Jump to content

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
730 posts

It is December 1943 and you are Supreme Commander of the Kriegsmarine.  You've just received alarming news of a 2.2 million ton Allied Super-Carrier operating out in the Atlantic bearing the name HMS Habakkuk.  Spies report that the ship has steam turbo generators supplying 33,000 hp (25,000 kW) for 26 electric motors. Its armament includes 40 dual-barrelled 4.5" DP (dual-purpose) turrets and numerous light anti-aircraft guns, and it houses an airstrip and up to 150 twin-engined bombers or fighters.  The hull is 40ft thick of the Pykrete wood pulp and ice mixture and appears to be torpedo proof. The Super-Carrier is disrupting the convoy hunts and sinking U-Boats at an alarming rate.  You've been ordered from the highest authority to sink HMS Habakkuk at all cost.  What do you do?

The Kristmarine still has the Battleships Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Tirpitz, the Pocket Battleships Admiral Scheer and Lützow, three Admiral Hipper heavy cruisers and a number of destroyers and U-Boats capable of sailing into the Atlantic.  Can HMS Habakkuk be sunk?  What would you do?

iceberg-aircraft-carrier.jpg

 

project-habbakuk-5-1200x728.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,203
[SYN]
Members
27,071 posts
15,629 battles

does this super CV operate alone, in a fleet or with some escorts if so what class of ships are operating with the Habakkuk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
3 minutes ago, Rolkatsuki said:

does this super CV operate alone, in a fleet or with some escorts if so what class of ships are operating with the Habakkuk?

Can the ship even be sunk if it's operating alone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,434
[KWF]
Members
4,032 posts
6,179 battles

You let global warming take it's course :Smile_hiding:.

On a more serious note, I don't think this can be sunk by surface ships. The best bet would probably be to use Fw200 to harass the ship while gathering every single Fritz X in the stockpile. Then use them to incapacitate the flight deck and disable it. After that beats me. Use incediary bombs to maybe try melting some of the ice?

No idea :fish_boom:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[CUTE]
Supertester
343 posts
10,029 battles
12 minutes ago, Super_Dreadnought said:

2JB2bfV.jpg

Wut!? Is this abomination entering WoWs? That project has been damned to the abyssal depths by the British admiralty and should stay there. If that behemoth should ever see daylight again, in WoW, it rather be in a scenario or, if PvP, the other team should have 5 t10 CVs.

 

Now, to the question...

25 minutes ago, Royeaux said:

What would you do?

Torpedoing seems pointless. So... shelling would be the first option and assembling a flotilla with all heavy calibers (Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau - preferably already converted to 15" guns - and all Deutschland-class cruisers). However, this flotilla would need some air cover. What would mean, in ahistorical terms, to kick Goering out of office, bringing back Raeder, comissioning Graf Zeppelin and finishing the light aircraft carrier Weser (conversion of the heavy cruiser Seydlitz), all by Dec. 1943. BTW, once WG starts a light/escort carrier line, KMS Weser would be a ship I would like to see as a premium. ... but I digress.

The remaining cruisers and light cruisers in der Kriegsmarine should escort the carrier to provide AA defense. The heavy bombers on Graf Zeppelin should be armed with several Fritz-X bombs, although, I have my doubts if Do-217 could take-off from the deck of GZ (or if the Focke-Wolf Ta-152 could carry such bomb). Alternatively, the fleet could try to lure the behemoth within range of Do-217 squadrons in the North Sea. However, I believe the RN would keep her operating in the North Atlantic. Shelling HMS Habakuk with heavy caliber guns would also possible be effective, however, that mammoth of naval aviation wouldn't be wander alone in the Atlantic and a large squadron of British BB (joint USN-RN battleships perhaps?) would be expected to intercept the German fleet somewhere in the Denmark strait (...a 2nd battle of Denmark strait?) before German ships could even get near that mothership of all carriers.

Another scenario would be seizing Iceland, so Do-217 armed with Fritz X bombs could get into the North Atlantic. However, with the Wehrmacht in deep sh*t in the Eastern front, that would be absolutely impossible. No extension of  Weserübung in 1943.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,842 posts
11,260 battles
Just now, Royeaux said:

Can the ship even be sunk if it's operating alone?

