/USNR.

I am happy to be corrected on facts, willing to listen to reasoned arguments on interpretation, but lets keep it polite. Ad hominem arguments are unacceptable. And, FYI my mother does not wear combat boots.
 
Even if one allows that the Germans could have built a lot more U-Boats I have to ask the obvious question why would they? in 1934 when Germany's priorities are a future war with France and the defence of the Baltic would they even contemplate building a massive submarine force whose only use is blockading Britain? Bearing in mind that through most of the 30's the British are incredibly lenient with Nazi Germany, allowing them to roll back provisions of the Versailles treaty and bending over backwards to avoid conflict. Beyond that the Nazis can't afford to make Britain a military priority during the early years of their reign, they need to focus their very tight resources on the army and an airforce intended to provide close support to that army.
 
Even if one allows that the Germans could have built a lot more U-Boats I have to ask the obvious question why would they? in 1934 when Germany's priorities are a future war with France and the defence of the Baltic would they even contemplate building a massive submarine force whose only use is blockading Britain? Bearing in mind that through most of the 30's the British are incredibly lenient with Nazi Germany, allowing them to roll back provisions of the Versailles treaty and bending over backwards to avoid conflict. Beyond that the Nazis can't afford to make Britain a military priority during the early years of their reign, they need to focus their very tight resources on the army and an airforce intended to provide close support to that army.

Aye. The problems of being a continental power - you primarily need a continental army.
 

hipper

Banned
In the late 1950s a research paper was published in Germany that examined what type of fleet the KM could have built instead of the historical fleet. It was written by officers who were part of the war time KM design office, and vetted by one of the top wartime designer.

They focused on the resources funding and ship yards involved in the construction of the 4 battleships and 5 heavy cruisers [Bismarck ; Tirpitz ;Scharnhorst ; Gneisenau plus 5 Hipper/Prince Eugen cruisers] . They concluded they could either build 21 Deutschland raiders OR 375 Type VII U-Boats....and completed before the war began.


The trouble with this plan is that it says to the UK we are going to declare war and it makes that fact known in the mid 30's before the west wall or first wave infantry divisions have been mobilised.

Germany is vulnerable to the French army, and by mass building UBoats the French will have the best argument for British support.

So the response is British mobilisation. The threat of which could trigger a coup against Hitler.
That's some of the OTL problems.
 
Even if one allows that the Germans could have built a lot more U-Boats I have to ask the obvious question why would they? in 1934 when Germany's priorities are a future war with France and the defence of the Baltic would they even contemplate building a massive submarine force whose only use is blockading Britain?

History shows that Britain always opposed any would-be hegemon on the continent. Although the nazis preferred war with other states, they couldn't rule out war with Britain, which is why they built warships of various kinds.


Bearing in mind that through most of the 30's the British are incredibly lenient with Nazi Germany, allowing them to roll back provisions of the Versailles treaty and bending over backwards to avoid conflict. Beyond that the Nazis can't afford to make Britain a military priority during the early years of their reign, they need to focus their very tight resources on the army and an airforce intended to provide close support to that army.

Of course. But since war with Britain was still possible, it would've been better to invest in the only type of warship which proved of much use in the First War--the U-boat. Of course Germany did something to counter British power. The problem was that its shipbuilding priorities weren't very good.
 
There's also the question of why on Earth would Spain agree to what would amount to an act of war against the British? I mean IOTL the Germans simply could not persuade the Spanish to join the Axis at any price, they certainly aren't going to make themselves an an enemy of the British for a scheme that is highly likely to bring the US into the war, the very thing Franco was convinced would spell Germany's doom.

Historically the Spanish did provide some support for the U-boats, some of which got oil and provisions from a Spanish vessel in the Canary Islands--the Corrientes IIRC--in 1941. For a time u-boats even refueled from a Soviet base.

As for the Italians where are these 'secret' supply ships going to operate from that allows them to avoid Malta and Gibraltar, not to mention that unless France doesn't fall the Italians will still declare war in June of 1940 anyway.

