Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7531
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by RF » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:47 pm

delcyros wrote:Considering that the Weimarian Republic went into some deep modernization programs with the aviable and allowed by Versalles Pre-Dreadnought force in 1922 to 1927 period, it´s not fully inconvincing that some of the HSF ships may have been modernized.

Germany would not buildt any Panzerschiffe.
The costs to upkeep this force would put a severe burden on the economical developement of the country
The political environment absent of Versailles would make it more difficult for the Nazis to rise in power
Modernization of the vessel would be very difficult as their protective schemes are dependent on the protective effect of coal.
This is an interesting post. However looking at it and at the economic/political environment the post identifies I would have thought that the Panzershiffe would be the direction that the Reichsmarine would have chosen to follow, certainly under Raeder. It offers the most economic modernisation programme for the replacement of the old dreadnoughts.
Indeed the building of panzerschiffe instead of ''proper'' battleships would have made the British even more willing to sign the 1934 Naval Agreement with Germany. In that scenario, a second generation panzerschiffe and the development of naval aviation/aircraft carriers would be the logical progression - particulary in the absence of a Hitler and assuming admirals like Weber and perhaps Marschall had a greater influence on planning the future German Navy.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

ede144
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by ede144 » Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:35 pm

RF wrote:
ede144 wrote:If there is no treaty of Versatile thab GErmany must nor pay reparation and will be able to keep a lot if people in jobs. Germany payed dor Ww1 more than 80 years back
Regards
Ede
After 1924 the Treaty of Versailles was not properly enforced, largely initially through the diplomacy of Stresemann, particulary through the Locarno Pact. After 1931 it was hardly applied. It had no real impact on jobs or GDP in Germany at all post Stresemann.
Really?, Part of the reparations were the bigger part of the German merchant fleet and acc. to a later offer 12% of the German export revenues plus 7000to of Gold. It might not bring down Weimar, however it contributed to the fall of the Republik.

quoted from RF:
After 1924 the Treaty of Versailles was not properly enforced, largely initially through the diplomacy of Stresemann, particulary through the Locarno Pact. After 1931 it was hardly applied. It had no real impact on jobs or GDP in Germany at all post Stresemann.

The damage was already done.

Loss of the Rhineland? The Rhineland was occupied by France/Belguim in 1923 for a brief period but it remained German territory

Yes it remained German teritory however hardly. It lasted for 12 years. The colonial attitude of the French and Belgium troops is well remembered till today. It also influenced economical developement of the area and stopped trade and industrial production. You can compare it to the Israel actions in the West Jordanian country. In addition there was the strike as a form of protest which damaged the German economy further.

So it was not a little inconvinience. It was a fight.

regards

ede

Guchi
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 6:39 pm

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by Guchi » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:20 am

boredatwork wrote:You'll note I said USEFULL.

What ***usefull*** role would the Derfflinger and her half sister 8x12" and 26.5knots perform during the war?
Funny! Wern't those the specs. of Graf Spee? (Oh! wait they were only 11 inchers!)

Regards

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4172
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by alecsandros » Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:18 pm

RF wrote:
Indeed the building of panzerschiffe instead of ''proper'' battleships would have made the British even more willing to sign the 1934 Naval Agreement with Germany. In that scenario, a second generation panzerschiffe and the development of naval aviation/aircraft carriers would be the logical progression - particulary in the absence of a Hitler and assuming admirals like Weber and perhaps Marschall had a greater influence on planning the future German Navy.
My opinion is that the "Von der Tann" was allready superior to the Lutzow's, allthough 15 years "older". With some refitting, it could challenge any British cruiser, while retaining a sufficient speed advantage to outrun a more powerfull enemy. Exactly the idea behind the Panzerschiffs...

