I read from some book years ago that the original war plan (Naval) for the Kreigsmarine was that they would build up the Navy till 44 with a so called 'Plan Z" then started the war. The Plan Z Navy would consist Zepplin Carriers, a bunch of new Battleship, some newer even than the Bismark, a number of heavy Cruisers/Destoryers, and hundreds of U Boats. Say if the German did stick to that plan, would the Plan Z Kreigsmarine set sail to the North Atlantic unchallenged? Or would Allies really tolerate such a Naval build up even though presumingly that German would not open War with the Allies?

Hard to imagine that Great Britian would have allowed Germany to achieve anything even close to parity in naval forces. The Z ("Zeil" or 'target') plan was to be completed by 1948. It envisioned a Kreigsmarine of 17 capital ships; 6 super battleships (72k tons each), 4 large BB's, 4 aircraft carriers, and 3 battle-cruisers. Along with the capital ships it planned for 3 pocket bttleships, 53 cruisers of various size, 68 destroyers, a numerous other surface ships, over one million tons in all. It also planned for 249 U-boats, most however were to be of the mine-laying or coastal patrol variety, not the ocean going menace we actually saw.

I don't have numbers for Great Britian at my fingertips, however, it is wise to remember that the RN fielded 21 battleships alone during the period in question, and could undoubtably have launched more if needed, and this doesn't include aircraft carriers, battle-cruisers, etc. So even in their wildest dreams (and these were wild ones) the Germans would not have achieved superiority.

Having said all that it is interesting to note the shift in air power between the West and Germany. When Hitler took power both Great Britian and France had a clear and decisive superiority that they allowed to slip away. They took solace in the fact that they both had superiority, then they took solace in the fact that COMBINED they held the advantage, then they trumpeted the fact that together they were real close to the German numbers, and so on and so on. So who knows, maybe those whose desire for peace (it's to easy to call good men appeasers after the fact, most anyway) clouded their judgement would also have allowed naval superiority to slip away as well.

Rick Cooper

Very good, gentlemen. I'll add another tidbit or two.

The Kriegsmarine did have superior gunnery optics at the start of the war, jsut as they did at Jutland two decades before. Germans are good with lenses. However....

Their radar was much less reliable and effective, and indeed Bismarck's was knocked offline by her first full boradside and was never repaired during her ill-fated voyage. Flaws like that possibly never appear in peacetime, so a Z-plan fleet would likely been populated with vessels possessing faulty electronics. Likewise German ship design had critical flaws, including a lack of reduncancy in rudder control and very weak stern structures. Look at the wreck of the Bismarck today: The stern broke off when she sank. Could just as easily been blown off by a bomb, torpedo, or shell hit. Other German vessels also exhibited this flaw, so it was a design issue and not workmanship.

Basically, Germany (as alluded to) has never had sufficient naval experience to build a really capable fleet, economics aside. Let's not forget that Bismarck wasn't exactly fighting on even terms on May 24th, 1941: Hood was a WW1 battlecruiser with a severly flawed armor layour, and Prince of Wales really belonged back in the dockyard or safely away on workup. Britain was lucky that both of them weren't sunk. But Bismarck fared far less well against Rodney and King George V, good ships with good crews. Forget Bismarck's inability to maneuver, she also couldn't shoot anymore that morning. I know this will draw fire, but while I appreciate that she was a beautifully menacing ship in appearance she was not a particularly impressive piece of naval architecture. Any of our fast battleships (North Carolinas, South Dakotas) would have beaten her in a stand-up fight and an Iowa would have simply eaten her for lunch.

Greg

Great discussion, I wouldn't disagree with a thing that has been said. It is fun to just follow the conversation here.

Much of the experience of the Kreigsmarine in the war I believe would have been repeated with the Soviet navy had open conflict ever broken out. They might have looked frightening on paper, but I think they were closer to a paper tiger than the real thing. The grind of combat would have quickly worn them to dust.

