Warships that should never been built?

Ramontxo

Donor
The Admiral Hipper class were great cruisers
Sorry but I have to disagree. Unreliable machinery same armament than a County and better protection (but not that much better) on a hull more than forty percent bigger and ten years younger. The Algier was a far better ship on (again) forty percent less displacement (and it far far more reliable)
 
Sorry but I have to disagree. Unreliable machinery same armament than a County and better protection (but not that much better) on a hull more than forty percent bigger and ten years younger. The Algier was a far better ship on (again) forty percent less displacement (and it far far more reliable)
Bear in mind that unlike the British and French, Germany was cut off from 20 years of experience. Those were the first major warships by Germany in 20 years.
 
Bear in mind that unlike the British and French, Germany was cut off from 20 years of experience. Those were the first major warships by Germany in 20 years.
Losing with a handicap is still losing.

edit: you wouldn't call the M11/39 a good tank just because it was Italy's first experience developing a "medium" tank, would you?
 
Last edited:

Ramontxo

Donor
Bear in mind that unlike the British and French, Germany was cut off from 20 years of experience. Those were the first major warships by Germany in 20 years.
Not the first but yes Navweaps has an excellent article on the German Naval Design between the wars and how they were screwed. But just try to compare them with a County cruising the seas for years around the world suffering combat damage getting whatever repair could be done and confronting the German Italian and Japanese ships and planes. That was a cruiser
 
Not the first but yes Navweaps has an excellent article on the German Naval Design between the wars and how they were screwed. But just try to compare them with a County cruising the seas for years around the world suffering combat damage getting whatever repair could be done and confronting the German Italian and Japanese ships and planes. That was a cruiser
Britain emerged victorious from World War 1 and were able to use their war experience to make new warships. Germany had to start new with NO experience at all.
 

Ramontxo

Donor
Britain emerged victorious from World War 1 and were able to use their war experience to make new warships. Germany had to start new with NO experience at all.
True and as a consequence their ships weren't that good. Sorry but I must stress this point a ship (the Hipper the Scharnosts etc) whose machinery fails regularly when pressed doesn't do his job. To sail for months on a end with minimum help from shore against more modern enemies and still do the job and win. That is it.
 
Every KM ship larger than a Light Cruiser was a waste. The KM needs subs, lots of them, from the first day of the war.
The problem is that a much larger investment in U boats pre war just makes the Brits panic more so then OTL and invest much heavier in ASW assets prewar.

Once the war starts then yeah continuing to build heavy cruisers and BB's is a huge mistake.

Though I also think the Germans would have been smarter to more thoroughly plan out the usage of Armed Commerce Cruisers/ auxiliary cruisers in the early war. The Germans used 10 in the early period and wasted a lot of time in the very early war when the Allies weren't using convoying at all. Even with those small number of vessels and late start the German AMC's wracked up a phenomenal kill total of something like a million tons of Allied shipping. If the Germans had more thoroughly covertly planned for using AMC's prewar they might have had a even larger effect. Obviously making preparations for hundreds of them is going to set off alarms and provoke an early response. But if the Germans had made preparations to outfit say 20 or 30 suitable vessels to be outfitted in the last days of peace to be used almost immediately after the outbreak of war. Before the Brits can really set up their blockade surge these vessels to sea and then have them scatter across the globe wreaking havoc.

The vessels should have the following characteristics.

1) At least 5,000 tonnage weight (smaller vessels could be used for shorter range operations say in the North Sea before the Brits begin convoying).
2) Able to be modified to carry a catapult and facilities to launch, operate, and maintain a small float plane (Probably a Arado-196) for recon.
3) Very long range with large amounts of storage room for food, spare parts, ammo, POWs, and the like.
4) Be able to mount say half a dozen old cruiser guns. Further armament of several similar caliber AA guns, a large number of machine guns and auto cannon, a couple torpedo tubes for close range dispatch of captured vessels.
5) A small marine complement to do boarding and scuttling operations.
6) The ability to have aspects of the ship at least superficially rapidly changed to disguise their identity.
7) The ability to refuel other AMCs or U-boats at sea. If possible the ability to pump fuel out of captured vessels to prolong the AMC's range.
8) Light armor over critical sections (not enough to stop a six or eight inch shell but hopefully prevent a 20mm auto cannon from ripping the ship apart.

