WitW-HKD TEA Fleet

[DuckofTindalos]

"Entire fleet" is a misnomer and it was two MONTHS before the fleet sortied again. They failed entirely to press the issue against the Royal Navy EVER again. In 1918, the fleet crews mutinied rather than engage in a Yamato-style suicide run to restore the tattered honour of the officer corps. The Hochseeflotte lost the surface war at Jutland.

The. End.

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Britain:
6.094 death
14 sunk ships with 115.025 ts

Germany:
2.551 death
11 sunk ships with 61.180 ts

No victory? [;)] Strategically no, but the battle itself ended in favour of the German Navy!

No, it did not, because they limped back to port and didn't come out for another two months (I shouldn't have said "never"). The Grand Fleet was fully ready to engage in a second round of fighting at Jutland when the Germans ran away.

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Britain:
6.094 death
14 sunk ships with 115.025 ts

Germany:
2.551 death
11 sunk ships with 61.180 ts

No victory? [;)] Strategically no, but the battle itself ended in favour of the German Navy!

No, it did not, because they limped back to port and didn't come out for another two months (I shouldn't have said "never"). The Grand Fleet was fully ready to engage in a second round of fighting at Jutland when the Germans ran away.

It was a tactical victory without any doubt.

"The.End." [:D]

[Monter_Trismegistos]

@Monster-Trismegistos

Do you see any "S" in first part of my nick? Imagine verb "montieren" - and create a noun from it - a man who is doing "montieren"

Good to have a polish player here I need some polish names for ships! It is important for that, that poland hasn't seized any German or russian populated territory, so a "Gdansk" isn't possible. Moreover, there aren't any war heroes of the Russo-Polish war, as this war never happened. Last we must consider, that the Polish King is of German Origin again.
For the two BBs, I would recommend "Jan Sobieski" as a King who fought for whole Europe and "August II." as a powerful polish King of German origin.
But which names for Cruisers and the smaller ships like DDs and SSs?

Biggest problem with names for Polish capital ships is that there were no modern capital ships There were some galleons but their names are too old fashioned.

For BBs I agree that kings would be best choice, but in form with word "Krol" (king). Also August II is not well known king, so it would be bad choice. Better one would be Boleslaw Chrobry, who was at 1000AD visited by German Emperor Otton III, who give Polish (at the time) Duke some kind of insignia, to show that he deserve to be a king. Finally Boleslaw was crowned in 1025AD. So: Krol Jan III Sobieski, Krol Boleslaw Chrobry

For predrednaughts - i propose great military leaders from XVII century - when Poland was at peak of its power: Hetman Chodkiewicz, Hetman Koniecpolski

For cruisers - let's say towns. But could you tell me more about borders of your Poland?

For destroyers - "bad weather". Historical: Burza (tempest), Wicher (strong wind), Blyskawica (lightning), Grom (thunder), Huragan (hurricane, planned), Orkan (another strong wind), Piorun (thunderbolt). Proposed by me: Szkwal (squal), Tajfun (typhoon), Cyklon (cyclone), Sztorm (storm)

For torpedo boats or destroyer escorts - inhabitants of regions: Kujawiak, Krakowiak, Kaszub, Pomorzanin, Podhalanin, Goral (highlander), Kurp. Excluding Slazak (from Silesia) and Mazur (from Masuria?).

For submarines - "big animals and hunting birds". Historical: Rys (lynx), Wilk (wolf), Zbik (wildcat), Orzel (eagle), Sep (vulture), Sokol (falcon), Dzik (boar), Bielik (white-eagle), Kondor (condor), Tukan (toucan)

Auxillaries:
Baltyk (Baltic, AO), Meduza (medusa, AO), Gryf (griffin, CM), Wodnik (aquarius), Lech, Piast (member of dynasty of kings)

For minesweepers - small birds: Czajka (lapwing), Czapla (heron/egret), Zuraw (crane), Mewa (seagull), Rybitwa (tern), Jaskolka (swallow), Flaming (flamingo), Albatros, Kania, Krogulec, Orlik

[DuckofTindalos]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: Terminus

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Britain:
6.094 death
14 sunk ships with 115.025 ts

Germany:
2.551 death
11 sunk ships with 61.180 ts

No victory? [;)] Strategically no, but the battle itself ended in favour of the German Navy!

