Poll. Germany or USA - Which country has the more advanced technology

I was going to mention about the Germans over engineering their tanks in WW2, but you beat me to it 'mushroom'

The 'Trabant' was built under the communism reign, and they spent 5 cents on the development on that car.....it would appear.

Yes, we could go on for ever mentioning individual engineering items which werent upto scratch, but some people seem to be missing the point, if you look at Germanys engineering skills, they have a valid reputation for good quality and technical excellence worldwide.

I was listening to a Radio programme on the way home from work yesterday, and there was a programme saying that even in the smallest towns in Germany, there were some advanced engineering companies, such as a company that made propellars for large ships, it was stated that even though the Chinese and British could also make these propellars, the customers would always buy from the Germans.

In a nutshell, there is good and bad engineering in all countries..........its just that the Germans have a world wide reputation for high quality engineering....its as simple as that.

..........and btw i'am not German....i'am British.

 

Says who? If you run an AMD processor in your box, it was probably manufactured in Dresden.

 

Really? East German Marks could be exchanged 1:2 a bit later. This supports my theory, that people going from East Germany to West Germany before the wall went down were often complete idiots. Some of them may have had good reasons, family or so, but many of them were only stupid.

Overengineering is traditional German problem. We know about this. When I worked in this plant engineering company and we discussed in meetings, my boss was sometimes saying "we are not building a Space Shuttle here". What he meant was, keep it simple.

 

What was wrong with Robotron computers? PC 1715 was at least reliable, very different from these resource hungry blue screen systems from US. Admittedly, Robotron Redabas originated from a dBase copy, coming from Apple computer of a West German.

He was probably a boaster. My parents had a Trabant and I studied with Robotron computers, I can't tell one single "horror story".

 

Blimey...you cant win on this site!

I was just saying, that as the 'Trabant' was made in East Germany, that at that time under the communism rule, i suspect its engineering quallities were hindered by the lack of funds from the state.

Oops...........i do have an AMD processor in my PC...........hasnt let me down YET.

If it does....looks like i'll be going back to the good ol Intel Pentium!

 

Please participate:

http://www.politicalforum.com/economics-trade/203520-your-favorite-german-product.html#post4356520

 

The Trabant was not a bad car for the time, when it was developed. It was definitely not overengineered

The advantage was, tht a lot of people could do maintaince and repairing by themselves or with the help of friends. Even if a Trabant stopped somewhere, they could do something at the moment easier than today.

Development was mainly stopped for economical reasons, there was some prototype development. A new Trabant came later, but this was shortly before the Berlin Wall went down.

Admittedly, the AMD production in Dresden is American technology and Arab money, but it shows, that technology development and economy are interconnected. Good technology has to do with having enough money to buy equipment and do research. This is not the only factor, but an important one.

 

I don't think so mate, as far as I can remember the US has never bought a major weapon system from the UK in the last 30 years or so..Harrier was the last one produced under licence by Douglas..

On the other side lets take a look at some of the major weapon systems the US delivered to the UK..

C-17 Globemasters, Chinook helicopters, C-130 Hercules , Early Warning AWACS , Apache helicopters, Reaper UAV's, Tomahawk Cruise missiles , AMRAAM A2A missiles are among the few to mention..

The statement ''It looks like the US buys a lot of their weapons in UK'' sounds like a highly exaggerated nonsense .. Sorry .

 

23 per cent of British arms exports makes the US the #1 recipient according to the source I gave.

Maybe you think, 23 per cent is not "a lot".
Maybe you think, the M777 howitzer is not a major weapon system.

Did I say somewhere, the UK does not buy a lot of weapons in the US?

I stand by my former statement.

 

Times have changed anyway.
Britons bought American companies and manufacture in the US.

 

''Did I say somewhere, the UK does not buy a lot of weapons in the US?''


NO.. You said ''It looks like the US buys a lot of their weapons in UK'' a conclusion which needs correction.. US buys some weapons from the UK , M777 doesn't mean a lot of its weapons, in terms of dollar value probably no more than few hundred million dollars... Nearly half of all major weapon systems which British Army use originate in the US, Trident II and nuclear weapons are not included.

here is the latest addition which is a major weapon system in my dictionary .


http://news.usni.org/2015/11/23/new...buy-p-8-poseidons-commits-to-f-35-procurement


''23 per cent of British arms exports makes the US the #1 recipient according to the source I gave''



Your source is meaningless, I don't know where you got this from but here is the real one ..


Britian whose worldwide share in arms exports is only 5% and its major customer is Saudi Arabia !!!!



http://www.ibtimes.com/global-arms-...ive-share-major-weapons-exports-china-2317715



''I stand by my former statement'' your choice mate ,obviously we interpret the word 'a lot ' differently or you should urgently upgrade your data..


The US is the biggest customer of German weapons but considering Germany's 5% overall market share in total arms trade, 13% of that doesn't mean' a lot' either

 

To the main subject of this thread which country is more advanced I can only say this is a question for which there is no definitive answer because there are so many areas to compare .. Germany don't have a Silicon Valley or MIT, Caltec , STANFORD or HARVARD but they have superior machinery production and the best car technology on the planet ..The US is massively superior in military technology and aerospace related fields such as Avionics and computers in which Germany really looks like a third world country in comparison but there are lot of other fields where Germans are ahead such as optics,industrial chemistry and precision engineering...

 

You only argue for the fun of it, right?

That's why I said, maybe you don't see it as a major weapons system.

Yes, obviously we interpret "a lot" differently. You can find out, where I have my source from by clicking the hyperlink.

You answered to a post from 2011. Are you surprised, that the data in this post is not from 2015?

What?

 

Mate, Your saying that 23% of all British arms exports goes to USA is ridiculous !!

There is nothing more to say, so I rest my case as you have been proven wrong .... Cheers.

 

Silicon Saxony, KIT, TU Munich, RWTH Aachen ... oh, and a few electronics companies in California are subsidiaries of German companies.

Really? German companies became part of European companies in these fields, this had to do with high R&D expenses and the customers they serve ... it's political, too. These companies may be headquartered in the Netherlands, If you think of stealth technology or drones, then this is not a focus. Germany leases drones from Israel. It is an expensive technology, and it may take a while to develop an up to date drone technology in Europe. Germany does not try to make everything, there is a focus in military technology.

 

I did not make up this number, it is written in the source I gave.
If your idea of "proven wrong" is "because I said so", then we have a different idea about this one, too.

 

Your comment is meaningless mate..Best German is number 27


http://www.topuniversities.com/univ...region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=

Few electronics companies in California is an isolated example which has no impact on the final outcome .In terms of both computer hardware technology and software developments , Germany is almost non existing in comparison to US..

German companies became part of European companies in defence related industries such as MBDA or Airbus which is former EADS or Eurofighter Consortium is true but the fact remains that before becoming a part of these Pan european joint ventures, both France and Britain were clearly ahead of Germany in military electronics,avionics and radars and tactical missiles and complete defence systems . BAE Systems in Britain and the group SAFRAN in France and THALES...The European rocket ARIANE for example is based 90% on technologies developed in France , Germany does not try to make everything is correct because it didn't do it in the past 40 years or so. It would be too late to start today..Leo II is an excellent tank, 120 mm Rheinmetall cannon is a worldbeater but when it comes to guidance systems, Germany is behind.

Eurofighter programms German suppliers use US technology ...

http://www.northropgrumman.litef.com/

https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Worldwide/Europe/Germany.aspx

You know now why the Eurofighter Typhoon exports to customers outside NATO need US congressional approval ,many people in Europe are still wondering why !!!!!
Here you have it ..

 

Nowadays, the USA is more advanced in terms of military technology.
Germany dishes out less money for military R&D.

 

The US has long had a policy of making their own weapons, so as not become dependent on foreign suppliers. They have done this for hundreds of years, so nothing there has changed.

Now for more basic systems, the interoperability is due more to the requirements of NATO then anything else. After all, why should the US design their own 81mm mortar when the Korean War M29 was no longer an effective weapon? It was cheaper and easier to simply update the British L16A2 mortar?

But in my experience, there is actually not much "American Equipment" in the UK armory. They use the Rapier missile, the Chieftan tank, the Warrior APC, the Starburst missile, and almost all of their aircraft and ships are domestically created (or created with other European partners).

And yea, the Royal Navy uses the Tomahawk. But only in their submarines. They use the Storm Shadow for their aircraft, developed by the UK and France.

 

The US has their universities and technology regions, we have ours. It's nice for US universities, that they won a ranking, but it does not change a thing.

Because you don't know German hardware and software companies, they are not existing?

This is part of the idea of European cooperation. Germany does not try to do things, which other European countries can do better. It would be double work.

Why invent it again, if it's already available?

 

A better rating would be to compare 'bangs for the buck' re research and development, in which case Germany does far better than the U.S. does in managing projects and budgets. The way the U.S. Congress decides on R&D and military spending is a sad embarrassment and rife with Third World style corruption and waste. We would probably do better outsourcing R&D to Germany and let them handle it, or at least part of it anyway.

 

Mate your data is hopelessly outdated, at least 30 years old even older .. Rapier missiles??? belongs to stone age...Chieftain tanks have long been replaced by Challenger2 tanks ( the entire computer and electronics are made by US and French companies ) decades ago. .You need to upgrade your knowledge urgently, really !! the only thing that is British in these tanks are the Chopham armour ...everything else is foreign ..

''But in my experience, there is actually not much "American Equipment" in the UK armory''


I provided you ample examples of how much the UK defence depends on American hardware.. Your experience is 30 years old !

 

Germany ( German EADS ) has screwed up the Eurofighter Typhoon project..They insisted on taking the responsibility for avionics and guidance systems in which they had no previous experience, the Brits made a big mistake by giving them this part of the project..The result was a 4 years delay !! after it became clear that Germans were completely incompetent in mastering the sophisticated avionics of the Eurofighter, they switched the role with BAE systems but it was too late.. The French RAFALE pulled ahead.. Today ,the new AESA radar of the Eurofighter Typhoon is under development at BAE Systems in Edinburgh ( former Ferranti) which should have been the case years ago,it was the main reason why the Eurofighter lost so many fighter competitions against the RAFALE even if it was the overall better fighter .....Germany was to blame ..

 

I was giving examples. But interestingly enough, the tank I mentioned was replaced by....

Another British tank.

I was actually trying to make a point there. When it came time to replace the Chieftan Tank, did they make their own, or just buy the M1 Abrams? And who figging cares if components came from US companies? US systems come with European components, and even Japanese, so that is simply a stupid thing to claim.

I am convinced that you argue simply to argue, and do not really have any kind of point to make. But if you must know, my experience is both 30 years old, and current.

 

Doubtful. Design by Committee never works, and Europe is plagued by the same political pork rolling the U.S. is, multiple states all wanting their cut of the deal, regardless of competence. It's not likely Germany owns the whole 'screw up', and besides, companies have to start somewhere in developing skills sets, just like craftsmen do. Lots of projects go 'bad', for one reason or another, and rarely is there a single cause, in fact that is never the case on complex engineering designs. Germany gets more stuff right than wrong, so one project is no measure of anything. I just spent 3 weeks in Singapore, 'correcting' a simple problem I wrote extensively on when I first began working on the project in 1998, for frigging sake. They call me back years later and pay me to tell the exact same thing they were told a dozen times between 1998 and 2002. That happens when one is dealing with Ph.Ds and engineers with fat heads and egos larger than their intellects, they can't admit they made mistakes, especially mistakes pointed out to them by the 'peasants'.