Steam locomotives from across the ocean

Photo: jury-a-kap.livejournal.com

Paradoxically, the temporary loss of the territories of the USSR for the time being, if I may say so, was in the hands of the NKPS. The loss of locomotives and wagons turned out to be not so critical - after all, the roads were under the occupier. He had to develop a military locomotive (it was written about in a previous article) in order to establish transport links on these routes.

And in 1943, everything turned out the other way around - the enemy began to roll back to the west. The length of the railway tracks began to increase, and then the question arose of how to serve them - during the war years, our factories produced only ... 292 steam locomotives:

• in 1941 - 200 pieces.
• in 1942 - 9 pieces.
• in 1943 - 43 pieces.
• in 1944 - 32 pieces.
• and in 1945 - 8 pcs.

As you know, the factories evacuated to the rear, deprived of their production bases and ties with subcontractors, completed the construction of locomotives from pre-war reserves. Many of the manufacturers generally switched to military products and produced parts for tanks, guns, other equipment.

"Sha"

In this situation, on April 10, 1943, the chairman of the State Defense Committee, I. V. Stalin, signed Decree No. 3159c: "On the order and delivery of steam locomotives from the USA and rails for the NKPS in 1943-1944"

The Allies quickly responded, especially since historical there was already a backlog in this area.

Here we need to make a small digression.

Even during the First World War, Russia ordered steam locomotives in America. Yes, there was such a fact. In the USA and Canada, steam locomotives were made for us, delivered by sea, and they were safely used on the roads. These were the E-series steam locomotives. "Elena", "Efim", as the machinists affectionately called them. One of the sad facts is that it was in the furnace of such a locomotive that the revolutionary Sergei Lazo was burned.

And now, the wheel of history has made a turn - a new order for an obsolete, in general, but such a necessary steam locomotive. Moreover, the car was familiar, repair, maintenance and operation were debugged.

But there was also a problem: locomotives were needed "yesterday". That is, the USSR wanted to start receiving them by the end of 1943. The ALKO and Baldwin factories, which previously produced these locomotives, could not rebuild the enterprises so quickly, and then it was proposed to start by supplying the USATC S160 model to Soviet Russia, which was specially designed for lend-lease deliveries to foreign countries. Conventionally, this locomotive can be attributed to "military locomotives", although it would be more correct to call it "a locomotive without luxury." In its design, everything was reduced to saving materials and simplifying.

Locomotive wheel formula 1-4-0, weighing 74 tons, machine power 850-1000 l / s. Speed ​​- 70 km / h, water supply - 24,5 cubic meters, coal - 10 tons.

Initially, a batch of 150 steam locomotives was ordered, later increased to 200.

American industrialists did not let us down - at the very end of 1943, the first locomotives "Sha" ("Sh" - Russian locomotives similar in formula, "a" - American) arrived in the USSR.

On January 1, 1944, there were 44 of them. They were transported on ships of sea convoys to the ports of Murmansk, Vladivostok and Molotovsk. From there - by rail to Moscow. Until 1947, they led the trains on the October Railway, serving the direction Moscow - Leningrad, as well as on the Belarusian, Estonian, Volga and Kazan railways.

In 1957, 50 "Sha" were converted to 1067 mm gauge and sent to serve on Sakhalin.

I posted a photo of this locomotive on the screensaver.

"Elena"

Now about the second locomotive.

As I mentioned above, it was known to the Soviet railway workers under the nickname “Elena”, where “E” is a type of steam locomotive, and “l” is the capital letter of engineer A. I. Lipets, who made many design changes and improvements to the car.

A quarter of a century later, steam locomotives of this series also began to arrive from across the ocean. Already improved and with minor changes. There was a different driver's booth, an American-type track clearer, a stoker (mechanical coal feeder) "Standard NT-1" appeared. The main distinguishing feature: the headlight "migrated" from the chimney below - to the frontal part.

Thanks to design improvements, the power of the steam engine increased by 20-25%.

Briefly about the car: the axial formula 1-5-0. Weight - 85-103 tons. Power - 1950 l / s. Speed ​​- 55 km / h.

