It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nazis had no "advanced" technology

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 10:23 AM
link   
QUOTE : ZPlan was dropped within a year of its start, so no loss their "

NO LOSS ??????????

i am afraid i must disagree , the " loss " was the building of bismark , tirpiz , graff spee and the " pocket battleships "

those ships contribution to the war was pitifull [ compared to the cost of construction ]

the replacement of this 150 ooo tons of surface ships with say 50 000 [ tons of uboats would have given doenitz >40 type IX ocean going boats at the start of war

i know which i would rather have

YRS - APE




posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape

the replacement of this 150 ooo tons of surface ships with say 50 000 [ tons of uboats would have given doenitz >40 type IX ocean going boats at the start of war


Yes, that is entirely correct. A combination of German pride and the arrogance of a quick victory over England, led to the U-boat arm being neglected.
40 more Type IX would have negated the British Fleets power in the Channel, thereby making the chances of ' Sea Lion ' being given the go more likely.
Once across the channel in strength there is little the English could have done to oppose them. Almost all their heavy weapons were left in France, there weren't even enough standard issue rifles left to arm the rescued soldiers.

If you look at the German plan for Sea Lion, they were going to hurl 2 armoured divisions and several infantry divisions all along the southern coast of england. But of course we'll never know.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   
one reason hitler didnt use gas was that when he saw pictures of th e105mm howitzers used by us and gb he thought the hydrolic recoil system was actully gas cannisters also germany had designed long range bombers to attack the us in early 1941 but the heads of the board that awarded contracts shut them down with out a reason why ( the most common theory is that goering said they could produce 2 twin engine bombers in the same time as it would take to build 1 4 engined bomber and for the same cost
heres some books that might help
Luftwaffe secret projects Bombers 1938-1945
Luftwaffe secret projects fighters 1939-1945
Luftwaffe secret projects ground attack aircraft
all these books run about $50 us



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wraith
one reason hitler didnt use gas was that when he saw pictures of th e105mm howitzers used by us and gb he thought the hydrolic recoil system was actully gas cannisters


I've never heard this before, are you sure of your facts ?

Another reason why Hitler may not have ordered its use is because Allied research into the same types of pesticides ( used for nerve gas ) ceased. The German scientists wrongly believed that the Allies were developing the same weapons whereas, research on it really did stop. They hadn't realised the potential of organophosphates.

There is an excellent book on the development of chemical weapons from WWI to the modern day. It details the German WWII nerve gas research and production in great detail.
It's called " A Higher Form of Killing "



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Gas would have allow violated the entire book of Geneva convention rules, meaning it would be enraged every other nation on earth, and it also not a suitable weapon for the fast moving war that the eastern and western front was. Gas requires time for preparation and a static target, which was rare on both fronts. It also means your enemy suddenly has a reason to use gas against you, and considering the fact that the German homeland was vulnerable to strategic gas attacks, if such a thing is possible, the Germans would have probably suffered for any use of gas and gained only a tactical advantage.

Of course, we will probably never know.



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
QUOTE :"one reason hitler didnt use gas was that when he saw pictures of th e105mm howitzers used by us and gb he thought the hydrolic recoil system was actully gas cannisters "

HMMMM - then what did hitler think of the :

15cm Kanone 18

www.militaertechnik-der-nva.de...

10.5cm flak 38

genso.9online.fr...


YRS - APE



posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
QUOTE : ZPlan was dropped within a year of its start, so no loss their "

NO LOSS ??????????

i am afraid i must disagree , the " loss " was the building of bismark , tirpiz , graff spee and the " pocket battleships "

those ships contribution to the war was pitifull [ compared to the cost of construction ]

the replacement of this 150 ooo tons of surface ships with say 50 000 [ tons of uboats would have given doenitz >40 type IX ocean going boats at the start of war

i know which i would rather have

YRS - APE


Ehh all those warships were prewar construction and not part of Zplan which was not finalised until the summer of 1939, although their construction were included in the Zplan after the fact. Not one ship planned in the Zplan construction was ever completed...other than maybe a handfull of destroyers and Torpedo boats. The UBoat construction was Donitz plan and not a part of Z plan. He was calling for 300 Uboat navy from 1935.

