AHC: Graf Zeppelin commissioned

[Cymraeg]

I would like to point out I'm maintaining my current policy of refraining from commenting on any threads involving German aircraft carriers. That is all.

Carry on that man!

 

[BlairWitch749]

Well, first things first she was a bad design. She had a permanent list because some idiot gave her a set of 6 inch guns (being confused as to the purpose of the ship obviously) and she was very heavy and handled badly (the Germans had a bad habit of designing ships that didn’t so much skip across the waves, as more like headbutt their way through them). Then you have the fact that the Germans wanted to stick navalised Me109s on the damn thing. The Me109 was a very good plane, but it had a very narrow undercarriage and rookies frequently crashed because of this. A narrow undercarriage on a plane for a carrier is a bad idea. Putting Stukas on it wasn’t a bad idea though. Finally there’s the fact that the Germans not only had no experience in designing a carrier they also had no experience in operating one either. Various people have tried to write (or in one case drivel) their way around this. Could the Germans have finished GZ? Very likely. Given enough time they could have finished Peter Strasser too. Could they have used them properly? Possibly. But the window of opportunity is a narrow one - don’t forget that Hitler writes off his surface fleet after the Battle of the Barents Sea in December 1942.

For all her flaws she was an interesting design. 35 knots means she could outrun anything except maybe a tribal on the high seas and her guns had about the same range as a town class cruiser she also had massive amounts I armor to the point where she weighed as much as the scharnhorst. As I have said before one just has to suspend disbelief that her doctrine called for killing merchies and destroyers with gunfire


She was actually more aviation cruiser than carrier

IMO if they finish her they delete the guns prior to sortie based on consult with japan

 

[Cymraeg]

For all her flaws she was an interesting design. 35 knots means she could outrun anything except maybe a tribal on the high seas and her guns had about the same range as a town class cruiser she also had massive amounts I armor to the point where she weighed as much as the scharnhorst. As I have said before one just has to suspend disbelief that her doctrine called for killing merchies and destroyers with gunfire


She was actually more aviation cruiser than carrier

IMO if they finish her they delete the guns prior to sortie based on consult with japan

I’m just imagining the thoughts of a Japanese naval aviation expert as he was shown around the GZ. The words ‘boggling’ and ‘hysterical giggling’ come to mind at his reaction to the guns…

 

[sharlin]

Not that much Cymraeg, don't forget that the Akagi and Kaga still had 8 inch guns in casemate mounts that had been retained after they had been massively rebuilt and modernised.

 

[Cymraeg]

Not that much Cymraeg, don't forget that the Akagi and Kaga still had 8 inch guns in casemate mounts that had been retained after they had been massively rebuilt and modernised.

Good grief. You're quite right.

 

[sharlin]

And when they were built they had dual 8 inch turrets on their lower flight decks

 

[Dilvish]

A heavy gun battery was common for the early carriers. Akagi and Kaga, Lexington and Saratoga, Furious, Glorious, and Courageous, Bearn. Hosho and Hermes both had batteries of 5.5" guns.

Of course, Graf Zeppelin was designed after all of those early carriers.

I have read that in the case of Kaga and Akagi, those heavy guns were not removed during later refits as they also served to balance out weights. Once the guns were there, it was easier to keep them there than to make new modifications.

 

[HMS Warspite]

A heavy gun battery was common for the early carriers. Akagi and Kaga, Lexington and Saratoga, Furious, Glorious, and Courageous, Bearn. Hosho and Hermes both had batteries of 5.5" guns.

Of course, Graf Zeppelin was designed after all of those early carriers.

I have read that in the case of Kaga and Akagi, those heavy guns were not removed during later refits as they also served to balance out weights. Once the guns were there, it was easier to keep them there than to make new modifications.

You are quite right, though Glorious and Courageous were exceptions, being the first true conversions with a main gunarmament fitted as AA guns primarily. (4.7 inch/43 QF Mk. VII HA) (Furious was stuck with her Original 5.5 inch/50 BL Mk.I guns, which were LA weapons.)

