Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
-
- Host - Allied sections
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Thanks. That gives some insight. Im reminded of how the Brits had continued efforts against the IJN codes through the 1920s, but made little to no progress vs the German systems. It looks like there were similar shifts in thinking for the BB & cruisers at the same times. This also tells me the Brits were relatively quick to alter construction strategy in light of altered Italian position.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3348
- Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Yes.Carl Schwamberger wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022 18:32For basic raiding the Germans did not send escorts. I don't see them provided for the Scheer, Hipper, Ugly Sisters, or Bismarck/Prinz Eugen in any of their Atlantic or Indian Ocean raids. If the Graf Zepplin is on a similar raid would escorts even be worth considering?
The historical raiders could (in theory) out gun anything they couldn't out run, and out run anything that couldn't out gun
-and- (more importantly) retain these advantages in all conditions.
Not so for a carrier. Heavy seas or night time would rob it of its only offensive asset. It would need something to shield her from bumping into a Rodney or Repulse in the dark.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb
~Babylonian Proverb
-
- Member
- Posts: 3374
- Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
- Location: Arizona
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Possibly that thing called radar?Kingfish wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022 00:49Yes.Carl Schwamberger wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022 18:32For basic raiding the Germans did not send escorts. I don't see them provided for the Scheer, Hipper, Ugly Sisters, or Bismarck/Prinz Eugen in any of their Atlantic or Indian Ocean raids. If the Graf Zepplin is on a similar raid would escorts even be worth considering?
The historical raiders could (in theory) out gun anything they couldn't out run, and out run anything that couldn't out gun
-and- (more importantly) retain these advantages in all conditions.
Not so for a carrier. Heavy seas or night time would rob it of its only offensive asset. It would need something to shield her from bumping into a Rodney or Repulse in the dark.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3348
- Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Which in turn require even more escorts. Where is Germany getting all these DDs? Who is providing air cover over the transports? GZ was no Essex. The proposed airwing was only 12 fighters. Enough for local defense, but not to cover CAP and escort a strike.T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑30 Nov 2022 18:41It would have made it possible for the Germans to use merchant ships to transport the troops instead.
What do you mean did nothing? Pre-war the British had 7 and were to add another 5.Historically, even as the Germans built and were fitting out the Graf Zeppelin, the RN did nothing to increase their own carrier forces or improve the FAA as war approached.
Bear in mind in addition to the home waters and North Atlantic the RN also had the Med and Pacific to contend with.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb
~Babylonian Proverb
-
- Member
- Posts: 3348
- Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Do you think the KM would risk their only carrier to the fickleness of pre-war radar sets?
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb
~Babylonian Proverb
-
- Member
- Posts: 3374
- Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
- Location: Arizona
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
-
- Host - Allied sections
- Posts: 9907
- Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Destroyers do need to be refueled & usually at inconvenient times.
Radar is a high powered emitter, but I know nothing useful about the ability of the Brits to DF it or even recognize it in 1941.
Radar is a high powered emitter, but I know nothing useful about the ability of the Brits to DF it or even recognize it in 1941.
-
- Member
- Posts: 112
- Joined: 11 Dec 2020 07:08
- Location: Texas
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
The German elbing class torpedo boats were the size of small destroyers, didn’t have the stability issues, and often operation in the Atlantic nearly as far as the Azores. Possible escort? Gun armament isn’t impressive but the torps are useful. The major problem is range, you would need a fast fleet oiler to keep a group like that constantly at sea with a carrier, don’t even think the Germans had one, just slow typical merchant steamer acting as supply vessels.
-
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 6223
- Joined: 13 Jun 2008 22:54
- Location: Kent
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
The best raiders are typically not warships at all with converted merchantmen doing well in both wars but, Germany lacks the ability to reliably fuel anything once it leaves port and that situation only gets worse as the cracking of codes becomes faster. The Norway campaign rather killed off much hope of more extensive fleet operations with the losses being unable to be replaced quickly.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3348
- Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
You could give the Germans the Aegis system and it still would not make sense to send their only operation carrier on a solo mission into the Atlantic.T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022 02:30In 1940, Seetakt was the world's best surface search radar available. All the Germans need is a better doctrine for its use.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb
~Babylonian Proverb
-
- Member
- Posts: 5702
- Joined: 29 Apr 2005 01:20
- Location: Ontario, Canada
-
- Member
- Posts: 3776
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
- Location: Reading, Pa
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3374
- Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
- Location: Arizona
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Well, the RN let the carrier Glorious go to sea with just two destroyers for escorts, captained by an officer who had previously served in submarines... So...Takao wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022 18:49Battleships tend to be far more heavily armed & armored as opposed to aircraft carriers...
-
- Member
- Posts: 3776
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
- Location: Reading, Pa
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
He was also American by birth, and had learned to fly. However, he appears not to have believed in the usefulness of aircraft.T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022 18:56Well, the RN let the carrier Glorious go to sea with just two destroyers for escorts, captained by an officer who had previously served in submarines... So...Takao wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022 18:49Battleships tend to be far more heavily armed & armored as opposed to aircraft carriers...
Still, all you are saying is that the German aircraft carrier is as good as sunk.
-
- Member
- Posts: 3348
- Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
- Location: USA
Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.
Apples and Oranges.
Bismark could have gone toe to toe with anything in the RN OOB and in all conditions. Throw in a rain squall or heavy seas - both common in the North Atlantic - and the carrier is as impotent as the Altmark.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb
~Babylonian Proverb