Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

Sigh... here we go again.

The germans were flying jet aircraft He 178 in 1939.
The He 280 was flying on pure jet in Sept. of 1940. The development of the HeS 011 (from the HeS 8) was superior to anything around for many years.
German guided weapon technology was at least 5 years ahead of Allied technologies
German A2A radar technology was at least 3 years ahead of Allied technologies
German rocket technologies was at least 7 (some say 10) years ahead of Allied technologies.

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oCdKGnWWxc[/youtube]

Mk23socom

My Feedback: (7)

and then pair that with a narrow set landing gear that had quirky ground handling characteristics and you have yourself a recipe for non-combat losses

da Rock

And the Germans put newly trained pilots into those hard to handle planes, pilots who were getting less and less hours of flight training.................

In 1940 German pilots got 75 hours in single-engine before being posted.
In 1942 that was reduced to 50 hours.
In 1943 it was 25 hours.

In '43, Brits got 75 hours of the same level
while U.S. pilots got 125 hours.

Prior to that fighter training, Allied pilots got twice as much time in basic as German trainees.

Also keep in mind that for the last half of the war, the odds in the air were heavily in favor of the Allies.

The kill ratios in WWII really don't mean much about the aircraft at all. When the Germans wiped the Russians from the skies, what did that say? When the Allies hosed the Japs and German planes from the clouds, that says what? Early on, they had experienced pilots in better airplanes. Later on we had better pilots in better planes that were in good shape and in far greater numbers.

Bottom line, the message back then was, "don't fight a modern, mechanized war with a 2nd rate economy against the side that has a superpower on it."

G-Pete

2nd rate economy? Germany, half size of Texas held 40000 miles of front line for a long time. The Germans lost the war because of strategic mistakes....

da Rock

The most strategic mistake Germany made was attacking Russia, who used U.S. equipment to hang on when their manufacturing was over run. Thanks to the Russians holding Germany's attention, the U.S. had time to deal with Japan. Most of the Pacific landings were much larger than Normandy, btw.

Remember Italy? and Japan? and the fact that all 3 Axis powers didn't have oil. nor the manpower to produce modern war materials. If Germany hadn't enslaved the people she chose not to "cleanse", and hadn't employed them as workers, she would have run out of troops way berfore she wasted them on the Russians. Most certainly, German's lack of manpower placed her down the list. Japan of course was still in the middle ages mentally as was Italy.

Not a one of the three could have actually won that war, and didn't do it in combination. And when they finally did surrender they were outnumbered, out provisioned, and out fought. And most certainly had made major strategic mistakes. Japan's major one was Pearl Harbor and German's was Barbarossa.

kahloq

Thats absolute garbage and not even close to reality. Germany HAD the numbers game intially. They HAD the UK on the down and outs and let them live by switching to a BAD strategy of attacking London instead of finishing off the RAF...which at best only had 2-3 weeks left of life at that point. Its quite well documented how big of a blunder this was on Germany's part. Had Britain fallen, the raw materials would have been there in much greater qunatities for Germany and NO Normandy could have happened.

Without a staging area...ie the UK, the US would not have been able to do much to Fortress Europe alone. Remember, BoB was 1940 and America wasnt even in the war yet. Had Germany conquered England, it would have been over. Period.
You seem to forget, even with the US in the war and beating Germany into the ground with constant bombing, Germany was well over 10 yaers ahead technology wise. Germany would have had the atom bomb also with England under nazi control. They almost had it anyway, except the heavy water plant in Norway being bombed by the English. If the UK was Nazi controlled, that wouldnt have happened.
The UK also wouldnt have ever produced the Gloster meteor since any scientists would have been dragged to germany or worse...killed. nad the Me-262 would have been built in greater numbers and well armed before any US invasion could have happened with the UK out of the picture. Think first before stating absolutes about any of the Axis powers not ever having the ability to win.
Im not supporting the nazi regime at all....but am pointing out the mistakes many ppl want to make about how close Germany actaully came to winning. It was DAMN close....so please dont sit there and try to say Germany could never could have won cuz thats BS. They could have and before WWII would have been more then a couple years old and before the US was even armed back up.
Attacking Russia was there 2nd huge mistake. Had they not done that, the resources to fend off Normandy would have been available. Again.....the longer Germany held on to Europe..the more prepared they could have been and much further along on the tech tree then anyone else.
It boils down to strategic mistakes....not a 2nd rate economy. For the time period...the econmy during WWII for Germany was not a 2nd rate relative to other countries.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

