Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
How about May 8, 1945...
From what I understand this weapons system was in development with maybe some combat testing but was not to appear on the 234 til the C-4 model.Granted, the Germans were ahead in feilding jets, particularly the Ar-234 which was performing recon before D-day I believe, though to be honest I've never liked the fixed rearward guns of the 234, there's virtually no rearward vision to aim it with or a gunner
much more powerful set of armament.
The me-262 would win cos it has more speed and a much more powerful set of armament. The P-80 advantage in manouverability wouldnt matter for much but it would be able to accclerate faster.
the allies did manage to find an answer to the panzers what about russia's is2 eh?
Say no more PLEASE!...I dont know if this really counts, but according to Secret Weapons Over Normandy (a video game
I was hoping, infact I was pretty sure, that you were a more mature person Bill.
I never called what the Allies made inefficient or junk as you imply in your childish attempt to ridicule, but then again its not the first time you've tried to put words into my mouth so I should've been prepared.
You stated that German engineers and scientists were better than the combined allies, then illustrated a mix of German scientists - some of which were major contibutors in WWI timeframe, some educated in germany and moved to US, some you didn't mention like Von Karman and Theodorsen and Planck and Einstein thet were educated in germany and moved to US then moved on as if the pioneers you mentioned would clearly illustrate your point. It didn't!
In my very own post I wrote that the B-29 was overall the best large bomber of WW2, but like you do so often you choose to ignore that.
BFD - the Germans had no counter to the Mossie, the Fw 190 and 109 was defeated handily by Spit, Tempest and Mustang - they were lucky they didn't have to deal with the F4U or even the P-51H or the P-80 - all of which were ready for combat in early 1945 but not deployed.
The He 219 was an excellent design but inferior overall to Mossie or maybe even the P-61 as pure night fighter. Debatable either way but neither an illustration of 'design superiority' - and the Mossie was in service in 1942.
The Me262 came into service after 3 years of development. The P-80 went from contract to flight in 143 Fu*****ing days, the P-51 in 117 days and first flew in 1940.
None of the German heavy bombers are even a footnote in history as far as either reliability or contribution to the war effort. The Ar 234 could have been interesting but relegated mostly to recon. Ta 152 slithered in in late March 1945 and made zero contributioon as good as it was - and would have been marginal over the P-51H and various Spits at that late stage of the war - it would have its hands full in medium high altitude to the deck against the F8F or F7F - I could go on and on here but my maturity would come into question once again.
Like I said the Allies had their own advanced projects, but as you can clearly see yourself the Germans were in general fielding more advanced equipment.
The German jets were slightly better and came into operations sooner. The armor was superior
The Allies failed to field an equal to the Me-262, He-162, Ta-152, Ar-243, Ju-388 Fa 233.
The Germans failed to field an equal to the F4U, the P-51H or the P-47N for long range escort. The Germans failed to produce a medium altitude to low altitude air fighter like the Yak3. The Germans failed to produce transports like the C-47 or C-54. The Germans failed to produce viable naval fighters as good or anywhere neare the numbers of F6F or Seafires or F4U for naval aviation. Had no general purpose naval bombers like the TBF or SB2C. Had no long rang Patrol bombers like the PBM or even the PBY. The closest thing to them was a converted airliner with a weak spine in the Fw200.
Don't even step into heavy or really, medium bombers. The Ju 88 was a superb medium carry, multi purpose twin but do you really want to say it was better than the Mossie, or even the B-25, B-26 or A-26.. pick the mission. If you want to go night fighter talk about mossie, if you want an anti shipping a/c look to up gunned B-25s and compare the records.
The Allies failed to field an equal to the StG.44, MG-42 Panzerfaust.
The Germans failed to field an equal to the M-1 Garand and the M2 heavy machine gun. The Panzerfaust was excellent short range the 3.5 bazooka was equally devastating at much longer ranges and effective against T-34 and T-54 in Korea.
The Allies failed to field an equal to the Pzkpfw V, IV, IV B, JagdPanther, JagdTiger Hetzer etc etc. Agreed but M-26 wasn't that short
The Allies failed to produce an equal to the Type VII, IX, XXI XXIII subs.
The Balao and Tranch Class were equal - but only one Trench (and two XXIII served combat)
The Allies, with a great amount of outside help, produced the A-bomb. The Germans failed to produce an equal to this.