 

[zoomar]

Well, first things first she was a bad design. She had a permanent list because some idiot gave her a set of 6 inch guns (being confused as to the purpose of the ship obviously) and she was very heavy and handled badly (the Germans had a bad habit of designing ships that didn’t so much skip across the waves, as more like headbutt their way through them). Then you have the fact that the Germans wanted to stick navalised Me109s on the damn thing. The Me109 was a very good plane, but it had a very narrow undercarriage and rookies frequently crashed because of this. A narrow undercarriage on a plane for a carrier is a bad idea. Putting Stukas on it wasn’t a bad idea though. Finally there’s the fact that the Germans not only had no experience in designing a carrier they also had no experience in operating one either. Various people have tried to write (or in one case drivel) their way around this. Could the Germans have finished GZ? Very likely. Given enough time they could have finished Peter Strasser too. Could they have used them properly? Possibly. But the window of opportunity is a narrow one - don’t forget that Hitler writes off his surface fleet after the Battle of the Barents Sea in December 1942.

I actuually agree with about all of this, but let me play devil's advocate.

Yes, GZ was a bad design, and her over-engineered catapult system would have been a marvel of inconvenience in operations, but we know what her operational sea handling qualities would have been like since she never went to sea under her own power? Do we really know whe would list when properly ballasted for sea?

GZ's heavy armament (that kept the Sheffield at bay in my tongue-in-cheek scenario) really wasn't a bad idea, especially for a carrier designed to be used by small navy that really did not have an organic air arm. Both the Japanese and USA put heavy armamenet on their 1920's BC conversions because of the possiblity they might be operating individually and might face enemy cruisers. A German carrier used in the commerce-raiding role (the only legitimate purpose for any German surface ship for that matter) might be expected to use its guns both for defense and against merchants.

I like to make fun of the Bf 109T also, but to be honest, the Seafire had the same narrow undercarriage and was an adequate carrier-based fighter until US Hellcats were available. Properly handled with an experienced deck and flight crew (a big if for the Germans in 1940-42, I admit), it might have been adequate to the job. Building Zeros under license would have been a better idea, but oh well.

I can't and won't be the Devil to to your key point: the fact that Germany had absolutely no experience in operating aircraft carriers, and what they probably thought they knew was disproven in light of how carriers were actually used in the Pacific. Even if somehow the Germans had magically built a GZ as good as a US Essex or IJN Shokaku, it it would have been incompetently handled.

 

[Tredecimus]

Building Zeros under license would have been a better idea, but oh well.

Just imagine a Zero with a Jumo engine...

 

[BlairWitch749]

Just imagine a Zero with a Jumo engine...

The Germans would never accept a plane with no armor

The Fw-190 could turn into a good corsair analogue

 

[sharlin]

Folks mock the Seafire due to its wonky undercarrage but as was rightly mentioned by Zoomar, the 109T had the same issue, if somewhat more narrow. But the big difference is in pilot experience. The FAA pilots knew their stuff even if their aircraft were for the most part 2nd rate until late war. The Germans would probably get a LOAD of flight deck prangs in what ever limited training they undertook because its all going to have to be on the ship in the Baltic, which can be a nasty sea when it wants but is a mewling kitten compaired to WNA.

 

[BlairWitch749]

Folks mock the Seafire due to its wonky undercarrage but as was rightly mentioned by Zoomar, the 109T had the same issue, if somewhat more narrow. But the big difference is in pilot experience. The FAA pilots knew their stuff even if their aircraft were for the most part 2nd rate until late war. The Germans would probably get a LOAD of flight deck prangs in what ever limited training they undertook because its all going to have to be on the ship in the Baltic, which can be a nasty sea when it wants but is a mewling kitten compaired to WNA.