In America, these locomotives were called "Russian decapod". In our country, they were registered under the index "Ea" "type "E", American."

The cars arriving from overseas were carefully received and carefully studied, after which the leading engineer V.V. Ivanov, through the NKPS, suggested that American manufacturers make some design changes. So the models "Em" and "Emb" appeared.

In total, 2 vehicles were delivered to the USSR: 047 - "Ea", 1 - "Em" and 622 - "Emv". Locomotives were used on almost all railway lines of the European part of Russia. Later, when domestic factories launched the production of new steam locomotives, these machines began to be “squeezed out” on the roads of Siberia, Transbaikalia and the Far East. There, on highways, they served until the 412s, and in shunting until the 13s.

And finally, a semi-myth, a semi-legend.

There is such a story that in every steam locomotive that arrived in the USSR from across the ocean, a set of overalls for the locomotive brigade, a box of stew and a bottle of whiskey were hidden.

There is no official confirmation of this, but, knowing how the American tanks were "packed", one can believe it.

Photo: osd.ru

Comments

[The leader of the Redskins]

According to the established tradition, I thank all the commentators and scolds - it stimulates and makes you think)))

[210ox]

Well, we thank you for interesting articles. The victory was forged in many places and on different equipment. I would like to read about the people who worked on these locomotives

[Catfish]

Igor, good evening and thank you! I thought there would be nothing today, but here you are pleased.
Below is a photo of locomotives arriving to us under Lend-Lease.

And this is just a beautiful graphics of the American USATC S160 steam locomotive supplied under Lend-Lease.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

I join the kind words of the Author!

[The leader of the Redskins]

By the way, Uncle Kostya, returning to our conversation about a German armored train with a turret from a "tiger" ... Here I studied literature, as you know, they put it from another tank. On special armored cars "tank destroyers". From Pz IV H. In the 44th year.

[Catfish]

O!!! And for this special thanks!
Of course, I could confuse the T-V and T-IV towers in a film seen half a century ago, but this is no longer important, but the important thing is that the Germans still put towers from their tanks on armored trains! And someone assured me that this was not the case.

[balabol]

Yes, beautiful HDR shot

[Alien From]

Thanks, interesting! And it’s unlikely about whiskey, the Yankees are still those greedy

[Andrei Nikolaevich]

Thanks to the author! Very informative. We are waiting for new articles. History is always interesting.

[Keyser soze]

A very interesting series of articles, thanks to the author for his work!

[Aviator_]

There is such a story that in every steam locomotive that arrived in the USSR from across the ocean, a set of overalls for the locomotive brigade, a box of stew and a bottle of whiskey were hidden.

The Lend-Lease aircraft had a set of flight uniforms, and everything else could have been a personal initiative of the packers.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: Aviator_

The Lend-Lease aircraft had a set of flight uniforms, and everything else could have been a personal initiative of the packers.

They shoved a bottle of whiskey into the Sherman tank guns.

[Avior]

I don’t know how much of a bike, but I read that a leather raincoat was attached to the cars as overalls, which the drivers did not get, but migrated to the authorities.
And somehow the Allied delegation that arrived with the escort could not understand why their drivers met them in a group at the pier.

[Catfish]

I don't know how much of a bike

This is not a bike, the same thing happened with leather tank overalls and Colts for the crew - the quartermasters stole everything. It was easier for the pilots, they themselves overtook the planes, but still managed to steal.

[Avior]

if I'm not mistaken, Loza had it - personal gifts from the Americans did not reach the tankers, but disappeared at the stage of re-preservation of the tanks after arrival. And then the bottles of whiskey began to be placed in the barrel, which was sealed for protection during transportation by sea and unsealed directly in the troops.

[The leader of the Redskins]

My grandfather, when he received the Sherman, broke the bottle. Didn't know about the gift. They quickly ran to the neighbors and saved the rest. Also in the trunk was a can of stew. And in boxes with spare parts they found knitted socks, gloves, scarves....

[Undecim]

model USATC S160 - specially designed for Lend-Lease deliveries to foreign countries.

