A Spanish Z Plan?

Discussions on the Allies and the Neutral States in general and the countries that does not have sections of their own.
User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

A Spanish Z Plan?

#1

Post by Andy H » 03 Dec 2007, 03:03

Forgive me for the use of the phrase Z plan in relation to Spain, but I'm looking for details of Franco's ambitious Fleet building programme, which from what little I have found revolved around building 4 BB's and numerous other vessels.

Regards

Andy H

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

#2

Post by Ironmachine » 03 Dec 2007, 09:34

In July 1938, with the Civil War still going on, the Nationalist Navy Headquarters made an study about the future needs of the Navy that listed the following ships to be build:
•4 battleships
•4 heavy cruisers
•2 aircraft carriers
•12 light cruisers
•48 destroyers
•48 "torpederos" (small destroyers)
•50 submarines
•Auxiliary units (mine ships, torpedo boats, etc.)
Based on this study, Admiral Moreno, the Navy Minister, presented a project for a Law of Naval Building (Ley de Construcción de Unidades Navales) in september 1939. This law project modified the number of ships to be build, that were now:
•4 battleships.
•2 heavy cruisers
•12 light cruisers
•54 destroyers
•36 "torpederos" (small destroyers)
•50 submarines
•100 torpedo boats
•Auxiliary ships
The program was to last for 11 years. The law was passed on, but given the situation of the Spanish economy, it was impossible carry into practice. Very few of the proposed ships were really built, the bigger ones being some destroyers.
As the previous plan was going nowhere, the Navy reviewed it and in June 1943 a new plan was ordered, with the following ships to be built:
•4 battleships
•4 aircraft carriers
•8 light cruisers
•12 "exploradores" (kind of fast cruisers)
•72 destroyers
•36 small destroyers
•50 submarines
•100 torpedo and anti-submarine boats
The new plan was as far away from the reality of Spanish economy as the previous one, and nothing came out of it.


User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#3

Post by Andy H » 03 Dec 2007, 14:49

Thank you Ironmachine for the detail you have provided.

Are there any plans or further information as to what these larger units-BB & A/C's would look like and were there any outside influences on these designs. Spain historically had a strong shipbuilding industry and no doubt it may have had the ability to design these vessels from scratch.

Regards

Andy H

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

#4

Post by Ironmachine » 03 Dec 2007, 20:28

I'm afraid that you have too much faith in Spain's capacity in this field at the time. The design of ships up to cruiser size could be (and in fact was) acomplished by Spain alone (even if the designs could be a little outdated), but designing battleships and, even more, aircraft carriers, was too much for Spanish shipbuilding industry in the 40's.
For obvious reasons, only the Axis countries could be asked for help with the desings. AFAIK, in the 1939 plan the battleships were to be based in the Italian Littorio class, but as little technical information arrived from Italy no serious study was made in Spain about the ships before the project was abandoned. In the 1943 plan, the battleships were still to be based on this class. Regarding the aircraft carriers, there were contacts with the Germans in order to obtain the plans of the French carrier Joffre, but the idea was soon abandoned as the Joffre was very outdated. There seems that also the plans of the Graf Zeppelin were asked for, but without success.

User avatar
pikeshot1600
Member
Posts: 203
Joined: 06 Apr 2006, 15:58
Location: USA

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#5

Post by pikeshot1600 » 23 Apr 2008, 23:41

An interesting thread.

I think it is unlikely, in the event Spain had been able both to afford and to construct such a large modern fleet, that the Allies in WW II would have allowed these units to put to sea without Spain throwing in her lot with the US and UK.

In any event, the steel, armor plate and weaponry and naval aircraft (not to mention radar) would have had to come from other nations' industrial/technology bases, and the Axis powers had precious little to spare during 1939-45.

Spain was in difficult circumstances after the civil war, and her leadership knew that food to feed the populace came from the Western Hemisphere. Franco knew who was going to wind up controlling the sea lanes.

