What effect on WWI would (limited but uninterrupted) US & German trade by commerce su

So, what do you think?


  • Total voters
    26
Ok, so like it says in the title, what effect would a small fleet of German commercial subs have had on history, had there been enough to handle strategic material imports from the USA, from 1914 onwards?

Let us say that Germany starts off 1914 with 6 trade submarines of historical size and capacity in commission and ready for their first (war time) voyages. Here is a previous thread that gave me the ideas for this thread’s questions.

Some wiki pages here and here give a bit of background, and I have a few other links to post later showing German U-boat production from 1914-1918.
My specific question for this situation would be:

1. Can Germany avoid or lessen the effects of the blockade on strategic materials with such a fleet of commercial submarines?
2. If the Germans can achieve limited trade with the USA during this time frame, and gain (or keep) access to strategic materials, what do the British and French do about this?
3. Historically, both protested, but the USA dismissed their objections, so do the Entente powers resort to unrestricted anti-submarine warfare?
4. Do the Germans, who now still have their most needed materials coming in, risk unrestricted submarine warfare, and possibly cut themselves off from their last large trading partner?
5. If the Entente does go with UASW, and the Germans refrain from USW, what effect, short of bringing about a US Declaration of War on themselves, might this have on their own trade with the USA, and what effects could such lessened trade have upon their own war efforts?
6. What new technologies might spring up earlier than OTL

I’m tired, so that’s all I’ll ask for the moment.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Thanks and welcome to the thread. I really liked your first link, as that is one that I missed and it contained some things I will be thinking about in the future.

I have to admit, I at first thought the idea of a commercial submarine was going to be a net loss, but once I read up on the historical voyages from OTL, I got to thinking what might have been the case if the Germans had had a few of them before WWI even broke out.
 
I wanted to link to a couple of other threads, namely those that asked about US trade with Germany during WWI, but I cannot find them at the moment. Can anyone post them here?
 

LordKalvert

Banned
The Deutschland carried 750 tons of cargo and could make at best 4 round trips a year for 3000 tons. Before the war, Germany was using 200,000 tons of artificial nitrates half of which she got from Chile, the other half as a byproduct of coking

So, a fleet of a hundred or so could help a lot for the nitrate problem and hence food production. The small precious cargoes like medicine and industrial dyes would also be good candidates for such trips.

On the other hand, the large bulky cargoes that Germany would need (steel for shells for example) would require a fleet way to massive to be consider


Now turning to your questions specifically-

1) with a fleet of 100 such submarines, the Germans could lessen their problems with select high value cargoes- though the blockade isn't really airtight until the Americans join the war. Specifically on nitrates, they would be able to get enough to maintain food production at satisfactory levels

2) There's not a whole lot that the British and French are going to be doing about it other than trying to hunt the subs. Doubtful if your going to be very productive looking for them on the high seas

3) Unrestricted anti-submarine warfare would be unnecessary. Cargo submarines would be helpless if actually caught on the high seas by surface ships. The Americans wouldn't really care as American lives and interests wouldn't be affected

4) The critical question. The Germans are reluctant to restart USW in OTL and given that the Russian revolution is just months away from the resumption of USW, its quite possible, maybe even quite likely, that the Germans delay USW long enough for the collapse of Russia to take her out of the war.

5) UASW is unlikely to have much effects on these

6) Not familiar enough with post war submarine development to answer this
 

LordKalvert

Banned
As to the specific poll question- Its hard to see why Germany is building such subs before the war. It would require them to decide that they would be facing a long war and could win it.

In that case, they would be more likely to take other steps such as the stockpiling of raw materials which would be vastly cheaper
 
While I highly doubt you will ever get more then a handfull in service. The impact could be rather important.

They would allow to import certain amounts of vital cargo. So lessening the demand from internal sources or allowing to keep things going.

They will also undermine the blockade as they are in reality blockaderunners and the Entente would like very much to stopp them. So maybe more need for small vessals? Results would be limited Imo as they were working on anti sub meassures full tilt already.

But most importantly, Germany is not cut from the USA/rest of the world. So they can bring their own viewpoint into play and the Entente would have to react. What that would be? At least the overblown British reports of German practices will likely sink like lead.
In the same vane, the continued service of high demand chemicals will probably pull the USA somewhat out of the Entente grip. Here the preasure to open Germany again up for trade may be stronger then OTL.
 
Before the war, Germany was using 200,000 tons of artificial nitrates half of which she got from Chile, the other half as a byproduct of coking.
Welcome to the thread, and thanks for the information.

