Plan Z

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Kriegsmarine except those dealing with the U-Boat forces.
User avatar
sallyg
Member
Posts: 615
Joined: 11 Jan 2006 19:27
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Plan Z

Post by sallyg » 25 Oct 2010 04:30

nebelwerferXXX wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The core of the Plan Z was 512,000 tons of steel.
To convert these ships into U-boats:
6 H-Class battleships, Bismarck, Tirpitz and 5 heavy cruisers = 300 more U-boats
I just ran my calculator. I'm using your 512,000 tons (tonnes??) of steel as a numerator.

For a denominator I chose the 769 tons surface displacementof the Type VIIC. I'm ignoring the proportion of the mass that is not due to raw steel, but whatever...

That gives me a result of 665 (+) U-Boats forfeited to build the monsters, rather than 300.

Just wondering why?

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 25 Oct 2010 04:40

sallyg wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The core of the Plan Z was 512,000 tons of steel.
To convert these ships into U-boats:
6 H-Class battleships, Bismarck, Tirpitz and 5 heavy cruisers = 300 more U-boats
I just ran my calculator. I'm using your 512,000 tons (tonnes??) of steel as a numerator.

For a denominator I chose the 769 tons surface displacementof the Type VIIC. I'm ignoring the proportion of the mass that is not due to raw steel, but whatever...

That gives me a result of 665 (+) U-Boats forfeited to build the monsters, rather than 300.

Just wondering why?
I am using the 1,650-ton Type XXI U-boat as my denominator. So, by dividing 512,000 tons by 1,650 tons is equal to more than 300 Type XXI U-boats.

User avatar
sallyg
Member
Posts: 615
Joined: 11 Jan 2006 19:27
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Plan Z

Post by sallyg » 25 Oct 2010 04:50

nebelwerferXXX wrote: I am using the 1,650-ton Type XXI U-boat as my denominator. So, by dividing 512,000 tons by 1,650 tons is equal to more than 300 Type XXI U-boats.
An interesting :roll: choice, but thanks.

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 25 Oct 2010 04:52

sallyg wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote: I am using the 1,650-ton Type XXI U-boat as my denominator. So, by dividing 512,000 tons by 1,650 tons is equal to more than 300 Type XXI U-boats.
An interesting :roll: choice, but thanks.
Welcome!

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Plan Z

Post by LWD » 25 Oct 2010 12:32

nebelwerferXXX wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The core of the Plan Z was 512,000 tons of steel.
To convert these ships into U-boats:
6 H-Class battleships, Bismarck, Tirpitz and 5 heavy cruisers = 300 more U-boats

To convert the H-44 Schwerschalchtshiff can create:
1) 8 more 508-mm super railway guns
2) 5,660 more Panzer Mark IV tanks
Or not. Raw tonnage of mostly steel is not the only constraint.

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 25 Oct 2010 13:31

LWD wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The core of the Plan Z was 512,000 tons of steel.
To convert these ships into U-boats:
6 H-Class battleships, Bismarck, Tirpitz and 5 heavy cruisers = 300 more U-boats

To convert the H-44 Schwerschalchtshiff can create:
1) 8 more 508-mm super railway guns
2) 5,660 more Panzer Mark IV tanks
Or not. Raw tonnage of mostly steel is not the only constraint.
Organization for Mass production:
Not only raw materials but, it needs Men, Money and Machines to convert those in the above statement.

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 26 Oct 2010 02:07

There are Four German 'Z-plan' topics in this forum namely:
1) Plan Z................... 29 March 2002
2) The 'Z' Plan............. 13 March 2004
3) Kriegsmarine Z-Plan... 08 March 2005
4) Z-Plan details.......... 15 February 2007

Let these Four topics stay-put in this forum...Thanks!

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 26 Oct 2010 05:28

nebelwerferXXX wrote:An Analysis: German shipyard capabilities for Plan Z:

Hamburg: Blohm and Voss
Slip 7: 690 ft x 90 ft = PS-2
Slip 8: 770 ft x 85 ft = SS Vaterland, PS-5 and PS-11
Slip 9: 900 ft x 120 ft = Hipper, Bismarck and battleship 'H'
Dry Dock 'Elbe 17': 1,150 ft x 130 ft = battleship 'M'
______________________________
A total of 8 ships in 9 years...3 battleships, 1 heavy cruiser, 3 armored cruisers and 1 steamship.