The Germans themselves had supply ships for Graf Spree, Scharnhorst and other vessels. If they could supply large warships they could supply wolf packs. The British didn't stop surface ship suppliers until around mid '41.
 
In the late 1950s a research paper was published in Germany that examined what type of fleet the KM could have built instead of the historical fleet. It was written by officers who were part of the war time KM design office, and vetted by one of the top wartime designer.

They focused on the resources funding and ship yards involved in the construction of the 4 battleships and 5 heavy cruisers [Bismarck ; Tirpitz ;Scharnhorst ; Gneisenau plus 5 Hipper/Prince Eugen cruisers] . They concluded they could either build 21 Deutschland raiders OR 375 Type VII U-Boats....and completed before the war began.

Wow, thanks for that. :) But let's assume they could've only built 150 VIIs. Backed by supply ships they'd be able to constantly keep, beginning in September 1939, over a third on station in the mid Atlantic, beyond the reach of bombers. What would British losses have amounted to, and what effect would that have had on their warmaking ability?
 
Wow, thanks for that. :) But let's assume they could've only built 150 VIIs. Backed by supply ships they'd be able to constantly keep, beginning in September 1939, over a third on station in the mid Atlantic, beyond the reach of bombers. What would British losses have amounted to, and what effect would that have had on their warmaking ability?

you win, Sealion would become possible
 
History shows that Britain always opposed any would-be hegemon on the continent. Although the nazis preferred war with other states, they couldn't rule out war with Britain, which is why they built warships of various kinds.

No they built their fleet primarily to control the Baltic or simply as prestigious symbols of German regeneration. Building a fleet to conduct commerce raiding against the British came along rather late in the day

Of course. But since war with Britain was still possible, it would've been better to invest in the only type of warship which proved of much use in the First War--the U-boat. Of course Germany did something to counter British power. The problem was that its shipbuilding priorities weren't very good.

Again throughout most of the 30s war with Britain was not a serious consideration, hence the inadequacies of the Luftwaffe as well as the Kriegsmarine when deployed to try and force Britain to seek terms.

Historically the Spanish did provide some support for the U-boats, some of which got oil and provisions from a Spanish vessel in the Canary Islands--the Corrientes IIRC--in 1941. For a time u-boats even refueled from a Soviet base.

Yes on a very small scale the Spanish were happy to help the Nazi's, they were not going to risk war by trying to supply hundreds of U-Boats.


The Germans themselves had supply ships for Graf Spree, Scharnhorst and other vessels. If they could supply large warships they could supply wolf packs. The British didn't stop surface ship suppliers until around mid '41.

You aren't talking about a handful of raiders, you are talking about several hundred U-Boats, a couple of merchantmen slipping through is one thing, an armada of supply ships is quite another.
 
To poke an oar in, as I'm reading up on Appeasement and British strategy at the moment, Chamberlain's strategy for appeasement was underpinned by a fear of Luftwaffe numbers in 1938 (vastly exaggerated as it turns out) and an inability to intervene effectively in Czechoslovakia. The Chiefs of Staff provided this info. It would have been a much different strategy if the Kriegsmarine were mass-building u-boats that were a direct threat to trade links with the Dominions.
 
BASED JUST ON THE HISTORICAL KM tonnage, 23 cruisers were laid down in the 1930 Hitler years; plus 30 warships of 100m or more and 74 warships of 50-99m. That doesn't include any U-Boats - which should add another 79 U-Boats.

In other words they had the building potential of 23 Kreuzers & 183 U-Boats.

http://navypedia.org/ships/germany/ger_index.htm

this is a good start point.

TOTAL TONNAGE based on max displacement.... 480,000 tons, which includes ~ 76,000t armor.

That allows 183 type VII @ 769t each plus 23 PBS @ 14,751 [3300t KC/NC] @ max displacement.
 
