Prince Henry of Prussia: The Rise of U-Boat.

[BlondieBC]

Where is the seventh ship or was that simply a typo?


Also, fun fact - the Germany navy was the first to employ all-metal fighter planes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_D.I

SMS E.F.F. was sunk in surface action while attacking merchant convoy near Crete in 9/1916. So the 7 is a typo.

 

[BlondieBC]

Snip

Well, Von Schultze perspective is important in understanding how he is approaching the post war period. First, he only has a few months dealing directly with the Kaiser. He is new to job. Second, he see that the stuff in the development pipeline makes his wartime navy obsolete fairly soon. So he is trying to skip a generation and go to things designed with these advance in mind. You will see a lull in production right after the war (1918, 1919) followed by a production surge. Third, I am trying to give him mild victory disease or at least the German Navy. Fourth, he is going a quality approach to beat the UK quantity. And going assymetrical. He has too. Five, he has accepted he will never outbuild the RN, so he has gone defensive. Six, he is trapped by the bias of the Germans. He is thinking from a land base power perspective.

So to the seaplane question. For the next few years, they will using existing plane while building the new generations of planes. The great success of the war was using Italian planes (land based) against shipping in the red sea. Based on airstrips outside of the range of naval aviation. He also decided to push guided weapons and larger torpedoes. I don't see 1000KG + pound weapons going on wing spars of seaplanes in 1919. So he is going land based attack planes. The seaplanes you mention will be cycled to Africa. And he needs very tough planes built with new tech for Africa. At this time, airplanes had about 1 year before they were pulled from front line duty. It is largely weapon package choice driving airframe in Germany. And lack of infrastructure driving airplanes in Africa.

If I get you right, the Geschwader is roughly the size of a regiment. So you are saying the naval airforce will use the regimental system of armies for lack of a better comparison. So for example, I will have pure Geshwader of one type of plane, mixed together adhoc as needed for missions. So based on this, I can give you sort of where I am at right now. Germany is probably 2 fighter Geschwader, 1 flying boat, 1 glide bomber (CA32 or CA 42 type Italian), 1 torpedo bomber, 1 have to figure out. Africa will be 4 various fly boat or water landing Geschwader, 2 fighter, 1 glide bomb, and one torpedo bomb. And the actual combat units will be widely spread out with 10-15 planes of various type under an airbase commander. Training occurs at central location (Kamerun) and probably half of the planes are hear at any given time.

I see what you are saying with the structure of the marines, I just think in Africa they will be under the naval command at least at first. I am not so sure the Marines will need a lot of airpower to put down various tribal revolts, and if they do, they will just detach naval aviation. Right now, the Marines are really tied down to using ships to move around and a pretty thin railroad network. A lot of the areas are under German control in name only, and over time Germany will expand as things of value are found. I will probably need to give the Marines some airpower eventually. I see the marines as a under the German Navy now, but moving towards being the 4th branch. Probably best thought of as the colonial army. The Seebattalione are still in Germany and report to Schultze, just a couple of regiments. The multiple corps of Marines (Colonial Army) has a separate chain of command reporting up to Schultze and have a vastly different role.

You probably are right on dive bombers. I will double check.

On Africa, the sea tenders (predreads) are to support a large deployment of them. Most of the time, the smaller groups of 10-15 are probably supported by building wooden structures in a small anchorage and periodic freighter resupply. At least initially if there is not big threat, you will find them at ports. So the way I see the deployment would be 10-15 planes at Walvis bay, each of the 3 Angolian ports, mouth of Congo, Lagos, Harcourt, and Togoland. So these locations would have a 100-200 planes combined at any given time, right at where a port meets a railroad. The rest would be at the major base in Douala for ease of logistics. Then say if we have a revolt in central Angola, planes would be moved to that location, and we might have 200 or so planes at a central airdome near a railroad. The problem for Africa can be show by Angolan Coastline. I am covering a coast line the length of Texas or Germany with 50 planes, 6000 marines, and sprinkling of other stuff. It is budget issues meet took too much worthless African coastline. Only on the Kamerun area do we see force ratios a European would recognize.

