The Art of War

[macbolan00]

Well considering that the French haven't won a war since the Franco-Prussian war, I'm not so sure they could have bottled up the Germans in North Africa. Rommel did make fools of a lot of British officers who are, on average, better than their French counterparts.

correction: the french were "part" of the allied victory in ww1 and even in ww2. in the latter, the belatedly organized french army took part in the final drive into germany.

[TheSmilingBandit]

correction: the french were "part" of the allied victory in ww1 and even in ww2. in the latter, the belatedly organized french army took part in the final drive into germany.

Hahaha, the French generals ordered so many charges across the trenches in WW1 that they virtually emptied France of adult males. Lets face it, without the Brits and Americans pulling their fat out of the fire in WW1 they'd be saluting the Kaiser now. As for WW2, they were overrun in a matter of weeks. Forget it, the French are good at making nice uniforms and saluting, but their record in war is losing.

[macbolan00]

ok, let's move back to capital ships. which of the two groups would you choose if you were to drive the other group out of the high seas:

 

15 battleships or 15 fleet carriers?

[TheSmilingBandit]

ok, let's move back to capital ships. which of the two groups would you choose if you were to drive the other group out of the high seas:

 

15 battleships or 15 fleet carriers?

Any other conditions?

 

What are the range?

Weather?

Fuel Status?

Ammo Status?

Type of BB and CV?

 

Based upon the following conditions, I would go for the carriers.

What are the range? 400 kilometers away

Weather? Crystal clear blue sky at dawn.

Fuel Status? Full fuel for everything.

Ammo Status? Full ammo load for everything.

Type of BB and CV? 15 Bismark or Yamato class BB vs. 15 Nimitz Class CVNs carrying full squadron loads of Super Hornets (hmmm ... or maybe Tomcats).

 

Okay, I know this is insane of course. LOL. A nice what if scenario, if you've watched the movie The Final Countdown, what if they didn't return to the present, what would have happened?

Edited December 3, 2009 by TheSmilingBandit

[macbolan00]

the condition is supremacy in the high seas. it doesn't matter from what point in the globe you start. you can assume you have access to unlimited supplies and replenishment (but not of lost ships,) whether in your base or at sea (though you run the risk of your supply ships being destroyed.) your can choose which location you can base from, at what lattitude you wish to come and challenge your opponent, whether day or night.

 

i always go with the battle ship and my opponent the carriers. i wonder why.

 

my force: 15 iowa-class battleships modified by removing B turret and replacing that with additional AA guns. the 12 5" guns will be reduced to 6 to make way for more 40MM and .50 cal guns. same engine to provide a flank speed of 30 knots and boosts to 35 knots.

 

my base? various supply depots within the visayan island group (Cebu, bacolod, panay, leyte, etc..) all those islands offer several points that can be modified for deep-draft capital ships.

 

your carriers? stick to WW2 actual deployed vessels.

Edited December 3, 2009 by macbolan00

[TheSmilingBandit]

the condition is supremacy in the high seas. it doesn't matter from what point in the globe you start. you can assume you have access to unlimited supplies and replenishment (but not of lost ships,) whether in your base or at sea (though you run the risk of your supply ships being destroyed.) your can choose which location you can base from, at what lattitude you wish to come and challenge your opponent, whether day or night.

 

i always go with the battle ship and my opponent the carriers. i wonder why.

 

my force: 15 iowa-class battleships modified by removing B turret and replacing that with additional AA guns. the 12 5" guns will be reduced to 6 to make way for more 40MM and .50 cal guns. same engine to provide a flank speed of 30 knots and boosts to 35 knots.

 

my base? various supply depots within the visayan island group (Cebu, bacolod, panay, leyte, etc..) all those islands offer several points that can be modified for deep-draft capital ships.

 

your carriers? stick to WW2 actual deployed vessels.

Oooh, okay, I choose 15 CV-41 type vessels (USS Midway), modified by increasing the flight deck from 11,300sqm to 16,600sqm and the addition of angled flight deck as well as catapults and 3 stage arrestor wires. Also add the enclosed Hurricane Bows and the added fuel tanks.

 

With these things these carriers can pack in up to 270 planes each.

 

Since you are an all battleship force, don't really need much in terms of fighter strength, on the other hand, the Corsairs were pretty versatile beasts, so let's call it only Chance-Vought Corsairs (the ones modified to pack 4 20mm cannons instead of 6 .50 cals) and can carry up to 2 x 1,000 pound bombs in addition to the 2000 pound drop tanks (or a 2000 pound bomb) that allow it to reach up to 3200 kilometers. With wing reinforcements so that they can use the Japanese Type 93 torpedoes instead of the 2000 pound bomb in the centerline.

 

So that would be up to 4,050 fighters, with all the pilots of course trained to do a mass kamikaze attack on the battleships in ONE massive strike. Somehow I don't think that there are enough AA guns to stop 270 planes from crashing down on EACH battleship.

