Magnum's naval PoD's. Ep. 4 - No new ships for Herr Hitler

[Magnum]

Upon seizing and consolidating power, Hitler informs Raeder no more new combat ships bigger than a torpedo boat are to be built. He can keep the ones he has, and even repair them and keep them up to spec, but no steel, materials and men will be invested in bringing in new ships to the fleet - not capital ships, not light cruisers or destroyers, not submarines.

Exception to this were made at the insistence of Raeder - existing ships under construction, primarily the Admiral Graf Spee, would be completed, and a force of "a dozen or so" U-Boats were to eventually be built "for training purposes".

Thus, when WW2 began, the Kriegsmarine looked like this:

3 Deutschland-class heavy cruisers (the "pocket battleships"):

• Deutschland
• Admiral Scheer
• Admiral Graf Spee

3 Pre-Dreadnoughts (2 Deutschland-class and 1 Braunschweig-class):

• SMS Schleswig-Holstein
• SMS Schlesien
• SMS Hessen

(all of them modernized, with new propulsion and additional AA)

5 light cruisers:

• Königsberg
• Karlsruhe
• Köln
• Emden
  
• Leipzig

12 torpedoboats (almost akin to mini-destroyers)

10 Type VIIA U-Boats
9 Type VIIIB U-Boats
(with Raeder really stretching the definition of "a dozen or so")

Now, what can we expect from this? There was one thread somewhat on the subject I could find, but it assumed the would be NO ships, and so things like the Invasion of Norway were off the table, as was forcing the British to adopt convoys, with the associated drop in overall tonnage shipped over time. Here however, none of those are the case - there are still ample ships to invade southern Norway and enough U-Boats to scare the British into adopting convoys.

On that thread, it was speculated that the saving generated from not investing in the Kriegsmarine would have been enough for 3 panzer and 5 infantry divisions. Would that have been the case? And if so, what effects, if any, can we expect from that? Furthermore, what about the global implications?

 

[Spencersj345.346]

Welp Norway's safe in this timeline and there's no battle of the Atlantic or heavy German naval vessels to be a threat which frees up an absolutely massive amount of resources to say the very least

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

The German Navy is never going to leave the Baltic. Even the Uboats would soon be sunk if they did.

Hitler has obviously decided he's not going to fight Britain as that tiny force leaves the RN free to do whatever it wants.

IF Britain and Germany end up at war and the Italians are foolish enough to join the Germans the Italian Navy will be quickly overwhelmed and destroyed. They cannot survive most of the RN (less convoy escorts and ships in refit and repair) being sent against them. There will be no North African campaign.

With the resources freed up from not having to fight in North Africa available Malaya will not fall to Japan.

 

[Magnum]

Sigh.

Here's the way ships were split for the invasion of Norway:

1. Battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as distant cover, plus 10 destroyers with 2,000 mountaineering troops under General Eduard Dietl to Narvik
2. Heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper and four destroyers with 1,700 troops to Trondheim
3. Light cruisers Köln and Königsberg, artillery training ship Bremse, Schnellboot mothership Karl Peters, two torpedo boats and five motor torpedo boats with 1,900 troops to Bergen
4. Light cruiser Karlsruhe, three torpedo boats, seven motor torpedo boats and Schnellboot mothership (Schnellbootbegleitschiff) Tsingtau with 1,100 troops to Kristiansand and Arendal
5. Heavy cruiser Blücher, heavy cruiser Lützow, light cruiser Emden, three torpedo boats and eight minesweepers with 2,000 troops to Oslo
6. Four minesweepers with 150 troops to Egersund

Alternate split:

1. 3 Pre-dreads to Oslo
2. OTL force to Kristiansand
3. OTL force to Egersund
4. OTL force to Bergen
5. 1 pocket battleship to Trondheim
6. 2 pocket battleships to Narvik

(or go conservatively and skip Narvik entirely, sending all 3 Deutschlands to Trondheim, or even skipping Trondheim as well, as neither was crucial, they just made things easier)

 

[thaddeus]

NO construction seems impossible for any modern, powerful nation, and would be seen as such by even Nazi leadership?

they could have rebuilt the 3 panzerschiffe with dual purpose secondary guns, and the light cruisers with some already identified fixes. revived the remaining WWI-era ships as (lightly) armored escorts/tenders.

built out a class based on diesel Bremse and their diesel supply/tankers?

if they built a larger u-boat force that speculated upon they could probably manage Norway?

 

[WaterproofPotatoes]

The problem there is that you have a very unbalanced fleet that is a glorified Coast Guard with a raiding arm, but nothing that can really tie down significant Royal Navy assets.

