Shrink the Bismarck! (and the rest of the Kriegsmarine)

Correct on both counts. The CV conversion was carried out on Seydlitz. However, it wasn't begun until 1942. IIRC at the time the CV conversion was begun Seydlitz was at least 80% complete and IMHO the effort put into the abortive aircraft carrier conversion would have been better used to complete her as a cruiser. Then she could have been sent to strengthen the fleet in being in Norway.

I do wonder what the reasoning was for the Seydlitz conversion. Convert a cruiser into a carrier while Graf Zeppelin sits mostly finished and unworked on. So now you have two major warships whose completion is being further delayed. Maybe the Seydlitz would have made a better carrier than GZ. Me, I'd finish Seydlitz as a cruiser, and finish GZ as some kind of useful ship. A fast armed transport (that might operate a handful of Fi.167s?) maybe? Or don't even work on Graf Zeppelin then. Finish Seydlitz and get another major warship up in Norway.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
If Germany started a program of building hundreds of then modern submarines in the mid 30s. Who is the obvious target of such a force. Obviously it’s the British. Now the use of USW during the latter part of WW1 had come as something of a shock to the British. It was a direct threat to the Home Nation. They did not like. Not one little bit. So if Germany starts to build large numbers of boats in the latter half of the 30s you can expect a very robust reaction from Britain. With no surface fleet there is less need for Cruisers and Battleships and there for far greater capacity to build escorts. corvettes and Frigates. And expect a far less accommodating reaction from its leaders in reaction to the pre war events if it appears that a large uboat fleet is being built and trained for use against them.

Agree with above, but...

For the Royal Navy the 1920s & first half of the 1930s were an era of competition with Japan & the USA in respect of fleet size, especially regarding battleships & cruisers. The Japanese threat never went away, and as we all know went very live. Those KGVs and Illustrious-type CVs which were built primarily for use in European waters ended up the nucleus of the British Pacific Fleet.

Now, if Nazi Germany goes all jeune ecole and builds subs, then the British have to respond. But they still have the need for all those heavy units with the looming Japanese threat. It could be that the RN tries to do both, with either budgetary consequences or less funds to the Army & RAF. Or they fall between two stools, having neither enough to combat the large number of U-boots or to dissuade / fight the Japanese.

It could be that such a German decision doesn't win the (European) war, but might give Japan a little more time before being crushed by the USN.

Talking of the USN, they would be caught out by developments and suffer even heavier casualties during the Happy Time, with consequences for the heavy units under construction to deal with Japan. Do we see delayed Essex & Iowa classes in exchange for modern anti-sub units? Again, Germany's expenditure may just extend Japan's lifetime.
 
meant to start in 1933.
If it was 1919...

I would have had the Germans lay down 6 Deutschlands 1929-32 for completion 1933-36 instead of 3. This would not have broken the Treaty of Versailles and still have left Germany with enough tonnage to build The Twins, Bismarck and Tirpitz without breaking the Anglo-German Naval Agreement. I think the main problem is financial. Could Germany afford to build them? Thought I thought it might be possible to justify them as an unemployment relief measure.
 
Agree with above, but...

For the Royal Navy the 1920s & first half of the 1930s were an era of competition with Japan & the USA in respect of fleet size, especially regarding battleships & cruisers. The Japanese threat never went away, and as we all know went very live. Those KGVs and Illustrious-type CVs which were built primarily for use in European waters ended up the nucleus of the British Pacific Fleet.

Now, if Nazi Germany goes all jeune ecole and builds subs, then the British have to respond. But they still have the need for all those heavy units with the looming Japanese threat. It could be that the RN tries to do both, with either budgetary consequences or less funds to the Army & RAF. Or they fall between two stools, having neither enough to combat the large number of U-boots or to dissuade / fight the Japanese.

It could be that such a German decision doesn't win the (European) war, but might give Japan a little more time before being crushed by the USN.

