Discussion: Comparing British and German industries 1900-1940

Well, finally you have admitted that British shipyards were outdated. You know, they even lacked pneumatic and electric tooling, as well as electric welding tools. Maybe even big yards like Vickers or A-W or Beardmore or H&W.
And yet somehow the output per man was still higher than in the "highly mechanised" American shipyards. Even the Liberty ships were never really production-line items: you aren't making every single example of a particular ship frame in one factory, on one jig, where the workers do that and nothing else all day long. That means you lose a lot of the benefits flowing from economies of scale - the huge production figures at the US shipyards were largely achieved by throwing huge numbers of workers at them. A highly skilled shipwright with a hammer, for instance, will be able to produce higher quality rivets than a semi-skilled one with a pneumatic hammer: this is important because poor quality rivets may have to be drilled out and refitted, a time consuming and expensive process, or you have to overdesign the ship with far too many rivets which again causes you to waste build time.
Welding is a separate issue - the UK was behind there, but the probably not by all that much and given the timing of the depression any transition to welded hulls is very difficult to justify.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
And yet somehow the output per man was still higher than in the "highly mechanised" American shipyards. Even the Liberty ships were never really production-line items: you aren't making every single example of a particular ship frame in one factory, on one jig, where the workers do that and nothing else all day long. That means you lose a lot of the benefits flowing from economies of scale - the huge production figures at the US shipyards were largely achieved by throwing huge numbers of workers at them. A highly skilled shipwright with a hammer, for instance, will be able to produce higher quality rivets than a semi-skilled one with a pneumatic hammer: this is important because poor quality rivets may have to be drilled out and refitted, a time consuming and expensive process, or you have to overdesign the ship with far too many rivets which again causes you to waste build time.
Welding is a separate issue - the UK was behind there, but the probably not by all that much and given the timing of the depression any transition to welded hulls is very difficult to justify.
Yes, the Depression, thats why I said government support was needed when it come to installing machines like welding equipment, especially this technology did not yield immediate profits. Also, government must intervene when unions object it.

Kaiser shipyards did pioneer modern shipbuilding, with lots of their techniques are eventually adopted today, you cannot deny.

More generally, Britain still stuck with riveting for both ships and tanks.
 

BooNZ

Banned
According to that paper, in 1924, when German share fell substantially, it still doubled that of Britain (30 vs 14). In 1937, German export was nearly 7 times higher (48 vs 7).

All these figures show that Germany outperformed Britain in machine tool, and the distance was not even close.

Compared to an earlier reference that is almost unbelievable...

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%

Edit: Upon further reading the British machine tool industry faded badly during the 1920s, in part because British manufacturers often sold/distributed cheaper American machines to fully fulfil orders. Traditionally this was not that unusual, but was greatly exacerbated by the war.
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
Compared to an earlier reference that is almost unbelievable...



Edit: Upon further reading the British machine tool industry faded badly during the 1920s, in part because British manufacturers often sold/distributed cheaper American machines to fully fulfil orders. Traditionally this was not that unusual, but was greatly exacerbated by the war.
Well, but the data was like that, and the source was noted below the figure.

And various accounts show that German machine tools were at least equal of not superior in quality.

And comparing American and British machine tool is like comparing Iphone with a Nokia (I mean the old Nokia mobile phone with keyboard). Many of American machines although less durable, were semi automatic and by 1940s many were even automatic, thereby superior in efficiency and capability.
 

BooNZ

Banned
And comparing American and British machine tool is like comparing Iphone with a Nokia (I mean the old Nokia mobile phone with keyboard). Many of American machines although less durable, were semi automatic and by 1940s many were even automatic, thereby superior in efficiency and capability.
Nope - I've corrected you before on this when you were asserting US had automatic machines in WW1, when they were still experimental in the 1950s
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Nope - I've corrected you before on this when you were asserting US had automatic machines in WW1, when they were still experimental in the 1950s
Semi-automatic machine tools and other machinery were already produced around 1910s. Automatic machinery and machine tools were produced in 1940, e.g. various accounts about British shipbuilding mentioned imports of automatic welding machines from the US. British welding tech and capability were a joke compared the US and Germany from the very beginning. Not only ships, British tanks were still mainly riveted, unlike US, German or even Soviet tanks.


