Thread: Most successful Weapon of WWII

Willys MB counts as weapon?

Hey, Rimsey.

Care to mosey along to the introduction thread to make an introduction?

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/wab...on-thread.html

After you do that, take a look at this thread. It might have the answer you're looking for.

What Weapon Had the Largest Impact on the Outcome of WWII?

Since you excluded the atomic bombs.

Centurion and T-44 tanks. Neither arrived in Europe soon enough to see combat, but both showcased the [cold] war to come and the rise of the MBT.

RAF Coastal Command B-24 liberators the worlds first stealth bomber

Essex class carrier- the birth of the super carrier

technology- Fritz X, V1, V2, wassferfall- the age of the missile.

HS293, Azon/Razon, Swod Mk 9- smart bombs

Stg 44- assault rifle

Luftwaffe Mistal, Japanese balloon bombs- first operational UCAV's

2.5-5 ton trucks, kublewagons and jeeps- an army no longer marched on its stomach but its gas tanks

Me-262, Meteor, Shooting Star- the jet age

Chainhome- war where the commander (and some combatants) could see farther than thier eyes could

Italian Frogmen, SAS, OSS, UDETS and Skorenzy- black ops

FFI, Polish Home Army, Soviet Partisans, Tito- the modern insurgency.

Sikorsky R-4, Fletnner FL185- welcome the whirly birds.

Lockheed C-69, transcontinental airborne logistics

computer- various forms

Plastic and nylon- synthetic fibers go to war

plasma, sulpha and penicillin- doctors had fewer extra parts laying around after surgery and far fewer graves needed to be dug.

Kamikaze- rebirth of the suicide warrior

Originally Posted by zraver

Kamikaze- rebirth of the suicide warrior

I challenged this one. Kamakazie repelled zero landings, delayed zero actions, ... and frankly was just a simple turkey shoot.

I do not deny that they have inflicted damage but they have NEVER inflicted intolerable damage.

Also, the history has shown that kamakazie units were the most indisciplined and the worst trained of all the Japanese forces. They were just a bunch of drunks who would rather punch the colonel in the face than to listen to his lectures.

Sir, since we already have a thread about the systems that affected WWII, I tweaked it a little bit to the weapons that affected the future. Can you deny that suicide warriors, homicide bombers, religious nutjobs et al are a fact of many modern battlefields?

Most of the weapons used in WWII were developed in WWI.

Some weapons that came into their own in WWII (Most successful)

• Aircraft Carriers
• Fleet submarines
• Automatic infantry rifles

Some WWII developments

• Radio Guided bombs
• Radar
• cruise and ballistic missiles (V1 & V2)
• Assault rifles
• Jet aircraft
• Rocket aircraft

Some weapons that dropped off in importance

• Battlecruisers
• Battleships
• Poison Gas (due to treaties - the weapon itself was even more terrible by WWII (nerve gas added), but was not used)

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

• Poison Gas (due to treaties - the weapon itself was even more terrible by WWII (nerve gas added), but was not used)

Not counting the Italian excesses in Ethiopia in 1935-1936 using mustard gas and arsenic or the "mistaken" use of mustard gas mines by Poland against Germany in 1939 Japan still used a wide variety of chemical weapons with abandon between 1937 and 1945 against both military and civilian targets in China, with several million casualties.
And it wasn't due to treaties that it wasn't used in particular in Europe. It was due to threats of MAD by Winston Churchill.

Prox fuse and other similar improvements to munitions that we now consider standard.

Anti-Submarine equipment and methodology.

Originally Posted by kato

Not counting the Italian excesses in Ethiopia in 1935-1936 using mustard gas and arsenic or the "mistaken" use of mustard gas mines by Poland against Germany in 1939 Japan still used a wide variety of chemical weapons with abandon between 1937 and 1945 against both military and civilian targets in China, with several million casualties.
And it wasn't due to treaties that it wasn't used in particular in Europe. It was due to threats of MAD by Winston Churchill.

Good points, thank you

I was unaware of the Polish gas mines - I'd like to learn more about that, are there any referances you could suggest?

I agree the Japanese extensively violated the rules of war in China (gas was just one example), and gas was used by the Italians and others in colonial wars.

I agree Churchills threats did much to enforce the treaties which prohibited gas, every major combatant had it and could have used it, it is fortunate that it was not used in most theaters of WWII.

Another point about gas, it was relatively hard to use, compared to HE. If ammunition supplies were limited, as they normally were, most combatants wanted something they could use for sure, even if the wind was blowing the "wrong" way. Gas does horrible things to civilians, and is often less effective than HE against troops equipped to defend against it.

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

Another point about gas, it was relatively hard to use, compared to HE. If ammunition supplies were limited, as they normally were, most combatants wanted something they could use for sure, even if the wind was blowing the "wrong" way. Gas does horrible things to civilians, and is often less effective than HE against troops equipped to defend against it.

mass gas attacks on a major European urban center with the number of cellars, subways and catacombs they tend to have would be horrific. No way for sunlight neutralization, unless you could fill (and then drain) the space with water to separate the chlorine atoms out you'd have to blow the gas back onto the street to send in teams to do body recovery

Radar?

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

I was unaware of the Polish gas mines - I'd like to learn more about that, are there any referances you could suggest?

"Scientific advances in alternative demilitarization technologies" by Francis W. Holm expands a bit on them (pages 67-68; don't know if that link will work for you). Appears to handle it neutrally too, which is somewhat rare regarding this particular topic.

Originally Posted by kato

"Scientific advances in alternative demilitarization technologies" by Francis W. Holm expands a bit on them (pages 67-68; don't know if that link will work for you). Appears to handle it neutrally too, which is somewhat rare regarding this particular topic.

It did work, thank you. The summary is brief but helpful (not surpising since the book is about methods for the destruction of these weapons) - they mention a gas mine capacity of 9 - 12 dm^3 - that sounds like a significant amount of mustard gas filling. Additionally, they mention "a few" mustard gas aviation bombs being used by the Germans on Warsaw in 1939. I wonder if that is correct or if it might be a Polish "justification" for the use of the gas mines?.