Changing Destiny (Kancolle)

So I didn't make a good argument but you missed the point I was trying to make in the first place; everyone went into world war 2 thinking of fighting the war with the same tactics, naval wise, that had worked for centuries before, only give the slightest consideration to aerial warfare. Thise tactics could easily be drawn on a sheet of paper without losing any detail. At the end of the war, they would need a 3 dimensional display, which they didn't have back then, to display the tactics they had developed during the war.

If any one country had seen just how much planes would change the next war, especially naval battles, after WWI, then they could had an advantage over every other nation to the point that the way the war ended would be in question.

All sides in WWII had made mistakes whens planning for how aerial combat would affect things. The point I was trying to make, which was that 2d tactics don't work in a 3d war. Once that third dimension was added, things were going to change, it was down to a matter of time when that would happen. Planes gave our wars a third dimension and once that happened their would always be a shift to compensate for that new direction. All branches of the military in most nations have pilots for that very reason
 
If your point was that the initial tactics involving aircraft were simple and/or basic then you would be pointing out the obvious.

While having an aircraft does allow you to move in a three dimensional space, the realities of attacking ground and naval targets boil down to fly in a constant speed and heading towards your target and release your weapons. This has always been the case, each evolution and upgrade in technology allowing aircraft to release ordinance from further and further away. It's only relatively recently that we are able to just fling a missile and have it track itself to target with little to no input from the launching aircraft. The tactics here, are and have always been 2D.

Air to air combat between aircraft is another story entirely, but Thompson has already been busy trying to hammer in post-war lessons into the USN pilot corps in that regard.
 
If your point was that the initial tactics involving aircraft were simple and/or basic then you would be pointing out the obvious.

While having an aircraft does allow you to move in a three dimensional space, the realities of attacking ground and naval targets boil down to fly in a constant speed and heading towards your target and release your weapons. This has always been the case, each evolution and upgrade in technology allowing aircraft to release ordinance from further and further away. It's only relatively recently that we are able to just fling a missile and have it track itself to target with little to no input from the launching aircraft. The tactics here, are and have always been 2D.

Air to air combat between aircraft is another story entirely, but Thompson has already been busy trying to hammer in post-war lessons into the USN pilot corps in that regard.
Um, I was mainly trying to point out that they hadn't considered the full potential of how a war with planes playing a bigger part of the battles would affect things, not about targeting any one thing in particular, ground or airborne. As planes were more used in the war, the more things shifted away from the standard of ship to ship battles. I was mainly thinking of how I, personally, would point out how things are changing, or something like that.
 
Everyone was aware of Aircraft carriers and how they would change naval combat. Hell, the American's had 11 aircraft carriers being built by the time Pearl Harbor happened. The post-Standard type Battleships the American's designed were all faster because they were going to be aircraft carrier escorts. No one scrapped their battleships because: A) No one else was so why give your enemy the advantage, and B) Battleships are called capitol ships for a reason. A significant portion of a Nation's wealth goes into each one. They are not something you can toss out like an empty food wrapper.

Pearl Harbor wasn't a surprise because they used aircraft carriers, it was surprise because no one thought the Japanese could get ships out there and back. As it was the Japanese nearly had to abandon some escorting destroyers because of the fuel oil availability.

You enter a war fighting the last war because all theory, tactics, a d equipment were developed from previous conflict. WW1 was a meat grinder because, among other various reasons, all previous fighting for the last century was small skirmishes. There were no large armies since Napoleon. The American Civil War was seen by the Europeans as proof that the American's didn't know how to conduct a war. The Crimea War reinforced this idea. The Maginot Line in France worked exactly as designed. Problem was that French Bureaucracy wouldn't let French units aware of the German Tanks reposition to block them as they struggled in the Ardennes.

Finally. Naval tactics were not the same for centuries. The advent of self propelled vessels over relying on the wind cast previous thoughts on tactics into the trash can. They look the same because the weapons are similar, mainly being guns.
 
