Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Graf Zepplin Completed

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BriteLite
    replied
    Production questions aside, the Graf Zeppelin project was more liability than asset and a waste of resources(include the pocket ships also. Germany's best chance for defeating Great Britain in the early war years was with the subs.

    The GZ was a magnificent looking ship. I have not read much about the project but it seems the Germans did not have proper aircraft for the purpose. I have seen some discussion of fitting JU-87 and 109's for carrier use. Early on these may have been satisfactory. However even before the Allies achieved air parity I don't see the GZ operating effectively. Operating in the Northern sea zones it might have been able to attain a few victories. In the end the British would have hunted it down as it did the Bismarck. Or kept it bottled up and trapped.

    Leave a comment:


  • Full Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by daemonofdecay View Post
    And sorry if I am going round and round the same point FM, I'm just trying to figure out whats preventing Germany from expanding its output in fields related to the Kriegsmarine's growth. I can usually grasp the basics of Macro Economics, but I did inherit a think skull from my father.
    Like I've posted before, it is what it is. A year ago I may well have agreed with you but after reading Tooze and combining that with other facts I'd come across I realised that the old idea that Speer galvanised a previously inefficient economy into a war powerhouse just had to be wrong. It would require not just irrationality but also gross stupidity and would leave one wondering just how the Wehrmacht expanded to the degree it did in the three or so years prior to the start of WW2. So what one sees is increasing state demands for strategic materiels as the economy is placed on a war footing (even before war starts), the realisation that there is a serious shortfall in the capacity of the economy to meet these demands, a large surplus of funds as a result of Government manipulation of public demand and foreign exchange dealings, and finally, investment of said funds in a number of large scale capital projects that start coming on line just as Speer takes control of armaments production. One might argue that these capital projects could have been started three or so years earlier but that would be at a time when the economy was still emerging from the slump of 1930-3 and available funds were required for other essential projects as well as ensuring that inflation didn't soar again. As I and others have posted previously, read Tooze, not only because he sets the record straight regarding the Nazi economic miracles but also because he reveals the rationale behind many of the Nazi's decisions that can sometimes leave one baffled (the cuts in panzer production in the winter of 1940-1 despite the decision to double the number of panzer divisions being one example).

    Anyway, be that as it may, let's move on (please!) to the Kriegsmarine c.1944 (in the DoD universe), production issues set aside for later, more focussed, threads.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Fodder76 View Post
    I assume the Kreigsmarine would maintian active operations while the force was being constructed. What impact would repairs have on German shipyard output?
    I'm of the opinion that the Kriegsmarine's operations would, by necessity, need to be very cautious and conservative for the first few years. With the Graf Zeppelin being completed in mid-1941 at the very earliest, it would need to spend a while training crews, getting practical experience launching and recovering aircraft, etc.

    The U-Boats would bear the brunt of the fighting for the first few years imho, but if Germany were expanding its surface fleet it seems logical that they wouldn't be able to produce as many U-Boats.

    The carriers. I must admit ignorance of their main design points but British experience showed that if you are going to operate close to shore, i.e in the Baltic or North sea, then an armoured deck is essential to be able to survive attacks from land based bombers and their significantly heavier payloads, both in terms of total payload and weight of each munition.
    I suppose by '45 the Germans would have come up with a better fighter to use that the 109T. Can you imagine trying to land a 109 on a pitching flight deck? The thing was so fragile the gear had to be attached to the fuselage as opposed to the wing just to land on terra firma.
    I agree. The Kriegsmarine would need dedicated carrier aircraft (and ones under their control ). This is another reason for Germany's carriers to their time training and working out what exactly works and doesn't.

    With the German war effort geared so heavily towards naval construction the allies would, you would imagine, direct their bombing campaign against the industries supplying the shipyards. The bottleneck in any Battleship production is the construction of the guns. How many sites in Germany had the capability to construct the 20in guns Hitler wanted, or the several dozen 16in that he compromised on? How difficult would it have been to disperse the production of these beasts?
    The best bet would be for the Luftwaffe, not having castrated itself in the Blitz and not involved in a war with the USSR, setting up shop covering major German ports and the air over the channel and North Sea. The Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe would have to recieve priority over the Heer, so the Luftwaffe would need to maintain the ability to contest the skies of Europe, especially when fighting on home turf.

