Plans for Aryan Aircraft Carrier

[KampfgruppeMeyer]

Did the Germans plan an aircraft carrier in 30's-40's? If so, Would it have been Kriegsmarine, oder Luftwaffe pilots?

[Patrick]

As I remember it, one aircraft carrier, KMS Graf Zeppelin, was launched in 1938 and a second, KMS Peter Strasser, was laid down but scrapped in 1940. I believe the pilots were all under Luftwaffe control. I haven't looked yet, but surely there must be some pages here at Feldgrau devoted to the subject.

[Wurger]

Construction of Graf Zeppelin was never completed. After several halts in construction, the program was scrubbed and the materials salvaged for other projects. Experiments with navalized Bf-109E's (the "T" for Traeger series) and a Ju-87 (the "C" series based on the Ju 87B) variant were conducted, but eventually abandoned. The Bf 109T's saw limited service based at Heligoland (I think) before they were scrapped.

Pilot's probably would have come from the Luftwaffe given the fact that the one Stuka unit destined for carrier use (186) was re-intergrated into the Luftwaffe once Graf Zeppelin was scrapped. It continued to fly with a helmet and archor motif as its squadron emblem.

Wurger - Resident Leftist Thug

[Arne]

Construction of Graf Zeppelin was never completed. After several halts in construction, the program was scrubbed and the materials salvaged for other projects. Experiments with navalized Bf-109E's (the "T" for Traeger series) and a Ju-87 (the "C" series based on the Ju 87B) variant were conducted, but eventually abandoned. The Bf 109T's saw limited service based at Heligoland (I think) before they were scrapped.

You are wrong in almost all points! See:

http://www.feldgrau.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5638

[Wurger]

Hello Arne,

The link you posted confirms that Graf Zeppelin was not completed. It also confirms that Bf-109's and Ju-87's were navalized. This confirms, rather than disproves, my original post.

Wurger - Resident Leftist Thug

[Arne]

OK:

GZ WAS NOT scrabbed for recycling, but scuttled by the russians
(there are lots of stories about that, i.e. "The russian filled the GZ with captured stuff but lost it of the coast of Finnland"
I tend to belive GZ was deliberatly sunk as a training target.)

About the Me109T: Heligoland was only the last station

Messerchmitt's conversion was approved but actual works would be carried out by Fieseler, the only company in Germany with some experience in naval aircraft. An order was issued for the completion of ten Bf 109E-1 fighter as Bf 109T-0 pre-production aircraft. Trials at the Erprobungstelle in Travemünde revealed that the fighter's offensive punch was insufficient and therefore two of the prototypes were modified to accomodate two MG FF 20mm cannons in the wings, thus bringing the armament to E-3 standard. The modified prototypes were denominated Bf 109 T-1 and sixty production aircraft were ordered. But only a few months later, works on the Zeppelin were halted and Fieseler was instructed to remove all carrier gear and complete the fighters as STOL (short take-off and landing) airplanes. Stripped of catapult spools and arrestor hooks and fitted with the new Daimler Benz DB601N engine, new angular canopy (E-4 standard) and a a ventral rack that could carry one 551lb (250kg) SC-250 bomb, or four 100lb (50kg) SC-50 bombs or a 79.25 US gal (66 imp gal; 300 liters) drop tank (E-7 standard), they were redenominated Bf 109 T-2. Works were completed in early 1942 and by then the sixty T-2's were already obsolete. They were assigned to III/JG77 in Norway and relegated to secondary roles, mostly to protect harbors from unlikely raids of Russian bombers. The survivors were used for the point defense of the island of Heligoland in late in 1944.

About the pilots: Everything flying was Luftwaffe. Himmler would have liked to have an own SS-Airforce but even that was also stop by Göring.

[Dackelstaffel]

OK:

GZ WAS NOT scrabbed for recycling, but scuttled by the russians
.

Hi,
I'am not really aware of all the things about the Graf Zepplein but are you sure that the russians scuttled the ship. I heard the story that the germans did scuttle the ship and the russians, after the war, refloated her and they tried to tow her to Russia but she sank after a tempest. Maybe the russians used the wreck as a target.

