Kriegsmarine Ship X

[thaddeus_c]

were there any designs of Kriegsmarine that could have rivaled impact of Panzerschiffe "pocket battleships" or Elektroboote?

(although Elektroboote impact was post-war)

to my thinking there were two possibles, a rocket u-boat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_U-boat or ship based helicopters http://german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ship ... index.html

(or any bits and pieces of a design not advanced that might have had equal impact?)

[Don71]

Perhaps.....

There was the prototype destroyer Z51 launched 10/1944, Type 1942 prototype destroyer
Since 1938 the germans/MAN were developing a V engine out of the M9Z 42/58 Panzerschiffe engines.
They developed a V12Z 42/58 and a V12Z 32/44 both were 24 Cylinder, 12 cylinder of each cylinder bank.

These engines were NOT in need of auxilary engines because they were producing their combustion air through their own propelled air blower.
The V12Z 32/44 which was developed for destroyers and very smal cruiser was at 60t weight and 10000 PSe performance for the shaft, turbo charged at 70t till 15000 PSe performance. 6 non turbo charged engines were built for the destroyer Z51. One is at the Museum at Sinsheim.
For comparison, the M9Z 42/58 engine of the Panzerschiffe was at 83-100t (Deutschland till Graf Spee) weight and 7100 PSe, plus one auxilary engine with ~50t for two main engines.

This destroyer had a range of 5500sm at 19kn out of 551t diesel fuel and a max speed of 36kn with 60000 PSe max performance.

[Paul Lakowski]

helicopter equipped escort vessel was important even though it took decades to materialize post war.

To me the GHG long range ultra low frequency sonar became the basis of most post war submarine threat. It helps to explain how the KM Wolf pacts were able to detect 50% of all North Atlantic Convoys through 1941-1944. Mind you BdU merchant fleet code cracking [41-43] was probably the main driving force behind that effort.

Wullenweber radio direction system became the foundation of all post was 'ocean surveillance systems'. "Krug" & "Classic Bullseye"....don't know if the KM ever planned to use it in that role.

http://www.tha.id.au/adc/Readings/Ops%2 ... ipage).pdf

[T. A. Gardner]

The German V-2 U-boat launch idea was totally impractical. There would have been huge issues with it starting with the missile using un-storable fuels. LOX would have required the U-boat to be able to make and store it for fueling the rocket.

The USN and RN both operated helicopters at sea in 1944. The RN flew the Sikorsky R-4 (aka Hoverfly) off the merchant carrier Daghestan in Atlantic convoy crossings. So, in terms of testing and operational use of helicopters at sea the Allies were already well ahead of Germany.

The Type XXI and the GHG sonar array were really the only two big surprises the KM had for the Allies after the war ended.

[thaddeus_c]

The German V-2 U-boat launch idea was totally impractical. There would have been huge issues with it starting with the missile using un-storable fuels.

The USN and RN both operated helicopters at sea in 1944. The RN flew the Sikorsky R-4 (aka Hoverfly) off the merchant carrier Daghestan in Atlantic convoy crossings. So, in terms of testing and operational use of helicopters at sea the Allies were already well ahead of Germany.

agree about V-2, in fact think other than research that whole project was their biggest waste (to place in production) of war. HOWEVER, the concept of submarine launched missile was sound, to strike thousands of miles away, etc.

they had Rheinbote solid fuel rocket and Arrow shells for 4.1" guns (already installed on many u-boats) better if less grandiose options.

don't question Allied research efforts or skill but Germans had good working helicopter and could refit many of ships with landing pad, seems better option than carrier efforts? http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng ... olibri.php

[thaddeus_c]

There was the prototype destroyer Z51 launched 10/1944, Type 1942 prototype destroyer
Since 1938 the germans/MAN were developing a V engine out of the M9Z 42/58 Panzerschiffe engines.
They developed a V12Z 42/58 and a V12Z 32/44 both were 24 Cylinder, 12 cylinder of each cylinder bank.

