Technology and Science from 1901 to 1945

[Soren]

That's a lot of untrue claims in one post M_kenny.

The Type XXI didn't suffer any serious faults, the thing that delayed their entrance into full service was the obligatory crew training period which could take several months.

 

[m kenny]

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.

It is sad when someone knows they are wrong but stupidly carries on in the hope they can bluff their way out of the corner they painted themselves into.
I repeat no Panthers with any form of IR set-up served in the Bulge. Not only that none of these Panthers served anywhere in the West.
You say 'prove they didn't' The easy option would be for you to give the names of 'the experts on this subject' who say they did.
List them for me and the book/page numbers.
Is that a problem?

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.

There you go again. What facts did you provide about German small arms IR? -Oh yes you said Germany was 'devolping' it. I was asking about combat issue and usuage and strangely you have failed to provide a single source.
Why is that?

Anymore claims you'd like to come up with ?

This. You will not find a single credible source for your claims about IR Panther in 1944.

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

Then why do you not do it in the case of IR Panthers?

Where does Jentz mention it?
Where does Speilberger state it?
Trojca have any info?

Unit, date, results and documented references please.

 

[Soren]

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.

Juha

Juha it wasn't the Type XXI's underwater speed which made it revolutionary, it was all the new technology packed into it, including the hull design and at the time highly advanced creep engine. The hydraulic reloading system, new sonar, accoustic listening devices, highly advanced weapons (The torps were the most advanced best in the world) And because of its' carefully designed shape the Type XXI was virtually undetectable by any Allied sonar radar equipment of the war. The battery lifetime was also taken to a whole new level, and the air cleaning filter system was state of the art.

Nothing came close to the Type XXI sub, it was by far the best most revolutionary submarine of the war. And luckily for the Allies it didn't get into service in early 44, something which could've spelled disaster for the Allies.

 

[m kenny]

The Type XXI didn't suffer any serious faults, the thing that delayed their entrance into full service was the obligatory crew training period which could take several months.

You live in a dream world. There are a number of books on the subject that list theses serious faults. Hitler was told they would be in service in early 1944 when in fact they never appeared untill a 15 months later.
Why so?
15 months (min) is normal for 'crew training'?

You are confusing potential with practicality-a trap most of the '1946 Uber-Weapon' believers fall into. They believe a weapon system falls fully proven and succesful straight from the drawing board and into action with 2 weeks of the blueprints being passed. Reality never dents the enthusiam of the true believer.

 

[pbfoot]

Juha it wasn't the Type XXI's underwater speed which made it revolutionary, it was all the new technology packed into it, including the hull design and at the time highly advanced creep engine. The hydraulic reloading system, new sonar, accoustic listening devices, highly advanced weapons (The torps were the most advanced best in the world) And because of its' carefully designed shape the Type XXI was virtually undetectable by any Allied sonar radar equipment of the war. The battery lifetime was also taken to a whole new level, and the air cleaning filter system was state of the art.

Nothing came close to the Type XXI sub, it was by far the best most revolutionary submarine of the war. And luckily for the Allies it didn't get into service in early 44, something which could've spelled disaster for the Allies.

Nuclear Depth Charges would soon settle that

 

[Soren]

It is sad when someone knows they are wrong but stupidly carries on in the hope they can bluff their way out of the corner they painted themselves into.

Ah but that can only be refering to yourself, cause I have brought forth only facts supported by well respected sources, facts you have been unable to disprove. You have on the other hand just spewed out a lot of untrue claims, including that the US fielded IR equipment before the Germans, that however has been thuroughly disproven not alone because you ofcourse have failed to bring forth any reliable sources to support your ridiculous claims.

So in a foreseen desperate attempt to try an guide the discussion away from the above facts you want me to bring forth sources cause YOU cannot present any yourself.

 

[parsifal]

Guys

If you want to keep this discussion thread open, then I suggest you all take a step back and cool it just a little

There is no need to get abusive with each other just because that person has a different point of view

For the record, my main referrences for this thread so far have included the following:


The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II: The Comprehensive Guide to Over 1,500 Weapons Systems, Including Tanks, Small Arms, Warplanes, Artillery, Ships and Submarines, By Chris Bishop, Published by Sterling Publishing Company, Inc., 2002

An article on the German Schwimmwagen from the December 1944 issue of the Intelligence Bulletin...which is available online at Lone Sentry: German Light Amphibious Car (U.S. WWII Intelligence Bulletin, December 1944), WW2 Volkswagen

I also relied on several other books from my library, notably "German War Economy - The Motorization Myth" The USSBS Vols 77 78

I also have a few bits and pieces that deal with specific items here and there, but honestly cant be bothered to post them at this point

 

[Soren]

You live in a dream world. There are a number of books on the subject that list theses serious faults. Hitler was told they would be in service in early 1944 when in fact they never appeared untill a 15 months later.
Why so?
15 months (min) is normal for 'crew training'?

You are confusing potential with practicality-a trap most of the '1946 Uber-Weapon' believers fall into. They believe a weapon system falls fully proven and succesful straight from the drawing board and into action with 2 weeks of the blueprints being passed. Reality never dents the enthusiam of the true believer.