Last edited:
Everyone else has basically hit the points I'd like to, so I'd just like to address the idea that no one considered the changes carriers brought to naval combat:

Fleet Problems I-XXI (Run from 1923-1940) were all in some part dedicated to figuring out how to integrate aircraft carriers into the fleet, and what changes they made necessary: For instance, Fleet Problem XIII in March 1932 demonstrated the weaknesses of a solo carrier, and established that a single carrier could not effectively provide either fleet air attack or air defense - thus the practice of operating carriers in groups of at least two began, and, were it not for the financial difficulties of the Depression, the Navy would have placed a large order for aircraft carriers - capital ships. The Navy also determined that a minimum of six to eight carriers would be necessary for a Pacific war.

Seventeen years of exercises and serious thought devoted to the implications of aircraft carriers and their effects on naval combat does not sound like a lack of consideration on the topic.

Naturally, they got some things wrong. You just don't learn some things until you use a new weapon for real for the first time.
 
Heck, they even had plans to convert some of the faster liners into CVEs in the thirties in case of war. It's just that they didn't want to put all their eggs in one basket. They took their time, and it helped.

For example, there was a huge concern that adding an island would cause way too much turbulence on the flight deck. Ranger was originally designed without an Island. This was only changed very late in her design process by data from the Lexington Conversions. Another question was "should we build a few big Carriers, ore bunch of small ones?" Again, thanks to experience with Ranger and the Lexingtons, they found that a large carrier was much more useful, as it had better performance in moderate seas compared to a smaller one. That's just on the USN CVs. Every nation went through this.
 
What about skip-bombing with Fortresses and such?
You could probably theoretically skip bomb with a B-17, but much of the reason skip bombing with B-25's was successful was its absurd forward firepower that could suppress light anti-aircraft guns by mulching the gun crews. B-17's were useful in breaking up formations by forcing the ships to DODGE!
 
Skip bombing brings all the risks of torpedo attacks and few of the benefits - its targets were restricted to merchantmen and other unarmed or minimally armed vessel because you had to fly in a straight line at really low altitude, making shooting down a plane attempting a skip bombing run rather easy if you saw it coming.
 
You want to bring high altitude multi-engine bombers to low-level flight against ships?

You would be far better off using torpedo bombers as they are both smaller and you lose less men and material when they inevitably get shot down.

If your goal is to just fuck with the opposing fleet, then you could just mount FFAR rockets on your fighters and have them do rocket runs or something.
 
You want to bring high altitude multi-engine bombers to low-level flight against ships?

You would be far better off using torpedo bombers as they are both smaller and you lose less men and material when they inevitably get shot down.

If your goal is to just fuck with the opposing fleet, then you could just mount FFAR rockets on your fighters and have them do rocket runs or something.
Erm, you do realize higher-altitude multi-engine bombers were used in low-level attacks on ships all the time, right? Aircraft like the He 111, G4M, and B-26 carried out torpedo attacks, and the B-25 carried out skip-bombing attacks.
 
Erm, you do realize higher-altitude multi-engine bombers were used in low-level attacks on ships all the time, right? Aircraft like the He 111, G4M, and B-26 carried out torpedo attacks, and the B-25 carried out skip-bombing attacks.

Note that for the most part, those where all considered Tactical or Medium Bombers, and they all had the Ability to use torpedos.

Using a strategic bomber (B-17, Avro Lancaster, Pe-8) in this role is an act of desperation at best, and a foolish waste of resources and manpower at worse.

Could you do it? Sure, but why?
 
B-17s were sometimes used for skip-bombing attacks, but they're really better used for other targets, in their intended role as a high-altitude bomber dropping a whole lot of bombs onto something that can't dodge.

If you're going to go skip-bombing, you want something fast and nimble as practical, like a B-25, A-20 Havoc, etc.

A SBD would probably be pretty good.... but why? It's a dive bomber, and a diving dive bomber is one of the hardest targets in the world to knock down with AA before it plants its bomb on your deck. Just come in high and fast, pitch over, and make one of the hell-for-leather dives that the damned thing is built for.

Also, once the Mark 13 was fixed, torpedo bombing wasn't nearly as dangerous, as the TBF Avenger could come in much faster, making evasive maneuvers for much of the attack run, and drop from pretty high up and expect the torpedo to function when it hit water.
 
Last edited:
Using a strategic bomber (B-17, Avro Lancaster, Pe-8) in this role is an act of desperation at best, and a foolish waste of resources and manpower at worse.

Could you do it? Sure, but why?