 

Okay, enough with the fantasy leanings, during WW2, each type of ship had its own uses. A fleet with only carriers, or only battleships, is in for a rude awakening. Even the much maligned and underappreciated destroyers and of course, my personal faves, the Cruisers, are really needed to scout for the opponents.

Edited December 3, 2009 by TheSmilingBandit

[macbolan00]

dude, fitting 200 airplanes on one midway-class carrier is a physical imposibility, unless you do a really far-out modifaction. i would put your air strength to 1,800 - 2,000. capital ships operating without escorts? possible. think ww1 scenario for battleships. for carriers, still possible, the way the british used them. carriers don't need scouts as much as they need escorts. no submaries to worry about. just 30-knot battleships.

[TheSmilingBandit]

dude, fitting 200 airplanes on one midway-class carrier is a physical imposibility, unless you do a really far-out modifaction. i would put your air strength to 1,800 - 2,000. capital ships operating without escorts? possible. think ww1 scenario for battleships. for carriers, still possible, the way the british used them. carriers don't need scouts as much as they need escorts. no submaries to worry about. just 30-knot battleships.

With the original 11,300sqm flight deck, the Midway could accommodate up to 137 combat aircraft. By increasing the flight deck to 16,600sqm (which was indeed done to the Midway) and then together with the high speed catapults to launch the aircraft, you could fully load the hangers and the flight deck to fit up to 270 Corsairs (specific reason I chose them) with wings folded, draw out those needed to be launched and lower their wings (3 cats = room for 6 corsairs to unfold the wings), pretty soon the deck will be free anyway.

 

Come to think about it, even with just 137 aircraft going kamikaze on each battleship, carrying 4000 pounds of explosives and fuel (external), that would pretty much sink every battleship.

 

Yeah I know it was cheesy of me to min-max, but everything I mentioned were all technologically feasible during WW2.

 

You want a studied what-if scenario? What if Hitler hadn't bungled the Polish affair and WW2 had begun 2 years later with the full Plan Z of the Kriegsmarine all launched and ready for action.

Edited December 3, 2009 by TheSmilingBandit

[WyldeChylde]

Has the Yamato at Bismark meet? I thought nasa opposite sides of the globe sila.

 

Also, you cannot find ganun kadaming suicide pilots.

Edited December 3, 2009 by WyldeChylde

[TheSmilingBandit]

Has the Yamato at Bismark meet? I thought nasa opposite sides of the globe sila.

 

Also, you cannot find ganun kadaming suicide pilots.

 

Its called a what-if scenario, you know, like a FANTASY thing. Also, no, the Yamato and Bismark never did meet considering the Bismark sank before the Yamato was commissioned.

Edited December 3, 2009 by TheSmilingBandit

[macbolan00]

mybe so but i wonder, with 270 planes and all their bombs and fuel, could you even manage 30 knots, when a battleship is after your blood?

 

plan z, as agreed in 1939, required a balanced surface and sub-surface force. with enough resources, the germans would have completed the entire plan by 1946. but i suppose your what-if assumes this was possible by 1941 (from the non-existent polish invasion.)

 

alright, the british would have spotted such a large build-up and tapped its commonwealth allies to augment its already strong navy. additional lend-lease agreements with the US would further boost its surface fleet. if, in 1941, the completed german force would stream out of the north sea (not sure if you're assuming france would be overrrun as really happend. the germans would probably not have enough metal for tanks and artillery due to your plan z,) there will be a jutland-type engagement. you're back to world war 1. the french and british army will likely resist your western invasion, given your diversion of resources into your navy. and what will that navy achieve assuming it beats the british on the high seas? invade britain? how many transports and auxillaries can you build? the UK had some 16 divisions inside britain waiting for the germans to invade, whether by sea or air.

 

face it. germany was a land power. it cannot compete with the british at sea. and we usually see that in a long war between a continental power and a sea power, the sea power wins. TBH, i dind't really think much of plan z. resources (and time itself) was simply too big a constraint.

[TheSmilingBandit]

mybe so but i wonder, with 270 planes and all their bombs and fuel, could you even manage 30 knots, when a battleship is after your blood?

You said the only non-renewable supply were the ships themselves right? Okay, Assuming that they can only pack 200 planes send all 3000 in one kamikaze wave at 3000 kilometers, renew supply of planes and launch another 3000 5 minutes later, recycle and repeat. :upside:

 

plan z, as agreed in 1939, required a balanced surface and sub-surface force. with enough resources, the germans would have completed the entire plan by 1946. but i suppose your what-if assumes this was possible by 1941 (from the non-existent polish invasion.)

