Technology and Science from 1901 to 1945

TempestMKV said:

You need tons of knowledge of allied weapons, Soren.

British Jet planes developement was as good as german.

Click to expand...

Nope.

British jet engine was second to none from 1930s to 1960s, in 1946, Nene engine was far better than german's and USSR/USA was behind british in this field even in 1960.

Click to expand...

¨
Wrong. The Germans were ahead. Check out the HeS.011 engine.

F80 is as good as me262.

Click to expand...

Nope, the Me-262 was far better.

21lbs boost Spitfire XIV outperformanced Ta152 and Dora.

Click to expand...

Again nope, the Ta-152 Dora-13 easily outperformed the Spitfire XIV.

Pershing outperformanced tiger, as good as panzer.

Click to expand...

Once again, no. The Panther Tiger were both more reliable (Yes, the Pershing featured absolutely 'horrible' reliability, worse than the Tiger II) and better mobility and equal to better firepower protection. The Tiger Ausf.B features far superior firepower protection than the rest though.

JagdTiger was most powerful TD of WW2 in service, because JSU130 had a more powerful gun.

Click to expand...

JSU130 ??? You just pull it all out from your sleeve dont you?

Both Su100 and JagdPanther are best TD of WW2

Click to expand...

No, the SU100 isn't even close to being as good as the JagdPanther. The JagdPanther features much better optics, mobility, protection firepower.

Browning .50 is the best heavy mechine gun, better than Mg131.
M1 is the best semi-automatic.

Click to expand...

Ok for once we agree, the .50 cal M2 HMG was the best HMG of the war, agreed. And the M1 Garand is the best semi automatic rifle of the war as-well, agreed.

USSR B20 and UK Hispano was as good as, if not better than Mg151/20.

Click to expand...

No.

170mm K-18, the best heavy artillery piece of WW2???? Don't forget USSR 203mm.

Click to expand...

The 170mm K-18 is far superior.

allied had "television-directed" in WWII, and P61 the best night fighting a/c.

Click to expand...

So did the Germans. And as for the P-61, the Ju-338 flies higher faster.

Note that allied had advantages in Radar, computer.

Click to expand...

Again that is completely untrue, the Germans were far ahead in terms of computers and were one the same level in regards to radar technology.

Soren said:

But that is not true Tempest, the KwK42 is not a tapered bore gun.

Nope. Check the figures for both guns, weight included. The 120mm M1 AA gun weighed some 5.5 tons more than the 128mm FlaK40, yet the FlaK40 fires a heavier shell at 880 m/s to a higher ceiling of some 17,600 m.

The 88mm FlaK41 L/71 has a ceiling of 15,000 m.

No it wasn't, it was heavier, slower less accurate compared to the KwK43.

And note when it was fielded, some 3 years later.

Again that is completely untrue Tempest. The optics in the Pershing weren't anywhere near as good as those the German panzers featured. German tanks were from the start of WW2 and to the end fitted with the best optics in the world, nothing came close, and that's a fact.

Now please, before making more claims, check your sources!

Click to expand...

Perhaps there are some errors in my resource.

US 120mm M1 gun is 2 years eralier than 128mm and it's the ancestor of US T34 heavy tank, M103, UK conqueror and chieftain.

12.8 cm FlaK 40

The eventual solution was to simplify the firing platform, based on the assumption it would always be securely bolted into concrete. The total weight of the system reached 26.5 tonnes, making it practically impossible to tow cross-country

Click to expand...

12.8 cm FlaK 40 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No, the SU100 isn't even close to being as good as the JagdPanther. The JagdPanther features much better optics, mobility, protection firepower.
---------------------

Bad quality of JagdPanther leads to same protection as SU100, kwk43 apcbc's penetration is same as D10T's.

Tempest, I hate to disappoint you, but the British did not have the best jet engine in WWII.

The British engine was bulky and troublesome compared to the jet engine that Hans von Ohain developed and tested shortly before Frank Whittle.

The first jet powered aircraft to fly under it's own power was the Heinkel He178, on 27 August 1939 and the He280 followed shortly afterwards, being the worlds first armed jet aircraft. That was on 30 March 1941, by the way, two years before the Gloster Meteor flew.

