PDA

View Full Version : WW2 Rader.



aly j
09-28-2008, 09:39 AM
Who invented the rader first. England, Germany or Japan.I first thought England, resoucers told me 1935 but resoucers also told me Germany 1935.
Since Japan was so high tech with England and Germany it also could of been Japan.

Nickdfresh
09-28-2008, 10:04 AM
http://rochesterturning.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/spellcheck1.gif

aly j
09-28-2008, 10:07 AM
http://rochesterturning.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/spellcheck1.gif

R u going to give me an answer,and may i tell you,theres other members on here with little spelling problems;)

aly j
09-28-2008, 10:12 AM
R u going to give me an answer,and may i tell you,theres other members on here with little spelling problems;)

It would help,if i can find it;)

aly j
09-28-2008, 10:48 AM
I meant to say WW2 Raider:rolleyes:

Adrian Wainer
09-28-2008, 12:12 PM
I think the word, you are looking for is "radar", off hand as best as I remember it, the issue of who invented radar is somewhat complicated as usually these things are. An issue is that, when most people who know a little bit about World War II think of radar, they think of the RAF airdefense radar system but a radar range finder on a Warship is just as much a radar as an airdefense radar. As for Japan, its lead in electronics is very much a post World War II phenomena. And as for your spelling, it is doing no end of good in improving my cryptology skills.:D LOL

http://www.radarworld.org/germany2.html

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

pdf27
09-28-2008, 02:20 PM
Like many things, it was a case of parallel evolution. The Germans first Radar system was used in Kiel Harbour in March 1934, developed from the same principles as Sonar. The British system was first tested in February 1935, and was developed out of a political request for a "death ray", which was correctly identified by the scientists as a silly scheme but gave them the idea of radar.

The reason the British are generally credited with inventing is is that they advanced much more rapidly than the Germans in the early years of radar, and were the first to implement a militarily useful radar system.

aly j
09-28-2008, 11:36 PM
I think the word, you are looking for is "radar", off hand as best as I remember it, the issue of who invented radar is somewhat complicated as usually these things are. An issue is that, when most people who know a little bit about World War II think of radar, they think of the RAF airdefense radar system but a radar range finder on a Warship is just as much a radar as an airdefense radar. As for Japan, its lead in electronics is very much a post World War II phenomena. And as for your spelling, it is doing no end of good in improving my cryptology skills.:D LOL

http://www.radarworld.org/germany2.html

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
A straight answer would be nice Adrian-U still have not gave me an answer yet.And i thought you guys dont need improving on youre cryptolgy skills,expressely if youre trying to improve by reading my post,and i know a bit of ww2 but i tought my self ,i didt have fancey university teachers too teach me.Thats all right if you dont know the answer, u cant know every thing about ww2;)

aly j
09-28-2008, 11:38 PM
Like many things, it was a case of parallel evolution. The Germans first Radar system was used in Kiel Harbour in March 1934, developed from the same principles as Sonar. The British system was first tested in February 1935, and was developed out of a political request for a "death ray", which was correctly identified by the scientists as a silly scheme but gave them the idea of radar.

The reason the British are generally credited with inventing is is that they advanced much more rapidly than the Germans in the early years of radar, and were the first to implement a militarily useful radar system.

Thanks,i wast sure:D

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 03:57 AM
I meant to say WW2 Raider:rolleyes:

Commerce raider? They weren't invented during WWII but go back a long way, back to the days of the privateers and beyond.

Or Admiral Raeder? He wasn't invented during WWII either or he wouldn't have been old enough to be an admiral, or even a cabin boy, but I believe he was invented by Herr and Frau Raeder. :D

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 04:00 AM
Since Japan was so high tech with England and Germany it also could of been Japan.

Japan was not particularly high tech before and during WWII (check out the laughable quality of their midget subs), and certainly not in the radar field.

Which is why Japan was at a serious disadvantage against the USN, especially in the latter half of the war, which had far better radar and even had radar when Japan had none earlier in the war.

aly j
09-29-2008, 04:25 AM
Japan was not particularly high tech before and during WWII (check out the laughable quality of their midget subs), and certainly not in the radar field.

