Carrier based kriegsmarine

[Ramontxo]

Yes they had. The German carriers (or their escorts) find an RN cruiser (heavy or light) that cruiser (or more probably pair of) starts radiating the German position. They (the carriers) detach an couple of hippers to take care of the shadowing British ships and they succeed and the carriers are lost. The ASV equipped Stringbags (probably already in flight and being directed to the enemy fleet by the RN cruisers) goes for them. No need this time for an rudder hit. As stated above the Graf Zeppelin with that 15 cm towers high on the ship was dangerously unestable by itself before any flooding.
And all the time the home fleet is getting near at 29 knots (the Prince of Wales give 29 knots for a full day when searching for the Bismarck)

 

[Garrison]

In summary I would say this would be the one option that would be a bigger waste of resources than Bismarck and Tirpitz and unlike the latter I can't see a carrier successfully forting up in Norway and acting as a magnet for RAF and RN attacks, mainly because I expect it would be sunk much sooner.

 

[Garrison]

Had another thought that this would be good news for PQ-17 or its equivalent, I can't see the order being sent out to scatter the convoy if a carrier sortied.

Convoy PQ 17 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[JasTysoe]

Probably ffrom the source the US military always got and get its funds:

debts​

... as had the germans as well.

So where were the debts coming from? At some stage, saying "just borrow more money" is pretty close to saying "just get ASBs to carry the troops across the Channel". Money isn't always available in endless streams, particularly in a country that (like Nazi Germany IIRC) already has cash problems and a balance of payment problem.

As noted, even in 1930s peacetime a 36 aircraft carrier required 125% as much to build and run as a 35,000 ton battleship according to Chatfield's figures. A country that has no experience in carriers will no doubt have to spend even more, This is not going to be a cheap exercise and hand waving away the expense is not realistic.

It's similar with training for night attacks. Unless you're going to find very large ASBs with very flat backs, you're going to need aircraft carriers to land on so that your pilots can learn how to do night attacks. Having carriers and training takes resources. As far as I know, all three of the navies with significant carrier fleets had at least one carrier just being used for basic training, and the navy that had just one for a while (the RN with Argus) had major problems in getting enough trained aircrew. So any combat-worthy carrier arm is going to need to put significant resources into training aircrew, deck crew, officers, etc. Where are those resources - at least one carrier plus lots of aircraft and aircrew - going to come from?

And if they were created, how effective would they be? The stats are stark - in that theatre three carriers went into action against capital ships at sea and they scored one (severely) damaging hit and sank no ships. Nine battleships went into action (ignoring the two or three old ships that defended convoys) and they sank two battleships, one battlecruiser, one carrier and two destroyers. Battleships on average sank .75 ships* and scored a couple of mission kills, carriers sank 0.00000 ships and got .333 crippled ships.

I'm NOT a battleship fan but the reality is that battleships did much better than carriers in the Atlantic, North Sea and Arctic Ocean in WW2 when it came to sinking heavy ships. Why, then, does it seem to be assumed that the KM would do better by using carriers as their main force? Yes, a carrier or two doing escort for capital ships could have been invaluable but that's not what the OP is about.

Yes, the Germans had radar. We know. That is irrelevant to the point that the Countries were not, as you claimed, going to be unable to track the German ships in poor visibility,

* with destroyer assistance in one case

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

Initially the He 112 and He 118 were the chosen aircrafts for carrier operations, it was only later on that the Bf 109T and Me 155A were chosen.

If the interest in carriers comes sooner, it is likely that the He 112B would end up as the carrier fighter, this would also please, to some extent, the 112's supporters, who felt that the 112 should have entered production and not the Bf 109.

Therefore, the Kriegsmarine will have an all around good aircraft with a wider undercarriage, better maneuverability and shorter takeoff distance (through it might require the DB601 for more power to get it off)

 

[minhow]

So, carriers will be a more expensive and less efficient way than battleships?

 

[sparky42]

Apart from all the other issues mentioned, there's also the logistical issue even if these carriers managed to "breakout" into the Atlantic, how much Av Gas did the the carrier carry, and how quickly would the air group use that up in operations?

 

[Garrison]

Initially the He 112 and He 118 were the chosen aircrafts for carrier operations, it was only later on that the Bf 109T and Me 155A were chosen.

If the interest in carriers comes sooner, it is likely that the He 112B would end up as the carrier fighter, this would also please, to some extent, the 112's supporters, who felt that the 112 should have entered production and not the Bf 109.

Therefore, the Kriegsmarine will have an all around good aircraft with a wider undercarriage, better maneuverability and shorter takeoff distance (through it might require the DB601 for more power to get it off)

It's also more expensive and complex and when you are dealing with Nazi Germany you can never ignore the politicking. I mean in theory it would have made sense to start phasing out the bf 109 in favour of the far superior Fw 190 IOTL and recognize that the 109 airframe was reaching the end of its development potential, and yet that never happened. You also have to factor in Goering's influence over which aircraft would operate from the flightdecks of Kriegsmarine carriers, it would have made the relationship between the FAA and RAF look warm and friendly.

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

It's also more expensive and complex and when you are dealing with Nazi Germany you can never ignore the politicking. I mean in theory it would have made sense to start phasing out the bf 109 in favour of the far superior Fw 190 IOTL and recognize that the 109 airframe was reaching the end of its development potential, and yet that never happened. You also have to factor in Goering's influence over which aircraft would operate from the flightdecks of Kriegsmarine carriers, it would have made the relationship between the FAA and RAF look warm and friendly.

Eh, perhaps for arming the whole Luftwaffe, but in the context of the He 112 as a carrier fighter, that's around 200-300 planes in total, with replacements for planes lost included.

