KM S-boat fleet ready at start of WWII?

[thaddeus_c]

Was not the majority of the schnellbootes produced at one yard?

yup, Lurssen, still in business

[Paul Lakowski]

To me the S-Boot was a waste of time & resources.KM commandeered > 500 fishing vessels in the first year of the war so coastal patrol was always going to be covered and the resources better applied else were.

For me making a faster M-Boot with a pair of torps built in to the fore castle would make for a better-faster 'channel destroyer' than historical and should have been a higher priority.

Build more R-Boot instead of S-Boot. R-Boot were valuable through whole war to escort coastal convoys which was a main vehicle for ore transfer.

[thaddeus_c]

To me the S-Boot was a waste of time & resources.KM commandeered > 500 fishing vessels in the first year of the war so coastal patrol was always going to be covered and the resources better applied else were.

For me making a faster M-Boot with a pair of torps built in to the fore castle would make for a better-faster 'channel destroyer' than historical and should have been a higher priority.

Build more R-Boot instead of S-Boot. R-Boot were valuable through whole war to escort coastal convoys which was a main vehicle for ore transfer.

to the fishing vessels, some planning and construction would have to assume end to the war? and that the 500+ VP-boats would return to their regular commercial duties OR if the war continues that fleet will be attrited.

the S-boats (IMO) suffered from lack of development program, certainly the armored cupola to protect crew, planned near end of war, should have come along sooner

had a post-war ship, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar-cl ... tack_craft, as evolution of S-boat design.

have always speculated that several classes of ships could have been supplanted by M-class, R-boats (the M-class was other ship proposed to use Voth-Schneider propellers, not that I'm advocating their use, just demonstrates overlapping use), F1- F10 escorts, torpedo boats of all classes from 1935- onwards.

[Paul Lakowski]

RM/KM planning had to work from assumption that if they didn't win war- Germany would not exist any more, so all civilian vessels were planned to be used for multiple war roles from start. In 1930 plans were drawn up to use steamers as troop ships for amphibious operations with hundreds of river/coastal barges were to be used to land what tanks trucks & arty was needed.

The SB & RB used up the bulk of the prewar & war time industries . To give you an idea, this combined diesel industry could have built a dozen large diesel plants for Deutschland class PBS. In fact KM warship staff that survived the war , claimed that up to 21 Deutschland PBS could have been finished prewar had the naval warship industry had been organised for a war by 1940.

[thaddeus_c]

agree with the use of civilian vessels, was simply making the point that during wartime their (planned) replacement would be proper naval vessels.

not sure the point about Deutschland-class? too much resources to S-boats and R-boats? or that overall build program a mishmash?

would agree with you on latter point.

[fredleander]

To me the S-Boot was a waste of time & resources.KM commandeered > 500 fishing vessels in the first year of the war so coastal patrol was always going to be covered and the resources better applied else were.

For me making a faster M-Boot with a pair of torps built in to the fore castle would make for a better-faster 'channel destroyer' than historical and should have been a higher priority.

Build more R-Boot instead of S-Boot. R-Boot were valuable through whole war to escort coastal convoys which was a main vehicle for ore transfer.

The S-boats were offensive weapons, the R-boats defensive. While the S-boats worked well against enemy escort destroyers during the first couple of years they lost much of their sting when the enemy installed radar on their escort vessels. But, the S-boats could usually evade the enemy with their speed and smoke-laying techniques. The R-boats could not. Neither could the M-boats which made them less feasible as offensive weapons in the Channel. As escorts, however, they couldn't very well just leave their sheep.

With their initially heavier gun armament the R-boats were better escort vessels against enemy MTB's than the S-boats. Just my opinion. Also, the first couple of years the destroyer/S-boat statistics were clearly in favour of the latter. Which prove their value as offensive weapons.

As for production resources the S-boats drew little compared with the U-boats.

Fred

[thaddeus_c]

how feasible to utilize MAN diesels from R-boats on AFPs? 1,800hp vs. 300 - 400hp truck diesels used. or even possible to use one of two from R-boats, for 900hp?

they were already well armed, approaching level of M-class.

[fredleander]

how big of a failure was it considered, they built a couple hundred more during wartime conditions?

German admirals had a long wait for the S-boat command to prove its worth. The first claimed sinking of an Allied warship did not take place until May 1940..

The next ones followed rather quickly, during the Dunkirk evacution. As with the U-boats (and the Luftwaffe), the primary target for the S-boats was the commercial traffic. If they were a failure it was for the same reason as the U-boats - not enough of them.

In a way, the S-boats took over for the U-boats in the Channel Theatre.

Fred

[Paul Lakowski]

S-boot were useless as offensive weapons except for the English channel which did not justify a large production run. The Med was irrelevant since it was not a part of prewar plans. A better idea would have been to design an enlarged longer M Boot, with the diesel propulsion and forecastle mounted torpedoes from the S Boot program. This way you build Flottentorpedoboot instead of M boot and build more R Boot instead of S-Boot. These were much more valuable to the war effort anyway.

