Who started WW2?

All of those you mention, syscom, bar the Atom Bomb were needed in a large quantity to achieve a success. The German weapons were able to perform missions in small numbers due to their superiority on the battlefield.

I have never implied that the Allies were inferior in every technical aspect. But it was our stream-lined large production that won us the war. The B-17s and B-24s while being superior to the German bombers, would not have been able to carry the war on their own in small numbers. Had the Germans produced heavy bombers, they probably would have been over-complicated and in small numbers due to this. And, most likely, would have failed to achieve the objective of strategic destruction.

You seem to think that the Allied ability to mass produce is an insult to the Allied victory. When it's certainly not. It took a lot of intelligence to turn the Allied nations into such large, efficient factories that they had become by 1945.

plan_D said:

The Allies won because they knew how to use what they had effectively. They relied on their production capacity rather than try to beat Germany at it's own game. We must not try and put down the Allied victory as a mere consequence of their size, the Axis was by no means a small force and the production capacity would have been enough to hold of it's opponents had it been handled properly. However, the Germans overcomplicated their production and products while the Allies simplified everything and increased their technology in the most important sector - production technology. The thought process of the Allies was simply - "How can we build more with what we have?" In the respect of total war, Albert Speer was probably the most valuble man in all Nazi Germany.

Both sides had effective equipment and leadership. But while the Germans thought precision, the Allies thought quantity. And it was the war winning weapon, a better thought process in the end.

Click to expand...

I also agree with that.

syscom3,

From your list above only the Heavy bomber, DUKW and C47 can be considered superior to its counterparts, the rest was more than matched by the Germans !

And about the Jeep... come on.. You seem to have forgotten about the German "Kubelwagen".

Fact is German equipment was in most cases superior in terms of effectiveness and quality pr. unit compared to allied equipment, but the sheer quantity of the allied equipment more than made up for that. Also what advantage is it to have superior equipment if haven't got something to fuel or load it with ??

The Jeep and the 6X6 were superior to their german counterparts.

US fire control of the artillery were the best in the world.

Allied proximity shells were superior to the German ones.

The M1 garand was the best semi auto infantry rifle.

Allied logistics in every form were superior to the germans.

Except for the Ta-152, no German piston engined fighter was superior to its allied counterparts.

The list goes on and on. German had their great stuff, the allies theirs.

And the Fw-190, the Me-262, were in there own respects superior than the Allied aircraft. The kubelwagen was better than the Jeep in some aspects.

syscom3 said:

So the allies could not produce one weapon or weapon system that was superior to the Germans? Not one? Not even one general who could beat his counterpart?

Dont you think youre being a little bombastic about that assertion?

Click to expand...

He is only doing the same thing that you allways do when you are talking about the United States. Not the allies, you forget about the allies just about all the time. You forget about England, Russia, Canada, The Aussies. He is just playing the same game you play with the US. Do you understand what I am saying? Probably not.

Now having said that. Soren and plan_D are hitting the nail on the head. Nothing they have said is an insult to the allies. What the allies did (especially there production) was amazing and a great undertaking, but that does not mean the equipment was more superior.

Also you say the P38, P-51, and P-47 were superior over the Luftwaffe Aircraft because of the longer range, the Luftwaffe aircraft did not need the range of the allied aircraft once they were on the defensive. Besides the Ta-152 you mentioned the Fw-190D, Me-262, He-163 were superior to allied and the Bf-109s were equalled.

syscom3 said:

The Jeep and the 6X6 were superior to their german counterparts.

Click to expand...

Untrue syscom3, the German Kubelwagen can be considered a match to the Jeep, cause while the Jeep had the early advantage of 4x4, the Kubelwagen had the advantage of a 4 speed manual transmission with overdrive.(But some later Kubelwagens actually had 4x4 as-well) The Kubelwagen was also slightly armored while still being lighter because of its smarter construction, the Jeep was not. The Kubelwagen also had an inclosed cabin, the Jeep did not.

Or what about the German Schwimmwagen, with a top speed on land of 50mph and 6mph in the water - Oh yes it could swim, and quite well at that, so a total of ~14,000 were made.(Heck its even highly popular today as-well!) It was also excellent off-road, with a 5 speed gear box and excellent ground clearence.

Schwimmwagen Type 166:


Some excellent color-photos of the Schwimmwagen

And regarding the 6X6, well I suggest you take a look at some of the German trucks of WWII, cause they had some of the very best.

