@ABWorsham:
I wonder what effect would the German Navy in World War 2 have if it’s size has been similar to the Kaiser’s Navy?
In order to reach the size of the Kaiser’s Navy, it would have needed to break the terms of the Treaty of Versailles much earlier than it did, which would have resulted in WW2 starting sometime in the early 1930s, long before it could have built up to any significant degree. The pocket battleships/armoured ships were built to get around the term of the Treaty of Versailles, but were in theory in compliance. The French in the late 1920s and early 1930s were looking for a reason to land on Germany, but were restrained by the British. Germany building another High Seas Fleet would have made Britain ready to invade Germany as well. The result would have been a British and French invasion of Germany sometime around 1931 or so. No Hitler, no Nazis, early WW2. You need to understand that the Germans had to first build the industrial base to produce heavy armor plate, large caliber guns, and heavy gun turrets before building ships like the Scharnhortz and Bismarck. Also, the Bismarck used enough steel for 2,000 Mark IV tanks. You have a finite amount of steel. What do you build if you are Germany?
I’ll take the 2,000 Mark IV’s.
Id take more subs at the start of the war like Raeder argued. It would have really put british in the bind.
The 300 u-boats that Raeder wanted to make war on England would have shocked the English into submission by 1941.
Speaking of the Battle of the Atlantic, this weekend I found my copy of Iron Coffins by Herbert Werner. I caught myself an hour later having to put it down. Great book!
Have any of you read the book The German Raider: Atlantis? It’s my all time favorite book.
If the Germans had started building that many U-boats earlier, assuming that they violated the Treaty of Versailles earlier, British rearmament starts earlier, and WW2 starts in 1938 over Czechoslovakia, not Poland, if not earlier. You gentlemen act as if the Western powers would make no response to German actions. READ THE TERMS OF THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES. Hitler took an enormous gamble breaking them. It takes time to build up your industrial base. It takes time to train aircrew, tank crewmen, and submarine crew. Time to allocate who gets the steel production first, who gets the engine production, who gets the armor plate production.
I went through all of this when I tried to run a full-scale WW2 naval campaign. The Axis players wanted to build anything that they wanted, while not allowing any response from the Allied players. If the Axis starts building earlier, there is no 1936 London Naval Treaty limiting the size and gun caliber of the new battleships to 35,000 tons and 14 inch guns. No treaty means that the British go straight to the Lion-class, and do not build ANY KGV. The 1940 Vinson Act mandating a Two-Ocean Navy moves up to 1938, at the latest. The US heads for the Iowa-class rather than the South Dakota class, and the Montanas start building in 1940, and become available in 1943. Armament buildups do not occur in a vacuum. One sides actions result in the other sides reaction.
Great point timerover51. How fast could Germany have built a navy by 1945? What size would this navy been?
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/zplan/index.html
According to this plan, the German Kriegsmarine should have grown to about 800 units, consisting of 13 battleships and battlecruisers, 4 aircraft carriers, 15 Panzerschiffe, 23 cruisers and 22 so called “Spähkreuzer” which were basically large destroyers. In addition to this many smaller vessels should have been build.
Those ships should have been build between 1939 and 1946, in this time, the personal of the Kriegsmarine should have been enlarged to 201.000 men and over 33 billion Reichsmark should have spend for building the new units.
This project never got reality. Its very questionable that the German industry would have had the resources for such a construction program and that the other European Nations would stood still and not react to this program. The realization of the Z-Plan started on January 29th, 1939. Two H-Class battleships were laid down, three months later Germany quit the the fleet treaty with England and the dream “No more war against Britain” was gone.
How would a 1945 European war been different? That’s a interesting question.
Since many weapons were developed during the war based on reaction i have no idea. The Tiger and Panther tanks were a response to the T-34. Would Germany start a 1945 war with Mark IV as the main battle tank?
Well the truth is Germany was accelerating FASTER than any other nation in terms of military technology. Eventually by waiting these would bear fruit. The naval treaty requirements of the London treaty and Versailles were already broken by Germany years earlier with those pocket battleships and the allies had no clue.
However, the industrial rebuilding of the Soviet economy and the slower English economy was slowly pulling away from Germany in some areas. The large Soviet population was viewed correctly by Hitler as an unstoppable inertia of men and material of the communist military complex may have proven an unassailable wall to breach by the whermacht.