No, it did not, because they limped back to port and didn't come out for another two months (I shouldn't have said "never"). The Grand Fleet was fully ready to engage in a second round of fighting at Jutland when the Germans ran away.

It was a tactical victory without any doubt.

"The.End." [:D]

I think we should probably stop debating this. Neither of us will ever be able to convince the other.

[Monter_Trismegistos]

ORIGINAL: Terminus
"Entire fleet" is a misnomer and it was two MONTHS before the fleet sortied again.

Ok I was wrong - it was months. But only Seydlitz and Derfflinger were stil under repairs. Also useless predreadnoughts were left out. The rest was combat ready.

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

@Monster-Trismegistos

Do you see any "S" in first part of my nick? Imagine verb "montieren" - and create a noun from it - a man who is doing "montieren"

mea culpa [;)]

Biggest problem with names for Polish capital ships is that there were no modern capital ships There were some galleons but their names are too old fashioned.

For BBs I agree that kings would be best choice, but in form with word "Krol" (king). Also August II is not well known king, so it would be bad choice. Better one would be Boleslaw Chrobry, who was at 1000AD visited by German Emperor Otton III, who give Polish (at the time) Duke some kind of insignia, to show that he deserve to be a king. Finally Boleslaw was crowned in 1025AD. So: Krol Jan III Sobieski, Krol Boleslaw Chrobry

Great choice! (I once had to write a test at university over Otto III. / renovatio imperii.) August der Starke is well known in Germany and would have shown how close Poland is with Germany in this days - but Boleslaw Chrobry is even better!

For predrednaughts - i propose great military leaders from XVII century - when Poland was at peak of its power: Hetman Chodkiewicz, Hetman Koniecpolski

It is important, that they didn't fight against Germany / the Teutonic Knights which both didn't (as far as my quick looking into books told me). Do you have two more for the training/target ships?

For cruisers - let's say towns. But could you tell me more about borders of your Poland?

All Territory with a Polish majority. So in the West a little bit less than 1918/1919 and in fewer territory in the east as well, as they don't get ukrainian, belorussian and lituanian Territory (while one could think about a renewal of Poland-Lituania within the borders of its population). Because of the embedding in the TEA and the Middle-Eastern Europeon Customs Union, it is no problem that the Korridor may block the route to the sea - they have free passage if needed.
In fact, the exact borders aren't that important, I thought about a Poland with borders that include every area with obvious Polish majority. As Poland is founded just to keep the Borders secure and to ensure a calm east - and not because of a lost war like in 1918, areas with parity stay with Germany. Now assume both countrys chummily with a saxonian king on the Polish throne and the state founded because of Germanys free will, there won't be that serious problems as IRL.

For destroyers - "bad weather". Historical: Burza (tempest), Wicher (strong wind), Blyskawica (lightning), Grom (thunder), Huragan (hurricane, planned), Orkan (another strong wind), Piorun (thunderbolt). Proposed by me: Szkwal (squal), Tajfun (typhoon), Cyklon (cyclone), Sztorm (storm)

good!

For torpedo boats or destroyer escorts - inhabitants of regions: Kujawiak, Krakowiak, Kaszub, Pomorzanin, Podhalanin, Goral (highlander). Excluding Slazak (from Silesia) and Mazur (from Masuria?).

Just look at the history. There haven't been any expulsion like in 1945/46 - so we can just take the historical settlement areas. As both peoples are chummy, I don't think its a problem to specify a boat after a polish minority in German territory. (Would be nice if the history of our countrys really were that friendly and apolitical...)

For submarines - "big animals and hunting birds". Historical: Rys (lynx), Wilk (wolf), Zbik (wildcat), Orzel (eagle), Sep (vulture), Sokol (falcon), Dzik (boar), Bielik (white-eagle), Kondor (condor), Tukan (toucan)

Auxillaries:
Baltyk (Baltic, AO), Meduza (medusa, AO), Gryf (griffin, CM), Wodnik (aquarius), Lech, Piast (member of dynasty of kings)

Piast isn't possible, as Poland is reigned by saxonian kings. This would deligitimate them - or at least could be understood like a deligitimation.

