syscom3
Pacific Historian
schwarzpanzer said:
I would think the German flak defenses as the best in the world.
Who would win the western allies or Russia?
- Thread starter RAGMAN
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I would think the German flak defenses as the best in the world.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
schwarzpanzer said:FLYBOYJ
FLYBOYJ said:
Ike?
The bickering would likely be worse than vs Germany?
Ike wouldn't of barreled into the Soviet Union on the verge of winter with the wrong equipment, and then threaten his commanders if they retreated. Hitler was a madman who thought he was a general, Ike was a politician who thought we was a general!!!!!!!
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
The Germans never had decent proximity fuses syscom3, the UK was the best there?
(I just know a Yanks gonna argue that one!
)
In general, German Flak defenses were far better than Russia's, with the (sole?) exeption of Moscow.
FLYBOYJ
The wrong equipment?
It wouldn't be needed if the Panzers hadn't have halted!
This was Hitlers fault though, even when he knew what happened to Bonaparte , so I'll give you that.
Yeah, that was a bit daft!
He started off smart, ended up daft.
e.g. had he been listened to, most Panzers would be toting the 50mm L60 in '39!
(I just know a Yanks gonna argue that one!
)In general, German Flak defenses were far better than Russia's, with the (sole?) exeption of Moscow.
FLYBOYJ
FLYBOYJ said:
The wrong equipment?
It wouldn't be needed if the Panzers hadn't have halted!
This was Hitlers fault though, even when he knew what happened to Bonaparte
, so I'll give you that. Yeah, that was a bit daft!
He started off smart, ended up daft.
e.g. had he been listened to, most Panzers would be toting the 50mm L60 in '39!
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Ike knew that a successfull general is part warrior, part politician. Plus he didnt have an ego. He was successfull cause he knew how to plan and how to delegate.
Thats maybe why the allies won.
Thats maybe why the allies won.
Nonskimmer
Captain
He basically kept Monty and Old Blood 'N Guts from killing each other long enough to get the job done.
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Didn't have an ego?
Come on, he was an American!
Didn't he say about Monty something like:
"Hard to serve with, impossible to serve over"(?)
Come on, he was an American!
Didn't he say about Monty something like:
"Hard to serve with, impossible to serve over"(?)
Nonskimmer
Captain
That doesn't give him an ego. It just means that Monty could be insufferable. Montgomery and Patton were both renowned for their egos, and the two men despised each other.
The Western Allies would have defeated the Soviet Union straight after the war. We all seem to forget that the Soviet Union had lost no less than twenty-three million people in the war, their country had been scorched and their industry was nothing comparable to the might of the U.S and British Empire, of whom were both in full working order and relatively untouched.
German troops would gladly join the Western Allies against the Soviet Union. The Germans still hated the Communists up to their dying day. Even during 1944 guards discussed with PoWs the idea of joining forces against the Soviet Union. Hubert Zemke, when captured, was even asked to join the Luftwaffe to fight against the Soviet Union. Maj. Gen. von Mellenthin wrote Panzer Battles to educate the Western World on armoured tactics so they could combat the Soviet Union. All, and I mean all, German forces capable of combat would gladly have taken up arms against the Soviet Union on the side of the Western Allies.
The VVS wouldn't have stood a chance against the Western Allied air forces. The USAAF had brought in the B-29 which the VVS had nothing to intercept with. The RAF had the Lancaster and I believe it wasn't long until the Lincoln came along. The VVS had no strategic bomber and even if it did, the RAF had the Meteor and the USAAF had the P-80. Not to mention the vast quantities of trained pilots in the Western Alliance compared to the ill-trained airmen of the VSS, even in 1945. And of course, there's the captured Luftwaffe airmen.
Then there's the Western supply to the Soviet Union, which would stop instantly. Everything from boots to trucks in the Red Army were provided by the Western Allies. There's more to war material than planes, tanks and guns ...and most of the less famous equipment was supplied by the Western Allies.
