Technological advances that would have emerged in a longer lasting WW2?

In France technological advancement during the war did not happen at all (you know, being occupied and having your college educated men filling pow camps is bad for rnd and all), so i'd wager far less than what we've got.
 
Surface-to-Air missiles. Larger/better V2 rockets. More autoloading naval artillery. Possibly development of jet-powered (gas turbine) warships.
 
Given how we're inundated weekly with "breakthrough" cancer treatments and studies showing that everything we eat causes/prevents cancer, I think we can say we don't need war to drive exploration in medicine.

The problem often isn't the basic technology, but it's production "en masse". Afaik, the only reason there was enough penicilin in 1944 was because rushed investment and mass convertion of equipment used for other purposes. I doubt this would happen in peace time.

Radar guided mobile tripple AAA, possibly SAMs as well. Massed use of SAMs in air defence. Rushed models of early air-air missiles. All of this would also acelerate the growth of ECM. Maybe "guided panzerfausts" as well.

IR equipment was being tested in 1945, wonder if that would also be used in wide scale?
 

kernals12

Banned
The problem often isn't the basic technology, but it's production "en masse". Afaik, the only reason there was enough penicilin in 1944 was because rushed investment and mass convertion of equipment used for other purposes. I doubt this would happen in peace time.

Radar guided mobile tripple AAA, possibly SAMs as well. Massed use of SAMs in air defence. Rushed models of early air-air missiles. All of this would also acelerate the growth of ECM. Maybe "guided panzerfausts" as well.

IR equipment was being tested in 1945, wonder if that would also be used in wide scale?
There's less penicillin needed during peacetime.
 

kernals12

Banned
I read once that the V2 rocket would be repackaged internally to make the best use of its internal space, this would increase the size of its fuel tanks and increase its range from 360 to 480km. Also the Nazis were working on improvements to the guidance system so that it would be more accurate at these longer ranges, making it suitably accurate to bombard bomber bases in England.
Didn't we get all those advancements after the war ended? This is not proof that a longer would give us better missiles.
 
The longer the war lasts the further behind the Soviets will be from the West at war's end from a tech standing, which will have implications for postwar politics. The Western Allies get to combat test fighter jets and bombers, probably develop their own ballistic missiles, further develop computers.

Nukes won't advance further than they did because I presume a war that lasts longer is a war where the Manhattan Project sputters a bit and takes a few years longer regardless of whether a bomb is eventually used on Germany or Japan. God forbid it gets used in combat in the first Cold War flare up since that would set a scary precedent.
 
Fewer bullet wounds mean less need for antibiotics. And the companies that produce antibiotics aren't going to let demand go unmet.

Penicilin, as the only antibiotic around, was used for every kind of infection: veneral, pneumonia, any kind of infected scratch, tropical, etc. And the kind of large-scale production that was force-rushed at the time was possible only by the mass influx of war-related money and legal power. Note that mid-1942, there was enough for only 10 patients. In peace time, without that kind of urgency? Sure, there would be production. But it would be a lot slower, and I bet the drug would be more expensive...
 

kernals12

Banned
Penicilin, as the only antibiotic around, was used for every kind of infection: veneral, pneumonia, any kind of infected scratch, tropical, etc. And the kind of large-scale production that was force-rushed at the time was possible only by the mass influx of war-related money and legal power. Note that mid-1942, there was enough for only 10 patients. In peace time, without that kind of urgency? Sure, there would be production. But it would be a lot slower, and I bet the drug would be more expensive...
Pharmaceutical companies are in business to earn a profit. And selling more penicillin means more profits. It's called the law of supply and demand.

Also, war means you have millions of people coming into contact with each other and moving about frequently, an ideal way for disease to spread. It's how the Spanish Flu outbreak in 1917 got so bad.
 
Last edited:
Top