Greatest aviation myth this site “de-bunked”.

[buffnut453]

As I understand the two companies simply took different ways of manufacturing an engine to the required tolerances.

In the UK, with cheaper labour and (generally) shorter production volumes they'd produce components to looser tolerances, then after manufacture get these groups into matching assemblies with the required tolerance.

In the US, with more expensive labour, larger production runs and presumably a more highly developed capital raising system they'd spend more on production machinery that produced tighter tolerances in the first place, without requiring the manual sorting and matching.

Both were valid for their particular circumstances.

Please explain how your concept of "shorter production runs" tallies with the plain fact that British Merlin production outstripped American production by a considerable margin.

That British production included setting up brand new factories in areas where there wasn't a skilled workforce pool. That's not something you can do using the approach of hand-fettling each part.

 

[pbehn]

As I understand the two companies simply took different ways of manufacturing an engine to the required tolerances.

In the UK, with cheaper labour and (generally) shorter production volumes they'd produce components to looser tolerances, then after manufacture get these groups into matching assemblies with the required tolerance.

In the US, with more expensive labour, larger production runs and presumably a more highly developed capital raising system they'd spend more on production machinery that produced tighter tolerances in the first place, without requiring the manual sorting and matching.

Both were valid for their particular circumstances.

You just continued the myth.

 

[swampyankee]

Don't forget that despite other Central Powers being involved in the great war, it was Germany who was the "last man standing" when the armistice was signed and the war reparations imposed on Germany were staggering.

...and likely less than those imposed on France after the Napoleonic Wars, yet France didn't get taken over by anything like the nazis. That Versailles was a particularly vicious or financially onerous is another myth that needs busting. Compare it to the Treaties of Vienna and Frankfurt or Brest-Litovsk (which was nullified by Germany's ultimate defeat in 1918).

 

[wuzak]

As I understand the two companies simply took different ways of manufacturing an engine to the required tolerances.

In the UK, with cheaper labour and (generally) shorter production volumes they'd produce components to looser tolerances, then after manufacture get these groups into matching assemblies with the required tolerance.

In the US, with more expensive labour, larger production runs and presumably a more highly developed capital raising system they'd spend more on production machinery that produced tighter tolerances in the first place, without requiring the manual sorting and matching.

Both were valid for their particular circumstances.

Not sure that the UK had lower wages.

And Rolls-Royce were ramping up production at their factories before Packard even started work on the Merlin.

 

[SaparotRob]

Myth Busted!

 

[pbehn]

Not sure that the UK had lower wages.

And Rolls-Royce were ramping up production at their factories before Packard even started work on the Merlin.

In a war time economy wages are not so important or telling. What the UK was short of was people, they had largely run out of places that a factory of 10-15,000 people could be put. For the Glasgow factory they had to build accommodation and move people to it.

 

[cherry blossom]

...and likely less than those imposed on France after the Napoleonic Wars, yet France didn't get taken over by anything like the nazis. That Versailles was a particularly vicious or financially onerous is another myth that needs busting. Compare it to the Treaties of Vienna and Frankfurt or Brest-Litovsk (which was nullified by Germany's ultimate defeat in 1918).

The problem that made it rather unlikely that an acceptable treaty could be negotiated or imposed after WW1 was that everyone on both sides had been exposed to four years of propaganda from controlled newspapers. Thus everyone on both sides knew that their cause was just and any attempt to impose a war guilt clause was likely to generated a burning sense of injustice. It was easier after WW2 because most people blame Hitler for that whilst arguments on who started WW1 continue fiercely to this day in academia.

 

[swampyankee]

The problem that made it rather unlikely that an acceptable treaty could be negotiated or imposed after WW1 was that everyone on both sides had been exposed to four years of propaganda from controlled newspapers. Thus everyone on both sides knew that their cause was just and any attempt to impose a war guilt clause was likely to generated a burning sense of injustice. It was easier after WW2 because most people blame Hitler for that whilst arguments on who started WW1 continue fiercely to this day in academia.

They do?

At least part of the reason that Germany went into a hyper-nationalist frenzy after losing WW1 was because the kaiser skittered away and the military leaders immediately started a blame game, where everybody except them was at fault. The "stab in the back" has as much currency and staying power as "the lost cause" and an equal amount of historical basis, i.e., none. Both were made up after the fact for political gain, nazism and right-wing revanchism in one case and white supremacy in the other.

 

[GrauGeist]

Post WWI Germany, and to a certain extent, the rest of Europe, was put into turmoil as society was moving away from a traditional class system that had existed for centuries. Italy, Spain, Greece are just a few examples of radical change in the post WWI years.
In the late 1920's and early 1930's, Germany had roughly 150 political parties, a broken government and astronomical inflation just to name a few points in the perfect storm. The National Socialists were able to gain traction with the public, because they offered stability in a tumultuous environment and used jews and communists as their scapegoat. The Social Democrats and their paramilitary arm, Antifaschiste Aktion (funded by Moscow) played right into the National Socialist's dialogue, too.