Yes it can and even if you couldn't do you NEED to sink it or can you do what you need by disabling it?

Odds are it will have a fleet around it, only a fool would send a ship like that out alone because with sufficient manpower the Germans could capture it and in 1943 the Luftwaffe still had enough teeth you do not want them getting their hands on that CV. 

The ship is torpedo RESISTANT - not torpedo proof. It's a giant slow moving target, easy prey to simply have your U-boats constantly taking shots at it and wearing it down. Shots that can disable the rudder or those engine nacelles along the side. It may take time and patience, but you could chip away at the ship or force it back to port.

It's aircraft can still be destroyed, and as I recall the elevators were of a standard construction - meaning a heavy bombing raid, again on a large barely moving target, could disable the lifts. If the lift falls in that opens up that bombs could enter the hanger and all. 

Superstructure is standard construction and an obvious target for multiple reasons.

The one with what looks like BB turrets a bomb penetrates the turret or a shell, detonates any ready ammo there that's going to cause some serious damage, possibly to the flight deck. What if it damages the refrigeration system? 

Back to the engines the one drawing appears to show access to the hanger deck for maintenance, meaning theirs a void behind it and it's below the water line - a hit could allow water in and possibly with the force to break through on to the hanger deck. If a chance second torp in the vicinity doesn't help.

Or you harass the enemy constantly. By day, waves of bomber while at night subs do their thing. Or surface ships, or whatever. Just attack it constantly, around the clock, and push the crew to breaking points, break their morale, their sanity, their will. The same effect that afflicted so many after the first World War when they were shelled for days in trenches - because it's basically a giant floating trench. If you can't break the ship you may be able to break the men.

And while your at it - start working on a more direct counter to the issue. Bombs that can better pen or torps that can. Some sort of hard to put out incendiary to set the flight deck and anything on it ablaze, etc. 

 

No ship is unsinkable, and if it's stuck in port due to constant repairs or unable to keep it crewed - then how is it different than existing land bases? British struggled to sink Tirpitz, but took it out of play by forcing it to stay in harbor. Same thing can be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
189
[CUTE]
Supertester
343 posts
10,029 battles
19 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

You let global warming take it's course :Smile_hiding:.

On a more serious note, I don't think this can be sunk by surface ships. The best bet would probably be to use Fw200 to harass the ship while gathering every single Fritz X in the stockpile. Then use them to incapacitate the flight deck and disable it. After that beats me. Use incediary bombs to maybe try melting some of the ice?

No idea :fish_boom:.

Oh, yeah! I forgot to mention that the KM should aim for disabling HMS Habakuk. Sinking that thing would be a different story (and a much harder one as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts

 

23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

The ship is torpedo RESISTANT - not torpedo proof. It's a giant slow moving target, easy prey to simply have your U-boats constantly taking shots at it and wearing it down. Shots that can disable the rudder or those engine nacelles along the side. It may take time and patience, but you could chip away at the ship or force it back to port.

"Admiralty wanted it to be torpedo-proof, which meant that the hull had to be at least 40 ft (12 m) thick." -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Habakkuk#Scale_model

Disabling the rudder doesn't seem all that important, the ship was as designed was very slow and the flight deck long enough that headwind would be unnecessary.

23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

Or you harass the enemy constantly. By day, waves of bomber while at night subs do their thing. Or surface ships, or whatever. Just attack it constantly, around the clock, and push the crew to breaking points, break their morale, their sanity, their will. The same effect that afflicted so many after the first World War when they were shelled for days in trenches - because it's basically a giant floating trench. If you can't break the ship you may be able to break the men.

And while your at it - start working on a more direct counter to the issue. Bombs that can better pen or torps that can. Some sort of hard to put out incendiary to set the flight deck and anything on it ablaze, etc. 

 

No ship is unsinkable, and if it's stuck in port due to constant repairs or unable to keep it crewed - then how is it different than existing land bases? British struggled to sink Tirpitz, but took it out of play by forcing it to stay in harbor. Same thing can be done.

