In other words "I'm going to take from hindsight what we know works in the form of 'wunderwaffe', and abandon the rest without cause because handwavium."
If you're taking a pragmatic approach to concepts deemed 'wunderwaffe/napkinwaffe', what is the metric you are using other than Goering walking in to Hitler saying "I had a dream that all the things on this list worked, but everything else did not".
Hindsight aside, what I am attempting to do is redefine what wunderwaffe means in terms of how such weapons, vehicles, and devices affect war-time logistics rather than the decisive war-winning miracle as we have come to associate the real wunderwaffe with. Basically, if German developments took a more pragmatic approach to special weapons and equipment.
In addition to that, this AH scenario is
not centered around the mere idea of pragmatic wunderwaffe, as such an idea is absolutely fruitless given the material shortages of a disoriented industry under a refractory hierarchy. No, I had to build an entire timeline from scratch, which would take ages for me to explain in this context. All I will say is that it deviates from our own in 1880. (and Goering is not present) I really just wanted everyone's opinions, but I did not give enough context to make this discussion more constructive. My apologies.
With Germany's limited resources I do not see the Do 335 being put into production.
The ta-152 was faster and only required 1 engine which means at burnt half of the scarce aviation fuel.
The advanced u-bolts would have run into trouble because the Allies were advancing their anti-submarine efforts. In 1945 depth charges we're about to be replaced with homing torpedoes.
As for the HS 293 anti-shipping missile, the Allies were ahead in radar and in electronic countermeasures its effectiveness was severely diminished by having its guidance system jammed.
My apologies for not being more forward in the context of my post. Resources aside, would you say that the Dornier Do-335 is a better investment than the jets? Imagine if you will the Germans put the jet engine on the back-burner until the technology is more proven and economical, which piston plane developments would fare best in keeping up with the Allies? I do agree with your assessment of the Ta-152, that is my second pick for multi-role attack aircraft.
Not sure about the U-boats to be honest. I hoped someone would see the B designation following the Hs-293, but alas, no one did. That is to indicate the wire-guided variety. Really said wire-guidance could be outfitted to the following Hs-294 and Hs-295 with similar results I imagine. What do you think?
Some of these hardly qualify as wunderwaffe.
Refer to my above answer. Again, my apologies for not being more forward in the context of my post. They don't qualify as wunderwaffe, because they aren't according to the definition we associate them with; that's the point.
The RPzB 54/1 is just a slightly shorter Panzerschreck tube with a slightly better rocket with another 30m of effective range.
I included the RPzB 54/1 because its easier to handle, plausibly easier to manufacture and therefore considering its purpose, a weapon of potential; especially given the introduction of Fliegerschreck ammunition.
The Sd.Kfz. 325 is an airfield tractor.
I am well aware of what the Sdkfz 325 is. Rather than have a hodgepodge of foreign and domestic equipment meant to tug aircraft (Austro-Daimler, Sauer, Latil, Borgward, Büssing-NAG, Deutz, Hanomag, Lanz, Skoda, Laffly, etc), why not have one? Efficiency. I consider that something with the potential to positively affect the war effort, even if only a little.
Espenlaub Luftflugabwehrdrachen is a barrage kite.
I am genuinely surprised someone knows what that is. I only included it because its a novel and cheap way to defend airfields in tandem to anti-air batteries. Again, efficiency. If something better comes along than I will revise my list.
Raedel's Schraubenantrieb Schneemaschine is a screw-propelled snowmobile that barely worked.
I chose this because it has potential if given the means for development. The reason being is given the terrain of Russia, especially in the winter and during the thaw (see rasputitsa) than such a means of propulsion could be useful in logistics. In addition if one looks at the Soviet ZIL-2906 from the 60s, then can it not be said the Germans could likely make something or similar or superior quality? Imagine if you will, a Raupenschlepper OST with a screw-propulsion chassis to get a feeling for what I mean.
Fahrgerat: Puma, Falke, Sperber & Uhu- are these the 8-wheeled armoured cars?
Those are actually the code-names for various types of night-driving apparatuses for German vehicles. Puma is a tank cupola apparatus, Falke is installed on the Sdkfz 251 (driver and gunner), Sperber is a complete tank apparatus (commander and driver), Uhu is a direction apparatus (installed in the rear of an sdfkz 251) meant to provide navigation for independent units via radio. I forgot to include Fahrgerat 1252 (unnamed), which was installed on cars and trucks.
To the OPs question - less Wunderwaffe and more FW190/Hetzer type kit is what is required not M262 and King Tiger
Grossfuss Sturmgewehr and not MP44
Robust, proven technology and not complicated and able to be built in large numbers, relatively cheaply and earlier than OTL
Exactly!
