How would German WWII Ac rate to WITP Ac ?

[Adnan Meshuggi]

Thanks to Frank, he help to clean the forum... the green dot...is the "clean mdiehl away"-Button

so, no need to get angry or insulted. It is just mdiehl... not America [:D][:D]
And this is still a game and we discuss fictional things...
Mr. Diehl is in another world, the madness-station will give im more drugs so everybody will be fine [:'(]

To the subs... hm only one hour ? That is a little bit short...

the XXI-er had more range - but it is also true that the numbers (17 knots for 4 hours) are not true - this numbers are true for the first subs... but the crews wanted to get below the surface quicker... so crash dive with 18 seconds should be achieved. For that the sub got larger openings and this means they got slower... but still with 14-15 knots, they were to fast for the allied search ships, cause their sonar could not work at this speed.

But i am really surprised about the japanese subs... as it seems it was an own creation (no thing with german knowledge send to the japanese...)

[Adnan Meshuggi]

Hehe... well this point is ignored so often...

if piston engine bombers try to fly into enemy territory and get attacked by hundreds of fast jet intercepters (also equipped with rockets that can break up any bomber box), they are dead birds.

And the piston engine Über-P51, flown by Überpilots (okay,enough MDiehl-BS), i mean, the allied piston engine fighters can do nothing against this. THink about "black thursday" in korea... such a beautiful happening that shows clearly what happen with piston engine bombers in a fight with jet fighters...
Sure, they can (and they did) attack the bases, destroy the starting/landing planes... but the point is, if the germans had enabled to launch 300 jets with rockets - say in spring 44, the air war is over. At last at daylight. After all we know this could have happen (hindsight) and also i think we all could be happy that this event does not happen.
To ignore these facts is silly too. It was simple stupidity by german leaders to not do so. And no piston engine bomber (B29, B36 or whatever) could have done something against this. And beside the lala-wishful-thinking of certain (blocked) posters, the allies were far behind the germans in jet techniques... and even if they are able to bring an equal fighter, the problem is still that the bombers are only prey.

To create a "fanboy-hood" troll-trash-thread is silly, cause these are facts that everybody with a brain can understand. At last the point "bombers hit the shit in the fan"... and this is just a matter of physics... in another thread we discussed that, too. My opinion is, the allies would react with very low level attacks (cause the speed advantage of jets are not so great here) but the price is that the FW190 could beat the piston engine fighters or at last the inferioity is not so big. And about the target the bombers get ripped in parts.

[el cid again]

And beside the lala-wishful-thinking of certain (blocked) posters, the allies were far behind the germans in jet techniques... and even if they are able to bring an equal fighter, the problem is still that the bombers are only prey.

Not really. The first operational jet fighter plane in the world was British, not German. The German superiority lie in things like swept wings - not something that yet mattered very much. The range of the jets was not yet great enough to replace piston engines for many missions. One might argue that there was a greater German advantage EARLIER, and that the Germans failed to exploit it (because the war was "almost won already.") But the real reason the Germans failed with jets, rockets and other fine technologies, where they led or were just competative, is that they squandered resources on far too many projects. Germany and Japan BOTH produced more kinds of planes (and weapons in several categories) than than the Allies did - in the sense of accepted for mass production. In field after field we see the same pattern - Japan had at least five - and probably seven - atomic research programs - with different objectives (atom bomb, atomic engine, radiological bomb) and different masters (army, navy) instead of a single focused Manhattan Project with a single objective and the unified support of the services. [The USN was FIRST in US atomic research - uranium research began in 1938 at NRL - and USN developed separation technology was used in the project - even though the USN did it for atomic engines - like IJN wanted - instead of atom bombs). The real German failing was a lack of focus. [So much for vaunted German planning]

[Adnan Meshuggi]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

And beside the lala-wishful-thinking of certain (blocked) posters, the allies were far behind the germans in jet techniques... and even if they are able to bring an equal fighter, the problem is still that the bombers are only prey.

