• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

What Germany did in WWII Military and Technology wise is Incredible

Luckily for us a lot of ahead of curve military invention by Nazis came so late in the war that they didn't make a lot of difference. For example the revolutionary Type XXI submarines that laid ground for modern submarines (first submarines designed to operate primarily submerged). The Stg. 44 that was first modern assault rifle and Messerschmitt Me 262 that was worlds first jet fighter.
 

Morat

Banned
Man, can you imagine what would have happened if Nazi Germany got the bomb before we did? Those crazy fuckers would have definitely tried to make a Metal Gear.

Luckily for the Allies, the Germans did not get the bomb precisely because they were wasting a huge amount of their resources on these flashy but militarily useless superweapons. Even on a lesser scale, if the Germans had devoted more resources to even U-boats as opposed to battleships earlier we in the UK might well have come far closer to defeat. This is without considering shit like V2 rockets, which killed more slaves during assembly than they caused casualties, and were cripplingly expensive both in money and rare resources.
 
Germany was an economic and scientific powerhouse ever since the country was founded. It's pretty much the reason why Europe got itself into the mess that was WW I, which lead directly into WW II.

Meh. Europe was still weakened by WWI and the great recession, nobody wanted yet another war. Wish they lost earlier.
 
This is a joke, I think? But if not, railway guns have been around since the Civil War.

I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.
 
This is a joke, I think? But if not, railway guns have been around since the Civil War.


Here's a monster US Navy Mk.1 railway gun from WW1.

9VRIaEL.jpg



Lots more here: http://mashable.com/2015/09/26/railway-guns/


Yeah, these things were made obsolete by aircraft. Train mounted were were popular in WW1 as well. Once you had divebombers and strategic bombers capable of seeing what they were hitting with larger bombs and concentration of damage making these things weren't worth it.
 
I've frequently read that the Soviet tanks were actually a far better design. The NAZI tanks were too heavy, over-engineered, and prone to breaking down.

That's correct. From what I remember even French tanks were better at start of war - in 1939 biggest German tanks was Panzer IV with short barreled 75mm gun. Their best anti-tank weapons were 88mm anti-aircraft guns.

Against France and UK they didn't even have air superiority as Spitfire and Hurricane could match Bf109.

All their victories in early years were results of military doctrine (Blitzkrieg, more freedom for lover level officers decision making, combined arms aproach ) and briliant commanders
 

RinsFury

Member
I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.

Yeah, I can't speak to how effective they actually were in combat but some of the more ludicrous designs seem impractical as hell.

On the topic of actual railguns, it seems nazi scientists did in fact research how to build them. Thankfully the ability to actually power one was far beyond their capabilities.


In 1944, during World War II, Joachim Hänsler of Germany's Ordnance Office proposed the first theoretically viable railgun.[14] By late 1944, the theory behind his electric anti-aircraft gun had been worked out sufficiently to allow the Luftwaffe's Flak Command to issue a specification, which demanded a muzzle velocity of 2,000 m/s (6,600 ft/s) and a projectile containing 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) of explosive. The guns were to be mounted in batteries of six firing twelve rounds per minute, and it was to fit existing 12.8 cm FlaK 40 mounts. It was never built. When details were discovered after the war it aroused much interest and a more detailed study was done, culminating with a 1947 report which concluded that it was theoretically feasible, but that each gun would need enough power to illuminate half of Chicago.[13]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
 
Most countries had not prepared for war the way Germany had and Germany invaded many neutral countries with no declaration of war. France and Britain also had vast swathes of land to defend across the world. Heck wasn't the BEF only 300,000 strong?
Russia helped carve up eastern Europe and German had many allies and sympathisers too.
 

reckless

Member
Luckily for us a lot of ahead of curve military invention by Nazis came so late in the war that they didn't make a lot of difference. For example the revolutionary Type XXI submarines that laid ground for modern submarines (first submarines designed to operate primarily submerged). The Stg. 44 that was first modern assault rifle and Messerschmitt Me 262 that was worlds first jet fighter.

So more submarines that would have been sunk like the rest.

Small arms don't win wars.

Pictured Allied jet fighters that don't kill most of their pilots which is a lot more then the Nazis could say.
Meteor
300px-Gloster_Meteor_F.4_VT340_Fairey_Ringway_21.07.55_edited-2.jpg

P80
300px-P80-1_300.jpg
 

AJLma

Member
The scientists who served the regime weren't nazis for the most part, and were educated before the nazis came to power.

