Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

The single most influential weapon of the war.

Discussion in 'The Guns Galore Section' started by Simonr1978, Jun 4, 2004.

  1. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, not necessarily. As you said, the monoplane changed air combat. It had a huge influence (bigger, better planes).
    Although the example is slightly flawed as all the 'plane types were there in WW1 - WW2 stuff was just beter...

    The point?
    A weapon can be hugely influential, even if both sides use it.
    How about the torpedo?
     
  2. Gatsby phpbb3

    Gatsby phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    The A-bomb was never very influential. With or without it, the war would have been won by the Allies. Its only when you take into account the global situation after World War 2 that the A-bomb can be said to be the single most important invention in the history of mankind.

    Radar did alter the course of BoB, but only to a certain extent. After all, even without radar, if Hitler had contiuned to target cities instead of airfields, he would eventually have lost anyway. Again, the radar changed the face of air combat completly after World War 2, even more so than the Jet. Its because of this that you have ultra-precise bombing capabilities (Modern day bombers are around 10 000 times more likely to hit their intended target than their WW2 counterparts) and missiles than can kill enemies from miles away.
     
  3. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    :eek: More important than the wheel? :eek:

    :wink:
     
  4. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I think Simon should return and adjudicate...
     
  5. GP

    GP New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    1,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Although Germany altered their bombing priorities to London, what RADAR did was to enable the Correct amount of fighters to engage the incoming outgoing enemy. So the ones who weren't scrambled rested. Without RADAR more would have been scrambled making them more tired and less likely to fight as well. So without RADAR the BoB would probably have ended with a German victory. IMHO
     
  6. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    And it gave the RAF fighters the advance notice needed to get to a decent altitude to allow for interception of the German planes.

    Relying on visual notification would mean that an awful lot of raids would only be intercepted on their way back from the target.
    And/or the British fighters trying to get up to intercept them would have been 'bounced' on a far more regular basis by German fighters.

    Admittedly the German fighters would be unwilling to dogfight when returning from a raid (low fuel), but the bombers would be empty, therfore that much faster, therefore that much harder to intercept (especially the Ju88's).

    Without radar, the British ability to fight back effectively in the BoB would have been seriously reduced, and our losses would have been much higher.

    However, historically the end result would probably have been the same, as the Luftwaffe involvement was scaled down in readyness for Barbarossa.
    It's just that the RAF would have been much, much weaker...
     
  7. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    More important than religion, computers or the printing press? I highly doubt it...
     
  8. Gatsby phpbb3

    Gatsby phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, yes, perhaps I am wrong...

    What about "Most important military innovation"?
     
  9. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Iron working, Gatsby... :grin:
     
  10. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    If you're not allowing tactical bombing and other things because they were in use before WWII, then disallow radar. The Germans had in (I think) Rhine ferries about 1910!! Similarly the jet engine (Coanda flew a ducted-fan biplane (admittedly he flew it into a brick wall where it caught fire :oops: )) at about the same time.
    I think by radar you mean the synergy of radar, fighters and a fighter-controller system, no?
    How about combined-arms/ panzer-grenadier units and tactics - most armies these days follow a variant of that - again, pre WWII - British exercises on Salisbury Plain in the 30s.
    Carrier dominance - there's one AFAIK.
    Nuclear bomb - purely WWII, again, AFAIK.
    Cruise missile - V1 was a good example, oh oh, Kettering "Bug" beat it.
    Face it guys, WWII had few technical "innovations", most the so-called WWII inventions were a case of dusting off older technolgies, finding a use and putting them into service - what's the saying? "There's nothing new under the sun".
    Oli
     
  11. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Just remembered another one -
    Mauser MG 213C revolver cannon - turned into the American 20mm, the ADEN, the DEFA etc.
    Don't think it was done before WWII - Tony would know.
    Oli
     
  12. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    guided missiles?
    acoustic torpedoes?

    there were a few technical innovations in WW2... :wink:
     
  13. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I'm not denying that there were, but the "majority" (no figures but the ones most mentioned by the general public and "illustrated books" certainly) weren't WWII.
    Guided missiles - depends on the guidance, but yeah, I could go for that (must check further though - don't want egg on my face)
    Acoustic torpedoes - ah, very probably - not a naval enthusiast (despite having spent the last month researching naval weapons for a set of wargame rules!!)
    Yeah, there were some, probably a good number, but "relatively" obscure...
    What about IR for night fighting?
    Oli
     
  14. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I know, I do actually agree with the point you made, but I could not help but be a pain in the neck... :oops:
     
  15. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    RHIP :lol: :lol:
    Oli
     
  16. Canadian_Super_Patriot

    Canadian_Super_Patriot recruit

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    For the early part of the war i think the U-Boat deserves some mention.
     
  17. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Don't think counts, CSP (I'm not bloody typing canadiansuperpatriot every time I want to talk you :lol: BTW do you have a cape :roll: ),
    because tactical bombing etc. have been disallowed due having been used prior to WWII. U-boats, therefore, also IMHO.
    Are we discussing most infulential weapon USED in WWII, or most influential weapon DEVELOPED in WWII. I for one have lost track, probably not the only one either.
    The topic started off making sense, and then drifted into a little corner of its own...
    rather like my posts really :cool:
    Oli
     
  18. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Submarines is a good one...
    though I do not know what lines we are drawing. Simon? Help!
     
  19. David.W

    David.W Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,981
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Devon. England
    via TanksinWW2
    For the Commonwealth forces; how about doing without the 25Pdr?
     
  20. Oli

    Oli New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Scunthorpe, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Everybody just put your hands in your pockets and look busy until Simon or someone comes and tells us what the topic really is.
    I have an idea - let's hijack his topic -
    and the question is

    Does anybody know what we're doing here?

    Correct answers mean you can go home early :lol:
    Oli
     

Share This Page