German Mistakes in WWII

[mallas]

Hello
I am interested about the serious mistakes that the Germans made in WWII.
E.X Why Bismarck the best ship was alone in the sea? Why they didn't have submarine next to bismarck or other 2 smaller ships or to be more save to have other ship and the submarine?
I think if that it was happen now the history probably will be different......

[Tiornu]

Historically, battleships have a certain job to perform--to defeat enemy battleships so that the seas are open to friendly travel and closed to enemy travel. Typically the battleships are accompanied by cruisers, which accomplish a couple things: they scout for the battleship, and they protect the battleship from enemy torpedo vessels. There are also a number of destroyers; destroyers also protect the battleship, and they are the ships that carry the most torpedoes for attacking enemy battleships. Submarines were never able to operate effectively in company with battleships because of their great difference in speed.
So why did Bismarck have only one ship with her? Because she was not doing what battleships were built to do. She was ordered not to fight any enemy battleships if she could avoid them. Instead she was sent to do one of the other jobs that was traditionally a cruiser's job--she was out to hunt merchant ships.
Regardless of the job, why was she so alone? Because the Germans did not have enough good cruisers and destroyers. It was found that several German cruisers had weak hulls that performed poorly in oceanic waters. The destroyers were overloaded, making them difficult to operate in heavy seas. In general, all these escort ships had insufficient fuel for long cruises, and their machinery was unreliable.
Why was Germany in this predicament? The Versailles Treaty had forbidden Germany to have a strong fleet, and it was only in the mid-1930's that Hitler dictated a rebuilding of the navy. German designers were relatively inexperienced, and the naval leadership was incertain what sort of warfare they needed to prepare for. When 1939 brought war against Britain, this was the worst nightmare for the German navy--they had only an incomplete fleet to fight against the Royal Navy, the most powerful fleet in the world.
So when Bismarck went out into the Atlantic with only Prinz Eugen as her escort, it was because the German navy was trying to find something useful to do with one of its tools, even though it was not the right tool for the job. When you use a wrench to do a hammer's job, bad things can happen.

[Bgile]

Very well said!

[Karl Heidenreich]

Hi.
Tiornu, with this I agree:

the naval leadership was incertain what sort of warfare they needed to prepare for. When 1939 brought war against Britain, this was the worst nightmare for the German navy--they had only an incomplete fleet to fight against the Royal Navy, the most powerful fleet in the world.

But I do not agree with this:

German designers were relatively inexperienced

The Germans did design and built fine warships since WWI. Moreover, when British officers and crewmen got on board the HSF dreadnoughts in 1918 after the Armistice they were impressed about the quality of the ships (not so about the crews). And in WWII the Bismarck Class was far from being a "defective" design. I wonder how well a KGV Class, Richelieu or North Carolina would have performed under the same circumstances and against the same odds.

[Karl Heidenreich]

... or the Iowas that never fought another BB in a desperate battle... well, never fought a BB in their whole combined careers.

[Gary]

Hi all.

German designers were quite competant in the HSF era.
But after WW1 and the treaty of Versailles, they had to sit in the sin bin for a few years and so fell behind other nations in warship design/building.

[Lutscha]

Afair the British considered Baden inferior in almost every way compared to their 15in armed ships.

BS ist not defective but rather mediocre for her weight. (look as well at the Hippers and how heavy they were w/o gaining any advantages over other cruisers) She is the heaviest of the treaty ships without possessing clear advantages. Her TDS was ok but inferior compared to others, speed was good and only inferior to Richelieu, but her propulsion was not very fuel efficient. Belt armour was very good with the sloped deck, turret armour was very weak and her deck armour wasn´t impressive either though it was completely adequate for her design specifics which called for an IZ of 20-30km against her own guns but was insufficient against the American superheavies. (as were all decks even Richlieus with Yamato as the only exception)

Tiornu´s picture is correct the Germans did not make the best possible with the weight of their ships the Panzerschiffe being an exception. Richelieu is better in many ways at a lighter displacement therefore the German ships are often called mediocre.

This does not mean that BS was helpless against Richelieu e.g., but if we put her against a modern American battleship with late war RFC its clearly an unfair fight if you look at the hit percentages and IZs. Imo she had a good chance in good visibility against anything without 16in superheavies or 18.1in guns.