The Deutschland carried 750 tons of cargo and could make at best 4 round trips a year for 3000 tons.
So, a fleet of a hundred or so could help a lot for the nitrate problem and hence food production. The small precious cargoes like medicine and industrial dyes would also be good candidates for such trips.

On the other hand, the large bulky cargoes that Germany would need (steel for shells for example) would require a fleet way to massive to be consider
I came up with a round trip of 2 months and two days, June 23rd to Aug 25th, and that is including all 24 hours of the three days that she departed, began the voyage home, and arrived back in Germany, so for simplifications sake, lets call it 6 trips/year, for a possible 4500 tons of yearly cargo. Also, from your post I took the 200,000 tons to be 100,000 tons imported, and 100,000 tons domestic production, so we would need 20-30 cargo subs to make up the carrying capacity of those 100,000 tons.

Either way though, I don't see the commercial subs being used to haul nitrates unless they have so many that that is the only remaining material Germany still needs. BTW, I thought that Nickel and Tin were added to Iron to make Steel? AFAIK, WWI Germany was completely dependent upon imported Rubber?

Wiki; said:
On its first journey to the US, departing on the 23 June 1916, Deutschland carried 163 tons of highly sought-after chemical dyes, as well as medical drugs and mail. Passing undetected through the English Channel she arrived in Baltimore on the 8 July 1916 and soon re-embarked with 348 tons of rubber, 341 tons of nickel and 93 tons of tin, arriving back in Bremerhaven on 25 August 1916. She had travelled 8,450 nautical miles (9,724 mi; 15,649 km), though only 190 nmi (219 mi; 352 km) of these submerged.
The profit from the journey was 17.5 million Reichsmark, more than four times the building cost, mainly because of the high prices of the patented, highly concentrated dyes, which would have cost 26.8 thousand U.S. dollars per pound once adjusted for inflation. In return, the raw materials brought back covered the specific needs of the German war industry for several months.[2]
A second journey in October-December of the same year was also very successful, again trading chemicals, medicines and gems for rubber, nickel, alloys and tin. However, the Deutschland was lightly damaged during a collision with a tug in New London.[2] Following his return, captain Paul König wrote a book (or possibly had it ghost-written) about the journeys of the Deutschland. The book was heavily publicized, as it was intended to sway public opinion in both Germany and the U.S.


Historically, Germany had 24 U-boats in 1914, and built just 10 more that year, but in 1915, they built 52, and in 1916, they built an additional 108.
 
While I highly doubt you will ever get more then a handfull in service. The impact could be rather important.

They would allow to import certain amounts of vital cargo. So lessening the demand from internal sources or allowing to keep things going.

They will also undermine the blockade as they are in reality blockaderunners and the Entente would like very much to stopp them. So maybe more need for small vessals? Results would be limited Imo as they were working on anti sub meassures full tilt already.

But most importantly, Germany is not cut from the USA/rest of the world. So they can bring their own viewpoint into play and the Entente would have to react. What that would be? At least the overblown British reports of German practices will likely sink like lead.
In the same vane, the continued service of high demand chemicals will probably pull the USA somewhat out of the Entente grip. Here the preasure to open up Germany again for trade may be stronger then OTL.
Welcome to the thread. I think you have hit upon some key points here.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Either way though, I don't see the commercial subs being used to haul nitrates unless they have so many that that is the only remaining material Germany still needs. BTW, I thought that Nickel and Tin were added to Iron to make Steel? AFAIK, WWI Germany was completely dependent upon imported Rubber?

Even today natural rubber is used for many applications. Natural rubber is good at stretching, while synthetic rubber is tough (more here).
 

LordKalvert

Banned
Welcome to the thread, and thanks for the information.

I came up with a round trip of 2 months and two days, June 23rd to Aug 25th, and that is including all 24 hours of the three days that she departed, began the voyage home, and arrived back in Germany, so for simplifications sake, lets call it 6 trips/year, for a possible 4500 tons of yearly cargo. Also, from your post I took the 200,000 tons to be 100,000 tons imported, and 100,000 tons domestic production, so we would need 20-30 cargo subs to make up the carrying capacity of those 100,000 tons.

Either way though, I don't see the commercial subs being used to haul nitrates unless they have so many that that is the only remaining material Germany still needs. BTW, I thought that Nickel and Tin were added to Iron to make Steel? AFAIK, WWI Germany was completely dependent upon imported Rubber?



Historically, Germany had 24 U-boats in 1914, and built just 10 more that year, but in 1915, they built 52, and in 1916, they built an additional 108.