Which is why Japan was at a serious disadvantage against the USN, especially in the latter half of the war, which had far better radar and even had radar when Japan had none earlier in the war.

OH i thought japan would of had radar, but thanks for clearing things up.
Im starting too respect you.:D

Adrian Wainer
09-29-2008, 05:09 AM
A straight answer would be nice Adrian-U still have not gave me an answer yet.And i thought you guys dont need improving on youre cryptolgy skills,expressely if youre trying to improve by reading my post,and i know a bit of ww2 but i tought my self ,i didt have fancey university teachers too teach me.Thats all right if you dont know the answer, u cant know every thing about ww2;)

My remark was not meant as a criticism it was meant as complement but you don't seem to have realized that, lots of people have problems with communications skills such as spelling and it doesn't follow that they are either stupid or lazy any more so than it follows if a person is in a wheelchair they are stupid or lazy. And I think, I would have realized myself that I did know not everything about WW2, nobody could know everything about World War it is just too big and complex a subject. Oh and I did have fancy teachers at University but the fancy teachers knew about Warfare in Classical Athens and Athenian triremes
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/trihrhs_en.asp
are a bit different from Panzerschifs
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=d1fri9F-rA0

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

aly j
09-29-2008, 05:21 AM
My remark was not meant as a criticism it was meant as complement but you don't seem to have realized that, lots of people have problems with communications skills such as spelling and it doesn't follow that they are either stupid or lazy any more so than it follows if a person is in a wheelchair they are stupid or lazy. And I think, I would have realized myself that I did know not everything about WW2, nobody could know everything about World War it is just too big and complex a subject. Oh and I did have fancy teachers at University but the fancy teachers knew about Warfare in Classical Athens and Athenian triremes
http://www.hellenicnavy.gr/trihrhs_en.asp
are a bit different from Panzerschifs
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=d1fri9F-rA0

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
Oh sorry,
HINT:When youre talking to me could you lower youre standards a bit please,like dont use univerity words,i miss took youre words as being offenive.
Im not up to youre standards:D. i need too relaxe more;) cheers

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 05:38 AM
OH i thought japan would of had radar, but thanks for clearing things up.

You might want to research how well trained and effective the IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy) was in night fighting compared with the USN in the early part of the war, which offset the technical advantages the Americans had with primitive radar.

aly j
09-29-2008, 05:46 AM
You might want to research how well trained and effective the IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy) was in night fighting compared with the USN in the early part of the war, which offset the technical advantages the Americans had with primitive radar.

Know i know why japan lost;)
The japs had something speical too.
They were the first ones too fitt there fighters with missiles too attack enemy,guess thats why america was hit so hard at Pearl Habour.
Am i right? Im second guessing my self.:)

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 06:47 AM
Know i know why japan lost;)
The japs had something speical too.
They were the first ones too fitt there fighters with missiles too attack enemy,guess thats why america was hit so hard at Pearl Habour.
Am i right? Im second guessing my self.:)

Unless you're classing torpedoes as missiles, which technically covers anything down to thrown stones, no, you're not right.

America got hit hard at PH simply because it had no warning of the impending sneak attack, which Japan had been working towards for a few weeks beforehand while going to great lengths to conceal its fleet's approach to Hawaii.

It was in strategic terms an unimpressive attack by Japan anyway as, despite basing their assault on the British attack on the Italian navy at Taranto which merely grounded some of the Italian ships in a shallow harbour, the Japanese merely grounded most of the American battleships in a shallow harbour rather than taking them out of the war, while ignoring the fuel storages and repair facilities which were of greater long term importance in limiting America's ability to respond.

Don't mistake the Tora! Tora! Tora! (which I understand in Japanese might be rendered To! To! To! pronounced more like Toh!) and Pearl Harbour films' cinematic bullshit and special effects for historically accurate records.

aly j
09-29-2008, 07:19 AM
Unless you're classing torpedoes as missiles, which technically covers anything down to thrown stones, no, you're not right.