It was the job of the Zerstroers/torpedo boot to intercept British coastal convoys...and they some times relied on the M-Boots for numbers. S Boot were never really apart of that strategy or the plans.

[thaddeus_c]

"except for the English Channel" being a pretty big consideration.

not being subject to any treaty restrictions, not tying up larger shipyards, suitable for export (to China,Yugoslavia,Spain, etc), serving as threat to much larger ships, requiring small crew?

for a relatively small amount of resources?

agree on the M-boats, have already suggested they could/should have replaced the R-boats/'35-onwards TB-boats/Flottenbegleiter (although the coal fired engines were one of their attributes)

[Paul Lakowski]

Primary role of the RM/KM in the 1920s & 1930s was coastal defence, followed by commerce warfare with either the Poles French &/or the Brits. English channel was a minor consideration, in fact they anticipated fighting Britain from "the lowland". From that launch point, commerce warfare was to be waged against the UK to cut the supply line from America to the allies.

RM/KM fuel requirements had a great need for diesel fuel [U-Boat & Surface raiders] and some bunker fuel [M-Boot ; torpedo boat and light cruisers] . However these fossil fuels that were costly & hard to come by and yet Germany was almost self sufficient in coal. This makes total war plans very difficult. In WW-I the solution was hybrid coal /oil propulsion systems , while smaller coastal vessels were simply restricted to coal only. Only Gross Torpedo Boot were all oil propulsion. This is what Germany should have done for WW-II ,except the hybrid warships would be diesel/oil.

Such precious fuel was to valuable to waste on coastal defence.

[thaddeus_c]

RM/KM fuel requirements had a great need for diesel fuel [U-Boat & Surface raiders] and some bunker fuel [M-Boot ; torpedo boat and light cruisers] . However these fossil fuels that were costly & hard to come by and yet Germany was almost self sufficient in coal. This makes total war plans very difficult. In WW-I the solution was hybrid coal /oil propulsion systems , while smaller coastal vessels were simply restricted to coal only. Only Gross Torpedo Boot were all oil propulsion. This is what Germany should have done for WW-II ,except the hybrid warships would be diesel/oil.

Such precious fuel was to valuable to waste on coastal defence.

have endorsed use of M-class since they were coal powered and effective ships, however they had no record or ability to strike Allied warships.

admittedly the S-boats needed to evolve (had an armored version never produced) but that is reflection of overall direction of war not deficiency of the design or concept.

[fredleander]

....have endorsed use of M-class since they were coal powered and effective ships, however they had no record or ability to strike Allied warships..

First a little correction. Actually, the first 60 or so M-boats - the Type 35 - were oil-driven and, as the war wore on, used more in an escort capacity than as minesweepers. They were quite respected by their opposition - often quoted as the "Channel Destroyer". With their two quick-firing 10.5 cm. guns and very good rangefinder and optics they were a match in night-fighting, as well. However, as opposed to the S-boats they were rarely used offensively. The main reason probably being their lack of speed - 18-22 knots, depending on conditions. As an example, I don't seem to remember any occasion where these were used offensively, except maybe in the Baltics, and no sinking of enemy destroyers - British, anyway - whereas the S-boats are credited for many sunk or damaged. This in spite of their primary targets, like the Luftwaffe and the U-boats, mainy were merchant shipping.

The later, coal-driven, M-boats had only one 10,5 cm. gun.

....admittedly the S-boats needed to evolve (had an armored version never produced) but that is reflection of overall direction of war not deficiency of the design or concept.

They did evolve in the sense that their gun armament was graduallyt increased and their steering/bridge positions armoured. Extensive armouring and more armaments would necessarily have inflicted on their speed and maneuverability. Anyway, the German S-boats were superior to the Allied ones throughout the war. Particularly their engines and sea-handling capacity. They were extensively used in The Channel and North Sea, The Med, The Black Sea, even in the North Atlantic - near the Norwegian/Soviet border, all along the Continental coastline.

Knowing how few they were through the war it should be obvious that many more of them would have been a bonus for the German war effort.

Fred

[Paul Lakowski]

Once the RN put 57mm guns on some of their fast craft -the Schnellboot could no longer compete and fared poorly. Their total kill numbered 100 out of a 5100 total, so not significant . However the vast majority of all KM construction and mission was minesweeping & coastal convoy escorts, with 3000 vessels plus 100,000 sailors employed as such by 1943. That was the bulk of their fleet along with the U-boats. More R-Boot & M-Boot were what was needed, not expensive S-Boot. Each S-Boot cost as much as 3-4 R-Boot or one M-Boot.

[thaddeus_c]

Once the RN put 57mm guns on some of their fast craft -the Schnellboot could no longer compete and fared poorly. Their total kill numbered 100 out of a 5100 total, so not significant .

the point of my scenario is effects of larger S-boat fleet EARLIER, not to build 1,000 ships, perhaps 4 - 5 times the 18 ships the KM started the war with in service.