[ACE-OF-ACES]

I am providing info and he is providing ...?

You really don't consider your opinion on what they might have done 'given more time' as proof do you?

not opinion..fact...my ONLY opinion/theory was about the 183

I don't see why he has such a hard time admitting they were ahead of the curve in many ways,a lot of what they were working on has changed the face of conventional warfare permanently, air to air surface to air wired guided missiles cruise missile...there type 21 sub was state of the into the 50's ...etc

Well mostly because most of it is a myth

Take the V2 as a perfect example

Ask most folks that get their info from the Hitler Channel.. I mean the history Channel who invented rockets and most of them will tell you the Germans

When the FACT remains that the Germans copied 20 of Robert Goddards patents from the 1920s and 30s to build the V2

(sarcastic tone) all that work on the V2 was such a waste of time...thats why Wernher von Braun was chief architect of the Saturn V launch vehicle

As for cruise missiles

Another myth

In that lobbing a bomb like the V1 at a city with no real idea of where it is going to land is not what I would call a big leap in warfare

And far from guided

you call a ramjet "lobbing"?? far from guided?? far from perfect but unguided...wrong! "gyrocompass based autopilot" myth? really?! In total, the V-1 attacks caused 22,892 casualties
"The United States reverse-engineered the V-1 in 1944 from salvaged parts recovered in England during June. By 8 September, the first of thirteen complete prototype Republic-Ford JB-2s, were assembled at Republic Aviation. The United States JB-2 was different from the German V-1 in only the smallest of dimensions. The wing span was only 2 1/2 inches wider and the length was extended less than 2 feet. The difference gave the JB-2 60.7 square feet of wing area versus 55 for the V-1
In the postwar era, the JB-2 played a significant role in the development of more advanced surface-to-surface tactical missile systems such as the MGM-1 Matador and later MGM-13 Mace.

And the few other wire guided bombs pail in comparison to the US's radar guided glide bomb of WWII called the BAT

The Bat was put into operation in May 1945, on Navy PB4Y-2 Privateer patrol bombers, maritime derivatives of the Consolidated B-24 Liberator. One Bat was carried under each wing. Privateers crews claimed many successes against Japanese shipping in the seas around Borneo, though some sources suggest they may have exaggerated the weapon's effectiveness. Bats with modified guidance systems were also used against ground targets in Burma and other Japanese-held areas; they simply homed in on the biggest target in their radar seeker.

The Navy tinkered with the Bat for a time after the war, successively renaming it "ASM-2" and then "ASM-N-2". However, its radar seeker was too easily spoofed and the weapon quickly faded into obscurity.

That was used to sink a few big ships in Japan before the end of the war

and the Fritz X sank the battle ship Roma and damaged several others in 43.... the Bat and Fritz had there day but didnt make the cut...however those "few other wired guided bombs" as you put it there concepts are still in use today...there called TOW missile , Electrical wire guidance was first employed by the Germans during World War II.

The BAT is a truly auto guided bomb and the real predecessor to todays cruise missiles

Really? ...now remember the Jb2 is a reverse enginneed V1

JB-2 played a significant role in the development of more advanced surface-to-surface tactical missile systems such as the MGM-1 Matador . The Martin MGM-1 Matador was the first operational surface-to-surface cruise missile built by the United States,

As for subs

Another myth

Not a sub expert but the US subs were far more advanced systems wise

Tench class American sub 1944 depth 400ft type XXI max depth 915 feet...

Type XXI, the general predecessor of modern submarines, in which the pressure hull was fully enclosed inside the light hull, but optimized for submerged navigation, unlike earlier designs that were optimized for surface operation.

After World War II, approaches split. The Soviet Union changed its designs, basing them on German developments. All post-World War II heavy Soviet and Russian submarines are built with a double hull structure. American and most other Western submarines switched to a primarily single-hull approach. They still have light hull sections in the bow and stern, which house main ballast tanks and provide a hydrodynamically optimized shape, but the main cylindrical hull section has only a single plating layer. The double hulls are being considered for future submarines in the United States to improve payload capacity, stealth and range.

As for the German ABOMB

Another myth

They tried to make an ABOMB and failed

Where as the US succeeded

Splitting atoms is a much harder task that sweeping a wing on a Me262 to account for the change in weight of the bigger than expected engines

In November 1954, five months before his death, Einstein summarized his feelings about his role in the creation of the atomic bomb: "I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them.

And i am glad they failed...but remember we are just VERY fortunate in that regard
At the end of the war, the Allied powers competed to obtain surviving components of the nuclear industry (personnel, facilities, and material), as they did with the V-2 program.

And something else you forgot to mention

The B2 flying wing

A lot of Hitler channel types think that too was a copy of the Go229

Not even close!

Jack Northrop was building flying wings as long as if not longer than the Hortons

There was nothing to learn from the Go299 that he didn't already know

Hugo Junkers patented a wing-only air transport concept in 1910.
The flying wing configuration was studied extensively in the 1930s and 1940s, notably by Jack Northrop and Cheston L. Eshelman in the United States, and Alexander Lippisch and the Horten brothers in Germany.

So now maybe you can understand why I don't agree with your assessment that the Germans were SO FAR AHEAD AND OR ADVANCED

In that from my point of view based on what I noted above

They were not

Now this is the point where you and I are simply going to have to agree to disagree

you gonna continue to beat this dead horse?

So what part of "Now this is the point where you and I are simply going to have to agree to disagree" did you not understand?