Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011 04:40

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by pugsville » 07 Jan 2023 05:12

nota wrote:
07 Jan 2023 00:44
Richard Anderson wrote:
06 Jan 2023 17:53
nota wrote:
06 Jan 2023 06:32
japan was at peace before the dec 7 attacks
Sorry but no, at that point it had been at war with China for four-and-a-half years and had occupied Indochina and Thailand, all much to the displeasure of the United States, which was closely tracking its actions.
so their fleet sailing would be a ''peace time '' event except the final few miles as above practice
No it would not be.
as you '' have no idea what you are trying to say so have no response. "
and then miss india hk is hong kong sing is a small island brit's hate to talk about
Taking the time to construct complete sentences and using correct spelling and reasonably understandable grammar will make your meaning considerably clearer to others as well as probably yourself. "WHY INDIA plus other areas the english have far closer to japan then any other axis power HK sing ect" begs the question why you would SHOUT about "why India" but fail to spell out "Singapore" - "sing" is a verb meaning to make musical sounds with the voice - or "HK" - which could be any one of a num ber of things.

If you can't be bothered to make yourself clearly understood why should you expect anyone to be bothered take the time to answer you?
well he missed the opening india HK sing ect do you read ?
Yes, I read, apparently considerably better than you can write.
quick is 6 attack carriers knock out the battle fleet as they did on 12-7-41
They knock out which "battle fleet"? The American? If so, then who goes the Northern Passage to join the Kriegsmarine? Or the British battle fleet? After a month sailing the Northwest Passage? That nobody will apparently notice. That the Soviets will cooperate with.

You do realize the Royal Navy bases in the UK are a considerably different target than Oahu?
then the german italy and japan have a chance to invade ie win quick
So the Regia Marina will sail through the Royal Navy's Mediterranean Fleet, Gibraltar, and around Iberia to Jolly Old England too? Fascinating.
and to keep USA out just swap india hk others to name later and not occupy england
So you're playing Risk? You'll swap India and Hong Kong to the American player to keep them happy? Seriously? And just how do you expect to invade "england [sic]" and at the same time not "occupy" it? That requires some interesting mental gymnastics. And how do you defeat the UK if you don't occupy Great Britain?

You may want to put just a smidge more thought into this.
north east passage is all red russian no english spys or outposts so they pop out north of Norway

then do scapa flow before anyone knows they are near

STRINGBAGS HAVE NO CHANCE AGAINST A CAP
English have no good aircraft in 1940 at sea

right USA did not act until attacked so why attack japan in a time frame to effect events in 1940 / 1941
we did not attack germany or italy when they went to war with england or even when france fell
and even if they wanted to they need time and lots of it
so expect a nasty note with threats no fleet to japan from the USA for YEARS

promise the reds what ever even if they never get anything just get the ships thru

defeat by invasion with terms to avoid an occupation with india and other areas as war prizes
generous but necessary to keep USA from acting in time
Have you considered that without radar cap chance of actual effective interception is quite low.

Or for that matter in 1940 the Japanese carrier force was operating molsy biplanes till quie elate in the year.

Poeople have a habit of comparing 1939/1940 fleet air arm with late 1941/42 IJN or USN aircraft. Before the IJN and USN got their latest generation of aircraft the FAA was not so bad. Both the IJn and USN got a excellent generation of aircraft during 1941 that significantly gaped the older aircraft,.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6413
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Richard Anderson » 07 Jan 2023 07:27