The vast wealth of airpower over the VVS and complete, and absolute air supremecy held by the Western Allies would more than make up for any deficient in armour capability. Despite the fact the Western armour was certainly on par with the Red armour. A combination of combat, tactical, operational and grand ability probably made the Western Allied equipment superior overall. Western armour tactics seem to work better in reality to those of the Red Army. Not to mention the fact the Sherman 76Ws and Sherman Firefly would be on par with the T-34/85. The Comet would be fighting the IS-2 on equal ground. And then there's the Pershing and Centurion fighting. The Pershing having already seen combat, and been proved combat capable. It most likely would have been in much larger numbers if the war had continued against the Soviet Union. I can safely say, the U.S could push out more Pershings than the Soviet Union could IS-3s.
On the point of Eisenhower, he was the best possible choice for Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. Either him or Alexander, but Alexander was dealing with Italy. Eisenhower was far from a good general but he was a remarkable individual, and he alone kept the British and Americans, plus a whole host of other nations fighting against the Axis ripping one another to pieces. He didn't have a massive ego because he knew he couldn't consider himself anything but equal. Monty and Patton were two hard men to contain, they had massive egos ...but they had good reasons to have them.
Everyone has an ego, by the way. It's something we ALL have.
German troops would gladly join the Western Allies against the Soviet Union. The Germans still hated the Communists up to their dying day. Even during 1944 guards discussed with PoWs the idea of joining forces against the Soviet Union. Hubert Zemke, when captured, was even asked to join the Luftwaffe to fight against the Soviet Union. Maj. Gen. von Mellenthin wrote Panzer Battles to educate the Western World on armoured tactics so they could combat the Soviet Union. All, and I mean all, German forces capable of combat would gladly have taken up arms against the Soviet Union on the side of the Western Allies.
The VVS wouldn't have stood a chance against the Western Allied air forces. The USAAF had brought in the B-29 which the VVS had nothing to intercept with. The RAF had the Lancaster and I believe it wasn't long until the Lincoln came along. The VVS had no strategic bomber and even if it did, the RAF had the Meteor and the USAAF had the P-80. Not to mention the vast quantities of trained pilots in the Western Alliance compared to the ill-trained airmen of the VSS, even in 1945. And of course, there's the captured Luftwaffe airmen.
Then there's the Western supply to the Soviet Union, which would stop instantly. Everything from boots to trucks in the Red Army were provided by the Western Allies. There's more to war material than planes, tanks and guns ...and most of the less famous equipment was supplied by the Western Allies.
The vast wealth of airpower over the VVS and complete, and absolute air supremecy held by the Western Allies would more than make up for any deficient in armour capability. Despite the fact the Western armour was certainly on par with the Red armour. A combination of combat, tactical, operational and grand ability probably made the Western Allied equipment superior overall. Western armour tactics seem to work better in reality to those of the Red Army. Not to mention the fact the Sherman 76Ws and Sherman Firefly would be on par with the T-34/85. The Comet would be fighting the IS-2 on equal ground. And then there's the Pershing and Centurion fighting. The Pershing having already seen combat, and been proved combat capable. It most likely would have been in much larger numbers if the war had continued against the Soviet Union. I can safely say, the U.S could push out more Pershings than the Soviet Union could IS-3s.
On the point of Eisenhower, he was the best possible choice for Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. Either him or Alexander, but Alexander was dealing with Italy. Eisenhower was far from a good general but he was a remarkable individual, and he alone kept the British and Americans, plus a whole host of other nations fighting against the Axis ripping one another to pieces. He didn't have a massive ego because he knew he couldn't consider himself anything but equal. Monty and Patton were two hard men to contain, they had massive egos ...but they had good reasons to have them.
Everyone has an ego, by the way. It's something we ALL have.
- Thread starter
- #29
RAGMAN
Airman
True about everyone having an ego. The west was superior in terms of better aircraft and numbers.I always wondered about the manpower advantage of Russia as they always seemed to have unlimited reserves to call upon.(during the war)Russia didn't have a long range bomber that I am aware of,so bombing targets in the west might have posed a problem for Russia.If I am mistaken .
.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
One thing to ponder is the Russian economy had maxed out by 1944. On the other hand, the US war economy was still ramping up right up to the end of the war.
