Think they would sail into earlier WWII and it would not be to their advantage.
Do you mean that Germany would start World War II earlier or that they would be sent into the far seas just before World War II was declared like Deutschland and Graff Spee were IOTL?
If the first, the answer is no. If the second the answer is, yes.
In the second case I think the Germans would have sent 4 out of 6 panzerschiffen to sea prior to the invasion of Poland instead of 2 out of 3. The 2 sent to the North Atlantic would sink 6 ships between them before being recalled to Germany. Of the 2 sent to the South Atlantic and Indian Ocean Graff Spee would suffer the same fate as OTL and there is a good chance that the second ship would be caught and sunk or forced to scuttle herself.
2 of the 4 survivors would be available for the invasion of Norway and all other things being equal both would be badly damaged by British submarines.
Scheer and one of the 3 the extra ships would be ready for a sortie October 1940. My idea is that they would sail together until reaching the South Atlantic and then operate independently. They would have been in company when HX84 was encountered and I think they would have sunk around 20 out of the 38 ships in the convoy. They would sink another 20 ships between them after parting company and both ships would make it back to Germany.
1942 would find all 4 surviving panzerschiffen with the fleet-in-being in Norway. All other things being equal all 4 would have sailed to attack PQ17, but 2 of them would have run aground. That would have left 2 ships to take part in the Battle of the Barents Sea. However, I think the RN made a mistake by running two small JW/RA convoys at a time instead of a single large convoy on the grounds that the smaller convoys were more manageable. The reason why I think it was a mistake was that the escort weaker. That is JW-51B and RA-51 each had an escort of 6 destroyers, but a single large convoy would have had an escort of 12 destroyers.
They also needed trained sailors also, could have started by constructing the smaller ships (M-class minesweepers were "retired" historically and classified as "tugboats" etc.? While new replacements were built, more of that could have been done) and larger commercial ships (including those later converted to auxiliary cruisers, their supply/tankers, etc.).
I agree about the personnel shortage. However, the crews for the 3 extra panzerschiffen would partially found by paying of the Schleisen and Schleiswig-Holstein.
My understanding the building of Deutschlands was a close call? A scheme to build six might scuttle whole plan. As it was three helped convince British to sign AGNA rather than alarm then into their own accelerated building program?
In reverse order:
- It was the construction of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau that helped the British to sign the AGNA.
- No, it wouldn't make the British accelerate their own programme.
- Between 1929 and 1935 they were constrained by the 1st London Naval Treaty which limited them to building 3 cruisers a year. The Treaty had also extended the battleship building holiday to the end of 1936.
- After the 1st LNT came to an end they started ordering battleships at the rate of 2 or 3 a year and increased the cruiser building rate to 7 per year.
- IMHO treaty limitations and domestic politics would have stopped the British from building more ships in response to the 3 extra Deutschlands in the period 1929-35, even if they wanted to. (IOTL the Admiralty did want to build more battleships and cruisers in the first half of the 1930s anyway to counter Japan and because its existing ships were reaching their replacement dates.) From 1936 financial and industrial limitations would have prevented the British would be prevented from building more ships than they did IOTL.
- I have heard that the building of the Deutschlands was a close call too.
My scenario would be to rebuild the WWI-era ships with smaller caliber, modern weapons during this time period, they could be used as escorts/fleet tenders/AA cruisers later. The problems of their light cruisers (built in the 1920's) were also known and they needed to be rebuilt.
They could probably commence in 1935 and complete nine or more ships hovering around 20,000 tonnes? (my term is Hipper-class but that is just reference point) complete them as fast battlecruisers to counter French Dunkerque or build some with 15 cm guns as heavy cruisers, throw in a carrier if desired? (coupled with two dozen or more large destroyers)
They sound more like Panzerschiff D and E as originally proposed.
Under the AGNA the Germans initially had an allowance of 183,750 tons (i.e. 35% of 525,000 tons). If the Germans still build 3 Deutschlands that leaves 153,750 tons, which is enough for seven or eight of your 20,000 ton panzerschiffen. However, after the WNT capital ship quota expired the British planned to increase their capital ship fleet by a third from 15 to 20 ships, which would increase the German quota by 61,250 tons, enough to build another three 20,000 ton panzerschiffen.
The 1st LNT gave the British a cruiser quota of 339,000 tons, which was enough for 50 ships (15 heavy and 35 light), which gave Germany a legal right of 118,650 tons of cruisers under the AGNA which was enough for 5 heavy cruisers (why 5 Hipper class were built) and 11-13 light cruisers. However, after the 1st LNT cruiser tonnage quota expired at the end of 1936 the Admiralty was planning for an increase to first 70 and then 100 cruisers. It also increased its rate of cruiser building from 3 per year in the early 1930s to 7 per year from 1936. These plans effectively doubled the number of cruisers that Germany was allowed to have under the AGNA.
The way I read your post is that your 20,000 ton ship is to be built instead of Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Bismarck, Tirpitz and the Hipper class. I think you need to build some light cruisers to use this allowance.