nota wrote:
07 Jan 2023 02:15
hope is before London falls by being surrounded to get a treaty
Its amazing how many what ifs depend on hope to get to their desired endstate.
so mini occupation for a short period
What is a "mini occupation"? How long is a "short period"?
as so little actual heavy arms exist in 1940 in england
if the germans can land troops with some tanks and big guns
there is very little to stop a quick dash to the capital
You do know that quite a few people have studied this quite a lot and it is pretty much nonsense/ The window of opportunity was from about 5 June to around 31 July 1940. To exploit that window with the Combined Fleet requires knowing that it will actually happen about six to nine months ahead of time.
yes they need deception not a radio silence as none is a tip also
yes they need to sneak and fake being elsewhere to
They actually weren't very good at that. The reason the Pearl Harbor attack worked was because Station Cast placed them in the home islands but the bearing actually extended eastward along the Arctic rim. It wouldn't have worked with them moving westward.
schedules can be changed we are using the ships in existence with aircraft
Why, yes, because reality only can be bent so far.
they can't decide to hold back so mini repair and sail
Kaga was not in for a "mini repair". It was a complete rebuild, scheduled months in advance.
sorry I do not see stringbags vs CAP working
Sorry, but the poor things worked amazingly well against all opposition. I do not see why Japanese pilots in obsolescent aircraft make a huge difference.
yes brits have good land based SHORT ranged fighters No dive bombers land or sea
and stringbags
The Japanese can have at best three carriers with perhaps 200 aircraft. Two-thirds of those are strike aircraft. No replacements. The amazing thing about short-ranged land-based fighters is that if carrier based aircraft wish to engage them then they have to come within range of the short-ranged land-based fighters, which are operating with a radar intercept system unknown to the Japanese.
they will miss the zero sure but the zero sank no capital ship ever in the whole war
and slow claudes are better shooting slow biplanes
I am not sure I would want to take on a Spitfire or Hurricane in a Claude.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6413
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Richard Anderson » 07 Jan 2023 07:32

nota wrote:
07 Jan 2023 02:27
btw fall 40 maybe best but if no russian war because this is hope to knock out england
so no russian attack at all in 1941 then the japan gets better toys in the air and the big boats by then plus more stuff

but so does the english in heavy arms
a timing problem best attack time is early but toys get better fast with just a little delay
ice makes late summer only time to do it 45 day or so window
You are playing Risk. It explains a lot.

Indeed. By around June 1940 the entire Japanese government and fleet has to be able to exploit a German victory that has just occurred and a Soviet government has to be prepared to allow an entire Japanese fleet to transit the Northeast passage with their assistance when they were hesitant a few weeks earlier to allow more than four German vessels to do so.

I can't see any problem with that. :roll:
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011 04:40

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by pugsville » 07 Jan 2023 10:00

nota wrote:
07 Jan 2023 02:15
hope is before London falls by being surrounded to get a treaty
so mini occupation for a short period

as so little actual heavy arms exist in 1940 in england
if the germans can land troops with some tanks and big guns
there is very little to stop a quick dash to the capital

yes they need deception not a radio silence as none is a tip also
yes they need to sneak and fake being elsewhere to

schedules can be changed we are using the ships in existence with aircraft
they can't decide to hold back so mini repair and sail
sorry I do not see stringbags vs CAP working
yes brits have good land based SHORT ranged fighters No dive bombers land or sea
and stringbags
they will miss the zero sure but the zero sank no capital ship ever in the whole war
and slow claudes are better shooting slow biplanes
While the British army in Britain was relatively small and desperately short of Equipment about 22 divisions with half the standard equipment sounds dire, it's got to be compared with the short of force the Germans were capable of landing.

The Germans were desperately short of anything that could be used in landing troops. Thus the reliance on river barges, fishing boats and ordinary merchant ships. There were variety of crude improvisations made experimentally very quickly without time for more than cursory training or testing. The ability to land heavy equipment was quite limited. The Bulk of the troops and equipment were planned to ferry ashore by the barges acting as lighters which would be beached and rely on the tide to re-float for the next journey. They did not have landning craft or landing ships like the allies had in 1944. Getting heavy equipment ashore was not going to be easy. In ideal conditions it would take over 3 days to land the first wave. The Germans struggled to get enough sailors or people with any sea experience at all to man these vessels even after stripping some crew from active service ships. After 3 weeks if things worked perfectly the Germans woudl still be quite outnumbered and out equipped by the British defenders. The Germans were planning to bring large numbers of horses, they would be landing with very few tanks or motorized transport.