Bismarck: 823 ft x 118 ft, was suited to a 900 ft x 120 ft slipway as described above.
Hitler planned to have these ships ready by 1948.
---200 U-boats @ 750 tons each = 150,000 tons
---20 light and heavy cruisers @ 10,000 tons each = 200,000 tons
---6 huge battleships @ 45,000 tons each = 270,000 tons
---4 aircraft carriers @ 23,000 tons each = 92,000 tons
______________________________
Totaling 712,000 tons of 'Z-plan' ships

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 2709
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Plan Z

Post by Takao » 26 Oct 2010 05:41

Looks nice on paper, but pales in comparison to what the US Navy was planning. See: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... sevelt.htm

User avatar
sallyg
Member
Posts: 615
Joined: 11 Jan 2006 19:27
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Plan Z

Post by sallyg » 26 Oct 2010 05:42

nebelwerferXXX wrote:There are Four German 'Z-plan' topics in this forum namely:
No Linkypoos?

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 26 Oct 2010 05:48

Takao wrote:Looks nice on paper, but pales in comparison to what the US Navy was planning. See: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... sevelt.htm
The German 'Z-plan' was no match to the 'US Shipbuilding Program of 1933-45'. But the Japanese can matched the US shipbuilding program by reading this book...'The Japanese War Machine' Thanks!

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 2709
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Plan Z

Post by Takao » 26 Oct 2010 08:02

Much of the Japanese shipbuilding plans were sheer fantasy that they had no hopes of completing, very similar to the German Z-Plan. The Circle Four six year plan approved in 1939, called for two more Yamato class battleships, six escort carriers, six cruisers, 22 destroyers, and 25 submarines. The Circle Five plan was even more fanciful with another two superbattleships, three aircraft carriers, two battlecruisers, 32 destroyers, and 45 submarines. Finally, all of the Circle Six plan had no basis in actual production capabilities of Japan. Most ships of the Circle Four plan were finished, while only a few Ships from the Circle Five plan were completed, and those of Circle Six never made it off the design board(included among these designs were the Super Yamatos mounting 50 centimeter guns). What the Circle Five and Circle Six plans failed to take into account was that the Japanese shipyards already had a backlog of construction orders from the Circle Three and Circle Four plans.

For much more detail on the subject of Japanese shipbuilding planning, I highly suggest "Kaigun: Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy 1887-1941" by David C. Evans and Mark R. Peattie. Specifically, Chapter 10: The Battle of the Shipyards.

The US Navy, on the other hand, was quite capable of completing the ships that had been ordered.

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 26 Oct 2010 08:57

Takao wrote:Much of the Japanese shipbuilding plans were sheer fantasy that they had no hopes of completing, very similar to the German Z-Plan. The Circle Four six year plan approved in 1939, called for two more Yamato-Class battleships, six escort carriers, six cruisers, 22 destroyers, and 25 submarines. The Circle Five plan was even more fanciful with another two super battleships, three aircraft carriers, two battle-cruisers, 32 destroyers, and 45 submarines. Finally, all of the Circle Six plan had no basis in actual production capabilities of Japan. Most ships of the Circle Four plan were finished, while only a few Ships from the Circle Five plan were completed, and those of Circle Six never made it off the design board(included among these designs were the Super Yamatos mounting 50-centimeter guns). What the Circle Five and Circle Six plans failed to take into account was that the Japanese shipyards already had a backlog of construction orders from the Circle Three and Circle Four plans.

For much more detail on the subject of Japanese shipbuilding planning, I highly suggest "Kaigun: Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy 1887-1941" by David C. Evans and Mark R. Peattie. Specifically, Chapter 10: The Battle of the Shipyards.

The US Navy, on the other hand, was quite capable of completing the ships that had been ordered.
Thanks Takao...In Circle Six, Are you referring to the 1942 5th Replacement Program (Canceled after Midway) if I am not mistaken? The Program gives a listing of:
3 battleships (Yamato-Class)
2 battle-cruisers (Type 'A')
3 carriers
2 cruisers
32 destroyers
46 submarines

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 2709
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Plan Z

Post by Takao » 26 Oct 2010 13:56

Yes, that is the one.

I believe that the plans were also referred to as Naval Armaments Supplement Programs, so the Circle Six plan would be the Sixth Naval Armaments Supplement Programs. I am not sure about the "Replacement" bit, but that could be a difference in translation.

Any way, a quick Google search found this nice gem, a good list of the ships included in each of the Japanese shipbuilding programs. http://www.alternatewars.com/WW2/IJN_Programs.htm

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: Plan Z

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 26 Oct 2010 23:04

Takao wrote:Yes, that is the one.

I believe that the plans were also referred to as Naval Armaments Supplement Programs, so the Circle Six plan would be the Sixth Naval Armaments Supplement Programs. I am not sure about the "Replacement" bit, but that could be a difference in translation.

Any way, a quick Google search found this nice gem, a good list of the ships included in each of the Japanese shipbuilding programs. http://www.alternatewars.com/WW2/IJN_Programs.htm
Hello...Thank You Again!

Return to “Kriegsmarine surface ships and Kriegsmarine in general”