And don't even get me started on the halftracks !

US fire control of the artillery were the best in the world.

Click to expand...

Go take a look at a Kommandogerät No.36 for the German 88 up close, and then come try tell me that again thank you.

Allied proximity shells were superior to the German ones.

Click to expand...

Bollocks, where have you heard this ?

But if you want to discuss shells I can tell you the Germans were light years ahead of the Allies in terms of quality, precision 'and' fusing!

The M1 garand was the best semi auto infantry rifle.

Click to expand...

Yes, and the K98k is the best bolt action rifle design of all time

And the German also had the Stg44, the best infantry small-arm of WWII.

And although the Garand IS superior to the K43, the K43 still has some very useful traits of its own - A interchangeable 10 round mag for example..

Allied logistics in every form were superior to the germans.

Click to expand...

Agreed, the reason being that the allies didn't deploy the same vast amounts of different kinds of weaponry as the Germans.

Except for the Ta-152, no German piston engined fighter was superior to its allied counterparts.

Click to expand...

Directly superior maybe not, but definitely a match, and at low levels often more than match.

The list goes on and on. German had their great stuff, the allies theirs.

Click to expand...

It just so happens the Germans had more (Not that this is good cause it only leads to the logistics problem)

The Jeep was far better than the kubelwagon.

The 6x6 was such a good design, it was still being produced into the 70's.

German tanks and halftracks were superior to the allies, except for the T34, which could give the Panther a run for its money.

Same with the assault rifles, the Germans were far better. But the bolt action rifle was an anchronism from WW1, and the semi auto rifle far better.

US and British proximity fuses were in use long before the Germans used them. And were far better in quality. Same with US fire control and doctrine.

Except for the Ta-152, no German fighter was superior to an allied type. Every fighter flown by any of the combatants had its strengths and weakness's and none were best in everything, except for the US designs having magntitudes better range (which meant they could bring the fight to the Luftwaffe and win the fight).

The allies (including the russians) had vastly superior logistics at every level. The Germans could only shake their heads in amazement in the ability of the big three to produce vast quantities of material, uniformly in good enough quality and get it to the battlefield when it was needed.

syscom3 said:

The Jeep was far better than the kubelwagon.

Click to expand...

Stupid claim, now back it up please.

The 6x6 was such a good design, it was still being produced into the 70's.

Click to expand...

Oh how I hate it when people use that worn out phrase... syscom3 since we don't know for how long the German trucks would have been produced if the Germans had won the war that remark of yours is useless..

German tanks and halftracks were superior to the allies, except for the T34, which could give the Panther a run for its money.

Click to expand...

And with that last phrase you have convinced me that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about!

You're actually being serious when you claim that the T-34 could give a Panther a run for its money ??!

Same with the assault rifles, the Germans were far better. But the bolt action rifle was an anchronism from WW1, and the semi auto rifle far better.

Click to expand...

Sure thats why bolt action rifles are still used in every army today right ?

A semi-auto full-powered rifle is a better main infantry weapon than a bolt action rifle, yes, but a bolt action rifle is a better sniper-rifle - and the Stg44 is a better main infantry weapon than both.

US and British proximity fuses were in use long before the Germans used them. And were far better in quality. Same with US fire control and doctrine.

Click to expand...

Again a stupid claim, now back it up.

Except for the Ta-152, no German fighter was superior to an allied type. Every fighter flown by any of the combatants had its strengths and weakness's and none were best in everything, except for the US designs having magntitudes better range (which meant they could bring the fight to the Luftwaffe and win the fight).

Click to expand...

No syscom3, the US designs won the day because of quantity quantity quantity... Had the numbers been equal we would be speaking German today.

The allies (including the russians) had vastly superior logistics at every level. The Germans could only shake their heads in amazement in the ability of the big three to produce vast quantities of material, uniformly in good enough quality and get it to the battlefield when it was needed.

Click to expand...

The reason having already been explained...

The Germans didn't deploy a proximity fuse at all during the war (they may have had experimental ones, but nothing in service)

The Stg 44 was the best infantry weapon produced in WW2 and that claim has been proven over and over. Hell it was the basis for the AK-47 which still today is one of the best weapons ever built.

As for your claim that no luftwaffe aircraft had an equal to the allied aircraft. Name me one that was overally better. Dont tell me the P-51D, syscom. If it had not been for numbers, it would have been a flop!

The P38, P47, P51 and Spits were equal to anything the Luftwaffe had.

