German Navy's Aircraft Carrier

German Kriegsmarine 1935-1945.
Tiornu
Contributor
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:56 pm

Post by Tiornu »

"I'm not getting into the Seelowe debate"
Is there a debate? I guess you can debate exactly how catastrophic such an operation would have been for the Germans.
I'm thinking of all the successful amphib operations in WWII where the defenders had the stronger naval presence and the attackers had no landing craft.
User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Andy H »

Tiornu wrote:"I'm not getting into the Seelowe debate"
Is there a debate? I guess you can debate exactly how catastrophic such an operation would have been for the Germans.
I'm thinking of all the successful amphib operations in WWII where the defenders had the stronger naval presence and the attackers had no landing craft.
Hi Richard.

I've fought enough Selowe What Ifs to last me a lifetime. It was feasible to launch but there's no reasoned way it could have been successful.

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die
Paul Lakowski
Supporter
Posts: 192
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 7:56 am

Post by Paul Lakowski »

Generalderpanzertruppen wrote:
I don't know Andy, didn't the Luftwaffe effectively close the English Channel during daylight hours leading up to the start of the Battle of Britain? The Stukas & Ju 88's showed they were more than capable of taking the fight to the RN Destroyers, as they showed again in the Med, so I don't think that the destroyers would have necessarily been that decisive, especially if the Kriegsmarine had launched all her own remaining Z-boats and S-boats, so who knows?
Andy is correct the primary strategy for usage of German capital ships was to draw off the Home fleet and ensure it didn't meddle in the channel. Churchill was aidding the Germans here by insisting that no battleships would enter the channel unless German battleships went their first. Further the RN Admiralty feared mostly the German capital ships savaging the convoys and always held the battlefleet and cruiser squadrons on standby for precisely that mission.

A combination of surge of Uboat fleets and Capital ships into the North Atlantic convoys would have stripped off "Home fleet" and if Forbes had his way, 1/3 of the "Anti invasion fleet"....leaving a mere 60 crusiers/destroyers to cover the entire British coastal defenses. They would be aided by 50 minesweepers and several hundred armed trawlers.... but with 3000km front to cover, that left at most 50-60% to cover the channel.

Despite what some will tell you, atleast 1/3 of that force would be down for long term overhaul maintenance and the rest would have to rotate deployments meaning at most 1/3 would be available. Given that the Germans had more such auxiliary warships to concentrate on the south coast suggests problems for the RN. Running warships continuously for periods of more than weeks exhausts the force involved, so its important for the Germans to trigger the RN surge weeks ahead of any cross channel operation.

The RN crusier/destroyer elements could remain on standby for alert , but again would be unlikely to sink more than one enemy barge/boat per sortie. The danger there is timely Luftwaffe port bombing and minning ops could sufficently delay such sorites to allow KM surges across the channel or Uboat ambush to be set up. No where in the Sealowe plans is there mention of the role of the German Torpedoboot/Zestroyers and Light cruiser mission. All the escort missions for the invasion fleet are Minesweepers/Sperrbrecher/Vorpostenboot/Rboot . I suspect the warships could be used to intercept such RN crusier/Destroyer sweeps before they reach the channel/crossing area.

Historically such clashes between RN/KM flottilas usually ended up even with both fleets heading for home at the conclusion of the clash. Mind you at night it was most of the battle just to find the enemy warships, since few if any warships had radars and most of those were with the "Home Fleet". If the german capital ships could decoy the homefleet away for several weeks ahead of any cross channel invasion , they would have served their purpose.
Paul, I thought the decision to bomb London and give up on the so-far successful strategy of attacking airfields, docks etc, was Hitler's, not Goring's? Didn't Churchill sucker the Fuhrer into bombing London after the accidental bombing of London by the Luftwaffe, in which Churchill launched an attack on Berlin, knowing full well that Hitler would respond in kind on London, thus saving Fighter Command and handing victory in the Battle of Britain over to the English?
The idea was originally Goerings, the terror air war to demoralise the 'Englanders' and win the war, but Hitler as 'furher' was ultimate arbitrar of policy, so the blame rests with both.
User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Andy H »

Resisting (strongly) temptation to respond to Paul's post :wink: :D

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

Andy, that was indeed the Home Fleet's strength as of late summer 1940, but don't forget to factor out any number of those detached no matter how temporarily or distantly on convoy duty. Even one days' steaming west of Scapa Flow or wherever puts them TWO days away from the fight at least. I don't know what protocols were in place to recall escorts etc. in the event of anticipated invasion, but that some would have been on detached duty adds to the numbers under repar....

