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

Let's look at that then.

Berlin Seige, Berlin Blockade, call it what you will.

It began on 24 June 1948. It ended on 12 May 1949.

The short story is that the USSE (and East Germany) tried to starve West Berlin into surrendering. After almost a year, they failed. West Berlin stayed seperate from East Germany, and continued to be politically part of West Germany.

Is that a victory for the USSR or the US and other Western powers?

The Cold War lasted from 1946 until 1991. The end date is the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In 1992, look at the US and USSR. The US was still alive and well, and 19 years later is still going. The USSR has been lying on the ash heap of history for the last 20 years.

It is not hard to tell which is the winner their either.

 

We might have our problems but we are richer than the Germans are. We are still the world leader in science and technology.

 

Who cares where it is built?

The first, last, and final thing that matters is where it is developed, and where the profits go.

In the US, workers would have to be paid $25+ an hour, and the phones would still cost $500 each. Maybe $15 of that would be profit.

Built in some third world hellhole (China), they pay the Government $25 to build the phone, and they pay the workders $2. The phone is sold for $100, and the profit is returned to the stock owners.

And the phone is still designed by high payed US workers. I could not care much less about the low paid grunts overseas. Let the low paying grunt work be exported to the third world. I care much more about the development side.

And that is how things are the world over nowadays. Nobody cares about "Made In The (COUNTRY OF YOUR CHOICE)". They do not care if it is made in Germany, USA, South Africa, China, or Singapore. As long as it is cheap, that is all that matters.

And by the same token, I do not care much who makes it. It may be in CHina, Philippines, or Singapore. As long as the profits return to a US company, I am OK with it.

And even that is not such a big deal to me, since the economy is largely global. The only countries that I have a problem with is China and Japan. And I try to avoid those when possible.

Personally, I would love to see the US and other nations adopt a variant of the Trade Reform Act, as proposed by Tom Clancy.

 

"And by the same token, I do not care much who makes it. It may be in CHina, Philippines, or Singapore. As long as the profits return to a US company, I am OK with it."

That is one issue. The profits are not returned to the USA. Have you seen how much money is currently offshore undeclared to the USA waiting for a tax-code change?

 

I voted for Germany. A few reasons, their cars are vastly superior, their Beer is vastly superior, and while I was in the Army their tankers always outperformed our tankers, good competition but the German tankers were superior.

They also have real castles.

I also spent the two best years of my life in Germany.

So, Germany wins.


You should surrender now America and become more like Germany. Together we could rule the world!

 

"I have worked for many corporations over the years. And I do not care much who makes the final product. The item is designed in the US by US engineers, designers, and programmers. MicroSoft may have the final Windows 7 disks made in China, but where are all the programmers and the like that actually write the code?"

I'm sure that will be a great epitaph on the tombstone of the USA, however, I have a much DIFFERENT opinion of manufacturing. Your illusion is short-lived. I was one of those $75 (71 I think, actually) dollar per hour "experts" that quit many months ago after 12 years of work as a "second-rate researcher" (i.e. I didn't go to MIT, CALTECH or Harvard). Those manufacturing morons in Asia are not as backward as you might think and neither was I.

 

This is an impossible question to answer. Germany has more advanced medical equipment and cars, the US has more advanced software development and rockets. You could go on and on until you get to the point where one country wins it by having more durable paper clips.

 

I voted "equal" despite the fact I am German. The point of this poll is (as it showed) that there is nothing about the USA being advanced to Western European countries. I don't know where some American get this idea as for example German cars are by far the best in the world and there is no doubt about it.

 

Common sense asks - Why did americans put together all missile related German scientists and developers and drove them to the USA if the had had Goddard who had launched his 1-st missile in 1926 and had their missile program so well developed in 1945 ?

What did lack that Americans drove documents so hastily that when the Soviet Army came all had alreay been cleaned up?

Why did Americans take such efforts to take out trains of documents if they needed no big of a leap as you say many people tend to say?

 

Die casting. The US die casting industry is good. but the German one is excellent. Very perfect are Italians and the Swiss.

 

Well, maybe because their leading scientist, Dr. Robert Goddard died in 1945 from cancer. Plus they had a slew of German scientists covering all fields of research who were begging to go to the US, England, and other Western powers.

