Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Or towing gliders...syscom3 said:In the ETO, I doubt that the Normandy invasion would have gone off as planned without the C47's carrying the paratroopers.
Bullockracing said:The C-47 was such a successful design, it was copied by the Russians and the Japanese
syscom3 said:One thing Ive learned from many different threads over the past year, is the "superiority" of an individual aircraft is always fleeting. An aircraft could be superior for a few months, then get superceded by either an axis or allied design.
But one thing where the allies were always superior, and the reason the allies won the war, was LOGISTICS!!
There was a book written a few years ago "Why The Allies Won". An argument was put forth that in the German military, the best and brightest went to command the field armies, which explains why they were such deadly opponants in battle. But when it came to the mundane occupations such as field engineering and logisitics, the allies put many of their best and brightest in those slots.
If you look at the campaigns in a macro sense, the firepower of both sides was about even. For example, the Tiger tank was vastly better than the Sherman, but the allies always managed to find enough Shermans to equalize the fight. Even if we were to say the Fw190 was the best fighter, the allies always managed to have enough P38/P47/P51/Spits in the air to offset it.
What determined the outcome in these campaigns was the allies simply managed to get more supplies to the troops up front. The Germans never seemed to win the battle of logistics.
Think about how different the war would have been if the allies didnt have LST's, DUKW's and 6X6 trucks.
FLYBOYJ said:syscom3 said:In the ETO, I doubt that the Normandy invasion would have gone off as planned without the C47's carrying the paratroopers.
Or towing gliders...
syscom3 said:One thing Ive learned from many different threads over the past year, is the "superiority" of an individual aircraft is always fleeting. An aircraft could be superior for a few months, then get superceded by either an axis or allied design.
But one thing where the allies were always superior, and the reason the allies won the war, was LOGISTICS!!
There was a book written a few years ago "Why The Allies Won". An argument was put forth that in the German military, the best and brightest went to command the field armies, which explains why they were such deadly opponants in battle. But when it came to the mundane occupations such as field engineering and logisitics, the allies put many of their best and brightest in those slots.
If you look at the campaigns in a macro sense, the firepower of both sides was about even. For example, the Tiger tank was vastly better than the Sherman, but the allies always managed to find enough Shermans to equalize the fight. Even if we were to say the Fw190 was the best fighter, the allies always managed to have enough P38/P47/P51/Spits in the air to offset it.
What determined the outcome in these campaigns was the allies simply managed to get more supplies to the troops up front. The Germans never seemed to win the battle of logistics.
Think about how different the war would have been if the allies didnt have LST's, DUKW's and 6X6 trucks.
delcyros said:This indeed is a good argument.
However, with or without the military deployment of US forces against axis in europe, Germany would have lost the war either.
It was the often underrated economy of the SU (which clearly hadn´t their best minds in the logistics department) and their military potential which broke the backbone of Germanys land air forces. From 1941-1943, the russian front binded 70-85% of Germany land air forces (depending on months). It was not possible for the vaunted Whermacht to achieve a strategic victory over the SU (with a notable exception in late 1941, when Stalin asked the rumanian ambassador in Moscow what conditions Hitler would want for an armistice), and I would even go so far and say it was beyond possibilities. However, the composite efforts done by all allieds contributed to the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945. And as Syscom pointed out, logistic advances contributed more to this than we would expect.
with the Africa Corp
Since you are one of those people Udet, can you spell out why?Udet said:Quote:
"However, with or without the military deployment of US forces against axis in europe, Germany would have lost the war either."
There are sufficient people that will certainly come along to contest that part of your arguent Mr.Delcyros.
Land forces yes but not the LW.the russian front binded 70-85% of Germany land air forces