Allies or allies?

123


The role of Western supplies during the Great Patriotic War is traditionally hushed up in Russian society. So, in the enchanting book of N. A. Voznesensky, “The Soviet military economy during the Patriotic War”, it was said that all Western supplies amounted to 4% of Soviet production, and the main ally in the anti-Hitler coalition was called: wars the monopoly capitalism of the United States of America. " Other sources indicate that all military equipment “bought for gold of the USSR” was useless stuff with a developed resource, followed by accusations of the United States and Great Britain for refusing to supply the most advanced models of equipment.

In general, there are polar opinions about the role of military supplies in the victory over fascism. There are few objective assessments. We invite the reader to read the facts from the field aviation and draw our own conclusions on the importance of military supplies under the Lend-Lease program during the Second World War.

Cobras

The most famous aircraft of the Lend-Lease was the legendary Bell P-39 Aircobra. In total, during the war years, the Red Army air forces received 5000 fighters of this type.


Aircobra Fire from all trunks


Aircraft coaches were equipped only with guards iap, due to the exceptionally high flight characteristics of the aircraft. Description Airbrocks can be found on any thematic site, I note only a small detail - the main caliber 37 mm. Also one of the important advantages of the aircraft was the original layout - the engine is located behind the pilot's cockpit, thereby protecting the pilot from the most dangerous direction. Oil radiator and crankshaft served as additional protection from the bottom of the cab.
It was on the P-39 fighter with the tail number 100 that Alexander Ivanovich Pokryshkin ended the war.

Allies or allies?

P-63 are preparing to be sent to the USSR


In addition to the main batch of Bell P-39 Aircobra, the USSR was supplied 2400 Bell P-63 Kingcobra - even more formidable cars.
Under the terms of the Lend-Lease, all military equipment after the end of the war was to be returned to the United States or destroyed on the spot. The Soviet Union, naturally, neglected this clause of the treaty, and the most modern Lend-Lease fighters went to serve in the air defense system until the appearance of the jet Migov. Thanks to the nose strut of the chassis, as on the Mig-15, the Kingcocks were successfully used to train pilots until the end of the 50s.

Бостон

A-20 Havos (Boston) attack aircraft. 3125 delivered machines. The first A-20 appeared on the Soviet-German front in the summer of 1943. “Boston” became in our aviation a truly multi-purpose aircraft, performing the functions of a day and night bomber, reconnaissance, torpedo and mine layer, heavy fighter, and even a transport plane. It was little used only as a ground attack aircraft - by its basic purpose!


Soviet pilots take the American middle bomber Douglas A-20 Boston, transmitted by lend-lease



The American bomber was distinguished by good maneuverability and a large practical ceiling. He was easily given deep turns, he freely flew on one motor. Given the poor training of pilots, accelerated from schools during the war years, the aerobatic qualities of the aircraft became important. Here "Boston" was excellent: simple and easy to manage, obedient and stable on turns. Take-off and landing on it were much easier to perform than on the domestic Pe-2.

The combat value of this aircraft was so great that, even with the advent of jet aircraft, the Northern Fleet before 1956 had a canned Boston set.

Useless trash

In the fall of 1944, upon a special application in the USSR, he began to receive P-47 Thunderbolt. One of the most heavily armed fighters of that time was 8 large-caliber Browning and 1000 kg of outboard weapons. Thunderbolts successfully escorted the Flying Fortresses in the sky over Germany (the range with a PTB is 2000 km), fought with the Focke-Wolves at extreme heights and chased after the German tanks (it is believed that it was the Thunderbolt missile that killed the tank of Michael Wittmann).



However, the paranormal happened: the USSR abandoned this aircraft! Soviet pilots complained that the Thunderbolt was too heavy and clumsy. The deliveries were stopped on the 203 machine, the already accepted Thunderbolts were sent to the assault shelves. After the war, the surviving cars were transferred to the air defense.

Marine Patrol

Consolidated PBY Catalina amphibians became the basis of naval patrol aircraft in many countries of the world, including the USSR. Equipped with radars, the Catalina were actively used for patrols, reconnaissance, search and rescue and anti-submarine operations.



"Catalina" was well known to Soviet specialists. Firstly, before the war in the USSR, a small series produced its licensed version - the GTS flying boat. Secondly, the English "Catalina" since 1942 regularly appeared at the airfields of the North fleet, solving a variety of tasks, including in the interests of the Soviet command. So, for example, in September-October 1942, nine Katalin from the 210th RAF squadron operated from our northern airfields when escorting the PQ-18 convoy.

After the war, no car was returned to the United States. Thus, in September, in the Northern Fleet, 1945 was formed by a separate reconnaissance air regiment fully equipped with Catalina, and in the Baltic a year later, 53, armed with clean flying boats, and amphibians. The reconnaissance regiments of the Black Sea and Pacific Fleets were also staffed, approximately in equal proportions, with the PBN-69 and PBY-1A aircraft.

For several years, the American technology has become the basis of domestic hydroaviation. Only from 1952, first to the Northern, and then to other fleets, new domestic flying boats Be-6 began to arrive. However, sea pilots warmly recalled the comfort, reliability and high quality of the manufacture of American seaplanes. Gradually replaced by the Be-6, the “Catalina” were used by sea pilots until the end of 1955.

Mosquito bite

When the DeHavilland Mosquito star rose, the USSR showed keen interest in a promising bomber. The British side provided one copy for review, Mosquito was distilled to Moscow and dismantled to the screw. The experts' verdict was categorical: the production of a Mosquito in the USSR is impossible, and the operation is associated with great technical difficulties, due to the lack of high-quality consumables and qualified specialists. Most of all doubts were caused by professionally glued trim and high quality Rolls-Royce Merlin motors.



Despite these findings, the Soviet Union ordered 1500 Mosquitoes as much. The order was canceled, in return, the USSR received Spitfires - the British decided that the fighter was more necessary to the Soviet Union than a bomber.

Apple of discord

Delivery of the fighter P-51 Mustang on the "Lend-Lease" is clearly not included in the American plans. An outstanding aircraft of his time was the basis of the US Air Force fighter fleet. Naturally, America did not want to share these machines with anyone. The only exception was the Royal Air Force - the most loyal allies of America, the Anglo-Saxons by blood. In total, over the years of mass production from 1940 to 1950, the 8000 Mustangs were produced for the year - an amount sufficient only to meet the needs of the US Air Force.

Objectively, the USSR had no need for Mustangs, for this aircraft there were no suitable tasks on the Eastern Front. The fights were fought at low and medium altitudes, where the Airbuns did an excellent job. Nevertheless, the Soviet mission managed to get 10 machines for review. All "Mustangs" went to TsAGI for detailed study.

trifle

Lend-Lease supplies also included:

- 4400 Tomahokov, Kittihokov and Hurricane (total)
- 1300 Spitfire
- B-870 Mitchell front bomber 25
- 700 C-47 "Skytrain" (the most common transport aircraft of the anti-Hitler coalition)
- AT-6 “Texan” combat training, AW41 Albemarle transport, Handley Page HP.52 Hampden bombers in quantities unworthy of mention

Freebie

A certain amount of aircraft was received by the USSR bypassing the Lend-Lease agreement. According to the Soviet-Japanese neutrality agreement in force at the time, all damaged American bombers that had landed on the territory of the Far East were interned. This practice applied to all American aircraft, starting with B-25 E. York from the Doolittle group, who landed on Unashi airfield in April 1942. In this way, a significant number of B-25 and B-24 of which the 128-I mixed air division was formed subsequently fell into the hands of Soviet pilots.

Aircraft crews were placed in a special assembly camp in Central Asia. Although representatives of the Japanese embassy observed the camp, the American pilots were periodically staged an “escape” and they were announced at US bases in Iran.

Petrol arithmetic

One of the bottlenecks of the Soviet economy before the war was the production of aviation gasoline. So, in 1941, on the eve of the war, the need for aviation gasoline B-78 was satisfied by only 4%. In 1941, the USSR produced 1269 KT, in 1942 - 912, in 1943 - 1007, in 1944 - 1334 and in 1945. - 1017 KT

In total, over the years of the war in the United States, Lend-Lease supplied 628,4 thousand tons of aviation gasoline and 732,3 thousand tons of gasoline of light fractions. In addition, from the Abadan oil refinery, the United Kingdom supplied 14,7 thousand tons of aviation gasoline and 902,1 thousand tons of light gasoline to the USSR (these supplies were offset by the United Kingdom of Great Britain). To this must also be added 573 thousand tons of aviation gasoline supplied to the USSR from the refineries of Great Britain and Canada. In sum, all this gives 2850,5 thousands of short tons of aviation gas and light gasoline fractions obtained by the USSR from the USA, Great Britain and Canada, which is equal to 2586 thousands of metric tons.

More than 97% of imported gasoline had an octane number of 99 and higher, whereas in the USSR there was even a huge shortage of B-78 gasoline in the USSR. In the Soviet Union, imported aviation gasoline and light gasoline fractions were used almost exclusively for mixing with Soviet aviation gasoline in order to increase their octane number. Therefore, aviation gasoline actually supplied under the Lend-Lease was included in the Soviet production of aviation gasoline and, therefore, (together with the light gasoline fractions), 51,5% of the Soviet 1941-1945 production. If we subtract from the total Soviet production of aviation gas for the first half of 1941, estimating it to about half of the annual production, then the share of lend-lease deliveries will rise to 57,8%.
123 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +17
    16 January 2012 09: 04
    The help, in fact, is huge and very necessary.
  2. dimarm74
    +12
    16 January 2012 09: 44
    You can also add - about 350 trucks. What allowed the USSR to concentrate on the production of tanks and other equipment
  3. Evgan
    +14
    16 January 2012 09: 46
    Zhukov:

    “Now they say that the Allies never helped us ... But it cannot be denied that the Americans were driving us so much materials without which we could not form our reserves and could not continue the war ... We did not have explosives, gunpowder. than to equip rifle cartridges. The Americans really helped us out with gunpowder, explosives. And how much sheet steel they drove to us! How could we quickly set up the production of tanks if it were not for American aid with steel? And now they imagine that we have everything it was its abundance.
    ... Without American trucks, we would have nothing to pull our artillery with. "

    Of course, the Americans helped us not without benefit for themselves, but - in a timely manner and on the topic. For this they "thank".
    1. 0
      16 January 2012 23: 18
      Thanks, why in quotation marks?
      1. snek
        +1
        16 January 2012 23: 30
        Quote: disa
        Thanks, why in quotation marks?

