"German Engineering" ... :-) or :-( ?

You appear to horribly uninformed about this. For starters, American submarines at the start of the war had a longer range, higher speed and more firepower than anything else than a few German submarines had at the end of the war. New technology was more prevalent on American subs than on German ones.

 

So you're saying that a German sub was sunk during, or before '32? Because that's the first time cryptoanalysts broke the Enigma. Did the capture of an Enigma help? Yes. Was it vital to breaking the codes? Heck no. There is a lot more to the history of breaking the Enigma code than just "lolz, we hacked your code with this one thing we found".

Sorry iam really good in WW2 knowledge.

Point 1: Stats Please

Point 2:

There have been different types of Enigma machines you know.

The Wehrmacht used a different type like the Kriegsmarine.

The Kriegsmarines Enigma code wasnt broken till the U110 incident. :smilewink:

Pronouncing that one is "good" at something intellectual is if anything a proof of the opposite.

1: Look it up yourself. As I said, what I've stated are facts. You go ahead and disprove it then.

2: Yeah, no. There is a lot more to breaking the Enigma codes than the capture of the code books and Enigma of the U-110.

I've never heard of the British having NV sights, just the Americans.

 

In regards to the German submarine campaign in the Atlantic, and the American submarine campaign in the Pacific, there is one vital difference: That the Americans won an astounding victory in achieving their goals. The Germans never did. Whilst they inflicted harsh blows on the Allies in the Atlantic, they never managed to cut the lifeline to the UK. In the Pacific, the USN simply never stopped dealing out blows against both the Japanese merchant navy, and their Imperial Navy from day one. Even despite the short time-frame in '41, the USN subs sank more Japanese merchants than they could replace in the same time.

 

USN subs completely severed the supply lines between mainland Japan and many Pacific island outposts, to such a degree that a famine started in Japan, and that entire island garrisons that were bypassed almost starved to death despite resorting to cannibalism. And this is despite the standard submarine torpedoes in the USN inventory being dangerously unreliable for a long time after the war started. In addition carried out reconnaissance, raids, etc. during the war. They also sank almost twice as many warships as the U-boats did.

 

Not to mention the fact that they sank more shipping than all everyone else combined. So did the German U-boats, but the Kriegsmarine didn't have quite as many surface ships out in the Atlantic as the Allies did in the Pacific.

 

 

Comparing American and German submarines is also something that the former seems to take home the highest score on. They had longer range, more firepower, and more technological advances than the Germans did, e.g. radar. Few German submarines were equipped with that even by the end of the war. The American submarines were also more capable in regards to range, firepower and speed from the first day of the war than many German submarines were even by the end IIRC.

The backbone of all allied naval operations in WW2 was the fact that early on, the axis codes were broken. The Japanese by the USA, and the German by the UK. At some, but not all points of the war, the British naval operations directors knew where EVERY German submarine was located. They had to use the information with care so they didn't alert the German Kriegsmarine to the fact that their codes were compromised.

If a naval asset can be put in the right place, at the right time, then you have an advantage that the best equipment on the planet couldn't overcome.

No single factor can be determined as decisive in a war, so stating that Germany had better equipment is just not provable, or relevant in the bigger picture.

Japan had the biggest and best? battleship in the Yamoto, and it was simple sunk by airpower the first time it was used in action - because it was already obsolete when the war began. German tanks at the outbreak of WW2 were inferior to the French, and no better than the British, BUT, they employed far far superior tactics, which was the decisive factor, and not the equipment.

I think Germans would have won if they fielded MiG-21's. They only had teens of those so when the US shot down 4 that's a huge % of it.

Just kidding.

Germans did have wonderful tech. It's amazing. But so did the other belligerents in the war.

Tech is just a tool and how its used is what counts. Sometimes its a huge advantage and sometimes it's not.

There are many factors to win / lose a war. High tech engineering is only one factor.

Some factors have much more impact like the ability to make more bacon, beans and rice or to have more boots on the ground or more wings in the air and the ability to transport aforementioned red beans and rice to their destination (yum).

The part about the haxing . . . . made me laugh. Imagine the frustration of the Japanese with those wind talkers. Sometimes just doing the math(s) won't work.

To bad modern German engineering isn't as good as their dubya 2 forms. W00t for Audi electrical issues, and BMW massive engine fatal breaks to Porsche Christmas tree display lights .

Same with Americans, seems like Japan cars have the Gr*****n ironworks, I remember offroading and boulder bashing, and this one tundra and tacoma had to tow out the GMC, Ford, chevy, and two jeeps out of this gnar gnar rock place. The electrical cooler and quality microbrews helped.

The microbrews were German and Belgium :D

but it was a naff effort