Calling Red Airforce Guru's.

[macleod01]

These:

P-39, 5007 (from US)
Hurricane, 2952 (from UK)
P-63, 2421 (from US)
Spitfire, 1331 (from UK)
A-20, 2700 (from US)

and the P-40's and B-25's saw a lot of combat in Soviet hands.

I don't know the number of kills, but those aircraft are mentioned in many accounts of Soviet air battles.  The P-39 is perhaps most prominent in the kills deparment as, for example, 3 of the top-5 Soviet aces flew the P-39, including the #2 ace (Pokryshkin).

I knew about the P-39, and I had heard that it was a killer in soviet hands.

Where's Snailman with his knowledge when you need him!

[MiloMorai]

Wow, when I posted this I never imagined the wealth of knowledge that would be unearthed about it. So many thanks again guys, and Ack-Ack, its a pity none of those jugs saw combat, would be pretty sweet to have a soviet Jug.
What about the other planes mantioned? I'm guessing the Spitfires saw action. Does anyone have any figures on kills for these crates?

Spitfires over the Kuban
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/spit/index.htm

On another board there is a guy who states the P-39 was used exclusively as a ground attack a/c. His reference books are those one would find in an elementary school library and on coffee tables.

[Brooke]

On another board there is a guy who states the P-39 was used exclusively as a ground attack a/c. His reference books are those one would find in an elementary school library and on coffee tables.

I was interested in "Attack of the Airacobras," by Loza because of the misconception about the P-39 being good only in ground attack.  The book goes into great detail on the use of P-39's by the Soviets.  It turns out that they used the P-39 primarily as an air-superiority fighter against German fighters and bombers and felt that it was a fine plane in that role.

http://www.amazon.com/Attack-Airacobras-American-Against-Germany/dp/0700611401

[MiloMorai]

That book was mentioned in the thread Brooke. He sluffed it of as being only one unit and not representative of all P-39 units.

The guy appears intelligent but is naive and gullible to believe his reference books. I think he is being a troll being more interested in flowery prose and brownie points.

[Brooke]

Just one unit here, though, is the whole 9th Guards Fighter Division.  Anyway, the fact that the 9th Guards flew it as an air-superiority fighter and that there is a decent list of Soviet aces in the P-39 ( http://www.acepilots.com/planes/soviet_p39_airacobra.html ) prove that it was used in and good at air combat, regardless of whether or not it was also used in other ways.

[Ack-Ack]

They had a P-38 that was used by a squadron for fun; my memory tells me it was a crashed bird they repaired or else it used a soviet field for emergency landing, but they didn't use it in combat.  Pity, too, 'cuz I'd love a red star 38 skin for the game.

The Soviets received 12 Lend Lease P-38Ls but there really isn't all that much known as to what happened to them after they received them.  It is known that they did fly some evaluation sorties but I cannot find anything that tells what the results of those evaluations were.  They did use one as a 'demonstrator' that would fly to the Soviet airfields on and would put on aerobatic displays but as for the other 11 or the others they recovered from crashes or emergency landings, I haven't been able to find anything.

ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Wow, when I posted this I never imagined the wealth of knowledge that would be unearthed about it. So many thanks again guys, and Ack-Ack, its a pity none of those jugs saw combat, would be pretty sweet to have a soviet Jug.
What about the other planes mantioned? I'm guessing the Spitfires saw action. Does anyone have any figures on kills for these crates?

As someone noted in another reply, the Soviets really didn't have a favorable impression of the Jug other than it had a good radio.  As a fighter, they felt it was very lacking due to the lack of manueverability.  I believe they were given to naval air units and were stationed up near Murmansk (sp?) or somewhere near the Baltic.

ack-ack

[Puck]

As someone noted in another reply, the Soviets really didn't have a favorable impression of the Jug other than it had a good radio.  As a fighter, they felt it was very lacking due to the lack of manueverability.  I believe they were given to naval air units and were stationed up near Murmansk (sp?) or somewhere near the Baltic.

ack-ack

Mostly Northern Fleet.  2 GIAP-SF, 225 IAP-SF (which used the -47 for some shipping strikes) and15 ORAB-KBF which used them for recon.

