Design escalation[edit]

In early July 1940, Hitler ordered the navy to examine new battleship designs and how wartime
experience might be incorporated. A study was completed on 15 July, and contained several
recommendations for the H-class ships, including increasing the freeboard and strengthening the
horizontal protection. In order to maintain displacement and speed and accommodate the
increased weight of the additional armor protection, the design staff drew up an informal design,
known as "Scheme A." The design removed one of the main battery turrets to save weight; the
propulsion system was also increased in power to keep the same speed as the original design.
The original diesel-only system was replaced by a hybrid diesel and steam turbine arrangement.
The staff also prepared a second design, "Scheme B", which retained the fourth turret and
accepted a much higher displacement. This design also incorporated the mixed propulsion
system.[29] These studies were abandoned in 1941 after Hitler decided to halt further battleship
construction until after the end of the war. The design staff therefore attempted to improve the
armor protection for the H-class.[30] The 1940 designs did not form part of the design chain that
resulted in the H-41 through H-44 designs.[31]

H-41[edit]

Bomb damage sustained by Scharnhorst in July 1941 provided the impetus for the effort to
increase the horizontal protection for the H-class.[30][f] The designers were confronted with a
significant problem: any increase in armor could correspondingly increase the displacement and
more importantly, the draft. It was necessary to maintain the full-load draft of 11.5 m of the H-39
design for operations in the relatively shallow North Sea. The only option that allowed the
displacement to be maintained while armor thicknesses to be increased was to reduce the ships'
fuel supplies. A 25 percent cut in range was required, which was deemed unacceptable by the
OKM. It was eventually determined that since deep-water anchorages on the Atlantic coast were
available, it would be permissible to allow the draft to increase. The initial redesign called for an
increase of only 5,000 long tons (5,100 t), 40 percent of which was additional deck armor, the
remainder being used for a larger-caliber main battery. [30]
One of the most significant changes was the decision to bore out the over-sized 40.6 cm guns to
42 cm caliber for the H-41 design. The design staff determined that modifications to the
ammunition hoists and loading equipment would be easily effected and that the original turrets
could be retained.[30] The OKM was aware that the British had settled on a 40.6 cm gun for the
proposed Lion class; the 42 cm gun would grant the H-41 design a significant advantage over
these new adversaries.[33] The ships' armament was otherwise unchanged, apart from an
increased number of 2 cm anti-aircraft guns, of which there were now to be 34. [8]
The ships' main armor decks were substantially strengthened: the deck was increased in
thickness from 120 mm (4.7 in) to 200 mm (7.9 in) and the sloped armor at the edges was
thickened from 150 mm (5.9 in) to 175 mm (6.9 in).[8] Wartime experience with
the Scharnhorst class indicated that the torpedo-defense system was insufficiently strong to
protect the H-39 design from underwater damage. Beam was therefore increased, with greater
width added at the ends of the armored citadel to allow a greater distance between the side wall
and the torpedo bulkhead. The stern section of the torpedo bulkhead was also strengthened
structurally to allow it to better contain the force of an underwater explosion. The number of large
watertight compartments was increased from twenty-one to twenty-two. [33] A triple bottom was
also included in the design, the first time this feature was used in a German warship design.
[8]
 The loss of Bismarck in May 1941 also influenced the design; two large skegs were added to
the outboard shafts to protect them and increase support for the stern while in drydock. The
rudder system was also designed with an explosive charge to detach the rudders in the event
they became jammed.[34]
The new design measured 275 m (902 ft 3 in) long at the waterline and 282 m (925 ft 2 in) long
overall, had a beam of 39 m (127 ft 11 in), and a draft of up to 12.2 m (40 ft 0 in) at full load
displacement of about 74,800 long tons (76,000 t). The increase in weight, while engine power
remained constant, reduced speed to 28.8 kn (53.3 km/h; 33.1 mph).[8] However, German naval
constructors were not satisfied with the torpedo side-protection system, and a series of design
changes were approved by Admiral Raeder on 15 November 1941; these included increasing the
side-protection system depth from 5.5 m (18 ft 1 in) to 6.65 m (21 ft 10 in), increasing beam to
40.5 m (132 ft 10 in), and greater hull depth and freeboard at full load. These changes resulted in
full load displacement increasing to 77,752 long tons (79,000 t) and maximum speed further
decreasing to 28 kn (52 km/h; 32 mph).[35]
As detailed design continued into 1942, the OKM planned to begin construction six to nine
months after demobilization, initially at Blohm & Voss and the Deutsche Werke shipyard in Kiel.
Deschimag, which had been awarded the contract for "J", could no longer be used due to the
increase in draft, which precluded travel through the shallow Weser. Following the completion of
a new, larger dock at the Kriegsmarinewerft in Wilhelmshaven, work would also be done there.
[36]
 The increased size of the ships would have lengthened the building time from four to five
years.[37]

