Possible designs for "Super Dreadnoughts" in 1935?

How big can an ATL Germany build it's Battleships?

  • 40,000 tons for the Bismark's was just about it.

    Votes: 7 21.2%
  • 50,000-60,000 tons would still be doable.

    Votes: 13 39.4%
  • 70,000-80,000 tons would be streching it, but doable.

    Votes: 4 12.1%
  • 90,000 tons +

    Votes: 9 27.3%

  • Total voters
    33
So, as the title says, give me some designs for a "Super Dreadnought" for an ATL Germany that breaks ground on jan 1st 1935 to build the drydock(s) to build these monsters. I have some dirty tricks in mind, and would like to have the forum communities input for what these ships could be like. I definately think that the kiel canal will have to be enlarged, as well as places built to house/berth these ships once commissioned into the fleet.

What is the biggest gun you can fit on 40,000 tons displacment? How many can you have of them?

If we go with the Yamato, say what 72,000 tons w/9-18" guns?

How much bigger can we get?

Anyway, I just want to see some ideas here that will give the british some major concern.
 
The question is where is your POD, is this standard WW1 ending with hitler ignoring versailles earlier.

In 1935 with an original time line the biggest you could probably get is the Bismarck as there were no larger guns around than the 15" for the Bayen class.
 
OOooppps!

Forgot that little detail, didn't I?
Lets say right after the end of WWI, so in 1919 plans begin for a 'revenge war' against the UK and France. The drydocks/slipways don't get started till 1935, but feel free to make he guns as early as you need to to have them ready when the time comes.

The idea is to have everything ready ahead of time, to speed construction as much as possible.
 
I think, in a sudden rearnament, that 50,000-60,000 tons is the max. Even though that's already really heavy to build instantly, it could happen.
 
Gun size...

Guns can be quite large. The British deployed a perfectly functional 18" gun in World War One--first on a carier, then on monitors. Big Gun tech is no problem if they are allowed to develop it.

Big ships are another problem altogether. Bismarck wan't a great design compared to some contemporary ships, and even bigger might be even more difficult. (Though if bigger, they might go to 4 props instead of three...)

If they've been building batleships all along, then big might work--if not, then big results in assorted problems.

Of course, the British will counter with either similar ships, and/or more normal batleships.

I'd guess that, if everything was built ahead of time, you might be able to get her ready to start working up in about 2 years from keel laying, at best. And the steel would be better used elsewhere...
 
With a 40k ship, presuming that one wants a ~balanced design (i.e. armored against her own guns at likely engagement ranges) with speed competitive with foreign contemporaries (~28 kts), the heaviest main battery one can put on the ship would probably be 8-9 15-16" guns (or 12x14", though that'd probably require quad turrets)- essentially, a typical WNT BB design of the 1930s; to get heavier or more guns, one'd have to sacrifice speed and/or armor, which both have their sets of problems; for more speed, guns and/or armor would get cut.

If you go to 50-60k, a balanced 18" design would probably be a bit slow; alternatively, one could put together a 12x15/16" design on that displacement that's balanced & can do 28 kts, or a balanced 9-gun ship capable of at least cruiser speeds (i.e. 32 kts+) and/or long-range, essentially what Iowa would have been had the USN's designers not been constrained with the 45k displacement limit of the escalator clause & the dimensional restrictions of the Panama Canal & had extra weight for more armor.

Even if it's possible to get the industrial structure to build a monster ship comparable to Montana or Yamato (let alone the giant wank-ships Hitler & the OTL Kriegsmarine dreamed up), there's the issue of diminishing returns, & being a bad investment that eats up too many resources; same goes with gun size- the USN's experiments found that beyond 16", you suffer from diminishing returns in performance vs ship impact, inferior ballistics (with sheer mass the only reason for greater power), & that really increases exponentially above 18", with 20" the biggest that's even worth bothering with .
 
When you're considering battleships for Germany there're some constrains, such as depth of North Sea approaches - it's especially important if you're planning basing in Wilhelmshaven, which is quite shallow - and of course width and depth of Kiel Canal. IIRC, above constraints necessitated large width of Bismarck (35m) to keep draugth small enough.
 

sharlin

Banned
The biggest would be in the 60k tonne range, that was the rough size of the planned H class but that's really stretching it and building such a behemoth would be noticed overseas and countered and in a naval arms race the Germans simply can not win.
 
With regards to the H-Class weren't some of the designs likely to have such a large draught they couldn't get into Wilhelmshaven. If so that can provide your upper limit.
 

sharlin

Banned
Some of the H designs were pure flights of fantasy that made the US Tillman designs look tame and mild, the H-41 was about the best of the lot and looked like an upsized Bismark in almost all respects save having two funnels and being a lot larger.

She would have fit in German ports, just. Anything bigger and you'd need bases outside of germany to harbour the damn thing.
 
In terms of pure technology, the Germans in 1935 could design and build whatever they wanted, although possibly not capable of delivering on short notice. The real problem would be the infrastructure needed to both create the vessel and to deploy it in the home waters, as both waterdepth and locks in and near ports, let alone the Kaisar Wilhem Kanal, could accomodate a ship of a much larger size than the OTL Bismarck.

In 1941, the armamentsindustry already succesfully tested a long navalgun of 21 inch bore (53 cm/52 (21") Gerät 36), designed in 1938, which was proof of Germany's technological capabilities, although fitting it in a suitable ship would certainly cause headages to the shipdesigners.
 
Top