Alternate German naval buildup question thread.

[Naval Aviation Fan]

Hello everyone, I've not been on much for some time, as my health has been rather poor. After multiple visits to the ER, and one stay in the hospital, I spent a few weeks recovering. I'm back up to biking and walking most days, but remain very much weaker than normal, and have not been even thinking about going forward with my main work, which was going to be making ahistorical stories about Howard Hughes, but that work will take way to much time and effort right now, and frankly I'm just not up to the task at present.

So, not feeling up to making up stories from scratch, instead I'm going to try my hand at writing some sorties about the early German naval buildup, and to that end I am envisioning one thread on each of the German naval laws, plus a couple more threads for major naval history events, such as the Russo-Japanese war and the HMS Dreadnought.

What I hope to do is make a series of threads that spell out what the Germans had before 1900, and where they historically went on from there, along with speculations about a different path. In this thread, I'd like ideas as to the best way to go about this task, for instance, I'm going to want to list out the German navies Battleships before the 1897 naval law, and include some vital statistics on those ships.

The reason I'm having trouble with this is the 1st law talks about having a fleet of 19 Battleships, but mentions that that particular law only calls for 7 'new' Battleships to be built, which seems to me to mean that they already had 12 of these mandated Battleships already built, or at least on order at the time, but so far I can only account for 9 ships. Worse still, Germany had a number of lesser ships, that had guns the same size as some of the ships they called Battleships, and this is very confusing for me, so I'm asking for help figuring out what counted as a Battleship and what didn't, as well as when these standards changed historically.

Does anyone have some links for some free online sources of information about these topics/ships?

My own take on this subject is that the main man responsible for the direction that Germany historically took, was Alfred Von Tirpitz and in my own opinion, he missed some things. I'm looking to research what was historically done, to provide a realistic backdrop for exploring alternative paths. WWI as we know it is expendable but other things are not, and I'm looking for ideas and thoughts on how to do this.

 

[Riain]

Go for your life, but I don't think Germany's building programme was particularly outlandish and probably only needs improving in detail. The biggest German Naval problem was the command structure

 

[Captain Seafort]

The reason I'm having trouble with this is the 1st law talks about having a fleet of 19 Battleships, but mentions that that particular law only calls for 7 'new' Battleships to be built, which seems to me to mean that they already had 12 of these mandated Battleships already built, or at least on order at the time, but so far I can only account for 9 ships. Worse still, Germany had a number of lesser ships, that had guns the same size as some of the ships they called Battleships, and this is very confusing for me, so I'm asking for help figuring out what counted as a Battleship and what didn't, as well as when these standards changed historically.

I assume you're counting the four Sachsens, Oldenburg and the four Brandenburgs as the nine. To them, you have to add the first three KFIIIs, as they were laid down before the 1st Fleet Law came into effect. As for battleship vs coast defence ship vs large cruiser, it's mostly a matter of speed, armour and range - as you say, the Siegfrieds, KFIIIs, Wittelsbachs, Furst Bismarck and Prinz Heinrich all had a 24cm main battery. It doesn't help that the Siegfrieds were later redesignated from coast defence ship to battleship so that when they became over-age they could be replaced by battleships instead of coast defence ships.

Does anyone have some links for some free online sources of information about these topics/ships?

Wikipedia is pretty good for an overview.

 

[NoMommsen]

During the negotiations regarding the 1st Naval Law (google translate or siomilar might be of help) there were in service or already planned and financed

• 4 "Linienschiffe" (ship of the line or 'pre-dread' equivalent) of the Brandenburg-class
• 5 "Linienschiffe" of the Kaiser-Friedrich-III-class

and there were still some

• ironclads in service as the SMS Oldenburg, SMS Baden, not to forget : the Kaiser-Friedrich-III was laid down as "Ersatz-Preussen" or replacemnet Prussia.

Maybe 3 of these might account for the in the law as "existing" claimed 12 units (§1 section 2.).

 

[Dorknought]

Capital Ship Authorisations from - Dodson, Aidan. The Kaiser’s Battlefleet: German Capital Ships 1871–1918 (p. 236).

