alternatehistory.com

Stalin apparently decided to develop a navy based upon heavy ships that could operate far from home waters in December 1935. The initial plan of April 1936 called for a fleet of 15 battleships, 53 cruisers, 162 destroyers, and 412 submarines to be ready by 1947. In 1938, the navy's share of defense expenditure reached its peak, amounting to very nearly 20 per cent; thereafter the great increase in spending on the army resulted in a relative decline in the navy's fiscal position, but in absolute terms the resources devoted to the navy in 1941 were more than twice that projected in 1938.

By 1939, Stalin had become enamored of the concept of a fast and heavily armed "cruiser-killer" — that is, a battle cruiser — the construction of large numbers of which required significant reductions in battleship and cruiser building.The Soviet naval staff also insisted upon the construction of aircraft carriers in spite of Stalin's dislike of this warship type.

In August 1939, the plan of 1936 was thus altered so that the 1947 Soviet navy was projected to consist of 8 battleships, 16 battle cruisers, two aircraft carriers, 31 cruisers, 216 destroyers, and no fewer than 442 submarines. While the cruiser and especially aircraft carrier building was modest, the heavy surface unit (i.e., battleships and battle cruisers) and submarine programs exceeded those of all other naval powers.

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/kritika/v004/4.2sumida.html

Because when it comes to giant fleets with no discernible purpose, you can't find a betterm man than Stalin.

Okay, let's imagine that Barbarossa never happens; I think that the Soviets would have trouble building even half of the 1939 fleet, but it never pays to underestimate the Soviet state's ability to do horrifying and yet impresive things with steel.

Hrmm. Thoughts on how the Soviets would be inclined to use such a fleet? Can they build a significant portion of it?
Top