What If...?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 03-14-2005, 03:17 PM

The only thing that I am saying about it is that I think the brits would have put anything they could put in the air to stop her. Maybe not her Battleships since there would have been air cover, but with eneogh aircraft they could have gotten the GZ.

delcyros · 03-14-2005, 04:45 PM

Swordfishs?

Cool. But in serious, you remember the failure of the swordfish attack against Scharnhorst and Gneisenau when they tried to breakout from France via Channel? They had to deal with air cover, none survived. No torpedo hits. Even if they would succeed in a torp attack (for that task I like the Beau´s more...), GZ had an excellent underwater protection, like most of the german heavy surface units (Bismarck survived 6 torpedo and uncounted shell hits, Scharnhorst was sunken by no less than 11 torp hits), a good compartimentation and an excellent torpedo bulkhead. I doubt that a few hits could sink her. (The russians did fired some 20 torps and dropped uncounted bombs on her, some were duds, but it stayed afloat after 7 torp hits and a 1000 Kg bomb hit at the funnel, without crew to prevent further damage...) British attempts to destroy the Tirpitz in Norway with conventional weapons did not succeed, so why should that be different in the case of GZ?

Nonskimmer · 03-14-2005, 05:00 PM

She'd be a tough nut to crack then, but if she were deployed to the North Atlantic run to take out the convoys, the Brits (with maybe one or two Canadian destroyers, as escort

) would have made another priority of her. The Americans might have even gotten in on it.
Tough? Perhaps. Unsinkable? Of course not.

This is assuming she were deployed in this way. I thought you brought up a good point earlier about the Murmansk run. If Graf Zeppelin had been sent to the Barents Sea she may have survived longer.

delcyros · 03-14-2005, 05:37 PM

Thanks. I stay with that statement. GZ in North Atlantic? No way. She wouldn´t have lasted, agreed. In the Barent Sea? More probable. As more "historical"-thanks to the fact that all surface operations were postponed in the Atlantic after the loss of Bismarck. And Murmansk convois would have been a good prey if KM units were free to attack them. But even if not, as a weapon of beeing, GZ would have been worthy there. I didn´t say that GZ should go in the Atlantic. (just an analogy: swordfishs failing to attack Gneisenau thanks to french air cover = swordfishs failing to attack GZ thanks to norwegian air cover (GZ in the Fjords, like Tirpitz or maybe in the Barentsea in range to air cover)) And of course GZ is not unsinkable, take any tallboy and a Lanc...-

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 03-15-2005, 04:06 AM

Alright I will consede there, in the Barent Sea she had a good chance.

the lancaster kicks ass · 03-15-2005, 10:42 AM

but chances are hitler would have held her back anyway because he didn't want to loose her......................

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 03-15-2005, 11:20 AM

Yeap probably, I can actually see that have happened.

the lancaster kicks ass · 03-15-2005, 11:29 AM

i mean after the loss of the Bismark i don't think hitlet would have wanted to take a risk with an aircraft carrier, this of the effect on the people's morale??

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 03-15-2005, 11:30 AM

Also the effect it would have had on him.

trackend · 03-15-2005, 12:12 PM

Thats a great post Rich
I believe that any threat presented by a surface raider be it carrier or battleship it would have been dealt with in the appropriate manner the famous channel dash succeeded because of surprise and the only available attack that could be mounted at short notice was the stringbags against an obviously overwhelming superior force but as with Operation Sea lion should the need have arisen the navy was prepared to use large numbers of its fleet to prevent invasion or serious surface raiders
I agree with you Rich if the GZ had shown its nose or been discovered it would have been goodbye within days .

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 03-15-2005, 04:22 PM

I too agree.

delcyros · 03-16-2005, 04:03 PM

GZ at op-sealion? It wouldn´t have been ready in time. Production was delayed with the loss of the Bismarck and later postponed (with a short exception in 1943). My point is that GZ ,under normal circumstances, wouldn´t have seen much use. It would have been putted into a "safe" norwegian Fjord and therefore it could last. It would have been very risky to attack her. (...but I don´t doubt that the Brits would try...) But I don´t see why it should have been sunken soon, lets say, in late 42? Why? Imagine a reliable scenario, I´m open to change my mind...

the lancaster kicks ass · 03-17-2005, 03:52 PM

why would she have gone down so quick?? because she was underarmed and she'd have half the royal navy chasing her...........

Concorde247 · 03-17-2005, 08:24 PM

What about a squadron of Lanc's with 12000lb Tall boy bombs!!!

Remember how the tirpitz was sunk?

They would have gone through any armour the Graf Zepplin had like Playdough!!!

R Leonard · 03-17-2005, 09:27 PM

Quote:

What about a squadron of Lanc's with 12000lb Tall boy bombs!!!

Well, they better come in nice and low and skip-bomb them into her hull. We already know that high altitude bombing of maneuvering ships just doesn't work. :roll:

Rich