For minesweepers - small birds: Czajka (lapwing), Czapla (heron/egret), Zuraw (crane), Mewa (seagull), Rybitwa (tern), Jaskolka (swallow), Flaming (flamingo)

Thank you! [:)]

[Monter_Trismegistos]

Piast? They reign has stopped in what? XIIIth century? Boleslaw Chrobry was Piast. They fought Germans only once or twice - in Xth century, during reign of Duke Mieszko I.

Cruisers would be: Warszawa (Warschau), Poznan (Posen), Lodz, Krakow, Przemysl, Lublin, Bydgoszcz, Modlin, Gdynia (Gdingen), Torun (Thorn), Katowice (Kattowitz), Brzesc (Brest Litovsk).

More predreadnoughts: Hetman Zolkiewski, Hetman Zamoyski.

[Historiker]

You are right about the Piastowie, but Katowice had a majority of 87% Germans, so it wouldn't be a part of the new Poland, I guess. But what about Radom Rzeszow, Bialystok?

[mlees]

Allow me to reinject some thoughts here:

The German experience in WW1 will shape their strategy for the next war.

1) The main German surface fleet was effectively bottled up by the Grand Fleet at Scapa, and mines/subs/torpedo boats in the Channel. Anytime they moved out in large groups, the British would sortie their own fleet. They effected interceptions at Dogger Bank, and Jutland. With more effective air/sea search, there is no reason to believe that the Brits would not be able to intercept the main German fleet, as it attempts to break out into the Atlantic.

Only commerce raiders in one's or two's (or disguised freighters) managed to do so.

Question: In your mod, what does your German high command expect to do with all those battleships and battlecruisers? 

I think you said that the overall strategy was one of commerce warfare, which I assume means to avoid a fleet v fleet slugfest. If so, your ships should be optimised for sinking lightly armed shipping. This is best accomplished with a high rate of fire with the guns of the raiders, so heavy calibre guns (with a rate of fire about 1 per minute) are actually counterproductive. Maybe something 8 inch range, max, to sink freighters, destroyers, and cruisers. (I dont remember the RoF of the 11 inch gun.)

Heavy calibre guns (like on your BB's) are best suited for destroying heavilly armored targets...

2) In WW1, surface raiders acounted for far less sinkings than the sub force. This is in part due to the distant blockade of the North Sea by Britain (reducing the numbers of raiders breaking out), but also because the British were able (due to the greater number of available warships) hunt down raiders when they appeared in shipping lanes. (The most effective surface raiders did not stay in one area too long.)

Subs are more effective because they are harder to spot (especially submerged), and because the main weapon (torpedo) is much more devastating (in shorter ranged) than the gun.

Question: Considering the above, why does your high command feel that the surface raider strategy will work better this time around?

Question: What is the best use of the available resources (steel) to accomplish your goal/strategy? Is a 35000 ton battleship worth three 12000 ton cruisers? Three cruisers (or battlecruisers), with a high rate of fire, are actually more effective at putting more hurt on a lightly armored enemy (this was the reason why the US Brooklyn class is so effective versus DD's/CL's and whatnot), plus they cover a broader swath of the ocean (for locating convoys), and more ships are available for operations at any given time (figure 1/3 of the force is in port for maintenance, upgrades, R&R, and/or repairs).

I propose that your carriers might be seens as CAP providers, to enable your ships to make the run past Britains Coastal and Bomber Command forces... also consider that in 1935, aircraft then in service (NOT on the drawingboards) had limited range and payloads.

[mlees]

ORIGINAL: Historiker
The Mackensen class BCs are continued as CVs in 1922 and enter service in 1925. With a displacement of around 23-25.000 t - how will their data be?
30kn v/max
12.000 nm at 16kn
6 10,5cm AAA on each side
5 3,7cm doubles on each side
4 2cm Vierling on each side
65 planes
Deck 65mm
belt 180mm
tower 65mm
Is this a possible data for 23-25.000 t?
Less or more armour? More planes? What do you think?