The Ugly Twins (Scharnhorst and Gneisenau), although lightly gunned, were fast and powerful enough to be a pain for the Royal Navy and meant that battlecruisers had to be kept ready and waiting to chase them down, and slow battleships had to shadow convoys to chase the Twins away. Bismarck and Tirpitz aren't as good investments, but they still diverted a lot of British naval attention, and diverted assets that couldn't be used elsewhere.

The Pocket Battleships, as good as they are, are not battleships. They are overgunned heavy cruisers that are too slow to run from and too weak to fight off real capital ships.

Granted, a lot of the Kriegsmarine's ships were lousy.

The Hippers underperformed contemporary heavy cruisers in just about every metric. Short range, complicated machinery, single-purpose secondaries including AA mounts that weren't even waterproofed, complex and unreliable boilers, and a lot of wasted tonnage.

The light cruisers were even worse. They were barely seaworthy and couldn't even use their entire fuel supply as something like 25% had to be retained as ballast.

The destroyers were not good either- although fast, they were unstable, short-ranged, and never resolved the problems they had with their ultra-high-pressure La Mont and Wagner boilers. The torpedo boats (more like small destroyers) suffered many of the same problems.



I think a better buildout might look something like:

3-4 x Scharnhorst class small battleships, perhaps some or all re-armed with 6× 15" guns

6 x heavy cruisers, 3x3 20cm guns in two triple turrets fore, 1 aft. Shrink the design of the 11" triple if necessary. This would allow a smaller, lighter ship.

3 x pocket battleships

28-40 x small destroyers. Instead of a too-small torpedo boat trying to do too much on the displacement, or an unnecessarily large and complex destroyer, combine the two into something more usable in the 1400-1600 ton range.

A bunch of diesel-powered, 20-knot capable destroyer escorts/ coastal defence ships.

Scrap the useless light cruisers. Scrap the pre-dreads- they don't stand a chance, and they use up too many sailors.

 

[Magnum]

The problem there is that you have a very unbalanced fleet that is a glorified Coast Guard with a raiding arm, but nothing that can really tie down significant Royal Navy assets.

The Ugly Twins (Scharnhorst and Gneisenau), although lightly gunned, were fast and powerful enough to be a pain for the Royal Navy and meant that battlecruisers had to be kept ready and waiting to chase them down, and slow battleships had to shadow convoys to chase the Twins away. Bismarck and Tirpitz aren't as good investments, but they still diverted a lot of British naval attention, and diverted assets that couldn't be used elsewhere.

The Pocket Battleships, as good as they are, are not battleships. They are overgunned heavy cruisers that are too slow to run from and too weak to fight off real capital ships.

Granted, a lot of the Kriegsmarine's ships were lousy.

The Hippers underperformed contemporary heavy cruisers in just about every metric. Short range, complicated machinery, single-purpose secondaries including AA mounts that weren't even waterproofed, complex and unreliable boilers, and a lot of wasted tonnage.

The light cruisers were even worse. They were barely seaworthy and couldn't even use their entire fuel supply as something like 25% had to be retained as ballast.

The destroyers were not good either- although fast, they were unstable, short-ranged, and never resolved the problems they had with their ultra-high-pressure La Mont and Wagner boilers. The torpedo boats (more like small destroyers) suffered many of the same problems.



I think a better buildout might look something like:

3-4 x Scharnhorst class small battleships, perhaps some or all re-armed with 6× 15" guns

6 x heavy cruisers, 3x3 20cm guns in two triple turrets fore, 1 aft. Shrink the design of the 11" triple if necessary. This would allow a smaller, lighter ship.

3 x pocket battleships

28-40 x small destroyers. Instead of a too-small torpedo boat trying to do too much on the displacement, or an unnecessarily large and complex destroyer, combine the two into something more usable in the 1400-1600 ton range.

A bunch of diesel-powered, 20-knot capable destroyer escorts/ coastal defence ships.

Scrap the useless light cruisers. Scrap the pre-dreads- they don't stand a chance, and they use up too many sailors.

While I truly appreciate the input, a discussion about a better KM composition is for another thread.

This one is about them not building anything and using the resources elsewhere

 

[Magnum]

Also, the pre-dreds get retained mostly for political purposes, but they would be immensely useful acting as a meatshield when taking Oslo

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Also, the pre-dreds get retained mostly for political purposes, but they would be immensely useful acting as a meatshield when taking Oslo

Assuming they could make it that far without breaking down.

 

[Magnum]

Assuming they could make it that far without breaking down.

Schlesien acted as an icebreaker in ww2 and both her and Schleswig-Holstein were active in the Baltic. I'd wager they'd make it. Plus, the Norwegians were also using ww1-vintage stuff, so why not the Germans?

