german engineering

Yeah, their leaders were the weak link. Hitler launched Barbarossa and conducted the eastern front in a way that was against the advice of his generals. And I don't get the Elvis comment. Are you saying their was no Operation Paperclip? No Werner Von Braun? Back to strategy. I guess I was more referring to their tactical skill. Nonetheless, if Hitler were killed in 44 and especially 43, and thus his madness was taken out of the equation, the Germans most likely would've won the war

 

And I don't get the Elvis comment ........ Nonetheless, if Hitler were killed in 44 and especially 44, the Germans most likely would've won the war

Many nuts living in fantasy land believe Elvis Presley is still alive and report seeing him in various locations.

Dave

 

if Hitler were killed in 44 and especially 44, the Germans most likely would've won the war

That is simply not true. By 1944 the war was lost and nothing would have changed the outcome. In truth all the Allied had to do was sit tight (in 1944) and in a couple of years Germany would have simply wasted away to nothing.
Dreams of wunder-waffen turning the war around are just that-dreams!

 

Oh so Normandy never had to be waged and won? Please. That war was up in the air completely until the success of Normandy. And the Allies could've certainly lost it after. What evidence do you have to suggest otherwise? And I meant "especially in 43", I still don't get the Elvis comment.

 

I have to say something real quick about the Audi comment. That comment reflects the fundamental difference between how Germans think and how most of the world does. They work to create powerful yet safe, well-balanced cars that are capable of precision maneuvering even at autobahn speeds, and you're pissed because the battery is not in the most convenient way to jumpstart it. And you don't care that the placement of the battery makes the car safer, because your dirty cable soils the upholstery. Well you know what, they probably wouldn't have such dirty cables.

German engineering is not infallible, nor is their quality control unsurpassable. They probably invented propaganda though and have been quite successful in converting it into PR.

Autobahn speeds are not, in general, all that high any more. The older ones are mostly two lanes with the inner full of badly driven eastern-european registered artics being slowly passed by a column of LED-illuminated tailgating Audis behind a smokey old Mercedes 406D running on cooking oil.

Your comment about Germany winning if Hitler hadn't been mad amused me. If old Schiklgruber hadn't been absolutely raving bonkers and able to surround himself with similar nutcases, the whole bloody lot would never have started.

Do I detect a hint of someone whose admiration of all things teutonic is so great that he wishes that Nazi Germany had won ?

 

Oh so Normandy never had to be waged and won? Please. That war was up in the air completely until the success of Normandy. And the Allies could've certainly lost it after. What evidence do you have to suggest otherwise? And I meant "especially in 43", I still don't get the Elvis comment.
1943? The year of the end of the Battle of Stalingrad? The Fall of Tunisia? (not a lot of German troops lost there oh no!) The invasion of Sicily and Italy? Kursk? Not a great year for the Axis and one they never really bounced back from.
As to Germany still being able to win the war, do some reading about the state of their economy (particularly the fuel situation) and their military infrastructure (pilot training was a shambles) and then get back to us. All the wonder weapons in the world, super fighter jets and invincible tanks aren't going to do you much good if they're immobile due to lack of fuel or you only have barely trained pilots to fly them. I know it's easy to get dazzled by the awesome coolness of those toys and the supply side of combat isn't as sexy fun but it's key to understanding why the Allies won and why, by 1943, Germany could only postpone the inevitable.

 

What are you talkin about? I just went there and was getting passed on the autobahn goin 110 mph. People were flying by me like I was stopped. And telling the truth about Germany's good qualities is always equated with something sinister. Maybe I'm just admiring of good engineering. That's all. If you love tech how can u not admire Germany?

 

The Allies had more supply because they started out with infinite more resources, not because they had a better production model. And all those battles that you mentioned would've been avoided had Hitler been killed in 43, the beginning in particular. And those battles were not what lost Germany the war, no more than all the battles the Allies lost in North Africa and Eastern Europe going up to that point lost the war for them

 

Must be the water, really.

 

That five panzers to take out one Sherman is not factual on any level

 

110 mph isn't fast. Where have you been living ?

I regularly drive commercials in Germany and see roadworks and queues more than anything else.

 

The Allies had more supply because they started out with infinite more resources, not because they had a better production model. And all those battles that you mentioned would've been avoided had Hitler been killed in 43, the beginning in particular. And those battles were not what lost Germany the war, no more than all the battles the Allies lost in North Africa and Eastern Europe going up to that point lost the war for them

Stalingrad started in 1942 ....so does this mean we push Hitler's death back to that year? Or how about 1941? (that means we don't get him declaring war on the US) How about 1940? (no Battle of Britain and failed attempt to knock the UK out of the war) How about 1939 (no invasion of Poland and the start of the whole mess)? How about 1889? (Hitler's never born and we miss the whole mess. Of course this forum doesn't exist because there's no World War Two to talk about....or is there? I love What if's so much )

As to the statement you made about the infinite resources of the Allies and their production model vs the Germans, that only scratches the surface. Compare the two sides use of mass production or how they utilized a large segment of their population (women) in industry for starters. There's so much more you haven't begun to look at.

