WI: Germany buids two aircraft carriers instead of the Twins?

I disagree on the political side.

The KM had fought from before Hilter for a naval air arm, like it had had in WW1.

Hilter built the S&G to match the French, but not too big to "stir up" the RN and a big response.

In mid 30s, nations were struggle with cost, the transition to metal mono-planes and speeds. CV tactics were a work in progress. With few carriers, carriers were support to the fleet. What the USN did with a 4x4 fast carrier fleet is not on the radar.

Combined BB /carriers was looked during WW2 by RN. Dobbs quote shows 3BB and 3 CV were cheaper and more effective than 3 combined!
 
Cancel the carrier was more likely still. One aircraft carrier with no reserve is a failure to happen anyway. The idea to continue building cruisers with 28 cm artillery was a flawed project, after the French Dunkerque was started with adn other navies also announced starting to build fast battelships of around 28 -30 knots. In the OTL the battleships of the Scharnhorst class were build as a response to the Dunkerque, provoking the British to develop their King George V as fast (28 knots) battleship, where earlier it was a slow battleship on paper with 23 knots. France answered to the Scharnhorst, as well as the Italian Littorio, by building the Richelieu class, which resulted in Germany starting the Bismarck class (After that the British came with Lion)

M-type cruisers were an integral part of the Plan-Z, though purely seen as supportships for the H-Class battleships, not so much the independant raider, untill the slightly smaller Spah-Kreuzer came around, releasin ghte M-type to become a pure merchant hunter, liek the Great War period SMS Emden had performed well. That means: no H-Class BB's, no M-Class cruisers, as the type was not very well thought through as fighting ship in the first place and weak compared to contemporary designs abroad.

Also missing completely is the Destroyer program, as the "Gross Torpedoboote" were not seen as destroyers by the Kriegsmarine, due to their offensive purpose. A more Multi-purpose design was missing still, which eventually became the large Zerstörer types, with their flawed powerplants. As a design these ships were a bit large, but well thought through, plagued by unforseen technical problems, which did plague more than just these nice looking ships btw.

In the U-Boote, the Type I was a flawed design, being not addaptable for mass production, compared to the slightly smaller Type VII. Also the Type I and Type II lacked range to cover the Atlantic, forcing the need to also create a long range type as well (Type IX). Likewise Type II, Type VII and also Type IX were relatively easy to construct and maintain, besides tough.




EHHH This WAS THE PLAN up until Z PLAN took over in the 1930S. Its not a matter if you to agree or disagree.

The politics was mostly Raeder's 'wet dreams' vs Hitler's refusal to allow the KM naval plan 1928 to limit his 4 year plan & HIS ENLARGED ARMY at the expense of the LW & KM. All Hitler wanted out of the KM was a coastal defence force with limited aspirations in the North Sea.

With every enemy warship built - Raeder regrouped the shattered naval plan and tried to salvage what he could. His best effort was to convince Hitler that a modest surface fleet to counter the French was doable and worth the effort, which Hitler tentatively agreed.

Zerstroers were a feeble attempt to replace the CL that had to be canceled to achieve the tonnage needed to attempt the 4 BB & 5 CA they built into the war. It had always been planned that a 3000t warship class was about the biggest they could mass-produce along side the U-Boat fleet during any war.

The Admiralty on the other hand always pushed exclusively for warships to support the U-Boat war, like the long range super Kreuzers evolving from the AGS warships. However this was all based on Hitler's belief that naval war would not happen for another 10-15 years. The politics between Hitler & Raeder crippled all plans.
 
Last edited:
Top