Technology and Science from 1901 to 1945

Soren · Dec 3, 2008

parsifal said:
Soren

I quote the relevant part of your Post 34

It is quite clear that Germany held a technological edge throughout the war, emphasizing quality over quantity at every corner.

Your next post, directed at me gave a long list of equipment pieces. Am I now to believe that the two consecutive posts are not related to each other in any way, and that you will say one thing in one post, and then change your position (without giving any notice to that effect) in the very next post?????????

Oh you're so good at making stuff up about me and my posts Parsifal, it's hilarious.

That the Germans emphasized quality over quantity at every corner doesn't translate into that all they made was better Parsifal, don't be ignorant.

And as for the list I provided, it was filled with superior equipment, yes, but as you should know it is far from everything the Germans fielded, and not everything they fielded was a success (Although you'd like everyone to think that I am of that opinion)

So stop fabricating stuff about me and what I think, thank you.

Soren · Dec 3, 2008

m kenny said:
Well you did write this:
I want you to 'debunk' me (as I say your claim is total fabrication) by giving me

a) Sources showing that German IR sights were in production and use before the US issued their version in the Pacific.

Sure, the US Infrared sights were first in use during the Battle of Okinawa in may 1945, and the infrared imaging these devices provided was no where near as good as that provided by German infrared equipment. The Germans had been experimenting with IR equipment since 1936 and infrared equipment was fielded starting in 1943 on vehicles early 44 on smallarms (Read 'German Assault Rifle by Peter R. Senich)

Again I say these claims are fiction and that you made it up.

Except I didn't make up squat, and I never have. You on the other hand I am not so sure about.

If of course you have nothing other than your imagination to back it up please feel free to ignore this challenge to your credibility (for 4th time)

Challenge was accepted and accomplished.

Now crawl back into that hole you came from plz. (Yes I can be rude as-well)

Soren · Dec 3, 2008

Btw, I was recently searching for German radio equipment on the net and I stumbled upon this:
GERMAN, WWII, WW2, Lichtsprechgerät 80/80

Pretty darn advanced for its time.

m kenny · Dec 3, 2008

Soren said:
Sure, the US Infrared sights were first in use during the Battle of Okinawa in may 1945, and the infrared imaging these devices provided was no where near as good as that provided by German infrared equipment. The Germans had been experimenting with IR equipment since 1936 and infrared equipment was fielded starting in 1943 on vehicles early 44 on smallarms (Read 'German Assault Rifle by Peter R. Senich)

Falls way short of what you were asked. Perhaps it was not made plain to you. Can you give me details (presumably in the book you mention) of where the German small-arms IR set-up was issued to the troops and dates for same.

Whilst at it could you also provide the details where we can confirm your (made up) claim that "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."
Where did this happen because there is not the slightest mention of such an event anywhere ( an old outdated Achtung Panzer site claim is not a source:
Achtung Panzer! - German Infrared Night-Vision Devices!)

Yes I can be rude

It would be better if you were factual instead.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Dec 3, 2008

Soren said:
Ok, here you go:

Thomas L. Jentz
Lorrin R. Bird
Peter R. Senich
Robert D. Livingston
Dietmar Hermann
Robert Bruce
Ian V. Hogg
Joachim Engelmann
Herbert Jager

No everything you have presented is just opinion. Nothing else...

Do you know the difference between opinion and fact? Do not take me wrong, I do not think anyone here has presented anything but opinion.

Its a downward spiral for everyone. It is rather entertaining however, watching people pack for vacation. I predict this thread has 5 more posts left in it.

Juha · Dec 3, 2008

Hello Adler
IMHO Parsifal presented facts when he typed specs for SEEP and Schwimmwagen plus he had added a table of LVTs and LWS specs in one of his messages.
My humble contribution was the info that LVT4 had rear loading ramp and that it has armament. Plus German complains on their lorries/trucks vs LL Studebaker 2½ ton 6x6 trucks. Of course I could have added that most Opel Blitz were 4x2 type and that Studebaker's had appr 50% more powerful engine than Blitz.
And because I think we all know when WWII ended in Europe I didn't mention that it was in Jan 43 when CL USS Helena made first shoot downs with VT fused AA shells.

Juha

timshatz · Dec 3, 2008

Just drop in for a second on this back and forth, I think Soren may have a point with the IR sights on Panzers in 1944. I recall reading that US Armor in the Battle of the Bulge ran into some Panthers (if memory serves me) that were IR equipped and the Panthers chewed them up.

Not sure if it was an passive sight with an IR Searchlight on the tank or just a passive sight, but I am almost positive the Wermacht used IR on their tanks in the West in the Late 1944 offensive.

Another trick they used was firing flares behind the US Tanks and opening up when they were silhouetted. Again, the Panzers chewed the US Tanks up, big time. Think it happened Southwest of Bastone.

m kenny · Dec 3, 2008

timshatz said:
Just drop in for a second on this back and forth, I think Soren may have a point with the IR sights on Panzers in 1944. I recall reading that US Armor in the Battle of the Bulge ran into some Panthers (if memory serves me) that were IR equipped and the Panthers chewed them up.

