Why was British navy so weak compared to Kriegsmarine?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • Who
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    funny aint it - most of the answers ignore the submarines

    Those were kicking the sh//t out of the UK navy well into 1943 and it was only the aid of the US that prevented the surrender of the UK in 1941-2 (due to starvation)

    (a couple of facts "anonymous"

    most of the UK fleet was holed up in scapa flow for most of the war

    THE UK navy was damned lucky to catch up with the Bismark - it was UK aircraft that gave them that luck

    considering the amount of effort the RN had to put in to sink it and its losses I woud say the german navy came out a head on points

    the navy didnt sink the tirpitz- the RAF did

    And perhaps you should research something about the submarine war "mercury"

    most of u-boat sinkings were in 1943 -1944

    and the UK only survived until then with the direct help of the US (they provided 1/2 the escorts to convoys up the 1941 and supplied the RN with 50 destroyers in autumn 1940 (under lend-lease) in the middle of the battle of britain so the RN could use them in convoy duties

    If the US had remained strickly neutral the UK would have been f//ked in 1941-2 (due to lack of food and raw materials . It was only the US supplying tanks to the UK that prevented the UK losing africa to the Italians even before Rommel got involved)

    Patriotism is a good thing but not when it ignores cold facts

    Facts are what enables you to work out what goes wrong, and how to make sure they dont go wrong in future

    When you shove you head up your a//s so as to appear patriotic is when things get f//ked up and continue to get f//ked up

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      The "Destroyers for Base Leases" was in Sep. '40. "Lend-Lease" didn't start until Mar. 41. U.S. didn't supply ANY ordnance to U.K. "pre-Rommel". It IS true that the U.S. broke its own Neutrality Acts to supply the U.K.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Dj2541
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    And at what precise moment in time are you speaking of?? the Kreigsmarine never actually beat the R.N at any time in either ww1 or ww2.

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      Really? I'd say it kicked the R.N.'s butt pretty good in the Battle of Jutland.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 year ago

    In what way could it be said to be "weak" compared to the Kriegsmarine? On 3 Sep. '39, it had 434 ships to the German 96. It had another 166 under construction to the German 41. Almost all of those 41 were never built. About 4 were started, but never completed.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Huh?
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    It wasn't. The RN just had trouble dealing with German U-boats for a while but they were very effective in closing down what surface ships the Germans had, such as the Tirpitz or Bismarck, neither of which really accomplished much of anything before being sunk.

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      Bismarck just demolished the pride of the R.N. & sent it's newest battleship running for its life under cover of a smokescreen, that's all. Had 5 of its 7 hits hot been duds, Prince of Wales would have, as a minimum, been seriously damaged.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 year ago

    Because Hitler never intended to abide by the Anglo-German Naval Agreement. However he severely underestimated the Royal Navy and got his **** smacked.

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      The 1935 treaty allowed Germany to build up to 35% of the R.N. tonnage. Even the ambitious "Plan Z" would not have achieved that, & the plan was greatly reduced in Aug. '39. You'rs is a particularly STUPID comment.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 year ago

    Where did you get that silly idea from. Perhaps you should research the number of U -Boats sunk by the RN.

    The main reason Hitler dropped any idea of invading the UK is that he known he would not get passed the

    Navy.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 year ago

    Other than the U-boats, the Kriegsmarine was for the most part holed up in the North Sea. Germany's surface fleet didn't stand a chance. Go read up on how quickly the Bismarck and the Tirpitz stayed afloat before being hunted down and destroyed.

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      Bismarck was sunk 10 months after being commissioned. Tirpitz was sunk 3 yrs., 8 months after being commissioned.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 year ago

    They weren't. Germany couldn't fight englands surface fleet, they didnt' have the material and naval docks to build a surface fleet to compare against the english. That's why Germany had to focus heavily on submarines. Of which were effective in the first 2 - 3 years of the war, but after advancements in sonar and anti-submarine warfare they no longer were effective.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 year ago

    EDIT: (Correction): The structure of your question indicates that you're referring to WW1 (which led me in that direction with my previous answer, now edited out). In WW2 there was never a problem with Britain's Navy against Germany - it was a moot point, anyway, since Churchill and Roosevelt had conspired to drag Germany into a war. The United States was assisting Britain in violation of America's Neutrality Laws. They would escort passenger ships through Britain's treacherous waters, report the whereabouts of German ships and U-boats, and in early 1941, was given permission to fire against the Germans, thus involving them directly before war had been officially declared between the United States and Germany.

    In an interesting FYI, Hitler offered to lend Britain some of Germany's troops to help them against the Japanese, as impossible as it may sound. I don't have a reference to it (I thought I did), but he did it in yet another attempt to make peace with Britain.

  • Mark
    Lv 7
    1 year ago

    They weren't expecting a SECOND world war. (Who did? Well , apparently the Germans and the Japanese.)

    • Killmouseky
      Lv 7
      1 year agoReport

      B.S.: R.N. on 3 Sep. '39 had 434 ships - 15 battleships, 1 battlecruiser, 7 aircraft carriers, 15 heavy cruisers, 41 light, 8 anti-aircraft & 1 mine-laying, 113 modern destroyers & 68 old, 53 modern subs & 12 old, 54 escorts, 44 minesweepers & 2 monitors.
      It had 166 ships under construction.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.