Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
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 »

Paul L wrote:
BTW there were actually 6 Dithmarschen tankers built and launched.The last tanker "Haverland" was not completed during the war.

Interesting information on Haverland. I have only read about the five ships completed. What details about her do you have?


I have always thought the Dithmarshen class ships would have been easy to convert into CVLs. Franken was launched just before the war and did not have her stack nor all of her superstructure completed at the start of the war--less to take apart before conversion. Haverland would have been even easier to complete as a carrier.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by RF »

The Havelland was the sixth ship in the Dithmarschen class, it was launched at Kiel in 1940 but no major construction work is recorded as being done to this vessel since. There was certainly no commissioning ceremony which is why most lists of the Dithmarschen class exclude this vessel.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
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 »

srgt rock wrote:
Paul L wrote:
BTW there were actually 6 Dithmarschen tankers built and launched.The last tanker "Haverland" was not completed during the war.

Interesting information on Haverland. I have only read about the five ships completed. What details about her do you have?


I have always thought the Dithmarshen class ships would have been easy to convert into CVLs. Franken was launched just before the war and did not have her stack nor all of her superstructure completed at the start of the war--less to take apart before conversion. Haverland would have been even easier to complete as a carrier.
Yes I thought that too. I envisage a dozen Fi 167 STOL planes to assist in scouting for Merchants and avoiding enemy warships etc. But the politics of Hitler the Nazi and the Wehrmacht were truly convoluted at this point in the war, so such improvising was not likely....mind you back in 1937 they trailed landing Fi 157 STOL on the rear of a small slow seaplane tender. One of the 15 landings had the plane go over the side and nothing more came from the effort. I think i have a video of this some were....

http://forum-marinearchiv.de/smf/index. ... 894.0.html

Unfortunately the Youtube clip was removed ....any one know if it can be viewed somewere else?

Anyway here is a crude translation...
Before the experiments, on the whole system GRIEF has been tested successfully on land. To reason based on the following parameters:
- landing deck of simple wooden planks
- Deck inclination 10-12% for the landing "uphill" direction of travel of the ship or for the start of "downhill" towards the rear of the ship
- total length of the landing deck 25 m
- maximum usable length of the landing deck about 2.5 aircraft lengths
- bungee launch from the spur bondage
- landing "uphill" against the superstructure with wheel brake
- No catch fence and catching room with landing hook was held on 01.11.1937 on Grief (without crane) the Seerprobung in the Bay of Luebeck place with a good breeze. First, Leo Conrad started with the Fieseler Fi-156 A-0, D-IJSN (W. 608) lying at rest or a moving ship without problems slowly backwards and forwards in a moving ship landed successfully using a "blind landing". The second flight went through the pilot Albert CHOICE. After running start, he broke off his first flat landing due to intermittent ailerons and buoyancy effects, but came in the second approach with the right wing into the dead water of the wake vortex, which is why the machine was left pulled up and, despite full throttle backwards and turn upward pressed down on the lake. In the film, this moment is good to see - is evident in this moment at the aft edge of the landing deck and the cameraman Otto Kuhn! CHOICE was the way of also visible assurance boat rescued unharmed. After a related meeting between DIAL and Hanna Reitsch and a gentleman STAMER of the Rhön Rositten Society and a detailed analysis of the flow pattern around the landing platform, several improvements were implemented, including turbulence grid, the should resolve compact structures in the wake vortices behind a lot of small, non-critical vortex. On 25 26.08.1938 and again led by Leo CONRAD 13 successful landings and takeoffs of Grief. Sources: E-Travemünde and places Tamewitz, Volume 2 flight test points to 1945
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

RF wrote:The Havelland was the sixth ship in the Dithmarschen class, it was launched at Kiel in 1940 but no major construction work is recorded as being done to this vessel since. There was certainly no commissioning ceremony which is why most lists of the Dithmarschen class exclude this vessel.
Yes, it was one of the many ships that were left unfinshed in order to meet Hitlers constant demands for more Uboats.
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

I have read the many interesting post on this topic and other topics in this forum on the subject of a German aircraft carrier. I have come to believe that it COULD HAVE been a better deal for the KM to convert some smaller ships into ESCORT CARRIERS.

If adding this discussion to this topic is not the best way to discuss this possibility, then I will start a new topic. Just let me know.

This is what I propose:
The German Navy could have converted one or two Naval ships into Escort Carriers in 1939/1940. These ships were the diesel driven: Catapult Ship Freisenland (16 knts) or the Trosschiff Franken (22knts). In addition to these two ships, the German Navy could have converted any or all of the 14 knot diesel driven Flensburg built iron ore ships they had into MACs in the summer and fall of 1940 in order to escort conveys along the coast of Norway.

The Germans had plenty of carrier ready aircraft ready by the summer of 1940. (190Ts, Ju 87s and Fi 167s) Use of Escort Carriers by the KM would have been possible with the least amount of disruption of other building and repair programs. It would have given the KM immediate war time experience in the possible roles an aircraft carrier could fill for them. Picture the invasion of the islands in the Baltic Sea or in the Gulf of Finland aided by the Escort Carriers or the drive on Murmansk in 1941.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin 1941

Post by RF »

The use of small carriers as escorts is interesting but hardly the sort of use Raeder would be inclined to employ. The KM is more likely to view them for eventual use in the Atlantic, such as support ships for operations like Berlin and Rheinubung, and perhaps for Biscay operations.