The more you know.

Not sure what's worse, a Nazi, or the guy who gives a Nazi a 200 meter cannon.
 

lazygecko

Member

They had magnetic tape before anyone else. They used them to broadcast propaganda and music 24/7 throughout Europe. Nobody ever figured out why they were broadcasting Wagner at unprecedented sound quality in the middle of the night, figuring they must have orchestras performing live or something, cause it would be obvious if they had been using vinyl records. It was only after Germany surrendered that a curious sound engineer relinquished one of these from a bunker and brought it back to the US and changed the music industry.
 

Violet_0

Banned
I learned the other day that they didn't have blood bags. They actually required someone to sit down and transfer their own blood to the wounded on the battlefield. That's kind of a big deal. The number of combatants bleeding out rose dramatically as guns became more advanced
 
I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.

Not only did you need a rail, you needed two side by side

396772ee95aca2c4ed09ade2aab646a0--schwerer-gustav-railway-gun.jpg


It was impressive, but ultimately worthless.

Image of the round it fired:

8d5c0739d52e7f71bd9f0956457c2ffd--schwerer-gustav-shells.jpg
 
I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.

They were supposed to be used against the french Maginot Line fortifications, but construction took until 1941. The only actual use they got was in the Siege of Sevastopol.

The only scenario guns like that where ever useful for was attacking heavy fortifications from outside the range of enemy artillery. They couldn't even rotate the barrel, only levitate it up and down, so the tracks had to be build so it would point to the target.
 
So more submarines that would have been sunk like the rest.

Small arms don't win wars.

Pictured Allied jet fighters that don't kill most of their pilots which is a lot more then the Nazis could say.
Meteor
300px-Gloster_Meteor_F.4_VT340_Fairey_Ringway_21.07.55_edited-2.jpg

P80
300px-P80-1_300.jpg

Well I don't mean Germans would have won the war. They lost it the day Operation Barbarossa started no matter what. But if they had gotten their ahead of curve weapons in practical use earlier there would have been even more casualties.
 

Prez

Member
How do you think firefighters know how long people can survive in a room full of smoke from a fire? Not from animal testings, I can tell you that.

Proof? Can't fin anything about that. If true, that's what tens of thousands of horrible deaths lead to?

The only other useful information I could find was hypothermia research. So much medical progress.

It was all still worthless.
 
I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.
Well, you already had to built rail to get anywhere with tanks and such. That stuff was not driven into the front, you used or built a rail network over the land you conquered. So the idea to throw large artillery on it on your way to a city or fort wasn't so ridiculous.
 

RinsFury

Member
Proof? Can't fin anything about that. If true, that's what tens of thousands of horrible deaths lead to?

The only other useful information I could find was hypothermia research. So much medical progress.

It was all still worthless.

The 'research' conducted by Mengele and other insane nazi doctors is the kind of stuff that makes The Human Centipede seem almost tame by comparison. I had trouble sleeping for a long time after reading about the vivisections and other horror experiments they performed, it was like they granted the worlds worst serial killers medical licenses and let them go to town. That Japanese were just as evil in this regard.
 

Keasar

Member
I can't believe people built these things. They're ridiculously impractical. What good is a gun that is confined to a track? It's not going to help against infantry or armor who are mobile and can avoid going near the track, it's not going to help against fortifications unless they're along the rail line, and it's really not that hard to destroy rail lines and make it so you can't move the thing anymore... I guess before planes people would grasp on to anything as the future of warfare.

Yeah, I can't speak to how effective they actually were in combat but some of the more ludicrous designs seem impractical as hell.

The thought is sound, railways does let you bring along much larger artillery that would otherwise be confined to seaborne vessels like Battleships. Smaller ones worked on regular railway tracks. The Schwerer however had a problem with that it required a custom built track, so they had to build it to where the gun was going to be used to move it.

It had to be protected by two AA flak battalions because if the enemy realized where it was, they could easily send airplanes to shoot at it (not a hard target to hit).

As for its effectiveness, the gun was barely used except against forts and...well...
"Hans."
"Yes?"
"See that fort?"
"Yes."
"I don't want it to be there."
"Understood."
The actual shells were devastating as hell. They could penetrate meters of bedrock and shatter the walls and bunkers of forts. A crater of one shell could be as deep as 12 meters. However, the problem was that it took roughly 45 minutes to reload the cannon and you could only fire 12 a day or risk overheating and destroy the barrel. It was stupidly powerful was also stupidly inconvenient, the manpower required was simply too high (250 to man the gun, 2500 to lay the tracks and 2 Flak battalions to protect it).
 