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by Paul L » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:25 pm

RF wrote:
Paul L wrote:Germany economic problems were made much worse by the loss of the Rhineland, which by some estimates represented 1/4 of their economy. .
Loss of the Rhineland? The Rhineland was occupied by France/Belguim in 1923 for a brief period but it remained German territory. The diversion of outputs alluded to here had no lasting effects into the 1930's.
The anti Stalist fears were universal through out Europe
True
....., and while they kept the Right wing strong in most countries it would not lead to Nazi part with larger vote, much less so infact. Prior to the Great Depression, the nazi party was viewed as 'lunitic fringe', by main stream German politics.
A lunatic fringe maybe, but still with a sizeable vote that yielded never lower than a dozen MP's. They were not wiped out, the rump formed the nucleous of a much bigger party later on. From 1925 onwards the membership of the NSDAP grew every year until the end of WW2.
They only got a foot hold due to the added severity of the GD on an already weakened German economy that had suffered under a decade of the new democracy....so the people chose another path that promised so much.
This is conjecture. In the late 1920's the NSDAP was steadily growing under its more disciplined and centralised leadership - before the Wall Street Crash..
... In this thread that element would be removed and since Schacht was a pre nazi figure his hand on the economic tiller would ensure German rebounds quickly anyway.The tubulance that lead to the WW-II that we all know and love would not be there.

That is again conjecture. In the context of European history in the 1930's I think it is an unlikely scenario.

I cant respond to these multi broken up passages. Takes things out of context. NSDAP never got more than single digit voter returns and they were only popular in the radical right. They would never have had even a chance of getting in power without the failure of the Weimer regime and the effects of the ToV and the Great Depression. Remove even one of these and the intensity is reduced sufficently to avoid voter panic.

How much repartions did the Germans pay during this period? I thought I read about a billion RM per year?
"Eine mal is kein mal"

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7531
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by RF » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:14 pm

ede144 wrote: Loss of the Rhineland? The Rhineland was occupied by France/Belguim in 1923 for a brief period but it remained German territory

Yes it remained German teritory however hardly. It lasted for 12 years. The colonial attitude of the French and Belgium troops is well remembered till today. It also influenced economical developement of the area and stopped trade and industrial production. You can compare it to the Israel actions in the West Jordanian country. In addition there was the strike as a form of protest which damaged the German economy further.

So it was not a little inconvinience. It was a fight.
The French occupation of the Rhineland in 1923 did not last for 12 years. That would have taken into year three of the Nazi dictatorship.

The Rhineland, including the Ruhr was already highly industrialised. French occupation did not influence ''economic development'' beyond the period of that occupation. Trade, industrial production was disrupted by sabotage and strike action, but only up to the time the French withdrew.

Comparing it to the Isreali occupation and permanent annexation of west Jordan is factually inaccurate and hyperbole. The French didn't even take the opportunity to annex the Saar, let alone seek a permanent presence in the Rhineland.
The economic policies of Streseman late 1920's largely overcame the damage to the German economy caused by the French occupation.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7531
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by RF » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:31 pm

Paul L wrote: NSDAP never got more than single digit voter returns and they were only popular in the radical right. They would never have had even a chance of getting in power without the failure of the Weimer regime and the effects of the ToV and the Great Depression. Remove even one of these and the intensity is reduced sufficently to avoid voter panic.

How much repartions did the Germans pay during this period? I thought I read about a billion RM per year?
Again a lot of this isn't factually correct.

Voter returns for the NSDAP in the mid to late 1920'S were very patchy. For the most part the share of the vote was in single digits, but on a rising scale. In parts of some lander such as Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria and Thuringia they polled substantially greater figures.
The ToV in itself wasn't the cause of the spike in electoral support during 1930-1932. The Great Depression and the resultant unemployment was, and was fuelled further by a rise in support for the KPD and the presence of political armies battling it out on the streets.
Take away the Great Depression and the NSDAP would continue to exist into the 1930's as a small but growing party. Saying they were only popular in the ''radical right'' is wrong. Look at the voting figures in places like Chemnitz from 1928 onwards, where the ''working class vote'' became increasingly polarised between nazi and communist. Also look at the SA - largely working class/lower middle class in its recruitment and membership and some members were ex-communist.

As for reparations payments - the figure quoted would be with devalued money from the great inflation of 1923. The payments in goods were largely suspended until Germany could pay - which never happened, as they were suspended again and again as appeasement eventually kicked in.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7531
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by RF » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:42 pm

alecsandros wrote:
My opinion is that the "Von der Tann" was allready superior to the Lutzow's, allthough 15 years "older". With some refitting, it could challenge any British cruiser, while retaining a sufficient speed advantage to outrun a more powerfull enemy. Exactly the idea behind the Panzerschiffs...
Coming back on to the correct focus of this thread I am inclined to agree with this. Only the name ''Von der Tann'' with its imperial overtones would be an unlikely name, perhaps more lIkely a name would have been Scharnhorst..... and at least it wouldn't have had to have been built from scratch as the actuall battleship/battlecruiser was.