Another consideration maybe a German carrier in the Med - the obvious question is how it gets there, past Gibraltar....
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
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 »

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides/So ... after_WWII

Looking at this site these ships had length and width of 135 x 18.2m . Could such planes land on such a small deck?
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

Paul L wrote:http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/guides/So ... after_WWII

Looking at this site these ships had length and width of 135 x 18.2m . Could such planes land on such a small deck?
These ships are of similar size to the same type of ships the British Navy converted into MAC ships. The Empire MacAndrew class had overall length of 446' by 56' wide that allowed a 400' X 60' FD to be built. Also, the British did not posses the truly remarkable STOL aircraft that the Fieseler company produced.(156 & 167) The Fieseler planes would not even needed arrester systems to land. The Ar96 trainer aircraft could probably land (stall speed 60 mph). Note: the IJA used their version of the 156 on the Akitsu Maru for ASW in 1944 and she did not have any arrester systems. I think it would have been a good idea to install arrester systems to allow the 109T to land on this carrier both for convoy protection and training.

The KM operational staff would have certainly looked upon the Franken converted ship for possible fleet supporting operations since its speed of 22 knots would allow it to be within range of surface units attacking the PQ convoys but I believe the MAC ships would have remained in the role of training/ Norway convoy protection.

IMHO operating these ships would have given the KM a taste of what a carrier COULD do for them and to train the pilots needed for GZ.
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 »

I have a question for you. The 1937 test of the storch landing on the Greif with a small deck [12 x 25m] was a limited success. Does any one know how much deck space did the Storch need to land on this Japanese Amphib?
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

Paul L wrote:I have a question for you. The 1937 test of the storch landing on the Greif with a small deck [12 x 25m] was a limited success. Does any one know how much deck space did the Storch need to land on this Japanese Amphib?

Akitsu Maru is listed as having a 404' long flight deck and was able to operate 10 Ki-76s which was their version of the Storch.

Some simple math. Both Fieseler aircraft had a stall speed of about 30 mph which is about 28 knots. With a wind over deck speed of 22 knots which was standard USN practice these planes would have only had a 6 to 8 knot speed differential.
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 »

I read some were that STOL needed 2.5 times the aircraft length to land -take off. But the overloaded Storch that rescued Mussolini required 30km to land and 80m to launch.

http://www.fantasyofflight.com/aircraftpages/storch.htm


the above site reports it takeoff and lands in 200 feet or 60m.

http://www.slepcevstorch.com/super_storch.htm


This site suggests the modified modern version can do TO & Landing in 30-50 feet for a 22 foot micro ultra light version and 150 feet for the heavier version That’s 2-4 times the plane length [ stationary ; with or without wind?]. The super sized version is 200 feet TOL for a 25 foot plane with max weight of 1500kg!!! That’s 8 times the plane length.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fieseler_Fi_167

Looking at much heavier Fi 167 it length is about 11.4ms , suggesting the TOL distance should be ~90m on stationary, no wind deck and about ½ that if the ship speed and wind over the deck add up to 20 knots? I guess if the ship speed and wind combined to 40knots this torpedo STOL plane should take off/land in 23m deck length.
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

With both the Fi 156 and Fi 167 the Germans would actually have had a problem with keeping the planes on the deck when the ship was headed into the wind unless the wings were folded. I have read somewhere and seen the photo of a Swordfish taking off w/o pilot when the carrier it was on turned into the wind.

There was a test demonstration with the Fi 167 later in the war in which the plane was able to hover over the same spot on the runway as it flew into a stiff breeze.

I would think the Fi 156 would make the better ASW aircraft for a German MAC ship due to the extensive cockpit glazed windows including the ability to look straight down out of the side of the cockpit. The C & D version could have carried small 50 kg bombs under the wings and/or a small depth charge on her center line. I would just add a tail wheel similar to the one used on the Fi 167.
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 »

Fi 167 had folding wings with a glazed cockpit and had a much better payload range figures than the Fi 156 ..it could carry an air torpedo and with better engine [DB 605?] could make 240mph or more and be fitted out with a couple of 20mm guns . That way it could also provide elementry airdefense against RN threats into mid war period. Have you considered helicopters?
"Eine mal is kein mal"
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 »

Paul L wrote:Fi 167 had folding wings with a glazed cockpit and had a much better payload range figures than the Fi 156 ..it could carry an air torpedo and with better engine [DB 605?] could make 240mph or more and be fitted out with a couple of 20mm guns . That way it could also provide elementry airdefense against RN threats into mid war period. Have you considered helicopters?
I agree the Fi 167 would have been a much used aircraft IF it could have gotten to sea on ANY German carrier. I believe that just as the Swordfish was used throughout the war, so too would have the Fi 167. I only pointed out the Fi 156 as a possible carrier plane since it was already in production to illustrate the fact that the KM had an aircraft they could have placed upon any carrier they built. Interesting side bar on the Fi 156 is the fact that some KM officers the most noted was Admiral Carls that they proposed landing a stroch on Scheer as a means to improve her air search capabilities.

Helicopters are another sore subject with many in the KM. Deploying the fl282 would have been a great help to German naval units but Anton Flettner was never able to get enough support to push the 282 into production.
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 »

Admiral Carls is one of my heroes :D in 1935 he proposed that in addition to the dozen Panzerschiffe to augment commerce raiding plus a battle fleet of a 1/2 dozen BB, he wanted four carrier battle groups to operate in and around the UK. Each group would have a carrier a battle cruiser plus a heavy cruiser a flotilla of destroyers and cover the actions of several flotillas of U-boats. Got to love someone with high ambitions :shock:
"Eine mal is kein mal"
Post Reply