Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Pandora wrote:thanks
I dont know why I thought ASV was located between the wheels of Swordfish.
are there any photos (not illustrations) of Swordfish where the ASV can be seen?
I am sure some exist somewhere, but ASV II was one of the most closely guarded secrets of the early war period and the RN vigorously censored all photos of the Swordfish/Albacore to make that the secret was kept. As a result photos of it on operational aircraft are exceedingly rare.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Pandora wrote:
I know some u-boats were sunk at night, but Ark Royal didnt launch the Swordfish in the night of 27 May and waited until the morning. Destroyers used parachute flares on Bismarck that night but the Swordfish waited until daylight.
Where does Horan's article state that they waited until morning:

http://www.kbismarck.com/article2.html

They launched their first strike at noon, and the delay was caused by a number of factors including the weather and the need to recover some of the recon aircraft for the strike.
Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Paul L »

dunmunro wrote:
Paul L wrote:Yes but these reports also say they had to make mutliple attacks because they could not locate the target to attack, even with ASV assistance. They had to spot them visually to launch the torps.
As I explained, on moonless nights, the FAA would illuminate the target with parachute flares.

The point is that if the RN none ASV Swordfish could be directed into attack targets using flares then the reverse also applies that the Germans could scramble aircraft in time to intercept and break up such attacks since they would be under illumination and under the cloud cover.
"Eine mal is kein mal"
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Paul L wrote:
dunmunro wrote:
Paul L wrote:Yes but these reports also say they had to make mutliple attacks because they could not locate the target to attack, even with ASV assistance. They had to spot them visually to launch the torps.
As I explained, on moonless nights, the FAA would illuminate the target with parachute flares.

The point is that if the RN none ASV Swordfish could be directed into attack targets using flares then the reverse also applies that the Germans could scramble aircraft in time to intercept and break up such attacks since they would be under illumination and under the cloud cover.
let's see, 3 seat and two seat FAA aircraft have great difficulty with the weather and navigation but KM single seat fighters won't? Launching and recovering single seat fighters at night is not going to happen, especially in the North Atlantic in winter.
Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Paul L »

dunmunro wrote:
Paul L wrote:


The point is that if the RN none ASV Swordfish could be directed into attack targets using flares then the reverse also applies that the Germans could scramble aircraft in time to intercept and break up such attacks since they would be under illumination and under the cloud cover.
let's see, 3 seat and two seat FAA aircraft have great difficulty with the weather and navigation but KM single seat fighters won't? Launching and recovering single seat fighters at night is not going to happen, especially in the North Atlantic in winter.
What are you talking about? German Graff Zeppelin had Fi-167 STOL two seater, which was armed and could do over 200 mph, more than enough to bounce 140 mph String bags etc and they only have to fly 10-20km range to do that. In most cases when the FAA attacked Bismarck and Tirpitz , the Germans had at least 1 hour warning. In the Tirpitz case they did have more than enough time to scramble a couple of Ar 196 15 minutes ahead of the attack , but the seas were too rough to land seaplanes and the Tirpitz couldn't aford to slow down enough to recover them anyway....so the Ar 196 flew back to near by Norway. In both the Bismarck cases it was simply the last part, they could launch them but not recover them at all.

It is rather naive to think the RN can do something the Germans could not master. That kind of mistaken assumption litters the history books throughout WW-II. If they had worked up the Graff Zeppelin , they would have organised some kind of response for such combat in heavy seas.
"Eine mal is kein mal"
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Paul L wrote:

What are you talking about? German Graff Zeppelin had Fi-167 STOL two seater, which was armed and could do over 200 mph, more than enough to bounce 140 mph String bags etc and they only have to fly 10-20km range to do that. In most cases when the FAA attacked Bismarck and Tirpitz , the Germans had at least 1 hour warning. In the Tirpitz case they did have more than enough time to scramble a couple of Ar 196 15 minutes ahead of the attack , but the seas were too rough to land seaplanes and the Tirpitz couldn't aford to slow down enough to recover them anyway....so the Ar 196 flew back to near by Norway. In both the Bismarck cases it was simply the last part, they could launch them but not recover them at all.

It is rather naive to think the RN can do something the Germans could not master. That kind of mistaken assumption litters the history books throughout WW-II. If they had worked up the Graff Zeppelin , they would have organised some kind of response for such combat in heavy seas.
In this scenario, we are talking about Albacores and Fulmars, not Swordfish. The Fi-167 is no interceptor and is no better armed than the Albacore.

