Were German Surface Ships Good Designs

[Paul Lakowski]

Well the short answer is that they didn't recognize the deficiencies of these warships or were too stretched to do anything about it. Truth be told it was all Hitler's fault, since he misled his forces into believing war would not happen until the mid to late 1940s. In other words they still had time to correct any problems like torpedo's and flak etc. Any criticism of the so called Z Plan has to be also judged in that contexts.

[SpicyJuan]

Well the short answer is that they didn't recognize the deficiencies of these warships or were too stretched to do anything about it. Truth be told it was all Hitler's fault, since he misled his forces into believing war would not happen until the mid to late 1940s. In other words they still had time to correct any problems like torpedo's and flak etc. Any criticism of the so called Z Plan has to be also judged in that contexts.

Huh, ok. I heard that a contingency plan against France and the UK was to make a lot of minesweepers/layers, screens, and uboats, is that true?

[Urmel]

Well the short answer is that they didn't recognize the deficiencies of these warships or were too stretched to do anything about it. Truth be told it was all Hitler's fault, since he misled his forces into believing war would not happen until the mid to late 1940s. In other words they still had time to correct any problems like torpedo's and flak etc. Any criticism of the so called Z Plan has to be also judged in that contexts.

Huh? The faulty design of the Flottenbegleiter and the Zerstoerer was Adolf's fault? You are confusing design and use or usefulness. The Flottenbegleiter were dogs. They would still have been dogs if if the war had started in 1945.

[Paul Lakowski]

First of all Hitler refused to allow von Blomberg to be "C-in-C Wehrmacht" from 1934 on only approving decisions himself and officially took over that post in 1938. He was effectively "C-in-C Wehrmacht" from the start. "C-in-C" always has to accept responsibility for any thing that happens on his watch. No excuses.

Prior to these decisions the KM was following the warship replacement plan "Naval Plan 1932" that was approved by parliament after a 4 year debate [1928-1932]. None of the warships that were built for KM through Hitler's reign were authorised under this Naval Plan 1932. All these warships were the product of the struggle between Grand Admiral Raeder's view of a "balanced fleet" and Hitler's demand that the KM remain nothing but a "coastal defence fleet" with offensive capability limited to dominating the Baltic. This way KM would pose no threat to Hitler's planned racial war on Europe/Russia by making a deal to keep the British/empire out of his affairs.

To get around this Admiral Raeder was able to salvage some of Naval Plan 1932, by convincing Hitler that a small surface fleet could play a valuable role defeating the French. At least he would be laying down the foundations of the fleet that would face the British, when the real war began in 1945-1947 time period. However to get this by Hitler all these warship numbers and designs became 'anti French'.

So Naval Plan 1932 envisaged building 30-40 Zerstörer 1932 -1500 tons @ 35knots + 3 x 5" guns & 6 Torps... like the FTB 1939. Instead the plan morphed into 16 Zerstörer 1934 - a 38 knot 3000 ton overweight super destroyer with poor sea keeping and strength ; just to counter fast French super destroyer's. The remaining contracts was filled building a dozen 1000ton fast torpedo boot 1935 and some "Flottenbegleiter" escort boats.

To achieve the increased speeds and displacement; Raeder had to invest in new high-tech lightweight high pressure ; high temp propulsion systems . Like most such high tech they were high cost / high risk failure a head of its time. Just as bad -these ships had poor endurance, almost 1/3 of original specs in some cases. Raeder may have been aware of these risks but- according to Hitler - he had another 10-15 years to work out the bugs.

Other navies had considered these 'super destroyers' but dismissed them in favor of fewer numbers of more capable light cruisers.

Likewise the plan to build 4 anti French battleships [38,000 ton "Twins" & 50,000 ton Bis/Tirp] started of as a plan to build 6 x 18-20,000ton PBS. The scaling up of these designs caused problems in sea keeping and strength and the only way to make them fast enough -to run away from French Battlecruisers -was to also rely on larger high pressure ; high temp propulsion systems...with the attended loss in endurance.