Here's the stats for the US Yortown class, then building in the mid 30's:

Item--------weights(tons)

Hull---------14500 (length 809ft, beam 109ft, draft 25ft)
protection--922 (see below)
engines-----2770 (33.6 knts on trials)
armament--194 (8*5"/38, 16*1.1", 24 50cal MGs)
airwing------240 (90 aircraft, using "deck park" doctrine)
fuel oil-------4200 (12000 miles @ 15knots)
avgas--------544 (178000 gals)
ammo-------670

Total---------23500 (I left off some mundane stuff) normal, 29900 full wartime

Protection specifics: Protective deck (hangar deck floor) 60lb steel (I think thats 2 1/2 inch mild steel). Belt: 4 inch tapering to 2 inch. Bulkheads (anti torp?): 4 inch. Conning tower (Under fore part of flight deck?): 4inch sides, 2inch top, Steering gear: 4 inch sides, 60lb deck.

Other note: 3 elevators, 17000 lb capacity. 3 catapults. Hangar deck 546 feet long, 63 feet wide, 17 feet clearance.

[mlees]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Wasp couldn't carry 80 planes by the beginning of the war; remember that the aircraft got bigger all the time. Also, the Wasp was nowhere near as heavily protected as what you're thinking about, and she was comparatively slow as well. Not a good design, that one...

How many could it carry then? I never assumed the Wasp to be heavily protected - indeed, such a design is unthinkable for the German navy. I have in my books, that the Wasp ran 29,5kn which isn't THAT slow to me. Now put Diesels in for cruising and use the free room for more turbines and we should achieve 30 or 31kn, no?
I know that the Wasp wasn't a good design, but I wanted to show how many planes can be put on such a small ship.
As I said, we have 8-10.000 t for better protection, better protection against torpedoes, more partition bulkheads...
This is 2/3 of the total weight of the Wasp and should result in some serious improvements, no?

Umm... Iowa had 10000 tons of armor... might want to reconsider...

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: mlees

Allow me to reinject some thoughts here:

I have my own plans, of course, and think they have their good reasons. But anyway, it also has its reason why I have started this thread [:)] - so you're welcome for every constructive suggestion!

The German experience in WW1 will shape their strategy for the next war.

Definitly, yes!

With more effective air/sea search, there is no reason to believe that the Brits would not be able to intercept the main German fleet, as it attempts to break out into the Atlantic.
Only commerce raiders in one's or two's (or disguised freighters) managed to do so.

Did they ever try to breakout into the Atlantic with major forces? I don't know any single incident. Most BBs didn't have the range for extensive Atlantic operations, especially as the French Atlantic coast didn't have German bases. So this never was a real option in WW1, no?

Question: In your mod, what does your German high command expect to do with all those battleships and battlecruisers?

I think you said that the overall strategy was one of commerce warfare, which I assume means to avoid a fleet v fleet slugfest. If so, your ships should be optimised for sinking lightly armed shipping. This is best accomplished with a high rate of fire with the guns of the raiders, so heavy calibre guns (with a rate of fire about 1 per minute) are actually counterproductive. Maybe something 8 inch range, max, to sink freighters, destroyers, and cruisers. (I dont remember the RoF of the 11 inch gun.)

We have a solid alliance between GB, F and J - and the US are expected to enter the war in a later stage. So even before any expansion of the fleet after 1936, the German navy must face 15 GB, 10 Jap, 7 French BBs as well as 40 CAs + even more CLs.
So how long will it take until the Allies form well protected Convois?
Now think CAs and CL for raiding operations. How long will they survive then? A single BB may outfight 2 or 3 CAs - and the Allies have plenty of CAs and BBs to escort their freighters.
If we have commerce raiders with small fast fireing guns, what shall they do against CAs and BBs?
So even Panzerschiffe with 28cm aren't the best, but as they are fast, well armed and have a long range, they are a good choice - as they can make a stand against some Cruisers...
BTW: The 38cm of the Bismarck fired 3 rounds per minute, the 28cm 2,5.