Though given the circumstances, how many would have remained in port under repair in the event of a FULL Cromwell order is debateable; the Bismarck incident shows that the RN was quite willing to order ships to sea with civilian workers aboard, and ships not up to full combat capability. Remember the Prince Of Wales sailed with one of her forward turrets temporarily out of commission and civilian workers still aboard. (Has anyone ever done a study of how THEY assisted in repairs aboard, allowing the PoW to get back in the chase so fast?)

Paul, I'm not too sure about the small losses to the invasion fleet you anticipate; what Crete did show also was that a fighting ship loose among civilian or converted ships would create absolute mayhem. Admittedly, there would be more steel- and iron-hulled vessels in the Channel, and less converted fishingboats and caiques, but also bigger, more lumbering targets, and trains of barges towed by one motor barge. Also, this time they wouldn't be carrying just infantry divisions, they'd be carrying armour, full logistics etc. - the loss of one or two vessels with the right gear could paralyse a unit. Look at Norway where machinegun sections arrived without tripods, ski troops without skis, and AA batteries without guns or ammunition. The wrong ships going down could result in a cohesive all-arms invasion force turning into a human wave of small arms'-equiped but otherwise unsupported troops going ashore.

The aim of Britain's anti-invasion plans were NOT to stop the fleet at sea, but to weaken it enough that her defences ON LAND could repel or halt the invader.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

regarding sir superiority - it wasn't essential, but would have been definitely preferable. Raeder may have said it wasn't necessary - but the KM had a whole raft of OTHER more powerful objections to the various plans LOL The RAF actually had a HUGE number of "ground attack" aircraft available, the rump of her obsolete day bomber force, Coastal Command etc., shore-stationed FAA squadrons etc. - and more converting everyday. They were even putting 50lb bomb racks on Tiger Moth trainers at a couple of airfields in East Anglia.

What the RAF - as we know - DIDNT have was pilots, as a lot of the bomber force had already been "combed out" along with all the training schools and conversion schools. If the Luftwaffe didn't have at least the upper hand in the air they would have not only had to counter Fighter Command but also a large number of RAF bombers of all types....note that MOST of the conversion work done to ferries, barges etc - apart from armour loading and fitting or upgrading engines - was fitting AA defences or protection.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Andy H »

Phylo wrote:
Andy, that was indeed the Home Fleet's strength as of late summer 1940, but don't forget to factor out any number of those detached no matter how temporarily or distantly on convoy duty. Even one days' steaming west of Scapa Flow or wherever puts them TWO days away from the fight at least
Dispositions of Warships in Home Waters, 1600hrs/16 September 1940

Scapa Flow (26 hrs from Dungeness at 20kts)
1 BC: Repulse (RA(D)), 1 BM: Erebus
1 CV: Furious (12 Skua, 18 Swordfish, 6 Gladiator)
2 CA: Berwick, Norfolk
1 CL: Glasgow, 1 CLAA: Curacoa
6 DD: Somali (D6), Eskimo, Matabele, Duncan, Versatile, Vimy
1 DE: Eglington; 1 SS: L.23
Dundee (19 hrs)
3 TB: Z.5 (NL), Z.6 (NL), Z.8 (NL)
3 SS: L.26, O.21 (NL), O.24 (NL)
Rosyth (18hrs)
2 BB: Nelson (C-in-C), Rodney
1 BC: Hood (VA, BCS)
3 CLAA: Naiad (RA, CS15), Bonadventure, Cairo (RA, AAS)
13 DD: Cossack (D4), Maori, Sikh, Zulu, Jackal†, Kashmir†, Kipling†, Ashanti, Bedouin, Punjabi, Tartar, Electra†, Vortigern
4 DE: Valorous, Vega†, Verdun†, Woolston
1 TB: Sleipner (NO)
2 SS: Seawolf, Snapper,
Blyth (14 hrs)
3 SS: Sturgeon, Swordfish, Ursula
Humber (10 hrs)
3 CL: Manchester (VA, CS18), Southampton (RA, CS18), Birmingham
5 DD: Javelin† (D5), Jupiter†, Jaguar†, Kelvin†, Watchman
Lowestoft (5 hrs): 1 TB: Draug (NO), 1 MTB: MTB.18
Harwich (3 5 hrs)
6 DD: Malcolm (D16), Venomous, Verity, Wild Swan, Wivern, Worcester
1 SS: H 44
11 MTB: MTB.14, MTB.15, MTB.16, MTB.17, MTB.22, MTB.28, MTB.29, MTB.31, MTB.32, MTB.34, MTB.67, MTB.68
London (4 5 hrs) 1 MTB: MTB.24
Sheerness/Chatham (4 hrs)
2 CL: Galatea (VA, CS2), Aurora
8 DD: Brilliant, Icarus†, Impulsive†, Campbell (D21), Venetia, Vesper, Vivacious, Walpole
10 DE: Cattistock, Holderness, Garth, Hambledon, Vanity, Vimiera†, Wallace, Westminster, Winchester, Wolsey
Dover (1 hr) 2 MTB: MTB.6, MTB.72