Also of interest regarding the He280, it was capable of out-performing piston powered aircraft of the day, and it was designed as a fighter, unlike the Me262, which was an interceptor.

The He280 never made it to production and the Me262 was plagued with problems and that made it appear on the front far too late to stem the tide of Allied bombers. The engines needed raw materials that were no longer available as Germany's sources fell to the Allied armies.

The technology of the Me262, however changed the face of aviation history.

The British on the other hand weren't having the same success, the first Meteor flew in 1943 and revised models didn't enter service until 1944 and the only enemy aircraft they destroyed were on the ground. As far as the Gloster E.28/39 was concerned, it did fly in 1941...but was underpowered and relegated to various tests and never considered as worthy of production. The DeHavilland Vampire was under development, but the war ended before it reached service and would have been the only British jet to support your claim.

The P-80 Shooting Star was a sturdy aircraft, but seriously flawed, and cost the lives of a number of pilots, including U.S. ace Major Bong in it's early days, which were the closing days of the war in Europe.

The Germans also had a large number of jets entering production, or near the production phase, and the list is a long one. You find that these later jets heavily influenced the next generation of combat jets, such as the F-86 Saber and the MiG-15, to name a very few of many examples.

The Japanese had their jets, but they weren't able to enter those into the war before it's conclusion in the Pacific. Most notably, the Kikka and the Ki-201 (Karyu).

I'm not sure where you're gathering your information from, but it seems to be gathered more from speculation than statistical facts.

Soren
Quote:" But to make myself a bit clearer: The Germans were flying sophisticated jet aircraft when everyone else were flying propeller aircraft. The Germans were using auto pilots and engine management computers in their a/c, something nobody else had. The Germans were using guided bombs missiles when everyone else knew either squat in this field or were just experimenting with the idea. The Germans were seeing clearly in the night when everyone else either had no clue how to achieve this or were having a very hard tme trying to achieve the same."

Never heard Gloster Meteor?
Allied didn't have auto-pilots?
Guided missile tests began late WWI/immediately after WWI, others thought that they were not worth of effort, Germans found out that they needed better anti-shipping weaponry. Hs 293 and Fritz X had a short period of glory before their control systems were jammed.
Now first British AI radar kill was achieved in July 1940 when LW got its first?

Agree with Me 262, Ar 234 and maybe also Ar 232 but
according to Brown Ta 152H and latest Allied fighters were very near each other, He-162 was delightful airplane especially in rolling axis but not very effective as practical warplane and it killed almost exclusively only those who flew it.
Ju 388, how many kills were achieved by pilots flying it?

On small arms I agree with reservation that there is different opinions around which was the best military bolt action rifle.

Was 15mm MG 151 or 30mm Mk 103 unrivalled?

Was JagdTiger unrivalled or waste of resources?

I'd not say that 75mm KwK 42 was unrivalled, 17 pdr had more or less same performance and
while Pak 42 had only limited production run 17 pdr was the main heavy A/T gun of British army.

X-4 wasn't very practical solution when allied used escort fighters and V-1 wasn't ballistic missile.

Juha

Ps
Quote:
USSR B20 and UK Hispano was as good as, if not better than Mg151/20.
"No."

Look at Table 2 Column Gun Efficiency at WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER GUN EFFECTIVENESS

Quote:" the Germans were far ahead in terms of computers"

Why they didn't see that Enigma code was possible to break by using computers if they had far better computers than Allied powers?

In 1945 late, meteor and vampire were capable of nearly 900km/h.
In 1946 Birtish Nene engine was far better than Jumo004.
In 1950s, English Electric Lightning was the first aircraft capable of supercruise in the world, even superpower such as USSR and USA can't achieve that.

English Electric Lightning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


BTW, USA had its own swept tech before VE day, North America Co. can't represent all US aviation companies. After all, Buzeman's swept wing idea had been released publicaly in 1935.

The core of The Third Technological Innovation of Human Being are Computer,nuclear and semiconductor technologies which were developed better in USA BFFORE VE DAY. And those tech have changed the world completely.

