Which army was proportionally the most lethal in World War II?

[Mushroom]

It's a myth. The Bolshevik empire produced more officers in the 1930s–40s than the rest of the planet combined.

Which means damned near nothing.

China makes more computers than any other country in the world right now, that does not mean that any of them are worth a crap. They are also the leading nation for manufacturing and selling video game consoles, but good luck actually finding one for sale at your local store.

And no, the XBox and PlayStation are not "Chinese". They are assembled there, but are designed and sold by US and Japanese companies.

The problem with both the USSR and modern Russia is they value ideological purity far more than ability. That is why their NCO Corps is an absolute joke. Quite literally, the "Sergeant" in an infantry unit has just as much time in the service as the Privates do. They were simply judged to be more ideologically pure, so sent to a special school based on that alone.

In fact, they very issue that they produced "more officers" screams that they in reality had a serious problem. When a nation at peace is going through that many officers, it damned near screams that most of those commissioned were of absolute garbage quality. Or on the battlefield their tactics were so bad that they were expending them in prodigious numbers.

 

[Litwin]

 

[AZrailwhale]

Germans had the best equipment during WW2. Their tanks could take everything we could throw at them. (No armor piercing tech yet)
Their missiles (early stages) were unstoppable but inaccurate. (Which helped us tremendously)
Their guns as well were great new technology and highly effective.

Their submarines were brand new and a massive threat to shipping routes. Depth charges and undersea mines were largely unsuccessful. (Big ocean)

However....when we cut off their petroleum products and the process to turn coal into diesel was not fully operational due to manpower shortages....the Allies started making gains. The Allies also had MORE radios and jeeps than Germany who valued quality over quantity....and so...Germany made great gains even with lower manpower.

But when supply lines got cut....no petroleum, no food, and no communications....even the best army is in trouble.

You are ignorant. The Panzer I was inferior to every British, Soviet and French tank operational in the entire war. The Panzer II was inferior to every British, French and Soviet tank operational in the entire war. The Panzer III was better than the British light tanks, but inferior to the British cruiser tanks until it was armed with the medium caliber 50mm KwK 38 L/42 gun but was superior when fitted with the 50mm KwK 39 L/60 gun. Same thing with the French Somua S-35. The Renault R-35/39 and Hotchkiss H35/39 light tanks were inferior an all models of the Panzer III. Every model of the Panzer III was inferior to both the US M-3 Medium and M-4 Medium, but superior to the US M-3 and M-5 light tanks. The Panzer IV was inferior to the Matildas, Valentines and Char B bis' and the M-3 and M-4 mediums until fitted with either the L/43 or L/46 75mm guns.

The Type II U-boats were only fit for training but committed to combat in the first two years of the war. The Type VII was short ranged and only carried fourteen torpedoes, five in the tubes, one external reload aft, 2 external forward and six reloads in the torpedo room. Habitability was absolutely horrible with no fresh water for anything except drinking and cooking and no air conditioning, so the boat was always hot and humid and no radar was fitted until mid 1943. The Type IX were decent boats, but few in number and still lacked air conditioning and adequate fresh water. The Type IXs were inferior to the US fleet Submarines in all respects.
For a sub that you claim was largely unaffected by depth charges, 749 were lost during the war, most to either surface launched, or aerial dropped depth charges. I'd hate to see the losses of a submarine affected by depth charges.

The V-1s and V-2s cost Germany more to produce than the damage they did to the British cost. Germany did produce world class tank and artillery guns, but so did the WAllies and Soviets.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Many of those Americans were not pro-US. Some had no choice.

You know that.

There was a considerable number of Americans of Japanese descent dragooned into Japanese service during WWII, Tokyo Rose was one.

 

[Failzero]

You are ignorant. The Panzer I was inferior to every British, Soviet and French tank operational in the entire war. The Panzer II was inferior to every British, French and Soviet tank operational in the entire war. The Panzer III was better than the British light tanks, but inferior to the British cruiser tanks until it was armed with the medium caliber 50mm KwK 38 L/42 gun but was superior when fitted with the 50mm KwK 39 L/60 gun. Same thing with the French Somua S-35. The Renault R-35/39 and Hotchkiss H35/39 light tanks were inferior an all models of the Panzer III. Every model of the Panzer III was inferior to both the US M-3 Medium and M-4 Medium, but superior to the US M-3 and M-5 light tanks. The Panzer IV was inferior to the Matildas, Valentines and Char B bis' and the M-3 and M-4 mediums until fitted with either the L/43 or L/46 75mm guns.