Portsmouth (3 5 hrs)
1 CL: Cardiff
12 DD: Beagle, Bulldog, Havelock (D9), Harvester, Hesperus, Highlander, Vanoc, Viscount, Saladin, Sardonyx, Sturdy, Mistral
2 DE: Berkeley, Fernie
5 TB: Branlebas, L'Incomprise, La Cordeliere, La Flore, Z 7
2 SS: Ondine, Orion
6 MTB: MTB.3, MTB.4, MTB.5, MTB.25, MTB.30, MTB.33
Southampton (4 hrs) 2 DD: Volunteer, Wolverine
Portland (5 hrs) 2 MTB: MTB.69, MTB.70
Plymouth (8 hrs)
1 BB: Revenge
2 CL: Newcastle, Emerald
11 DD: Isis†, Broke, Vansittart, Whitehall, Westcott, Blyskawica (PO), Burza (PO), Ouragan (FFNL), Garland† (PO)
3 TB: Bouclier(NL), La Melpomene (FFNL),
Milford Haven (14 hrs) 1 TB: G.13 (NL)
Liverpool (18 5hrs)
3 DD: Vanquisher, Walker, Sabre
Firth of Clyde (21 5 hrs)
1 CL: Sheffield
10 DD: Keppel (D12), Achates†, Active†, Amazon†, Antelope†, Arrow†, Douglas, Ottawa (RCN), Skeena† (RCN), St Laurent† (RCN)
6 SS: Tigris, Otway, Upright, B.1 (NO), H.31, H.34
Oban/Tobermory (22 5 hrs)
3 SS: H.32, H.33, H.50
Belfast/Londonderry (20 hrs)
3 DD: Shikari, Scimitar, Skate

Destroyers at Sea (patrols, escorting convoys etc )
8 DD: Veteran (left Harwich 17 Sep), Witherington (left Plymouth 16 Sep), MacKay (left Plymouth 15 Sep), Hurricane (left Liverpool 15 Sep), Winchelsea (left Liverpool 13 Sep), Warwick (left Liverpool 11 Sep), Witch (left Belfast 17 Sep), Wanderer (left Londonderry 16 Sep)
2 DE: Vivien (left Rosyth 16 Sep), Wolfhound (left Rosyth 15 Sep),
1 TB: G.15 (NL) (left Plymouth 16 Sep)

Submarines on patrol
17 SS: H.49, H.43, L.27, Clyde, Sunfish, Tuna, Taku, Talisman, Tribune, Cachalot, Porpoise, Utmost, O.9 (NL), O.22 (NL), O.23 (NL), Rubis (FFNL), Wilk (PO)

Given that the German invasion forces would need 24/7 supply, RN ships further afield (and excluding the Med Fleet & Far East) would/could also become involved, such as