How would the others have fared? Depends on luck. Richelieu wasn´t finished and had gunnery and ammunition problems and may well have reveived wrecked gun barrels putting her at a great disadvantage compared to BS. NC could have done quite well but w/o a hit in the magazines she is in trouble, as would be KGV or BS. It may very well be that all others would have lost without a hit in Hoods magazine.

Iowa was only finished with her Mk 13 radar and would have opened and straddled at ranges, were Schneider wouldn´t have even dreamed to open fire. Looking at Brad´s hitting percentages hits past 30km seem probable. Without radar she either destroys/softkills one of them quickly or she has to excape otherwise it she is in danger, though she has a very good IZ while her opponents have none.

[Tiornu]

There's a fine article at Navweaps called "The Working Environment for German Warship Design in World War I and World War II" that describes the infortunate situation in the German design bureau. The article was written by Peter Lienau, a primary-source researcher and member of the Groner revision committee. In my opinion, the German design bureau was the least competent among the larger navies, with the exeption of the Soviets.

[mallas]

Hello
i dont think so that the worst mistake it was to attack the royal air force
My opiniom was that when they attack the soviet union it was the bigest MISTAKE.Before to attack the USSR it was safe, from the east it was safe also from the north.The only problem it was the U.k.I think with Bismarck accompanied with 2 submarine and 2 smaller ships they will can control and the north atlantic and u will have all the germans army against U.K.
What chance to louse.But ...............

[RF]

I think attacking the Soviet Union was only a mistake insofar that it was done while Britain was still in the war. After all, Barbarossa nearly suceeded.

[Karl Heidenreich]

RF:

I think attacking the Soviet Union was only a mistake insofar that it was done while Britain was still in the war. After all, Barbarossa nearly suceeded.

Operation Barbarosa is often regarded as the Great Mistake that Hitler commited (I´m sure it was more than one) as a mistake "per se". Which many believe is not correct. Operation Barbarosa, having being conducted the way the German High Command planned it from the beggining would have been a success. If the line of Archankel-Astrakan would have been reached Stalin didn´t had any oportunity to continue the war against Hitler. That wasn´t achieved because Hitler changed the axis of advance of Army Group Centre in July 1941 in order to attack Kiev and the Oil Fields and the offensive against Moscow reassumed only late in August.

[RF]

I largely agree with Karl on this. I think Hitler's fatal, irretrievable blunder was to declare war on the USA after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

With respect to Barbarossa, it is possible that the final line of advance would be unnecessary. Soviet records held by the NKVD indicate that Stalin was sufficiently panicked by October/November 1941 with the German advance on Moscow that he was considering doing a deal with Hitler to ensure his own survival. It was believed that Lavrenti Beria, the secret police chief, was intending to have Stalin assassinated to clear the way for him to succeed Stalin and collaborate with the Germans....

[Karl Heidenreich]

RF:

With respect to Barbarossa, it is possible that the final line of advance would be unnecessary. Soviet records held by the NKVD indicate that Stalin was sufficiently panicked by October/November 1941 with the German advance on Moscow that he was considering doing a deal with Hitler to ensure his own survival. It was believed that Lavrenti Beria, the secret police chief, was intending to have Stalin assassinated to clear the way for him to succeed Stalin and collaborate with the Germans....

That´s right, RF. Beria was not better than Himmler facing defeat. I don´t believe, neither, that the Germans needed to reach the line from Archangael but merely surround Moscow sometime in mid-October.
That as far 1941 is concerned. Even if Barbarosa failed as historically did then 1942 offered too a chance for victory to the Germans, only if Stalingrad was ignored and Plan Blue worked the way it was originally thought it might.

[RF]

Karl, I can agree your point about 1942 with the reservation that by the end of that year the US was fully involved in the war in Europe and matters in the Meditteranean were turning sharply against the Axis: to win from that point I think the Germans would need Russia to change sides and intervene in both Europe and in East Asia.

[RF]

surround Moscow sometime in mid-October.

With Stalin trapped inside - Guderian could have pulled it off by September had Hitler not interfered, and gave the Soviets time to move the seat of government to Gorky....