The politics is a reason why I think they will choose the He 112 for carrier operations, in OTL after the 109 won and was scheduled for production, Udet still supported Heinkel and urged him to build the planes for export. It also makes sense for Heinkel to supply the navy given their Rostock factory and access to the sea.

Eh, not really, the FW 190 was more of a complementary aircraft than a replacement for the Bf 109, and given the issues it was facing in 1942, with overheating being so bad that there was an uncertainty if it will continue production, it is hard to see it replace the 109.

It is the same story as with the Spitfire and Mustang, one being a 1930s design upgraded to remain competitive throughout the war, while the other was an early 1940s superior design.

There was also engine production to take into account, the Bf 109G1/2 was theoretically superior to the FW 190A1-A3, but the miscommunication and bad management lead to a somewhat worse aircraft than its previous variant. However, even if the 190 replaced the 109 in 1942, there would not be enough engines to go around, the DB601 and 605 engines would not be enough for the larger and heavier 190 while the DB603 and Jumo 213 would not be ready for production yet. They could not really afford to change over to the 190, and by the time such a thing was possible they had: 1. A better aircraft - G.55 (DB605); 2. A constant need for more planes, which a retooling would make a bad situation worse.

 

[Garrison]

Eh, perhaps for arming the whole Luftwaffe, but in the context of the He 112 as a carrier fighter, that's around 200-300 planes in total, with replacements for planes lost included.

The politics is a reason why I think they will choose the He 112 for carrier operations, in OTL after the 109 won and was scheduled for production, Udet still supported Heinkel and urged him to build the planes for export. It also makes sense for Heinkel to supply the navy given their Rostock factory and access to the sea.

Frankly it doesn't really matter as they are only going to be of interest to some camera crew working on an episode of 'Drain the Oceans' after the carriers they are aboard get sunk in short order.

 

[sparky42]

I mean honestly I’m trying to figure out what would be the larger waste of resources? The OTL fleet whose main achievement was anchoring naval assets to guard them or this suggestion of a carrier based fleet? I mean would even Norway be achievable with this different force mixture or would we instead see “reverse” Glorious as the RN surface units beat up the German carriers?

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Is there any reason to believe that German carriers would be more like the Bearn than the Glorious?
The Germans didn't have any friends with carriers when they most needed input on the designs, and while this doesn't guarantee a bad design or implementation, the possibility is there. Tension between Luftwaffe and navy would improve the chances of a Bearn.

 

[sparky42]

Is there any reason to believe that German carriers would be more like the Bearn than the Glorious?
The Germans didn't have any friends with carriers when they most needed input on the designs, and while this doesn't guarantee a bad design or implementation, the possibility is there. Tension between Luftwaffe and navy would improve the chances of a Bearn.

There’s also just the sheer timeline issues, I mean as noted you would really need at least one training carrier to build up the air group so it has to be built first, so when could the Kriegsmarine get away with modifying some hull to do that, and then actual carriers?

 

[Catspoke]

Instead of GZ, maybe a Shoho type carrier or an escort carrier, something ready for 1941 Bismarck cruise, a 20 plane carrier.

 

[jlckansas]

The KM and Luftwaffe talk with the IJN on what they need for carrier ops means that they would get the FI 167 for their torpedo bomber on the KM's carriers. The 167 was an outstanding torpedo bomber as designed and built, with it being better than the Stringbag in some contexts. You would loose some of the Stukas on board, if not all of them, when the Japanese tell them you are attacking ships not land targets and torpedos are killers for ships and bombs are not guarenteed to sink a ship.

 

[muddyleathers]

Wasn't the problem with the 190 re carrier ops the high landing speed? How soon could the Germans start cooperating with the IJN on carrier ops? Weren't the Germans supplying the Chinese into the 30's? That will not facilitate things.

 

[Garrison]

Instead of GZ, maybe a Shoho type carrier or an escort carrier, something ready for 1941 Bismarck cruise, a 20 plane carrier.

The KM and Luftwaffe talk with the IJN on what they need for carrier ops means that they would get the FI 167 for their torpedo bomber on the KM's carriers. The 167 was an outstanding torpedo bomber as designed and built, with it being better than the Stringbag in some contexts. You would loose some of the Stukas on board, if not all of them, when the Japanese tell them you are attacking ships not land targets and torpedos are killers for ships and bombs are not guarenteed to sink a ship.

But again why? What are these Kriegsmarine carrier supposed to achieve before it gets sent to the bottom, and probably sooner rather than later. The British and Americans had a use for carriers in convoy escort and the open waters of the Pacific, what strategic role are they supposed to fill for the Kriegsmarine? Bearing in mind that the Germans might be able to put two carrier hulls in the water it seems a complete waste of resources to build them.

 

[Post]

But again why?

The rule of cool.
or
Oooh, shiny.

 

[sparky42]

Instead of GZ, maybe a Shoho type carrier or an escort carrier, something ready for 1941 Bismarck cruise, a 20 plane carrier.

Thought the OP was suggesting carriers instead of battleships? But even then, what shifts the thinking for the Germans to do that? I mean in some ways some sort of “baby” carrier would be better than jumping straight to a 30k GZ as a first in German experience but still it takes plenty of PODs and still ends up with issues.

 

[naraic]

Wasn't the problem with the 190 re carrier ops the high landing speed? How soon could the Germans start cooperating with the IJN on carrier ops? Weren't the Germans supplying the Chinese into the 30's? That will not facilitate things.

Germany started pivoting its relationship to being pro Japan in 1935. was giving aid to China until April 1938.

German foreign policy was quiet confused in the mid 30s. There was an official foreign ministry an an ambassador at large (Ribbentrop) that answered to Hitler separately. Both had separate views and policies and engaged separately with different countries.