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

Agreed. The border is short and easy to defend. The A-H plan to build a defensive line of forts backed up with a second line of forts in the likely attack lanes. Sort of a double Maginot line. In many locations, the terrain means little is needed to build a powerful defensive line. It is more having supply paths up to the high terrain. I guess they will invest heavily in mules. They are investing heavily on larger/newer naval artillery on the coast line, and the navy is designed to only control the Adriatic. The concept is to make it too expensive for Italy to even think about attacking. Much of the modernization of the Army is based on the belief that Russia will arise again and look to reverse prior losses. Galicia is not the best place to build a defensive line, and here mobility is much more important. AH believes in a war with Italy, it simply can import through German ports, so there is no need to try to force the Med.

The German Army plan is more based on the requirement to have a plan for all likely opponents.

But don't forget that the Ittalian coastal plain from (basically the AH border to Venice and further is a Prfect avenue for advance. While the Slovenian Mountains make a perfect defensive terrain (I personally was there ).

So in case of a war (assume Italy is the agressor as I hardly think AH will want to have MORE Italians ) ThE Austrian strategy would be : let them attack and bleed dry and then counterattack. Tirol, Trentino and the alps are good defensive territory for BOTH nations, so I assume not much actions will happen there (AS OTL - nothing decesive, but "tragic" moments...)

 

[lukedalton]

But don't forget that the Ittalian coastal plain from (basically the AH border to Venice and further is a Prfect avenue for advance. While the Slovenian Mountains make a perfect defensive terrain (I personally was there ).

So in case of a war (assume Italy is the agressor as I hardly think AH will want to have MORE Italians ) ThE Austrian strategy would be : let them attack and bleed dry and then counterattack. Tirol, Trentino and the alps are good defensive territory for BOTH nations, so I assume not much actions will happen there (AS OTL - nothing decesive, but "tragic" moments...)

And all this bring us to the fact that after some years people will try to come up with solution at this problem (and in general how to not play the great war massacre again), Italy will probably go for the special forces approach (MAS and Paratroopers) and use his Navy superiority and try to land an invasion force; in general aviation and bomber will be on the rage as a mean to overcome landbased defence and directly attack cities and strategic objective, and even if stunned tank development will happen, it has too much potential as a mean to beat trench warfare (the former entente nations are the best candidate as a motivation for trying something new when finance are goods, and the French can go for the Nazi Germany way and bankrupt themselfs for war)

 

[Detlef]

Detlef's post is far more informative than mine, so you should probably continue using the information he provides.
However, the namechange to Kaiserliche Marineflieger-Abteilung could still be possible. William II will probably even have some love for the two unexpected bastard children (U-boats and planes) of his beloved Kaiserliche Marine. It also binds the aviators to the Emperor making them (in his mind) honour-bound to follow him (such things would additionally be of ulterior political use in Africa)

Sorry about that.
Looks like you published your post while I was still writing mine. I only saw yours when I published mine.

 

[Detlef]

If I get you right, the Geschwader is roughly the size of a regiment. So you are saying the naval airforce will use the regimental system of armies for lack of a better comparison. So for example, I will have pure Geshwader of one type of plane, mixed together adhoc as needed for missions. So based on this, I can give you sort of where I am at right now. Germany is probably 2 fighter Geschwader, 1 flying boat, 1 glide bomber (CA32 or CA 42 type Italian), 1 torpedo bomber, 1 have to figure out. Africa will be 4 various fly boat or water landing Geschwader, 2 fighter, 1 glide bomb, and one torpedo bomb. And the actual combat units will be widely spread out with 10-15 planes of various type under an airbase commander. Training occurs at central location (Kamerun) and probably half of the planes are hear at any given time.

Well, I have to admit making two mistakes in my earlier post.

The first one isn´t so severe I hope:
First "See-Flieger-Abteilung" (HQ in Kiel) is responsible for the Baltic Sea, not North Sea, Second "See-Flieger-Abteilung" (HQ in Wilhelmshaven) is responsible for the North Sea, not Baltic Sea.
First See-Flieger-Abteilung also commands the three seaplane tenders built during the war.

The second one is totally my fault for concentrating too much on the land based naval aviation.

Let´s start with land based aircraft (air force and naval land based aviation supporting the Marine Corps Flanders):

A "Jasta" (fighter squadron) around 1916/17 nominally had 12 pilots. Meaning 12 aircraft plus sometimes reserve aircraft. In 1918 some fighter squadrons in critical regions got up to a strength of 18 pilots.
A "Gruppe" (group) consisted normally of 2 fighter squadrons.
A "Geschwader" (wing) of 4 fighter squadrons.
(The one existing land based naval air fighter wing supporting the Marine Corps Flanders though consisted of 5 fighter squadrons.)
Only 4 air force fighter wings were created plus 12 air force fighter groups in OTL (4 x 4 + 12 x 2 = 40 squadrons).
Since the German air force created more than 80 fighter squadrons, independent fighter squadrons therefore were pretty normal. With the larger fighter groups and wings more mobile and deployed to critical regions during the war.