Programme Newbuild name - Launch Name
1872/ 73 Armoured ship A - Bayern (i)
1872/ 73 Armoured ship B - Sachsen (i)
1873/ 74 Armoured ship C - Baden (i)
1873/ 74 Armoured ship D - Württemberg (i)
1880/ 81 Armoured ship E - Oldenburg (i)
1887/ 88 Armoured vessel O - Siegfried
1888/ 89 Cruiser-corvette H - Kaiserin Augusta
1889/ 90 Armoured vessel P - Beowulf
1889/ 90 Armoured vessel Q - Frithjof
1889/ 90 Armoured vessel R - Hildebrand
1889/ 90 Armoured ship A - Brandenburg
1889/ 90 Armoured ship B - Wörth
1889/ 90 Armoured ship C - Weißenburg
1889/ 90 Armoured ship D - Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm
1890/ 91 Armoured vessel S - Hagen
1890/ 91 Armoured vessel U - Heimdall
1891/ 92 Armoured vessel V - Odin
1892/ 93 Armoured vessel T - Aegir
1894/ 95 Ersatz-Preußen - Kaiser Friedrich III
1895/ 96 Cruiser-corvette K - Hertha
1895/ 96 Cruiser-corvette L - Victoria Louise
1895/ 96 Ersatz-Freya (i) - Freya
1895/ 96 Ersatz-Leipzig - Fürst Bismarck
1896/ 97 Cruiser-corvette M - Vineta
1896/ 97 Cruiser-corvette N - Hansa
1896/ 97 Ersatz-Friedrich der Große - Kaiser Wilhelm II
1897/ 98 Ersatz-König Wilhelm (i) - Kaiser Wilhelm der Große
1898/ 99 Battleship A - Kaiser Barbarossa
1898/ 99 Battleship B - Kaiser Karl der Große
1898/ 99 Large Cruiser A - Prinz Heinrich
1899/ 1900 Battleship C - Wittelsbach
1899/ 1900 Battleship D - Wettin
1899/ 1900 Battleship E - Zähringen
1900 Battleship F - Schwaben
1900 Battleship G - Mecklenburg
1900 Large cruiser B - Prinz Adalbert (iii)
1901 Battleship H - Braunschweig
1901 Battleship J - Elsaß
1901 Ersatz-König Wilhelm (ii) - Friedrich Carl (ii)
1902 Battleship K - Preußen (ii)
1902 Battleship L - Hessen
1902 Ersatz-Kaiser - Roon
1903 Battleship M - Lothringen
1903 Battleship N - Deutschland (ii)
1903 Ersatz-Deutschland - Yorck
1904 Battleship O - Pommern
1904 Battleship P - Hannover
1904 Large Cruiser C - Gneisenau
1905 Battleship Q - Schleswig-Holstein
1905 Battleship R - Schlesien
1905 Large Cruiser D - Scharnhorst
1906 Ersatz-Bayern - Nassau
1906 Ersatz-Sachsen - Westfalen
1906 Large Cruiser E - Blücher (ii)
1907 Ersatz-Baden - Posen
1907 Ersatz-Württemberg - Rheinland
1907 Large Cruiser F - Von der Tann
1908 Ersatz-Oldenburg - Ostfriesland
1908 Ersatz-Siegfried - Helgoland
1908 Ersatz-Beowulf - Thüringen
1908 Large Cruiser G - Moltke
1909 Ersatz-Frithjof - Oldenburg (ii)
1909 Ersatz-Hildebrand - Kaiser (ii)
1909 Ersatz-Heimdall - Friedrich der Große (ii)
1909 Large Cruiser H - Goeben
1910 Ersatz-Hagen - Kaiserin
1910 Ersatz-Aegir - Prinzregent Luitpold
1910 Ersatz-Odin - König Albert
1910 Large Cruiser J - Seydlitz
1911 Ersatz-Kurfürst Friedrich Wilhelm - Großer Kurfürst (ii)
1911 Ersatz-Weißenburg - Markgraf
1911 Battleship S - König
1911 Large Cruiser K - Derfflinger
1912 Ersatz-Brandenburg - Kronprinz (ii)
1912 Ersatz-Kaiserin Augusta - Lützow
1913 Ersatz-Wörth - Baden (ii)
1913 Battleship T - Bayern (ii)
1913 Ersatz-Hertha - Hindenburg
1914 Ersatz-Kaiser Friedrich III - Sachsen (ii)
1914 Ersatz-Victoria Louise - Mackensen
1915 Ersatz-Kaiser Wilhelm II - Württemberg (ii)

 

[Garrison]

Hello everyone, I've not been on much for some time, as my health has been rather poor. After multiple visits to the ER, and one stay in the hospital, I spent a few weeks recovering. I'm back up to biking and walking most days, but remain very much weaker than normal, and have not been even thinking about going forward with my main work, which was going to be making ahistorical stories about Howard Hughes, but that work will take way to much time and effort right now, and frankly I'm just not up to the task at present.