H-42 through H-44[edit]

On 8 February 1942, Albert Speer became the Reichsminister for Armaments and Munitions and
gained influence over the Navy's construction programs. Speer reassigned some members of the
H class design staff to work on new U-boats and other tasks deemed critical to the war effort.
[37]
 The Schiffsneubaukommission (New Ships Construction Commission), [36] intended to liaise with
Speer and the OKM, was created and placed under the direction of Admiral Karl Topp. This
group was responsible for the design work that resulted in the H-42 type, as well as the
subsequent designs. The Construction Office of the OKM formally concluded their work on new
battleships with the H-41 type in August 1942 and played no further role in battleship
development.[37]
After the completion of the H-41 design, Hitler issued a request for a larger battleship and placed
no restrictions on gun caliber or displacement. The only requirements were a speed of 30 kn
(56 km/h; 35 mph), horizontal and underwater protection sufficiently strong enough to protect the
vessel from all attacks, and a main battery properly balanced with the size of the ship. [37] The
results were purely study projects intended to determine the size of a ship with strong enough
armor to counter the rapidly increasing power of bombs deployed by the Allies during the war.
  The Commission did not discuss its activities with Raeder or his successor, Admiral Karl
[36]

Dönitz, or with other branches in the OKM.[37] As the designs for the H-42, H-43, and H-44
battleships were purely conjectural, no actual work was begun. The German navy did not
seriously consider construction on any of the designs, which were so large that they could not
have been built in a traditional slipway. The Construction Office of the OKM sought to
disassociate itself from the projects, which they found to be of doubtful merit and unnecessary for
German victory.[38]
The first design, H-42, was 305 m (1,000 ft 8 in) long between perpendiculars and had a beam of
42.8 m (140 ft 5 in) and a draft of 11.8 m (38 ft 9 in) designed and 12.7 m (41 ft 8 in) at full load.
The designed displacement was 90,000 t (89,000 long tons; 99,000 short tons) and at full load
rose to 96,555 long tons (98,104 t). The dimensions for the second, H-43, increased to 330 m
(1,082 ft 8 in) between perpendiculars, a beam of 48 m (157 ft 6 in), and design and full load
drafts of 12 m (39 ft 4 in) and 12.9 m (42 ft 4 in), respectively. Design displacement was
111,000 t (109,000 long tons; 122,000 short tons) and estimated at 118,110 long tons (120,010 t)
at full load. For the final design, H-44, the length rose to 345 m (1,131 ft 11 in) between
perpendiculars, the beam increased to 51.5 m (169 ft 0 in), and draft rose to 12.7 m (41 ft 8 in) as
designed and 13.5 m (44 ft 3 in) at full load. The displacement for H-44 was 131,000 t (129,000
long tons; 144,000 short tons) as designed and up to 139,272 long tons (141,507 t) at full load.[36]
Details on the propulsion systems for these designs are fragmentary and in some cases
contradictory. Erich Gröner notes that "some [had] pure [diesel] engine propulsion, others [had]
hybrid engine/turbine propulsion systems," but does not record the type and performance for
these propulsion systems.[36] William Garzke and Robert Dulin state that all three designs
featured hybrid diesel/steam turbine plants, each supplying 266,000 shp (198,000 kW) for top
speeds of 31.9 kn (59.1 km/h; 36.7 mph), 30.9 kn (57.2 km/h; 35.6 mph), and 29.8 kn (55.2 km/h;
34.3 mph) for H-42, H-43, and H-44, respectively. According to Garzke and Dulin, the designs
had a speed of 24 kn (44 km/h; 28 mph), 23 kn (43 km/h; 26 mph), and 22.5 kn (41.7 km/h;
25.9 mph), respectively, on just diesel engine power.[39] Both sources agree on a maximum range
of 20,000 nmi (37,000 km; 23,000 mi) at a cruising speed of 19 kn (35 km/h; 22 mph).[39][36]
Information on the armament outfits for the designs is equally contradictory. Both sources agree
on the armament for H-44, which was to have been eight 50.8 cm (20.0 in) guns. Gröner
indicates that H-42 and H-43 were to be armed with eight 48 cm guns, while Garzke and Dulin
state that the H-42 design was to have retained the 42 cm guns from the H-41 design and H-43
would have also been armed with 50.8 cm pieces. Both works agree that the secondary
armament was to have consisted of twelve 15 cm L/55 guns and sixteen 10.5 cm L/65 guns as in
the previous designs, though the lighter weapons are disputed. Gröner states that all three
designs were to be equipped with twenty-eight 3.7 cm and forty 2 cm anti-aircraft guns, while
Garzke and Dulin report only sixteen 3.7 cm guns and forty 2 cm guns for H-43 and H-44 only; H-
42 was to have twenty-four 2 cm guns. Both sources concur that six submerged 53.3 cm torpedo
tubes were included in each design.[39][36]