Going back to German British comparison, German clearly outperformed in machine tool export market. Britain only surpassed temporarily in 1920 due to the effect of blockade during the war had cut off German machine makers from its prewar markets, especially France, Italy, Belgium and Russia, its enemies.
Various accounts confirmed that in quality, German machine tools were at least equal if not superior, due to German emphasis on quality (at least until Nazi). Unless you could find an account which states that British machines were qualitative superior or perceived to be superior like you have claimed, performance in export market would still be the best indicator, especially when Germany mainly exported to highly developed countries like France, Sweden, Low Countries, which unlike British colonies and dominions would never accept junks.
 

BooNZ

Banned
Semi-automatic machine tools and other machinery were already produced around 1910s. Automatic machinery and machine tools were produced in 1940, e.g. various accounts about British shipbuilding mentioned imports of automatic welding machines from the US. British welding tech and capability were a joke compared the US and Germany from the very beginning. Not only ships, British tanks were still mainly riveted, unlike US, German or even Soviet tanks.
Reference please - you are claiming automatic machine tools were widespread in the 1940s - not generic "automatic machinery".

Going back to German British comparison, German clearly outperformed in machine tool export market. Britain only surpassed temporarily in 1920 due to the effect of blockade during the war had cut off German machine makers from its prewar markets, especially France, Italy, Belgium and Russia, its enemies.
Various accounts confirmed that in quality, German machine tools were at least equal if not superior, due to German emphasis on quality (at least until Nazi). Unless you could find an account which states that British machines were qualitative superior or perceived to be superior like you have claimed, performance in export market would still be the best indicator, especially when Germany mainly exported to highly developed countries like France, Sweden, Low Countries, which unlike British colonies and dominions would never accept junks.

I have already provided references that cite the premium paid for British machine tools and the superior profit margins relating thereto. Most businesses would only pay a premium for superior quality. I daresay the quality of the German machine tools improved over time to be competitive, but the most competitive quality of the German machine tools was lower price. Think Japan in the 1970s...
 

BooNZ

Banned
...especially when Germany mainly exported to highly developed countries like France, Sweden, Low Countries, which unlike British colonies and dominions would never accept junks.

At the time a number of British colonies had a higher GDP per capita than any European state, so they did not have to settle for second (or third) best...
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Reference please - you are claiming automatic machine tools were widespread in the 1940s - not generic "automatic machinery".
https://books.google.com.vn/books?id=k6FIMyG4SmgC&pg=PA14&dq=american+automatic+machine+tool+in+1914&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjC0cCiqJbRAhXMGZQKHcBuAswQ6AEIODAC#v=onepage&q=american automatic machine tool in 1914&f=false
The last paragraph in page 14 mentioned American automatic machine tool in British bicycle industry.


I have already provided references that cite the premium paid for British machine tools and the superior profit margins relating thereto. Most businesses would only pay a premium for superior quality. I daresay the quality of the German machine tools improved over time to be competitive, but the most competitive quality of the German machine tools was lower price. Think Japan in the 1970s...

What you said about Japan was extremely bullshit, and no longer true by 1970s. Japan was the main driver of the development of consumer electronics, not the outdated British producers. During 1980s, Japanese computer industry also outperformed Britain. Japan was also the main pioneer of industrial robots, where Britain was just a joke (like today). Finally, Japanese cars were of course superior to disastrous junks like British Leyland. I remeber that British cars at that time were described as Frankenstein
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
At the time a number of British colonies had a higher GDP per capita than any European state, so they did not have to settle for second (or third) best...
Well, most of British colonies were not industrialized, with the exception of Canada, while Canada was nowhere near France or Low Countries in level of industrialization so these colonies do not need lots of superb machine tools.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Welding is a separate issue - the UK was behind there, but the probably not by all that much and given the timing of the depression any transition to welded hulls is very difficult to justify.
Regarding welding tech and capability, Britain was a joke compared to US and Germany from the very beginning.
 
Regarding welding tech and capability, Britain was a joke compared to US and Germany from the very beginning.

Regarding welding tech and capability, welded ships were banned from the Arctic run, as the metal would crack, and with no sheets riveted together to stop the crack, welded ships would sink. Also, "superior" German techniques had sterns falling off ships.
 