I'm not sure the Kriegsmarine has the supply chain to conduct multi-day attacks.  Battleships only have enough munitions for a single hour of firing.  And all those ships would be subjected to heavy RN air attack in the process.  As for heavy bombing raids, they'd need to get Graf Zeppelin up and running to conduct that and that would limit the size of the bomber.  HMS Habakkuk was meant to act as an air base in place of the Azores if Portugal wasn't willing to let the RN use them.  Germany couldn't even performs bombing raids in Scotland, reaching the Mid-Atlantic around the Azores should be an impossible task. Conversely, any fleet that tries to confront HMS Habakkuk would be up against Heavy and Light bombers.  U-Boats included.

23 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

No ship is unsinkable, and if it's stuck in port due to constant repairs or unable to keep it crewed - then how is it different than existing land bases? British struggled to sink Tirpitz, but took it out of play by forcing it to stay in harbor. Same thing can be done.

No ship is unsinkable true, but Germany wasn't doing to well by the end of 1943.  The Eastern Front was lost, the were suffering resources shortages, oil being chief among them.  It's questionable if the Kriegsmarine had the power to force any ship in port that was beyond the range of the Luftwaffe and the strength of the Luftwaffe was already shattered by the end of 1943.

Edited by Royeaux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,842 posts
11,260 battles
4 minutes ago, Royeaux said:

"Admiralty wanted it to be torpedo-proof, which meant that the hull had to be at least 40 ft (12 m) thick." -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Habakkuk#Scale_model

Disabling the rudder doesn't seem all that important, the ship was as designed was very slow and the flight deck long enough that headwind would be unnecessary.

They could have also wanted laser armed unicorns that fly on wishes and dreams and have had just as much luck. It could take 1 hit like nothing, a consistent pounding would eventually chip away at it. Germany through the war just between type VII and IX U-Boats had about 1000 of them, which carried 14 and 22 torpedoes respectively. If you need it sunk that badly, and given it wasn't exactly a hard target to hit, even if you sent 25% of that at it, your talking at least 3000 torpedoes. I think there going to at least put dents in it, but I'd wager a bit more than that.

Also - ship still has to steer even if a headwind is unrequired - see Bismarck.

16 minutes ago, Royeaux said:

I'm not sure the Kriegsmarine has the supply chain to conduct multi-day attacks.  Battleships only have enough munitions for a single hour of firing.  And all those ships would be subjected to heavy RN air attack in the process.  As for heavy bombing raids, they'd need to get Graf Zeppelin up and running to conduct that and that would limit the size of the bomber.  Germany couldn't even performs bombing raids in Scotland, reaching the Mid-Atlantic should be an impossible task. Conversely, any fleet that tries to confront HMS Habakkuk would be up against Heavy and Light bombers.  U-Boats included.

Also, the Fw-200 has range comperable to the 4 engine long range UK bombers, and Ju-88's and He-111's are close enough to UK twin engines, and that's not counting the He-177 or had they gotten a project like the He 274 off the ground by then. And at that point they still controlled France and the Hab would have to at least be close enough for the planes to return, unless they were going to fly planes off the carrier to France, and then from France to England, with planes from England going to the carrier to replace the ones now in England. And the further inland the target is, the closer the ship has to be, and the closer to range from attack from land and the Germans having better fighter cover when launching it. Maybe the Germans take a page from the British and have old 109's made to be cat launched to deal with the bombers besides AA which your talking bigger and slower targets not exactly noted for their accuracy at hitting moving targets, hell they at times struggled with stationary. They also have to have found the U-Boats, and score a hit likely with Depth Charges. Going with the above example again, lets say they take out half the subs somehow - that's still 1500 torpedoes being launched at it.

37 minutes ago, Royeaux said:

No ship is unsinkable true, but Germany wasn't doing to well by the end of 1943.  The Eastern Front was lost, the were suffering resources shortages, oil being chief among them.  It's questionable if the Kriegsmarine had the power to force any ship in port that was beyond the range of the Luftwaffe and the strength of the Luftwaffe was already shattered by the end of 1943.

Going back to above while the first two points are generally true, they did have sufficient range bombers to attack the ship, question mark is fighter escort. And while the Luftwaffe was not what it had been during the Battle of Britain and the Blitz - It was not yet shattered. It was shattered in mid-late 1944 when the allies started doing "fighter sweeps" ahead of bomber formations and all, and officially in 1945 after one last major air offensive that failed to complete it's objectives to a satisfactory level. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
1 hour ago, WanderingGhost said:

Also - ship still has to steer even if a headwind is unrequired - see Bismarck.

