Discussion: Comparing British and German industries 1900-1940

Synthetic dye was a classic example to show british weakness when bringing its inventions to practical application.
I was writing about military applications, not commercial exploitation, which I thought was perfectly clear in the post. However, I'll concede the point about British inventions being too often exploited by other countries economically.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
What is the synthetic dye case? Furthermore you need at least two more examples to prove that the Germans were usually ahead in applying the technology as well as developing the technology.

Synthetic case was one of the biggest blunder by british firms

German developing and applying tech: Fritz Haber process, gas weapon, aspirin and some other drugs, diesel engine, electrical industry (most electrical things were invented by American)
 

Thomas1195

Banned
I was writing about military applications, not commercial exploitation, which I thought was perfectly clear in the post. However, I'll concede the point about British inventions being too often exploited by other countries economically.
This topic is about industry. Soviet union had many excellent weapons, but their industrial techniques and capability was a decade behind developed capitalist countries in Weatern Europe, US and Japan
 

Thomas1195

Banned
I did often google to search about the cases in which british outperform germany in new, high tech industries during 1900-1914, and 1919-1940, and only found motor car industry, just one :teary:, a sector which was negligible in the uk between 1900 and 1914 and only significant during the interwar
 
They used no radios for fire control and in terms of tubes about 76k all war vs 220k by the British. Its actually a problem both of intent but also capability. Could not make dry cell batteries in numbers.

Average life of a truck ( which is admittedly and HGV type) in the german army is 50 hours, after that the ill trained driver has buggered up the gearbox.

For all the alleged superiority in everything the germans were outproduced across the board in just about every category of relevant weaponry. and seriously outproduced in the decisive ones, with an enemy that also maintained a massive superiority in anything that floated.

So electrical industry, copper wiring, where do you get the copper? 21k tons annually produced in germany in 1907, and they were short of metal for artillery driving bands and scavenging off the battlefield. Optics yes, but then Chance Bros start outproducing Zeiss and ofc Britain has rubber, and oil and money and the ability to import.

The working German assumption pre WW2 was that war with Britain or France meant war with the US economy, no question. In WW1 the western front was supposed to be over inside 6 weeks it did not happen, the level of British Imports in 1914 is irrelevant, what matters is the level of British production in 15, 16, 17, 18 and 39-45 as a whole.


Even on the items you cite by late war (say 17 on, or 42 on germany s being outproduced and in the qualitatively outproduced.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
They used no radios for fire control and in terms of tubes about 76k all war vs 220k by the British. Its actually a problem both of intent but also capability. Could not make dry cell batteries in numbers.

Average life of a truck ( which is admittedly and HGV type) in the german army is 50 hours, after that the ill trained driver has buggered up the gearbox.

For all the alleged superiority in everything the germans were outproduced across the board in just about every category of relevant weaponry. and seriously outproduced in the decisive ones, with an enemy that also maintained a massive superiority in anything that floated.

So electrical industry, copper wiring, where do you get the copper? 21k tons annually produced in germany in 1907, and they were short of metal for artillery driving bands and scavenging off the battlefield. Optics yes, but then Chance Bros start outproducing Zeiss and ofc Britain has rubber, and oil and money and the ability to import.

The working German assumption pre WW2 was that war with Britain or France meant war with the US economy, no question. In WW1 the western front was supposed to be over inside 6 weeks it did not happen, the level of British Imports in 1914 is irrelevant, what matters is the level of British production in 15, 16, 17, 18 and 39-45 as a whole.


Even on the items you cite by late war (say 17 on, or 42 on germany s being outproduced and in the qualitatively outproduced.
You never focus on peacetime commercial aspect.
 
I did often google to search about the cases in which british outperform germany in new, high tech industries during 1900-1914, and 1919-1940, and only found motor car industry, just one :teary:, a sector which was negligible in the uk between 1900 and 1914 and only significant during the interwar


Chaim Weizman discover how to obtain acetone from bacteria 1910, this discovery being an important contribution to cordite supplies in World War 1

also 1910 William Hill develops the first gastroscope.

1919 Robert Alexander Watson-Watt patents the radiolocator a system for establishing the position of ships and aircraft by radio waves, this system will of course be subsequently improved on by using microwaves but sadly I am not aware of anyone managing a version using synthetic dye.

I mean I do have to ask where you are looking and what for?
 
It's amazing to me that Germany were so obviously superior in all areas of technology and industry and yet had absolutely no qualitative superiority in weapons in either war (particularly in WW2 where Germany had been planning the war for at least six years while the UK sat with their fingers in the their ears shouting 'la, la, la, I can't hear you' until 1937).

How was it that such a technologically and industrially advanced nation like Germany could manage to end up relying on horse drawn logistics and captured vehicles until the end of the war while the British Army in Europe was 100% motorised by 1939?

How did the massively superior German industry never manage to gain any advantage over the crappy British retards sitting in their darkened cottages in any area of warfare?
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Chaim Weizman discover how to obtain acetone from bacteria 1910, this discovery being an important contribution to cordite supplies in World War 1

also 1910 William Hill develops the first gastroscope.

1919 Robert Alexander Watson-Watt patents the radiolocator a system for establishing the position of ships and aircraft by radio waves, this system will of course be subsequently improved on by using microwaves but sadly I am not aware of anyone managing a version using synthetic dye.

