WI: U556 had torpedoes

So sure - build up a mighty 'Jeune Ecole' fleet - and yes this would be far more effective vs the British/Allied Merchant fleets - but don't expect to be able to keep it a secret (you have more chance of farting your way in to low orbit around Jupiter) and given that it has but one target (the British Merchant Fleet) expect a far far different reaction by the UK to Germany's rearmament and subsequent Hitler Brinkmanship during the late 30s.


It may not have been possible to build many more u-boats secretly but I once suggested Germany might've done that, while avoiding the British reaction, by ostensibly building them for allied customers like Italy and Japan. By secret prearrangement, Mussolini and a Japanese representative could've "ordered" 100 u-boats each, and even sent some personnel to make the scam seem more convincing. German propaganda meanwhile, c 1936 or so, would not have said that they were getting stronger at sea but just providing more employment for people.
 
It may not have been possible to build many more u-boats secretly but I once suggested Germany might've done that, while avoiding the British reaction, by ostensibly building them for allied customers like Italy and Japan. By secret prearrangement, Mussolini and a Japanese representative could've "ordered" 100 u-boats each, and even sent some personnel to make the scam seem more convincing. German propaganda meanwhile, c 1936 or so, would not have said that they were getting stronger at sea but just providing more employment for people.

Italy was not a German ally in 1936 and all things being equal might have quite possibly have sat the whole thing out - or given how unhappy Il Duce was regarding the Anschluss - its not beyond the realms of possibility that Italy joins the allies (earlier than 1943 ;) )?

And Japan and Italy ordering 100 Boats each???

Italy in June 1940 had 112 submarines

Japan on 7th Dec 1941 - not sure but they were the 3rd largest navy in the world in 1939 and like Italy had a large number of boats

Them ordering 100 more is like a red rag to several nations not just the UK - and why are they ordering them from Germany when they have their own ship yards?
 
When Germany and the UK entered into the OTL Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 18 June 1935 it allowed the German Navy to build a balanced fleet that matched the RN in a 35:100 ratio (if memory serves U Boats were allowed to be 45:100 and later parity? Notably Germany started WW2 with just 59 Submarines (UK had 59!) ) - this agreement was important to Germany because it satisfied the UK and kept them from seeking earlier methods for opposing Germany's rearmament as well as rearming themselves and also drove a wedge between the UK and France as the British went ahead with the agreement in spite of French resistance. It also appealed to Hitler's long term hopes of either aligning with the UK or having the UK give Germany a free hand on the continent to achieve their long term goals.

So without building a balanced fleet and entering into an agreement of this type which the British thought would take Germany till 1942 before they reached this 35:100 limit (other than U-boats they never reached it) - the British are not placated and are therefore far less sympathetic to Germany's rearmament.

So sure - build up a mighty 'Jeune Ecole' fleet - and yes this would be far more effective vs the British/Allied Merchant fleets - but don't expect to be able to keep it a secret ... given that it has but one target (the British Merchant Fleet) expect a far far different reaction by the UK to Germany's rearmament and subsequent Hitler Brinkmanship during the late 30s.


Britain thought it could make deal's with Hitler and so they did, and a large part of that was driven by Germany's agreement to the AGNA to build a balanced fleet (and therefore have a fleet that could not threaten the UK's domination of the seas) - which prevented Germany from building the fleet you have suggested and the one that the British feared most.

not understanding the triggers you are observing that would alarm the British (not present historically already?) or is it the absence of a building program that would have them questioning what was ongoing?

they had modern diesel merchant ships, some even in process of conversion, and a class of fast supply ships/tankers. they also left "tonnage on the table" as they were allowed 35% of RN heavy cruisers and light cruisers?
 

