Me109 landing characteristics

[Debonair]

did the GZ have an armored deck like RN carriers or a wood one like USN flat tops?

[Viking]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Big deal since there was no air cover for the PoW and Repulse.

Nor would there be any air cover for the home fleet in 40-41.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The Japanese used over twice as many bombers and torpedo a/c than the GZ had.

The Japanese sent two strikes of level bomber that only made one hit on Repulse starting a small fire in the hangar deck area. The planes that did the real damage were the torpedo bombers:

16 torpedo bombers from the Genzan Air Corps.
8 torpedo bombers from the Mihoro Air Corps.
26 torpedo bombers from the Kanoya Air Corps.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Even if your mighty KM aviators were up to the standards of the IJN, there was not enough a/c on the GZ to sink the entire Home Fleet as you claim. After one mission, a/c losses would be such that any further missions would have no effect.

The Japanese lost 3 planes to the Prince of Wales and Repulse. Hardly an unsustainable loss rate for a 50 plane strong force.

Replacement aircraft and crew could easily be transferred from Norway or France, depending on were the GZ was operating.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Kindly put your hobnailed boots back in the closet.

No need to be offensive. If you cannot debate in a civil manner I will have to put you on ignore.

[MiloMorai]

The RN was not without carriers in 40-41, so no free attack. So nice of you to forget about them.

The Home Fleet comprised the flagship HMS Nelson leading a force of one battle squadron (5 more battleships), one battlecruiser squadron (2 ships), one cruiser squadron (3), three destroyer flotillas (27), a submarine flotilla (6) two aircraft carriers and associated vessels. Another 1 or 2 carriers would have re-enforced the Fleet if the GZ was commisioned.

HMS Formidable was damaged by two 1,000 KG bombs and due to this damage she was out of action for 6 months. The Ju87 sure could not takeoff with that bomb load from the GZ.

For sure replacement a/c could be flown to the GZ but only if within range of the GZ. They would have also have to find the GZ in the vaste expanse of the NA. The 109T could only stay in the air for 1h40m and a range of 635km(~400mi).

So how many a/c would land safely on the not so calm NA? It is not just losses due to enemy actions. So nice of you to forget.

The Home Fleet was NOT just 2 heavy ships.

Talk sense and I would not have to tell you to put them away.

[Viking]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The RN was not without carriers in 40-41, so no free attack. So nice of you to forget about them.

The Seafire did not enter service until 1942, and the "Hurricat" did only operate in small numbers from catapult ships in 1941. The Swordfish bombers the carriers could launch would be a rather ineffective defense don't you think? In 40-41 the RN was without effective air cover whenever they operated outside the range of the RAF.

In any case by 1941 German u-boats had already sunk HMS Courageous, HMS Ark Royal and HMS Audacity.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The Home Fleet comprised the flagship HMS Nelson leading a force of one battle squadron (5 more battleships), one battlecruiser squadron (2 ships), one cruiser squadron (3), three destroyer flotillas (27), a submarine flotilla (6) two aircraft carriers and associated vessels. Another 1 or 2 carriers would have re-enforced the Fleet if the GZ was commisioned.

An impressive fleet to be sure, but its carriers didn't have effective planes to launch until mid-1942. Also, when did the home fleet ever sortie in any sizable formations? The hunt for Bismarck clearly shows how the RN operated prior to the Force-Z incident. The home fleet was deployed in small groups, usually pairs of ships or even single ships.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
HMS Formidable was damaged by two 1,000 KG bombs and due to this damage she was out of action for 6 months. The Ju87 sure could not takeoff with that bomb load from the GZ.

I don't know how much the carrier version if the Ju-87 could carry.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
For sure replacement a/c could be flown to the GZ but only if within range of the GZ. They would have also have to find the GZ in the vaste expanse of the NA. The 109T could only stay in the air for 1h40m and a range of 635km(~400mi).

Is that including the drop tank? In any case the GZ would naturally have to return to port to refuel and rearm between sorties.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
So how many a/c would land safely on the not so calm NA? It is not just losses due to enemy actions. So nice of you to forget.

Carrier operations would of course be limited to calm oceans, just like for all carriers of that time. During the attack on Pearl Harbor the IJN fleet launched two strikes with over 300 planes. No planes were lost in accidents during that operation.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
The Home Fleet was NOT just 2 heavy ships.

No, but they often sailed in small groups … just like Force-Z did.

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Talk sense and I would not have to tell you to put them away.

I do talk sense, but even if you do not understand me or don't agree with me you should refrain from provocative remarks like that. Unless that is the only way you know how to debate?

[Angus]

Originally posted by Viking
They could have sunk the entire British fleet. At that time shipboard AAA was woefully inadequate to defend capital ships; something Bismarck discovered to her demise. It was only later in the war that AAA became effective with the advent of radar-fused shells and purpose built AA cruisers and destroyers.

In 1941 every British warship was as helpless against aircraft as the Bismarck was.

I think that is an overstatement, but they sure would have been a nasty surprize. Remember, that any capital ship the Germans managed to get to the high seas caused the Brits to goo chase the fox, with many times the resources. And those were already stretched in 1941. So, with say one German TG out in the Atlanticboth the Home fleet and force "H" at Gibraltar have an extra job on their hands.
But:
"The Seafire did not enter service until 1942, and the "Hurricat" did only operate in small numbers from catapult ships in 1941. The Swordfish bombers the carriers could launch would be a rather ineffective defense don't you think? In 40-41 the RN was without effective air cover whenever they operated outside the range of the RAF."