You're good at describing yourself, I'll give you that.

And as for the books on the subject, well you obviously haven't read any of them cause then you'd know how big an impact the Allied bombing had on the project and that the subs actually could have been made ready in early to mid 44 if it hadn't been for the mentioned bombing. Allied bombing forced the production to be split up into inland companies with little experience in shipbuilding, and thus a whole array of fixes had to be made by the the experienced personnel at the Shipyards, which is where the assembled sections arrived for final assembly.

So do us all a favor and leave your imagination at home next time Mkenny.

But anyway congratulations, you have earned your way to my ignore list.

 

[Soren]

Nuclear Depth Charges would soon settle that

 

[Glider]

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!

I don't disagree with you when you say that the T34 and KV1 were a wake up call for Germany its a point I have made myself, but the PzIII 50mm L60 was a good match for the T34 but the problem was that only a handful were built in 1941. The problem was that Germany lacked the production facilities to equip the 1,650ish 50mm L42 tanks built in 1941 with the L60 gun.
The KV1 was a tougher nut to crack but the long 75 could breach it. Again there was no reason why the PzIV's of 1941 could not have been built with the L43 instead of the L24. In both these cases it was too late.

Re Type XXI and Type XXIII, 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.

There were some build quality issues with the first one but training was the biggest drawback. To say they were not advanced because they didn't prove themselves is a bit shortsighted. The facts speak for themselves. It wasn't just the speed and depth it was the technology they were equipped with, that made the difference. They were a complete package. Japan had vessels that could match the speed and the USA in a number of areas matched the technology, but Germany put the two together.

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.

Have to agree with this. German Intellegence was basically dreadfull with a couple of exceptions.

 

[Juha]

Hello Soren

I didn't say that XXI wasn't important. Was it "was by far the best most revolutionary submarine of the war."? Answer is in USN evaluation reports on XXI and I-200 Class, I haven't seen them.

Underwater speed was important, because speeds over 16knts meant that enemy needed new type escort vessels and sonars.

I agree with highly advanced creep engine. Highly advanced weapons, yes, but how effective they would have been. Germans had had too high expectations on their earlier new torpedoes, effects of acoustic torpedoes and FAT had been much less than Germans had expected. And as I wrote even R-Class had advances hydrophone system which allowed tracking of U-boats while totally submerged.

And on hull shape, the single screw stemlined spindle-shaped hull of circular section with bulbous bow of R-Class is the modern hull type not that of that of XXI

Juha

 

[timshatz]

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.

Guess we need a definition on this one Kenny. Clarification. What is the difference between IR equipment and IR attachments? Need to know before I go looking for the book that I read it in.

 

[Soren]

Hello Soren

I didn't say that XXI wasn't important. Was it "was by far the best most revolutionary submarine of the war."? Answer is in USN evaluation reports on XXI and I-200 Class, I haven't seen them.

Well we know what the tests concluded Juha, that the Type XXI was far ahead of its time.

Underwater speed was important, because speeds over 16knts meant that enemy needed new type escort vessels and sonars.

No'one said it wasn't important Juha, it most cerainly was, but it wasn't its' speed which made the Type XXI revolutionary.

I agree with highly advanced creep engine. Highly advanced weapons, yes, but how effective they would have been. Germans had had too high expectations on their earlier new torpedoes, effects of acoustic torpedoes and FAT had been much less than Germans had expected.

Well most designs in history have their most troublesome time at the beginning of their entrance into service. By late 1944 the German accoustic torps had been perfected to the degree that they couldn't be "jammed" so to speak as they went for a large variety of sounds.

And as I wrote even R-Class had advances hydrophone system which allowed tracking of U-boats while totally submerged.

There's no comparison Juha, the hydrophones on the Type XXI were state of the art.

And on hull shape, the single screw stemlined spindle-shaped hull of circular section with bulbous bow of R-Class is the modern hull type not that of that of XXI
Juha

I don't see that Juha but despite this it doesn't detract from the fact that the Type XXI was undetectable for any Allied sonar radar equipment used during he war. And this would undoubtedly have proven a decisive advantage.

 

[m kenny]

This is not a subject that can be described as 'opinion'.
Soren said:
"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."

This is simply untrue. IR equiped Panther never served anywhere in the West.
Here we have someone who is completely rewriting history to suit his fan-boy mentality.
For the life of me I do not know why he believes this lie and all attempts to get him to source his claim are ignored.

I did a quick check on the books I had to hand and there is not a single scrap of evidence for any IR Panther usuage in any of them.
Try:

31 titles in total.
I just stuck to dedicated Panther books as I do not think encylopedic volumes covering every tank would have the same depth of information. The above constitutes the bulk of published work over the last decade or so. Kindly give me the page numbers where I can read verifiable facts about 1944 Western Front use of IR Panthers.
I take the subject very seriously and feel very strongly about those who distort the facts to suit a prejudice, I also would not like casual viewers to be led astray by these IR Pipe dreams-this is an histirical borad after all.

