Ju 52 question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ju 52 question
I notice that a lot of Ju 52s were fitted with a BMW 132 licensed version of the Pratt and Whitney Hornet/Wasp radial engine. Also Bristol Pegasus engines were used on some export models.
Junkers built thousands of Ju 52s - did the Nazis pay the license fees throughout the war?
Junkers built thousands of Ju 52s - did the Nazis pay the license fees throughout the war?
Last edited by aviate1138; 16th Jun 2009 at 20:01. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ascot berks uk
Age: 93
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surly you jest ,they were at war with Britain and the U.S.A. would you pay your enemies royalties especialy when they were bombing the living daylights out of you . [ If you are younger than 65 please let us no have any arguments of the rights of mass bombing , you were not born]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite as old as you and I ask the question because Sweden and Switzerland acted as bankers/lawyers on a number of licensed items - TVs/ Pharmaceutical products/Junkers aircraft etc. One reason we got TV after the war was because afaik Philips were making German TVs for most of the war. Germany only stopped Berlin TV news broadcasts in late 1943. The RAF destroyed the TV mast/transmitters in Berlin.
The RAF could pick up German 441 line TV news broadcast from the Eiffel Tower until 1944 at a site near Beachy Head.
France started almost as soon as the war ended on 455 lines.
Anyway I don't think civil contracts, possibly including BMW and Pratt and Whitney, would have stopped until nearly 1942 at the earliest. Soon after Dec 11th 1941.
The RAF could pick up German 441 line TV news broadcast from the Eiffel Tower until 1944 at a site near Beachy Head.
France started almost as soon as the war ended on 455 lines.
Anyway I don't think civil contracts, possibly including BMW and Pratt and Whitney, would have stopped until nearly 1942 at the earliest. Soon after Dec 11th 1941.
Last edited by aviate1138; 17th Jun 2009 at 19:15. Reason: typos
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aviate, do you seriously imagine in a million years, Germany would pay licence fees during the war for building copies of US or British engines? Have you no idea of what 'World War' means? Since we could receive German TV broadcasts, maybe the UK should have paid Germany a licence fee?!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If William Manchester is to be believed, Krupp and Vickers kept track of cross licencing fees during WW1 and settled at the end of the war. I've been told that the Japanese paid licence fees to Hamilton Standard for the propellers used on many Japanese warplanes.
After an excellent landing you can use the airplane again!
After an excellent landing you can use the airplane again!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm pretty sure Rainboe knows, as does almost everyone else here.
This is one of the most bizarre threads I've ever seen...maybe the 8th Air Force and Bomber Command sent the Germans their fuel bill for the hassle incurred visiting, and that FW190 who got lost was charged landing fees ?!
This is one of the most bizarre threads I've ever seen...maybe the 8th Air Force and Bomber Command sent the Germans their fuel bill for the hassle incurred visiting, and that FW190 who got lost was charged landing fees ?!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the point is that BMW might have paid royalties to the US before the declaration of war between those countries. What's hard about that? Not to mention that it is claimed that at first the RAF avoided bombing private property in Germany (deliberately avoided), which suggests a concern for private property rights at the beginning. It is, in other words, NOT a dumb question, whatever the answer might be.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The original question was " did the Germans pay royalties throughout the war ? " - if that's not a dumb question I'd like to see your definition...
As to paying the U.S. before that country entered the war, that's a different question, seems extremely unlikely but I suppose there's the off-chance the Germans were trying not to antagonise the U.S. so may have paid up; as I say I very much doubt it as they were rather preoccupied, or rather their victims were if you'll pardon the pun.
As to paying the U.S. before that country entered the war, that's a different question, seems extremely unlikely but I suppose there's the off-chance the Germans were trying not to antagonise the U.S. so may have paid up; as I say I very much doubt it as they were rather preoccupied, or rather their victims were if you'll pardon the pun.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Swindon, Wilts,UK
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently the Japanese also set up an account for the royalties on Amal Carburetters and BSA motorcycles built under licence. Also a well known American company continued to supply tabulating machines, cards and spare parts through their Swiss subsiduaries almost right up to the end of the conflict.
War is War but Business is Business.
War is War but Business is Business.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question, although seemingly a trifle dumb initially - does raise more questions and uncover a lot more murky stories about business collaboration during WW2.
Avaite1138 - No, there were no royalties paid directly during WW2, for manufacturing technology, that the Germans had already obtained (legally) prior to WW2.
