Documentaries Thread:

It was part of their downfall. They over engineered everything... their Panthers were designed to last 30-40 years when in practise if they had designed them to last 10-15 years they could have made a lot more of them faster.

If they had kept the Panzer IV in production with the late model gun and produced it in the numbers needed they would have been in a much better position. It was the same with aircraft... producing more FW-190s and keeping the Me-262s as fighters only and concentrating on fighters that could deal with bombers but fly at speeds where they didn't need to worry about enemy fighters would have made a difference.

Their tanks were unbeatable in the open fields of most Europe; until the same successful tanks meet the forest/snowy landscapes of Eastern Europe then they failed & lighter but relatively underpowered Soviet tanks outperform the mighty Panzers. Because of manpower minority Nazi cannot go for numbers ideology so easily followed by Soviets.

Accept what?
It is used to tell what angle you should be facing now and based on a known or estimated flight speed it can be used with a clock for very basic navigation.

you already accepted!!....see that wasn't that hard to accept the proof available in all the books & internet

What I mean is that no aircraft during the WWII period was capable of flying at supersonic speeds so the problems of supersonic speed were unknown at the time.

you are asserting that Germans were unaware of any correlation b/w speed & planform??

Swept wings had been proposed as early as 1935 by Adolf Busemann, and Messerschmitt had researched the topic from 1940. In April 1941, he proposed fitting a 35° swept wing (Pfeilflügel II, literally "arrow wing II") to the Me 262,[36] the same wing sweep angle that would later be used on both the American F-86 Sabre and Soviet MiG-15 fighter jets. Though this was not implemented, he continued with the projected HG II and HG III (Hochgeschwindigkeit, "high speed") derivatives in 1944, which were designed with a 35° and 45° wing sweep, respectively.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262
Now read about the bold scientist he had done quiet research over planforms & increasing speed/range [meant reducing drag] was a clear-cut reason for swept wings

Obviously a straight wing could be used but it has to be small like on the X-1 and the F-104 and that the best solution to sonic and near sonic flight is a swept wing.

Since considerable work had already been done on the P.1101 design, the RLM decided to continue reduced funding in order for Messerschmitt to carry out experimental flights testing the swept back wing at anticipated speeds up to Mach 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_P.1101

Their negative impact on the world far outweighed their positive impact.

All the five fingers [on one hand] ain't equal buddy!! The scientists working under Nazi may have been forced to pursue such a work or else there family be....

Very short sighted but hardly an attempt to kill a section of the family. There would be plenty of other more direct ways of doing that if that was the goal.

Got it~~

Their tanks were unbeatable in the open fields of most Europe;

Their individual tanks on a one for one basis were adequate, it was their tactics and cooperation with the Luftwaffe that made them so effective.

Mobility and communication were the key so when the weather (mud or snow) effected mobility they were as stuck as any other large force and therefore largely impotent.

By 1943 however the Russians had learned the new rules of how to play the game and they played it as well as the Germans ever did.

until the same successful tanks meet the forest/snowy landscapes of Eastern Europe then they failed & lighter but relatively underpowered Soviet tanks outperform the mighty Panzers.

What? The main problem the Soviets had was that their T-34 was too good... excellent armour, good gun, powerful engine, wide tracks. The early models were not well layed out with the commander having to load the gun for instance and vision from the tank was not great, but much better than the equivelent german tank of the time... the Panzer 4 with a short barreled 75mm gun.

The speed of the T-34 and its cross country ability meant a formation of T-26 light tanks, T-34 medium tanks and KV-1 heavy tanks would arrive in pieces with the T-34s often arriving first and the KVs arriving last if at all.

In terms of performance however the KV-1 was an undergunned Tiger and resulted in quite a bit of tank terror on the Germans when it was encountered... even the 88mm guns sometimes needed a few shots to kill them... can't really say that about many tanks of the period.

By the time the Germans had Panthers and Tigers the Soviets had T-34/85s and IS-1s which are certainly matches... the difference is of course the Soviets made about 5 times more T-34/85s than the Germans made Tigers of all types, and Panthers of all types so the actual chance of coming across a Panther or Tiger on the battlefield was not actually that high.

Because of manpower minority Nazi cannot go for numbers ideology so easily followed by Soviets.

