About German Mystery Objects

From: Aerophotos


Gordon your a non believer and thus dont belong here, your time to leave
the discussion has arrived, goodbye narrow minded american..

German was technology and vastly superior in everything ... even the
Kevlar PASGT helmet design was copied. Bet you'll find some american
claim next?


You have GOT to be kidding. The technology didn't exist anywhere in the world
during WW2 and the helmet looks nothing like any of the German helmets. I own
German and U.S. examples going back to WW1 and I can place my Kevlarâ„¢ helmet
next to any of them and see no resemblence. Did the Nazi pigs even have
Nylonâ„¢ ?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: Stephen Harding

snip

What if one of these research landers make the mistake of drilling
a test hole through the little guy's head??!!! The first known
interplanetary war?

The visual of that made me laugh to the point of tears. I needed that. Marvin
the Martian will blow up the Earth for that.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: 362436 (Ron)
Date: 2/17/2004 10:46 AM Central

snip

Well how come all the secrets of ww2 and since are still locked away
with people not allowed to speak????

Name one..


Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)

I'm sure there are quite a few sources-and-methods secrets left.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: (Erich Adler)

(B2431) wrote in message
...
From: (robert arndt)


I'll give you another example comparison between US and German tech
from 1945.
Had the war gone on just until the fall of 1945 the German soldier
would have had: a new M44 stalhelm, M44 Liebermuster camouflage (which
contained carbon and IR defeating dyes), the STG-45 assault rifle, the
Pzf 150 AT weapon, and Nipolit formed disc grenades.
Now compare that with the shabby US Army soldier with the old M-1 and
a Bazooka.

Rob

And if the war had just lasted 6 months longer you still would have lost
and
have been the target of at least 2 atomic bombs. Get over it, you were
defeated
by Russians, Brits, Americans etc in shabby uniforms, M1s and bolt action
rifles who would not have been there if you hadn't started the war in the
first
place. All your wonder weapons wouldn't have staved off defeat. Your
"leaders"
would still have suicided. Your country was in ruins politically, morally,
economically and militarily.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Mr. Dan,

Do you hate Germany?

If it wasn't for the unfair Treaty of Versailles restrictions and
repayments there probably wouldn't have been a war in 1939. Before
that it was everyone with their various alliances and pacts that
marched off to the Great War for glory. Germany, however, gets the
total blame for the war.

Why? Because Germany backed Austria and by military necessity had to
violate Belgium's neutrality to achieve its war aims? As for the
Lusitania incident the Germans were kind enough (in war) to post
notices advising passengers of enemy liners that they risked being
sunk by U-boat in the present war situation. They lost their lives
because they did not heed that posted warning besides the fact the
ship was illegally carrying armaments.

Before that Mr.Dan, Great Britain didn't want a competing superpower
on the high seas. As Imperial Germany and the Kaiser built up his
Great White Fleet the idea of future war with Germany was already
there at the turn of the 20th century.

So stop blaming Germany for the cause of the wars. Many peoples and
nations conspired to march off into battle. Germany gets the full
weight of the blame however since they lost.

I do not make excuses for the Holocaust nor any other German atrocity
but you must look within the context of the other warring powers which
committed similar atrocities against other nations, races, and
cultures for several hundreds of years. In Russia's case, even against
their own peoples.

I've said enough. Please consider what you are saying historically.

Erich Adler


I don't hate anyone. I have seen too much hate and what it does. I was
responding to teuton who thinks all good things come from the Germans, the SS
were wonderful geniuses etc.

Germany always had the option of not going to war. WW1 did not have to happen.
It was basically allowed to happen. Austrian Count Bercholt did some
manipulating after the assasination of the Archduke. A bunch of people got
upset. Basically everyone mobilized and no one said no.

The Lusitania was sunk in 1915. The U.S. declared war in 1917. There's no
direct link. If Germany had not sent a telegram to Mexico (read up on the
Zimmerman Telegram) asking them if they would join the Germans in declaring war
on the U.S. which they obviously didn't. Obviously the Germans wanted war.

