2 Likes
German gear is overrated. It spoils was often introduced too quickly and out of necessity, not an idea. All these “super guns” were introduced by the Germans because drowning people catch razors.
World War 2 movies are cool. but no one will show the truth that the Americans mostly in Normandy fought the Germans who used captured French tanks, or that the Americans and the British had to fight the Regular Army of Vichy France.
Great movies like Paton where paton tanks play the role of tigers. Where the Germans produced 1,355 tigers, and the Russian army, in its reports, destroyed hundreds of them every day.
In the games, no one will show the truth that the PzKpfw V Panther was the worst tank of the Second World War. The worst technically, statistically the most broken tank of all World War II tanks. It was supposed to be a medium tank and it came out heavy because it weighed 45t. This dego was complicated and expensive to manufacture and as complicated to repair as the tiger. the transmission system in the tiger or panther was a watchmaker’s wet dream.
Let’s not forget about firearms. 1/3 of German small arms were captured weapons. Their own constructions were also often failures. The FG42, for example, was the most complex in terms of design and construction, expensive to manufacture and due to being fed with a rifle cartridge that was defective and sensitive to dirt.
The Germans had a mania and, in fact, still have complications in the production of their own equipment to this day.
And their best constructions, which could be produced cheaply and massively, stand in the shadow appreciated only by history researchers and daredevil military maniacs, not pathological lovers who believe in German UFOs and the power of the Third Reich, where this power was created by the countries that defeated the Third Reich.
Poland in 1939 was a weak opponent attacked by two super strong states. France had her hand in the potty. Denmark and Norway were such quick actions. Then the stagnation in 1942 and from 1943 the Germans were on the defensive and it turned out that their equipment was junk, and the native industry was inefficient and it was behind it that the Allies razed the factories to the ground.
Not to mention the Italian Army, which may be brave, but with equipment designed for the previous war.
And of course Japan, which has taken a hoe to the sun.
3 Likes
Your description is pretty much on par with a T-34 except the Russian tin can was cheaper and even worse quality-wise.
Best ones in the entire war/ good opponents with Allied stuff. Best machine guns to the point its de facto still used until today, the first actual mass-produced assault rifle, managed to produce a far better weapon out of the Bazooka, the Flak 8,8, one of the most successful AA artillery guns in history…
Nah its just crap.
What does it say about their quality?
What the heck are you saying?
The FG42 was basically a lighter BAR and successful at its role. But oh no, they didn’t intend to mass produce a weapon that was designed for paratroopers. Throw it away.
Which overall didnt really affect its role, effectiveness and influence huh.
Of course nothing compares to the superior battle rifles of the Motherland such as the AVS, which was so good, the Soviets didnt allow their troops to use it in full auto, was way more unreliable and ditched it after the Winter War, or the AVT aka the AVs 2.0. Or the “first assault rifle”, which relied on foreign ammo and was not an economic weapon as well.
But funny not to mention literally any other weapon but stick with one gun and bitch about it because a specialist weapon isn’t suited for mass production and because of some drawbacks without mentioning its strengths.
Really, at least use a bad gun such as the Gewehr 41.
As any country. Wanan talk about British or heck even glorious Soviet manias and complications?
Which they mostly did but only a certain other country they didnt had main tanks which required a hammer to handle the suspension or SMGs which could only use the two magazines which came from the same workbench.
Last time I checked that most T-34s who died in combat and didn’t die struggling to reach the front where killed by Panzer IIIs, which technically shouldn’t stand a chance against glorious Soviet T34s.
Well, that and the fact that the casualty rates were in favor of the Germans despite the so-called shitty stuff the Jerries had.
5 Likes
Your clinging is misplaced. every country did crap.
If German equipment was really so great, why did they lose the war?
The Germans did not have time to remove technical faults, so their equipment was faulty.
And they were not the first in many weapons because the Meteor was made before the Me262, but the British knew that it was not a revolutionary weapon. The Germans introduced the Me262, as I wrote, the drowning man grabs the razor.