Because the choices were pretty much go to the West, or be captured by the Soviet Union. Dr. von Braun knew what to expect at the hands of the Soviets, so he fabricated documents that allowed himself and over 500 of his people to move further West. And even though the SS had orders to kill all the scientists and workers in the event of capture, Dr. von Braun managed to keep the guards away until his brother was able to surrender to a passing US Private.

Dr. von Braun and a great many other scientists and researchers from all fields of study went out of their way to surrender to the Western powers. Maybe because after living in one police state, they had no desire to simply move to living under another police state.

The same happened both ways. Both sides scrubbed their areas clean of any research material they could find. And early on, much of the effort was focused not on the rocket program, but on their Uranverein. They had already captured most of the information needed on the rocket program by this time, but were rounding up anybody and any information that could be used against them by the Soviet Union.

Because if these scientists and researchers ended up in the hands of the Soviet Union, there was no question how their skills would have been used. With the US, Dr. von Braun was able to build the Redstone rocket, the Jupiter-C rocket (which launched Explorer-1 satellite), and eventually his crowning achievement, the Saturn-V. Anybody who has read the history of Dr. von Braun knows that the was a very bad Nazi. Only interested in rockets, he scorned the NAZI party, and was arrested several times for his remarks and statements against the party. Only the need of the party for his abilities keep him from being sent to a camp or executed.

At the end of the war, leaders on both sides knew that the next war would more then likely be against the Soviet Union. And in order to prepare for it, they tried to capture as many people and documents in order to keep them out of the hands of the other side.

And the Soviets did the same thing. Look at the speed in which they raced to capture Konan in what is now North Korea. For some reason, people know little to nothing of the Japanese Atomic Bomb program, F-Go, which at the end of the war was centered in Korea. The Soviets got far more from Japan in this aspect then they ever did from Europe.

Probably because Germany was not very close to completing a fision device. But Japan was either assembling theirs, or conducting a live test. They were actually neck and neck with the US over who would be first, while Germany was barely on the track.

 

I'd agree that German scientist were afraid to fall into Red Army hands and Americans were qucik to make use of this fear. If they wanted to help Germans they could have club them together and pull out of Germany without documents, drawings and blueprints they took away in mass numbers.


This convinces me that the US rocket program proved to be far from being che-d'ouvre contrary to the ating German programs.

As to Goddard experiments I hope we can find other people in Europe who experimented with rockets including Koroliov in 1931-1932.

The 1921 year saw not only his experiments with liquid engine trials but N. I. Tikhomirov who formed 1 st R&D on missiles (USSR).


So what?

Germans were the first and only nation to mass product rockets and missiles!
Had the American commanders had the mass producted rockets at hand the would have launced them at Germany!

 

During the Second World War, General Dornberger was the military head of the army's rocket program, Zanssen became the commandant of the Peenemünde army rocket centre, and von Braun was the technical director of the ballistic missile program.They would lead the team that built the Aggregate-4 (A-4) rocket, which became the first vehicle to reach outer space during its test flight program in 1942 and 1943.By 1943, Germany began mass producing the A-4 as the Vergeltungswaffe 2 (“Vengeance Weapon” 2, or more commonly, V2), a ballistic missile with a 320 kilometres (200 mi) range carrying a 1,130 kilograms (2,500 lb) warhead at 4,000 kilometres per hour (2,500 mph).

What do America or Japanese experiments have to do with German successful mass production of the acting missiles?

Its supersonic speed meant there was no defense against it, and radar detection provided little warning. Germany used the weapon to bombard southern England and parts of Allied-liberated western Europe from 1944 until 1945. After the war, the V-2 became the basis of early American and Soviet rocket designs.

Why V-2 if you had everything prepared by 1945? You could have launched you own mass production on the basis of native American designs and developments!

At war’s end, American, British, and Soviet scientific intelligence teams competed to capture Germany's rocket engineers along with the German rockets themselves and the designs they were based on.Each of the Allies captured a share of the available members of the German rocket team, but the United States benefited the most with Operation Paperclip, recruiting von Braun and most of his engineering team, who later helped develop the American missile and space exploration programs.

The United States also acquired a large number of complete V2 rockets.

Again V-2.

What for?