And in regards to my earlier comment about staggering debt, I'm pretty sure that 132 billion Geldmarks in 1921 was not pocket change. Germany fell behind on their payments and France occupied the Ruhr in 1923 creating a considerable amount of tension.

Had the Allies helped stabilize Germany and other ruined nations after WWI, then I'm sure the social and political landscape would have been much different by the late 1930's.

 

[gjs238]

The Social Democrats and their paramilitary arm, Antifaschiste Aktion (funded by Moscow) played right into the National Socialist's dialogue, too.

 

[GrauGeist]

Yes, Antifa is short for Antifaschistische Aktion.

 

[swampyankee]

Post WWI Germany, and to a certain extent, the rest of Europe, was put into turmoil as society was moving away from a traditional class system that had existed for centuries. Italy, Spain, Greece are just a few examples of radical change in the post WWI years.
In the late 1920's and early 1930's, Germany had roughly 150 political parties, a broken government and astronomical inflation just to name a few points in the perfect storm. The National Socialists were able to gain traction with the public, because they offered stability in a tumultuous environment and used jews and communists as their scapegoat. The Social Democrats and their paramilitary arm, Antifaschiste Aktion (funded by Moscow) played right into the National Socialist's dialogue, too.

And in regards to my earlier comment about staggering debt, I'm pretty sure that 132 billion Geldmarks in 1921 was not pocket change. Germany fell behind on their payments and France occupied the Ruhr in 1923 creating a considerable amount of tension.

Had the Allies helped stabilize Germany and other ruined nations after WWI, then I'm sure the social and political landscape would have been much different by the late 1930's.

Germany also had unreliable security services -- the police would not follow orders from the legitimate government -- a military leadership, e.g., Hindenburg and Ludendorff who were actively lying about the reason Germany surrendered -- that it had been beaten -- and a government that was deliberately inflating the currency. That Versailles was particularly punitive is a myth -- its reparations were not more severe than those of the Treaty of Vienna and many of its provisions were less harsh than the Treaty of Frankfurt. Germany's internal problems were not those of the Entente; they were the result of an unreliable police and military, a massive portion of elites who were actively against the concept of anything resembling representative democracy, and the violent Freikorps.

 

[GrauGeist]

You CANNOT place all of Germany's tribulation on the National Socialists. The years leading up to 1934 were pure chaos. You had 150+ political parties vying for power - those included Fascists, Nationalists, Communists, right, left, ultra-right, ultra-left and everything in between.
The National Socialists were the ones that prevailed.

And how could Germany deliberately inflate it's currency? It was broke after waging total war, it's industry was in a shambles, it's GDP was almost non-existant amd there was no cohesive plan to get it's infrastructure restored because of a lack of a decisive government.

I know it's easy to just say it's all the Nazi's fault, but realistically, alot happened between 1918 and 1933 that set the stage for their rise to power.

 

[rochie]

As I understand the two companies simply took different ways of manufacturing an engine to the required tolerances.

In the UK, with cheaper labour and (generally) shorter production volumes they'd produce components to looser tolerances, then after manufacture get these groups into matching assemblies with the required tolerance.

In the US, with more expensive labour, larger production runs and presumably a more highly developed capital raising system they'd spend more on production machinery that produced tighter tolerances in the first place, without requiring the manual sorting and matching.

Both were valid for their particular circumstances.

 

[GrauGeist]

You know, Karl, you can thin slice all that spam, pan fry it, dice it up and fold it into a cheese omelette, add seasoning to taste.

It'll be a hit with the patrons and you'll be a hero!

 

[rochie]

You know, Karl, you can thin slice all that spam, pan fry it, dice it up and fold it into a cheese omelette, add seasoning to taste.

It'll be a hit with the patrons and you'll be a hero!

I'll put it on the menu when we re open .

On a more serious note, i am just glad America let us dumb British build your magnificent Packard merlin, even if Rolls Royce didnt build it very well or very quickly !

 

[GrauGeist]

I'll put it on the menu when we re open .

On a more serious note, i am just glad America let us dumb British build your magnificent Packard merlin, even if Rolls Royce didnt build it very well or very quickly !

We were glad to help! I should also mention that you Brits are most fortunate that it was Packard that saved you - had it been Henry Ford, he'd have taken over everything and claimed as his own

 

[GrauGeist]

I'll put it on the menu when we re open

Seriously, my Mom used to dice pan-fried spam and folded it into omelettes and other dishes, like Macaroni and Cheese and fettuchini carabonara.
She'd also add just a dash of Lowrey's seasoned salt to the melted cheddar cheese in the omlette when she was adding the diced spam.

 

[Airframes]

And, of course, there's Spam fritters ..................... once one of the staples in the canteens of UK Social Security main sites.

 

[rochie]

And, of course, there's Spam fritters ..................... once one of the staples in the canteens of UK Social Security main sites.

Spam fritters, Mmmmmmmmm !