The V12Z 32/44 which was developed for destroyers and very smal cruiser was at 60t weight and 10000 PSe performance for the shaft, turbo charged at 70t till 15000 PSe performance. 6 non turbo charged engines were built for the destroyer Z51.
For comparison, the M9Z 42/58 engine of the Panzerschiffe was at 83-100t (Deutschland till Graf Spee) weight and 7100 PSe, plus one auxilary engine with ~50t for two main engines.

This destroyer had a range of 5500sm at 19kn out of 551t diesel fuel and a max speed of 36kn with 60000 PSe max performance.

wonder the development of their hybrid system with such advanced diesel? they used 4 6-cyl. diesels producing approx. 4700 hp?

or could their whole concept be changed where the steam engine was supplement? as was later mooted for O-class battlecruisers?

[T. A. Gardner]

agree about V-2, in fact think other than research that whole project was their biggest waste (to place in production) of war. HOWEVER, the concept of submarine launched missile was sound, to strike thousands of miles away, etc.

they had Rheinbote solid fuel rocket and Arrow shells for 4.1" guns (already installed on many u-boats) better if less grandiose options.

don't question Allied research efforts or skill but Germans had good working helicopter and could refit many of ships with landing pad, seems better option than carrier efforts? http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng ... olibri.php

The helicopter was an immature technology in 1945. As a shipboard system it really needed a decade or more of development to get to where it was useful.

Two Allied technologies the Germans didn't even have on the drawing board for naval warfare that began to appear at the end of the war were:

AEW: Project Cadillac was the first success in producing an AEW aircraft. The USN wanted this technology to extend the range at which enemy air strikes and ships could be detected. The British had tried with very limited success the same idea with a Wellington bomber. The problems with their system was a poor radar, position of the same that meant it was blanked by the airframe in portions of its search, and they couldn't resolve the parallax errors in positon of targets relative to the plane.

The other was Project Bumblebee / Typhoon: This was the concept that future ships would have an integrated radar system, CIC, and use missiles to shoot down incoming airstrikes. Bumblebee became the Talos SAM in the 50's. Typhoon went through many development stages eventually to become the Ageis system.

The RN likewise had several developments, primarily in ASW that they were pushing. One was Limbo, the ASW mortar firing 12" depth charges ahead of the ship. The other was a bottom scanning sonar that could detect submerged targets like midget subs in shallower water.

They already had a homing torpedo in limited use, FIDO.
The US had developed a directional sonobouy from the original design the British had come up with. These were in use with both navies on aircraft by 1945.
Both navies already had scanning active sonar for ships. This is the surface ship equivalent of the GHG passive array. Scanning sonars were replacing earlier "searchlight" types that had a (roughly) 11 degree beam and were manually swept around the ship.

Oh, I should mention that the Japanese had high speed submarines too. The I-201 class, while smaller than a Type XXI had similar speed underwater and were looked at seriously by the USN postwar. The I 400 class was looked at very closely too for the arrangement of the aircraft hanger on it. This was important to the USN as a starting point for putting missiles aboard submarines postwar. Having a watertight arrangement for them was being seriously considered in 1945 - 46.

[Paul Lakowski]

No one had anything like the GHG sonar in WW-II.

High submerged speed subs rendered all ballistic ASW useless , which is why most navies worked on switching over to such guided torpedoes post war.

[T. A. Gardner]

No one had anything like the GHG sonar in WW-II.

The technology in the GHG was nothing special, what made it unique was the size of the array.

High submerged speed subs rendered all ballistic ASW useless , which is why most navies worked on switching over to such guided torpedoes post war.

This isn't completely true. Ahead thrown ASW weapons were still of some value pre-nuclear submarine because high speed diesel-battery boats could only sprint for a limited time. Guided torpedoes and longer ranged weapons carrying one, like ASROC, gave a larger area of coverage. The limiting factor to all these weapons was the range of shipboard sonar systems. If you couldn't find the target having weapons to attack it was useless.