A "Schlasta" (literally battle squadron, close air support) seems to have had 6 two-seater aircraft (= 12 airmen). All close air support squadrons (created 1917) were independent.
I suspect the reconnaissance squadrons and "light" bomber units probably had the same amount of aircraft, since they used mainly two seaters too. Reconnaissance squadrons were independent. Bomber squadrons were organized in bomber wings of 3-6 squadrons.
I´ve no information about the number of planes in the heavy bomber squadrons. Only that they were organized in bomber wings too.

Organization was somewhat different for the "Marine-See-Flieger". Using mostly seaplanes but also some land based fighters.
2nd See-Flieger-Abteilung (2nd naval sea aviation district) responsible for the North Sea and with HQ in Wilhelmshaven -> Occupied Belgium ->
Below them naval aviation base ("Seeflugstation") Flanders I (Zeebrugge) and naval aviation base Flanders II (Oostende). Both with a mixture of fighter, reconnaissance and torpedo bomber seaplanes. The seaplane fighters in both bases were each organized in a "Marine Küsta" (naval aviation coastal defense squadron). In this case Marine Küsta I and II. Not sure if they ever reached the 12 plane standard.
Torpedo and reconnaissance seaplanes there were organized in squadrons too. It seems that they were trying for 6 plane squadrons too following the example of the air force.
Additionally two "Marine Küstas" (Küsta III and IV) were created using land based fighters to protect naval installations especially the naval coastal artillery. Seems that these two squadrons only got older fighter aircraft and never reached a strength of 12 pilots and airplanes.
(Wilhelmshaven of course also controlled naval aviation in German North Sea bases. So the number of seaplanes used was much higher than indicated here. Using only the example of Flanders.)

So if naval aviation is responsible for the African colonies you could follow WW1 German procedures.
Create an additional two (maybe three?) naval sea aviation districts (See-Flieger-Abteilungen)?
- German East Africa (HQ in Dar-es-Salaam)
- German West Africa (HQ in Douala)
(- maybe German South West Africa - covering Angola and German South West Africa - HQ in Swakopmund?)
German West Africa covers a pretty long coast? So dividing responsibility might make sense?

Each naval sea aviation district then creates several naval aviation bases (Seeflugstationen) responsible for a coastal region. Essentially a regional HQ / base responsible for deployment, supply and repair in their region.

And each naval aviation base then deploys aircraft to forward bases in its region.
That might be a full squadron, a half-squadron or an "Abteilung" (detachment) of a squadron. Probably a detachment (Abteilung) of 2-4 planes in most cases.

However you wrote earlier:

1) I am looking at 14 squadrons (Gruppen?) with 40-60 planes each. Many will be mixed in types of aircraft, and the deployment will be 2 in East Africa, 3 in Douala, 1 in SWA/Angola, 2 in Nigeria, and 6 in Germany. This would give me about 750 aircraft and 15,000 men.

That´s just 450 (750 x 0.6) planes in all of German Africa.
In that case I just can´t see the Germans distributing their planes all over the place in pickets of 10-15 aircraft. It would violate German military thinking. Conserve your forces for the "Schwerpunkt" (point of decision).

Which you also recognized saying that "probably half of the planes are here [in Cameroon] at any given time". Which would just leave 15 bases with 15 airplanes each. Given the size of German Africa most colonies - especially German East Africa - would feel a little insecure?

So most forward / minor naval air bases might have just 2-4 airplanes at best?
Reconnaissance? With bomber and torpedo bombers too flying reconnaissance?
Keeping the rest concentrated? At least at squadron or group level?

 

[BlondieBC]

Snip

I see what you are saying, but i am not sure the resources allow for what you are saying. Some let me step back. Winners suffer victory disease. They will want a what we would call a peace dividend. So a flat budget for Navy and Army seem quite generous. (Note: Marines get about 1/8 of German prewar Army budget). And the Colonial issues gets dumped in Naval lap.

