German waste of resources??

[jsolano4]

During NS Regime, Germany built 2 Battleships, 3 Battlecruisers and 5 Heavycruisers...an amount of 227.232tons of vital steel and other raw materials. IMHO Germany´s main war effort was on land by far, because as Hitler said in Mein Kampf they needed Lebensraum...and it was in the East.
An U-boot weight was already 1600 tons, a Pzkpfw IV 25 tons and a Pzkpfw Panther 44.8 tons. It means 140 U-boots (if are really urged to improve Kriegsmarine power), or better...9000 Pzkpfw IV (in 1941) or 5072 Phanters (in 1943)could have been used in Barbarossa and Africa, not to mention the +12000 men from those ships crews!!!! Just imagine the impact of such numbers in the course of the war!!! Opinions??

[fuser]

140 U-boots means Germany loosing battle of Atlantic more earlier. As UK will also speed up its ASW capabilities in reaction of such massive U-boot production.

9000 Pzkpfw IV (in 1941) or 5072 Phanters

And how will you keep them supplied. Where will You find the manpower for these tanks. note I am not talking about tank crew but everything like support infantry etc. Then now Germany needs oil more desperately than in real life.

Also you should see that they were hard pressed in supplying the original afrika armee only and with your plan of giving them more tanks, you are making situation more worse.

I know I know we all love to talk about interesting tanks and not boring Infantry or behind the lines logistics. But trust me these two are most important part of warfare.

Barbarossa failed not because they had less tanks but because it was stopped by soviet Infantry and not tanks.


and lastly this method of simply subtracting and adding steel from here and there is faulty and in real life it doesn't work that way but only in video games.

[jsolano4]

IMHO Germans were stoped by a combination of factors...NOT just russian infantry!!! I agree that Barbarossa failed not because ONLY a insufficient amount of armour, again it was because a combination of factors, including underestimation of soviet military and industrial potential, faults of logistical planning and weather.
Personally I would like to prefer the risk of focus my entire forces, production and oil resources in a overhelming surprise blitz, before winter, rasputitza and endless fresh reserves defeat me. NO other way to fight against SU. Regards

[JonS]

Oh dear god, not this again. This thread belongs in the What If section, not here.

During NS Regime, Germany built 2 Battleships, 3 Battlecruisers and 5 Heavycruisers...an amount of 227.232tons of vital steel and other raw materials. IMHO Germany´s main war effort was on land by far, because as Hitler said in Mein Kampf they needed Lebensraum...and it was in the East.
An U-boot weight was already 1600 tons, a Pzkpfw IV 25 tons and a Pzkpfw Panther 44.8 tons. It means 140 U-boots (if are really urged to improve Kriegsmarine power), or better...9000 Pzkpfw IV (in 1941) or 5072 Phanters (in 1943)could have been used in Barbarossa and Africa, not to mention the +12000 men from those ships crews!!!! Just imagine the impact of such numbers in the course of the war!!! Opinions??

I wasn't aware that uboat yards and shipyards were so easily able to switch between building ships/uboats and tanks.

How IS it that you imagine factories work? Do you think you just drop some raw materials into the hopper at the top, switch the dial to "PzIV", or "Tirpitz", turn the crank handle a couple of times, and the thing you wanted comes sliding out the bottom, complete with a fully trained and experienced crew, logistic support, and ammunition?

[jsolano4]

Ok here we come again. What am I saying is this: Instead send steel and other raw materials to create BB, BC or HC... I think it would have better use them SINCE THE BEGINNING to produce armored vehicles, trucks or whatever would help the main war efort (land operations) Is it so really hard to realize????? May be my very bad English is the reason

[fuser]

SINCE THE BEGINNING

What do you mean by beginning??

Nazis weren't planning for a world war until it begin.

I have a feeling that you are playing too much WW2 strategy computer games.

So which one is it?? Hearts of iron, gary grigsby, strategic command or making history.

[Baltasar]

Really no point in discussing this. There's a multitude of different metals, so you can't really compare the raw ton weight of ships with that of eg tanks. Furthermore, you'd massively increase the need for fuel, for support troops and equipment... if anything, a few thousand additional trucks would certainly have helped their war effort, along with a few hundread tanks. But simply not building heavy ships wouldn't change that much. Besides, I suspect that there were more interests involved than just military considerations. My money would be on the need to create jobs, eg in the dockyards.

[LWD]

Ok here we come again. What am I saying is this: Instead send steel and other raw materials to create BB, BC or HC... I think it would have better use them SINCE THE BEGINNING to produce armored vehicles, trucks or whatever would help the main war efort (land operations) Is it so really hard to realize????? May be my very bad English is the reason

I disagree. The German fleet would have been very useful if for example the Germans had gone to war with the French and the British had remained neutral or they had gone to war with the Soviets and the west had remained neutral. As the war developed the fleet was of rather limited utility although it still played an important role. Saying it was a waste however requires 20:20 hindsight.

[mescal]

Without any significant navy, Germany would most probably not have invaded Norway, enabling UK to sever the iron ore shipments from Narvik.

No heavy units would also mean that the British Home Fleet would not be tied to their surveillance, and that the Rs would be freed from convoy escort duties.
All these points may have a very strong influence in the Mediterranean. One may think that a complete defeat of the Axis in North Africa could occur far earlier than OTL. And then an assault on the Southern flank of Festung Europa could also take place earlier.

[fuser]

enabling UK to sever the iron ore shipments from Narvik.

After capitulation of France it didn't mattered.

[Baltasar]

enabling UK to sever the iron ore shipments from Narvik.

After capitulation of France it didn't mattered.

How would that affect the German (in)ability to project her power towards Scandinavia or how would the fall of France stop the British from marching into Norway? Operation Wilfried and accompanying plan R4 had been developed simultaneously with the German plan Weserübung. Once France fell and with no apparent threat towards the British Isles, the UK would be free to project her power wherever she liked. In fact, no German surface fleet could as well mean more RN vessels in the Pacific, since the Germans would not have the means to conduct landings themselves.

Granted the French iron ore mines in north eastern France would be occupied by Germany but even when this happened historically, I seem to remember that there were still vast quantities imported from Sweden.

[fuser]

I was talking about iron ores only by the way and not power projection.

Yes, Germany was still importing quite large amount of Swedish ore as I also seem to remember but the point is without Swedish ore and France occupied I don't think Germany was going to be starved off of iron ores.

Once France fell and with no apparent threat towards the British Isles

Why would not occupying Norway result in no threat to British isles??

[LWD]

... Why would not occupying Norway result in no threat to British isles??

It's got little to do with the occupying of Norway. If the Germans don't have a significant surface fleet then they have no credible invasion threat. At least that's the way I read it.

Note that if the British control Norway it cuts directly into the Swedish iron ore shipments to Germany as well as allowing them an alternatiave place to sell their ore.

[fuser]

. If the Germans don't have a significant surface fleet then they have no credible invasion threat. At least that's the way I read it.

Ah yes, that must be it, my mistake

But in my original quote I didn't commented on surface fleets but only on occupation of Norway and Swedish iron ore, hence the confusion.

[Kingfish]

Note that if the British control Norway it cuts directly into the Swedish iron ore shipments to Germany.

But only for the 3-4 months the Gulf of Bothnia is icebound, unless you are suggesting (as Churchill did) to launch airstrikes on Sweden.