The Type II U-boats were only fit for training but committed to combat in the first two years of the war. The Type VII was short ranged and only carried fourteen torpedoes, five in the tubes, one external reload aft, 2 external forward and six reloads in the torpedo room. Habitability was absolutely horrible with no fresh water for anything except drinking and cooking and no air conditioning, so the boat was always hot and humid and no radar was fitted until mid 1943. The Type IX were decent boats, but few in number and still lacked air conditioning and adequate fresh water. The Type IXs were inferior to the US fleet Submarines in all respects.
For a sub that you claim was largely unaffected by depth charges, 749 were lost during the war, most to either surface launched, or aerial dropped depth charges. I'd hate to see the losses of a submarine affected by depth charges.

The V-1s and V-2s cost Germany more to produce than the damage they did to the British cost. Germany did produce world class tank and artillery guns, but so did the WAllies and Soviets.

The Germans had Race Cars that had 500+ HP and went 200 MPH in 1937 , and their Military had the best shit imaginable ( even their uniforms were superior .

 

[AZrailwhale]

Did he? there is a theory he was not so much a appeaser as much as a collaborator, at that time there were some in Britain who wanted Hitler to attack the Soviet Union before he did they sold the Czechoslovaks down the river and allowed Hitler take take the Rhineland back it was only after Hitler invaded Poland they came to their senses, stick that in your pipe and smoke it Obergruppenfuehrer.

From what I've read, Chamberlain wasn't a collaborator but was desperately playing for time to prepare the UK for war against Germany in the face of a lot of pro-German types in high society and the government that supported Mosely and wanted to ally with Germany against the USSR. The UK needed the war to be stalled until 1942 at the earliest, so the RAF, Army and RN would be prepared for war. At the time of Munich, the Hurricane had just entered service, the Spitfire was coming into production the standard medium bombers of the RAF were the Blenheim I and the Wellesley, the standard "heavy" bombers were the Whitley and Wellington.

 

[yidnar]

WITHOUT GOOGLING, please ​

Patton's 3rd Army ..

 

[AZrailwhale]

The Germans had Race Cars that had 500+ HP and went 200 MPH in 1937 , and their Military had the best shit imaginable ( even their uniforms were superior .

The Italians and French were right up there with the Germans until the 1938 season where German government funding allowed Mercedes and Auto-Union to produce superior cars. German uniforms were anything but superior. They used choker collars, HOBNAILED boots that transmitted cold right from the ground to the feet of the wearers and lacked cold weather uniforms. The Germans did have "pretty" uniforms that I understand were designed by Hugo Boss, but for practicality, the British and especially the Americans had them beaten even though the Brits stuck with putties until at least 1941.

 

[Failzero]

The Italians and French were right up there with the Germans until the 1938 season where German government funding allowed Mercedes and Auto-Union to produce superior cars. German uniforms were anything but superior. They used choker collars, HOBNAILED boots that transmitted cold right from the ground to the feet of the wearers and lacked cold weather uniforms. The Germans did have "pretty" uniforms that I understand were designed by Hugo Boss, but for practicality, the British and especially the Americans had them beaten even though the Brits stuck with putties until at least 1941.

Mercedes Benz & Auto -Union Dominated the GP Racing from 1935 until the War and the Socialist German Government Funding ( After Max Schmelling beat Joe Louis and Motor Sports became a real focus ) just solidified their dominance , and the Tiger & Tiger 2 were 20 years ahead of their time , and the MG 42 was the best Machine Gun of the War ( with the later StG 44 paving the way for all the future Assault Weapons around the world for decades afterwards ) your downplaying of the German War Machines is revisionist history run amok

 

[Litwin]

Patton's 3rd Army ..

proportionally ?​

PS ONE FOR SURE, GG Patton knew the drill ....

 

[AZrailwhale]

Mercedes Benz & Auto -Union Dominated the GP Racing from 1935 until the War and the Socialist German Government Funding ( After Max Schmelling beat Joe Louis and Motor Sports became a real focus ) just solidified their dominance , and the Tiger & Tiger 2 were 20 years ahead of their time , and the MG 42 was the best Machine Gun of the War ( with the later StG 44 paving the way for all the future Assault Weapons around the world for decades afterwards ) your downplaying of the German War Machines is revisionist history run amok

The Tiger 1 was an old concept heavy tank. Vertical armor that was inefficient, under powered and a maintenance nightmare. The Tiger 2 was also mechanically unreliable, under powered and overweight, both were evolutionary dead ends with none of their features incorporated into post war tanks. The MG-42 was a good gun, well designed and easy to produce, but it’s 2,000 round per minute rate of fire reduced the members of its squad to being ammo bearers to feed its voracious appetite for 7.92 mm rounds. Most German soldiers were armed with WW1 Mauser Kar 98k bolt action rifles, never rode in a truck and were supported by horse drawn wagons carrying their supplies. The Germans never had quality OR quantity with only a few formations getting modern weapons.

