Bismarck what if

[Baltasar]

Your point is which?

The whole commerce raiding idea about Bismark being sent thousands of miles away from any help with the majority of the RN on her heels, is completely pointless. Even if she hadn't been sunk in the try, she was inevitably heavily damaged, so she had to be repaired for months and months to come. No use sending her out this way or the other. If you're lucky, the Tommies would waste even more recources trying to sink her than the Germans when they built her.

I don't see any point in sending any capital ships on commerce raiding when you can be sure as hell that they would be hunted by the largest fleets who possibly ever roamed the seas.

[LWD]

POW will certainly beat PE. But five or six 20.8cm hits from her may prevent POW from engaging/following Bismarck. ...

It's possible but not very likely. I believe POW took about that many hits from both German ships and it wasn't enough to prevent her from engaging or following Bismark.

[NASAFAN101]

POW vs. PE would be ugle at best!
NIKKI

[LWD]

Not from POW's point of view .

[NASAFAN101]

ya i reazlied that, but if you thing about it she was bigger them PE.
NIKKI

[waldzee]

bombarded Fort Churchill into surrender...

( "">>>Around 8500nm at 15kts

WI she had been hounded north west, eventually into the Hudson Bay to bombard the significantly named city of Churchill?! ...")


& the guns had yet to be replaced
Have you SEEN the Port of Churchill?

Seriously, Bismarck was capable of 21 knots, POW would have been sending out position reports every 15 minutes, staying just out of range...

[waldzee]

Is there any chance of the German's retreat back to France, the Baltic or Norway being cut off, they are hounded all the way to Canada and get trapped in the Hudson Bay?! Is this totally inconceivable?

If they end up berthed at the Vichy St Pierre or Miquelon, what do the Anglo-Canucks do? The Germans scuttle their ships and the crews repatriated?

Or Lutjen's fights to the finish?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
St Pierre was Vichy in Name only, & revolted as soon as 'De Gualles' Xmas corvette dropped anchor.
with two narrow entrances to St Pierres harbour, blockships & torpedoes, then raise her in time for Overlord.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Your point is which?

The whole commerce raiding idea about Bismarck being sent thousands of miles away from any help with the majority of the RN on her heels, is completely pointless. Even if she hadn't been sunk in the try, she was inevitably heavily damaged, so she had to be repaired for months and months to come. No use sending her out this way or the other. If you're lucky, the Tommies would waste even more recources trying to sink her than the Germans when they built her.

I don't see any point in sending any capital ships on commerce raiding when you can be sure as hell that they would be hunted by the largest fleets who possibly ever roamed the seas.

All correct, they were and they were. The results were:

Graf Spee: sank or captured seven cargo ships in four months, then sunk.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau: June 1940 sent on interdiction raid in North Sea & Norwegian waters with Gneisenau & Adm Hipper. One cargo ship sunk; also a corvette, two destroyers & a aircraft carrier. Second anti shipping sortie with Gneisenau into the Atlantic . Eleven cargo ships sunk by the two BB. Directed a submarine wolfpack into the path of one fleeing convoy. Returned to Germany. Subsequently sunk on a attempted raid into the Arctic ocean

Adm Hipper: Sank one oil tanker in Norwegian waters in June 1940 & two cargo ships in a Febuary 1941 sortie into the Atlantic

Admiral Scheer: Atlantic raid started Oct 1940. Extended to Indian Ocean. Twelve cargo ships/oil tankers sunk or captured. Returned to Germany March 1941.

Sucess here was mixed. Several other attempted sorties were aborted for multiple reasons. Coordination with submarines was mediocre, and with air support very poor. Coordination with the 'auxillary cruisers or armed merchant raiders was helpfull. Aside from sinking /capturing cargo ships a half dozen British convoys were scattered making them vulnerable to submarine and air attack. The sortie of the Tirpitz against convoy PQ17 resulted in severe losses from submarines and aircraft after the convoy dispersed.

