Comments by "Kameraden" (@Alte.Kameraden) on "Who were technologically superior? The Axis or Allies in WW2?" video.

  1. Technically the T-34 wasn't a superior tank to the Panzer III. Technologically anyways. On paper the T-34 and KV-1 are terrifying. M4 Sherman was also superior to most every tank the Germans and Soviets ever produced during the war. Just because something is bigger/more terrifying doesn't mean it's technologically superior. Kinda like Adolf Gallant said. If the Me262 had British Engines it would of been an amazing aircraft, as the British Meteor itself was crap but it's engines were superior to the ones in the Me262. Same thing with the M4 Sherman, I bet German crews would of been tickled to death if the Panther had a M4 Sherman's gear box. You can look at images of the Gear Box/Transmission used on a M4 Sherman and there is absolutely no way the Panther has superior technology when it comes to individual components put into it.
    5
  2. I would argue against the A6M Zero, even by the A6M5 variant from 1943 just wasn't as technologically advanced as even a BF109E1 from 1938. The reason they had such great performance was because they were very light weight aircraft, but technologically there isn't much special about the A6M Zero outside of materials used in it's construction, of which was a double edged sword as early war variants of the A6M were renown for being death traps bursting into fireballs after just getting touched by gun fire. Which means the A6M would have to hit an enemy plane hard to down it, while an enemy barely had to touch it. It didn't take until a few years into the war for the Japanese to fix these issues, at the cost of performance, as the Zero finally saw self sealing fuel tanks, and a tad of pilot protecting armor, but still used the same low powered engine but it was already mid war by the time the Zero saw those improvements. Which was too late, as vastly superior American aircraft that not only could out perform it in ways that mattered, also had superior firepower and superior protection, Zeros just didn't really stand a chance. In most respects, the A6M is a grossly over rated aircraft. It shocked the world because of it's performance, and it's range allowed it to strike often with people's pants down, but once people learned how to get around it, they were blown out of the sky in an alarming rate. To sum it up, a BF109E-1 in 1938 could carry 500kg of bombs. Climb to higher altitudes, could dive much faster. Compare firepower to the E-3 variant they were nearly identical. E-3 entered service a few years before the A6M. Technologically even when the A6M came out the E-3 was still better. When it came to engine technology even the DB601 used in the BF109E which had existed in some form or another since the mid 30s was superior to most of the engines the Japanese were using in their aircraft into 1943. Which is why the Japanese licensed them from the Germans as the Ha40 which would be used on the Ki61 which was one of the better fighters the Japanese produced in WWII, yet tragically isn't as famously remembered. In short. It didn't take until 1943 for a version of the A6M, the A6M5 to start seeing wide production that I say would be comparable to aircraft being used in Europe, over all technologically from the beginning of the war. The one major advantage that the Zero did have, that nothing the western powers could compete with was it's range. But again, that has more to do with the fact they chose long range, at the cost of being a flying death trap. A6M5 even saw it's wings reinforced and thickened just so it had a chance to keep up with enemy aircraft that chose to dive away. Basically by 1943 many of the advantages it had were thrown out for practicality, self sealing fuel tanks, reinforced wings, some armor protection for the pilot, all reduced it's performance and range. By 1943 the Zero was just any other fighter, but one that was now years behind everything else.
    4
  3. ​ @ZER0ZER0SE7EN  Well to be honest, there was a level of hostility between them. This same level of hostility didn't exist between the Luftwaffe and the Italian Air Force, and the Germans often gave high praise of some Italian aircraft designs. So I think there is more to it than just aircraft but personal feuding. I remember the testing of the Bf109E-7 in Japan the two German test pilots were forced to fly in a restricted manner, ie play by specific rules that didn't suit the plane's strengths. As if the Japanese were afraid they'd be embarrassed or something, I don't really know. Because of this honestly some of the Japanese trials of the BF109 were not exactly fair sadly they're the only comparison test that exist. The 2nd pilot they brought in would often ignore the rules much to the frustration and anger of the Japanese involved in the testing so you can assume he was getting frustrated. As I said, I think there is a lot more to it.
    2
  4.  @silentbob5566  If you could fly a Me262 using Meteor engines, vs a Meteor using the Me262's Jumo Engines, which would you choose. Because what made the Me262 sucked wasn't the aircraft design itself,, but it's engines, and advantages the Meteor had over the Me262 were literally it's better engines. Adolf Galland spelled it out. He disliked the Meteor itself, but loved the power plant the aircraft had. The engines were more powerful, and far more reliable. But the Meteor was a piston engine fighter with jet engines, while the Me262 was better designed to fly at the higher speeds that said engines required. Same issue the American Shooting Star had. I used it as an example of 1. British Jet Engine Technology was better than the Germans. 2. German Jet Airframe design was better than the British. it's a great example of two countries with jet Fighters having pro/cons in their WWII Jet Fighter designs.
    1
  5. Honestly videos like this, taking breaks form the bigger series are nice. ^^
    1