Not really. The first operational jet fighter plane in the world was British, not German. The German superiority lie in things like swept wings - not something that yet mattered very much. The range of the jets was not yet great enough to replace piston engines for many missions. One might argue that there was a greater German advantage EARLIER, and that the Germans failed to exploit it (because the war was "almost won already.") But the real reason the Germans failed with jets, rockets and other fine technologies, where they led or were just competative, is that they squandered resources on far too many projects. Germany and Japan BOTH produced more kinds of planes (and weapons in several categories) than than the Allies did - in the sense of accepted for mass production. In field after field we see the same pattern - Japan had at least five - and probably seven - atomic research programs - with different objectives (atom bomb, atomic engine, radiological bomb) and different masters (army, navy) instead of a single focused Manhattan Project with a single objective and the unified support of the services. [The USN was FIRST in US atomic research - uranium research began in 1938 at NRL - and USN developed separation technology was used in the project - even though the USN did it for atomic engines - like IJN wanted - instead of atom bombs). The real German failing was a lack of focus. [So much for vaunted German planning]

sorry - no.
The brits had the Meteor and it was not the first operational jet.
The advantage of the germans in jet technology was large, so large that everybody tried to catch and copy it. Sure, the brits brought the Nene-Engine, but it had german technology in it.
For the statement about the german failing - i agree. The lack of focus was next to other important things (Hitler in comand, two-front-war, no war industry from the begining) the main failure (gladly)

About the piston engine fighter ves. the jet plane.
The first was worthless in PROTECTING the bombers.
And if the jet does not dogfight your piston engine plane, it can do nothing... only if the jets turbines get trouble or damages slow down the jet. And sure, the "bomb the bases and shoot em down at start/landings".
But if we look in the real war and we shift the date for jet fighters to December 43... this was possible... the germans have some important advantages
a.) the piston engine fighters can deal with the allied fighters, here they are better suited for (not superior, but less losses cause the allied fighter are in trouble to protect the bombers)
b.) the germans have much more fuel, logistics and well trained pilots (germany lost 2300 Pilots in January/february 44), so the average quality of german pilots is higher - means higher allied losses - means less german losses...
c.) without the big week, german logistic looks much better. Without the allied daylight bombings the german industry will produce more as they did in 44... and they now have products that will be equal or superior to the allied equipment. With this happen in the west, the urgent need for more planes in the east will be satisfied, and this means that the russian operations get hurt much more by german airforce and that the russians do not reach air superiority...

So we can say, that the german mistake here have serious follow-ups... You can ask yourself, what happen to the invasion if you can´t rule the skies and can not kill any transport car at daylight at your own wish. D-Day would be delayed.

I bet the allies would improve their own developments for jet fighters.. but honestly, the me262 was only a bad german design... they had much better engines, better designs for the planes and so on. With a delay in the war (and not knowing what happen in Alamo (we know this had ended the war... but think about this what-if)) what would the allies do ? Risk the invasion (with a high(er) chance for failure, maybe 400.000 captured soldiers?)

For the japanese... the americans were not really better... just think about the rivality between army and navy... sure, the difference is, the japanese could not allow such stupidity...

But i do not want to say "i know the truth"... it is just my opinion, if we create a what-if with 6-9 months speed up for german jet technics (oh - and the losses through maintanence and failures would be high - but with 2000 more pilots...you can risk it)

or to say it short : piston engine bombers with piston engine air cover against jet fighters is a bad day for the bombers. not for the fighters...

[Fishbed]

Well whom could have Castro invaded? The US? Barbados? Get back to the ground!

Saddam was so sure of his rule that he even allowed his people tp have guns in their homes, something you dont see to often in dictatorships or even in democracies. Dont believe everything you see in TV!

Who should get back to the gound first over there man?
Iran-Iraq war is bullshit so? TV bullshit? Well i'd better wonder what kind of TV or education you may get in your remote hidden hole of Hungaria someday, cuz so far any other Hungarian I met didn't think exactly the way you do, and to tell you the truth that makes me somewhat worried to know you are part of the very same union as I am [;)]
Ho God yes having a gun at home is indeed a very charming proof of taking care of the well-being of your people - personally I'd prefer doctors or hospitals, but if indeed your gun solve health problem just like the Cubans did, why not!
Indeed I live in France, I don't own a gun, neither the biggest part of my co-citizen do, while I still have the illusion of being in a caretaking democracy. Yeah, I may get spoiled by TV leftist rubbish for sure... [:o] [:D]

Ive got to know half a dozen Cubanese people here, and they respect the idea I have of him being a dictator like any other, with an iron and bloodfull hand when it comes to people who oppose him, better or worse than him - but they still have somekind of affection for him. The fact is that I wonder if I may say the same for the vast majority of 1992 iraqi people, could I? [8|]

[Demosthenes]

feeling fisty...(waiting for a game turn)

Bismarck was sunk![:D][:D]

[Ursa MAior]

The style of your answer does not need any comment, nor does the obvious mixing of my arguements on two different issues.

People start to react so out-of balance when they are (or feel themselves) personally attacked. If you are a poltical refugee from Iraq then I apologize, because I know what is it like to live in a dictatorship, something (Thank God) most people on these forums cant tell. But if not, then you have just earned your place right beside mdiehl.