This model was not designed for Lend-Lease, but specifically for D-Day. His customer was USATC - the US Army Transportation Corps. Several types of such locomotives were developed, ranging from the shunting USATC S100 Class to the powerful USATC S200 Class, taking into account the specifics of the railway lines of future theaters of operations, along which it was planned to transport troops and supply them.

[The leader of the Redskins]

I don't know, Viktor Nikolaevich, I don't know...
The encyclopedic data tells a different story. And how could a steam locomotive be created in 1942, for an operation in 1944? Is it too strategic thinking? And why, then, were they first handed over to the British?
I'm talking about a 160 m locomotive.

[Undecim]

The encyclopedic data tells a different story.

What encyclopedia is the data from?

And why, then, were they first handed over to the British?

The British (four British railway companies) 400 steam locomotives were transferred to increase the capacity of the railways in preparation for "Operation Overlord". Another 400 were stored at the Great Western's Ebbw Junction depot. After landing in Normandy, all these locomotives, both those that were stored and those that were used, went to Europe.

Is it too strategic thinking?

Just normal thinking. Including logistics. And D-Day is the generally accepted designation of the day the start of any military operation that the Americans have been planning since entering the war. Therefore, for example, in the same 1942, USATC S200 Class steam locomotives were designed for the conditions of the Middle East, which, after landing in Italy, were transferred there.

[Avior]

https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/united-states-army-transportation-corps-2-8-0-mos-wd-austerity-s160/
write that the name S160 was not officially used, although it was widely used.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Leader of the Redskins

And how could a steam locomotive be created in 1942, for an operation in 1944? Is it too strategic thinking?

So it was created not specifically for the "Overlord", but in general - for a future landing in Europe. Which was inevitable - for Europe was appointed by the Allies as the main theater of operations of the future war back in February 1941.
In general, the planning of ground operations on the ETVD began already at the beginning of 1942 - operations Bolero and Roundup. But the forces and means for the normal organization of the landing were accumulated only in 1944.

[tihonmarine]

Later, when domestic factories launched the production of new steam locomotives, these machines began to be “squeezed out” on the roads of Siberia, Transbaikalia and the Far East. There, on highways, they served until the 60s, and in shunting until the 80s.

It was like that, back in the early 70s, "American women" went from Zabaikalsk to Borzi.

[75 Sergey]

It's a pity the article does not talk about the improvements proposed by our engineers

[tihonmarine]

One of the sad facts is that it was in the furnace of such a locomotive that the revolutionary Sergei Lazo was burned.

A controversial issue. One of the Soviet local historians found documents stating that Lazo, under the name of ensign Kozlenko, was shot on Egersheld and then burned there. In 1945, SMERSH authorities arrested a former Cossack in China, who was standing in a cordon on Egersheld, when the arrested Bolsheviks and partisans captured on the night of April 5, 1920 were massively shot. Among them was ensign Kozlenko, in whom the Cossack recognized Lazo. The Japanese calmly watched this execution. Lazo's body was burned there, on Egersheld.
The latest edition of the History of the Far East of Russia indicates that in reality the opening of the locomotive furnace was very small (64 × 45 cm), as in the P-36 steam locomotive.
Yes, and my Transbaikal countrymen did not like this comrade, he was painfully cruel and his wife, Commissar Olga Grabenko.

[Avior]

USATC S160 prototype, KWVR S160

Poor machinists in the tunnel :))

[km-21]

Almost all countries involved in the Second World War suffered huge losses due to combat losses and economic shocks. Except two - Switzerland and the USA. The first repeatedly increased bank capitalization at the expense of gold looted by the Nazis. And the second made good money on the supply of American products to everyone who needed it on both sides of the front.

Undoubtedly, lend-lease supplies played a huge positive role in the Victory over fascism. But supplies to the fighting USSR were not charity. For every plane, truck, steam locomotive, for every ton of metal, gunpowder, stew was paid in full. Moreover, it was paid not only in gold and jewelry, but also in grain, which was sorely lacking in the post-war country. It was very painful, but the USSR complied with the terms of the agreement.

You can read about these conditions in open sources. According to the official version, the USSR had to pay only for those products (aircraft, tanks, food, raw materials, etc.) that survived during the hostilities but were not returned after the victory back to the United States. For example, if an American truck was not destroyed in battle, then it had to either be returned to the Americans, or paid for and left in the USSR. And if it is destroyed, then you do not need to pay for it.