Tirpitz flew off her Ar-196 in daylight, to try and destroy an Albacore recon flight, not to oppose the TB strike against Tirpitz.

If you read the operational history of RN CVs operating in Northern waters in winter, you will find many instances when flying off operations were not possible, but in any event, the FAA did master night CV-based attacks, and did introduce tactics and technology that no one else mastered, including the IJN and USN, who had very large FAAs of their own. Expecting the KM to be able to do what the IJN and USN couldn't is also "naive".
Pandora
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Pandora »

dunmunro wrote:
Pandora wrote:
I know some u-boats were sunk at night, but Ark Royal didnt launch the Swordfish in the night of 27 May and waited until the morning. Destroyers used parachute flares on Bismarck that night but the Swordfish waited until daylight.
Where does Horan's article state that they waited until morning:

http://www.kbismarck.com/article2.html

They launched their first strike at noon, and the delay was caused by a number of factors including the weather and the need to recover some of the recon aircraft for the strike.
the strikes you mention are from 26 May.
I was talking about the night of 26-27 May after the Bismarck rudder was hit. they had plenty of time to launch another strike at night but they waited until the next morning and could not attack cause Bismarck was under heavy fire of Tovey battleships.
Pandora
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Pandora »

Paul L wrote:
dunmunro wrote:
Paul L wrote:Yes but these reports also say they had to make mutliple attacks because they could not locate the target to attack, even with ASV assistance. They had to spot them visually to launch the torps.
As I explained, on moonless nights, the FAA would illuminate the target with parachute flares.
The point is that if the RN none ASV Swordfish could be directed into attack targets using flares then the reverse also applies that the Germans could scramble aircraft in time to intercept and break up such attacks since they would be under illumination and under the cloud cover.
Good point! hehe.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Pandora wrote:
the strikes you mention are from 26 May.
I was talking about the night of 26-27 May after the Bismarck rudder was hit. they had plenty of time to launch another strike at night but they waited until the next morning and could not attack cause Bismarck was under heavy fire of Tovey battleships.
The near torpedoing of the Sheffield should give you a hint as to why they didn't strike again that night. The other factor is that the strike that hit Bismarck's rudder was not recovered until 2300, and the weather was getting increasingly severe; by the time another strike could be launched Tovey's BB were also waiting for daylight, to commence the final action.
Paul L
Senior Member
Posts: 317
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:04 pm
Location: Vancouver Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Paul L »

The Fi 167 is more than capable of intercepting torpedo Albacores , since they can only do 150-160mph, while the STOL aircraft is capable of 203 mph. All it has to do is to break up the attacks. Further more good well trained pilots could fly Me-109T if they had to, it’s just silly and bad military analysis to assume they could not. I find it naive and insulting to suggest that the Germans were not capable of improvising and adapting workable solutions to obstacles they encounter. It's also ignoring historical records.
Last edited by Paul L on Wed Dec 14, 2011 5:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Eine mal is kein mal"
Pandora
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Pandora »

dunmunro wrote:
Pandora wrote:
the strikes you mention are from 26 May.
I was talking about the night of 26-27 May after the Bismarck rudder was hit. they had plenty of time to launch another strike at night but they waited until the next morning and could not attack cause Bismarck was under heavy fire of Tovey battleships.
The near torpedoing of the Sheffield should give you a hint as to why they didn't strike again that night. The other factor is that the strike that hit Bismarck's rudder was not recovered until 2300, and the weather was getting increasingly severe; by the time another strike could be launched Tovey's BB were also waiting for daylight, to commence the final action.
if they mastered night attacks they would hve been launched, if they didn't is because the chances of success were extremely low.
back to TP - GZ scenario, if weather is so bad in winter then the chances are the FAA doesnt strike and the Germans get to the Atlantic are really good.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

Pandora wrote:

if they mastered night attacks they would hve been launched, if they didn't is because the chances of success were extremely low.
back to TP - GZ scenario, if weather is so bad in winter then the chances are the FAA doesnt strike and the Germans get to the Atlantic are really good.
Bismarck was being attacked by Vian's destroyers all night, and a planned strike for first light was cancelled because of the weather. Making night strikes while your own surface forces are in contact with the enemy is not a good plan, but it is unlikely that that Ark Royal's pilots had the stamina for 3 strikes in less than 12 hours, as the first strike TO was at 1450, the 2nd at 1910, with recovery at 2300, plus 8 other aircraft were flown off in pairs throughout the night to continue the recon efforts.