Talking of the USN, they would be caught out by developments and suffer even heavier casualties during the Happy Time, with consequences for the heavy units under construction to deal with Japan. Do we see delayed Essex & Iowa classes in exchange for modern anti-sub units? Again, Germany's expenditure may just extend Japan's lifetime.
When it comes down to the crunch though, the British are going to take this increased pre-war German submarine threat as the first priority. The US and Japanese are building against each other and the British will manage that through diplomacy. Geography also favoured that solution. The German threat is direct and cannot possibly be interpreted any other way as against the British Isles and a challenge to the Royal Navyand the commerce it protected.

Simply having more hulls in the water isn’t going to solve this problem in itself, the faith in asdic and changing technology and weapons development will still need to take place, but I agree with you that the RN will still need to build larger units to at least remain competitive. I think though that in this new threat environment, the budgets will not be as restricted when it becomes clear what the Germans are doing.
 
I do wonder what the reasoning was for the Seydlitz conversion. Convert a cruiser into a carrier while Graf Zeppelin sits mostly finished and unworked on. So now you have two major warships whose completion is being further delayed. Maybe the Seydlitz would have made a better carrier than GZ. Me, I'd finish Seydlitz as a cruiser, and finish GZ as some kind of useful ship. A fast armed transport (that might operate a handful of Fi.167s?) maybe? Or don't even work on Graf Zeppelin then. Finish Seydlitz and get another major warship up in Norway.

if you have an unfinished Graf Zeppelin by 1939 (which also means no trials with aircraft not just finishing the boat) the best choice would probably be to deal it to the Soviets.

(at some point during 1940 -41 production of other armaments was curtailed to allow deliveries to USSR?)

am a fence-sitter on building carriers but IF they decided to build a carrier something the size of Seydlitz conversion (not a conversion in this case) would be more appropriate.
 
If it was 1919...

I would have had the Germans lay down 6 Deutschlands 1929-32 for completion 1933-36 instead of 3. This would not have broken the Treaty of Versailles and still have left Germany with enough tonnage to build The Twins, Bismarck and Tirpitz without breaking the Anglo-German Naval Agreement. I think the main problem is financial. Could Germany afford to build them? Thought I thought it might be possible to justify them as an unemployment relief measure.

think they would sail into earlier WWII and it would not be to their advantage.

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.)

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?

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)
 
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.
 
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?

meant that an accelerated program centered around long range Panzerschiffe would provoke an earlier WWII or confrontation with Germany.
 
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.

depending on the progress some could be built as heavy cruisers (4x3 15cm guns), not sure how 5,000 tonne destroyers would be viewed? would that use the light cruiser allotment or not? (they had schemed 24 at one point)

of course this is just a snapshot in time, you can project Plan Z or some variation, include H-class battleships and a class of light cruisers.

my scenario is only what seems feasible and effective to construct first.
 
Auxiliary Cruisers - the way to go...

...The Hilfskreuzer had the most effective value for money of all Kriegsmarine surface vessels. The Twins and the Bismarck class were glamour assets to constitute a 'Fleet In Being', and were really wasted money... Nasty, aren't I ?

U-boats, Zerstorer and Hilfskreuzer, can be deployed prewar to globally block the 'Sea Gates' and impede the Royal Navy. I would suggest that they are all diesel powered so the HK can refuel the other deployed vessels. They will be difficult to find and hard to destroy.
 
not sure how 5,000 tonne destroyers would be viewed? would that use the light cruiser allotment or not? (they had schemed 24 at one point).
I think that you are referring to the Spähkreuzer, which would have been seen as the German equivalent to the British Arethusa class of small light cruisers so they would have to be taken out of Germany's cruiser tonnage quota under the AGNA.

Furthermore the British destroyer quota under the 1st London Treaty was 150,000 tons, which gave the Germans 52,500 tons under the AGNA and the Germans will need that for destroyers of the Z-boat and T-boat varieties.

However, in common with other categories of warship the Royal Navy planned a large expansion of their destroyer force after the 1st LNT tonnage quotas expired. IIRC the 150,000 tons was enough for 12 destroyer flotillas. The Admiralty wanted 16 flotillas just for a war against Japan and 22 flotillas for a war against Germany and Japan. That increased the number of destroyers that Germany was allowed to have under the AGNA.
 
