Why Were The Allies So Successful

[Kweassa]

Just for fun, quoting R. Overy's collection of figures in the lendlease;

-14,204 aircraft (9,438 fighters, 3,771 bombers)
- 6,196 tanks
- 363,080 trucks
- 43,728 jeeps
- 32,200 motorcycles
- 325,784 tons of explosives
- 35,089 tele-communcation shacks
- 380,135 telephones
- 5,889 radio receivers
- 956,688 miles of telephone wires
- 782,973 tons of canned meat
- 14,793,000 boots
- 2,577,000 belts
- 339,599 tons of copper
- 261,311 tons of aluminum

[Angus]

14,793,000 boots

And some rough 100 lbs of meat to go with the pair as well as the rough 50 lbs of explosives.

A mean army of 14 million on the march

Or if it's single boots, - then a 7 million strong with twice the ordnance

[Pongo]

Not to sure of your point.
I know that Stalin was not about to surrender ever, But discounting the effect of the loss of Moscow as a transportation hub is hard to support.
It would have in effect "trapped" the russians east and "freed" the germans in the west.  Its tough to exaclty surmise what German occupation of a line moscow west would have been like for them in 1942, but it certainly would have been a drastically better postion for them then they held at the kick off of the 42 summer offensive in the south and a drastically worse postition for Stalin.
 

Originally posted by joeblogs
More years ago than I care to admit, I wrote a thesis that described what the German General Staff told Hitler: The other side has lost; they should forfeit the game.

Only trouble was that Stalin did not see the game that way, even if Moscow was to be evacuated,

-Blogs

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Pongo
Not to sure of your point.
I know that Stalin was not about to surrender ever, But discounting the effect of the loss of Moscow as a transportation hub is hard to support.
It would have in effect "trapped" the russians east and "freed" the germans in the west.  Its tough to exaclty surmise what German occupation of a line moscow west would have been like for them in 1942, but it certainly would have been a drastically better postion for them then they held at the kick off of the 42 summer offensive in the south and a drastically worse postition for Stalin.

Good points.  Losing Moscow would have made it far more difficult for the Russians, but that's a far cry from saying that they would have thrown in the towel and surrendered, which is what the German generals' theory seems to have been.

- oldman

[Angus]

Well, if the Germans would have gained a proper foothold of Moscow, I'd think the deal would have been over for the USSR.
No big scale war after that, more like skirmishing.

[Oleg]

Glad to see not everyone believe US won WW2 alone (with little help their minor friends). Kweassa, Karnak, joeblogs, Oldman and others.

Dont sure was it posted before or not, it was made year ago in 60th anniversary of the WW2 victory. If you dont seen it yet look it now, it worth your time.
http://english.pobediteli.ru/

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Kweassa
Just for fun, quoting R. Overy's collection of figures in the lendlease;

This is but a small example of the volume of Lend-Lease material sent to the USSR. And looking at the casualties on the eastern front, the western Allies got away cheap.

The Arsenal of Democracy was also the Arsenal of all Anti-Nazi nations.

Much of the machine tools used in Soviet factories was American made. The great irony was that the USA basically provided the Soviets much of the industrial base for the cold war.  

My regards,

Widewing

[Angus]

Along with lots of stuff that the USSR harvested in conquered Germany

Anyway that link Oleg sent is nice.

[Knegel]

Originally posted by Angus
What Milo said.

I once browsed through the LW loss records in the IWM. I was stunned to see that they were losing equal or more aircraft in N-Africa alone than in the east. (1942, at the time of Stalingrad)

Would have taken days to compile it properly though.

Hi,

this isnt a suprise. Simply look to the tactical circumstances.

While the LW fighters had the tactical advantage in russia till the end, they got forced into a tactical disadvatage after El Allamain, cause they had to protect the particular unorganisated rearward  going DAK (after Hitlers crazy 'Stand or die" command, which disalloved a organisated withdrawal when it was time to.) and short time after this they had a 2nd front in Algeria/Tunesia.  And instead of evacuating the german troops from Tunesia(like the brits did in Duenkirk), Hitler now brought the former badly needed supply to tunesia. But this did lead to a tactically hopeless position for the LW. They had to protect the lot of low and slow flying Ju52´s and also the low flying bombers and Jabo´s. With other words they got presured into the same poor tactical position like Stalin´s VVS, but the LW was much less in numbers and dont had the resources.
Similar it was while intercepting the escorted bombers. The topcover simply was to smal in numbers to defend the 'Schwere Gruppen", while the Bombers itself brough a not to smal number of losses(specialy before the FW190A7-R8 was available).
Over russia the LW could dictate the rules, they had hordes of low flying enemys, anyway in most cases with poor high alt performence.
So here it was "easy" for the german pilot to get home with a kill, while in the west it was pretty much more difficult not to end with a higher enemy on the tail.

Only my opinon!

Greetings, Knegel

[Glasses]

All nonsense we all Know the USa singlehandedly won the War with its Chuck Norris P-51 Mustang, it wasn't a self inflicted wound that killed hitler it was a 50 cal roundwith  8 feet penetrating power that entered the bunker and blew up in the door and a part of it  made from steel lodged itself in Hitler's cranium thus causing him his death twittler Wulf Yeah!

[Platano]

This debate doesnt need to be soo long....there is only one answer to this whole thing....


The Allies' greatest ally was there Enemy...
Hitler's Number one enemy was himself...
His stupidity and "unrealistic" tactics caused him the war...

It was NOT That the allies had better airpower....
The LW, despite losing the war had better pilots and aircraft...

has everyone failed to realized that germany had been rebuilding their military since the end of WW1?

Although recources was an issue... if it had not been for Hitlers lack of intelligence and wanting to fight a war on 3 different fronts  the war wouldve had a different outcome...

On PTO side of things  the pilots and A/C were also better than american airpower....  keep in mind that im not talking  about numbers...Americans had an advantage over numbers...but the fact is that the japanese were fighting way before they attacked pearl harbor..

Bottom line is that the reason allies won the war:

-Allies had better recources
-American factories couldnt be bombed
-Hitler was a cuddlinghunk that didnt listen to his generals or pilots.. and his tactics were horrible....AND he didnt realize the significance or RADAR.....

I mean really who in the world tries to win a war by bombing civilians (bombing attacks on London) instead of using his recources to hit british aircraft factories, oil refineries or radar installations...

[Glasses]

Originally posted by Platano

I mean really who in the world tries to win a war by bombing civilians (bombing attacks on London) instead of using his recources to hit british aircraft factories, oil refineries or radar installations...

Worked for the Brits and Americans in Japan and Germany.

[68DevilM]

Originally posted by LEDPIG
Simple question why were the allies so successful in ww2,

was watching a millitary channel special on the battle of brittian last night, one point they made was that during BOB the brits were fighting with homefield advantage, ie when a german got shot down it was in enemy teritory hence more pow's, the brits however useually just cuaght a ride back to base......

so less trained pilots for the LW......


another good reason. we stopped thier ability to make war materials.

and hitler was crazy too.....

[Furball]

Originally posted by Glasses
Worked for the Brits and Americans in Japan and Germany.

didnt work for germany...

[indy007]

Originally posted by Glasses
Worked for the Brits and Americans in Japan and Germany.

Didn't even come closing to working on Germany. If it worked, German production numbers would have gone down. They continued to climb until the end of the war. They were out of fuel, not machines or warm bodies to stuff in them. It didn't even have a large impact on civillian morale, due to a totalarian regime. Civil unrest did not unseat the Fuhrer either (but some angry generals almost did).