I've frequently read that the Soviet tanks were actually a far better design. The NAZI tanks were too heavy, over-engineered, and prone to breaking down.

Their planes were worse. Even today, people who own WWII german warbirds have fits trying to get parts because of how finely tuned they have to be.
 

Respect

Member
Yes, there were some impressive military advancements by Germans during WWII. V2 rocket, first jet engine planes, and the type XXI uboat, among others.

I think the German war machine would have been more dangerous. The way I understood it was that Hitler wanted to wait until the early 1940s to start his war in Europe, but he pushed the envelope too much when he invaded Poland. There was supposedly an agreement with Mussolini to not start the war until 1943 so they could build up their military forces. With so much of Germany's resources invested in military R&D and another 3-4 more years of research could have made their war machine even more terrifying.
 
They had magnetic tape before anyone else. They used them to broadcast propaganda and music 24/7 throughout Europe. Nobody ever figured out why they were broadcasting Wagner at unprecedented sound quality in the middle of the night, figuring they must have orchestras performing live or something, cause it would be obvious if they had been using vinyl records. It was only after Germany surrendered that a curious sound engineer relinquished one of these from a bunker and brought it back to the US and changed the music industry.

Seriously? I never heard of this, amazing.
 

Kyzer

Banned
Germany was not fighting by itself OP

But yeah they pulled a well oiled war economy right out of their ass
 
Strange how people credit German tanks when they were influenced by the superior Soviet tanks from the start of the war.

Because once something becomes generally accepted as true - in this case that German armor was somehow head and shoulders above the rest and was only taken down by hordes of inferior Russian and American tanks, for example - it's hard to change minds.

The French had really good tanks too, but they were horribly misused - almost entirely as infantry support instead of massing them against German armor (plus they had various technical deficiencies that weren't addressed due to their value not being fully recognized)

Same with German military successes - they're often times attributed to some general "German superiority/awesomeness" when the reality was much more complicated (or completely different). The aforementioned misuse of tanks, political infighting (especially between Reynaud and Gamelin), major strategic blunders (and lack of strategic vision) by French high command, loss of Belgium's formal alliance, etc. all played major roles in the defeat of France, for example, but are not talked about all that much. That and France, in general, simply wasn't as powerful as people thought at the time (for those and other reasons).
 
Proof? Can't fin anything about that. If true, that's what tens of thousands of horrible deaths lead to?

My fire-fighting trainer told me that. The Nazis performed inhumane medical experiments on prisoners of concentration camps (I'm sure you will be able to find something about that). Some of the results derived from those - especially on how long people from all age groups and genders can survive in certain conditions (heat, cold, under water) or how often you can breath in a room full of smoke before collapsing - have found their way into military and fire-fighting training, and (as I suppose) training of medical staff as well. It's obvious that no one's proud that the likes of Dr. Mengele and the suffering of thousands had anything to do with it.

But, for the love of god, don't get me wrong on this one, I am not defending this shit in any way!
 

reckless

Member
Yes, there were some impressive military advancements by Germans during WWII. V2 rocket, first jet engine planes, and the type XXI uboat, among others.

I think the German war machine would have been more dangerous. The way I understood it was that Hitler wanted to wait until the early 1940s to start his war in Europe, but he pushed the envelope too much when he invaded Poland. There was supposedly an agreement with Mussolini to not start the war until 1943 so they could build up their military forces. With so much of Germany's resources invested in military R&D and another 3-4 more years of research could have made their war machine even more terrifying.

So a bunch of half-baked ideas that cost huge amounts of money, rare resources they didn't have and were plagued with reliability problems.

Specifically talking about the V-1/ V-2
The German V-weapons (V-1 and V-2) cost the equivalent of around USD $40 billion (2015 dollars), which was 50 percent more than the Manhattan Project that produced the atomic bomb.[12]:178 6,048 V-2s were built, at a cost of approximately 100,000 Reichsmarks (GB£2,370,000 (2011)) each; 3,225 were launched.

The attacks from V2s resulted in the deaths of an estimated 9,000 civilians and military personnel, and a further 12,000 forced laborers and concentration camp prisoners died as a result of their forced participation in the production of the weapons.

Good investment.