Imagine what the US could produce once the diversity in weapons were narrowed down to a few designs. And not having a navy to build would release an untold ammount of resources into other sectors of industry.
Just for the heck of it, If I was the secretary of war in Sept 1945, these are the warplanes I would order both the navy and airforce to concentrate on. All other types would have their production stopped. Since a battle with Russia would not be a naval war, the Navy would have to be second fiddle, whether they liked it or not.
Air Force:
B29 (replace B17 and B24 groups as B29's become available)
A26 (All B25, B26 and A20's to be removed from service as A26's are available)
P80 (P38, P47 production to terminate)
Skyraider (if AAF wants it to replace P47)
P82 (replace or expand P51 groups)
C54 (replace C47 and C46)
C69 (long range transport to be mass produced)
C119 (production to be accelerated)
Navy:
F4U (remove F6F and F8F)
F7F (if marines want it)
Skyraider (replace SB2C and TBF)
Imagine what the US could produce once the diversity in weapons were narrowed down to a few designs. And not having a navy to build would release an untold ammount of resources into other sectors of industry.
Just for the heck of it, If I was the secretary of war in Sept 1945, these are the warplanes I would order both the navy and airforce to concentrate on. All other types would have their production stopped. Since a battle with Russia would not be a naval war, the Navy would have to be second fiddle, whether they liked it or not.
Air Force:
B29 (replace B17 and B24 groups as B29's become available)
A26 (All B25, B26 and A20's to be removed from service as A26's are available)
P80 (P38, P47 production to terminate)
Skyraider (if AAF wants it to replace P47)
P82 (replace or expand P51 groups)
C54 (replace C47 and C46)
C69 (long range transport to be mass produced)
C119 (production to be accelerated)
Navy:
F4U (remove F6F and F8F)
F7F (if marines want it)
Skyraider (replace SB2C and TBF)
- Thread starter
- #31
RAGMAN
Airman
I agree with what you just posted except I would have kept the P47 as the longer range version was just coming into service and would have been a reliable ground attack fighter.(as it could take quite a beating)
syscom3 said:
The Germans had possibly one of the best anti aircraft systems set up but as was stated the lack of proximity fuses is what they lagged.
marconi
Airman 1st Class
Russia could only conquer the continental part of Europe.They had no means to cross the channel.On the other hand I think its absurd to think that Western Allies could force Soviet forces to draw back, they simply hadn't enough armor for that.So, IMHO, there were to possibilities, either USSR conquers continental part of Europe or they fail to do this and sign peace treaty with Western Allies.I prefer the second variant.I think they would do this in a few weeks or month after the beginning of the war, probably even before Americans could bring A-bomb to Britain, which would be an excellent tool for negotiations.
P.S. Russia didn't have nuclear weapon, but they could use chemical weapon in respond.
P.S. Russia didn't have nuclear weapon, but they could use chemical weapon in respond.
Glider
Captain
Can you imagine what the germans would have done to the bomber formations at night and day, if they had the proximity fuse? Doesn't bear thinking about.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
RAGMAN said:
I thought of that, but figured the Skyraider as being a better plane for fighter bomber work. The P80, P51 and P82 would have been the air-air fighters.
marconi
Airman 1st Class
The Western Allies could probably stop Russians and even pull Soviet forces back, but I doubt they could defeat them.As soon as both sides would realize that this new war can last for several years they would start negotiations.
I doubt it. Stalin would not give in until he was defeated and once the allies started they would not have stopped until an uncoditional surrender and the allied Military was far more superior to the Russians so it would have been a victory for the Allies and no Cold War.
The Red Army didn't have the manpower and resources to continue a prolonged fight against the British Empire and United States. The Soviet Union was a cripple after the Great Patriotic War. Any offensive by the Western Allies would have knocked it down and out.
Glider
Captain
I admit to not having any details to support this but its been my understanding that all sides were close to their last reserves on manpower, certainly the UK was.
The USA had more but I believe the last surviving son rule would have had to be breached to use them.
The USA had more but I believe the last surviving son rule would have had to be breached to use them.
