Notices
Results 1 to 34 of 34
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By danhanegan
  • 1 Post By shlunka
  • 1 Post By Eighty88

Thread: OPINION: Were Nazi weaponry a waste of time, talent, and treasure?

  1. #1 OPINION: Were Nazi weaponry a waste of time, talent, and treasure? 
    Forum Freshman Josey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Amerika
    Posts
    59
    A contributor here has expressed an opinion concerning German military advances in WWII. Were the efforts a waste of time? Support your opinion with detail please.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    You think it's an opinion?
    You don't think that the resources and effort put into developing weapons that never got into service (and which, in many cases wouldn't have worked as advertised even if they had reached the front line) was a waste of time?
    You don't think that the effort spent on designing and prototyping the numerous aircraft of, for example, the Jägernotprogramm (at least 5 different types) could/ should have been spent on, say, ensuring that the types (e.g. Me 262) they did have actually worked?
    You don't think that developing the Maus was a waste and things would have been better (for Germany) if they'd ignored the ridiculous contraption in favour of workable tanks?
    A country that is on the defensive and obviously losing needs materiel on the front line now, not speculative Wunderwaffen three years down the line.


    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by Josey View Post
    A contributor here has expressed an opinion concerning German military advances in WWII. Were the efforts a waste of time? Support your opinion with detail please.
    Didn't the US hire former Nazi Werner von Braun and put him to work designing US spacecraft?

    As Tom Lehrer sang:

    "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
    That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    Not sure how you are qualifying waste of time. The entire war effort by the Germans turned out to be a waste of time after all.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Not sure how you are qualifying waste of time.
    In that it produced nothing of any direct value to the war effort, and in fact reduced (by diversion) capabilities.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Josey View Post
    Support your opinion with detail please.
    This kind of sounds like homework, but anyway just look at it this way most countries in the world have priorities of which they devote their resources to. Many of the worlds countries are also run under capitalist free market system. So what you have is countries doing whatever they consider most important and most of the people doing whatever is most profitable. Under these conditions it's pretty unlikely that military advancement could ever progress as fast during WW2 when the entire German economy was turned over to supporting it's miltary campaign.

    This being said Hitler actually held up the development of many of the "Wonder Weapons" that would be seen towards the end of the war in favour of more conventional weapons. We should also consider though that the technologies designed by the Germans didn't just serve a function during World War 2 but indeed would go on to provide the core of both the Russian and American Space Programs, and the development of all of the worlds ICBM's, which many still argue have been responsible for preventing any further world wars because of the thread of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction).

    Generally thoughout history wars have spawned new technologies and the Second World War is certainally no exception here, scientists from all over Europe were brought together to work on miltary projects, if indeed WW2 hadn't have happened there wouldn't have been any such requirement for so many scientists working on military advancements.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,370
    Quote Originally Posted by someguy1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Josey View Post
    A contributor here has expressed an opinion concerning German military advances in WWII. Were the efforts a waste of time? Support your opinion with detail please.
    Didn't the US hire former Nazi Werner von Braun and put him to work designing US spacecraft?

    As Tom Lehrer sang:


    "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down?
    That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun.
    Yes without Wernher von Braun, it's doubtful the US would have even had a space program. But it's also true much of the Russian space program was also based on German rocket technology. Whilst the Americans got their hands on some of the key scientists like von Braun at the end of the war the Russians managed to capture the main centre, for German rocket technology, at Peenemünde.


    Wernher von Braun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Peenemünde - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    And ironically, they ended up not funding their development of nuclear weapons very well - which *could* have turned the tide of the war.

    My impression has been that most of the R&D projects were begun at a time when Germany was winning, and then simply didn't get the plug pulled when Germany was on the defensive. Possibly out of a (misplaced) hope that they might make a difference if they could be completed.