This whole thing sounds like military politics, with an admiralty wish list, and attempts to access scarce resources. Any admiral-in-command would want to have such a fleet.

User avatar
redcoat
Member
Posts: 1361
Joined: 03 Mar 2003, 22:54
Location: Stockport, England

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#6

Post by redcoat » 26 Apr 2008, 12:40

pikeshot1600 wrote:This whole thing sounds like military politics, with an admiralty wish list, and attempts to access scarce resources. Any admiral-in-command would want to have such a fleet.
Indeed. Taking into account the state of the Spanish economy after the civil war, it does seem to be nothing more than a pipe dream of the Spanish Admiralty

User avatar
Windward
Member
Posts: 1810
Joined: 30 Jul 2003, 15:41
Location: Pechinum
Contact:

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#7

Post by Windward » 13 May 2008, 07:08

To build four Littorio class battleships... that's far too ambitious 8-)

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#8

Post by Ironmachine » 13 May 2008, 08:20

Given Spain's capacity at the time, even building a destroyer was far too ambitious. :)

User avatar
Bronsky
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: 11 Apr 2003, 10:28
Location: Paris

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#9

Post by Bronsky » 09 Sep 2008, 23:37

I'm not even sure what the point of the whole program would be.

Given what was known of international shipbuilding in 1938-39, exactly what would Spain have done with 4 Littorio-class battleships assuming she could have afforded them? They would be available in the late 1940's, by which time the Italian and French navies (assuming no war) would be far more powerful. Nor would 4 BB's make much of an impression on the RN, all of it negative.

Pretty much what you can exect when you let the military run things: the generals and admirals ask for new toys because they want them, rather than first determining what their actual needs are and only then figuring out what equipment is required.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#10

Post by Ironmachine » 18 Sep 2008, 09:08

Well, in fact there was no way for Spain at the time to equal the power of the Italian or French Navies, much less so the RN, so from your point of view no program would have had any point. Should Spain have stopped the building of new warships? :wink:

User avatar
Bronsky
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: 11 Apr 2003, 10:28
Location: Paris

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#11

Post by Bronsky » 18 Sep 2008, 13:33

Not necessarily new warships altogether, but what would be the point of trying to build super-expensive battleships?

Battleships were specialized ships, their specialty being to fight other battleships. You built them if you aspired to great power status (Spain was not a great power), or if you thought you had a chance of fighting enemy battleships and getting away with it.

Building lighter (and far less expensive) warships for escort and coastal defense duties made sense, submarines would be a good, cheap deterrent against a battleship-equipped navy. But there seems to have been no point in building battleships except if you could reasonably hope to have enough of them to make a difference. I don't see why Spain should have done so in the 1930's.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#12

Post by Ironmachine » 18 Sep 2008, 17:42

In fact, the point is the same for almost every kind of warship: there is no point in building them except if you could reasonably hope to have enough of them to make a difference, be them battleships or submarines (the point is the same with any weapon, really). And in fact, with that rule, the whole Spanish naval construction policy from 1898 to 1943 (and even before and after, but this is out of the question) was completely unreasonable.
But certainly you can be sure that Spain dreamed about regaining its great power status. After all, the Ley de Construcciones Navales of 1939 was also known as the "Plan Imperial". And after all, dreaming was free (but building the ships wasn't, obviously). :)

User avatar
Bronsky
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: 11 Apr 2003, 10:28
Location: Paris

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#13

Post by Bronsky » 18 Sep 2008, 21:45

Ironmachine wrote:In fact, the point is the same for almost every kind of warship: there is no point in building them except if you could reasonably hope to have enough of them to make a difference, be them battleships or submarines (the point is the same with any weapon, really).
Other warships serve other purposes: a cruiser will be about as good for shore bombardment, show-the-flag missions or to deal with smaller ships (i.e. the bulk of them) as a battleship, for a fraction of the cost. Destroyers are useful to deal with submarines and light craft i.e. the kind of threat likely to be built by Spain's competitors.