So Hitler took his leap of faith in this period of History and plunged the world in his war of annihilation. It was a calculated risk to be sure, but it was entirely possible given the structure of blitzkrieg and her military capabilities that her European foes could be vanquished in quick victories, but Hitler didn’t set up Stalin for a quick campaign and that was only what Germany could afford so they failed. Its like buying a home with a mortgage you can no longer afford to pay and eventually losing everything.
The London Treaty was signed in 1930, and the French refused to sign it based on the German Pocket Battleships, building the Dunkerque and Strasburg in reply, and beginning design work on the Richelieu-class ships. The all-forward armament of the French ships was based on the assumption that any engagement with the pocket battleships would rapidly turn into a running chase, so maximum forward firepower was desired. So much for the Allies having no clue. The British figured that in the Hood, Renown, and Repulse, plus carrier hunting groups that they had a counter already. Italy refused to sign because the French refused to sign, therefore making much of the treaty meaningless, except for the US and UK. Japan started breaking the terms of the treaty almost immediately, which took a while for the US and UK to realize.
As for Germany accelerating FASTER than anyone else, that would be highly dependent on the area. When it came to radar, the Germans were behind in some respects, and rapidly got far behind with their inability to produce microwave radar. They never got remotely close to a proximity fuze, despite the desparate need for one. Atomic research was years away from getting to even a test reactor. Their highest grade of aircraft fuel was 92 octane, making the carrying of water-alcohol and nitrous oxide supplemental fuels for the performance boost the Allies got from having 100/130 and 115/145 octane fuel. Bomber development pretty much stopped with the death of General Weaver, while British and US heavy bomber development accelerated. Yes, the ME-262 did see combat, with an engine that required a complete overhaul after 15 to 25 hours of use. That does tend to limit how many you can produce. The early jet engines of the Allies had an overhaul requirement of 185 hours, and it steadily improved from there.
Their tanks were good, but the Panther, Tiger, and Tiger II were mechanically unreliable, and in the case of the Tigers, badly underpowered. The US made the conscious decision to push production of the Sherman because of the need for overseas shipment, which limited US development. The British Centurion and the US Pershing clearly brought the Allies up to par with the Germans.
@ABWorsham:
Great point timerover51. How fast could Germany have built a navy by 1945? What size would this navy been?
Pretty Quickly if they hadn’t Attacked Russia, And a Good Chunk of the Z-Plan would have been Realized, Making the KGM more then a Heavy hitting Token Fleet.
I am completly Convinced had the Russians and Germans Stayed Allies. The Axis would have won WWII, weather it happens in 1935, or 39, or 45.
The UK and The US would not Stand a Chance Against them.
The British Centurion and the US Pershing clearly brought the Allies up to par with the Germans.
yes on par with the Germans after they surrendered. They were not used against Germany coming in very late when the war was decided, while Germany had tiger I in the mid war period.
German tanks were better than all allied counterparts except T34/76 because only German tanks required too many parts and even one tank of the same model had different part than another, so they were always in need of spare parts, while the Soviet t-34 was like comparatively fewer parts and interchangeable. ON the battlefield the Germans always exacted more loses and punishment upon the enemy than they received in return.
Germany had jet power and could have had it earlier had Hitler not re-designated Me-262 as a tactical bomber rather than a pure interceptor.
Germany was ahead in Nuclear fission, but Hitler as usual stopped research when they had the lead and lost it. It was theirs to develop or let others pass them up. But they had the knowledge.
Germany also developed primitive radar latter , but radar was a defensive weapon and Hitler would have no part on it.
Under all aircraft types and rockets no nation was Germany equal, unless perhaps gliders are included.
The walter U-boat was superior to any other allied submarine and was faster than even some allied destroyers submerged.
as i remember the Allies copied German technology after the war and not the other way around.
Both the US and the UK gave up pretty quickly on the Walther Hydrogen Peroxide powered sub because of the continued explosions of the fuel. That was also a problem with the ME-163 Komet, as unused H2O2 had this nasty habit of exploding on landing, which was not very good for the continued good health of the pilot.