WW2 was carried out on every front - militarily - economically - psychologically - and financially. Despite the Govts of the Allies breaking most economic and financial ties with the Axis countries upon the declarations of War - the U.S. Govt allowed some to continue - and there are many books that have been written about American-German-Swiss-Swedish business collaboration, that should never have been allowed to happen.
Unfortunately, as Windy Militant has noted - Business is Business - even when there's a War on.
To quote - "all during that time (WW2) IBM, Bell and Standard Oil, all Morgan Companies and Rockefeller Companies, continued to provide technology, fuel and communications through hidden or other subsidiaries to the Nazi cause .. "
Switzerland in particular, and Sweden to a lesser extent, were bases used for hiding business entities belonging to both German and American companies - and for carrying out profitable trading between countries at War. The records show that many murky deals were transacted.
Switzerland acted as a financial clearing house and gold exchange for the Nazis (at least one reason why Hitler never invaded them) - and many companies (Ford and GM included) were transnational before WW2, and continued to operate business transactions during WW2. Ford and GM factories in Germany were used to build equipment for the Nazis. Ford and GM claim they lost control of the factories in Nazi Germany, during WW2 - but records discovered in recent years show that wasn't true.
Germany went to America to buy goods between Sept 1939 and mid 1941 - and the American Govt sold them U.S. equipment on a "cash and carry" basis - until Britain protested.
Ask the Aussie WW2 Vets what they thought, when they came across the Nazis driving new Chev trucks in the desert during 1942! - and the Aussies were driving old clunkers scrounged up from anywhere! (a ME Vet told me this personally!)
The following site has many books dedicated to the thorny and often murky arrangements between businesses, banks and Govts during WW2. Not all of them are kind in their descriptions of the intransigence and callousness of many corporations during WW2, as they did roundabout deals with people who were supposed to be enemies.
Trade with the Third Reich - Trade With the Third Reich Bibliography
Trading with the Enemy - Trading With The Enemy - (Preface to the book)
Avaite1138 - No, there were no royalties paid directly during WW2, for manufacturing technology, that the Germans had already obtained (legally) prior to WW2.
WW2 was carried out on every front - militarily - economically - psychologically - and financially. Despite the Govts of the Allies breaking most economic and financial ties with the Axis countries upon the declarations of War - the U.S. Govt allowed some to continue - and there are many books that have been written about American-German-Swiss-Swedish business collaboration, that should never have been allowed to happen.
Unfortunately, as Windy Militant has noted - Business is Business - even when there's a War on.
To quote - "all during that time (WW2) IBM, Bell and Standard Oil, all Morgan Companies and Rockefeller Companies, continued to provide technology, fuel and communications through hidden or other subsidiaries to the Nazi cause .. "
Switzerland in particular, and Sweden to a lesser extent, were bases used for hiding business entities belonging to both German and American companies - and for carrying out profitable trading between countries at War. The records show that many murky deals were transacted.
Switzerland acted as a financial clearing house and gold exchange for the Nazis (at least one reason why Hitler never invaded them) - and many companies (Ford and GM included) were transnational before WW2, and continued to operate business transactions during WW2. Ford and GM factories in Germany were used to build equipment for the Nazis. Ford and GM claim they lost control of the factories in Nazi Germany, during WW2 - but records discovered in recent years show that wasn't true.
Germany went to America to buy goods between Sept 1939 and mid 1941 - and the American Govt sold them U.S. equipment on a "cash and carry" basis - until Britain protested.
Ask the Aussie WW2 Vets what they thought, when they came across the Nazis driving new Chev trucks in the desert during 1942! - and the Aussies were driving old clunkers scrounged up from anywhere! (a ME Vet told me this personally!)
The following site has many books dedicated to the thorny and often murky arrangements between businesses, banks and Govts during WW2. Not all of them are kind in their descriptions of the intransigence and callousness of many corporations during WW2, as they did roundabout deals with people who were supposed to be enemies.
Trade with the Third Reich - Trade With the Third Reich Bibliography
Trading with the Enemy - Trading With The Enemy - (Preface to the book)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the best description of BMW WW2 engine production is provided by "CJ - the aircraft nut", whose information has been reposted by "tobermor", as an answer to a Yahoo question ..
What companies made engines for german world war 2 airplanes? - Yahoo! Argentina Respuestas Respuestas
In essence - BMW bought a "licence to manufacture" for the P&W Hornet engine in the early 1930's - but redesigned and improved the design in the late 1930's - thus relieving them of any need to pay royalties. Royalties would only have been deemed payable on exact copies of the Hornet engine.