<<FOCKE-WULF FW190>> by Manfred Griehl

acknowledgement
In producing this profile specail thanks is due to Flugkaptaen Hans Scander, the former chief pilot of the Focke-Wulf company, for his extensive help, as well as to Joachim Dressel, Franz Selinger, Willy Radinger and many others with an interest in the history of the fw190.....



Werknumber 210001 was the first prototyoe to present the D-9 production aircraft with the Jumo213A-1. The aircraft was used in performance measurement tests untill Octobe18 1944. On september 28, 1944 a supercharger failure made necessary an engine change. The new enigne was a Jumo213C-1. Testing was interrupted following an engine failure and was not resumed until early 1945.


In early march 1945 the focke-wulf company's technical field service put together an extensive report concerning design prolems encounted with the Fw190D-9 in order to eliminate these as quickly as possible. it was determined that the D-9's exhaust stubs frequently burned through. Furthermore pilots of JG6,11and 26 reported frequent breakdown of the Jumo213A-1 inverted-vee engine.

As the same time, in early February,1945,JG2 discovered several defeats with the ETC504. These were also evident on most of JG6's aircraft.

Nine of the units aircraft were fitted with the gyro-stabilized reflector gunsight, the EZ42 which even in early 1945 was prone to numerous malfunctions.

Click to expand...

Do you believe that Fw190D9 had no intercooler at all?

The importance of intercooler is below:

TempestMKV said:

Bad quality of JagdPanther leads to same protection as SU100,

Click to expand...

You couldnt be more wrong. Check your sources.

kwk43 apcbc's penetration is same as D10T's.

Click to expand...

Nope, the KwK43's penetration with the APCBC projectile is far greater than that of the 100mm D10T, and there are both German, US USSR test results to back that up.

So again check your sources.

TempestMKV said:

Perhaps there are some errors in my resource.

US 120mm M1 gun is 2 years eralier than 128mm and it's the ancestor of US T34 heavy tank, M103, UK conqueror and chieftain.

Click to expand...

And the 128mm FlaK40 is still lighter more powerful.

12.8 cm FlaK 40

The eventual solution was to simplify the firing platform, based on the assumption it would always be securely bolted into concrete. The total weight of the system reached 26.5 tonnes, making it practically impossible to tow cross-country

12.8 cm FlaK 40 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Do you at all understand what you're reading ? Why are you taking small phrases out of context and using them to prove your claims ??

If you'd care to read the whole article you'd notice that the gun weighed 12 tons in its firing position. And when on a mobile rig it weighed 17 tons. When on a large travel rig it weighed 27 tons, or the prototype did.

I don't see the point in this discussion. Germans were ahead in one field and behind in others. I don't see the Germans being either far ahead or far behind the Allied powers. Allied powers, especially Russia only had the tendency to use a pragmatic aproach, ease of building and numbers being more imported then slight technological advatages. The (slight) inferiority of Allied weapons had thus nothing to do with lagging science. Germans tended to over design and had thus problems in maintenance, replacement, manufacturing etc. I would say one of the reasons of German defeat is the lack of practical thinking on their part.
While allied weapons were on one-to one comparisment possibly slightly inferior, on the battlefield this didn't make any difference as they still won.
Look at it this way, what good does it do when you have the best tank (Tiger) when it is overwhelmed by great masses of (inferior) T34's?

I broadly agree with Marcel
More broadly, the effectiveness of combat formation is more than the sum of its sub-units because the good co-operation with different arms is usually the key to success. Single arm alone isn't usually enough.
If we look the Eastern front, Germans got at the gates of Moscow when their tanks were qualitatively in worst position vs Soviet tanks. T-34, KV I and II were great shocks to panzer crews but with good team work, better communications and training and good co-operation with artillery and Flak they overcame the quality problem.
Same in late summer early autumn 43, this time Soviet tanks were qualitatively in worst position vs German tanks but anyway managed to push Germans from Donets to Dnepr over open Steppe which clearly favoured Panzers with their better firepower.
Or when at the beginning of 43 when Hitler imagined that one Tiger battalion (503) would have been able greatly help to stabilize the Southern part of Eastern front.
Or in west in Autumn 44 when in series of encounter battles GTL Langlade/2nd French Armoured Div and CCs/4th Armor Div smashed the PzBrs sent against them, even if the M4s of Allied formations were almost exclusively armed with 75mm cannon and main tank of PzBrs was Panther Aufs G.

