Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26179
    Points : 26725
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 02, 2020 1:47 am

    Yeah, the Soviet Navy was critical in the defeat of Germany...

    The Amusing thing is that a couple of Soviet subs hold records for number of people killed when they torpedoed about three transport ships moving soldiers and people during the Soviet advance...
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 4617
    Points : 4613
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Mon Mar 02, 2020 2:38 am

    GarryB wrote:Yeah, the Soviet Navy was critical in the defeat of Germany...
    At least it helped to guard the Arctic convoys; its subs, planes & Naval Infantry [greatly feared by Germans] were still an asset that Stalin used at best in the Black sea and the Baltic until 1945. Riverine forces, of all these, were probably the most heavily involved into the fight due to the abundance of large rivers and tributaries from where they can operate from.
    Some armoured gunboats even fought in the battle of Berlin, making their way on the Spree. The actions of marine troops at Sevastopol, Leningrad or Stalingrad are also all to be remembered. ..
    During the war, the Soviet fleet received a certain number of units from the allies: The battleship Arkhangelsk (ex-Royal Sovereign, Resolution class) arrived in reinforcement in August / September 1944, as well as the cruiser Murmansk, ex -USS Milwaukee, Omaha class, in April 1944. The USSR also received a group of eight ex-British destroyers, the famous mass-pipe-pipeers of 1917-19, under the name of class Dostoinyi.
    4 Romanian destroyers were captured by the Russians and integrated in 1944 into the Black Sea fleet. These were the Letuchyi, Likhoi, Logkiy, Lovkiy, ex-Regele Ferdinand and Regina Maria, Marasti and Marasesti, as well as three Romanian submersibles (S3, 4 and TS4 ex-Requinul, Delfinul, Marsuinul.). It will integrate 4 other ex-Latvian and ex-Estonian submersibles (Ronis, Spidola, Kalev, lembit) into the fleet, and received 4 British submarines of the S and U classes, named V1 to V4.
    More modest units were also transferred, 28 class EK1 (former Tacoma class) escort in 1945, for the Pacific front; 34 minesweepers T111 (ex-US, class Admirable), of which 10 in 1943 and the others in 1945; 15 ex-British coastal minesweepers in 1944-45; 43 lightweight minesweepers (ex-YMS class, Americans) in September 1945, to which were added Vosper (British, 90 issued in 1944-45) and Higgins (Americans, 43 delivered between 1943 and 1945) Elco (Americans, 60 delivered in 1944-45, 202 other deliveries including 53 in sections and spare parts). The Americans also delivered 138 submarine chasers of the SC, OTC and RPC classes to the USSR from mid-1943...The greater part of the Russian fleet was a victim of land forces, itself serving as a fire support for the Black Sea’s strongholds such as Sebastopol, or the Baltic as Leningrad. The paradox of this war was, as it were for the campaign of France, the uselessness of a fleet in operations. The only units massively deployed and in direct contact with the enemy were thus hundreds of armored fluvial gunboats (On the Volga, the Amur and the Western Prut, the Dnieper and the Don.).
    There were, on the spot, few units of value, no cruisers, no battleships to oppose German liners and cruisers before the transfer of two ships under the leasing law (Bearing the names of the ports concerned by these operations). The latter, moreover, were elderly (the United States and Great Britain were reluctant to entrust the “reds”, allies of circumstance, valuable ships, fearing probably to have to find them in front of them later)..

    https://www.naval-encyclopedia.com/ww2/soviet-navy

    The NF subs sunk 51 enemy ships; all transferred Pac. Fleet subs sunk at least 8 enemy vessels:
    S-51 from Pacific Ocean through Panama Channel and Atlantic to reinforce the North’s Fleet. Received the Order of Red Flag
    3/Sept/43 sunk German submarine-chaser UJ-1202/Franz Dankworth (464 GRT) torpedo
    S-55 (lost Dec 1943 mine) from Pacific Ocean through Panama Channel and Atlantic to reinforce the North’s Fleet.
    29/Apr/43 sunk German merchant Sturzsee (708 GRT) torpedo. Cargo of iron ore.
    12/Oct/43 sunk German merchant Ammerland (5381 GRT) torpedo. Cargo of 865tons of forage, 538tons of oats, 600tons of hay, 361tons of food.
    8/Dec/43 should have been the sub. responsible for unexploded torpedo hit on Norwegian merchant Valerie (1016 GRT)
    S-56 from Pacific Ocean through Panama Channel and Atlantic to reinforce the North’s Fleet. Had 5 victories, was the third best submarine in Arctic and received both the Oder of the Red Banner and the Guards Badge
    17/May/43 sunk German tanker Eurostadt (1118 GRT) torpedo. Cargo of 1.280tons of fuel
    and damaged German merchant Wartheland (3678 GRT) with unexploded torpedo during the same attack. It’s considered the only multiple torpedoes-launched attack by a Soviet submarine that scored hit on 2 different targets.
    17/Jul/43 sunk German minesweeper M-346 (551 tons) torpedo
    19/Jul/43 sunk German patrol ship NKi 09 / Alane (466 GRT) torpedo
    28/Jan/44 sunk German merchant Heinrich Schulte (5056 GRT) torpedo. No cargo
    L-15 from Pacific Ocean through Panama Channel and Atlantic to reinforce the North’s Fleet.
    4/Oct/43 a mine from submarine could have sunk the German submarine hunter UJ-1214/Rau V (354 GRT), but that could also have been a German mine.
    http://wio.ru/fleet/subm-n-p.htm
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 4617
    Points : 4613
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Mar 19, 2020 3:24 am