    Without Germany needing to send aircraft east, and without the US directly involved in the war with Germany (best case scenario there ) it seems that the RAF's bombing damage would be negligable to German industry. The worst thing for the Kriegsmarine I could imagine would be the RAF targeting the Kriegsmarine ships while at dock, where if they were lucky they could set production back by months.

    Well, the worst would be if the RAF was able to hit one of the ships at sea where Germany couldn't recover it, but that would be much more difficult to do if the ships were out training in the Baltic and not stationary in a port or drydock.

    Does Pearl Harbour still happen? If so the 8th USAAF takes up the strategic bombing of Krupp factories and shipyards and the Brits divert resources from Bomber Command to Coastal Command (yeah right, I know, as if the RAF would give up its baby, it's perceived raison d'etre).
    Germany's best (some would say only) bet would be avoiding war with the US at all costs. If Germany took steps in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor to condemn Japan's attacks or whatnot and didn't declare war on the US, it would be difficult for Roosevelt to declare war on Germany. The US people would want Japan's head on a platter, and Roosevelt would probably be able to increase aid to the UK but a direct intervention would be difficult to justify to the American people ("Look, I know Japan attacked us and Germany didn't do a think but condemn those attacks. But since Germany is clearly the bigger threat to the US, we're going to declare war on them and focus on defeating Germany first.")

    If the US were directly involved in 1940 onwards, German production of ships would be severely hampered because the bombing campaign could easily focus on leveling the shipyards, targeting related industries, etc. and would not rely solely on British produced fighters and bombers contending against the entirety of the Luftwaffe.

    Since the Luftwaffe would still be very strong at this point (no Blitz, no Barbarossa), the RAF and USAAF would both face a daunting prospect that might force them both to adopt the safer but less accurate night missions.

    Yet on the other hand AFAIK tha contemporary fighters in both nations arsenals had the reach to escort the bombers to and from, say, Hamburg.

    By '45, and with little action on the European ground front to distract them, the US have succesfully prosecuted their "Japan first" strategy. The US Navy now has the lions share of the battle hardened Pacific Fleet available for action against the Germans.
    I quite agree. If Germany is at war with the US and UK, then by 1945 all of their work up until this point would be of little consequence even without Barbarossa to distract them. It would turn into a stalemate, with the Allies unable to conduct a successful invasion of Europe (Germany would have the forces of well trained and equiped troops to actually throw them back into the sea) but Germany's Kriegsmarine nothing more than a small threat to the combined RN and USN.

    And then the US would drop Fatman on Berlin. Game over.

    On the 21st of February 1946, just as the last H Class battleship enters active service having successfully completed sea trials a lone B-29 drops the worlds first atomic bomb on Wilhelmshaven, a week later Kiel. Bugger......
    Ha, you beat me too it. I wrote the above sentence before reading this part.

    I cannot agree more here: once the US enters the war on the British side, the clock starts ticking. Germany would need to get a conditional peace before the mushroom clouds start forming, end of story.

    Personally, I believe that Germany could have avoided drawing the US into the war if they (aka Hitler) had really understood the threat the US posed, in the same way they could have defeated the USSR if they had actually take a realistic assesment of what it would take to defeat a nation with so many more available soldiers.

    The US was an isolationist nation. After the attacks on Pearl Harbor the hatred was for the Japs, not the Germans, and its hard to imagine the US people rallying round to attack Germany so soon after being attacked themselves without some kind of provocation.

    Germany expresses outrage at the Japanese attacks, Hitler gives a speech or two on tv, etc. to help keep Germany from seeming like an immediate threat to the US. Roosevelt was no fool, but even he would find it difficult to join in a war without being provoked. Especially as Germany a) wouldn't have attempted the Blitz and be seen as killing civilians and b) the U-Boat campaign wouldn't be as major a threat as Germany wouldn't be able to turn out as many U-Boats as it did historically.

    That in turn might lead the parts of the US Government who actually recognized Germany's threat to believe that they could help defeat Germany just by sending the UK goods and materials it needed by falling back into the whole "Arsenal of Democracy" persona.