[behblc]

M.J. Whitley in his book "German Capital Ships of WW2" paints a picture of a ship almost completed , which might have been in service prior to Bismarcks excursion into the Atlantic had it not been for indecision , diversion of resources and lack of direction in the planning .
She is given as being scuttled at Stettin in April 1945 , her internal machinery having been "trashed"/ wrecked.
Its is believed that she sailed from Swinemunde on 14/08/47 loaded with cattured materials , Mr. Whitley notes that some sources say she docked in Lenningrad and was scrapped there , he also states that her salvage was contrary to Allied Tripartite Commission so her movements might have been kept secret and hidden from Western eyes.
Doubts are expressed as to her seaworthiness and she may well have foundered on route , he right points out that the arrival of the ship would not have gone unnoticed.
Begs the question just where did she sink and "where is she now" ?
Wurger's point about materials being salvaged for other projects is not incorrect in that her hull was really all that was left , her flak and anything that could be used elsewhere was removed and recycled , M.W> reports her at one stage having been reduced to being a floating warehouse.
Whole episode is one of what might have been unfulfiled promise and possible salvation for Bismarck , lack of policy and planning by the navy.
Has anything specific been written about the "Graf Z." M.Whitley's chapter in his book is the best is have on her , all in all a very sorry tale.
He even notes that te navy and Luftwaffe men had seperate mess accomadation....Gorings finger prints I wonder !

[duncan]

Hi
You might want to try this website where there is information on the GZ.

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waf ... ppelin.htm

Although in German it provides data, and a brief synopsis of what happened to her. Apparently it was scuttled, refloated by the Russians and then resunk by them, by artillery fire, in 1947.

Duncan

[Dackelstaffel]

Hi,
Because we are in the Luftwaffe section and we're talking about the Graf Zeppelin, don't you think if the carrier was operationnal that the Messerschmitt 109T could have been a poor carrier fighter because of its short range. On a carrier, a squadron take off takes a lot of time. I mean the first plane airborne has to wait (by flying around the carrier and spending fuel ) the last one. And without talking about the catapult system ( did the germans copy a seaplane catapult ?). Don't you think too that the Me109 undercarriage would have been too weak for the rough landing on a carrier ? And what about the visibility from the cockpit.
Does anybody know what kind of landing guiding system the germans want to use on the Graf Zeppelin ?

[behblc]

I would wonder exactly along the same lines as "Dackelstaffel" regarding both range and under carriage strength of the 109 , she would have been a handful to land ......... landing in a "Swordfish" would be a better bet !
Only thing I can find is about the nature of her catapults which are quoted as being able to launch 9 aircraft at a rate of one every 30 seconds , with a recharge time of 50 minutes. Two catapults on the carrier.
A good point made earlier in the discusion was that of how would aircraft be directed to intercept any airborne or attacking shiping ?
Would also see range of the 109 as being a limiting factor , it was pointed out to me perhaps in a different thread that the "Seafire" operated well as a carrier borne aircraft , perhaps this may have been partly down to the experience and well estiblished direction on part of RN ? ( Would not well up on this ).

Some German Tech. people did go to Japan in 1936 to gleam an insight from the IJN. They also had obtained techanial details of the USS Lexington and HMS Courageous to work on as a starting point design wise.

There is a disturbing note in M. Whitley's writing on the carrier in that she fully loaded would have had a projected 4.5 degree list to starboard , which was countered by using thicker plating to port side...to provide 300 tonnes of extra ballast.

[behblc]

Above mention of Lexington and Courageous implies some degre of co-operation from US /UK.....how Germany got this information I don't know , can't imagine UK or US volunteering help.

[Dackelstaffel]

There is a disturbing note in M. Whitley's writing on the carrier in that she fully loaded would have had a projected 4.5 degree list to starboard , which was countered by using thicker plating to port side...to provide 300 tonnes of extra ballast.

With a bloody f.... propeller, she could have look like the french carrier "Charles de Gaulle" (Joke)

[behblc]

Come to mention it , not unlike said ship .....wonder if the new RN carrier when it comes to pass will look like a carbon copy of "C de G"

[Dackelstaffel]

I hope not for the Royal Navy. Meanwhile if the RN has a ship like that don't forget to put the mention " BEWARE OF PROPELLERS" not only on the desk but on the stern too, of course outside and inside the hull (the french carrier had lost a propeller blade in the atlantic, now she has one propeller of the former french carrier Clemenceau).
But to be serious, the Thales project for the new british carrier seems to me to be bigger ( and wiser) and not powered by a nuclear reactor. I don't undertand ( from my books) what kind of Lockheed F35 the Royal navy will use. Will it be a normal F35 or a V/STOL F35.