In fact the Zplan or some enlarged fleet should have been started in 1935 and completed in 1945, and would have if Adm Raeder had his way and Hitler not stood in the way . Hitler believed the british were fellow Aryans and would come around to sence when the war began and either join Germany or remain out. Had the Germans invested as such a navy, the RN could have been neutralised long enough for the UK to be invaded in 1940. With out the UK as a launch point , the Anglo American axis is half as effective.



posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by wdl



Also the Spitfire, Radar and Hurricane were British developments, not Allied.


The British were among the allied forces!

The tired point about the nazis "running out of time" is one of the most bizarre I've come across. People constantly state that if the war had gone on for six more months or a year than things could have turned out differently because the nazis would have deployed all these amazing weapons. In reality if the nazis had held out for six months than Berlin would have been destroyed by the atom bomb.

I stick by the point I made in my original post. We can all look in wonder at the innovation of nazi weapons but the fact of the matter is that allied weapons won the war.

It was the nazis who had strength in numbers at the being of the war before the Russians and Americans got involved but British technology prevented them from invading our island.

It was the nazis who virtually owned the Atlantic with there U-boats but again is was allied code breaking, radar and sonar technology that eventually defeated the U-boats (despite their guided torpedoes!).

The nazis initial strength was curtailed by allied technology and once the allies outnumbered the nazis they were finished. Only the atom bomb would have saved the nazis and if they had been as technologically advanced as they are claimed to have been they would have made it, instead they spent their money on rockets that couldn't even hit a target as big as London towards the end of the war!


I agree , the only thing that could have saved the nazi's was to have the A bomb fist. However their scientists were a long way to build it. Their theory involved the use of 1 ton of uranium. + They didn't know how to make it work. So if indeed they had resisted 6 more months half of Germany would have been wiped out.

Besides, how can Germany could have won a 3 front war?

The Germans were indeed the best engineers of that time, they had the best tanks and they had the V-2 bombs. However they underestimated Britain, the US and the Russian winter...



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 04:19 AM
link   
QUOTE : “ Ehh all those warships were prewar construction “


Yes , and ?? the pre war production was not ad hoc , they HAD a plan for a blue water navy from day one ,
Z plan was an attempt to budget [ both financially and [physically ] this fleet

The pre war Nazis fleet building [ pocket battleships , bismark etc ] were the first block , z plan detailed later planned construction

PS - considerable resources were squandered on z-plan construction


QUOTE : “ which was not finalised until the summer of 1939, although their construction were included in the Zplan after the fact.

You have the cart before the horse , z-plan was the printed plan , that’s all

z-plan built upon all previous plans , there was an x and y plan – bismark was not added to the z-plan fleet post hoc , rather z-plan promised sister ships and support vessels for bismark , a big difference

QUOTE : “ The UBoat construction was Donitz plan and not a part of Z plan. He was calling for 300 Uboat navy from 1935.


I NEVER said it was – indeed my entire premise was that deonitz having more uboats instead of a white elephant battleship fleet would have given the Nazis a good chance of forcing the uk to surrender

No need to engage the RN or undertake sea lion  if Churchill has to offer terms

QUOTE : “ In fact the Zplan or some enlarged fleet should have been started in 1935 and completed in 1945, and would have if Adm Raeder had his way and Hitler not stood in the way . Hitler believed the british were fellow Aryans and would come around to sence when the war began and either join Germany or remain out.


I agree , Hitler was delusional


QUOTE : “ Had the Germans invested as such a navy, the RN could have been neutralised long enough for the UK to be invaded in 1940

Utter rubbish !

Where would this “ magic “ blue water fleet come from ? to overwhelm the RN the germans would need the full planned build of the H class pluss cruisers , destroyers etc AND landing ships

This could only be achieved by :

Less panzer II / III tanks ??? the campaign in france might fail

Less aircraft ??? – the germans LOST the BoB with the aircraft they had , even if they used rational tactics , could easily loose if they had fewer aircraft

QUOTE : “ . With out the UK as a launch point , the Anglo American axis is half as effective.”

YUP - the loss of the UK islands is a very interesting scenario , how long would a “ headless “ empire last ?

Even with the UK gone – the germans would still have their hands full with the soviets , who would now get more aid from the USA

The big what if is – would the nazi A bomb project get back on track , as who developed the A bomb first would decide a usa / nazi war –

The Nazis could not invade “ the new world “ and a US led invasion of Europe from Africa alone would take much longer [ torch would not be possible till later ]

YRS – APE



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 04:29 AM
link   

z-plan built upon all previous plans , there was an x and y plan – bismark was not added to the z-plan fleet post hoc , rather z-plan promised sister ships and support vessels for bismark , a big difference


The Z Plan envisioned battleships far bigger than the Bismark around the 70 000+ tonne range.
And Bismark did have a sister ship The Tirpitz.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 07:04 AM
link   
ROGUE1:

the german super battleships were the " h class "design , see here :

www.chuckhawks.com...

for some specs and commentary

YRS - APE



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   
The Allies also had the benefit of letting professionals run the war. The Germans had a psychotic, attention deficit disordered egomaniac corporal in charge of their efforts.