        Because the quote. For example: and then he said "thank you".
  4. Charon
    +18
    16 January 2012 10: 51
    The main speculations on the topic of Lend-Lease ended after the publication of the figures. After that, indulgent talk about 4% ceased. And who did not stop did not read the source.
    But exaggeration is also not necessary. You need to carefully look at the numbers.
    Not all deliveries were expedient. The cost of transporting a number of types of weapons clearly exceeded the effect of use.
    If there were no American supplies of gunpowder and gasoline, the war would not have been lost. I just would have to expand my production to the detriment of another.
    It would be more difficult, but not catastrophic. If you look at the delivery schedules, then in the most difficult moments we relied only on our own strengths.
    In general, estimates should be weighted, without extremes.
    1. +12
      16 January 2012 12: 04
      Correctly you noted, all the numbers must be correctly decomposed "on the shelves." For example, in the 41st year, the USSR received only 2% of the total volume of Lend-Lease. In the 42nd year - 13%. If we talk about cars, in the 43rd year they accounted for 5,4% of the total number of cars in the Red Army, in the 44th year -19%, and as of May 1, 45 in the Red Army there were 32,8% of Lend-Lease cars, 9,1% are trophy cars, and 58,1% are domestic. 14126 aircraft were received from the United States, but 76% of this number was received in 1943, after the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of the Caucasus. And 2595 planes never got to the front. The situation is similar for ships. Another delusion is an attempt to compare the amount of property received with the amount of similar property issued in the USSR during the war years. For some positions, it seems that there was nothing at all without Lend-Lease. But at the same time it is forgotten that the Soviet Union did not lose all of its reserves during the German invasion, and very actively used what was created in the pre-war years. So, for example, 2 thousand steam locomotives were received from the allies, but the USSR had 27 thousand of its own locomotives. 11 thousand cars were received, but in the USSR 41 thousand cars were produced in the 33st year and another 1 during the war ...
      1. +2
        16 January 2012 13: 39
        In-started))

        For example, in the 41 year of the USSR, it received only 2% of the total volume of Lend-Lease
        If anyone forgot, the United States officially set foot on the 7 December 1941 war. So why would they provide military assistance earlier?

        14126 units were received from the USA, but 76% of this amount was received in the 1943 year
        Well, the peak of the German production of equipment fell on the 1943-1944, before that the Wehrmacht aircraft and tanks counted hundreds

        And 2595 aircraft didn’t get to the front at all
        Naturally, they covered the Far East

        Another misconception is an attempt to compare the amount of property received with the volumes of similar property issued in the USSR during the war years.
        Potatoes and rutabaga were equated with chocolate and stew. Most importantly, the percentage is the same))

        So, for example, 2 thousand locomotives were received from the Allies, but in the USSR there were 27 thousand of their locomotives. 11 thousand cars were received, but in the USSR in the 41 year 33 thousand cars and another 1 thousand were produced during the war ...
        And Nizh. The Tagil plant for half a year could not produce the T-34-85, until the carousel was brought from America
        1. +5
          16 January 2012 14: 10
          But yours continues. Waving slogans and enumeration of facts beyond the general picture of events continues. I did not equal potatoes and rutabaga with chocolate and condensed milk, but the importance of potatoes for the country's population should not be reduced. Speaking about airplanes for covering the Far East, one should not forget that they could not be used there, since many of them came after the defeat of Germany. And about the machine, you could just buy it, the country would not be very ruined.

          Speaking of food, it should be noted that of the 3,84 million tons of food received from the Allies, most (2,5 million tons) was received in the 44th, 45th years.
          1. +1
            16 January 2012 14: 58
            Waving slogans and enumeration of facts beyond the general picture of events continues
            It looks more like false patriots. They don't like numbers, they want the "big picture".
            Well: Aircobre was received 5000, Kingcobra -2400, in the amount of 7400 Bell fighters. Is it a lot or a little? The legendary La 5 units were released 9900.
            Hurricanes and Kittyhocks were delivered 4400 pcs. Yak-1 and Yak-1bis were released 8700 units.
            50% of Soviet production is obtained, no matter how you twist. And this is serious

            many of them came after the defeat of Germany
            Write the exact number of aircraft received in the USSR after 9 on May 1945.
            1. +3
              16 January 2012 15: 14
              This is just you do not like numbers. You do not like exact numbers. So you wrote about 50% of Soviet production. What is this interest? Why only La-5 and Yak-1? There were no other fighters in the Soviet Air Force? I wrote you the exact number of American planes that did not take part in the hostilities! Neither in the West nor in the East.
            2. +3
              16 January 2012 15: 34
              During the war years, the USSR produced 96520 aircraft (without Po-2). Including 50687 fighters; 33930 attack aircraft; 11903 bombers. And if we talk about La planes, then 5 La-5753 planes should be added to La-7 planes.
              1. +1
                16 January 2012 16: 07
                Including 50687 fighters; 33930 attack aircraft; 11903 bomber.
                Heh ... It's not so simple, many samples were produced long after the war, and you added them (example Yak-9 16.000 pcs. (But were produced before the 1950 year, Pe-2 11000 pcs., But from them a couple of thousand are post-war licensed issue and issue)

                5753 aircraft La 7
                Same. The bulk of the post-war issue.

                Here are some more numbers: 5000 LaGG-3 and 1300 Spitfires. Also serious numbers.
                1. +1
                  17 January 2012 00: 21
                  Stop dodging! I gave you the numbers of the number of aircraft released during the YEARS OF WAR!
            3. +2
              16 January 2012 15: 51
              If we talk about the Yak aircraft, about 37000 aircraft were produced during the war years!
              1. -2
                16 January 2012 16: 10
                Not true.
                1. The figure is overpriced
                2. Post-war issue not taken into account
                1. oleg-sochi68
                  0
                  17 January 2012 03: 25
                  If you analyze and calculate everything so carefully and meticulously, then why are you missing out on the author's words - "More than 97% of imported gasoline had an octane number of 99 and higher, while in the USSR, as we have already seen, there was even gasoline B- 78 ". For some reason, he considers it possible to compare the A-99 (as I understand it) and the B-78 - this is gasoline of different characteristics. Based on this, I believe that the author did not carefully approach the question, and you indulge him. Without the help of the allies (Lend Lease), the Union would not have suffered defeat. And the supplied equipment and its quantity were not that good. And the gold from us was also "good". The bourgeois did not miss theirs. So do not tear your soul for them.
                  1. +1
                    19 January 2012 15: 28
                    comparison of A-99 (as I understand it) and B-78 - this is a different gasoline in terms of characteristics
                    And what do you want? To say that it is the same fuel? B-78 octane number 91 ... 93. What does the difference in 6-9 multiple units mean?

                    In the second half of 1941, Soviet diplomats, in accordance with government directives, took active steps to organize the procurement of aviation fuel and octane boosting components in the United States. The Soviet political and military leadership was well aware that high-octane gasoline could greatly enhance the tactical and technical advantages of aviation in the “engine war”. So in the USA, the use of 100-octane gasoline made it possible to reduce the aircraft mileage by 33,3% before taking it off the ground, by 40% accelerate the ascent by 1 a mile of altitude, and by 20-30% increase the bomb load.

                    Without American fuel, there could be problems near Stalingrad, because due to the threat of the offensive of the fascist troops on 13 on September 1942, the GKO adopted Decree No. 2298 “On the dismantling of Grozny oil refineries,” which reduced the production of aviation gasoline in the USSR by 25%.
                    1. oleg-sochi68
                      +2
                      20 January 2012 12: 23
                      I'm not talking about the fact that high-octane gasoline is worse, but about the fact that the author omitted part of the fuel indices and created the subject of controversy.
                      The letter "A" in the marking of gasoline means that it is automobile, and the following figures are the octane number, which shows the knock resistance of the fuel. It is also known that the octane number is determined by two methods - motor and research. In the latter case, "And" is added to "A" (it is capital, large).
                      Higher requirements for the quality of aviation gasolines are also determined by stringent conditions for their use. GOST 1012-72 provides for two brands of aviation gasolines: B-91/115 and B-95/130. The brand of aviation gasoline means its octane number according to the motor method, indicated in the numerator, and grade on the rich mixture - in the denominator of the fraction.
                      1. 0
                        29 January 2012 19: 01
                        and created the subject of controversy
                        For this, an article was written, otherwise it would not be interesting

                        What else do you want? This is not a scientific work, the main thing here is to attract the attention of the reader and make him think. There is no falsification of facts here, the main idea is clearly indicated - the USSR had major problems with the production of high-octane gasoline. The needs, even for the relatively mediocre B-78, were satisfied in 1941 only by 4%. Anyone interested can find detailed information in any directory.
            4. +2
              16 January 2012 17: 21
              And why are only Yak-1 and Yak-1bis aircraft mentioned in comparison ??? And if you count the Yak-3 (about 10000 units), Yak-9, of which almost 20000 units were produced? The percenter will change !!! and not about 50% of Soviet production will have to be considered !!! Again, in addition to La-5, La-7 was also produced, so not 50% of Soviet production, but only 15 - 17% !!! And one more thing: people say: "The road is a spoon for dinner!" And fighter planes were much more needed in 1941-42, when the Germans walked over the heads of our soldiers on the Messers, and the Ju-87 hammered any resistance into the dust (Remember at least the tragedy of Stalingrad in August 1942) when the planes and the rest supplies were needed to the extreme. And in the summer of 1942, the "allies" staged a massacre of the PQ-17 caravan, when the fleet of the "mistress of the seas", putting in their pants out of fear that the "Tirpitz" had entered the sea, threw almost 50 defenseless transports to be "devoured" by the Germans. (ONE Soviet submarine K-21 was enough to stop "Tirpitz" !!!) And then the vile Churchill, complaining about the defeat of the caravan, stopped the release of convoys in the USSR until autumn. And 75-80% of Lend-Lease cargo went through the Northern Route! And what was the situation in the summer of 1942, a literate person should know, one order number 227 is worth it, not from a good life. And in 1943-1944, and even more so in 45, the army was supplied with aircraft to a sufficient extent and would have coped without imports. Yes, Pokryshkin fought in the Aircobra since 1943, and before that in the MiG-3, and the Yak. And Kozhedub fought on La-5 and La-7, so this is not an indicator of the quality of equipment. It was just that the Aerocobras were nailed to Pokryshkin's regiment, and they would have been sent to another regiment, our ace would beat the Germans on Yak or La.
              1. +1
                16 January 2012 19: 58
                False patriots hang out numbers, like real cheaters)))
                Try to understand.

