|
I was just thinking why at a very late date the Nazis went 'all in' on jets You are right, the Me 262 was considered a essential project by...1942?
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
I think I read in this very thread that the fuel thing is actually very important; there are certain performance envelops you just can't reach with easier to develop and produce engines without them; so to compensate you needed to do all sorts of weird things with engines that caused all sorts of problems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 04:13
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:1944 has nothing to do with the development of jet aircraft, and frankly I doubt gas considerations had much to do with it either. They were working on turbojets (as well as most of the other "wonder weapon" projects) long before the war started. The first jet engine aircraft flew in August 1939 as part of a test bed program with Heinkel. The guy who led the design of the V-1 was experimenting with remote controlled aircraft in 1936, had proposals out for strapping bombs to them in 1939, and was working on a jet version of that basic idea in 1940. Whittle was also designing this poo poo in 1930, before the war was a consideration.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
So, is there a historical consensus on the AK-47 design and German influences? I argued with a tour guide last week and said that the gas systems are all different, which he countered by saying that the AK was trash the first time it was submitted (and that the only true invention by Kalashnikov is a tank speedometer or smth), but it was a great piece when it was resubmitted after the war (with great help from Shmeiser or someone). The German designer then died mysteriously.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
Short version is that the soviets probably had help from German engineers getting the processes right for making them with stamped parts. The design itself is Russian and has gently caress all to do with the stg44 aside from both being mag fed pistol gripped select fire rifles using intermediate cartridges. There's an argument that there was some inspiration from seeing what the Germans were making but beyond that they're totally different in how they work. Look at the FCG for Christ sake. Edit: mishaco has a new vid up on exactly this where he breaks down one of each. Haven't watched much of it but it's out there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 06:21
|
|
|
Yeah AFAIK the two guns don't really work the same way at all and the AK47 approaches the problem in a different way than the STG44 because it was designed by someone else.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
As I recall, mechanically the AK has more in common with the M1 Garand and John Browning's Auto 5 shotgun than it does the StG.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Sure, after the war, but I was curious about the thirties. But no Adolphs in 44 is certainly interesting. i think metternich has the stats for all of germany, if he ever sticks his head in here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
Nobody names their child "God".
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 09:07
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Nobody names their child "God".   checkmate
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
At the risk of starting a theological debate outwith the theology threads, there is to my mind a huge psychological difference, one the size of the Grand Canyon, between calling your child "God-the-Son", who came to earth in human form (or, indeed, "God's-last-best-prophet") and calling them "God Almighty". (Other gods are available from all good retailers and some rubbish ones as well.) What we need here is someone to see what the trend was in other totalitarian regimes that involved a strong cult of personality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 09:43
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:At the risk of starting a theological debate outwith the theology threads, there is to my mind a huge psychological difference, one the size of the Grand Canyon, between calling your child "God-the-Son", who came to earth in human form (or, indeed, "God's-last-best-prophet") and calling them "God Almighty". I think you're entirely right, though I'd be just as curious to see the change in names away from names typical or suggestive of demonised groups in the same type of regime. I don't think there's any question though that, putting aside dictatorships, monarchies do have a profound effect on names.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 09:47
|
|
|
I'm not sure what the impact was on regular names, but the Soviet Union did see a number of... unusual ones pop up. Aside from the fairly well-known cases like Tractor, Soyuz, or Kalashnikov, there were also stuff like Electrification or one that was an abbreviation of "Hooray, Yura [Gagarin] in Space!", and I think I might also recall an abbreviation for "Glory to Stalin?" Not sure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
Right, got to remember it for the next time. I mean, what's the use of bringing in a German StG44 designer to build a gun that looks similarly, but is actually totally different in the internals.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 10:12
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:I'm not sure what the impact was on regular names, but the Soviet Union did see a number of... unusual ones pop up. Aside from the fairly well-known cases like Tractor, Soyuz, or Kalashnikov, there were also stuff like Electrification or one that was an abbreviation of "Hooray, Yura [Gagarin] in Space!", and I think I might also recall an abbreviation for "Glory to Stalin?" Not sure. Chinese names were like this for while, depending obviously on your parent's involvement in the red guard sweep. A lot of kids named "Red Star" "Red Guard" "National Unity" and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 10:34
|
|
|
I believe classical Athens saw a massive rise in nautical-themed names after the Battle of Salamis - like, naming their kids 'Trireme' and the like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:At the risk of starting a theological debate outwith the theology threads, there is to my mind a huge psychological difference, one the size of the Grand Canyon, between calling your child "God-the-Son", who came to earth in human form (or, indeed, "God's-last-best-prophet") and calling them "God Almighty". there is no difference. arians get out reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
How many kids do I have to have to justify naming one of them SLAMRAAM?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 11:19
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:Speaking of WW2, I was reading something recently about the He-162 and it suddenly struck me that I couldn't recall why Germany went all in on jet propulsion near the end of the war, barring some aircraft like the Ta-152. It just strikes me as a bizarre decision considering the state of Germany's resources at that point and how resource intensive and meticulous manufacture is. Did they get caught up in the idea of ~jet powered super planes~ or was there some other reasoning behind it like the repeated difficulty in developing more powerful piston engines? (let's be real it's probably the former because the Nazis loving loved their dumb "superweapon" projects, logic be damned) Actually kind of the opposite of this happened - when the He178 flew just before the start of the war, it represented pretty clear proof of concept. Primitive as it was, it still outperformed the best and newest prop fighters in a number of ways. It was shown/offered to the Luftwaffe, but they made the decision to not invest in it heavily, focusing instead of building lots of their prewar prop designs. By 1943 it was abundantly clear that jets represented a huge leap forward in performance; it was also pretty clear that Germany was going to lose the war, so both sides planned accordingly. The US/UK pursued jets in kind of a halfassed way as they weren't very well suited to what they needed to do at the time; Germany came up with by far and away the best fighter of the war but was of course undermined by material shortages and Nazi stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Right, got to remember it for the next time. I mean, what's the use of bringing in a German StG44 designer to build a gun that looks similarly, but is actually totally different in the internals. Getting the process right, I'm not particlarly an expert but as far as i understand it AK's started by making milled receivers because they didnt quite get how to use stamping to make them, milling quite time and machine intensive because you are milling out internal features from a block of steel so you want to stamp if you can because its faster and cheaper. People were experimenting with getting stamping processes right throughout WW2 and the Germans got it right first i believe with the later STG-44's kind of out of neccesity. Hence you take the guy that knew how they did it and tell him to make your new design via the same processes which helps you get it right faster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 12:48
|
|
|
Calling the Me262 far and away the best fighter of the war seems dubious along the lines of calling the Maus the best tank.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
I thought that MG42s were already stamped, so StG doesn't seem revolutionary in that aspect. I like checking out pictures of AKs to see if they're milled or stamped.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Calling the Me262 far and away the best fighter of the war seems dubious along the lines of calling the Maus the best tank. Also, while the US may have dragged its heels, the Gloster Meteor was a fighter of World War 2. You're going to have to explain why the Me 262 was 'far and away' better than it even if you think 'goes really fast' is the be-all and end-all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
M O S Q U I T O O S Q U I T O
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Also, while the US may have dragged its heels, the Gloster Meteor was a fighter of World War 2. You're going to have to explain why the Me 262 was 'far and away' better than it even if you think 'goes really fast' is the be-all and end-all. The early Meteors didn't really surpass piston engined aircraft in overall performance except for top speed at low altitudes. The F.3 was the first variant that showed any serious performance advantage over the late model prop fighters, but it still lagged well behind the 262 in most respects (it was about 60 km/h slower and had around a 30% disadvantage in initial climb). It wasn't until the 1946 variant (the F.4) that the Meteor's performance equalled the 262. The only aircraft in the world that was anywhere near the 262's performance during the wartime years was the P-80, though it still couldn't match the 262's critical mach or acceleration at speed. It had some serious developmental issues that weren't resolved until after the war was over, but it probably could have been pressed into combat had it been needed. In any case, during that era, "goes real fast" really was the most important performance characteristic. More specifically, it was energy retention. The 262 retained energy so well that it was a serious challenge to slow it down to landing speeds, which led to the preferred tactic of stalking them around their airfields as they came home. It was largely untouchable the rest of the time. bewbies fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Jun 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yeah AFAIK the two guns don't really work the same way at all and the AK47 approaches the problem in a different way than the STG44 because it was designed by someone else. Forgotten Weapons has a good post on this. https://www.forgottenweapons.com/ak-and-stg-kissing-cousins/