The Germans didn't need the promise of a super tank in development when a cheaper simpler proven tank that could do the job and actually be produced and sent to the front to actually do the job. I am glad they were so dumb because it made the job of the Soviet forces easier.

you already accepted!!....see that wasn't that hard to accept the proof available in all the books & internet

No. There was no map, just a compass and gyro so it wasn't a navigation system. A human had to do the maths to work out the flight time to the target area and enter that time in the delay.
It could just as easily have been a very long burning fuse... which isn't a navigation system either.

you are asserting that Germans were unaware of any correlation b/w speed & planform??

I am asserting during WWII they didn't put a swept wing on the Me-262 for aerodynamic reasons but cg reasons.

Now read about the bold scientist he had done quiet research over planforms & increasing speed/range [meant reducing drag] was a clear-cut reason for swept wings

... so he copied the British?

The first aircraft with swept wings were those designed by the British designer J.W.Dunne in the first decade of the 20th century. Dunne successfully employed severely swept wings in his tailless aircraft as a means of creating positive longitudinal static stability.[3] Historically, many low-speed aircraft have had swept wings in order to avoid problems with their center of gravity, to move the wing spar into a more convenient location, or to improve the sideways view from the pilot's position.

wiki.

The scientists working under Nazi may have been forced to pursue such a work or else there family be....

How do you force someone to be brilliant if they really don't want to?

about tanks:

Russian tanks were more suited to topography thats why they overcome the relatively mighty German tanks plus the number factor. The widely spaced tracks & smaller size aided their movement in the Soviet winters & the coming muddy landscapes!! Look at the T-34 it appears to be a baby infront of German Panzers However their smaller size & greater number played the trick & not their [as you said] armament & guns [again the strategic defeat not the technology defeat]

Soviet firing tests against a captured Tiger in April 1943 showed that the T-34's 76 mm gun could not penetrate the front of the Tiger I at all, and the side only at very close range. An existing Soviet 85 mm antiaircraft gun, the 52-K, was found to be very effective against the frontal armor of the Tiger I, and so a derivative of the 52-K 85 mm gun was developed for the T-34. The Soviets thus had already embarked on the 85 mm gun upgrade path before encountering the Panther tank at the Battle of Kursk.[91][92]

After much development work, the first T-34-85 tanks entered combat in March 1944. The production version of the T-34's new 85 mm gun proved to be ineffective against the Panther's frontal armor, meaning the Soviet tank had to flank the Panther to destroy it, while the Panther's main gun could penetrate the T-34 at long range from any angle.[93] Although the T-34-85 tank was not quite the equal of the Panther, it was much better than the 76.2 mm-armed versions and made up for its quality shortcomings by being produced in greater quantities than the Panther.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank#The_Allied_response

No. There was no map, just a compass and gyro so it wasn't a navigation system. A human had to do the maths to work out the flight time to the target area and enter that time in the delay.
It could just as easily have been a very long burning fuse... which isn't a navigation system either.

Now you are really upsetting me look at the previous URLs & talk to any engineer their books are plastered by the fact that Germans produced first operational feedback guidance system for missile

... so he copied the British?

Have listened about independent researches. London was meagre with respect to German in finding any correlation b/w speed/drag. Have you listened about Prandtl; he was way beyond British aeronautics & guess what he mathematically modelled the compressibility factor in supersonic regime just after the WW2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Prandtl

His theories about boundary layer in 1930s paved a way to completely understand the drag & the lift phenomenon[ in addition to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Zhukovsky]. Again I assert London was nowhere near him!! His theories latter were put to use by Nazis to design Swept wings to reduce drag because the ME 262 was experimented at Mach 0.82 where transonic regime occurs & compressibility starts to take place. Although this compressibility factor wasn't understood by Nazis at that time but experiments did proved of increasing drag & swept wings were tested to counter this drag[in addition to cg factor as you stated]..

How do you force someone to be brilliant if they really don't want to?

the factor of want wasn't listened by Hitler as well as Stalin. If you want you die; you just have to listen & obey

Russian tanks were more suited to topography thats why they overcome the relatively mighty German tanks plus the number factor.

You mean the German tanks were poorly designed with narrow tracks and the stupid interlocking wheel design of the Panther.
During wet periods or very cold periods any mud in between the wheels of a Panther froze and immobilised the tank completely... totally stupid and unnecessary design.

The widely spaced tracks & smaller size aided their movement in the Soviet winters & the coming muddy landscapes!!

Every tank design should be able to operate off road... the fact that the German tanks were designed for parades when it came to mobility says a lot about German tank designers.