    And once Roosevelt dies its hard to imagine Truman being able to get America behind a war with Germany, especially as the "war" would have lasted for 5 years, most of which nothing really happened as Germany would be building up the Kriegsmarine and the UK would be limited to using the RAF to try and damage Germany as they wouldn't be able to free western Europe themselves.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
    DoD, it's all to do with capital investment. The increases we see in production are due to those investments made five years or so earlier. That capital was only there because of the increasing restrictions on foreign exchange and private consumption (Nazi economic policy).
    I knew I shouldn't have slept through my AP Economics class.

    It just seems that the "capital" could be created by the German government for increasing industrial output artificially beyond what the market would normally support, even though this would have repercusions later on.

    Anyway, I feel like we are splitting hairs here. I believe that Germany could have increased its output in the 40's by a degree if it followed my stipulations; I may be missing the point (and if I am, please enlighten me. I really do want to figure out if I am completely ignoring a part of the puzzle), but it seems that in the aftermath of conquering France, the German economy would be better than it was historically if the Heer was not rapidly increased (more labour, a key factor of production) and German companies were able to trade with the nations surrounding Germany that would not be at war with (like the USSR, Yugoslavia, Greece, etc.) that would help secure more raw resources for industry.

    That would free up some of the demand on German industry by the gov't, allowing them to refocus on producing more capital, especially capital related to heavy industry that would be tied into producing parts needed for ships and aircraft. This would, of course, take time: if you are producing more parts for factories you a) arn't producing parts for ships and b) those new machines take time to set up, train workers for their use, etc.

    It just seems that more available labour, rising demand, and access to the raw resources would be enough to allow Germany to expand its industry.

    One way to get more steel in the mid to late thirties is to lift the restrictions of foreign exchange. But that will reduce investment and so production in 1943.
    I am not going to sit here and claim that by 1945 Germany would be outproducing the US when it came to carriers. Any expansion I have expressed would be on a very, very moderate scale. Most of the Kriegsmarine's expansion would have to come from the same industry it has had for a while, and this would take time and lots of investment by the German gov't. The Kriegsmarine way to optimistic plan for expansion had a set date of completion of around 1945/46. I believe a date like that could be me for the Kriegsmarine, with or without any noticable economic growth, but only if the Z-Plan (or Plan Z. I get contradictory names of the interwebs ) were trimmed down to the essentials and made use of plenty of conversions and ad-hoc measures to get the number of CVs it would need.

    Since this whole idea of having a Kriegsmarine capable of contesting the North Sea with the Royal Navy is a very long term goal (its no contest until the mid-40s at the earliest) I can't concieve how Germany couldn't take the steps to see output increase later.

    And sorry if I am going round and round the same point FM, I'm just trying to figure out whats preventing Germany from expanding its output in fields related to the Kriegsmarine's growth. I can usually grasp the basics of Macro Economics, but I did inherit a think skull from my father.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fodder76
    replied
    Some questions, in the spirit of the great Plan Z what if....

    I assume the Kreigsmarine would maintian active operations while the force was being constructed. What impact would repairs have on German shipyard output?

    The carriers. I must admit ignorance of their main design points but British experience showed that if you are going to operate close to shore, i.e in the Baltic or North sea, then an armoured deck is essential to be able to survive attacks from land based bombers and their significantly heavier payloads, both in terms of total payload and weight of each munition.
    I suppose by '45 the Germans would have come up with a better fighter to use that the 109T. Can you imagine trying to land a 109 on a pitching flight deck? The thing was so fragile the gear had to be attached to the fuselage as opposed to the wing just to land on terra firma.

    With the German war effort geared so heavily towards naval construction the allies would, you would imagine, direct their bombing campaign against the industries supplying the shipyards. The bottleneck in any Battleship production is the construction of the guns. How many sites in Germany had the capability to construct the 20in guns Hitler wanted, or the several dozen 16in that he compromised on? How difficult would it have been to disperse the production of these beasts?

    Does Pearl Harbour still happen? If so the 8th USAAF takes up the strategic bombing of Krupp factories and shipyards and the Brits divert resources from Bomber Command to Coastal Command (yeah right, I know, as if the RAF would give up its baby, it's perceived raison d'etre).

    By '45, and with little action on the European ground front to distract them, the US have succesfully prosecuted their "Japan first" strategy. The US Navy now has the lions share of the battle hardened Pacific Fleet available for action against the Germans.

    On the 21st of February 1946, just as the last H Class battleship enters active service having successfully completed sea trials a lone B-29 drops the worlds first atomic bomb on Wilhelmshaven, a week later Kiel. Bugger......