Each had its strengths and each had its weakness's.

Same with the Luftwaffe, each had its strengths and each had its weakness's.

The Me-109 doesnt even deserve to be mentioned for anything post summer 1944. It was a great design at the start of the war, but decidely inferior untill the last few months when it didnt even matter. The -190 was the best, but not superior to the allied aircraft.

Great pilots fought to the strengths of their aircraft and avoided the weakness's. And the fact that allied pilots consistently shot down in great numbers -109's and -190's proves that the German fighters were not invincible nor superior. And the fact that plnty of allied fighters were also shot down proves their fighters were also not invincible.

Hop said:

The Germans didn't deploy a proximity fuse at all during the war (they may have had experimental ones, but nothing in service)

Click to expand...

The Germans had proximity fuses alright, radio proximity fuses as-well, not in any way as many as the Allies, but just as good, they weren't fielded in any significant way for a reason though..

AFAIK the V-2 used a proximity fuse, the high impact velocity pretty much demands it in order to be truly effective, and as we know it must have done a fine job. - Not sure about this though!

syscom3 said:

The P38, P47, P51 and Spits were equal to anything the Luftwaffe had.

Click to expand...

Say that again. Equal not superior.

syscom3 said:

Each had its strengths and each had its weakness's.

Click to expand...

Agreed

syscom3 said:

Same with the Luftwaffe, each had its strengths and each had its weakness's.

Click to expand...

Agreed

syscom3 said:

The Me-109 doesnt even deserve to be mentioned for anything post summer 1944. It was a great design at the start of the war, but decidely inferior untill the last few months when it didnt even matter. The -190 was the best, but not superior to the allied aircraft.

Click to expand...

Disagreed and you are believing a myth that everyone else seems to believe.

syscom3 said:

Great pilots fought to the strengths of their aircraft and avoided the weakness's. And the fact that allied pilots consistently shot down in great numbers -109's and -190's proves that the German fighters were not invincible nor superior. And the fact that plnty of allied fighters were also shot down proves their fighters were also not invincible.

Click to expand...

Vast quantity. Superior numbers!

Adler you might as-well spare yourself the effort, I mean the guy thinks the T-34 was the equal of the Panther for christ sake!

The Germans didn't have a proximity fuse in service. Some experiments towards the end of the war, but nothing in service.

As to the V-2, one of the drawbacks was the fact it didn't have a proximity fuse, which meant it buried itself before exploding, doing less damage.

Hop said:

T....
As to the V-2, one of the drawbacks was the fact it didn't have a proximity fuse, which meant it buried itself before exploding, doing less damage.

Click to expand...

That actually created far more damage by creating a seismic effect that destroyed foundations. It didnt flatten as many buildings, but it made them as unsafe as to be impossible to occupy.

Soren said:

Adler you might as-well spare yourself the effort, I mean the guy thinks the T-34 was the equal of the Panther for christ sake!

Click to expand...

If the T34 wasnt so good, why did the Germans think of actually copying it.

It had a great gun, well sloped armour and was simple enough to be built by the thousands and crewed and operated by peasants.

Probably the best tank of WW2

You know I think you're right about the V-2 Hop, I was looking through some doc's on the V-2 and could find nothing on any proximity fuse. Plans were made to use one however, and not just in the V-2 but in various guided missiles - these plans were however not fulfilled partly because it was realized it would have zero effect on the war and partly because of fear that countermeasures would be developed which would render the huge effort of deploying them useless.

syscom3 said:

If the T34 wasnt so good, why did the Germans think of actually copying it.

Click to expand...

That was in 41 for christs sake syscom3 ! And the Germans in no way intended to copy it, and didn't either. The Panther shared nothing with the T-34 except for its sloping armor, and even this had been used on tanks before and can therefore not be considered copying.

It had a great gun, well sloped armour and was simple enough to be built by the thousands and crewed and operated by peasants.

Click to expand...

A gun which couldn't harm the Tiger Ausf.E unless it came within 100m of its side armor, and a sloped armor protection which could be penetrated frontally as far away as over 2km by the 88mm Kwk36 L/56 main gun of the Tiger Ausf.E. (And at even longer distances by the Panther's 75mm Kwk42 L/70 main gun)

And about the Panther's debut at Kursk, while it initially revealed allot of teething problems(Which shortly after were solved), it also demonstrated the tremendously superior firepower of this new German tank as this Russian radio message testifies:

"Enemy introduced new tank ! Shape roughly similar to 'Tridsatchedverka' (T-34). Tank is heavily armored, weight is est. 40-50 tons. Armament is probably 88mm AA gun. We had losses at combat ranges beyond 2,000m...." - From July 8th 1943.