The internal layout however was superior as were the tactics where in a German tank the commander was the eyes of the hunter and was not distracted by being loader or gunner.
The Soviets got it right eventually in the T-34/85 and the IS series tanks.

Look at the T-34 it appears to be a baby infront of German Panzers
However their smaller size & greater number played the trick &
not their [as you said] armament & guns [again the strategic defeat
not the technology defeat]

The fact that the German tanks didn't have better armour or better guns yet were larger than Soviet tanks was not a good design feature of German tanks. It was only their superior communications and tactics that allowed them to survive as long as they did.

Soviet firing tests against a captured Tiger in April 1943 showed that
the T-34's 76 mm gun could not penetrate the front of the Tiger I at
all, and the side only at very close range. An existing Soviet 85 mm
antiaircraft gun, the 52-K, was found to be very effective against the
frontal armor of the Tiger I, and so a derivative of the 52-K 85 mm gun
was developed for the T-34. The Soviets thus had already embarked on the
85 mm gun upgrade path before encountering the Panther tank at the
Battle of Kursk.[91][92]

Comparing a medium mass produced tank that was in service in 1941 with a German heavy tank of which less than 1,500 were made is hardly a fair comparison. The Soviets were making more than 1,500 T-34s a month... The Germans liked the T-34 so much the Panther is a German T-34... the only difference is that the rear of the Panther has the opposite slope to the T-34. The Tiger was planned before 1940 but its design was speeded up when the T-34 was met in battle in 1941. The Panther was a scratch design created in serious urgency also after meeting KV-1 and T-34 vehicles on the battlefield.

The Tiger was an impressive vehicle but it had its problems too. It couldn't fire while moving. Its design was frozen before the T-34 had been encountered so although it had thick armour it wasn't sloped to maximise its performance.

After much development work, the first T-34-85 tanks entered combat in
March 1944. The production version of the T-34's new 85 mm gun proved to
be ineffective against the Panther's frontal armor, meaning the Soviet
tank had to flank the Panther to destroy it, while the Panther's main
gun could penetrate the T-34 at long range from any angle.[93] Although
the T-34-85 tank was not quite the equal of the Panther, it was much
better than the 76.2 mm-armed versions and made up for its quality
shortcomings by being produced in greater quantities than the Panther.

Again... you are comparing the T-34 of which almost 85,000 of all types were built with a Panther... less than 6,000 made?
Panthers and Tigers were relatively rare on the battlefield in comparison.

A much more fair comparison would be to compare the Panther with what would be hunting it. The Panther was for killing tanks and its Soviet equivelent would be the Su-100... not the T-34/85.
Rather than describe the performance of the Su-100 I would just say the German post war publications have great respect for this vehicle and the Soviet nickname for it was "Pizdets vsemu" or "F**king end to anything" which suggests it didn't meet anything it couldn't deal with armour wise on the battlefield.

the factor of want wasn't listened by Hitler as well as Stalin. If you want you die; you just have to listen & obey

I disagree. You never had to show talent in the first place. Pretending to be an idiot is easier than you think and certainly pretending to not understand stuff to get out of developing technologies for those who will misuse them would be the moral thing to do.

Just look at the vids you just posted... especially the last one... the Maus was an enormous waste of money and time and people and resources. Its basic standard armour thicknesses were probably much less than current tanks have yet its weight makes it practically immobile... It would destroy any paved surface it was driven over and without air superiority it would not last very long at all. A unit of Maus tanks could simply be cut off and encircled and would be useless on the Eastern front. Come the rainy season that they would disappear forever into the mud.

You would be much more convincing if you talked about the TV guided anti ship missiles they were developing, or the early attempts at surface to air missiles, but the V-2 was only special because it was an example of a liquid fuelled single stage rocket. Its gyros and targeting system were basic.

Just a nice video of Soviets in Afghanistan

http://rutube.ru/tracks/2007993.html?v=121802e461f99eaa78b42826f7e0711d

Another one

nightcrawler wrote:
With respect to Churchill my claim stands.
He didn't & never did butchered masses

Thats bull$hit, you should stop using western sources in order to see things without bias.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53276
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Winston-Churchill-to-blame-for-Bengal-famine-Book/articleshow/6521955.cms
http://www.samarthbharat.com/bengalholocaust.htm

Corrosion wrote:

nightcrawler wrote:
With respect to Churchill my claim stands.
He didn't & never did butchered masses

Thats bull$hit, you should stop using western sources in order to see things without bias.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53276
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Winston-Churchill-to-blame-for-Bengal-famine-Book/articleshow/6521955.cms
http://www.samarthbharat.com/bengalholocaust.htm

Ummm...not equivalent to Stalin atrocities. Yes I knew of the famine story but blame is to be shared with Indians (including the now Pakistannis) as well. In the first place they shouldn't had helped in British war efforts

nightcrawler wrote:@Garry

There wasn't anything special about Nazi scientists except for the fact that they were properly funded and supported.

