A few questions

[FOARP]

I don't understand why is he so stubborn.
Several people listed examples of excellent weapons developed by minor nations in this thread. He ignored 90% of those, and only adressed where he could find any minor detail he could disagree on.

"Minor details" like:

1) Them not actually being a product of the country concerned (the Bofors 40mm, the Bren)

2) Them not actually being made during WW2 by the country concerned (all of the Czech weapons).

3) Them not actually being better than weapons produced by the majors (e.g., the Romanian and Polish aircraft).​

When the original statement was that minor countries produced better weapons than the majors during the war, the above three points are kind of important.

And, in reality, I'm not that bothered if something comes up (and people are having a hard time finding anything) - my main point here is that if people who support minor countries being OP get their way, we end up over-powering all of the minors by giving them all the ability to develop tanks, warships, and aircraft.

 

[Zaku]

"Minor details" like:

1) Them not actually being a product of the country concerned (the Bofors 40mm, the Bren)

2) Them not actually being made during WW2 by the country concerned (all of the Czech weapons).

3) Them not actually being better than weapons produced by the majors (e.g., the Romanian and Polish aircraft).​

When the original statement was that minor countries produced better weapons than the majors during the war, the above three points are kind of important.

And, in reality, I'm not that bothered if something comes up (and people are having a hard time finding anything) - my main point here is that if people who support minor countries being OP get their way, we end up over-powering all of the minors by giving them all the ability to develop tanks, warships, and aircraft.

Ok then I give you a good example to please you a 100%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40M_Nimród

It was developed as a SPAAG/light TD.
First one was produced in 1941.
No other nation had an armored SPAAG design at that time.
Let me quote the Wiki:

The concept of an armored SPAAG was pioneered by Hungary during World War IIHungary by producing the 40M Nimrod based on the Luftvärnskanonvagn L-62 Anti II license acquired from Sweden. Germany followed later with their "Flakpanzer" series. German World War II SPAAGs include the Möbelwagen, Wirbelwind, Ostwind and Kugelblitz. Other forces followed with designs of their own, notably the American M16 created by mounting quadruple M2HB Browning machine guns on a M3 Half-track.

Germany only developed theirs in 1943-1944.

 

[Centerbe]

I don't understand why is he so stubborn.
Several people listed examples of excellent weapons developed by minor nations in this thread. He ignored 90% of those, and only adressed where he could find any minor detail he could disagree on.

Personally i never thought Sweden or other nations in europe are inferior to other Major nation of HOI in the meaning they cant produce good weapons and tech....

 

[FOARP]

Ok then I give you a good example to please you a 100%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/40M_Nimród

It was developed as a SPAAG/light TD.
First one was produced in 1941.
No other nation had an armored SPAAG design at that time.
Let me quote the Wiki:



Germany only developed theirs in 1943-1944.

The fact that this was a combination of two weapons licensed from Sweden militates against this being a Hungarian-developed and produced weapons-system, no? Seems this is a product of two minor countries working together - and that's a 50%.

Personally i never thought Sweden or other nations in europe are inferior to other Major nation of HOI in the meaning they cant produce good weapons and tech....

My concern has always been that it seemed unlikely whether any but the biggest of the "minors" could ever have produced enough home-developed weapons to keep pace with losses in long-duration high-intensity combat in every area (i.e., artillery and armour and small arms and aircraft). Even Italy had difficulty with this.

 

[Swinds]

Dutch Fokker G.I twin engined Fighter. - not best in class by any measure.

3) Them not actually being better than weapons produced by the majors (e.g., the Romanian and Polish aircraft).

Think you will find that the Polish PZL 37 was a good bomber in 1939 full stop. (IMHO Wrong) The follow on was as good as any PZL.49 Miś, How may days was Poland in the war again and they were still in production for export orders so Technically right on all counts.

The Fokker G.I was ahead of most countries twin engined developments (Whirlwind, Beaufighter, P38, Ki 45) the only other fighter in service was the Bf110 which also had it's faults. (IMHO Wrong) Very good aircraft, Spanish aircraft could not be delivered because of the invasion so still in production.

IAR 80 was not the best fighter around but was equivalent to the P40, P39, Hurricane, MS406, LaGG 3 and Bf109A-D (IMHO unfair) Build 1940 - 1944

 

[Zaku]

The fact that this was a combination of two weapons licensed from Sweden militates against this being a Hungarian-developed and produced weapons-system, no? Seems this is a product of two minor countries working together - and that's a 50%.

Are you serious? I don'T even know any more if you are, or just joking.

 

[Swinds]

Saab 18 was equally as good as the Do17, Blenhiem IV

 

[Swinds]

No FOARP is having a joke on us

 

[Zaku]

No FOARP is having a joke on us

Well I'm seriously starting to wonder. Saying that the Nimrod is not a Hungarian design is the same as saying that the infamous 8.8 Flak is not a German design because it's predecessor was Swedish.

After losing the war, Germany had been forbidden from procuring new weapons of most types. Nevertheless, the Krupp company started the development of a new gun in partnership with Bofors of Sweden. The original design was a 75 mm model.[7] During the prototype phase, the army asked for a gun with considerably greater capability. The designers started again, using 88 mm caliber.

