Military Review

The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR

333
Almost everybody knows about American supplies to the USSR during the Great Patriotic War. “Studebakers” and an American stew, nicknamed “second front” by Soviet soldiers, immediately come to mind. But these are rather artistic-emotional symbols, which are actually the tip of the iceberg. The purpose of this article, the author puts the creation of a general understanding of the Lend-Lease and its role in the Great Victory.



In the initial period of the Second World War in the United States acted the so-called act of neutrality, according to which the only opportunity to assist any of the belligerents was the sale of weapons and materials exclusively for cash, and the transportation was also assigned to the customer - the system "pay and take" (cash and carry). At that time, Great Britain became the main consumer of military products in the United States, but very soon it exhausted its monetary resources. At the same time, President Franklin Roosevelt was well aware that in the current situation, the best way out for the United States was full economic support for countries fighting against Nazi Germany. Therefore, he actually “pushed” 11 March 1941 of the year in the Congress “The United States Protection Enforcement Act”, also referred to as the Lend-Lease Act. Now, any country whose defense has been recognized as vital to the United States, weapon and strategic raw materials were provided under the following conditions:

1. Weapons and materials lost during hostilities are not payable.

2. Remaining after the end of the war, property suitable for civilian purposes must be fully or partially paid on the basis of long-term loans provided by the United States.

3. Equipment that has not been lost after the war must be returned to the USA.


Joseph Stalin and Harry Hopkins, 1941 Year

After Germany attacked the USSR, Roosevelt sent his closest assistant, Harry Hopkins, to Moscow, because he wanted to find out "how long Russia will last." This was important, because in the United States at that time the opinion prevailed that the resistance of the USSR would not be able to offer significant resistance to the Germans, and the weapons and materials supplied would simply fall to the enemy. On July 31, Harry Hopkins met with Vyacheslav Molotov and Joseph Stalin. Following their results, the American politician departed for Washington with the firm conviction that the Germans would not have a quick victory and that the supply of arms to Moscow could have a significant impact on the course of military operations.

However, the USSR was included in the Lend-Lease program only in October-November 1941 of the year (up to this point, our country paid for all American military supplies). It took Roosevelt this long period of time to overcome the resistance of a sufficiently large number of American politicians.

Signed on October 1, 1941, the first (Moscow) protocol provided for the supply of aircraft (fighters and bombers), tanks, anti-tank and anti-aircraft guns, trucks, as well as aluminum, toluene, TNT, petroleum products, wheat and sugar. Further, the quantity and range of supplies was constantly expanding.



Cargo delivery took place along three main routes: Pacific, trans-Iranian and Arctic. The fastest, but at the same time dangerous, was the Arctic route to Murmansk and Arkhangelsk. The ships were escorted by the British fleet, and on the approaches to Murmansk, protection was strengthened by the ships of the Soviet Northern Fleet. At first, the Germans practically did not pay attention to the northern convoys - their confidence in an imminent victory remained so great, but, as the fighting became protracted, the German command pulled more and more forces into bases in Norway. The result was not long in coming.

In July 1942, the German fleet in close collaboration with aviation practically defeated convoy PQ-17: 22 transport ships out of 35 died. The heavy losses, as well as the need to attract a large number of ships to escort ships with supplies for besieged Malta, and then prepare for the landing in North Africa, forced the British to stop escorting the northern convoys before the polar nights. Since 1943, the balance of power in the Arctic waters gradually began to shift towards the Allies. There were more convoys, and their wiring was accompanied by less losses. In total, 4027 thousand tons of cargo were transported along the Arctic route to the USSR. Losses did not exceed 7% of the total.



The Pacific route was less dangerous, along which 8376 was delivered by thous. Tons. Transportation could only be carried out by ships under the Soviet flag (the USSR, unlike the United States, did not fight with Japan at that time). Further, the received cargo had to be transported by rail through almost the entire territory of Russia.

The trans-Iranian route served as a definite alternative to the northern convoys. American transport ships delivered cargo to the ports of the Persian Gulf, and then they were delivered to Russia by rail and road. In order to ensure full control over transport routes in August 1941, the USSR and Great Britain occupied Iran.

In order to increase capacity, we carried out a large-scale modernization of the ports of the Persian Gulf and the Trans-Iranian Railway. Also, General Motors has built two factories in Iran at which the vehicles intended for delivery to the USSR were assembled. During the war years, 184 112 vehicles were manufactured and sent to our country at these enterprises. The total freight traffic through the ports of the Persian Gulf for the entire period of the trans-Iranian route was 4227 thousand tons.


Aircraft in the framework of the program Lend-Lease

From the beginning of 1945, after the liberation of Greece, the Black Sea route began to function. This way the USSR received 459 thousand tons of cargo.

In addition to those noted above, there were two more air routes along which aircraft were distilled "under their own power" in the USSR. The most famous was the Alsib air bridge (Alaska - Siberia), through which they transferred 7925 airplanes. Also, the aircraft flew from the United States to the USSR through the South Atlantic, Africa and the Persian Gulf (993 aircraft).

For many years in the works of domestic historians it was stated that the supply under Lend-Lease constituted only about 4% of the total volume of output of Soviet industry and agriculture. And, although there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of this figure, nevertheless “the devil is in the details.”

It is well known that the strength of a chain as a whole is determined by the strength of the weakest link. Therefore, in determining the range of American supplies, the Soviet leadership sought, first and foremost, to close the "weak points" in the army and industry. This is especially clearly seen in the analysis of the volumes of strategic raw materials supplied to the USSR. In particular, the thousands of tons of explosives received by our country 295,6 amounted to 53% of all produced in domestic enterprises. Even more impressive is the ratio of copper - 76%, aluminum - 106%, tin - 223%, cobalt - 138%, wool - 102%, sugar - 66% and canned meat - 480%.

The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR

General A.M. Korolev and Major General Donald Connelly, shake hands against the background of the train, which came as part of the lend-lease supplies.

No less attention should be paid to the analysis of deliveries of automotive vehicles. Total USSR received a Lend-Lease 447 785 cars.
It is significant that during the war years the Soviet industry produced only 265 thousand cars. Thus, the number of machines received from the allies more than 1,5 times exceeded its own production. In addition, these were real army vehicles adapted for use in front-line conditions, while the domestic industry supplied the army with ordinary national economic machines.

The role of land-lease cars in the fighting is difficult to overestimate. To a large extent, they ensured the success of the victorious 1944 operations of the year included in history as "ten Stalin strikes."

Considerable merit of the Allied deliveries and in the successful functioning during the war years of the Soviet railway transport. The USSR received 1900 locomotives and 66 diesel-electric locomotives (these figures are especially vivid against the background of their own production for 1942 – 1945 years in the 92 locomotive), as well as 11 075 cars (own production - 1087 cars).

Parallel functioned and "reverse lend-lease". During the war years, the Allies received from the USSR 300 thousand tons of chromium and 32 thousand tons of manganese ore, as well as wood, gold and platinum.

During the discussions on the topic “Could the USSR have managed to do without Lend-Lease?” Many copies were broken. The author believes that, most likely, he could. Another thing is that now it is not possible to calculate what the price of this would be. If the volume of weapons supplied by the allies to one degree or another could well be compensated by domestic industry, then with regard to transport, as well as the production of a number of types of strategic raw materials without the supply of allies, the situation would very quickly become critical.

The lack of rail and road transport could easily paralyze the supply of the army and deprive it of mobility, and this, in turn, would reduce the pace of operations and increase the growth of losses. The lack of non-ferrous metals, especially aluminum, would lead to a decrease in the output of armaments, and without food supplies it would be much more difficult to fight hunger. Surely our country could stand and win even in such a situation, but it is not possible to determine how much the price of victory would increase.

The Lend-Lease program was terminated on the initiative of the US government 21 August 1945, although the USSR requested to continue deliveries on credit terms (it was necessary to restore the country destroyed by the war). However, by that time F. Roosevelt was no longer among the living, and the new era of the Cold War was loudly knocking on the door.

During the war, the payment of supplies under the Lend-Lease is not made. In 1947, the United States estimated the USSR’s debt for deliveries to 2,6 billion dollars, but a year later the amount was reduced to 1,3 billion dollars. It was planned that the repayment will be made within 30 years with the accrual of 2,3% per annum. I.V. Stalin rejected these accounts, saying that "the USSR paid off the lend-lease debt in full." As a justification of its point of view, the USSR cited a precedent for writing off debts for lend-lease supplies to other countries. Besides I.V. Stalin quite reasonably did not want to give the means of a war-ravaged country to a potential enemy in the Third World War.

Agreement on the procedure for repayment of debts was concluded only in 1972 year. The USSR undertook to pay up to 2001 of the year 722 million dollars. But after the transfer of 48 million dollars payments again stopped due to the adoption of the US discriminatory Jackson-Vanik amendment.