    Leave a comment:


  • Full Monty
    replied
    DoD, it's all to do with capital investment. The increases we see in production are due to those investments made five years or so earlier. That capital was only there because of the increasing restrictions on foreign exchange and private consumption (Nazi economic policy). One way to get more steel in the mid to late thirties is to lift the restrictions of foreign exchange. But that will reduce investment and so production in 1943.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
    Actually we disagree on the time-scale. Historically the German economy was functioning at full tilt from the mid-thirties onwards.
    See, I knew that one of the reasons Hitler was so succesful at bringing Germany out of the depression was because of massive military buildup creating jobs, putting money back into the system, etc. that begun in the mid-thirties (say '36 onwards?).

    But I always read that the German economy was never working at its real maximum capacity or effeciency until a few years after the war began; that Hitler and his cronies didn't really feel the need for it after beating Poland and France so swiftly, and it really took the reversal of fortunes in Russia to change their minds.

    But I think it would be fair to say that German industry could have expanded at least to a minimal degree if there was no war with Russia or the USA. No, Germany would not expand its output by 50%, but a much smaller increase sounds plausible, yes?

    Plus it seems to me that the number one reason the Kriegsmarine didn't complete any of its projects was because a) it was not given priority over the Heer and Luftwaffe and b) the long term projects would have needed valuable resources and labour right when the war in the East was going sour, compounded with Allied air superiority, strategic bombings, and the eventual invasion of France.

    As I said earlier, I have no problem suspending this particular reality for the sake of debate, I just wanted to clarify it for the sake of being a pedant.
    I just find the idea that there was no way at all for Germany to increase, say, the number of steel foundries it had more unrealistic a proposition.

    I mean, from 1942 to 1943 Germany's Armoured fighting vehicle production rates more than tripled (from 4,136 to 13,657), and this included the fact that Germany was producing bigger and more complicated machines than before.

    Likewise we see a big jump in Germany's aircraft production in the same years (15,409 to 24,807), although one of the reasons here was because Germany was switching to more single-engined fighters.

    Germany was increasing output during the war even with large manpower losses in the east, strategic bombings, and a lack of many key resources. I think its fair to say that with the first two completely gone (no war with the USSR and USA) and the third reduced by being able to trade with other nations (minors Germany didn't invade, the USSR, etc.), Germany could find a way to increase production of goods needed to expand the Kriegsmarine.

    This would not make Germany into a world Naval power in 5 short years. But an increase in industrial capacity (however small) combined with a Kriegsmarine recieving priority for resources and slimmer, more intelligent Z-Plan could have seen a Kriegsmarine that might stand a chance at contesting the North Sea with the Royal Navy. Especially if the Luftwaffe developed some decent long range naval bombers to opperate from land.

    Leave a comment:


  • Full Monty
    replied
    Of course, me and FM disagree on just how much expansion was available, but I think that we can also agree that there was room for at least minimal expansion of German industry, infrastructure, and effeciency.
    Actually we disagree on the time-scale. Historically the German economy was functioning at full tilt from the mid-thirties onwards. As I said earlier, I have no problem suspending this particular reality for the sake of debate, I just wanted to clarify it for the sake of being a pedant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
    Your theory could work with perhaps a sane man, However, Hitler was going to invade some one. He had suceeded in doing that about one a year after all.
    Exactly. Hitler being, well, Hitler basically dooms Germany to failure every time. This entire scenario really depends on Hitler not acting like he did historically. Without that being changed, it wouldn't work.
    Last edited by Daemon of Decay; 11 Nov 08, 19:52.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick the Noodle
    replied
    Daemonofdecay

    In one of my more foolhardy moments, I put forward a scenario from a source, I still utterly respect, that could succeed in defeating Britain in 1940. It was foolhardy in that I did not know all the facts the source did. While I still believe it could have a reasonable, but an outside chance of success, many facts from other threads convinced me it probably could not work.

    Your theory could work with perhaps a sane man, However, Hitler was going to invade some one. He had suceeded in doing that about one a year after all.

    However, cut and paste to a 'what if' thread and that would be interesting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
    Some would suggest it's to do with his (alleged) childhood obsession with his stools.


    Never heard that one before. Gave me a chuckle though.

