Why British, Soviet and Japanese aircraft are better than U.S. and German in AH.

[Tilt]

 

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Widewing,


Just picture 1945 and the war ends with Germany and begins with the Soviet Union. There would be no Mig15, that was captured German technology. Imagine hoards of B-17 and B-29's flying over Moscow at 25K to 30K. What was going to come up and stop them?  

Except of course with the Russian strategic targets all safely behind the Urals, the B17's and P51's could not reach them..... then the best prepared ground war (ground support airforce) would have won..plus the Russkies would have had 20 million people not yet killed in the war to throw into the equation.

[Dune]

Actually, as has been mentioned before, B-29's and such could have reached the VVS factories by flying from India and surrounding countries I believe.

Also consider this.  Japan had surendered.  This gives the extremly experienced US and Comonwealth forces a base from which to launch an invasion of the eastern coast of Russia.  I believe that between the US Navy and planes from Japan, air superiority could have been achieved and landings effected.  Plus, if a port like Vladivostok (sp) could be taken, supply problems would become much less problematic.
 
And I wonder how long it would have taken someone to figure out to use the A-Bomb in a tactical roll.  It would take only one B-29 to stop any massed Soviet army in it's tracks.  And that is something that wouldn't require very accurate bombing.

This move instantly would instantly take some pressure off the Allies in Europe.  In fact it might become the bigger problem due to the  proximity to Soviet industry.  

This is just an idea I've had.  Not completely sure it would work, but I don't see why not.

And remember, the Allies would have been able to fight with two jets, not just one.  Not only did the RAF have Meteors, but the F-80 had already reached Italy by the end of the war.  Lockheed was gearing up for major production of the jets when the war ended.  At that point production was significantly scaled back, several hundred were still built by 1947.  And you know that the US could've churned out a bunch more if the need was there.

------------------
Col Dune
C.O. 352nd Fighter Group
"The Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney"

"Credo quia absurdum est." (I believe it because it is unreasonable)
- The motto of the Republic of Baja Arizona

[Nashwan]

3 jets. The Vampire entered production in eary 45

[Buzzbait]

S!

And the Vampire was a lot better jet than the Meteor.

[leonid]

RE: a post-WWII Allied invasion of the Soviet Union.  It's true that B-29s might have been able to bomb the Urals or the Baku region, and that Allied troops might even have been able to land troops in Siberia.  But what you're not taking into consideration is time.  All these theories would require a lot of time, a couple months at the very least to plan for(think logistical nightmare).  In the meantime the Red Army is parked right in front of the Allies along the front, complete with the VVS.  

After what the Germans did to Russia from a surprise attack, do you think the Soviets would idly watch once again as all the telltale signs of buildup became evident along the Allied front?

------------------
leonid, Kompol
5 GvIAP VVS-KA, Knights

"Our cause is just.  The enemy will be crushed.  Victory will be ours."

[-lynx-]

I think it's quite amusing to see people theorising on the B29s winning the war with Russia  . Any army needs infantry to win and hold territory. On the ground Russian tanks would be shoving the remains of Allied would-be-assailants into the Mediterranian before the B29s from the first air assault would return to their bases.

By early '45 nothing Allies had was even comparable to latest Russian tanks arriving to the front in droves - IS-2s (IS-3s and T44s just missed the action but were manufactured and shipped to frontline tank divisions). Majority of Soviet infantry carried automatic weapons. Il-2s/10s were never actually matched in their day as an air-to-ground attack aircraft... And the army that had just defeated Hitler's Germany had the best combat experience and highets possible morale.

America reigned supreme in the Pacific/sea battles and in startegic bombing but on the ground... Let's just say you guys weren't the best, OK?

Exhaused industry? Sure, in "mainland industrial Russia" it was actually non-existent as Germans destroyed anything they couldn't take with them. It was different story altogether in, say, Novosobirsk - a town (wasn't obviously as big in those days but now ~1.5 million people) in the middle of Western Siberia where all factories were working in full swing building planes, tanks etc...

Allies planes using bases in China? You do remember who is in power in China, don't you? At the time Mao Tse Dung was the best friend with Russians - they brought him to power after all.