So, not feeling up to making up stories from scratch, instead I'm going to try my hand at writing some sorties about the early German naval buildup, and to that end I am envisioning one thread on each of the German naval laws, plus a couple more threads for major naval history events, such as the Russo-Japanese war and the HMS Dreadnought.

What I hope to do is make a series of threads that spell out what the Germans had before 1900, and where they historically went on from there, along with speculations about a different path. In this thread, I'd like ideas as to the best way to go about this task, for instance, I'm going to want to list out the German navies Battleships before the 1897 naval law, and include some vital statistics on those ships.

The reason I'm having trouble with this is the 1st law talks about having a fleet of 19 Battleships, but mentions that that particular law only calls for 7 'new' Battleships to be built, which seems to me to mean that they already had 12 of these mandated Battleships already built, or at least on order at the time, but so far I can only account for 9 ships. Worse still, Germany had a number of lesser ships, that had guns the same size as some of the ships they called Battleships, and this is very confusing for me, so I'm asking for help figuring out what counted as a Battleship and what didn't, as well as when these standards changed historically.

Does anyone have some links for some free online sources of information about these topics/ships?

My own take on this subject is that the main man responsible for the direction that Germany historically took, was Alfred Von Tirpitz and in my own opinion, he missed some things. I'm looking to research what was historically done, to provide a realistic backdrop for exploring alternative paths. WWI as we know it is expendable but other things are not, and I'm looking for ideas and thoughts on how to do this.

I think you missed a poll option for its going to end the same way as previous threads on the same subject.

 

[Finbarr the Fair]

Go for your life, but I don't think Germany's building programme was particularly outlandish and probably only needs improving in detail. The biggest German Naval problem was the command structure

I think the Fleet build up was too obviously aimed at the UK/British Empire. A similar (perhaps slightly smaller) fleet could be justified with reference to the Dual Alliance. But that wasn't the rhetoric Kaiser Wilhelm and Tirpitz adopted.

Of course, the UK reacted rather mire forcefully and decisively than they expected. First by the Entente, then the naval race.

It took a bunch of perverse geniuses to create a situation where Britain allied with two of its three most dangerous Imperial rivals rather than come to a <i>modus vivendi</i> with Germany.

 

[steamboy]

I think the Fleet build up was too obviously aimed at the UK/British Empire. A similar (perhaps slightly smaller) fleet could be justified with reference to the Dual Alliance. But that wasn't the rhetoric Kaiser Wilhelm and Tirpitz adopted.

Of course, the UK reacted rather mire forcefully and decisively than they expected. First by the Entente, then the naval race.

It took a bunch of perverse geniuses to create a situation where Britain allied with two of its three most dangerous Imperial rivals rather than come to a <i>modus vivendi</i> with Germany.

The problem was that the Germans, by building up their risk fleet were challenging and threatning the UK directly, even without 'ol Kaiser Bill and co publically saying such a thing. And as the British Empire and the security of the nation rested on naval supremacy, it was a challenge that the UK could simply not ignore.

The RN wanted to keep a fleet strength equal to what the Germans had, plus an extra third on hand to take into account repairs, refits, damage/losses etc. And this is without taking into account other worldwide commitments, securing the Med, keeping an eye on the US, on Japan etc etc. So if the Germans started radically strengthening their fleet the RN had to as well, they simply couldn't allow another nation to reach naval parity especially one so very close to them in terms of geographical distance.

As was said in another thread, the RN was able and willing to lay down 6 Dreadnoughts a year if needs be if the Germans started approaching naval parity, and the Government would have gladly given them the money to do so. The thing that stopped it was WW1 and even then the RN was hammering out capital ships, cruisers and destroyers.

 

[Captain Seafort]

The problem was that the Germans, by building up their risk fleet were challenging and threatning the UK directly, even without 'ol Kaiser Bill and co publically saying such a thing. And as the British Empire and the security of the nation rested on naval supremacy, it was a challenge that the UK could simply not ignore.

The RN wanted to keep a fleet strength equal to what the Germans had, plus an extra third on hand to take into account repairs, refits, damage/losses etc. And this is without taking into account other worldwide commitments, securing the Med, keeping an eye on the US, on Japan etc etc. So if the Germans started radically strengthening their fleet the RN had to as well, they simply couldn't allow another nation to reach naval parity especially one so very close to them in terms of geographical distance.