The Germans were the first to introduce the MKb42 intermediate cartridge rifle into use. The Germans were the first to use rocket artillery in World War II, but the Chinese were the first in history to use it. They were the only ones with ballistic missiles. The MG42 is still used today under the name MG3, that’s true, but somehow I don’t see anyone still using panthers. PzIV was still used by Syria until the 70s, and Stg44 Yugoslavia produced until the 70s, which is why so many of these weapons are now in Ukraine.
As for the use of captured equipment, it is not because the equipment was good, but because the Germans did not have their own and had an inefficient industry due to too complicated production processes, and two, because they are a Central European country and it was easy to cut off them from deficit resources.
The myth of the mighty Third Reich was really created mainly by the Americans thanks to Hollywood and Soviet propaganda. Let me give you an example, there is a movie from the times of the Soviet Union where Tito’s partisans are fighting the German occupiers and in this movie the partisans are being attacked by tiger tanks, and there were no fronts. To fight the Yugoslav partisans, the Germans sent armored units equipped with French H35 and R35 tanks.
As for the T34, it shows the state of Soviet industry. The Russians were unable to produce anything better until 1943. The more so that the Leningrad plants where heavy tanks were produced did not work. The T70 tank was needed for now to fill the gap in the lack of tanks because they were faster to produce than the t34. And then, on the T70 chassis, the su76 self-propelled guns were used until the end of the war.
In general, the weapons produced in the Soviet Union are a tragic and comic subject. Because you could have two of the same submachine guns or machine guns from two different factories and you couldn’t replace them with parts because the barrel from it didn’t fit, or the magazines for the PPSz-41 had the serial numbers of the weapon stamped and you couldn’t take the magazine from your friend because you couldn’t fit. it happened that the ammunition of the same caliber did not fit the guns from one factory, and from another did.
1 Like
Because they had a madman as their leader (hitler) that killed all their effective generals and they were fighting like 3 different super powers and they where fighting like four different fronts on there own and exhausted there resources
5 Likes
the power of German equipment is a myth. If instead of all these panthers and tigers they produced Stugas, maybe they would have armored forces capable of fighting on two fronts.
Because StugIII was a very successful construction.
They made many stugs. If I remember correctly, I think it was the third most produced tank during World War II (could be wrong) they were fighting more than two fronts at the point it became clear that Germany would not win. There was nothing they could’ve done Hitler’s poor leader ship was the biggest factor in Germany’s defeat.
1 Like
Makes entire post against Germany because they mostly made crap.
Maybe excluding the US, nearly all WW2 nations had industry-related issues, most notably the Germans late-war and the Soviets until the end of 43/44. (Imo) The issue of the Germans doesn’t necessary rely on the industry itself, but rather that they overstretched their capabilities with tanks and other crap such as the V1 or V2 which wasn’t able for the industry to cope with except keep decreasing the quality (control) to the point it made their weirdo steampunk tanks just even worse together with their questionable supply strategies, especially for the Luftwaffe.
I dont know. Why did the US/ West lose against a bunch of rice farmers armed with WW2 weapons and Chinese AK47 rip-offs living in caves and no air superiority?
Yeah I guess because worse gear. Quite simple huh.
So did the Soviets in early and mid-stage but to way greater extent. And in regards to the Tiger I, it isnt completely true as later one, the main issues relied on supply and maintenance issues and not because it insta died te second it rolled from the factory.
Yeah, try to fight a M1 Abarahm or even a CW tank with a tank from WW2 and afterward, you may get why there is a difference between a gun and a tank.
I didnt doubt the reliability of the Panther overall, just finding it huh that the Panther is on a similar level as the T-34 and I don’t know if this is the right way to bitch about German engineering and declare it garbage if the Panther is basically a heavier T-34 but not the backbone of the German Army for most of the time unlike the T-34.
Especially just ranting about one tank like they never built the III, IV or the StuG.
So I dont know how this fits in with bitching about German weapons if this is about the German industry/supplement. Its like saying that the reason why British guns suck is because they relied much on foreign supply.
I dont know about legacies but as long as you dont embrace commies, take Fury literal or love to dress up with Grandgrandpas old SA uniform… or simply just wanted to watch a action movie while dont care about the subject apart from shootings I doubt seeing Tigers in Fury or so will make you think that German stuff (or Soviet/ American whatever) is alien, at least nowadays. Because this will require a lack to read/ care.