BlondieBC

Banned
We are unsure exactly how much damage there was to the Bismarck, from the cannon hit at the Denmark Straits battle. That affects how long she sits in dry dock at St Nazaire. The longer in dry dock the increase in odds of a aircraft bomb doing damage. Whatever the case the Brits reorganize their fleet operations to deal with a sortie of multiple German surface raiders. Bomber Command may be told their priority is the capitol ships in the French ports. Even if the Brits know the damage to the Bismarck they are not going to let it & its ugly sisters sit at the docks unmolested. The Brits may even transfer some of the T Class subs in the Med to the Atlantic to screen the routes from the French ports.

This is actually the biggest win for the Germans. IOTL, the UK spent a lot of bomber effort on German ships in French Atlantic ports. It gave the Germans a concentrated area to defend and generally favorable defensive character for the Luftwaffe. i.e. Long run without fighter support. Each bombing missions against the German Navy was a bombing mission not against, to the Germans at least, more valuable targets in Germany. Adding the Bismarck will increase this effect. We see the butterflies out of this mission in more Luftwaffe fighter strength in Russia and higher German war production, at least for a while. I have a picture of the 8th Air Force cutting its teeth on a few massive bombing raids for these ships.

I agree the UK will reorganize, and, IMO, the ships will mostly be pulled from the forces facing Japan. And we roughly know the ratio. 2 or 3 British ships for each German ships that is a threat. So we get an ATL with no British ships at Singapore in December 1941, so we don't get the demonstration of how vulnerable capital ships are to quality land based naval aviation. We may get different force deployments by the IJN at the start of the war. Depending on what we pull from the Indian Ocean, we could see some interesting changes to what Japan does in 1942. Or maybe with a weaker UK, the IJN sits in port waiting for the decisive battle with the USA.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
… and then the torpedo spread to take out Ark Royal!

It would really be bad luck.

Impossible? not likely after all, but ….

Consequences:
1) What would be sent to Singapore?
2) Home fleet would not look so inviting, but would it be necessary to call on Med to plug the gap?
3) Where would Bismarck go after this? - hit a convoy? go to Brest? Go back to Germany

The list can be fascinating after all

Ivan

Nothing is sent to Singapore from the Royal Navy. Might change some land unit deployments or air deployments, but you need someone with better understanding of forces available. I would first look at any ANZAC forces not in the Pacific theater. Speaking of this, does this mean FDR pulls a couple more BB from Pearl in case the Germans come out in force?

If the Ark Royal dies, then the UK will pull back a carrier from somewhere else IMO. I thinking the Hermes will not go east. Interestingly enough, the butterflies don't look so bad. Wasn't the Ark Royal sank fairly soon anyway, so unless we assume the Hermes or some other carrier is lost on time, the fixes itself in the short term. We also save two capital ships at Singapore, so we may get a stronger UK navy once the German warships are eventually destroyed. If nothing else, constant bombing by the 8th Air Force and Bomber Command will eventually work.

Most Likely, the ships would not do a lot of work since there is the battle damage. Plus the constant bombing is likely to produce damage. But if the Germans get their way, I would guess the ships will come out in mass to go after some particularly large convoy. Or at a particularly critical time from the German Perspective
 
I see I must be more precise ...

... Assume Hitler does go for the Treaty for the same of diplomatic influence, but Ribbentrop quietly lets the British know that Germany has absolutely no intention of challenging the seagoing power of the British Empire and in fact is more concerned with Russian and French 'adventurism' so will be building a coastal fleet of small ships and monitors to guard Germany's coastline. Germany might also ask if Britain will assist Germany by guarding its overseas merchant fleet from piracy and abuse. This might sound crazy, but is strategically sensible and apparently peaceful. This lack of a challenge can be supported by Germany 'very reluctantly' arming some merchantmen with 'pop-guns' of up to 40mm calibre in bandstand mounts to deter pirates. It will give no support to French and British rearmament budgets and mislead diplomats.