Subs are more effective because they are harder to spot (especially submerged), and because the main weapon (torpedo) is much more devastating (in shorter ranged) than the gun.

Question: Considering the above, why does your high command feel that the surface raider strategy will work better this time around?

Long range BBs to be able to attack even heavy protected convois, while the Panzerschiffe attack single ships and small weakly protected convois.

Question: What is the best use of the available resources (steel) to accomplish your goal/strategy? Is a 35000 ton battleship worth three 12000 ton cruisers? Three cruisers (or battlecruisers), with a high rate of fire, are actually more effective at putting more hurt on a lightly armored enemy (this was the reason why the US Brooklyn class is so effective versus DD's/CL's and whatnot), plus they cover a broader swath of the ocean (for locating convoys), and more ships are available for operations at any given time (figure 1/3 of the force is in port for maintenance, upgrades, R&R, and/or repairs).

I propose that your carriers might be seens as CAP providers, to enable your ships to make the run past Britains Coastal and Bomber Command forces... also consider that in 1935, aircraft then in service (NOT on the drawingboards) had limited range and payloads.

Well, look at a PzKpf I (6t) and at a PzKpf V (45t). You could choose between 7 Panzer 1 and 1 Panther - what would you choose? [;)]
Cruisers and even Panzerschiffe aren't able to fight against a really protected convoi. Just think about what even just a handful of DDs is able to do against a CA.

We have a considerable number of old BBs that are the classical force in being and are able to attack the British scout lines north of Scotland and in the Denmark strait. They will force the allies to keep a really strong force in the Home fleet. The old pre-Dreads are able to fulfill every "secondary mission" for BBs, so shore bombardement, escort duty, coastal defence.
That leaves a big number of Panzerschiffe for LR-convoi raiding in the South Atlantic, the coast off South America and the Indic Ocean.
The heavier BBs are able to attack even well protected Convois as they are heavily armoured, heavily armed and have both long range and great maximum speed.
The light CVs are used to find the convois and to attack single ships off the main shipping routes.
The heavy CVs protect the "fleet in being" BBs on their attack raids into the breakthrough routes and add their bombers to enlarge the impact of this raids.

Subs are way to ineffective in witp. When the allied player makes convois with 100 ships, you bearly have a chance even to find it. Moreover, you don't have the historical option to let a sub trace the convoi and lead other subs to it. In witp, you can't give the order "attack the detected ships wherever they are next trun" which would be a historical correct option. So subs may be a nice addition, but they aren't able to fight the fight I intend to have... - or I'm just to stupid to use them correctly...

[Historiker]

ORIGINAL: mlees

ORIGINAL: Historiker
The Mackensen class BCs are continued as CVs in 1922 and enter service in 1925. With a displacement of around 23-25.000 t - how will their data be?
30kn v/max
12.000 nm at 16kn
6 10,5cm AAA on each side
5 3,7cm doubles on each side
4 2cm Vierling on each side
65 planes
Deck 65mm
belt 180mm
tower 65mm
Is this a possible data for 23-25.000 t?
Less or more armour? More planes? What do you think?

Here's the stats for the US Yortown class, then building in the mid 30's:

Item--------weights(tons)

Hull---------14500 (length 809ft, beam 109ft, draft 25ft)
protection--922 (see below)
engines-----2770 (33.6 knts on trials)
armament--194 (8*5"/38, 16*1.1", 24 50cal MGs)
airwing------240 (90 aircraft, using "deck park" doctrine)
fuel oil-------4200 (12000 miles @ 15knots)
avgas--------544 (178000 gals)
ammo-------670

Total---------23500 (I left off some mundane stuff) normal, 29900 full wartime

Protection specifics: Protective deck (hangar deck floor) 60lb steel (I think thats 2 1/2 inch mild steel). Belt: 4 inch tapering to 2 inch. Bulkheads (anti torp?): 4 inch. Conning tower (Under fore part of flight deck?): 4inch sides, 2inch top, Steering gear: 4 inch sides, 60lb deck.