It would take days to load this invasion fleet, many hours (up to 18 hours) to exit the mostly narrow harbors and assemble out side the harbors, then another 18 hours to transit to the invasion ares. These convoys would up to 17 kms long, be navigating by dropping buoy along the route, and chivvied by guys in motor boats to keep formation. The British were keeping surveillance on these ports, by air, and by submarine. There were also some 300 odd small patrol at night working a grid across the channel and parts of the north sea, Surprise was not likely. Bad weather would pretty much destroy the invasion fleet which was barely sea worthy in mild conditions. British attacks just have to cause kaos and disruption if the invasion fleet of merchants, towing barges with barley trained crews.

The British had a dive bomber in service. The Blackburn Skua in Fleet air arm service. Though it was both poor and in small numbers. It was a cpable enough aircraft in 1938 badly dated by 1941. Aircraft development was motoring in this period.

The British were quite proficient at night attacks with there Swordfish, even in carrier operation. What is going to protect the German invasion fleet on poorly armed civilian merchant vessels at anchor from night time torpedo attacks by Swordfish in air, destroyers and motor torpedo boats on the surface, and submarines under the waves.

nota
Member
Posts: 214
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 16:35
Location: miami

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by nota » 08 Jan 2023 00:09

TB's are a dead duck in most sea battles at the time

diving gets hits and sinks ships TB's just die most before the fish swims

skua as you admit just ain't very good and only a few
they have no good long range fighters at sea
the land based good fighters are very short ranged
stringbags is about all they have at sea they get hits but fail to sink at sea

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6413
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Richard Anderson » 08 Jan 2023 01:29

nota wrote:
08 Jan 2023 00:09
TB's are a dead duck in most sea battles at the time
Tell that to the IJN, RN, and USN. I don't think they would believe you.
diving gets hits and sinks ships TB's just die most before the fish swims
Um, no, whatever gave you that idea? Torpedoes were the ship killers. Bombs could damage ships and enough hits could sink them depending on the type but torpedoes were more reliable in sinking ships. Certainly Japanese dive bombers are unlikely to sink the modern British armoured carriers or battleships.
skua as you admit just ain't very good and only a few
As a dual purpose aircraft Skua was less effective as a fighter but was a good dive bomber. It sank Königsberg after all.
they have no good long range fighters at sea
Neither did the Japanese. Claude was matched by Gladiator and Fulmar.
the land based good fighters are very short ranged
Which does not matter since the Japanese are coming to them and the Claude is inferior to the Spitfire or Hurricane and matched by the Gladiator.
stringbags is about all they have at sea they get hits but fail to sink at sea
Sure, except for Mers-el-Kébir, Taranto, Cape Matapan, 14 U-Boot, and so on. Such a horribly ineffective aircraft that nine squadrons were still equipped with it at the end of the war.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Orwell1984
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 18 Jun 2011 18:42

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Orwell1984 » 08 Jan 2023 01:34

nota wrote:
08 Jan 2023 00:09
TB's are a dead duck in most sea battles at the time
Which is why the FAA's torpedo attack doctrine placed great amount of importance on night attacks.

They trained intensively for this.
nota wrote:
08 Jan 2023 00:09
stringbags is about all they have at sea they get hits but fail to sink at sea
They don't need to sink anything. A few damaging hits on this magical super fleet is enough to throw the time table into disarray. Where do any damaged Axis vessels go to get repaired?
If a capital ship has to detach, you also lose escort ships with it.

See what happened to the Regia Marina at Cape Matapan re the Vittorio Veneto and the Pola.

There's so many holes in this plan and no effort to supply any evidence or sources to back any of the claims made here.