Some elberation is required, what about Bismarck is comparable?  A 2.2 million ton CV does not necessarily even need to move to conduct operations unlike a Battleship.

1 hour ago, WanderingGhost said:

Also, the Fw-200 has range comperable to the 4 engine long range UK bombers, and Ju-88's and He-111's are close enough to UK twin engines, and that's not counting the He-177 or had they gotten a project like the He 274 off the ground by then. And at that point they still controlled France and the Hab would have to at least be close enough for the planes to return, unless they were going to fly planes off the carrier to France, and then from France to England, with planes from England going to the carrier to replace the ones now in England. And the further inland the target is, the closer the ship has to be, and the closer to range from attack from land and the Germans having better fighter cover when launching it. Maybe the Germans take a page from the British and have old 109's made to be cat launched to deal with the bombers besides AA which your talking bigger and slower targets not exactly noted for their accuracy at hitting moving targets, hell they at times struggled with stationary.

The He-111s had a range of 1,212 mi.  The Azores are 1,380 mi from La Rochelle.  They wouldn't even be able to make a one-way trip if HMS Habakkuk is truly acting as a stand in for the Portuguese air bases.

 

1 hour ago, WanderingGhost said:

Going back to above while the first two points are generally true, they did have sufficient range bombers to attack the ship, question mark is fighter escort.

The Atlantic is a very big ocean.  Is there a reason the ship could not conduct ASW patrols in the Atlantic without getting close to Europe itself.

1 hour ago, WanderingGhost said:

Germany through the war just between type VII and IX U-Boats had about 1000 of them, which carried 14 and 22 torpedoes respectively. If you need it sunk that badly, and given it wasn't exactly a hard target to hit, even if you sent 25% of that at it, your talking at least 3000 torpedoes. I think there going to at least put dents in it, but I'd wager a bit more than that.

An interesting idea, I'll look into how many U-Boats the Germans could put into the field around the end of 1943.

 

Edited by Royeaux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[JFSOC]
[JFSOC]
Members
1,410 posts
4,382 battles

I'd say you need to dump lots of this on it...

maxresdefault.jpg

Add in something off this chart as well:

d0325fbe7bd93eba9593dd948f32eb61--freezi

Simply accelerate the melting of the ship...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
50 minutes ago, Murotsu said:

I'd say you need to dump lots of this on it...

maxresdefault.jpg

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Napalm a US invention?  Used strictly by the Allies in WWII?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,842 posts
11,260 battles
3 hours ago, Royeaux said:

Some elberation is required, what about Bismarck is comparable?  A 2.2 million ton CV does not necessarily even need to move to conduct operations unlike a Battleship.

Bismarck was trying to make for port when the Torpedo struck and jammed her in a turn. Take out the rudder of the Hab - same thing, it can no longer steer, and should it need to return to some type of port or the like - it can't. It Can't dodge further attacks. Short of cutting the 100 foot rudder off and hoping that the ship can actually be turned by alternating speeds on propulsion of each side - it's a sitting duck adrift in the ocean. 

3 hours ago, Royeaux said:

The He-111s had a range of 1,212 mi.  The Azores are 1,380 mi from La Rochelle.  They wouldn't even be able to make a one-way trip if HMS Habakkuk is truly acting as a stand in for the Portuguese air bases.

Actually with all possible fuel range was just under 1500 miles. Also still leaves it in range of other bombers like the 177.

3 hours ago, Royeaux said:

The Atlantic is a very big ocean.  Is there a reason the ship could not conduct ASW patrols in the Atlantic without getting close to Europe itself.

ASW no, that was more use as a traditional attack carrier. However if it's hunting them n the middle of the ocean and an issue, does it not stand to reason to instead effectively blockade closer to England again in which they have planes that can cover the subs which yes, puts them back in range of land based ASW however, you now get to at least laugh that the British spent that kinda money and resources on something now with no real justification.

3 hours ago, Royeaux said:

An interesting idea, I'll look into how many U-Boats the Germans could put into the field around the end of 1943.

Conservative estimate around 4-500 between what was built, sunk, and in need of supplies and repair. Another thing to consider would be that if it has an escort thy are going her speed, so if you have BB's and Cruisers protecting it, well, now if you can't sink her how many slow moving targets do you have that you can?