    Alrighty then, in the interest of actually getting some hard data to back up my pretty much fantastical claims and ideas, does anyone have any real information on what Germany's naval production capabilities were before/during the war?

    I mean, the actually numbers of ships (except U-Boats) would be lower than what Germany could have achieved if the Kriegsmarine recieved priorities (that seems pretty obvious considering how many ships like the Graf Zepplin Germany was building but never fully finished due to other demands) and if they had expanded their industrial/infrastructure capabilities.

    Of course, me and FM disagree on just how much expansion was available, but I think that we can also agree that there was room for at least minimal expansion of German industry, infrastructure, and effeciency.

    I was thinking we could look at how many shipyards did Germany have that were capable of building capital ships, how many drydocks did they have capable of servicing said ships, etc.

    And for comparison, we would need to look at the UK's capabilities to build ships during the war as well. Without the US directly involved (and occupied with a war in the Pacific), the UK would really be on its own except for the odd Destroyer or what have you the US sends Churchill's way. They would have the experience and the bigger shipyards (if I remember correctly), but they would find it a bit tougher to get the resources needed to expand the navy with U-Boats threatening transports to England.

    It more just conjecture on my part, but I think it quite possible that a Germany not at war with the USA and actually trading with Russia to keep the peace going would be capable of completing a much leaner Plan-Z (especially if the large numbers of BBs, BCs, etc. were cut out) by the time 1945/46 rolled around.

    A Kriegsmarine with two Graf Zepplin class CVs, plus converted CVs from the Europa, Potsdam, and Seydlitz (the first two being civilian liners, the later a CA) would have been a very impressive force.

    Of course, being realistic here means that the later ships would not be ready for service until 1945 at the earliest (most likely later considering German naval industry would be hard pressed to build the two Graf Zepplins, convert three other ships, and build the escorts said ships would need to operate effectively).

    And this date would only be achievable if the Kriegsmarine were to get priority for the resources it needed, if German war industry were expanded to its limits (FM read a book about German industry during the war recently, right?), Germany kept from going to war with any other major powers, and if Germany were able to keep trading with the USSR (and other nations that it didn't invade) to gain the resources it would need to fuel the expansion.

    All in all its a very tall order indeed. It would require Hitler to have a different mindset about the war first and foremost. As long as Germany was not at war with the USSR or the USA, it strikes me as being just a case of Germany just having to wait a long while until they have a strong enough force to threaten the RN for control of the North Sea.

    I still believe that any invasion of England would be a pipedream for Germany, even with a stronger Kriegsmarine there. In my mind, the best bet for Germany would be to use the Kriegsmarine to threaten England enough (where the threat of invasion was taken very seriously by the government and military) so a negotiated peace could be reached.

    Especially if the British people felt that they couldn't very well invade France on their own (no war in Russia to show that the German army wasn't invincible). By the time the Kriegsmarine could even begin to threaten the RN in the North Sea, it would be around 1946. Six years of basically a stalemate war doesn't really inspire much will to keep fighting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Full Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by daemonofdecay View Post
    Gotta love the whole Freudian facination Hitler had with very large machines.
    Some would suggest it's to do with his (alleged) childhood obsession with his stools.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
    If you can come up with a German fleet we can discuss the RN's likely response. Just don't be too outlandish, we don't want KMS Fuhrer wallowing in the North Sea do we.
    Thats... thats a very large ship.



    Gotta love the whole Freudian facination Hitler had with very large machines.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
    More importantly, where are the Germans going to get the fuel oil needed to propell all of those surface warships of a greatly expanded Kriegsmarine? They were always on the verge of running out of fuel throughout the war and this created no end of difficulities whenever the Germans massed their troops and vehicles for a major military offensive.
    Thats one of the reasons I strongly feel that any succesful growth and use of the Kriegsmarine would require Germany not to invade the Soviet Union or declare war on the US. It is not feasible to expect Germany to be able to fuel the thousands of tanks, trucks, and other armoured vehicles fighting a war in Russia along with a larger Kriegsmarine, or hope to deal with the RN and the USN, especially if large numbers of American strategic bombers are laying waste to German ports.

    Like I stipulated, for Germany's Kriegsmarine to ever hope to compete with the RN, Germany would need to give the expensive and lengthy naval projects priority, and instead of rapidly expanding their Panzer forces they would instead focus on stockpiling the needed supplies for the fleet.