This is one of the reasons the Soviets kept the RBU rocket propelled depth charge launchers on ships for so long. These could reach out to about the maximum range of active detection of their sonar systems on many of their ships. With several (the US in the early 50's preferred twin trainable hedgehog for the same reason here) of these on a ship they could lay down a pattern and when the target maneuvered at high speed to escape the pattern put a second, and possibly a third or even fourth, pattern down in its path.

[Paul Lakowski]

Soviet keeping the RBU system was as mostly because of the need to have a layered defence against NATO torpedo attacks. The layering allowed long range decoys to be launched ; followed by multiple sonar blinding detonations to break acoustic torpedo tracking....with the last moment barrage in the hopes of detonating the torpedo before it hits the ship.... clever.


The disparity between standoff ASW torps range and the escorts short range, was what lead to NTDS & link 11 etc. The escort group had to be able to remain close to the convoy , while a detachment prosecuted the detected contact. If such a contact was hostile, ALL the escorts could join in the battle using the standoff weapons as 'artillery'. In time this method would be supplemented by light helicopters carrying D/C or ASW torps to attack the contact.

BTW allied use of helicopters were merely for search and rescue , trails in convoy duties match similar trials with Flettner helicopters operating in the Baltic from cruisers and tenders. Original plan for Fl-282 was to be a scout /ASW helicopter to supplement ship born A/C. This was established in 1938 when Raeder ordered contract to develop such Helicopters. Trails for these helicopters were begun in 1940. When were the allied trails begun?

[thaddeus_c]

BTW allied use of helicopters were merely for search and rescue , trails in convoy duties match similar trials with Flettner helicopters operating in the Baltic from cruisers and tenders. Original plan for Fl-282 was to be a scout /ASW helicopter to supplement ship born A/C. This was established in 1938 when Raeder ordered contract to develop such Helicopters. Trails for these helicopters were begun in 1940. When were the allied trails begun?

know the auxiliary cruisers sometimes would not launch floatplanes due to cumbersome procedure of hoisting into and out of water, they couldn't have catapults since it would/could give away whatever disguise they were using. that small Flettner helicopter would have benefited them as well as u-boats if it did nothing more than hover 500 ft.(?) above? able to carry depth charge or small bomb all the better.

[Paul Lakowski]

The Flettner helicopter could carry smoke bombs to mark targets they could see. I gather they were particularly good at spotting subs at periscope depth prior to attack.

[thaddeus_c]

The Flettner helicopter could carry smoke bombs to mark targets they could see. I gather they were particularly good at spotting subs at periscope depth prior to attack.

and frankly it could be shared with LW and army so whatever efforts KM are able to make the development of helicopter is not wasted.

[thaddeus_c]

the KM did have one idea, a class of minelayers, Minenleger Projekt http://german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ship ... index.html

they could have beaten the British to construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdiel-class_minelayer

using Don's speculative diesel engines or high pressure steam, the larger German ships might not be as fast as British minelayer class but could carry two and half times the mines (400.) it would take six destroyers to deploy the same number of mines.

[Takao]

BTW allied use of helicopters were merely for search and rescue , trails in convoy duties match similar trials with Flettner helicopters operating in the Baltic from cruisers and tenders. Original plan for Fl-282 was to be a scout /ASW helicopter to supplement ship born A/C. This was established in 1938 when Raeder ordered contract to develop such Helicopters. Trails for these helicopters were begun in 1940. When were the allied trails begun?

The US Navy began testing autogyros in 1931, don't think Germany is going to be that, and found them wanting. The US Navy again tested autogyros, as well as the Royal Navy, in 1940, and again found them wanting.

A landing platform was considered impractical because of air turbulence from the superstructure. Further, when landing vertically, the pilot lost sight of the landing platform. Finally, the autogyro was not considered offensive due to it's lack of any real payload capacity.

Still, out of these discussions, came the USS Long Island, the prototype for a class of ship far more useful class of warship, the CVE.