 

As to von Braun and his capabilities well said these people in their book: Naimark, Norman M (1979). The Russians in Germany; A History of the Soviet Zone of Occupation, 1945–1949. Harvard University Press. pp. 207. ISBN 0-674-78406-5.

Regarding Operation Alsos, Allied Intelligence described nuclear physicist Werner Heisenberg, the German nuclear energy project principal, as “ . . . worth more to us than ten divisions of Germans.”

Seems very strange for an ordinay scientist to be worth of 10 divisions!

 

Every body knows that German Nazis were absolutrly leading in technology. Return to Castle Wolfenstein proves this. Look the blue reyes in that picture. Ever seen US military doing such thing?

http://www.sg.hu/kep/2001_12/return_to_castle_wolfenstein_bemutato_02.jpg

 

Well, as far as "mass producing rockets", you need to step back in history a bit. Say 125+ years.

The first truely "mass produced" military rocket was the Congreve Rocket, produced by England. First used in 1804, they saw extensive use during the 19th century.

However, their high point was truely the Napoleonic Wars era. In the US, they are immortalized in song in the US National Anthem:

And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,

England was if nothing else an early rocket proponant. When they attacked the French flotilla at Boulogne in 1806, they had 24 ships outfitted specifically as rocket boats. During the seige of the city, they fired over 2,000 Congreve Rockets at the city.

When they attacked Copenhagen in 1807, they fired over 14,000 rockets.

At the Battle of Leipzig, the only British unit was a detachment of Artillery, armed with Congreve rockets.

And what makes you think the US did not have rockets, nor did not use them?

For one, they had the T34 Calliope. This was an M4 tank, with 36 tubes mounted on top for launching rockets.

There were also many ships used with rockets in the Pacific. These were used in every amphibious landing during WWII.



Then you have the classic M1 Recoiless Rifle, commonly called the "Bazooka". That was a rocket. In fact, the Germans copied the US in this area. The M1 came out in 1942, and German forces captured several during the early Africa Campaign.

These were sent back to Germany, and a year later they had their own, the RPzB, or Panzerschreck.

However, the need for a V-1 or V-2 weapon for the Allies was simply not there. They needed large support facilities, and were not mobile. More importantly, they had a very limited range.

The German rockets were not fired from Germany. The V-1 attacks came from Belgium, primarily Antwerp. V-2 launches mostly happened from France, but also some were launched from the Netherlands.

Similar systems located in England would have struck... France, Belguim, and the Netherlands. All were allied nations that were occupied by Germany.

So no, it was not that the Allies did not have the interest or capability to build such rockets. Such rockets would have done them absolutely no good in the military sense. They were not very accurate, usefull for little more then "Terror Tactics". They could not effectively be aimed at anything smaller then a large city, and could not be fired very quickly.

Heavy bombers were much more successfull as weapons then the V series rockets ever were.

 

Don't exagerate!

I talked about modern rockets industry where The Allies lagged behing the German rocket industry!This is why their technology was not precise contrary to that one of Germans that got quickly rid of the V-1 as the most unreliable ballistic missiles passing to the V-2.

What do the British Army have to do with modern rocket industry even if tey fired some sparkling toys 125 years ago?

If we want to trace back the history of all the things called rockets we have the full right to say a word about first experiments with rockets in Chinese Armies thousand years ago!

Russians have a saying that facts are a stubborn thing.
Facts are events that have happened or are happening now. Some facts need confirmation some not. The fact of the WW2 doesn't need confirmation any more!

1. Germans developed their ballistic missile program up to 1942 ending with first missiles launched into the sky.
2. What was the year when Americans and British successfully launched their first ballistic mussiles in the sky?
3. The names of German scientists who headed the shooting are known.
4. What are the names of the American and British scientists that comissioned ready to shoot modern ballistic missiles?
5. Germans began shooting (read: were successful to set into motion the entire missile industry) in 1942.
6. What was the year when the Americans and British Allies set into motion their missile industry?
7. The names of the ready to use for continuos startGerman launching pads are known.
8. What were the names of the ready to use American and British launching pads in 1942 or previous years?

 

Limited range have many effective arms. I don't think that Londoners would have shared your idea about ineffectiveness of the V-2.

 

Wasn't it the British Navy to destroy the French Allied Fleet in the very beginning of the war?

 

who has put men in space?

 

This is complete nonsense. People from West could simply go to East Berlin to buy food or so. There were city trains going all the time.

No, they simply changed plans.

Germany and Berlin got divided by Western powers, but this didn't last. Germany is unified now.

None of them.

A group of Russian politicians wanted Russia to be independent. The Baltic states wanted to become independent anyway, the Caucasians have a history of trying to be independent, the other countries did arrange with it. It is actually difficult to say, who is the winner here or if there has been a winner at all.

 

I do, that's why I asked the question.

It should be rather difficult to find out about this one.

Personal costs are around 5 % of the costs of a cell phone at an example from Nokia moving a factory from Germany to Romania. With wages having been 10 times lower at this time, this may have had an important effect on win and loss situation, but not on prices.

Development centers are in China, India, Malaysia nowadays, too. If companies try to save on low payed costs, why shouldn't they try to save on high payed jobs?

The company may be an US company, the investors may be from all over the world.

You don't buy Japanese. This explains your position on another topic. "I know about Japanese culture, history, Bushido and so ... I don't buy Japanese products" may be the American version of "I know about Jewish culture, history, Kabbala and so ... I don't buy Jewish products".

This wouldn't end well for the US.

 

Lets ask Microsoft.

http://www.microsoft.com/china/CRD/en/newsrelease/press20100420.mspx

And you dare to call other people racist? You do not only fail to understand economics

 

I see. So you are now stating that the only rockets that matter are Ballistic Missiles. Changing the rules after the debate started, ain't ya?

Why such a narrow definition? Because you are aware, are you not, that the Congreve Rocket is a "Ballistic Missile".

Because here is the definition of a "Ballistic Missile":

A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering one or more warheads to a predetermined target. The missile is only guided during the relatively brief initial powered phase of flight and its course is subsequently governed by the laws of orbital mechanics and ballistics.

So you see, with very few exceptions (like Cruise Missiles and anti-tank missiles), any missile shot in an upward direction is by definition a Ballistic Missile.

As far as the US launching it's first "Ballistic Missile", that is simple. I would say that is 1925, when Robert Goddard launched his first liquid fueled rocket.

Now, if you are talking weapons grade missile, that is 1944, with the previously mentioned Hermes.

And once again, look back at what was stated very clearly earlier. I will say it again here.

The US and UK had no need to spend time and money developing ballistic missiles. Everything they could have hit with them would have been in a friendly country that was occupied by Germany.

The German rockets were not fired from Germany. Not even the Germans had that kind of range. So any rockets fired from the UK-Scotland would have landed inside a friendly country.

And in reality, the rockets were not that effective. They only had a range of 200 miles. They only carried a 1 ton warhead. And they were inaccurate as hell.

A modern ICBM like the Minuteman III can strike any target within an 8,100 mile range. And it has a CEP (Circular Error Probablity) of 150 meters. That means it will hit somewhere in a circle within 150 meters of the intended impact point.

The V-2 on the other hand had a range of 200 miles. And it's CEP is around 9.25 statute miles. That means that if you are intending to hit Wimbledon Park, it would be perfectly understandable if it instead impacted at Heathrow Airport instead.

A great many weapons were developed by both sides during the war. Both sides had Super Battleships, but neither the Germans or Japanese were able to employ them effectively. Both sides had Aircraft Carriers, but by the end of the war only one side still had any in appreciable numbers.

However, only one side built a great many other things. Only Japan built Submarine Aircraft Carriers. Only Germany built short range Ballistic Missiles. And only the US and UK built true Heavy Bombers.

This did not mean that only those nations had the technology to do that. Germany had the capability to build Heavy Bombers, but chose not to. Planners decided that their medium and short range bombers would do the trick. The Soviet Union had the capability to build Battleships and Aircraft Carriers, but doing so would have been foolish. Her land was fought almost exclusively on land, and building large naval ships would have only been a distraction.

The same goes with these Ballistic Missiles you keep going on and on about. These were weapons that for many reasons, only Germany could employ. Once the Allies got to a position where they could have used them against Germany, they were already inside Germany.

And their Heavy Bombers were much more accurate and much more effective then all the V series rockets combined.