Thinking about it my paragraph above does impinge on an issue which would certainly influence the development of the Navy for the twenties and thirties ....
does the monarchy get restored at some point - and rapid naval reconstruction started again as per pre WW1?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by Paul L » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:43 pm

RF wrote:
Paul L wrote: NSDAP never got more than single digit voter returns and they were only popular in the radical right. They would never have had even a chance of getting in power without the failure of the Weimer regime and the effects of the ToV and the Great Depression. Remove even one of these and the intensity is reduced sufficently to avoid voter panic.

How much reparations did the Germans pay during this period? I thought I read about a billion RM per year?
Again a lot of this isn't factually correct.[/quote="RF"]

Actually it looks mostly factually correct, more or less. The NSDAP was at best increasing its vote about 1% per year through this period . For the NSDAP to go from 6-7% of the vote to 33% would have meant they can't get in power until 1953 at the rate they were going!

The people migrated to the NSDAP because they saw Democracy and Communism as failures and the only alternative was Hitler. That can only happen if Weimar fails, which may not happen if German doesn't lose WW-I and if there is no ToV and Germany retains most of its territory. The Great Depression is clearly the catalyst for crisis.

So we may have a basis for extrapolating Reichmarine economic possiblities in to the early 1930s. If we take 1/4 million tons capital ships and 65,000 tons carriers from the London treaty and liquidate the rest of the force to fund an renewed Reichmarine this opens up significant possiblies. I'm currently going through Groeners english translation itemizing the ships scrapped scuttled or seized post WW-I and the periodic sales values of each class of ship. We'll see were this can take us in rebuilding the KM into the 1930s.
"Eine mal is kein mal"

delcyros
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:26 pm

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by delcyros » Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:25 pm

VON DER TANN (and many other imperial navy vessels...) lack the range to operate like a Panzerschiff.
VON DER TANN had a range of approx. 4400nm @14kts, the Panzerschiff DEUTSCHLAND´s range with Diesel engines was specified with 16,600nm @ 14kts, that is almost four times the range of the 15 years older battlecruiser.
At 20kts the range of DEUTSCHLAND was 10,000nm, while that of VON DER TANN was estimated with 2350nm...


But with WASHINGTON NAVAL TREATY in place, Diesel driven ships are highly unattractive. The weight of fuel and reserve feed water is not to be counted under standart displacement, the weight of the engine and equipment on the other hand counts 100% into it.
Diesel engines are heavier than geared steam turbines but more fuel efficient. If the fuel doesn´t count, You may be tempted to reject the whole concept of Diesel engines, which is what actually happened to SCHARNHORST, GNEISENAU, BISMARCK & TIRPITZ thanks to adoption of the WNT standart displacement calculation rules via AGNA 1935.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4172
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by alecsandros » Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:51 am

delcyros wrote:VON DER TANN (and many other imperial navy vessels...) lack the range to operate like a Panzerschiff.
VON DER TANN had a range of approx. 4400nm @14kts, the Panzerschiff DEUTSCHLAND´s range with Diesel engines was specified with 16,600nm @ 14kts, that is almost four times the range of the 15 years older battlecruiser.
The VON DER TANN operated with coal-fueled boilers in the WW1. I would assume a refit in the 20s-30s would give it oil-power, thus increasing the range. And additional fuel-storage could be added during the refitting...

HIpper class cruisers were also used as commerce raiders, allthough having a range of ~ 6500 miles. Gneisenau had even smaller range, at 6200 miles...

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4172
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by alecsandros » Wed Feb 08, 2012 8:26 am

RF wrote:
Thinking about it my paragraph above does impinge on an issue which would certainly influence the development of the Navy for the twenties and thirties ....
does the monarchy get restored at some point - and rapid naval reconstruction started again as per pre WW1?
That would be very interesting, but hte ultra-nationalists would probably still win...

