Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Peter Skelton <skeltonp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 10:03:53 -0500
On 10 Mar 2007 06:44:49 -0800, "Rob Arndt" <teuton263@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Mar 10, 5:26?am, Peter Skelton <skelt...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10 Mar 2007 04:31:14 -0800, "Rob Arndt" <teuton...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Mar 10, 3:02?am, "Flashnews" <skit...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You are right about "numbers" - but the German equipment was on the whole
technically superior to just about everything short of the M-1 rifle - they
were overwhelmed not out technolog'ied
The German rifles were no exception as the Mauser action is still used
today all over the world, the K98 rifle being the most produced rifle
of the 19th and early 20th centuries. The MP-44/STG-44 became the
world's first assault rifle (a name coined by Hitler himself) and led
to the postwar AK-47, the most produced and copied modern rifle on
earth. The STG-45 prototypes led to the Spanish CETME series and the
returning Mauser engineers started HK which turned the CETME into the
HK G-3 which has sold well around the world. And finally, the
Wimmersperg Spz-1 of Jan 1945 was the first bullpup assault rifle
design.
Germans had assault rifles from 1942 forward yet US troops didn't get
one until Vietnam- the jamming prone M-16A-1. In fact, the 1945 German
soldier and projected 1946 German soldier were far ahead of anything
the US had until Vietnam.
The late 45/46 German soldier would have had as standard issue:
- new M44 helmet
- new Liebermuster anti-IR camouflage uniform
- either STG-45 or Wimmersperg Spz-1 assault rifles w/various IR
scopes
- Nipolit disc grenades, replacing the egg and stick types
- Panzerfaust 150M-250 AT weapons
- D.IX drug replacing methamphetamine Pervatin and painkiller Eucadol
(a morphine derivative) combined
And what fraction of the German troops were so equipped?
Your knowledge of German technology is admirable, but "standard
issue" means about everybody had it. You're amply replete with
feces this day.
Peter Skelton- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'll answer this very specifically Peter, by each category:
- M44 helmet was in production when war ended, was basis for East
German postwar helmet
and therefore not standard issue
- Liebermuster was in production for Waffen SS when war ended
so used in part of the forces and not standard issue for them
- STG-45 was in two prototype forms while Wimmersperg Spz-1 was
reputed to have a sole prototype in Jan 1945- they were not
competitors but two seperate designs. The SS sponsored the Spz-1, the
German Army the STG-45.
Clearly not standard issue
- Nipolit disc grenades reached the battlefield in 1945 and were used
in Battle of Berlin
and also limited issue
- Likewise, the Pzf-150M reached the battlefield in troop trials while
Pzf-250 was in development phase
as above
- D.IX was tested on the Eastern Front by select Waffen SS troops. AllClearly ansd obviously not standard issue.
German soldiers were on Meth since 1939 with Pervitin. D.IX was to be
in full production and issue by the Summer of 1945. Interesting to
note this drug was classified for 60 yrs. The US version of the story
claims it was for marching 50 miles per day and only tested at Dachau,
making the future German soldier a robot. The Russian version claims
they actually encountered the Waffen SS on D.IX and they were more
like homicidal zombies, immune to pain. Subsequently, some of these
soldiers had to be shot multiple times to die and they showed no signs
of pain. One SS soldier took 16 hits to be killed, but in that
timeframe killed 9 Russian troops. THAT is why the drug was
classified. Amazingly, Merck still retains the correct formula for
that drug. Also, there were NOT 7 combinations in that formula as the
AJM claims but 9.
Rob
p.s. I'm sure you will want to split hairs and talk about the general
term "standard issue" vs "becomes standard issue". Doesn't matter,
these weapons and uniforms would have been issued to both the German
Army and Waffen SS starting in the Summer of 1945 had the war dragged
on.
I stand by my comment. This stuff was not "standard issue", and
would not have been standard issue for some time (except perhaps
the grenades). I gave the meaning of the term last time around,
it was correct, you were full of it.
Peter Skelton
.
- References:
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Flashnews
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Rob Arndt
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Flashnews
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Rob Arndt
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Peter Skelton
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- From: Rob Arndt
- Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- Prev by Date: Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- Next by Date: Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- Previous by thread: Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- Next by thread: Re: List of Airpower conflicts between near technological equals
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|