    Once it's clear that your existing arms are certainly not going to be enough, the only spark of hope left is that some new invention will do it. Tell the troops they're fighting to buy time for the doom's day device. They'll fight harder than if you tell them they're just fighting to delay the inevitable (or in other words... if you tell them the truth.)
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    282
    Early in the war, Germany produced armaments at a glacial pace, Hitler seemingly convinced his wonderful Aryan soldiers only needed good morale to vanquish the enemy. The panzer I tank, for instance, had never been intended to be used as anything but a training vehicle, but constituted more than half of the german armored force in the Poland invasion. After operation Barbarossa stalled on the Russian steps, the German war industry finally geared up to produce weapons and vehicles in large numbers, but it was mostly too few of the wrong things too late. Hitler never had a realistic view of the numbers and types of weapons needed, and crippled his war industry by constant ill-conceived interference. At first, mostly just keeping the numbers down so he could point to the prosperity of the civilian economy as a political lever. Then later, when the Germans were in trouble, seizeing on a seemingly endless series of pipedream programs that accomplished little. When the rare wunderwaffen program produced something useful, he like as not would impose senseless restrictions on the new weapon that made it useless, as when the Me-262 came out Hitler insisted it be developed as a bomber, regardless of the fact that it had too little range and payload to be useful as a bomber.

    It wasn't so much that Germany's high tech weapons were a waste of time as Hitler's clueless interference and the poor management culture he established crippled the entire German armament industry.
    Josey likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Germany didn't switch to a war production footing until mid '43, almost two years after Barbarossa started.
    And it's doubtful as to what effect Hitler's insisting the 262 be a schnellbomber actually had given the the other difficulties with the type.

    It wasn't so much that Germany's high tech weapons were a waste of time
    Um:
    seemingly endless series of pipedream programs that accomplished little
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,784
    I wonder if the whole "bigger and better" mentality affected Hitler's sexual life?
    Josey likes this.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman Josey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Amerika
    Posts
    59
    That was only in effect when he moved to Argentina and became a latin lover.
    "the opera ain’t over until the fat lady sings." - Ralph Carpenter
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Universalis Infinitis Devon Keogh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dublin, Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    145
    Well, it was a stupid decision for the Nazi's, but it benefited the victors a few years down the line. If it was not for Nazi Germany and their eccentric obsession with their wonder weapons, we would be years lss advanced in terms of

    Rocketry: German scientists who worked on the V1 & V2 also got people to the Moon and other missions through NASA
    Fusion: Germans were much further ahead in terms of Fusion energy, which still is not functional, but was helped by discoveries from Nazi scientists

    Some others should be here but I forget...

    "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    In my own opinion there is no greater mathematical Principle than that which is x - x = 0. This shows that matter can be created from nothing as long as the total product of the matter's mass & energy equal exactly zero.
    The only question is, "Where did all that antimatter go?"

    Favourite Elements: Sodium, Neodymium, Xenon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Devon Keogh View Post
    Fusion: Germans were much further ahead in terms of Fusion energy, which still is not functional, but was helped by discoveries from Nazi scientists
    Huh?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,444
    My Mother lived through the Nazi's and the Communists as a young girl in Slovenia.

    She bears the consequences of that life.

    Her entire prospective of life was changed.

    The insensitivity
    sorry out of this one
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    German scientists were incredibly innovative back in the day! From the development of jet-technology to early forms of autonomous weapons (V2). I feel like much of their time was mis-allocated however. V2's were not accurate and consumed a huge amount of time and resources like man-power, precious fuel, and design time. Instead, they could have been focusing more on radar like the British or even more so on their nuclear program.

    Their huge railroad guns were engineering marvels but utterly useless as well!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    German scientists were incredibly innovative back in the day! From the development of jet-technology to early forms of autonomous weapons (V2).
    So, innovative, but came up with nothing new?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    12,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    German scientists were incredibly innovative back in the day! From the development of jet-technology to early forms of autonomous weapons (V2).
    So, innovative, but came up with nothing new?
    yeah...you are right Sir Ducky, Genocide and torture among other things...really wasn't new.....serious here, NOT Facetios
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    German scientists were incredibly innovative back in the day! From the development of jet-technology to early forms of autonomous weapons (V2). I feel like much of their time was mis-allocated however. V2's were not accurate and consumed a huge amount of time and resources like man-power, precious fuel, and design time. Instead, they could have been focusing more on radar like the British or even more so on their nuclear program.