                And if you count the Yak-3 (about 10000 pcs.)
                Lying. Yak-3 released 5000 pcs., Of which 1000 pcs. AFTER 9 on May 1945.

                Yak-9, which almost 20000 pieces released?
                Again a lie. 16.000 pcs., One third of them - AFTER the war
        2. Bayun
          +2
          16 January 2012 15: 42
          Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
          And Nizh. The Tagil plant for half a year could not produce the T-34-85, until the carousel was brought from America
          Oh well! It means there was not one nail in the forge and the plant stood for six months? What is one machine in a factory? really on one machine kept all factory production? You, sir, did not measure your temperature? And it looks like a fever.
          1. +2
            16 January 2012 16: 02
            The carousel was used to process the epaulettes of the tank turret. A gigantic tool could handle a shoulder strap of a tower up to 1,5 meters in size. At T-34-85, it increased to 1530 mm. They waited six months for the new unit.

            Actually, a well-known fact, it is not clear why it surprises you so much)))
            1. Bayun
              0
              16 January 2012 16: 29
              I am not aware of the fact that the factory was one carousel. And what super-speed productivity should he have, that he alone ensured the annual plan of the plant! Do you even think that write!
              1. -1
                16 January 2012 17: 00
                Your knowledge of machine tools is limited to the school study of labor.

                You can imagine the dimensions of this unit, which bores 1,5 meter holes! Naturally, it was one of the main elements of the production line and there was nothing to replace it with.
                1. Bayun
                  0
                  16 January 2012 17: 42
                  I just do not write about the size. And about performance. And the number of such machines in the factory.
                  1. 0
                    16 January 2012 18: 52
                    Yes, he was the only one. The only camp.
                2. 0
                  16 January 2012 19: 51
                  .... Well, well, tell us something new in metal cutting by the Chief Engineer of the plant ......
                  1. 0
                    16 January 2012 23: 26
                    100% to the chief engineer of the plant.
                3. Gur
                  -1
                  16 January 2012 20: 17
                  And before this machine .. sov.rabochki files are sharpened holes or jigsaws ?? Or did we not make tanks before this machine ??
                  1. -1
                    16 January 2012 20: 38
                    GUR, read the conversation thread from the start.
                    Before this Nizh. Tagil did the T-34 and there was no problem.
                    1. Gur
                      +1
                      17 January 2012 16: 18
                      I am your branch .. I see through ...
                      In addition to the T 34, we had others, and where with large towers .. as well as turning towers made on ships .. what are you making up of yourself so clever ...
        3. 0
          20 January 2012 16: 52
          They tried to limit the supply of any equipment to the USSR! Sometimes even in spite of the crime of such behavior! We must not forget that the Russians were never loved! Not even then, now even more so! And the bureaucrats didn’t give a damn about the war! paying with pure gold! This war helped America out of the economic crisis, by the way!
      2. 0
        April 4 2018 01: 38
        firstly, for steam locomotives, such as, for example, ICE or rocket engines, their own niches, their own requirements for the quality of the path, slopes and radii. 16% of the total was lost until the fall of 1942. Many thousands more were not exploited or exploited to a limited extent, as Under the new high-speed regime, railways (up to 15 km / h average speed) were ineffective, consuming significantly more coal (like a revving ICE in a traffic jam).
        secondly, a special joint commission determined the composition and quantity of goods being transported, each ton, each meter was the subject of debate and debate. The country needed EVERYTHING, but it was necessary to choose the most necessary in order to close the bottlenecks. As you can see, in spite of the existing “friends”, the steam locomotives were recognized more important than other positions. And also terribly heavy and bulky, fit only on the upper deck and this inefficiently use the carrying capacity of transports (reducing their effective cargo capacity). But still they were taken.
  5. +9
    16 January 2012 10: 53
    In fact, the problem is not that we do not recognize the help, but that this help is now issued as the only thing that saved the USSR. Respect for each other and the relationship of equals is the only guarantee of peaceful coexistence.
    1. +1
      16 January 2012 12: 40
      Judging by the level of xenophobia and pseudo-patriotism, the opposite opinion prevails in society: "Lend-Lease is unnecessary junk for Soviet gold, and its value is negligible."
      1. snek
        0
        16 January 2012 16: 01
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        In fact, the problem is not that we do not recognize the help, but that this help is now issued as the only thing that saved the USSR.

        I don’t remember that somewhere I met a similar position. Yes, most American films, including documentaries, concentrate on those fronts where they fought. But this is natural. Similarly, we do not have films about Pearl Harbor or Iwajima, although hundreds of films have been made about the war.
        1. +1
          16 January 2012 19: 54
          The fate of the world was decided in Europe .... they defeated Hitler, then the Soviet Army demolished the Kwantung (millionth) army in a matter of weeks .... we have about a couple of films about the defeat of the Yupps too ....
          1. -5
            16 January 2012 20: 01
            Frigatekapitan - bespontovy Troll, funny to read his cloying patriotic vysery wink
            1. -1
              18 January 2012 19: 25
              ay not troll, unlike you ... go ... for today the hamburger worked out ....
      2. Gur
        +1
        16 January 2012 20: 23
        I don't understand .. "false patriotism" is when I say that my country washed itself with blood .. fought .. Europe liberated, saved the same amers from the boilers .. going on the offensive .. ie. I stand up for the country and defend it .. And "patriotism" means .. I must agree .. that if it were not for America, we would not have planes, tanks and my country is not a grateful vacuum cleaner ?? Oh t with about s .. Whose "patriot" you will be ??
        1. -6
          16 January 2012 20: 59
          pseudo-patriotism "is when I say that my country washed in blood .. fought .. liberated Europe,
          When these words are repeated 1001 times, it already causes nausea. 70 years have passed, it's time to learn to be proud of something else. And do not reproach that I forget the Great Victory. There was already such a Great Victory and everyone forgot it over the past years. Weak to name the date of the battle of Borodino without Wikipedia?)))

          saved the same amers from boilers .. going on the offensive .. i.e. I stand for the country and defend it ..
          Words of an illiterate false patriot. You are not defending a country; you are codifying the history of another country. And on this you can’t magnify your story.

          that if it weren’t for America, we wouldn’t have planes
          These are your stupid words, make excuses for them yourself
          1. +2
            16 January 2012 23: 33
            ... another little boy is trying to prove that the grandfathers who were dying for their Motherland were "ponto free" ... go to the states, the sun, we will not be offended by a smart, well-reasoned, practically savvy - an ignoramus.
          2. Gur
            +1
            17 January 2012 16: 37
            For people like you .. it must be burned on the forehead, because everything Russian makes you nauseous ... you are fed with hamburgs and Coca-Cola. 70 years is not a period for history. Those who won this victory and those who made it in the rear are still alive. And such ..... you killed something in the country that you could be proud of, and continue to kill .. And in Russia there are plenty of victories (although Borodino is essentially a "draw" in 1812, the glory of the CPSU is still a Soviet formation) there were other victories.
            I didn’t hurt the honor of American history, but you don’t know your origin and country of residence, crap on the history of my country, diminishing its merits and conquests (to put it mildly). And about airplanes these are not my words, but the subtext of this article and your posts.
            1. -1
              18 January 2012 10: 23
              So name the date of the Battle of Borodino without the help of Wikipedia, the guardian of Russian history))
              1. -1
                18 January 2012 19: 27
                ... wise guy ... you don’t have to be rude to people who are someone, and it’s you who are stupidly heroic milestones of Pindostan you draw clearly from Wiki without thinking ...
          3. -1
            18 January 2012 19: 30
            Soon, soon we will be proud of others ... wait
  6. +6
    16 January 2012 11: 07
    Quote: Charon
    If there were no American supplies of gunpowder and gasoline, the war would not have been lost. I just would have to expand my production to the detriment of another.
    It would be harder, but not catastrophic.


    Quote: Kaetani
    In fact, the problem is not that we do not recognize the help, but that this assistance is now being issued as the only thing that saved the USSR

    Bravo, dear! Short and absolutely correct
  7. J_silver
    +5
    16 January 2012 11: 14
    Personally, I have never denied the importance of Lend-Lease supplies, but regarding this article - in this case, almost complete nonsense ...
    in almost every point, starting with Aero Cobra - and about protecting the engine from the back - the front protection is more important for a fighter, because if you allow the enemy behind, then the Borjomi will no longer help ...
    By the way, Kingcobra also had to do it because of the revealed structural defects of the Aero Cobra, in general, the plane was very good ...
    Stormtrooper Boston - what’s not the Flying Fortress? As a bomber really was very much appreciated, by the way his merits were not belittled anywhere in the Soviet books, but only boasted ...
    What is so heavily armed in Thunderbolt? Let it be eight 12,7 mm machine guns? But Witman seems to have been flunked by the Typhoon ...
    Still, escorting the fortresses and attacking are somewhat different tasks and you cannot solve the same aircraft the same way ...
    Special thanks to Hurricane - it seems that Safonov has disappeared due to the fact that the bearings in the engine melted in flight, was such a reliable machine?
    Nobody ever said a bad word about Catalina ...
    1. -5
      16 January 2012 13: 22
      For a fighter, protection from the front is more important, because if you let the enemy behind you, then Borjomi will no longer help ...
      Those. life of a pilot means nothing to you. The armor plates were put in vain ...

      By the way, Kingcobra also had to do it because of the revealed structural defects of the Aero Cobra, in general, the plane was very good ...
      Cobras received only guard regiments. There is nothing more to add.

      What is so heavily armed in Thunderbolt? Let eight 12,7 mm machine guns?
      1000 kg payload

      Still, escorting the fortresses and attacking are somewhat different tasks and you cannot solve the same aircraft the same way ...
      Creating a multifunctional aircraft is a difficult task. Among the successful designs are Thunderbolt and Phantom II.