All true as far as it goes, but Finbarr is right in that it was the rhetoric that provoked the UK into the Entente and restructuring the RN into a primarily anti-HSF force. If the rhetoric had been built on keeping the French and Russians out of the Heligoland Bight and southern Baltic, with an overseas squadron to defend Germany's colonial possessions, then it wouldn't have got nearly as much attention. There would have been suspicion, and the KM would have been factored into the two-power standard, but no more so than France or Russia. It's not as if German capital ships were all that impressive compared to the stuff the rest of the world was coming up with.

 

[CalBear]

I think the Fleet build up was too obviously aimed at the UK/British Empire. A similar (perhaps slightly smaller) fleet could be justified with reference to the Dual Alliance. But that wasn't the rhetoric Kaiser Wilhelm and Tirpitz adopted.

Of course, the UK reacted rather mire forcefully and decisively than they expected. First by the Entente, then the naval race.

It took a bunch of perverse geniuses to create a situation where Britain allied with two of its three most dangerous Imperial rivals rather than come to a <i>modus vivendi</i> with Germany.

There is pretty much no way for a substantial German naval build-up of heavy units to be seen as NOT aimed at the Royal Navy. There is really no other real potential opponent that requires that level of construction, especially without a massive building/leasing program of colliers that could somehow allow the Germans to explain the build-up was meant to protect their Pacific possessions (a massive reach, but at least a try for a fig leaf), which the Germans did not even pretend to be starting. Combine that with the Naval Defense Act of 1889 (aka the Two Powers +1 law) and you have an automatic arms race.

That building race became considerably worse once the U.S. got its dreadnought program going. When the 1889 Law was passed to two largest battleship fleets were Germany and France. That was not the case by 1914 when the French had four dreadnoughts in service (along with six "semi-dreadnoughts, and 15 "pre-dreds" which were well acknowledged as being obsolete) while the USN had 10 dreadnoughts in commission (along with "22 pre-dreds"), two other launched and fitting out, and two more finishing construction within six months. The 1889 law created a situation where, rather than dealing with a French government which was far more focused on its ground forces (France only commissioned 3 additional battleships between August of 1914 and the end of the war) the RN was, quite unintentionally, now engaged in a building race with a country that was extremely focused on battleship construction, with its ground forces almost an afterthought

There is also the Kaiser and and what seems to a remarkable inferiority complex. If his cousin Georgie (aka George V) had a big impressive navy to show off at Naval Reviews, by God-Almighty, he was going to have one too, hang the cost. That also made extremely clear why Germany was building a fleet.

 

[steamboy]

All true as far as it goes, but Finbarr is right in that it was the rhetoric that provoked the UK into the Entente and restructuring the RN into a primarily anti-HSF force. If the rhetoric had been built on keeping the French and Russians out of the Heligoland Bight and southern Baltic, with an overseas squadron to defend Germany's colonial possessions, then it wouldn't have got nearly as much attention. There would have been suspicion, and the KM would have been factored into the two-power standard, but no more so than France or Russia. It's not as if German capital ships were all that impressive compared to the stuff the rest of the world was coming up with.

True, the rehtoric and the building program basically sent up warning flares and set alarm bells a ringing. Even pre-ente, people like Fisher were saying that our enemy wasn't France but Germany, especially following the 1st Naval Law which was the gauntlet being raised and the 2nd Naval Law which was it being thrown in challenge. The only way to not provoke a reaction from the UK would be to seriously trim back on the fleet, but you'd need to change Tirpitz and Kaiser Bill to get that done.

 

[Captain Seafort]

True, the rehtoric and the building program basically sent up warning flares and set alarm bells a ringing. Even pre-ente, people like Fisher were saying that our enemy wasn't France but Germany, especially following the 1st Naval Law which was the gauntlet being raised and the 2nd Naval Law which was it being thrown in challenge. The only way to not provoke a reaction from the UK would be to seriously trim back on the fleet, but you'd need to change Tirpitz and Kaiser Bill to get that done.

Tirpitz, yes (maybe he falls overboard on the way back from the far east), the Kaiser I'm not so sure of. He strikes me as the sort who, susceptibility to the good idea fairy aside, tended to have exceptionally similar opinions to whoever last spoke to him. If that's someone with a more realistic idea of the RN's reaction to an explicit challenge then I think a happy medium could have been found that allowed him his nice shiny toy to play with without also getting Jacky Fisher's undivided attention.

 

[HB of CJ]

Somehow change the way Germany thinks and concentrate of modern evolutionary U-boats. Many diversified small yards close to a suitable water transport. Smaller high speed diesels. High grade steel. Nickel Iron batteries. Snorkel. Advanced torps. A true diesel electric boat by 1914. Something much better by 1939 comparable to today's diesel electric subs.

