What of no lend lease to Soviets?

Nov 2015
1,786
Kyiv
#11
there were 8 convoys in 1941 , 15 during the 42 sailing season
After the disaster of pQ17 in late June 42 , the convoys were stopped ,
much to Stalin ire , some convoys were send in mid September
but the sailing season was short no ships sailed in winter

the battle of Stalingrad was fought with Soviet resources ,
the number of 4697 tanks in 41 42 ( I suppose it include January 43 ) seems surprising
Britain supplied a little more than 5000 tanks for the whole war ,
during the whole of 41 , 1084 Mathildas were send but only 918 received
I'm digging for the Valentine numbers
are you sure you don't include the "universal carriers" tankette in the number

From the tank encyclopedia
Matilda II in Soviet Service - Tanks Encyclopedia

"By the end of 1941, some 182 British tanks had been committed to combat operations, of which around 80 would be lost in action. By this time, there were only 46 Lend/Lease tanks still operational on the Western Front, this consisted of 38 Valentines and only eight Matildas. Many Matildas were pulled back from frontline service due to the Matilda’s shortcomings in harsh winter weather. "
Supplies of British tanks decreased by 1943. Matilda enjoyed popularity with the Russians for her strong frontal armor etc. and the American Sherman for its armor, reliability and comfort for the crew. At the same time, British tanks (Churchill) are visible in the photo on the streets of Kiev in the days of the liberation of the city in the autumn of 1943.



Theу move along the center of Kiev which was completely destroyed by explosions of Russian land mines with radio detonators in September 1941 after the Germans entered the city. Prior to this, the city was absolutely not affected by the fighting.

It must be said that the Soviet political leaders and the NKVD made great efforts against praising the Western armament in the Red Army, so good words about British and American tanks can be heard only in the responses of Russian veterans recorded in recent years - when the syndrome of fear to tell the truth gradually passed

The whole phrase about the number of tanks under the Lend-Lease from that source looks like this -

In 1941-1942 The Red Army received 4,697 tanks on Lend-Lease, in 1943 - another 3026.

Спасительный ленд-лиз / / Независимая газета

That is, the number of tanks in the Russian requests for lend-lease after 1942 was reduced on the whole. They preferred to receive instead of tanks scarce materials, machine tools and equipment that they could not produce.

And they did the tanks well themselves. At the same time, it is necessary to say about the main shortcomings of the most popular Russian tank T-34.

All models with a 76mm cannon that dominated before 1944 had a very poor visibility for its crew. The gearbox of this tank was disgusting. And I read that many tank drivers used only the second gear - on it they drove on the march and in battle. Switching the control levers of the tank for the driver was very hard. And for this the radio operator/machine gunner (радист-стрелок) of these T-34 models often helped the driver (Rus. - механик-водитель) pull arrows to the next gear lever as he sat near the driver . The intercom system of the crew was unreliable and noisy, so the commander often gave signals to the driver for driving the tank, kicking him on the back or on the shoulders. The driver-mechanic saw almost nothing during the battle, and he often had to drive with a half-open hatch in the frontal part of the tank with more risk to be wounded or killed.

A very large upper hatch on the T-34-76 opened with great difficulty, and often this required the efforts of two or three crew members. In a burning tank this often prevented the crew from quickly getting out. After several shots, the tank was filled with powder gases, and it was very hard to breathe in it.

When an Armor piercing shell (non-explosive) got into the tank even without penetrating the armor, lots of the fragments of the armor flew out from its inside part and damaging the crew. During a heavy rain inside the tank, a real flood often began.

There also were problems with radio stations. On many T-34s, they have not been installed for a long time. Thus, on June 1, 1941, the Red Army had 671 “linear” (линейные) T-34 tank (without a radio station in general) and 221 - “radio” (радийные) (with just a receiving radio station, less often with a receiving and transmitting one). The radio stations themselves were of poor quality for a long time. Due to problems with the evacuation of enterprises from August 1941 the production of tank radio stations in Russia was practically ceased until the middle of 1942.

By the middle of the war, the Russians began to release new and quite high-quality tank radio stations (РСИ-4 - 9Р ). The radio station was of English origin and for a long time it was produced using lend-lease components. This radio station was praised by Russian tankers.
Etc.
 
Nov 2015
1,786
Kyiv
#12
are you sure you don't include the "universal carriers" tankette in the number
More detailed information about Lend-Lease tanks, armored personnel carriers, repair and evacuation vehicles, etc. - in an excellent article in Russian -

Танки ленд-лиза. Объемы и модификации
Lend-Lease Tanks. Volumes and modifications
Танки ленд-лиза. Объемы и модификации

If you have some difficulty translating something in the article with Google translator - I can help

The tables in the article give such supply figures in 1941-1942:

- In 1941, 361 tanks (Matilda and Valentine) were delivered to Russia from Britain, in 1942 - 1,689 tanks (Matilda, Valentine, Churchill and Tetrarch).

From the USA in 1941 tanks were not delivered to Russia. In 1942, 1,825 tanks were delivered (Lee, Stuart and Sherman)

Thus, your replica looks quite appropriate. In total for 1941-1942, the Allies delivered 3,875 tanks to the Russians, and taking into account the British 1,233 carrier Universal, we reach the figure of 5,108, which is closer to the figure I had announced from another - less reliable - source in the previous message. Thus, my previous figure of tank supplies to Russian in 1941-1942 was clearly too high.
 