America got hit hard at PH simply because it had no warning of the impending sneak attack, which Japan had been working towards for a few weeks beforehand while going to great lengths to conceal its fleet's approach to Hawaii.

It was in strategic terms an unimpressive attack by Japan anyway as, despite basing their assault on the British attack on the Italian navy at Taranto which merely grounded some of the Italian ships in a shallow harbour, the Japanese merely grounded most of the American battleships in a shallow harbour rather than taking them out of the war, while ignoring the fuel storages and repair facilities which were of greater long term importance in limiting America's ability to respond.

Don't mistake the Tora! Tora! Tora! (which I understand in Japanese might be rendered To! To! To! pronounced more like Toh!) and Pearl Harbour films' cinematic bullshit and special effects for historically accurate records.

Yes i believe you about Pearl Harbour.
I was watching a docmentry and there resources told me, the japs had advaced technolghy which at that point the western allies did not know about.
The advaced technolghy was japs fighters where equipet with missiles which no other fighter could carrie before.
They end up sinking two main british war ships[this is the funnie part]right after Churchill said , japans fighters and planes where all made out of rice paper,I just thought maybe they used it on pearl harbour aswell, but you put me back in my box hehehe:D

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 08:51 AM
Yes i believe you about Pearl Harbour.
I was watching a docmentry and there resources told me, the japs had advaced technolghy which at that point the western allies did not know about.

Somebody correctly cautioned you in another thread about relying upon the History Channel and similar sources for reliable historical information.

I don't know what technology was mentioned in the documentary you saw, but Japan wasn't hugely advanced in any areas that gave it an overwhelming advantage over the Allies. Sure, the Zero was very strong because of its mainspar wing, and there were some other examples of sound Japanese engineering, but they only gave Japan useful (for a while) but not war winning advantages over the Allies.

Japan was, however, stronger in naval forces than the Allies knew because in the mid 1930s it broke away from the Washington Naval Treaty which limited its naval capacity and because Japan then rapidly expanded its naval shipbuilding without the future Allies having any real knowledge of what was being built. That's the major area in which Japan had a secret and significant advantage upon entering the war.

aly j
09-29-2008, 09:23 AM
Somebody correctly cautioned you in another thread about relying upon the History Channel and similar sources for reliable historical information.

I don't know what technology was mentioned in the documentary you saw, but Japan wasn't hugely advanced in any areas that gave it an overwhelming advantage over the Allies. Sure, the Zero was very strong because of its mainspar wing, and there were some other examples of sound Japanese engineering, but they only gave Japan useful (for a while) but not war winning advantages over the Allies.

Japan was, however, stronger in naval forces than the Allies knew because in the mid 1930s it broke away from the Washington Naval Treaty which limited its naval capacity and because Japan then rapidly expanded its naval shipbuilding without the future Allies having any real knowledge of what was being built. That's the major area in which Japan had a secret and significant advantage upon entering the war.
No No No, dont get me wrong,they still wernt strong enough to beat the western allies.They only had one big hit and that was with the two main british ships which where sunk,its all true. If i went to uni, i could of explian it to you in youre laguage.Fighters cant carrier missiles but some how the japs invented a fighter that could.cheers:D

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 09:41 AM
No No No, dont get me wrong,they still wernt strong enough to beat the western allies.They only had one big hit and that was with the two main british ships which where sunk,its all true.

They had a few other big hits, including beating the British and Commonwealth in Malaya and Burma; the Dutch in the NEI; and the Americans in the Philippines.

Along with some lesser hits like beating the Portuguese in Timor and the Australians in various places to our north, along with other excursions like the Aleutians.

And they managed to hang on to most of their conquests for a few years.

Not a bad effort for a country with few natural resources but a lot of spirit.

aly j
09-29-2008, 09:45 AM
They had a few other big hits, including beating the British and Commonwealth in Malaya and Burma; the Dutch in the NEI; and the Americans in the Philippines.

Along with some lesser hits like beating the Portuguese in Timor and the Australians in various places to our north, along with other excursions like the Aleutians.

