What If: Germany captured enough territory to have enough materials to build capital ships.

1. again, you obviously do not know much about welding/etc.....
...it's not like Rosy the Riveter --you can teach a monkey to rivet...it's easy--welding is not--the statement cannot be refuted
2. do I have to get the book on the Thresher and quote it? like I did with the Ratline thread? and prove you wrong--again?
3. links on percentage of female welders..how many female welders per total of welders--
--but, more to the point, more importantly--how long did it take??
how much training/OJT? I guarantee you it was not a 2 week class and they can do it---
4.what type of welders?
...now, if you knew anything about welding,[ which you don't ] there are spot welds--this is simple--you just press a foot pedal, and it's spot welded....this is simple...or a very simple '''single'' spot weld with a gun, but this is not what we are talking about
5. no one said they couldn't be welders---but just to do a barely acceptable job, it takes a lot of hands on work--this is a fact

..If you have ever tried to weld, you would know that

 

what is this?

 

welder training program
....this is just the basics---like any college graduate--they don't know how the real stuff works
....same with engineers---they get out of school and don't know anything about the real world of engineering/etc..they know the school book, but it takes hands on to get things done right
...I've been working with 4 recent college grad/college engineer interns, and they get a lot of stuff wrong...even the older engineers get stuff wrong--and not just rarely

....plain and simple--welding is not like making a cheese sandwich--it's not easy/not easy to learn/takes time to learn = fact
...so, going back to the point I made = post # 13--it would've taken a long time to get female welders working in the German shipyards...and longer to get many female welders

How Long Does it Take to Become a Welder? - Midwest Technical Institute.

 

That is why it is probably easiest to assume a neutral Soviet Union supplying Germany. Not only with raw materials, but possibly machined steel - provided Germany was willing to lend technological and experienced personnel to help with production.

Don't forget the surface raiders, they were also quite cost effective. Futher, a neutral Russia would bring those materials much faster, but at a cost.

The war in the Pacific was quite different than the war in the Atlantic or Med. There were vast tracts in the Pacific that were unreachable by land based aircraft. The various island chains tended to be to far distant to be mutually supportive by land-based aircraft. Then there are the philosophical and doctrinal differences between US carriers and British carriers, as well as their use by the respective nations. Further, British carriers had their own successes(Taranto, Bismarck), failures (Courageous, Glorious, chasing the Twins), but proved to be mostly inconclusive in their actions. (Several fleet actions in the Med). Finally, land-based air had also proven it's worth when it could be focused(Crete).

Also, such carrier fleets needed immense fleet trains to maintain their combat readiness at sea - the carrier actions in the Pacific are all hit-and-run in nature - as the lacked the necessary logistics to be maintained on station for any lengthy period of time.

Sans an Eastern Front, an Allied lodgement in NW Europe would remain questionable - one look in the AHF Forum "What If" section will provide ample evidence of this.

As to what Germany has will depend on the emphasis given to warship construction. By 1944, Germany could possibly have 4 H-Class battleships, 4 P-Class Panzerschiffe(or else 3 O-Class battlecruisers - there was a late decision to produce the latter), 4 new light cruisers, and 9 new Spahkreuzers. As well as 2 carriers and the 2 heavy cruisers Seydlitz & Lutzow. This would probably be the maximum, of course it could be revised downward depending how the war went.

That requires qualification as 16 Allied battleships were completed during the war. 5 King George V class, 2 North Carolina class, 4 South Dakota Class, 4 Iowa class, and the Richelieu. The qualification being that they were all laid down prior to their respective nation entering the war. Those laid down after their respective nation entered the war were either not completed during the war or were cancelled in favor of other construction.(Lion class, Vanguard, 5th & 6th Iowa class, and the Montanas). The only large warships completed during the war were the Large Cruiser/Battlecruiser USS Alaska & USS Guam(which would be comparable to the German O- class battlecruisers.

That would very much depend on Hitler, if he allowed Raeder to fight the naval war Raeder wanted, instead it was Hitler's fear, like that of the Kaiser, of having a ship sunk, that kept the respective fleets from seeing much action.

 

And, again, history proves Bronk wrong, with the vast expansion of shipbuilding during the war.

Which one would you like to discuss? I have 3, as well as the JAG investigation. You also seem to have confused Silver brazing with welding. The books I have all mention the failure of a silver brazing, not a weld.(I would think, as a self-proclaimed "expert", you would know the difference between the two.)