Now lets look at what we have to make sure not too low. I am figuring the land budget for one Germany army will roughly pay for the roughly one army active, one reserve in Africa plus buys working on the missing items. I have to keep building some railroads. I am sure I will have continual colonial issues and revolts that have to be resolved, and the ungodly logistics of Africa. Seems like a reasonable short cut. Besides a little color that may show up, i will not cover the wars in a lot of detail. Needless to say, with over 1000 tribes under my rule now, and the way I selected some winners (selected Kamerun plus OstAfrica), I have also picked losers. And there will be old tribal grudges to settle, tribes that don't want to "Germanize", etc. Maybe i should beef up the number of Squadrons and have additional squadrons from the Marine budget? Maybe I need to go up to another 4-8 Marine units.

Now to the Naval budget proper. Lets look at the plus and minus, so we see it is not too small or large by any wide margin.

1) You are right that I am going from 21 or so dreadnoughts in 7 years (3 per year) to less than one per year. But really, I am probably going from 75K tons to 40K tons per year. And cost rises faster than tonnage as far AFAIK.
2) Second savings is that I will be able to build smaller ships in Africa for less money. So I can save money on destroyer, gunboats, and light unarmored carriers. Also can built things like landing craft down here. And I have the potential to build merchant shipping for profit. These are the upsides.
3) Now to downsides. Need to pay for operation and later replacement of 18 Zeppelins, along with testing for Zeppelin aircraft carriers.
4) These 14 squadrons of planes.
5) I can sort of say Douala might break even, but probably should account for all the ports I am running in Africa.
6) I need at least 4 times as many cruisers as OTL prewar. So probably need to be building 30-60 over next decade or so.
7) Need lots of destroyers.
8) Need over 9 or so new U-boats per year. And these are bigger and more expense that prewar.
9) Fund R&D. Radar, glide weapons, aircraft, pressurized cabins, etc.
10) And going to go a lot heavier on shore based port defense. 380mm then 420mm guns, permanent mine fields, etc.


And this gets me to my dilemma. I have probably 50 active marine regiments of all types. And I have a coastline much, much larger than Germany to defend. I have 11 ports to defend, plus a vast interior to control (1 EA, 4 SWA, 3 Kamerun, 3WA). My though was each port, say Walvis Bay would have about 1-2 regiment of Marines, 10-15 planes, few shore guns including at least 2 of 380mm or larger. This will take up 15 or so regiments plus 150 or so planes. 1/3 of my forces. And then put half at Douala as main reserve and training center, and I am very thin in the interior. Now to get to the problem. Each of these areas covered is huge. At least the size of Germany North Sea Coast, probably closer to its 1914 Baltic coast. I have trouble seeing how I could put less. We are talking maybe 3000 to 5000 total people, 15 planes, and a few smaller gunboats or like. And for conquered places like Angola, these units are basically the entire government. The whites don't like us, and the natives don't like us. Given time the colonial office will establish a government structure, but by then the Naval structure is probably set.

On naval district, I think I need to create 2 or 4. Four to match the colonial offices, or 2 to match East and West Coastline. One per colonial seems to make more logical sense. And the smaller units of 6 to 12 airmen make sense. With some much area to cover, 6 plane units would work well.

On the Schwerpunkt, I am concentrating forces at the major ports. Did Germany leave the entire Baltic coastline undefended prewar? And the North Sea outside of the main naval port? To me, half of the forces in one port near the sea seems like concentration. 2% of the coast line has 50% of the forces. So adjusting for Coast line size, this is like keeping the main fleet (all the ships bigger than Cruisers at Wilhelmhaven) along with 70% of all other forces. And then putting 10% at Kiel, Danzig, and Konigsberg. And you need to think about distances involved if I lose the port, say in Togoland. It is a 1000 to 1500 KM by rail which is about the rail distance from Hamburg to Estonia. I really, really need not to lose the ports.

On German East Africa, it is insecure. The British are building a major naval base in Zanzibar. A 15" gun with some high angle shots can pretty much shell Dar Es Salaam without leaving port. I see Greater SWA (Angola and SWA) being the prestige settler colony and Kamerun having the built up infrastructure. Kamerun has electric power, industry, and a good port.

 

[forget]

BC

We seem to agree with the fact giving the ginormous colonial gains the germans have managed during there effective african campaigns. There is just no way for the effective control and Germanisation of all these colonial gains, many of them geographically isolated from main control areas.

Why not give large portions of african land that cannot be effectively managed back to the defeated? After the designated gloating and humiliation period of course or after war reparations have been paid.