      But Witman seems to have been flunked by the Typhoon ...
      Or maybe Sherman-Firefly ... some assumptions
      1. J_silver
        +1
        16 January 2012 15: 50
        And about the fact that the engine could break off the mounts when bonding on landing? What would the pilot prefer: an air-cooled engine in the front or nothing? The armored back is the armored back ...
        For some reason, the allies were delighted with the Typhoon, whom no one had thought to supply to the USSR, and did not mention much about the Thunderbolts, who were engaged in long-distance escort ...
        And why no one mentions anything about that flow of goods. what came from the USSR? Or does someone think it was a one-way street?
        1. -1
          16 January 2012 16: 43
          And about the fact that the engine could break off the mounts when bonding on landing?

          Nosing is a guaranteed end to the plane and the pilot. And nothing depends on the engine.

          The armored back is the armored back ...
          The armored back is 6 ... 8 mm. And here a whole block of cylinders covered the pilot.

          For some reason, the allies were delighted with the Typhoon, whom no one thought to deliver to the USSR
          The USSR had its own 30.000 IL-2. There was no need for attack aircraft.

          And why no one mentions anything about that flow of goods. What was coming from the USSR?
          Give the numbers. Very interesting.
          1. J_silver
            0
            16 January 2012 17: 01
            Bonding is not a guaranteed end to the plane at all - when the engine arrives from above, then yes ...
            Much more often, the battle is oncoming, and they are already pursuing it, so the pilot behind the engine was much calmer ...
            Figures about the oncoming stream? What about just looking at Wiki? Problems?

            The USSR sent various goods to the United States (including 320 thousand tons of chrome ore, 32 thousand tons of manganese ore, as well as gold, platinum, wood). This was done as part of the reverse Lend-Lease program.
            During the war, no one paid for Lend-Lease - and should not, instead of money they paid in blood, questions arose later - about that, and negotiations were conducted ...
            1. 0
              16 January 2012 19: 16
              Bonding is not a guaranteed end to the plane at all - when the engine arrives from above, then yes ...
              Do not be silly. When kapotirovaniya person guaranteed breaks. And then the fire is guaranteed to begin.
              Moreover, in Cobra, the center of gravity is shifted back, which, on the contrary, reduces the risk of bonding.

              Much more often the battle is oncoming
              Nothing like this. Always strive to tail. Ases generally stuffed themselves up with an unexpected attack from behind from above.

              The USSR sent various goods to the USA (including 320 thousand tons of chrome ore, 32 thousand tons of manganese ore, as well as gold, platinum, wood)
              320 thousand tons ... the cargo flow in the USSR amounted to 15 MILLION tons ... that is, all 2-3% went back. Moreover, you have equalized trucks and planes with raw ore.

              During the war, no one paid for Lend-Lease - and should not, instead of money they paid in blood
              Everyone fought. But the USSR did not help anyone, only sucked in goods and equipment from other countries, like a giant vacuum cleaner.
              1. J_silver
                -1
                16 January 2012 19: 58
                And not at all! Broke unattached or poorly attached ...
                At the x..th airfield with a nose stand, it’s just as easy to break it down - and there were problems with airfields for almost the entire war ...
                Usually the battle begins on the opposite courses, and only then they try to get in the tail - all of a sudden you can attack only escort aircraft or just gape ...
                It is written - including, they didn’t go empty ...
                And gold, platinum - with what to equal?
                Just the same, they fought in different ways ...
                1. +1
                  16 January 2012 20: 07
                  And not at all! Broke unattached or poorly attached ...
                  Belts will not save, because broke the design of the aircraft. Following almost always a fire started.

                  It is written - including, they didn’t go empty ...
                  2-3%. Here's the whole price of yelling for reverse Lend Lease

                  And gold, platinum - with what to equal?
                  With trucks and planes. If at least 7% paid - well done.

                  Just the same, they fought in different ways ...
                  The USSR had a chance to become a hero. So wipe away the tears and be proud.
                  1. J_silver
                    0
                    16 January 2012 20: 15
                    In most cases, they were limited to changing the screw - and this is not a big discovery ...
                    Specific numbers were indicated for individual positions, so much more than 2-3 percent arrived ...
                    Yes, unfortunately, more often than not, our people had to fight in such conditions that the defeat led to the guaranteed death of the whole nation, that is, a war of total annihilation ...
                    1. -1
                      16 January 2012 20: 37
                      In most cases, they were limited to changing the screw - and this is not a big discovery ...
                      You are talking about armament of the PV-190 nonsense and again climb into the air of disgrace)))

                      Specific numbers were indicated for individual positions, so much more than 2-3 percent arrived ...
                      Try to indicate everything. I am sure that more than 4% will not scratch.
                      1. J_silver
                        0
                        16 January 2012 22: 44
                        I just retold the publicly available information - and I’m not disgraced anywhere else ...
              2. -1
                16 January 2012 20: 01
                Sorry ... even modern Boeings and MIGs are planted in a bonded way ... it's easy to find the info ....
          2. -1
            16 January 2012 19: 59
            Our armored backs began to be put back in Spain on the I-15, I-16 .... so that this is not an exclusive Aero Cobra ...
  8. Gur
    0
    16 January 2012 12: 29
    To the author of 100+, I knew .. that the Americans won the war, your honestly earned hamburger is waiting for you !!
    No, I don’t want to say that we didn’t need help, but the article creates an opinion .. that the Soviet Army fought .. only on American cars, airplanes, tanks ... Although some aircraft and tanks raise many doubts about their reliability, yes and this began to enter the army already only at 43 meters. And despite the "superiority" of American and British aircraft Kozhedub on our La7, overwhelmed two Mustangs, the pilots of the Normandy Niemen ... on Il-s in a demonstration battle in France ... rolled out. .English Spitfires.
    Well, the fact that not everyone returned ... so .. when the amers brought the press to destroy the equipment and just started making pancakes from it .. Stalin, looking at these atrocities .. ordered more than the equipment not to be handed over ... since she’s raising the state was extremely necessary. (especially cars), and for some warriors .. it was generally blasphemy.
    1. grizzlir
      0
      16 January 2012 12: 49
      Quote: GUR
      the pilots of Normandy Neman .. on Il-s in a show battle in France .. rolled out .. English Spitfaers.

      Is it that you were so wrong, or do you have such knowledge of history?
      1. Gur
        -4
        16 January 2012 16: 12
        Everything is okay with history ... Stalin gave the Normandy Neman planes to the pilots who fought on them .. they drove them to France .. but there already in France a demonstration battle took place .. because ..the French fought on Spitfaers or the English the pilots (I don’t remember exactly already) rated our Ily low .. (like the Germans like our tanks) This is for you dear grizzlir so fill in the blanks
        1. J_silver
          +1
          16 January 2012 16: 18
          The French flew on the Yaks, in particular, and now the Yak-3 aircraft is in the museum ...
          If this is okay with the story, then it’s ridiculous ...
          1. grizzlir
            -2
            16 January 2012 16: 27
            Well, everyone has their own story, perhaps the GUR story the French flew on ILs. Perhaps even on IL-28 or IL-86.
            1. Gur
              0
              16 January 2012 19: 38
              I had to fly .. at 86))) Yes, I'm sorry I gave a blunder .. with ILs. I was more focused on the fact of the presence of our aircraft in France and their participation in a show battle. Well, as for Bf and Fw, and this could be .. German planes .. captured as well as tanks were used in the Red Army ... so do not scuffle.
  9. +2
    16 January 2012 12: 45
    We must definitely remember the deliveries of porosovo and railway cars, as well as rails. 1900 steam locomotives and 66 diesel-electric locomotives were delivered to the USSR during the war during Lend-Lease. Lend-lease supplies exceeded the total Soviet production of steam locomotives in 1941-1945 years 2,4 times, and electric locomotives - 11 times. a total of 11 wagons were delivered {, or 075 times more than Soviet production in 10,2-1942. It is known that during the First World War, the transport crisis in Russia at the turn of 1945-1916, which largely triggered the February 1917 revolution, was caused by the insufficient production of railway rails, steam locomotives and wagons, since the industrial capacities and rental resources were reoriented to arms production . During World War II, only Lend-Lease deliveries prevented railway paralysis in the Soviet Union.
    The El-629 steam locomotive is a series of freight locomotives delivered to the railways of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union during the First and Second World Wars to quickly replenish the locomotive fleet. Built at North American factories. Delivered as military assistance. The “E” locomotives are also known for the fact that in 1920 in the furnace of one of them (El-629) the White Guards burned down the revolutionary Bolshevik Sergey Lazo.
    1. 0
      16 January 2012 13: 10
      You forget that in the USSR for 41 years there were 27 thousand steam locomotives. Give facts taken out of the big picture ... This is a rotten method of liberoid pseudo-historians.
    2. 0
      16 January 2012 14: 37
      "a total of 11 wagons were delivered {, or 075 times more Soviet production in 10,2-1942." But at the same time, your sources forget to indicate how many cars were in the USSR on the eve of the war.
      1. snek
        0
        16 January 2012 16: 05
        Quote: erix-06
        But at the same time, your sources forget to indicate how many cars were in the USSR on the eve of the war.

        Railway trains were systematically destroyed by German aircraft, and to increase their production volumes means to reduce the production of something else, for example, tanks.
        1. 0
          16 January 2012 16: 12
          Yes, destroyed. But they could not be destroyed ALL! 11 thousand wagons is a good help, but only in the 41st year the country produced 33 thousand wagons. Therefore, to say that in the USSR there were only one thousand of its own wagons is a hoax.
          1. snek
            0
            16 January 2012 16: 48
            Quote: erix-06
            but only in the 41st year the country produced 33 thousand wagons. Therefore, to say that in the USSR there were only one thousand of its own wagons is a hoax.