 

[Failzero]

The Tiger 1 was an old concept heavy tank. Vertical armor that was inefficient, under powered and a maintenance nightmare. The Tiger 2 was also mechanically unreliable, under powered and overweight, both were evolutionary dead ends with none of their features incorporated into post war tanks. The MG-42 was a good gun, well designed and easy to produce, but it’s 2,000 round per minute rate of fire reduced the members of its squad to being ammo bearers to feed its voracious appetite for 7.92 mm rounds. Most German soldiers were armed with WW1 Mauser Kar 98k bolt action rifles, never rode in a truck and were supported by horse drawn wagons carrying their supplies. The Germans never had quality OR quantity with only a few formations getting modern weapons.

lol @ the Revisionist history .

 

[AZrailwhale]

lol @ the Revisionist history .

Truth. Tiger I power trains were so delicate that they were forbidden to tow disabled Tigers lest there be two disabled tanks instead of one. It generally took two or three eighteen ton Famo recovery three quarter tracks to tow one disabled Tiger 1 and it couldn’t be done under fire. Every Allied tank could and did tow disabled sisters out of trouble under fire.

 

[westwall]

The Tiger 1 was an old concept heavy tank. Vertical armor that was inefficient, under powered and a maintenance nightmare. The Tiger 2 was also mechanically unreliable, under powered and overweight, both were evolutionary dead ends with none of their features incorporated into post war tanks. The MG-42 was a good gun, well designed and easy to produce, but it’s 2,000 round per minute rate of fire reduced the members of its squad to being ammo bearers to feed its voracious appetite for 7.92 mm rounds. Most German soldiers were armed with WW1 Mauser Kar 98k bolt action rifles, never rode in a truck and were supported by horse drawn wagons carrying their supplies. The Germans never had quality OR quantity with only a few formations getting modern weapons.

ROF of the MG42 is 1200 rpm. Fired from a Lafette tripod, 2 shot bursts are easily attained. It is quite simply the finest GPMG ever designed and is still in use in modernized form as the MG3.

 

[AZrailwhale]

ROF of the MG42 is 1200 rpm. Fired from a Lafette tripod, 2 shot bursts are easily attained. It is quite simply the finest GPMG ever designed and is still in use in modernized form as the MG3.

You are correct about the rate of fire. But 1200 rpm equals TWENTY ROUNDS A SECOND. Are you seriously trying to say that a human can press and release a trigger in one tenth of a second?

 

[Stryder50]

You are correct about the rate of fire. But 1200 rpm equals TWENTY ROUNDS A SECOND. Are you seriously trying to say that a human can press and release a trigger in one tenth of a second?

Machine guns tend to keep firing as long as the trigger is depressed.
Press and release of a trigger would be single shot or short bursts.
Belt feed is usually 100-200 rounds at most. Weight and entanglement major factors.
If it did have a belt feed of 1200 rounds and fired them in a minute, likely the barrel would be hot enough to droop, or worse, and the gun would likely jam or go disfunctional before getting through those 1200 rounds.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Machine guns tend to keep firing as long as the trigger is depressed.
Press and release of a trigger would be single shot or short bursts.
Belt feed is usually 100-200 rounds at most. Weight and entanglement major factors.
If it did have a belt feed of 1200 rounds and fired them in a minute, likely the barrel would be hot enough to droop, or worse, and the gun would likely jam or go disfunctional before getting through those 1200 rounds.

I realize that, I used to carry an M60A1. He’s not talking rate of fire, he’s claiming gunners could fire two round bursts, which as I said, was twenty rounds a second, so a two round burst would be a tenth of a second if my math is correct. The MG-3 has a recommended burst of three to five rounds per Wikki, just like an M-60, with a recommended barrel change at between 100 and 150 rounds.

 

[westwall]

You are correct about the rate of fire. But 1200 rpm equals TWENTY ROUNDS A SECOND. Are you seriously trying to say that a human can press and release a trigger in one tenth of a second?

Yes, I have friends who own them, and I was pretty amazed at what they can do with them. Even I was able to get down to a two shot burst with practice.

 

[Failzero]

Yes, I have friends who own them, and I was pretty amazed at what they can do with them. Even I was able to get down to a two shot burst with practice.

1/8th of the Schwimwagons produced are still in operation or used for parts & spares ( that number is actually higher % wise than all variants produced of the Jeep during wartime ( even though 500X more were produced

 

[Failzero]

And if you compare Self propelled Artillery and anti Aircraft Rigs the Germans created the Game and had it perfected in first few years of the War ( With allies playing catchup the entire war