 

[BlondieBC]

BC

We seem to agree with the fact giving the ginormous colonial gains the germans have managed during there effective african campaigns. There is just no way for the effective control and Germanisation of all these colonial gains, many of them geographically isolated from main control areas.

Why not give large portions of african land that cannot be effectively managed back to the defeated? After the designated gloating and humiliation period of course or after war reparations have been paid.

Well, mainly that is not what nations did back then. Colonies were viewed as things that made you stronger. Basically all the colonies were massive money losers after the military budgets are factored in. They are best seen as ways for rich people to receive welfare via the military budget via general taxes. So Germany will not leave. And they analysis is from the Navies perspective in defending against another major power (UK) fighting a major war to take the colonies. In a war against anyone but the USA or UK, the colonies are massively well defended. And against tribal revolts, the ratio of power is even better. And do to a quirk of the war, Kamerun is able to supply itself in an extended war. And this gets into why the ports are defended such as Walvis bay. It is not that defeating a couple of regiments of troops is that hard. I am just making you bring down a few divisions. And it easy to suppress a the naval coastal guns, if you bring down enough modern ships. It is about making it too expensive for anyone to want to try to do it.

On the effective control, this was also the case IOTL. Many things painted red on the map or painted blue were not governed by the Europeans as we understand it today. Often a colony had under 3000 total whites. You can imagine how much control you have with 1500 whites in country the size of Texas with 3 million natives. And 80% of the whites concentrated in just a few dozen square miles, often at a port. And for some places like what is now the Central African Republic, it was probably under 300 people, all missionaries. The level of day to day control the Germans have is extraordinary for OTL, where there are literally 10,000 + German military personnel within 20 miles of Douala. It just looks weak ITTL because it people generally don't understand the day to day stuff of colonies. Same with the ethnic cleansing I did in Europe. It is less ITTL than OTL.


As to Germanizing, a lot depends on what you mean by the word. It is not like a Polish village in Prussia where given a 100 years, you can end up with people that are indistinguishable from regular Germans. It in Africa you will always be able to spot the Germanized people not only by skin color, but even if fully European looking, you can tell by cultural difference. The GAP is just too big to be closed over a few generations. So what do the Germans get 50 years down the road of things work out well for them. In say a area the size of Europe and with say 75 million native people, they can get the following:

1) They can get hopefully the German outflow to go to German colonies. So they can have 3-10 million people of German descent living in the colonies, probably concentrated in a few areas that are less than 10% of the colony. Probably a high percentage are mixed race due to the way immigration patterns go. They likely speak German first but know the local trade languages.

3) They can hopefully have a similar numbers of Europeans from other countries. Think the Italians in Argentina, but it will be Russians in Angola. Hopefully speak German first and think of themselves by German.

4) Of the 75 million natives, you will have 5-15 million that speak German fluently and benefit from the system. They are loyal to German and have the elite class. Large economic benefits.

The rest will probably suffer, but it is a workable situation, even for the long term. Now there are host of ways this can go wrong, which I skipped. People are people, so the largely unsupervised "German" tribes will likely abuse the unfavored tribes. Likely continual low scale rebellion. You are more likely to create a MittelAfrika that has another national identity, than being German first. Think India. It can easily break into war between the white Germans and the "German tribes". In colonialism, the majority of the people always suffer, despite what the history books of the colonial masters say. The British Empire harmed Africa compared to the areas being ignored. Same for Germans. But when written from the perspective of the winners, it will be a golden era. You can go watch all the movies glorifying the colonial days to see examples. They always show the 4-10 white people who turn out so well, and sort of skip the 1000+ workers partially enslaved to support the lifestyle.


But in short, why keep? Ego and they are powerful enough to keep it.

 

[Glenn239]

Sorry, just coming in here. What’s the German geo-strategic rationale for building bases in Africa?

 

[BlondieBC]

Sorry, just coming in here. What’s the German geo-strategic rationale for building bases in Africa?

Same rational for Singapore or Gibraltar for the UK. To control shipping lanes. IOTL, RN could keep the Germans bottled up in the North Sea, and interdict merchant shipping where the Germans had no counter. ITTL, the bases allow control of the South Atlantic, which cuts off the UK from desperately needed food from South America. And Dar Es Salaam gives them a chance to cut the India ocean, but the war plans generally assume the Ottomans will provide bases. Cut the Med and South Atlantic, and the UK is in serious trouble.