Regarding welding tech and capability, welded ships were banned from the Arctic run, as the metal would crack, and with no sheets riveted together to stop the crack, welded ships would sink. Also, "superior" German techniques had sterns falling off ships.

I learn something new everyday! I assume the German ships still sank in a superior manner though?
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Regarding welding tech and capability, welded ships were banned from the Arctic run, as the metal would crack, and with no sheets riveted together to stop the crack, welded ships would sink. Also, "superior" German techniques had sterns falling off ships.
Not just ships but also tanks. Only Britain, Italy and Japan made fully or mainly riveted tanks, regarding post 1940 belligerents

Countries no longer build riveted warships or any large ships these days.
 
Not just ships but also tanks. Only Britain, Italy and Japan made fully or mainly riveted tanks, regarding post 1940 belligerents

Countries no longer build riveted warships or any large ships these days.

These days are the first two decades of the 21st Century, wielding techniques and more importantly the grades of metal that are being wielded have had a long time to mature since the period ending 1940 your thread claimed to be covering.
 
Last edited:
I learn something new everyday! I assume the German ships still sank in a superior manner though?

I know Bismarck and a Hipper class (herself?) had the stern break off while sinking- never heard of any other nation's ships doing that except when hitting the seafloor or magazine explosion. The German navy did expand rapidly, so insufficient amount of experienced designers is my guess.

Not just ships but also tanks. Only Britain, Italy and Japan made fully or mainly riveted tanks, regarding post 1940 belligerents

Countries no longer build riveted warships or any large ships these days.

That statement is as related to the OP as the fact Iphones are made is China: none. If you are trying to damn the British with this "fact," then the US also has far fewer carriers than in 1945, and the US nuclear arsenal is both smaller than the 1970's, and of an average lower yield.
 
Last edited:

BooNZ

Banned

No. This paragraph appears to be referring to semi-automatic machines - because it makes reference to them able to be operated without skilled labour, which implies unskilled labour. In contrast, an automatic machine tool either requires very skilled labour (to set it up) or no labour at all (during production runs). The American and German machine tool production pursued semi-automatic machine tools because they lacked British expert users. This meant they could produce simple consumer goods with cheaper more common labour, but Britain industry remained competitive due to the quality of its workforce.

What you said about Japan was extremely bullshit. Japan was the main driver of the development of consumer electronics, not the outdated British producers. During 1980s, Japanese computer industry also outperformed Britain. Japan was also the main pioneer of industrial robots, where Britain was just a joke (like today). Finally, Japanese cars were of course superior to disastrous junks like British Leyland. I remeber that British cars at that time were described as Frankenstein
You just cannot comprehend that national industries can evolve. I don't think anyone on this thread has sung the praises of British industry post WW2 (beyond scope of thread), but in the start of the 1970s, the Japanese automobiles were not perceived as much better. By the end of the 1970s anyone with an understanding of motor vehicles would recognize the Japanese had surpassed the British. By the end of the 1980s the quality of Japanese cars exceeded anything mass produced in Europe or the Americas. As an aside, it was the Japanese machine tool industry that ultimately crushed their British counterparts in the 1970s - something Germany and the US failed to do.
 
And Japan might have been the electronics king on the 1990's and the early 2000's, but it has lagged badly in software development, and certainly by your metric of "if a vital but unseen part, then it's less valuable than being the name on the banner." Android, Apple, and Google, oh my!
 

Thomas1195

Banned
And Japan might have been the electronics king on the 1990's and the early 2000's, but it has lagged badly in software development, and certainly by your metric of "if a vital but unseen part, then it's less valuable than being the name on the banner." Android, Apple, and Google, oh my!
None of them were European, sorry man
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
No. This paragraph appears to be referring to semi-automatic machines - because it makes reference to them able to be operated without skilled labour, which implies unskilled labour. In contrast, an automatic machine tool either requires very skilled labour (to set it up) or no labour at all (during production runs). The American and German machine tool production pursued semi-automatic machine tools because they lacked British expert users. This meant they could produce simple consumer goods with cheaper more common labour, but Britain industry remained competitive due to the quality of its workforce
Even then, the semi-automatic nature of American AND German machines should make them superior in efficiency and capability as it reduce cost and increase production speed
 
Last edited:
Top