Again Raeder may have been aware of these risks but- according to Hitler - he had another 10-15 years to work out the bugs.

[Paul Lakowski]

Well the short answer is that they didn't recognize the deficiencies of these warships or were too stretched to do anything about it. Truth be told it was all Hitler's fault, since he misled his forces into believing war would not happen until the mid to late 1940s. In other words they still had time to correct any problems like torpedo's and flak etc. Any criticism of the so called Z Plan has to be also judged in that contexts.

Huh, ok. I heard that a contingency plan against France and the UK was to make a lot of minesweepers/layers, screens, and uboats, is that true?

From WWI on ,there was always contingency plans to build # U-Boats & M-Boots to supplement the Reichwehr fleet upon mobilization. Also the speed at which Germany mobilized >500 civilian vessels to fill auxiliary roles of HSK ; tankers ; supply ships plus minesweeping /patrols and mine laying etc; suggest these were also 'standing contingency plan' as well.

BTW the Spähkreuzer were designed from 1938-40 and contracts granted from 1941 on 'to take place of canceled Zerstroers'. In theory they could have begun in 1940 & finished in 1942/43 had resources & yard space been made available.

[Urmel]

He was effectively "C-in-C Wehrmacht" from the start. "C-in-C" always has to accept responsibility for any thing that happens on his watch. No excuses.

That's a meaningless concept.

[Paul Lakowski]

He was effectively "C-in-C Wehrmacht" from the start. "C-in-C" always has to accept responsibility for any thing that happens on his watch. No excuses.

That's a meaningless concept.

To you yes; but to history no. He was responsible for everything.

[Urmel]

Whatever. Well done in ruining what could have been a good thread.

[SpicyJuan]

Whatever. Well done in ruining what could have been a good thread.

Wait, let's forget about U-boats for a second. How would Germany fare with a contingency navy with much more screens and auxiliary ships? Would it have been better than the half-baked balanced fleet they had historically?

[Paul Lakowski]

Whatever. Well done in ruining what could have been a good thread.

How is it ruined? The OP ? was answered on the first page IE ; NO, they were not good designs.

Logical next step is to ask "what if". IE could it have been any different? To do that you must start early.

[Urmel]

No. The logical step is to ask 'why'.

There's a forum for What-Ifs where all the stupid threads can go.

[Urmel]

Whatever. Well done in ruining what could have been a good thread.

Wait, let's forget about U-boats for a second. How would Germany fare with a contingency navy with much more screens and auxiliary ships? Would it have been better than the half-baked balanced fleet they had historically?

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewforum.php?f=11

[Paul Lakowski]

No. The logical step is to ask 'why'.

There's a forum for What-Ifs where all the stupid threads can go.

Which is exactly what I was attempting to do above.

In fact "what if" questions & answers" is one of the only effective methods of exploring the consequence of failed decisions.

[Urmel]

You are confusing 'why' and 'what'. I am not interested in consequences. I am interested in reasons. I would like to know why the Germans came up with these failed designs in the first instance (and no, 'it's all Adolf's fault' isn't very satisfying).

There are no consequences in any case. The Germans could have had a range of nuclear-powered hover ships armed with sharks with friggin' laser beams on their heads and capable of launching X-Fighters, the outcome would have been the same. There wouldn't have been enough of them, and Germany would not magically have moved to a better geographical location.

[Paul Lakowski]

As I already explained they had a line of warships planned that would have functioned effectively in the Naval Plan 1932 and would have been built in numbers that could make a contribution to a common strategy . But Hitler rejected all this in a vain attempt to lure the British into neutrality. He demanded that the KM be nothing more than a coastal defense fleet.

Raeder tried to mitigate against this with the threat of French fleet so Hitler allowed a small 'anti French' fleet to be built. Since WW-I Germany had a policy of building warships to 'run away from what they could not defeat'. The French also seemed to have such a philosophy so there was an bidding war to see who could build the fastest destroyers and most powerful destroyers and then super destroyers etc. With the cruisers/Battlecruisers, it became a race of "one up-manship" since they were only building a couple with each revolution.