Other note: 3 elevators, 17000 lb capacity. 3 catapults. Hangar deck 546 feet long, 63 feet wide, 17 feet clearance.

Protection spe

Can you give me the data in mm, not in inch?
So what data would you propose?
If the Iowa had 10.000t for armour and the Mackensen has 10.000t free - than this should mean a quite well protected Wasp, no? [;)]

[mikemike]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Is there any chance we get every slipway / drydock of over 100m or even 50m?

To list everyslip/dock will be difficult, but I'll tellyou what can be seen from the plans I've got.

A.G. Vulcan Hamburg: 2 ships ???

At least one; the HAPAG liner "Imperator" was built there in 1913, a ship almost 280m long. Yard was sold to Howaldt in 1930; judging from the plan I'd say they shortened the slip afterwards, because the three slips shown on the plan look like they were between 160-200 m.

Kaiserliche Werft Kiel 2 ships
Kaiserliche Werft Wilhelmshafen / Kriegsmarinewerft: I have come to the number of 3, are you sure that it were only 2?

Yes, the KW Wilhelmshaven, just as the one in Kiel, had mainly drydocks for construction and repair. Wilhelmshaven had just two slips. Kiel had initially two, one of which had to be temporarily lengthened both for Gneisenau and Graf Zeppelin; a new slip was constructed for the H-Class, but used only for submarine construction. Both yards had about eight docks each suitable for cruisers and pre-dreadnoughts (120-170m), and Wilhelmshaven had about a dozen small docks for torpedo boats.

The first two H-class ships were laid down on slips at AG Weser and Blohm & Voss. For the others, a new slip was built at Deutsche Werke Kiel, and building docks at Wilhelmshaven, AG Weser, and Blohm & Voss.

Germaniawerft: a total of eight slips
Blohm & Voss: 8
Bremer Vulkan: 6
Howaldt, Kiel: 4
Howaldt (ex Vulcan), Hamburg: 3
Deutsche Werft, Hamburg: 6
AG Weser: 11
Schichau, Elbing: 5
Schichau, Danzig: at least 5

Don't forget LMG Lübeck with four slips up to 120 m. Additional smaller yards:
Schichau Königsberg
Kaiserliche Werft, Danzig (cruisers and submarines)
Seebeck, Bremerhaven
Lindenau, Memel
Flender, Lübeck
Hitzler, Lauenburg
Flensburger Schiffbau
Atlas Werke, Bremen
Rickmers, Wesermünde
Unterweser Schiffbau, Lehe
Elsflether Werft
(these yards either built submarines or minesweepers in WWII)

[Monter_Trismegistos]

I believe that Katowice, despite being German, was surrounded by swarms of Poles - so it gave Poles a majority in region. Thats why i didn't included cities with Polish majorities: Lwow (Lvov) and Wilno (Vilnius) - because these were surrounded by swarms of Ukrainians and Lithuanians.

I you think otherwise, scratch Katowice and add Lwow and Wilno.

[Historiker]

@mikemike

Do you have the length of this slips/docks?

@mon(s)ter_trismegistos [;)]
"Am 20. März 1921 wurde die Volksabstimmung unter der Aufsicht einer interalliierten Kommission und Präsenz der Truppen der Siegermächte durchgeführt und ergab eine Mehrheit von 59,42 % für Deutschland. Im Stimmkreis Kattowitz stimmten 51,9 % der Wähler für Deutschland. Während im dazugehörigen Landkreis Kattowitz eine Mehrheit von 55,6 % der abgegebenen Stimmen für Polen abgegeben wurde, sprachen sich die Wahlberechtigten der Stadt zu 85,4 % für einen Verbleib bei Deutschland aus."
Such a contested area would not be given to Poland if Poland is founded through free will of  Germany.

I really don't want to touch any patriotic feelings, but I guess we have enough Polish citys that must be part of a new Poland without any doubt, no? [:)]

[Historiker]

My proposal for the CA(AA), a Admiral Hipper with more AAA:
I took the Hipper and simply added AAA. When I look at the ship, IMO there might be the possibility for more AAA on the ship.

