FW 190A vs Hellcat and Corsair

[otftch]

Structure asides.I think it would have fared well against the Hellcat but the Corsair would have eaten it up.
Ed

[R Leonard]

Originally Posted by renrich

In my handy dandy, 1942 original "Janes" the Graf Zeppelin is shown to be complete whereas her sister Peter Strasser was believed to be incomplete. GZ was 19250 tons, about same size as Yorktown, 32 kts, 16-5.9s(what for) 10-4.1s(not enough), 22-37mm, 40ac.

Funny, my handy-dandy original 1942 Janes also pointedly notes 40 aircraft as the complement (less than half of the Yorktown class). It also does not appear to actually claim the GZ is complete. It says, if I may quote:
“Sides appear to be armoured for two-thirds of length amidships, and to a lesser extent as far as bow, which is of bulbous form. Will have island superstructure on starboard side. One of these aircraft carriers was photographed from the air fitting out alongside a quay in the Naval Dockyard at Kiel, in July, 1940, whence she is believed to have proceeded to Gdynia. P. Strasser does not appear to have been completed.”

I read “Will have island superstructure on starboard side” and “fitting out” to mean incomplete. Nowhere does my Janes say that GZ is complete.

Oh and all those 5.9’s? Look at the hull casemates pictured in the Janes. Eight of them are single mount, single purpose, casemates . . . ideal for banging away at approaching RN destroyers.

Rich

[renrich]

Well, I inferred that GZ was complete because they said PS was not, wrong inferrence? although fitting out would not take long to complete and the photograph taken from the air in 1940 was taken at Kiel where she then proceeded to Gydnia. Would not that mean that she had finished fitting out? Her 5.9s remind me of the 8 inchers on Lex and Sara. My favorite uncle's first ship was Sara in the 30s. Anyway, if the GZ had to bang away at DDs with the 5.9s she is in deep dodo, more 4.1s would seem to make more sense. My handy dandy "Janes" original is getting so old, I am afraid to open it. I have been poring over it for more than 30 years and it is fascinating. I have a handy dandy not original "Janes" 1945 and it appears you are right, Rich, the war losses section says that GZ (incomplete) was found in wrecked and waterlogged condition at Stettin, April, 1945. Also PS seemed never to have reached launching stage. Is it possible that equipment may have been scavenged off of GZ? Just goes to show you about intelligence information. WMDs anyone?

[R Leonard]

Great minds . . . I've a "not original" 1945, too, which I looked at, but decided not to mention since it was an outcome of which we already knew. I know what you mean about the shape of the 1942. Mine's in pretty bad shape from first my brothers, then my, poring over it through the years. My mother gave it to my father for his January 1943 birthday.

Rich

[Glider]

The GZ reached about 90% completion but in some ways was an outdated design. To equip a carrier with 16 x 5.9 is a massive waste of weight and crew.

[SoD Stitch]

Originally Posted by Glider

The GZ reached about 90% completion but in some ways was an outdated design. To equip a carrier with 16 x 5.9 is a massive waste of weight and crew.

Yeah, almost looks like the old CV-1 "Langley" with an island; the flight deck looks like it was added on to an existing design . . .

[blu3y4]

im not sure if the two/three ever met in the skies (if im wrong correct me). but it really depends on the individuals opinion

[renrich]

I was involved in building a small limited service hotel in Crested Butte which was a perfect rectangle 55 feet high, 65 feet wide and 220 ft long. If I am not mistaken those were the flight deck dimensions of CV1. I used to stand on the roof of that building and visualise having to land on that deck. Scary!

[renrich]

My 42 "Janes" was bought for me by a cousin who was a book dealer in DC. I paid 45 dollars for it. It had been the property of a Commander Victor Logan who was in the Medical Corps of the Navy. I bought the book in about the late 60s, early 70s. The frontispiece, as you know is a picture of HMS Exeter and is the best photo I have ever seen of her. I also have a not original 1914 "Janes". Lordy, I love looking at those old ships back when they had lots of guns, not missile launchers and one puny auto 5 incher. I get a lump in my throat every time I look at the picture of the Exeter and read the caption. In a recent book about the USS Houston, one of the Houston survivors said that on either Exeter or Perth, when they were steaming out of Surabaya harbor en route to the Battle of the Java Sea, the ship's band was playing "A Hunting We Will Go" That gives me goose bumps. My favorite uncle after serving on Saratoga, served on Augusta, flagship of the Asiatic Fleet. He was then detailed to the Houston, that was scheduled to replace Augusta. Another petty officer who was a friend wanted to have a chance to serve in the Asiatic Fleet and my uncle swapped with him and went to the old "Swayback Maru" CA25 in his place and his friend did not come back. Timing is everything.

[R Leonard]

My only other "Janes" is a repro 1905, however I've stuffed in it some photos my Grandfather (an Army Lieutenant stationed in the Philippines) had of some of the surviving Russian ships, from their 1905 misadventure, that were interned in Manila.