            Hmm, for the first time I hear such numbers. Could you name the source, otherwise I cannot find information on the pre-war issue of the car. Regarding release during the war, here is a quote:
            During the war years (1941-1945), the wagon fleet was almost not replenished with new wagons, since the car-building factories were switched to military output. In the second half of 1941, all of them, except the Ural and Ust-Katavsky plants, were evacuated to the east of the country. In 1942-1943 some of them were engaged in the manufacture of spare parts for the needs of the NKPS, the re-equipment and repair of cars, the construction of small lots of new cars. For example, the Altai Carriage Building Plant (Dneprodzerzhinsky plant named after the newspaper Pravda evacuated during the war in Barnaul) built 1942 freight cars in 20, and 1943 freight cars in 46. The Uritsky Plant (Engels) and Kalininsky were repaired 192, and in 1934 - 123 freight cars. The Kalinin Plant converted 13 wagons in 1942 and 30 wagons in 1943.
            taken from here:
            http://www.1520mm.ru/railcars/wagons-1941-1945.phtml
            1. 0
              17 January 2012 00: 32
              You again give the number of cars produced in the USSR during the war. I do not dispute its authenticity! But I’m saying that it’s very incorrect to take into account only this figure in the calculations !!! There were disproportionately more wagons in the country! But all sorts of observers in their country stubbornly do not want to notice this! As for the source, I will find, I will share.
            2. 0
              18 January 2012 08: 51
              By the way, locomotives and railway platforms from the Lend-Lease allies began to arrive in the 44-45th years ... So the USSR liberated its territory from the Germans without foreign locomotives. And at about the same time in the USSR there were about 2 thousand captured troop locomotives.
  10. grizzlir
    +2
    16 January 2012 12: 55
    Of course, the help was enormous. The supplies of the Allies allowed us to save thousands and maybe millions of lives of Soviet people and bring the victory hour closer. True, the Allies made good money on supplies, although they could have provided truly free help to the country, which took upon itself the brunt of the fight against fascism.
    1. -8
      16 January 2012 13: 47
      The USA did not receive a cent for deliveries; moreover, the USSR did not return most of the equipment back. It crushed tanks in front of the American commission 100 Aero Cobra, and this was the end of the disposal process.

      The calculation was made only with Great Britain, but after the death of "Edinburgh" such calculations stopped.
      Few people know that part of the Edinburgh cruiser gold went to the production of radio equipment (gilding the terminals), again, for the USSR. It's a trifle, but you need to know for general development.
      1. J_silver
        +1
        16 January 2012 16: 16
        Yes, at least they looked at Wiki - they paid at least 722 million dollars, and this is not according to the most verified data ...
        1. 0
          16 January 2012 19: 50
          And you didn’t read the paragraph further? It says that the Soviet Union repaid only the cost of 7% of deliveries ... and the payment term is moving further and further, already up to 2030 of the year .... 722 million dollars))))
          1. J_silver
            +1
            16 January 2012 20: 04
            You should have read it more carefully from the beginning - no one was obliged to pay for a land-lease money during the war years, the repayment conditions should have been determined after the war ...
            Almost everything was written off to the British - from which hangover should we pay in full? They asked for the same conditions as the English, then conspired and paid about 722 million ...
            By the way, the tsar’s debts were paid - and this was a complete mess ...
            1. -3
              16 January 2012 20: 30
              Almost everything was written off to the British - from which hangover should we pay in full?
              You are not English.

              Asked for the same conditions as the English
              The British are faithful allies, blood brothers. And who are you?

              Then we conspired and paid about 722 million ...
              Nobody has agreed on anything so far. Only 7% of the cost of deliveries is compensated.
              1. J_silver
                0
                16 January 2012 22: 42
                We are faithful allies, and the only country honestly fulfilling ALL of its allied obligations under ANY government ...
                Everything has already been decided for a long time, and everything can already be forgotten - every attempt to pay off earlier was shut up precisely because of the USA ...
                1. -1
                  17 January 2012 09: 32
                  We are faithful allies
                  Silier, at least think when you write. What are the USSR's faithful allies?)))
                  England became an influential member of NATO, and the USSR turned into the worst enemy. And what are the discounts for the enemy?

                  and the only country honestly fulfilling ALL of its allied obligations under ANY government ...
                  When did they promise to transfer the K-152 "Nerpa" to the Indian Navy? I remember something in 2007. The money was received 5 years ago, and they are not going to give the Nerpa back.
                  When was the aircraft carrier Gorshkov promised to India? In 2008. As a result, the Indians were paid for money and the aircraft carrier has not yet been modernized.
                  1. J_silver
                    +2
                    17 January 2012 12: 33
                    Even under Peter, the allies had already begun to deceive Russia, but he kept his word ...
                    During the Seven Years' War, the most faithful allies ...
                    During the Napoleonic Wars - the most faithful allies ...
                    Liberation of the Balkans - not even fulfilled and exceeded. but simple promises ...
                    The First World War - the most faithful allies from the very beginning, and even at the end a lot of interesting questions we have to get to the allies ...
                    The Second World War - the most faithful allies, and they did not hold a stone behind their backs ...
                    And we have financial relations with turkeys - this is another matter, a completely different one ...
                  2. -1
                    18 January 2012 19: 36
                    He raves again ....
  11. +3
    16 January 2012 14: 01
    SWEET_SIXTEEN Based on your words, I have to believe that the USA GIVEN ALL FREE GIFT?

    Are you in yourself?
    1. -5
      16 January 2012 16: 13
      You must not believe. You must look at the facts and draw your conclusions.

      What are the facts of the transfer of US payment for Lend-Lease (dates, transmission channels, amounts). Leave an idle talk to false patriots.
      1. Bayun
        +1
        16 January 2012 16: 45
        Read Harry Hopkins memoirs, they mention, without exact numbers, payment by our American supplies. And I ask you not to confuse it - Lend-Lease, it’s precisely free deliveries, during the war, of US property that is not necessary for state security at the moment, but can serve to protect its interests where it is supplied. Under the Lend-Lease Act, after the end of the war, property must be returned, destroyed or redeemed. In addition, an agreement was concluded between the USSR and the USA that part of the payments for deliveries would be made by raw materials. More than once I had to communicate with veterans of the Far Eastern Shipping Company and I know for sure that our vessels did not go empty to the USA.
        1. -4
          16 January 2012 17: 06
          Read Harry Hopkins memoirs, they mention, without exact numbers, payment by our American supplies.
          Those. you cannot answer my question

          property must be returned, destroyed or redeemed
          Tell this to the fighters of the 53 aviation regiment of naval aviation, before the start of the 50x flying on the Catalines

          In addition, an agreement was concluded between the USSR and the USA that part of the payments for deliveries would be made by raw materials.
          What are the goods and their number sent from the USSR to the USA
          1. Bayun
            +1
            16 January 2012 17: 37
            There are no Hopkins memories at hand. But I read them and you, apparently not. By the way, do you even know who this is?
            Well, we flew on the Catalinas, so what? They served in the Civil Air Fleet even longer. You want to say that Stalin banally stole these Catalins? Or maybe he bought it? Do you have evidence of misappropriation of someone else's property? I'm not saying that ours destroyed all the property. Only what the US demanded. And about cargo - for example, kasasterite from the Magadan region. Gold, from the same place. Forest. The fish, by the way, was supplied. because American fishermen were afraid to leave the coast of Alaska - they had a war with Japan, if you remember. And again, if you are not too lazy, search the internet for "deliveries to the USA from the USSR 1941-45". you will surely find something.
            1. -2
              16 January 2012 20: 20
              You want to say that Stalin stole these Catalins?
              Yes.

              Or maybe bought it? Do you have evidence of the misappropriation of another's property?
              Yes, there is evidence.
              1. About the Lend-Lease technique used in the army and the national economy after the war, it was forbidden to mention in the open press
              2. Stalin never settled with America for Lend-Lease; the first advances began in 70x.

              just what the US required. And about cargoes - casserite, for example, from the Magadan region. Gold, from there. Forest. Fish, by the way, was supplied
              2-3% of cargo turnover. This is the price of screaming "reverse" lend-lease, with the US supplying planes and trucks, and the USSR sending the raw ore.
          2. Lech37
            +1
            19 January 2012 22: 16
            What are the goods and their number sent from the USSR to the USA


            I will quote an interesting quote:

            Lend-Lease was not a charity - it was an example of well-thought out mutually beneficial cooperation. By the end of the war, the USSR returned to the United States 1 million 70 thousand tons of oil products, paying the bulk of the materials received. In addition, the USSR received the Allied fleet in its ports, serviced it, repaired, provided fuel, etc.

            According to E. Hopkins, “Americans never believed that Lend-Lease assistance was the main factor in the Soviet victory over Hitler on the Eastern Front. The victory was achieved by the heroism and blood of the Russian army. ” For his part, the head of the Soviet state I. Stalin noted that the lend-lease made an “extraordinary contribution to the victory”. Stalin drew attention to the fact that “in previous wars, some states provided financial assistance to their allies, but it only insulted those who received subsidies and created financial difficulties. Lend-lease did not give rise to such evil. "