Again this issue was raised in 1990 at a meeting of the presidents of the USSR and the USA. A new amount has been established - 674 million dollars - and the final maturity date is 2030 year. After the collapse of the USSR, obligations for this debt went to Russia.



Summing up, we can conclude that for the US, Lend-Lease was primarily, according to F. Roosevelt, "a profitable investment of capital." Moreover, it is not the profits directly from supplies that should be assessed, but the numerous indirect benefits that the American economy has gained after the end of World War II. It was a pleasure for history to dispose of the post-war well-being of the United States to a large extent paid for with the blood of Soviet soldiers. For the USSR, Lend-Lease was almost the only way to reduce the number of victims on the way to Victory. Here is a "marriage of convenience" ...
Author:
Originator:
http://историк.рф/special_posts/значение-ленд-лиза-для-ссср/
333 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 21 May 2016 06: 47
    +24
    Whoever said that, but the land-lease really helped our people in the fight against the Nazi invaders, even to take that Pokryshkin fought on aero cobras and not Katybackers and a lot of other things were installed so that help was great, not a second front until 1944, even though that plus helped.
    1. Shadowcat
      Shadowcat 21 May 2016 07: 25
      +3
      Aero cobra plus is only all-metal with respect to our planes (as a result, great lightness (sounds funny) and the consequence of this is a large load-carrying capacity), but for beginners it was difficult to learn.
      It’s ridiculous to say - since the pepelats is so cool, why did most of the cars were delivered to the USSR and not to the army of the same states?
      http://www.airpages.ru/uk/p39_2.shtml
      1. rkkasa xnumx
        rkkasa xnumx 21 May 2016 08: 07
        +9
        Quote: ShadowCat
        Aerocobra in plus only all-metal

        Powerful weapons, good visibility and a walkie-talkie, survivability seems to be quite good. Above 3000-4000 thousand, generally a good plane.
        1. Conductor
          Conductor 21 May 2016 11: 58
          +1
          The article is just like a tub of cold water on the head of local rascals
          1. MrK
            MrK 23 May 2016 19: 23
            +5
            Quote: Explorer
            The article is just like a tub of cold water on the head of local rascals


            I did not want to get into the discussion, but I read all the comments of the “friends” of Russia and understood what was needed. I will give only two quotes
            1. From the book of the First Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR Nikolai Voznesensky "The Military Economy of the USSR during the Patriotic War." He remained in this post throughout the war years.
            «If we compare the sizes of supplies of industrial goods by the Allies in the USSR with the sizes of industrial production at the socialist enterprises of the USSR for the same period, it turns out that the share of these supplies in relation to domestic production during the war economy will be only about 4%».
            2. From a book by Edward Stettinius in charge of the Lend-Lease program in the USA. He writes with disarming honesty. "The first Lend-Lease deliveries in the winter of the 1941 / 42 of the year reached the USSR very late, in these critical months, Russians, and some Russians, resisted the German aggressor on their own land and by their own means, without receiving any noticeable help from Western democracies . By the end of the 1942 of the year, the agreed delivery programs to the USSR were carried out by the Americans and the British by 55%. In 1941-1942 years, the USSR received only 7% of the cargo sent from the USA during the war years. Most of the weapons and other materials were received by the Soviet Union in 1944-1945, after a radical change during the war.
            In general, the volume of military materials we supplied is not too large. Frankly speaking: we do not have detailed information about the benefits that our weapons brought to the Russian Empire in 1943
            ».
            About locomotives. 25 000 locomotives that the USSR had before the war. 14% of them, however, we lost at the beginning of the war. But 40% of railways in European Russia was under the German. So the density of locomotives has only increased. Only in May of the 1944 did deliveries of the largest batch began - in the 1600 of steam locomotives.
            I cited this small example to show how easy it is to manipulate numbers using Lend-Lease. Anything can be said - and proved with numbers in hand ... If you show only part of the truth.
            «This help cannot be measured in numbers. There are no standard estimates with which, for example, one could compare the thousand dead Russian soldiers and the thousand fighters ... Their victims save the lives of Americans”, Said the honest Stettinius in a report to Congress in 1943.
            The emphasized cynical Truman looks even more honest: “Lend-lease money certainly saved many American lives. Each Russian soldier who received Lend-Lease equipment and fought proportionally reduced the dangers for our own youth».
            Thanks to Lend-Lease, the profits of American corporations grew 2,5 times. 26 billion was received by monopolies for the conversion of enterprises for the needs of Lend-Lease.
            Output. Thanks to the USA for their help and it’s good that they helped us, not Germany.
            Did we win World War II without Lend-Lease? Yes, but it would be harder.
            1. MrK
              MrK 23 November 2016 19: 59
              0
              Quote: mrark
              Did we win World War II without Lend-Lease? Yes, but it would be harder.

              By the way, this is an excerpt from A. Kurlyandchik's book "Damned" Soviet power ... on Prose.Ru
        2. Nehist
          Nehist 21 May 2016 13: 28
          -1
          That's just the fighting on the Soviet-German front took place mainly at heights of 2000-3000 thousand! Of the advantages, by the way, you can also call the nose wheel strut, which simplified take-off and landing
          1. veteran66
            veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 43
            0
            Quote: Nehist
            mostly at heights of 2000-3000 thousand!

            so this is because Soviet aircraft at high altitudes lost to German aircraft. In general, whoever is taller is stronger, remember the formula for Pokryshkin's victory, by the way he flew in a "cobra".
        3. hohol95
          hohol95 21 May 2016 17: 18
          +3
          The plane was good! But only in the Red Army Air Force! Our pilots flew on COBRA using flight modes completely unsuitable for the manufacturer’s instructions! The Yankees themselves tried to fight on the COBRA with the Japanese according to the instructions - there were big losses and there was no sense! They gave it to the Britons, those same problems! Losses without results! The first COBRA were transferred from the UK !!!
          1. svp67
            svp67 21 May 2016 17: 23
            +2
            Quote: hohol95
            Our pilots flew on COBRA using flight modes completely unsuitable for the manufacturer’s instructions!

            they are fighting not according to the instructions of the manufacturer, but according to the regulations and using combat experience. And since the "Cobra" withstood the regimes that our pilots asked in battle and made it possible to carry out the necessary maneuvering, then who said that this could not be used?
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 21 May 2016 08: 19
        +10
        According to the memoirs of A.S. Yakovlev, Airacobra suffered from a number of shortcomings: in the first series, when overloaded, its tail unit collapsed, the Cobra easily fell into a flat spin, from which it was almost impossible to withdraw it. The United States sent test pilot A. Kochetkov and engineer F.P. Suprun, to evaluate the "King Cobra". And the Cobra was sent for export because it had an Allison liquid-cooled engine, and air-cooled engines were installed on American aircraft for its own Air Force. Like the Studebaker Cobra, it was considered non-standardized for the American army.
        1. avt
          avt 21 May 2016 09: 28
          +8
          Quote: Amurets
          According to the memoirs of A.S. Yakovlev, the AeroCobra suffered from a number of shortcomings: in the first series, the tail plumage was destroyed during overload,

          Well, let's put, King Cobra "did not participate in the war, that's something I did not even hear about the use in the Far East", they did not wait and aligned with our filing, Aircobra
          During discussions on the topic “Could the USSR do without Lend-Lease?” many copies are broken. The author believes that most likely he could. Another thing is that now it is not possible to calculate what the price of this would be.
          Well, as the author correctly believes, I completely agree with him. A good article is calm and sound. Well, maybe in the section where the author talks about calculating the USSR for a land lease, it is worth mentioning how the Great Shaved Empire was calculated for a land lease with the USA. And so - this is quite a plus article.
          1. svp67
            svp67 21 May 2016 12: 15
            +4
            Quote: avt
            Well, let's put, King Cobra "did not participate in the war, that's something I have not heard even about the use in the Far East"

            The bulk of these fighters began to be sent to the Far East: to the units of the 12th Air Army, preparing to enter the war against Japan. So, R-63A aircraft were equipped with the 190th fighter air division, relocated to Transbaikalia in June 1945, which began to receive American aircraft from the end of this month, completing the re-equipment by August 2, 1945. Kingcobra fighters received the 940th and 781th IAPs of the 245th IAD, which is part of the same air army.
            In addition, the R-63 received the armament of the 888th IAP of the 128th mixed aviation division, as well as the 410th assault air regiment, retrained after re-equipment as a fighter. American fighters were also sent to the 9th and 10th air armies.
            During the hostilities against Japan, the Bell P-63 Kingcobra escorted bombers and reconnaissance aircraft, as well as launched assault and bombing attacks on enemy troops. In addition, their duties included air cover for Soviet ground forces and ships. So, on August 10, 1945, 50 R-63 fighters covered a bomb attack of 40 IL-4 on the fortified area of ​​Chuzhou. American fighters from the 888th and 410th IAP during the Manchurian operation carried out attacks by Japanese bases located on the Kuril Islands, and supported the landing on them.
            There were almost no air battles of the R-63, since there was almost no opposition from Japanese aviation. In the only clash of that period, the commander of the 17th IAP, part of the 190th IAD, Hero of the Soviet Union, Major V.F. Sirotin paired with lieutenant I.F. Miroshnichenko intercepted two Japanese attacking Soviet transport aircraft. During the attack, I.F. Miroshnichenko was shot down by one fighter (presumably Nakajima Ki.43 Hayabusa) of the enemy, the second aircraft managed to escape on a shaving plane, taking advantage of the terrain.
          2. veteran66
            veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 45
            -1
            Quote: avt
            Well, let's put, King Cobra, which did not participate in the war,

            Yes?!!! and men don’t know !!
        2. AK64
          AK64 21 May 2016 10: 42
          +12
          According to the memoirs of A.S. Yakovlev, Aerocobra suffered

          I see ... But what did Yak suffer from, according to Yakovlev’s recollections?