Emphasis mine for the exception.

Wartime correspondence and testimony from Lancaster pilots stated that without its bomb load, it was incredibly nimble; On more than one occasion on a hundred-bomber raid, the first wave to drop their ordnance would immediately double back and serve as escorts for the planes still laden with bombs or guardians for the damaged ones that were lagging behind due to engine trouble.

Mind, it's still a heavy bomber with at least 8 guns, the option of a ball turret in the belly (another 4 guns), and the option of flanking turrets in the middle of the body (another 2), so you're not going to do things like Immelman loops or split-S and Thatch Weave, but the Lanc actually did have the mobility for low-level 'absolute screaming bullshit' runs, both against fortified specialist targets and naval vessels alike.

There's a reason it was used for the Ruhr Valley raid, which was basically skip-bombing with backspun 4.5-ton depth charges, and required the planes (again, 102 feet wide), to fly at below-treetop altitude for the duration of their bombing runs.

(The fact that 'The Night they Broke the Dams in Happy Valley' was never properly exploited and the dams were rebuilt within 2 years notwithstanding, that was an incredible feat in and of itself)

(Also, amusingly, the Lancasters of the Dambuster Squadron were the only heavy bombers confirmed to have killed a ship bigger than a CL. Sorry, Tirpitz, hope you liked those Tallboys.)

The long and short of it is that the only time heavy bombers of any stripe were effective against naval assets was when those assets were tied up in harbour or otherwise unable to raise steam and start moving. And even then, the naval assets were more 'collateral' than they were the focused objective.

In a battle at-sea, you Need the agility and reaction times of single-engine planes to ensure telling blows, and as HMS Repulse might be happy to remind you, a skilled ship and crew can spend hours dodging both bomb and torpedo with aplomb.

(Before her sinking, Repulse dodged Some 68 torpedoes out of the 73 launched from IJN Planes, as well as 23 of 24 bombs)
 
Chapter 56
Chapter 56

Admiral Lütjens would be the first to say that he had never, in his wildest dreams, expected to be in this position. As an officer of the German Navy- any variation of it -being ashore in Britain would have been a rare enough occurrence. As an Admiral? One at war with Britain? He'd never thought it would happen.

I most certainly never expected that I'd be in the same room as Churchill himself.

Yet, here he stood, across from the bulldog himself. Churchill was every bit as imposing in person as he was in the news reels. He wasn't the tallest man, nor the most physically built. If Lütjens had to describe him, he'd call Churchill stocky. However, the man radiated the kind of aura that only true leaders could. Hitler lacked the natural charisma that Churchill possessed, and the German could see it the moment he stepped into the room. There was a reason that this man had kept Britain in the war, through mostly his own iron-will. Hmm.

"Relax, Admiral. If I wanted to have you harmed, I would hardly have brought you into my office to do it!" Churchill's voice was, just as the man, every bit as booming in person as on the radio. The stocky politician placed his hands on the desk, his beady eyes staring into Lütjens' with a cunning intellect behind them. "Though, you remain a fascinating one to watch. That your little maid over there could hide who she was, for so long, is equally impressive. I don't put much stock into you Germans and your little Navy, but I will admit, you know how to use what you have."

Beside the Admiral, Gneisenau bristled like a cat being threatened by a rival. "Our Navy is---"

"Peace, Sascha." Lütjens placed a calming hand on the woman's arm, calling her by the human name she had taken. He knew her better as Sascha, and more importantly, he felt it humanized her. She wasn't a weapon, not anymore, and he refused to treat her as one. "Mr. Churchill, did you want to talk to us just to insult Germany, or is there a purpose to this?" Staring directly at the Prime Minister, Lütjens rose to his full height and narrowed his eyes slightly. "I will have you know, that I have no intention of betraying Germany. And if it comes down to it, I will gladly stare a firing squad down to keep Sascha safe."

Churchill smiled back, though it was a grim expression with no genuineness to it. "So I imagine. For all that I loathe your dictator, I have never doubted that Germans will fight to the last. Not after the last war. No, I called you here for a different reason, Admiral. Tell me...how much do you know about an Admiral Schreiber?"