Germans had the first infrared (night vision), the first jet fighters, superior tanks, radar-guided night fighters, the first shoulder-mounted anti-tank weapon, and a lot of other fun killing toys. They're tech was on par with the Allies. What they didn't have was the same level of funding, industrial capacity, resources, manpower, etc. And did I mention a crazed leader who ruined his country after 12 years?



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 08:43 AM
link   
QUOTE :" The Allies also had the benefit of letting professionals run the war "

ROFLMAO

i would rate

1st stalin

2nd the frech general staff

3rd churchill

for thier MAJOR bouts of " what were they thinking "

although churchill did make up for all of his blunders with spectacular brilliance

going slightly off topic my favourite " what if " would have been the chezchs declaring war on germany in order to hold onto seudenland

with thier army and the border defences intact - i would bet on a easy chezch " victory " if the uk and france would give them full support .

my next entry in the " what were they thinking " files was the poor defence of crete , crete should have been defended at all costs . as from crete you could bomb the roumanian oil fields

PS - i do have issues with roosevelt , but what appear to be his " mistakes " were IMHO more a case of hanging others out to dry in order to advance his own goals

YRS - APE



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
The German scientists wrongly believed that the Allies were developing the same weapons whereas, research on it really did stop. They hadn't realised the potential of organophosphates.


- Sorry I can't give you a reference but it is my understanding that Britain was aware of German research into poison gas etc (even if the extent or the actual German discoveries of 'nerve gas' like sarin and tabun were unknown then.)

IIRC Churchill let it be known that if Germany were to use gas of any sort on the UK then Germany would be drenched from top to bottom in gas and/or chemical weapons of Britian's own.

Interesting that Britain had the means to deliver such a threat whereas Germany fairly quickly in the war lost the ability to do much more than 'tip and run' raids. Even the V1 & V2 had comparitively small weapons loads (and thanks to centimetric radar the allies were able to nullify the V1 threat very quickly via radar aimed and radar proximity fused AA fire).

Anthrax was to be primary in this - and remember Churchill had shown no hesitation in using gas against the Iraqi tribesmen and their villages in the 1920's.

Perhaps Hitler's own experience with being gassed was a factor in Germany not using her nerve agent stocks - as well as plenty of other Germans having firsthand experience of how unreliable those weapons were on how they could easily rebound on those unleashing them.



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
QUOTE : “ Ehh all those warships were prewar construction “


Yes , and ?? the pre war production was not ad hoc , they HAD a plan for a blue water navy from day one ,
Z plan was an attempt to budget [ both financially and [physically ] this fleet

The pre war Nazis fleet building [ pocket battleships , bismark etc ] were the first block , z plan detailed later planned construction

PS - considerable resources were squandered on z-plan construction





Oh lord read some history books for a change!

From the start Hitler didn't want war with the UK and commonwealth and believed he could fight a limited war with Poland and France without involving any one else. He believed in his own powers to limit this, so no their was no blue water navy planned from the start, that only started to take shape in 1938/39. In actual fact Zplan was conceived on back in 1935 [as Xplan] but Hitler refused to fund it. Adm Raeder spent the next 4 years changing Hitlers mind instead of building his fleet. The funding on ship building drops off from 1936-1937. It was due to lack of steel allocation to KM that most ships took far to long to build . The heavy cruisers and battleships fell over a year behind schedule, while the carriers fell 2 years behind schedule. By 1940 ,had the followed the building plan, the Germans should have had ...

1+1 x CV [ Graff Zeppelin class]
4 x BB [Bismarck class & Scharnhorst class]
3 x pocket battlecruiers [Scheer]
5 x heavy cruisers [Hipper] & 6 light cruisers [Koln]
28 x DD and 12 x TB with 70 corvettes/MS and over 60 Uboats.

In stead they had

2 x BB [ Scharnhorst class]
3 x pocket battlecruiers [Scheer]
3 x heavy cruisers [Hipper] & 6 light cruisers [Koln]
20 x DD and 12 TB with 40 corvettes/MS and ~ 60 Uboats.