But this is nonsense, any thinking person will say. Why pay for a Ford or a Studebaker when they can be easily chalked up to combat losses? No checks will reveal this "write-off", and all supporting documents can be fabricated.

All right. Americans are not such fools as to squander material values ​​on such terms. In fact, everything was much simpler. Each unit of production was recorded in the protocols of acceptance and transmission, and after the war these protocols were presented for return. And since it was impossible to return the bulk of the products (for various reasons), a decent amount of debt was accrued for all the unreturned goods, which they managed to fully return only a few years ago.

Here is such a story with Lend Lease.
To whom is war, and to whom is a profitable business.

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: km-21

To whom is war, and to whom is a profitable business.

And after the war, they did not need this technique. Vessels were sunk, cars were allowed to press right at the transfer port. Dogs in the hay.

[Constanty]

Their property and they had the right to do with it what they wanted.

[3danimal]

Can you give specific examples (with links to sources) that the United States implemented the Lend-Lease program in relation to Nazi Germany? (The submarines of which, let me remind you, sank American transports)

[km-21]

I do not quite understand why you require these examples from me? After all, I never claimed that the American Lend-Lease is related to Germany. Another thing is that American business collaborated with the Nazis despite the war between the two states. And the facts confirming this thesis are known. But it wasn't a Land Lease.

[3danimal]

If the cooperation of individuals did take place, then this did not apply to the American government and the scale in comparison with Lend-Lease is a priori simply insignificant.
In fact, such "black sheep" worked against their country, their sailors and the military.
Germany declared war on the United States on December 11, 1941 (it was a huge stupidity on her part).
Question: what facts are known?

[km-21]

Have you heard about the German company Adam Opel? I bring to your attention that during the war this company produced trucks and aircraft for the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe. And on the other hand, this company was a division of the American concern General Motors, that is, in fact, it was an American resident in Germany, earned money for American businessmen and paid taxes to the American treasury. Of course, the US government was aware of this situation and had nothing against it. Moreover, the policy of the American leadership has always been focused on expanding the sphere of American interests around the world, so the cooperation of General Motors with the Nazis in the United States was only welcomed. So, if the General Motors concern is considered "individuals", then we can safely state the cooperation of these very "individuals" with the Nazis.

[3danimal]

In 1939, the fascist leadership of Germany demanded that the company put on stream the Blitz army truck, howitzers and aircraft parts, which gave rise to the new president of General Motors, William Knudsen, to ironically state: “Hitler became the complete and undivided owner of our German enterprise, with which I have the honor to congratulate all the owners and co-owners of the concern…”.
In the period from 1941 to 1945, Opel was engaged, like all other nationalized enterprises in Germany, the release of weapons and military equipment for the needs of the Wehrmacht.
In 1942, GM classified Opel as a war loss, valuing it at $34. In return, Opel became a "Model National Socialist Enterprise."
In August 1944, bombers of the allied forces almost completely destroyed the production workshops of the Opel factories.

https://m.carobka.ru/cars/history/opel/

The word "nationalized" is striking, don't you think?
It is not very reasonable to think that Hitler would allow any payments to be made to a country on which war has been declared.
He needed production facilities and he took them.

https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel

Here it caught my eye

1945 - General Motors management again became the owner of Opel.

It turns out that before 1945 it was different?
Logic, search for information, nothing else

[km-21]

Quote: 3danimal

1945 - General Motors management again became the owner of Opel.

It turns out that before 1945 it was different?
Logic, search for information, nothing else

Let's be logical to the end.
The nationalization of Opel is just an assumption that you want to pass off as a fact. But, if this "fact" really took place in the history of Opel / General Motors, then they would write about it in sufficient detail, indicating the exact date of this event. And those hints that you read on Wikipedia should be considered nothing more than an attempt to smear the famous American enterprise from the shameful page of its history. Moreover, the US government is also involved in this shame.

[3danimal]

Moreover, the US government is also involved in this shame.