 

Hab was an interesting and creative concept, but not very practical and plenty of potential drawbacks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,434
[KWF]
Members
4,032 posts
6,179 battles
3 hours ago, Royeaux said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Napalm a US invention?  Used strictly by the Allies in WWII?

Correct. The only incendiary ordnance the Germans used during WWII were bomblets. From wikipedia:

Quote

The German Luftwaffe started the war using the 1918-designed one-kilogram magnesium alloy B-1E Elektronbrandbombe; later modifications included the addition of a small explosive charge intended to penetrate the roof of any building which it landed on. Racks holding 36 of these bombs were developed, four of which could, in turn, be fitted to an electrically triggered dispenser so that a single He 111 bomber could carry 1,152 incendiary bombs, or more usually a mixed load. Less successful was the Flammenbombe, a 250 kg or 500 kg high explosive bomb case filled with an inflammable oil mixture, which often failed to detonate and was withdrawn in January 1941.

I don't know the penetration of the 1kg bomblets, but I doubt they would be able to do much damage. At that point might have been better to just throw petrol in the ocean and light it on fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,236
[RKLES]
Members
12,213 posts
13,844 battles

Hmm well solutions would possibly depend on the time of year, weather, and it’s location as that ice armor could be more vulnerable in warmer waters. But then again maybe the refrigerator coils would have been up to the task of keeping the ice cold? But that would be the first thing I would look into. Second idea may sound counterproductive at first, but luring the ice ship up into arctic waters to turn the ice ship against itself. Because water would be trying to freeze around that ship all the time and the aircraft and guns would not exactly be easily kept warm either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
6 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Bismarck was trying to make for port when the Torpedo struck and jammed her in a turn. Take out the rudder of the Hab - same thing, it can no longer steer, and should it need to return to some type of port or the like - it can't. It Can't dodge further attacks. Short of cutting the 100 foot rudder off and hoping that the ship can actually be turned by alternating speeds on propulsion of each side - it's a sitting duck adrift in the ocean. 

At 2.2 millions tons, they can just build another rudder or use any of the 26 external engines to steer.

6 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Actually with all possible fuel range was just under 1500 miles. 

Still makes it a one way trip to the bottom of the ocean.

6 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

ASW no, that was more use as a traditional attack carrier. However if it's hunting them n the middle of the ocean and an issue, does it not stand to reason to instead effectively blockade closer to England again in which they have planes that can cover the subs which yes, puts them back in range of land based ASW however, you now get to at least laugh that the British spent that kinda money and resources on something now with no real justification.

I don't understand your question.  What was more use as a traditional attack carrier?  Hunting n? Who blockades closer to England?   The turning point in the Battle of the Atlantic was Churchill invoking a Alliance with Portugal from the 14th century to gain access to the Azores so land based planes could conduct ASW patrols.  HMS Habakkuk was a solution to the scenario in which the Portuguese turned them down as the Habakkuk could launch land based planes.

6 hours ago, WanderingGhost said:

Conservative estimate around 4-500 between what was built, sunk, and in need of supplies and repair. Another thing to consider would be that if it has an escort thy are going her speed, so if you have BB's and Cruisers protecting it, well, now if you can't sink her how many slow moving targets do you have that you can?

Estimates between four and five hundred U-Boats?  That's pretty vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[JFSOC]
[JFSOC]
Members
1,410 posts
4,382 battles
10 hours ago, Royeaux said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Napalm a US invention?  Used strictly by the Allies in WWII?

Hey, this is WoWs!  1920's airplanes can have rockets, battleship shells can ricochet off destroyers...

So why not napalm...?  :Smile_izmena::Smile_veryhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
293 posts
742 battles

Simple but that simple really. Ferry as many of these as possible to Greenland 

Resultado de imagen para flamethrower airplane

And hope for the best.

Been a bit more serious, I don't know if the Germans had napalm or something similar (And if they did, how effective it was) but since we are talking about a giant  block of ice put as many flammable things in a V2 or maybe ferry some V1 by U boats or blockade runner to a place where it can reach the Habakkuk and launch away, its not like there are better options unless we start talking about using the Tirpitz as a Molotov cocktail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,830
[HINON]
Privateers, In AlfaTesters
7,762 posts
2,134 battles

Honestly?