    Their huge railroad guns were engineering marvels but utterly useless as well!
    I believe I recall reading somewhere that German scientists were directed into fields such as ballistic missiles by the Fuehrer's disapproval of the "Jewish" sciences of Quantum Theory and Relativity. Which probably didn't help them when it came to trying to work on an atom bomb. And of course we may never know whether or not Heisenberg dragged his feet deliberately in that project.....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    German scientists were incredibly innovative back in the day! From the development of jet-technology to early forms of autonomous weapons (V2).
    So, innovative, but came up with nothing new?
    So you're saying that jet-technology wasn't new? The Germans greatly expounded upon it and created the first operational jet engine thanks to German engineer Hans Von Ohain. Von Braun. Or the V-2 which is referred to as the "first ballistic missile".

    If you disagree that is fine but you will have to provide some factual basis for it, otherwise you're interjecting your opinion which does not equate to truth.

    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    well I have many things to discuss on this... but I will better not start it...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    So you're saying that jet-technology wasn't new? The Germans greatly expounded upon it and created the first operational jet engine thanks to German engineer Hans Von Ohain.
    Jet technology wasn't new, nor were the Germans in the lead.
    Whittle developed and built the first working jet engine (1928 submission, 1930 patent, April 1937 first running prototype). Von Ohain managed an externally-driven gas turbine (i.e. not a jet engine), his actual jet engine came later (1933 conception, September 1937 first running prototype of a complete engine - but running on hydrogen, not a practical fuel for the time).
    Or even Maxime Guillaume - 1921: first patent for using a gas turbine to power an aircraft.
    (Henri Coanda: ducted fan 1910).
    Yes, the Germans flew a jet-powered aircraft first. And then the RLM cancelled it as having no worth in the coming war.
    The British, on the other hand, spent time and effort making a reliable militarily useful engine before fielding it (typical example: the German engines that did go into service had a life of approximately 15 hours - and suffered from a number of problems, British ones were Type Tested for 100 hours of reliable operation before being approved for use).

    Von Braun. Or the V-2 which is referred to as the "first ballistic missile".
    Again, not new, only the size/ application. Tsiolkovsky. Goddard. Hales. The Chinese! Rockets had been a weapon of warfare, on and off, for centuries.
    The V-2 was the first long range ballistic missile.

    If you disagree that is fine but you will have to provide some factual basis for it, otherwise you're interjecting your opinion which does not equate to truth.
    As opposed to, say, the factual basis you've provided here?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    So you're saying that jet-technology wasn't new? The Germans greatly expounded upon it and created the first operational jet engine thanks to German engineer Hans Von Ohain.
    Jet technology wasn't new, nor were the Germans in the lead.
    Whittle developed and built the first working jet engine (1928 submission, 1930 patent, April 1937 first running prototype). Von Ohain managed an externally-driven gas turbine (i.e. not a jet engine), his actual jet engine came later (1933 conception, September 1937 first running prototype of a complete engine - but running on hydrogen, not a practical fuel for the time).
    Or even Maxime Guillaume - 1921: first patent for using a gas turbine to power an aircraft.
    (Henri Coanda: ducted fan 1910).
    Yes, the Germans flew a jet-powered aircraft first. And then the RLM cancelled it as having no worth in the coming war.
    The British, on the other hand, spent time and effort making a reliable militarily useful engine before fielding it (typical example: the German engines that did go into service had a life of approximately 15 hours - and suffered from a number of problems, British ones were Type Tested for 100 hours of reliable operation before being approved for use).

    Von Braun. Or the V-2 which is referred to as the "first ballistic missile".
    Again, not new, only the size/ application. Tsiolkovsky. Goddard. Hales. The Chinese! Rockets had been a weapon of warfare, on and off, for centuries.
    The V-2 was the first long range ballistic missile.