In a war crisis, the HSK put to sea and mount their hidden armament, maybe collecting more munitions (mines, guns, ammunition, bombs, torpedoes, seaplanes) from other ships, then their captains open hidden safes and follow prearranged orders. When Germany is at war, the HSKs set to work against an Empire that has peacetime warship deployments and British merchant shipping not in convoys. The effects would be horrific. The HSKs may act as depot ships for Schnellboote and Unterseeboote deployed in the crisis, but the small fleet of capital ships and escorts remains in the Heligoland Bight or in the Baltic, apparently harmlessly.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
This is actually the biggest win for the Germans. IOTL, the UK spent a lot of bomber effort on German ships in French Atlantic ports. It gave the Germans a concentrated area to defend and generally favorable defensive character for the Luftwaffe. i.e. Long run without fighter support. Each bombing missions against the German Navy was a bombing mission not against, to the Germans at least, more valuable targets in Germany. Adding the Bismarck will increase this effect. We see the butterflies out of this mission in more Luftwaffe fighter strength in Russia and higher German war production, at least for a while. I have a picture of the 8th Air Force cutting its teeth on a few massive bombing raids for these ships.

I agree the UK will reorganize, and, IMO, the ships will mostly be pulled from the forces facing Japan. And we roughly know the ratio. 2 or 3 British ships for each German ships that is a threat. So we get an ATL with no British ships at Singapore in December 1941, so we don't get the demonstration of how vulnerable capital ships are to quality land based naval aviation. We may get different force deployments by the IJN at the start of the war. Depending on what we pull from the Indian Ocean, we could see some interesting changes to what Japan does in 1942. Or maybe with a weaker UK, the IJN sits in port waiting for the decisive battle with the USA.
Again, I I noted, it doesn't HAVE to be a huge fraction, nor does it have to be to the exclusion of Harris' beloved "dehousing". Weather over Germany was frequently bad enough to cancel missions, it is a simple matter to alter the bomb load to strike the ports on these nights. As Carl pointed out the range is such that medium bombers can easily reach the targets with a good bomb load. THe RAF could even combine mediums with a strong fighter escort (the French ports are close enough, especially Brest, to allow Fighter Command enough loiter time to cover the strikes ALL THE WAY IN AND OUT).

The Germans understood this, that is why they took the insane risk of the Channel Dash. Better to maybe lose the ships than leave them where you WILL lose them.
 

SsgtC

Banned
I see I must be more precise ...

... Assume Hitler does go for the Treaty for the same of diplomatic influence, but Ribbentrop quietly lets the British know that Germany has absolutely no intention of challenging the seagoing power of the British Empire and in fact is more concerned with Russian and French 'adventurism' so will be building a coastal fleet of small ships and monitors to guard Germany's coastline. Germany might also ask if Britain will assist Germany by guarding its overseas merchant fleet from piracy and abuse. This might sound crazy, but is strategically sensible and apparently peaceful. This lack of a challenge can be supported by Germany 'very reluctantly' arming some merchantmen with 'pop-guns' of up to 40mm calibre in bandstand mounts to deter pirates. It will give no support to French and British rearmament budgets and mislead diplomats.

In a war crisis, the HSK put to sea and mount their hidden armament, maybe collecting more munitions (mines, guns, ammunition, bombs, torpedoes, seaplanes) from other ships, then their captains open hidden safes and follow prearranged orders. When Germany is at war, the HSKs set to work against an Empire that has peacetime warship deployments and British merchant shipping not in convoys. The effects would be horrific. The HSKs may act as depot ships for Schnellboote and Unterseeboote deployed in the crisis, but the small fleet of capital ships and escorts remains in the Heligoland Bight or in the Baltic, apparently harmlessly.
It sounds like a great outline for a novel. Just not terribly likely as Alternate History
 