Rich

[delcyros]

I wouldn´t go so far and downgrade Graf Zeppelin as an outdated design. It had two of a carriers key abilites: beeing fast and long legged.

Her design speed of the 1940 stage was 35 Kts. That brings us to the question, what did they wanted with such an extreme speed? It could, as a matter of fact, outrun any RN & US BB, cruiser and DD in the open Atlantic. Against a 30 mp/h wind factor, the Fieselers could start without take off run (35 Kts are slightly over 40 mp/h), strange. Her 16 x 5.91"/55 QF are close to twice the firepower of contemporary light cruisers. Altough beeing critisized for casematte mounted, they have been mounted far above the waterline to ensure they remained dry. How this would work in the Atlantic, I don´t know.
Perhaps thread scenarios played a role in the decision to arm & protect her like a large cruiser. Germany had little use for a carrier in the Atlantic (bad weather, which was preferred by the raiders but isn´t good for a carrier).
Her range was comparable to the Twins & Tirpitz, around 8000nm @ 19 Kts, which means she could maneuvre quite independently as the other raiders.

She was a bit larger than the officially approved limit. In her last 1943 stage GZ had 33.550 ts max. / 27.650 ts design diplacement, some blisters for more stability (& displacement) and thus a reduced speed to "only" 33.8 Kts design.
Her aircraft complement was 43 planes max (rather small) and the hangar controlls, catapults and aircraft operational systems seemed to be very sophisticated - or just overengeneered.

Flip a coin and see...

[R Leonard]

The theoretical performance of the GZ still all boils down to carrier doctrine. This is something for which the British, Japanese, and Americans naval aviators sweated and bled for in the 1920’s and 30’s. The Germans had no such experiences and, thus, no doctrine. The GZ was just a fluke case of the Germans saying to themselves “Gee, everyone else important has aircraft carriers . . . we better build one, too.”

Though it appears elsewhere in another thread, and really has nothing to do with FW 190s vs F6Fs and F4Us, I am really getting tempted to drag out my standard trashing of the GZ as an operating platform.

Bottom line is that as an effective war-fighting weapon, the GZ was just a lot of wishful thinking.

Rich

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by R Leonard

The theoretical performance of the GZ still all boils down to carrier doctrine. This is something for which the British, Japanese, and Americans naval aviators sweated and bled for in the 1920’s and 30’s. The Germans had no such experiences and, thus, no doctrine. The GZ was just a fluke case of the Germans saying to themselves “Gee, everyone else important has aircraft carriers . . . we better build one, too.”

Though it appears elsewhere in another thread, and really has nothing to do with FW 190s vs F6Fs and F4Us, I am really getting tempted to drag out my standard trashing of the GZ as an operating platform.

Bottom line is that as an effective war-fighting weapon, the GZ was just a lot of wishful thinking.

Rich

Rich, I remember that thrashing you made, and hope you can find it and resurrect it.

[delcyros]

Bottom line is that as an effective war-fighting weapon, the GZ was just a lot of wishful thinking.

My position is that Graf Zeppelin was nothing special as a carrier but it is wrong to underestimate the ship. The Luftwaffe and navy both drew experience from Akagi in 1935-1939.

You should factor in what could be done AGAINST Graf Zeppelin (a reasonable timeframe for sortiing is in late 1941) or worse, against Tirpitz & Zeppelin.
The only fast BB´s the RN has in late 1941 are Renown & KGV. Together they are able to take on Tirpitz (altough this must be considered risky as denmark street showed) but Tirpitz is covered by Graf Zeppelin as well. Both ships are faster than either KGV & Renown and Graf Zeppelin is much faster than any single ship the RN (or for that matter, the USN) can send to intercept her. I suspect a breakout into the North Atlantic by late 1941 is kind of an worst case scenario for the RN. More worrisome, even a slow Fi-167 is a much more potent "raider" and "scout" than a BB or CA. A CA projects firepower effectively to 25000 yards, a BB projects firepower effectively to maybe 30.000 yards (debatable, I doubt anything past 26000 yards) but a Fieseler to around 300.000 yards. A merchant beeing detected and (if alone) attacked is an easy prey. A convoi maybe tracked until Tirpitz projects it firepower on it. Unlike Jervis Bay, dispersing the merchants inspite of Tirpitz makes them an easier target for the carrier (for this part the dive & torpedo bomber). A hit like those received by Bismarck are less probable due to improved AAA FC of Tirpitz, the more AAA of GZ (10x 4.1"/65 DP, later 12 x 4.1"/65) and the fightercover (even if the 9-12 Bf-109 are few indeed, the RN didn´t send larger airattacks in, as well).

best regards,
delc

[syscom3]

The GZ suffered from being neither a true aircraft carrier, nor an armoured cruiser.

The KM would have done better to remove most of the guns and armour and stowed more aircraft in its place.

In the end, even a slow moving torpedo bomber like the Devestator or Swordfish would have sent her to the bottom.