Nuke the bastards? Hmmm... How many A-bombs did US have at the time?

Allies landing in Siberia? Hmmm again... And then what? The Soviet Union used to occupy 1/6 (!) of all landmass on this planet. You land in Vladivostok and it's a 6,000 miles to Moscow - through mud, wilderness, forests...

Guys, no disrespect, but you have no idea what you're talking about when you say "we ran a wargame and..."

I've been watching all the experts on Russian affairs available in this country for the last 10 years - and they just make me laugh with their "assessments".

On the other hand, it's great to see some people whose outlook on history does not seem to have heavy anti-communist bias - <S>!

p.s. I was also wondering how your democratic government would explain to the voters the unprovoked attack on an country you fought together against Nazis just a few days ago with hunderds of thousands of casualties to boot arriving in a very short order?

p.p.s. I bet you anything that if you run an "wargame" with an American army, Navy and the Airforce attacking with all they've got a small country in, say, Indochina...

[pzvg]

Hehe Yeah lynx you are oh so correct,
Tell you what old chap, I'll just pop down to the U.S. Army Staff College and tell them those wargames were pure BS, would you do me the kindness of dropping by SandHurst and letting them know the participation of Her Majesties Armed Forces was a mistake, since it was all baloney.

Next time read everything and comprehend it,
To look knowledgeable is a lot trickier than looking merely foolish.
Regards,
         Wilton Stewman, United States Army

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[-aper-]

pzvg

Aren't you mixing WAR and War Game? In War Game you can win the Battle of Kursk in 3 days in real life - never.
If WWIIOnline be successfull we'll see the big online War Game. And we'll be very surprised how good the French Army will do against the German Army just because it is a game where too many important factors are not taken into account.

[-lynx-]

 

Next time read everything and comprehend it,
To look knowledgeable is a lot trickier than looking merely foolish.

Hey pzvg - sure thing pal, can't agree more: next time you try to realise that "wargame" outcome depends on information input, so does the accuracy of that outcome. 200 fighters, apparently, beat the hell out of VVS on a daily basis (I wonder what happened to 39,000 109s manufactured, musta been damaged in taxiing accidents) - too bad it didn't affect the outcome, right? Quotes taken out of context are represented as underlying views etc. Hell - I saw it so many times it stopped being amusing.

Again - lets see the U.S. Army Staff College playing Vietnam over and over. And winning. You suggested the same versus an enemy who was just as motivated, infinitely better armed and trained, not afraid to die for their country and on a scale that would swallow both Americas. And you'd won? Hey waiter - I'll have what this guy's having, sounds like a good stuff


Michael Zarutsky, 1st Lieutenant (retired) Motorized Infantry.

[pzvg]

Go ahead have a cow,  
Politicians lost 'Nam, The NVA never won a single battle by their own admission. So that's not relevant.
While you seem overwhelmingly proud of the Soviet's war effort, You forget the rather obvious, namely the America fought 2 wars, the pacific and european, at the same time, across vast distances, In case you hadn't noticed, the Soviet Navy of the time wasn't up to stopping the US from arriving off it's shores, as for the "impenetrable" vastness of the Eastern USSR, that's hardly the problem it seems to an army that got there over 9,000 miles of ocean. The upshot is, my Russian friend, not only do the military people in America disagree with your theory, but in others as well, Hell, I'm sure the Russians themselves weren't looking at the idea with a gleam in their eyes post '45. You can take whatever stance you choose, In the real world you stand discredited by the people who do know what was possible then, Basing your conclusions on the much later status quo of the Cold War and some rather suspect facts, Is kind of like trying to describe the taste of fire.
On that note, I'll be departing this conversation, since using established proof seems to be rebutted by "I know you are but what am I"
Y'all try to have a nice life, y'heah  

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[This message has been edited by pzvg (edited 03-30-2001).]

[Toad]

"Just the facts, ma'am, if you please."


Equipment Lend-Leased To The USSR
 http://members.aol.com/forcountry/ww2/lus.htm

or, if you prefer specifics, item by item:
 http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/lend.html

It's all there, blasting cap by blasting cap, shoe by shoe, tack by tack, chemical by chemical, and on and on and on.