    If you disagree that is fine but you will have to provide some factual basis for it, otherwise you're interjecting your opinion which does not equate to truth.
    As opposed to, say, the factual basis you've provided here?
    You clarified numerous examples in your reply but managed to leave a number of things out.

    The Germans developed their jet technology independent of the innovations of anyone else. If you go here Jet engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia look under the history title, it explains how Von Ohain developed the engine independent of Whittle i.e. without knowledge of Whittles designs. This doesn't take credit away from Whittle, but neither does it strip Von Ohain of the credit he deserves.

    You're also probably familiar with the ME 262 or Ar 234. Both of which This is basic information provided on a quick Google search, I'm not even trying here.

    Von Braun was a genius, no one could compare to him. You compared the worlds first Ballistic missile to Russian and Chinese rockets which is not even close to being a good comparison. Those rockets were dummy rockets, launched for short range purposes. The V-2's were ballistic missiles with guidance systems of which nothing else existed anywhere else in the world at the time.

    Also, your statement reflecting the life-expectancy of the German jet engines is only applicable to the Jumo type engine, not the BMW 003 type engines. On the Jumo engines, one engine was enough to fly on, though not desired.

    This can all be found with a simple Google search!



    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    The Germans developed their jet technology independent of the innovations of anyone else.
    So what?
    It still doesn't make the jet "new".
    Back to my earlier comment about innovation not being an exclusively, nor particularly, German trait.

    You're also probably familiar with the ME 262 or Ar 234.
    And your point here would be... what?

    Von Braun was a genius, no one could compare to him. You compared the worlds first Ballistic missile to Russian and Chinese rockets which is not even close to being a good comparison. Those rockets were dummy rockets, launched for short range purposes. The V-2's were ballistic missiles with guidance systems of which nothing else existed anywhere else in the world at the time.
    IOW a refinement of pre-existing technologies.

    Also, your statement reflecting the life-expectancy of the German jet engines is only applicable to the Jumo type engine, not the BMW 003 type engines. On the Jumo engines, one engine was enough to fly on, though not desired.
    Oh good, it had a longer service life (the average life span of production engines was 25 hours). Reliability of the 003 was still a problem. E.g. Jumo 004 being only marginally more reliable than the BMW 003.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    The Germans developed their jet technology independent of the innovations of anyone else.
    So what?
    It still doesn't make the jet "new".
    Back to my earlier comment about innovation not being an exclusively, nor particularly, German trait.

    You're also probably familiar with the ME 262 or Ar 234.
    And your point here would be... what?

    Von Braun was a genius, no one could compare to him. You compared the worlds first Ballistic missile to Russian and Chinese rockets which is not even close to being a good comparison. Those rockets were dummy rockets, launched for short range purposes. The V-2's were ballistic missiles with guidance systems of which nothing else existed anywhere else in the world at the time.
    IOW a refinement of pre-existing technologies.

    Also, your statement reflecting the life-expectancy of the German jet engines is only applicable to the Jumo type engine, not the BMW 003 type engines. On the Jumo engines, one engine was enough to fly on, though not desired.
    Oh good, it had a longer service life (the average life span of production engines was 25 hours). Reliability of the 003 was still a problem. E.g. Jumo 004 being only marginally more reliable than the BMW 003.
    Wow,

    I have been looking over your posts and notice a clear pattern with you: anytime you're wrong on a point you a) ignore it b) say something along the lines of "so what" or c) "your point is"... that is not how a discussion goes bud.

    I'll see how long you hang on here for before you get lost again:

    So regarding the ME 262 and the Ar 234... anyone that knows anything about WW2 history is very familiar with the significance of these aircraft! Anyways, the ME 262 was the worlds first jet-powered aircraft. Read this Messerschmitt Me 262 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia to become more familiar with it. Basically, the 262 had no equals. The British couldn't put up anything to rival it! The British were still confused as to what they should do with jet technology, how to apply it, and it wasn't until after the war the British discovered just how advanced German jet technology was!