And also back them colonies were seen to make countries stronger. So it makes Germany stronger to have MittelAfrika, just like India helped make UK stronger or China made Japan stronger. And with a war of attrition being viewed as the wave of the future, it gives away to counteract the "unlimited" manpower of India.

 

[Monty Burns]

And this gets me to my dilemma. I have probably 50 active marine regiments of all types. And I have a coastline much, much larger than Germany to defend. I have 11 ports to defend, plus a vast interior to control (1 EA, 4 SWA, 3 Kamerun, 3WA). My though was each port, say Walvis Bay would have about 1-2 regiment of Marines, 10-15 planes, few shore guns including at least 2 of 380mm or larger. This will take up 15 or so regiments plus 150 or so planes. 1/3 of my forces. And then put half at Douala as main reserve and training center, and I am very thin in the interior. Now to get to the problem. Each of these areas covered is huge. At least the size of Germany North Sea Coast, probably closer to its 1914 Baltic coast. I have trouble seeing how I could put less. We are talking maybe 3000 to 5000 total people, 15 planes, and a few smaller gunboats or like. And for conquered places like Angola, these units are basically the entire government. The whites don't like us, and the natives don't like us. Given time the colonial office will establish a government structure, but by then the Naval structure is probably set.

The solution could be to define core territories to be defended and developped and outlying territories for which guerilla warfare is planned. The core territories will see industry, port facilities, general infrastructure, domestic industry and agriculture able to support them in case of war. Outlying territories are then mainly used to conscription - and for later development. With time passing by development will dissipate into the fringe territories, Germany will have mroe money and colonists for these territories as well. At the moment, though, what's crucial for the German victory were the facilities in Cameroon that allowed to field and supply the colonial troops. Those facilities will be extended and must be protected, the rest is optional.

On German East Africa, it is insecure. The British are building a major naval base in Zanzibar. A 15" gun with some high angle shots can pretty much shell Dar Es Salaam without leaving port. I see Greater SWA (Angola and SWA) being the prestige settler colony and Kamerun having the built up infrastructure. Kamerun has electric power, industry, and a good port.

The Germans know that missing a great port in the Indian ocean is missing a great opportunity. Any plan for a new war with Britain will therefore see a major attack into Kenya adn landing attempts on Sansibar. If there's another war with Britain, this will be teh major objective.

The second objective, by the way, will be supporting rebellions in colonies like teh ones in South Africa and Ireland. They proved extremely successful. Likely candidates are Egypt, the Arabian statelets and India.

Of course, the attack on Kenya means that Germany needs another core territory there for that purpose. I propose Eastern Congo and Ruanda/Burundi. The highlands there should be fitting for white settlers, it's inland and thus safe from whatever naval assets the British can field, and for the attack on Kenya land forces are needed. And of course a railway between Ruanda and Cameroon is far away from any possible Allied attack (besides the British from Uganda/Sudan, where the Germans will attack anyway).

 

[Detlef]

I see what you are saying, but i am not sure the resources allow for what you are saying. Some let me step back. Winners suffer victory disease. They will want a what we would call a peace dividend. So a flat budget for Navy and Army seem quite generous. (Note: Marines get about 1/8 of German prewar Army budget). And the Colonial issues gets dumped in Naval lap.

I must apologize. It seems my posts were totally unclear.
I do agree with you that funds - given the challenges - are limited for the navy. And quite understandably so given the situation post-war.

And this gets me to my dilemma. I have probably 50 active marine regiments of all types. And I have a coastline much, much larger than Germany to defend. I have 11 ports to defend, plus a vast interior to control (1 EA, 4 SWA, 3 Kamerun, 3WA). My though was each port, say Walvis Bay would have about 1-2 regiment of Marines, 10-15 planes, few shore guns including at least 2 of 380mm or larger. This will take up 15 or so regiments plus 150 or so planes. 1/3 of my forces. And then put half at Douala as main reserve and training center, and I am very thin in the interior. Now to get to the problem. Each of these areas covered is huge. At least the size of Germany North Sea Coast, probably closer to its 1914 Baltic coast. I have trouble seeing how I could put less. We are talking maybe 3000 to 5000 total people, 15 planes, and a few smaller gunboats or like. And for conquered places like Angola, these units are basically the entire government. The whites don't like us, and the natives don't like us. Given time the colonial office will establish a government structure, but by then the Naval structure is probably set.

My fault again.
I thought that more bases / ports would receive 10-15 airplanes.
With 11 ports your plan is probably the best anyone can do.