Versailles was very much unfair to the Germans economically, not militarily.
This doesn't excuse the Germans illegally taking parts of Czechoslovakia,
invading Poland, the low countries, France, North Africa, Russia etc nor did it
excuse declaring war on the U.S. 11 December 1941.

I do blame the Germans, Stalin, Chamberlain and anyone else who could have
avoided the war. The fact remains the Germans DID invade Poland 1 September. No
one forced them to do so.

Before both wars started the Germans could have simply said "we will not make
war on our neighbours." How hard is that to comprehend? National pride is a
stupid reason to start a war. The shame is it's been done too many times.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
I'd just like to know how come we don't see anything derived from
these "crashed UFO's"? Keeping something secret and never actually
using it sort of defeats the purpose of having it.

A number of times I've clashed on Usenet with a fellow named Don Palermo.
He claims that UFOs are actually human designed craft and that the stories
of "Mr. ET" are simply to cover this up. Why don't we see open evidence of
such craft? According to Don "Its classified," as if merely uttering the
phrase explains everything. Apparentl,y the US has spent zillions of
dollars on "conventional" aircraft and so forth to hide the existence of
this technology, which is controlled by some ultrapowerful cabal, and which
apparently no one else has ever managed to stumble across

tim gueguen 101867

In message m, David
E. Powell writes
Very true - and the US Garand was a good gun.

Easy to knock it with hindsight as overpowered and with that niggle of
the eight-round clip feed, but it was a reliable, effective, durable
semi-automatic rifle that led the world at the time.

The MP43/StGw44 was an excellent weapon, but not available in sufficient
quantity: most of the German troops were still using Kar98s.

Don't forget the BAR, which had some quibbles (fixed barrel,
under-mounted magazine) but was a robust attempt at a SAW chambered for
..30-06. The Bren was a better weapon, but the BAR was good.

The British of course had
the Bren, Sten, and Enfield.

The Lee-Enfield was adequate (like the Kar98 and 1903 Springfield, it
was a solid reliable bolt-action, distinguished only by a larger
magazine); the Sten was primarily notable for by ease of production and
acceptable reliability: the star performer was the Bren, which was still
in service five decades later. We also had the PIAT, which for all its
eccentricities was able to kill most German tanks that could be enticed
into range.

Sadly, we concentrated on producing what we had and left the innovation
for peacetime: it's a nice thought to imagine EM2s arriving in service
in time for D-Day

ISTR the Germans also had G43 rifles, in 7.92
Mauser,

Rather demanding weapons, mostly issued to snipers who could give them
the TLC required to keep them working. And German production was
definitely having quality problems by war's end: shortages of everything
was taking its toll, and all manner of kit was having corners cut to
speed manufacture. Not every weapon was happy to be short-circuited
thusly.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

"Krztalizer" wrote in message
...

I see this is going to be a fantasy piece.... ok.

Yes, and from what I can tell, paraphrased almost entirely from a Harbinson
"Projekt Saucer" book, which of course is FICTION.

Si

Erich Adler wrote:

snip




Mr. Dan,

Do you hate Germany?

If it wasn't for the unfair Treaty of Versailles restrictions and
repayments there probably wouldn't have been a war in 1939.

snip


I've said enough. Please consider what you are saying historically.

Erich Adler


Okay -- historically, Germany lost WWI, and as such wasn't in much of a
position to dictate treaty terms.

David Windhorst -- German-American who thinks the U.S. should have
stayed home in 1917, but at least understands why things turned out the
way they did.

"David E. Powell" wrote in message ws.com...
"Eunometic" wrote in message
om...
Bernardz wrote in message
news:MPG.1a9b8d33930402ad9898f6@news...
In article ,
says...
Some say the technology came from an alien UFO that crashed near
Freiberg in 1936 and was taken to Himmler's castle at Wewelsberg,
reverse engineered. Nevertheless, Thule and Vril continued development
of these RFZ (RundFlugZeug) with models 1-6 up to 1939. By the start
of the war Vril had their own designs of which the often-quoted V-7 is
mentioned. This is a mislabel as it is not part of the

The designation V-1, V-2 etc was not used till late in the war.

