Jump to content

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


Flagrum
 Share

Recommended Posts

Heh ... to not drag the original thread about the FW 190 too far off topic, but I am interested in your opinions.

 

So far we had:

How do you know the upcoming DCS Dora is not a trim fest? How do you know it doesn't have worse stall characteristics than pony?

German Engineering. thumbup.gif

 

But those are the engineers that lost the war. tongue.gif

 

But those are the engineers that lost the war. tongue.gif

I think it would have been much more easy for the allies when they had not been that good.smilewink.gif

 

German Engineering is massively over-hyped. Just look at the Panther, lots of armor, mobility and firepower. Yet, even the later models had operational rates of less than 50%. If it cant make it the fight, it may as well not exist. The allies had plenty of engineering marvels off their own in ww2. It is a nonsensical myth that the Nazi's had better tech than everyone else.

 

I think, the german technology was more advanced, generally spoken. But sometimes probably too advanced - for the rough reality of war. Lack of proper ressources, lack of propper resupply lines.

 

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they clearly had an edge is some forms of technology. They were basically preparing for WWII all along. No coincidence that they had jets and swept wings. By no means was it alien technology though. They also managed to lose some tech races (like the atomic bomb, and they weren't that far ahead with flying wings if at all).

[sIGPIC]http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk187/Exorcet/F-15singaturebaseACOmodifiedcomp-1.jpg[/sIGPIC]

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great Engineering, complex to maintain.

Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra, i7-9700k (4.9ghz all cores), NH-D15 cooler, 64 GB CL-14 3200mhz RAM, RTX3090FE, Soundblaster Z, Yamaha 5.1 A/V Receiver, 2x 512GB Samsung NVMe, 1x 1TB Samsung NVMe, 2TB Samsung SSD, Win 10 Pro, TM Warthog, Virpil WarBRD, MFG Crosswinds, 43" Samsung 4K TV, 21.5 Acer VT touchscreen, TrackIR, JetSeat KW-908, Reverb G2, Wheel Stand Pro Super Warthog, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Full Tower Case, EVGA 850 P2 PSU, PointCTRL, Buttkicker 2 , K-51 Helicopter Collective Control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They where not that time ahead at the beginning of the war the only special things they had where 109s and Stukas. The Tanks where not that good and U-boats...hmmm im not sure about U-Boats.

 

Great Engineering, complex to maintain.

 

Complex to maintain......hhmm Partwise like extremly Heavy tanks and such stuff.


Edited by Isegrim

"Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was also a matter of resources. The access to high quality materials was, well, limited. Take the fuel quality for example. German aviation fuel was far inferior octane wise afaik. Higher octance grades enabled higher boost w/o detonating the engines. Efforts were being made to reach a higher fuel quality with synthetic fuel, but the refineries got bombed.


Edited by -Flo-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by USARStarkey View Post

German Engineering is massively over-hyped. Just look at the Panther, lots of armor, mobility and firepower. Yet, even the later models had operational rates of less than 50%. If it cant make it the fight, it may as well not exist. The allies had plenty of engineering marvels off their own in ww2. It is a nonsensical myth that the Nazi's had better tech than everyone else.

 

1. The North American F-86 Sabre was the first American aircraft to take advantage of flight research data seized from the GERMAN aerodynamicists at the end of World War II

 

2.Wernher von Braun. His crowning achievement was to lead the development of the Saturn V booster rocket that helped land the first men on the Moon in July 1969.[3] In 1975 he received the National Medal of Science.

 

3.Messerschmitt P.1101's design features were subsequently used by Bell as the basis for the Bell X-5, which was the first aircraft capable of varying its wing geometry while in flight.

 

4.http://www.wrightmuseum.org:

Capture of U-234. Among them were German civilian scientists who were bound for Japan to help the Axis ally in the development of cutting-edge aviation technologies to be used against their common enemy. These scientists would remain in America and make significant contributions to efforts relating to the development of stealth technologies, jet powered aircraft, and eventually guided missiles.

 

5.The MG 213 never reached production, but inspired the DEFA, the very similar British ADEN cannon, and the smaller American M39 cannon.

 

6.Infra red technology(nightvision) on tanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The German night vision was very basic, and they were not the only ones to have it. IIRC the Marine Corps had similar NV scopes before the Germans, and on a larger scale.

 

They were certainly the only ones to have it on tanks, but on a very small scale late in the war. If they had had more and earlier, it would've taken a quite short time for the Allies to pick up on it via captured assets and intelligence, and they could then easily have rushed own IR optics out to their tank units, since this is active NV we're talking about, meaning that you illuminate something with IR light and use optics capable of seeing that light.

