I gotta come in on TM Moses’ side on this one: Germany’s big-ship strategy in WWII was bad bad bad & I’ll tell you why. WARNING: This post will be very long…
Inspired by the stories of WWI ships like SMS Konigsberg and SMS Emden, Admiral Raeder was convinced that (failing Plan “Z”, the German buildup to take on the Royal Navy directly in line-of-battle, which wasn’t ready in time for the war) surface raiders operating singly & in small groups, supported by supply ships hidden in the vastnesses of the world’s oceans, could inflict tremendous damage to British shipping & tie down large numbers of British ships as a “force-in’being”. U-boats were the OBVIOUS choice for this task, but Raeder was stuck on his surface raiders. The ‘Scharnhorst’, ‘Gneisenau’ & all the “Deutschland”-class ships were purpose-built for surface-raiding, the Deutschland class (including ‘Graf Spee’) in particular w/ BC (battlecruiser) guns on a CA (heavy cruiser) hull. But he didn’t take into account that:
A.) All the WWI efforts w/ the possible exception of Emden (which was eventually sunk) were essentially failures…
B.) Detection technology such as aircraft recon & radar/radio spotting had VASTLY improved since that war…
C.) That SUBMARINES were immeasureably superior to big ships in the commerce-raiding role the same as always…
German gunnery & optics were–just as in WWI–superior to the British, but with a poorly-balanced (no CVs, not enough Detroyers, bad torpedoes) & poorly-supported fleet (Goering hated the Kriegsmarine & only rarely & then grudgingly allocated planes to them), such a bad strategy was doomed to failure. As an example–everyone keeps talking about ‘Bismarck’s failure to refuel before leaving Norway, Admiral Lutjen’s poor (that is to say, almost suicidal) decisions during the battle, etc. No one has mentioned what is, to me, the most crucial fact: through Norwegian patriots working w/ the British, and through aerial recon, the UK knew exactly when the ‘Bismarck’ had left harbor & roughly where they were headed. Not to mention that all German surface commanders (except torpedo-boats’) were given impossible instructions to engage at all costs, but also avoid damage at all costs! The mission was doomed to failure from the very start, ultimately because the strategy itself–that is, the surface-raider strategy–was flawed. U-BOATS COULD’VE & SHOULD’VE BEEN BUILT INSTEAD.
Thankfully for all of us, they weren’t!
Getting back to the main topic–‘Bismarck’ was a cool ship. I also am partial to the ‘Scharnhorst’-class because of their speed, relatively good armor for BCs & the fact that the ‘Scharnhorst’ & ‘Gneisenau’ were as far as I know the only ships IN HISTORY to defeat & sink a CV (I believe the HMS Glorious) w/ surface gunfire.
The ‘Graf Zeppelin’–Germany’s CV–would’ve been a cool ship had it ever been completed. Imagine “Sea-Stukas”! You get my drift…
As for British I think the HMS ‘Warspite’ is coolest. An oldie but a goodie–took hits at Jutland, killed MANY German DDs at Narvik, faught Italy at Cape Matapan, bombarded Normany on D-Day & faught kamikazes in the Pacific. Then it was broken up for scrap. Go figure…
For Japan, the CA ‘Kumano’. Just look it up…
For USA: the CA USS ‘San Francisco’. Charged a Japanese BC’s 14" guns at Guadalcanal & won (with help)! Oh, & also my Granddad’s friend (that is my Mom’s uncle) was serving on it at the time–might affect my judgement :D !
Funny–no one ever names U-boats as their faves. Raeder’s syndrome, I guess… :wink:
That is all. Return to your posts.
Ozone27