How so?
Having bombed the shops of the nationalized Opel in 1944? Supporting Britain, which has been at war with the Nazis since 1939?

The nationalization of Opel is just a guess

Did you not read the first part of my comment?

[3danimal]

Sometimes it is useful to read the English-language wiki:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_General_Motors

By the spring of 1939, the German Government had assumed day-to-day control of American owned factories in Germany

By the spring of 1939, the German government had assumed day-to-day control of American factories in Germany.

(Specially translated)
They seized the factories they needed. Because they could.

[km-21]

I recommend reading an interesting article on the Military Review website (maybe you heard?). Here is the link:

https://topwar.ru/68426-gruzovoy-avtomobil-opel-blitz-rabochaya-loshadka-vermahta.html

And here is a quote:
In March 1929, the American company General Motors acquired an 80% stake in Adam Opel. At the same time, Opel was the first company in Germany to establish a bank and an insurance company to finance car sales on credit. In 1931, the American company expanded its stake in Adam Opel to a full 100%. At the same time, Opel received $33,3 million for both transactions, becoming a 100% subsidiary of General Motors. It is curious that this company actively financed the NSDAP in the 1933 parliamentary elections. The company employed about 13 people who assembled up to 500 cars and 6000 bicycles daily.

Let's explain the situation.

General Motors cooperated with Hitler even before he came to power, and even contributed to his rise by financing the NSDAP election campaign. Opel (read: GM) factories were successfully expanding truck production at a time when Hitler was clearly preparing for a future war. In the 1939-40s, Hitler (quite expectedly) transferred the German industry to a war footing. Opel was required to increase the production of military products, to which the Americans agreed without objection. The nationalization of the enterprise would be disadvantageous to the Nazis because it would lead to a conflict with the Americans and stop production. After all, a significant part of the technology belonged to GM, and many components were produced at factories in North and South America. That is, Opel was in critical dependence on the parent company and did not have the slightest opportunity to escape from it. This was the style of work of the Americans, who know how to impose their partners on a short leash.

Thus, we have every right to have no doubts about the participation of Americans in the production program of Nazi Germany. And the so-called "nationalization" of Opel was invented by historians after the war in order to save the face of GM. Like the prefix AG to the name "Adam Opel". However, there is no documentary evidence of this "fact". However, we have already discussed this ...

[3danimal]

That is, Opel was in critical dependence on the parent company and did not have the slightest opportunity to escape from it.

On what basis are such conclusions made? Machines were delivered from the USA? Drawings only in the head office? Or engineers and staff
GM recorded Opel at a loss in 1942 and received reparations after the defeat of the Nazis.
In 1944, Opel AG workshops were destroyed by US and British aircraft.
Speaking of some support by a number of influential people for the Nazis, we can also recall the British Edward, who was briefly king for a short time.
On the other hand, a third of the fuel used in the Luftwaffe raids on Britain was from Soviet oil.

[km-21]

Based on knowledge of the laws of business, according to which no normal investor will invest his money in a risky enterprise that can be taken away from him (nationalized). Therefore, when they tell me that Hitler dared to nationalize the factories of the most powerful American corporation, I clearly understand that this cannot be. In such statements there is always a catch in the form of a conspiracy of the same Hitler with the same Americans. And nationalization was just a screen behind which the joint interests of Hitler and General Motors were hidden.

[3danimal]

I clearly understand that this cannot be

That is, in the basis - personal guesses and certainty?
An investor will invest in a risky asset if the venture promises to bring high returns.
It would be wise to sell a risky asset, but it was too profitable, IMHO.
You can insure, not to mention post-war reparations.

joint interests of Hitler and General Motors.

Hitler's interests were to kill American soldiers and sailors. Support such things GM, they would be greatly misunderstood in the US.
In fact, GM lost control of the business in 1941 (the year war was declared between Nazi Germany and the United States).
Again, there are fundamental differences in the organization of industry in the USSR and the USA. For example, it is impossible to imagine the independent functioning of any ZIL and its ownership of foreign assets.

[km-21]

Quote: 3danimal

That is, in the basis - personal guesses and certainty?

- supported by knowledge of objective laws. I'll ask a counter question - are your conclusions justified by something else? Can you provide links to indisputable documents? Oh yes, instead of your personal experience of Google with Wikipedia ...