 

Here's the summation:

SUMMARY

MUNITIONS $4,651,582,000

NON-MUNITIONS 4,826,084,000

Total 9,477,666,000

Note: the figure of $11 billion includes services as well as goods furnished.
The U.S. Government has never released detailed reports on what was sent in Lend-Lease, so Major Jordan's data, gleaned from the Russians' own manifests, is the only public record. More than one-third of Lend-Lease sent was illegal under the terms of the act which specifically prohibited "goods furnished for relief and rehabilitation purposes."

It should be kept in mind that Russia was an ally of Japan throughout the war, that it had been the ally of Hitler during the first two years of the war, that its division of Poland with Germany started the war, that it was an agressive imperialist force that attacked Finland and subverted the Baltic states as well, that it had announced that it intended to take over the world and that most of the aid sent in 1945 was sent after Stalin's February speech in which he said he would continue the war but against the United States.

Franklin Roosevelt's alter ego and Lend-Lease administrator Harry L. Hopkins, a KGB agent, declared to Russia before a crowd at Madison Square Garden on June 22, 1942, that: "We are determined that nothing shall stop us from sharing with you all that we have." He was not joking.

[Buzzbait]

S! to those non-paranoid types

Hey Toad what have you been smoking?  Harry Hopkins is a KGB agent... OK  )

The fact is, the U.S. and Britain sent a lot of supplies to the Soviet Union.  Yes.

Why?

Because they were in a life and death struggle with an extremely powerful alliance of nations.  The outcome of the war was not a certainty.  In 1941, '42, '43 someone had to deal with the monster which was threatening to overwhelm the world.

And the Soviet Union was tying down and fighting the overwhelming BULK of the Germans/Italians/Rumanians/Hungarians/Slovaks/Finns, etc.  Have a read of the facts re. how many German divisions were commmitted to the Eastern front.  Check the figures on how many Wehrmacht casualties were inflicted there.  The Soviet Union won the war on land versus the Germans.  No ifs, ands or buts.  Yes, the Western Allies supplied a lot of material, but the guys doing the fighting...  They spoke Russian.

Have you ever heard the phrase:  "My Enemy's enemy is my friend"?  Well figure it out from there.

The U.S. government did not like Joe Stalin and his evil crew, but they did know some basic strategy.  If the Soviets lost and 200+ German divisions were turned around to face the West, how easy would it be to get ashore at Normandy?????  If the all the German's Oil supply problems were solved with the capture of the Caucasus oil fields how helpful is that?????  If the Germsns suddenly get the huge resources of the Soviet Union, including all those people they can use for slave labour, how big a boost is that going to be for the Axis economy?????  If the Germans and Japanese now have a land bridge to link them so they can exchange supplies and technology, how is that going to affect fighting in the Pacific?????  

Figure it out.

Maybe next time you won't come here talking out your A**

[Buzzbait]

By the way...

The Soviet Union was NEVER an ally of the Japanese.  Their relations were semi-hostile neutrality.  The Russians and Japanese were never friendly.  Heard of the 1905 Russo-Japanese War????   In addition, the Soviet Union and Japan fought an undeclared war in 1937 at Khalkin Gol in the Manchurian/Mongolian Border region.  Zhukov commanded the Soviet troops and the Japanese got their butts spanked.  Armies involved totaled in the 300,000 range.

After that the Japanese figured out that the Soviets were tough cookies and left them alone.  And the Soviets weren't stupid enough to declare war when they were barely hanging on by their fingernails at Moscow and Stalingrad.

You need to do some historical research instead of consuming whatever intoxicants you specialize in.

[Regurge]

Yes, but what could the Soviets have done without the 13,328 teeth, 400$ of lipstick and $4,352 of amusement park and playground devices sent by the US?

Imagine the look of horror on the beleaguered German soldiers' faces when they saw fresh Soviet divisions all gussied up and grinning ear to ear atop their brand new ferris-wheels.  

[Buzzbait]

S!

Correction:  Khalkin Gol was in 1939.