The longer they waited to more the Allies could have prepared too, which would have almost certainly meant a quicker allied victory as their economies dwarfed the Axis.
 
Yes, there were some impressive military advancements by Germans during WWII. V2 rocket, first jet engine planes, and the type XXI uboat, among others.

I think the German war machine would have been more dangerous. The way I understood it was that Hitler wanted to wait until the early 1940s to start his war in Europe, but he pushed the envelope too much when he invaded Poland. There was supposedly an agreement with Mussolini to not start the war until 1943 so they could build up their military forces. With so much of Germany's resources invested in military R&D and another 3-4 more years of research could have made their war machine even more terrifying.

If they had waited years longer they would had never had the success they had against Soviets during the early phases of operation Barbarossa. If anything even earlier attack would have been preferable if just possible. Soviet military was still recovering from the purges of Stalin and modernization was still unfinished.
 

Prez

Member
My fire-fighting trainer told me that. The Nazis performed inhumane medical experiments on prisoners of concentration camps (I'm sure you will be able to find something about that). Some of the results derived from those - especially on how long people from all age groups and genders can survive in certain conditions (heat, cold, under water) or how often you can breath in a room full of smoke before collapsing - have found their way into military and fire-fighting training, and (as I suppose) training of medical staff as well. It's obvious that no one's proud that the likes of Dr. Mengele and the suffering of thousands had anything to do with it.

But, for the love of god, don't get me wrong on this one, I am not defending this shit in any way!

Of course you're not defending anything, I know that. I'm jus a bit sceptical about your smoke claim since google doesn't bring up any results.
 

RinsFury

Member
It's worth noting that the French actually had the biggest tank of WW2, but it ultimately wasn't very useful. Lots of videos of it crushing walls and houses, but the slow speed (15km/h), needing a crew of 12-13 people, and tall profile took it out of the war fairly quickly. Looks like it would have had enormous blind spots as well.


The Char 2C

xR11HV6.jpg
 

Respect

Member
So a bunch of half-baked ideas that cost huge amounts of money, rare resources they didn't have and were plagued with reliability problems.

Specifically talking about the V-1/ V-2


Good investment.

The longer they waited to more the Allies could have prepared too, which would have almost certainly meant a quicker allied victory as their economies dwarfed the Axis.

The difference being, majority of the allies weren't investing for war like Germany was at the time. France has settled in feeling confident in the Maginot line. Britain's investment was in air superiority assuming that France would bear the potential burden of the ground war with Germany. The US military was tiny and wanted no part of European wars after world war I.

Russia was investing in building up their armed forces though and that seemed to be Stalin's' play with the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, I doubt the campaign in Russia would have been as successful if they were given more time. Even though Stalin had just purged his leaderships, it would have made for a bloodier conflict on the eastern front.

Also in regard to the V2 program, by the the program started to bear fruit, Hitler had stopped listening to his military commanders and made most of the decisions himself which hampered alot of the innovation going forward they would have made without his constant meddling. And the advancement of the V2's success lead to the space age.
 
Yeah why were their aesthetics so much better than other militaries? I'm assuming something to do with appearing very neat and imposing and having lots of iconography being a core part of fascism rather than them just happening to spend effort to be extra stylish?
I think you hit the nail on the head. Nazism wasn't just about a military force, it was about trying to impose an entirely new culture and set of ideals.

Because once something becomes generally accepted as true - in this case that German armor was somehow head and shoulders above the rest and was only taken down by hordes of inferior Russian and American tanks, for example - it's hard to change minds.

Yeah, I've noticed when people talk about WWII tanks (and military equipment in particular) they treat it like a game of Top Trumps and say things like "the Tiger had the strongest gun and armour so it's the best" This ignores many important questions like: How easy/quick was it to manufacture? How much did it cost in resources? How reliable was it in field conditions? How easy was it to operate? What sort of logistical support did it require?
The later Nazi tanks were great on paper, but that's it.

Anyway, here's my submission for "cool Nazi tech"
vampyr.jpg

An infra red scope aka, the "Vampyr"
 
Didn't USA end up pocketing those German scientist and engineers after the war? If I am not mistake of they heavily contributed to NASA 's space program back then among other things.
 

emag

Member
The 'research' conducted by Mengele and other insane nazi doctors is the kind of stuff that makes The Human Centipede seem almost tame by comparison. I had trouble sleeping for a long time after reading about the vivisections and other horror experiments they performed, it was like they granted the worlds worst serial killers medical licenses and let them go to town. That Japanese were just as evil in this regard.