6 trips annually would really be pushing it. Submarines need a huge amount of maintenance work. The Deutschland makes it first journey on June 23 and begins its second journey on November 16. That's five months from start of 1st to start of 2nd. With experience turnover might pick up but getting down to 2 months seems really unlikely. Allowance for losses should also be made

The number might be greatly increased if some country (i.e. Spain) would act as a transhipment point or if meeting ships on the high seas- the latter sounds real difficult to pull off though

Specific cargoes I leave to others- I used nitrates for all the Haber-Bosch fanatics around here
 
6 trips annually would really be pushing it. Submarines need a huge amount of maintenance work. The Deutschland makes it first journey on June 23 and begins its second journey on November 16. That's five months from start of 1st to start of 2nd. With experience turnover might pick up but getting down to 2 months seems really unlikely. Allowance for losses should also be made. The number might be greatly increased if some country (i.e. Spain) would act as a transshipment point or if meeting ships on the high seas- the latter sounds real difficult to pull off though.
I have to agree upon reflection, that 6 trips is expecting too much, and that given maintenance and losses perhaps your 4 trips/year estimate is closer to doable.

Specific cargoes I leave to others- I used nitrates for all the Haber-Bosch fanatics around here.
I hear that.


One thing that no one seems to have tumbled too yet, and that was the unremarked poll option #5.

Once American shipping companies realize that they can quadruple their investment in one voyage, at least as long as the war is going on, how long until US trade subs start making their way to Germany? And if by this time, the Entente is going to be leaning towards UASW, then what?
 
Last edited:
Diesel tech was just starting to get good enough by 1914 to think about something like this. You would probably need WW! to be delayed 5 to 10 years for someone to apply the capability like this.

I can see Germany keeping about 10 cargo subs around to supply colonies where the cargo might not really be known until after the war started.

Otherwise I agree that stockpiling is far easier.

Of course if you delayed the war 5 or 10 years maybe a limited cargo zeppelin service could be maintained with the colonies.
 
One problem with this is while the financial gain from these voyages paid for the subs, there is only so much shipyard space and materials to build submarines. Every commercial sub the Germans build is probably two warship subs they don't build. Even without totally unrestricted submarine warfare this can be problematic.

If the Germans give the detailed plans to the USA (say in 1914 assuming they have built a few Deutschlands by then), they can have US yards build them for Germany. I doubt the US would want to run goods to Germany via submarine in defiance of the British blockade. While even early on (before sympathy went strongly to the Allies) the USA was very unhappy with the British blockade vis a vis neutral rights, it never got to the point where US ships refused to stop for inspection even well away from Germany.

While not being as isolated from trade would help Germany, in the long run the only thing that would really make a difference is the USA not entering the war - that was the reality that prevented both sides deciding to end it.
 
Diesel tech was just starting to get good enough by 1914 to think about something like this. You would probably need WW1 to be delayed 5 to 10 years for someone to apply the capability like this.

I can see Germany keeping about 10 cargo subs around to supply colonies where the cargo might not really be known until after the war started.
Welcome to the thread. I was thinking much the same thing with respect to the colonies receiving things others don't know about.

One problem with this is while the financial gain from these voyages paid for the subs, there is only so much shipyard space and materials to build submarines. Every commercial sub the Germans build is probably two warship subs they don't build. Even without totally unrestricted submarine warfare this can be problematic.
Welcome to the thread. I myself was wondering about the trade off between combat and cargo sub construction. I assumed that the cargo subs were bigger, but less complex than the combat subs. Ton for ton, I would think that the combat subs would take longer to build (let alone train up to standards), but the larger cargo subs would take more steel.

If the Germans give the detailed plans to the USA (say in 1914 assuming they have built a few Deutschlands by then), they can have US yards build them for Germany.
This would be an interesting development, and quite interesting in light of the British building blockade runners for the confederacy during the US civil war.

I doubt the US would want to run goods to Germany via submarine in defiance of the British blockade. While even early on (before sympathy went strongly to the Allies) the USA was very unhappy with the British blockade vis a vis neutral rights, it never got to the point where US ships refused to stop for inspection even well away from Germany.
I think that there would probably be folks on both sides of the fence on this issue, and that we would probably see some folks wanting the profits, and holding up US rights to free trade, going ahead with operating US cargo subs, so long as public opinion and government don't step on them.

While not being as isolated from trade would help Germany, in the long run the only thing that would really make a difference is the USA not entering the war - that was the reality that prevented both sides deciding to end it.
I don't follow you here?

Do you mean that neither side was willing to end the war because they hoped to get the USA into it on their side, or something else entirely?
 
And now for one of the questions I have been dying to ask, If Germany is not suffering as badly from the distant blockade as in OTL, and is able to trade with the USA and thus not willing to sink US merchant shipping with USW, and so refrains from such, how does this affect the outcome of WWI, and most importantly, will there be no TOV?
 
Top