The big problem is they didn't need the things the Jug was good at.  Diving, long range...all useless below 3000 meters when your base was an inch from the front lines.  The P-47 was bigger and heavier than the standard BOMBER (Pe-2).

[Pongo]

Why is that?

Because there is some function that could be applied to move the furthest advance of the red army east X cm for every dollar of lend lease that was given to the soviets. How ever far that function would move back the red army it would be better for all concerned.

[KgB]

Because there is some function that could be applied to move the furthest advance of the red army east X cm for every dollar of lend lease that was given to the soviets. How ever far that function would move back the red army it would be better for all concerned.

Wow you horrible sweetheartbag, 30 million dead soviets not good enough for you or did you want Americans to fight Nazi's by themselves?
P.S Nothing was "given", words "Land" or "lease" should've given you a clue.

[Puck]

Wow you horrible sweetheartbag, 30 million dead soviets not good enough for you or did you want Americans to fight Nazi's by themselves?
P.S Nothing was "given", words "Land" or "lease" should've given you a clue.

"Lend" and "Lease" would have more meaning if anything was "Returned" or "Paid For".  Actually IIRC the British pushed Corsairs off the side after the surrender of Japan; they had to pay for aircraft that survived, but not for aircraft that were lost.  I'm going to have to go check my references now.

The war in the east was a completely different animal.  It's kind of interesting walking through Russian towns and seeing where they intentionally didn't repair damage to preserve the effect; this was very apparent in St. Petersburg...generally they put up signs to tell you what and when.  The Palaces had before and after pictures...the Germans didn't leave much standing.

[macleod01]

I find it really funny that people are arguing about 'Those Nasty Russians' Or people keeping money. I bet in 1943-44, all the world leaders were really saying, It doesn't matter what's done, just beat Germany and Japan'

Wonder what their reactions would be if they saw us bickering now.

[Puck]

Wonder what their reactions would be if they saw us bickering now.

"Must be nice to have so few worries you can bicker about that..."

Just a thought.

My parents were there; all I have to do is ask.  No internet, no TV, no satellite transmissions.  You got news from the radio and news reels at the picture show, all of which was carefully controlled.  Pretty sure nobody on this side of the pond really knew or cared about the man of steel.

[Brooke]

For lend/lease, the UK did pay back the US.  The final payment was made in 2006.

I don't know if the USSR or China did (both of whom got lend-lease assistance, I believe).

There was a lot of bickering back then, as well.  Bickering over where to attack, who is in charge of what, which regions were to fall under which country's oversight afterwards, etc.

Chuchill and Patton (and a lot of others) felt that the US and UK would be enemies of the Soviet Union and vice versa shortly after WWII (which turned out to be correct) and had ideas on what to do at the end of the WWII with that in mind.  There were a lot of people in the west who were deeply uncomfortable with communism and Stalin's purges, wherein a couple million Soviets were arrested and put in labor camps or executed.

The USSR didn't start off as a US and UK ally in WWII.  At the start of WWII, Germany and the USSR had an alliance that included a specification of how to divide up Europe between them.  Both invaded Poland at the start of WWII in 1939, each taking their specified half.  Shortly thereafter, the USSR took over Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania and invaded Finland, while the Germans went for Scandanavia and France.

Only after Germany reneged upon the alliance and invaded the USSR in 1941 (Operation Barbarossa) did the USSR become a US and UK ally.

It's interesting to ponder what would have happened if the UK had declared war on the USSR like they did on Germany for invading Poland or if the Germans had not reneged on the initial German/USSR alliance.

[Krusty]

You have to understand some of the Russian/Soviet history and the cultural past to understand US/UK aprehension over the Soviets taking over all of Europe... They weren't far behind the Germans in terms of expanionist aggression. They would easily (and happily) have occupied all of greater Europe and then kept looking further Westward.

The only reason they signed a treaty with Germany in the first place, was to buy time so they could conquer them later. Barbarrosa moved their timeline up and it wasn't until 1944/45 that they were ready, but when they were -- oooh boy, were they ever ready!