Nov 2015
1,786
Kyiv
#14
You make it sound like it was charity
both the US and Britain gave war material so that soviets boys could die rather than their own
I want to remind you in turn that the British and French boys died in the war with German Nazism while the Russian authorities signed a friendship agreement with Nazis in October 1939 following a joint campaign with Wermacht against Poland. Then Russian boys killed the Finns in Finland in an attempt to seize and annex this country, and in the summer of 1940 Russia annexed Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bessarabia and Bukovina threatening the Baltic countries and Romania big war
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,712
Sydney
#15
During which time the British were sweet talking Stalin
get real ......geopolitics has very little to do with morality except in the packaging
and the non-aggression pact was a neutrality and trade treaty , like a dozen of others non-aggression treaties signed by pretty much everybody before
one of the few things Stalin did right
 
Likes: Gvelion
Nov 2015
1,786
Kyiv
#16
During which time the British were sweet talking Stalin
get real ......geopolitics has very little to do with morality except in the packaging
and the non-aggression pact was a neutrality and trade treaty , like a dozen of others non-aggression treaties signed by pretty much everybody before
one of the few things Stalin did right

I am not talking a non-aggression pact. I'm about the Secret protocol. And this is not the format of the sweet talking. This is a secret agreement on the coordinated seizure of foreign countries and their territories. Agreement of two tomorrows aggressors and bandits

And the fact that the WWII began a week after the parties signed this Russian protocol, makes at least think about the direct connection between the two events. And there is no need to talk about morality here. The friendship treaty between the Russians and the Germans, signed during the Second World War, is not from the sphere of morality. He is absolutely immoral.

And the meat grinder that staged Berlin and Moscow to the local population after the occupation of Poland by the Germans and the Russians - each in its own part of the sawn territory - is also beyond the scope of morality. The consequences of the Russian meat grinder that the Germans saw when they entered Lviv and other cities in the west of Ukraine at the end of June 1941 shocked even inhuman Nazis.
 

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
4,712
Sydney
#17
"makes at least think about the direct connection between the two events "

there was plenty of connections , Stalin was fighting the Japanese at Khalin gol
the Fascists in Spain had won with plenty of support from the British
the poles six months before had attacked Czechoslovakia alongside the Nazis
the poles had not hesitated in grabbing lands from the Lithuanian ( including the Capital ) and as much of Western Ukraine as they could
the French had dishonored themselves for the sake of the British alliance
Both the French and British explicitly wanted the Soviets to fight and bleed while they would be on the defensive

Of course Stalin knew there would be a great war in the West ,
he was many things but stupid wasn't one of them
he just loved the idea that he could look forward to his enemies ripping each other to shred for years


where are morality and honestly ?? in Sweden , who made a lot of money from the war ?
don't worry too much for the Germans sensibility , soviet troops were shocked when they saw Auschwitz , Sobibor ,Majdanek ...
 
Last edited:
Likes: Gvelion
Jul 2016
9,557
USA
#18
You make it sound like it was charity
both the US and Britain gave war material so that soviets boys could die rather than their own
What about all the other countries the US gave Lend Lease supplies to?

nation supply value, in millions of dollars
British Empire 31,387.1
Brazil 372.0
Soviet Union 10,982.1
Mexico 39.2
France 3,223.9
Chile 21.6
China 1,627.0
Peru 18.9
Netherlands 251.1
Colombia 8.3
Belgium 159.5
Ecuador 7.8
Greece 81.5
Uruguay 7.1
Norway 47.0
Cuba 6.6
Turkey 42.9
Bolivia 5.5
Yugoslavia 32.2
Venezuela 4.5
Saudi Arabia 19.0
Guatemala 2.6
Poland 12.5
Paraguay 2.0
Liberia 11.6
Dominican Republic 1.6
Iran 5.3
Haiti 1.4
Ethiopia 5.3
Nicaragua 0.9
Iceland 4.4
El Salvador 0.9
Iraq 0.9
Honduras 0.4
Czechoslovakia 0.6
Costa Rica 0.2

All done so their boys would die instead of America's?
 
Likes: andyferdinard

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
5,567
Portugal
#19
What about all the other countries the US gave Lend Lease supplies to?


nation supply value, in millions of dollars
British Empire 31,387.1
Brazil 372.0
Soviet Union 10,982.1
Mexico 39.2
France 3,223.9
Chile 21.6
China 1,627.0
Peru 18.9
Netherlands 251.1
Colombia 8.3
Belgium 159.5
Ecuador 7.8
Greece 81.5
Uruguay 7.1
Norway 47.0
Cuba 6.6
Turkey 42.9
Bolivia 5.5
Yugoslavia 32.2
Venezuela 4.5
Saudi Arabia 19.0
Guatemala 2.6
Poland 12.5
Paraguay 2.0
Liberia 11.6
Dominican Republic 1.6
Iran 5.3
Haiti 1.4
Ethiopia 5.3
Nicaragua 0.9
Iceland 4.4
El Salvador 0.9
Iraq 0.9
Honduras 0.4
Czechoslovakia 0.6
Costa Rica 0.2

All done so their boys would die instead of America's?
Interesting list.

It would be quite interesting to see how some of that money was spent:

200.000 dollars to Costa Rica and 600.000 to Czechoslovakia, just to pick the two last ones. Costa Rica really didn’t make it much with 200.000 dollars and when were the 600.000 give to Czechoslovakia. Did the country exist at the time, or was under German and then Soviet occupation? I have no sources, but could this serve to wash some money? It was my first idea when I saw the list.
 
Jul 2016
9,557
USA
#20
Interesting list.

It would be quite interesting to see how some of that money was spent:

200.000 dollars to Costa Rica and 600.000 to Czechoslovakia, just to pick the two last ones. Costa Rica really didn’t make it much with 200.000 dollars and when were the 600.000 give to Czechoslovakia. Did the country exist at the time, or was under German and then Soviet occupation? I have no sources, but could this serve to wash some money? It was my first idea when I saw the list.
Costa Rica in WW2
 

Similar History Discussions