open historical conversation

[the warlord of the reich]

ww1 zeros?

why did zeros achived the nickname and the amazing kills and it was an ace flight also was the most feared of ww2,

no need for explaining any US planes, zeros could take down any in the begin of the war untill the mid's they were even with zeros and late they were finally able to shoot it down

it was a dogfighter.lightning was crap for it, wildcats were even more crappy,

dude, yamato and musashi were top ships of history and WW2, prince of waes cant stand a chance in a head on fight

yamato was Laid down in 1937 and formally commissioned in late 1941, Yamato was designed to counter the numerically superior battleship fleet of the United States, Japan's main rival in the Pacific

either IOWA is crap for yamato, radar guidance was not diffrent in effeciency during WW2 and yamato had radar guns.and a decicivly much stronger armour then iowa had

the war was turned to USA favour in 1944 as long with zero, beating down zeros in 1942 is like japan was gonna lose the war earlier

hellcats were late made,

about kamikaze

allied ships and avaitors were experienced vetrens and fly supiorior aircraft to figh the incoming kamikazes and those inexperienced IJN pilots were untrained yet they were doing a good success for such conditons

yamato was fought near okniawa with 9 other warships in a sucide attack but the US fleet sent about 500 aircraft to shoot down yamato, the 9 warships were seprated and the yamato was alone with the light cruiser yagahi and were sank by hundreds of aerial torpedos and dive bombs, both yagahi and yamato fought to the end shooting down lots of allied aircraft,

[wyvern]

It barely shot down any aircraft and it was sunk with only 10 torpedo and 7 bomb hits, barely more then the prince of wales which was sunk by heavier torpedo carrying land bombers. The only true fact you said about the battle the yamato had with US aircraft is that the japanese fought bravely. achieved no spectacular kills, only a few japanese ever achieved much acedom and the zero wasn't feared post mid 1942 once the myth of its invincibility was blown away by stunning US successes against them. Yamato and Musashi were not the top ships, they didn't last long had poor performance and technology for their weight and 1 vs 1 the Yamato is slightly better then the Iowa, now take into account that to make the fight fair in weight, the Yamato would be slaughtered in the 2 Iowa or two Prince of wales that would be against it. BIGGER IS NOT BETTER! japanese super ships and subs achieved nothing significant, German super tanks, nothing significant either. I said the zero was good for ww1 not that it fought then, the winning element of ww1 air combat was maneuverability, in ww2, it  was speed, take the attack on Yamamoto for example, 16 lightnings versus 2 betties plus zero escort, using dive and zoom tactics they succeeded with the loss of one lightning, the zero couldn't keep up with nearly any fighter and was vulnerable to bomber defensive weapons, the hellcat came in the year 1942-43 and the corsair joined the marines a little later. While you seem to think dogfights were a thing of ww2 that is false, most combats were fought in long high speed chases in which the zero couldn't compete , thats how the germans beat the russian aircraft in 1941, they weren't as maneuverable as the i-15 and i-16 but they used dive and zoom tactics that the russian fighters couldn't match. dogfights were a thing of ww1 The b-29, was feared as was the corsair and b-17 by the japanese.

[the warlord of the reich]

dude, zeros had little time yet they were beating alot and alot of US and british planes. thats it, solved, zeros are the bestfor the start

heavier, heavier means better gunnery and performence, fix your opanians

the pride of the british navy, prince of wales and other such as prince of wales battleships were sunk by a bunch of germen bombers, the pride of the british navy was trashed

germen tanks weak? reconsider this extremley stupid word, germen tanks were perhaps the best tanks in the entire and meybe the whole world

in the other, japanese troops were brave but mostly inexperienced, germen troops were speciel and brave and highly trained, SS troops were like spartans

IJN made the heaviest armeed and armoured heavy cruiser in the world during the war

there was a battle off rabual or other sea where a squadron of 4 zeros led by an ace attacked and destroyed about 9 lightnings from 12

10 torpedos and 7 dive bombs is not few for your information, reconsider the yamato's aircraft kills. it had the best AA and flak during the war i may say,this is not assured but yamato had a very HUGE number of AA and flak mounted on a ship

WW1? there was no zeros back then, if japan joint the germens in WW1 with zeros, the british and US and all other countries will be crushed in no matter of time.

lets take the word of the experts and warriors, zero was called a wonder weapon, it had a very amazing menouverbility and agility and range and feul tanks and it was a dogfighter and it was rated one of the war's best kills and the IJN made a ace flight, it was even upgraded to a sea plane, it was the best carriar based in the entire world, the allies themselfs called a dogfighter so dont challange me challange them,

winning world war 2 air combat is speed?

this is a nice joke

[wyvern]

dude, zeros had little time yet they were beating alot and alot of US and british planes. thats it, solved, zeros are the bestfor the start

heavier, heavier means better gunnery and performence, fix your opanians

the pride of the british navy, prince of wales and other such as prince of wales battleships were sunk by a bunch of germen bombers, the pride of the british navy was trashed

germen tanks weak? reconsider this extremley stupid word, germen tanks were perhaps the best tanks in the entire and meybe the whole world

in the other, japanese troops were brave but mostly inexperienced, germen troops were speciel and brave and highly trained, SS troops were like spartans

IJN made the heaviest armeed and armoured heavy cruiser in the world during the war

there was a battle off rabual or other sea where a squadron of 4 zeros led by an ace attacked and destroyed about 9 lightnings from 12

10 torpedos and 7 dive bombs is not few for your information, reconsider the yamato's aircraft kills. it had the best AA and flak during the war i may say,this is not assured but yamato had a very HUGE number of AA and flak mounted on a ship

WW1? there was no zeros back then, if japan joint the germens in WW1 with zeros, the british and US and all other countries will be crushed in no matter of time.

lets take the word of the experts and warriors, zero was called a wonder weapon, it had a very amazing menouverbility and agility and range and feul tanks and it was a dogfighter and it was rated one of the war's best kills and the IJN made a ace flight, it was even upgraded to a sea plane, it was the best carriar based in the entire world, the allies themselfs called a dogfighter so dont challange me challange them,

winning world war 2 air combat is speed?

this is a nice joke

air combat in ww2 was decided by speed and firepower, genius, the zero lacked both and thus could not be efficient against anything but the second rate fighters in the pacific, they failed to match the out dated spitfire mk V's with a few exceptions, the main amount of spitfire losses was due to running out of fuel. with the ww1 thing, your completely missing my point, the zero would have been good for ww1 because of its maneuverability, I never said it served then , just for your info, the fighters facing the zero in the beginning of the war were way out classed because most were older then the zero by 5+ years, the wildcat was crap, the hurricane and fulmar were poor and still occasionally beat the zero, and the brewster buffalo was, well, lets not even go there, the p-40 was old but the AVG still slaughtered everything from ki-43s to zeros to bombers. you are comparing the zero to old aircraft, the good allied aircraft were initially being used mainly against the good german aircraft, the spitfire's mk V and IX were far superior to the zero, as was the typhoon, the mustang, p-38 and p-47 were also far superior to the zero, as was the russian mig, yak and lavochkin, the german bf 109f was better then the zero, and so was the FW-190, the whirlwind was a great twin engine plane that was better then the zero, as was the mosquito. The american and british pilots managed to stay alive, unlike most experienced japanese pilots, meaning that they soon outmatched their enemies, and from late 1942 to early 1943 new planes like the hellcat, corsair, spitfires mk V and p-38s conducted a series of massacres that the japanese couldn't stop combat or do anything about, the zero was only feared when the allies had few good aircraft in the pacific, after that the allies viewed it with contempt and pitied how they outmatched it. in 1944 it was getting shot down by typhoons and fireflies, they sucked, post late 1942. Also, allied pilots could decide when to attack or run due to better speed, they didn't have to stay and fight, also, one scratch from a 50. cal and the zero fell down. I will agree that the zeroes were great when faced with inexperienced pilots in old aircraft, but when faced with the equipment used in the frontline in the western theater, they were doomed. Heavier does not mean better, the performance of Yamato was in no way spectacular for its size, its AA guns were not radar guided and it lacked medium AA artillery of something in the 37-40mm category, the 25mm was only good at short range, like the allied 20mm's and the heavy AA artillery is inaccurate and inefficient at least the allies had radar mounted on it. The british only lost three battleships, the Barnham and Royal Oak to submarines and the Prince of Wales to japanese land aircraft with heavy torpedoes. The Yamato didn't shoot down, many aircraft and its AA defenses were innacurate though as mentioned huge, as also mentioned, they lacked the all critical medium AA artillery. The SS was suicidal and conducted horrible slaughter on many innocent people, they were well equipped and pretty well trained though. The German Falschirmjager, the US rangers and paras, the british SAS and paras and the finnish and Polish were probably the best troops of ww2. 10  and 7 hits is not amazing for a ship of its size and is called poor damage control and neither is how the americans sank Yamatos sister ship aircraft carrier with a submarine. I'm not sure about the japanese cruiser, I'll check that, do you know what it was named . Yes speed decided ww2 battles, thats why the allies wreaked such havoc on the japanese because of their superior speed, the battle of britain was mostly fought with such tactics, ad was most of the whole war. The german tanks were nothing amazing, early war, they used mainly Czech tanks, and the early panzer III was crap, the panzer IV was okay, but had trouble with matildas and valentines. The Char b1 and the somua were both better for example as was the matilda. The t-34's and KV1's were near impossible for the germans to take out early on. The Crusader was equal to the panzer III and the later Panzer IV was equal to  the sherman and cromwell, it had a better gun but they had better armor. The tiger was okay but too slow, heavy, unreliable etc, some even got taken out by m24 chaffees, The sherman firefly was able to take it out with relative ease. the panther was pretty good but outweighed other medium tanks by 7+ tons, it even outweighed, the heavy tank Churchill, it also lacked proper side armor and it was unreliable. The koenigtiger was well armored and armed but extremely unreliable, slow and unable to cross many bridges, not to mention an easy target for air attack. In my opinion the best tank was the IS-2, it was better armed and armored then the panther, while being a ton lighter it was about equal to the tiger I, but was faster, and versus the koenig tiger, it was way lighter and could take it out in a medium range, though it was very vulnerable to the koenig tigers great gun, it was also faster and more reliable, the comet was nearly equal to the panther and weighed over 10 tons less. Fun fact about the IS-2, ISU-122 and ISU-152, while their main guns lacked great penetration power, the mere shell shock would shake the armor or tore the turrets off of nearly anything it hit. The british ships especially aircraft carriers were quite possibly the best in the war. Face the facts the zero was no good when it met aircraft that were roughly of the same generation. Its myth was of greatness was blown away and it only succeeded against older aircraft.

[the warlord of the reich]

oh my.... GOD 

calling panzers crap is like saying a moder tank cant take on a WW1 tank

saying tigers were "okay" is COMPLETLEY an insult to its amazing performance

dude, germeny had the best and fastest production and heaviest and most armored and best guns in the whole war

sherman is a light tank DUDE, its not equel at all

tigers and panzers were AMAZING range and armor

not to mention germeny had very exellent ships... bismarck, and brandenburg and best performance submarines

prince of wales is the one who cant take a beating.... it was sank along with the 2nd best british ship in the sea crossing to the pacific, by a bunch of germen bombers

careful with your search, i think the name was yagahi or agahi or yaghi. all i can assure that it was compnied with yamato in a sucide attack, allies sent 400 BOMBERS AND AIRCRAFT to attack it, after 2 hours of heavy assult and batteling it was sank, more time later yamato was sank too

dude, YAMATO HAD A RADAR GUIDED AA and also it was accurate but even so.... radar guns could'nt stop the inexperienced kamikazes from sinking lexington and 2 kamikazes hitting yorktown. more other warships from the huge fleet were sank or heavily damaged.

lets take their words. now zeros were beating while taking back weak hitts. like a tiger batteling a squirrel. P40s were abslout crap and it was a workhorse and also wildcats were slow crap with weak gun and average armor, it can outmenouvred easily, wildcats were only able to be able to survive a small while more if it was grouped togather in squads for assesting,

japanese had best submarine, but was not used fully

as i said, zeros can be broken by a few hits, BUT! how can they hit it with it called a dogfighter and a wonder and extreme agility?

zeros can keep perhaps be medium (or meybe) trashing corsairs and hellcats if IJN had experienced pilots,

IJN had also made randy, shinden, tony, those flights were extremley able and capable aircraft

SS were very powerfull, relegion and lack of food and jails perhaps forced them to kill citizens, even so, SS killing citizens made them even tougher, relegion plays part in the army's activity, SS and specilizts were the last stand troops who were the only soldiers fighting in the end of the great reich, when the allies even reached berlin, it was meybe the end and the war is lost.... yet the SS fight in the streets of berlin along with the volkstrumm and the militia and partisans

yamato was agile, armed with long range and very destructive artillery, torpedo bay was avilable, flak was huge evrything in here is shortened to the word "heavy"

is heavy infantry better then light infantry?

is heavy tank is better then light tank?

is a heavy fighter is a better then a light fighter?

is heavy cavalry is better then light cavalry?

the answer for these questions is yes.

allies were meybe worse... but people were aside with them because germany had less allies,

the allies imprisoned evrery japanese americans in USA and put them in jail,

allies bombarded alot of germen towns killing lots of citizens randomly by those massive boeings

allies launched first nuclear bombs. killed 100,00 people and leaving 20 million japanese as homeless people.... thats only in nagasaki. thats not all.... the uranium dust killed more and effected their buddies and left them diseased and ill and dying....

allies were jailing the young boys who joined the service after their perants were killed in the mass bombardment, the beutifull city of dresden was bombed to a difficult situation in the night and it was bombed by fire and incedinary bombs, the city was burning for 7 days

the old volkstrum were captured and starved and mass excuted too.

even the red army was not loyal to their president stalin the tyrrant.... the russian women considered the germans as librators

cheers!

[the warlord of the reich]

just saying
in the whole history of europe. there was no more legendery or stronger army or troops then the waffen SS. in the history of europe, all of it, even the french old guard, and the praetorians and the barbarian hordes and the english longbowmen, there was nothing better or stronger then the waffen SS and the whermacht, germany was much stronger, if britian dident cowardly ran into USA then belive me, theres a 71% chance that they would be destroyed, and a 89% chance that they'll be destroyed if germany dident attack soviet union, germany had the best fighters, fastest and most agile, best guns, best tanks, best army, best bombers, best ships, best industry and production, best air superiority and best genralship. making them the toughest army orgnization the world has ever seen them in action, best genrals such as erwin rommel and hermann goering, jet fighters, fallschirmjagers, volksttrum, volksgrenadiers, and best tanks such as tiger II and tiger I and panzer III better then any tank allies had, and dont argue about speed anymore, germany holds i think 2 or 3 fastest airplane in the world records which happens to be both militry luftwaffe fighters, while the tanks germany holds the best tanks in the war with their industry, also the largest invasion in WW2 was conducted by them, operation barbarossa, where 3 milion germans face off with 8 milion soviets and win a decisive victory, the SS were the best. else they wont be able to excute so many prisoners, grab so much land, attack and overwhelm uneven odds, dig in and fortify all their borderlines of their country, being able to hold out untill the end of the war, thats why germany would've won if it toke down its enemies part by part

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_m73cz5i8.jpg[/img][/URL] the beutifull jet fighter of luftwaffe, it proved very difficult to shoot for its speed and claimed 509 allied pilots,  the allies were able to shoot it only when landed or taking off but when it goes to air its near impossible to shoot it down

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_iao05cta.jpg[/img][/URL] this is a Junkers Ju 88 became one of the most versatile combat aircraft of the war. Affectionately known as "The Maid of all Work" (a feminine version of "jack of all trades"), the Ju 88 proved to be suited to almost any role. Like a number of other Luftwaffe bombers, it was used successfully as a bomber, dive bomber, night fighter, torpedo bomber, reconnaissance aircraft, heavy fighter, and even as a flying bomb during the closing stages of conflict.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_6rf4cqpm.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_4m5a2pt8.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_e7kra0ud.jpg[/img][/URL] and the powerfull junkers (stuka) bombers, the german army used them in posters declaring victory  also in recruitment posters. stukas were one of the best, they rear gunners were devilish and very accurate and the bomber itself is EXTREMLEY ACCURATE and it was an effective bomber to take out ships, it was a well armored bomber and also very agile for a bomber, stukas earnt their lengthy glory, they were powerfull bombers

about japanese betty bombers

you'll need to revise everything you said about it, the betty coniniously grew stronger as the war kept going, they upgraded bettys with new self sealing fuel tanks and brand new armor and guns and it was far superior to allied fighters, it was even better then mitchell and early bettys wthout upgrades  can be compered to marauders and beufort

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_wvn23wxs.jpg[/img][/URL] betty bombers in a raid over australian island darwin

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_yrdiiw4g.jpg[/img][/URL] betty bombers in flight

about more axis flight

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_3vfsbnuf.jpg[/img][/URL] this is a tony fighter, pwnage for hellcats and corsairs and P-38 and P-40 and wildcats, it was a mass produced extremley agile fighter and very powerfull and fearfull that i told you the IJN had better fighters, USA was gonna be crushed if the IJN had well train avaitors, this fighter had a liquid-cooled inline V engine.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_fk3gi839.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_ythc8jtn.jpg[/img][/URL] this is the IJN's frank fighter, it was the legend of the war perhaps, it was more ten a match against hellcats and corsairs which fell mass victims to it, Featuring excellent performance and high maneuverability, the Ki-84 was considered to be the best Japanese fighter to see large scale operations during WWII. It was able to match any Allied fighter, and to intercept the high-flying B-29 Superfortresses. Its powerful armament (that could include two 30 mm and two 20 mm cannons) increased its lethality

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_memafhqs.jpg[/img][/URL] thats a val diver which was an able aircraft of the whole war, it sank more US ships then any other plane did and it toke a large role in kamikaze which made it an effective weapon for the IJN to use.


heinkel he 111

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_s6mojjz8.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_76yn49d6.jpg[/img][/URL] thats the epic luftwaffe successful bombe of the war, it was a superior bomber for air superioriority and air raids and torpedo runs, it proved capable of sustaining very heavy punishment, it was often described as a wolf in a sheep's clothes

[wyvern]

Get your facts straight, the RAF whipped the Luftwaffes butt, the german navy couldn't beat past the royal navy and so invasion of england was avoided, The US joined in after the attack on pearl harbor, the british were building more fighters and were already making fighter sweeps over europe before the US joined in. The Waffen SS was good but not as good as your making them out to be, they were very fanatical and commited hundreds of atrocities, the SS managed the concentration camps, they killed millions of innocent civilians, and they killed thousands of prisoners, for example, the massacre at Malmedy crossroads, and I'm certain shooting, hanging, burning, and gassing innocents is "okay" for them to do, the germans were only greeted as liberators in ukraine and the baltic states, not in russia, plus, their horrible behavior soon lost them all support.
As far as weapons go, they had very good cannons, poor rockets, okay tanks and aircraft and so on. By 1943 it had lost its air superiority in the west and was being attacked round, the clock, they couldn't stop the allies and in many ways they were behind in technology, Herman Goering was a fat, pompous, idiot, though honestly I think the top WW2 commanders were the following, though not in order Patton, Montgomery, Arthur Harris, Nimitz, Zhukov, Chuikov, Rokkosovsky, Halsey, Manstien, Kesserling, Runsdent, Rommel, O'connor, and Kurt Student. The best soldiers were the SAS, Airborne troops of Germany, USA and Britain, the Rangers, and the regulars of Poland and Finland. In operation Barbarrosa it was more like 3 million to 3.5-4 million and not all of the troops were german, the Russians fought with great heroism and their tanks were initially superior, the Germans didn't have a chance of winning the war, even if it was only them versus Britain, they probably had the best tank in the 25-35 ton category(the Panzer IV), except for the Comet, they had generally superior guns, except for the UK who had the 2lb, 6lb and 17lb guns that were amazing for their calibre, the germans had the amazing pak 43 88 L71 and the 75 L70 guns. However, while the panther was good it was little more mobile the the lighter IS-2 while having worse armor and a worse HE shell, the Tiger was extremely unreliable and overweight, though it had okay armor and a good gun, the tiger II and Jagdtiger were overweight monsters that were unreliable and slow, their only good use was as road blocks and pillboxes due to their heavy guns and armor, the IS-2, Comet, Pershing, and IS-3(if it had gotten their a tad faster, were just as good, if not better then their equal weight german counterparts, for example, the churchill is a heavy tank, yet weighs 7-8 tons less then the "medium tank" panther, it had better armor and is more versatile, though its slower and has an inferior gun, the sherman in all honesty sucks, as does the cromwell. The SS often overwhelmed smaller not greater odds by the way, the germans had a speed record on what, the me 262, which had a loss to kill rate of about 1-1, other fighters were already slower then the allied fighters in 1944-45, for example the Spitfire mkXIV. tempest, p38 and p51

[the warlord of the reich]

SPITEFIRES AND TEMPSETS WERE COMPLETLEY OVERWHELMED BY LATER GERMAN AIRCRAFT,

get your head out of propaganda, and start thinking and realizing, why would SS soldiers excute all the civilians? think about it

heavy or not, nor better allied tanks were able against them, they were actually crushed, germans got defeated because they were a small and outunmbered country, they had to help attacking partisans in italy, and hold france, and hold captured cities of russia, the SS proved themselfs worthy thru all this war,
speed record in world's fastest flight dude, germany would be WHUPPIN britian, it was an island dude not a fort....

great heroism where? russians were massacred by the much outnumbered SS and they were mostly outnumbered in the eastern front because they had a huge soviet infront of them, germans captured town after another, leningrad, stalingrad all the way to moscow
dude, italy had to break out because of the partisans and the death of its great president bentino mossulini and romania kept fighting along, japan was bombed by nuclear

poor rocket? your joking right, germany was like lighting HELL in london with their cruise rockets, also germany were the best jet designing industry in the world

fat? thats an insult, churchill was fat too, while rosvelt was a stick smoking 100 cigaattes a day

rommel takes top, one of the best leaders the world recognized, while  zhukov was an @ss with an angry look on his face every day,
spitfires and tempsets were ground fighters that can be beaten in air, also schornhorst and prinz eugon and brandenburg, bismarch, those you call weak?

[wyvern]

SPITEFIRES AND TEMPSETS WERE COMPLETLEY OVERWHELMED BY LATER GERMAN AIRCRAFT,

get your head out of propaganda, and start thinking and realizing, why would SS soldiers excute all the civilians? think about it

heavy or not, nor better allied tanks were able against them, they were actually crushed, germans got defeated because they were a small and outunmbered country, they had to help attacking partisans in italy, and hold france, and hold captured cities of russia, the SS proved themselfs worthy thru all this war,
speed record in world's fastest flight dude, germany would be WHUPPIN britian, it was an island dude not a fort....

great heroism where? russians were massacred by the much outnumbered SS and they were mostly outnumbered in the eastern front because they had a huge soviet infront of them, germans captured town after another, leningrad, stalingrad all the way to moscow
dude, italy had to break out because of the partisans and the death of its great president bentino mossulini and romania kept fighting along, japan was bombed by nuclear

poor rocket? your joking right, germany was like lighting HELL in london with their cruise rockets, also germany were the best jet designing industry in the world

fat? thats an insult, churchill was fat too, while rosvelt was a stick smoking 100 cigaattes a day

rommel takes top, one of the best leaders the world recognized, while  zhukov was an @ss with an angry look on his face every day,
spitfires and tempsets were ground fighters that can be beaten in air, also schornhorst and prinz eugon and brandenburg, bismarch, those you call weak?

The german navy was vastly inferior to the US and british navies, they also lost most of their lighter ships at norway, they were only advanced in submarines, the SS killed millions, get it, millions of civilians, even if that isn't all they would have killed all had they won, the Brits smashed the Germans in the air, the tempest and late mark spitfire were superior to all late war german piston fighters in the air and they could outturn, outrun and beat nearly all opposition, including the me262, which had poor acceleration, its guns tended to jam, the engines often blew up and they killed just as many of their own as of the enemy with these fighters due to the unreliability, the Allied jets, like the meteor and Vampire(missed the war by a few weeks/months) in britain and the US P-80(also missed the war by a few weeks) were far more reliable, safer, equally fast and more maneuverable. Face the facts, the brits beat the germans in the battle for britain, the t-34/85 was slightly better then the late mark panzerIV's, the IS-2 was better then the panther and tiger, the comet was nearly as good as the panther and a good 10+ tons lighter, the churchill was 38 tons and very versatile and useful, the pershing was as good as the tiger and the IS-3 missed the war by a few weeks and was the best tank design of its day and so on. The allies had pretty good tanks too as you see, they also had much more concentrated production, though stuff like the sherman and cromwell were crap.

Get your facts right in some stuff, the cities of stalingrad and leningrad and moscow were never captured by the germans, the soviets were initially losing due to bad leadership, but they fought bravely and by the last two years of the war they often beat the germans with smaller casualties on their own side. Italy broke out because the citizens disagreed with the war and the italians were not particularly brave fighters(no offense to anyone meant), Mussolini was a pompous idiot, the only smart fascist dictator was Franco of spain who didn't get involved. Romania joined the russians the moment they reached their borders.

With all honesty, the V-1's were easy to shoot down, very expensive and not very effective in payload or accuracy, The V-2 was too fast to be caught but notoriously inaccurate, expensive and ineffective, their main effect was on morale. Other rockets, think about it, the germans were the only ones who lacked proper air to ground rockets and in ground to ground rockets they were also inferior, While the brits and americans had stuff like the calliope and land mattress, the russians had the amazing katyusha, the germans only had the nebelwerefer, from the air, both the US and UK had accurate and advanced rockets, the russians were more behind but still had okay projectiles.

What are you basing the claim of Germanies amazingly superior jet designs on. The allies had jets that were just as good. Goering almost never achieved a thing he promised after Dunkirk, and never achieved anything after Crete. Churchill was quite brave and encouraging, he was amazing. I don't really like FDR either though the cigar thing is a tad exaggerated. I think Manstein, Montgomery, O'connor, and Kurt Student were better then Rommel, though he is one of my favorite generals, Runsdent, Guderian, and Patton were also great. Zhulov was quite a skilled leader, he won in Mongolia against the japanese, he saved moscow, leningrad, and stalingrad, he won at Kursk and his units eventually fought all the way into the heart of berlin.

By the way, in my opinion the bravest of the brave were the Finns and Poles

[the warlord of the reich]

finns and poles ?  NO WAY MAN they were completly whipped out very easily both air and land. no offense

katyusha is a very unacurate artillery that requires alot of time for reload and is also fragile and often causes friendly fire in open battles or mountain battles.

no no no.... you are very mistaken. leningrad was captured, and stalingrad was captured, moscow was'nt. i dident SAY THAT MOSCOW WAS SIEZED WHY DID YOU SAY I DID MAN?

churchill was a lazyass who just keeps saying words instead of actions, so the people would think that the government is ACTUALLY doing something, did you hear his words "if your going through hell keep going through it" why the hell would keep going through hell while theres a heaven? is this guy's a dumbass? or he's trying to make his army keep going and fighting?

dude, allied jets were'nt as good, and also the focke wulfs completley domnited the skies of their own while messershmitts were owning their enemies in their lands, spitfires and hurricanes were beaten, the luftwaffe was running short on planes and aviators while the stukas were owning russia and the SS bearing down large armies at their fronts and rommel managed to fortify its borders completley, italians did a great job in the war assisting but ended up in ruins and treachery for no reason, bentino died by their hands

pershings were slow, mobility does'nt really matters so stop talking about it! one tiger can take out a whole armored column on its own, stuats and shermens were bitterly weak compered to panzer IV and panzer III and STUG guns and the amazing german anti tanks and also one panther can do like what. destroy 10 shermens? and also tiger 2 was a hell for allied troops, they had tto use aircraft to kill it and alot of anti tank,  british tnks were no match,  well honestly, V1 wwas not easy to shot or intercet without causing some people to die, the pilot will be fried up by the explosions and the remaining pieces and plane will fall down the city, and they were'nt inacurate because they usually run outta fuel when they reach london and fall randomly at the huge city, and  about artillery,  naval superioriority was germany's. they controlled the channels and defended heavily,




stukas were exellent bombers that are even able to turn with allied fighters on their own, not to mention exellent speed and payload and turning radius, it was pretty much the same as val bombers, both of those bombers are historiclly able to fight out enemy fighters alone and kkepp their pace, also aallied planes are mostly ugly,  japanese and germans planes are honestly always nice looking, zeros are really beutifull and stukas and vals and especielly kates and jills, they have extreley large wings and a long stick, what makes them beutifull, and also the spitfirees and hurricanes were usually badly colored and same looking, while acolored their planes nicley, also allied jets were poorer thenn germany's

seeya

[wyvern]

The Poles held off the combined forces of Germany and Russia off for a month, more then france can brag about, then, many fled and fought as tankers, paras, infantry, and pilots in foreign armies. The finns lacked enough ammo, anti tank weapons and troops, yet they held off the russians for nearly half a year in the winter war, then they beat the russians again in 1941-44, and then they beat the Germans out of finland, the Finns and poles were very brave and achieved many things that others deemed impossible. The Katyusha was inaccurate, but it didn't take so long to reload, it didn't cause many friendly casualties and it could swamp enemy positions with the sheer weight of explosive in seconds. Germans feared it more then any other russian weapons. Leningrad was not captured, neither was stalingrad, look it up, here's a link about each, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalingrad_%28battle%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad
Churchill wasn't lazy, he had already achieved a ton prior to WW2 and he inspired the people to fight on, he himself had fought at Omdurman and in the Boer war. He was brave, tough, and a good leader. He wasn't dumb and his leadership ensured britains victory in the battle of britain and further on in the war.

Stukas were getting massacred in the battle of britain, after some skirmishes in which they had terrible losses, the Germans  withdrew them from the west, The Germans lossed air superiority in the battle of Dunkirk and in the west, all of their equipment was too outdated to fight well by 1942, messerschmitts and focke wulfs couldn't keep up with the allied fighters over normandy, they couldn't match the spitfires mkIX and XIV Tempests, typhoons and so on. The luftwaffe lost any dominance in the sky after 1942 when new mark spitfires appeared.

Their fortifications failed, the italians barely helped and the british would have smashed the italians in a couple of months if it wasn't for the afrika corps, The italians fell apart because the civilians hated the war and mussolini who was a pompous and incapable leader.

Allied jets were actually pretty good.

Mobility matters very much, if you can't move fast enough, enemy tanks can out maneuver you and in\f you break down a lot while withdrawing, you lose the vehicle, Two tigers were take out by chaffees, the chaffees flanked them, and before the tigers could turn their turrets they were being gutted, The pershing was just as good as the tiger on;ly more reliable and lighter, The panzer IV was a tad better then the cromwell and sherman, but the panzer III was pretty bad and the stug lacked a turret and all had weak side armor, in fact, even the mighty panther could be taken out by a flank shot from a stuart because it only had 45mm side armor. The tiger II was easily outmaneuvered, an easy target for infantry, tank hunters and fighter bombers, its only use was as a slightly more mobile pillbox.the churchill, matilda, and comet were wonderful tanks, as was the pershing. IS-2 and IS-3, and SU-100 and ISU-152 and T-34/85.

The V-1 was actually quite easy to shoot down and most fell completely off target.

Also, on the naval issue, the Germans didn't control anything with their navy, they had very few ships larger then a destroyer and their submarines had a higher death rate then kamikazes.

The germans did have some cool tank aces like Knispel and Wittman, they rarely survived and though they occasionally held up while allied columns, it often cost them their tanks and lives.

No offense but in air combat the stuka and val couldn't turn with a bomber, let alone a fighter, they also weren't fast enough to catch much, The two dive bombers that had any chance of fighting air to air were the dauntless, one crew had over 5 kills in this plane, and the crummy skua, The Val could barely carry more the 500lbs, just like the worthless skua and the stuka could carry as much as a dauntless but that was still only 1000lbs.

Actually allied fighters were quite beautiful but every plane is unique in some way, in my opinion the nicest looking were the Avia b534 biplane, the dauntless, the spitfire, typhoon and tempest, p-38, p-40, Focke wulf, ki-32 and corsair.

The allied planes often had nice camouflage too

Lastly allied jets were just as good if not better then germanies.

One important thing, you have posted multiple incorrect things so I suggest that you get all your facts and research straight prior to posting.

[Hagekura]

I think german Aerodynamics at WWII were far more advanced than allies.
Maybe you know the "Operation Paperclip" of US army.
If the allies technologies were superior than germany's,they didn't have to do such operations.
Later German Recipro　planes like FW190D-9 and Ta152,they were superior planes than the Spitfires and Mustangs.
though germany lacked of fuels to fly those planes and outnumbered by allied air forces.

about Jet airplanes,germany Jet fighters were truely of the future products at that time.
RAF's Gloster Meteor jet fighter wasn't so great if compared with other advanced Recipro planes.lesser than Me262.and about USAAF's bell p-59 jet fighter,It's topspeed was slower than advanced Recipro planes.

One fact that shows german's advanced air technologies is that:


It's a USAF's F-86A Sabre Jet fighter which fought in the korean war.first flight was 1947.

It's a Soviet Air Force's Mig-15 Jet fighter.also fought in the korean war.first flight was 1947.


It's a prototype design of Ta183 jet fighter of german.It's developed under WWII.

[the warlord of the reich]

no.... historiclly, stukas and vals can fight out with enemis on their own, especielly in early fights, stuka is agile and medium gun and armor and val was fast, the allies had to like tighten turns alot with IJN planes that they started to stall alot of times,

tempst and spitfires look alot like eachother and they're seriously not beutifull, honestly

stuka with its nicley gulled and shor wings was beutifull and also HE111 bombers were incredibly nice looking with a side view for it

finns were poorly armed and poorly trained, why did you say they were the best???

germans infantry were the best, and also artilllery, katyusha would like hit a very wide radius if the sorounding area f the target, it was completly useless, germans had the best and heaviest and most dangerous artillery have ever seen service or made....


germans attempted to assist mussolini back atop his governjment but failed as german borders were gbesiged, dude the SS were like holding off alot of outnumbered and outnumbering enemies and aircraft,


dude, flanked or not tigers can make a massive damage and extreme casualties to advancing enemies with a very long range guns and also panther was near impossible to kill or destroy by anything, infantry are like crap and useless to take on tanks, they infact get crushed by tanks that have a great armor, allied troops were usually not well equiped and armed and given few greneds while strumgrenadiers and volksgrenadiers and and fallscchirmjager even volksstrumm were heavily armed with anti-tank panzercreck (armor terror) and the short range of allied tanks was usually promising the german anti-tank to advance and take minimum damage and fire and run!



king tiger 2 was a creation of massiv destruction and death to allies.... they were unable to take it out with stuarts and shermans and lees and sometimes churchills and cromwells and all other tanks, while germans produced their extremley deadly and killer mauser super heavy tanks that has the range of artillery and the speed of a tiger and the power to hole down a modern skyscrapper or reduce a mediaval bulwark to pieces and reduce a heavily armored churchill from a tank to a piece of squished iron, nothing could stand up to it except extreme heavy air assault with extra rockets top accurate and high speed otherwise it will result in alot of ammo waste.... either artillery such as priests and long toms were unable to detroy the tank even with accurate shots, panzers were ann exellent support for infantry and lighht armor and blizkreig assault, dont say they were crap they were very effective beating down alot russian and allied tanks with ease, while italy brought its carros to the fight for light tank support and armor support and light infantry, panzers are able to advance in speed while shooting alot of enemys down instead of a crappy lee or a sherman or churchills, pershings were an industrial nightmare also were much weaker for the german tanks, and in medium tanks panzers definetly win, inn the anti-aircraft warfare germans win with alot of heavy flak both able to shoot tanks and planes with asee,

corsairs were as deadly to its enemies alo as deadly to its own pilots for serioustechnical trouble and usually its can be outmanouvred by oscars very easily, while trying to tighten turns it stalls and gets destroyed with no kills, like in the marianas turkeyshoot, allied planes fell one ater another shoot down by oscars and vals and zeros and shot apart and scattered without a great much of victory, it was a pwnage of death for alied planes that fell down along with alot of defeats untill the turning point at midway

[wyvern]

no.... historiclly, stukas and vals can fight out with enemis on their own, especielly in early fights, stuka is agile and medium gun and armor and val was fast, the allies had to like tighten turns alot with IJN planes that they started to stall alot of times,

tempst and spitfires look alot like eachother and they're seriously not beutifull, honestly

stuka with its nicley gulled and shor wings was beutifull and also HE111 bombers were incredibly nice looking with a side view for it

finns were poorly armed and poorly trained, why did you say they were the best???

germans infantry were the best, and also artilllery, katyusha would like hit a very wide radius if the sorounding area f the target, it was completly useless, germans had the best and heaviest and most dangerous artillery have ever seen service or made....


germans attempted to assist mussolini back atop his governjment but failed as german borders were gbesiged, dude the SS were like holding off alot of outnumbered and outnumbering enemies and aircraft,


dude, flanked or not tigers can make a massive damage and extreme casualties to advancing enemies with a very long range guns and also panther was near impossible to kill or destroy by anything, infantry are like crap and useless to take on tanks, they infact get crushed by tanks that have a great armor, allied troops were usually not well equiped and armed and given few greneds while strumgrenadiers and volksgrenadiers and and fallscchirmjager even volksstrumm were heavily armed with anti-tank panzercreck (armor terror) and the short range of allied tanks was usually promising the german anti-tank to advance and take minimum damage and fire and run!



king tiger 2 was a creation of massiv destruction and death to allies.... they were unable to take it out with stuarts and shermans and lees and sometimes churchills and cromwells and all other tanks, while germans produced their extremley deadly and killer mauser super heavy tanks that has the range of artillery and the speed of a tiger and the power to hole down a modern skyscrapper or reduce a mediaval bulwark to pieces and reduce a heavily armored churchill from a tank to a piece of squished iron, nothing could stand up to it except extreme heavy air assault with extra rockets top accurate and high speed otherwise it will result in alot of ammo waste.... either artillery such as priests and long toms were unable to detroy the tank even with accurate shots, panzers were ann exellent support for infantry and lighht armor and blizkreig assault, dont say they were crap they were very effective beating down alot russian and allied tanks with ease, while italy brought its carros to the fight for light tank support and armor support and light infantry, panzers are able to advance in speed while shooting alot of enemys down instead of a crappy lee or a sherman or churchills, pershings were an industrial nightmare also were much weaker for the german tanks, and in medium tanks panzers definetly win, inn the anti-aircraft warfare germans win with alot of heavy flak both able to shoot tanks and planes with asee,

corsairs were as deadly to its enemies alo as deadly to its own pilots for serioustechnical trouble and usually its can be outmanouvred by oscars very easily, while trying to tighten turns it stalls and gets destroyed with no kills, like in the marianas turkeyshoot, allied planes fell one ater another shoot down by oscars and vals and zeros and shot apart and scattered without a great much of victory, it was a pwnage of death for alied planes that fell down along with alot of defeats untill the turning point at midway

@Hakegura
The ta 183 never flew though, it has to be compared to stuff like the comet and metero mkIV's to the me 262 in which case the allied planes are just as good though with lighter, more accurate armament, better turning ability and far more reliable.
Also, the focke wulf ta 152 and d-9 were good but I wouldn't say better then the allied fighters, more like equal by performance but there were too few to make much of a difference, also, against focke wulf's the mustangs and tempests usually came out as the winners, though with spitfires it was about 50-50 chance of winning in a fight of spitfire mkIX or XIV against a Ta 152.

And what you said about how germanies jet designs being futuristic, they were, and nearly none of them made it off the paper either. Also, while many allied and axis jet and aircraft designs look advanced, most had poor performance, were never built or otherwise worthless.

Here are some stats
Focke-wulf Ta152's built-150
Mustang's built-16-17,000
Spitfires built-20,351

While these include post war production and I didn't include the focke wulf or messershmitt stats, the allied fighters were produced far more en mass

Warlord-When did stukas and vals try to fight with fighters, they were usually gutted when they tried anything of the sort, most kills achieved by stukas were ancient bombers and recon aircraft.

The finns were the best for multiple reasons, they beat the russians twice and then they beat the germans out of finland, They had bad equipment but they were very courageous, well trained and adapted, they also came up with numerous traps and improvised weapons, Histories best sniper is from finland and they took out hundreds of tanks with mines, AT rifles, molotov's, and explosives, all of which were improvised or considered by others to be outdated.

German artillery was in no way amazing, it was roughly equal to the allies but without the devastating rocket artillery like the calliope, land mattress, and katyusha.

Actually those who held off the most were the fallschirmjager, not the SS.

Tigers and Panthers could be taken out relatively easily at the flanks. Infantry are the biggest danger to a tank anywhere, the allied infantry took out hundreds of tigers and panthers with AT mines, flamethrowers, molotov's, Bazooka's, PIAT's, plastic explosives and other weapons. several tigers were killed by 6lb guns in the flanks and both the tiger and panther could be killed head on by the 17lb at a decent range.

For your information, there is no such thing as sturm grenadiers, the volkstrumm was militia of old men and boys armed with five round rifles and single shot panzerfausts. The volksgrenadiers were also like militia, the only good soldiers you mentioned were the fallschirmjager.

Also, the panzerschreck had a huge backblast, it shot fumes and dust at the firer and though this was partially alleviated with the shield, the panzerschreck got a recoil from this addition. the panzer faust was single shot and both of these weapons could be protected against with sand bags, angled metal plates, and additional spaced armor. The bazooka and piat also have the weakness when faced with spaced armor due to their HEAT shells.

Lees weren't even in service in 1944, the Koenigtiger could be taken out with infantry AT weapons and the british 17lb and american 76mm AT guns, and while well armored head on, its flanks were still vulnerable, it was an easy target from the air too slow to run away, its turret was very slow and it was prone to breakdowns, its only good points were armor and firepower, otherwise, its about the same like a pillbox.

The maus you mean, it never got into service, was not as effective as your depicting against buildings and never actually fought, they would have been very vulnerable to infantry, aircraft and heavier tank weapons, it couldn't cross bridges, was even slower and more unreliable the the Koenigtiger, which is near impossible, and was too large for practical use, once again, it was little more then a pillbox.

The panzer III's and IV's couldn't penetrate a churchhills front armor and when confronted by lees and shermans in africa they were outmatched, only late mark IV's could beat the sherman and even those couldn't beat the comet. Pershings were just as good as tigers, far less of an industrial problem while being lighter, faster and far more reliable. In medium armor the british comet wins with 4" of armor on three sides a slightly weaker version of the 17lb gun, fast, agile, and a mere 32 tons in weight.

The corsair had some initial teething troubles but it didn't kill many pilots, While it could be outmaneuvered by most japanese planes, it was far faster, better armored, and had greater firepower and carry capacity, your must realize that a pilot in a faster airplane decides when and where to fight, the japanese planes maneuverability was worthless when enemies used dive and zoom tactics that they couldn't match.

Again, get your facts straight, the marianas turkey shoot was a huge victory for the US, they shot down hundreds of enemy planes for the loss of a mere 29 of their own, initially they were losing, but this can be at least partially blamed on the lack of proper equipment and aerial support.
Fact:US sherman crews in the pacific often stopped using AP shells because they would break through the japanese tanks from one side to the other without destroying the enemy.

[the warlord of the reich]

hehe not true man completley not, volksgrenadiers were elites instead of militia, while panzergrenadiers and fallschirmjagers and volkstrum and sturmtruppen (world war 1 vetrens) were more then able to defeat tanks, panzerfaust is a single warhead enough to ambush the enemy with a good punch of damage yet still light enough to carry and run away from enemy sight, they were also heavily armed with recoiless guns and bazookas,

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_ee3y4dky.jpg[/img][/URL] german light recoiless gun, very effective VS all ground targets, can be used by airborne infantry and light infantry

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_lckud5ip.jpg[/img][/URL]15 cm Nebelwerfer 41 multiple rocket launcher, more then able to destroy advancing enemies although its more accurate and fires like a bombard cannister instead of loose and spread missiles, amazingly effective VS armor, infantry and columns and buildings

artillery of germany was seriously amazing, such as morsar and the amazingly and incredibly super ultra heavy pwnage knock out puncher 35.5 cm Haubitze M1 artillery, thats not all, the Karl-Gerät was the largest self propelled artillery that has seen service in history, only 7 were built and they were completley destructive stuff with not a tiny drop of doubt

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_r7pi3iqk.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_twtcf4p0.jpg[/img][/URL] those are Karl-Geräts , check out the sieze,

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_0thg2zpu.jpg[/img][/URL] this is an another light recoiless gun was able to fire at high rate at advancing enemy of any kind (land enemy) this gun fires grenades instantly like a grenade launcher, it used to fire and fallback by recoil while reloading

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_kczj2vfc.jpg[/img][/URL] The 12.8 cm FlaK 40, was a German World War II anti-aircraft gun built as the successor to the 88 mm gun. Although it was not produced in high numbers, it was one of the most effective heavy AA guns of its era, award winning and effective guns used especielly in the defense of berlin, The gun fired a 27.9 kg (57.2-pound) shell at 880 m/s (2,890 ft/s) to a maximum ceiling of 14,800 m (48,556 ft). Compared with the 88mm FlaK 18 & 36, the 128 used a powder charge four times as great which resulted in a shell flight time only one-third as long. This made aim against fast-moving targets much easier.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_ak0jwswv.jpg[/img][/URL] The 21 cm Kanone 12 in Eisenbahnlafette (21 cm K 12 (E)) was a German railroad gun used in the Second World War. it was a furiously and strategiclly long range firing gun that will shoot for support and naval guarding and lots of damage with long range makes it over the top, this picture shows it ready for firing

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_gtwbi5cm.jpg[/img][/URL] In the first years of the war, the Wehrmacht had less interest in developing self-propelled anti-aircraft guns, but as the Allies developed air superiority, the need for more mobile and better-armed self-propelled anti-aircraft guns increased, this one's a very powerfull air craft shooter that is able and capable to shoot alot of allies with heavy precise machine The combination of armor and rapid fire from the four guns of the Wirbelwind also made it very effective against ground targets aswell, it has maximum protection for crew and also very effective at shooting the lightly armored spitfires

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_up9qqd2l.jpg[/img][/URL] check this railway gun out, its a vetren of both WORLD WAR 1 and 2, it was originally a naval gun thts what made its damage over the top, it served in coastal defense after they finished with it in the frontlines, it was truelly helpfull and effective gun of both WW1 and WW2 only had 2 models in service

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_hbq9ad9c.jpg[/img][/URL] 21 cm Mörser 16 was a heavy field howtizer for extremly long range support and attacks, seving as a field bombardier and support for advancing friendly troops, it was effective for firing heavy shells and large explosions terrorizing enemies to death

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_rrxi65iv.jpg[/img][/URL] yet an another haubtize, and this one is yet another world war 1 and world war 2 vetran!!! this one was amazing services esecielly coast guard duties although it could've been slightly more effective as a supporter in the eastern front, if germany gathered all those up and pushed them into russia, they could even possibly turn the tide now thats a defeater of katyushas and organstalins, this one also particepated in the seiege of Sevastopol.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_osa3vxe9.jpg[/img][/URL] marder tank, one of the best anti-tanks in the war, it was a verry effective and often used by the german army, most of it was made in captured french factories, it furiously toke out the allied tanks with ease, extremley long range and top damage to blow them tanks up without difficulties

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_kdsxyeqn.jpg[/img][/URL] Krupp K5 was an extremley long heavy railway gun that can fire like from city to city, it was an able artillery to squish advancing enemiees of alll types with no difficulty, also defended by machineguns and rifles in it, it will be able to defend itself while firing to support friendly tropops,

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_m2pcjr08.jpg[/img][/URL] The 15 cm Kanone 16 (15 cm K 16) was a very heavy field gun used by Germany in World War I and World War II. proved effective in fire support and coast guarding and mobility along with escorting divisions and corps

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-12-2010-almlf_com_l6iw42nd.jpg[/img][/URL] The 7.5 cm PaK 40 (7.5 cm Panzerabwehrkanone 40) was a German 7.5 centimetre anti-tank gun developed in 1939-1941 by Rheinmetall and used during the Second World War. PaK 40 formed the backbone of german anti-tank guns for the latter part of World War II. it was effective gun VS tanks and armor

[wyvern]

Now, at least, most of its factual, except for a couple of stuff, the volksgrenadiers had worse training then normal, infantry, the title was more for moral rather then due to quality.

Recoilless guns are nice except for a couple of things, they still way more the infantry AT weapons like the bazooka, piat, etc while using the same HEAT style of attack(mostly), they cause a huge dust cloud that reveals their location, just like all infantry AT weapons but the PIAT, and lastly, the jet of hot gas and flame that shoots can incinerate crewmen and troops positioned behind it. The nebelwerfer was nice but not very accurate or good AT wise, though it was still like the katyusha and other allied rocket launchers and due to its immobility it was easily discovered by its smoke trail while being unable to move away, just like the recoilless guns. Also, while the heavy artillery displayed was impressive, it was not in any way very accurate, I also noticed you didn't mention the schwerer gustav, however as mentioned, none of this equipment was very mobile or accurate, the railguns are really cool, I saw one in aberdeen, but they were stuck to railways, and an appealingly easy target for an airstrike, so they're not really worth the amount of resources that have to be spent on them, they were also not very proof to a partisan or infantry attack. The 128mm was a very nice gun, I haven't seen a picture of it in a while, but It was, as is the problem with all heavy AA guns, rather inaccurate and immobile, though these had as mentioned several advantage including some amount of radar guidance.

Also, while the wirbelwing looks really cool, it was in fact not much better then other SPAA guns of the time, it couldn't really fire on the move, it was very inaccurate and it had trouble hitting most Airborne targets, it could, however be quite devastating to infantry, though due to its light armor and open top, this was only as long as the infantry lacked bazookas and grenades or any sort of armor support, its turret lacked armor to stop even a 37mm gun, it looks nice though.

I wouldn't call the haubitzes a defeater of katyushas, since the katyushas would obliterate it immediately in counter battery fire, also, the russians would sacrifice their bombers without a thought to take them out, these guns had trouble pounding through sevabostopol and artillery often caused more trouble then it solved, for example, in monte cassino and stalingrad.

the pak 40 was a good gun but not as good as the 17lb gun or the 75mm L70 on the panther.

The marder is not a tank, its a tank hunter, tanks are vehicles with a turret and fully enclosed crew space, the marder had a decent gun but beyond that it was little more then a su76, its armor couldn't cope with much more then heavy machine guns and it had an open top, leaving it vulnerable to shrapnel and grenades and small arms fire. Also, the sturmtruppen weren't used in WW2, I believe.

Heres a way russians defeated panzerfaust and panzerschreck attacks on their tanks, they attached sandbags extra metal plates, and angled aluminum to deflect or absorb HEAT projectiles.

[the warlord of the reich]

nebelwerfer was the most furious and dangerous and scary and accurate rocketlauncher in the whole war dude, they were scary and sylogical and extremley devestating and destroying and alot of russians surrendred under its fire, even if they were not physiclly injured, the missiles were fast and furious and damaging
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
germany mad super heavy and powerful and stealth stuff, i mean it, Landkreuzer P1000 "Ratte" was the design of world's most furious tank, if the tank was completed, it will be probably used this day, it was a giant, truest me when i say "it was a giant" it was big as a building not a tank, it was a ship size, and also the germans made the "horten ho229 flying wing" was a super advanced jet fighter and recon that lead germany to the side of victory in air supirioriority in techenology, meteor sucks, this flying wing has 2x jumo 004B turnojets 2x 30MMcannons, 2x brake parachutes,plywood and charcoal body for stealth crossings, ejection seat for pilot. can reach 1000/MPH. thats not all of it, messerschmitt ME163 "the rocket buggy" jet aircraf that shot down mustangs like turkeys and burnt flying fortresses in the air having a HWK 109-509 hot engine and 200/MPH launch and cruise speed of 550/MPH and an amazing 50MM 2x shot, flying under the bomber it would fire like a shotgun, thats still not it. germany also made the first XXI U-BOAT also known as "elektroobote" was the first submarine that can operate entirley submerged,, made the US and UK navy look very primitive, the sub could fire 18 torpedos in only 19 minutes in the range 15,000NM the design of it inspired the invention of nuclear submarines, wanna revise what you saidabout the poo german industry?????????
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERSHINGS SUCKED, they were even beaten by panzars if they concentrate fire, and possibly flank they're gonna be able to pwn the enemy pershings with ease, one tiger can take out 2 pershings and like 5 anti-tanks without losing half of its armor, bazookas were'nt able to pentrate its armor at all, and nearly all allied tanks were poorly armed to face off with tanks, poor guns were setup on lees and shermans and pershings and nearly all, pershing was a normal heavy tank while tiger were advanced and techonolgical heavy tanks that lead the germans to a long jump forward in technology and industry, panthers were an ultra fear for allies that alot of allies were beaten by it caused the allied army to sustain heavy moral and sycological damage on enemys, tiger 2 was most feared and strongest tanks of the war, unmobile? no worries, the gun can fire a shell that will pass thru the armor of a stuart and then go through an another stuart and get stuck on a third tank, tiger 2 can squish an entire anti-tank batteries with ease, it was resistent to armor and anti tank so bye bye for those anti tanks, hello for the future tanks, and tiger 2 can be destroyed by mostly 20 spitfires with rockts and nearly 6 hours of heavy assault they'll be able to finally take it out.

the allies started reporting of massive shells of wide radius and a very deadly ultra unbelivable damage on their columns, lots and lots of their tanks got whiped out furiously untill by critical recon they realized that there was gustav scherwer "the father of all guns" 2 of it were firing upon the advancing troops, those 2 were used in devestating manner that whiped out alot of allied troops with few shots and precise, those artilleries were killing craploads of allies in europe and it proved it in italy and france and sevastipol, the russians weere getting an ultra whupping from it, especielly haubtize, the haubtize was velunarble to air thats why the fockewulfs and messershmitts were like controlling the skies, and wirbelwing was not inaccurate, it was infact deadly even while trying to fire mass shoots at the sky instead of accurate, it was fast and powerful also supported by flak guns they can massivley slaughter air assaults and recon planes like the crappy grasshoper, having so many heavy artillery concentrated at one town was ULTRA DEADLY SUPER KILLING to the russians, alot surrendred or fled, the others were punished by death from afar, the railway guns of germany were the best also the subarines and aLSO THE TANK DESIGNS OF GERMANY WERE ADMITTED TO BE THE BEST TANK DESIGNS DURING THE WAR WINNING GERMANY WITH THE BEST JETS, SHIPS AND FASTEST AIRCRAFT AND BEST SOLDIERS AND BEST AIRBORNE AND BEST ARTILLERY AND BEST SUBMARINES

then panzer grenadiers can take them out, HEAT waas effective before the enemy proved ways to counter it, but recoilss guns are still avilable also whats wrong with 5 bullet guns? they are good and fast, shoot&reloa quickly also usually accurate for an aiming piece of iron attached was accurate, instead of machinguns, they were hard to aim, although germans had easily aimed guns and machineguns, recoiless can be used for ambush instead of open field. the german rocket launcher was mobile, and accurate while reloading fast but katyushas were inaccurate, russians wasted completly alot of ammo that have'nt done a single kill without close or lucky shoots, it was like 1 german kill for evrey 50 rockets fired, and also the german rockets launchers were able to fallback by recoil which made them totally effective VS advancing enemies, they can also limber and run away with it, and it barley burned the crew except if he puts his head down the barrel, and also the dust was little due to mud and ice in russia and even if it was sandy, dust clouds will be small for hig firing speed and few rockets while katyusha was making large clouds for its huge and sevrel rockets fired, and reload speed is low for katyusha, very slow

yeah railway guns are cool, they're awesome i never saw one except in photos but i hope i'll see one, germany was the most industrial country that made so many railguns, they were also long range and accurate and also railways can be built, it was accurate otherwise they would'nt put it all in coast guard services

[wyvern]

First off, the nebelwerfer was crap, it was immobile, easy to find, inaccurate and near worthless in most combat, the katyusha was extremely feared by the germans and killed thousands of germans cowering in their fortifications.

The Ratte would never get into use, it didn't have enough armor, was impossible to hide and slow to move, it would have just wasted resources and been destroyed by a fighter with a 500 lb bomb, plus, it never got off the drawing board, if you're gonna be showing german technical superiority with projects never leaving the paper, I should start including stuff like the Tortoise ,  The Ho229 was only on paper, it never served flew or fought, If I include every allied experiment like this, I might as well include the Sea Hawk and other aircraft, It couldn't reach 1000mph, cuz thats past the speed of sound, and with its structure, it would fall apart.

Going onward, the me163, shot down very few allied aircraft at a large loss rate of pilots and aircraft, it actually had 2x30mm cannons and was not particularly popular with its pilots and crew.

The XXI sub was good, but I already said the germans had the best submarine technology, the only technology they were best with, also, very few were built and none fought and its hard to judge how well it would have done considering the great allied technological advances against submarines of the time.

Hate to break this to you but in nearly all pershing versus tiger engagements, the pershing beat the tiger, not the other way around, also, the US tanks had one great advantage over their german counterparts, gyro-stabilized cannons allowing them to shoot while moving with better accuracy, every tank from the lowly stuart had it. plus, bazookas could penetrate from the side which is where infantry will most likely ambush it from anyway. The pershing when compared to a tiger is about like this. Armor, about equal, armament, equal but pershing has stabilized gun, weight, pershing is lighter, speed and reliability, pershing is better. Plus here are some weapons that can take out a koenigtiger with ease, Flamethrowers, 17lb and 76mm guns at the flanks, possibly head on, 95mm howitzer from the flanks, bomb, rocket, 122mm and 152mm cannon-howitzer head on due to shell shock, russian 100mm AT gun from the side, maybe from the front, molotov, AT mine. Not so invulnerable anymore, don't you agree.

The allies generally ignored shell fire because if the germans opened fire, there was a large chance of the haubitzes and cannon getting killed by CB fire or aircraft, Also, despite the shell fire the russians fought bravely and with grim determination, not to mention that all artillery, even in modern times is inaccurate, by the way, what do you mean by five bullet guns, thats not a lot since its only one kar98 magazine.

While rifles are good at long range, they are pretty bad in close range which is what the russians were great at fighting, the ppsh-41 had a 63 round magazine with which they swept the germans aside with ease.

About recoilless guns, they do incinerate you if your within about 10 feet behind them which is not good, they're not very mobile and the dust/smoke cloud give away their position.

Reload speed is bad for all rocket launchers and the katyusha had far more rockets the the neb ready to fire. What do you mean by fall back by recoil, it doesn't make sense?

Rail guns were crap, they look really nice and have good range but are stuck to the railways, are inaccurate, and an easy aerial target. still, they look cool and huge

In my opinion the germans had the best submarines and best AT cannons tied with the british.

Best jets go to UK
best aircraft to the USA and UK
best soldiers can go to anyone due to the skills of their elite forces.
best airborne is probably a tie between britain, germany and USA.
best artillery goes to USA UK and Russia
best tanks go to russia and the UK.

[the warlord of the reich]

wrong, WRONG just for you seeieng a gun on a stationary unlimbred does'nt mean its not mobile, revise revise revise....

best roops are germany's
best aircraft are luftwaffe's, they were far faster then anything the allies had
best artillery are german for complete damage and usually light and precise,
tiger 2 is more then able to like crunch infantry and all allied tanks, also jagdpanthers were squishing allied tanks all over europe
nebelwerfer was crap? i suggest you to immedietly change your mind, and one qustion, what aircraft strikes? germans had some sense and you're thinking them as foolis idiots for leaving artillery open for air strikes, what you said is dumb, nebelwerfer was accurate for rocket launcher and fast reloading, near worthless? it was whipping out tanks and infantry cowering and surrendring with you saying they were brave, why did germans made so many jails and camps? criminals? no, it was the russians surrendred under railway guns and rockets, sheesh....

stuck on railway or not, a new railway can be built with high speed by engineers, and katyusha was more crap, missiles usually bomb in the air or fall down with its engine stopping and also was very inaccurate shooting alot more russians and katyushas were easily taken out by air support and light infantry and armored vehicles even by recon vehicles

judge what? what techenology? sonar? i said that this sub is completly submerged while operating, it wont be lockated so easily otherwise it would've been not world's best sub at the time, if you say UK had bet subs then why so many UK ships sank at the channel? the channel was a graveyard for all alllied convys and fleets, and in pacific, l-400 was crushing everything, it was alaso able to operate and send aircraft to attack enemies from it, amazing aircraft

fallback by recoil would make sense if you know anything about artillery

itts a fallback, the artillersists will start pulling the cannon backwards afor short distance and reloading meanwhile and shooting even while movingalso they were able to attach a vehicle to pull the gun and stop to fire and continue running, no tank could catch that

how did it swept germans? by beynnet? sure explains how volkstrumm were able to kill so mqany enemies for militia troops it was by shooting the charging sickos, seriously who is a machinegun was better for melee?

railguns are crap, thats an insult to like a best gun that can take out a 1/5 of a city with a single shot, crazy... and they were large radius explosive otherwis they would'nt pwn down everything at their ways and kill them

[wyvern]

Guns are not very mobile, other then mountain howitzers like the m8 and thew leig 18, recoilless cannons and light AT guns, all artillery has to be towed, it takes a long time to limber up a cannon and then redeploy it, no matter what you may think, it is near impossible to man handle a 6lb gun let alone standard artillery.

Best troops are specifically the following, in my order of most skilled downward, SAS, Rangers, sezione gamma(italian commandos), Finnish troops, fallschirmjager, american and british paras, Polish troops and ANZAC soldiers, italian and german mountain troops, french foreign legion.

Best aircraft, probably UK and USA, the p-80 and meteor IV were just as fast as the me 262, and the allied piston engined fighters were more then able to take out all german piston opposition.
Fun fact:The british spitfire mkXIV succeeded in catching up to, and shooting down an arado 234 jet bomber in a dive, despite the arados official speed superiority.

Best artillery goes to the allies, the huge rocket and conventional artillery barrages they conducted wiped out whole german battalions, the germans didn't have any particularly good artillery either.

The koenigtiger was even vulnerable to the t34/85's cannon, it was being taken out with relative ease, the main problem was, that if it got immobilized or disabled in the middle of a road it couldn't be towed away .

the nebelwerfer was worse then russian and allied rockets, the germans may have had sense to camouflage their artillery but good luck hiding anything when the huge smoke trail the rockets leave immediately show you position, the allied rockets were usually mounted on vehicles to be more mobile, none of the rockets were accurate but the nebelwerfer was one of the less accurate types, and was not particularly fast to reload either, plus, the katyusha units did not have particularly large casualties. The russians surrendered because of bad leaders not because of a lack of individual courage, at sevabostopol, they held out for months while inflicting huge casualties on the germans.

Thinking railways can be built fast is crazy. it takes a long time and lots of resources while never covering everything.

So many UK ships were not sunk in the channel as in the atlantic in the years 1940-41, the channel wasn't the graveyard for anything, I just said the germans had the best subs too. The I-400 didn't smash anything and the airplanes on it were nothing impressive, on the other side though, the US and UK submarine force caused the near complete obliteration of japans merchant ships and cause huge damage to japanese military ships too.

Good luck shooting a cannon while moving it, ever considered what the recoil of the cannon would do, hooking it up to a vehicle takes a lot of time too, you can reload while dragging the gun but you can't shoot without setting it up and positioning it. Also, you can't shoot your cannon when its hooked up to a vehicle that's towing it, if you were to do anything close to that in real life, you'd get overwhelmed because the process would take a lot of time, it would be something like this, hook up cannon to tow vehicle, ride along and maybe reload, stop, detach cannon, position cannon, aim, fire, re attach cannon to vehicle and so on. This is all but impossible while in combat, you'd get caught and overrun before you set it up.

The russians swept them with their smg and lmg armed squads whose rapid firepower proved far superior to the bolt action rifles in close combat, a 9 man german infantry squad had five riflemen, an nco with an smg and a three man machine gun team, this was good for long range combat but when the russian troops got into close range, their fully automatic and high capacity weapons caused panic and destruction, it was, in fact, what pushed the germans to develop the stg44 in response to these russian assault tactics.

the volkstrumm didn't kill much while receiving huge casualties and surrendering a lot.

rail guns didn't smash much either, they were only good for sieges when railroads were available and the enemy didn't any aircraft.

[the warlord of the reich]

dude, russians had poor guns either and also volkstrum and militia-mostly all nazi forces were armed with heavy damage MP40 and MG34 and gehwer guns, kar 98 was'nt bad infact it was effective both close range and long range to counter back assaults, russia had poor industry resulted in weak weapons and primitive aswell,

try to not fix the crapness of UK's anti-sub defense, the cannel contains craploads of dead convoys or ships, what anti-sub defense? sonar? water bazookas? no. it operated completley submerged so please under stand that it could not be possibly seen by a ship or a plane or any other crap like that, I 400 was capeble and extremley large with a medium anti-air gun and the planes WERE impressive, taking out scouts and intercepting, even shooting allied supplies or reinforcments, and also a powerfull armor, and also you have the range advantage for a fallback by recoil so you will not b caught, omg, yo fallback while reloading, dettach, fire, limbre and reload, from a mximum range you cant be caught at all,

allies had like good anti-air like what gun? bofors? dont tak about it it stinks in anti-air it had a poor armor and very short range while ostwind and werbelwind were medium and long range and were able to fire while moving bieng mobile and powerfull anti-air

particulary? dude, katyusha was widley and unbelivably inaccurate, it was firing like 50 missiles for a single vehicle or something out, nebelwerfer was happens to be probably one of world's most accurate missile launchers

ever heard of germany's armored vehicles and recon? they were even able to punish and completley trash and shower infantry AND tanks with shells and machineguns, that germany had the best armored vehicles and recon in the war, best planes especiielly in speed goes for germany, completley, while allied aircraft usually lacking armor and guns and agility, they didnt make all round planes while ME109 was an able and capeble planes, and focke wulfs was all able to shoot and manuever and accalearate and shoot,

hey how can like fortify a tank while moving it? your gonna like rope the sandbags on the tank or your just guns shower the sand over the tank? and panzerfausten was an elite anti tank was more then capeble and fearsomly able to take nearly all the world's tanks out at the time,

russia dident had planes to counter back those railguns, and railguns were more then able to bomb up and trash 40 shermans with 1 precise shot

british paras? are you serious?they were almostly doing like nothing in the war, they were'nt trained, anyways the whole britis army was very regular instead of elite, it had a small army untill germany invaded they quickly conscripted large numbers of people to their army with low training they were pushed, volksturm were one of the last troops surviving the wr that fough with germany do you know that? they slaughtered tanks

panthers and tigers were able to fire while moving, and for your information, churchills were weak tanks, lacking a good gun, it would be easily ambushed or even stupidl attacked by infantry and fried up,

werbelwind was'nt inaccurate infact its mass bullets can ripe an entire air offensive with just inaccurate and unconcentraed fire, fail... and also heard of ballestics?

you can take out a marder by encercling it or by jumping like a superman over it, no so easy to shoot it out without a skyscarpper either,

jagdpanther could out beat and like put a nice piece of iron through the armor of all allied tanks

smoke? so what, like the russians are gonna send cossacks to handle it? artillery anything? nope, smoke is'nt a problem and also there was no rocket launcher dustless, and nebelwerfer was completley terrfying russian otherwise the germans wont build so many arresting camps and jails in russia, sheesh!

nearly all allied tanks were armed with extremley poor guns, do you realize that 3 panzer III can take out a churchill? and do you realize 2 pershings would be squished under the gun of a tiger king? and do you realize that a panther can defeat an anti-tank column? and also sturmtigers were one of the best at taking out an entire armored division, and stug dident need a turret, it was an assault gun, whats the actual point of a turret?

[wyvern]

dude, russians had poor guns either and also volkstrum and militia-mostly all nazi forces were armed with heavy damage MP40 and MG34 and gehwer guns, kar 98 was'nt bad infact it was effective both close range and long range to counter back assaults, russia had poor industry resulted in weak weapons and primitive aswell,

try to not fix the crapness of UK's anti-sub defense, the cannel contains craploads of dead convoys or ships, what anti-sub defense? sonar? water bazookas? no. it operated completley submerged so please under stand that it could not be possibly seen by a ship or a plane or any other crap like that, I 400 was capeble and extremley large with a medium anti-air gun and the planes WERE impressive, taking out scouts and intercepting, even shooting allied supplies or reinforcments, and also a powerfull armor, and also you have the range advantage for a fallback by recoil so you will not b caught, omg, yo fallback while reloading, dettach, fire, limbre and reload, from a mximum range you cant be caught at all,

allies had like good anti-air like what gun? bofors? dont tak about it it stinks in anti-air it had a poor armor and very short range while ostwind and werbelwind were medium and long range and were able to fire while moving bieng mobile and powerfull anti-air

particulary? dude, katyusha was widley and unbelivably inaccurate, it was firing like 50 missiles for a single vehicle or something out, nebelwerfer was happens to be probably one of world's most accurate missile launchers

ever heard of germany's armored vehicles and recon? they were even able to punish and completley trash and shower infantry AND tanks with shells and machineguns, that germany had the best armored vehicles and recon in the war, best planes especiielly in speed goes for germany, completley, while allied aircraft usually lacking armor and guns and agility, they didnt make all round planes while ME109 was an able and capeble planes, and focke wulfs was all able to shoot and manuever and accalearate and shoot,

hey how can like fortify a tank while moving it? your gonna like rope the sandbags on the tank or your just guns shower the sand over the tank? and panzerfausten was an elite anti tank was more then capeble and fearsomly able to take nearly all the world's tanks out at the time,

russia dident had planes to counter back those railguns, and railguns were more then able to bomb up and trash 40 shermans with 1 precise shot

british paras? are you serious?they were almostly doing like nothing in the war, they were'nt trained, anyways the whole britis army was very regular instead of elite, it had a small army untill germany invaded they quickly conscripted large numbers of people to their army with low training they were pushed, volksturm were one of the last troops surviving the wr that fough with germany do you know that? they slaughtered tanks

panthers and tigers were able to fire while moving, and for your information, churchills were weak tanks, lacking a good gun, it would be easily ambushed or even stupidl attacked by infantry and fried up,

werbelwind was'nt inaccurate infact its mass bullets can ripe an entire air offensive with just inaccurate and unconcentraed fire, fail... and also heard of ballestics?

you can take out a marder by encercling it or by jumping like a superman over it, no so easy to shoot it out without a skyscarpper either,

jagdpanther could out beat and like put a nice piece of iron through the armor of all allied tanks

smoke? so what, like the russians are gonna send cossacks to handle it? artillery anything? nope, smoke is'nt a problem and also there was no rocket launcher dustless, and nebelwerfer was completley terrfying russian otherwise the germans wont build so many arresting camps and jails in russia, sheesh!

nearly all allied tanks were armed with extremley poor guns, do you realize that 3 panzer III can take out a churchill? and do you realize 2 pershings would be squished under the gun of a tiger king? and do you realize that a panther can defeat an anti-tank column? and also sturmtigers were one of the best at taking out an entire armored division, and stug dident need a turret, it was an assault gun, whats the actual point of a turret?

First off, the militia was generally armed with just rifles, smg's like the mp40 were usually used by the following, NCO's, secondary weapons for gunners, tankers weapons, and paratroops. Infatry squads were organized as I just mentioned, 5 riflemen, a 3 man machine gun team with an mg34 and later and mg42, and a mp40 armed nco, fallschirmjager had and extra 2man machine gun squad, only limited numbers of troops ever recieved weapons like the stg44 and fg42-43. compared to this, american squads almost always consisted of a mix of semi automatic carbines and tommy guns, while the russians were armed either with lots of bolt action rifles but in the case of Guards soldiers and assault troops, it was near 100% smg's and SVT's with lmg support, british squads were the only ones who maintained the doctrine of bolt action rifles but also had sten gunners and bren lmg's in support.

The allies had depth charges, their sonar could detect submerged submarines and they had figured out a variety of sub hunting tactics.

The I-400 had no notable success against allied ships and the planes it carried were only meant for scouting and very light bombing, they couldn't outfight anything in the air.

The allies had plenty of good anti air that was almost never used against ground target against which the bofors was actually quite effective, the americans had the 90mm that was the equivalent of the german 88 and the british had the capable 3inch and 3.7inch AA guns, The german AA guns were roughly equal to the allied ones, the allies had 2omm the germans used 20mm, and they both used medium AA guns in the 37-40mm category, neither of them was much better then the other. Also, the German SPAA guns couldn't shoot with any accuracy while moving, similar to the american m16 halftracks and UK Crusader AA guns.

As I said, none of the rockets were very accurate and the nebelwerfer was among the least accurate, the katyusha wasn't very accurate either but could flatten and area with the sheer amount of firepower.

German recon like what, the sdkfz 221 and 222, the 231, the 234/1 or the 234/2 puma, of these, only the puma was good recon in combat ability, also, other then the 234 series, the maximum armor of these cars was usually 8-10mm, compare this to the abilities of the AEC's, staghounds and daimlers and you have a clear difference. German armour was generally just better in armor(occasionally) and weaponry(also just sometimes) but lacking in maneuverability and speed and reliability.

The late war german planes were slower then allied planes, roughly equally maneuverable, equally or less armored and in weaponry generally worse for fighter versus fighter combat, the spitfire had 4 light mg's and two 20mm's, the american planes all had 6-8 50.cals and the typhoon had 4x20mm's, compared to this, only the focke wulf had comparably rapid fire and heavy armament, the messerschmitts 30mm was low velocity and innaccurate, while the light machine guns were too bad for the armor of the times.

Thats exactly what they did, rope sandbags or weld extra armor to their tanks or attach angled aluminum plates, HEAT relies on an explosion channeled into its targets armor to break it and kill everyone inside the unfortunate vehicle, However, it had to hit at a certain angle to cause the penetrating damage needed, against which the angle plates were adequate to cause rocket projectiles to slip off. It also had to make contact with the actual armor, if it blew up a mere 6 inches away, the metal fragments and projectile force would just patter harmlessly onto the targets armor, german schurzen works this way, and the add on sandbags, spare track and metal plates worked just as well in stopping the projectile just short of the target. Also, while panzerfausts could take out all but the heaviest armor in reality but it doesn't take much ingenuity to stop HEAT attacks.

Also, russia initially didn't have planes due to the treacherous surprise assault launched by the germans, later their shturmoviks would more likely then no wipe the offending rail gun off the face of the earth in a flash. Also, I doubt a rail gun would hit anything smaller then a city with any accuracy.

British paras heroically held off repeated german attacks at arnhem, despite being greatly outnumbered, they also capture multiple targets in the airborne assaults around D-Day and so on. The volkstrumm took out tanks but not in great numbers and they could easily be beaten off by tank riders and supporting infantry. Also, the small british army, was the best trained in the world but inexperienced, later in the war they were the best allied troops and probably just as good, if not better then german regulars and SS. The few better trained organizations were the paratroops of other nations, rangers, SAS, various commando units and possibly the ANZAC troops.

I'm not denying the german tanks ability to fire on the move, but they couldn't do so with much accuracy due to the lack of stabilization on their guns.

Before you insult the churchill, realize that its main weakpoint was its gun, otherwise, its front armor could stop a tigers 88 or panthers 75 and while vulnerable from the sides, it could still stop a pak 40 or panzer IV cannon, it also had great cross country ability, was used as a flame throwing and engineering tank, and stayed in service long past WW2. It could be ambushed easily without infantry support but so can every type of tank, and getting ambushed by a tank is something it can usually notice on its own. and before you start insulting its vulnerability to ambush, realize that soviet, british and finnish troops took all sorts of german tanks out with cheap molotovs and hand carried explosives, some british paras took out panzers by dropping plastic charges from windows onto the german tanks top.

Yes the whirlwind was inaccurate, as was every other non radar guided AA gun of the period, only in modern times, with small portable radar, are AA tanks accurate. also, with an open roof and light armor its easy picking for tanks and infantry.

A marder can be taken out with an AT rifle, it had what 20mm maximum armor, it also had and open back and roof which means its vulnerable to artillery and grenades, it is a very vulnerable vehicle, while not being very stealthy, its main advantage is its cheapness.

The jagdpanther was nice and could take out all allied tanks but lacked particularly strong armor anywhere but in the front and while looking low down and stealthy it was in fact, larger then a churchill in weight and height. I just got a flames of war model of one for christmas and when I compared it to the churchill crocodile I have, I was quite surprised by the difference.

Smoke will bring counter battery fire, and airstrikes which due to the nebelwerfers relatively short range will have no trouble finding it, also, while all rocket launchers make smoke, the other launchers are generally truck mounted of mounted on armoured tracked suspensions or even on shermans. The reason germans had so many POW camps was because of the amount of prisoners gained after the treacherous Barbarossa attack, long before the nebelwerfer came to service.

Do you realize that three panzer III's versus a churchill might possibly scratch its paint, their guns would barely dent the armor, let alone penetrate it. Realize that the koenigtiger weighs about 30 tons more then the pershing and the super pershing, which is still lighter but better armed would take it out with one hit. It is also possibly vulnerable to the pershings main gun, even from the front.

A panther is based on the concept of an assault gun and lacks proper side armor, it is not, in my opinion a remarkable tank.

A sturmtiger is cool but its 380mm rocket mortar is meant to wreck buildings and not tanks, it was inaccurate and rarely used, an interesting project nonetheless.

The stug has a good gun and strong front armor, otherwise, it has but 30mm side armor at the max while lacking good slope on the sides and rear.

Lastly, the point of a turret is to be able to move your gun without having to turn the whole tank, it also means that if your tracks get blown off you can keep shooting, which a turretless assault gun can still do but can't turn to face any attacker unless they attack it head on. Assault guns are cheaper then tanks because they don't need a turret and all the included mechanical parts and production hindrances but on the battlefield, they are very limited.

Oh, and before you criticize russia's inferior designs, realize that their t34 was amongst the most revolutionary tanks of the war, as was the IS-2 and the later IS-3, the IS-2 is near unarguably one of, if not the best tank of the war.

[the warlord of the reich]

do you know wurferhmen? one of the best rocket artillery. it would bomb off katyushas like shooting turkeys. it was slightly and defnitley better then katyusha. much much better.

hmm. the 101st airborne got their ass kickd by the fallschirmjagers. and even more armored and light divisons fell victims of the elie fallschirmjager. terrfying the allies. they flee quickly when facing off with fallschirmjagers that actually armed with powerfull tank assault guns and very well armed with automatic guns and heavy infantry cleaning machine guns. the allies learnt how to respect the fallschirmjagers without taking any step forward.

british army sucked. seriously. no offense but it HAD sucked. with weak an untrained army of regulars and weaker paras armed with mostly WW1 guns they were tottaly disadvantaged to every german troops.

errrm. panzer IV had an extra armor by attaching armor to its flanks. so i declare it the best medium tank with high speed and very high volocity gun and powerfull armor it deserves the best medium tank in te war. equipped with a nice long range 70MM gun with legndary precise shots (best of the war) and panzer lll was an other top light tank,, hunting flanks and assaulting infantry. it results that it had came atop one of the best light tanks of WW2

seriously.. seriously. SERIOUSLY. what kind of sonar or depth charge can actually destroy it while its deep within? it was submerged also once you'll be charging towards a sub, you'll be sinking before that you realize that there was a sngle torpedo fired, using sonar means you'll have to charge towards the sub and try to keep it in sight while it can go deep leve and run away and you still think its there, nothing was able to outfight them, even planes carrying depth charge could'nt do that. and I-400 was a high performance and the planes were impressive, they'll carry depth charge and bomb off USA subs off to little bits.

nah bofors gun was a completley weak damage with usually very light shells. the epic stukas were able to rush withing 50% of its range before it will respond and go into action, though fast planes were like trashing down and waling over bofors and the m16 gun you talked about is crappy aswell, it was usually light ammo so every typ of light or fighter bombers can take it completley before it starts doing serious damage, dont forget that its slow responding at aiming.

t34 was like junked down, trashed, killed, ultra killed, slaughtered by tigers, tigers had an amazing legendery 88MM gun with high vvolocity and even highher acuraccy and top range, it was arguably the best, flanked or not in reality it takes 3 shermans to only flank it but the shermans or still doomed, and in reality it toke 7-10 shermans to take out 1 tiger, tiger was a legend of war. a dreadfull foe tha inspired a large terror an fear and wrecked complete havoc in alied ranks.... and it was the dream of every tank crewmen, tigers when appeared, the next 2 following years after the tiger showed up, there was nothing as strong as it, there was litterly not a single type of anti-tank in the world can destroy it. it was a top supertank of legends. good luck with your sucidal tiger flanking attempt in the phase where you'll have to run through a field under fire by a very extended long range and high acuraccy gun firing from afar, shermans were very weak aarmor and had a very light gun either a low range for a medium tank like that, it was honestly, a crap tank. it was'nt designed to face off tanks at all. and it was urgently designed with poor scales and quality only to replace the even crappier and worse lee tanks, then cames the even more legendary tiger king.... it inspired a true fear this time, the allies run and flee in terror once they hear of any tigers in the field, one tiger could take out thousands of infantry in a single phase with a nice anti infantry defense, tiger was the businass. allied generals had to extremley cover alot of intelligance from their officars and armies to not wreck avoc amongst the ranks like saying "he tigers were destroyed by our thunderbolts YAY" or saying "germans ran outta tigers" to keep their amies from panicking completley, most of every allied tanks dident keep its crews safe. alot of shermans were seen dead on the field, but it looks like not damage  or on fire, it seemed abandoned, though once they checked it inside they found the dead crew inside has been chopped and picked to little bits after a sheell passed through the halll. alot of allied tanks same thing occures to it, weak armor dident provide them a chance to survive a shell from nearly any tank. also shermans ha a large reputation for burningg.




this is fun right? i think its not like all days your gonna have someone to talk about history with. i like sharing and talking about history. we're living in a coward dull world. lets curse peace AND START AN ANOTHER WORLD WAR! YEAH

[Omega]

lets curse peace AND START AN ANOTHER WORLD WAR! YEAH

That kind of attitude is not allowed on this forum. Please mind yourself. I don't know if you're joking or being serious, but it matters not, as joke or no joke, it's certainly no laughing matter. I don't care what you think or believe in, but on the board, please mind yourself.

[the warlord of the reich]

lets curse peace AND START AN ANOTHER WORLD WAR! YEAH

That kind of attitude is not allowed on this forum. Please mind yourself. I don't know if you're joking or being serious, but it matters not, as joke or no joke, it's certainly no laughing matter. I don't care what you think or believe in, but on the board, please mind yourself.

right then.