Just nonsense.

 

[FOARP]

Saab 18 was equally as good as the Do17, Blenhiem IV

Conceded.

No FOARP is having a joke on us

Are you serious? I don'T even know any more if you are, or just joking.

Only partly: my job is in patenting, where the trick is to find a difference between what you want to claim is your invention and what has gone before. In that context, spotting small differences and arguing that they are all-important is a necessary skill.

Here, well, I think it significant that it took so long for an indisputably minor-produced weapon made during WW2 that is at least arguably best-in-class (though I'm a bit dubious about whether the Saab 18 really was best-in-class, it's at least arguably so) to be found.

 

[Centerbe]

My concern has always been that it seemed unlikely whether any but the biggest of the "minors" could ever have produced enough home-developed weapons to keep pace with losses in long-duration high-intensity combat in every area (i.e., artillery and armour and small arms and aircraft). Even Italy had difficulty with this.

Of course the production amount of a nation cause a bottleneck, but its not the only factor decides the fate of the war.
So much factors decides the fate of the war you can not make a similar simplification.
Tech level of weapons have an importance, but also logistic tech, tactical decisions, strategic decisions, the width of the front, the kind of war it fight, weather and terrain conditions, political situation, the morale of army and the national unity. ecc ecc ecc. Not only Italy had difficulty with this, also France, UK, Japan, USA, Russia....ecc ecc

 

[Swinds]

Here, well, I think it significant that it took so long for an indisputably minor-produced weapon made during WW2 that is at least arguably best-in-class (though I'm a bit dubious about whether the Saab 18 really was best-in-class, it's at least arguably so) to be found.

Sadly just as I got you to agree the Saab was great in 1938 when it was designed but outdated when they actually got round to building in in 1944.

I thought that the Germans used some of the Czch anti tank guns because they were so good but I can't remember were I read that.

Ohhhwww and yes the Czch's might not have used their 'Bren' or anti tank guns in WW2 Slovakia sure did. They helped in 1939 in the invasion of Poland and 1 division was involved in Russia.

 

[Swinds]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_World_War_II_infantry_weapons#.C2.A0Slovak_Republic

 

[Swinds]

The Germans loved the state of the art Bren too

The ZB-30 and ZB-30J were the later versions of the famous Czechoslovak machine gun, the ZB-26. However, the ZB-30 had some design differences, making it similar to the later ZGB-33, which was an early prototype of the Bren gun.[1] Like the ZB-26, the Wehrmacht adopted the ZB-30 after the occupation of Czechoslovakia, renaming it the MG30(t); it was used in the same role as the MG34, as a light machine gun. In the opening phases of World War II, the ZB-30 in 7.92 mm Mauser caliber was used in large numbers by elements of the German Waffen SS, who did not initially have full access to standard Wehrmacht supply channels.

 

[Gamer_1745]

I thought that the Germans used some of the Czch anti tank guns because they were so good but I can't remember were I read that.

Again it could be from my earlier post:

4,7cm KPÚV vz. 36

Production started in 1939 before German occupation. I think the best or one of them at the time.

Here mounted on a Pz I:

 

[Swinds]

Saab 21???

 

[FOARP]

Sadly just as I got you to agree the Saab was great in 1938 when it was designed but outdated when they actually got round to building in in 1944.

Well yes, but the fact that it could use guided missile indicates it must have had something good about it. At least arguably so.

Saab 21???

Didn't start delivery until December 1945 according to wiki

 

[Nicolas I]

Do I even need to point out that the Bren gun wasn't developed by the Czechs?

The Bren was a licensed version of Czechoslovak light machine gun ZGB 33, which was a modified version of ZB vz. 26, which British Army officials had tested during a firearms service competition in the 1930s. The later Bren featured a distinctive top-mounted curved box magazine, conical flash hider and quick change barrel. The name Bren was derived from Brno, Moravia, the Czechoslovak city where the Zb vz. 26 was originally designed (in the Zbrojovka Brno Factory), and Enfield, site of the British Royal Small Arms Factory. The original and main designer was Václav Holek, a gun inventor and design engineer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bren_light_machine_gun

 

[FOARP]

The Bren was a licensed version of Czechoslovak light machine gun ZGB 33, which was a modified version of ZB vz. 26, which British Army officials had tested during a firearms service competition in the 1930s. The later Bren featured a distinctive top-mounted curved box magazine, conical flash hider and quick change barrel. The name Bren was derived from Brno, Moravia, the Czechoslovak city where the Zb vz. 26 was originally designed (in the Zbrojovka Brno Factory), and Enfield, site of the British Royal Small Arms Factory. The original and main designer was Václav Holek, a gun inventor and design engineer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bren_light_machine_gun

Again, not developed by the Czechs, a British improvement on a Czech design, as the Wiki article actually tells you if you bothered to read it.

 

[Nicolas I]

Again, not developed by the Czechs, a British improvement on a Czech design, as the Wiki article actually tells you if you bothered to read it.

Sigh ! So when the british copy someone it's like they invented it themselves ? I'm not sure the patent office would share your vision.

Does the british improvement erase the original invention? Isn't that revisionism ? Or time traveling ?