Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
This is an interesting exercise.
Yet, in my opinion, for a better understanding of the Soviet ground forces strengths and weaknesses, we need to take into account the situation with manpower in USSR. Some post-Soviet historians suggested that the Soviet Army in 1945 faced the imminent crisis due to demographic situation. 17-year old boys were conscripted officially and in large numbers since 1943 and there was a practice of conscripting 15-16 y.o. to NKVD troops and auxiliary units. Some voenkomats already in 1944 registered more 17-year-olds than all other ages. And there was another problem: from about 1927-1928 the number of births went down in USSR and the mortality rate among young males remain as low (if not worse) as before 1914. Add to that the "quality"of manpower grown up during the war: poor nutrition, lack of medical service and education, etc.
As for the questions raised:
1. Probably it would but Allies would need time (and bear costs of all kinds) to adapt to new tactics since VVS was not LW.
2. Ground transport. Very good point. While the number of trucks in the USSR in 1945 was huge there was a regular deficit of fuel and lubricants which could become critical with the lend-lease interruption. Also the deficit of rail engines (lend-lease again). Should Allies manage to hit refineries and POL storages, the Soviet Army would be stopped in its tracks, probably.
3. Again, as in p.1, Allied forces would need to learn and to adapt. How quickly they could in real life, we can just speculate...
That's quite a thought, Soviet Spitfire IX's adopting TARAN tactics against lone B-29's armed with nukes flying deep unescorted missions over Soviet territory. Messy.Interesting scenario.
To the third point "Would Western Allies air forces be able to deflect VVS' strategy of flooding combat areas with overwhelming numbers?".
The only 2 areas where the US and UK really had a technology advantage (that would matter in this scenario IMO) were the Atom Bomb and Radar etal. If we leave out the Atom Bomb (which would make the scenario untenable for the Soviet Union in 1945) then Radar etal is the only major factor.
The radar systems and the fighter control systems and methodologies developed by the UK in the early-war had increased considerably in capability by the end of the war. The EW/FC systems used for anti-V1 duties would be equally(?) effective against low flying aircraft, and the various late-war AMES EW/GCI systems were quite effective. By the end of the war the UK had developed very capable mobile systems (ie transportable to a location where they could then be temporarily emplaced).
The early-war UK methodologies had been passed to the US, who were already developing systems to meet their own needs. The highly capable late-war Project Cadillac in the PTO being just one result of what the US came up with.
If I were an opposing air force I would not like the idea of dealing with any of these systems. I am not saying that Radar etal would be the deciding factor, but I think it would have a significant effect vs VVS aircraft trying to penetrate the US/UK sectors to any depth.
Thanks Dimlee,
In my opinion a USAAF Strategic Air Campaign against the VVS would look a lot like the pre-invasion campaign against german mobility and transportations targets and would be the one aspect of such an air war where it would be the VVS adapting to allies tactics rather than the other way around. A high altitude campaign would force the VVS into the same disadvantages that the LW faced, dedicating fighters to attacking bombers and being at a disadvantage to USAAF protecting fighter escorts. Fighting at an altitude where VVS fighters are less than optimal vs P-51's and P-47's.
At lower altitudes it looks a lot different and I agree, USAAF/RAF would have to develop new tactics fairly quickly.
Thanks!
Valid point.If I were an opposing air force I would not like the idea of dealing with any of these systems. I am not saying that Radar etal would be the deciding factor, but I think it would have a significant effect vs VVS aircraft trying to penetrate the US/UK sectors to any depth
Interesting scenario.
If I were an opposing air force I would not like the idea of dealing with any of these systems. I am not saying that Radar etal would be the deciding factor, but I think it would have a significant effect vs VVS aircraft trying to penetrate the US/UK sectors to any depth.
Yes, probably the pre-invasion scenario would be the most natural choice for the Allies in this situation, at least as a starting point for further planning. There was an experience and there was a success, so why to invent something else. But would it be as effective as in 1944?
Interdiction campaign.
Many targets of opportunity and Allies had the equipment and experienced aviators for the job. Soviet air defences at the front line and in rear areas were probably no worse (or better) equipped than German in 1944. VVS is effective at low/mid altitudes. Allies have some jets - will they become a trump card? Communication, logistics, equipment reliability, command and control - this is where Allies had the upper hand, in my opinion.
But "providence is on the side of big battalions"...
VVS front units on May 10th, 1945:
bombers 2,977
sturmoviks 3,585
fighters 6,268
Including 1,664 aircraft in reserve. Serviceability rates around 85%.
Source:
ВОЕННАЯ ЛИТЕРАТУРА --[ Военная история ]-- Советская авиация в Великой Отечественной войне 1941-1945 гг. в цифрах
It makes sense to compare with Allied numbers.
Valid point.
And VVS is not really prepared for deep penetration. No experience and Il-2/Il-10 have limited range. So, probably Allied supply lines remain untouched until 50-100 km beyond the front line as it was with Germans on the Eastern Front.
This brings up another thought as well. The western allies air forces would be able to operate from bases well outside of air coverage by the VVS while the entirety of VVS operations would be under the air coverage of the western allies. This would be a significant advantage to the western allies would could employ tactics where you would wait until VVS aircraft had to return for rearming and refueling and attack them on the ground.
Allies also have some facilities in the Mid east, especially Iran, for mounting strikes into the Soviet oil fields near Baku.
VVS supplied mostly by railroad. I am reminded of the difficulties the Germans had once into USSR with the different gauge of rail and this nullified the efficient use of rail in supply. Is the reverse for the USSR not also true?
While all sides had made great improvements to aircraft towards the end of the war, it seems to me much more so for the Allies, at least to the end of 1945. VVS has nothing to compare to B-29, the B-32 is now available in small but increasing numbers. Jet fighters make appearances at the front. Aircraft late to the party in early 1945 are now showing in numbers in late 1945 such as the P-51H, Tempest, Bearcat, F2G and etc. Airbases can now be had all over western Europe cutting down distances. I imagine allied bases near the lines are much more tenable than the Soviets'. Can one imagine the VVS sending a bunch of sturmoviks and medium bombers to be met by F2G's and Bearcats while Meteors and P-80's provide top cover against VVS escorts? There's not a lot on the VVS side to interdict B-29's and B-32's at high altitude covered by P-51H and P-47N. What about our night fighting ability vs the VVS? Mosquitos and P-61's (hey, maybe even some left over Uhu's? Would F4U-5 be available?) I imagine this can have an impact as well. They can also cover night bombers...
The Soviets have a large edge on artillery and armor already in the theater. Airpower used with impunity can really mess up their day. See June-October 1944 for the Germans on western front for the effect. Typhoons, P-47's, F4U-4. If reaching into the plains of USSR where unhampered by tree cover, it can get messy. See Stuka vs t-34 and German armor vs Sturmovic.
What about a reconstituted French Army thrown into the mix for a shot of manpower?
Naval superiority. Not much flowing into Murmansk now, is there? I imagine most shipping has ceased and the USSR can be starved fairly quickly. Especially since Uncle Sugar stopped importing.
IMHO, the Soviets would have to do what Hitler tried against them and that is strike and move very quickly gaining ground before the Allies can respond effectively.
Bogie exchange is easy but what was the russian railways loading gauge ?
Would russian rollingstock be able to pass standard gauge station platforms , fit standard gauge bridges ,pass each other on adjacent standard gauge tracks tracks ?
broad gauge does usually have a more generous loading gauge but even standard gauge varied and still does from country to country.