Would Plan Z have been effective?

>>34816723
yes

>>34816723
no

>>34816723
Maybe

I don't know

>>34816723
plan z wasn't as good as plan y so no

>>34816723
If you expanded all the alphabet on failed plans, you need to rethink your strategy.

>>34816723
Only if we had reached Condition Fabric.

>>34816723
It would've given the KM something to rival the Home Fleet and thus would've been a good fleet in being, thus allowing the u boats to go about raiding with far less interference.

if they spent all those resources on a million fucking naval bombers and patrol aircraft they could control the english channel long enough to move an army across

I don't think they had resources for it and their naval engineering (excluding submarines) and naval tradition was lacking so I doubt they would manage to challenge RN even if they did complete it.

>>34816723
They couldn't afford it.

>>34818081
By making all the Plan Z elements you have to draw from other budgets, suddenly the Luftwaffe can't maintain air dominance and you don't have enough panzers to take out France.

The thing that made uboats so effective during WW2 was the ability to base directly on North Atlantic ports after the fall of France.

The single largest expendtirue program of the Allies in Ww2 was strategic bombing (construction of heavy bomber bases cost as much as a whole battlefleet), if the UK is not forced to pursue that avenue due to circumstances on the ground in Europe being different the Royal Navy would be pootling around with blinged out Lions, lots more high end destroyers and thousands upon thousands of Coastal command anti u-boat patrol bombers (which they didn't get until late in the war due to the need to bomb the shit out of germany).

File: Plan Z.png (141KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1280x800px

>>34816723
IT'S LEMON SCENTED!

>>34817343
>>34817762
>>34817780
>>34817790
Same Faggot?

>>34818183
But lets say they did have the money and materials, do you think it would have been a good use of there time and effort? Why or why not? And what do you think would have been a better option for all that materials if it didnt go into the Navy

File: 1474037379414.png (245KB, 444x638px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 444x638px

>>34816723
Probably get the same outcome to the German naval build-up of the 1890's-1900's: Britain matches and exceeds the German naval buildup, Germany is left with a powerful battle-fleet bottled up in the Baltic/North sea.

The timetable for Nazi Germany's buildup had the Kriegsmarine ready to rumble by the second half of the 1940's (at the earliest). Britain sees all this happening and matches Germany ship-for-ship at a bare minimum. The idea that a nation which relies entirely on its navy to maintain its empire and position as a world power would let itself be surpassed in warships was a silly presumption in the early 20th century and isn't any less silly in the 1930's-40's.

File: pmrK8jr.jpg (50KB, 750x468px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 750x468px

>>34820900

>>34820881

>do you think it would have been a good use of there time and effort?

No. The Z-Plan put a very heavy emphasis on battleships, which were not nearly as useful in WW2 as everybody thought they were going to be. It did include a few carriers, but not many, and not nearly enough to protect all the battleships included in the plan from air attack.

If Germany had the time and resources to actually complete the Z-Plan, it would have been a FAR better usage of resources to devote all that money towards developing a larger, more capable air force, including naval aviation.

File: IMG_2525.jpg (126KB, 2048x652px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 2048x652px

>>34820853

>>34820956
I agree, hell it probably would have been better if they started on their submarine program earlier with all that time, money, and materials.

>>34817790
Can you repeat the question

>>34816723
To be fair, one shipbuilding river, the Clyde, could spit out more ships than Germany combined, if they started dick waving, Britain would have slapped them with theirs and knocked their teeth out.

File: 1501867131025.png (187KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 640x360px

>>34816723

>The plan called for a fleet centered on ten battleships and four aircraft carriers which were intended to battle the Royal Navy

In which case the Royal Navy would have built twenty new battleships and ten aircraft carriers. Did they really think Britain would sit back and let them achieve naval parity? Germany had to have a huge army as well, the UK ploughed its resources into the navy which it depended on.

>>34823285
The British have the luxury of their little island, if their army is ever needed the RN and RAF have fucked up

>>34820457
Beat me to it

>>34823081
YOUR NOT THE BOSS OF ME NOW!