Following Michael's (boredatwork) line of thought, the most realistic evolution would probably imply some kind of participation of Germany in the WT, leaving them with 150-225.00 tons maximum. This would be formed by
- 2xBayern (70.000 tons)
- 2xDerfflinger (52000 tons)
- 1xVon der Tann (20000 tons)
- 1xSeydlitz (25000 tons)

The 3xpanzerschiffs and 2xScharnhorst class would be un-necessary, as the WW1 refits could elegantly make up for those 5 ships at a fraction of the money cost, and at a much, much lesser consumption of raw materials. Thus, the KGM could start directly building 4 x Bismarck class somewhere in 1934-36, using the resources historically used for Scharnhorst class and Bismarck class. I would expect at least 2xBismarck class to be operational by late 1939. This would be extremely disturbing for the Royal Navy, as the first KGV class BB (only comparable to the Bismarck class) was only commisioned in Sep 1940. This would give the KGM technological superiority for allmost 1 year. At the same time, the British supply routes would be challenged by 6 refitted battleships and battlecruisers, 4 of which had speeds of 26kts+ without refiting.

ede144
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by ede144 » Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:09 pm

RF wrote:
The French occupation of the Rhineland in 1923 did not last for 12 years. That would have taken into year three of the Nazi dictatorship.

The Rhineland, including the Ruhr was already highly industrialised. French occupation did not influence ''economic development'' beyond the period of that occupation. Trade, industrial production was disrupted by sabotage and strike action, but only up to the time the French withdrew.

Comparing it to the Isreali occupation and permanent annexation of west Jordan is factually inaccurate and hyperbole. The French didn't even take the opportunity to annex the Saar, let alone seek a permanent presence in the Rhineland.
The economic policies of Streseman late 1920's largely overcame the damage to the German economy caused by the French occupation.
RF I find it really funny that you want to teach me the history of my own country. If you don't believe my words, you will probably believe wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice_with_Germany. 1923 started the occupation of the Ruhrgebiet, by French troops. France started this action to bring further pressure on Germany to fulfill the ToV reparations.
Comparing it to Israels occupation of West Jordan country is a valid one, because the French put a lot of pressure on the German people with road blocks, controls of companies etc. If I remember correctly the influence of the French occupation is even mentioned in Whittley's book "German capital ships". He mentions that production of ship turrets went down from 3/year to one/year due to the French.
If France tried to annex the Saar they would have gotten in conflict with the other signees of the ToV.

Regards
ede

Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 311
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by Paul L » Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:16 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Germany

German voting records Weimar Republic Look at 1920-28 which is the period of interest Note the poor fluctuating record of the NSDAP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_fed ... tion,_1920
Not evident, not registered at this time?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election,_May_1924
6.5%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_ele ... ember_1924
3%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election,_1928
2.5%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election,_1930
7%

According to German historians Hitler’s NSDAP was treated as lunatic Fringe during this period.
"Eine mal is kein mal"

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7531
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Germany keeps all it's fleet after WW1

Post by RF » Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:00 am

alecsandros wrote: Following Michael's (boredatwork) line of thought, the most realistic evolution would probably imply some kind of participation of Germany in the WT, leaving them with 150-225.00 tons maximum. This would be formed by
- 2xBayern (70.000 tons)
- 2xDerfflinger (52000 tons)
- 1xVon der Tann (20000 tons)
- 1xSeydlitz (25000 tons)

The 3xpanzerschiffs and 2xScharnhorst class would be un-necessary, as the WW1 refits could elegantly make up for those 5 ships at a fraction of the money cost, and at a much, much lesser consumption of raw materials. Thus, the KGM could start directly building 4 x Bismarck class somewhere in 1934-36, using the resources historically used for Scharnhorst class and Bismarck class. I would expect at least 2xBismarck class to be operational by late 1939. This would be extremely disturbing for the Royal Navy, as the first KGV class BB (only comparable to the Bismarck class) was only commisioned in Sep 1940. This would give the KGM technological superiority for allmost 1 year. At the same time, the British supply routes would be challenged by 6 refitted battleships and battlecruisers, 4 of which had speeds of 26kts+ without refiting.
I think that like the Japanese the Germans would probably start to cheat and seek more than their WT entitlement.

Given the type of vessels that the panzerschiffe were, its quite possible that the Germans would still develop them, additional to the fleet specified above, though publicly getting round the 8 inch calibre restrictions on heavy cruisers would be a problem.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Post Reply