          And Cobra was sent for export because it had an Allison liquid-cooled engine, and air-cooled engines were installed on American aircraft for its own Air Force.

          Uh ... Mustang, for example? Yes? Well, the most famous Amer fighter.

          Like Studebaker, the Cobra was considered non-standardized for the American army.

          This is your invention. Amers simply had a huge number of types of aircraft: they could choose.
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 21 May 2016 12: 38
            +2
            Quote: AK64
            I see ... But what did Yak suffer from, according to Yakovlev’s recollections?

            Bad gluing of the wings. This is the main defect and still were, I will not cut it, but it did not hide them.
            Quote: AK64

            Uh ... Mustang, for example? Yes? Well, the most famous Amer fighter.

            Here I apologize, error, but the engine was Packard and not Allison, as on the Cobra. With the Allison R-51 Mustang had unsatisfactory characteristics.
            Quote: AK64
            This is your invention. Amers simply had a huge number of types of aircraft: they could choose.

            This is not a fiction. The American army had strict requirements for standardizing equipment and what didn’t fit into the standard went to the Marine Corps and the National Guard or for export, and there are many examples. there should be only overhead valves. And a number of minor differences from the base sample. http://topwar.ru/27985-rekordsmen-lend-liza-studebaker-us6.html
            1. Fly tsetse
              Fly tsetse 21 May 2016 13: 01
              +2
              Yes, that’s how it was!
              One ZIS-2 was made in Zlatoust, the other the United States drove overhead valve trucks. Well, why so modest, write immediately to the supreme leaders they went!
              Note to you, overhead ICEs have been widely used since the 50s, because this type of ICE is more sensitive to the octane number, so until the 50s it was mainly used only in small-scale, racing cars.
            2. AK64
              AK64 21 May 2016 13: 06
              +2
              Bad gluing of the wings. This is the main defect and still were, I will not cut it, but it did not hide them.

              It is clear: that is, it was Yakovlev who invented the airplane, but they glued it poorly. Glued poorly.
              And if they glued correctly - then oh, what a plane!

              Here I apologize, error, but the engine was Packard and not Allison, as on the Cobra. With the Allison R-51 Mustang had unsatisfactory characteristics.

              Already closer.
              So at first Allison was put on Mustanki, like ka on Cobras. And samol somehow did not impress anyone. And they would have written it off ... yes, even if they were Russian, but they put the British (!!!) Merlin on it - Packard this is the license of Merlin.

              That is, the reason for not using Cobra is not that it had water cooling, but that it was unsatisfactory in terms of height and economy.
              But Up to 3000m, and even up to 4500m, Allison is quite satisfactory, perhaps better than that of Spain, which is the M-105, which was put on Soviet fighters. The relics of Allison range from 1100 in the earliest to more than 2000 mares in the later versions, which is much better than Spain (M-105).

              But such "height" could not suit amers


              This is not a fiction. The American army had strict requirements for standardization of equipment and what did not fit into the standard went to the Marine Corps and the National Guard or for export, and there are many examples of this.

              Nevertheless, both Mustang and Lightning P-38 with water cooling engines.

              The student was originally created under the order of the USSR
              1. murriou
                murriou 21 May 2016 15: 07
                +6
                "Studer was originally created under the order of the USSR"
                Studebaker’s seers, clairvoyants! wink

                First, they made a car, put it up for a competition for the American army, but lost to General Motors, and only then a law on lend-lease appeared, and even later - supplies to the USSR.
              2. hohol95
                hohol95 21 May 2016 17: 22
                0
                Studebaker US6 was created by the standardization program lost by the American army!
            3. Stas57
              Stas57 21 May 2016 13: 32
              +5
              Yes, of course, cobra shit: an all-metal machine, with oxygen equipment, with an excellent walkie-talkie,

              On the P-39 Airacobra, the cockpit, oxygen cylinders and the engine were reserved. Behind the fighter pilot was reliably protected by an engine, behind which was an armored plate. Directly behind the pilot’s head was 63,5 mm thick bulletproof glass, and just below was another armored plate. Front of the pilot was protected by bulletproof glass with a thickness of 35 mm, to which an inclined armor plate adjoined.
              In addition, with the help of 5 armor plates, a screw gear was protected, which also increased the front pilot's protection. Moreover, such a reservation can be considered not entirely rational, since the pilot was actually protected twice from both the rear and the front.
              http://topwar.ru/13676-pokryshkin-aleksandr-ivanovich-i-ego-istrebitel-bell-p-39
              -airacobra.html
              1. veteran66
                veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 48
                +1
                Quote: Stas57
                with great walkie-talkie

                and with excellent weapons, forgot
          2. veteran66
            veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 46
            -1
            Quote: AK64
            And what did Yak suffer, according to Yakovlev’s recollections?

            Bravo!!!!
        3. iouris
          iouris 21 May 2016 13: 27
          -3
          1) There are no techniques without flaws.
          2) The disadvantages of technology - a continuation of its advantages.
          3) The USA supplied under Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.
          4) The creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries began long before the German attack on the USSR: what does this mean ?!
          1. overb
            overb 21 May 2016 13: 41
            +10
            Quote: iouris
            The United States supplied Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.

            It’s strange. And in the films of Americans on Sherman show. Are they lying?
            Quote: iouris
            Creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries

            Masterpiece phrase.
            1. iouris
              iouris 21 May 2016 16: 10
              -2
              There are no rules without exceptions. my statement concerns mainly aviation and automotive technology.
              That is exactly what happened. The United States unleashed a war in order to earn money on it and overcome the crisis (incidentally, the crisis of overproduction of everything).
              1. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 16: 40
                0
                Quote: iouris
                The United States unleashed a war in order to earn money on it and overcome the crisis (incidentally, the crisis of overproduction of everything)

                The United States can still somehow try to blame the outbreak of war in the Far East. But in Europe then they did not dispose. So here, just past.
                And the crisis, so the 40s stood in the yard. Depression in the first half of the 30s as a whole ended. Since 1933, restoration has already begun, although the United States returned to the original figures only in 1939.
                1. AK64
                  AK64 21 May 2016 16: 46
                  0
                  The United States can still try to blame the outbreak of war in the Far East. But in Europe then they did not dispose.


                  Look here on the website for a series of articles about WWII as a war between the USA and B-Britain.
                  And also look at the result of WWII
                  1. overb
                    overb 21 May 2016 17: 01
                    0
                    Quote: AK64
                    Look here on the website for a series of articles about WWII as a war between the USA and B-Britain.

                    I'm not into fantasy fiction.
                    Quote: AK64
                    And also look at the result of WWII

                    The Britons clicked. They did not want in 1941. share Europe with the Germans, as a result of 1945. I had to give the whole world to the Yankees. Although, in fairness, it was only a matter of time, the Yankees would have gained this domination anyway. It just happened that before.
                    1. AK64
                      AK64 21 May 2016 17: 16
                      +2
                      I'm not into fantasy fiction.

                      That is, to familiarize yourself with the arguments, you don’t want to point out the author for errors ...
                      Oh well

                      The Britons clicked. They did not want in 1941. share Europe with the Germans, as a result of 1945. I had to give the whole world to the Yankees.

                      Rather funny: WHO are the Germans for the then Master of the World - Britain to "share" something with them? WHY is Britain?

                      But why, or rather WHY Germany got into the war with the Master of the World - that's the question. And there is no reasonable answer to this question - well, except that "yes there was this Hitler, so he got out!" - we somehow did not hear.