 

 

The way I see it regarding aircraft technology is that they had some good very new technology, but that a lot of it wasn't knowledge exclusive to the Germans, but simply something that no other country recognized as being worthwhile developing at the expense of other things at the time. When you look at the waste resources diverted to the V1 and V2, rocket planes, jet planes programs, etc. it makes sense. Obviously the knowledge and especially the experience gathered from this was very sought after by all countries after the war, since it saved them the effort of finding it out for themselves.

 

The submarines is something that I personally regard the Americans to have done better during the war. They had technology that took some time for the Germans to introduce in even small scales, they had further range, more torpedoes, and practically speaking, the USN's submarine campaign in the Pacific trumped the Kriegsmarine's U-boat campaign in the Atlantic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The German night vision was very basic, and they were not the only ones to have it. IIRC the Marine Corps had similar NV scopes before the Germans, and on a larger scale.

 

They were certainly the only ones to have it on tanks, but on a very small scale late in the war. If they had had more and earlier, it would've taken a quite short time for the Allies to pick up on it via captured assets and intelligence, and they could then easily have rushed own IR optics out to their tank units, since this is active NV we're talking about, meaning that you illuminate something with IR light and use optics capable of seeing that light.

 

 

The way I see it regarding aircraft technology is that they had some good very new technology, but that a lot of it wasn't knowledge exclusive to the Germans, but simply something that no other country recognized as being worthwhile developing at the expense of other things at the time. When you look at the waste resources diverted to the V1 and V2, rocket planes, jet planes programs, etc. it makes sense. Obviously the knowledge and especially the experience gathered from this was very sought after by all countries after the war, since it saved them the effort of finding it out for themselves.

 

The submarines is something that I personally regard the Americans to have done better during the war. They had technology that took some time for the Germans to introduce in even small scales, they had further range, more torpedoes, and practically speaking, the USN's submarine campaign in the Pacific trumped the Kriegsmarine's U-boat campaign in the Atlantic.

 

Its pretty good when you come up with such things, And i did know that the British and US had invented NV also but never hear that its been more early than the german devices and also used in War.

 

And what exactly you are trying to say with that U-Boat thing...can you be more accurate there please.

"Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.


Edited by Scrim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they clearly had an edge is some forms of technology. They were basically preparing for WWII all along. No coincidence that they had jets and swept wings. By no means was it alien technology though. They also managed to lose some tech races (like the atomic bomb, and they weren't that far ahead with flying wings if at all).

 

 

we should all be happy, that the nazi lost the race to get an atomic bomb first.

They were close, but they have removed/killed all Jewish scientist in the different academic departments!

Waiting for: DCS: Mi-24 Hind, and AH 64D Apache

Intel i5-7600K @4.1GHz, 32GB DDR4 @2400MHz, GTX 1070 Gigabyte Gaming OC 8GB DDR5, WIN 10 64Bit Prof.

Squadron "Serious Uglies" / Discord-Server: https://discord.gg/2WccwBh

Ghost0815

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

UHH thats a nice they are simply better post.

 

Ever heard about "Enigma" and how worse it would have ended for the British people when this device would had been not in Allied hands at some time. (Thanks god id did)

"Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the engineering that lost the war. It was the leaders' tactical decisions that caused it....imo

http://www.leatherneck-sim.com/

https://www.facebook.com/leatherneck.simulations/

 

i9 7980XE, 128GB Ram, SLI GTX Titan Xp, Win10 Pro, SSD, 2 x 256GB SSD, 4 x 512GB SSD RAID 0

i7 4960X, 64GB Ram, GTX Titan, Win10 Pro, 512GB PCIe SSD, 2 x 256GB SSD, 6 x 4TB HDD RAID 6, 9361-8i RAID Controller

i7 2600K, 16GB Ram, GTX 580, Win10 Pro, 240GB SSD, 3 x 4TB HDD

Pentium 4, 2GB Ram, GeForce 6800 Ultra, WinXp Pro, 3 x 500GB HDD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that.

 

 

For sure it is like that!

 

The allied forces could do easily a Assassination on mr. H on many Points.

But they where afraid that someone ...lets say more competent could take his place than.:megalol:

 

Edit:I had to troll cause H was an ignorant idiot.


Edited by Isegrim

"Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the engineering that lost the war. It was the leaders' tactical decisions that caused it....imo

 

Tactics are the purview of Captains and Lieutenants. The Germans were very good at fighting and had sound tactics on the operational level. The majority of their Generals and Colonels were very good. The problem is that Germany allowed the US to enter the war.

