Quote:
Originally Posted by sailor
Not to mention that the Russian T-34 tank was far superior to anything we had, but thats another story.
.
|
incorrect.
the T34 was roughly on par with the M4.
The russians won the "tank" game with numbers.
Both sides employed a similar tank doctrine (masses of tanks to punch through, supported by tank destroyers)
Anti Tank ability goes to the Sherman, often because of ammunition type and doctrine, but it slightly edges out the t34 as far as penetration goes. With the upgunned 76mm, shermans definitely beat the late war T34s.
The British Sherman firefly was superior to both of these in terms of penetration.
Similarly, while American tanks were build just as simply and easily maintained as Soviet tanks, they benefitted from generally superior weapons firing and optical technology. (Firing on the move)
When these two fought each other in the Korean War, Shermans took the majority of kills.
The Sherman was also considerably more versatile than the T34 with numerous readily adaptable variants including up-gunning, support fire, anti personnel roles, hedge clearing etc. Trumps the T34 in this category.
AND, the fact that the west was boasted successful tanks such as The M10, and the Perhsing who could punch holes through anything, fielded by any side.
Even the British Comet was scoring Panther and Tiger kills with ease, and it was low-slung and quick.
So, stop watching the History Channel with its constant bemoaning of the Sherman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by losthellhound
I give it to the Russians..
The Red Army wasn't beaten, and by the end of the war they were racing towards Berlin just as fast as Patton's armor...
Forget air power.. Any planes would be shredded by Red Army AA guns.. Forget Patton's tanks, they would be stuck defending itself from the Red Army, the conscripts Russia picked up liberating Eastern Europe (Eastern Europe at that time had about as much trust for North Americans then they did for Germans.. Russia was still the liberator at that point) and from pockets of Waffen and regular German units..
|
Western Air Power comprised 2 prongs: strategic and tactical while russian air power was mostly tactical.
While russia boasted an awful lot of AA defenses, they would be unable to deal with the two-pronged attack of Night Time bombing, 4-engine hight altitude bombing, combined with Night Time ground attack and regular ground attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJekyll
From a friend of mine...
This was actually war-gamed out by some institute in the 80's. Sorry that I can't find a link for it, but I read the results in a book on strategy back then, and the end result was Allied (U.S.,U.K.,China and Eastern European) victory, mostly due to:
2) Without lend-lease, the Red army would have withered away for lack of supplies. Even the meager rations of the average soldier would have been reduced by more than half when the allied aid was cut off.
3) Superior equipment- The Soviet T-34 was the best mass produced medium tank of the war. Having said that, the Allies would have access to captured German equipment, factories, personnel, and technology, and were in much better shape to begin production of advanced equipment such as the Panther, Panther II, Go229, Me262, Sturmgewher 44, Type XXI and XXIII U-boats, and the V-1 & V-2 programs.
.
|
i like to keep nukes out of this argument. it's less fun.
but point 2 is huge.
But, as for #3, look at my earlier post.
Late war T34s would fall to late war Shermans, and the allies produced much better supporting vehicles.
The western allies trumped the russians in air power, naval power and tank power.
Russian infantry units were a prime example of combined arms and were better armed at the end of the war than your standard American infantry unit. I believe heavy weapons were available more readily as well. (Americans liked to deploy machine guns on a platoon level as well i believe) But the russians had whole units of sub-machine gun units. That's alot of fire.
Russians also had an incredible amount of artillery.
---------- Post added at 12:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:22 AM ----------
i would say that russian infantry was the superior attacking force, this combined with their artillery power would mean a very fast and crushing advance.
But, the western allies had an awful lot of supply in reserve and i think could exploit russian attacks by falling back, digging in and pinching them at their nerves.
No way they'd advance right into moscow, but they'd hold off any russian assault for some time.