Right now the ports are probably getting the 24 cm main guns of the older pre-dreads?

On naval district, I think I need to create 2 or 4. Four to match the colonial offices, or 2 to match East and West Coastline. One per colonial seems to make more logical sense. And the smaller units of 6 to 12 airmen make sense. With some much area to cover, 6 plane units would work well.

I´d vote for 4 districts. Given the large West coastline (compared to East) one district in the East and three in the West seem to make sense. No need to make one naval district simply too large. And there would be after all still a supreme naval commander and staff for all of Africa (HQ probably Douala). They would be responsible for deploying units from one district to another in wartime or during a revolt.

On German East Africa, it is insecure. The British are building a major naval base in Zanzibar. A 15" gun with some high angle shots can pretty much shell Dar Es Salaam without leaving port. I see Greater SWA (Angola and SWA) being the prestige settler colony and Kamerun having the built up infrastructure. Kamerun has electric power, industry, and a good port.

It might make sense to use the port of Lindi in Southern German East Africa as a supply base for Indian ocean German naval ships? At least in wartimes?
According to the German Colonial Encyclopedia (in German) from 1920 the town is located at the Northern bank of the Lukuledi river. Width of the river roughly 1 km there. Including a channel roughly 400 meters wide with a depth of at least 10 meters. Only problem is a barrier at the mouth of the river into the bay. At low tide that limits entry to the river to ships with a draft of 5 meters or less.
One would need to cut a channel through that barrier to allow naval ships to leave or arrive at any time. And not only at high tide.
Destroyers (Grosses Torpedoboot 1916) or OTL U-93 type U-boats could enter or leave anytime. Cruisers and U-cruisers would be restricted to the high tide.

Population before WW1 roughly 4000. Administrative center for the Lindi district. The third company of the German colonial "Schutztruppen" troops was stationed there. Customs office, postal office and telegraph office.
Roughly 1 km behind Lindi you´ll find hills roughly 200 m high. On the Southern side of the river the hills (slightly lower than on the Northern side) start almost at the ocean bay. Seems like a perfect location for some coastal artillery?
Warmest months: November, December 26.8 degrees Celsius
Coolest months: July 23.6 degrees Celsius
Major exports: sisal, cotton, rubber, sesame and peanuts from plantations
Civilian ship port traffic in 1908: 34 ships of the German East-African line plus 52 government ships with together 104870 registered tons. Plus 304 dhows with a volume of 6073 cubic meters.

I mention it as a possible supply base in wartime and nothing more.
Advantage: no British owned islands nearby
Disadvantage: No large infrastructure except a roughly 20 km long narrow gauge railway for transporting export goods from the plantations in the Lindi valley to the port. No industry to repair ships. For resupply totally relying on ships.

But with the problems facing Dar Es Salaam the German navy might at least think about using Lindi.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

Entertaining but...

Shouldn't this be in ASB?...

 

[BlondieBC]

Shouldn't this be in ASB?...

No, but you need a longer comment for me to respond to in detail. Exactly what do you find so hard to accept?

 

[BlondieBC]

Question

The TL is getting much longer than I originally envisioned and I post less often. Would it help to setup a new thread with just the story posts? Or is better to keep it like it currently is? I would still post the updates both here and in the new thread. Assuming it does not violate board policy.

 

[Keith Robertsson]

Yeup, set up a story only thread. But first check with the Admin to see if he can change this thread title to ..... Comment Thread.

The TL is getting much longer than I originally envisioned and I post less often. Would it help to setup a new thread with just the story posts? Or is better to keep it like it currently is? I would still post the updates both here and in the new thread. Assuming it does not violate board policy.

 

[BlondieBC]

Germany Plans, part 8:

Thanks for the comments, they help a lot.

The land based KFMA has a budget strength of 750 airplanes and 15,000 men with 40% stationed in Germany. The planes bases in Germany will be roughly 30% fighters, 25% level bombers, 30% torpedo planes, and 15% other. They will largely be wheel based. Generous funding is allocated for planes capable of effectively using the glide weapons and for glide weapon refinement. Most of the existing seaplanes are to be transferred to Africa. Africa will be roughly 50% seaplanes, 10% wheeled fighters, 15% level bombers, 10% torpedo planes, and 15% other. The African commands and Germany command will generally have different types of planes. Africa will require more rugged and easeer to maintain multi-function planes. Germany will have higher performance planes designed to fight the Royal Navy.

