Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dieseltaylor

Technology in WW2

Recommended Posts

Including the lovely passage where he coughs up the fact that the whole thing was a joke aimed at getting him on talk shows:

According to Frank Miele, a member of the Skeptics Society in the United States, Zündel told him that his book 'UFOs: Nazi Secret Weapon?' (which became an underground bestseller, going through several printings) was nothing more than a ploy to attract readers, a deliberate hoax to build publicity for Samisdat. Said Zündel in a telephone conversation with Miele:

"I realized that North Americans were not interested in being educated. They want to be entertained. The book was for fun. With a picture of the Führer on the cover and flying saucers coming out of Antarctica it was a chance to get on radio and TV talk shows. For about 15 minutes of an hour program I'd talk about that esoteric stuff. Then I would start talking about all those Jewish scientists in concentration camps, working on these secret weapons. And that was my chance to talk about what I wanted to talk about." "In that case," I asked him, "do you still stand by what you wrote in the UFO book?" "Look," he replied, "it has a question mark at the end of the title."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalin's Organist,

Figured you were au courant on the Panther turret depending types! Nice link, and I've long been familiar with Zundel's "efforts" in the area. Unfortunately, for you, Zundel's doings do not ipso facto make all the other evidence go away. Long before Zundel did anything, there was evidence aplenty for those willing to pay attention and not just in Germany, either, though I have a great deal taken from German newspapaers right after the war and through the early 1950s. See, for example, "Spies Bid for Franco's Weapons" in the Denver Post here. Issue date is November 9, 1947. http://webfairy.org/missilegate/rfz/rocket.htm Think about those electromagnetic rockets in the context of Lt. Gen. Jimmy Doolittle's quiet investigation of "ghost rockets" over Sweden and elsewhere after the war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_rockets Oh, I made a mistake on the page cites from BEHOLD A PALE HORSE. Should've read pp. 402 and 403.

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalin's Organist,

This should help sate your saucer mit Panther turret Jones. (link excluded to conform to Forum Rules) Just use this search term, and you can have have own model! Dornier-Stratospharen Haunebu II. Talk about the last model I ever expected to see offered!

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pak_43,

I'm confused. I was referring to the U.S. National Archives, but the link you gave suggests you mean the U.K. equivalent. Which one do you mean, please?

Ah, in that case you probably don't realise the PRO in Kew isn't actually referred to as that any more but is called the "National Archives.."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Record_Office

So I just need the document reference for the National Archives in the UK to be able to look up the reference as per your quote below...

If you don't believe me, try the PRO at Kew, U.K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John in what way is an unsubstantiated newspaper article from 1947 evidence of anything at all?

As always you have started with your conclusion, and then uncritically adopted anything at all that supports it.

Certainly there were UFO reports before Zundel - all of them traceable to drivel, misreporting, kitchen implements and poor focus or outright charlatans.

None of it is evidence for anything. Anything that has not been disproved outright remains unsubstantiated and supported only by woolly thinking like yours.

I note that the "write up" around that article says that the US 11" atomic cannon was actually developed by the Nazi's too......oh dear oh dear....that didn't get you thinking that perhaps the writer doesn't quite have it all together up top?? No...I guess it wouldn't....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dieseltaylor,

Was just over at 75% Off books, where I found a new to me study which seemed right down your alley, so I wrote down the title for you: THE WAGES OF DESTRUCTION, by Tooze. It's a pioneering, award winning study of Germany's wartime economy and how it was used and abused. Seems to cover the kinds of things near and dear to you. Also, just yesterday learned about a Japanese type 91 diving shell, an AP shell designed to hit the water short of the target and penetrate below the waterline. The U.S. cruiser Boise took one in the 6" magazine at Guadalcanal; the shell exploded, but the magazine didn't blow because the flood of seawater from a hit ~10 feet below the waterline knocked out the resulting magazine fire, which could've blown the ship apart. A much simpler Japanese innovation was to fit bomb fins and mounting lugs to a 14" naval AP shell, producing the deadly bomb that sank the Arizona. Incidentally, the same idiots at BuOrd (Navy's Bureau of Ordnance) who screwed up our torpedoes forced the Navy to fight the war without a proper AP bomb for attacking armored warships. Instead, the best they had was SAP (semi armor piercing).

Stalin's Organist,

Your ability to dismiss out of hand, ridicule and ignore information you don't want to accept is truly impressive. I've presented you with contemporary records, declassified Top Secret documents from a bunch of different sources, eyewitness testimony, photos, classified engineering plans, even a POW debrief so important it went to Hoover by AirTel and was subsequently passed on to key players in the Intelligence Community, yet you won't yield so much as a nanometer of ground in the debate. Face it. You'd rather live in your safe little world than deal with what was, let alone where the tech base has gone since. And we're way past being able to build the Millennium Falcon, which was doable in the 1980s, as noted by Ben Rich, Kelly Johnson's successor as head of the Skunk Works in his 1980s GUNG HO interview "Stealth and the UFO Connection" with noted aviation writer Jim Goodall, though at the time of publication he was a Deep Throat, an obligation Goodall was released from when Ben Rich later died. Here's some more of what Ben Rich said, not that it'll change your mind. (Fair use) Ben Rich...Quotes...

"The U. S. Air Force has just given us a contract to take E. T. back home."

"We also know how to travel to the stars."

"Anything you can imagine we already know how to do."

"If you've seen it in Star Trek or Star Wars, we've been there and done that."

"We have things in the Nevada desert that are alien to your way of thinking far beyond anything you see on Star Trek." (taken from here, where there's much more to see) http://204.74.214.194/forum1/message848282/pg1

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John all your "evidence" is simply unsupportable. One off interviews not corroborated by any source, "plans" that are nothing more than diagrams like those of space ships I drew when I was 12.

You haven't got a single working model for any of these astounding technologies, not a single piece of physical evidence for these massive flying saucers that weighed 10's or hundreds of tons.

Flying saucers armed with a dozen large naval cannon? So where are the production records for the cannon? AFAIK all large calibre German artillery is accounted for on land and sea.

A single 1947 article from a journalist expounding an electromagnetic rocket? So how come no-one has built one? the "effect" mentioned in the accompanying article is well known - so why hasn't anyone actually been able to make it "work"? where is even a little flying saucer (or anythnig else) using it for propulsion? No need for a 100 tonner - moving something weighing 100 grams would suffice to start down the road of real evidence.

It is easy to present evidence that is hearsay and then cry foul because no-one else believes it.

There are any number of logical fallacies presnt in your ideas and hte sites you use to support them - misleading vividness, slippery slope, post hoc, hasty generalisation and false dilema all seem obvious.

The one thing that is not present is corroboration.

Edit : Oh and I hope you didn't get any headaches last night (local time) when Chch got hit by 3 aftershocks over 5 magnitude........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JK hasn't changed at all in at least 2 years (ther's probably older versions....)

Induitably. As I recall, he took his great leap into the unknown sometime shortly after the terrorist events on 11th September 2001, with that whole 'pre-chambered' and 'where did the plane go' nonsense. Prior to that he was a bit quirky but at least vaguely grounded. After that he cut the last guy ropes and totally embraced the lunacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flying saucers armed with a dozen large naval cannon? So where are the production records for the cannon? AFAIK all large calibre German artillery is accounted for on land and sea.

But of course lack of 'official' records is no refutation for a conspiracy. Because the governments are all in on it. On the other hand, a wildly speculative story from the Denver Post is all the evidence you need. Especially when the journalist has never been identified and the only other story he ever produced was about a secret American invasion of Czechoslovakia to recover secret Nazi documents hidden in a tunnel.

I also love the language that is used to imply fait accompli. Doolittle's "quiet investigation" of ghost rockets. It was nothing of the sort. It was a very public consultation sought by the Swedish military because Doolittle was over there on a business trip. Thye wanted to know if he had any ideas and like a good ex-military man he reported back to his government.

By the way, if the HoneyBee can clock 4800 kph and "stop on a dime and turn right angles", you'd have to pity the poor crewmen inside it who would be smashed to jelly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't it A E Van Vogt who had "inertialess" drives in his books of the 1930's?? (I used to love them when I was a kid!! :))

Oops - no - had to look it up - it was EE "Doc" Smith in the Lensmen series - another towering talent in Sci Fi...man this brings back some good memories! :)

When you think that Vogt used to work for the Canadian Dept of Defence until 1941, and Smith was a chemical engineer (working for a donut manufacturer was just a cover!!), clearly they were actually describing the top secret experiments they had witnissed.....heck Doc even made a point of noting how hard it is for the miltary to keep secrets....oops.....perhaps he was secretly priming us to that viewpoint so we'd always assume that they can't.....hence when secrets are exposed we don't believe it??

OMG OMG OMG Doc Smith was a deep plant military psy-ops agent programming us so we won't believe the agents of truth and independant thinking!!:eek::eek:

Pfftt.....:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dieseltaylor,

Was just over at 75% Off books, where I found a new to me study which seemed right down your alley, so I wrote down the title for you: THE WAGES OF DESTRUCTION, by Tooze. It's a pioneering, award winning study of Germany's wartime economy and how it was used and abused. Seems to cover the kinds of things near and dear to you.

This created quite a sensation when it first appeared a couple of years ago, so in that sense it is old news. It is however an excellent study of the subject well worth reading. It's also an unusually easy read for what is normally a dry subject. I've been reading it off and on for several months now and have found it very informative on a topic of some considerable importance. I guess what I like best about it is the way he has tied economic developments in Germany to grand strategy and diplomacy as well as the personalities involved.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does it compare to this paper:

Demystifying the German “armament miracle” during World War II.

New insights from the annual audits of German aircraft producers

by

Lutz Budraß, Jonas Scherner, and Jochen Streb

Abstract

Armament minister Albert Speer is usually credited with causing the boom in German armament production after 1941. This paper uses the annual audit reports of the Deutsche Revisions- und Treuhand AG for seven firms which together represented about 50 % of the German aircraft producers. We question the received view by showing that in the German aircraft industry the crucial changes that triggered the upswing in aircraft production already occurred before World War II. The government decided in 1938 that aircraft producers had to concentrate on a few different types, and in 1937 that cost-plus contracts were replaced with fixed price contracts. What followed was not a sudden production miracle but a continuous development which was fuelled first by learning-by-doing and then by the ongoing growth of the capital and labor endowment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SO,

based on the abstract that pretty much parallels Tooze. It's a while since I've read it (Tooze, that is) but as I recall his main argument in relation to Speer's 'miracle' is that it was anything but - it was, instead, the entirely predictable outcome of investment and plans made much earlier, and due to reach fruition shortly after Speer came to power. And, of course, Speer's 'miracle' was anyway stopped in it's tracks by The Battle of the Ruhr.

A fairly similar event occurred in the UK after Beaverbrook took over - he arrived just before earlier plans and investement were due to take effect, and so managed to accrue the kudos for them because he happened to be The Man In The Seat at the right time.

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By the way, if the HoneyBee can clock 4800 kph and "stop on a dime and turn right angles", you'd have to pity the poor crewmen inside it who would be smashed to jelly.

Meh. If you've once decided to deny reality, why would the mere laws of physics get in the way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot recall the exact details and lack the time at this moment to find the section but Overy[1980] slates Germany for them deciding on a very generous aluminium allocation per aircraft, more thn either the US or the UK. This lead to stockpiles at the many firms involved which could be diverted for other uses.

He also slates the lack of usage of the car firms where Volkswagen and Adam Opel were under-utilised. Apparently the giant Opel firm had very long drawn out negotiations prior to contracts and produced only a fraction of what it was capable of to the army AND the air force. When it finally got involved its lengthy change for tooling lead it to be ready to produce an obsolescent plane. It therefore had to start re-tooling again.!!!

I will look out for Tooze. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JonS,

You heard of Hermann Oberth, right? You might be interested to know that he studied UFOs and concluded that they created their own internally referenced gravitational field, thus nullifying your otherwise cogent objection and making possible "impossible" aerial maneuvers that otherwise would squash the pilot and other crew.

From the Wiki on UFOs under Reverse Engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object

"Reverse engineering

Attempts have been made to reverse engineer the possible physics behind UFOs through analysis of both eyewitness reports and the physical evidence, on the assumption that they are powered vehicles. Examples are former NASA and nuclear engineer James McCampbell in his book Ufology, NACA/NASA engineer Paul R. Hill in his book Unconventional Flying Objects, and German rocketry pioneer Hermann Oberth. Among subjects tackled by McCampbell, Hill, and Oberth was the question of how UFOs can fly at supersonic speeds without creating a sonic boom. McCampbell's proposed solution is microwave plasma parting the air in front of the craft. In contrast, Hill and Oberth believed UFOs utilize an as yet unknown anti-gravity field to accomplish the same thing as well as provide propulsion and protection of occupants from the effects of high acceleration.[85]"

Affentitten,

Um, gee... How about too many powerful foes, fighting on too many fronts, insistence for a long time on avoiding a wartime economy, incredible levels of deliberately encouraged infighting, failure to rationalize production, duplication of effort, weapons not designed for mass production, etc.? Yet the best evidence indicates it was, as Wellington said of Waterloo "a near run thing, " and this an opinion shared by people who've served in the military, held high clearances, worked for alphabet soup agencies and taken a gimlet eye to the real German tech base. Germany ran out of time, but the best technology wound up being spirited out of the country or hidden, along with a fortune in gold and other valuables. I can show you accounts not only of American ops in Antarctica against an apparent Nazi base there, but we now have a British one, too. "Britain's Secret War in Antarctica" (originally published in NEXUS magazine) http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tierra_hueca/esp_tierra_hueca_13.htm

Michael Emrys,

It was new to me and will be read by me eventually--now that I know of it. Years ago someone did a very good analysis of how the Luftwaffe dug its own grave, but I don't recall the title. I do remember it was an oversize book and had, I think, a Stuka on a red and black dust jacket.

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SO,

I had a look at my copy of Tooze. As far as I can tell he doesn't reference that paper, but he does reference others by each of the three authors.

"internally referenced gravity"? Best laugh all week. Like I said; once you've let go of reality, the laws of physics are only for chumps.

Jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You heard of Hermann Oberth, right? You might be interested to know that he studied UFOs and concluded that they created their own internally referenced gravitational field, thus nullifying your otherwise cogent objection and making possible "impossible" aerial maneuvers that otherwise would squash the pilot and other crew.

From the Wiki on UFOs under Reverse Engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unidentified_flying_object

"Reverse engineering

Attempts have been made to reverse engineer the possible physics behind UFOs through analysis of both eyewitness reports and the physical evidence, on the assumption that they are powered vehicles. Examples are former NASA and nuclear engineer James McCampbell in his book Ufology, NACA/NASA engineer Paul R. Hill in his book Unconventional Flying Objects, and German rocketry pioneer Hermann Oberth. Among subjects tackled by McCampbell, Hill, and Oberth was the question of how UFOs can fly at supersonic speeds without creating a sonic boom. McCampbell's proposed solution is microwave plasma parting the air in front of the craft. In contrast, Hill and Oberth believed UFOs utilize an as yet unknown anti-gravity field to accomplish the same thing as well as provide propulsion and protection of occupants from the effects of high acceleration.[85]"

Sure, this kind of hypothesizing was going on at least as early as the mid-'50s, when I began reading on the subject. But so far it has remained science fiction. SFAIK nothing of the sort has been reported as discovered in the labs of the relevant sciences. As you well know, it is invalid to describe a hypothesis as a recognized fact. The two are distinctly different critters.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Oberth concluded they had an internally referenced gravity field huh?

Since no such thing is (otherwise) known to exist one must conclude that he invented it to fit his conclusion.

Kinda fails on the evidence stakes, yet again....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...