Cost to the British was large. Keeping captiol ships as escorts, on standby, and chasing the raiders was a minimum of 12-1 to the German raider cost in terms of fuel, manpower, repairs, ect... Confining the German fleet to littoral operations during the Scandinavian campaign or in the Baltic would have simplified British naval ops and saved considerablly in resources. Given the construction of the fleet a raiding strategy has some logic vs having it sit until decosntructed for material. The only other alternative I can think of is in support of amphibious campaigns vs the Baltic Sea & Bothnia Gulf coasts, and the Murmansk area. How practical that might be I'll leave for another time.

It is difficult to say what sucess the combination of the Bismarck, Scharnhoirst, & Gneisenau would have had. Variables would be coordination with air reconissance & submarines. Also diversions or actual sorties by others from the North Sea would complicated the British problem.

[waldzee]

Your point is which?

The whole commerce raiding idea about Bismarck being sent thousands of miles away from any help with the majority of the RN on her heels, is completely pointless. Even if she hadn't been sunk in the try, she was inevitably heavily damaged, so she had to be repaired for months and months to come. No use sending her out this way or the other. If you're lucky, the Tommies would waste even more recources trying to sink her than the Germans when they built her.

I don't see any point in sending any capital ships on commerce raiding when you can be sure as hell that they would be hunted by the largest fleets who possibly ever roamed the seas.

All correct, they were and they were. The results were:

Graf Spee: sank or captured seven cargo ships in four months, then sunk.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau: June 1940 sent on interdiction raid in North Sea & Norwegian waters with Gneisenau & Adm Hipper. One cargo ship sunk; also a corvette, two destroyers & a aircraft carrier. Second anti shipping sortie with Gneisenau into the Atlantic . Eleven cargo ships sunk by the two BB. Directed a submarine wolfpack into the path of one fleeing convoy. Returned to Germany. Subsequently sunk on a attempted raid into the Arctic ocean

Adm Hipper: Sank one oil tanker in Norwegian waters in June 1940 & two cargo ships in a Febuary 1941 sortie into the Atlantic

Admiral Scheer: Atlantic raid started Oct 1940. Extended to Indian Ocean. Twelve cargo ships/oil tankers sunk or captured. Returned to Germany March 1941.

Sucess here was mixed. Several other attempted sorties were aborted for multiple reasons. Coordination with submarines was mediocre, and with air support very poor. Coordination with the 'auxillary cruisers or armed merchant raiders was helpfull. Aside from sinking /capturing cargo ships a half dozen British convoys were scattered making them vulnerable to submarine and air attack. The sortie of the Tirpitz against convoy PQ17 resulted in severe losses from submarines and aircraft after the convoy dispersed.

Cost to the British was large. Keeping captiol ships as escorts, on standby, and chasing the raiders was a minimum of 12-1 to the German raider cost in terms of fuel, manpower, repairs, ect... Confining the German fleet to littoral operations during the Scandinavian campaign or in the Baltic would have simplified British naval ops and saved considerablly in resources. Given the construction of the fleet a raiding strategy has some logic vs having it sit until decosntructed for material. The only other alternative I can think of is in support of amphibious campaigns vs the Baltic Sea & Bothnia Gulf coasts, and the Murmansk area. How practical that might be I'll leave for another time.

It is difficult to say what sucess the combination of the Bismarck, Scharnhoirst, & Gneisenau would have had. Variables would be coordination with air reconissance & submarines. Also diversions or actual sorties by others from the North Sea would complicated the British problem.

Thank you, Carl for an excellent analysis
The Kriegsmarine & Admiral Reder was ‘pressured’ to say the least, by an increasingly deranged Furher . The medical evidence of his advanced Parkinsons, & the effects of Dr Morrel’s treatment programs ( methamphetime & other assorted wonder drugs, injected DAILY by 1941) has been documented in other threads.
We are now aware of the effects of meth addiction on cognitive functions.( The senior leadership of the Hells Angels carefully abstains from their chief market products.).
A concentration of forces to block the Murmansk run would have made’ naval sense’. ‘Doubious, aggressive naval campaigns’ may make sense to a meth mainlner- but are a sure way to lose the war.

