Rick Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 Just finished the U.S. Army "Green Book" on logistics, part one. On page 715 it states U.S. Lend-Lease played an important role in helping the Soviets win this battle. First "eye" have seen of this. Is it true? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the way Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 (edited) Yes. I read some where that 70% of all trucks in the Russian army were lendlease from the US. This is the number and I am sure a fair number was employed in Stalingrad 400,000 jeeps & trucks 14,000 airplanes 8,000 tractors 13,000 tanks 1.5 million blankets 15 million pairs of army boots 107,000 tons of cotton 2.7 million tons of petrol products 4.5 million tons of food Edited April 20, 2022 by On the way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Niehorster Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 A lot of stuff ... Lend Lease to the U.S.S.R. in Wortld War II -- Leo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougRichards Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 Well even if not much of the stuff made it from the USA to Stalingrad itself, it meant that the Soviets themselves could sent materiel to Stalingrad knowing that the USA (And Britain and Canada) would send the stuff that was needed to fill in the gaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandro_ Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 34 minutes ago, On the way said: Yes. I read some where that 70% of all trucks in the Russian army were lendlease from the US. This is the number and I am sure a fair number was employed in Stalingrad It was less. At the start of the War Red Army had 275,000 trucks. During the war 745,000 were received: - 150,000 from Soviet production - 221,500 requisitioned from the civil industry - 60,600 were captured - 312,600 received via lend-lease Of course, lend-lease were brand new and generally of better quality than Soviet models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted April 20, 2022 Author Share Posted April 20, 2022 Didn't know enough stuff reached the Soviet Army by the end of 1942 while this battle was going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 I read book from Soviet general Popel and he didnt have high estime of Land- lease equipment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 This is interesting article, google translation can translate it https://gezesh.livejournal.com/9526.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 This link to: https://www.o5m6.de/redarmy/foreign_softskins_redarmy.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam_S Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 If we're including the Caucuses in the Stalingrad campaign then a considerable amount of the Soviet armies' equipment in the region was lend-lease as there was a supply route up through Iran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted April 20, 2022 Share Posted April 20, 2022 Engines of the Red Army in WW2 (o5m6.de) Way way back I believe there was a discussion on trucks in the USSR > Soviet and L/L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the way Posted April 21, 2022 Share Posted April 21, 2022 On 4/20/2022 at 2:31 AM, DougRichards said: Well even if not much of the stuff made it from the USA to Stalingrad itself, it meant that the Soviets themselves could sent materiel to Stalingrad knowing that the USA (And Britain and Canada) would send the stuff that was needed to fill in the gaps. I read somewhere that some lend lease P-39s were used by the Red Air Force in Stalingrad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted April 21, 2022 Share Posted April 21, 2022 9 hours ago, On the way said: I read somewhere that some lend lease P-39s were used by the Red Air Force in Stalingrad. Possibly. Voronezh is ~300 miles from Stalingrad. Lipetsk is ~70 miles north of Voronezh. Cobras join the battle: P-39s and P-63s in Soviet forces. - Free Online Library (thefreelibrary.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted April 22, 2022 Share Posted April 22, 2022 On 4/20/2022 at 6:05 AM, alejandro_ said: Of course, lend-lease were brand new and generally of better quality than Soviet models. Most Soviet trucks were based on American and British trucks. Ford even help build a factory in the USSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted April 22, 2022 Share Posted April 22, 2022 (edited) And Italian (AMO/ZIS series) Edited April 22, 2022 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Kotsch Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 On 4/20/2022 at 12:29 PM, Perun said: I read book from Soviet general Popel and he didnt have high estime of Land- lease equipment General Popel was commissar. Therefore, its assessment in this case is doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 1 minute ago, Stefan Kotsch said: General Popel was commissar. Therefore, its assessment in this case is doubtful. And he was writing in the middle of the Cold War under a regime that rigorously vetted books before publication to ensure they followed the Party line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 (edited) His experience was with Matilda and M3 medium, which were generally not liked - nicknames were "Candle" for Matilda and "Grave for 6 brothers*" for M3. Feeling toward LL armor varied a lot depending on what they used. Loza thought highly about Sherman, but had very poor opinion on Matilda that he served before transferring to Shermans. General guideline: Dislike - M3 light, M3 medium, Matilda (with most hate toward Matilda, even more than toward M3 medium) Mostly ambivalent - Churchill (armor was often prized, gun sometimes, but overall it was considered to be "far from the best tank". Like - Valentine, Sherman, T48 (57mm on halftrack) *Not just Lee, Soviet T-60 was also called BM-2 "grave for two brothers". Edited April 23, 2022 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alejandro_ Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 On 4/22/2022 at 10:31 PM, MiloMorai said: Most Soviet trucks were based on American and British trucks. Ford even help build a factory in the USSR. I am not sure if manufacturing quality was the same, but brand new trucks delivered from the US are going to be better than requisitioned/captured ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunday Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 The current GAZ is the plant that Henry Ford sold to the Soviets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 The Soviet trucks at the time that were based on American designs were based on ones from the twenties and early thirties. The Lend-Lease trucks were state-of-the-art for the early forties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perun Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 General Popel critique of L-L equipment does not differ from opinion of others who used same equipment (american, british, french...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the way Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 15 hours ago, bojan said: His experience was with Matilda and M3 medium, which were generally not liked - nicknames were "Candle" for Matilda and "Grave for 6 brothers*" for M3. Feeling toward LL armor varied a lot depending on what they used. Loza thought highly about Sherman, but had very poor opinion on Matilda that he served before transferring to Shermans. General guideline: Dislike - M3 light, M3 medium, Matilda (with most hate toward Matilda, even more than toward M3 medium) Mostly ambivalent - Churchill (armor was often prized, gun sometimes, but overall it was considered to be "far from the best tank". Like - Valentine, Sherman, T48 (57mm on halftrack) *Not just Lee, Soviet T-60 was also called BM-2 "grave for two brothers". Even Chuck Yeager mentioned that when he met the Russian Air Force senior staff at a banquet in his honor, they loved the P-39s send to them under LL. The plane was almost universally loathed by the Americans. But some of the highest scoring Russian aces flew the aircraft. So Russian experience and opinion with LL equipment sometimes bore no resemblance to the Allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 Well, when you have a 2cd rate a/c, you give it to a country that can use it. It then becomes a 1st rate a/c in that country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 P-39 was not really "second rate", but it's abilities and strengths did not really fit with either US nor British doctrine. Soviets did not like P-40, absolutely hated Hurricane (well, in 1942 that one was 2nd rate), were indifferent at best toward Spitfire (those had reputation for being a bit of "hangar queen" and unsuitable for very rough forward airfield conditions). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now