Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
german armour...
6 Answers
you dont have to be a historian to know how powerful the german tanks were in ww2, especially the famous tiger series! - but i was wondering, does anyone know "why" the germans always seemed to be able to produce such powerful and elite tanks compared to us allies. from what ive read personally, its as if the allies were always trying to catch up, and whatever we produced, was only the result of german armour getting more powerful.
ive read about some german tanks featuring near-modern features, although these were never produced, and only reached the drawing board...
but how powerful do you think the german armour would have become, if we hadnt beaten them when we did?
ive read about some german tanks featuring near-modern features, although these were never produced, and only reached the drawing board...
but how powerful do you think the german armour would have become, if we hadnt beaten them when we did?
Answers
1 to 6 of 6
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dannyday5821. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
1) Germany had an advanced steel industry. They had both the resources and the factories. They were a very industrial society.
2) Germany had scientists working on the military side. For a long time they had a leading national proportion of scientists and technicians. During war, these scientists put their skills to work in the military field.
2) Germany had scientists working on the military side. For a long time they had a leading national proportion of scientists and technicians. During war, these scientists put their skills to work in the military field.
Not really my area so just a general comment.
I think the Germans were building up their military might during the 1930s, whereas the UK, France etc did very little in that area after the first world war.
When the second world war started we (the UK) were woefully under strength military wise, whereas the Germans had had all the 1930s to build up their military strength.
When the second world war started we were playing catch up all the time.
The US tanks were also very under powered compared with the German tanks.
I think the Germans were building up their military might during the 1930s, whereas the UK, France etc did very little in that area after the first world war.
When the second world war started we (the UK) were woefully under strength military wise, whereas the Germans had had all the 1930s to build up their military strength.
When the second world war started we were playing catch up all the time.
The US tanks were also very under powered compared with the German tanks.
I agree, Teddio; the Soviet T34 was (arguably) the
best all-round tank of WW2. Its main armament was
only a little less powerful than the Tiger's, but it was
fast and reliable.
The Tiger was built to carry the formidable 88mm. gun
so it was heavy, slow and over-engineered.
In contrast, the T34 was cheap, cheerful, easy to
manufacture and staggeringly effective. The battle of
Kursk was almost a foregone conclusion thereby.
The Germans learned that size alone is not the main
criterion in tank design. The Elephant was designed
to be bigger than the Tiger, but it couldn't be used on
normal roads. A bit OTT. so back to the drawing board.
best all-round tank of WW2. Its main armament was
only a little less powerful than the Tiger's, but it was
fast and reliable.
The Tiger was built to carry the formidable 88mm. gun
so it was heavy, slow and over-engineered.
In contrast, the T34 was cheap, cheerful, easy to
manufacture and staggeringly effective. The battle of
Kursk was almost a foregone conclusion thereby.
The Germans learned that size alone is not the main
criterion in tank design. The Elephant was designed
to be bigger than the Tiger, but it couldn't be used on
normal roads. A bit OTT. so back to the drawing board.
The T34 was the best tank of WW2. I fear that the people who say the Germans had the best equipment are unwitting victims of Nazi propaganda.
The Russians had the best tanks, the British had the best fighter planes (and ground attack aircraft), the British had the best Navy in the Wetstern theater (and superior tactics the Bismarck was sunk because she did'nt refuel when she had the oportunity) and the Americans had the best scientist (Oppenheimer), the best merchant ship capability (Kaiser built freighters on a production line) and the best bombers (in fact the Germans had no strategic bombers, except perhaps the Albatross(?) of which they had very few)..
The Russians had the best tanks, the British had the best fighter planes (and ground attack aircraft), the British had the best Navy in the Wetstern theater (and superior tactics the Bismarck was sunk because she did'nt refuel when she had the oportunity) and the Americans had the best scientist (Oppenheimer), the best merchant ship capability (Kaiser built freighters on a production line) and the best bombers (in fact the Germans had no strategic bombers, except perhaps the Albatross(?) of which they had very few)..
1 to 6 of 6
