Discussion: Comparing British and German industries 1900-1940

Thomas1195

Banned
British shipbuilding actually lagged behind US and Germany in adopting new technology before ww1. It was more efficient because shipbuilding before ww2 still favoured craft based methods using skilled labour more than mechanization.

By 1939, British shipbuilding was totally obsolete compared to Germany and US, the only exception might be Vickers
 
Last edited:

BooNZ

Banned
Thanks to superior machines imported from the US, because british machinery industry sucked compared to US and germany.
Apparently you do not know what you are talking about - no surprises there...

Extracts from Alfred Herbert Ltd and the British Machine Tool Industry, 1887-1983

In 1914 Herbert's was the largest machine tool maker in Europe, with a pattern of profits that were "very high relative to the available benchmark returns, for industrial companies"
...
Regarding the increase in British imports of machine tools "American imports formed the vast bulk of this increase. These imports were largely destined for munitions work, import of machine tools being tightly regulated by the Board of Trade Licenses, which were only granted for 'special undertakings' to enforce a limitation on the number of projects.
...
Not discounting the contribution of American imports to the British cause, it was nevertheless in supplying France where America made a decisive impact, and by doing so eased the pressure on British makers
."
...
In 1920 the UK accounted for 24.46% of world exports, only superseded by the USA with 49%, and above Germany at 20.9%
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Apparently you do not know what you are talking about - no surprises there...

Extracts from Alfred Herbert Ltd and the British Machine Tool Industry, 1887-1983

In 1914 Herbert's was the largest machine tool maker in Europe, with a pattern of profits that were "very high relative to the available benchmark returns, for industrial companies"
...
Regarding the increase in British imports of machine tools "American imports formed the vast bulk of this increase. These imports were largely destined for munitions work, import of machine tools being tightly regulated by the Board of Trade Licenses, which were only granted for 'special undertakings' to enforce a limitation on the number of projects.
...
Not discounting the contribution of American imports to the British cause, it was nevertheless in supplying France where America made a decisive impact, and by doing so eased the pressure on British makers
."
...
In 1920 the UK accounted for 24.46% of world exports, only superseded by the USA with 49%, and above Germany at 20.9%

By 1920, German economy was a mess. It did not recovered until 1924.

Before the war, German machine tool export was 4 times higher. Germany's overall exports were higher, and the gap in production output might be even larger.
https://books.google.com.vn/books?i...d herbert british world export market&f=false

And well, were there any figures about world share of output??
 

BooNZ

Banned
By 1920, German economy was a mess. It did not recovered until 1924.

Before the war, German machine tool export was 4 times higher. Germany's overall exports were higher, and the gap in production output might be even larger.
https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=EfKyy2aa1twC&pg=PA246&dq=alfred+herbert+british+world+export+market&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjcz4LrodDQAhUCnJQKHaUgDW4Q6AEINzAB#v=onepage&q=alfred herbert british world export market&f=false

And well, were there any figures about world share of output??

It appears the British machine tool manufacturers focused on the high end (i.e. quality) of the market that could attract a premium price and thereby maximise profits. However, an increasing part of Herbert's business was selling cheap American machine tools in niches it considered to be uneconomic.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
It appears the British machine tool manufacturers focused on the high end (i.e. quality) of the market that could attract a premium price and thereby maximise profits. However, an increasing part of Herbert's business was selling cheap American machine tools in niches it considered to be uneconomic.
American machines were more efficient, high-powered and many were automatic and electric powered. British machines tended to be the old types that would be eventually phased out like reciprocal steam engines. Besides, American machines were better for ammunition or so factories that focus on mass production, as well as for assemnly lines.
 

BooNZ

Banned
American machines were more efficient, high-powered and many were automatic and electric powered. British machines tended to be the old types that would be eventually phased out like reciprocal steam engines. Besides, American machines were better for ammunition or so factories that focus on mass production, as well as for assemnly lines.
From my reading there was no practical difference in the quality of the machine tools, any difference were largely a result of management decisions rather than technical knowhow. The British tended to produce a diverse range of generalist machine tools, whereas the Germans and Americans were more likley to mass produce a narow range of machine tools and thereby reduce production costs.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
From my reading there was no practical difference in the quality of the machine tools, any difference were largely a result of management decisions rather than technical knowhow. The British tended to produce a diverse range of generalist machine tools, whereas the Germans and Americans were more likley to mass produce a narow range of machine tools and thereby reduce production costs.
British could not export various highly sophisticated electrical machinery.
 

BooNZ

Banned
How would you compare British and German industry between 1910 and 1940?

Back to the original question...

