Things you don't know about WW2 article

[FLOOB]

This is one of those, "things you don't know about..." articles. Well weirdos like us do know. Basically the gist of it is that Germany's wartime designers compulsively over engineered their weapons of war. Apparently the author just stumbled upon the old stereotype of the over engineering german cuckoo clock maker. Contrasting the supposed mentality of the german industry striving to make the perfect unter uber dingus versus the soviet mentality that good enough is better than perfect. Of course the latter philosophy is the more intelligent, and I'm sure a lot of german engineers were smart enough to appreciate that view. But for whatever reason germany did manufacture no small amount of things overly complicated. And the author seems to have just discovered this.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lot-what-we-think-we-know-about-world-war-ii-terribly-wrong-14275

[DaveBB]

Their tanks were excellent war machines, but just too mechanically unreliable and fragile.  The MG42 was probably the best infantry machine gun of the war. 

So is something really over-engineered if it breaks all the time? Or is that just poor engineering?

[FLOOB]

Their tanks were excellent war machines, but just too mechanically unreliable and fragile.  The MG42 was probably the best infantry machine gun of the war. 

So is something really over-engineered if it breaks all the time? Or is that just poor engineering?

I don't think a machine can be excellent if it is unreliable and fragile. Maybe over engineering is poor engineering, it would be simpler to just drop the buzz word and call it poor engineering.

Are you certain the MG42 was the best infantry machine gun of the war? Or are you just repeating the asertions we've all heard. The article points out some important flaws of the MG42, and this isn't the first I've heard of them. The german mg42 platoon of 4 guns required an extra squad just to carry ammo and barrels. 43 men total versus 35 men of a US army machine gun platoon with 4 guns. In addition to being logistically heavy it was expensive to build and allegedly wasn't very accurate.

[NatCigg]

without knowing much. I would say if you can do more with less your better engineered.  one good bomb or a million rifles, same thing, just depends on effective use.

[Oldman731]

In college I had a history professor who was a lieutenant in tank destroyers during the war (he was the one who said he was glad he was never in a firefight in an M18).  He told me once of his people digging up a German mine.  When they examined it, they decided it was a work of art; carefully machined and so on, and they stood there and marveled that the Germans would waste so much time on such a device.

I thought of that when I saw the Arado 234 at the Smithsonian once.  Mercedes quality interior, flush rivets, tuck-and-roll headrest, it was a real piece of work.  Meanwhile the sky above was full of Thunderbolts, Mustangs and Fortresses.

- oldman