 

[Riain]

The problem with the idea that Britain doesn't build a fleet so not to antagonise Britain is that it takes two to tango and Britain could still turn on Germany and join the Entente even if Germany had a small navy. The HSF wasn't the only source of rivalry between Britain and Germany, IIUC Germany was out-competing Britain in global commercial markets, particularly in newer industrial sectors like chemical, optics and electrical. Britain is a European great power like France and Russia and it is ludicrous that Germany doesn't take steps to ameliorate the threat that Britain posed, otherwise Germany could find itself on the receiving end of British naval and expeditionary power with no way to counter it.

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

The problem with the idea that Britain doesn't build a fleet so not to antagonise Britain is that it takes two to tango and Britain could still turn on Germany and join the Entente even if Germany had a small navy. The HSF wasn't the only source of rivalry between Britain and Germany, IIUC Germany was out-competing Britain in global commercial markets, particularly in newer industrial sectors like chemical, optics and electrical. Britain is a European great power like France and Russia and it is ludicrous that Germany doesn't take steps to ameliorate the threat that Britain posed, otherwise Germany could find itself on the receiving end of British naval and expeditionary power with no way to counter it.

I agree with the sentiments expressed, but Tirpitz et al botched the job. They didn't build a fleet that could defeat the RN, but a fleet that could take enough British ships with it to threaten RN dominance of the waves. So, in other words, the beneficiaries of Germany's riskflotte would be the Americans, Russians, French & Japanese. Unfortunately it stimulated the British response and saw the Grand Fleet concentrated in home waters to face the Germany challenge.

To my mind Germany has two options: -
1. Build a fleet to beat the British - which is impossible to do without sacrificing Army funding or social reform efforts, so really the next option should have been: -
2. Build a navy to protect Germany's home waters, especially the Baltic, & if necessary cruisers to protect the far-flung parts of the German Empire - and, under no circumstances, seek to challenge British control of the Channel & North Sea unless someone else has taken down a large chunk of the RN first. And hope that's enough to keep them out of the embrace of the French & Russians.

 

[Riain]

I agree with the sentiments expressed, but Tirpitz et al botched the job. They didn't build a fleet that could defeat the RN, but a fleet that could take enough British ships with it to threaten RN dominance of the waves. So, in other words, the beneficiaries of Germany's riskflotte would be the Americans, Russians, French & Japanese. Unfortunately it stimulated the British response and saw the Grand Fleet concentrated in home waters to face the Germany challenge.

To my mind Germany has two options: -
1. Build a fleet to beat the British - which is impossible to do without sacrificing Army funding or social reform efforts, so really the next option should have been: -
2. Build a navy to protect Germany's home waters, especially the Baltic, & if necessary cruisers to protect the far-flung parts of the German Empire - and, under no circumstances, seek to challenge British control of the Channel & North Sea unless someone else has taken down a large chunk of the RN first. And hope that's enough to keep them out of the embrace of the French & Russians.

In terms of ship numbers what is the delta between a HSF big enough to stop the GF from defeating the defensive forces and sweeping the mines to force the Baltic and conducting close bombardment of the North Sea coast and OTL? My guess is that there isn't much in it, single digit numbers at best.

 

[steamboy]

Somehow change the way Germany thinks and concentrate of modern evolutionary U-boats. Many diversified small yards close to a suitable water transport. Smaller high speed diesels. High grade steel. Nickel Iron batteries. Snorkel. Advanced torps. A true diesel electric boat by 1914. Something much better by 1939 comparable to today's diesel electric subs.

In a word. No. Submarines at this point are barely worth the name and are barely mobile and very limited platforms that are purely for coast defence and they do not have the power or presence of a surface fleet and would barely project power about 10 miles off the German coast. And if the Germans did go nuts and go for the Junne Ecole kinda warfare, IE subs, torpedo boats and long range anti-commerce cruisers. Well..who's that aimed at? Off in the corner the UK is giving you serious stink eye at this moment as its seen these shenanigans with France.

 

[Count of Crisco]

There is pretty much no way for a substantial German naval build-up of heavy units to be seen as NOT aimed at the Royal Navy. There is really no other real potential opponent that requires that level of construction, especially without a massive building/leasing program of colliers that could somehow allow the Germans to explain the build-up was meant to protect their Pacific possessions (a massive reach, but at least a try for a fig leaf), which the Germans did not even pretend to be starting. Combine that with the Naval Defense Act of 1889 (aka the Two Powers +1 law) and you have an automatic arms race.