British Background

The Royal Navy dominated the oceans of the world and over centuries Britain accumulated the prime colonial territories. In the 18th century Britain initiated the first industrial revolution and dominated the global trade of manufactured goods before the industrialisation of any other major power. The wealth and influence generated enabled Britain to not only able to strenthen its grip on empire, but control global trade including significant investments in South America and dominating international trade with 'independent China'. Britain enjoyed being the pre-eminent financial and naval power for the better part of two centuries. It was not until 1900 that the scale of US and German industrialisation rivaled that of Great Britain.

So at 1900 Britain had a rich colonial empire spanning the globe and had accumulated vast wealth and investments both within and without that empire. It remained the pre-eminent naval and financial power and had unrivaled access to resources and affluent markets both within and without empire. It dominated traditionally profitable parts of global industry and its productivity continued to be competitive by most measures.

German Background

It was a late comer to the industrial revolution, but its industrialisation was enhanced by high literacy rates and a strong population growth. By 1900 the scale of German industry was close to parity with Britain, but it lacked the easy access to resources, the established markets, the globe spanning empire and financial muscle of the British empire. Notwithstanding the above, its late industrialisation and rapid growth meant German Industry was more modern than most of its peers and before the war Germany was recognised as a centre of excellence in respect of science.

Britain was the established European industrial power with perceived qualitative superiority, so Germany either had to compete aggressively on price on existing products and/or focus on new products (e.g. chemical goods and electrical stuff). The quality of German science and research was well ahead of its peers, but this was not fully apparent in the performance of its industry before war. Its advanced science enabled it to dominate niche markets like optics, but it was not until the industrial scale production of nitrates during the war that German science truly demonstrated the potential to dominate a mass mainstream market - being artificial fertilizer.

Summary:

Around 1900 British industry effectively occupied the centre of the chess board - this required all competitors (including Germany) to work far harder to get their share of any market that featured British products. Post 1900 British industry was nothing flash, but it was competent (beit conservative) and it enjoyed many actual and potential competitive advantages in respect of access to markets, finance and resources.

The performance of German industry was a product of high population growth, high literacy rates and late industrialisation. The German excellence in science fields had the potential to propell German industry into greatness, but that never really eventuated due to those world wars. To keep things in perseptive, German industrial greatness would be unlikely to come close to that previously achieved by the British empire, nor that subsequently achieved by the US empire - but could be impressive all the same.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Back to the original question...

British Background

The Royal Navy dominated the oceans of the world and over centuries Britain accumulated the prime colonial territories. In the 18th century Britain initiated the first industrial revolution and dominated the global trade of manufactured goods before the industrialisation of any other major power. The wealth and influence generated enabled Britain to not only able to strenthen its grip on empire, but control global trade including significant investments in South America and dominating international trade with 'independent China'. Britain enjoyed being the pre-eminent financial and naval power for the better part of two centuries. It was not until 1900 that the scale of US and German industrialisation rivaled that of Great Britain.

So at 1900 Britain had a rich colonial empire spanning the globe and had accumulated vast wealth and investments both within and without that empire. It remained the pre-eminent naval and financial power and had unrivaled access to resources and affluent markets both within and without empire. It dominated traditionally profitable parts of global industry and its productivity continued to be competitive by most measures.

German Background

It was a late comer to the industrial revolution, but its industrialisation was enhanced by high literacy rates and a strong population growth. By 1900 the scale of German industry was close to parity with Britain, but it lacked the easy access to resources, the established markets, the globe spanning empire and financial muscle of the British empire. Notwithstanding the above, its late industrialisation and rapid growth meant German Industry was more modern than most of its peers and before the war Germany was recognised as a centre of excellence in respect of science.

Britain was the established European industrial power with perceived qualitative superiority, so Germany either had to compete aggressively on price on existing products and/or focus on new products (e.g. chemical goods and electrical stuff). The quality of German science and research was well ahead of its peers, but this was not fully apparent in the performance of its industry before war. Its advanced science enabled it to dominate niche markets like optics, but it was not until the industrial scale production of nitrates during the war that German science truly demonstrated the potential to dominate a mass mainstream market - being artificial fertilizer.

Summary:

Around 1900 British industry effectively occupied the centre of the chess board - this required all competitors (including Germany) to work far harder to get their share of any market that featured British products. Post 1900 British industry was nothing flash, but it was competent (beit conservative) and it enjoyed many actual and potential competitive advantages in respect of access to markets, finance and resources.

