Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Biggest mistake of the Kriegsmarine: not putting any aircraft carriers into service.

Discussion in 'Atlantic Naval Conflict' started by DerGiLLster, May 13, 2016.

  1. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    235
    That means that the number of ocean going U Boats was even lower than the number I mentioned .Something which is fortifying my argument .
     
  2. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,798
    Likes Received:
    655
    Sorry, but you remain confused as to what was going on and what you posted.

    The North Sea IS a part of the Atlantic Ocean. The majority of ships lost in that period WERE in the North Sea/Atlantic Ocean. The U-Boote inflicting the MAJORITY of those losses WERE ocean-going U-Boote. The U-II coastal boats were never very successful albeit virtually all their success was in the first year of the war.

    They are all not mutually exclusive. What you appeared to be arguing was: the North Sea IS NOT a part of the Atlantic Ocean and the U-Boote inflicting the MAJORITY of those losses WERE NOT ocean-going U-Boote.
     
  3. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Yes, you are trying to use a red herring...

    31 U-Boats were coastal U-Boats, and 26 were ocean going types...ie. the "minority" is only just that. And, it is far closer to parity between the types than not.

    Further, if you wish to nitpick...Several of the Type II coastal u-boats were being used as school boats. Thus, the majority of the U-boats doing active patrolling would be the ocean going types.


    Which is again...Say it with me class...The Atlantic Ocean.
     
  4. R Leonard

    R Leonard Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    777
    Likes Received:
    475
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    I hear and, checking the charts, obey . . . "The Atlantic Ocean".
     
  5. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    It would behoove you to go to uboat.net and actually look at the daily positions of the early U-boat patrols...
    While, Hyperwar is an excellent source, they are not always correct...This is one of those occasions.

    The 8 U-Boats that could go to Gibraltar are likely the 8 Type IXs that had already been commissioned.

    Although, several Type VIIs made war patrols off Spain & Portugal.


    This, my fine feathered friend...Is a joke, and a badly told one at that...

    The Type VIIs did not venture much farther than 15o West...Because they were headed south to the happy hunting grounds off the coasts of France, Spain, and Portugal.

    Now, had it been decided to send the Type VIIs west, instead of south, the Type VIIs most certainly could have gone much further than 15o West.


    Of which several of the Type IIs were being used as "school boats" and did not partake in war patrols.


    As always...You draw the wrong conclusion.

    The correct conclusion is: LJAd is incapable of drawing correct conclusions, because he does not do even a modicum of research on his topics.
    http://www.uboat.net/boats/patrols/ Shoots your "conclusion" full of more holes than Swiss Cheese.
     
  6. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Don't worry , I don't believe that he can comprehend actual facts. That's why his posts are so full of fantasy.
     
  7. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    235
    A lot of irrelevant answers who do not answer the question which is : it has been claimed that 40/50 of the 56 German U Boats on the start of the war were ocean going. The fact is that this claim was not correct .
     
  8. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    The US did tend to use armor quality steel throughout its vessels. I suspect this includes the reinforcement of the flight decks but I'm not sure what the coverage was or how thick. Depending on that and exactly how you want to define "armor" it becomes a bit cloudy.
     
  9. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    The Essex class flight deck was 0.2-inches of steel plate & 3-inches of wood planking.

    AFAIK, the steel was neither any Class armor plate nor STS.
     
  10. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm not at all sure that this is accurate. Hitler didn't become chancellor until 1933. In order to start building carriers in 1935 they would have to design them and get the funds and materials to construct them. 2 years seems a bit short to me especially when Germany was as strapped for both resources and cash as it was during that period. Then consider that the Hiryu was based on ~15 years of experience in the construction and operation of carriers. It's also very questionable that they could build ships that could easily converted to carriers while avoiding suspicion. At least a fleet carrier requires a hull and power plant capable of ~30 knots the only civilian vessels capable of that and of sufficient size that I can think of are liners and converting them would be non trivial.
     
  11. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Fact is "Ocean going" and "Coastal" is quite an oversimplification of a submarine's given size, range and/or armament.