Quote: 3danimal

An investor will invest in a risky asset if the venture promises to bring high returns.

The problem is that absolutely all enterprises promise big profits. But not everyone keeps their promises. It is especially dumb in those cases when the investor does not have leverage over the invested enterprise and relies only on the honesty of business partners. In such cases, it is thrown at 100%.

Quote: 3danimal

It would be wise to sell a risky asset, but it was too profitable, IMHO.

Everything that does not lead to losses is reasonable. If GM lost assets, then either he acted unwisely, or his losses were fictitious. Personally, I do not believe in the unreasonableness of GM and tend to the second option.

Quote: 3danimal

You can insure, not to mention post-war reparations.

Do you think insurers do not assess the risks of investing in Nazi Germany at all? No, dear, there are no fools in such matters. High risks will either not be insured by anyone, or the insurance premium will be comparable to the price of the insured assets.

Quote: 3danimal

Hitler's interests were to kill American soldiers and sailors. Support such things GM, they would be very misunderstood in the US

Right. That is why the play with fictitious nationalization was staged. Formally, GM lost the enterprise and portrayed itself as a victim of Nazism. But in fact, GM continued mutually beneficial cooperation with the Nazis, but Wikipedia did not report this to you.

Quote: 3danimal

In fact, GM lost control of the company in 1941 (the year war was declared between Nazi Germany and the United States)

In fact ??? Do you have documents confirming this fact and can you refer to them? Not? Oh yes, you have Google with Wikipedia ...

Quote: 3danimal

Again, there are fundamental differences in the organization of industry in the USSR and the USA. For example, it is impossible to imagine the independent functioning of any ZIL and its ownership of foreign assets.

The laws of universal gravitation, thermodynamics and all the others operate in exactly the same way on the territory of both the USA and the USSR. In the same way, business laws are the same in all territories. That is, efficient enterprises develop, while inefficient ones go bankrupt.

[3danimal]

Formally, GM lost the enterprise and portrayed itself as a victim of Nazism. But in fact, GM continued mutually beneficial cooperation with the Nazis, but Wikipedia did not report this to you.

What do you have in opposition? Communication with space? Relying on your own infallible logic? Have you ever thought that you are only trying to defend a theory you like?

In the same way, business laws are the same in all territories. That is, efficient enterprises develop, while inefficient ones go bankrupt.

Let me remind you that in the Union for starting a business there was an article up to 7 years. You will become a capitalist.
And in the Union, inefficient enterprises were quite successfully supported for years from budget funds (which became an important reason for the severe crisis in the economy).

[Constanty]

Let me remind you that until the very last minutes before dawn on June 22, 1941, the USSR traded with Germany - the last echelons with oil and raw materials crossed the border minutes before the attack - so reducing trade contacts between the USA and Germany until December 8, 1941 is hypocritical.

[km-21]

This was before the war. With the outbreak of war, the echelons ended.
At the same time, the Americans collaborated with Hitler throughout the war.
Catch the difference?

[Constanty]

Do you have problems with logical thinking and reading?
After the start of the war (or even before) provided by you Opel was nationalized - in other words, they were taken away from the owner - so there was no cooperation during the war, because then it was no longer an American Company.

[km-21]

It turns out that the Americans bought the Opel factories from the Germans, invested a lot of money in them, equipped them with production technologies, set up the production of first-class cars, and Hitler threw them as the last suckers? Do you really believe that Americans are so naive and do not insure against such a case?

[3danimal]

and Hitler threw them as the last suckers? Do you really believe that Americans are so naive and do not insure against such a case?

And what could they do to Hitler in 1941? Nothing.
They succeeded in 1944, turning the production shops into ruins, and in 1945 they took a good reparation (no longer from Hitler, he cowardly sawed himself out).
I told you, this is all your kind of logical chain, based on "feelings" and conspiracy theories

[avg avg]

The Americans did not have Lend-Lease with Germany. But there was cooperation. Search the web for a book by an American author, "Business with the Enemy"

[Constanty]

And the second made good money on the supply of American products to everyone who needed it. on both sides of the front.