            You can read the full material here http://www.hist.msu.ru/Labs/Ecohist/OB11/USSR/kostornichenko.html
  12. Bayun
    +4
    16 January 2012 14: 01
    The help of the Allies was of course very necessary, and the fact that it helped to save many lives. But, you should not overestimate it either. Even Roosevelt spoke about this at the Yalta meeting.
    Now on the merits of the article. The supply of weapons and equipment, except for vehicles, did not play a decisive role in front-line operations. Moreover, in 41-42 years, in the most difficult times, they were minimal. Much more important was the supply of raw materials and vehicles - cars and steam locomotives.
    But the supply of some types of military equipment raises questions. The British supplied us with only outdated aircraft models. That is, if during the "Battle of England" Hurricane could still compete with the Messers, then in 41-42 the new modifications of the Masses burned them for nothing. The same goes for Kittyhawks and Tomahawks. R-39 "Airacobra" - I admit it is not a bad plane. But American pilots refused to fly it. Due to the mid-position of the engine, he tended to fall into a flat spin from which pilots of even average skill took him out with difficulty. There is even this in Pokryshkin's memoirs. That is, there were restrictions on aerobatics.
    Further. A-20 attack aircraft. It may be he was listed in the attack aircraft. The author is ironic that it was not used for its intended purpose. Yes, over the battlefield, he would simply not last long. Our Ilya flew in from the task all in tatters, and the A-20 would not have returned at all. So ours competently used it.
    Well, about the Tandenbolt citizen, I don’t know which country, he turned down from the heart. That means 8 12,5 mm. machine guns - heavy weapons? And up to 6 20 mm guns and 2 13 mm. machine gun for some models of the Fokke-Wulfs? A 3 30mm. guns and two 20mm for Messers? And the Luftwaffe night fighters had even more trunks! In short, the author does not own the topic absolutely.
    And for some reason he does not mention the supply of American tanks Lee, which our tankers called "a mass grave for five." Does not mention that the Matilda tank supplied to the USSR (in principle, a good tank) did not have high-explosive shells for its 42-mm cannon. Didn't have it at all, in nature! They were not designed for him.
    Under the terms of Lend-Lease, all military equipment after the war was to be returned to the United States or destroyed on the spot. The Soviet Union, of course, neglected this clause of the treaty, and the most modern Lend-Lease fighters went to serve in air defense until the appearance of jet MiGs.
    Firstly, some of the equipment was not delivered under Lend-Lease, but purchasedpaid either in gold or in the raw materials that we supplied to the allies. The Americans did not want to take back most of the Lend-Lease loan, the same Studebakers. They stamped them so much that there was nowhere to put their own. And the USSR honestly bought them at residual value. And part of the equipment was destroyed. For example, torpedo and patrol boats delivered to the Pacific Fleet were flooded in one of the bays of Russky Island, near Vladivostok.
    In short, the author is either illiterate, or deliberately juggles the facts.
    1. J_silver
      +2
      16 January 2012 14: 19
      That's right, only what can a high-explosive shell for Matilda fake? From an ordinary grenade, the effect will be three times more ...
      1. 0
        16 January 2012 17: 28
        it is better to shoot a high-explosive shell from a well-armored "Matilda" or send a soldier with a grenade at the machine-gun nest ??? Like: "You don't mind people !?" By the way, our forty-five had a high-explosive projectile, although it was considered a purely anti-tank gun.
        1. J_silver
          +1
          16 January 2012 17: 39
          For bunkers and bunkers, it is better to shoot from a normal gun, so that it’s guaranteed that there are enough hits nearby, and not try to get a 47 mm projectile into the embrasure ...
          Like Matilda, an infantry tank according to the English classification, and the weapons are just ridiculous ...
          1. Charon
            0
            17 January 2012 01: 16
            There is one fundamental difference. The magpie could accompany the attack and support with direct fire. And the "normal cannon" fired from a closed position and could not get into the embrasure. And in order for a hit nearby to be guaranteed enough, either the bunker must be flimsy, or the howitzer from the RVGK.
    2. Evgan
      0
      16 January 2012 14: 49
      The ratio of materials and weapons supplied by the allies to the USSR for payment (that is, "purely purchased") and transferred under a lend-lease agreement is interesting. Can anyone give any data on this?
    3. -6
      16 January 2012 16: 31
      Bayun, you have the most deceitful comment))

      The British supplied us with only obsolete aircraft models.
      1185 Spitfire MarkIX units - is this an obsolete technique?

      That is, if during the "Battle of England" Hurricane could still compete with the Messers, then in 41-42 the new modifications of the Masses burned them for nothing.
      1. The English had nothing better. Spitfire was not enough for ourselves.
      2. Many Hurricanes were equipped with 40 mm guns and were successfully used as ground attack aircraft.

      R-39 "Airacobra" - I admit it is not a bad plane. But American pilots refused to fly it.
      1. Only guards regiments were equipped with aircrabs. There is nothing more to say.
      2. Aircobra was impossible to use in the West. front, but for the USSR it was an ideal solution

      And up to 6 20 mm guns and 2 13 mm. machine gun for some models of Fokke-Wulfs?
      What kind of prodigy is this?)))
      Usually FV-190 carried 2 20 mm guns and 2 machine guns. Sometimes 2 Oerlikon-FF was added, but there was little sense from them (the trajectory of the shells of all 3 types of weapons was too different). And he couldn’t carry anything else!

      And Thunderbolt besides the main (8 0.50 Browning) carried 1000 kg of suspended weapons (2 times more than IL-2)!

      And 3 30mm. guns and two 20mm for Messers?
      What the fuck .. d?
      1. J_silver
        0
        16 January 2012 16: 40
        In fact, there were different modifications of the aircraft - so there were 6 guns in the FV-190 ...
        It’s clear that you don’t have much text available even on Wiki ...
        By the way, there is a difference: did the Aero cobras only go to the guard regiments and the guard regiments were equipped only with the Aero cobra? The question is rhetorical, it is not necessary to answer ...
        1. -2
          16 January 2012 17: 09
          so FV-6 had 190 guns ...
          This is completely impossible. He barely carried 4, and fired poorly from them (guns were of different types, shells had different trajectories)

          Aero cobras came only to the guards regiments and the guards regiments were equipped only with aero cobra?
          The key is the first part of the phrase.
          1. J_silver
            +1
            16 January 2012 17: 12
            Open Wiki, an article about the FV-190, there, towards the end, everything is written about weapons ...
            And in my opinion. the key is the second part ...
            1. 0
              16 January 2012 19: 36
              Do not confuse Rustzac with the main armament.

              The meaning of the second part: in addition to Aerocobra, the USSR had its own excellent types of aircraft. So: before the La-5 and the new modifications of Jacob, the Aerocobra was out of competition.
              1. J_silver
                +1
                16 January 2012 20: 06
                Only during the war years no one thought so, and it is not entirely clear why you decided this ...
                1. -2
                  16 January 2012 20: 26
                  Okay.
                  Name the domestic analogue of "Aircobra" for 1942 and "Kingcobra" for 1945
                  1. J_silver
                    0
                    16 January 2012 22: 24
                    Yes, almost any - everyone has their own advantages. there are also disadvantages!
                    Interesting? Run to the appropriate sites - everything is painted there ...
                    I can only copy from those pages: both about accident rate, and about moodiness in management, and about deformations during maneuvers, and also a cart, a wagon and a small cart of shortcomings ...
                    And the Kingcobras were generally worse - they were rejected in batches in America ...
                  2. Charon
                    +1
                    17 January 2012 01: 22
                    Easily.
                    Yak-9T
                    On the plane in the collapse of the cylinder block of the engine M-105PF was installed 37 mm gun NS-37
                    In the period from March 1943 to June 1945, 2748 Yak-9T aircraft were built.
                    Yak-9K
                    Modification of the Yak-9T, on which, instead of the 37 mm NS-37 gun, a 45 mm NS-45 gun was installed
                    In April-June 1944, the Yak-9K series of 53 aircraft was built. During military tests, the fighters conducted 51 air battles, during which 8 FW-190A-8 and 4 BF-109G were shot down (there were no meetings with the bombers). Their losses amounted to 1 Yak-9K. The average consumption of 45 mm rounds per shot down enemy aircraft was 10 pieces. The Yak-9K was not launched in a large series due to the unreliable operation of the NS-45 gun.
                    1. -1
                      17 January 2012 09: 44
                      The Yak-9T carried the 1 machine gun instead of the 4x on Aircobra.
                      Flight range: Ayrkobra -1000 km, Yak-9Т - 730 km
                      About equipment and build quality is not even worth mentioning.
                      1. J_silver
                        +1
                        17 January 2012 12: 39
                        Have you checked it - is it quality? What did these cobras first have to fly over in special parts and modify to a normal appearance? And the Yak-9 had different modifications, there were both D and DD, for that matter ...
                        This is the simplicity of our pilots. ready to put up with even shortcomings, just to fly, provided the "glory" of Cobras ...
                        The purely dialectical approach is to put up with shortcomings and enjoy advantages ...
      2. Bayun
        +1
        16 January 2012 17: 13
        1185 Spitfire MarkIX units - is this an obsolete technique?
        - when put? what year? give exact numbers? Deprecated depends on the time of delivery.
        In 1942, it was already better, and the danger of the landing of England no longer threatened. But we were supplied with the Hurricanes. And immediately on the supply of Hurricanes with 40 mm. guns. Several dozens of them have been delivered to us, moreover BU, from Africa. So, as for many, you are lying! The history of the fighting of the regiment in this gorge is in the internet - look if not laziness.

        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        1. Only guards regiments were equipped with aircrabs. There is nothing more to say.
        2. Aircobra was impossible to use in the West. front, but for the USSR it was an ideal solution

        5000- Aero cobras delivered to the USSR. In the regiment, according to the state, 40 with something planes. So about 100 guards regiments on cobras? Well, let half be mowed to recover losses. total of 50 Guard fighter regiments on Cobra? No, you have problems with mathematics.
        However, as with knowledge - look, be so kind as a guide to the Luftwaffe aircraft and their modifications. Not necessarily a Russian author. And then I see that you are very distrustful in this regard. Yes, and take a look at the same time TTX La5FN, Yak9, Yak3 and compare with the data of the P-39. Well, the fact that Tandenbolt carried a large bomb load was a flag in his hands. But actually it’s a fighter. And as you know from history, a universal aircraft is worse than a specialized one.
        1. -1
          16 January 2012 19: 31
          - when put? what year? give exact numbers?
          Spitfire Mark9 appeared at the front in the summer of 1944 - 26 and 27 guards regiments.
          Tests have shown that the "nine" with its powerful and high-altitude engine has a much higher practical ceiling than all domestic serial fighters. Even the LF confidently climbed 12500 m, while the HF climbed to 13 m, which was 100 m more than the Yak-2450U and 9 m more than the La-2350.

          In 1942, it was already better, and the danger of the landing of England no longer threatened. But we were delivered by the Hurricanes
          Those. Was England supposed to supply the latest aircraft to its own detriment?

          So about 100 guards regiments on cobras? Well, let half be mowed to recover losses. total 50 Guard fighter regiments on Cobra?
          Of course, your combat and non-combat losses do not count

          And as you know from history, a universal aircraft is worse than a specialized one.
          Nevertheless, in the USSR, he served as an attack aircraft and as a high-altitude fighter)))
          1. Lech37
            +2
            16 January 2012 20: 56
            Nevertheless, in the USSR, he served as an attack aircraft and as a high-altitude fighter)))


            It is highly doubtful that. Thunderbolts were used as ground attack aircraft on the eastern front. The references to them speak of their use in air defense and naval aviation. In particular, the 255th IAP of the Northern Fleet Air Force was equipped with them, and it also entered the fighter aviation regiments of the South-Western Air Defense District. If you have information about the use of Thunderbolts in regiments, then I would be glad if you share the link.
            1. 0
              17 January 2012 12: 31
              http://www.airpages.ru/uk/p47su.shtml
              1. Lech37
                +1
                17 January 2012 21: 51
                http://www.airpages.ru/uk/p47su.shtml


                I already read the article on your link earlier. There is no mention of the use of the Thunderbolts by the Soviet Air Force as attack aircraft. Perhaps in full their epic on the eastern front can be expressed by a quote from your link:

                In fact, the Thunderbolt repeated the story of the Soviet MiG-3 fighter - an excellent air fighter at high altitude and awkward on the ground. Such a plane in the Red Army Air Force during the war was unclaimed.