 

alright, the british would have spotted such a large build-up and tapped its commonwealth allies to augment its already strong navy. additional lend-lease agreements with the US would further boost its surface fleet. if, in 1941, the completed german force would stream out of the north sea (not sure if you're assuming france would be overrrun as really happend. the germans would probably not have enough metal for tanks and artillery due to your plan z,) there will be a jutland-type engagement. you're back to world war 1. the french and british army will likely resist your western invasion, given your diversion of resources into your navy. and what will that navy achieve assuming it beats the british on the high seas? invade britain? how many transports and auxillaries can you build? the UK had some 16 divisions inside britain waiting for the germans to invade, whether by sea or air.

 

face it. germany was a land power. it cannot compete with the british at sea. and we usually see that in a long war between a continental power and a sea power, the sea power wins. TBH, i dind't really think much of plan z. resources (and time itself) was simply too big a constraint.

Sadly I tend to agree with your analysis, now if Hitler had stuck to his original plan of gobbling every little nation up before going to war with England/France while keeping the Soviets out with a peace pact, then that may be an entirely different story.

[macbolan00]

one of the hardest what-if i encounter is how hitler could have finished off britain. sea lion was a no-go. even if the gemans had enough air transports, which they didn't, and the battle of britain won.

 

the most feasible i still see is destuction of british air power (starting 1940 and ending maybe 1942, with no russian front.) they would have to have a fleet of heavy bombers and a special long-range fighter escort developed. people will have to accept that the me-109 was a short-ranged interceptor. and then, germany should gradually build a brown water navy consisitng of frigates, destroyers, cruisers, subs and escort carriers. guadalcanal at least proved that one can grab and maintain a toehold on a beachhead while having an inferior navy. but an air invasion would have been feasible. at least, arnhem proved that one can transport several divisions under the enemy's nose, that paratroopers can hold ground much longer than expected; and seapower gradually strengthened.

 

but the germans will have to be even richer and more productive than the americans. at guadalcanal, things were basically hopeless for the japanese roughly 90 days after the first landing. after 90 days, there were already 20,000 marines on the island. they had a tank company, an amtrak battalion, a working harbor, 5-inch shore defense guns. henderson already had 200 planes, 90mm AA guns and two operating airfields (the seabees were then constructing 2 more.)

 

also, the germans should be prepared to lose as many men, planes and ships as the americans did in the solomons to even just maintain a toehold on british soil. very tall order.

Edited December 3, 2009 by macbolan00

[TheSmilingBandit]

one of the hardest what-if i encounter is how hitler could have finished off britain. sea lion was a no-go. even if the gemans had enough air transports, which they didn't, and the battle of britain won.

 

the most feasible i still see is destuction of british air power (starting 1940 and ending maybe 1942, with no russian front.) they would have to have a fleet of heavy bombers and a special long-range fighter escort developed. people will have to accept that the me-109 was a short-ranged interceptor. and then, germany should gradually build a brown water navy consisitng of frigates, destroyers, cruisers, subs and escort carriers. guadalcanal at least proved that one can grab and maintain a toehold on a beachhead while having an inferior navy. but an air invasion would have been feasible. at least, arnhem proved that one can transport several divisions under the enemy's nose, that paratroopers can hold ground much longer than expected; and seapower gradually strengthened.

 

but the germans will have to be even richer and more productive than the americans. at guadalcanal, things were basically hopeless for the japanese roughly 90 days after the first landing. after 90 days, there were already 20,000 marines on the island. they had a tank company, an amtrak battalion, a working harbor, 5-inch shore defense guns. henderson already had 200 planes, 90mm AA guns and two operating airfields (the seabees were then constructing 2 more.)

 

also, the germans should be prepared to lose as many men, planes and ships as the americans did in the solomons to even just maintain a toehold on british soil. very tall order.

I don't see how Unternehmen Seelöwe could have been won except under extremely different circumstances.

 

Peace with the USSR must be kept despite Hitler's personal animosity towards communism.

Peace with the USA must be kept despite FDR's personal wish to join Churchill.

 

Perhaps if the Luftwaffe had continued building aircraft at the rate asked for by many of their squadron leaders, including Galland. In general, the Nazi planes were superior dogfighters specially the FW190. Just keep pounding away at the airfields rather than the cities and pretty soon the Tommies would've been knackered.

 

The Kriegsmarine just needed to build more transports as with a stronger Luftwaffe, the Nazis could've pounded the Royal Navy into pieces, assuming of course that the US didn't join in on the side of the Tommies. You can't compare Guadalcanal since the distance between the French ports to England is quite short, furthermore, the British didn't quite have the same Fight or Die concept as the Japanese had, not that they'd have surrendered easily still, but they wouldn't be quite as fanatical.

 

Harry Turtledove did a great what-if story about this entitled In The Presence Of Mine Enemies.

Edited December 4, 2009 by TheSmilingBandit

[TheSmilingBandit]

Any opinions on Bernard Montgomery? I've always felt that he was overrated specially compared to Alan Cunningham. If only Claude Auchinlek wasn't a total waste of air for a human being, then Cunningham could have won at El Alemein without the losses that Monty suffered.

 

The overweening pride that Monty points to Patton also applies to this supercilious bastard as well I think.