That building race became considerably worse once the U.S. got its dreadnought program going. When the 1889 Law was passed to two largest battleship fleets were Germany and France. That was not the case by 1914 when the French had four dreadnoughts in service (along with six "semi-dreadnoughts, and 15 "pre-dreds" which were well acknowledged as being obsolete) while the USN had 10 dreadnoughts in commission (along with "22 pre-dreds"), two other launched and fitting out, and two more finishing construction within six months. The 1889 law created a situation where, rather than dealing with a French government which was far more focused on its ground forces (France only commissioned 3 additional battleships between August of 1914 and the end of the war) the RN was, quite unintentionally, now engaged in a building race with a country that was extremely focused on battleship construction, with its ground forces almost an afterthought

There is also the Kaiser and and what seems to a remarkable inferiority complex. If his cousin Georgie (aka George V) had a big impressive navy to show off at Naval Reviews, by God-Almighty, he was going to have one too, hang the cost. That also made extremely clear why Germany was building a fleet.

I think if, for starting at least, if Germany was building expressely to counter the Russian navy they could have gotten away with much more than they historically did. Granted they could not have built to the extent they did IOTL but an impressive fleet could have been built up under that guise, and may have even succeeded in causing the British to seek an alliance with Germany if they were seen as being opposed with the same nations that they were at the period. But again Germany would have to change its general outlook and relationship with the wider world in general.

In short OTL German empire probably could not have pulled it off, but under a different Kaiser or much more reasonable OTL Wilhelm some compromise could have been worked out with Germany keeping a very impressive navy, and not antagonizing the British and forcing their hand. Not that the British would not start just building ships at OTL rates anyway with a new threat found to justify the fleet.

 

[Naval Aviation Fan]

Thanks for the input folks!

Anyone got suggestions for where in this learning process I should create fact filled threads? My initial thoughts are that, in order not to have to attempt to rewrite things from scratch so to speak, is to stick to mainly OTL levels of funding for the Germans, but spending that on other things than just the Battleships, and NOT the Battleships historically built. My main focus will be to get details on what was done historically, and then write these threads up as groundwork for later threads that I can then write as a departure from OTL, but ones that hopefully will be factually accurate and well founded because of the work in these first threads.

For instance, historically Tirpitz made up his mind by December of 1892 for what he wanted for the future German navy and this was a fleet composed at it's core of groups of 8 identical Battleships, and when, by the fall of 1895 Germany didn't start following his recommendations, he wanted to quite, but instead the Kaiser asked for ship construction plans, which Tirpitz delivered in Jan 1896. Because of the politics of the day, the process of getting funding for ships seems to have been quite a process, and one area that I for sure need to learn/write more about. Eventually, Tirpitz gets his long desired way, and the Kaiser makes him the Secretary of the Imperial Navy. When Tirpitz arrives in Berlin on June 6th, 1896, it takes him just 9 days to present "THE PLAN" to Kaiser Wilhelm II, and this gave us what was built, but what I would like to explore is what we could have gotten had he gone down a different path, that didn't focus blindly on building a navy to challenge the RN, and everything he did seems to point Germany directly at this goal of his.

I'm going to try at some point to get some world maps up, that show where Germany had trade with, and who they could count on to remain neutral and still willing to buy/sell German products. For one thing, I want to try to understand why Tirpitz came up with the ideas he did, and instead didn't focus some on where potential enemies shipping needs/trade partners were, and then combining these two sets of maps, and looking at what Germany had in the way of colonies

 

[Naval Aviation Fan]

Doing some more reading on background material...

Some questions I have.

1) How and why did relations change between the British and German Empires? I mean, why was Tirpitz's plan to pit the two against each other, right off the bat?
2) Was it just that Germany had no 'PLAN' for it's navy before Tirpitz, that made his plan Germany's 'PLAN'?

From what I'm reading, it is starting to look like Germany didn't have any plan for the direction of her navy, so when the Kaiser asked the senior naval officers what they should do, Tirpitz said build Battleships, and the Kaiser went with that as well as the whole UK = ENEMY thing?

Got some good links to German ships, including some I had never heard of before.
I think I'll start with everything they built, that mounted guns the same size as their Battleships, regardless what they called those ships, just to try to keep my sanity, lol. What kind of things should I be on the lookout for, if I do want to try a mega list? Is Displacement a good thing to go by, or perhaps Draught?