There it was. The real question, and the one that Lütjens had half-expected. They clearly overheard the conversation and wanted to know what Schreiber was up to. A question that Lütjens dearly wished he knew the answer to, himself. He'd never have pegged the captain of Blücher as a traitor or a subversive. Then, he never would have imagined that he'd be standing next to the spirit of his flagship either.

One wondered when the world went completely mad.

"I'm afraid I will disappoint you, then." All the German could do was smile slightly, and shake his head. "My knowledge of Admiral Schreiber is fairly limited. I know him as the captain of our newest cruiser, and not much more. His men trust him and he ran a good ship, but I can hardly say why he would have done what he has. He never gave me the impression of someone willing to stand against the Nazis."

"Pity that few of you Germans were willing to in the first place. Maybe we wouldn't be fighting the second war in as many decades if they had." Churchill sighed deeply, standing from his desk. He walked around to stand before Lütjens.

The German could sense the broad-shouldered woman behind Sascha tense slightly, when Churchill grew closer. Which only served to confirm that theory. He had no idea who she was, though.

"I will be frank with you, Lütjens. I don't trust you, and my trust for Germans has been sorely strained by events after your little Führer decided to stab us in the back over and over again." Churchill seemed to enjoy the little twitch that Lütjens gave at that specific terminology. The man was a politician, who had never been friends with Germany. He knew, as well as anyone, about the Dolchstoss. "Oh, don't think I don't know about that piece of rubbish. You bloody Germans couldn't take the loss, and here we are again. That's why I don't know if I should trust anything you, or this Schreiber, say. Chamberlain trusted Hitler, and look where we are. Give me a reason to trust anything a German says, right now. Especially if it involves saving your own skins from the mess you started."

"You're just as responsible for this!" Sascha, while still normally fairly meek in private, was a firestorm when riled enough. Little point in denying what she had been, anymore. "You and the French punished us for a war we didn't start! Holstein told me everything about the Kaiser and about the Austrians. If you had just---"

"Done what? Let Germany walk without any punishment after raping Belgium and ruining France? Do you know how many of our boys died in the trenches? We could hardly let Germany off with a slap on the bloody wrist after what had happened. I hardly regret our choices at Versailles. If anything, we were too lenient."

Sascha prickled even further, to the point that it was possible to see- just barely -the outline of a warship around her. "How dare you..."

Coughing softly, Lütjens cut off the argument. He looked past Sascha, towards the woman behind her. The twist of his head didn't go unnoticed. The burly woman, looking more like a prize fighter than the lithe elegance of his flagship, stared back. Her arms were crossed over an imposing chest, as she raised an eyebrow at him. "Keep her on a tight leash, Admiral. I'd hate to have to dirty the Prime Minister's office."

"Quite." Lütjens sighed softly, and turned his eyes on Sascha, who had deflated slightly and sent him a guilty expression. "Don't worry, my dear. The Prime Minister is blunt, but he isn't incorrect. We, Germany as a whole, caused this war. Maybe not the last one, but certainly this one. Let's try to avoid escalating it."

Looking back at Churchill, the Admiral continued with a much harder tone. "I would appreciate if you kept your feelings to yourself, Mr. Churchill. I wish to help you, damn my soul, if it will keep Germany from suffering any more than she already has. I get the feeling you feel the same way, or you wouldn't have called this meeting."

"I find much more interest in maintaining Germany as a bulwark against Stalin," Churchill was quite blunt, Lütjens was right about that. "However, if I could end this war before it costs as many lives as the Great War, that would be ideal. Oak, show him the message."

Oak?

The woman behind Sascha sighed and stepped forward. She uncrossed her arms, and pulled a slip of paper from a pocket on her skirt. She handed it over to Lütjens, the German recognizing it as a printout from a wireless set. Eyebrow climbing up his face, he read the message. Each line drove deeper into his heart. His eyes widened further and further, until he was looking between Sascha, Churchill, and the message. This was...this was...

Schreiber, you madman. Are you seriously considering this? Working against the Nazis to the point of...giving away secrets to the British? Are you that desperate to keep the Soviets out?

Letting the message fall from shaking hands, the Admiral turned to the Prime Minister. "When Sascha told me that Schreiber was working against the Nazis, I didn't expect it to go this far. I thought he was just trying to secure Germany. That he didn't trust Hitler or the others. I had no idea...how long have you known about this? How long have you been working with him?"