BlondieBC

Banned
I think even if we except further good fortune on behalf of the Bismarck, we end up with fit or damaged German ships using Brest or St. Nazaire as their base.
OTL, this was a bomber command/KM battle of attrition which was more or less won by the bomber command. The Bismarck gets even more fortunate does not solve this problem per se, but could it?
Lets assume Bismarck survives and need to go into a brief set of repairs. Soon Tirpitz are ready and S&G. Bomber command wil get a fit, but is there nothing germany can do about it.
What if Hitler in front of all his croonies says that the Luftwaffe couldnt break Britain, but protecting the french bases might yet win the war for Germany. Here lies the Luftwaffe's chance of redeeming its pride.
What would happen of the best radar, a further 1000 flak guns and a further 300 day and night fighters are located around the French ports (and St. Nazaire is well protected at sea).
What happens then (we are in a German getting very lucky scenario and testing follow on effects, but Hood is gone, PoW damaged, Ark Royal gone as per the OP)?
Raeder is beaming like a lit christmas tree..


IOTL, the UK made serious and sustained attempts to get these French Port, and the Germans made determined defense of these ships. ITTL, the UK likely makes a much stronger (i.e more frequent) focus. The German forces are about OTL level to OTL level plus 10%. The only thing I can see a lot more of is the larger flak gun that could not be moved (128mm). They were much more effective due to much faster warhead speed, and this would be a natural place to have this type of flak gun concentrated.

I don't think you see major change in attrition rate. The UK went all out, and we are just moving where the attack happen at. The Germans have a bit of gain for the Luftwaffe since the UK attacks will be a bit more predictable, and therefore easier to counter.

So if I was to write this ATL, it really comes down to an economic ATL. German lose fighters a bit slower in west, maybe 5% or less. UK loses bombers about same rate. I would then take every 10th or so raid over Germany and make it not happen. See what was not damage. The deal with the butterflies.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Again, I I noted, it doesn't HAVE to be a huge fraction, nor does it have to be to the exclusion of Harris' beloved "dehousing". Weather over Germany was frequently bad enough to cancel missions, it is a simple matter to alter the bomb load to strike the ports on these nights. As Carl pointed out the range is such that medium bombers can easily reach the targets with a good bomb load. THe RAF could even combine mediums with a strong fighter escort (the French ports are close enough, especially Brest, to allow Fighter Command enough loiter time to cover the strikes ALL THE WAY IN AND OUT).

The Germans understood this, that is why they took the insane risk of the Channel Dash. Better to maybe lose the ships than leave them where you WILL lose them.

I thought these ships were heading to St. Nazaire, not Brest.

To you point about fighter coverage, all the stuff happened IOTL, and it was very resource intensive for the RAF compared to the damage done. I am not saying the ships last forever, or that they are not damaged. Or that at some point the Nazi are not going to make a use it or lose it choice sortie in the Atlantic. Or some channel dash ITTL. You are overstating the effectiveness of the RAF by not putting enough weight on similar missions from OTL.

It is just when you come at it from the Luftwaffe bomber defense command, you see how valuable it is. IOTL, the Luftwaffe struggled to contained the British bomber offensive and meet other Luftwaffe needs such as Russia or the Med basin. From the perspective of the Luftwaffe generals, this bomber command attacks were a godsend each time they happened. Instead of defending many German cities, you had a fairly obvious target. i.e. The bombers headed in the general of a French Atlantic port were not going to gut some French city. Nor are there a lot of other German high priority targets in the area. So when Germans picked a raid towards these French ports, there is one target to defend compared to a bomber wave heading towards German which could be dozen or hundreds of important targets. Deploying the German fighters is a order of magnitude easier to do. And it is much easier to deploy the flak.

The point is that in 1941, the German fighters have to interact daily with UK fighters. It is better to do this at place favorable to the Luftwaffe, and these ports were about as favorable as it got.

And we then get the damage side. The Bomber command did hit and even more commonly came close to hitting important war targets on raids on Germany. Here, the war target is not really that important from the perspective of the Luftwaffe or the Heer.

