What single weapon was the most crucial to Germany?

German weapons, vehicles and equipment 1919-1945.

Moderator: sniper1shot

Post Reply
User avatar
Sam H.
Associate
Posts: 644
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 7:39 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

What single weapon was the most crucial to Germany?

Post by Sam H. »

Basically, what single weapon (88, MG 42, etc) was the weapon that was the most crucial to German battlefield success? What were German prospects like without that weapon?

For me, I'd pick the MG 34 and its successor the MG 42. Superb guns that were years ahead of its competition. Without these machine guns, Germany would have been unable to hold off the mass Soviet infantry assults of the early days of the war in Russia.
User avatar
Tony
Supporter
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 8:08 pm
Location: Indiana

Post by Tony »

IMO, It'd be the 88 because of its power and its versatility. I mean how would the German war machine been affected if there was no 88mm gun to put in the field to defend against Allied tanks or put it their Tiger Is and Tiger IIs or no 88s to defend its industrial areas or its cities from the Allied airforces?

cheers,
Tony
"When you dance with death, you wait until the song ends."
- Josef Stalin
thecaramel
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 4:58 am

Post by thecaramel »

IMO, the Pz III (all models) was the most significant. It fought in every campaign, was the mainstay of the army for almost, if not the entire, war. Versatile, fast, endlessly configurable, it was the ultimate tank. Outclassed as the war dragged on, the German army still could not relinquish the design due to its cost and usefulness. Kind of the T-34 of the Wehrmacht...
Pirx
Associate
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:46 am
Location: UK/Poland

Post by Pirx »

Well trained soldier
User avatar
Smiget
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 10:28 am
Location: Good Question

I AGREE

Post by Smiget »

i agree with pirx,

With out a well-trained army most weapons and their performance would be seriously hampered. Furthermore the solder may become a bigger danger to himself than the enemy.

smiget
As long as there are historians there will be arguments.
User avatar
behblc
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 6:21 pm
Location: UK.

A weapon.

Post by behblc »

If strictly a weapon, I would say the 88mm flak.
If any other could be named the common soldier.
" Life , to be sure is nothing much to loose ; But young men think it is , and we were young . "
A.E. Housman.

" The old lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori. " Wilfred Owen (M.C.).
User avatar
Vicgonz
New Member
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 8:47 am
Location: Somewhere in the Earth

Post by Vicgonz »

Without dubt Pzkwgn IV. All Campaigns, great versatility & save the panzertruppen in the bitter moments of war, in the begining of 1943 when the tank production drop to zero
Regards Victor
User avatar
tirola
Supporter
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 9:57 am
Location: New England

Post by tirola »

I have to cite with the MG42. All the soldiers basically became ammo carrier for it.
User avatar
19KUBAN43
Supporter
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 8:46 pm
Location: Arvada,Colorado

Post by 19KUBAN43 »

Although it came to be late in the conflict, one can not discount the importance of the Mp/StG-44. The Mp-44 leveled the playing field on the eastern front when Germany was at a huge numerical disadvantage, and bought the Germans valuable, albeit futile, time during their retreat. When the first prototypes of the Mp-44 (the Mkb-42) were airlifted to the surrounded men of Kampfgruppe Scherer in the Cholm Garrison in the winter of 1942, they proved to be the deciding factor in the groups succesful breakout. It also must be noted that numerous modern assault rifles were derived from, or incorporated elements of the Mp-44 design including the AK-47, Czech Vz-52,Spanish CETME, etc. Overall, the Mp-44 was an important advance in military technology and it has had a lasting impression on the world.
A man who takes a stand is sometimes wrong. A man who never takes a stand is always wrong.
User avatar
Dackelstaffel
Contributor
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:29 pm

Post by Dackelstaffel »

tirola wrote:I have to cite with the MG42. All the soldiers basically became ammo carrier for it.
Even so good that it's still in production under the name of MG3 but firing Nato 7.62mm instead of 7.92mm. I've heard that 88mm gun were used during the war in Bosnia
User avatar
Florin
Supporter
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 1:41 pm
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: What single weapon was the most crucial to Germany?

Post by Florin »

Hi,

An aircraft designed for military purposes can be considered a weapon, so... I cannot imagine the Blitzkrieg and the successes in Russia in 1941-1942, against a tank force five times bigger, without Messerschmitt Bf 109, who protected the Stuka - Junkers Ju87, and the other planes.
Regards,
Florin
User avatar
KampfgruppeMeyer
Banned
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2003 5:06 pm
Location: Marina del Rey, CA 90292

Post by KampfgruppeMeyer »

88 in AT role, no question
Last edited by KampfgruppeMeyer on Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Meine Ehre Heisst Treue...
Timo
Patron
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Former member

Post by Timo »

KampfgruppeMeyer wrote:88 AT no question
...You keep repeating the same basic mistakes. The 88 AT gun had a minor role, it was the 88 FlaK that was very important (yet 'crucial' is an open question)
Former member
Sebastian Pye
Enthusiast
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 5:32 am
Location: Sweden, Västerås
Contact:

Post by Sebastian Pye »

I agree, the 88 flak, I think the allies would agree.
Helmut Von Moltke

Post by Helmut Von Moltke »

yes, as Pirx said, well trained soldiers, but espeically a large amount of them. Many German Divisions at the end of the war could not reach full potential due to manpower shortages.
Post Reply