And they managed to hang on to most of their conquests for a few years.

Not a bad effort for a country with few natural resources but a lot of spirit.

Really i didt know that.But thank god they only won the battle and not the war.I dont really want to speak japanese;)

Rising Sun*
09-29-2008, 09:53 AM
I dont really want to speak japanese;)

It could sneak up on you. :D

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=PQyClNEfncg&feature=related

Adrian Wainer
09-29-2008, 02:29 PM
Oh sorry,
HINT:When youre talking to me could you lower youre standards a bit please,like dont use univerity words,i miss took youre words as being offenive.
Im not up to youre standards:D. i need too relaxe more;) cheers

http://www.guidepostsmag.com/media/images/article-images/Erica_Enders_0606.jpg

Go Girl Go!

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Waiiner

aly j
09-29-2008, 10:55 PM
It could sneak up on you. :D

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=PQyClNEfncg&feature=related

I love that song, its so catchy:cool:
We better stay on the topic WW2 Radar.

aly j
09-29-2008, 10:57 PM
http://www.guidepostsmag.com/media/images/article-images/Erica_Enders_0606.jpg

Go Girl Go!

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Waiiner

Yeah now youre talking my Language:D
We better stay on the topic WW2 Radar.

Walther
10-02-2008, 08:13 PM
Somebody correctly cautioned you in another thread about relying upon the History Channel and similar sources for reliable historical information.

I don't know what technology was mentioned in the documentary you saw, but Japan wasn't hugely advanced in any areas that gave it an overwhelming advantage over the Allies. Sure, the Zero was very strong because of its mainspar wing, and there were some other examples of sound Japanese engineering, but they only gave Japan useful (for a while) but not war winning advantages over the Allies.

Japan was, however, stronger in naval forces than the Allies knew because in the mid 1930s it broke away from the Washington Naval Treaty which limited its naval capacity and because Japan then rapidly expanded its naval shipbuilding without the future Allies having any real knowledge of what was being built. That's the major area in which Japan had a secret and significant advantage upon entering the war.

The problem is that up to 1941, the Western countries underestimated the Japanese and their willingness to fight (including such gems as "the Japanese soldiers are all shortsighted and don't know how to shoot"). After 1941, they became for a while supermen from the jungle, but later impressions became more realistic.

Jan

Rising Sun*
10-02-2008, 09:59 PM
The problem is that up to 1941, the Western countries underestimated the Japanese and their willingness to fight (including such gems as "the Japanese soldiers are all shortsighted and don't know how to shoot").

True to some extent, but I think this view might have grown a bit with the passage of time.

Certainly there were plenty of instances of the disdainful "shortsighted little men can't fight" attitude at various levels of the English-speaking officer corps (what is the plural of corps when I'm referring to the officers corps of several countries?), but it was balanced by more realistic attitudes among other officers. I recall one instance of an English officer lecturing Australian troops to that effect in Malaya shortly before the war started. After he left, an Australian officer of similar rank addressed the troops, commencing with a warning to disregard the bullshit they had just heard and to remember that the Japanese had been fighting a gruelling war in China for years and were competent and experienced troops.

The much, and I think unfairly, maligned Malaya commander, General Percival, had a realistic assessment of their fighting abilities and correctly anticipated their tactical movements, but he was hamstrung in his defence by various political, geographic, tactical, and resource factors not of his making and which he could not correct. Those aspects gave Japan a significant advantage at all stages of the campaign and, most importantly, in the early phases when it was establishing beachheads and driving inland. Without taking anything away from what was a very well planned and executed campaign by the Japanese, they were lucky that Percival was as hamstrung as he was and could not dispose all his forces with a free hand. The Japanese were also lucky that Churchill, with his customary military incompetence in peninsula campaigns spanning two world wars, put Percival in a virtually unwinnable position.


After 1941, they became for a while supermen from the jungle, but later impressions became more realistic.