So we end up with a double win from OTL perspective. Better defensive situation for the Luftwaffe, and when it fails, less real damage to the German war effort. Again, I don't think it is huge or a war winner, but take a few percent off the western fighter command losses, it helps. Maybe add a few % to the UK losses since the Spitfires are not attacking near to the UK (Belgium for example) and making much longer trips where if nothing else, mechanical losses add up. Then we get some buff to the German war effort, but off the top of my head, I can't list the major losses to Germany from Bomber command in late 1941.
 
Last edited:
I see I must be more precise ...

... Assume Hitler does go for the Treaty for the same of diplomatic influence, but Ribbentrop quietly lets the British know that Germany has absolutely no intention of challenging the seagoing power of the British Empire and in fact is more concerned with Russian and French 'adventurism' so will be building a coastal fleet of small ships and monitors to guard Germany's coastline. Germany might also ask if Britain will assist Germany by guarding its overseas merchant fleet from piracy and abuse. This might sound crazy, but is strategically sensible and apparently peaceful. This lack of a challenge can be supported by Germany 'very reluctantly' arming some merchantmen with 'pop-guns' of up to 40mm calibre in bandstand mounts to deter pirates. It will give no support to French and British rearmament budgets and mislead diplomats.

In a war crisis, the HSK put to sea and mount their hidden armament, maybe collecting more munitions (mines, guns, ammunition, bombs, torpedoes, seaplanes) from other ships, then their captains open hidden safes and follow prearranged orders. When Germany is at war, the HSKs set to work against an Empire that has peacetime warship deployments and British merchant shipping not in convoys. The effects would be horrific. The HSKs may act as depot ships for Schnellboote and Unterseeboote deployed in the crisis, but the small fleet of capital ships and escorts remains in the Heligoland Bight or in the Baltic, apparently harmlessly.

The idea that Germany could build a large Kreuzerkrieg type fleet without the British or anyone else for that matter finding out and not reacting like a camouflaged sniper who has just felt 2 Squirrels run up the insides of his trouser leg and then overhead them saying that they will eat one now and save the other one for later is quite frankly impossible!

OTL Germany managed to create 11 Hilfskreuzer based on a common design all built before the war with the first being ready for action in early 1940 and others much later but not all 11 operated at the same times

Some of those ships led a charmed life - some did not but they were all eventually swept from the seas by the British and French Crusiers

Building a large number of those ships pre war and then arming and getting them ready is far far more likely to be spotted and having more than a handful at sea is certainly going to cause problems initially but then with more at sea greater chance of being detected by the almost 150 or so Crusiers and Aux Crusiers of the RN and MN whose raison d'etre is the hunting down of such said Raiders.
 
Difficult, I agree, but not impossible, CryHavoc101...

...Merchant crews receive naval training as conscripts, some officers are the only ones in the know, so the only real giveaway is by spies at highest level and the effects of a co-ordinated and pre-arranged attack should not be under-estimated. The Reichsmarine and Kriegsmarine had people like Canaris managing operational security. I suggest you read up on the Great War 'Black Tom' explosion in New York caused by Imperial German agents, to consider what can be achieved by careful pre-planning.
 
Difficult, I agree, but not impossible, CryHavoc101...

...Merchant crews receive naval training as conscripts, some officers are the only ones in the know, so the only real giveaway is by spies at highest level and the effects of a co-ordinated and pre-arranged attack should not be under-estimated. The Reichsmarine and Kriegsmarine had people like Canaris managing operational security. I suggest you read up on the Great War 'Black Tom' explosion in New York caused by Imperial German agents, to consider what can be achieved by careful pre-planning.

One Swallow does make a Summer

Tell me how many people were involved in that op?

How many people would be involved in this Kreuzerkrieg master plan of yours?
 
Master plan ?

Not sure what you mean. Not advocating it as a plan, only as a comment using resources more efficiently.

Read up 'Black Tom' and you may get the answer on numbers. As astonishingly effective as WW2 German sabotage in the USA was inept.