Let me emphasize (again) that submarine construction does not simply mean using the steel etc freed up by not building something else and using those materials and workmen to now make submarines. Submarine construction, even of 1930s designs, requires very particular skills and techniques. Standards are much higher for submarines than surface ships. Errors in construction that would cause nuisances on surface ships, even smaller ones, could easily become life threatening on a submarine or guarantee the loss of the boat. A building slip that can accommodate a 250 meter long capital ship cannot simply have three 75 meter long submarines constructed there without some major alterations.

To build anything you need to have the proper facilities and the proper correctly trained work force before the first bit of raw material enters the production stream. The USA had a huge automotive industry, a huge steel industry - this did not mean that on December 8 automotive factories would take the resources used to turn out cars and be producing tanks. Did this happen, yes but not overnight. If you look at data for production rates for shipyards that started building submarines from zero in the USA, you see how it took time to start production and how there was a learning curve to actually make the submarines and this was in an environment which was much less resource constrained for material and personnel than Germany.

Even if you assume 1 ton of surface warship not built= 1 ton of submarine built (which is grossly incorrect), there is a lag from making this decision to implementation and a lag from early slow construction to serious series production. While it is obvious that when you have limits on resources of any sort shifting from one use to another will result in less of A and more of B there is not a one for one concordance (one ton less of A equals one ton more of B) and there is a lag where production facilities are expanded to make more of B (and workers found/trained). You get closest to 1:1 if you look at very similar items - for example trading off single engine aircraft for multi-engine aircraft, battleships for aircraft carriers, and so forth. The more dissimilar items are, like battleships for tanks, the more a ton for ton comparison is inaccurate.
 
BASED JUST ON THE HISTORICAL KM tonnage, 23 cruisers were laid down in the 1930 Hitler years; plus 30 warships of 100m or more and 74 warships of 50-99m. That doesn't include any U-Boats - which should add another 79 U-Boats.

In other words they had the building potential of 23 Kreuzers & 183 U-Boats.

http://navypedia.org/ships/germany/ger_index.htm

this is a good start point.

TOTAL TONNAGE based on max displacement.... 480,000 tons, which includes ~ 76,000t armor.

That allows 183 type VII @ 769t each plus 23 PBS @ 14,751 [3300t KC/NC] @ max displacement.

Yes but, you're missing the fact that another poster pointed out in detail that the KM didn't have the slips or facilities needed to make these extra u-boats. Theoretical freed-up tonnage doesn't make a u-boat fleet
 
Let me emphasize (again) that submarine construction does not simply mean using the steel etc freed up by not building something else and using those materials and workmen to now make submarines. Submarine construction, even of 1930s designs, requires very particular skills and techniques. Standards are much higher for submarines than surface ships. Errors in construction that would cause nuisances on surface ships, even smaller ones, could easily become life threatening on a submarine or guarantee the loss of the boat.

One of my favorite quotes was from the book SUBS AND SUBMARINERS written back in the 70's. One paragraph has a sub's future captain inspecting his sub which is still under construction. He finds a few pinhole's in the steel in the conning tower and points this out to the yard foreman. Foreman's reply? "Don't worry about it, when we finish painting it them holes won't show!"

So yes, construction crews MUST know what they're doing and can't slack off for a second...
 
BASED JUST ON THE HISTORICAL KM tonnage, 23 cruisers were laid down in the 1930 Hitler years; plus 30 warships of 100m or more and 74 warships of 50-99m. That doesn't include any U-Boats - which should add another 79 U-Boats.
Err... Three Panzerschiff (though, the first two were well on the way before Hitler got power) or possibly five if you include the two D-class (laid down and immediately cancelled, when little more than two hull plates, to make way for S&G), five Hippers (two never completed), three K class light cruisers (technically pre-Nazi), two Leipzig class (again, technically pre-Nazi), two M class light cruisers laid down but scrapped while still little more than keels.

Even being VERY generous and counting ships built immediately prior but not under Nazi government and vessels which barely proceeded beyond a pile of hull plates that's 17 cruisers NOT 23. Being less generous it's eight built to a meaningful extent during the Nazi years (counting all Panzerschiff and given equal weight to two incomplete hulks).
 
Top