 

[m kenny]

Guess we need a definition on this one Kenny. Clarification. What is the difference between IR equipment and IR attachments? Need to know before I go looking for the book that I read it in.

Metal brackets to hold the IR Equipment. Not the IR sights/lights themselves

 

[parsifal]

I hate doing this, but one area that the germans did excel, was in Tank design. Nobody could approach them when it came to innovation in that field. However, for a nation so industrially challengedd as Nazi Germany, it made no sense to design and produce the most expensive and complicated tanks in the world. Just to give it some perpective, it cost roughly six times the cost to produce a Tiger Tank as it did a Sherman. A Panther was roughly four times the unit cost of the Sherman. The Panther forces are estimated to have ddestroyed about 3.5 enemy tanks for eeach tank lost, whilst the Tigers accounted for about 5.5 tanks for each tank lost. In anyones book the results are impressive (particulalry since many of the Tiger losses were due to breakdowns and fuel shortages) .

As far as IR equipped Panthers are concerned, I did find this link. On the basis of the Link alone (which I dont know is true or not, but the lack of evidence by either of you guys for such entrenched and acrimonious positions is breathtaking)

I found that there is evidence of IR equipped tanks, but equally these articles also say that there was a conspicous lack of success with the equipment. It appears to very much be the case that the fitments were highly experimental, and incomplete in terms of their development. Cant prove that, but that appears to be the case.

Anyway, aftger you guys stop venting, perhaps you would like to read the attached article

Achtung Panzer! - German Infrared Night-Vision Devices!

Nightfighting Panthers

Nightfighting Panthers

 

[m kenny]

I hate doing this, but one area that the germans did excel, was in Tank design. Nobody could approach them when it came to innovation in that field.

Quite simply not true. French tanks in particular were ahead of the German designs. Grermany still won but not because their tanks were superior. Once they got into Russia they found out exactly how out of date their designs were. They instituted a crash programe to re-arm and produced the Panther. This held the lead until the IS series came out. Once that happened it was all even again with Russia.

The Panther forces are estimated to have ddestroyed about 3.5 enemy tanks for each tank lost, whilst the Tigers accounted for about 5.5 tanks for each tank lost.

Not true. If anyone has data that leads them to believe this claim then it is up to them to produce it. There simply were not enough Allied tanks produced to give a 3:1 or 5:1 ratio. It is an old chestnut but it has no connection to reality.

As far as IR equipped Panthers are concerned, I did find this link.

The Achtung Panzer article is full of errors and supposition. It even ends by mentioning none of its 'facts' are confirmed. There was no Platoon of Comet tanks destroyed by IR Panthers. The second link is a retelling of the Achtung Panzer story so is of no value.
The third link plainly states that none of the IR Panthers saw action in the Bulge.

On the basis of the Link alone (which I dont know is true or not, but the lack of evidence by either of you guys for such entrenched and acrimonious positions is breathtaking)

Perhaps you could tell me how I can produce 'evidence' that no IR Panthers served in the West in 1944? Would it not be much much easier for those saying they did to name the Units, dates and results of any such usuage?

I found that there is evidence of IR equipped tanks, but equally these articles also say that there was a conspicous lack of success with the equipment. It appears to very much be the case that the fitments were highly experimental, and incomplete in terms of their development. Cant prove that, but that appears to be the case.

It is not disputed that IR equipment was being developed by both sides. The problem is that this experimental work is mentioned as if it was on a large scale and widely used in the German Army. It was not for one simple reason. The Germans knew the Allies had their own IR kit. The first time it was used the Allies would have issued their own IR detectors that they had stockpiled for just such an eventuality. Then any of these Uber-Panzers that dared switch on the war-winning weapon (aren't they all?) would immediatley give its location away and be blasted into scrap metal. It would stand out by virtue of its own light! They did not use it because they knew that the Allies would use thier own IR equipment and beat them with it. They realised that they could not keep the advantage so CHOSE not to use it.


]

 

[parsifal]

Thanks for the reply. I wont take the issue further, simply because I dont consider myself an expert on Tanks. Lets see what Soren has to say. Hopefully it will be more insightful than the previous posts

 

[timshatz]

Metal brackets to hold the IR Equipment. Not the IR sights/lights themselves

Ok, so we're going with an add as opposed to it being an integral part of the sighting equipment. Got it.

Gonna take a while (have to find the book) and I honestly don't remember if it was one or the other. But I'll look around.

Get back to you in 2 years...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

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.

Very good points. The Germans certainly were ahead in some areas, but to say that the Germans were ahead of the allies in every catagory (as some people like to think, you know the whole uber complexity) is ignorant and completely false.

Ah but that can only be refering to yourself, cause I have brought forth only facts supported by well respected sources, facts you have been unable to disprove.

Then do as he asked!

Fricken list them, author, title, page number...

As others have said, it is not that hard for someone who has all the facts.

Guys

If you want to keep this discussion thread open, then I suggest you all take a step back and cool it just a little

There is no need to get abusive with each other just because that person has a different point of view

Everyone should listen to this man!