"Insane"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States

Just a selection:

Throughout the 1840s, J. Marion Sims, who is often referred to as "the father of gynecology", performed surgical experiments on enslaved African women, without anaesthesia. The women—one of whom was operated on 30 times—eventually died from infections resulting from the experiments. In order to test one of his theories about the causes of trismus in infants, Sims performed experiments where he used a shoemaker's awl to move around the skull bones of the babies of enslaved women.

From 1913 to 1951, Dr. Leo Stanley, chief surgeon at the San Quentin Prison, performed a wide variety of experiments on hundreds of prisoners at San Quentin. Many of the experiments involved testicular implants, where Stanley would take the testicles out of executed prisoners and surgically implant them into living prisoners. In other experiments, he attempted to implant the testicles of rams, goats, and boars into living prisoners. Stanley also performed various eugenics experiments, and forced sterilizations on San Quentin prisoners.

The Tuskegee syphilis experiment was a clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama, by the U.S. Public Health Service. In the experiment, 399 impoverished black males who had syphilis were offered "treatment" by the researchers, who did not tell the test subjects that they had syphilis and did not give them treatment for the disease, but rather just studied them to chart the progress of the disease. By 1947, penicillin became available as treatment, but those running the study prevented study participants from receiving treatment elsewhere, lying to them about their true condition, so that they could observe the effects of syphilis on the human body. By the end of the study in 1972, only 74 of the test subjects were alive. 28 of the original 399 men had died of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children were born with congenital syphilis. The study was not shut down until 1972, when its existence was leaked to the press, forcing the researchers to stop in the face of a public outcry.

In a 1946 to 1948 study in Guatemala, U.S. researchers used prostitutes to infect prison inmates, insane asylum patients, and Guatemalan soldiers with syphilis and other sexually transmitted diseases, in order to test the effectiveness of penicillin in treating the STDs. They later tried infecting people with "direct inoculations made from syphilis bacteria poured into the men's penises and on forearms and faces that were slightly abraded . . . or in a few cases through spinal punctures". Approximately 700 people were infected as part of the study (including orphan children). The study was sponsored by the Public Health Service, the National Institutes of Health and the Pan American Health Sanitary Bureau (now the World Health Organization's Pan American Health Organization) and the Guatemalan government.

In 1963, 22 elderly patients at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn, New York were injected with live cancer cells by Chester M. Southam, who in 1952 had done the same to prisoners at the Ohio State Prison, in order to "discover the secret of how healthy bodies fight the invasion of malignant cells". The administration of the hospital attempted to cover the study up, but the New York medical licensing board ultimately placed Southam on probation for one year. Two years later, the American Cancer Society elected him as their Vice President.

From approximately 1951 to 1974, the Holmesburg Prison in Pennsylvania was the site of extensive dermatological research operations, using prisoners as subjects. Led by Dr. Albert M. Kligman of the University of Pennsylvania, the studies were performed on behalf of Dow Chemical Company, the U.S. Army, and Johnson & Johnson. In one of the studies, for which Dow Chemical paid Kligman $10,000, Kligman injected dioxin — a highly toxic, carcinogenic compound found in Agent Orange, which Dow was manufacturing for use in Vietnam at the time — into 70 prisoners (most of them black). The prisoners developed severe lesions which went untreated for seven months. Dow Chemical wanted to study the health effects of dioxin and other herbicides, and how they affect human skin, because workers at their chemical plants were developing chloracne.

In 1957, with funding from a CIA front organization, Donald Ewen Cameron of the Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal, Canada began MKULTRA Subproject 68. His experiments were designed to first "depattern" individuals, erasing their minds and memories—reducing them to the mental level of an infant—and then to "rebuild" their personality in a manner of his choosing. To achieve this, Cameron placed patients under his "care" into drug-induced comas for up to 88 days, and applied numerous high voltage electric shocks to them over the course of weeks or months, often administering up to 360 shocks per person. He would then perform what he called "psychic driving" experiments on the subjects, where he would repetitively play recorded statements, such as "You are a good wife and mother and people enjoy your company", through speakers he had implanted into blacked-out football helmets that he bound to the heads of the test subjects (for sensory deprivation purposes). The patients could do nothing but listen to these messages, played for 16–20 hours a day, for weeks at a time. In one case, Cameron forced a person to listen to a message non-stop for 101 days. Using CIA funding, Cameron converted the horse stables behind Allan Memorial into an elaborate isolation and sensory deprivation chamber where he kept patients locked in for weeks at a time. Cameron also induced insulin comas in his subjects by giving them large injections of insulin, twice a day, for up to two months at a time. Several of the children who Cameron experimented on were sexually abused, in at least one case by several men. One of the children was filmed numerous times performing sexual acts with high-ranking federal government officials, in a scheme set up by Cameron and other MKULTRA researchers, to blackmail the officials to ensure further funding for the experiments.