As of hungarians supporting the war they are mostly the same who were licking the soviets' a** with same big tongue movements as they do it now with US's. Even 2-3 years before the collapse of communism they bashed american colonialism and imperialism (in a typical commie bla-bla style), but after the USSR fell to pieces they looked for and found a new master. Very reliable, honest and trustful persons. .

One more thing: the style defines the person. Since we only can judge you based on your posts, you have just excluded the words which might be used in conjunctuion with you such as : gentleman, courtesy, broad sighted and maturity. No to foget tolerant and able to discuss things in a normal way.

But if you are so outrageous about Saddam just answer me a simple question. After he has showed what kind if evil person he really is, by invading Kuwait -although he gased the kurds way before 1991 so I suppose his personality was no surprise for a major power' intelligence service- why was nt he removed immediately after Desert Storm?

[Honda]

Do I get to thrash someone or do I have to stand in a line of some sort?[:D]

[Fishbed]

The style of your answer does not need any comment, nor does the obvious mixing of my arguements on two different issues.

Well have a real idea of what a real answer in anger may be? I thought the smileys were explicit enough, you're the only one who is taking there seriously and put yourself over me, so once more you'd better get back to my level chap, I didn't insult yet, did I? [;)]
Unlike you...
btw, you were the first one to mention "caring about the well-being of his people", and you bring up this gun argument as a proof of everybody's being happy in Iraq - sir, remind how Iraqi Kurdish and Shiites are fighting the minoritary Sunni oligarchy for decades in Iraq, politically or military, especially since the first gulf war! Do you understand my point?

People start to react so out-of balance when they are (or feel themselves) personally attacked. If you are a poltical refugee from Iraq then I apologize, because I know what is it like to live in a dictatorship, something (Thank God) most people on these forums cant tell. But if not, then you have just earned your place right beside mdiehl.

Well looks like that those last days, Mdhiel has become the new house-made WitP forum Goldwin Point [:D][;)]

One more thing: the style defines the person. Since we only can judge you based on your posts, you have just excluded the words which might be used in conjunctuion with you such as : gentleman, courtesy, broad sighted and maturity. No to foget tolerant and able to discuss things in a normal way.

I beg your pardon? Are you paranoiac or what? [&:]
Im not the one who told you in the first place to "get back on the ground" and "not to believe TV rubbish" thus dealing with me like you deal with a kid - with all the due respect, Im old enough now to have other sources, "Master"...

But if you are so outrageous about Saddam just answer me a simple question. After he has showed what kind if evil person he really is, by invading Kuwait -although he gased the kurds way before 1991 so I suppose his personality was no surprise for a major power' intelligence service- why was nt he removed immediately after Desert Storm?

Ho is "evilness" really matters? I mean, if Castro is so Evil, why finally no-one tried to pull him off after the Pigs Bay? Why Kadhafi, maybe one of the "Evilest" in the way you define it, is still in place? Is the fact that Pinochet was a neo-fascist a problem for the US when they helped him to get the power in Chile? Since when US and the west invade a country to save this very country's citizen, I mean since Korea? No offense to the US readers, any western country shares a part of this kind of burden, that's just real-politik... [:(]
Once more with all due respect, do you have a complete idea of Saddam's feats in Iraq during the last 24 years? Once more, maybe up to 900 000 Iraki deads during the Iran Iraq war, the Kurds as you say (not to mention the gazed Iranians), the Koweit occupation, the Shiite uprising repression of 1992, and it goes on...
Yes, do you remember the Shiites were asking the very same question as you when the uprising happened after Desert Storm - why the West didn't help us? Do you think that the answer "Saddam was not Evil enough" would be satisfactory for them?

Im not more outrageous against Saddam for no reason - pigs like Kim Jong Il are of the same wood anyway. The point is that 1992 Iraq has nothing to do with 1992, or 2006 Cuba, and in this case, the two leaders have their share of responsability, honestly... You are the one who's got a personal grief with your Castro syndrom [&:]

AJ

[Fishbed]

I just read the rules about political talking over the forum - Im sorry to have started this, no-one is supposed to ignore the law.
So Ursa Major, I suppose this is better for the two of us to stand back on this. You have your opinion, Ive got mine, I suppose nobody will change his mind, so it is as good to stop this now before someone gets hurt on either side, once more I apologize to have started that very flaming party [:o] [;)]

Sorry for the inconvenience all!