    The engineers who developed the 262 also developed the iconic swept back wing design. They were so fast the allies were dumbfounded! Pretty incredible would compared to the rest of the worlds aircraft!

    And my point that you quickly dismissed regarding the German jet engines, wasn't that jet technology was new. Actually no... it was still new! The fact that they developed it by themselves is as great a feat as the British development of their engine!

    You clearly have no knowledge of WW2 history! Your response to ballistic missiles was pretty much your nail in your own coffin! I was going to write something well-thought out but instead I am going to reply with the following: The Germans were developing ballistic missiles while the British were doing... what exactly? The British made no advances in rocket technology that can compare!



    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    anytime you're wrong on a point you a) ignore it
    Examples please.

    b) say something along the lines of "so what" or c) "your point is"... that is not how a discussion goes bud.
    Or, just maybe, I'm asking what the point of the comment made is supposed to be.

    Anyways, the ME 262 was the worlds first jet-powered aircraft.
    Bullshit.
    The He 178 was the world's first.
    And before you try a different tack, the Me 262 wasn't even the world's first jet fighter.

    The British were still confused as to what they should do with jet technology, how to apply it
    Arrant nonsense.
    The British had been planning a jet fighter more or less since Whittle came up with the idea.
    The first jet-powered aircraft we came up with was the Gloster E.28/39 - which was specified to be an armed fighter prototype - so clearly we didn't know what to do.

    and it wasn't until after the war the British discovered just how advanced German jet technology was!
    Also incorrect.
    They were surprised at the aerodynamic advances, but German jet technology was generally lagging.

    The engineers who developed the 262 also developed the iconic swept back wing design.
    Except that the Me 262 wasn't a swept-wing design. Any "sweep" was solely based on CofG considerations - Although the Me 262 is often referred to as a "swept wing" design, the production Me 262 had a leading edge sweep of only 18.5°, too slight to achieve any significant advantage in increasing the critical Mach number.[19] Sweep was added after the initial design of the aircraft, when the engines proved to be heavier than originally expected, primarily to position the center of lift properly relative to the center of mass

    They were so fast the allies were dumbfounded! Pretty incredible would compared to the rest of the worlds aircraft!
    Speed wasn't everything.
    Reliability counts for a lot, too.

    And my point that you quickly dismissed regarding the German jet engines, wasn't that jet technology was new. Actually no... it was still new! The fact that they developed it by themselves is as great a feat as the British development of their engine!
    Okay, so it was new to the Germans.

    You clearly have no knowledge of WW2 history!
    Evidently more than you given your ridiculous assertions here.

    The Germans were developing ballistic missiles while the British were doing... what exactly? The British made no advances in rocket technology that can compare!
    Do you know why?
    Because we didn't need them.
    Therefore we didn't put any effort into it.
    What did the V-2 achieve?
    Anything?
    Anything at all?
    The V-1 did more damage, for less cost.

    With regard to the Ar-234: the "so what?" was based on this: what did they do that other aircraft couldn't? Okay, they managed a couple of recce missions.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    anytime you're wrong on a point you a) ignore it
    Examples please.

    b) say something along the lines of "so what" or c) "your point is"... that is not how a discussion goes bud.
    Or, just maybe, I'm asking what the point of the comment made is supposed to be.

    Anyways, the ME 262 was the worlds first jet-powered aircraft.
    Bullshit.
    The He 178 was the world's first.
    And before you try a different tack, the Me 262 wasn't even the world's first jet fighter.

    The British were still confused as to what they should do with jet technology, how to apply it
    Arrant nonsense.
    The British had been planning a jet fighter more or less since Whittle came up with the idea.
    The first jet-powered aircraft we came up with was the Gloster E.28/39 - which was specified to be an armed fighter prototype - so clearly we didn't know what to do.

    and it wasn't until after the war the British discovered just how advanced German jet technology was!
    Also incorrect.
    They were surprised at the aerodynamic advances, but German jet technology was generally lagging.