The performance of German industry was a product of high population growth, high literacy rates and late industrialisation. The German excellence in science fields had the potential to propell German industry into greatness, but that never really eventuated due to those world wars. To keep things in perseptive, German industrial greatness would be unlikely to come close to that previously achieved by the British empire, nor that subsequently achieved by the US empire - but could be impressive all the same.
Agreed, but German industrial power had surpassed Britain by 1913. British industrial structure post 1900 was doomed to failure, this was exposed during the post war period. It has been technologically lagged behind Germany since 1900 until today. After all, it was industrial and technological power that determine national strength.
 

hipper

Banned
British shipbuilding actually lagged behind US and Germany in adopting new technology before ww1. It was more efficient because shipbuilding before ww2 still favoured craft based methods using skilled labour more than mechanization.

By 1939, British shipbuilding was totally obsolete compared to Germany and US, the only exception might be Vickers

Hmm in 1939 the British could construct a ship more quickly than the Germans and more cheaply than the Americans.

it used more riveters than welders but wielding was still in in its early stages and many problems remained to be worked out, in the meantime the sterns of British ships did not fall off, and their merchantmen did not crack in the middle.


Note that in the immediate post war years British shipbuilding boomed while all those high Tech American yards built by Mr Kaiser with British money shut down. They produced ships that were too expensive.

In the 1960's rising incomes & lack of investment made British shipbuilding noncompetitive but that's a different tale from the one you are trying to spin.

German and american yards used a mix of rivets and welds too by the way.

perhaps you would like to say something about the relative proportions of each method in each country that would be interesting ... constant repetition of the same point without any facts to back them up is dull

cheers

Hipper
 

hipper

Banned
Agreed, but German industrial power had surpassed Britain by 1913. British industrial structure post 1900 was doomed to failure, this was exposed during the post war period. It has been technologically lagged behind Germany since 1900 until today. After all, it was industrial and technological power that determine national strength.


what do you mean by power ?
by 1916 Britain & Canada were producing more shells than Germany so in a competitive situation Germany's vaunted industrial superiority crumbled in a little over a year.
 

Deleted member 1487

what do you mean by power ?
by 1916 Britain & Canada were producing more shells than Germany so in a competitive situation Germany's vaunted industrial superiority crumbled in a little over a year.
They were sourcing heaps of shells from the US, which is included in their shell output numbers, so it's not really a comparison of what the Canadians and Brits were doing with their own industry, it is a function of US contributions as well.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Hmm in 1939 the British could construct a ship more quickly than the Germans and more cheaply than the Americans.

it used more riveters than welders but wielding was still in in its early stages and many problems remained to be worked out, in the meantime the sterns of British ships did not fall off, and their merchantmen did not crack in the middle.


Note that in the immediate post war years British shipbuilding boomed while all those high Tech American yards built by Mr Kaiser with British money shut down. They produced ships that were too expensive.

In the 1960's rising incomes & lack of investment made British shipbuilding noncompetitive but that's a different tale from the one you are trying to spin.

German and american yards used a mix of rivets and welds too by the way.

perhaps you would like to say something about the relative proportions of each method in each country that would be interesting ... constant repetition of the same point without any facts to back them up is dull

cheers

Hipper
British shipyards also lagged in pneumatic and electric tooling
 
Last edited:

hipper

Banned
They were sourcing heaps of shells from the US, which is included in their shell output numbers, so it's not really a comparison of what the Canadians and Brits were doing with their own industry, it is a function of US contributions as well.

I was not counting American shell production or even French Just the UK and Canada.... Thomas provided the source it was quite interesting

cheers Hipper
 

Thomas1195

Banned
I was not counting American shell production or even French Just the UK and Canada.... Thomas provided the source it was quite interesting

cheers Hipper
But not in rifles and guns, and machine guns as well, and Germany produced more shells than Britain alone.
 
Last edited:
As fascinating as all this is, can I ask what the purpose of this thread is?

You're not inviting discussion; nor exploring if, and how, such things could be altered in an ATL; nor how these facts themselves could, with a suitable PoD, cause changes to OTL.

This is just a list of things that you've discovered, or inferred. It's fairly interesting, but why is it here?

Yet it has 13 pages... I never had a 12 pages discussion thread on this part of the forum... And that actually was AH.
 
Yet it has 13 pages... I never had a 12 pages discussion thread on this part of the forum... And that actually was AH.
I have, however, now ascertained the point of this thread.

It's a one where the OP founds it to discuss why his view of the world is the only correct one. These can run and run. All it needs is for the OP to stick to their guns, and at least one other person to disagree, and it can go on and on and on. It's not meant for exploring a PoD, it's not discussing how these factors might change something else, given a different PoD. It's using this thread as an area to state that they are right (as is often the case), to back themselves in a disagreement on another thread. All discussion, evidence, and anything else will be handled according to that preordained goal.

While of disputed origin, the quote about statistics, the drunkard and the lampost springs to mind.
 
Top