Probably the best tank of WW2

Click to expand...

Probably the worst by late 1943 and onwards. Even the US Sherman can be considered better by 1944 with the introduction of the EasyEight.

Fact is the T-34 was outdated already in 42 and remained outdated from then on throughout the war - it litterally became gun-fodder throughout the second half of the war.

The only thing which stayed superior about the T-34 was its ease of manufacturing.

Germany thought of copying the T-34, but never did. If you compare the T-34/76 to it's German couterparts of 1941 you can quickly understand why the Germans considered copying it. The Wehrmacht hadn't even fielded the Pz.Kpfw IV Ausf F/2 or the L/60 equipped Pz.Kpfw III Ausf J let alone the Tiger or Panther. Germany never did copy the T-34 though, they designed something far superior, the Pz.Kpfw V 'Panther'.

The T-34 was a simple and robust design, it had all the makings of a great tank. Strong armour, powerful cannon and mobility made this tank the greatest tank in the world until 1942. But the introduction of the Pz.Kpfw IV Ausf F/2 and Pz.Kpfw VI Ausf E in that year rendered the T-34/76 an obselete design.
1942 saw the Tigers introduction onto the battlefield and what a show it put on. The Soviet Army was undeniably shocked, the bar had been raised to levels no one before would have dreamed of. At the time the Soviets, or West knew how complex this Tiger was. And the mere sight of one of these monsters caused fear, and if one pointed it's cannon at you it was time to abandon.
Spearheading the assault, and supported by the Pz.Kpfw IV these armoured assaults put the T-34 to shame. As the Tigers would simply destroy dozens before being made inoperable themselves, mostly by breaking down or getting stuck. Even in those circumstances, the Tiger was an effective tank destroyer and could halt any Soviet counter-offensive sometimes on their own!

Now you're thinking "but I'm talking about Panther vs. T-34." Well, I'm getting there. By the time the Panther was put on to the field, it was 1943. The Soviets had learnt to fear the Tiger, and the Panther was just another shock in waiting. But as we know the performance it first put forward was pretty pathetic for what would become the greatest tank of the war.
First reports of the Panther did come as a '88 equipped tank' which was knocking out the Soviet tanks at anything up to 2,500 m! The Panther's cannon was superior to both the 76mm and 85mm T-34 cannons, and none could hope to strike back at the same distances. The optical equipment in a T-34 wouldn't give them a chance in hell to hit anything anyway. Some n Stalingrad were coming out with NO optical equipment, and aiming was done by looking down the barrel! The Panther, however, had the most precise optics of the war. And had superior radio to anything Soviet, making it a more flexiable tank.

The armour of the Panther was superior in thickness and sloping. On all sides, on top and underneath. It was on par with the IS-2, and that was a Soviet design itself superior to the T-34. Panthers would often destroy dozens of T-34s with little loss to themselves. I've seen ratios in battles of 70 : 2 between T-34s and Panthers , and there well could be higher.

The Panther was mobile, commented on by the 6th Grenadier Guards who captured a Panther G in the Ardennes. They state that the Panther was able to hold the road in any amount of ice, while their own tanks (Churchills) were slipping and sliding all over the place.

While the T-34 was simple, it lacked all the various internal equipment that would make the tank much more flexible. And while it could be controlled, to some extent, by barely trained people ... it's not a good thing. The Wehrmacht was made up of soldiers, not peasants. They don't want to have farmers driving tanks, they want soldiers. And many T-34s were not started, as the peasants that are so often said to be able to control the T-34 easily wouldn't know which lever to push when, and a lot had the unfortunate incident of trapping their hands in the loading mechanism, the same happened in the IS-2.

The reliabilty of the Panther was an issue in the first two marks, D and A. But by the G the problems were largely solved. And the production would have been extremely high had Germany not wasted resources on hundreds of dead end projects, and costly tanks. Had we seen a complete replacement of German armour by the Panther and Panther alone ... you'd have seen a lot more dead Allies and Soviets on the battlefield.

The T-34 was the best in the world in 1941, when the Germans thought of copying it. The Tiger beat it. The Panther beat that. And the King Tiger was the most powerful tank ever to see the battlefield during World War II.