    The engineers who developed the 262 also developed the iconic swept back wing design.
    Except that the Me 262 wasn't a swept-wing design. Any "sweep" was solely based on CofG considerations - Although the Me 262 is often referred to as a "swept wing" design, the production Me 262 had a leading edge sweep of only 18.5°, too slight to achieve any significant advantage in increasing the critical Mach number.[19] Sweep was added after the initial design of the aircraft, when the engines proved to be heavier than originally expected, primarily to position the center of lift properly relative to the center of mass

    They were so fast the allies were dumbfounded! Pretty incredible would compared to the rest of the worlds aircraft!
    Speed wasn't everything.
    Reliability counts for a lot, too.

    And my point that you quickly dismissed regarding the German jet engines, wasn't that jet technology was new. Actually no... it was still new! The fact that they developed it by themselves is as great a feat as the British development of their engine!
    Okay, so it was new to the Germans.

    You clearly have no knowledge of WW2 history!
    Evidently more than you given your ridiculous assertions here.

    The Germans were developing ballistic missiles while the British were doing... what exactly? The British made no advances in rocket technology that can compare!
    Do you know why?
    Because we didn't need them.
    Therefore we didn't put any effort into it.
    What did the V-2 achieve?
    Anything?
    Anything at all?
    The V-1 did more damage, for less cost.

    With regard to the Ar-234: the "so what?" was based on this: what did they do that other aircraft couldn't? Okay, they managed a couple of recce missions.
    You're continuing to gain angular velocity into a chasm of insanity!

    First: I never said the ME 262 was a swept wing design.
    Second: I omitted two words regarding the ME 262: "operational" and "fighter"
    Third: The V-2 is never dismissed by anyone who understands WW2 history as quickly as you dismissed it. The V-2 technically achieved its goal(s):
    1) Make it to England
    2) Strike London
    3) Detonate
    4) Instill fear

    By all measurements, the V-2 accomplished all these objectives... did it not?

    The Gloster is an interesting case and I was waiting for you to bring it up. It was actually under-powered and completely outmatched by its German rival, the ME 262. Just look at the Wiki article of both! Or just the 262!

    Thanks for bringing up the HE, yet another achievement on the German side!



    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    First: I never said the ME 262 was a swept wing design.
    Ah, okay.
    You're still wrong. Busemann developed swept wings. He didn't work on the 262 that I'm aware of.

    Second: I omitted two words regarding the ME 262: "operational" and "fighter"
    Meh, it depends on how you meant "operational": it was the first in combat - with a TEST (Erprobungskommando) unit.
    The Gloster meteor was the first jet fighter taken into squadron operational service.

    Third: The V-2 is never dismissed by anyone who understands WW2 history as quickly as you dismissed it.
    Assumption on your part. Again.
    "Quickly"? You have no idea...

    The V-2 technically achieved its goal(s):
    1) Make it to England
    2) Strike London
    3) Detonate
    4) Instill fear
    By all measurements, the V-2 accomplished all these objectives... did it not?
    So what you're saying is, is that the goal of the V-2 was to cost ridiculous amounts of money, cause relatively little damage and generally not do much.
    Fair enough.
    "The cost of the development and manufacture of the V-2 was staggering, estimated by a post-war US study as about $2 billion, or about the same amount as was spent on the Allied atomic bomb program. Yet the entire seven-month V-2 missile campaign delivered less high explosive on all the targeted cities than a single large RAF raid on Germany. While such a massive expenditure might have been justified if it had had a military impact, the V-2 accomplished nothing of significant military value."
    "In terms of actual damage, the V-1 was a more effective weapon than the V-2"
    Both from the previously-named book, page 36.

    Fear?
    "Finally, the V-1 had a far greater psychological effect on civilians since its eerie sound could be heard over a very wide area, contributing to an unofficial mass evacuation of London in the summer of 1944."
    Same, page 38.