Last edited:
depending on the progress some could be built as heavy cruisers (4x3 15cm guns)
My heavy cruiser was going to be a scaled up Leipzig with nine 203mm in three triple turrets.

And I was going to do an Eric Morecambe by building them in the wrong order.

That is instead of 5 Hippers followed by the abortive Kreuzer M class of light cruisers I was going to build 7 Super Leipzig light cruisers (i.e. the 8,000 ton version) instead of Nurnberg and the Hipper class. Then I was going to order 5 heavy cruisers instead of the Kreuzer M class. However, none of the heavy cruisers would have been laid down before September 1939 and they would have been cancelled shortly afterwards.
 
Auxiliary Cruisers - the way to go...

...The Hilfskreuzer had the most effective value for money of all Kriegsmarine surface vessels. The Twins and the Bismarck class were glamour assets to constitute a 'Fleet In Being', and were really wasted money... Nasty, aren't I ?

U-boats, Zerstorer and Hilfskreuzer, can be deployed prewar to globally block the 'Sea Gates' and impede the Royal Navy. I would suggest that they are all diesel powered so the HK can refuel the other deployed vessels. They will be difficult to find and hard to destroy.

Agree that they should have built more auxiliary cruisers, from a bang for the buck standpoint they were quite effective. However, they tied down RN cruisers, not capital ships. You need a few heavies to tie down the RN's capital units which TIRPITZ did quite well OTL. The mistake was sending BISMARCK out on a raid...
 
depending on the progress some could be built as heavy cruisers (4x3 15cm guns), not sure how 5,000 tonne destroyers would be viewed? would that use the light cruiser allotment or not? (they had schemed 24 at one point)

of course this is just a snapshot in time, you can project Plan Z or some variation, include H-class battleships and a class of light cruisers

I think that you are referring to the Spähkreuzer, which would have been seen as the German equivalent to the British Arethusa class of small light cruisers so they would have to be taken out of Germany's cruiser tonnage quota under the AGNA.

Furthermore the British destroyer quota under the 1st London Treaty was 150,000 tons, which gave the Germans 52,500 tons under the AGNA and the Germans will need that for destroyers of the Z-boat and T-boat varieties.

actually was referring to the initial design which grew into Spahkreuzer http://german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/destroyer/zerstorer1938a/tech.html built in place of Z-boat destroyers.

would supplement those large ships with diesel Bremse-class and enlarged S-boats (they had intended the '35 and '37 torpedo boats to serve same role as S-boats)
 
I do wonder what the reasoning was for the Seydlitz conversion. Convert a cruiser into a carrier while Graf Zeppelin sits mostly finished and unworked on. So now you have two major warships whose completion is being further delayed. Maybe the Seydlitz would have made a better carrier than GZ. Me, I'd finish Seydlitz as a cruiser, and finish GZ as some kind of useful ship. A fast armed transport (that might operate a handful of Fi.167s?) maybe? Or don't even work on Graf Zeppelin then. Finish Seydlitz and get another major warship up in Norway.


IJN took a bit over 5 months to convert Ise to.....
whatever you would call it

Ise2.jpg


Neither Fish nor Fowl.

Or cheap out, and do the original HMS Furious conversion, and leave most of the superstructure in place, with catwalks on either side
furious.jpg
 
actually was referring to the initial design which grew into Spahkreuzer http://german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/destroyer/zerstorer1938a/tech.html built in place of Z-boat destroyers.

Would supplement those large ships with diesel Bremse-class and enlarged S-boats (they had intended the '35 and '37 torpedo boats to serve same role as S-boats)
I think the Kriegsmaine still needs a smaller destroyer for "maid of all work" duties in the Baltic and North Seas.

Does the Bremse class use the part of the 1st LNT that allows unlimited construction of what the Royal Navy called sloops? That is ships displacing less than 2,000 tons and a maximum speed no greater than 20 knots and an armament no larger than four 6-inch guns and no torpedoes.
 
I think the Kriegsmaine still needs a smaller destroyer for "maid of all work" duties in the Baltic and North Seas.

Does the Bremse class use the part of the 1st LNT that allows unlimited construction of what the Royal Navy called sloops? That is ships displacing less than 2,000 tons and a maximum speed no greater than 20 knots and an armament no larger than four 6-inch guns and no torpedoes.