I dont know if this really counts, but according to Secret Weapons Over Normandy (a video game for the XBOX), the me 262 was rather unmaneuverable, but was the best plane cause of it's speed and firepower. The game's creators (LucasArts with a aviation museum) tried to make it as accurate as possible.
I have also read that the me 262 was not very maneuverable from several places
What REALLY distinguished combined Allied engineers was designing some 'good to very good' and then getting them to the field ops in record times.
You stated that German engineers and scientists were better than the combined allies, then illustrated a mix of German scientists - some of which were major contibutors in WWI timeframe
, some educated in germany and moved to US, some you didn't mention like Von Karman and Theodorsen and Planck and Einstein thet were educated in germany and moved to US then moved on as if the pioneers you mentioned would clearly illustrate your point. It didn't!
BFD - the Germans had no counter to the Mossie,
the Fw 190 and 109 was defeated handily by Spit, Tempest and Mustang - they were lucky they didn't have to deal with the F4U or even the P-51H or the P-80 - all of which were ready for combat in early 1945 but not deployed.
The He 219 was an excellent design but inferior overall to Mossie or maybe even the P-61 as pure night fighter.
Debatable either way but neither an illustration of 'design superiority' - and the Mossie was in service in 1942.
The Me262 came into service after 3 years of development.
The P-80 went from contract to flight in 143 Fu*****ing days
, the P-51 in 117 days and first flew in 1940.
None of the German heavy bombers are even a footnote in history as far as either reliability or contribution to the war effort.
The Ar 234 could have been interesting but relegated mostly to recon.
Ta 152 slithered in in late March 1945 and made zero contributioon as good as it was - and would have been marginal over the P-51H and various Spits at that late stage of the war - it would have its hands full in medium high altitude to the deck against the F8F or F7F - I could go on and on here but my maturity would come into question once again.
The German jets were slightly better and came into operations sooner. The armor was superior
The Germans failed to field an equal to the F4U, the P-51H or the P-47N for long range escort.
The Germans failed to produce a medium altitude to low altitude air fighter like the Yak3.
The Germans failed to produce transports like the C-47 or C-54.
The Germans failed to produce viable naval fighters as good or anywhere neare the numbers of F6F or Seafires or F4U for naval aviation.
Don't even step into heavy or really, medium bombers. The Ju 88 was a superb medium carry, multi purpose twin but do you really want to say it was better than the Mossie, or even the B-25, B-26 or A-26.. pick the mission. If you want to go night fighter talk about mossie, if you want an anti shipping a/c look to up gunned B-25s and compare the records
The Germans failed to field an equal to the M-1 Garand
and the M2 heavy machine gun.
The Panzerfaust was excellent short range the 3.5 bazooka was equally devastating at much longer ranges and effective against T-34 and T-54 in Korea.
The Balao and Tranch Class were equal
The Germans produced nothing like the Liberty ship,
the Jeep or the GM 6x6.
The Germans could never produce a ship like the Liberty in less than 5 days which is the record.
The 1911A1 was better combat sidearm than the P-38 or the Luger.
If you even want to go there, bring on your equivalents to Iowa class BB, Alaska Class Heavy Cruisers, Cleveland Class Light Crusiers or Fletcher Class Destroyers.
What REALLY distinguished combined Allied engineers was designing some 'good to very good' and then getting them to the field ops in record times.
This special weaponry is __________ ?The Mossie lacked the special weaponary of the German nightfighters to effectively fight enemy bombers at night.
Yes Bodenplatte showed that.The FW-190 Bf-109 did amazingly against the fighters above considering the situation Germany was in by 1944-45 and both handily defeated the Tempest, Spit Mustang when'ever the odds were equal.
But the Germans did, the 109T.Errr, Bill, incase you didn't notice the Germans didn't field any navy carriers during WW2, which is probably why they didn't produce any naval fighter
Speed allowed them to get on station quicker. Then there is the air conditioning for greater crew comfort and thus less fatigue. They didn't have to dive as deep as Japanese anti-sub measures, and Germanys, were not that great.No the Balao and Trench Class were inferior mainly because they couldn't dive half as deep or feature as advanced equipment (Esp. in the field of Targeting) or weaponary as its German counterparts. The only thing the Balao Trench Class subs have in their favor is speed, something which is nearly completely irrelevant for a sub as its a stealth hunter.