Dispositon of British Warships in the North Atlantic
Halifax
3 DD: Restigouche† (RCN), Assiniboine (RCN), Saguenay (RCN)
Gibraltar
1 BC: Renown (VA, Force "H")
8 DD: Gallant†, Griffin†, Encounter†, Hotspur†, Vidette, Velox, Wishart, Wrestler
Freetown (Force M, for Dakar landings)
2 BB: Barham, Resolution
2 CV: Ark Royal (24 Skua, 30 Swordfish), Argus (no aircarft)
3 CA: Devonshire (VA, CS1), Australia (RAN), Cornwall
11 DD: Inglefield (D3), Echo†, Eclipse†, Escapade†, Faulknor (D8), Firedrake†, Foresight†, Forester†, Fortune†, Fury†, Greyhound†
Lagos: 1 CL: Dragon
Bermuda: 1 CL: Dunedin
Tortola: 1 CL: Caradoc
At Sea
1 CA Cumberland
3 CL: Enterprise, Delhi, Despatch
1 SS: O.14 (NL)

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die
Tiornu
Contributor
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:56 pm

Post by Tiornu »

I think it's largely irrelevant to discuss the particulars of British and German fleet composition. However many teeth a shark is missing, the tuna can't beat him.
I'm looking at Lenton's British and Empire Warships of the Second World War. The section on destoyers lasts 59 pages. But the trawlers get 90 pages, the motor boats 48, the minesweepers 30--and then there are the sloops, patrol vessels, armed tugs, etc. These are the vessels that would be slaughtering the Germans, not the glamorous fleet units.
User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Andy H »

Tiornu wrote:I think it's largely irrelevant to discuss the particulars of British and German fleet composition. However many teeth a shark is missing, the tuna can't beat him.
I'm looking at Lenton's British and Empire Warships of the Second World War. The section on destoyers lasts 59 pages. But the trawlers get 90 pages, the motor boats 48, the minesweepers 30--and then there are the sloops, patrol vessels, armed tugs, etc. These are the vessels that would be slaughtering the Germans, not the glamorous fleet units.
I agree fully Richard, but those that believe in a Germany successful river crossing, demand detail. That's easier to find (on Fleet assets) than say the 1200 odd trawlers etc that completed the Auxillary Naval Patrol.

Its Ok for a German barge or tug to be armed but mention such things on a British (eg.Trawler) vessel, then its always the LW angle that is brought up. The LW though formidable couldn't be everywhere 24/7, and its night fighting capabilities were almost nil. Yet the barges etc would be sailing to and fro on constant resupply, including during the night with no LW cover.

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die
Tiornu
Contributor
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:56 pm

Post by Tiornu »

Remind me, which country was it that had an air arm trained specifically in anti-ship warfare? And which had radar-equipped aircraft for nighttime anti-ship strikes?
At the fall of France, how many aerial torpedoes were there in all of Germany? Is it in double figures?
User avatar
Troy Tempest
Enthusiast
Posts: 524
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Port Macquarie, NSW, Australia

Post by Troy Tempest »

Tiornu wrote:The Germans themselves considered GZ inadequate for Atlantic operations.
Any sortie like the one you describe would entail a massive logistics effort after Rheinubung had established the futility of such things.
The Allied forces available by the time these German ships could be ready would be overwhelming.
The KM never had sufficient ocean-going escorts.
Hi Tiornu, I found this on the Axis History Forum, and was wondering what you thought about it, in regards to the GZ being used as a commerce raider in the Atlantic:
Again, German design comes up short in this regard. German warships were all carrying standard A/A weaponry of the period (i.e. poor) and were completely unable to deal with a plane as slow and obsolete as a Swordfish. Yet we know the Germans were aware of British aircraft carriers by their own experiments with the Graf Zeppellin. Here the Germans missed a great opportunity to put a first class (even if of second class construction) convoy raider at sea. The Graf Zeppellin would have had long range recon, torpedo aircraft, and fighter protection against outdated Swordfish. It probably would have been the greatest surface raider of the war. Yet, instead of sending out the Graf Zeppellin, the Germans sent out the Bismark. Again, the Bismark would have served better purpose escorting the Graf Zeppellin.
It is part of a long discussion, but I was interested to see what your thoughts were in regards to this posters views on Atlantic operations for the German carrier?
Hello from sunny Port Macquarie
User avatar
Troy Tempest
Enthusiast
Posts: 524
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Port Macquarie, NSW, Australia

Post by Troy Tempest »