It's obviously not going to be enough to make the Germans win the war but it would be very costly for the Allies and force the allies to beef up their coastal artillery and protection forces around the globe draining their strength. Also would force the RN to at least temporarily divert large numbers of naval vessels and aircraft around the world and do expensive convoying across the globe.
 
Assymetric Naval Warfare is definitely the best plan for the Kriegsmarine .

Where did the AMC guns from ? Did Germany have sufficient to ramp up numbers of raiders ?

These would have been useful
 

nbcman

Donor
French, Italian and Japanese warships were the most modern of the war. Japan probably was THE most modern navy of the war.
Then what was the battle of Surigao straight? The Standards wrecked opposing IJN BBs of a similar era.

EDIT: or an earlier example, Second Guadalcanal.
EDIT2: or the RN against the RM in every engagement in the Med!
 
Last edited:

Driftless

Donor
Then what was the battle of Surigao straight? The Standards wrecked opposing IJN BBs of a similar era.
To be fair, the US PT boats and Destroyers torpedoed several ships, prior to the old Standards delivering the Coup d'Gras. We remember the Battleships part, as a peer-to-peer fight and that whole Pearl Harbor survivors Karma aspect
 
Then you might like this.

From pages 98 and 99 of Modern Combat Ships 5 - Type 21 by Captain John Lippiett, RN.
There is a line drawing of the Seawolf Type 21 at the top of Page 98 and below that is the artists impression of the ship that was also on the lid of Seastrike.
2nded

There's also a artists rendition of a VLS SeaWOLF system in place of the 4.5 in gun that was offered to upgrade the Type 21, but the money was never spent.

REF: Modern British Missiles by Paul Beaver.
 
To be fair, the US PT boats and Destroyers torpedoed several ships, prior to the old Standards delivering the Coup d'Gras. We remember the Battleships part, as a peer-to-peer fight and that whole Pearl Harbor survivors Karma aspect
Even ignoring that, Washington utterly wrecked Kirishima in something like 20 minutes, at night. Massachusetts knocked the Jean Bart out in about the same amount of time (granted, the French ship was incomplete, so it's not apples to apples, but it still counts).
 
2nded

There's also a artists rendition of a VLS SeaWOLF system in place of the 4.5 in gun that was offered to upgrade the Type 21, but the money was never spent.

REF: Modern British Missiles by Paul Beaver.
While I'm sympathetic to the VLS Seawolf replacing the 4.5", I have to wonder what the point would be given the intended role of the ship. And as much as I like the idea of the twin Seawolf launcher idea, I do wonder at what sea state would the extra ballast required to support it have put the helicopter deck underwater?
 
Assymetric Naval Warfare is definitely the best plan for the Kriegsmarine .

Where did the AMC guns from ? Did Germany have sufficient to ramp up numbers of raiders ?

These would have been useful
I believe the AMC main battery guns were pretty much all taken from old long since scrapped WW1 era cruisers. They weren't really intended for fighting actual warships. More along the lines of sink merchantmen at close range, shooting shots across the bow of enemy merchantmen, or generally just scaring merchantmen into surrendering so they could be sunk by scuttling charges and the like. I don't think the ones the Germans used in OTL used any real sort of fire director but relied solely upon local control. Having the AMC's modified have some sort of fire control would be a good step.
 
What?

Most modern as in still thinking in 1945 that the best possible AA weapon for a ship was the same old 25mm autocannon and "beehive" rounds for 18.1 guns?
Then what was the battle of Surigao straight? The Standards wrecked opposing IJN BBs of a similar era.

EDIT: or an earlier example, Second Guadalcanal.
EDIT2: or the RN against the RM in every engagement in the Med!
I strongly suggest you read a few Naval histories of WWII. Every objective fact says the opposite
To be fair, the US PT boats and Destroyers torpedoed several ships, prior to the old Standards delivering the Coup d'Gras. We remember the Battleships part, as a peer-to-peer fight and that whole Pearl Harbor survivors Karma aspect
Depends on the context and era you are viewing. At the start of the World War 2 Pacific theater, then yes Japan was indeed THE most modern navy in the world. However, Japanese industry couldn't keep up with American industry and therefore was unable to make improvements or make new designs while the Americans with the vast industry and resources churned out superior models like as if they were making cars. The American battleships at Leyte Gulf not only outnumbered the Japanese, they were also significantly modernized into practically new ships.

As for the Italians...
Having a modern navy doesn't represent competence.
 
Top