Guaporense wrote:My source states 3.4 million tons of major combat vessels. If you take your number and add the 200 submarines at 1.500 tons, you get 3.4 million, therefore my source on the american numbers, which state: 3.4 million tons of major combat vessels, including 1.1 million build in 1944.
Therefore we could at first glance compare the 3.4 Mtons of the US with the 1.2 Mtons of the Germans.
But there is a major problem, which lies in the definition of "major combat vessel".
This category is at best ambiguous, and moreover, you seem to apply it to the US but not to Germany.
One widely accepted definition of "major combatant" is the set of destroyers and bigger vessels. But submarines are generally excluded from this set. The reason being that the implicit raison d'etre
of those major combat vessels is to gain control of the sea, an objective the submarines (at least the subs of the era) were unable to fulfill.
This would thus exclude the subs from the German sample and bring it down to 200,00 tons, while not altering the 3.1 Mtons I computed for the USN.
Another way to try building a comparable dataset would be to choose one (or more) property the vessels of each navy should verify, and only include those vessels in the set.
Here I would go for "blue-water capable" as a criterion. If it's clear s to what we want to compare, it's a bit fuzzy wrt which ships verify it or not (after all, it's technically possible to cross the Atlantic in an open cutter). But in practice, it has a translation in terms of tonnage threshold which is relatively clear in practce.
During wartime, the smallest German warships which operated on a sustained basis on the high seas were the Typ VII U-boat (750 tons). For the British, it was the Flower class (900 tons), and for the American the Auk class MS (850 tons). Thus we have a smallest class for each navy, and moreover those classes had relatively comparable dsiplacement.
Therefore, we still have the 1.2 Mtons for the German naval building between 1939 & 1945, but now we have many classes of escort vessels to add to the US sample :
And there are still the subs to add - let's say 300000 tons.
And the two CBs : +60,000 tons.
Thus we now have close to 4.4 Mtons to compare with the 1.2 Mtons of the German
But we still don't have in this US sample the ships built (i.e. completed) between 1939 & 1941, which amounts to a bit more than 100,000 tons for DD, CL & CV only.
Thus its 4.5+ Mtons to 1.2 Mtons.
But now we have another fact to take into account - namely that if these combat vessels represented most of the Kriegsmarine, they were only the sharp end of the USN. We still haven't taken into account he dozens of AO, AK, AP which were a strength multiplier. And neither are taken into account the ~1,000 LST or the other amphibious ships.
I'm too lazy to make the computation and I probably lack some of the data for all those support ships, but it's rather obvious that US production exceeded the German one - perhaps as much as 10 times higher.
But the point is that, if you want to make a comparison of the investment in naval power, it's sensible to try to take into account all the component of naval might, and not only the flashy battleships.
Guaporense wrote:ammunition production tends to peak in the year of most intensive army activity.
Or is it the other way round ?
Guaporense wrote:US ammunition production peaked in 1944, the same year as Germany.
I don't have the data for the US production, and I'm not so sure it's completely true for Germany either - probably depends on what "ammunition" is, exactly.
And it's to be noted that in 1944 the US were still investing (that is, thinking post-war), while Speer reoriented all the German economy towards immediate production (that is, they payed for their 1944 guns with the investments which would have enabled production in 1945).
Therefore, comparing USA and Germany in 1944 is irrelevant - they basically had two completely different logic guiding their ammunition production.
Finally, I do not have the exact amount of investment in the Navy for 1944. But the Navy budget in 1944 was lower than in 1943 & 1945 :
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.