No one wanted a blue water navy just a costal fleet until 1938/39 when the push for Zplan started. Ship building from Zplan would not have materialised until 1941/42, given a 1939 start time.It should be noted that Hitler stood in the way of development , it was not a case of 'not being able to build'.

[edit on 4-9-2005 by psteel]



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape


QUOTE : “ Had the Germans invested as such a navy, the RN could have been neutralised long enough for the UK to be invaded in 1940

Utter rubbish !

Where would this “ magic “ blue water fleet come from ? to overwhelm the RN the germans would need the full planned build of the H class pluss cruisers , destroyers etc AND landing ships

This could only be achieved by :

Less panzer II / III tanks ??? the campaign in france might fail

Less aircraft ??? – the germans LOST the BoB with the aircraft they had , even if they used rational tactics , could easily loose if they had fewer aircraft



Neutralising RN was not as difficult as it appears. Over 1/2 the fleet was spread around the globe and given its mission of sea blockade, they were forced to practice 'fleet rotation' while KM 'surged' its surface fleet. This mean't the KM would face not more than 1/4 of their fleet and more like 1/5 if they are caught of guard...as was the case with the invasion of Norway. As it was KM surface fleet was already about 1/5 of the RN without any new builds.

At any given time [1940] the RN home fleet and antiinvasion fleet could count on 3 capital ships [BB/BC/CV] and 6 cruisers plus 33 escorts with maybe 150 smaller patrol craft at sea. While the KM could surge 2 x Battleships and 5 cruisers [PBC & HC] plus 50 escorts [DD/Corvettes] and several hundred armed patrol craft and a couple of hundred powered 'Sieble ferries' and 1000 towed ferries [not very effective].

The enlarged KM could surge 5 capital ships [ BB/CV] and 9 cruisers [PBC & HC] plus 100 escorts [DD/Corvettes] and hundreds armed patrol craft plus several hundred large landing craft and ~1000 powered 'Sieble ferries'.

Whats worse is that RN ablity to intercept german shipping was not great. About 1/2 the ships got through the blocade in 1940, so german invasion fleets could reach UK soil without interception. This is especially true if the RN is distracted and decieved into believing an enlarge KM battle fleet was putting to sea for a big fight. I gather that the 'First Sea Lord' admitted to Churchill that atleast 100,000 german troops could land on UK ports without being stopped..not unlike what happened in Norway.

Enlarged KM would not have effected Luftwaffe or army budgeting or resource allocation. It might have resulted in no 'Westwall' or other porkbarrel Nazie building projects. Alternatively, had Hitler been removed from the whole process, an enlarged KM would have been afforded along with an enlarge Heer and Luftwaffe. All they needed to do was to settle on a 'European war' as the goal from the start of the building programe[IE-1934/35] instead of a 'limited war'.Because of Hitlers unrealistic expectations, hughly expensive crash programs had to be rushed from 1937/38 on, to enlarge the Wehrmacht by 50% at upto tripple the cost !!!! That extra resources/cost alone could have been enought to an fund enlarged KM , motorize the Heer , build a strategic bomber force and an enlarged synthetic fuel industry to feed this.

German war industry was run very poorly prewar,unlike those in the UK/USSR & USA. As a result it was only 1/3 as efficent as their opponents industries. I read that these allies spent the 1930s preparing their industries for a long war of attrition. Hitler , while he paid lip service to this notion , neglected the arrangements with industry so the germans had to make those complex adjustments to industry after the war started.

When the war began each of the allied countries spent only a year or two building up to maximum capacity. The germans took most of the war doing the same thing and only reached their stride in the last year of the war
Even having said this , I gather that some industries like the auto industry , never exceeded 1/2 capacity through out the entire war!



posted on Sep, 4 2005 @ 06:49 PM
link   
QUOTE :”Oh lord read some history books for a change!

I have , when are you planning to


counter to your claims zplan vessels were laid down , then scrapped , the guns from one ended up as a coastal battery , IIRC it never fired a shot in anger


QUOTE :”No one wanted a blue water navy just a costal fleet until 1938/39”

So that’s why they built over 100 ooo tons of blue water capital ships


QUOTE :”when the push for Zplan started. Ship building from Zplan would not have materialised until 1941/42, given a 1939 start time.It should be noted that Hitler stood in the way of development , it was not a case of 'not being able to build'.

