the Baron wrote:

squeakie wrote:  the Baron wrote: I think they play up the "what-if" angle a little much, in sensational fashion, if you will, to help create interest for the show and get better ratings. read the book What If? gary I understand and enjoying discussing counterfactuals.  My point is that for a show like this, they might play up the what-if factor to a greater significance than it has, for the sake of taking what is really an esoteric subject, outside our community, and making it more attractive for a broad audience. That's probably a big reason with The History Channel has so little history and so much more crypto-zoology and UFO stories anymore, and tons of Nazi stuff, that is really superficial, when you look at the content.  Like the story on Hitler's relatives, including kids in the US today-I think there was a question in that show, raised by implication, of whether another maniacal dictator might arise from the bloodline.  I mean, c'mon!

as I caught only about 60% of the show, it left me with the impression that it was more or less an engineering exercise with political tones added into it as an afterthought. It also pretty much alluded the public to the fact that in those days there were a lot of misgivings about the idea of a flying wing. I've often wondered how the Horten Brothers overcame the handeling issues of the flying wing back then when something like "fly by wire" didn't exist. I don't think the plane was a viable issue due to the engine design. Maybe two generations of turbojets later? But on the otherside of the coin if they had of had even better engines than the 004 Jumo the design could well have been the so called super weapon that could have virtually opened up the UK to another bombing campaign. They could not have put enough picket vessels in the channel to make up for them loss of the high powered ground bassed search radar to give the much needed advanced warning capability. This and less than ten minutes of warning might have proven itself to being another disaster waiting to happen. I don't think the idea of a flying wing itself was the watch word here as it was the shear speed and well under ten minutes of early warning. Reason I say this is that it's a well known fact that the Germans flew AR234's over England all the time without much opposition to speak of. Still in the end the Germans would have succomed just the same to the Russian onslaught from the east, thus making this a mute point

gary

spaltro3 wrote:

In the Schiffer book on the Hortens, the author emphasized their past experiences with gliders. Many engineers at the DFS establishment also had similar experiences. It was cheaper and easier to test aerodynamic theory with gliders during the inter-war period in Germany. Good points being made here. All the high tech designs in the world weren't helping Germany in 1945, as there was no fuel to be had. And witness the difficulties in the development of current flying wing designs, which require multiple computers to keep them aloft. The XB-35 and -49 suffered from similar contol problems. The 229 likely would have been an unstable bombing platform. Now a Go-229 Mistel....

I think the best thing for tactical use by Germany was their air to ground rockets and glide bombs. It still needed more work, but when you look at what we're using today and what they were starting to use, you know they were about 25 years ahead of the game. There were three or four weapons they developed that are standard issue now on aircraft, and are simply taken as a matter of fact.

     Still with all those hitec pieces of equipment, the down fall of Germany was simply the fact that they couldn't knock out Russian tanks as fast as the Russians could build them. The samething could be said for heavy bombers supplied by the United States. I think I read somewhere that we built over 15,000 B24's alone!

gary

squeakie wrote:

spaltro3 wrote: In the Schiffer book on the Hortens, the author emphasized their past experiences with gliders. Many engineers at the DFS establishment also had similar experiences. It was cheaper and easier to test aerodynamic theory with gliders during the inter-war period in Germany. Good points being made here. All the high tech designs in the world weren't helping Germany in 1945, as there was no fuel to be had. And witness the difficulties in the development of current flying wing designs, which require multiple computers to keep them aloft. The XB-35 and -49 suffered from similar contol problems. The 229 likely would have been an unstable bombing platform. Now a Go-229 Mistel.... There were three or four weapons they developed that are standard issue now on aircraft, and are simply taken as a matter of fact. gary

This is a nice thread, one of those where there's a bunch of thought in each post. So I wonder, there seems to be a lot of good info out there about German late war projects, and they all seem pretty advanced.

So maybe that's what happens when you can't actually get anything done. The german armament industry worked well for a number of years in the early war, but these were all WW1 companies developing 1930's designs until the designs in 1941 based on experience began to get translated into product in 44. Then there were no resources, well you all know the drill. But hwere's my thought: towards the end of WW1 the US railroads were organized under something called the USRA, which standardized designs and regulated construction into the twenties and had a lasting influence to the end of steam.

During WW2 designs were used in a non-competitive nature where there might be Douglas, North American and Ford all building B-24s.

While Germany had the RLM, there was no useful organizational structure to focus production where it was needed. Of course that defined the Soviet Union. My way or Siberia.

Engineering doesn't win wars, economies do.

When my friend, now deceased, George went to Vietnam as a Marine he carried an M1. Worked too.