I mean I do have to ask where you are looking and what for?
I looked for and emphasized on production and commercializing phases, also in peace time to eliminate the blockade factor, not just invention.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
It's amazing to me that Germany were so obviously superior in all areas of technology and industry and yet had absolutely no qualitative superiority in weapons in either war (particularly in WW2 where Germany had been planning the war for at least six years while the UK sat with their fingers in the their ears shouting 'la, la, la, I can't hear you' until 1937).

How was it that such a technologically and industrially advanced nation like Germany could manage to end up relying on horse drawn logistics and captured vehicles until the end of the war while the British Army in Europe was 100% motorised by 1939?

How did the massively superior German industry never manage to gain any advantage over the crappy British retards sitting in their darkened cottages in any area of warfare?

Wartime: blockade limiting raw materials, thus lowering quality.

Now focus on peacetime commercial and production aspect, and you could not find any british advantage other than motor car
 
Wartime: blockade limiting raw materials, thus lowering quality.

So why weren't the Heer/Luftwaffe/Kriegsmarine of 1939 streets ahead of the RN/British Army/RAF in terms of technology?

There was no blockade until the war started.

Even after 1939, they were cut off from the sea by the far superior (despite all their ships being made of coal and built in cottages lit by animal fat lanterns, apparently) Royal Navy but they had most of Europe to draw on.

So why weren't the Germans all running round with Plasma Rifles and hovertanks while the stupid Brits were trying to figure out how flint worked?
 
I looked for and emphasized on production and commercializing phases, also in peace time to eliminate the blockade factor, not just invention.

Okay then so 1919-1939 how many aircraft did Britain export? How many aircraft did Germany export? How many cars, trucks, tractors? How many wireless sets did each nation export in the period?

I think you need to actually look at these questions and not dodge around them.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
So why weren't the Heer/Luftwaffe/Kriegsmarine of 1939 streets ahead of the RN/British Army/RAF in terms of technology?

There was no blockade until the war started.

Even after 1939, they were cut off from the sea by the far superior (despite all their ships being made of coal and built in cottages lit by animal fat lanterns, apparently) Royal Navy but they had most of Europe to draw on.

So why weren't the Germans all running round with Plasma Rifles and hovertanks while the stupid Brits were trying to figure out how flint worked?
I mean now lets focus on commercialize aspect, on high-tech industries which produce either non-military capital goods or consumer goods. Soviet had numerous nice military kits, but their non military industries were mostly technologically inferior
 
I mean now lets focus on commercialize aspect

No.

Why did the massively superior Germans, who had at least a five year advantage of planning for World War 2 over the UK, never manage to equip their armies with superior weapons?

It's a simple question Thomas.

"In 1940 I could at least fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now! It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy. The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that? There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war is over I'm going to buy a British radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked."
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Okay then so 1919-1939 how many aircraft did Britain export? How many aircraft did Germany export? How many cars, trucks, tractors? How many wireless sets did each nation export in the period?

I think you need to actually look at these questions and not dodge around them.
Oh, i did said that britain outperformed in motor car industry. German aircraft industry was not allowed to free develop at that time.

But others, CHEMICAL, pharmaceutical, electrical and electronic goods, machinery, precision instruments like optics used in labs, Germany clearly outperformed. Germany also led in other heavy sectors like steel (very big lead), construction material and general metallurgy. In this thread I am comparing industries in today's sense, all about peacetime and commercial aspect

Oh, I also forgot magneto and ball bearings

Of course the lag was much bigger before 1914
 
Last edited:
Okay then so 1919-1939 how many aircraft did Britain export? How many aircraft did Germany export? How many cars, trucks, tractors? How many wireless sets did each nation export in the period?

I think you need to actually look at these questions and not dodge around them.

Quite. You could also look at how many were made. So the British in their wattle and daub cottages spoon whittling in steam powered factories travelled to work in cars and buses. Leading to a plethora of mechanics able to fix internal combustion engines and drivers and suchlike while the germans travelled on trams powered by mains electricity.

Shame they could's run tramlines for the tanks and planes when war came.

Same for radios, in the Britain and France they are a something teenagers build for fun. In germany there is a massive state effort to make radios avialable so people can listen to propaganda speeches, so fixed tuned to one station and comparatively rare.

The whole synthetic fuel and rubber issue is a case study in stupidity and attempted autarchy. Yes you can make it at around the twice the price of importing it. But to import it requires global trading and exports people want and there are only so many guns you can sell. From 1910 - 1940 with a brief interruption in the 20's Germany did not have a viable export economy because it was gearing up a military.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Why was their armour plating (even in the early war years) so poor then?
Yeah, nazi period, yes. But overall Germany had bigger steel industry. Before 1914, germany exported lots of steel to UK.

Look at the composition of exports in 1914, you can see that British exports were dominated by low tech goods like textile, clothing, footwear, food and beverage. German exports were mostly high tech engineering stuff.

In an economic competition, German high-tech industries clearly outperformed british.
 
Could not make dry cell batteries in numbers.

Germany was really behind in this area, for some reason.
USA was the leader here, much of it driven by Radios for rural areas, where Electrification was slow due to the vast areas. So radios used dry or wet cells for the tube heaters( 'A' Battery, 1.5 to 12V), and other high voltage batteries for the plates ('B' Battery, 22.5V to 90), and a 'C' Battery for the bias grid, typically 4.5 to 6V

Even early US cars used Dry Cells for hand cranked auto for the Ignition circuit , to aid in starting than to just rely on the magneto or Kettering ignition at hand crank speeds
batteries.jpg


For portables, the Germans typically went for magnetos, either clockwork or continuous crank than dry cells
 
Top