                At the same time, I do not want to belittle at all the merits of this formidable aircraft, which served a good service where it was in demand.
                1. 0
                  19 January 2012 15: 35
                  You are not careful.
                  http://www.airpages.ru/uk/p47su.shtml Еще раз, в самом низу. Сначала отчет об испытания Р-47 в качестве штурмовика, затем номера боевых подразделений, в которых использовался Тандерболт, как штурмовик.
      3. ivachum
        +2
        16 January 2012 17: 31
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_190_Wurger winked

        "The A-6 and A-7 series were characterized by increased firepower. On the A-6 aircraft, instead of MG FF cannons, guns with better ballistics MG 151 / 20E were installed. The wing design was changed so that it was prepared for the installation of 20 and 30 mm with ammunition. The standard armament of the Fw 190A-6 was two MG 17 machine guns and four MG 151 / 20E cannons. Some of the vehicles carried an ETC 501 bomb rack, which was usually used for the suspension of a 300-liter tank. equipped with a FuG 6ZE radio station with an additional circular direction finder antenna, 16 vehicles were produced from July to November 1943.

        Modifications:

        Fw 190A-6 / R1 - attack aircraft with weapons, reinforced with up to six MG 151 / 20E guns and two MG 17 machine guns. Additional guns were suspended under the wing in a WB 151/20 gondola. Despite the initial plans, a bit of the Fw 190A-6 / R1 was released, which served in some parts, such as the JG 11.
        Fw 190A-6 / R2 - interceptor fighter, armament: two MG 17, two MG 151 / 20E guns and two MK 108. Used in combination with other kits (see below).
        Fw 190A-6 / R7 - a fighter with standard weapons and reinforced armor, designed for air defense of the Reich, was often equipped with a 300-liter tank on the ETC 501.
        Fw 190A-6 / R8 - heavy armored fighter-interceptor, used a combination of sets (weapons, extra armor or fuel) Rststze R2 and R7. Often, machine guns were removed from under the hood. The most effective aircraft to deal with American bombers.
        Fw 190A-6 / R11 - an all-weather and night fighter equipped with flame arresters on the exhaust pipes, a landing spotlight, an autopilot PKS 12 and a windshield heater. Some vehicles were equipped with the FuG 217 Neptun J-2 radar. An additional 300-liter tank was suspended on an ETC 501 holder.
        The Fw 190A-6 / R12 is a heavy all-weather and night fighter, a combination of R2 and R11 kits. "
        1. -2
          16 January 2012 19: 33
          What you have copied here is a bro ... d amateur

          For the future: do not confuse Rustzac with the main armament of the aircraft.
      4. 0
        16 January 2012 20: 11
        Fokke-Wulfo-190 is one of the best 2WW aircraft ........................................ ...........- Fw 190A-5 / U9 - 6 guns and an increase in bomb load up to 1000 kg - this is the word about the heavy Thunderbolt .....
  13. +2
    16 January 2012 14: 57
    BayunYou still forgot about the mosquito-wooden bomber that the proud Britons made from despair at that moment. although the crap turned out and a good straight pride takes for the English furniture makers !! wink but why the hell did we need this device-load minimum, zero weapons! speed is great, stick to the German messers. purely for psychological balance (high-speed fart-fart and ye) wink Yes, machines and materials, and this is because most of the production capacities were lost and only unfold in the east of the country! Yes, and performance characteristics of the equipment supplied was controversial especially for tanks. convenient yes but against German and ours almost complete bullshit !!! altruism and the Americans is nonsense !!!! , after the war ended, more than 70% of the total gold reserves of the West were concentrated in America! tore off everyone’s sticky !! and their blood brothers-Anglo-Saxons are so complete !!. fellow
    1. -3
      16 January 2012 16: 39
      In fact, wood is the coolest aircraft material in those years. Duralumin only worsened flight performance.
      1. J_silver
        +3
        16 January 2012 16: 43
        And what worsened dural performance?
        In the USSR, just initially (and not only initially) there were great difficulties with aluminum after the loss of plants in the European part ...
        1. -4
          16 January 2012 17: 11
          And what worsened dural performance?
          The glider was harder

          The main advantage of duralumin is that it is easier to work with.
          1. J_silver
            +2
            16 January 2012 17: 14
            Therefore, were all the planes of the Germans so bad? What firewood was missing?
            Do you ever think when writing?
            It would be plenty of duralumin, would no longer be writhing on half-wooden aircraft!
            1. -2
              16 January 2012 19: 41
              Therefore, were all the planes of the Germans so bad?
              This is your nonsense phrase, justify it yourself

              It would be plenty of duralumin, would no longer be writhing on half-wooden aircraft!
              There were no problems with duralumin. But they were with the tree: for its processing, professional workers are needed, and not children of 14 years.

              If you handle the tree correctly, you get Mosquito.
              If you handle the tree in a horrible way, you get a gluing Yak trim, but CHEAP
              1. J_silver
                +2
                16 January 2012 20: 10
                The planes of the Germans were just good - so there is nothing for me to make excuses for ...
                How was it no problem? Why then did aluminum get under Lend-Lease? From excess at home, or what?
                Widespread use of wood is a necessary measure ...
                What other discovery will you please?
                1. -1
                  16 January 2012 20: 46
                  Why then did aluminum get under Lend-Lease?
                  Well, obviously not for airplanes. Despite all the supplies of lumin, the aircraft of the USSR remained plywood))

                  Widespread use of wood is a necessary measure ...
                  I already wrote, please be careful: you can make cheap bad planes from wood. This was what the USSR needed.

                  At the same time, cool aircraft can be made of wood (Spitfire, Mosquito), but the construction process will be expensive and requires skillful hands. Fact: if Spitfire were made of aluminum, it would be cheaper.

                  So the tree itself is a cool aviation material and they laugh at the wooden Mosquito from a lack of intelligence
                  1. J_silver
                    0
                    16 January 2012 22: 10
                    Aluminum was required for many purposes, not just for airplanes - so there wasn’t enough for everything ...
                    Wood is shitty aviation material, and no one in their right mind will laugh at Mosquito ...
                    In the USSR, delta wood was made, which had some advantages over ordinary plywood, but this was abandoned ...
                    1. +1
                      17 January 2012 10: 08
                      It is difficult to explain the incredible survivability of the ignorant myth about the "miserable plywood planes" Maybe it is supported by "practical experience" - everyone knows that a steel pipe is stronger than a wooden shovel handle ... All this is true, but with respect to aviation, only power elements of EQUAL WEIGHT can be compared. That is, the steel rail should not be compared with the board from the fence, but with a wooden beam of such a section at which the weight of the beam becomes equal to the weight of the rail. This is a log and it is advisable to try to break it with a fist or leg kick. And even better - heads ... After that, it will be forever remembered that in terms of specific strength, high-quality aviation pine is superior to carbon steel, duralumin and second only to high-strength alloy steel.

                      Nevertheless, at the end of the 40's, the tree forever left the structure of military aircraft. Why?
                      It is impossible to compare the complexity, duration and complexity of gluing a multilayer plywood part and forming a duralumin sheet (one movement of the hydraulic press plunger). Gluing requires the strictest compliance with the requirements for temperature, humidity and dustiness of the room, surface preparation; finally gluing and drying take time. Glues (resins) used in the manufacture of plywood, roads, are a product of complex chemical production, and in war and blockade conditions, they may not be available (it was this misfortune that occurred in the USSR with the production of delta wood).

                      The second reason is size. Where can I find such a pine from which it would be possible to cut the wing spar of the B-29 bomber (wing span of 43 meter)?

                      And all the fantasies of J_Silvera "Wood is shitty aviation stuff" - shit .. d stupid and uneducated person
                      1. J_silver
                        +1
                        17 January 2012 12: 43
                        This ignorance is arguing with your conceit!
                        It would be possible to refute all your stupidities as if, but I only give lectures, as I give consultations, only for money, and even before that I check the audience’s knowledge level ...
                  2. J_silver
                    +1
                    16 January 2012 22: 26
                    Supermarine Spitfire (English Supermarine Spitfire) - the English fighter of times of the Second World War. By its design, it was a single-engine all-metal monoplane with a low wing and retractable landing gear.
                    Where is the cardboard and plywood?
            2. -2
              16 January 2012 20: 16
              Recently I flew to Turkey - imagine the A-310 and the whole wood-plywood ..... and about it is easier to work -.... with plasticine is even easier ....
              1. snek
                0
                16 January 2012 22: 16
                Quote: FREGATENKAPITAN
                Recently I flew to Turkey - imagine the A-310 and the whole wood-plywood .....

                Straight all-all? Is it your humor?
                1. -1
                  18 January 2012 19: 20
                  snack ... read above ... it also says that the best aircraft from plywood, so I agree ...
  14. 755962
    0
    16 January 2012 15: 19
    Lend-lease deliveries undoubtedly contributed to the overall contribution to the Victory, the more unfortunate the tragedy with the PQ-17 caravan in 1942 looks exactly when we needed this help! The list of non-essential cargoes of the PQ-17 convoy Automobiles-3350 pcs ,, Tanks - 430 pcs., Aircraft - 210 pcs., Other cargoes 156 492 tons! Of the 35 transports, only 11 reached Arkhangelsk. 2 vessels returned to Iceland. 22 vehicles with a total tonnage of more than 142 thousand tons were sunk by German submarines and aircraft. According to one version, the convoy PQ-17 was a bait for the battleship Tirpitz. Again, without a conspiracy could not have done?
  15. ivachum
    +1
    16 January 2012 15: 45
    ! de Havilland Mosquito - British multipurpose bomber, night fighter World War II, which was in service with the Royal Air Force.
    ---- /// ----
    The Mosquito were powered by turbocharged engines designed to operate at high altitudes and had a ceiling of up to 11 meters. The cruising speed at this altitude was 000-640 km / h. Such high-altitude and speed characteristics made it practically unattainable for attacks by Messerschmitt Bf.675G-109, which opposed them at that time. Only the first German jet fighters Messerschmitt Me.6 could effectively fight the Mosquito. "

    And its German "analogue":

    "Messerschmitt Bf.110 - twin-engine heavy strategic fighter (Zerstrer) in the service of the Luftwaffe during World War II. Due to the inability to use for its intended purpose, it was retrained as a fighter-bomber and night fighter."