The naval commands in Africa will be reorganized to match the 4 colonial administrative units. Overall commander remains in Douala.

Bases: To lower costs, a rationalization and standardization of naval bases will occur into 3 major bases (fortified ports with drydocks) and 13 minor bases (fortified ports with limited support abilities). The major bases shall be Wilhelmshaven, Kiel, and Douala. The minor bases will be Riga (F), Danzig, Haifa (F), Duba (F), Ascension Island, Lagos, Banana, Luanda, Lobito, Namibe, Walvis Bay, and Dar Es Salaam. Base controlled by foreign powers (F) will be defended by the host country. The German Navy will work with these countries to ensure they have access to the needed weapons and expertise. A study will be conducted on the cost of a major base in southern East Africa. The German Navy will work with colonial authorities and German authorities to help insure other ports are as usable as possible for the German Navy without large additional expenditures. The German army will be responsible for defending the land approaches of the bases in Germany.

Major bases will keep enough supplies to be able to fight a two year war either in stockpiles or local production. Major bases shall keep enough mines, ships, shore batteries and airplanes to stop an determined attack by a major navy to a radius of 50 miles. The major bases will receive the majority of the newer coastal defense guns (350 mm, 380 mm,420 mm). These guns will have high angle mounts and will have ammunition designed to extend the range beyond what is normally seen in the associated surface ships. Each year, four guns of the largest caliber under production will be produced. The bulk of the marines and air force will be in Kamerun, and will be available to defend Douala in case of war.

It is understood that some minor bases may not be able to meet all the listed criteria due to geography or budget reasons. They will keep enough supplies to be able to support a U-boat squadron, a torpedo squadron and half a cruiser squadron for a six month war. There will be plans to ramp up supply levels to support the main fleet in the 3 month leadup to war, if necessary. Minor bases shall keep enough forces to require a determined assault by a major power and a 3 month siege before surrender. The naval artillery off these bases will be mostly off ships being retired, but each base shall receive two naval guns of 350mm or larger size as production permits. Each German colonial base will have 1-3 regiments of Colonial marines who will be tasked with defending the port in case of a war. In peace time, their main role will be to suppress rebellion and otherwise provide any military power needed by local colonial officials. Attached will be 10-20 planes of various roles. In peacetime, the planes will be used mainly for patrols to assist the local police.

Zeppelin: Germany will maintain 24 of the more modern WW1 Zeppelins - Germany 9, Togoland 3, Kamerun 6, South West Africa 3, East Africa 3. Significant funding is being allocated to developing the technology need for true long endurance height climbers with night detection systems. Once the technology is developed, there is a planned replacement cycle of 2 new height climbing command Zeppelins per year. Three older Zeppelins will be used to test the aircraft carrier Zeppelin in Africa. After testing, a decision will be made.

 

[Deimos]

I miss some internal security measures for the new colonies - particularly Angola and the former Belgian Congo.
Granted, Angola may be handwaved with what surely amounts to police forces as the enlarged South Africa is an accomplice of Germany and Douala acts as a base that can send ships when Agola needs them.

However I believe it to be different where the Congo is concerned, sadly, I did not find a budget for the Belgian "force publique" to help you but I think it would make some impact when you are trying to be faithful to the German naval budget.


I would also like to see a thread that presents the pure story. But don't correct too many spelling mishaps when doing so. I still chuckle at the typo of "British introduce steal helmets"

 

[BlondieBC]

I miss some internal security measures for the new colonies - particularly Angola and the former Belgian Congo.
Granted, Angola may be handwaved with what surely amounts to police forces as the enlarged South Africa is an accomplice of Germany and Douala acts as a base that can send ships when Agola needs them.

However I believe it to be different where the Congo is concerned, sadly, I did not find a budget for the Belgian "force publique" to help you but I think it would make some impact when you are trying to be faithful to the German naval budget.


I would also like to see a thread that presents the pure story. But don't correct too many spelling mishaps when doing so. I still chuckle at the typo of "British introduce steal helmets"

Well, we can never trust a Brit.

I am not so sure what your concern is on the budget. The German control consists largely of the 100K active, 150K reserve Colonial marines. The funds were found by making the German Army smaller (1/4 or so). Now on the Congo, much of it is effectively under no European control. Just because the Belgians had some level of control, does not mean the Germans have yet gained that level of control. To a very large extent, Germany has taken control of the port cities. I has good control in Kamerun proper. It would have taken control of valuable things like mines. The rest is very, very lightly controlled.