    Could the USSR win the war if Japan attacked with Hitler
    Cherevko and Kirichenko note that in the fall of 1941, 12 rifle, 5 tank, and 1 motorized divisions were transferred to the west from the Far East, but “the reduction in troops in the Far East was made up for by a new draft. Therefore, the Japanese expected mass reduction of Soviet troops in the Far East in 1941 did not happen."

    https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2887867.html

    The USSR was also supplying Japan while she was busy fighting the Alles: https://russian7.ru/post/chto-v-razgar-velikoy-otechestvennoy-ru/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fzen.yandex.com
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 4617
    Points : 4613
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Apr 30, 2020 9:05 pm

    https://www.rbth.com/defence/2015/05/18/christies_chassis_an_american_tank_for_the_soviets_46135.html

    https://www.rbth.com/history/329895-did-us-help-to-modernize-t34

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-T-34-was-built-in-the-United-States-during-WWII-as-a-help-to-the-Soviets-so-they-could-beat-the-Germans

    https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP81-01044R000100070001-4.pdf

    The USA shipped 2.3 million tons of steel to the USSR during the WWII years. That volume of steel was enough for the production of 70,000 T-34 tanks. Aluminum was received in the volume of 229,000 tons, which helped the Soviet aviation and tank industries to run for two years. https://www.pravdareport.com/history/2756-roosevelt/

    See pgs from 116-end:
    https://histrf.ru/uploads/media/default/0001/12/df78d3da0fe55d965333035cd9d4ee2770550653.pdf
    kvs
    kvs

    Posts : 6993
    Points : 7140
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  kvs on Fri May 01, 2020 1:42 am

    That's nice but there was not much of anything shipped before 1943. Lend-lease ramped up in 1942. The key detail is that
    in 1942 the USSR gained the advantage on the eastern front and the Nazis started their retreat. So the "generosity" (paid for
    in gold) of the yanquis was clearly tied to the situation on the front. All the claims that lend-lease won the war for the Soviets
    is self-serving propaganda BS.

    Look up thread for the links on the lend-lease volumes from 1941 to 1945.

    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 4617
    Points : 4613
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri May 01, 2020 2:32 am

    The USSR paid only fraction of the $ for supplied materials & armaments. The Land-Lease helped them win in 1945 instead of much later, thus reducing mil. & civilian casualties. The defeat of Japan's Kwantung Army followed in China & Korea on August 16, 1945, one day after Emperor Hirohito announced the surrender of Japan in a radio announcement. Some Japanese divisions refused to surrender, and combat continued for the next few days.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwantung_Army#Surrender_of_the_Kwantung_Army

    If the war in Europe ended later, more Americans would die fighting Japan, even after the atomic bombings.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 26179
    Points : 26725
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Fri May 01, 2020 10:57 am

    Without lend lease Stalin might have accepted a deal with Hitler and supplied machines and oil and men to help fight Britain and the US... after all without lend lease the western allies did fuck all on the eastern front to help their "allies".

    The west provided lend lease because it was in their interests to do so and for no other reason.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 4617
    Points : 4613
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri May 01, 2020 6:25 pm

    Without lend lease Stalin might have accepted a deal with Hitler and supplied machines and oil and men to help fight Britain and the US...
    no, there would be a stalemate or he could have lost power & war. Then Germany & Japan would take anything they wanted or in any case making the allies war effort a lot more strenuous.
    The Anglo-Saxon bankers weren't going to reach accommodation with Germans & Japanese.
    Was the Soviet fleet useless in World War II
    https://vz.ru/society/2020/5/17/1039405.print.html


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Sun May 17, 2020 7:05 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : add link)

    Sponsored content

    Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion - Page 8 Empty Re: Lend-Lease - World War II: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 20, 2020 5:21 pm