                      How is it: before 1939 he was not, and in 1939 he suddenly lost his mind?


                      Although, in fairness, it was only a matter of time, the Yankees would have gained this domination anyway. It just happened that before.

                      Smiles to you wide.
                      WHO would allow them, may I ask?
                      All the thieves' positions, you know, have long been occupied. So how is it that some redneck (Americans of 1900 is exactly a redneck) can give in and get "dominance"?

                      Well, that is, tell us about the technology of production.

                      Just in case: Great Britain arr 1940 is 25% of the inhabited land, 25% of the inhabitants of the Earth, and immeasurable resources. And here comes some redneck "you this ... hear-ko ... move --- now we will dominate!"
                      1. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 17: 39
                        +1
                        Quote: AK64
                        That is, to familiarize yourself with the arguments, you don’t want to point out the author for errors ...

                        I do not want.
                        Quote: AK64
                        WHY Germany climbed into the war with the Lord of Peace - that’s the question

                        This is just not a question at all.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And there is no reasonable answer to this question - well, except that "yes there was this Hitler, so he got out!" - we somehow did not hear.

                        And do not hear. For now.
                        Quote: AK64
                        So how is it that some redneck (Americans of 1900 is exactly a redneck) can give in and get "dominance"?

                        Almost half a century has passed since then. Any hillbilly sooner or later ceases to be her. This is called development.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Just in case: Great Britain arr 1940 is 25% of the inhabited land, 25% of the inhabitants of the Earth, and immeasurable resources. And here comes some kind of redneck "you that ... hear ... move over --- now we will dominate!"

                        Yes something like that. There were many great empires, but all of them sooner or later ended. Starting from the ancient Egyptian (I do not take into account the different Sumerian ones) and ending with the British. And American will end in the same way, it is a matter of time. It may be long enough, but maybe not.
                      2. AK64
                        AK64 21 May 2016 17: 52
                        0
                        I do not want.

                        We already understood, we understood

                        This is just not a question at all.

                        Really?
                        And what is the answer?

                        And do not hear. For now.

                        What they will not tell us - we already understood.
                        So we try with our own mind.
                        But you clearly know the answer — but don’t want to say it! What, huh ?!

                        Almost half a century has passed since then. Any hillbilly sooner or later ceases to be her. This is called development.

                        Do you think that half a century is such a huge period for the state?
                        And Britain at this time, presumably, stood still and watched as yesterday's cousins ​​develop - "Well done!"

                        Yes something like that. There were many great empires, but all of them sooner or later ended. Starting from the ancient Egyptian (I do not take into account the different Sumerian ones) and ending with the British.

                        Just one example for something to fall apart SAMO

                        And American will end in the same way, it is a matter of time. It may be long enough, but maybe not.

                        Yeah --- in the 14th the British Empire didn’t fall apart, in the 40th it didn’t fall apart - but in the 44th rrrrraraaaz --- and into dust. Herself.
                        Clear.
                        Well, maybe she ate, of course, of what.
                        And maybe someone fed.

                        I, mind you, do not mind - there, in fact, the road to her. I'm just about the facts
                      3. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 18: 17
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        but do not want to say!

                        I do not want. Slippery topic.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Do you think that half a century is such a huge period for the state?

                        Huge.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And Britain at this time, presumably, stood still and watched as yesterday's cousins ​​develop - "Well done!"

                        At a different stage in the development of society, it has different dynamics of this very development.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Just one example for something to fall apart

                        EVERYTHING collapsed SAMO. The rest is just the surface part of the iceberg destroyed from the inside.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Yeah --- in the 14th the British Empire didn’t fall apart, in the 40th it didn’t fall apart - but in the 44th rrrrraraaaz --- and into dust. Herself.

                        1. Why did it have to fall apart in the 14th year?
                        2. Why did it have to fall apart in the 40th year?
                        3. In 1945. the Yankees' advantages became apparent. And instead of being bullied and as a result get on a hat and be trampled in th *** o, cunning Britons went into "best friends of the Yankees." This, too, must be able to - to lose with dignity, getting even from this benefit.
                      4. AK64
                        AK64 21 May 2016 18: 27
                        +1
                        I do not want. Slippery topic.

                        But at the same time you call a series of articles "fantasy".
                        Strange.

                        Huge.

                        Hmm ...
                        Wholeheartedly

                        At a different stage in the development of society, it has different dynamics of this very development.

                        Sorry, but you said that you "caught up and overtook". But once caught up and overtook - then STAGE ONE AND THE SAME.
                        By the way, you really don’t see the difference between Britain arr 1914 and arr 1940?

                        EVERYTHING collapsed SAMO. The rest is just the surface part of the iceberg destroyed from the inside.

                        Well, yes, well, yes: I walked for myself and fell on a knife. Fourteen times. And all, note, himself ....

                        1. Why did it have to fall apart in the 14th year?

                        And in the 46th why?
                        2. Why did it have to fall apart in the 40th year?

                        And in the 46th why?
                        3. In 1945 The benefits of the Yankees have become apparent.

                        Oh really?
                        Ah, well, yes - when one has a sharpening in the side - then the advantages of the other are perfectly obvious - "developed better"

                        And instead of being bullied and as a result get on a hat and be trampled in th *** o, cunning Britons went into "best friends of the Yankees." This, too, must be able to - to lose with dignity, getting even from this benefit.

                        Hehe ...
                        A lop-eared cowboys from Arizona hung their ears and immediately believed all of these --- such naive Texas guys.

                        Not a single hegemon has given anything to himself - there have not been such examples in history. "Himself" gives - when he sees that the guy has a gun, and has no doubts that he will use it. That's when they make a "good face": "I see you need money --- take mine, I don't need it, my family will somehow live in the garden"
                      5. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 18: 46
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        But at the same time you call a series of articles "fantasy".

                        I have not read them. And I will not read, because The theme draws on fantasy.
                        In fact, everything there was different, much more primitive and simpler.
                        Quote: AK64
                        but you said that you "caught up and overtook"

                        About "overtook" I did not say anything.
                        Quote: AK64
                        By the way, you really don’t see the difference between Britain arr 1914 and arr 1940?

                        I see. But in 1940. Britain was exactly where it was in 1914, i.e. at the top of the pyramid. Maybe the foundation was already wrong. But the top was still the same.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And in the 46th why?

                        Because the time has come for this.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Not a single hegemon of the SAM itself has given anything away - there were no such examples in history.

                        Why so? Post-war Britain is a prime example. Of course, she didn’t give it herself, but she pretended to be herself. There are examples of other behaviors. Only about such countries and peoples do we know mainly from history. The British made the right conclusions from this fact.
                      6. AK64
                        AK64 21 May 2016 18: 53
                        0
                        I.e,
                        on the one hand you do not agree.
                        On the other hand, what do you think is right? You don’t want to tell us.

                        Such is the conclusion.

                        But in my opinion everything is just obvious, and if you look at the subject from this point of view, then there are no questions left. Well, if something swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and generally behaves like a duck - then most likely this is a duck. Not?
                      7. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 19: 27
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        I.e,
                        on the one hand you do not agree.
                        On the other hand, what do you think is right? You don’t want to tell us.

                        You understood everything absolutely correctly.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Well, if something swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and generally behaves like a duck - then most likely this is a duck. Not?

                        It could also be a decoy.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                  2. The comment was deleted.
            2. Amurets
              Amurets 21 May 2016 17: 42
              0
              Quote: overb
              It’s strange. And in the films of Americans on Sherman show. Are they lying?

              No! But Shermanov had several modifications from different companies. The main model in the US Army was the M-4A3. By the way, a rather detailed article on Sherman in Wiki, with all the variations of the tank, was in Wiki.
              1. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 18: 01
                0
                Quote: Amurets
                But Shermanov had several modifications from different companies. The main model in the US Army was the M-4A3

                Perhaps the M4A3 were slightly better. Especially M4A3 (76) W HVSS and M4A3E2.
                But also M4A2 (76) W (about half of deliveries to the USSR) was more than not bad. And the M4A2 with the M3 gun (second half) against the background of the T-34/76 was very good.
          2. opus
            opus 21 May 2016 17: 56
            +3
            Quote: iouris
            3) The USA supplied under Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.

            Explosives? Car tires? Fuel and lubricants? Detonators?
            M3 Lee, Bell P-63 Kingcobra, Light tank M3, M4A2 and variations, Dodge WC, Willys MB (A), 37-mm automatic Colt-Browning, 40-mm automatic guns "Bofors" (Swedish design), " Colt M1911A1, Thompson and Rising submachine guns, as well as Browning machine guns: the M1919A4 and the large-caliber M2 HB; English Bran machine gun, Boyce and Pirate anti-tank rifles, Dodge WF32, Ford G8T

            To be honest, I don't know anything about the Vosper (A-1), Higgins (A-2) and ELKO (A-3) torpedo boats and minesweepers of the YMS, SC, AM, and MMS types , frigates of the "PF" or "Tacoma" type, and 641 radar stations for various purposes (they helped us a lot)
            I doubt that the United States would produce such a nomenclature (TC, minesweepers, frigates, radar) exclusively for someone.