What is the point of GZ trying to get into the Atlantic in winter? I have been trying to make the point that her ability to contribute would be very limited, and she would not be much of a threat or an even an asset. Her airgroup is too small, and with typical operational attrition would be reduced in numbers so quickly that it just wouldn't be worth the effort.
Pandora
Member
Posts: 136
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:40 pm

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by Pandora »

dunmunro wrote:
Bismarck was being attacked by Vian's destroyers all night, and a planned strike for first light was cancelled because of the weather. Making night strikes while your own surface forces are in contact with the enemy is not a good plan, but it is unlikely that that Ark Royal's pilots had the stamina for 3 strikes in less than 12 hours, as the first strike TO was at 1450, the 2nd at 1910, with recovery at 2300, plus 8 other aircraft were flown off in pairs throughout the night to continue the recon efforts.
I think not all the pilots planes were the same in the first strike and the second and in any case they probably didn't know Bismarck was attacked by destroyers. they could have launched at 0300 if they found that Bismarck is under attack then just stay away. in fact Ark Royal launched 12 Swordfish to attack Bismarck at 0920 in the morning and stayed away when they arrived.
dunmunro wrote:What is the point of GZ trying to get into the Atlantic in winter? I have been trying to make the point that her ability to contribute would be very limited, and she would not be much of a threat or an even an asset. Her airgroup is too small, and with typical operational attrition would be reduced in numbers so quickly that it just wouldn't be worth the effort.
The point is to give additional protection to Tirpitz so she doesnt suffer the same fate as Bismarck.
now, I agree that even if they get to the Atlantic and can destroy a convoy it wont change things much overall in the course of the war but that was not what is being discussed.
srgt rock
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:17 pm
Location: Central New York State, USA

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by srgt rock »

If you read the operational history of RN CVs operating in Northern waters in winter, you will find many instances when flying off operations were not possible, but in any event, the FAA did master night CV-based attacks, and did introduce tactics and technology that no one else mastered, including the IJN and USN, who had very large FAAs of their own. Expecting the KM to be able to do what the IJN and USN couldn't is also "naive".
I beg to differ on your statement that the USN did not develop night operations. The USS Enterprise was converted into a night operations carrier by 1944. The Big E conducted many night interceptions of the Japanese snooper aircraft. By the end of the war, the USN was conducting night attacks.

As far as the Germans not mastering night ops, do not forget we are talking about the Luftwaffe and not just the KM. The Luftwaffe were conducting night harassment raid in Russia by early 1942.

Winter operations into the Atlantic would be difficult but the goal would be to disrupt the convoy system AND bring the Brest Group back to safety. As the operation name would imply, quick hard thrusts at the enemy.

WE could also discuss KM carrier operations against the PQ convoys in the summer of 1942. I would want to add a second carrier to the German forces. I could easily see the KM completing the Trosschiff Franken as a CVL. (30 more a/c). Operations would start against PQ 16 in late May. I would see closure of the Arctic convoy route then. Could the Soviet forces have stopped the German southern drive when they did without the lend lease supplies arriving in the late spring and early summer?
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by dunmunro »

srgt rock wrote:
If you read the operational history of RN CVs operating in Northern waters in winter, you will find many instances when flying off operations were not possible, but in any event, the FAA did master night CV-based attacks, and did introduce tactics and technology that no one else mastered, including the IJN and USN, who had very large FAAs of their own. Expecting the KM to be able to do what the IJN and USN couldn't is also "naive".
I beg to differ on your statement that the USN did not develop night operations. The USS Enterprise was converted into a night operations carrier by 1944. The Big E conducted many night interceptions of the Japanese snooper aircraft. By the end of the war, the USN was conducting night attacks.

?

"By the end of the war, the USN was conducting night attacks."

So, the USN, the world's largest navy (by wars end) with the largest FAA, took ~4 years to catch up to the RN FAA, and then only with technical and tactical assistance from the RN. Expecting the KM's FAA to master all this in time for their first ever carrier, is stretching things...
Post Reply