"Graf Zeppelin curious." Topic

Just wondering about proposed complement of Bf109s and Ju87 Stukas? Article says 'Navalised', though never completed, obviousy. Just wondering… had folding wing versions been developed? BF109, might not have needed, but Stuka was a Big Beast! Not my field at all, just curious.

Ju 87C
On 18 August 1937, the RLM decided to introduce the Ju 87 Tr(C). The Ju 87 C was intended to be a dive and torpedo bomber for the Kriegsmarine. The type was ordered into prototype production and available for testing in January 1938. Testing was given two months and was to begin in February and end in April 1938.[52] The prototype V10 was to be a fixed wing test aircraft, while the following V11 would be modified with folding wings. The prototypes were Ju 87 B-0 airframes powered by Jumo 211 A engines.[52] Owing to delays, the V10 was not completed until March 1938. It first flew on 17 March and was designated Ju 87 C-1.[52] On 12 May, the V11 also flew for the first time. By 15 December 1939, 915 arrested landings on dry land had been made. It was found that the arresting gear winch was too weak and had to be replaced. Tests showed the average braking distance was 20–35 metres (66–115 ft).[53] The Ju 87 V11 was designated C-0 on 8 October 1938. It was fitted out with standard Ju 87 C-0 equipment and better wing-folding mechanisms. The "carrier Stuka" was to be built at the Weserflug Company's Lemwerder plant between April and July 1940.[54]

Among the "special" equipment of the Ju 87 C was a two-seat rubber dinghy with a flare gun, signal ammunition and other emergency supplies. A quick fuel dump mechanism and two inflatable 750 L (200 US gal) bags in each wing and a further two 500 L (130 US gal) bags in the fuselage enabled the Ju 87 C to remain afloat for up to three days in calm seas.[54] On 6 October 1939, with the war already underway, 120 of the planned Ju 87 Tr(C)s on order at that point were cancelled. Despite the cancellation, the tests continued using catapults. The Ju 87 C had a takeoff weight of 5,300 kg (11,700 lb) and a speed of 133 km/h (83 mph) on departure. The Ju 87 could be launched with a SC 500 kg (1,100 lb) bomb and four SC 50 kg (110 lb) bombs under the fuselage. The C-1 was to have two MG 17s mounted in the wing with a MG 15 operated by the rear gunner. On 18 May 1940, production of the C-1 was switched to the R-1.[55]

link

link

This answers your questions
YouTube link

Graf Zeppelin and its air group were just a very, very, very bad joke.

The best use for GZ would have been to fill her with 40-odd Bf109Ts and use her to provide air cover for a concentrated force of the two Bismarck- and the two Scharnhorst-class battleships. The heavies could have used their own embarked floatplanes for ASW and search. The 109 was a significantly better fighter than anything embarked on RN carriers at that date so they would have been pretty effective at keeping even escorted inbound carrier strikes off target. The German carriers' air group capacity was so small that they really hadn't the capacity both to attack and defend.

The 109 was a significantly better fighter than anything embarked on RN carriers at that date so they would have been pretty effective at keeping even escorted inbound carrier strikes off target.

Yes and no.

IIRC the Bf-109T (navalized version) was based on the Bf-109E. By the time the GZ would have gotten into service this would have been a bit behind the curve on land-based fighters, but well ahead of what the RN had onboard. Still, how does a GZ-led taskforce get out of reach of land-based air? Likely by sailing through it.

And … the stats of the fighters hardly matter. Where and when would the pilots and deck-handling crews learn their trades? On the open waters of the North Sea during combat sorties, most likely. Let us remember that the Bf-109 was a notoriously difficult plane to handle on take off and landing, with a narrow-track canted main gear that led to more ground-loops than almost any other fighter in any airforce in the world. And that was when you had a large airfield that wasn't moving as you pushed in or pulled back your throttle, and could be found right where you left it when you returned. Put these planes on a crowded, narrow deck moving away at 30 kts while pitching up and down, with pilots who have no practical experience with carrier take-offs and landings, and the result would have been deck crewmen getting chopped up left and right while the planes swerved off to the sides and fell into the waves, while many of those that did manage to get off the front flew straight into the next wave, or crashed into the stern of the ship upon their return (if they even found the ship before their fuel went bingo).

It is often said that the deck of a carrier during air ops is the most dangerous workplace in the world. The USN, RN, and IJN spent 20 peacetime years developing their carrier air ops techniques, methods, and equipment before they sailed off to war. The Kreigsmarine had none of that, and no sheltered safe-water training grounds to figure it out. GZ's maiden voyage would have been a disaster.

Or so I expect.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

@ Mark

They would have had the Baltic to work up in – pretty safe. Thereafter they'd have had to operate out of fjords, where they could be covered by land-based air.

I don't disagree re the Bf109T's shortcomings, but it's often overlooked how badly off for fighters the RN was. In 1939-41, not only were their mainstays the Skua, Sea Gladiator and Roc, but worse, they didn't have remotely enough of them. The RN was thrilled to receive the Fulmar because at least it was an an actual fighter.

The loss-to-accident rate of Bf109Ts would certainly have been high. But if it came down to whether RN carriers would run out of strike aircraft before the GZ ran out of 109Ts to shoot the strikes down, I tend to think it might.

Of course, in a counterfactual where Germany actually builds GZ and PS, probably the RN also solves its carrier fighter problem. How would the 109T have done against the Brewster Buffalo?

Cutting from my usual several pages long debunk of the Graf Zeppelin:

How many pilots, crew, and aircraft was Germany prepared to sacrifice to bring their carrier into operational being? Carrier aviation, though somewhat safer today, and "safer" is an extremely subjective term, in the 1930's, 40's and 50's was an extremely dangerous profession. Where were the Germans planning on training their folks to operate their hybrid craft off carriers? In the Baltic? How nice for them, nice, enclosed seas, compared to the reaches of the North Atlantic's well known nice calm waters. What's going to happen when a pilot who has trained in calm waters is suddenly faced with crappy North Atlantic weather with the horizon a short 3 miles away and a flight deck that rises and falls 25 to 30 feet as he attempts to land. Did the Kreigsmarine have a plan for training Landing Signal Officers to deal with this problem as they coaxed the pilots aboard? Were there flight deck officers who knew by feel just when to launch a plane so that it doesn't just "thuup" into a wave? News flash, the folks doing these jobs in the USN, RN, and IJN (although the Japanese were ahead of the game with a light system rather than LSO's) had years and years of practice at this and even they made mistakes. And what of the poor pilots? Do you suppose their training included flying their craft to their extremes of range; fighting an action; making their way back to where they think their carrier is going to be; if they're lucky, finding it; and then trying to land in the gloom under lowering skies on a pitching deck with their engines running on fumes?

Does anyone really think the good Reich's Air Marshal Fatty was going to send his best and brightest? I suspect that he, unlike apparently everyone else, already saw the writing on the wall and did as little as possible to encourage the project. Nobody ever said he was stupid.