Also compare HSK performance with that of the WW2 'Graf Spee', 'Admiral Scheer' and WW1 'Emden' - and consider value for money. You may be surprised.

Now, shall we let the OP have his TL back ? This is a nice debate, but we have diverted from the intention of the OP.
 
And Japan and Italy ordering 100 Boats each???

Italy in June 1940 had 112 submarines

Japan on 7th Dec 1941 - not sure...

Around 60 IIRC.

Them ordering 100 more is like a red rag to several nations not just the UK - and why are they ordering them from Germany when they have their own ship yards?

I presume you mean British intelligence wouldn't have been fooled for the reasons cited. But around mid to late '30s the "customers" could've made up something like German subs have deeper safe diving limits or they're having the Germans build their subs so they can build more battleships or carriers.
 
Master plan ?

Not sure what you mean. Not advocating it as a plan, only as a comment using resources more efficiently.

Read up 'Black Tom' and you may get the answer on numbers. As astonishingly effective as WW2 German sabotage in the USA was inept.

Also compare HSK performance with that of the WW2 'Graf Spee', 'Admiral Scheer' and WW1 'Emden' - and consider value for money. You may be surprised.

Now, shall we let the OP have his TL back ? This is a nice debate, but we have diverted from the intention of the OP.

Black tom was the singular successful op of the war as far as I am aware and other than killing 4 including an infant child and damaging the Statue of Liberty materially achieved little and i am not really sure how that translates into Germany building a Kreuzerkrieg fleet undetected !

The raiders operated in very small numbers hence being hard to find with only a handful being abroad at any given time and their impact on the actual conduct of the war was negligible

Increase the numbers of Raiders and expect more of them to be destroyed (and a greater allied response) till eventually their numbers are again small enough to avoid detection - yes their initial impact is going to be very large but so will their loss rate.

But it was the type of fleet and tactic that the RN and MN feared above all and to some degree had planned to fight.

In isolation it makes better sense than the fleet Germany started the war with - however as I have previously discussed a balanced fleet as built while a threat to the UK was not one with a singular purpose and was one that the UK believed to be manageable - on the other hand a Kreuzerkrieg fleet is a direct threat to the UK's Merchant fleet and has no other purpose and building such a fleet would have a serious detrimental impact on German-UK relations during this period compared to OTL.
 
Around 60 IIRC.

Thanks - my go to book which is Antony Prestons 'navies of WW2' discusses subs for every major navy except the Japanese - which I had not noticed before!

I presume you mean British intelligence wouldn't have been fooled for the reasons cited. But around mid to late '30s the "customers" could've made up something like German subs have deeper safe diving limits or they're having the Germans build their subs so they can build more battleships or carriers.

And naturally the British would simply go 'Oh that's alright then...because ha ha...we thought you might secretly be trying to pull the wool over our eyes and secretly build a 'Jeune Ecole' type fleet on the sly' and then go back to sleep?

Lets face the very fact that Germany could build so many subs during this period (which at the time they could not) is going to upset the British as they bore the brunt in the previous war and would be a very large red flag surrounded by flashing warning lights and a loud alarm.
 
Thanks - my go to book which is Antony Prestons 'navies of WW2' discusses subs for every major navy except the Japanese - which I had not noticed before!

Odd, the IJN had a fair number of subs, many of them big. My main source on this is The Japanese Submarine Force and World War II.



And naturally the British would simply go 'Oh that's alright then...because ha ha...we thought you might secretly be trying to pull the wool over our eyes and secretly build a 'Jeune Ecole' type fleet on the sly' and then go back to sleep?

Lol, it would be risky, but previously I suggested to help the scam the Japanese, Italians and other "customers" could send personnel to the Baltic to be photographed alongside/atop u-boats under construction or after launching. The boats themselves would get foreign national symbols at first and Germans would come aboard only for "testing and evaluation."
 
Top