 

No. 

A 2.2-million ton hunk of Pykrete, is just not going to be sinkable with what the KM can throw at it. Best-case scenario, enough U-boats torpedo it to the point where it loses all propellers and can't make headway (which was only 6 knots anyways) and it ends up endlessly riding the Gulf Stream for the next 100 years as the world tries to figure out how the hell they can tow it.

In the meantime, the vast amount of resources the Allies wasted on the project would certainly buy the Axis more time before they inevitably lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
1 hour ago, Phoenix_jz said:

Honestly?

 

No. 

A 2.2-million ton hunk of Pykrete, is just not going to be sinkable with what the KM can throw at it. Best-case scenario, enough U-boats torpedo it to the point where it loses all propellers and can't make headway (which was only 6 knots anyways) and it ends up endlessly riding the Gulf Stream for the next 100 years as the world tries to figure out how the hell they can tow it.

In the meantime, the vast amount of resources the Allies wasted on the project would certainly buy the Axis more time before they inevitably lose.

Could you imagine if this thing were still around for the Falklands War?  They could have stuffed half the RAF on this thing before sending it down south.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
127 posts
1,354 battles
1 hour ago, Royeaux said:

Could you imagine if this thing were still around for the Falklands War?  They could have stuffed half the RAF on this thing before sending it down south.

Would you want to send this thing past the equator? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
11 minutes ago, flufflyfatcat said:

Would you want to send this thing past the equator? 

Because the Falklands is quite close to Antarctic and thus quite cold.  Also it took the prototype 3 hot summers to completely melt and that was with the refrigeration turned off so the ship would be perfectly capable of sailing past the equator so long as it didn't stick around forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,942
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,842 posts
11,260 battles
13 hours ago, Royeaux said:

At 2.2 millions tons, they can just build another rudder or use any of the 26 external engines to steer.

And attach it at sea? not the greatest. And that was the original proposal, but that's still a chore and the fact that an attack could disable any number of them.

 

13 hours ago, Royeaux said:

don't understand your question.  What was more use as a traditional attack carrier?  Hunting n? Who blockades closer to England?   The turning point in the Battle of the Atlantic was Churchill invoking a Alliance with Portugal from the 14th century to gain access to the Azores so land based planes could conduct ASW patrols.  HMS Habakkuk was a solution to the scenario in which the Portuguese turned them down as the Habakkuk could launch land based planes.

There was no question. My statement about it being closer to land was if it was being used closer to the same roll as a USN or IJN carrier. If they wanted to launch an attack from the carrier on Germany lets say. If the Hak is hunting the U-boats more in the open ocean, where German air cover can't reach, command could have easily moved the U-boats closer to England and the channel where they could get air cover to deal with ASW patrols launched from England. The subs have air cover, and can still target the convoys, and the Hab, built for that reason, becomes a waist of money and resources as if the U-boats no longer hunt where it is needed, it has no purpose.

13 hours ago, Royeaux said:

Estimates between four and five hundred U-Boats?  That's pretty vague.

I should have been clearer that was my own personal estimate with what little numbers and Info I have. Which is why it's vague. I know production of those types started around 1937 so if they maintained an average of 125 a year produced (1000/8 years of production) then by 1942 that's 750 U-boats of those 2 types made, and then figure some have been sunk and others are being repaired, rearmed, refuled, etc, roughly 50-60% of that being available does not seem unreasonable, but I'm not an expert on the full details there. I spent 20+ years on studying aircraft and 15+ on studying carriers, not submarines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
730 posts
2 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

There was no question. My statement about it being closer to land was if it was being used closer to the same roll as a USN or IJN carrier. If they wanted to launch an attack from the carrier on Germany lets say. If the Hak is hunting the U-boats more in the open ocean, where German air cover can't reach, command could have easily moved the U-boats closer to England and the channel where they could get air cover to deal with ASW patrols launched from England. The subs have air cover, and can still target the convoys, and the Hab, built for that reason, becomes a waist of money and resources as if the U-boats no longer hunt where it is needed, it has no purpose.

Well the British and US did gain the Azores, so whatever strategy the Kriegsmarine adopted afterward still lost them the Battle of the Atlantic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×