From 1964 to 1968, the U.S. Army paid $386,486 to professors Albert Kligman and Herbert W. Copelan to perform experiments with mind-altering drugs on 320 inmates of Holmesburg Prison. The goal of the study was to determine the minimum effective dose of each drug needed to disable 50 percent of any given population. Kligman and Copelan initially claimed that they were unaware of any long-term health effects the drugs could have on prisoners; however, documents later revealed that this was not the case.

Medical professionals gathered and collected data on the CIA's use of torture techniques on detainees during the 21st century war on terror, in order to refine those techniques, and "to provide legal cover for torture, as well as to help justify and shape future procedures and policies", according to a 2010 report by Physicians for Human Rights. The report stated that: "Research and medical experimentation on detainees was used to measure the effects of large-volume waterboarding and adjust the procedure according to the results." As a result of the waterboarding experiments, doctors recommended adding saline to the water "to prevent putting detainees in a coma or killing them through over-ingestion of large amounts of plain water." Sleep deprivation tests were performed on over a dozen prisoners, in 48-, 96- and 180-hour increments. Doctors also collected data intended to help them judge the emotional and physical effects of the techniques so as to "calibrate the level of pain experienced by detainees during interrogation" and to determine if using certain types of techniques would increase a subject's "susceptibility to severe pain."
 

Morat

Banned
Didn't USA end up pocketing those German scientist and engineers after the war? If I am not mistake of they heavily contributed to NASA 's space program back then among other things.

Operation Paperclip

Edit - damn you and your ninja skills Respect.
 

Akronis

Member
It's worth noting that the French actually had the biggest tank of WW2, but it ultimately wasn't very useful. Lots of videos of it crushing walls and houses, but the slow speed (15km/h), needing a crew of 12-13 people, and tall profile took it out of the war fairly quickly. Looks like it would have had enormous blind spots as well.


The Char 2C

xR11HV6.jpg

Yea the bigger is better mentality was quickly disproven. German tank designs like the Maus were dumb as shit.

Mass produced T-34s and M4 Shermans were the right way to go during WW2.
 

reckless

Member
The difference being, majority of the allies weren't investing for war like Germany was at the time. France has settled in feeling confident in the Maginot line. Britain's investment was in air superiority assuming that France would bear the potential burden of the ground war with Germany. The US military was tiny and wanted no part of European wars after world war I.

Russia was investing in building up their armed forces though and that seemed to be Stalin's' play with the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, I doubt the campaign in Russia would have been as successful if they were given more time. Even though Stalin had just purged his leaderships, it would have made for a bloodier conflict on the eastern front.

Also in regard to the V2 program, by the the program started to bear fruit, Hitler had stopped listening to his military commanders and made most of the decisions himself which hampered alot of the innovation going forward they would have made without his constant meddling. And the advancement of the V2's success lead to the space age.

A more built up, modernized and recovered from the purges USSR would be enough for it to be a worse scenario for Germany then it was in real life. Sealion would never work, the U.S would still be the industrial powerhouse it was and the USSR would be much more prepared.

Hell with 3 or 4 extra years France might have actually been able to modernize some more like actually having radios in tanks which would have been pretty useful.

Space age doesn't help when your in the middle of a war, the V1/V2 was a huge waste of resources, like all of the Nazi's wunderwaffes.
 
I think it's easy to overlook how huge it was that France fell so rapidly. I mean these two European powers had been squabbling for centuries and France was the dominant land power in Europe for a very long time. Bowled over I think is a good term for it. pretty incredible military feat that has, maybe undeservedly, shamed France ever since.
 

KingV

Member
We should talk about medical advancements we have to thank the nazis for, that would be a fun discussion.

A lot of what we know about some diseases and radiation effects on the human body is due to ethically immoral research from the Nazis and Japanese armies. And frankly some US agencies as well.
 
Top Bottom