Most decisive battle of World War 2

**1979** · 18 Oct 10,, 14:37

Originally Posted by zraver

Half the wartime supply of TNT and other epxlosives the Soviets had was based on LL shipments.

Only if LL deliveries didn't include any smokeless powder at all.

**zraver** · 18 Oct 10,, 15:39

Originally Posted by 1979

Only if LL deliveries didn't include any smokeless powder at all.

if you include gunpowder, allied contributiosn drop to 33% of total Soviet stocks.

Allied contribution
Aviation fuel- 59%
automotive fuel- 2.5%
coppe- 42.5%
Alumanum- 55.5%
tires- 30%
machine tools 27% (complex machine tools (nearly 100%)
Sugar 29.5%
meat 15%
British tanks as a percentage of total Soviet tanks in the battle of Moscow 30%
imported tanks as a percentage of total Soviet tanks forces July 1942 16%
Percentage of American defense spending during WWII deciated to the USSR 4.1%
enough steel for 70,000 T-34's
595 ships
7,056 tanks
12,000 aircraft
400,000+ wheeled vehicles (nealry all the USSR's 4x4/ and 4x6 trucks werre LL)

**1979** · 18 Oct 10,, 15:53

Thanks Z
altrough i've known the figures.
Was explosives production realy a factor ?
Afaik, Germany Tnt production was superior to the soviets even with LL contribution included .

**zraver** · 19 Oct 10,, 03:10

Originally Posted by 1979

Thanks Z
altrough i've known the figures.
Was explosives production realy a factor ?
Afaik, Germany Tnt production was superior to the soviets even with LL contribution included .

explosive filler for shells and bombs, charges for engineers, landmines.... without high explosives you get stuck firign canon balls.

Germany lead the world in chemicals before WWII, no big surprise there.

**Officer of Engineers** · 19 Oct 10,, 04:32

Am I the only one who advocates that had Japan been killed faster, and not without that much more effort, better Chinese Generals would have done it, that WWII would have ended earlier?

**zraver** · 19 Oct 10,, 06:24

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Am I the only one who advocates that had Japan been killed faster, and not without that much more effort, better Chinese Generals would have done it, that WWII would have ended earlier?

Depends on when the new Sun Tzu appears. After Dec 7, 1941 I don't so. Before the US jumps in, quite possibly although I think the fight back up China would have been slow going no matter who the general is given the arms the Chinese had to work with.

**tantalus** · 19 Oct 10,, 12:14

Am I the only one who advocates that had Japan been killed faster, and not without that much more effort, better Chinese Generals would have done it, that WWII would have ended earlier?

If the chinese had been better organised and unified, thus posing a greater threat to the Japanese,then surely the Japanese woulnt have gone looking for trouble elsewhere in 1941,allowing full distribution of their resources on their western flank. In this scenario, I imagine the chinese would have found it tough going.
In the overall context of the theatre, the chinese front did tie up hundreds ot thousands of japanese soldiers, clearly important

Also As zraver states

given the arms the Chinese had to work with.

especially once Burma fell, the americans struggled to get supplies in at all

**1979** · 19 Oct 10,, 14:07

Originally Posted by zraver

explosive filler for shells and bombs, charges for engineers, landmines.... without high explosives you get stuck firign canon balls.

Germany lead the world in chemicals before WWII, no big surprise there.

However...
In the case of Germany bigger explosive production does not translate into bigger artilery ammo production nor bigger aluminum production into bigger aircraft production vs the Soviets.

Bad management of resources negated the german advantage here IMHO.

**1979** · 19 Oct 10,, 14:29

nealry all the USSR's 4x4/ and 4x6 trucks werre LL
Well the germans got
4 wheel drive trucks,they
got stuck in the mud as well .

**zraver** · 19 Oct 10,, 19:16

Originally Posted by 1979

nealry all the USSR's 4x4/ and 4x6 trucks werre LL
Well the germans got
4 wheel drive trucks,they
got stuck in the mud as well .
http://www.o5m6.de/Borgard%20B3000_3.jpg

http://www.o5m6.de/Mercedes%20L3000_3.jpg

http://www.o5m6.de/Mercedes%20L3000_4.jpg

No hotlinking, so I don't know what your trying to say with the images since I can't see them.

**1979** · 19 Oct 10,, 19:49

my bad ,
the pictures are from this site

Engines of the Red Army in WW2 - Foreign Trucks Overview

the first is the Borgward B3000 A3-ton, 4x4, Cargo, and the 2 and 3 a Mercedes L3000A
3-ton, 4x4, Cargo

**zraver** · 19 Oct 10,, 22:15

Originally Posted by 1979

my bad ,
the pictures are from this site

Engines of the Red Army in WW2 - Foreign Trucks Overview

the first is the Borgward B3000 A3-ton, 4x4, Cargo, and the 2 and 3 a Mercedes L3000A
3-ton, 4x4, Cargo

How long do you think they stayed running while overloaded to meet demand, travelling on rough surfaces and denied a source of quality spare parts?

**Officer of Engineers** · 20 Oct 10,, 06:44

Originally Posted by zraver

Depends on when the new Sun Tzu appears. After Dec 7, 1941 I don't so. Before the US jumps in, quite possibly although I think the fight back up China would have been slow going no matter who the general is given the arms the Chinese had to work with.

Originally Posted by tantalus

If the chinese had been better organised and unified, thus posing a greater threat to the Japanese,then surely the Japanese woulnt have gone looking for trouble elsewhere in 1941,allowing full distribution of their resources on their western flank. In this scenario, I imagine the chinese would have found it tough going.
In the overall context of the theatre, the chinese front did tie up hundreds ot thousands of japanese soldiers, clearly important

Also As zraver states

especially once Burma fell, the americans struggled to get supplies in at all

Gentlemen, both scenarios point to an earlier end. British and American navies ande armies ... and in fact, Dutch, and Australian navies and armies would be committed to the ETO rather than the PTO since the IJE cannot take on anybody else but China ... and would eventually lose in China ... and face a determined China in exacting vengeance.

**1979** · 20 Oct 10,, 09:41

On unimproved roads ~50.000 km between overhauls.

Btw the letter A in the german designations stands for Allrad (all wheel drive) .Production was discontinued in 1942, as it brought complexity to the design and did not alleviate the problems related to the road conditions in Russia.

**zraver** · 21 Oct 10,, 00:07

Originally Posted by 1979

On unimproved roads ~50.000 km between overhauls.

Given the loss of trucks in 1941, that 50,000km claim is vastly out of sync with reality.

Btw the letter A in the german designations stands for Allrad (all wheel drive) .Production was discontinued in 1942, as it brought complexity to the design and did not alleviate the problems related to the road conditions in Russia.

Two different claims here.

Does allrad really mean all wheel drive? ie power to all the wheels. This would add considerable complexity and cost to the viehicle by requiring locked/locking differentials on each axel as compared to posi/limited slip differnetials used by normal 4x4/4x6/4x10 trucks.

The Germans didn't plan on extensive spring or fall operations after 1941 and might have conclued that the trucks were excess during the expected campaign months.

The Soviet's did not agree and accepted every 4x4+ plus truck America could ship. The german's also introduced a 4x4 version of the Kubelwagen in 1942....