    And considering that any German projects would take a few years to really come to fruition, it seems likely that Germany could maintain decent stockpiles from European fields and from synthetic sources to be able to have their ships moving. Especially considering that the Kriegsmarine's main goal would be to threaten England enough to effect a peace treaty or fight the RN in the North Sea, where Germany might be able to use its U-Boats and landbased aircraft to try and overcome any numerical supperiority on the British side.

    But its also worth noting that the UK would be building ships too, and with greater skill and experience I might add. The Kriegsmarine would need to try and draw the RN into a fight on their terms and avoid loosing. Really, as long as there is a strong Kriegsmarine around the UK wouldn't feel secure, so not loosing would be more important to the Kriegsmarine than winning.

    Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg
    Aw com'on John. You still dont belive in the History Fairy with the magic dust?
    And dontcha know, the Germans could use Rhine river barges to carry the troops across the channel and then have U-Boats deliver the supplies safely. It couldn't fail!

    Originally posted by piero1971
    they'll have to get it from the USSR. which means the alliance with Stalin will have to be stronger. perhaps Nazism would do it's ideological U-turn ??
    Thats one of the major things I believe would have to change: Hitler as he was historically would not be willing to work with the Soviet Union for very long. The Nazi idealogy wouldn't have to change (Hitler worked with Stalin in 1939), but Hitler/the German leadership would have to decide that dealing with Britain is essential before any moves against the Soviet Union.

    And such an economic pact between the USSR and Germany is not far fetched. Germany recieved many thousands of tons of essential materials from the Soviet Union before Barbarossa historically. Stalin wanted to stay on Hitler's good side and the Communists shipments were always orderly and on time (even a day or two before the actuall invasion the USSR was still sending supplies over the border to Germany), but what Hitler promised (advanced machinery, etc.) was always late and often of insufficient numbers.

    With Germany needing Russian resources, Stalin would sense the balance of power shift a bit more in Russia's favor and would then be able to put a little pressure on Germany to actually make the correct shipments on time. With Germany focused on the UK (but keeping the Heer in Poland in strong defensive positions just in case), Germany would have no choice but to actually abide by the deals so they can keep the naval programs going.

    also, a war later, means a much more modern France and also a French Fleet, whose plans for the mid 40's was also of more modern battleships, battle cruisers and carriers...
    The scenario I proposed wasn't a later starting war, just that Plan Z wasn't ditched as soon as war began. Germany would need to make the Kriegsmarine a priority, and would also need to cut back on some of the less useful aspects of Plan Z; fewer battleships, for instance, because those resources would be better spend on smaller ships, or CVs, etc.

    One thing that I also forgot to mention was the number of conversion jobs planned by the Kriegsmarine that might have been critical to make up for Germany's need to expand rapidly but lacking the capabilities to lay down numerous capital ships all at once; the Europa and Potsdam from passenger ships, the Seydlitz from a Heavy Cruiser (it was 2/3 done when war broke out: with priority status and access to the resources needed it could easily have been operational within two years or so, hey?), etc.

    Converting said ships would be much easier for the German industry to handle, even if said ships might not be as well built as a purpose built carrier. But they would also be good testing grounds for the Kriegsmarine to explore carrier technology and tactics.

    Leave a comment:


  • Carl Schwamberg
    replied
    Originally posted by johnbryan View Post
    More importantly, where are the Germans going to get the fuel oil needed to propell all of those surface warships of a greatly expanded Kriegsmarine? They were always on the verge of running out of fuel throughout the war and this created no end of difficulities whenever the Germans massed their troops and vehicles for a major military offensive.
    Aw com'on John. You still dont belive in the History Fairy with the magic dust?

    Correct, for the Z Plan to work a relaible source of suffcient oil must be had. I really have no idea what the potiental of th Rumanian source might be. In theory Caucasian oil might do, but there are 'complications'. Other sources in Lybia or Kurdistan are not going to be developed in time. Stashing away a few millions tons of reserve does not sound doable either. That leaves the synthetic oil production, and I have no idea if that would be a viable alternate for ship fuel. Maybe he KM should revert to coal?

    Probablly a combination of Rumanian development, reserve, and synthetic would be the possible solution. But, I am not sure the nazis were smart enough to hit on that one or make it happen.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X