AJ

[pauk]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl


Nope. Still not reading you. You said the US couldn't put a man in space in the 21st century. That claim is factually incorrect. Don't get *** mad at me because you come to a debate armed with statements that are factually incorrect.

Ok, let me rephrase (my pidgin english isn't always easy to understand).
US aren't capable to send men in the space in the 21st century safetly.

I mentioned that because you stated that US would be, without little help from the Werner and friends, late only 18 months with accomplishing "mission man on the moon". 18 months... who said than? Mdiehl? American scienists? Didn't we all tired of such propaganda?

I just can not understand this arognacy - nothing that isn't American isn't good. So, let me ask you once more. If american stuff is so superior how is possible that NASA can't garantee supplying ISS and safetly return astronauts to Earth?

"The ISS." Again, what about it? Is it your claim that only Russia can get people to the ISS in the 21st Century?

Again I direct your attention to STS-114.

[/quote]

No, this is not my claim and you know that very well. "or tries to claim I said something I didn't say," is actually your way or corresponding with people.

My claim is that only Russia was/is able to keep ISS alive. As you may know, it isn't enough to send man to ISS - human being needs oxygen, food and water for survival.

Since you so familiar with using NASA web page i direct your attention to http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/shu ... -2004.html

No fligts in 2004, and just one flight (your famous STS-114, which was, by the way several times prolonged. Do i need to mention that this 114 mission were faced with several tehnical problems and that is reason why NASA stopped further flights?) Yes i need to mention that because in your best manner you "forget" to mention this (or you, what is more likely did not know this?)....

So quoting just one fact (mission) to prove that US is capable to resuply ISS is really laughable. I think there is only one way to prove you you are wrong:

NASA should send you with STS-114 and drop you on ISS with supply enough for three or even six months and let you await for their return. But when i think again you would probably scream "shuttle is able to bring me back on Earth" until you run out of oxygen....

For all other people here on forum, i want to make clear that i'm not glad about failed US space program and i'm very sorry about the humans lives lost (and i would certainly like that NASA is still leader in space exploration)... but mr.all-knowing-arrogance really piss me every time when i read his posts (that's why i open my ignore list from this moment)...

So feel free to continue your pamflets, you will have discussion with your own soon.

to community:

It's sad that US spending billions for arnament while NASA can't develop space program due lack of the funds... It seems that Russians will take lead again:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/kliper.html

[Mike Scholl]

BOY HAS THIS TRAIN OF THOUGHT JUMPED THE TRACKS. WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE PUT IT OUT OF IT'S MISERY?

[Ursa MAior]

Even using one or two smileys (or writing a sort of apologies after) dont change the insulting style of your first post 'hole' fanboy. .

BUT I dont want to get involved in daily politics either. So I am off this thread.

[Przemcio231]

Well we were talking about German aircraft and it ended on politics[:D][:D] cool[:D] im feel in those topics like fish in a water[:)] i would like to be a politician someday[:D] but well some one who posted erlier made a good point... piston engine aircreafts could not succed in their role of bomber escorts ageainst Jet Interceptors... and if you ask me if i have to chose between Schwable and the Mustang i would pick the Schwable[:D]

[Black Mamba 1942]

Nah, the P-51 would just fly around in tight circles, and wait for the 262 to land and refuel.[;)]

[33Vyper]

Anyone ever done any art for adding Germans?

[Hoplosternum]

ORIGINAL: 33Vyper

Anyone ever done any art for adding Germans?

There is some on Spooky's site I think, or a link I got there. Is it from Elf?

A mod I am planning would have some, due to the 'plot' [:)] I am also interested in the relative merits of the Britsih, French and even Italian designs. Plus the ships [:)] But I am waiting for 1.8 before I start to make it apart from on spreadsheets.

I am therefore interested in how the European aircraft stack up. But in my case I am much more interested in the relative merits of the '42 and '43 designs than the jets and Ta 152s et al. Anyone know how the Bf 109s and earlier Fw 190s performed against the US planes around the torch landings and Tunisia battles?

Unfortunately the thread keeps going off topic [;)] and getting quite heated [X(]

[Fishbed]

Even using one or two smileys (or writing a sort of apologies after) dont change the insulting style of your first post 'hole' fanboy.

How can you even dare to say that someone like Saddam was taking care of the well of his people more than Castro?!
As far as I know, despite militaristic expeditions on remote places like Angola, I never saw Castro getting his country into a 8 years-long war yet with an overall loss of a million deads or maybe more
Nor exposing his country to complete world-wide reaction invading the southern neighbour is "caring about the well being of his people", sorry to say so - Koweit is what it is, but still taking the Iraqi invasion as a legitimate attack because of oil prices would simply be historical revisionism!