Now back to our regularly scheduled handwaving. :roll:

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6413
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Richard Anderson » 08 Jan 2023 02:44

Orwell1984 wrote:
08 Jan 2023 01:34
Now back to our regularly scheduled handwaving. :roll:
Well of course. It's a what if after all. Handwaving is de rigueur. :lol:
Last edited by Richard Anderson on 08 Jan 2023 08:10, edited 1 time in total.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Europe

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Peter89 » 08 Jan 2023 07:13

Why are we even discussing this to this length? We all know it has zero probability.

The Kriegsmarine's surface ships were so much more interesting. So what if Germany starts the war with double the number of Hilfskreuzers? Could they sink double the Allied merchantmen? Or was it more like their extremely low numbers were part of their disguise? If the British could count on meeting Hilfskreuzers, would they be more suspecting and take them out more regularly? Could the Germans "saturate" the seas with Hilfskreuzers? If yes, then with how many?
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011 04:40

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by pugsville » 08 Jan 2023 12:25

Peter89 wrote:
08 Jan 2023 07:13
Why are we even discussing this to this length? We all know it has zero probability.

The Kriegsmarine's surface ships were so much more interesting. So what if Germany starts the war with double the number of Hilfskreuzers? Could they sink double the Allied merchantmen? Or was it more like their extremely low numbers were part of their disguise? If the British could count on meeting Hilfskreuzers, would they be more suspecting and take them out more regularly? Could the Germans "saturate" the seas with Hilfskreuzers? If yes, then with how many?
On Bang per buck baisis a sound investment. They could have easily had more but I would think woudl have needed a certain type of naval officer to be good at it.

Here a short web article about German supply ships that were quite active in surface raider support. They were successful for a time but the Royal navy started to put some time and effort into them and their effectiveness and utility dropped off. I read natter article on this recently I got it somewhere.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedi ... rld-war-ii

Spoke one of my friends who is a big naval nerd he got a book on the Hilfkreusers I'llpick it up during the week,

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4918
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Urmel » 08 Jan 2023 17:46

Richard Anderson wrote:
08 Jan 2023 02:44
Orwell1984 wrote:
08 Jan 2023 01:34
Now back to our regularly scheduled handwaving. :roll:
Well of course. It's a what if after all. Handwaving is de rigueur. :lol:
Vaguely interesting question
Total lack of understanding of either one or all of German strategic thinking, technology, logistics, combined with failure to appreciate Allied capabilities in any related matter
Magic
Factual tidbit, usually not related
Magic
More magic
Yet more magic
Factual tidbit
Magic
A helluva lot of magic
Germany wins
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6413
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Richard Anderson » 08 Jan 2023 18:47

Urmel wrote:
08 Jan 2023 17:46
Richard Anderson wrote:
08 Jan 2023 02:44
Orwell1984 wrote:
08 Jan 2023 01:34
Now back to our regularly scheduled handwaving. :roll:
Well of course. It's a what if after all. Handwaving is de rigueur. :lol:
Vaguely interesting question
Total lack of understanding of either one or all of German strategic thinking, technology, logistics, combined with failure to appreciate Allied capabilities in any related matter
Magic
Factual tidbit, usually not related
Magic
More magic
Yet more magic
Factual tidbit
Magic
A helluva lot of magic
Germany wins

Yep. I always have to laugh when someone accuses me of hating what ifs. I don't but I do prefer ones based in reality, some knowledge of the periods participants, and their capabilities and strategic thinking. Instead what we get, over and over again, is gee whizzims, non sequitur, shouting, and magical thinking.
Last edited by Richard Anderson on 08 Jan 2023 22:11, edited 1 time in total.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Orwell1984
Member
Posts: 578
Joined: 18 Jun 2011 18:42

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Orwell1984 » 08 Jan 2023 21:36

pugsville wrote:
08 Jan 2023 12:25

Here a short web article about German supply ships that were quite active in surface raider support. They were successful for a time but the Royal navy started to put some time and effort into them and their effectiveness and utility dropped off. I read natter article on this recently I got it somewhere.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedi ... rld-war-ii

Spoke one of my friends who is a big naval nerd he got a book on the Hilfkreusers I'llpick it up during the week,
Nice article. Thanks for sharing.