4 Likes
For original thread:
One of my favorite books that I got a while ago is “Brave Men” written by Ernie Pyle, and is an original copy from 1944.
1 Like
There is a cool thing with this movie because the Furia tank is the M4A3E8. By 1945, the Tiger was obsolete, and the M4A3E8 penetrated its frontal armor without any problems at long range.
In Vietnam or Afghanistan, the Americans lost for political reasons, rather than for military reasons. It’s because of liberalism and frontline reporters and drugged flower children. In general, the morale of the soldiers was worse every year, mainly due to public opinion, and the enemy strengthened his military and political position.
And, of course, partisan. The partisan is a tough enemy. The Germans themselves had to engage large forces in the rear troops because the guerrillas attacked the supply lines.
Speaking of supplies, while almost all German troops were motorized, logistics was still based on horse-drawn carts.
The Tiger aged quickly, and the Tiger II was dire, as confirmed by the reports of the crews themselves. Pantera never got rid of gearbox problems. Jagdtiger was also tragic. The commanders accused the designers of creating a dud, and the designers claimed that tankers are not able to appreciate such a perfect machine. Ferdinands that had hybrid engines.
The Germans introduced too many novelties to the front, but they did it because of the poor situation in which they found themselves.
As for the US, their army at the beginning of the war consisted of 300,000 soldiers. They had such a problem that when Japan attacked the US, the marines were equipped with weapons from the civilian market, hence such flowers as Reising or hastily produced M3s that were more often seen in the hands of American soldiers than M1 thompson.
Throughout the existence of the Third Reich, Germany produced 57,000 tanks of various types. The rest of the tanks were French, Polish, Russian and Allied trophies.
The Russians of the T-34 and T-34-85 alone produced 57,000.
And the Americans M4 49,000 in all versions.
And the watercolor painter himself was not a bad commander. His advisers and favorites were a mistake.
The Panther was considered a medium tank only by the Germans because it was designed as a medium tank, the rest considered the Panther a heavy tank. And what they came up with is what we would call a main battle tank today. But it turned out like you said. So shitty.
The Panetra was supposed to have interchangeable parts with the PzIII, and that was the main problem because the PzIII’s transmission mechanisms couldn’t handle the weight of the vehicle. In addition, the vehicle had an engine that was not adapted to the weight, which made the Panther accelerate for a long time, just like the Tgrys II. Panther crew had dire situational awareness, complicated to repair, field repairs were almost impossible. Each time the tank had to be towed to a field workshop because the crew was unable to fix the faults themselves.
Here’s a quote from the book “Armoured Catastrophe”.
“The Panzer-Kampfwagen V Panther made its debut on the battlefield in 1943. Theoretically, it had everything to instill fear and panic in the ranks of the enemy: considerable firepower, strong armor, high speed. The worst thing for the Wehrmacht was that this underdeveloped design caused a gigantic equipment crisis for the Panzertruppen and contributed to a drastic shortage of tanks in the panzer divisions. According to German statistics, in 1943 the Panther was technically the worst armored fighting vehicle of the Wehrmacht.”
Can’t argue with that
He was a good political leader but he never had the required military leadership skill and it became ever more obvious as the war continued
1 Like
And there you identify the problem - numbers.
Panthers were no more unreliable than Pz IV’s, and every allied vehicle was just as technically flawed in some way - the Sherman was too tall and ill armed by 1944, the Cromwell badly armoured and ill-armed, the T-34 rough, badly armoured (by 1943), hard to drive and unreliable, etc…
The German FG42 didn’t have a cartridge that was “defective and sensitive to dirt” - weapons were sensitive to dirt, not cartridges. The FG 42 was lightly constructed for what it was - but it was still a very clever and good design.
And the British DID recognize that the Meteor was revolutionary - but they did not have a need for it.
Your writing is a rant of no useful value.
I can - it was nothing to do with “liberalism” or hippies - it was mainstream middle-America that saw no value in nearly 60,000 dead young Americans fighting in a land war in Asia, along with seeing the horrors of the war in their news every night.
hog wash! what you just wrote is pure bias propaganda with no evidence to support your ill founded claims
3 Likes