maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:57 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:28 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 36448
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Anthropoid wrote:
Found this page on the "Bomber B" project which never seems to have 'got off the ground.'
Quote:
Bomber B was a German military aircraft design competition organised just before the start of World War II to develop a second-generation high-speed bomber for the Luftwaffe. The new designs would be a direct successor to the Schnellbomber philosophy of the Dornier Do 17 and Junkers Ju 88, relying on high speed as its primary defence. Bomber B would also be a much larger and more capable aircraft, with range and payload far greater than the Schnellbombers, besting even the largest conventional designs then under consideration. The winning design was intended to form the backbone of the Luftwaffe bomber force, replacing the wide collection of semi-specialized designs then in service. The Reich Air Ministry was so optimistic that more modest projects were generally cancelled; when the project failed the Luftwaffe was left with hopelessly outdated aircraft


I agree that the large surface ships were a waste. I always take those out of the build queue as soon as I start a Germany campaign! :lol:

Some interesting points about the fact that only the U.S. had a decent four engine heavy bomber as of 1939 . . . from the Bomber B wiki page.
Quote:
By the late 1930s, airframe construction methods had progressed to the point where airframes could be built to any required size, founded on the all-metal airframe design technologies pioneered by Hugo Junkers in 1915 and constantly improved upon for over two decades to follow – especially in Germany with aircraft like the Dornier Do X flying boat and the Junkers G 38 airliner, and the Soviet Union with the enormous Maksim Gorki, the largest aircraft built anywhere in the 1930s.

Engines for such designs was a great problem; mid-30s aero engines were limited to about 600 hp and the first 1000 hp engines were just entering the prototype stage – notably the Rolls-Royce Merlin and Daimler-Benz DB 601. Even the latest engines were limited in the sort of designs they could power; a twin-engine aircraft would have about 1,500 kW (2,000 hp), the same power as a mid-war single engined fighter aircraft like the Hawker Typhoon or Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. Although using a larger number of engines was possible, and achieved in some airframe examples for both the United Kingdom and the Third Reich, the production capacity of both nations was considered too small to equip a fleet with such designs. The United States, confident in its ability to produce aviation engines in any needed quantity, opted for four-engine designs with massed defensive firepower, as seen in the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress.

In Germany, most bomber designs were adapted from pre-war designs, many of them passenger aircraft or dual-use designs. The first specialist bomber aircraft was the Junkers Ju 88, which had limited range and payload, forcing the Luftwaffe to maintain the Heinkel He 111 for other missions. A shortage of both types forced the early-war Luftwaffe to improvise with a collection of aircraft, a problem no one in the Luftwaffe was at all happy with. The earlier Ural bomber program that had been championed by Luftwaffe General Walther Wever but which had failed to produce any practical Allied-style "heavy bombers". Wever's death on June 3, 1936 prompted the issuance of the RLM's "Bomber A" heavy bomber design specification on the day he died, to inspire development of a new heavy bomber with much better range and payload than the Ural Bomber prototypes, the Dornier Do 19 and the Junkers Ju 89 would ever be able to provide. The winning design, given its RLM airframe number on November 5, 1937 was the Heinkel He 177.[1]



Interesting.
I was not aware of some of that (or had forgotten reading about it in the distant past).

Quote:
. I always take those out of the build queue as soon as I start a Germany campaign! :lol:


When I am playing Germany in HoI4 I usually let the surface ships already in the queue run through, but I normally do not build Bismarck/Tirpitz. After that queue of ships runs out I am normally only building Uboats, some small coastal models and a longer range model that will cover as far as the Mid Atlantic and the Cape Verde sea zone which stretches between South American and Africa. The goal is to strangle Trade to U.K. that would pass through the Pillars of Hercules, from the South Atlantic, or from the Americas.

The surface ships that are built I normally use for the invasion of Norway. I generally never Sea Lion and rarely send ships elsewhere.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:44 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:26 pm
Posts: 4256
Location: not the end of the world but you can see it from here
Reputation points: 12314
An interesting question, if Germany doesn't declare war on the US, is would Roosevelt been able to convince Congress to declare war on Germany at some point in time? What happens if the US stays out of the war in Europe? Does Germany fear an invasion of Continental Europe from the British enough to maintain large number of formations in Western Europe of not having to worry about American manpower allow the Wehrmacht to send more troops against the Soviet Union. No American bomber fleet bombing the Reich by day allows the Luftwaffe concentrate on the Soviet Union among other possibilities.