I'd be interested to know the title of the book your friend as I've been interested in this topic for a bit.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Europe

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by Peter89 » 08 Jan 2023 22:11

pugsville wrote:
08 Jan 2023 12:25
Peter89 wrote:
08 Jan 2023 07:13
Why are we even discussing this to this length? We all know it has zero probability.

The Kriegsmarine's surface ships were so much more interesting. So what if Germany starts the war with double the number of Hilfskreuzers? Could they sink double the Allied merchantmen? Or was it more like their extremely low numbers were part of their disguise? If the British could count on meeting Hilfskreuzers, would they be more suspecting and take them out more regularly? Could the Germans "saturate" the seas with Hilfskreuzers? If yes, then with how many?
On Bang per buck baisis a sound investment. They could have easily had more but I would think woudl have needed a certain type of naval officer to be good at it.

Here a short web article about German supply ships that were quite active in surface raider support. They were successful for a time but the Royal navy started to put some time and effort into them and their effectiveness and utility dropped off. I read natter article on this recently I got it somewhere.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedi ... rld-war-ii

Spoke one of my friends who is a big naval nerd he got a book on the Hilfkreusers I'llpick it up during the week,
This is a good article, thanks.

Although I was familiar with most of its content, it's nice to see these stories cobbled together.

Die deutsche Handelsflotte 1939-1945 (although it does not have the story of ALL German merchantmen) is also a key source in my opinion. It shows that the naval blockade was by no means an unbreakable barrier, and that the SKL made several crucial mistakes before the war - something that American literature in the 1950's (often using interviews with German officiers as source). It also made me acknowledge that the British Empire was built up for the control of the sea lanes, and that they held all key strategic positions to accomplish that task.

There were certainly wide open possibilities for a more extensive naval war effort in the Atlantic. But the inherent flaw in any German plans was their failure to appreciate how important the straits were, most notably Gibraltar. The only way to offset British naval superiority was not a vis-á-vis surface action or a tonnage war, but the pinching off of enclosed seas.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

nota
Member
Posts: 214
Joined: 21 Aug 2006 16:35
Location: miami

Re: Kriegsmarine surface ships are more aggressive in the Atlantic.

Post by nota » 09 Jan 2023 04:46

Richard Anderson wrote:
08 Jan 2023 01:29
nota wrote:
08 Jan 2023 00:09
TB's are a dead duck in most sea battles at the time
Tell that to the IJN, RN, and USN. I don't think they would believe you.
diving gets hits and sinks ships TB's just die most before the fish swims
Um, no, whatever gave you that idea? Torpedoes were the ship killers. Bombs could damage ships and enough hits could sink them depending on the type but torpedoes were more reliable in sinking ships. Certainly Japanese dive bombers are unlikely to sink the modern British armoured carriers or battleships.
skua as you admit just ain't very good and only a few
As a dual purpose aircraft Skua was less effective as a fighter but was a good dive bomber. It sank Königsberg after all.
they have no good long range fighters at sea
Neither did the Japanese. Claude was matched by Gladiator and Fulmar.
the land based good fighters are very short ranged
Which does not matter since the Japanese are coming to them and the Claude is inferior to the Spitfire or Hurricane and matched by the Gladiator.
stringbags is about all they have at sea they get hits but fail to sink at sea
Sure, except for Mers-el-Kébir, Taranto, Cape Matapan, 14 U-Boot, and so on. Such a horribly ineffective aircraft that nine squadrons were still equipped with it at the end of the war.
midway torpedo 8 all lost no hits STRONG CAP tb8 was way better then stringbags
the channel dash all 6 shot down no hits STRONG LAND BASED CAP

sure taranto berth like pearl not at sea aka sitting ducks
Mers-el-Kébir, BERTHED again no hits at sea against moving targets

Königsberg was an old light cruiser not a capital ship very thin armor

only with no CAP WERE TB's

Return to “What if”