Like the Ratline thread, you will again be proven wrong. Other US submarines had burst silver brazings...and did not sink. There is far more involved with the loss of the Thresher than a simple burst silver brazing. Finally brazing is not the same as welding. Hence, your Thresher line is a strawman.

Your argument is welders with several years experience vs. those with far less experience is it not? Not female vs. male welders - that is a strawman. Show me the numbers & percentages of experienced welders in the shipbuilding industries of US, Britain, and Germany during the war years vs. less experienced welders employed in the same industries.

However, since you asked, womn doing welding in all industries was 50,201 constituting 28 percent enrollment.
("Women's Work and the War, Mary Elizabeth Pidgeon, pg. 15)

How long did it take? Training for a skilled welder was approximately 60 - 270 hours of training.
("Anchors Away", Independent Woman, Beatrice Oppenheim, March, 1943)

Actually, it is. It is all part of the process...Is it not? You would not want an "expert" performing spot welds would you?
Florence Ditullio started out doing Butt welding, moving on to tack welding, finally going to production welding.

But, what does a female elderly ex-welder know about welding...

Your problem is that you are stuck in perfect peacetime thinking. Which is all well and good for...Peacetime...But, it does not get product out the door.

Again, that is peacetime thinking, not war production thinking.

 

Women doing acetylene gas welding passed Army-Navy tests two to one better than men.
Women Workers in Transition, Department of Labor, Woman's Bureau, Special Bulletin No. 17, Mary Elizabeth Pidgeon, 1944.

 

....I'm going to make this plain and simple--and this is a perfect example of the '''realism'' issue:
--Opana asked if hitler would let women into welding jobs--there!! perfect example of the ''realism'' issue....no, .they will not be able to weld without much training and hands on experience--which is my reply to his post...unless they have a bunch of experienced and trained female welders, it's going to take a lot of time for them to start welding in the shipyards...my point is irrefutable

 

And, as usual, disproven by history.

You don't get more "real" than that.

 

thank you--exactly what I mean in post # 27
'''1944'''
...there is no way someone is going to learn to weld properly, with experience, in even 2 months--welding the even ''non-critical jobs'''

 

....again, there is no way to ''quickly'' teach someone to weld like they did with riveting/etc ..I know from first hand experience--O -sorry, I said that!!!! didn't mean to upset you by using that term

 

And yet they were out welding with 60-270 hours of training...

 

....they weren't expert or even experienced welders
....there are different types of welding
--anyway, welding is far from easy to learn --unlike riveting---main point stands

 

Yes, the main point stands...They were welding with relatively little training. They might not have been "experts" at it, but they were doing it.

 

I'm with Takao on this... "Grinder and paint make me the welder I ain't..."
While this may not be strictly true for maritime purposes, I don't think that the weld has to be exactly perfect.

 

There were approximately 125,000 welders in the United States in 1940. The approximate peak number of welders during WW2 was 364,000. So, only about 1 in 3, at most, was an "experienced" welder.

Employment Opportunities for Welders
Monthly Labor Review, Volume 61, Number 3, September, 1945.

 

no, they were not welding with little training

 

Augusta H. Clawson...Hired April 7th, 1943...First day welding in the shipyard April 18th, 1943.
That's two weeks of training, then out welding.
Shipyard Diary of a Woman Welder, authored by the woman mentioned above,1944.

That's war "reality" for you...Not your peacetime reality of the late 20th Century.

 

you don't learn how to weld in 10 days--plain and simple--whatever year it is.....
..welding what? what type? this is probably like the crap we hear today---lies and myths/half truths/etc
link please--to a credible source/etc

 

tack weld---is not experienced welding

How to perform tack welding successfully

sounds like she couldn't do the job properly/didn't like it..she was investigating why woman were leaving the welding jobs!!!!!!!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...s-at-93/cb4b799e-6f2c-4763-8d04-f4dae6f62e5e/

Augusta Clawson - Wikipedia

..sounds like the issue of women in the military--they don't have the physical strength to keep up with the males

here---the training was NOT realistic---says it right here:

exactly what I said before----exactly--proven right here----the schooling/training is nothing like the real thing
....they can train them in welding/etc--but it's not like the real thing---and like I've said before- there are many more issues involved

 

Funny, how the many first hand accounts, i have provided, of those who were actually doing the job are not credible. Yet, your "first hand" account is supposed to be credible?