Pretty bold statement

But supplies to the fighting USSR were not charity. For every plane, truck, steam locomotive, for every ton of metal, gunpowder, stew was paid in full. Moreover, it was paid not only in gold and jewelry, but also in grain, which was sorely lacking in the post-war country. It was very painful, but the USSR complied with the terms of the agreement.

I don't understand - after all, below you wrote the rules for "payment" for L-L and for paying for each aircraft, tank, etc. there is no speech. And they paid with gold for deliveries from the UK that were not covered by L-L

[km-21]

Quote: Constanty

I don't understand - after all, below you wrote the rules for "payment" for L-L and for paying for each aircraft, tank, etc. there is no speech.

To understand this "paradox", one must not snatch it out of context, but read the comment to the end. Because even lower I described the inconsistency of these rules and thereby demonstrated that there can be no such rules, and the real rules were completely different

[Constanty]

This is just your biased subjective interpretation of them. LL's contract was very precise, and its clauses specified both return and payments for property intact and unreturned (which were de jure delivery materials).

[km-21]

And how was the liability of the debtor for the property not returned due to destruction indicated in the L-L contract?

[Constanty]

By agreeing to use L-L, the USSR automatically agreed with its provisions.
https://loveman.sdsu.edu/docs/1941LendLeaseAct.pdf
And this gave the US President a lot of freedom of action in terms of supplies and everything related.

This was beneficial to both sides - the United States strengthened its defenses (this was the meaning of this act) and the USSR survived thanks to L-L. This is how he survived - without him he would have nothing to produce planes, tanks from, he would not have transport, food in the amount necessary to spend all his efforts on the production of weapons - not even counting the tanks or planes received

[km-21]

Please do not leave the answer, because this answer is very important for understanding the situation. I repeat the question:

How was the liability of the debtor for property damaged, destroyed or expended during the hostilities spelled out in the L-L contract?

[mat-vey]

"And in 1943, everything turned out the other way around - the enemy began to roll back to the west. The length of the railway lines began to increase, and then the question arose sharply of how to serve them" - "by the summer of 1942, the traffic area was reduced by 40% - from 106 thousand km up to 62 thousand. The rest was captured by the Germans. And a much reduced network could be fully serviced by a much smaller fleet of locomotives. Moreover, about 6000 main locomotives in 1941 were withdrawn from the threatened zone and for some time they stood in reserve, from where they were gradually withdrawn for movement."
Here they were reactivated and began to be serviced and captured (for the war about 2 thousand) ... Well, Lend-Lease went from 1944 - mostly from the middle in an amount comparable to captured ...

[mr.ZinGer]

Thanks for the material, as an addition, a link to an article about how steam locomotives were delivered across the ocean.
http://photoship.ru/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=3:klara-tsetkin&Itemid=184

[Constanty]

Later, when domestic factories launched the production of new steam locomotives, these machines began to be “squeezed out” on the roads of Siberia, Transbaikalia and the Far East. There, on highways, they served until the 60s, and in shunting until the 80s.

Was it supposed to return the equipment received under lin-lease after the end of the war to the USA in accordance with the contract?

PS. By the way, the Americans delivered almost 10 times more steam locomotives for the war than were produced in the USSR - actually a small page

[Siberian54]

Seven or eight thousand steam locomotives stood in reserve throughout the war and from 8000 to 15000 worked on the line, This is me about the percentage of lend-lease to the country's steam locomotive fleet

[your vsr 66-67]

I'm sorry. Maybe off topic, but also about OK. road. In the 2000s, an American diesel locomotive arrived at the Novaya Chara locomotive depot, I don’t remember the brand. So our 3-section lifts go very hard with the train, the lifts are 18 thousandths, the smoke is coming down mama don't worry! Amersky 2-section drags the same train effortlessly! And you can't even see the smoke! And what is most interesting, there were two American engineers in the depot, and it was strictly forbidden after the trip to wipe off oil and other liquids anywhere. As a result, the wheel pairs did not withstand, the rental was quickly formed. We ordered new wheelsets, waited more than a month, then changed them and sent the locomotive somewhere to Surgut or even further north.