Comments by "John Fisher" (@johnfisher9692) on "The Drydock - Episode 148" video.

You have stated that one of the reasons the German capital ships of WW2 were inefficient was because they had no experience of building large warships after WW1. But after the Nelson's were completed NO ONE else was building them either. Although other Navy's were designing ships they couldn't build, you have stated the Germans were also designing Battleships they were forbidden to build, so they did have practical experience in designing large capital ships. As for keeping up physical experience by rebuilding and modernizing ships, again, so were the Germans with their Pre Dreadnoughts. So is there any other reason why WW2 large German ships were so badly designed or is it, as it seems to me, just people making excuses.
3
@bluemarlin8138 You do make a lot of good points though there is a huge difference between the design of a cruiser compared to a Battleship, especially given the limited displacement available to treaty cruisers, And Germany did build their own light cruisers no matter how bad they were and later on the Panzerschiff. Germany DID have experience with 4 shaft propellers, all the BC's in WW1 used a 4 shaft design as opposed to 3 in their BB's. Why they chose what is perhaps the least efficient layout can only be speculated on unless you go with the pride/arrogance reason.
3