Wank the RM/Kriegsmarine 1929 POD

Do types like the Bv138, Bv222, Bv238, Do24 and Do26 need to be flying boats in the first place?

ITTL they should be built as landplanes with better performance. Either the existing wings and engines should be fitted to new fuselages without planing bottom and with a wheeled undercarriage. Or the factories should build more Fw200s, He111s, Ju88s and Ju290s. If longer runways are required Germany still had over a million unemployed (IIRC) in 1938 so there is an adequate supply of labour to build them with.

we agree on this! (lol)

the DO-24 used the BMW Bramo 323 radial engines (when in German employ), and was used by number of countries (recall some of the German fleet was captured Dutch aircraft.)

what stands out is that BV-138 got the contract and couple hundred built but they returned and built more of Dornier DO-24s (and they were built post-war.)

if you cancel BV-138 you free diesel engines for small number of DO-26s if very long range aircraft are desired.
 
we agree on this! (lol)

the DO-24 used the BMW Bramo 323 radial engines (when in German employ), and was used by number of countries (recall some of the German fleet was captured Dutch aircraft.)

what stands out is that BV-138 got the contract and couple hundred built but they returned and built more of Dornier DO-24s (and they were built post-war.)

if you cancel BV-138 you free diesel engines for small number of DO-26s if very long range aircraft are desired.
I think we want the same result, but have different opinions on how to achieve it.

The Do26 had four engines and the Bv138 three. That's effectively an exchange rate of 3 Do26 for 4 Bv138 if the supply of engines is the limiting factor.
 
Extract from the British Cabinet's Third Report of the Defence Requirements Sub-Committee, February 1936, which I think is a useful piece of background information.Ship "F" was Bismarck, Ship "G" was Tirpitz and Ship "H" wasn't laid down until the summer of 1939. The delay in laying down Ship "H" was first because of a shortage of suitable slipways and later because instead of ordering a third Bismarck they spent too much time designing what became the "H" class.
Just out of interest, what would a third Bismarck be named?
I know the H class were going to be something like Hindenburg and Hutten
 
Just out of interest, what would a third Bismarck be named?
I know the H class were going to be something like Hindenburg and Hutten
In No Aircraft Carriers and More Battleships for Germany the light cruisers built instead of the Hipper class were named after German towns. However, IIRC I didn't re-use Hipper, Blucher, Prinz Eugen, Seydlitz or Lutzow for the extra battleships to avoid confusing the readers. But as we had The Twins named after two Napoleonic generals perhaps Blucher for the Third Bismarck.

Also after the British announced DoY, Anson and Howe early in 1937 the Germans had enough tonnage in the AGNA for a fourth 35,000 ton battleship. If they order Ship "J" as a repeat Bismarck instead of messing about designing a new ship and lay her down instead of Aircraft Carrier B and complete her with the material assembled for the OTL Battleships H, J and K they might be able to complete her by the end of 1941. IIRC when DoY etc were announced the plan was to have Ship "J" completed in January 1942.
 
This is the first entry in Version 1.0 of More Battleships and No Aircraft Carriers for Germany
More Bismarcks and Less Graff Zeppelins

IOTL the Anglo-German Naval Agreement allowed Germany enough tonnage to build three 35,000 ton battleships.

The Germans used some of this to build Bismarck and Tirpitz. The planned completion dates were 1st October 1939 and 1st February 1940 respectively (39 months to build) but they were actually completed on 28th August 1940 and 1st February 1941 (for an average of 51 months to build).

According to M J Whitley, the third ship Battleship H was to have been laid down on 10th October 1937 for completion on 1st January 1941 (39 months to build). In January 1937 the Germans calculated that the British plan to build Duke of York, Anson and Howe allowed to them to build a fourth 35,000 ton battleship and they planned to lay down Battleship J on 1st May 1938 for completion in 3½ years (which would have been 1st November 1941).

However, Battleships H and J weren't laid down until 15th July 1939 and 15th August 1939 respectively and were cancelled after World War II broke out.