the training for the air group to be assigned to the GZ was on an extensive track

an outline of gz's deck was painted on an airstrip and the pilots were made to fly in appalling weather to simulate winds at sea... some sources say the 30 selected pilots made 900 test landings, and others say 1800

my guess is that if it really got that far where the ship was on trials they would conduct a shit load of landings whilst she was working up, and if prior to barbarossa would make a deal to send japan a number of pilots for deck qualification

 

[Cymraeg]

the training for the air group to be assigned to the GZ was on an extensive track

an outline of gz's deck was painted on an airstrip and the pilots were made to fly in appalling weather to simulate winds at sea... some sources say the 30 selected pilots made 900 test landings, and others say 1800

my guess is that if it really got that far where the ship was on trials they would conduct a shit load of landings whilst she was working up, and if prior to barbarossa would make a deal to send japan a number of pilots for deck qualification

Interesting. How large was the air group? Come to that did the Germans even have an equivalent to the FAA?
Only problem with the airstrip with the outline is that you can't really get a feel for the pitch and yaw of the real thing.

 

[BlairWitch749]

Interesting. How large was the air group? Come to that did the Germans even have an equivalent to the FAA?
Only problem with the airstrip with the outline is that you can't really get a feel for the pitch and yaw of the real thing.

They were lw regular pilots and afaik still in the lw chain of command. The common number I have heard was 30 fighter pilots selected the training program afaik was only working on the 109s to the point where war broke out although maybe the ju-87s had been flown too I'm not sure

Once gz construction was stopped they used the group and their planes as regular front line units


The training on outline was just a place to start naturally they would have used gz for training as she worked up. And if they actually wanted a larger pool they would have had to make a deal with japan of some sorts to qualify on some of their ships

The outline thing was done in the usn for trainees as well

 

[Pangur]

A heavy gun battery was common for the early carriers. Akagi and Kaga, Lexington and Saratoga, Furious, Glorious, and Courageous, Bearn. Hosho and Hermes both had batteries of 5.5" guns.

Of course, Graf Zeppelin was designed after all of those early carriers.

I have read that in the case of Kaga and Akagi, those heavy guns were not removed during later refits as they also served to balance out weights. Once the guns were there, it was easier to keep them there than to make new modifications.

Don't forget that the Essex class had 12 5" guns

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Don't forget that the Essex class had 12 5" guns

Different animals, the 5" 38's on the Essexes while dual purpose were primarily intended as anti aircraft guns, whereas the carriers mentioned had their heavy guns as pure anti ship weapons

Now the successors to the Essexes, the Midways were intended to have 8" guns at one point early in the design phase, but they were deleted

 

[Pangur]

Different animals, the 5" 38's on the Essexes while dual purpose were primarily intended as anti aircraft guns, whereas the carriers mentioned had their heavy guns as pure anti ship weapons

Fair point

Now the successors to the Essexes, the Midways were intended to have 8" guns at one point early in the design phase, but they were deleted

What on earth make them think about doing that? If they had opted for duel purpose guns on the previous design then surely the designers had got the point that big guns don't belong on carriers

 

[sharlin]

What on earth make them think about doing that? If they had opted for duel purpose guns on the previous design then surely the designers had got the point that big guns don't belong on carriers

I'm going to guess they were designed as a long range AA weapon, possibly a single gun mounted automatic cannon like those the Des Moines class were fitted with, just higher angle.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Fair point

What on earth make them think about doing that? If they had opted for duel purpose guns on the previous design then surely the designers had got the point that big guns don't belong on carriers

The 5"/38 Dual Purpose Guns on the Essexes (also mounted on the preceding Wasp and Yorktown classes) were successors to the single purpose 5"/25 AA Gun on the Ranger and Lexington classes, the 5" battery on every US carrier after Langley was intended as an AA battery, presumably the designers thought that since they had 45,000 tons to play with instead of 27,000 they could afford a dedicated anti surface battery as well and still fit 130 aircraft, though that was removed from the plans a year before they were ordered and two years before they were laid down, and the 5" AA battery was changed from 36 guns to 18 guns