            Quote: iouris
            4) The creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries began long before the German attack on the USSR: what does this mean ?!

            Lend Lease Act— An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States, passed by the US Congress 11 March 1941 year
            ? For a long time.
            He (LL) was actually for the UK.

            Quote: Author Andrei CHAPLYGIN
            3. Unused equipment after the war must be returned USA.

            Author why lie?
            *in case of interest of the American side, undestructed and unspent machinery and equipment must be returned after the war in the USA

            There is a difference?
            1. iouris
              iouris 21 May 2016 19: 42
              0
              The United States entered the war after the Pearl Harbor incident. Until 1942, deliveries on LL could go to Germany - this is how the US Senator or Vice President Harry Truman will justify US interest.
              As for the wide range of goods that you were not too lazy to list, this is such a polemic technique.
              1. opus
                opus 21 May 2016 20: 08
                +1
                Quote: iouris
                Until 1942 of the year, deliveries on LL could go to Germany -

                belay
                Well, where is it about Germany?




                Quote: iouris
                As for the wide range of goods that you were not too lazy to list, this is such a polemic technique.

                1.Not difficult. I'm "in the tank"
                2.PP: fool
                You at least before using the term, at least read about it.

                Here it’s okay, and so you can seriously make out

                According to my refuted delirium:
                Quote: iouris
                3) The USA supplied under Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.
                4) The creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries began long before the German attack on the USSR: what does this mean ?!

                essentially have what to present?
                Though with PP, even without?
                FACTS if only.
          3. veteran66
            veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 51
            -1
            Quote: iouris
            which was not in service with the US Army.

            But what about the A-20 and B-25, the Wilis and the Doji, the Sherman and Lee / Grant tanks? Is it just for fun?
          4. Alf
            Alf 21 May 2016 21: 48
            +5
            Quote: iouris
            3) The USA supplied under Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.

            1. B-25 Mitchell.
            2. A-20 Boston.
            3. P-47 Thunderbolt.
            4. P-40.
            5. M-3 Grant.
            6. M-4 Sherman.
            5. M-10 Wolverin.
            What didn’t the US Army have on this list?
            By the way.
            The author, the photo you brought with the Mustang fighters is out of place. North American P-51 Mustang was not supplied to the USSR. Moreover, the photo shows a rather rare modification of the A-36 Invader.
      3. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 21 May 2016 08: 26
        +4
        Excellent performance characteristics for mid-altitude operations, where air battles were mainly fought on the Soviet-German front. At that time, the Americans were mainly engaged in strategic bombings. They needed a high-altitude fighter with a large radius of action. On the Pacific Theater, the states needed a carrier-based fighter, which COBRA was not.
      4. Sarmat149
        Sarmat149 21 May 2016 09: 04
        +3
        Pepelats Aerocobra in all versions had an irreparable flaw due to which it was practically not used in the USA. According to its scheme, the aircraft was built with an engine behind the cockpit to install as many weapons as possible. Accordingly, the armament power was achieved. But, since the aircraft engine was located behind the cockpit almost in the center of mass, the plane at any moment broke into a flat corkscrew. It is very difficult, almost impossible to get out of a corkscrew. Hence the numerous disasters and non-combat losses in the first place pilots.

        Accordingly, after a brief operation of these aircraft in the Marine Corps, the Americans handed them over to the British. The British acted similarly. Soon, all these aircraft were withdrawn from combat formations.

        Our pilots are different, respectively. Due to the high firepower, the aircraft was used until the very end of the war. But only in our Air Force. Moreover, the manufacturer did not go bankrupt only thanks to orders from the USSR. A flat corkscrew, the broken legs of the pilots jumping out of a crashed plane were commonplace.
        1. Spartanez300
          Spartanez300 21 May 2016 09: 22
          +7
          Pokryshkin creatively approached the capabilities of the aircraft and developed tactics for the combat use of fighters against German aircraft, flying Airacobras since the spring of 1943, destroyed 48 enemy aircraft in air battles, bringing the total score to 59 victories. If you are interested.
        2. Dimon19661
          Dimon19661 21 May 2016 12: 22
          +2
          You want to say that after a corkscrew, the legs are broken ??? not even funny .....
          1. murriou
            murriou 21 May 2016 15: 11
            0
            Broken legs from an aircraft hitting a pilot leaving the cockpit with a parachute, not wanting to die with him in a spin. This was common for Cobras. Your K.O.
            1. svp67
              svp67 21 May 2016 15: 18
              +2
              Quote: murriou
              Legs broken by a plane hitting a pilot leaving a cockpit with a parachute

              It happened and the spine broke, until they carefully read the instructions and began to follow it, when leaving the plane. Each car has its pros and cons, you just need to know them.
              1. AK64
                AK64 21 May 2016 15: 22
                +1
                It happened and the spine broke, until they carefully read the instructions and began to follow it, when leaving the plane. Each car has its pros and cons, you just need to know them.

                All the exterminators were hard to leave.
                Tramvatism when struck by plumage was terrifying for all types equally.
                That's why they came up with a catapult
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. iouris
              iouris 21 May 2016 16: 12
              -1
              During the war, such "little things" are ignored.
        3. St_tov
          St_tov 21 May 2016 17: 02
          0
          In fact, the US pilots had a much larger flying time during the preparation period - up to 500 hours, unlike the Soviet ones, which were often sent to combat units with a 30-50 hour flight time.
      5. AK64
        AK64 21 May 2016 10: 38
        +2
        but for beginners, it was difficult to learn.

        On the contrary: the front strut extremely facilitated landing (the most difficult element for beginners)
        It’s ridiculous to say - since the pepelats is so cool, why did most of the cars were delivered to the USSR and not to the army of the same states?

        Because the amers themselves did not like an aircraft with such a range. Compare Cobra range with Mustang or Lightning range.
      6. Fly tsetse
        Fly tsetse 21 May 2016 11: 59
        +3
        Well, that is, the saying "a bad Faberge dancer gets in the way" is it about a cobra?
        It is a pity that Russia does not understand that the low qualification of the pilot cannot be a sufficient basis for recognizing the aircraft as bad. Then the Ferrari should be considered worse than the Lada, because on it booty to the oncoming traffic is much easier to fly!
      7. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 21 May 2016 12: 24
        +2
        Quote: ShadowCat
        It’s ridiculous to say - since the pepelats is so cool, why did most of the cars were delivered to the USSR and not to the army of the same states?

        In the USA, as well as several companies, we were engaged in the development and production of aircraft
        and in the process of military operations, so to speak, new models were developed and put into service. It is clear that any state in the first place will saturate its air force and "give" something simpler. By the way, supplies were ordered by the USSR
      8. murriou
        murriou 21 May 2016 15: 00
        +1
        Cobra was also supplied to the British. Moreover, they immediately put their 20-mm guns on it instead of the native 37-mm one, the aircraft's efficiency improved from this.
        1. iouris
          iouris 21 May 2016 16: 15
          0
          This is if you fight according to the standards of the British Air Force. And if you open fire from 50 m, then the effectiveness of the 37-mm gun can be increased.
          Domestic fighters were not just criticized for very weak weapons. And the engines were not so hot.
          1. murriou
            murriou 21 May 2016 17: 11
            +1
            Quote: iouris
            if you open fire from 50 m, then the effectiveness of the 37-mm gun can be increased.

            The 37 mm has a much lower rate of fire, so the effectiveness of fire from long distances is sharply deteriorating. The British knew what they were doing, ours, too.

            The 37-mm cannon is good for destroying heavy bombers, which are large and slow, and for fights between fighters its caliber is not an advantage, but exactly the opposite.

            Quote: iouris
            Domestic fighters were not just criticized for very weak weapons. And the engines were not so hot.

            There is no perfection at all in this world. wink

            However, basically our Air Force fought with our fighters, and fought well. And according to the performance characteristics, Yaki and La kept without much lag behind the Germans, even ahead of the war by the end of the war.
            1. iouris
              iouris 21 May 2016 19: 44
              0
              Not only the "Air Force fought", but also people, pilots, the moral factor.
              1. murriou
                murriou 22 May 2016 05: 11
                0
                The air force is the air force, all together: people, equipment, and morale.
            2. nosferatus2
              nosferatus2 22 May 2016 10: 15
              +1
              Quote: murriou
              And according to the performance characteristics, Yaki and La kept without much lag behind the Germans, even ahead of the end of the war

              No one argues with this. And what did our planes make of? For example, improvements to La and Yak mainly related to replacing wood with aluminum in them and boosting the engine.
              Arlazorov M.S. The front goes through the KB
              IL-2

              http://aviaforum.ru/threads/postavki-prokata-v-sssr-v-vov.36096/
      9. veteran66
        veteran66 21 May 2016 19: 40
        -1
        Quote: ShadowCat
        why most of the cars were delivered to the USSR, and not to the army of the same states?

        because the USSR ordered the "cobras". The main mistake of many in assessing Lend-Lease is that they believe that the states supplied us on the basis of "God forbid, that we don't like it." However, deliveries were carried out according to schedules and assortment approved by bilateral commissions. What the USSR ordered was delivered. Yes, the cobra was not the height of perfection, but, unfortunately, neither our technicians, nor the production of fuels and lubricants kept pace with the more high-tech Mustangs and Lightnings.
        1. svp67
          svp67 21 May 2016 19: 54
          +2
          Quote: veteran66
          because the USSR ordered the "cobras"

          But it was the best that the Americans offered us. Anyway, better "Cobra" than P-40
          Quote: veteran66
          unfortunately, neither our technicians nor the production of fuels and lubricants kept pace with the more high-tech Mustangs and Lightnings.

          Here, there is no need to slander, if in the first year of the war our technical services really could not immediately cope with imported equipment, then since 1942 the level of maintenance has been raised so high that even American specialists were surprised. Somehow, during that war, the USSR found methods to quickly restore order. And the parts that flew on imported equipment were provided with gasoline ONLY at the expense of Lend-Lease. They took care of "someone else's" equipment, because, besides everything, there was always a "watchful eye" of the manufacturer's representative.
          1. veteran66
            veteran66 22 May 2016 10: 35
            -1
            Quote: svp67
            since 1942, the level of maintenance has been raised so high that

            what technique? The same simple "Cobras" and "Tomahawks" with "Hurricanes", and as for the fuel and lubricants, look at the traces of exhaust, the entire fuselage is smoked from our fuel. There were frequent complaints from our pilots about the breakage of the connecting rods and the wedge of the engine, the consequences of the use of our fuels and lubricants. Lend-lease fuels and lubricants entered the guards regiments, and in ordinary combatants there were our gasoline and oil only diluted with amerovsky.
          2. Alekseev
            Alekseev 23 May 2016 06: 37
            0
            Quote: svp67
            But it was the best that the Americans offered us. Anyway, better "Cobra" than P-40

            hi
            Critics of the Aerocobra should not forget that in addition to strict control, this aircraft also had undeniable merit.
            He was loved and skillfully used by A.I. Pokryshkin.
            "since then the warning" Attention! Pokryshkin is in the air! " It sounded many times on the air when the Aircobra with tail number 13, and later 100 appeared in the sky. In the Kuban, a whole constellation of air combat masters of the 16th Guards Regiment distinguished themselves. All of them flew on Cobras with a red spinning spin and a red stripe on the very crest of the tail: Grigory Rechkalov, Vadim Faddeev, Arkady Fedorov, Nikolai Iskrin, Georgy Golubev, Andrey Trud ... "
      10. sivuch
        sivuch 21 May 2016 20: 30
        +1
        There are many reasons. Both objective and subjective. For example, the Britons needed a car with good performance characteristics at a height of 6-7 km and above. In addition, they were burned on the early R-400 aircobra
    2. Sarmat149
      Sarmat149 21 May 2016 08: 23
      +10
      Helped, but paid for by the blood of our soldiers. Help is not free financially. Russia transfers humanitarian aid to Donbass UNTREAMEN.

      Russia and the USA are different civilizations.
    3. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 21 May 2016 10: 08
      +6
      Quote: Spartanez300
      Whoever said that, but the land-lease really helped our people in the fight against the Nazi invaders, even to take that Pokryshkin fought on aero cobras and not Katybackers and a lot of other things were installed so that help was great, not a second front until 1944, even though that plus helped.

      No less important was the industrial lend-lease.
        Machine tools and equipment: Industrial products delivered at the end of the war included 23,5 thousand machine tools, 1526 cranes and excavators, 49,2 thousand tons of metallurgical, 212 thousand tons of power equipment, including turbines for the Dnieper hydroelectric power station. To understand the significance of the supply of these machines and mechanisms, one can compare them with the production at domestic enterprises, for example, in 1945. That year, only 13 cranes and excavators were assembled in the USSR, 38,4 thousand metal-cutting machines were produced, and the weight of the produced metallurgical equipment was 26,9 thousand tons. The nomenclature of lend-lease equipment and components consisted of thousands of items: from bearings and measuring instruments to cutting machines and metallurgical mills. Along with lots of individual machines and mechanisms, the Allies provided the Soviet Union with several production and technological lines, and even entire factories. American oil refineries in Kuibyshev, Guryev, Orsk and Krasnovodsk, and a tire plant in Moscow produced their first products at the end of 1944. Soon, the car assembly lines transferred to the Soviet Union from Iran, and a plant for the production of rolled aluminum began to work. The delivery of more than a thousand American and British power plants revived industrial plants and residential areas in many cities. At least two dozen American mobile power plants solved the problem of supplying power to Arkhangelsk in 1945 and in subsequent years. And one more very important fact related to lend-lease machines. On January 23, 1944, the T-34-85 tank was adopted by the Red Army. But its production at the beginning of 1944 was carried out only at one plant Љ 112 ("Krasnoe Sormovo"). The largest manufacturer of "thirty-fours", the Nizhny Tagil plant # 183, could not switch to the production of the T-34-85, since there was nothing to handle the gear rim of the tower with a diameter of 1600 mm. The carousel machine available at the plant made it possible to process parts with a diameter of up to 1500 mm. Of the NKTP enterprises, such machines were available only at Uralmashzavod and plant заводе 112. But since Uralmashzavod was loaded with the IS tank production program, there was no hope for it in terms of the T-34-85 production. Therefore, new carousel machines were ordered from the UK (Loudon) and the USA (Lodge). As a result, the first T-34-85 tank left the workshop of the plant # 183 only on March 15, 1944. These are the facts, with them, as they say, you cannot argue. If the factory had not received imported carousel machines, tanks of a new modification would not have come out of its gates.
    4. svp67
      svp67 21 May 2016 11: 24
      +2
      Quote: Spartanez300
      even take that Pokryshkin fought on aerocobra and Katyusha was not installed studentbuckers

      You can add to this list, since these machines also made a significant contribution to the Victory:
      Bombers "Boston"

      Of course, "Willis" that "staff"
      that in "combat", like this one in the role of a tractor in PTAB

      And FordGPA, which allowed our army to overcome water barriers on the move, we didn’t produce such cars, but they were very necessary in the war

      And self-propelled anti-aircraft guns M-17, covering our tank and mech.column on marches
    5. iouris
      iouris 21 May 2016 13: 23
      +5
      What is 71 years old breaking through an open door? Of course, these deliveries eased the situation at the front and in the rear. But the United States organized Hitler, two world wars and a lot of wars after 1945. There would have been no such negative phenomena, and no Lend-Lease deliveries would have been needed.
      1. overb
        overb 21 May 2016 13: 39
        +3
        Quote: iouris
        But the US organized Hitler, two world wars

        Wow. Where did such "revelations" come from? Do you have any secret knowledge? Then can you tell me, the Tunguska meteorite was not dropped on Russia by the Americans?
        1. max73
          max73 21 May 2016 14: 49
          +4
          there are a dime a dozen of such "generals" ...))
        2. iouris
          iouris 21 May 2016 16: 18
          +1
          Don't jump out of the snuffbox. I "own" information from official US documents. What reasons do you have for such attacks?
          1. overb
            overb 21 May 2016 17: 06
            +2
            Quote: iouris
            I "own" information from official US documents.

            So share them with us soon!
            Quote: iouris
            And what reasons do you have for such attacks?

            What are the lunges? Just asked 3 clarifying questions.
          2. Cat man null
            Cat man null 21 May 2016 17: 30
            -1
            Quote: iouris
            I "own" information from official US documents

            - I would have believed the documents. You take a word - somehow you don’t want to ..

            And where are these "documents"?
            1. iouris
              iouris 21 May 2016 19: 47
              -1
              Why are you asking me where are the documents? Read books where these documents are published, or studies based on these publications.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. St_tov
        St_tov 21 May 2016 17: 22
        0
        Hitler’s predetermination as an enemy of the USSR was far from 100%. As the IVS used to say, two socialist states can always agree with each other. And the confrontation in Spain, just a misunderstanding provoked by the then ComIntern, including by persons well thinned at 37.
        1. overb
          overb 22 May 2016 01: 04
          +2
          Quote: St_tov.
          As the IVS used to say, two socialist states can always agree with each other. And the confrontation in Spain, just a misunderstanding provoked by the then ComIntern, including by persons well thinned at 37.

          Whoever calls the Third Reich a "socialist state" (by analogy with the USSR), he is a round do ..... He does not understand the essence of Nazism at all. And "socialism".
          These were two antipode states. Any other state in the world was closer to the Third Reich than the USSR. This does not mean at all that one of them was absolutely good, and the second, absolutely bad. It only means that they were diametrically different.
          1. veteran66
            veteran66 22 May 2016 10: 53
            -1
            Quote: overb
            that they were diametrically different.

            only that in one they were persecuted on a class basis, and in the other on a national basis. And so even the holidays and marches were the same, totalitarian-militaristic states.
            1. overb
              overb 22 May 2016 11: 34
              0
              Quote: veteran66
              only that in one they were persecuted on a class basis, and in the other on a national basis.

              No, you're wrong. Everything was diametrically different. For example, the attitude towards the population. In Germany, "the nation comes first." In the USSR "the population is in the furnace, this is the material for the world revolution" Those. diametrically different approach. And so in everything.
    6. iouris
      iouris 21 May 2016 13: 32
      -1
      Do you want to get American equipment and stew on Lend-Lease? Get involved in the war for the interests of the North American cluster of TNCs.
    7. Alekseev
      Alekseev 22 May 2016 19: 01
      +1
      Quote: Spartanez300
      Whoever said that, but the land lease really helped our people

      "... But you can't deny that the Americans drove us so many materials, without which we would not be able to form our reserves and could not continue the war .. We got 350 thousand cars, but what kind of cars! .. We did not have explosives, gunpowder. There was nothing to equip rifle cartridges .... And now they present things in such a way that we all had our own in abundance. "
      This is how none other than Marshal G.K. Tikhonov spoke about Lend-Lease and its image in Khrushchev's "History of the Great Patriotic War" Zhukov.
    8. siberalt
      siberalt 28 September 2016 11: 54
      0
      By and large, the USSR and the USA divided Europe and Asia among themselves. But with the collapse of the USSR, our share went to the USA, plus Ukraine and the Baltic states.
  2. Timyr
    Timyr 21 May 2016 06: 56
    +14
    Lend-lease helped of course, only the author should have indicated that the first protocol was 30% complete and the second 30% complete, and only after the Kursk Bulk did the main stream go. And then, in some heads, they say that Lend-Lease immediately went in all volumes and was strictly carried out.
    1. Zaslavsky-S
      Zaslavsky-S 21 May 2016 07: 27
      -2
      And, most importantly, they paid for EVERYTHING with gold!
      1. Spartanez300
        Spartanez300 21 May 2016 07: 37
        0
        No one gives anything for nothing, this world is so arranged.
      2. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 21 May 2016 10: 04
        +3
        Quote: Zaslavsky-S
        And, most importantly, they paid for EVERYTHING with gold!

        That's not true.
        1. Papandopulo
          Papandopulo 21 May 2016 14: 59
          -2
          Yes - not for everything ...
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Ramzaj99
          Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 19: 35
          0
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          And, most importantly, they paid for EVERYTHING with gold! This is not true.

          Of course not true. They also took out all the platinum.
    2. AK64
      AK64 21 May 2016 10: 45
      +3
      And then, in some heads, they say that Lend-Lease immediately went in all volumes and was strictly carried out.

      Tell us exactly how the lend-lease should have gone "right away". Through teleports, I suppose?

      Here is your opinion, in detail.

      And we will listen.
      1. Papandopulo
        Papandopulo 21 May 2016 15: 09
        -3
        it was written as a percentage of the plan ... ships or trucks go through Iran a couple of weeks and not a year
      2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 21 May 2016 07: 19
    +17
    Even more impressive is the ratio of copper - 76%, aluminum - 106%, tin - 223%, cobalt - 138%, wool - 102%, sugar - 66% and canned meat - 480%.

    * quietly whistling under his nose *
    the supply from the USA of canned meat - 665 thousand tons. But over the same years, Mongolia supplied almost 500 thousand tons of meat to the USSR.
    according to GOST of the USSR (does not apply to the Yankees) the quantity of meat in stews should be at least 53%. Count for yourself.
    And yes, according to statistics, until the 43rd they basically ate their stocks (although they lost most of them in the first years), after which they ate a Second Front.
    From the USA, 54 thousand tons of wool came to us then, from Mongolia - 64 thousand tons.
    And this is not to mention the human resources, currency, precious metals (silver and gold), horses (and this is not only cavalry, but also the traction force for guns, supplies, etc. etc. And it would be brutal - rations).
    For the USA, Lend-Lease was primarily, according to F. Roosevelt, “a profitable investment of capital”.

    What is true is true. I’m thinking that Lend-Lease is like renting a car. One surrenders to the police, the second to robbers. It seems that the tenant has nothing to do with it, but it has loot. (I exaggerate a little, but ...)
    In addition, you can pay attention to WHEN and WHEN it was delivered.
    Take Pokryshkin’s famous aerocobra, but the Allies could not stand (is it a joke - most of it was delivered to the USSR, and not to other fronts). Other examples can be given.

    For the USSR, Lend-Lease was almost the only way to reduce the number of victims on the way to Victory.

    Yes, or as A. Mikoyan said - "Without Lend Lease, we would have fought for a couple of years."
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 10: 33
      +1
      Quote: ShadowCat
      the supply from the USA of canned meat - 665 thousand tons. But over the same years, Mongolia supplied almost 500 thousand tons of meat to the USSR.
      according to GOST of the USSR (does not apply to the Yankees) the quantity of meat in stews should be at least 53%. Count for yourself.

      I think - meat is not a carcass, and in the absence of refrigerators its value drops sharply, and processing it into a carcass was a problem.
      Therefore, the supply of meat from Mongolia was in the winter.
      Quote: ShadowCat
      And yes, according to statistics, until the 43rd they basically ate their stocks (although they lost most of them in the first years), after which they ate a Second Front.

      those. after the 43rd (if there had not been a 2nd front) could you not have eaten?
      1. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 21 May 2016 13: 55
        +2
        Quote: atalef
        and processing it into carcass was a problem.

        For Jews, a problem, for Russians not. (Yes, yes, stew food is not kosher)
        The simplest recipe: Meat (pulp), Lard or internal fat, Salt, Peas, Water, Bay leaf.

        Quote: atalef
        Therefore, the supply of meat from Mongolia was in the winter.

        And butter from Siberia was taken to the royal table on a sleigh. There was such a thing in the Russian Empire and the USSR - a glacier car is called, even fish (more perishable than meat) could be in them without treatment for up to 12 days.

        Quote: atalef
        those. after the 43rd (if there had not been a 2nd front) could you not have eaten?

        Jews generally walked through the desert without food for a hundred years. Do not distort. hi
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 22 May 2016 12: 07
          0
          Quote: ShadowCat
          Jews generally walked through the desert without food for a hundred years. Do not distort.

          40
    2. overb
      overb 21 May 2016 11: 17
      +2
      Quote: ShadowCat
      the supply from the USA of canned meat - 665 thousand tons. But over the same years, Mongolia supplied almost 500 thousand tons of meat to the USSR.

      Quote: ShadowCat
      From the USA, 54 thousand tons of wool came to us then, from Mongolia - 64 thousand tons.

      That's just the good Mongolia carried out deliveries for money, and the evil Yankees, for free. No, their profit from this was huge. But indirect, the USSR did not pay them specifically for deliveries on lend-lease.
      And further. It is necessary to distinguish foreign trade supplies from Lend-Lease deliveries. Not everything that was delivered to the USSR by convoy ships was Lend-Lease supplies.
      1. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 21 May 2016 13: 41
        +2
        Quote: overb
        That's just the good Mongolia carried out deliveries for money, and the evil Yankees, for free.

        Strange conclusion
        587 thousand tugriks were transferred in cash to the State Bank of the USSR.
        Those. we pay them, but on the contrary they send back. And this is not counting the purchase of tank divisions and air squadrons, voluntary donations (in Europe, the word is not familiar. I translate - The transfer does not require anything in return for itself)
        1. overb
          overb 21 May 2016 13: 44
          +4
          Quote: ShadowCat
          Those. we pay them, but on the contrary they send back.