"Working with him? Hardly." Churchill bit out a laugh, fishing around in his pocket for a cigar. Coming up with one, the older man stuck it in his mouth and gestured at the open window of the office. "Does it look like we're working with a German? We're still fighting the same war. I called you here, because I was hoping you would have some insight into the man who sent this. Do you know how we got this message?"

Lütjens followed the gesture, wondering what the Prime Minister was getting at. "No, I do not. I wasn't even aware that Sascha was who she was until today, certainly I had no idea a man I knew as an old Captain was a traitor."

He didn't use the word lightly. It was, technically, what he and Schreiber were. Traitors to the legitimate government, however one may feel about that government. After all, he was in the office of the leader of an enemy nation. Making small talk with him and talking about how to work against the German government. There wasn't any other word that really fit, was there?

"I see. I'll grant that man this, he is no fool." Idly chewing on the cigar, the stocky man shrugged his shoulders. "That message was sent directly from Bismarck to Revenge after your Admiral crippled her. That was after you were captured, of course. He seems to want to set up a working relationship with my government. A secret agreement that we won't force Germany to submit to occupation by our allies to the East. He seemed rather insistent on not wanting 'unconditional surrender'. I don't even bloody well know where he got that idea."

Lütjens didn't feel the need to tell Churchill that his own reactions indicated he was looking in that direction. The Prime Minister had been pretty clear over the course of this little meeting that he had little real intention of treating Germany leniently. If he considered Versailles as not going far enough to keep the German people down. The damndest thing, was that Lütjens knew he was right. At least in regards to the Nazis. Would punishing Germany further have stopped the war?

The nationalistic side of him railed against that idea. Germany had been punished beyond what was reasonable.

"Regardless, here we are." Lütjens shook his head, and looked down at his hands. He wished, not for the first time, that he had his old academy dirk. It was comforting to hold it. "I am...uncomfortable with the idea of working against a government that is legitimate, no matter my own feelings about them. However, if Admiral Schreiber is even remotely correct about the Soviets and what they'd do to our people..."

Churchill bit out a bitter chuckle. "This is probably the one thing we're in agreement on. I've never trusted Stalin. I'm only working with the man because Hitler is a greater threat to the world, and I'd send tanks and food to Satan himself if it meant killing that madman." The Prime Minister walked forward, and held his hand out. Lütjens looked down, and hesitantly, took it. Churchill grimly smiled. "I make no promises, you understand. I want to know more about you and the man you're representing. That is why you're here, and why I'm willing to do this meeting. If I can keep Stalin in Russia and send Hitler to Hell, it may be worth trying."

Letting go of Lütjens' hand, Churchill turned to Sascha. He stuck his hand out to the battleship, who looked at it with narrowed blue eyes. "It may turn out that we can't work together and that Germany will need to surrender, without any conditions. I have learned not to trust Germans. I won't let that leave my mind. However, I hope that you can teach us more about the ships."

"I don't know how I ended up like this." Sascha bit out, refusing to take the hand. She just crossed her arms instead. "Why don't you ask your lapdog?"

"I do so love a woman with fire in her." The Prime Minister laughed, warmly this time, and shook his head. He looked past Sascha and towards 'Oak', shrugging magnanimously. "We don't know how she's here either. There is someone who might, though."

Walking right past everyone else, Churchill flung his door open and looked out into the hallway. Past him, Lütjens could see the form of a shockingly young man for the Admiral uniform he wore. A uniform that was not British, nor German. Standing beside the man who couldn't be older than his mid-thirties, was a woman who looked only slightly older. A woman with unnatural gray hair, in a feminine version of a naval uniform cut in the same pattern.

"Admiral Thompson, Utah, we have much to talk about."



Not as long as I would like, nor is it getting back to Thompson (yet) but it seemed a good point to stop. Not least because Star Wars is coming out next week and I work at a theater...so I wanted to get something up first.

Now, this was difficult for much the same reason as the Roosevelt and Hitler chapters were. Writing major historical figures is hard. Rewarding, mind, but very very hard. Hopefully this worked well enough. Churchill is a man who is blunt, hides nothing, and doesn't like Germans. He didn't before WW1, he didn't after, and he sure as hell doesn't now. But he's also the man who was perfectly willing to rearm Germans and send them against the Russians after the surrender (see: Unthinkable) soooo....yeah.