As Soren will find out (if he bothers to check) there were no IR equiped Panthers operating ANYWHERE in the West for 1944. There were Panthers that had the attachments for the IR equipment but that is not the same thing.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Dec 3, 2008

Juha said:
Hello Adler
IMHO Parsifal presented facts when he typed specs for SEEP and Schwimmwagen plus he had added a table of LVTs and LWS specs in one of his messages.
My humble contribution was the info that LVT4 had rear loading ramp and that it has armament. Plus German complains on their lorries/trucks vs LL Studebaker 2½ ton 6x6 trucks. Of course I could have added that most Opel Blitz were 4x2 type and that Studebaker's had appr 50% more powerful engine than Blitz.
And because I think we all know when WWII ended in Europe I didn't mention that it was in Jan 43 when CL USS Helena made first shoot downs with VT fused AA shells.

Juha

You are correct, and I should not have lumped everone in the same boat...

Hop · Dec 3, 2008

I honestly don't seem how anyone can claim a German lead in electronics with a straight face.

As Goering said:

In the field of radar they must have the world's greatest genius. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops ... The British would have never dared use the metal foil here if they had not worked out 100% what the antidote it. I hate the rogues like the plague, but in one respect I'm obliged to take off my cap to them. After the war's over, I'm going to buy myself a British radio set, as a token of my regard for their high-frequency work

I believe it was prompted by the German capture of a H2S radar, which was so beyond German radar scientists it took them months to work out what it was.

As regards infrared, the British had a hand held amplifier the size of a water bottle in use in late 1942. See Appeals for Help
for an example.

parsifal · Dec 3, 2008

Soren said:
Oh you're so good at making stuff up about me and my posts Parsifal, it's hilarious.

That the Germans emphasized quality over quantity at every corner doesn't translate into that all they made was better Parsifal, don't be ignorant.

And as for the list I provided, it was filled with superior equipment, yes, but as you should know it is far from everything the Germans fielded, and not everything they fielded was a success (Although you'd like everyone to think that I am of that opinion)

So stop fabricating stuff about me and what I think, thank you.

Soren

I am not fabricating the words that you used....your exact words from post number 34 are there, and very clearly said that at every corner the Germans fielded superior equipment, not that they opted for the technological edge. Your exact words are there for everyone to see......

The photographic list I assumed was a list of some of the equipment items that you consider to be superior, judging from the above post.....where you say.... "as for the list I provided, it was filled with superior equipment"...

Have you looked at the performance specs I posted so far. They show that the LWS was inferior to its allied counterparts, whilst the Type 166 Schwimmwaggen was about the same as the Allied equivalent. Yet subsequent to that information being made available you have stated words to the effect that the Type 166 was unique (I assume you mean in a positive way by that statement), and later, as indicated above, that your list was a list of superior items for my consideration.

I am waiting for you to provide evidence to the contrary on the two items I have analyzed so far, namely the Type 166 and the LWS amphibian. You should not rely by opinion, but by evidence, preferably by a comparison of the design specs that you may have, or to analyse what I have posted. Or you might want to analyse their operational histories. That would be okay, but hard to verify. But i think the time for you to stomp your feet, abuse people and simply say that it is superior without any supporting information is counterproductive at this point.

Soren · Dec 4, 2008

m kenny said:
As Soren will find out (if he bothers to check) there were no IR equiped Panthers operating ANYWHERE in the West for 1944. There were Panthers that had the attachments for the IR equipment but that is not the same thing.

Bollocks. You can't prove that ridiculous claim of yours at all.

I trust the experts on this subject, one of which you are not.

I have provided the facts, you have but provided opinions claims, claiming the US used IR equipment before the Germans, which has been proven they did not.

Anymore claims you'd like to come up with ?

Soren · Dec 4, 2008

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
No everything you have presented is just opinion. Nothing else...

Do you know the difference between opinion and fact? Do not take me wrong, I do not think anyone here has presented anything but opinion.

So all the authors which I have quoted are opinion based in your opinion ???

I'm sorry but that's far fetched Adler.

You know I can provide the names of all the books by the authors I listed which I used as reference.

Soren · Dec 4, 2008

timshatz said:
Just drop in for a second on this back and forth, I think Soren may have a point with the IR sights on Panzers in 1944. I recall reading that US Armor in the Battle of the Bulge ran into some Panthers (if memory serves me) that were IR equipped and the Panthers chewed them up.

Not sure if it was an passive sight with an IR Searchlight on the tank or just a passive sight, but I am almost positive the Wermacht used IR on their tanks in the West in the Late 1944 offensive.

Another trick they used was firing flares behind the US Tanks and opening up when they were silhouetted. Again, the Panzers chewed the US Tanks up, big time. Think it happened Southwest of Bastone.

Roger that Timshatz.

Soren · Dec 4, 2008

Juha said:
Hello Adler
IMHO Parsifal presented facts when he typed specs for SEEP and Schwimmwagen plus he had added a table of LVTs and LWS specs in one of his messages.

So providing unsourced specs is providing facts ?? Hmm... Allow me to best that by providing spec figures for all the equipment I listed then in my next post.