In the early phases of the war, it was Japanese battle hardening which gave them an advantage over green, and often very poorly trained, Allied troops on the ground, plus vastly better air support in Malaya, which was the campaign that really mattered to allow the push into NEI and its oil which was their biggest prize and critical to their ability to continue the war.

Their endless successes certainly gave their ground troops, both IJA and IJN, an air of invincibility until the Australians repelled a SNLF of about brigade strength at Milne Bay in August 1942, closely followed by Australian success in the Kokoda campaign and Australian success with American support at the Gona, Buna and Sanananda beacheads at the end of 1942, and the American success at Guadalcanal soon after.

It is instructive that the Australian successes occurred in large part because our battle hardened units from the Middle East confronted the battle-hardened Japanese and because some officers and NCOs from our Middle East units were transferred to our militia units. Two militia battalions bore the brunt of the Japanese attack in the early phase of the Japanese advance on Kokoda. One performed very poorly, the other splendidly. No prizes for guessing which one was heavily reinforced with battle hardened officers and NCOs and which one wasn't.

aly j
10-03-2008, 10:29 PM
You might want to research how well trained and effective the IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy) was in night fighting compared with the USN in the early part of the war, which offset the technical advantages the Americans had with primitive radar.

I dont need too research, i just get the information i need of you fellows.:cool:

aly j
10-08-2008, 11:08 PM
Like many things, it was a case of parallel evolution. The Germans first Radar system was used in Kiel Harbour in March 1934, developed from the same principles as Sonar. The British system was first tested in February 1935, and was developed out of a political request for a "death ray", which was correctly identified by the scientists as a silly scheme but gave them the idea of radar.

The reason the British are generally credited with inventing is is that they advanced much more rapidly than the Germans in the early years of radar, and were the first to implement a militarily useful radar system.
It does proof that Germany invented the Radar first.
But i think England invented the Radar locating of aircraft first.
I always thought it was a British man last name was Marconi invented radio first in 1900. Radio was named after him-Marconi.But yes Germany did first.
Radar Invention
Go to- Radar and Doppler Radar Invention and history.
I cant give you that address ,it works but it doest take you straight to the point.
I havet work it out yet. This might work- http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blradar.htm

pdf27
10-09-2008, 01:46 AM
Radio was named after him-Marconi.But yes Germany did first.
Marconi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guglielmo_Marconi) was an Italian (indeed, he was later an active Fascist). He shared the 1909 Nobel Prize for Physics (awarded for the invention of radio) with Braun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Ferdinand_Braun).

aly j
10-09-2008, 02:00 AM
Marconi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guglielmo_Marconi) was an Italian (indeed, he was later an active Fascist). He shared the 1909 Nobel Prize for Physics (awarded for the invention of radio) with Braun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Ferdinand_Braun).

Hey PDF.. He may born in Italy but wast he living in England at the time when he was trying to invent radio. Im not shore.

Major Walter Schmidt
11-02-2008, 06:36 PM
Where, and who?

navyson
11-02-2008, 07:29 PM
mY COUSIN TOLD ME TAT SO DONT YOU GO CALLING ME A LIAR, ITS TRUE AND THATS DAT!
Time to throw this guys posts into the dump thread.............

Churchill
11-02-2008, 07:35 PM
I second that...

aly j
11-02-2008, 07:39 PM
Did you all know tat the Black man invented Rader, thats what |i loined

And did you know that a white man can out sprint a black man:roll:

Krad42
11-03-2008, 01:25 PM
Oh sorry,
HINT:When youre talking to me could you lower youre standards a bit please,like dont use univerity words,i miss took youre words as being offenive.
Im not up to youre standards:D. i need too relaxe more;) cheers

It is true that some of us might be a bit more educated and it is difficult to "lower standards" when it comes to written communication. Instead of requesting that the standards get lowered, maybe you could just, as you said, relax, and use a dictionary when you read if you don't quite understand something. If you still don't understand, you can always ask without immediately thinking that some are out to offend you. Frankly, I don't even lower my standards when I speak to my children. They've learned that if they don't understand something, they should look it up or ask. It isn't shameful to ask.