3 ms·

Calling Type XXI failure is kind of (mo)ironic. Soviet submarines and to some extend western submarines are practically build on top of it. It is like saying je

by qwerta 12y ago

Calling Type XXI failure is kind of (mo)ironic. Soviet submarines and to some extend western submarines are practically build on top of it. It is like saying jet-engines are failure :-)

mpyne 12y ago
I agree, and almost pointed this out myself. But the article isn't really calling the XXI itself a failure, but instead the whole strategy to design, build, and rely on the Type XXI to prosecute a commerce interdiction war that Germany couldn't actually win even with the Type XXI in service. The title would have been better as "The Failure of the Type XXI Strategy" I think.
- nkoren 12y ago
  Yes, this. The same can be said for the V2. Technologically, it was wildly successful, and today most Russian rockets and many American rockets can be considered its direct descendants. However there's no question that it hastened the end of the war for the Germans. I've often wondered what the world would look like if Germany had had the same militaristic and expansionist policies, yet hadn't devoted so many of its resources towards genocide and wonder weapons. It may be that Hitler's obsession with these things actually spared the world from a far more effective Nazi Germany, and thus an even longer and bloodier war.
  - simonh 12y ago
    It's one of the problems with the idea of using a time machine to kill Hitler. The problem is the Nazi party and Germany might actually end up with a more sane, capable and effective leader and end up winning the war.
    - spacehome 12y ago
      Perhaps the previous, competent, dictator was replaced by Hitler.
      - emiliobumachar 12y ago
        http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2920 http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2920
  - trhway 12y ago
    >It may be that Hitler's obsession with these things actually spared the world from a far more effective Nazi Germany, and thus an even longer and bloodier war. are you really sure that a far more effective Nazi Germany would lead to even longer and bloodier war? Lets imagine that Germany won Battle of Britain and occupied it in 1940 (with resulting full control of North Atlantic) and took Moscow in the Fall of 1941 and Stalingrad - summer of 1942 with resulting control over Caucasus and the plains until Mongolia. What war we would be talking about after that? The world would look of course completely different. In some sense having that bloody war we were spared from living in that different world.
    - nkoren 12y ago
      I doubt it. I'm not a historian, but my sense is that absent the death camps and and silly wonder weapons, Germany would have been perhaps 10% or 20% more effective -- not 100% more effective. Stalingrad would probably have wrapped up a bit more quickly -- but Moscow, London, and points beyond would all have become the new Stalingrads. Which would not have been a happier outcome, on the whole. [Edit]: Also, it's not entirely clear who would've been the "bad guys" in this alternate-history. The German death camps were certainly the evilest single element of the war -- but the Allied policy of mass-firebombing civilian population centres was arguably the second evilest element of the war, and the Russians were very nearly as nasty as the Nazis to whomever they occupied. Absent the death camps, the moral clarity of that war would have become significantly muddier -- although Germany would certainly still have been the aggressor.
      - trhway 12y ago
        in big picture, at very coarse grain, we can see that one of the main themes of the 20th century was the battle between totalitarian and democratic states. WWII was a huge piece of it. Totalitarian approach was defeated, though as we clearly see today only specific forms of it were defeated while the approach itself was dealt only temporarily setback and starts to emerge in new shapes today. Btw, obligatory to our discussion http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/ . No technical prowess can defeat a society build on principle "Yes, she can" :)
rosser 12y ago
The article isn't calling the submarine a fail; it's calling the Reich's use of it a fail.
- AdrianoZum 12y ago
  Indeed. War is about producing weapons in quantity as well as quality.

by qwerta 12y ago

Calling Type XXI failure is kind of (mo)ironic. Soviet submarines and to some extend western submarines are practically build on top of it. It is like saying jet-engines are failure :-)

mpyne 12y ago

I agree, and almost pointed this out myself. But the article isn't really calling the XXI itself a failure, but instead the whole strategy to design, build, and rely on the Type XXI to prosecute a commerce interdiction war that Germany couldn't actually win even with the Type XXI in service. The title would have been better as "The Failure of the Type XXI Strategy" I think.

nkoren 12y ago
Yes, this. The same can be said for the V2. Technologically, it was wildly successful, and today most Russian rockets and many American rockets can be considered its direct descendants. However there's no question that it hastened the end of the war for the Germans. I've often wondered what the world would look like if Germany had had the same militaristic and expansionist policies, yet hadn't devoted so many of its resources towards genocide and wonder weapons. It may be that Hitler's obsession with these things actually spared the world from a far more effective Nazi Germany, and thus an even longer and bloodier war.
- simonh 12y ago
  It's one of the problems with the idea of using a time machine to kill Hitler. The problem is the Nazi party and Germany might actually end up with a more sane, capable and effective leader and end up winning the war.
  - spacehome 12y ago
    Perhaps the previous, competent, dictator was replaced by Hitler.
    - emiliobumachar 12y ago
      http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2920 http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2920
- trhway 12y ago
  >It may be that Hitler's obsession with these things actually spared the world from a far more effective Nazi Germany, and thus an even longer and bloodier war. are you really sure that a far more effective Nazi Germany would lead to even longer and bloodier war? Lets imagine that Germany won Battle of Britain and occupied it in 1940 (with resulting full control of North Atlantic) and took Moscow in the Fall of 1941 and Stalingrad - summer of 1942 with resulting control over Caucasus and the plains until Mongolia. What war we would be talking about after that? The world would look of course completely different. In some sense having that bloody war we were spared from living in that different world.
  - nkoren 12y ago
    I doubt it. I'm not a historian, but my sense is that absent the death camps and and silly wonder weapons, Germany would have been perhaps 10% or 20% more effective -- not 100% more effective. Stalingrad would probably have wrapped up a bit more quickly -- but Moscow, London, and points beyond would all have become the new Stalingrads. Which would not have been a happier outcome, on the whole. [Edit]: Also, it's not entirely clear who would've been the "bad guys" in this alternate-history. The German death camps were certainly the evilest single element of the war -- but the Allied policy of mass-firebombing civilian population centres was arguably the second evilest element of the war, and the Russians were very nearly as nasty as the Nazis to whomever they occupied. Absent the death camps, the moral clarity of that war would have become significantly muddier -- although Germany would certainly still have been the aggressor.
    - trhway 12y ago
      in big picture, at very coarse grain, we can see that one of the main themes of the 20th century was the battle between totalitarian and democratic states. WWII was a huge piece of it. Totalitarian approach was defeated, though as we clearly see today only specific forms of it were defeated while the approach itself was dealt only temporarily setback and starts to emerge in new shapes today. Btw, obligatory to our discussion http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1034314/ . No technical prowess can defeat a society build on principle "Yes, she can" :)

rosser 12y ago

The article isn't calling the submarine a fail; it's calling the Reich's use of it a fail.

AdrianoZum 12y ago
Indeed. War is about producing weapons in quantity as well as quality.