If the germans had such “excess “capacity why did the germans not use it to produce war winning materiele ??????

YRS - APE



posted on Sep, 5 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
QUOTE :" The Allies also had the benefit of letting professionals run the war "

ROFLMAO

i would rate

1st stalin

2nd the frech general staff

3rd churchill

for thier MAJOR bouts of " what were they thinking "



Yeah, but it seems that Hitler really had his fingers more in the pie. When he saw the ME-262 for the first time he decided it must be a bomber! And for awhile it was being built as his personal 'blitz-bomber.' Even Adolph Galland had to say to the Fuhrer's face 'the smallest child can see this is a fighter.'

And Hitler's greatest idea - invade Russia. "Kick the door in and the whole rotten structure will collapse." Yeaaahh.



posted on Sep, 5 2005 @ 11:15 AM
link   


J. Robert Oppenheimer - German Jewish Descent

Aren't you glad his family imigrated to the US in 1888.

The threat of a Nazi atomic bomb was one of the primary driving forces behind the creation of the British Tube Alloys project which would eventually lead to the Allied nuclear weapons effort under Robert Oppenheimer.

The ultimate irony is it took a Austrian Jew to start WWII and a German Jew to end it.



posted on Sep, 5 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
QUOTE :”Oh lord read some history books for a change!

I have , when are you planning to


counter to your claims zplan vessels were laid down , then scrapped , the guns from one ended up as a coastal battery , IIRC it never fired a shot in anger


QUOTE :”No one wanted a blue water navy just a costal fleet until 1938/39”

So that’s why they built over 100 ooo tons of blue water capital ships


QUOTE :”when the push for Zplan started. Ship building from Zplan would not have materialised until 1941/42, given a 1939 start time.It should be noted that Hitler stood in the way of development , it was not a case of 'not being able to build'.

If the germans had such “excess “capacity why did the germans not use it to produce war winning materiele ??????

YRS - APE


Since I've already explained why ,I suggest you read Overy and Harrison and then maybe you'd understand. 100,000 tons is only two good size battle ships. Before 1938 they only had the 3 pocket battlecrusiers as capital ships at 15-16,000 tons apeice , none of the Battleships or cruisers were completed until 1938/39. And that was directly due to delays in steel supplies that Hitler authorized. Infact the initial plans for the Scharnhorst class were just enlarged pocket battlecruisers.

As I already explained, Hitler never reorganised his heavy industrys for total war economy as the British , Soviets and Americans already did in the 1930s. Such a move required appointing an overseeing body that made strategic choices pretaining to what industries would be allocated to which service for what purpose.

Major General Thomas and Reich defense minister Blomberg , tried to set up such a overseeing body to best exploite heavy industry towards total war in 1933/34, but Hitler was having nothing to do with that. He probably saw it as competion for power.So no changes were made to the procurment process until after the war began . In the UK this transition was overseen by Chamberlin who took 4 years to complete the tast in 1939...just in time for the war. At the same time Stalin did the same thing in Russia inviting American industrialists to build hugh tractor works ,that he then duplicated all over Russia.

Hitler instead was content to have each services vieing for his attention and contracts handed out to companies that were most loyal to the Nazie party, so the whole process was very corrupt and inefficent. There were no night shifts planned for the factories and there were no incentives for increased productivity. The products did not have fixed unit prices, but were cost plus, so often the same weapon produced in one factory cost 3 times what it cost in another factory. Worse still there was no attempt to rationalized resources allocated so incredible amount of wastage occured.

As I said the germans would eventually overhaul their industry as they increasingly lost the war so that when Speer proposed the very same changes in 1942/43 , Hitler gave him unlimited poweres to achieve a 3-4 fold increase in out put. In truth the same overhaul could have been achieved from 1934-1939 ,had Hitler supported Thomas and Blomberg in 1934.

As a direct result of these transitions, the productivity in 1940 was 10 tons of weapons for every 100 tons of steel allocated . By 1944 this productivity quadrupled to 40 tons of weapons for every 100 tons of steel allocated.When it came down to it, Speer just forced the companies to make do with the resources and workforce allocated and increase output through working night shifts, incentives and elimintating wastage....it was no real miracle , just hard work.

It may well be that the forcing the German industry to build hugh navy army and airforce could have been just the catalyst that Hitler needed to allow the overhauling of the industry to the much more efficent 'total war' footing. After all they would only be making the exact same transitions that the British Americans and Soviets were doing.


[edit on 5-9-2005 by psteel]




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join