US help to Russia in the 2nd World War

remember it was Henry Ford who invented the assembly line.  At the time, no one could out produce Detroit.  Most of what I know is directly related to the conversion of auto plants to tanks.

The Soviets knew how to make tanks on a large scale yes, but the boys from Detroit knew how to do it faster and cheaper.  They also acted as advisors during the process of relocating all heavy industry beyond the Urals.  No small feat to do in less than a year.

 

The Soviets had requested as much help as the US could provide.  The US had been quietly gearing up industry from approx. 1938 on.  Politically the US was isolationist still.  FDR was just as anti war as anyone, however he was well aware of where things would ultimately end up.  Ford and Dupont were already into war production by 1940.  FDR had organised Industry leaders as early as 1936.  Using the WPA as a cover, he had Kaiser Ship Building institute a Welders training program in 1936. What they didn't mention was that the trainees were welding up hull and deck plates for warships and merchant vessels.  These were put into storage as soon as they were made.  But the importan part of that was that Henry Kaiser used that time to perfect the Liberty Ship.  Liberty Ships were built in modules.  The modules could be assembled anywhere and shipped to the shipyards when needed. [by 1944, the US was producing one ship every 3 days]  The Soviets, having been caught with their pants down, hadn't time to develope much of this technology on their own.

 

BTW- One stat that was missing, the US sent the USSR over 100,000 trucks and some 50,000 Jeeps.  That's the kind of production skills that the USSR lacked.  And yes, the Soviets listened and put their services to good use.  They didn't produce 30,000 T34's by accident.

 

 

 

The M3 performed well in the desert war completely outclassing the Panzer III's so much they had to hastily deploy the new Panzer IV's recall and returret all Panzer III's.

 

As for the Sherman vs T-34, a post from Tanknet, from a post war set of comparison tests carried out on both by the Yugoslav Military.

 

"T-34 gun has better penetration but differance is marginal.

Accuracy of the HE rounds is almost same up the 1500m. Over that range up the 3000m (maximum efective range for both tanks firing HE) ZiS-S-53 on the T-34 has about 20% more accuracy.

Accuracy of the AP rounds is almost same up the 1500m. Over that range up the 2500m (maximum efective range for both tanksfiring AP) ZiS-S-53 on the T-34 has about 20% more accuracy.

HVAP round fired from M1A1 gun on sherman is about 10% more accurate then one fired from the ZiS-S-53 gun up the 1000m.From 1000 up the 1500m accuracy is about same.

Both HVAP rounds show very poor performances above 1500m***.

Gunsights were judged to be about same - T-34/85 actualy was considered somewhat better but diferances were judged as a minor.

Observability is judged to be somewhat better from the Sherman but was considered poor for both tanks.

Firing from the move was judged as poor for both tanks (no big surprise). Firing from short halt - Sherman marginaly supperior."

 

 

 

The T34 was the best tank to come out of WW II.  Optics I don't know about, but the rest of it your just flat out wrong.

 

And stating that tanks weren't crucial, tells me just how little you really know about the Eastern front.  Kursk was the most crucial and largest tank battle in history.  It was also the turning point in the war for the Nazis.  After Kursk they were totally on the defensive.

 

 

It was a fine tank and against the best the Germans could offer it did well...I concur.

Much of what I might add has been covered already as to the importance of numbers, dates, engineers ,adoption of mass production etc.

 

Hence no need.

 

Otoh.. what is often overlooked, is the quantities of wheeled tactical vehicles and more modern C3 systems that were made available and greatly enhanced the maneuverability, command and control, and the upgrading; into a solid and well equipped, in many respects, mechanised force the Soviets came to possess.

 

As to the contention that the T34 was the best...that remains speculative for a lot of reasons (tho many later would indicate its optics were indeed second tier at best)....and encompasses many factors. I know tanks and it was as I noted a fine weapons system especially when in operation in a combined arms fashion . But the best?

 

In every measurable respect probably not. But it was very close. The best, tho never produced in significant quantities during the conflict, was arguably the M26 Pershing. But then one gets into the argument of classification as to heavy tank vs. medium etc.etc.

 

And that's an old saw that is never settled to everyone's satisfaction. And for me, to be honest, gets boring as I have argured it endlessly on a different venues hundreds of times. Ntl the Op is a good one.

 

CV

I am not aware of any advisory teams being sent to the USSR.  In regards to the evacuation of industries away from the German advances, the book I read stated that the Soviets accomplished it on their own.  It also added that one Soviet production genius in particular was responsible for most of the successes.