    The Gloster is an interesting case and I was waiting for you to bring it up. It was actually under-powered and completely outmatched by its German rival, the ME 262. Just look at the Wiki article of both! Or just the 262!
    Oh dear.
    Of course it was outmatched: it was a first-off prototype - not intended for combat but merely to establish the principle.
    The 262 however was (at least) a THIRD iteration/ attempt at a jet fighter design.
    Apples and oranges...
    Last edited by Dywyddyr; October 13th, 2013 at 01:55 AM.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    First: I never said the ME 262 was a swept wing design.
    Ah, okay.
    You're still wrong. Busemann developed swept wings. He didn't work on the 262 that I'm aware of.

    Second: I omitted two words regarding the ME 262: "operational" and "fighter"
    Meh, it depends on how you meant "operational": it was the first in combat - with a TEST (Erprobungskommando) unit.
    The Gloster meteor was the first jet fighter taken into squadron operational service.

    Third: The V-2 is never dismissed by anyone who understands WW2 history as quickly as you dismissed it. The V-2 technically achieved its goal(s):
    1) Make it to England
    2) Strike London
    3) Detonate
    4) Instill fear
    By all measurements, the V-2 accomplished all these objectives... did it not?
    So what you're saying is, is that the goal of the V-2 was to cost ridiculous amounts of money, cause relatively little damage and generally not do much.
    Fair enough.
    "The cost of the development and manufacture of the V-2 was staggering, estimated by a post-war US study as about $2 billion, or about the same amount as was spent on the Allied atomic bomb program. Yet the entire seven-month V-2 missile campaign delivered less high explosive on all the targeted cities than a single large RAF raid on Germany. While such a massive expenditure might have been justified if it had had a military impact, the V-2 accomplished nothing of significant military value."
    "In terms of actual damage, the V-1 was a more effective weapon than the V-2"
    Both from the previously-named book, page 36.

    Fear?
    "Finally, the V-1 had a far greater psychological effect on civilians since its eerie sound could be heard over a very wide area, contributing to an unofficial mass evacuation of London in the summer of 1944."
    Same, page 38.

    The Gloster is an interesting case and I was waiting for you to bring it up. It was actually under-powered and completely outmatched by its German rival, the ME 262. Just look at the Wiki article of both! Or just the 262!
    Oh dear.
    Of course it was outmatched: it was a first-off prototype - not intended for combat but merely to establish the principle.
    The 262 however was (at least) a THIRD iteration/ attempt at a jet fighter design.
    Apples and oranges...
    Saying "meh" means you have no intelligible thing to say. It's akin to "ooh ooh ah ah"! Look at the Wiki article I have listed below and view the very first paragraph.

    You never provided a link for Buseman so I will provide for you: Messerschmitt Me 262 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Look towards the bottom, first paragraph under "High-speed research". And yes, he did work on the ME 262.

    In regards to the V-2, I never mentioned cost or even the weapons value (anyway you want to measure it) relative to its costs. All I said was that it succeeded in its goals.

    Also, what book are you using? I am curious because I have the internet at my fingertips and also the most famous recorded history of the Nazis and Hitler next to my bed, called "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. I haven't begun to quote that yet.

    You're last paragraph simply proved my point again.


    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    Saying "meh" means you have no intelligible thing to say. It's akin to "ooh ooh ah ah"! Look at the Wiki article I have listed below and view the very first paragraph.
    Saying "meh" followed by what I wrote, is an indication that you may be using "operational" in a different sense than I use it.
    From the Wiki page:
    On 19 April 1944, Erprobungskommando 262 was formed at Lechfeld just south of Augsburg, as a test unit.
    Also from the same page:
    By January 1945, Jagdgeschwader 7 (JG 7) had been formed as a pure jet fighter wing
    Meteor:
    No. 616 Squadron RAF was the first to receive operational Meteors, ... on 12 July 1944.

    You never provided a link for Buseman so I will provide for you: Messerschmitt Me 262 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Look towards the bottom, first paragraph under "High-speed research". And yes, he did work on the ME 262.
    So he worked on proposals for an upgraded (never-built) 262. Okay.