What companies made engines for german world war 2 airplanes? - Yahoo! Argentina Respuestas Respuestas
In essence - BMW bought a "licence to manufacture" for the P&W Hornet engine in the early 1930's - but redesigned and improved the design in the late 1930's - thus relieving them of any need to pay royalties. Royalties would only have been deemed payable on exact copies of the Hornet engine.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to mention that it is claimed that at first the RAF avoided bombing private property in Germany (deliberately avoided), which suggests a concern for private property rights at the beginning.
Pa Rainboe showed no respect for Italian naval property during the war, and he tried to bin the Stukas but lost out every time. Got quite practised at swimming he did. It was dreadful how they had no respect for Royal Navy property rights those Stuka pilots! Couldn't give a damn. Criminal.
Of course some countries did well out of both sides -
I like Mr Burns (of Simpsons fame) take on all this when talking about Oscar Schindler he said
The Swedish Bofors is strongly associated with a 40mm anti aircraft design based on a Bofors design which was produced and used by both sides in WW"2
"We've got lots in common. We're both factory owners and we both made shells for the Nazis. But mine worked, dammit!"
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lancing, Sussex
Age: 92
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JU52 Question
Maybe the RAF avoided bombing civilian areas deliberately but as early in the war navigation was by dead reckoning or astro they were probably bombed accidentally, unless their Astro was a great deal better than mine.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a distinct recollection of reading, in some reliable-looking source, that the first RAF sorties were directed against distinctly military targets, like naval bases. It wasn't just avoidance of area bombing of civilians, but also avoidance of war-relevant civilian property (like Krupps !!) I also have a recollection that a voice in Cabinet against bombing civilian property was Hore-Belisha's, who could hardly have been accused of being soft on the NSDAP regime. Such restraint, of course, didn't last beyond the invasion of Norway. Alas, this is a recollection from long ago. A troll through Wikipedia doesn't disconfirm it, but nothing solid located yet.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was wrong, but not totally. It was, in fact, Kingsley Wood, and the statement in the House comes from the Wikipedia article on that gent:
'Kingsley Wood is most notorious for a response made to Leo Amery MP in late 1939, during the so called phoney war, when asked why the RAF, rather than just scattering leaflets could not incendiary bomb sizeable arms dumps known to be hidden in the Black Forest, which was very dry after a hot summer. A shocked Wood responded: ''Are you aware it is private property? Why, you will be asking me to bomb Essen [the home of major arms manufacturer Krupp] next!''.'
It was a while before the western front became ruthless, and this attitude is entirely compatible with having funds for deferred royalties payable to the enemy. I agree it was unlikely that royalties would be payable to the US throughout the war, but rule-bound warfare can be pretty complicated.
'Kingsley Wood is most notorious for a response made to Leo Amery MP in late 1939, during the so called phoney war, when asked why the RAF, rather than just scattering leaflets could not incendiary bomb sizeable arms dumps known to be hidden in the Black Forest, which was very dry after a hot summer. A shocked Wood responded: ''Are you aware it is private property? Why, you will be asking me to bomb Essen [the home of major arms manufacturer Krupp] next!''.'
It was a while before the western front became ruthless, and this attitude is entirely compatible with having funds for deferred royalties payable to the enemy. I agree it was unlikely that royalties would be payable to the US throughout the war, but rule-bound warfare can be pretty complicated.
Last edited by FlightlessParrot; 1st Jul 2009 at 08:46. Reason: Fix formatting
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
FP,
The main reason that the RAF (under direction from the Government) did not bomb indiscriminately (at least until after BoB) was because of fear of reprisal.
The accepted wisdom of the 20's and 30's was "the bomber will always get through", and the authorities were hugely fearful of the scale of the casualties that could be inflicted. Figures in the 100s of thousands were estimated for London alone within the first few days of a German bomber offensive.
Such niceties as "Private Property", "avoiding civilian casualties" etc. were high-sounding and morally right, but still excuses for not hitting the hornet's nest with a small and puny stick in the first year of the war.
SD
The main reason that the RAF (under direction from the Government) did not bomb indiscriminately (at least until after BoB) was because of fear of reprisal.
The accepted wisdom of the 20's and 30's was "the bomber will always get through", and the authorities were hugely fearful of the scale of the casualties that could be inflicted. Figures in the 100s of thousands were estimated for London alone within the first few days of a German bomber offensive.
Such niceties as "Private Property", "avoiding civilian casualties" etc. were high-sounding and morally right, but still excuses for not hitting the hornet's nest with a small and puny stick in the first year of the war.
SD