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
Polyakov posted:Getting the process right, I'm not particlarly an expert but as far as i understand it AK's started by making milled receivers because they didnt quite get how to use stamping to make them, milling quite time and machine intensive because you are milling out internal features from a block of steel so you want to stamp if you can because its faster and cheaper. People were experimenting with getting stamping processes right throughout WW2 and the Germans got it right first i believe with the later STG-44's kind of out of neccesity. Hence you take the guy that knew how they did it and tell him to make your new design via the same processes which helps you get it right faster. The Soviets had a lot of equipment set up and experience with milling, so their first attempts at stamped AKs ended with them going "gently caress it, just mill them until we get the stamping figured out." I recommend you get Gun Disassembly on Steam and use it to take apart the StG 44, AKM, PPSh-41, and DP. You'll notice striking similarities in design between the Russian guns and absolutely nothing in common with the German gun (which has bizarre design decisions like a ton of spacers filling up the receiver).
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:31
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:If it was officially prohibited, you'll most likely find it somewhere in the Queen's Regulations; a free download of the 1862 regulations is here: https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=SjIWAAAAYAAJ&rdid=book-SjIWAAAAYAAJ&rdot=1 Thanks for clarifying that for me. What a bizarre age.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
bewbies posted:In any case, during that era, "goes real fast" really was the most important performance characteristic. More specifically, it was energy retention. Doubly so when its mission profile was largely "kill bombers with cannon fire" and not to win dogfights against a bunch of fighters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
GotLag posted:What a bizarre age.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
The Victorians basically have a shitload of weird issues going for them. They are insane.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:The Victorians basically have a shitload of weird issues going for them. They are insane.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
Guilt, self loathing, racial confusion and sexual issues all wrapped up in a starchy tight suit with too much facial hair. And lots of running away from home and doing stupid stuff when you are young.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
I wonder what stuff from today future historians are going to find utterly inexplicable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
Fullcaps. Neither God nor science can explain that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Nobody names their child "God". The Shammgod family disagrees.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
bewbies posted:The only aircraft in the world that was anywhere near the 262's performance during the wartime years was the P-80, though it still couldn't match the 262's critical mach or acceleration at speed. It had some serious developmental issues that weren't resolved until after the war was over, but it probably could have been pressed into combat had it been needed. ...the P-80 had exactly the same engine as the Meteors, though, since the US at this time licence-built UK jet engines rather than having its own design in production. I doubt that at any given point in time (i.e. if the P-80 had been pressed into service early, thus with earlier model engines) it would have been much slower or faster than the Meteor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:once you figure out the honor thing, their unique gender ideas, and the part where magic and religion are 100% real and can have physical effects on your life, i "get" people from the 17th century. i still don't really "get" the victorians I found this article which helped me (as a manchild who views the world through the lens of video games) understand a little bit, but it's still so foreign to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:...the P-80 had exactly the same engine as the Meteors, though, since the US at this time licence-built UK jet engines rather than having its own design in production. I doubt that at any given point in time (i.e. if the P-80 had been pressed into service early, thus with earlier model engines) it would have been much slower or faster than the Meteor. Fuselage design matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 18:18 |
|
|
xthetenth posted:Fuselage design matters. Wing design too. Iirc the 262s wing was one of the best out there until the mig15 abd maybe e be the f86
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 16:04
|
|