As for the myth that the ME-262 could have been in combat earlier, that is just what it is, a myth. The problem was engine unreliability, and the fact that not until the Germans had a look at the landing gear of a P-47 did they come up with the final gear for the ME-262. The test pilots hated the engine of the ME-262 as they never knew when it was going to fail, only that it would.
Not sure where you get the idea that the Germans were ahead in Nuclear Fisson. The ALSOS mission documents definitely do not show that, nor do they show any major interest in the idea. Nerve gas is a different story, and a bit more complex.
As for rockets, that depends. Liquid-fuel large rockets, yes. Although if Goddard had had the funding that Von Braun received, that might have been more than a bit different. Air to ground rockets for ground support, no. Nothing even close to the US 5" HVAR, or the 11.75" Tiny Tim. Air to air rockets, yes, because they had all of those B-17 to shoot at. Oddly enough, the Allies did not have that many German bombers to shoot at after 1941. Ground to air rockets would be a toss up between the UK and Germany. Ground to ground, about even, although the Germans never had anything close to the rocket barrages launched by the Russians, or the US during an amphibious assault.
Germany was way behind in aircraft engine development, mainly because of poor fuel and not having a good turbocharger for non-Diesel engines. As for the jet engine, which was developed by an Englishman named Whittle, if the UK had been able to devote a bit more time to research, rather than fighting a war, I suspect that they would have had a jet fighter a year or so earlier. The Meteor was used to shoot down V-1s. The Germans were a long way from anything comparable to the B-29, and the US had the B-36 under development. They never did have any carrier aircraft, although the British is some respects were in the same boat there. Transport planes were pretty much a US monopoly, with the German ones being hampered by having too many military characteristics build into them.
Both the US and the UK gave up pretty quickly on the Walther Hydrogen Peroxide powered sub because of the continued explosions of the fuel. That was also a problem with the ME-163 Komet, as unused H2O2 had this nasty habit of exploding on landing, which was not very good for the continued good health of the pilot.
well thats typical for new technology. The allies were further behind
As for the myth that the ME-262 could have been in combat earlier, that is just what it is, a myth. The problem was engine unreliability, and the fact that not until the Germans had a look at the landing gear of a P-47 did they come up with the final gear for the ME-262. The test pilots hated the engine of the ME-262 as they never knew when it was going to fail, only that it would.
Hitler didn’t use them as proper interceptors when clearly Germany was not in need of more fighter-bombers. If Hitler had decided to begin with their natural talents it would have been used earlier to greater effect. Also, if Germany was winning the war by 1944 these units would have had fuel and sufficient quantities produced to outclass all allied counterparts. IN groups these were devastating to allied Bombers and more than a match for escorts. Plus other planes coming on line even better
As for rockets, that depends. Liquid-fuel large rockets, yes.
Although if Goddard had had the funding that Von Braun received, that might have been more than a bit different.
Air to ground rockets for ground support, no. Nothing even close to the US 5" HVAR, or the 11.75" Tiny Tim. Air to air rockets, yes, because they had all of those B-17 to shoot at. Oddly enough, the Allies did not have that many German bombers to shoot at after 1941. Ground to air rockets would be a toss up between the UK and Germany. Ground to ground, about even, although the Germans never had anything close to the rocket barrages launched by the Russians, or the US during an amphibious assault.
well thats the same thing as the A-bomb program as well. Hitler didn’t support it and it was done only as low level. If Hitler invested in the Bomb early and made it priority he may have got it in a few years.
Germany was way behind in aircraft engine development, mainly because of poor fuel and not having a good turbocharger for non-Diesel engines. As for the jet engine, which was developed by an Englishman named Whittle, if the UK had been able to devote a bit more time to research, rather than fighting a war, I suspect that they would have had a jet fighter a year or so earlier. The Meteor was used to shoot down V-1s. The Germans were a long way from anything comparable to the B-29, and the US had the B-36 under development. They never did have any carrier aircraft, although the British is some respects were in the same boat there. Transport planes were pretty much a US monopoly, with the German ones being hampered by having too many military characteristics build into them.
The Germans had no need to long range strategic bomber. Its not because they didn’t have one means they didn’t have the means to build one. If the Reich was finishing off Russia, they may have developed some to bomb the ural factories and if they got far enough to bomb America. Only USA needed long range bombers because the way the war turned out.