Meanwhile Aircraft Carriers A and B were ordered in 1935 for completion on 1st April 1939 and 15th November 1939. According to Whitley Aircraft Carrier B was laid down on 30th September 1936, but hadn't been launched when World War II broke out and was scrapped on the slip. Her sister ship wasn't laid down until 28th December 1936, but was launched as Graff Zeppelin on 28th December 1938. However, work on her was suspended in June 1940 and she was never completed.

ITTL the Germans decide to convert a merchant ship to an experimental aircraft carrier to gain operating and design experience for a class of bespoke aircraft carriers to be built in the first half of the 1940s. This releases resources to build other warships in the second half of the 1930s.

Therefore is it possible to lay down a third Bismarck in September 1936 in place of Aircraft Carrier B and complete her in 51 months, that is December 1940? The dimensions are about the same size, Graff Zeppelin is longer and Bismarck is beamier. However, Bismarck is about 10,000 tons heavier, could the slipway take the extra weight?

Graff Zeppelin had more powerful machinery than Bismarck. Therefore I think the major stumbling blocks would be: the main and secondary armaments; the fire control equipment; and finally the armour.

More Light and No Heavy Cruisers

What if the Germans also built a sextet of 8,000 ton light cruisers with combined steam and diesel machinery (COSAD?) instead of the 5 Hipper class? The sixth ship would use the slipway used by Graff Zeppelin IOTL.

These light cruisers would be an enlargement of the Nurnberg design or the Kreuzer M. They would be better suited to the commerce raiding role. As they consumed less of Germany's scarce industrial resources than the Hipper class it might be possible to complete all 6 of them in the time it took to complete the first 3 Hippers IOTL.

A third Bismarck and 3 extra cruisers would not change the course of history, but they would be a better investment for Germany than the 2 incomplete aircraft carriers and 2 incomplete heavy cruisers of OTL.
There is some dispute over when Aircraft Carrier B was laid down. Whitley who was my main source said 1936 others say 1938.

Also at this stage I was going to lay Bismarck and Tirpitz at the same time as OTL, a battleship instead of CV B and a light cruiser instead of Graff Zeppelin. Later on I decided to build the Twins instead of the abortive Pocket Battleships D and E which broke the Treaty of Versailles anyway. Therefore an earlier Anglo-German Naval Agreement and effectively a head start of 15 months on Germany's naval expansion.
 
Last edited:
I think we want the same result, but have different opinions on how to achieve it.

The Do26 had four engines and the Bv138 three. That's effectively an exchange rate of 3 Do26 for 4 Bv138 if the supply of engines is the limiting factor.

Well the original Do26 had more than three times the range and much higher speed (survivability, chance to get away before that hurricane has to turn back for the pilot pick-up)). Both, in both cases, would probably be even higher if not build as a flying boat. So its 1775 km per engine vs. 1433 km (Do/Bv). Plus, Do26 looks much better.
 
About slipways, in "Hitlers Zweites Buch Rewrite" the Germans attempt to steal a march on the British with regards to new ships but fails. Nevertheless, it was not because of slipways. 6 could be identified as having handled 250+ m ships and there would be more for 200+ meter cruisers at the same time (i think only two that could have handled the H-class but never mind). The major difficulty was in getting the heavy guns and turrets in place, adding the complexity of no time to engine mistakes and ordering, and the more general comment that the extra activity in handling the battleships many guns, wiring, fire control etc. would have taken more trained personel than what was available. There was a reason for the OTL delays.
It was to allow getting these factors a somewhat plausible hand-waive that I selected this wank thread with a 1929 POD, and sticking to the original BB timelines will not get them ready before some KGV's is also in the water.
 
Please allow me to ressurect this thread with this quote.http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4344
Its the posts by Matrosse71.
Lets assume that the massive funding increase happens in 1929 and not 1938.
There is an increase in 1929-33 and no cut in 1933. Thus, maybe, the 1939-40's diesels become available in say 1933-34 and are certainly part of the plans in 1933.
What opportunities opens then?
 
Top