_________________
Texas, where we have the death penalty and aren't afraid to use it! Build the wall!!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 8:49 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 12416
Reputation points: 17177
Germany and USA were already in defacto shooting war by the time of Pearl Harbor. So I think getting USA into war would've be "easy-ish" if Pearl Harbor happened. A slightly harder challenge might have been if Japan had NOT attacked USA anywhere in the Pacific initially. But only Brit/Dutch "colonies". Then at least there would've been a delay in USA getting in War. But FDR would've "trolled" USA Ships near Japanese ships and eventually shooting would have happened. But the "rosie the riveter" type of "get the evil japs" enthusiasm would have been missing ... and that might have mattered.

_________________
Ugum Bugum Uber Alles - Iddi Ut Amine Dada !!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:00 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 15583
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 18687
jwilkerson wrote:
Germany and USA were already in defacto shooting war by the time of Pearl Harbor. So I think getting USA into war would've be "easy-ish" if Pearl Harbor happened. A slightly harder challenge might have been if Japan had NOT attacked USA anywhere in the Pacific initially. But only Brit/Dutch "colonies". Then at least there would've been a delay in USA getting in War. But FDR would've "trolled" USA Ships near Japanese ships and eventually shooting would have happened. But the "rosie the riveter" type of "get the evil japs" enthusiasm would have been missing ... and that might have mattered.


When you say "de facto" you are probably referring to the fact that uboats were sinking American merchant men in the Atlantic? My understanding was that, until the official state of war, those crews (and ships) were basically "on their own," no? Don't recall exactly, but seems like those were the conditions of providing lend-lease to GB and Russia which FDR had been forced to adopt in order to get Congress/The anti-war/Pro-Fascist elements to go along with it?

If memory serves we were NOT providing armed escorts ourselves, at least not beyond the American waters part of the journey? Obviously, once there was an official state of war that all changed.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:10 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 12416
Reputation points: 17177
Here's an example, the USS Reuben James ... sailing with a convoy ... torpedoed near Iceland. The data is the data. Interpret as you like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Reuben_James_(DD-245)

_________________
Ugum Bugum Uber Alles - Iddi Ut Amine Dada !!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:13 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 12416
Reputation points: 17177
Here's' another example.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Kearny_(DD-432)

_________________
Ugum Bugum Uber Alles - Iddi Ut Amine Dada !!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:14 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 12416
Reputation points: 17177
When both sides are shooting at each other ... I call it "defacto shooting war" ... others may call it something else.

_________________
Ugum Bugum Uber Alles - Iddi Ut Amine Dada !!


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:49 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 15583
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 18687
Right, no argument there. However, I THINK that there were American registered merchant ships, and definitely American crewmen who became victims of the Reich even long before October 1941, no?

It would be interesting to go back into the documentary evidence to examine the discussions in Congress and with FDR about what this event "meant" for the U.S. Kind of shocking really that it apparently was not sufficient basis to go to an official declared state of war between the U.S. and Germany. I wonder how the proponents who argued it was NOT a sufficient basis to go to war rationalized that? I'm assuming that FDR agitated for either a full state of war, or at least a more substantial state of defensiveness as a result of the Reuben James incident, and that his calls for this were squelched by dissenting voices in Congress?

American "isolationism" never ceases to amaze me; we got hundreds of American citizens just doing a job they were legally hired, else assigned by the Federal government to do, getting killed because of aggressive warmongers and we cannot be bothered to go to war . . . on the other hand, we got backwater cesspools of disorder where no Americans who have good reasons to be there are being harmed, and no real threat to America is being presented, and someone insists we need to get involved . . . these themes have played out so many times in American history, it is amazing there isn't a name for it: "Walking the Giant Tug-of-War?"

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:09 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 32059
Reputation points: 20000

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Military Thread
PostPosted: Fri Oct 11, 2019 11:15 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 15583
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 18687
jack t ripper wrote:


Heh! The days when "folk" singers were warmongers, instead of peaceniks :)

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 472 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group