![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Phil J wrote:
Germany's use of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every other country on the planet at that time. Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about the equipment and tactics of the era.) Refs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...n_World_War_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 28, 1:18*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Phil J wrote: Germany's use of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every other country on the planet at that time. Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about the equipment and tactics of the era.) Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...ki/Panzerblitz Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. But their combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive- bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat. Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the FW-190. Phil |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Phil J" wrote in message ... Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. But their combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive- bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat. Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the FW-190. The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the scene. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 28, 3:29*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote: "Phil J" wrote in message ... Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. *But their combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive- bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat. Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the FW-190. The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the scene. You're right. I was thinking it was introduced earlier, but it didn't come along till 1941. One of the more surprising (to me) pieces of technology developed by the Germans was the radio-controlled glide bomb used against shipping. They were dropped from a bomber and flown into the target by radio control. They also had radar-guided glide bombs, and near the end of the war they were even working on a television-guided bomb, but it was not perfected. They weren't a factor in the war, but I think some of the most amazing stuff designed in World War II was the asymmetrical aircraft by Blohm and Voss. Definitely "outside of the box" thinking. Phil |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message ... The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the scene. They'd have probably just used them for strafing and busting up formations, wouldn't they? They couldn't have hung long in a turn fight with Spitfires. As I understood it, they sort of took the bull-in-a-china-cabinet approach to things. My grandfather's bombardier recalled slugging it out with one attacking them head-on, watching pieces off the FW's cowl fly off and seeing an exposed piston working as the plexiglass of the B-17 exploded all around him. (They crashed in Sampigny, France.) -c |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 28, 2:18 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Phil J wrote: Germany's use of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every other country on the planet at that time. Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about the equipment and tactics of the era.) Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...ki/Panzerblitz Not exactly. The T-34 was produced en masse, had a weak main gun, and had very little room inside for the crew. German tanks were better made and better gunned. But -- all Wermacht maintenance was depot level -- throw a rod? Send the whole tank back to the fatherland by rail. The US forward deployed maintenance philosophy helped defeat the far superior German armor. They would blast four of our tanks -- the next day three would reappear. The Soviet maintenance and refit was not as efficient, but the sheer numbers of T-34s helped swing the tide. The main innovation that German armored units employed that helped facilitate blitzkrieg was small unit communications (radios). The French had better (on paper) tanks then the PKZW Mk IV, but the French employed their tanks as infantry support while the Germans used penetrate and exploit tactics. The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams. Now *that's* a tank. Dan (retired US Army Armor Officer) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:18 pm, Jim Logajan wrote: Phil J wrote: Germany's use of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every other country on the planet at that time. Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about the equipment and tactics of the era.) Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...ki/Panzerblitz Not exactly. The T-34 was produced en masse, had a weak main gun, and had very little room inside for the crew. German tanks were better made and better gunned. But -- all Wermacht maintenance was depot level -- throw a rod? Send the whole tank back to the fatherland by rail. The US forward deployed maintenance philosophy helped defeat the far superior German armor. They would blast four of our tanks -- the next day three would reappear. The Soviet maintenance and refit was not as efficient, but the sheer numbers of T-34s helped swing the tide. The main innovation that German armored units employed that helped facilitate blitzkrieg was small unit communications (radios). The French had better (on paper) tanks then the PKZW Mk IV, but the French employed their tanks as infantry support while the Germans used penetrate and exploit tactics. The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams. Now *that's* a tank. Too bad there will be no more tank battles... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Stewart wrote:
Too bad there will be no more tank battles... Now that's wishful thinking. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 5, 5:10 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams. Now *that's* a tank. Too bad there will be no more tank battles... Don't be so sure. While it's unlikely we will see mass tank battles such as Kursk, the Tank will continue to dominate the battlefield. When I was in OCS playing infantry grunt we were assaulted by a platoon of tanks. Everyone knew it was "war games", but let me tell you - nothing, but nothing gets the pucker up like 63 tons rolling at you at 50 MPH, main gun and coax pointing in your direction. At that moment, my choice of branch was clear -- armor. Though I completed my 21 years as an infantry Company Commander, and learn to respect the havoc wreaked by one grunt and a LAW, I think reports of the tank's demise are greatly exaggerated. Dan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Off-topic, but in need of help | Alan Erskine | Aviation Photos | 20 | January 5th 07 06:21 AM |
Off-topic, but in need of help | dennis | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 4th 07 10:40 PM |
Almost on topic... | Richard Lamb | Home Built | 22 | January 30th 06 06:55 PM |
French but on topic... | ArVa | Military Aviation | 2 | April 16th 04 01:40 AM |
off topic | Randall Robertson | Simulators | 0 | January 2nd 04 01:29 PM |