The designation V was for "Versuchs" the German word for experimental.
Most german protduction aircraft had up to 30-100 V series aircraft

This is incorrect.

The above sentence is entirely correct. German prototypes always had
a "V" series designation. Any book on German aircraft always lists
this.

V as it related to the V-1 buzz bomb and V-2 rocket was
for "Vergeileitung" (sp?) which translantes into "Vengeance." Meant to
retaliate for bombing raids on Hamburg, Berlin, etc.

The proper designation of the "Buzz Bomb" was Fiesler Fi 103 and that
of the "V2" was A4. Preceding the A4 was an A1,A2,A3.

The term "Vergeileitung" translates more accurately as "Reprisal".

The terms were applied both for their abillity to deceive allied
intelligence (thus the V1 Fi103 could be made to appear as a prototype
Flakzielgaraete" or aerial targed drone and the propaganda value as a
'reprisal' for the saturation bombing of German cities.



The V-designation was applied to the V-1 cruise missile, the V-2 rocket, and
the V-3 cannon project which was never completed. There were other guided
missiles, bombs, etc. that were developed but they did not have
V-designations. (The missiles used to sink the Italian battleship Roma, for
isntance, or the Wasserfall surface to air missile concept.) Before
recieving the "V-2" designation, Dr. Von Braun's rocket was known as the
A-4.

Quite right but as I pointed out the V designation had a duel purpose:
it allowed the Germans to misrepresent their weapons as part of a
series of prototypes in accordance with the Reich Luftfahrt
Ministeriums standards for deisgnation.

Eg Ju 188 V2 meant a derivative of the Ju 88 and the second
experimental protoype (Versuchs 2) thereof. The first series in
production was usually an "A" series aircraft but not always if there
were high altitude pressurised versions or clipped wing versions for
instance.



As for the UFO stuff, it is nonsense. The proponents invariably post some
sort of cock and bull talem then ask people to prove it wrong. The onus of
proof is on them, and they try to avoid that because they have none. I mean,
if I were a German strategic type in 1945 and I had some super-craft, I'd
darn sure want to use it. Maybe against, say, the Russians? I mean they
would have had a lot of motivation there.

The Philidelphia Experiment also existed as an allied equivalent.

There do appear to have been "foo fighters" or reports filed by allied
aircrew of them that might be traced.

These may have been atmopheric phenomena, they may have been some
unusual lifting body aircraft probably a prototype with some kind of
pulse/ramjet system with lots of external flame that was being used as
some type of contact aircraft.

An aircraft with a speed of 600mph would have looked miraculouse at
the time. I don't discount that possiblity. I do discount the ideas
of exotic energies and propulsions systems based on Vril or some such
nonsense.




DEP

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message ...

There truely were some unnecesary stuff up that could have been
avoided if the leadership understood how technology progesses. The
fact that all German radars shared a single frequency...

All German radars did not share a single frequency - far from it,
actually*. Their radars were far more frequency agile than Allied
radars, although not like the "frequency agile" that we know today.
Most could be retuned fairly easily, being rather simple, elegant
designs. Most allied radars could not without a massive headache (as
in hours of unstable operation, getting all the bugs out). Allied
microwave radars could not change frequency at all, unless the
magnetron was actually replaced. The "first" (I think) tuneable
microwave radar the Allies had was the X band SCR-584.

On a side note, both the Allies and the Axis both tried to keep their
radars confined to various bands. There is a good reason for this -
interference. The airwaves were horribly overcrowded, even up in the
VHF area where air search radars live. Spreading your radars all over
the place on the band is actually troublesome.

*Freyas were found everywhere between 90 and 190 MHz. Wurzburgs were
found from 470 to 590 MHz. Source: TME 11-219 "Directory of German
Radar Equipment".

and the secrecy
sourounding the effectiveness soruning 'duppel' or the German version
of Window which had so much secrecy placed upon it proper
countermeasures could not be developed.

For 1940s technology, Window was almost impossible to defeat. The
Germans, however, did a pretty good job with their Window ECCM
(anti-jam). Allied radars had AJ features as well, but not quite as
advanced (it was rarely used).

William Donzelli