    The small Type IIs had less range(3,100 - 5,650 miles depending on model) and carried less torpedoes(5) than their larger brethren. They still could, and did, venture out into the "ocean" proper.

    So, if the "Coastal" submarines could, and did, venture out into the "ocean" proper, should they not then be called "ocean going"...
    Still, the Type IIs would be quite limited as to what they could accomplish once out on patrol, either in "Coastal" or "Ocean" waters, given that they only carried 5 torpedoes.

    Further, in the early part of the war, even the much larger Type IXs did not travel much further west than 15o West, and they did spend time patrolling in the Norwegian Sea. Does this mean that we must now classify the Type IX as a "Coastal" submarine?

    The facts remain that even the "Coastal" boats scored several successes and could not be ignored, and that the larger "Ocean going" boats never really went to far out into the "Ocean" - because at the time, they didn't need to.

    So, yes, in one sense, the claim can be consider correct, and in another sense, it can be considered incorrect, depending on how you are defining the question.

    Belasar's point is that the British were hard-pressed to defend their shipping due to a lack of escorts(chief amongst several reasons - another would be the anemic RAF Coastal Command), which is correct. LJAd, so far, has done nothing to disprove this fact.
     
  12. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,126
    Likes Received:
    565
    LJAd wouldn't be our loveable, cuddly LJAd if he didn't misconstrue, misread, or misinterpret.

    We all do it now and again, some us more successfully than others. No one, however, dives in on a live hand grenade quite like LJAd.
     
  13. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    235
    I never said that this point was wrong .

    There was a lack of escorts, but this lack was relative ,besides there was always a lack of escorts, but the results of this lack of escorts were meaningless, because there was also a lack of U Boats
    in 1939 12 ships were lost in convoy and 5 stragglers ,thus the results of the shortage of escorts were meaningless .

    During WWII,Britain lost 1584 merchant ships sailing in convoys (including 318 stragglers) : a total of 0.33 % which means that almost 470000 ships were sailing in convoys . of which 1 on 296 was lost .

    And it is very dubious that more escorts would have as result less ships lost or less escorts more ships lost . .
     
  14. GunSlinger86

    GunSlinger86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,002
    Likes Received:
    31
    Hitler didn't want conflict with Britain and rather wanted them as an ally. He wasn't aiming at war with them, just preparing in case they didn't agree with his expansion years down the road and wanted war with Germany to stop his policies?
     
  15. DerGiLLster

    DerGiLLster Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2015
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Illinois
    I wonder when everyone speaks of the Germans making 300 U-Boats do they refer all 300 being made in the North Sea? If so, what if they had built 200 of those U-Boats in the ME and then 100 in the North Sea? Would the huge presence of U-Boats at the Beginning have made Germany own the ME?
     
  16. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    1,798
    Likes Received:
    655
    U-Boat final assembly was primarily at Wilhelmshaven, Bremerhaven, and Cuxhaven on the North Sea, and Luebeck, Rostock, Stralsund, Stettin, Danzig, and Koenigsberg on the Baltic. Where are the German shipyards on the "ME"?
     
  17. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    871
    Could use the Italian shipyards?
     
  18. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,912
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    IIRC, the Italians had the second largest submarine fleet in the world, and where did it get them.
     
  19. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,126
    Likes Received:
    565
    You're all insane.
    German subs would be manufactured on the German Moon Base of course, brought across the Aether by the Foo-fighters only on foggy nights during the new moon.

    Meanwhile, Japanese anthropoligists would work to awaken dead Cthulhu from his dreams in the sunken city of R'lyeh.

    "The nightmare corpse-city of R'lyeh…was built in measureless eons behind history by the vast, loathsome shapes that seeped down from the dark stars. There lay great Cthulhu and his hordes, hidden in green slimy vaults."
    - Lovecraft
    (Emphasis mine)

    Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
    "In his house at R'lyeh, dead Cthulhu waits dreaming".


    [​IMG]
    Location of R'lyeh as given by two different authors.
     
    RichTO90 likes this.
  20. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    871
    Fiji?
    Or...NZ North Island?
     

Share This Page