 

[thaddeus]

NO construction seems impossible for any modern, powerful nation, and would be seen as such by even Nazi leadership?

they could have rebuilt the 3 panzerschiffe with dual purpose secondary guns, and the light cruisers with some already identified fixes. revived the remaining WWI-era ships as (lightly) armored escorts/tenders.

built out a class based on diesel Bremse and their diesel supply/tankers?

a discussion about a better KM composition is for another thread.

This one is about them not building anything and using the resources elsewhere

do not believe the resources are easily convertible into more divisions ...

DO think you could limit construction to lightly armored ships, and naval guns to ?? 5.9" or 6.8" main guns? you would save all the valuable metals in the armor and all the efforts fabricating large guns?

that would yield most of the benefits you are speculating upon while still presenting the UK with dangerous foe?

 

[RamscoopRaider]

On that thread, it was speculated that the saving generated from not investing in the Kriegsmarine would have been enough for 3 panzer and 5 infantry divisions. Would that have been the case? And if so, what effects, if any, can we expect from that? Furthermore, what about the global implications?

Maybe the resources are there, maybe in terms of raw materials. But you run into issues with turning that material into something useful, and then issues with expansion, diluting the troops you have even more. Germany's expansion was pretty rapid as is, a significant portion did not even have barracks built, but were having to sleep in tents in garrison. I'd say you'd get more stuff, but not as much more as theoretically possible. Any extra troops would be more than cancelled out by other effects. First one is that he RN has an extra Carrier and a Battleship, and a couple hundred extra merchant ships get through with their cargoes. The extra carrier and lack of the Twins probably means Norway turns into a more prolonged campaign and Glorious is not lost. Norway probably holds, and not getting the Iron Ore exports next winter outweighs any extra ground equipment built in the 30's. Then you have all the other knock on effects of a stronger RN and a vastly reduced U-Boat force

 

[Magnum]

Norway probably holds

Question is - how? Where does Britain find the forces necessary to halt the German forces that landed in southern Norway, let alone push them back?
True, you'd have 1-2 extra hastily-conscripted Norwegian infantry divisions, assuming some of the German landings are cancelled, but those by themselves would not be nearly enough. The allies pulled out of Narvik OTL despite technically winning the local engagement precisely because they knew the German forces advancing from the south, which btw had beaten 6 ways from Sunday any allied formation encountered in Norway thus far, were coming for them as well, and they had no means of stopping them.

IMHO, Norway holds by preventing the landings, or not at all.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

IMHO, Norway holds by preventing the landings, or not at all.

Most likely, but if the landings do take place Germany is going to have trouble supplying their troops with the RN free to move at will without having to worry overly much about the German Navy. The Luftwaffe is another matter but that's where having Courageous, Glorious, Furious and Ark Royal comes in handy.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Question is - how? Where does Britain find the forces necessary to halt the German forces that landed in southern Norway, let alone push them back?
True, you'd have 1-2 extra hastily-conscripted Norwegian infantry divisions, assuming some of the German landings are cancelled, but those by themselves would not be nearly enough. The allies pulled out of Narvik OTL despite technically winning the local engagement precisely because they knew the German forces advancing from the south, which btw had beaten 6 ways from Sunday any allied formation encountered in Norway thus far, were coming for them as well, and they had no means of stopping them.

IMHO, Norway holds by preventing the landings, or not at all.

Because the German supply situation is going to suck, as they are going to have far fewer escorts than OTL, so their convoys will be more vulnerable to Allied Subs. Because without the U-Boat campaign the RN can afford to risk destroyers inside the Skagerrak to interdict German supplies. Because the Narvik and Trondheim landings are 100% dead without S&G occupying the RN, and Bergen and Egersund likely so. Because the RN has another carrier available for air support. Because hundreds more merchants got through with their cargoes, including extra arms for the Allies

 

[Dorknought]

Narvik was the key as Swedish ore came through here. No steel to make your tanks or at this time it’s being turned into ammunition. Oslo was to capture the government, which failed.

 

[WaterproofPotatoes]

The Battle of Drøbak Sound would certainly be interesting. I can only imagine the look on Hitler's face when he finds out he has lost 1/3 of his capital ships to shore installation equipped with 40 year old German guns and Austrian torpedoes.

 

[Dorknought]

The Battle of Drøbak Sound would certainly be interesting. I can only imagine the look on Hitler's face when he finds out he has lost 1/3 of his capital ships to shore installation equipped with 40 year old German guns and Austrian torpedoes.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

(The King's Choice is one of the best war films I've ever seen. I highly recommend it)

 

[Cockroach]

No S&G probably means the poms read the prelude to the invasion of Norway properly rather than mistake it for an Atlantic breakout. That puts reasonable odds on some of the German forces bound for northern ports getting intercepted and sunk...