German Weaponology

[m kenny]

Can somebody then explain the concept of 'Blitzkreig' to me?

Why? Do you dispute that as late as 1944 the bulk of German transport was horse drawn. Its a simple yes or no.

Sure seems to me your'e saying that German weapons are inferior.

No I say that German weapons were not all superior and better than Allied ones. However seeing as they Battle of the Atlantic was lost by Germany it would appear the Allied Anti-Submarine tactics were better than the German submarines. Would you agree?

. But as a whole Germany had excellent and in some cases advanced weaponery than any other country.

And the opposite is true. Many Allied weapons were superior to German ones.

Name me one BB that the US, UK or Russian had that Germany had to mobilized almost its entire fleet to stop? Germany had the Bismarck.

So you think Britain should have sent out just one ship to fight a duel with the Bismark? Just like Germany sent a couple of Regiments to attack Greeece and Yugoslavia? Get real. The Bismark was sent to the bottom on her first voyage. The pride of the fleet lasted a few days in action. So good were the results obtained by this unsinkable ship that her sister spent the rest of her life hidind in fiords and never daring to put to sea

Name me one aircraft became so famous that it attached a name to its speciality that the US, UK or Russia had? The Stuka wasn't the name of the aircraft but it became so, kinda like xerox

I do not know any country that calls it dive bombers 'Stukas'. Remind me who they are?.

.

Name me a tank that when introduced on the battlefield,...................

Stop right there. Where did the word 'tank' come from?

 

[Konigstiger205]

These so called 'inferior' weapons had to have something that shook the boots of the Allies.

Thats what I've been trying to say from the start but nobody listened to me.Its funny how this thread ended..from a couple of videos on youtube to an argue on who got the best of everything in WW2...

 

[Konigstiger205]

Stop right there. Where did the word 'tank' come from?

So did the Germans invented the submachine gun...assault rifle too...that doesn't mean that no other country can use those words or develop their own projects....

 

[Njaco]

In answer to you're first question, I'll have to say no but.....
you said "The least mechanised Army in WW2" and I believe Blitzkreig was based on an army being mobile. As far as motor transport, I can't argue.

No I say that German weapons were not all superior and better than Allied ones

I'm not either. Never said all German weapons were.
What I said was "as a whole Germany had excellent and in some cases advanced weaponery than any other country". Which does lead to the next conclusion

And the opposite is true. Many Allied weapons were superior to German ones.

. I think I've said that several times.

However seeing as they Battle of the Atlantic was lost by Germany it would appear the Allied Anti-Submarine tactics were better than the German submarines.

Explain to me how tactics equates into superior weaponery? IMHO those are two different things. And if Germany lost because of incompetance in tactics - that I'll agree. But what does that have to do with execellent German design?

 

[SoD Stitch]

Quite the active topic we have here . . . . .

I can't argue about IR Panthers as I have absolutely no knowledge about that area. (BTW It was I that brought that up, not Kenny).

As for the "IR Panthers", there is no evidence that any were used in their intended role (nightime assault); the few that were captured were being used during the day as "regular" assault tanks. The following is from George Forty's book German Tanks of World War Two "In Action": "On 31 July 1945, 21 Army Group, Tech Int, produced a report on German infrared equipment as fitted to the Panther. It was based on the examination of four Ausf G's which had been equiped with IR, plus one captured crew member. The report explains how the four tanks had been at Fallingbostel with the Panzer Jager Lehr und Versuchs Kompanie (author's emphasis). However, they had not been withdrawn northwards with the soft-skinned vehicles on the formation of Kampfgruppe Uhu, but were comitted in a daylight role to the battle east of Minden. Three were subsequently burnt out and the fourth badly damaged. Their IR equipment comprised a screened car-type headlamp with a 12 v 200 w transmitter lamp; an IR receiver gunsight for use with the main armanent; a gun elevation control device; a power source (12 v batteries), vibrator unit (?) and a transformer. The codename for the equipment was 'Puma', according to a crew member interrogated; however, another PW called it 'Sperba' (sparrow-hawk). The equipment had to be lined up and checked against a source of light at 600 m before going into action. The tank commander alone could traverse, elevate, or depress both the screened headlight and the receiver, by means of special hand grips. The tank commander only could see where he was going or spot a target, for the rest of the crew worked 'blind' on orders over the intercom."

But I have read and I will try to find where its stated - by IIRC Sherman tank crews - that it usually took about 3 or 4 Shermans to effectively knock out a Tiger or Panther. Memory is a faulty source so am not going to argue the point.

Actually, it was closer to 5; official US Army documents state that they estimated that it took approximately five (5) Shermans to destroy a Panther (not a Tiger, though it's probably about the same).

 

[Kurfürst]

Have not got an 'agenda'.

Of course you have, I know your stuff for half a decade, on every board its like waving the red carpet in front of a maddened bull to even mention that any German made stuff in WW2 could possibly have any quality whatsoever.. Mentioning the Panther in particular has similiar effect as pulling the trigger - you explode immidately.

At least be honest to yourself about your acute germanophobia, and spare us from it please... and especially from these ultra-stupid arguements like you are throwing around lately.

They are offense against any intelligent being..

One more thing. Systematically bullying members for opinions which existance you appearantly cant even bear will probably get you kicked from this board extremely quick. This is a friendly place, with a friendly tone, and most of us would want it to remain the same.

 

[m kenny]

Actually, it was closer to 5; official US Army documents state that they estimated that it took approximately five (5) Shermans to destroy a Panther (not a Tiger, though it's probably about the same).

Their is no such 'Official US Army Document'. It is much quoted but never referenced. It can not be quoted becuase it does not exist. The whole 5:1 exchange ratio is the product of wish fulfilment.
Of course if you have figures showing a 5:1 exchange rate I would be extremely interested in seeing them.

Mentioning the Panther in particular has similiar effect as pulling the trigger - you explode immidately.

.

Someone quotes the old myth about IR Panthers and I simply tell them that it is all fiction. Is that a problem? You know the stories about the Comets being destroyed is made up but perhaps you would prefer I did not mention it?
Then we could wait until it is brought up again and we can all sit and wonder at the amazing German technology.

One more thing. Systematically bullying members for opinions which existance you appearantly cant even bear will probably get you kicked from this board extremely quick. This is a friendly place, with a friendly tone, and most of us would want it to remain the same.

Oh dear. If you don't like the message shoot the messenger!

They are offense against any intelligent being..

At least I didn't offend you then..that's a relief!

There is also the fact that the German Enigna codes were broken by the Allies. They were good at some things, average with a lot and poor with others. Sort of like ordinary. Just like normal humans worldwide

 

[Udet]

Mr Glen:

Your opening statement on this thread was a very interesting piece of summary.

Can you elaborate further about that comment of yours affirming the best rocket was the Katyusha? I wasn´t really aware of that.

And about the Spitfires...a midget submarine "claimed as sunk" is surely battle record enough to elicit the claim the Mk. 21 is better than the Ta 152 H?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Well since this is obviously not going to remain civil. Case closed...