    So the Mosquito wasn't all that bad. There were simply no tasks for him in the Red Army Air Force.
    fellow wink

    By the way, one of the main reasons why night ME-110s (and not only them) were not used much on the Eastern Front, was that most of our aircraft were wooden (for the most part) - night fighter radars could not detect them. wink
    1. 0
      16 January 2012 17: 30
      And it was on Mosquito that the writer Saint Exupery died. Caught up with the same!
      1. J_silver
        +3
        16 January 2012 17: 32
        Saint-Exupery died on p-38 Lightning - this is a completely different plane ...
  16. +4
    16 January 2012 17: 03
    Undoubtedly, American and English help cannot be repaired. She brought the hour of victory and, therefore, saved many lives of our soldiers and citizens.
    However, we must not forget the motives for which it was admitted by the dominant part of the British and American elite. Now there is no accurate quotation of the speech of the American congressman in June 41 when the fascists attacked our homeland, but on the whole it sounded like this: “If Germany wins, then we must help Russia. If Russia helps, then we must help Germany. And may they kill each other as much as possible. ” The congressman’s last name is Truman, and it was he who was named president of the United States after Roosevelt’s death. (I hope no one has any illusions about the relatively free and fair democratic elections).
    Considering that Hitler’s coming to power was planned, organized and financed (no matter how concealed) by the Anglo-Saxons with his further sharpening on the USSR, they conducted them through the Munich Agreement (not for nothing the materials about the Second World War in England have not yet been declassified), then piety before this help allies I do not feel.
    And to say that some of the supplies turned out to be unpaid, especially about some freebies, forgetting that the highest payment for the overall Victory is the blood of our fathers and mothers, I consider it a sin.
    In general, we must speak soberly about help. Without boorish neglect, but without undue admiration. We paid the highest price possible for this assistance.
  17. J_silver
    +3
    16 January 2012 17: 27
    Stupid situation, the right word ...
    I recognize the importance of Lend-Lease, but I have to drive the most odious characters here ...
    1. Bayun
      +1
      16 January 2012 17: 47
      Similarly! Some are very sharpened by one comrade.
  18. 0
    16 January 2012 19: 30
    Thanks to the Americans, of course! But our country paid for the Victory with the lives and blood of our soldiers, and unfortunately in my opinion (I would be glad if it weren’t) I overworked!
  19. -2
    16 January 2012 20: 47
    The article is called, "Allies or allies?" ... yes, of course there were allies .... The Union was glad of any help, for more than three years he alone opposed the German machine from Murmansk to Novorossiysk .... here we have gentlemen who deliberately knock off the main idea, distorting the facts ... God be their judge! It's true with us!
    1. 0
      16 January 2012 21: 12
      Uneducated FREGATENKAPITAN amuses with his stupidity and patriotic dibilism wink
      1. -1
        18 January 2012 19: 19
        I’m turning to a moron, up to the level of my education, I suspect you have to study for at least five to ten years ... it’s you who are so sick of your trollism .... work out your 30 silver pieces of infection ...
    2. snek
      -1
      16 January 2012 22: 03
      Quote: FREGATENKAPITAN
      more than three years, he alone resisted the German car

      Well, as if Germany had fought with England. All sorts of battles for Britain and the battle for the Atlantic. Plus North Africa, plus a landing in Italy in the fall of the 43rd. Plus the bombing of Germany. So about the fact that it’s completely alone - to put it mildly, not true.
      Another thing is that the main blow fell on us and most of all (at least from the countries of the winners) had to be transferred to our people - this is true.
      1. Aleksey67
        +3
        16 January 2012 22: 20
        Quote: snek
        Well, as if Germany had fought with England. All sorts of battles for Britain and the battle for the Atlantic. Plus North Africa, plus a landing in Italy in the fall of the 43rd. Plus the bombing of Germany.


        Still, full-scale hostilities were conducted on the territory of the USSR and Europe. Britain was bombed, but the material damage suffered cannot be compared with the countries in which the war was like a roller. North Africa is an argument, but due to the lack of a civilized infrastructure, the damage is not critical. You can also recall Japan, but here, as the saying goes, "they ran up themselves" (now their prime minister inspects the island on a coastal boat, it seems that science has not gone into the future).
        1. -1
          17 January 2012 10: 12
          What about the Pacific Theater of War?
      2. -1
        18 January 2012 19: 16
        Read carefully ...... meaning on the European land theater ...
        1. 0
          April 4 2018 01: 45
          Quote: FREGATENKAPITAN
          Read carefully ...... meaning on the European land theater ...

          And why did the USSR not help France and England in 1939-1940, instead occupying eastern Europe together with Hitler? Moreover, you know what Molotov (the head of state!) Announced at the opening of the Congress in October 1939? Your brain will flow out of torture to link this with your hurray-beckoning world.
  20. AlexMH
    +1
    16 January 2012 23: 51
    The most important for the USSR were the supply of cars, steam locomotives and strategic materials (oil products, rubber, food, cloth, some metals, etc.). Actually, military equipment was supplied in limited quantities and was either inferior to the domestic one (tanks), or it was delivered that was not really needed by the allies themselves (Hurricanes, R-40s, and the same aerial cobras that the Americans didn’t take into service). By the way, the aerocobra, with powerful weapons and high comfort, had insufficient speed, a disgusting habit of entering into a tailspin and a large mass. Although some aces pilots successfully fought on it with fighters, this aircraft was more suitable for attacking bombers at low altitudes or as an attack aircraft (naturally giving way to the Il-2).
  21. Wolkin
    0
    18 January 2012 08: 14
    Regarding the exclusively guards regiments on the "Cobra"

    The first combat unit to receive the Airacobra was the 145th IAP (on April 4, 1942, for the successful combat work of the 145th IAP, it was converted to the 19th GvI-AP)
    The first part, retrained to "Aerocobra", was 153 IAP (later became 28th Guards IAP)
    Unlike the 153rd and 185th IAPs, who studied at the rear training center, the 145th IAP mastered an import fighter directly in its operational area.
    The third unit, which was re-equipped with "Airacobras" in the 22nd ZAP, was the 180th IAP, which was withdrawn from the front on July 20, 1942. The regiment had previously been armed with Hurricanes and had only been at the front for five weeks.

    The 298th IAP was the first regiment to be armed with the P-39D.
    The second regiment, rearmament on the R-39D, was the 45th IAP, (on June 18, 1943, the 45th IAP was converted to the 100th Guards), which fought in the Crimea and the North Caucasus
    The third regiment, P-39D, was the most eminent Soviet air force regiment of the 16th Guards and Infantry Aviation Regiment.
    Another unit that received the P-39 in 1943 was the 27th IAP (from October 8, 1943, it became the 129th Guards and Information Aviation Regiment).
    The 9th GvIAP received the "Cobras" in August and soon became known as the "Regiment of Ases" (it became the third in terms of productivity with 558 wins). In August 1943, the regiment received P-39s and flew them for about 10 months. In July 1944, the 9th GvIAP was withdrawn from the front and re-armed with La-7.

    Etc.

    For the first time in the Great Patriotic War, "Aerocobra" entered the battle on May 15, 1942 as part of the 19th Guards. IAP (16 cars) in the Arctic.
    During the first flight on May 15, Pavel Kutakhov and the future ace, senior lieutenant Ivan Bochkov, each shot down one fighter, the Me-109F. This success was paid for by the loss of the first Cobra (AN660), also piloted by the future ace Ivan Gaidenko, shot down in an air battle.
  22. +4
    29 January 2012 17: 47
    Quote: Wolkin
    For the first time in the Great Patriotic War "Airacobra" entered the battle on May 15, 1942 as part of the 19th Guards. IAP (16 aircraft) in the Arctic. During the first flight on May 15, Pavel Kutakhov and the future ace, senior lieutenant Ivan Bochkov, each shot down one fighter, Me-109F. This success was paid for by the loss of the first Cobra (AN660), also piloted by the future ace Ivan Gaidenko, shot down in an air battle.

    Perfectly
  23. +15
    4 November 2017 16: 45
    the value of Lend-Lease is difficult to overestimate
  24. 0
    April 4 2018 01: 42
    Quote: Snake831
    They tried to limit the supply of any equipment to the USSR! Sometimes even in spite of the crime of such behavior! We must not forget that the Russians were never loved! Not even then, now even more so! And the bureaucrats didn’t give a damn about the war! paying with pure gold! This war helped America out of the economic crisis, by the way!

    Seriously? "tried to limit"? Give at least one example? Dozens of the latest chemical plants (there were no oil desulfurization plants in the USSR at all), hundreds of state-of-the-art radars, thousands of CCPs of different systems - all that had to be kept secret was given on request.

    Well wow, it turns out that giving away free goods to hundreds of billions allows the distributor to get rich! New heights of cotton logic.
  25. 0
    9 November 2019 01: 22
    How I love these Soviet manipulations with numbers ...
    "The B-78 was satisfied by only 4%. In 1941, 1269 thousand tons were produced in the USSR."
    Lol, where do these numbers come from? These are all aviation gasoline combined, and specifically 4B-78 - only 36 thousand tons ... what this figure of 4% says.
    Let's go further "Lend-Lease was supplied with 1216 thousand tons of aviation gasoline and 1634,4 thousand tons of light gasoline fractions." - This is why they summarize, although this is not correct.
    Gasoline was used immediately, but the pure fractions were mixed
    with the Soviet B-70 in the ratio of 40% to 60%.

    Let's translate everything into metric tones:
    1634,4 thousand tons of short = 1483,1 thousand tons of normal ours
    1216 thousand tons of short = 1103 thousand tons of normal ours

    As a result, from 1483,1 thousand. tons of fractions received 3712,75 tons of high-octane suitable gasoline.
    And now 3712,75 thousand tons + 1103 thousand tons = 4815,75 thousand tons were received in total thanks to Lend-Lease.
    Even considering that the USSR produced 36 thousand tons of its own B-78 every year, but this is not so,
    production only fell, then all the same for 5 years (together with pre-war stocks) we get 180 thousand tons.
    Now compare the numbers 180 and 4815 !!!
    What kind of 50% are you talking about ???
    As it was purely Soviet independent gasoline, 4% remained, 96% - thanks to land lil.
    That's the turn, right :)))