Juha

what is this a fourm to find all the crap that never would have been usefull now or ever?

Marcel said:

I don't see the point in this discussion. Germans were ahead in one field and behind in others. I don't see the Germans being either far ahead or far behind the Allied powers. Allied powers, especially Russia only had the tendency to use a pragmatic aproach, ease of building and numbers being more imported then slight technological advatages. The (slight) inferiority of Allied weapons had thus nothing to do with lagging science. Germans tended to over design and had thus problems in maintenance, replacement, manufacturing etc. I would say one of the reasons of German defeat is the lack of practical thinking on their part.
While allied weapons were on one-to one comparisment possibly slightly inferior, on the battlefield this didn't make any difference as they still won.
Look at it this way, what good does it do when you have the best tank (Tiger) when it is overwhelmed by great masses of (inferior) T34's?

Click to expand...

I agree.

Now having said this. I see no point to this thread.

This is all that is going to happen in this thread:

Tempest: Soren, you do not know what you are talking about.

Soren: Tempest, you do not know what you are talking about.

Tempest: You are a liar.

Soren: You are a liar.

Tempest: Germans suck.

Soren: Allies suck.

Click to expand...

In the end, no facts that actually prove anything will be posted by either side. It will be nothing more than the usual speculation by both sides, as well as the use of opinions as facts (which is what happens 90% of the time).

In the end, the thread will be closed and both sides will probably take a forced vacation.

I will however leave it open, and give everyone a rope long eneogh to hang themselves.

Adler I can provide sources for every single fact I have presented here, Tempest on the other hand is but speculating which is made clear by all the false information he has provided.

Anyway moving on...

It is quite clear that Germany held a technological edge throughout the war, emphasizing quality over quantity at every corner. This is also a part of the reason they lost the war. They spend a lot of labour on very advanced designs just to get a few out of the factory each week. And this is clearly seen in the equipment they fielded, they were constantly raising the technology bar higher. By the end of the war the Germans were fielding the best and most advanced aircraft, tanks, smallarms uboats in the world:

Aircraft:
Me-262, He-162, Ta-152, Ar-234 Ar-232.

AFVs
Pzkpfw.V, Pzkpfw.VI Ausf.E B, JagdPanther, JagdTiger, SdKfz. 234 etc etc

Large Guns:
128mm KwK/PaK44 L/55 60, 88mm KwK/PaK43 L/71, 75mm KwK/PaK42 L/70, 88mm KwK36 L/56, 105mm LeFH 18(M), 150mm K-18, 173mm K-18 210mm K-18.

Smallarms:
StG.44, Mauser 98, MG-42, MG-34, FG-42 S-18/1100.

Naval:
Type XXI Type XXIII

Other:
Infrared equipment (Vampir etc.), X-4, V-1 V-2, Fritz X, Wasserfall, Rheinbote, Enzian, Various computers Kommandogeräts incl. engine management control computers, autopilots and the Z-1/2/3 4 programmable computers in WW2 (Z-4 digital computer was demonstrated at the aerodynamic test facility in Göttingen in 45), Würzburg Radar etc etc...


The Western Allies took to concentrate on the middle ground, producing lots of good quality equipment while the Soviets emphasized quantity over anything else and went for highest mass production. Put together this was too much for the Germans to overcome.

ah, the old chestnut surfaces again...we were beaten by quantity, and nothing else.......err suffice it to say that is opinion hotly contested by many.

And sorry, but what you are presenting is opinion pieces only, as is that presented by this other fellow.

In my opinion this thread has a predictable and rapid demise heading its way

parsifal said:

ah, the old chestnut surfaces again...we were beaten by quantity, and nothing else.......err suffice it to say that is opinion hotly contested by many.

And sorry, but what you are presenting is opinion pieces only, as is that presented by this other fellow.

In my opinion this thread has a predictable and rapid demise heading its way

Click to expand...

Aah but you are so wrong, it is not opinions it is facts, but you are welcome to try and contest any of them. Which one shall we take first ? Can you find an equal to any of them ?

VT fuses
Magnetrons
ship borne fire control radars
amphtracs
Hedgehog
Mousetraps
Mulberrys
Jungle webbing
Mountain guns
Sonars
Radar modulation
Valenkiys,
Fur Lined winter gear
Russian winter ponies
Jeeps
Chev Trucks

to name just a few

If you want to expand the discussion and look and produceability as well as the sharp end techniology issue, I would add the following

Garand rifles
Sten Guns
PPSH
Degtarev
Sherman Tanks
T-34 Tanks
Fletcher and Gearing Class DDs
LCT
LST
Liberty Ships
C-47s
Flower Class Frigates
Escort Carriers


etc etc



In poor weather German weapons were unreliable. We have had this discussion before, and once again I referred the matter to a person that would know better than either of us. My Step father served on the eastern front in the 343rd ID, as a machine gunner. He just happens to also be a toolmaker by trade, with more knowledge on machining tolerances etc under his fingernails than either you or i will ever have. His verdict, German weapons were technically better, but suffered reliability issues because of the excessively tight tolerances to which they were built. Consequently they suffered much more frequent stoppages in the freezing Russian conditions than their equyivalent counterparts in the Russian snow and mud...thus your statement about the Russians relying only on quantity is only half true. They were simple, and crude, but more reliable.

But I am not even going to discuss this with you, to be honest. I have learnt that "discussions" with you are a complete non-event, and in fact are more lectures than anything even remotely approaching a discussion

These arent my words., these are the opinions of a true expert, and not from someone who relies on bullsh*t book learning and opinions to "prove their statements.

Hehe, regarding the German smallarms, I believe it was me who explained that German guns were prone to jamming in the Russian winter because of the fact that the Germans built their guns to extremely tight tolerances. A new type lubricating oil was however introduced which partially solved the issue.

And as for sonar, ever heard of the S-unit ?

Oh and tell me, what do you make of the below:













For more: german prime movers

And as for winterclothing, the Germans had plenty of that (Although Hitler made sure it wasn't sent in 41), ever heard of the Wintertarnanzug Sumpfmuster-44 (Padded Parka Padded Trousers).

And as to Proximity fuzes:
The German proximity fuse.

And anti radar sonar technology:
U-Boat Anti Sonar Coating - Alberich, Tarnmatte

And as for jungle webbing, what makes you think that the Germans didn't have this ? Oh and in terms of technology I really don't think it has a place.

Soren

On amphibious tractors LVT4 with its real-loading ramp and armed with 4 mgs (US use) or 3 mgs and 20mm automatic cannon (British) was clearly more practical vehicle in amphibious warfare. And for extra amphibious load carrying there was DUKWs, ie amphibious lorries.

Even if Schwimmwagen is my favourite WWII vehicle there were more amphibious Jeeps around, which was better I don't know.

Mountain artillery, You might well have point here, IIRC German mountain arty pieces were first class, but I must admit that my knowledge on Allied mountain arty pieces is very limited.

Lorries, if one has studied Eastern front battles from Autumn 43 to Spring 44 one must have came across German complains how their lorries and cars became stuck into sticky Ukrainian mud but Soviets on their 2½ tons and 1½ tons LL trucks ploughed around their flanks. So lorries/trucks definitely Allied supremacy.

Proximity fuzes, now Allied were at least 2½ years AHEAD Germans.

Juha

Soren said:

Adler I can provide sources for every single fact I have presented here,

Click to expand...

You said the following in another thread and I asked you for for 'sources'. You have yet to reply so I thought I would post it here because you may have missed it and it is all part of the same claim:

Soren said:

Germany was also the leader in radar infrared techonology, producing the best infrared imaging and being the first to deploy infrared equipment on smallarms AFV's a good number of vehicles (Inclduing the Pzkpfw.V Panther) being equipped with this in late 44 on the western front and enjoying amazing success.

Click to expand...

I have provided information (twice now) that shows you that the USA was the first to field IR small arms in WW2.
I asked you for sources that confirm 'a good number of vehicles (Inclduing the Pzkpfw.V Panther) being equipped with this in late 44 on the western front and enjoying amazing success
Why have you not been able to do this?