Glider · Dec 4, 2008

Re Sorens List of items. Whilst I would argue that some of the items on it don't deserve to be there, there can be little doubt that in a number of areas the Germans were ahead of the rest of the world.

Aerodynamics leading to the Me262, He162, Arado 234 is one obvious area.
In some cases aircraft design not forgetting the Fw190 which was a quantum leap in performance when it was introduced into service.

Tank Design, the Pz III, PzIV, Tigers and Panthers were all ahead of the rest of the field in their day and were the tanks everyone measured their own tanks against.

In Submarines no one would doubt that the Type XXI and Type XXIII were a generation ahead.

In small arms the Germans had some advanced ideas.

There are other examples in the list but equally there is no doubt that the vast majority of the examples, it was a case of too little too late.

That doesn't detract from the design teams. The one area where Germany fell behind was the war of Logistics. I mentioned on an earlier thread flipantly that they relied on the horse which sums up their weakness.

Can anyone imagine what would have happened if the German designs had been matched with the economic power of the USA?

As I said at the start I would question some of the items on Sorens list but that isn't the point, generally speaking in a number of key areas, the Germans were ahead.

Soren · Dec 4, 2008

You make good points Glider. But that some of their material was horsedrawn to the battlefield wasn't really the problem. The main logistical problem which plagued the German army was the magnitude of different caliber guns smallarms, engines, yes even the clothing it fielded, making it a nightmare to organize the logistics properly. The Allies opted instead to more or less standardize their fielded equipment, making it far easier to organize the logistics.

So logistics was one area where the Germans could improve, most certainly yes.

Also like others have already pointed out, the German obsession with engineering perfection and state of the art technology had its' obvious downsides = Greatly reduced production rate. And it cost the Germans in the end.

m kenny · Dec 4, 2008

Glider said:
Tank Design, the Pz III, PzIV, Tigers and Panthers were all ahead of the rest of the field in their day and were the tanks everyone measured their own tanks against.

The invasion of Russia was a wake-up call to Germany. The T-34 and KV series totally outclassed every German tank in service. They also found that their standard A/T weapon (37mm) was obsolete. Overnight they found that they were not the top tank designers and a crash program was institiuted to reverse this disadvantage. The Panther and Tiger helped but the Soviets played their usual game and brought in the IS series. This was roughly comparably to a Tiger but at a much lower cost. Everyone waffles on about 1946 German Uber-Panzers that MIGHT have got into service but completely overlook the IS-3 (which was in production and not an airy fairey soon to be finished prototype).
Of all the WW2 combatants nobody got more bang for their buck than the Russians. Not for them over-engineered tanks with a predicted track life of 5 years (useful when your tank has a combat life of 6 months) but simple cheap and deadly designs that could swamp the 6 or seven Tiger II's spread over a 100 mile front!

In Submarines no one would doubt that the Type XXI and Type XXIII were a generation ahead.

Well we can becuase they never actualy proved themselves. They were supposed to be in service from early 1944 but they were full of faults that stopped their safe use. Devotees ovelook this awkward fact.

The one area where Germany fell behind was the war of Logistics. I mentioned on an earlier thread flipantly that they relied on the horse which sums up their weakness.

They had other bigger shortcomings. Their intellegence service was comprehensively penetrated and their most secret code was being read right from the beggining. I can't understand how a nation that STARTS a war against the 3 biggest powers on the planet expected to win the war. It was the most idiotic course of action and nothing but suicide. You can't praise their small scale success whilst ignoring these stupid strategic decisions.

Juha · Dec 4, 2008

Hello
Usually technological development is rather complicated, ideas pop up in different countries. With reasonable education system and some industrial base countries could design and develop world class products if they put resources on that sector. Nothing new or surprising in this.
If we look Type XXI and XXIII submarines they were not in fact so revolutionary as some thinks.
In fact the idea of submarines optimized for underwater operations was not new. First to see combat were British R-Class hunter-killer submarines near very end of WWI, they had under water speed of 14knts, single screw, sensitive hydrophones in the bulbous bow as well as 6 bow torpedo tubes. So in theory very modern concept but too much ahead its time and difficult to control while submerged because of their high speed. Next which I can recall was in late 30s IJN Vessel Number 71 (submerged speed 21 knts) and very late in the WWII Japanese also built I-200 Class submarines which had underwaterspeed of 19knts.

Soren
I have good info on LVTs and SEEP and at least reasonable on LWS and Swimmwagen so because the specs Parsifal gave sounded familiar I had no reason to ask sources.

Juha

lesofprimus · Dec 4, 2008

I can't understand how a nation that STARTS a war against the 3 biggest powers on the planet expected to win the war. It was the most idiotic course of action and nothing but suicide. You can't praise their shortcomings whilst ignoring these stupid strategic decisions.

Gotta agree with u Kenny 100%....

Technology and Science from 1901 to 1945

1st Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

Banned

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Senior Master Sergeant

Chief Master Sergeant

Banned

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Senior Airman

Colonel

1st Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

1st Lieutenant

Captain

1st Lieutenant

Banned

Senior Master Sergeant

Brigadier General

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads