What exactly was the Germans pioneers at during WWII that was actually useful? No, all of the Wunderwaffes were complete memes.
No, big heavily armoured tanks are not innovative
What exactly was the Germans pioneers at during WWII that was actually useful?
Germans were the first to put a radio in every single tank, half track and lots of other vehicles. This took their leadership to a completely new level because it enabled real-time communication in both ways.
Also: The germans made the machine gun the core of every squad with the riflemen protecting it. AFAIK at least at the start of the war all other armies did it vice versa
Wasn't the machin le gunner supporting the rifleman that tactic that was more effective? Isn't that what the U.S. uses today?
>Isn't that what the U.S. uses today?
No. The US uses the riflemen and machinegunners supporting the artillery and chairforce tactic.
modern US tactics is descended from WW2 tactics, but it hardly resembles any force from WW2 except in the broad concept of fire and maneuver
germans specifically used a GPMG in every squad whereas modern US squads uses belt-fed LMGs in each squad
US squads do use the rifle element without the LMG as a maneuver element, closer to their own WW2 squads, whereas the germans only saw the rifle section without an MG as strictly support for the machine gunner
the use of individual 4-man fire teams acting as independent units was theoretically done for both germans and americans in WW2 but in practice the squad was commanded as a single unit, pretty much every army doubled down on fireteams post war
>germans specifically used a GPMG in every squad whereas modern US squads uses belt-fed LMGs in each squad
In this case a distinction without a difference.
the US still has GPMGs but they are held at the platoon level
so squads have M249s, with a crew served M240 section supporting the platoon
the germans used the MG42 in both squads and weapon sections and was used almost exclusively from the bipod
the M249 can and is fired while standing often, in this case it acts like a combination between a BAR and a MG42, belt-fed and designed for prolonged fire like the latter but designed to be fired from the shoulder like the former
probably the closest the US army resembled the german one in doctrine was during the cold war, when the lack of an LMG meant that they equipped the M60 to each squad
>the M249 can and is fired while standing
Anon, you can shoot an MG42 while standing just fine.
Doing so was actually part of the doctrine. Though the accuracy suffers fir obvious reasons.
>Anon, you can shoot an MG42 while standing just fine.
its not very good to fire from the shoulder
>Doing so was actually part of the doctrine. Though the accuracy suffers fir obvious reasons.
if this was done, it was rare and impractical
it was purely a bipod-fired weapon
>if this was done,
It was.
>it was rare and impractical
It wasn't
>it was purely a bipod-fired weapon
Somebody post the humanpod.
Also no.
>It was.
rarely done
>It wasn't
they would sooner fire off the shoulder of another squad member than fire it while standing
>Also no
it was
standing fire would have been a last resort
they would always set it up on its bipod and fire
What a weird way to argue from a position of ignorance.
shoulder firing was not standard practice
the MG42 was not intended to be fired that way normally
if a squad was taken by surprise, they would sooner drop prone and fire from there than to fire from the shoulder
it was more common to hip fire it, but this was a niche tactic on the assault, not the norm
>shoulder firing was not standard practice
Standing fire was, it was officially part of the doctrine. Nobody except you mentioned the shoulder, moronboy.
I'm glad you keep on moving closer to a sensible position in your post though. Your initial one was extremely retarded.
>fucking MG42 going off directly into your ear at 1200 rpm
How do you say
>"EEEEEEEEEEEEE!" in German?
>How do you say "EEEEEEEEEEEEE!" in German?
Depends on the forms involved.
You type like a faggy brit with 0 knowledge on the topic
Go eat your moms cunt
May I see it?
My experience is with the MG3 both in the Bundeswehr and recreationally. From the bipod the gun is a tack driver out to 400m easily if you know what you are doing. With the right technique almost everyone can fire it well. I taught a scrawny math teacher to fire it properly in a few minutes while we were at a tourist range in Warsaw. And this was with a Yugo bipod since the Poles didn't have an original MG3 one. Still, flip it 180° and it can be preloaded like the MG3 bipod. This is essential and not done by 90% of youtubers who fire MG42s and hence have abysmal accuracy. By that standard, sure firing from the should is just as accurate. I wouldn't call it effective enough to fight individual targets beyond 100m though.
So if you have some footage or some MG42 manual mentioning shoulder fire without resting the gun on anything/anyone, I am happy to learn something new about the gun's usages.
What do you mean by "preloading" the bipod?
set it so you lean into the gun and the bipod doesnt flop around
Oh. So most retards shooting the MG42 or MG3 don't do that?
mg42 bipods flop a lot more in one direction than say a saw or 240, theres not too much of a spring on the up and down movement, so depending on what direction its facing it will either try to collapse forward or backward. Makes it more important to get the direction of the stop, the angle its dug in, the height and how you push into it/ let off it durring and after firing a burst. Thats why sometimes you can see an mg42 with its bipod sticking forward at a prett severse angel set up prone sometimes. Also picking if you have the bipod mounted at the end or the middle of the barrel jacket makes a difference
>May I see it?
Yeah, read the fucking infantry manuals of the time, retard.
>So if you have some footage or some MG42 manual mentioning shoulder fire
Nobody except one delusional moron (whom you're not even responding to) is mentioning shoulder firing.
>the germans only saw the rifle section without an MG as strictly support for the machine gunner
Isn't that pretty much modern kraut MG doctrine as well?
Sorta. We never really fully adopted it, even know there are weapons platoons instead of building all infantry squads around the MG. In basically every 20th century war we fought in the MG centric concept was proven superior but the culture of marksmanship was too strong for the US Army to overcome. Was most obviously a problem in Vietnam were the morons quickly gained fire superiority in meeting engagements. US forces that went with the German style MG method, like ST1 and 2 absolutely raped the VC and NVA for similar reasons.
They also focused their aviation development on tactical interdiction rather than strategic effects. The only groups that were doing this early war were the Germans, and USN and IJN, although Navy Aviation is sort of tactical interdiction by default. All three were vastly more effective than the regular air forces. When the USAAC made a similar shift in 1944 that was widely acknowledged by both the USA and Nazis as the second the air war was definitively won by the allies.
iirc they didn't invent concept, but they perfected it
Wrong, France invented it in WW1 with Le Chauchat
The Brits literally prioritized Bren mags for their infantry over LE clips in the 1937 webbing.
The brits were retarded and hilariously incompetent, anon.
This old misconception again. British interwar infantry doctrine states black on white that LMGs and HMGs are the core of the infantry platoon’s firepower and its primary weapons.
>PAM No 4, the LMG training lessons where the most compelling evidence resides. Here we see in Section 5 the following text: “The light machine gun is the principle weapon of the infantry and every man will therefore be trained to use it”. It goes on, “the rifle is the personal protective weapon of the individual, it may be needed, in an emergency to augment the fire of the section…”. Thus it is here we find solid evidence for the thinking behind the employment of the LMG in the British infantry Platoon, in a pre war version of the PAM.
>We find that British thinking was precisely that of the German Army: that the Platoon was based around the LMGs and not the rifleman. Also, incidentally, in the same section we find text that shows that “infiltration tactics”, another supposed German staple, was also present in British Army thinking at the time: “this phase demands skill in the use of ground and a correct appreciation of how to apply all the available fire-power to penetrate between localities held by the enemy…”.
British infantry were using sections based around the Lewis gun as early as 1915, while the German infantry only got the MG13 in 1930. So, no, unfortunately, the Germans did not pioneer platoon machine guns either.
Lies! Soviet tonk doctrine uber alles!''
.t radio-less t-55 tankman
they also had massive cable networks with like cable-laying kettenkrads. kettens should have been a wonderwaffle but germans can't design good vehicles.
Didn't the French put radios in half of their tanks, then ban their use?
Yes. They were paranoid that the Germans might listen in to commands and send countercommands that would confuse the troops.
Actually there's a good argument that the French tanks were better, they were at least more numerous when combined with the British tanks in France, and that the Allies could have stopped the Blitzkrieg had they mobilized them when they broke through the lines. Certainly the Allies knew about the advancing tanks, and were ready to send bombers to intercept them.
However the British and French were bad at communicating as there was no unified command between them and the order to intercept kept getting fumbled until the opportunity to intercept had been lost.
Honestly I think the fall of France was a complete fluke.
it was an upset for sure
>justifiably paranoid about germany
>build hundreds of miles of fortifications
>get fucked overnight
>Actually there's a good argument that the French tanks were better
The French tanks were absolutely worse in every way that isn't a warthunder meme. Actually being able to use then properly (which includes a proper turret and a commander who's not overworked) is more important than pure armor.
They're main problem was fire-power, but the concept of the 'universal turret' to make tank production cheaper is a good one in my mind- it basically preceded the current MBT. The French also invested more in tanks to try to make up for a sharper manpower shortage they had compared to the Germans- a good chunk of the German tanks were actually looted from the Czechs.
firepower was really not the problem. only putting one man in the turret borders on fucking sadistic.
Again the idea was to maximize the strength of their small manpower. But still.
>Honestly I think the fall of France was a complete fluke.
most of the early german successes were
>Actually there's a good argument that the French tanks were better
>They're main problem was fire-power
they were atrocious by every metric besides resource usage and protection
you could make the argument that it would've been a more efficient use of what resources they had but the fact other nations using similar 2-3 man designs had moved away from them best as they could speaks about their effectiveness
the universal turret philosophy doesn't apply to all their tanks either, and their choice of turret for their more ambitious designs was complete shit and greatly hamstrung them
squad tactics, close air support, concentrated armor, and rocketry, though rocketry was just a massive waste of money
They literally wrote the book on combined arms tactics you dolt.
Also submarine warfare but it didn't work so hot for them since the Americans could literally build and send more cargo ships than they could sink, and by '43 anti-submarine warfare had gotten so good that U-boats were literal deathtraps.
>though rocketry was just a massive waste of money
You're thinking "V2" and not "Nebelwerfer", which was the very first rocket artillery piece and obviously wasn't as flashy as the V2, but saw a lot more action and was a lot more effective.
Hey, Benny said they weren't ready.
>Hey, Benny said they weren't ready.
Which is why Adolf repeatedly told him not to join the war, but when he saw what happened in France Mussolini didn't want to miss out.
The rocketry under Wernher von Braun, who would join the US government in Operation Paperclip, involved slave labor from the gnomish population. There was also the nuclear energy research as reported on by Einstein leading up to the Manhattan project.
Combined, the nazi rocketry research and nuclear research gave us the space program, nuclear bombs, and nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles. As well as nuclear power plants and nuclear powered ships and submarines.
The Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama is where the former nazi scientist invented the first ballistic nuclear missiles and space-faring satellite launching rockets.
These Redstone rockets were a direct continuation of the V2 rockets by the same research team from nazi Germany, smuggled into the United States government to develop rockets. These projects would later go on to become NASA and America's space travel program.
>The rocketry under Wernher von Braun, who would join the US government in Operation Paperclip, involved slave labor from the gnomish population.
based
Concept of a rocket wasn't introduced in ww2
How did they do this? Strings?
>Put farming implement between legs
>Jump
>Have your buddy snap the photo while you're in the air
Yes, anon. Strings.
They fly now
Nazi black magic actually
They pioneered the entire concept of modern combined arms warfare
It was actually the french during ww1, even through they switched doctrine in the meanwhile
Long-range rocketry was one of the few things the Germans did that the Allies didn't have an equivalent of. It was also a spectacular waste of resources.
>They pioneered the entire concept of modern combined arms warfare
Hundred Days Offensves goes brrrrrrr.
The allies' equivalent weapon was bombers.
All you retards saying Germans invented combines arms warfare.
That was Fuller, a British fascist, coming from the same school of thought as Patton, Guderian and Tukochevsky.
The Brits invented it, the Germans and the Soviets developed it and the Germans first applied it.
Dumb fucking racists always categorizing shit to nations and races when it’s multiple people having the same ideas across the developed world.
>Plan 1919
>What if we took Blitzkrieg, set it 20 years earlier, ran it in slow motion, and added gratuitous use of chemical weapons?
t. Dumb moron who thinks WWItanks have enough operational similarities to WWII and modern tanks to matter in that regard
Lmao
Also no, brits never used combined arms in WWI to any meaningful degree. The different systems worked in parallel.
He wrote his fucking essays in the 1920s, when the Germans and Soviets were also starting to experiment in the Kama tank school.
Get a grip, you buffoon and atleast go by the timeline of his publications.
>He wrote his fucking essays in the 1920s, when the Germans and Soviets were also starting to experiment in the Kama tank school.
After WWI.
>Get a grip, you buffoon and atleast go by the timeline of his publications.
Anon, people have been writing aboit combined arms for a long time.
The Germans figured out how to actually do it first.
Brits never did it in WWI.
blitzkrieg
Blitzkrieg was just standard manuever warfare but with new toys.
i mean yeah maneuver warfare was definitely a thing but actually requiring large scale coordination between potentially multiple branches of the military? there were a lot of technological and doctrinal requirements that had to come together before it could happen and germany was ahead of the curve.
>there were a lot of technological and doctrinal requirements that had to come together before it could happen and germany was ahead of the curve.
british and french had already done it in WW1
like a radio in every car, plane, tank and squad? in ww1?
>squad
the germans did not have a radio in every squad.
im on your side in the argument, but lets not exaggerate things.
No such term
Made up by the British to explain early war losses. Germany had no such doctrine. Basically reverse propaganda.
Maneuver warfare had been a major focus of the prussian military for a very long time.
Brits were just retards about it as they seem to be about most things related to their military.
The term blitzkrieg was used in German propaganda.,notably news reels, as well as speeches.
rockets
DID NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE
>No, all of the Wunderwaffes were complete memes.
>No, big heavily armoured tanks are not innovative
Wrong.
What's with the randomly increased butthurt about Germany in the last year?
>counter-wherbs ever getting annoying
i would take 1000 years of them over giving germany even the tiniest bit of recognition
It's literally just butthurt war tourists from shitholes like Poland or Britain who have no experience with or interest in guns but still think they should post here.
I'd argue the single greatest invention the Germans made was the Jerry Can. Allied gas canisters easily degraded and would waist a lot of gasoline, while the Jerry Can was cheap, efficient to use, saved on the very precious gas the Germans needed, and they even had multiple handles so you could hold four of them at a time and easily pass them to a fellow soldier.
Unfortunately (for the Germans) the rest of the military was nowhere near as efficient or easy to use.
The jerry can was legitimate brilliant you gotta give them that.
Guided munitions
>The Germans were first to introduce Precision Guided Munitions (PGMs) in combat, using the 1,400-kg (3,100 lb) MCLOS-guidance Fritz X to successfully attack the Italian battleship Roma in September 1943
>After Pietro Badoglio publicly announced the Italian armistice with the Allies on 8 September 1943, the Italian fleet had steamed out from La Spezia and headed to Tunisia. To prevent the ships from falling into Allied hands, six Do 217K-2s from III. Gruppe of KG 100 (III/KG 100) took off, each carrying a single Fritz X. The Italian battleship Roma, flagship of the Italian fleet, received two hits and one near miss, and sank after her magazines exploded. 1,393 men, including Admiral Carlo Bergamini, died. Her sister ship, Italia, was also seriously damaged but reached Tunisia.[7]
>The American light cruiser USS Savannah was hit by Fritz Xs at 10:00 AM on 11 September 1943 during the invasion of Salerno, and was forced to retire to the United States for eight months of repairs. A single Fritz X passed through the roof of "C" turret and killed the turret crew and a damage control party when it exploded in the lower ammunition-handling room. The blast tore a large hole in the ship's bottom, opened a seam in her side, and blew out all fires in her boiler rooms. Savannah lay dead in the water with her forecastle nearly awash, and eight hours elapsed before her boilers were relit, allowing the Savannah to get under way for Malta.[7] USS Savannah lost 197 crewmen in this attack.
lol first used against italy
>The Italian battleship Roma, flagship of the Italian fleet, received two hits and one near miss,
>6 bombs
>2 hits 1 near miss
That's amazing for WWII.
I'm honestly a bit pissed that literally every battleship that was sunk in both world wars got taken down by a mine, a submarine, a torpedo boat, an airplane, or another weapons system that was way, way cheaper than it was.
Like, a battleship was literally never sunken by another battleship, (except once I believe in Tsushima but that fight was so one-sided it doesn't count) despite that being why they were built in the first place. Real life is fucking lame.
Battle of Jutland? Battle of the North Cape?
Kirishima got ganked by Washington at Guadalcanal, Yamashiro also got used for target practice by the Pearl Harbor legacy squadron at Surigao Strait although that was as hilariously lopsided as you could get without involving aircraft.
>Her sister ship, Italia, was also seriously damaged but reached Tunisia.[7]
Did that just happen randomly or was she hit as well?
Apparently this little bro was even better
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henschel_Hs_293
Didn't have to be over the ship to use it, most successful anti shipping bomb until the frogs made something better 30 years later.
They were the first to put guided missiles in production. At that point, the U.S. was already experimenting with ASM that used active radar, passive radar, or MCLOS like the Fritz
>The Germans were first to introduce Precision Guided Munitions (PGMs) in combat
They beat the Allies by a few months, but by April 1944 the US had an active radar homing fire-and-forget air-launched anti-shipping glide bomb. The Fritz-X, by comparison, was a MCLOS system steered with the aid of a flare. It may have been first (though not by much) but it was lightyears behind the Bat technologically
I'm also a fan of the VB-6 Felix, which was an infrared homing bomb meant for destroying steel mills and large metal-roofed buildings (i.e. factories). It had a CEP of 26m(!) in 19-fucking-45.
Then there were a series of expendable, remote-operated aircraft which were known as the time as "assault drones".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-N-2_Bat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VB-6_Felix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_TDR
Aren't you forgetting the self-guided torpedoes or are we gonna pretend they don't count?
the brits thought they could counter the accoustuc torpedo guidance by towing a noise buoy behind their ships.
but the german microphones on the torpedoes were good enough to distinguish between ship classes, torpedos ignored the noise buoys. the only effect of the buoys was, that the germans heared the brits now over even greater distances.
You sure?
looks like one of those brodozers when the manlet maxes his cards on the lift kit and cant finance new wheels
could a late war BF-109 win a dogfight with an A-10?
someone's trying to convince me the old German plane wins since it's faster and more maneuverable
arcade mode or RB mode?
in arcade mode the warthog just does a 180 with rudder and oneshots the 109
real life
in real life the Bf 109 would never fight the A-10
They essentially created the GMPG, you can argue some shit prior was the actual first but they had a machine gun thay was easily used for every single role you could want and it did a decent to great job at it while also being cheaper to make then pretty much anything else comparable.
They created the first assault rifle, plain and simple every meme rifle and prototype people bring up are not even in the same league as the mkb/stg/mp44.
They created (argueably) the first MBT although I don't fully support it you could argue the tiger was a MBT.
They had the most advanced rocketry tech in the world at the time so much so that the engineers were the first people that every nation tried to snatch up post-war.
They had some of the best sythetic oil production and it's byproducts, they invented the shit although that was pre-nazi germany it was still german and expanded greatly under the nazis.
They did have the best encryption device in the world that was the basis for later devices, yes the enigma was cracked but it took years and was mostly broken due to failures of the krauts than the machine itself.
There's plenty more fields they had some superiority in but these are some of the biggest.
>They did have the best encryption device
the allies had a better encryption device that was never cracked SIGSALY
> yes the enigma was cracked but it took years and was mostly broken due to failures of the krauts than the machine itself.
>Years
Broken December 1932 by mathematician Marian Regarden gnomeski, 7 years before the war started.
Wrong Enigma, retard.
>Not that enigma code, the other enigma code
Yes, there was multiple enigma machines with varrying levels of complexity. There was no one size fits all solution to all of them.
Wow you read a wikipedia article with no understanding of it, good job.
First off there were multiple types of enigma machines and he cracked one of them. His method for cracking them was great but it was pretty much useless by the start of the war proper. When the war actually did start he ofcourse still worked on and did crack them again until they made a new enigma that he didn't crack, less due to it being too much and more to him fleeing the country.
The bongs then used him and some other smart morons to crack the enigma machine they managed to steal which finally let them completely break the code.
Until the navy made a new machine that again they couldn't crack until they managed to steal one.
There's like a billion documentaries on this that go in a lot more detail than I feel like doing you can just watch one of them.
While there were multiple types of Enigma, the biggest reason the navy codes weren't cracked as soon as the other ones was because they actually maintained OPSEC and used the damn things as intended. The Luftwaffe Enigma for example was cracked because Goering started and finished his messages in the exact same way.
>They created (argueably) the first MBT although I don't fully support it you could argue the tiger was a MBT.
I only ever see this said in reference to the Panther. It makes sense but it sort of feels off. If you're going to call every tank with heavy armor, a heavy gun, and medium tank speeds and maneuverability an MBT, then by the very much low standards of what's considered heavy armor and weaponry to mount on a tank in 1940, surely there's a brief moment in time where the T-34 qualifies.
Is main battle tank even a real term used doctrinally or a popterm that has grown to distinguish post WW2 tanks from WW2.
Challenger and Abrams are just called "Tank". T-72 is called a medium tank in its manual.
The only reference to the term MBT are programmed names like MBT-70, MBT-80, FMBT which are short for "main battle tank for the 1970s" etc.
there are some light tanks around, MBT is used to differentiate from them
The german military being hyped as some kind of high tech super modernized force compared to others is just wheraboo cope. They were still using horses in their logistics chain and gluing together plywood rocket planes that melted their pilots while the US was busily preparing to unleash the sun upon their backwards asses.
The answer to "what if germany had more (insert supposed war winning cope bullshit here)? Could they have won or prolonged the war?" is "then this is what berlin would look like on August 6th 1944"
Butthurt tourist.
Ah yes, Germany, the antagonist of a two and then later three front war, fighting successfully across land sea and air, who took the economic cooperation of twenty two nations no less than three years to abate and push back until they were utterly exhausted of both resource and, finally, energy and will.
Yes that Germany.
Backwards asses.
Of course.
I've been so blind until this post.
>fighting successfully
Since when is losing the same as success?
yeah they were hand decoding enigma way early, it was CRACKED later
i'm not convinced MBTs are anything but completely useless memes
Panzerfaust.
The jerrycan, shame they had no fuel to put in it.
Zuse Z3 (Z-Maschine) Computers:
the fuselages of the later planes (from 1941) such as the me262 or me 109 from g on etc. were designed using computer algorythms from zuse to optimise aerodynamics.
they also made prcalculated trajectory charts for artillery use with that computer.
i think it also pioneered in being the first one with a real os or to be easier programmed but im not to firm in that matter.
Wind tunnels anyone?
They're as old a flight.
The German ones were kind of a league of their own at the time.
The guided gliding bombs were also developed using the zuse computer because humans doing the calculations would have taken longer than the war even in 24 hour shifts.
Typ XXI submarine
the mother if all modern subs
bounty boats used by brits, french, soviets till the 60s.
Nautilus is a direct successor.
from the top of my head
>first computer and first high level programming language
>first ballistic missile, also the first man-made object in space
>most toxic man-made substance
>first jet fighter
>first assault rifle
>first phased array radar, radar tech in general
>first night vision
>Beck arc lamp aka Flak searchlight
>first sophisticated engine control unit (BMW 801)
>jerrycans
they also created television guided missles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_guidance
ovens that burn human bodies 700 times faster than modern crematoria
Idk if you are shitposting, but there is a big difference between modern crematoria ovens and those used in the death camps.
A respectful cremation oven can only contain one body for the entire cremation process, to avoid mixing human remains.
In the concentration camps the muffles would be loaded with 4-6 bodies at a time, but the actual oven would contain the remains of potentially dozens of people at various stages of cremation that would fall through the grates, such that while complete cremation down to the final ash and bones might take a few hours, the ovens could be continually loaded every 30 minutes.
They resembled a giant barbeque grill a lot more than a modern crematoria and were actually designed to use the bodies as fuel to save on coal.
>i know this because i've been told it by reputable sources!
Primary sources Vs pol infographics by guys who think pasteurization is a conspiracy, who to believe...
If you want a real 'red pill', during the time that the crematoria at Aushwitz were at maximum capacity, between late 43 and 44, processing some 8000 bodies a day, they were processing the Hungarian gnomish population.
Himmler had actually tried to ransom these 1 million garden gnomes to the western allies in exchange for trucks and fuel that they would promise to use against the Soviets.
He was so convinced of the power of garden gnomes within the British and American government that he was sure that they would take his offer, however the British diplomat who received it immediately destroyed it to ensure that it would never leak to the Soviets.
Out of those 1 million or so garden gnomes around 500 000 were subsequently murdered.
clearly wasn't enough, maybe use an actual poison instead of a delousing agent and we wouldn't be dealing with their rotten offspring today
>reddit spacing
have a nice day moron
>but there is a big difference between modern crematoria ovens and those used in the death camps.
yeah modern crematoria are usually not in the 2nd floor. the rest of what you said is just cope and fiction as usual. the bit where they used a bag of water as fuel is a cool one though.
The human body contains 125,000 kcal, whereas 40kg of water takes about 20,000 kcal to vaporise.
Under the right conditions (IE a high enough continuous operating temperature, efficient combustion and low thermal losses) you could absolutely burn human bodies continuously.
>designed to use the bodies as fuel to save on coal.
Holy shit you morons actually believe this?
>they were burning the garden gnomes to save money on coal
poetic irony
>In the concentration camps the muffles would be loaded with 4-6 bodies at a time
That would make it quite a lot slower, anon.
They were very big on mission command in a way that influenced the US and NATO powers post WW2.
It's ironically partly a result of the treaty of Versailles, that imposed very strict limits on the size of the German standing army; the Wehrmacht basically cheesed this limitation and trained most of their 'allowed' soldiers as officers.
The result was that they could scale their army very rapidly from this massive cadre, and they had proportionally a very well trained force.
However Mission command only works well if you have skilled enough junior leadership to pull it off.
It suits smaller professional forces.
The PLA for example was also based heavily on independent leadership, as the Chinese military was both A: largely institutionally influenced by Prussian and German advisors, but also because this suited the massive scale Guerilla warfare of the civil war.
However during the Korean war, fighting a more professional war and having to institute a mass levy, they ran into serious organisational problems trying to fight this way.
for me, it's the Storch, the first and best STOL aircraft. it was so overpowered and its secrets so obscure that allies had no choice but it copy it down to the last screw for decades.
Ze Beetle!
They invented the gpmg
The US Army in the 1980s basically copied a lot of Nazi crap. Like, the old school X-strap webbing got replaced with Nazi Y-strap style webbing with ALICE. PaSSgt helmet inherited more from the Nazi Stahlhelm than M1 pot or especially the bong helmets. 1956 universal ammo pouch used up to like the 1990s was more like the Nazi ammo pouches, there were 2 on the front on each side of the buckle. Whereas the old US cartridge belts had pouches all around and the bong cartridge belt was fully 360 degree ammo pouch filled. Nazi uniforms went down and covered the arse like BDU whereas the old Vietnam-era uniforms generally were tucked into the pants.