    In regards to the V-2, I never mentioned cost or even the weapons value (anyway you want to measure it) relative to its costs. All I said was that it succeeded in its goals.
    So you don't think the cost of a weapon comes into it?
    You don't think that the money spent on V-2 could have used to develop and field a weapon that actually was militarily effective? (I note that you seem to have ignored the highlighted section of the quote).

    Also, what book are you using?
    Osprey New Vanguard V-2 Ballistic Missile 1942-52 (sorry previous quotes were in a different thread).

    I am curious because I have the internet at my fingertips and also the most famous recorded history of the Nazis and Hitler next to my bed, called "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. I haven't begun to quote that yet.
    Oh good. A 50 year-old non-technical book that hasn't got the latest findings in it.

    You're last paragraph simply proved my point again.
    How exactly does my last paragraph make your point for you?
    Or maybe you're claiming that a German prototype would have matched a British 3rd attempt?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    I never said the cost of a weapon had nothing to do with it. I was looking at it from a purely objective standpoint. Literally! The objectives of the V-2 were met. Did it take a lot of money, resources, and lives? Yes it did! Results are results!

    That 50 year old book is still used today! Pretty incredible!



    Cheers!
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,679
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    The objectives of the V-2 were met.
    So presumably you're of the opinion that the objective was to come up with a weapon that was essentially militarily useless.
    In which case I'd agree.

    "The V-2 missile program was a technical marvel from an engineering standpoint, but a spectacular flop as a weapon."
    "The decision to proceed with the mass production of the V-2 was premature on a variety of technical and tactical grounds."
    Both, page 36.
    "All in all the V-2 program was not too little too late as is so often claimed, but too much too soon."
    Page 38.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty88 View Post
    The objectives of the V-2 were met.
    So presumably you're of the opinion that the objective was to come up with a weapon that was essentially militarily useless.
    In which case I'd agree.

    "The V-2 missile program was a technical marvel from an engineering standpoint, but a spectacular flop as a weapon."
    "The decision to proceed with the mass production of the V-2 was premature on a variety of technical and tactical grounds."
    Both, page 36.
    "All in all the V-2 program was not too little too late as is so often claimed, but too much too soon."
    Page 38.
    You're answering your questions.

    I said the V-2 met its objectives and it did.

    Also, the V-2 was the first ballistic missile ever made so there are bound to be problems with anything that is the first of anything. The V-2 proved that a missile could be built which is capable of hitting long-range targets. It was an engineering marvel for its time as nothing else quite like it was in existence. I have never stated anything beyond this, yet you're managing to create your own version of discussion that is outside reality.

    The engineering was so incredible that the concepts and math behind the development and use of the V-2 that the U.S. (among several nations including Britain) would later use those as a foundation for building several of their missiles and launch vehicles such as the Atlas rocket and submarines' Inertial Navigation System.

    Lastly, several of the engineers behind the creation of the V-2 were later exonerated of any possible crimes against humanity and used to create new systems, weapons, and launch vehicles for several other nations around the world. The most famous of these men of course, was Wernher von Braun.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-2_rocket



    C
    heers!
    Ascended likes this.
    [Analyst/Engineer/Independent]

    "SPEAK SOFTLY AND CARRY A BIG STICK"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Sophomore ChaosD.Ace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    So you don't think the cost of a weapon comes into it?
    LOL absolutely not, Remember me, the guy who is willing to spend 5000 dollars on a single bullet.

    Nice to know your from brittain, Go UK.

    Don't we make the best Sniper Rifles?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Why do we waste our time with religion
    By Ascended in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: February 17th, 2013, 05:47 AM
  2. SETI is largely a waste of time and space?
    By Booms in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 24th, 2012, 12:10 PM
  3. Is this the beat time for go green products (opinion)
    By Fmp2491 in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 16th, 2011, 08:53 PM
  4. Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 21st, 2009, 12:39 AM
  5. Schools - an utter waste of time?!
    By Hanuka in forum Behavior and Psychology
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: May 14th, 2008, 08:30 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •