Jump to content


Best WW2 Innovation?

innovation innvation

  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

DStegCat #1 Posted 04 September 2015 - 08:53 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 25012 battles
  • 2,031
  • [BACON]
  • Member since:
    05-24-2014

Best WW2 Innovation?

 

A tremendous number of technical innovations came out of WW2? Which do you consider the most important and why?

 

A small representation includes:

Assault Rifle

APCR, HEAT, HESH

NAPALM

Nerve Agents

Computers

Code breaking

The Atomic Bomb

Atomic Energy

Expanded elements of periodic table

Rockets for example the V-2

Penicillin

Mobile Army Surgical Hospitals

Radio Navigation

Radar

Jet Airplane

Helicopter

Missile Submarine plans by Germany

Man Portable Antitank weapon

Night vision – infrared

Plastics

man portable Radio

Silly Putty

nylon and plastics

Blood transfusion

Transistor

Liberty Ship

Manufacturing Techniques for mass production

Hershey Chocolate Bar

DUKW

Pressurized Cockpit Air Travel

Proximity Fuze

DDT

vaccines

Goliath remote control mine

Frisbee

Twinkies

Baby Boomers

Freeze Drying

Cargo Pants

Duct Tape

Microwave

Jerry Can

 



Party Poison91 #2 Posted 04 September 2015 - 08:54 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 16129 battles
  • 2,650
  • [X-OFF]
  • Member since:
    08-22-2013
Better combustible engines.
"That's a typical, shabby NAZI trick!"

Sqn Ldr B #3 Posted 04 September 2015 - 08:57 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 6140 battles
  • 18,352
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014
I think the frisbee and the twinkies have to be the most important. :trollface: Actually, I'd say the pressurised cabin, atomic energy, and the helicopter.

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life" ~ Cecil Rhodes

Click For a Compilation of My Ideas


Crazedtiger77 #4 Posted 04 September 2015 - 09:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11426 battles
  • 2,420
  • Member since:
    05-17-2014
Forgot all the actually useful innovations, WWII created Fanta!


Matthew J35U5 #5 Posted 05 September 2015 - 12:14 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013
Think I'll give one for every major power:
America is really easy, nuclear energy
The Soviet Union developed the best land warfare doctrine. (Deep battle)
Britain was able to make practical jet fighters.* 
Japan made great advances in war crimes. (Their chemical/biological weapons program that unit 731 did)
Germany made several advancements in submarine/torpedo technology. 

*Unlike, say, the german jet engines which happily melted themselves. They were bad enough that despite the Soviet Union literally capturing German jet engines, they bought british engines rather than trying to make something useful out of them. 

KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


ChopperGreg VGC #6 Posted 05 September 2015 - 07:08 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4712 battles
  • 669
  • Member since:
    08-24-2013

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 04 September 2015 - 05:14 PM, said:

Think I'll give one for every major power:
America is really easy, nuclear energy
The Soviet Union developed the best land warfare doctrine. (Deep battle)
Britain was able to make practical jet fighters.* 
Japan made great advances in war crimes. (Their chemical/biological weapons program that unit 731 did)
Germany made several advancements in submarine/torpedo technology. 

*Unlike, say, the german jet engines which happily melted themselves. They were bad enough that despite the Soviet Union literally capturing German jet engines, they bought british engines rather than trying to make something useful out of them.

 

In some ways my thinking is similar to yours, with a couple of exceptions.

 

German jet engines suffered more from a late war lack of proper alloying minerals, than anything else.  But the axial compressor design they came up with, is the same general design used today all over the world, with better alloys. The British centrifugal compressor engine design, didn't go very far after the war ( even if the British design generally lasted longer ) because the centrifugal compressor design generally had a higher weight to power ratio and larger diameter size than axial compressor designs of similar thrust.   For me, I would have to give Germany the vote for jet engine and rocket technology. 

 

For the British, I would say it would have to be, radar technology.

 

 

 



WidowMaker1711 #7 Posted 05 September 2015 - 07:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 11824 battles
  • 9,987
  • [BNKR]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014
Id say the advancements in Plastic Surgery especially by Dr Archie McIndoe at Queen Victoria Hospital, East Grinstead trump pretty much all those innovations.

Although Helicopters, Blood Transfusions, Nylon, Plastics, Penicillin, Transistors and the Man portable anti tank weapon are all pre WW2 inventions

For Russ and the Allfather

 

 


Matthew J35U5 #8 Posted 06 September 2015 - 01:33 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostChopperGreg VGC, on 05 September 2015 - 02:08 PM, said:

 

In some ways my thinking is similar to yours, with a couple of exceptions.

 

German jet engines suffered more from a late war lack of proper alloying minerals, than anything else.  But the axial compressor design they came up with, is the same general design used today all over the world, with better alloys. The British centrifugal compressor engine design, didn't go very far after the war ( even if the British design generally lasted longer ) because the centrifugal compressor design generally had a higher weight to power ratio and larger diameter size than axial compressor designs of similar thrust.   For me, I would have to give Germany the vote for jet engine and rocket technology. 

 

For the British, I would say it would have to be, radar technology.

 

 

 

Maybe my definition of innovation is overly demanding, but I wouldn't even consider rockets to be a WWII innovation. Taking Goddard's work and scaling it up is a worthy task, but not exactly an innovation. A demanding challenge of engineering perhaps, but nothing that time and capital wouldn't solve. 


KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Section47ABH #9 Posted 06 September 2015 - 01:54 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12126 battles
  • 1,849
  • Member since:
    08-08-2015
A lot of the things on that list pre-dated the war, but were, yes, accelerated by the war.  My view is that the really useful innovations were social, political, economic and logistical, but the amount of neoliberal voodoo-economic kool-aid being drunk these days makes that a controversial opinion....
Terranis Holds.  FOR THE EMPEROR!

ChopperGreg VGC #10 Posted 07 September 2015 - 09:35 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4712 battles
  • 669
  • Member since:
    08-24-2013

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 06 September 2015 - 06:33 AM, said:

Maybe my definition of innovation is overly demanding, but I wouldn't even consider rockets to be a WWII innovation. Taking Goddard's work and scaling it up is a worthy task, but not exactly an innovation. A demanding challenge of engineering perhaps, but nothing that time and capital wouldn't solve. 

 

Then you would have to rule out a number of things from your list, for the same reason.  Submarines, torpedoes, jet engines - even the idea that the atom could be made to release energy, all actually predate the war. 

 

Simply scaling up Goddard's work, doesn't work, because the power to weight ratio, doesn't scale with size.  Goddard, never conceived of putting warhead on his work or the use of proactive guidance, with the intent to actually send it to a specific location.   Dual wall thrust chamber, with active cooling to preventing burn through in higher thrust engines, were ( to my knowledge ) a German development.



IronBallsMatt #11 Posted 07 September 2015 - 10:30 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 10629 battles
  • 1,415
  • Member since:
    05-06-2014
plastics

Section47ABH #12 Posted 07 September 2015 - 11:45 AM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12126 battles
  • 1,849
  • Member since:
    08-08-2015
The first plastics were a late 19th century thing.  Not going to crack a book or google so I could be wrong, but the earliest phenolic resin composites were coming out of labs in the 1860s-70s some time.  It wasn't until the petrochemical industry had a load of tarry byproduct that they got cheap, though, and that was a product of the inter-war years and the massive increase in the use of internal combustion.
Terranis Holds.  FOR THE EMPEROR!

Kellen NA #13 Posted 07 September 2015 - 01:13 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 31626 battles
  • 3,592
  • [FAME-]
  • Member since:
    05-10-2014
Twinkies because logic!

Retired Competitive Player for [FAME-] inFamous Animals

and [TNG-] Top Notch Gaming

Twitch || 50+ Three Marks || YouTube

Matthew J35U5 #14 Posted 07 September 2015 - 01:20 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostChopperGreg VGC, on 07 September 2015 - 04:35 AM, said:

 

Then you would have to rule out a number of things from your list, for the same reason.  Submarines, torpedoes, jet engines - even the idea that the atom could be made to release energy, all actually predate the war. 

 

Simply scaling up Goddard's work, doesn't work, because the power to weight ratio, doesn't scale with size.  Goddard, never conceived of putting warhead on his work or the use of proactive guidance, with the intent to actually send it to a specific location.   Dual wall thrust chamber, with active cooling to preventing burn through in higher thrust engines, were ( to my knowledge ) a German development.

