Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That says what they built not what they had left. Once Norway and other non contiguous countries (to Germany) were back in allies hands where Germany get the raw materials come from?German Aluminium Production
1940 = 265.3 000 metric tons
1943 = 432.0 000 metric tons
Germany: 28,499,000 metric tons of steel output in 1944. 113,996,000 total production of steel in 1944 ( includes Belgium, Northern France, Meurthe et Moselle, Protectorate (Bohemia-Moravia), Netherlands, Poland).
Once Norway and other non contiguous countries (to Germany) were back in allies hands where Germany get the raw materials come from?
Two basic issues here....norway remained under German control until surrender....it was never retaken. secondly whilst i get what you are trying to say....that Germany suffered from a shortage of raw materials and this got worse as they lost territory, thats not a function of industrial output. its not even a direct function of the strategic air offensive. The advances by the Russians 9mostly) and the allies (to a lesser extent), had more to do with these shortages.
Germany did suffer from a transport problem, as the RAF turned to destroying the rail infrastructure. this was sped up by the allied interdiction campaigns in '43-4. To that extent there is an element of truth to some of what your saying. but I would suggest you are taking a few half truths and twisting them out of proportion to serve your purposes.
especially on maintenance issues.
There is no real choice. It's the F6F hands down. For power, range and maintenance, especially Hellcats R2800 engine beats
Spitfires in line, especially on maintenance issues.
Why don't we evaluate it this way? What did the Spitfire have over the Zero in terms of combat effectiveness? We'll throw out Australia, as the Spitfire was stretched, there. Load them up and put them against one another. I'm seeing you describing a Zero, here, too, for the most part, and I see these machines as a wash, basically. And look at what the Big Cat did to the Zero.How about firepower, speed, maneuverability, climb, dive, ceiling?
Why don't we evaluate it this way? What did the Spitfire have over the Zero in terms of combat effectiveness?
Seafires were considered by the BPF, who fielded all three of the major Allied Carrier Fighters (Hellcat, Corsair and Seafire III) to be the best defensive fighter in their inventory. They were credited with from memory 55 kills during the okinawa campaign, had the lowest rate of deck landing accidents and loss rates of all those three
Performance wise the Seafire Ii had the following characteristics
General characteristics
Empty weight: 6,204 lb (2,814 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 7,640 lb (3,466 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Rolls-Royce Merlin 55M liquid-cooled V-12, 1,585 hp (1,182 kW)
Performance
Maximum speed: 359 mph (578 km/h) at 5,100 ft (1,554 m)
Cruise speed: 218 mph (351 km/h)
Range: 513 mi (825 km)
Service ceiling: 32,000 ft (9,754 m)
Rate of climb: 1.9 min to 5,000 ft (1,525 m)
The A6M5 was its contemporary and has the following characteristics. theres really nothing in it. However the Seafire has superior climb (to 5000feet) and dive characteristics, far better protection and significantly better firepower. Against the contemporary of the A6m5 (the Spitfire XIV) ther is no comparison in outright performance. the British fighter has advantages in every major category except its ability to turn ayt speeds below 200 knots
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/Zeke-52-TAIC-102D.pdf
Fliht trials comparing the Seke 52 to the Corsair, Hellcat and FM-2 are here:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/ptr-1111.pdf
We'll throw out Australia, as the Spitfire was stretched, there.
Nope, it was misused
Load them up and put them against one another. I'm seeing you describing a Zero, here, too, for the most part, and I see these machines as a wash, basically.
Once the British learned how to deal with the Zeke,, the Zeke was not really able to cope with the Spitfire, except with exceptional pilots, which were few and far between by 1945.
Not that much against a half decent pilot, as the cats found out in November 1943 whilst operating against Rabaul. against defencless rookies, maybe. And who ground the JAAF and IJN pilots into the dust....not the Hellcats. They came in after the hard work had been done basically.And look at what the Big Cat did to the Zero.
Yeah, I recall somebody having tried to establish that proposition, earlier, in this thread. FWIW, the Mustangs stepped in at much the same spot in the ETO. Didn't they?And who ground the JAAF and IJN pilots into the dust....not the Hellcats. They came in after the hard work had been done basically.
Yeah, I recall somebody having tried to establish that proposition, earlier, in this thread. FWIW, the Mustangs stepped in at much the same spot in the ETO. Didn't they?
Its the same numbers lol.No, no, no!!! Complete fantasy. See here for the facts:
Axis History Forum • German Steel Production
and the USSBS European summary for WW2:
The United States Strategic Bombing Survey: over-all ... . - Full View | HathiTrust Digital Library | HathiTrust Digital Library
Its the same numbers lol.
Germany: 28,499,000 metric tons of steel output in 1944. 113,996,000 total production of steel in 1944 ( includes Belgium, Northern France, Meurthe et Moselle, Protectorate (Bohemia-Moravia), Netherlands, Poland).