Submarines are a deterrent to a stronger naval power, and much cheaper than battleships. They could also serve as scouts, which battleships couldn't.

It so happens that those navies that had built lots of submarines so as to offset their disadvantage in regular warships didn't get all that much value out of them (the largest submarine fleets in 1939 were IIRC the Soviet, French and Italian ones) but the Spaniards couldn't have known that in 1939.

On the other hand, building battleships only made sense if having one provided an edge or a significant deterrent. Spain's potential enemies were either small powers with navies that a modern cruiser could deal with, or major powers (Italy, France, UK, US etc). Against the former, a battleship was a waste of money, against the latter it could only be useful as a deterrent. But submarines would provide the same level of deterrence for a fraction of the cost, ergo building battleships made little sense QED.

I'm not saying that the other powers had a God-given right to have battleships and the Spaniards hadn't, just that even if the long-term goal had been to rebuild Spain's naval power status, starting with battleship construction in 1939 made little sense.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#14

Post by Ironmachine » 19 Sep 2008, 06:33

All that you say can also be applied to other Navies (for example, Germany at the time also started with battleship construction as soon as she could), so Spain was only doing the usual thing: if you want respect, you need to build battleships... look at what some South American Navies did at the start of the century: they build battleships... and almost nothing more, but they still were the sensation of the time. Everybody was ready to waste money to buy prestige, and Spain was not different (but for the fact that there was no money to waste). In fact, a prevailing idea at the time was the recovery of the old glory of the Spanish Empire, and showing the flag in a battleship was like a wet dream for many.

User avatar
Ironmachine
Member
Posts: 5821
Joined: 07 Jul 2005, 11:50
Location: Spain

Re: A Spanish Z Plan?

#15

Post by Ironmachine » 19 Sep 2008, 08:39

Bronsky wrote:It so happens that those navies that had built lots of submarines so as to offset their disadvantage in regular warships didn't get all that much value out of them (the largest submarine fleets in 1939 were IIRC the Soviet, French and Italian ones) but the Spaniards couldn't have known that in 1939.
Well, in fact they could have known that in 1939, for they have just fought a war...
In the Spanish Civil War, the submarine forces' record was far from outstanding. surface vessels were far more valuable, and the bigger the better. In fact, that in 1939 they were ready to order such a great number of submarines after their "failure" in the war may indicate that they were more far-sighted that they are usually credited with.
On the other hand, even those navies you cited with a large submarine force (Soviet, French, Italian) were building battleships, so the Spaniards were just going the same path that the rest of the world.
Bronsky wrote:On the other hand, building battleships only made sense if having one provided an edge or a significant deterrent. Spain's potential enemies were either small powers with navies that a modern cruiser could deal with, or major powers (Italy, France, UK, US etc). Against the former, a battleship was a waste of money, against the latter it could only be useful as a deterrent. But submarines would provide the same level of deterrence for a fraction of the cost, ergo building battleships made little sense QED.
Quite a bit of over-simplification here.
First, that submarines were a good defense against a powerful surface fleet was far from being universally accepted at the time. Given their previous experience in the Spanish Civil War, it would have been too much to ask the Spanish Navy to give full confidence to the power of the submarine, instead of going along with the proven might of the battleship.
Second, UK was a major naval power, but Italy and France were clearly on a far lower level. I do not think that anyone in the Spanish Navy was thinking about defeating UK at sea, but Italy and France were another thing. And if you take a careful look at the strength of the French and Italian Navies at the time, you could see that the fleet that the Spanish plan seem directed to create a fleet able to take on any of them by her own means... but for that battleships were needed. Italy and France, for example, were building battleships mainly to fight each other, and surely the Spaniards wanted to reach their level; nothing more, but nothing less.

Post Reply

Return to “The Allies and the Neutral States in general”