Rick Cooper

While I'll leave things naval to those with better understanding I will tackle the question of appeasement. If Germany had not attacked poland and waited for this plan z totake effect I think the battle of the atlantic would have been harder and the war last longer. The appeasement would have had no reason to stop. up to and to some degree after Sept 39 people still believed hitlermussolini could be appeased. Europe still hasn't learned the lesson. they would rather renew business dealings with Iraq than stop him. only a chemical or nuclear attack would disuade them. and since they are not likely to face immidiate attack, their line of apppeasement still stands. so yes I think the powers that were would have allowed hitler to comlete his preperations.only the invasion of poland tilted the balance in europea and only japans attack on Pearl moved US opinion to war.

Josh Weingarten
aKa shiryon

Again I dont even pretend to know Naval stuff but even if they had the actual ship, building aircraft to take the ounding of landing isa omthing else. then there is the problem of running the deck. they have no SOP.

Josh Weingarten
aKA shiryon

Again I dont even pretend to know Naval stuff but even if they had the actual ship, building aircraft to take the ounding of landing isa omthing else. then there is the problem of running the deck. they have no SOP

We need to add the US Fleet capability. The North Carolinas and South Dakota class were either in the water or working up in the early 40's. The Iowa class were in building stage and there were plane to build a class of Super-Iowas" with four three-gun turrets with new improved 16" guns. Add the plethora of new cruisers, destroyers and carriers to add to British, Canadian and possibly French heavy units and the Germans are still in the hole.

Next, how do the Japanese fit into all this? They spread out in 1941 based on teh Germans tying down the British, Dutch and French fleets in the Atlantic and Med. Would they have still sat still while US had the embargo in place? Would they continue to build more Yamato-class BBs and more CVs? they did continue to launch new carriers throughout the war, but ran out of trained carrier qualified aircrews.

Oh yea, how would Germany fuel this large fleet? With Coal? I don't think they had the oil resources to keep the fleet going. Plus, similiar to their lack of carrier experience, they had no "underway replenishment" experience. And forget their naval aviation: Sea Stukas, biplane torpedo bombers and BF-109Ts. Bf-109s had terrible legs. How would they escort a strike? I know, the British also had a biplane torpedo bomber. They never had to force an attack against F6F Hellcats ot A6M Zeros. (By the time the British Fleet arrived in force in the Pacific they were entirely equipped with US naval aircraft.)

Just more fodder about Nazi dreams.

Thank goodness!!!!

DJ,

You nailed it. Without carrier support battleships are all but obsolete for their intended purpose. Musashi (?) never fired at another ship in anger, if I recall correctly, and Yamato only at DDs, DEs and CVEs. The only Japanese BB engagements were at one of the Savo Island battles where North Carolina sank the Kirishima (again I believe, a Japanese BB was added to Iron Bottom Sound), and the infamous Surigaio Straits massacre by teh "Ghosts of Pearl Harbor". I don't recall any Japanese BBs (I think only Japanese crusiers and destroyers and land based aircraft were present) involved in chasing down ABDA Fleet during initial conquest of Indonesia.

Very sorry performance for Japanese BBs. I seem to recall that only Guadalcanal ever suffered their rath form shore bombardment. The Japanese tended to use cruisers and destroyers to provide shore bombardment during their intial invasions.

The BBs were occasionally used as their makers intended. Battheships from both sides dueled at night in Ironbottom Sound during the Guadalcanal campaign. Washington and South Dakota demolished Kirishima in one of those, I believe. Also, both battle lines engaged (again at night) in the Battle of Surgao Straits durign the larger Philippine Sea battle in '44. The US battleships crossedthe Japanese T and usign radar gunnery ranging sank Yamashiro and Fuso as well as smaller ships.

And Yamato was nearly taken down by BBs. Admiral Olendorf wanted to send his battleship screening force to engage her, as they weren't needed for shore bombardment. But the carier admirals scotched the idea, wanting to shut the battlewagon boys out of the fight for internal political reasons. Too bad...