33kn
6800 nm @ 19kn
3700 t fuel
30mm deck armour
80mm belt
150mm tower
8x2x20,3cm
10x2x10,5cm (5 on each side)
10x2x3,7cm
56x4x2cm - 7 Flakvierling 38 per side might be to much?
Maybe if the ship gets 5-10m longer?


Panzerschiff P-Klasse:
35kn
19000nm @ 16kn
9842 t
75mm deck
145mm belt
140mm tower
6x3x28cm - possibility to upgrade to 4x2x38cm (was indeed calculated to be possible)
6x3x15cm
8x2x10,5cm
12x2x3,7cm
16x2x2cm
8x4x53,3cm torpedoes
This are the data that were projected. The medium artillery and AAA seem to weak, but this might be the result of my "a ship can never have enough AAA" knowledge. There's more than enough room for additional AAA, so it can be added in later updates.


The "Spähkreuzer" heavy DD / light CL which I want for LR escorts:
36kn
15.000nm @ 16kn
1550 t
25mm deck
40mm belt
20mm tower
12x3x12,8cm DP
12x2x3,7cm
16x4x2cm
6 DC throwers
length not bigger than 150m

[Historiker]

@mikemike

In addition to the known shipyards, I've found some more

The known:
A.G. Vulcan Hamburg
A.G. Vulcan Stettin
A.G. Weser Bremen (5 long slipways)
Blohm & Voß, Hamburg
Deutsche Werft, Hamburg
Friedrich Krupp Germaniawerft Kiel
Friedrich Schichau Danzig
Friedrich Schichau Elbig
H.C. Stülcken & Sohn in Hamburg-Steinwerder
Howaldtswerke Kiel
Kaiserliche Werft, Danzig
Kaiserliche Werft Kiel
Kaiserliche Werft Wilhelmshafen / Kriegsmarinewerft
LLoyd Werft Bremerhaven (2x121m, 1x160m,, 1x335m, 2 more long with unkown lenght, new)
LMG Lübeck (4x120m)
Meyerwerft Papenburg (new)
Neptun Rostock
Nordseewerke GmbH Emden
Tecklenborg-Werft Bremen (7 slipways up to 225m new)

Smaller shipyards:
Abeking & Rasmussen Lernwerder (new)
Atlas Werke, Bremen
Cassens-Werft Emden
Elsflether Werft
Fassmer Bremen
Flender, Lübeck
Flensburger Schiffbau
Hamburger Schiffsbau-Versuchsanstalt Hamburg (new)
Hansawerft Bremen (new)
Hegemann-Werft Bremen (new, may not exist at that time)
Hitzler, Lauenburg
Kröger Werft Warnemünde+Stralsund (new)
Langewerft Bremen (new)
Lindenau, Kiel (new)
Lindenau, Memel
Lürssens Bremen (new)
Meidericher Schiffswerft Duisburg (110m Slipway, new)
Norbiskrug Rendsburg (today 2 drydocks, 2 slipways, new)
Rickmers, Wesermünde (up to 8000 BRT, at least two slipways)
Schichau Königsberg
Seebeck, Bremerhaven (at least two slipways, ships up to at least 7800 BRT, DDs, SSs http://werften.fischtown.de/archiv/ssw5.html)
Unterweser Schiffbau, Lehe
Weichselwerft Schröttersberg (new, I don't know where Schröttersberg is, but it was part of Poland in 1939)


You've written "Bremer Vulcan" - do you mean A.G. Weser with that?

Papenburg itself had around 20 shipyards until 1920 but most of them got bankrupt after the lost war, so one should be (in theorie) able to calculate with them, too.

Now just look how many Shipyards in Bremen I've found...
http://werften.fischtown.de/archiv.html

[mlees]

Did they ever try to breakout into the Atlantic with major forces? I don't know any single incident. Most BBs didn't have the range for extensive Atlantic operations, especially as the French Atlantic coast didn't have German bases. So this never was a real option in WW1, no?

 
The German fleet in the next war will still find themselves in the position of having to find a way past the British Isles, past the Coastal Command bombers, past the mines, past the British fleet. Even when operating out of the Bay of Biscay ports.
 