For example the Mig-8 not only had swept wings but also canard fore planes and a pusher propeller so you could hardly say the Nazi scientists were alone in exploring the features of swept wing design.

First there was really something special about Nazis. In 1940s more than half the nobel prize winners were Germans; just look at their literature & one can estimate how intelligent they were...

Regarding MiG-8 there is no literature available that Soviets preceded Nazis in this work; we do know that aviation in Soviet was very meagre; no jet engines Soviet had of their own & perhaps if I can recall their MiG-15 were powered by Rolls-Royce engines delivered before hand by British.
One also can say that in rocket-launcher concept Nazis preceded in effectively deploying their 21 cm Nebelwerfer 42 relative to Soviets who only latter in the war put their Katyusha's in use

Actually, Katysha found widespread employment well before Nebelwerfer.

Russia's Toughest Prisons
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkd4xy_russia-s-toughest-prisons-documentary-2011_shortfilms

I personally think russia should return the death penalty.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:I personally think russia should return the death penalty.

nah, make em work their ass in Siberia, like they used to

Epic Russian army in Chechny video with excellent music.

A Documentary video hosted by Haydn Gwynne, published by BBC in 2013 about Cold War NATO submarines struggle to counter the advancing of Soviet submarines

A Documentary video hosted by Haydn Gwynne, published by BBC in 2013 about Cold War NATO submarines struggle to counter the advancing of Soviet submarines

Austin wrote:A Documentary video hosted by Haydn Gwynne, published by BBC in 2013 about Cold War NATO submarines struggle to counter the advancing of Soviet submarines

I think there is a forum rule that disallows posting of material from Wikipedia. BBC is, of course, no better.

Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:

Austin wrote:A Documentary video hosted by Haydn Gwynne, published by BBC in 2013 about Cold War NATO submarines struggle to counter the advancing of Soviet submarines

I think there is a forum rule that disallows posting of material from Wikipedia. BBC is, of course, no better.

Specially when you take into account that such "News" broadcasting Networks like BBC,CNN,FOX,MSNBC are hiring actors for Syrian atrocities to fake footage of Chemical weapons, injured syrian civilians, reporters who getting "shot".

Who ever gives a single credit to those networks must be a lunatic, as soon as you pay actors you lost all credibility.

Austin wrote:A Documentary video hosted by Haydn Gwynne, published by BBC in 2013 about Cold War NATO submarines struggle to counter the advancing of Soviet submarines

Is there anything in this BBC gibberish related to proekt 20380?

"Hubris" (Full Film) Iraq War Documentary - Rachel Maddow

Military Aspect of Iraq Invasion

Invasion of Iraq Documentary

This looks pretty good... interviews with soldiers and civilians who were there...

Stalingrad... 2 and a half hours doco in English but from what I have seen of it none of the usual western BS.

A 2002 documentary about the April 2002 Venezuelan coup attempt which briefly deposed Venezuelan

Documentary by Vladimir Solovyov

Episode 1 - War in Chechnya. Way from Prime Minister to Acting President
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c7f_1430284031

i found here mistake 05.25 when Zakhar Prilepin talk about ChabanMakhi and KarabanMakhi - two villages in Dagestan

Episode 2/8 - Elections. President of a country in decay. Tragedy of Kursk submarine
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=517_1430437349

Episode 3/8 - Relations between Russia and US. Restoring Russian Economy - Beginning
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=07b_1430592154

Episode 4/8 - Developing partnership with EU. Terrorist acts in Russia. Russia stands United
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f20_1430662214

PRESIDENT - Episode 5/8 - Formation of Personality
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e8c_1430759524

Episode 6/8 - Putin on the post of Prime Minister during 2008 crisis
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=93e_1430924790

Episode 7/8 - Relations with opposition. Bolotnaya protests. Standoff between US and Russia
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=5e3_1430934131

Episode 8/8 Revival of Russian Army. Putin serves his Country. Peoples faith in the President and Country
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bee_1431009868