Man, is saying "how can you even dare to say..." making so easily an insulting style for a post? Hope you don't beat people in the street in the real life everytime they dare to debate with you so.
Thanks for the "hole fanboy" thing. You're lucky Im not the kind who's looking for moderator's divine intervention - btw, if you have difficulties getting a good psychiatrist in Hungaria for consulting, please give me a call, I may help you to find a good one elsewhere in the Union...[:D][:'(]
Always happy to help a fellow "fanboy" of the same kind...

AJ

[mdiehl]

No, this is not my claim and you know that very well. "or tries to claim I said something I didn't say," is actually your way or corresponding with people.

You are incorrect. I always address only the claims people make, as you well know, which is why you have shifted your position twice now. Each claim you have made in this thread has been demonstrated false.

My claim is that only Russia was/is able to keep ISS alive. As you may know, it isn't enough to send man to ISS - human being needs oxygen, food and water for survival.

STS114 made cargo deliveries to the ISS. Your third-time-revised claim seems to be that the US cannot do so. That is not correct. The US *could* operate the STS under the same conditions as it has for the last 25 years and probably suffer about the same failure rate. The US now does not do so. The reason for that is not owing to lack of expertise (as though all Americans that ever worked on the space program suddenly forgot everything they learned about it). It's down to money and politics.

I am truly delighted that Russia regularly supplies the ISS now. They get American money to do it. It never was cost effective to use the STS as a cargo conveyor, and it is much cheaper to let the Russians do the longshoreman work. It ought to be. They were 6 years behind completing their modules and only then after the US subsidized their cost overruns.

No fligts in 2004, and just one flight (your famous STS-114, which was, by the way several times prolonged. Do i need to mention that this 114 mission were faced with several tehnical problems and that is reason why NASA stopped further flights?) Yes i need to mention that because in your best manner you "forget" to mention this (or you, what is more likely did not know this?)....

Insulating foam. If you knew the history of the STS you'd know the foam recipe was changed about 10 years ago at the behest of radical environmentalists. Not all environmentalists are radicals, but some are. I am pleased that of late no one in NASA seems to care what they think.

So quoting just one fact (mission) to prove that US is capable to resuply ISS is really laughable.

Noting the existence of a 2 year pause in US space planning is sufficient for you to claim that the US knows nothing about space technology? This after a pretty successful previous run of 40 years? While we're at it, tell me again genius, who was the last nation to land an *intact* vehicle on another planet?

but mr.all-knowing-arrogance really piss me every time when i read his posts (that's why i open my ignore list from this moment)...

You're pissed at the wrong man then. You should be most angry with yourself. You say factually unsupported things and get angry when it turns out the reality does not match your claims.

So feel free to continue your pamflets, you will have discussion with your own soon.

Nawp. You'll come back and say something that is not supported by the facts. Again. And I'll still be here to prove you wrong.

It's sad that US spending billions for arnament while NASA can't develop space program due lack of the funds... It seems that Russians will take lead again:

I'd bet on the Chinese rather than Russia or the US as far as manned space flights go. For non-human (robotic) research I suspect the US will remain in the lead for a while. I agree that the US ought to dedicate less money to armaments and more to pure research in general, but at the moment we have a president who has never seen a "defense" project that he did not like.

I'm really curious why you think Von Braun was the "sine qua non" of the US Space Program. His last US design was the Redstone. The US had the lead in solid fuel technology and gyrostabilization before Von Braun came into US hands, and gyrostabilization was the key to self-correcting thrust control. Von Braun's chief contribution was as a project manager. Particularly for the Saturn Program. But the Saturn V was not the rocket that he wanted to build. Von Braun saw only two ways to get to the moon. Direct ascent (one ship lifts off from earth and goes to the moon) and earth orbit rendezvous (one ship detaches a small ship that goes from earth orbit and lands directly on the moon). Lunar orbit rendezvous (the way the US got there) was invented by an American engineer on the Huntsville team. Lunar orbit rendezvous resulted in a rocket that Von Braun in 1960 thought should not be built.

He was the right guy for the job because he was a rocket team project manager. But the US managed some other pretty darn big projects, so I am not at all convinced that he was the ONLY guy who could have done the job.

One last thing. The real technological marvel of the US Moon missions was not the Saturn V rocket. It was the LEM. And Von Braun had nothing to do with that. It was a bunch of really sharp guys at Grumman.

[treespider]

Better get some popcorn before this gets locked up...