Logistics are what win and lose wars. On the strategic level, brilliant engineering without sufficient numbers will lose every time. The simple fact is that if you have a machine that is capable of performing a task (not necessarily the best but not the worst either) and can be produced in large numbers, you will win through numerical superiority. High technology usually translates into high maintenance. The late war German tanks were a fine example of this because the wheel and track designs offered great cross country ride but they were relatively easy to break and hard to fix. The Germans could not produce enough material to win once the industrial might of the US was brought to full capacity. That is why they lost.

 

Of course Hitler's meddling in the operational/strategic level planning towards the end didn't help much either. I suppose we can thank him for expediting the process though. While he was brilliant at nation building, a General Officer he was not.

Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills.

 

If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

 

"If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MP-5. Enough said.

And don't forget that Germany had ICBMs (V2) over 70 years ago.

 

And I believe that Germany lost because purely because of Hitler. He did things like take Stalingrad, only because it had Stalin's name in it. It had no strategic advantage whatsoever and his Generals even told him this.


Edited by Sceptre

RTX 2070 8GB | 32GB DDR4 2666 RAM | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 4.2Ghz | Asrock X570 | CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle | TM MFDs | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UHH thats a nice they are simply better post.

 

Ever heard about "Enigma" and how worse it would have ended for the British people when this device would had been not in Allied hands at some time. (Thanks god id did)

 

UHH what? Seriously, everything I wrote about the submarines and the campaigns are facts. Please, go ahead and disprove any of it instead of childish "duh, you're wrung" posts.

 

The Enigma? Breaking that code was a part of the intelligence aspect of the Battle for the Atlantic. Your point being what then?

 

And don't forget that Germany had ICBMs (V2) over 70 years ago.

 

And I believe that Germany lost because purely because of Hitler. He did things like take Stalingrad, only because it had Stalin's name in it. It had no strategic advantage whatsoever and his Generals even told him this.

 

Well, not Intercontinental, right?

 

I think Germany would've lost even without Hitler. It would have taken longer time, but in the end they were in such a position that they couldn't have won. But ultimately I suppose speculating about a war without Hitler is of little point, as his absence would've made the WW2 we know today, or even a war at all very unlikely.


Edited by Scrim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UHH what? Seriously, everything I wrote about the submarines and the campaigns are facts. Please, go ahead and disprove any of it instead of childish "duh, you're wrung" posts.

 

The Enigma? Breaking that code was a part of the intelligence aspect of the Battle for the Atlantic. Your point being what then?

 

I didnt say that you are wrong.

They where all round 20 knots max. And they where all going around 23000 km max distance and they where all equipped with Periscopes and Torpedos.

So whats exactly your breakthrough here.

 

And the enigma code of the german Kriegsmarine wasnt broken by intelligence it was broken after a short sea battle where U-110 was damaged badly and surfaced.

The commander evacuated the ship and was thinking that the U-boat will sink very soon. But it didnt, so the crew of the british ships nearby could get onboard and get the enigma and all codes used for it.


Edited by Isegrim

"Blyat Naaaaa" - Izlom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respect the German engineering, I certainly do ;)

 

They lost the war because of stupid decisions (by Hitler) and they fought on more than 1 front, against more people.... had it been 1:1 war, I think they would have won.

No longer active in DCS...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Respect the German engineering, I certainly do ;)

 

They lost the war because of stupid decisions (by Hitler) and they fought on more than 1 front, against more people.... had it been 1:1 war, I think they would have won.

 

I have always thought about that what-if scenario.

ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Germany would've lost even without Hitler. It would have taken longer time, but in the end they were in such a position that they couldn't have won. But ultimately I suppose speculating about a war without Hitler is of little point, as his absence would've made the WW2 we know today, or even a war at all very unlikely.

 

Certainly they would have lost, it can not be disputed among the facts of having to fight in Mussolinis wars, not securing North Africa and Russia first, attacking targets of little strategic importance, not having long range bombers and having the german industrial centers bombed nightly and after declaration of war against the US even during the day didn't help. Add to that not attacking the british and irish Isles, which had a not unassialable but hard to attack stating area that was ignored the whole war and you certainly got a recepie for disaster where attrition will get the better of you in the end, even with the fairly high production numbers of military hardware for such a small country as Germany.

 

That there were no truly dedicated long range bombers in the german arsenal at the beginning and even towards the end of the war also didn't help, as strikes agains American production lines and research centers were not possible. Even if they were, the sheer size of the US would have made it possible to have these in places hard to reach or bomb, easily hidden away from view. Without a large enough navy and landing operation the US wouldn't have fallen anyway and won almost by default.

 

But in the end I believe that we still ended up with the better deal here in Germany with Hitler losing. On the other hand, would I know any different if he had won (disregarding the fact if I would even be here then)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...