Tiornu wrote:The Germans themselves considered GZ inadequate for Atlantic operations.
Any sortie like the one you describe would entail a massive logistics effort after Rheinubung had established the futility of such things.
The Allied forces available by the time these German ships could be ready would be overwhelming.
The KM never had sufficient ocean-going escorts.
Hi Tiornu, I found this on the Axis History Forum, and was wondering what you thought about it, in regards to the GZ being used as a commerce raider in the Atlantic:
Again, German design comes up short in this regard. German warships were all carrying standard A/A weaponry of the period (i.e. poor) and were completely unable to deal with a plane as slow and obsolete as a Swordfish. Yet we know the Germans were aware of British aircraft carriers by their own experiments with the Graf Zeppellin. Here the Germans missed a great opportunity to put a first class (even if of second class construction) convoy raider at sea. The Graf Zeppellin would have had long range recon, torpedo aircraft, and fighter protection against outdated Swordfish. It probably would have been the greatest surface raider of the war. Yet, instead of sending out the Graf Zeppellin, the Germans sent out the Bismark. Again, the Bismark would have served better purpose escorting the Graf Zeppellin.
It is part of a long discussion, but I was interested to see what your thoughts were in regards to this posters views on Atlantic operations for the German carrier?
Hello from sunny Port Macquarie
Tiornu
Contributor
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:56 pm

Post by Tiornu »

It appears the author is dealing more with the idea of a German carrier in the Atlantic by 1941 rather than the idea of the specific ship GZ in the Atlantic by the time it would have been feasible to send her there.
Since there is a vast difference between GZ and a practical CV design, the two subjects deserve separate consideration.
Prinz Eugen ventured twice into the open Atlantic during her career, and both times she suffered significant machinery malfunctions. GZ had the same type of machinery as PE. Maybe this is why the Germans decided GZ was unsuited to the Atlantic.
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Post by phylo_roadking »

Andy, with regard the the Auxiliaries, what DID hapeen to the records on "Harry Tate's Navy"? Were they just shredded over the years or what? This has always been an interest of mine, and the publications on it are like rocking horse droppings! Have only ever actually come across ONE dedicated book, only enough to fill a slim 1950's paperback :-(

The problem with most of the armed auxiliaries is their fragility. It took VERY little to break the back of an armed fishing boat - theyre just enclosed storage space! - and many were rusting out bad by the outbreak of the war. There are SO many tales of boats just vanishing into the fog of war - especially down of Africa and North Africa - where a U-boat's deck gun could outrange the WWI-era weaponry with which most were equiped. Very few carried radios, with many of the heavier boats even on convoy escort duty relying on Aldis. Crews were at a minimum, trained medical personnel at a premium, even hands able to cook for crews were a prized resource LOL Techinically-speaking, put an armed Auxiliary trawler up against an invasion barge and my money would be on the BARGE, with all those automatic weapons, anti-tank rifles, and even tank turret guns LOL.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds
User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Andy H »

The problem with most of the armed auxiliaries is their fragility. It took VERY little to break the back of an armed fishing boat - theyre just enclosed storage space! - and many were rusting out bad by the outbreak of the war. There are SO many tales of boats just vanishing into the fog of war - especially down of Africa and North Africa - where a U-boat's deck gun could outrange the WWI-era weaponry with which most were equiped. Very few carried radios, with many of the heavier boats even on convoy escort duty relying on Aldis. Crews were at a minimum, trained medical personnel at a premium, even hands able to cook for crews were a prized resource LOL Techinically-speaking, put an armed Auxiliary trawler up against an invasion barge and my money would be on the BARGE, with all those automatic weapons, anti-tank rifles, and even tank turret guns LOL.
Hi Phylo

As Tiornu pointed out, just flicking through Lentons work, you see the vast scale of things afloat under RN command.Though some were old, many were brand new, and trawlers, whalers and drifters were built to work in some of the most extreme weathers.

Armament obviously varied but most were armed with at least 1x4" or 12pdr AA or MG's. Given that these could manouver, I would take them anyday over a towed barge making 2-5kts etc.

I would side with you on the UBoat statement, though I would argue that they were there to act more as a deterrent, rather than a actual offensive asset. 1 UBoat deck gun against say a flotilla (8ships, maybe) of Aux ships, and maybe the UBoat will dive, or try and outrun them on the surface?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die
Post Reply