[Carl Schwamberger]

...
Thank you, Carl for an excellent analysis

Thanks, but I was just regurgitating some stuff from a old magazine article. Maybe some bits from else where as well. All borrowed comments & numbers.

... A concentration of forces to block the Murmansk run would have made’ naval sense’. ‘Doubious, aggressive naval campaigns’ may make sense to a meth mainlner- but are a sure way to lose the war.

There was some sucess at that 1942-43. The PQ17 disaster & the subsequent postphonment of several convoys counted for something. Fortunatly for the Allies the Brits managed to find solutions and cope.

I wonder if anyone has throughly gamed out the results of the Bismarck reinforced fleet raiding the Atlantic, with some improved air support? I mean a professional level simulation & not the simple commercial games I was familar with back in the 1970s

[waldzee]

After 1940 the efects of Parkinsons & the 'medicine' given to Adolf Hitler created increasingly erratic decisions. A rational state would have had provisions to retire & replace.
by 1942 the Furher had to be 'convinced' not to scrap Germany's surface fleet- in the middle of a war...

[Andy H]

Hi

This thread is on the cusp of reaching its finale, so please lets not hasten its demise by now introducing another POD regarding Hitler

Regards

Andy H

[Von Schadewald]

WI Bismarck is kept in the Baltic. Instead of being lost in June 1941, she is used to hammer Soviet forces around Leningrad. Although at risk from Russian submarines, her bombardment firepower could have broken the siege before the end of 1941.

With Leningrad captured, Bismarck & PE could then be sent skipping round North Cape to ensure that not one Allied Arctic convoy dared be sent to Murmansk and Archangel.

This could have knocked the Soviets out of the war by autumn 1942.

[waldzee]

Your point is which?

The whole commerce raiding idea about Bismarck being sent thousands of miles away from any help with the majority of the RN on her heels, is completely pointless. Even if she hadn't been sunk in the try, she was inevitably heavily damaged, so she had to be repaired for months and months to come. No use sending her out this way or the other. If you're lucky, the Tommies would waste even more recources trying to sink her than the Germans when they built her.

I don't see any point in sending any capital ships on commerce raiding when you can be sure as hell that they would be hunted by the largest fleets who possibly ever roamed the seas.

thank you Andy
as Baltasar points s out, after 1940 the Kriegsmarine is increasingly pressured to undertake high risk missions , instead of focusing on a fleet in being / Murmansk interdiction force/ Baltic control fleet. High level decision pressure was less & less rational.

[Orwell1984]

WI Bismarck is kept in the Baltic. Instead of being lost in June 1941, she is used to hammer Soviet forces around Leningrad. Although at risk from Russian submarines, her firepower could have broken the siege before the end of 1941.

With Leningrad captured, Bismarck & PE could then be sent skipping round North Cape to ensure that not one Allied Arctic convoy dared be sent to Murmansk and Archangel.

This could have knocked the Soviets out of the war by autumn 1942.

Firstly the Bismarck was lost in May 1941, not June 1941 as you state.
Secondly your argument about the Allied convoys does not follow at all. The logical course of action would be for the RN to strengthen the convoy's escorts to deal with the threat of the Bismarck and the PE and attempt to force a confrontation a la the Battle of the North Cape.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_North_Cape

On a side note and after reviewing your previous posts, I notice a trend of throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, no matter what the logic or reality of the situation.
For example your plan to have the Bismarck bombard the port of Churchill fails to take in to account that Hudson Bay is largely frozen over from December to the middle of June and as far as I know the Bismarck was not an icebreaker.
Given how long you're been posting like this and the warnings you've received already I know it's useless to point this out but showing that some thought and grounding in reality is behind the structure of a 'What if" is key to having it taken seriously.