Lets not forget in 1944 Germany was STILL building over 4000 aircraft. Mind you they didn't have enough qualified pilots to fly them... but they were still building them (and the allies underestimated how many by quite a bit). They were still turning out tanks at a rate that the allies couldn't explain (but they VERY much understood exactly how many Germany was producing).

The German Strategic mistakes cost them the war. Holding to 1920's arial doctrine, the lack of a long range heavy bomber, the move to Zerstörer over single engine longer range fighters, Hitler's meddling in the Luftwaffe, ect, all compounded the lack of resources (raw materials and people) to the point that the economy collapsed around it.

da Rock

yes, Hitler ruined their half of their half of the war for them.

Now let's get back to German oddities.

da Rock

Actually, we're not.

Got a post about another German oddity? Post it. And we stay on topic.

Let's stay on topic.

kahloq

Yes japan was going to lose no matter what. All the production the US could do back then wouldnt have been enough if Germany hadnt invaded Russia and wasted half their army and luftwaffe resources there. Just the shear size of the German army/airforce before Russia would have kept the Allies from mounting a direct assault(normandy) until much later. Its all a guessing game now because none of that happened fortunately. But im not blind to how close it was to ultimately being so much different.

Now as for german oddities....theres a ton of lufte46 planes and designs

da Rock

Actually, we're not.

Got a post about another German oddity? Post it. And we stay on topic.

Let's stay on topic.

Charlie P.

Both Japan and Germany fought amazing 2-1/2 year wars but were, like so many start-up operations, undercapitalized. They had to conquer to get materials.

But, back to the thread:



http://www.luft46.com/mess/mep1099b.html

kahloq

Amerika Bomber
http://www.luft46.com/misc/sanger.html

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

how often does one see this German beauty?

kahloq

For all the great designs and even some built as prototypes....im still amazed at how Germany NEVER produced a long range heavy bomber.

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

they didn't think they needed too. (well Hitler thought anyways). as the troops advanced, so does there
fighters and medium bombers. I don't think he ever had any intentions on stepping on American soil.
In fact, I don't think he wanted America in the war period.. but those japs forced him into it.

da Rock

It's interesting to note what appears to be a reinforcing ridge down the spine, and the braces that strengthen the vertical stabilizers. Guess the original design of the fuselage wasn't correct and the force of the rudders (or engine turbulence) was more than expected.

No wonder we didn't see it.

da Rock

It's also interesting they didn't seem to make space aft the wing for defensive positions. They already staffed their bombers with very few defenders, and this one didn't seem to show a change of that approach.

Was it an early development back when designers thought they could outrun the fighters? Or was it further proof they knew the bompers were not going to protect themselves?

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

fighter escorts.

Experten109/40

My Feedback: (-1)

nutter' one.

ARUP

The old Profile Publications covering the Roland 2-holer have photos of this scheme and also of the 'smiling whale' scheme. How intimidating is a smiling whale??? LOL

ZoomZoom-RCU

Hows a bout the Henschel Hs 132 jet dive-bombe. Pilot flies in prone position and can, because of this, endure excessive dive speeds on bombing attacks that would black out a seated pilot. Not sure that flying on your belly like Superman for hours would be a lot of fun......but damn cool it is, none the less.

ZZ.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Sorry, forgot the pic.....here it is.

ZZ.

ZoomZoom-RCU

and another: amazingly enough, I have seen somewhere in my travels, a picture of this exact same aircraft, after the war with a soviet red star simply slapped on over the swastika on the tail rudders. Apparently this is how the Russians "invented" many of thier early jet technologies.