I believe there was zero concern on cheating with Destroyers for numbers, capability or tonnage: they were Destroyers, what could they do?

Taffy 3 was in the future
 
actually was referring to the initial design which grew into Spahkreuzer http://german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/destroyer/zerstorer1938a/tech.html built in place of Z-boat destroyers.

would supplement those large ships with diesel Bremse-class and enlarged S-boats (they had intended the '35 and '37 torpedo boats to serve same role as S-boats)

I think the Kriegsmaine still needs a smaller destroyer for "maid of all work" duties in the Baltic and North Seas.

Does the Bremse class use the part of the 1st LNT that allows unlimited construction of what the Royal Navy called sloops? That is ships displacing less than 2,000 tons and a maximum speed no greater than 20 knots and an armament no larger than four 6-inch guns and no torpedoes.

my suggestion was for largest possible ship that could be classified as a destroyer, and that at the time the hybrid propulsion likely would be considered. however for my purposes that was only a consideration for sustained operation in the Baltic and North Seas, not for unlikely sorties into the Atlantic (i.e. so they are not out of fuel at Narvik) they also had option of diesel generators for ship operations instead of using the high pressure steam for everything?

for "maid of all work" part of the work (per my scenario) would be performed by G-class and M-class coal fired boats (the unrealized G-class approx. twice as large as the M-class) coupled with (somewhat) modernized WWI-era ships (also coal fired.)

have no idea where Bremse would be classified? thought it likely the RN would consider them destroyers. was projecting to build them instead of the F-class and 1930's torpedo boats, they were mooted as squadron leaders for such vessels. under my scenario they would/could work in tandem with S-boats especially since the fast attack boats had no radar?

(not projecting to build any more torpedo boats past 1920's classes, but recall the Elbing torpedo boats did not start arriving until 1943, whereas my scenario the Bremse-class are built pre-war)
 
my suggestion was for largest possible ship that could be classified as a destroyer, and that at the time the hybrid propulsion likely would be considered. however for my purposes that was only a consideration for sustained operation in the Baltic and North Seas, not for unlikely sorties into the Atlantic (i.e. so they are not out of fuel at Narvik) they also had option of diesel generators for ship operations instead of using the high pressure steam for everything?

for "maid of all work" part of the work (per my scenario) would be performed by G-class and M-class coal fired boats (the unrealized G-class approx. twice as large as the M-class) coupled with (somewhat) modernized WWI-era ships (also coal fired.)

have no idea where Bremse would be classified? thought it likely the RN would consider them destroyers. was projecting to build them instead of the F-class and 1930's torpedo boats, they were mooted as squadron leaders for such vessels. under my scenario they would/could work in tandem with S-boats especially since the fast attack boats had no radar?

(not projecting to build any more torpedo boats past 1920's classes, but recall the Elbing torpedo boats did not start arriving until 1943, whereas my scenario the Bremse-class are built pre-war)

OR alternatively my projected destroyers or the historical destroyers are not constructed but instead Bremse diesel escorts/destroyers and 1939 Elbing torpedo boats are built instead.
 
Auxiliary Cruisers - the way to go...

...The Hilfskreuzer had the most effective value for money of all Kriegsmarine surface vessels. The Twins and the Bismarck class were glamour assets to constitute a 'Fleet In Being', and were really wasted money... Nasty, aren't I ?

U-boats, Zerstorer and Hilfskreuzer, can be deployed prewar to globally block the 'Sea Gates' and impede the Royal Navy. I would suggest that they are all diesel powered so the HK can refuel the other deployed vessels. They will be difficult to find and hard to destroy.

my scenario(s) have at least a small number of escorts/destroyers built off the Bremse design, specifically to support S-boat operations since the fast attack boats did not have radar.

but that would be a rather small ship for Atlantic? and if something pushing into cruiser size (with diesel propulsion) was built it provokes the RN (pre-war)?

always consider that when the cooperation with Soviets ended, the loss of Northern Sea Route was real blow to use of auxiliary cruisers and contact with Japan.
 
Top