 

The Allies had more supply because they started out with infinite more resources, not because they had a better production model.
Now you are mixing production and design, which are two different beasts. You can design the most beautiful widget in the world, but if you don't have the production acumen make the widget available....
German engineering often resulted in overly complicated items that really did not have to be like that, such the tracks on the Panther that took untold man-hours to build and then replace in the field. And that is just a simple example.
And all those battles that you mentioned would've been avoided had Hitler been killed in 43, the beginning in particular. And those battles were not what lost Germany the war, no more than all the battles the Allies lost in North Africa and Eastern Europe going up to that point lost the war for them
How would the loss of 750,000 or so men not contribute to losing the war?

By Jan 1943, the 6th Army was immobilized and unable to break out even if Paulus had wanted to. How would Hitler's death have saved that debacle?

That five panzers to take out one Sherman is not factual on any level
Za is known for his humor.B)

Don't get me wrong, they made some good weapons and had some good ideas. But does the gee-whiz factor really help the man in the field when the widget breaks unexpectedly?

 

Stalingrad was a turning point ultimately, but it certainly did not have to be. All The German forces had to do was get out of the Soviet Union in 43. Bring the troops back to a more beneficial turf. I the Soviets attacked, the Germans had morethan enough manpower still to annihilate them. The only advantage the Soviets had going through 43 was the winter. All the German generals recommended this pullback of forces. Hitler didn't listen, as was his modus operandi from then on. Using the Me262 for it's intended purpose couldve singlehandedly destroyed enough bombers to break the British an American pilots' morale. That would've changed the dynamic of the war drastically

 

And 110 mph on the autobahn is like our 65 mph here. Many go around 120 and a significant percentage even higher. And I visited there twice, mainly Bavaria, but also all over, especially Saxony and the Berlin area.

 

. Using the Me262 for it's intended purpose couldve singlehandedly destroyed enough bombers to break the British an American pilots' morale. That would've changed the dynamic of the war drastically

Do you have some special insight into the morale of the bomber crews ? They had been taking horrendous losses from flak and fighters at various times with little sign that they were going to stop.

I suspect that the mods are going to have to read the riot act here and consign yet another 'what if ' to internet purgatory.

 

I don't have special insight into the bomber crews morale. It is a known fact that bomber crew morale was one of the biggest concerns to the military. If the kill rate was high enough, after a certain amount of flights the crew was statistically guaranteed to be shot down. That would break their morale. That's a problem. That would cause crews to drop their payloads early and a number of other things that would severely hinder the mission objective

 

Alrighty then.

Lets compare some examples of German vs American engineering.

I am not as familiar with some of the excellent CW stuff such as radar and sonar.

Were did the American have it over the Germans in quality (in addition to quantity) ?

I'll only list the ones that are not even close.

Aircraft carries
Battleships
Battle cruisers
Heavy and light cruisers
Destroyers
Subs
Landing vessels of all sizes
Tankers and oilers
Cargo ships
Attack transports
Carrier fighters, bombers and torpedo planes.
Amphibians and sea planes


rifles
radios
trucks !!!
engineering and bridging vehicles
Prime movers
locomotives
light tanks
Self propelled artillery
Tractors and dozers

Strategic bombers
Atomic bombs
Medicine
Packaged food

Care to dispute any single item, old boy?

Dave

 

Yes I absolutely dispute. There was no better battleship made than the Bismark. It took the whole British Fleet to take it down. and even then it wasn't sunk. It was scuttled, after taking 700 direct hits. It took down the British capital ship, the Hood, with three shots. Because it's firing was so prices and it's armor unmatched. They didn't build aircraft carriers because it wasn't necessary to their strategy of a predominantly land oriented war in Eutope. The German submarines were unmatched in their destructiveness. And most everything else you named were not weapons that turne te tide of war, like self propelled artillery. The nuclear bomb was the only thing the US built that the Germans didn't and were trying to. But, again, that was a resolve intensive project and the Germans had 1/20th the material resources available to the US.

 

I don't have special insight into the bomber crews morale. It is a known fact that bomber crew morale was one of the biggest concerns to the military. If the kill rate was high enough, after a certain amount of flights the crew was statistically guaranteed to be shot down. That would break their morale. That's a problem. That would cause crews to drop their payloads early and a number of other things that would severely hinder the mission objective

That logic sounds suspiciously similar to the doctrine of Bomber Harris and how German civilian morale would be broken down by repeated bombing. Neither view is credible.