ON V-1 basically any plane can shoot those down. The V-2 was impossible however, But the Germans also had many other planes in development and only didnt need these capabilities, but had the inventiveness to outclass allied technology even when they were losing the war and lacked resources. If they were winning the war it would have been more pronounced.
@Imperious:
The British Centurion and the US Pershing clearly brought the Allies up to par with the Germans.
yes on par with the Germans after they surrendered. They were not used against Germany coming in very late when the war was decided, while Germany had tiger I in the mid war period.
German tanks were better than all allied counterparts except T34/76 because only German tanks required too many parts and even one tank of the same model had different part than another, so they were always in need of spare parts, while the Soviet t-34 was like comparatively fewer parts and interchangeable. ON the battlefield the Germans always exacted more loses and punishment upon the enemy than they received in return.
Germany had jet power and could have had it earlier had Hitler not re-designated Me-262 as a tactical bomber rather than a pure interceptor.
Germany was ahead in Nuclear fission, but Hitler as usual stopped research when they had the lead and lost it. It was theirs to develop or let others pass them up. But they had the knowledge.
Germany also developed primitive radar latter , but radar was a defensive weapon and Hitler would have no part on it.
Under all aircraft types and rockets no nation was Germany equal, unless perhaps gliders are included.
The walter U-boat was superior to any other allied submarine and was faster than even some allied destroyers submerged.
as i remember the Allies copied German technology after the war and not the other way around.
Actually Imperious Leader, not to challenge your wealth of knowledge but Hitler saw the Me-262 as a bomber and wanted it specified for that primary purpose. The people at Messerchmitt knew it was best suited for a fighter role so they secretly made adjustments in it’s design as to show Hitler in demonstration that it must be used as a fighter. A pretty thing to do behind his back, but they knew it’s power. It could bring down a fortress in a single burst. If the 262 would have been specified for a primary role as a fighter much earlier and mass produced, it would have cost the Allies immensly in the air war.
Unfortunately, they never really did solve all the kinks in the engine. Although plenty of jets flew sorties without difficulty, reoccuring problems with engine stalls and failure plauged it’s reliability. To this day, there aren’t (to MY knowledge) a single flyable 262 with the EXACT engine they were using. It’s too dangerous to pilots. I know of one that is being restored with modern jet engines in place of the original ones.
So it could be argued that if they had that fighter in mass production much ealier they may have had air supperiority. However, it was a technological breakthrough that was just a few years out of reach for the Reich in terms of all the kinks being worked out.
but Hitler saw the Me-262 as a bomber and wanted it specified for that primary purpose.
Thats just what i said, but that it was a mistake to waste its abilities in this role, when they would have been better utilized as a proven interceptor against allied bombers and deployed as such earlier, than retrofit additional ordinance and equipment.
@Imperious:
but Hitler saw the Me-262 as a bomber and wanted it specified for that primary purpose.
Thats just what i said, but that it was a mistake to waste its abilities in this role, when they would have been better utilized as a proven interceptor against allied bombers and deployed as such earlier, than retrofit additional ordinance and equipment.
Oh -ok! I thought that may have been what you meant and I completely agree with you. They were proven to be a deadly interceptor and at the speeds they were capable of, you’d think that would be the first thing on Hilters mind: Defense of the Fatherland. His arrogance made his decisions just flat our stupid. His final orders to destroy Paris and even all railyards in Germany really showed how selfish he was at heart. When his whole campaign was for the restoration and empowerment of Germany yet his final months really showed he cared more about power than he ever cared about Germany and the well being of its people. Maybe he was driven to these actions out of insanity once Germanys loss was but writing on the wall.
It seems like every stupid decision he made from a leadership role, was based on pride and anger. He clearly was not capable of managing his emotions for the better of Germanys. It seems to me like leaders should be able to set aside fervent emotions and make decisions based on logic. Hitler certainly proved himself incapable of that.
If Hitler got shot before June 1941 and Von Manstein took over Germany would have won the war no question IMO.
Ohh! I’ll be spending the weekend studying Von Manstein. Seriously. I hardly know a thing. Thanks for theory.
His Lost Victories. Best book ever.