This subplot will be FUN.

(also, continuing the trend from this and Holding the Line of there being a specific reason why certain girls are coming back. Sascha/Gneisenau is the outlier.)
 
Last edited:
(also, continuing the trend from this and Holding the Line of there being a specific reason why certain girls are coming back. Sascha/Gneisenau is the outlier.)

Ahhh... so the WWI era girls are the ones who are able to come back generally then? Which explains Lutzow in Holland as well. Sascha/Gneis would be too new normally but to keep her Admiral alive meant extraordinary measures had to be taken.
 
About damn time we returned to Thompson!
EDIT: Having read the A/N, I clarify my statement to say returned to events more associated with Thompson.
 
Last edited:
I like more of stuff happening in the European Theater. There is just more political things happening there then in the Pacific.
Though, I wonder, the Iowa is currently being built, (laid down in 1940, she should be nearing completion, as she was commissioned in 1943...launched august 1942) has anyone sent anyone on board to investigate the chance of there being a spirit onboard? Cause, right now, with things being as weird as they are, there might be a push to finish these ships to get them out to sea. I like the idea of more Iowa sisters.
 
I like more of stuff happening in the European Theater. There is just more political things happening there then in the Pacific.
Though, I wonder, the Iowa is currently being built, (laid down in 1940, she should be nearing completion, as she was commissioned in 1943...launched august 1942) has anyone sent anyone on board to investigate the chance of there being a spirit onboard? Cause, right now, with things being as weird as they are, there might be a push to finish these ships to get them out to sea. I like the idea of more Iowa sisters.
At least get ALL the Iowa sisters built, plus the Montanas.
Yes, they will be, more or less, a boondoggle for the current war, considering carriers are flat out going to be the keys by which it is won & lost in the Pacific, but they will definitely prove useful later on (as has been repeatedly shown, if you're within 10-12 miles of the shoreline, and your bosses pissed off a USN battleship, you. are. fucked.) in other vital roles. And that is before the big bomb get dropped about the Abyssals are coming.

For that matter, we might just see the United States class medium bomber capable carriers actually get built, post-war.
 
Eh, the United States Class (the one you're referring to) was an answer to a problem *already in the process of being* solved. The *only* reason why the Navy wanted it 'medium' bomber capable (and why the Savage was built) was for the nuclear role.

But, between the nukes themselves being smaller, and planes becoming more capable (I suggest you look at the max load of a 1945 B-29, compare it to a F-15E, much less some proposed F-15 concepts (8 tons at max range load for the F-15, while the B-29 was *2.5* tons (less, actually, depending on which ton you use), at max range.), the need for a medium bomber, instead of a attack plane/light bomber, was *very* short lived, in real terms. The A-6 was fully nuclear capable, for example, and while if you squint the A2/A3 could be considered 'medium' bombers, they fit the light role better. Both *could* operate off refitted Essexes.
 
Ahhh... so the WWI era girls are the ones who are able to come back generally then? Which explains Lutzow in Holland as well. Sascha/Gneis would be too new normally but to keep her Admiral alive meant extraordinary measures had to be taken.

Sort of, if 'Oak' is Royal Oak who got blown up by a U-Boat in Scapa Flow, then she's like Genis, because she was in active commission as a heavy combatant just like Genis, whereas Utah was an outlier due to being a training ship.
 
At least get ALL the Iowa sisters built, plus the Montanas.
Yes, they will be, more or less, a boondoggle for the current war, considering carriers are flat out going to be the keys by which it is won & lost in the Pacific, but they will definitely prove useful later on
Illinois and Kentucky I can see being finished, but the US did not have the spare industrial capacity to build the Montanas during the war and no need for them after. They weren't even laid down due to other ships getting priority after Pearl. As for building them for the Abyssal War, yeah, good luck getting the Congress that was fully on board with the Air Force's 'nukes solve everything' plan to approve such a major expenditure for a war Thompson has no proof is coming.
 
Another interesting update. Sadly, we have to deal with...him for most of the chapter, but I'm still glad for the update.
 
Back
Top