My point was that large formations of ships can't "sneak" out.
 

So how long will it take until the Allies form well protected Convois?

 
A couple months, maybe up to six. There might initially some resistance from the owner/operators of the civilian ships to the idea, as they will claim that they cannot afford (financially speaking) to spend time hanging around the ports waiting for convoys to get organised, or that convoys aren't forming up where the customers need the goods.
 
Those were the arguments used in WW1. heh.
 

Now think CAs and CL for raiding operations. How long will they survive then? A single BB may outfight 2 or 3 CAs - and the Allies have plenty of CAs and BBs to escort their freighters

 
Initially (historically) in WW2, the British did not escort convoys with battleships. They only did that when the Germans had conducted raids with Scharnhorst/Gneisenau. If the Germans have a large battlefleet "in being", the British will be reluctant to detach these heavy units from the new Grand Fleet, unless it is clear that the Germans are slipping BB/BC's out into the Atlantic.
But even if they have an "R" class BB escorting a convoy, it can only chase a single raider at a time. If you have (as the raider) a single BC, your dastardly plans may be foiled. If you had 2 or 3 cruisers, one cruiser could slip around the flanks of the battle area and get at the fleeing convoy.
 

If we have commerce raiders with small fast fireing guns, what shall they do against CAs and BBs?

 
Nothing. The goal is to sink the commerce, remember? You have already stated from the outset that fleet v. fleet slugging was not the goal of the German high command...
Your cruisers should attempt to outmaneuver the enemy, or go find less well defended targets.
I will concede that the WiTP combat generator is not well suited to simulating a battle where a cruiser force is attempting to avoid the powerfull escorts and get at the freighters...
 

BTW: The 38cm of the Bismarck fired 3 rounds per minute, the 28cm 2,5.

 
I believe that is with a prepped load. (The gun crews have the spare powder and shells brought up to, and sitting in, the turret house, the guns are loaded and primed, and more shells waiting in the hoists.) With the stop-watch starting at the first salvo, any ship looks good for the first few minutes, especially if the guns are being fired without being readjusted based on new fire control data.
After the first initial few minutes, this rate of fire slows down, and the guns will have to be retargeted based on spotting and radar data (or shifting to a new target).
 

Well, look at a PzKpf I (6t) and at a PzKpf V (45t). You could choose between 7 Panzer 1 and 1 Panther - what would you choose?

 
Poor example, as the PzKpf had machinegun main armament.
 
One of the more (in)famous debates is: You can choose between 4 Sherman tanks, and a 1 Panther. What do you bring?
 
The famous reply turns out to be "Quantity has a quality all of it's own".
 

Cruisers and even Panzerschiffe aren't able to fight against a really protected convoi. Just think about what even just a handful of DDs is able to do against a CA.

 
Answer: not much, unless surprise was acheived. A CA is armored against 5inch shell fire. (Granted, the "Pocket Battleships" didnt have much armor to speak of...) The only danger is the torps.
 

We have a considerable number of old BBs that are the classical force in being and are able to attack the British scout lines north of Scotland and in the Denmark strait. They will force the allies to keep a really strong force in the Home fleet. The old pre-Dreads are able to fulfill every "secondary mission" for BBs, so shore bombardement, escort duty, coastal defence.
That leaves a big number of Panzerschiffe for LR-convoi raiding in the South Atlantic, the coast off South America and the Indic Ocean.

 
I think that your going to find, especially with the WiTP model, that LBA is going to kill your fleet...
 

The heavier BBs are able to attack even well protected Convois as they are heavily armoured, heavily armed and have both long range and great maximum speed.

 
But they won't be as efficient as cruisers, IMO.
 

Subs are way to ineffective in witp.

 
Your preaching to the choir.
 

Can you give me the data in mm, not in inch?

 
1 inch = 25.4 mm. (For ease of mental gymnastics, round down to 25mm.) So, hanger deck is 60mm (mild), belt is 50 to 100mm, torp bulkheads 100mm, etc.
 

  If the Iowa had 10.000t for armour and the Mackensen has 10.000t free - than this should mean a quite well protected Wasp, no?

 
Are you serious?