5 ms·

"didn’t manage to compete" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262? the V-2? https://en.wikipedia.

"didn’t manage to compete" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262? the V-2? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_Ho_229 ? The A-bomb seems to be the only technology they failed to build. But it played no role on the European theatre in WWII anyway. Don't forget that American reliance on foreigners led directly to leaking the atomic secrets to the Soviets.

p_l 5y ago
Well, they first had to steal the A-bomb project from British Empire (ok, technically the theft happened post-war, when they stopped brits from taking back their notes) As for the above examples - Nazis were a bit behind on jet engine technology, and most importantly got lost in trying to get some super weapon while their designs and production lines were hamstrung by stupid ideas
- onecommentman 5y ago
  The Brits might have been able to field a Los Alamos during WWII, but not a Hanford or Oak Ridge/TVA, especially not in the British Isles while under direct fire. Also, in the very improbable event of a successful Nazi island invasion, nice to keep such projects an ocean away in the US. The UK couldn’t have afforded an expanded post-WWII atomic program at the level the Soviets eventually fielded, at least not while transitioning back to a civilian economy. The US could and did. The big challenge for the UK to meet at the time was decolonization, a challenge they met with aplomb and whose successful achievement was and is under-appreciated by the global community.
dogma1138 5y ago
The Allies had fielded jets earlier than the Germans. WW2 arguably slowed down jet development not accelerated it as most of them were pre-war designs. The Brits didn’t had the industrial capacity to produce jets in large numbers and for the US the early jets were a logistical nightmare. Early jets couldn’t fly off aircraft carriers in fact it would take quite a while for the navy to get jets working and for close air support the navy still had prop aircraft until early Vietnam. Jet bombers weren’t viable during WW2 and the limited range of jets their fuel, landing stop and other logistical requirements meant that it was far harder to support them from frontline airbases. So it’s more of the case that the US simply couldn’t use the jets of the time effectively if they could they would’ve built more of them and some even earlier than 43-44. The Me-262 was built in relatively large numbers but did absolutely squat to change the tides of war as the Allies found a very simple solution to go after the air bases. Unlike most prop aircraft of the time that could take off and land in a field and could be serviced in a barn jets needed proper runways and maintenance facilities.

p_l 5y ago

Well, they first had to steal the A-bomb project from British Empire (ok, technically the theft happened post-war, when they stopped brits from taking back their notes) As for the above examples - Nazis were a bit behind on jet engine technology, and most importantly got lost in trying to get some super weapon while their designs and production lines were hamstrung by stupid ideas

onecommentman 5y ago
The Brits might have been able to field a Los Alamos during WWII, but not a Hanford or Oak Ridge/TVA, especially not in the British Isles while under direct fire. Also, in the very improbable event of a successful Nazi island invasion, nice to keep such projects an ocean away in the US. The UK couldn’t have afforded an expanded post-WWII atomic program at the level the Soviets eventually fielded, at least not while transitioning back to a civilian economy. The US could and did. The big challenge for the UK to meet at the time was decolonization, a challenge they met with aplomb and whose successful achievement was and is under-appreciated by the global community.

dogma1138 5y ago

The Allies had fielded jets earlier than the Germans. WW2 arguably slowed down jet development not accelerated it as most of them were pre-war designs. The Brits didn’t had the industrial capacity to produce jets in large numbers and for the US the early jets were a logistical nightmare. Early jets couldn’t fly off aircraft carriers in fact it would take quite a while for the navy to get jets working and for close air support the navy still had prop aircraft until early Vietnam. Jet bombers weren’t viable during WW2 and the limited range of jets their fuel, landing stop and other logistical requirements meant that it was far harder to support them from frontline airbases. So it’s more of the case that the US simply couldn’t use the jets of the time effectively if they could they would’ve built more of them and some even earlier than 43-44. The Me-262 was built in relatively large numbers but did absolutely squat to change the tides of war as the Allies found a very simple solution to go after the air bases. Unlike most prop aircraft of the time that could take off and land in a field and could be serviced in a barn jets needed proper runways and maintenance facilities.