 

What do warheads have to do with anything? A rocket/missile is a delivery system: Goddard, being a scientist imagined payloads of instruments, the Germans, working for the army, conceived of a payload of explosives. 

Goddard also made/theorized on active cooling. The problem was that Goddard didn't have enough funding to do anything with his ideas, while the Germans had all the money the wishful thinkers could throw at them. 

Perhaps I am being overly demanding on this front, but I would have hoped that the step to atomic energy, required more than just engineering. 

Though I guess if I were to be really demanding, everything after Tsilokovsky is just engineering, isn't it. 

KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


ChopperGreg VGC #15 Posted 11 September 2015 - 06:19 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4712 battles
  • 669
  • Member since:
    08-24-2013

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 07 September 2015 - 06:20 AM, said:

 

What do warheads have to do with anything? A rocket/missile is a delivery system: Goddard, being a scientist imagined payloads of instruments, the Germans, working for the army, conceived of a payload of explosives. 

Goddard also made/theorized on active cooling. The problem was that Goddard didn't have enough funding to do anything with his ideas, while the Germans had all the money the wishful thinkers could throw at them. 

Perhaps I am being overly demanding on this front, but I would have hoped that the step to atomic energy, required more than just engineering. 

Though I guess if I were to be really demanding, everything after Tsilokovsky is just engineering, isn't it.

 

 

It's not that it had a warhead specifically, but the fact that the payload size was significant, requiring a more powerful motor than what simple instruments would require - so "warhead" was a poor choice of words on my part.   What I was trying to get at, was that the relatively high payload requirement drove engine power development faster than what instrument pack requirements would have, since simple instrument data could have been collected over the course of multiple launches, of smaller payloads, where as a large warhead required a single launch, with a more powerful engine.

 

We shouldn't forget that Von Braun, who might have benefited from some Goddard contact, Braun didn't just copy him.   Braun was more influenced by Oberth, who was paralleling Goddard's research in many aspects, but unlike Goddard who was pulled in many directions ( like torpedo development for the US Navy and small powder rockets for the US Army), Oberth tended to focus on the math and physics of rocketry, eventually joining Germany's "Spaceflight Society" and static firing his first liquid fueled rocket engine, with the direct assistance of an 18 yr old young man with the name of von Braun (who was already applying himself to math and physics of rocketry, because he had read Rocket into Planetary Space, authored by Oberth).

 

It was Oberth, that Braun credits with guiding his life, not Goddard.


Edited by ChopperGreg VGC, 13 September 2015 - 05:41 PM.


XxDAFFYxxDUCKxX #16 Posted 11 September 2015 - 06:25 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 19433 battles
  • 12,270
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

Most benign: Penicillin, because saving lives=gud.

Most uncertain: Nuclear energy, if used responsibly, can provide the world with (relatively) cheap power, but if used incorrectly, well, I need not go further.


R.I.P. Lucky the cat, (2-24-14) you magnificent bastard.

Click here to learn about the math of WoT!


Uranprojekt #17 Posted 13 September 2015 - 03:05 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,436
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013
I can't believe you've all neglected the most important innovation of all... Molotov cocktails. The Finns really made something out of practically nothing with the Molotov.

How else would the modern anarchist/rioter firebomb the nearest storefront without the glorious Molotov? :trollface:

War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


Matthew J35U5 #18 Posted 13 September 2015 - 03:20 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostUranprojekt, on 13 September 2015 - 10:05 AM, said:

I can't believe you've all neglected the most important innovation of all... Molotov cocktails. The Finns really made something out of practically nothing with the Molotov.

How else would the modern anarchist/rioter firebomb the nearest storefront without the glorious Molotov? :trollface:

Well, it was invented in Spain, not Finland. :P The Finns just gave it a catchy name. 


KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Uranprojekt #19 Posted 13 September 2015 - 03:25 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,436
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 13 September 2015 - 03:20 PM, said:

Well, it was invented in Spain, not Finland. :P The Finns just gave it a catchy name. 

 

They both sided with the Germans so we'll call it a joint venture (that neither side knew about) :P


War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


MrWuvems #20 Posted 14 September 2015 - 12:13 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 10629 battles
  • 8,091
  • Member since:
    11-08-2013
Well, computerized warfare was starting to creep in particularly in cryptography. And, you know, that sort of got the ball rolling on the defining features of the late 20th century.





Also tagged with innovation, innvation

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users