Already in 1940, a squadron of Hurricanes landed on a carrier, with no tailhook, no experience, and no accident! The Hurricat and Seafires weren't so much on the carriers in the beginning for they weren't needed that bad, - not untill the Condors started to bother the convoys.
A German carrier with 109's aboard would have pressed those into service at once! And a humble Seafire in 1942 is a handful for a 109T.
As an offensive weapon, the GZ was just as good or better than anything the Allies had at the time, and as a defensive weapon she might have proved very useful for the German capital ships, for spotting, and although the little bombs did have problems with the armoured decks of capital ships, there was always the chance, and not all ships were capital ships.
So, just my cents.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Angus
Already in 1940, a squadron of Hurricanes landed on a carrier, with no tailhook, no experience, and no accident! The Hurricat and Seafires weren't so much on the carriers in the beginning for they weren't needed that bad, - not untill the Condors started to bother the convoys.
A German carrier with 109's aboard would have pressed those into service at once!

I don't think that reasoning adds up. You see the "Scourge of the Atlantic" was most active from June 1940 to February 1941 when they sank 365,000 tons. Still it took the British a whole year more to get the Seafire operational.

Originally posted by Angus
And a humble Seafire in 1942 is a handful for a 109T.

Do you think the 109T could outturn a Spit5? BRING THE 109T TO AH!!!

[Angus]

"I don't think that reasoning adds up. You see the "Scourge of the Atlantic" was most active from June 1940 to February 1941 when they sank 365,000 tons. Still it took the British a whole year more to get the Seafire operational. "
365.000 tonnes? Wholy crap?!?!?! All British shipping?
Well, anyway, and obviously they could not have a cv with every convoy. But the deck landing Hurricanes did it when retreating from Norway, and in the timeframe you mentioned, the RAF whad it's hands full with the BoB, so this does have it's reasons.
The GZ might have been ready in 1942 I belive, by that time the Seafires are around as well as Hurricats.
I didn't spot the specs for the 109T, but it has a greater wingspan, DB 601, wider track and added weight. Performancewise between the 109E and 109F?

[MiloMorai]

You don't talk sense since you think the British would do nothing to counter the threat the GZ posed. That would include getting the Seafire into the FAA earlier.

Carrier operations would of course be limited to calm oceans, just like for all carriers of that time.

Nice to know that the NA is a calm ocean. Better tell the British that the escort carriers of the sub hunting groups should not have been there.

So 3 carriers had been sunk but the British still had 5 more carriers. You think that British attack a/c would be sitting idle and not going after the GZ.

So do those 10 109Ts escort the German a/c or stay and defended the GZ? Sea Gladiators would be able to take care of most of the 20 German torpedo a/c but would those 10 109Ts be able to shoot down the 100 or so British attack a/c before they sunk the GZ?

Is that including the drop tank? In any case the GZ would naturally have to return to port to refuel and rearm between sorties.

Was the navigation of the pilots of the a/c that good that they could find the GZ in the expanse of the NA, drop tanks or no drop tanks? Any radio traffic would have been picked up and given the away location of the GZ to the British. The 109T-2 only had a range with d/ts of ~450mi.

Yes the GZ would have to run the gaunlet of land based a/c to make port, if it had not been sunk and with how many a/c to defend itself after previous battles?

Unlike Allied carriers, the 109Ts of the GZ had to be placed on a cradle for launch. Sure not expediant for quick reaction to an attack.

No, but they often sailed in small groups … just like Force-Z did.

So which small group of British ships that encircles the GZ do the miniscule number of a/c available do they attack?

[Angus]

Hehe, I missed this:
"Carrier operations would of course be limited to calm oceans, just like for all carriers of that time."
The conditions in the N-Atlantic and as well how small some of the carriers of the British were is a good example of the standard of their airmen. It was anything but calm when they went after the Bismarck for instance.
BTW, a Swordfish was doing subspotting from an escort CV outside Iceland in 1941 (I think). Hit by heavy headwind, the pilot realized he would not make it back to the ship, so he landed on the noodleula of Snæfellsnes.
The landing patch was really a tiny patch, and he landed totally perfectly!
A Sea Gladiator is a match for the Stuka. A Hurricane is the nightmare of the Stuka. A Seafire (bear in mind that the most common one is better than the one we have in AH) is also nasty enough for a 109T.
A Swordfish is easy prey for a 109. Then there were the Barracuda and some more.
So, yet again, in short, I think the British would have gone wild after the GZ, BUT had it been launched it would not have been good news from them. And had it been launched, those 109T's would also have been more than 10....

[MiloMorai]

So Angus if there was more 109Ts that would mean less attack a/c which would mean even less chance of any success in the attacks on the British ships.

Only so many a/c could be carried on the GZ.

[Angus]

Yep.
Imagine she was ready, and you were Raeder (boss), how would you have used her.
Always like what-if's

In my case, I think I would have used her as balanced as possible, with some 12-16 109's though.

[Viking]

Apart from Milo's usual "t3h British rulez" commentary () it is interesting to se how Angus and I are bouncing back and forth from one side of the argument to the other. One thing is for sure though: Like with all hypothetical arguments this one will not yield any clear answers.

[Angus]

That's what I like most when viewing a thing like that. Bounce around it and take a look from many positions.
Brittannia ruled teh waves though

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Viking
Apart from Milo's usual "t3h British rulez" commentary () it is interesting to se how Angus and I are bouncing back and forth from one side of the argument to the other. One thing is for sure though: Like with all hypothetical arguments this one will not yield any clear answers.

No Viking, it is not Brittannia Rules but good old fashioned common sense unlike your fantasy dreams of the superior Germany with its one carrier that would wipe the British Home Feet from the surface of the ocean.

[Viking]

Angus, I see Milo still hasn't developed a sense of humor. Or common decency. I'd better put him on ignore now than later.