          We pay, but what else? Free but not gratuitous, there was only a land lease. And the fact that the Mongols gathered in the form of donations is another.
          1. Shadowcat
            Shadowcat 22 May 2016 18: 28
            0
            Your decision, Mr. President, to give the Soviet Union an interest-free loan of $ 1 to ensure the supply of military equipment and raw materials to the Soviet Union was accepted by the Soviet Government with heartfelt gratitude, as an urgent help to the Soviet Union in its enormous and difficult struggle against the common enemy - bloody Hitlerism. I.V. Stalin
            Great indirect investment of money in the economy. Here you have the money - buy it. Remember to pay for shipping.

            At the same time, Mongolia gave the Red Army 65 million tugriks, 100 thousand dollars and 300 kilograms of gold in total on a gratuitous basis (for the whole of Europe - for free. We read above for free).
            If you have data that contradict mine, I ask you to bring it (to say that Mongolia gave the USSR Credit during the Second World War). As far as I went through - nothing that indicates the opposite is not present.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Ramzaj99
        Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 19: 49
        -4
        Quote: overb
        That's just the good Mongolia carried out deliveries for money, and the evil Yankees, for free. No, their profit from this was huge. But indirectly, the USSR did not pay them specifically for deliveries on lend-lease. And yet. It is necessary to distinguish foreign trade supplies from Lend-Lease deliveries. Not everything that was delivered to the USSR by convoy ships was Lend-Lease supplies.

        Stop carrying heresy about a free Lend-Lease. The USSR even paid for fuel and all the expenses of the American bulk carriers that carried goods. Moreover, the United States provided protection only to territorial waters, often even throwing transports. Sunken transports, too, by the way were inserted into the account.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 21 May 2016 20: 06
          +2
          Quote: Ramzaj99
          Stop carrying heresy pro free land lease. The USSR even paid for fuel and all the expenses of the American bulk carriers that carried goods

          - a link to a noteworthy source. Especially about the "non-free Lend-Lease".
          - or stop talking nonsense already ..

          Quote: Ramzaj99
          The US provided protection only to territorial waters, often even throwing transports

          - What are you talking about now?

          Quote: Ramzaj99
          Sunken transports were also inserted in the bill

          - similarly. Link to the source - in the studio

          So far, apart from your own words, nothing your words confirms .. negative
        2. overb
          overb 21 May 2016 20: 07
          +4
          Quote: Ramzaj99
          The USSR even paid for fuel and all the expenses of the American bulk carriers that carried goods.

          Another one of those who do not understand how Lend-Lease deliveries differed from foreign trade deliveries. I hope the fact that foreign trade during WW2 did not stop is known to you? Or even that, no?
          1. Ramzaj99
            Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 20: 15
            -2
            Quote: overb
            Another one of those who do not understand how Lend-Lease deliveries differed from foreign trade deliveries. I hope the fact that foreign trade during WW2 did not stop is known to you? Or even that, no?

            And you know the fact that the vast majority of equipment, equipment and materials were delivered to the USSR in 1943-1945. That is, after a turning point during the war. So, for example, in 1941, Lend-Lease delivered goods worth about $ 100 million, which amounted to less than 1% of the total supply. In 1942, this percentage was 27,6. Thus, more than 70% of Lend-Lease deliveries came in 1943-1945, and during the most terrible period of the war for the USSR, the help of the Allies was not too noticeable. An even more significant example is automobiles: as of April 30, 1944, only 215 thousand units were delivered. That is, more than half of the Lend-Lease cars were delivered to the USSR in the last year of the war, when it became clear that the USSR would take Berlin without any help.
            1. overb
              overb 21 May 2016 21: 06
              +3
              Quote: Ramzaj99
              that the vast majority of machinery, equipment and materials were delivered to the USSR in 1943-1945.

              Of course. From autumn 1941 to the end of 1942 1,25 years. And from the beginning of 1943 until the fall of 1945, 2,75 years. Guess where more.
              Quote: Ramzaj99
              Thus, more than 70% of Lend-Lease deliveries came in 1943-1945, and during the most terrible period of the war for the USSR, the help of the Allies was not too noticeable.

              This is you tell the pilots. Without an American thermal power plant, you were also Soviet aircraft in 1945. in the sky would not have seen.
              Quote: Ramzaj99
              On April 30, 1944, only 215 thousand of them were delivered. That is, more than half of the Lend-Lease cars were delivered to the USSR in the last year of the war.

              Were they superfluous? Are you firmly convinced of this? Do not want to see the production of automobiles in the USSR by years?
              Quote: Ramzaj99
              When it became clear that the USSR would take Berlin without any help.

              Who would take in this case? Hungry kids with rifles?
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. Cat man null
              Cat man null 21 May 2016 21: 11
              0
              Quote: overb
              I hope the fact that foreign trade during WW2 did not stop is known to you?

              Quote: Ramzaj99
              And you know the fact that the vast majority of equipment, equipment and materials were delivered to the USSR in 1943-1945. That is, after a fracture during the war

              Ramzaj99you with head the logic of trouble ..

              They ask you about Thomas, and you, instead of answering (about Thomas), about Yeryoma .. ask ..

              It’s strange somehow ..
              1. Ramzaj99
                Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 21: 38
                -1
                Quote: Cat Man Null
                Ramzaj99, you are headlong with the logic of disagreement .. You are asked about Thomas, and you, instead of answering (about Thomas), about Yeryoma .. ask .. It's strange somehow ..

                Check your little head ...... What should surprise me in the fact that foreign trade did not stop during WW2 ????
                Well, let's be objective to the end. Or do you think the author wrote this article himself ?? I know perfectly well where it comes from. And it pisses me off as the author tried to crawl out everything, removed all the bad things and left only candy. I want to be objective, let's talk about something else. That in the most difficult time, the United States reduced supplies to a minimum. What Stalin requested in the letters was not supplied, but was supplied according to the principle: - what is not a pity. Everything was delayed in every possible way, the protection of the convoys was useless. The United States traded quite briskly with the Nazis, perhaps not the government, but business circles openly helped Germany to the very end, the same Ford. There are official quotes: - Truman "If we see that Germany is winning, we must help Russia, and if Russia begins to win, we must help Germany, and let them kill each other as much as possible."
                Therefore, do not make angels of salvation from them. Business and nothing personal.
                1. Cat man null
                  Cat man null 21 May 2016 22: 04
                  -1
                  Quote: Ramzaj99
                  I know where it comes from.

                  - and here I am - no. Share the link?

                  Quote: Ramzaj99
                  removed all the bad and left some candy

                  - Yes, do not give a damn about the author and that he tried there ..
                  - I was personally hurt by your statement that Lend-Lease deliveries (namely, Lend-Lease !!) were not free
                  - I asked for evidence, you ignored it

                  This is me and .. surprises, let’s say so. All the rest - do not care.

                  And further. Again, instead of answering specific questions, you dumped a bunch of "knowledge" (in many ways, by the way, well-known), but ... absolutely not in the subject of the question ...

                  However, the trend (c) what
                  1. Ramzaj99
                    Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 22: 13
                    -3
                    Quote: Cat Man Null
                    - - and here I am - no. Share the link?

                    Google to the rescue.

                    Quote: Cat Man Null
                    - I was personally hurt by your statement that Lend-Lease deliveries (namely, Lend-Lease !!) were not free

                    Yes, I say that!
                    And ships stuffed with gold that still raise from the bottom do not give me to believe in FREE.
                    And in the 90s, they came up with a lot about American benefactors, and about a free Lend-Lease, but for some reason, Russia paid 70 years for a free one and only recently paid.
                    1. Cat man null
                      Cat man null 21 May 2016 22: 26
                      +1
                      Quote: Ramzaj99
                      Quote: Cat Man Null
                      - - and here I am - no. Share the link?

                      Google to the rescue

                      - well, at least not "went to ...". Minus earned, however. Such an answer - "I know, but I won't tell you, look for it yourself" - is rudeness ..

                      Quote: Ramzaj99
                      Quote: Cat Man Null
                      - I was personally hurt by your statement that Lend-Lease deliveries (namely, Lend-Lease !!) were not free

                      Yes, I say that!
                      And ships stuffed with gold that still raise from the bottom do not give me to believe in FREE.
                      And in the 90s, they came up with a lot about American benefactors, and about a free Lend-Lease, but for some reason, Russia paid 70 years for a free one and only recently paid.

                      Ouch, her ... a hundred times they answered, okay, a hundred and first - I repeat:

                      - the ships, stuffed with what they raise, were in payment for deliveries that were in addition to the lend-lease .. these deliveries were not included in the Lend-Lease, and therefore - were paid .. is it clear now?
                      - after the war, Russia paid for what was not "spent" during the OBD and was not returned to the United States (and it was only possible to return what the United States wanted to get back). This, by the way, was originally stipulated in the terms of Lend-Lease supplies.
                      - about the 90s - yes, there really is a lot of things .. and not only came up with .. but specifically to Lend-Lease it has nothing to do .. from the word "absolutely"

                      That's something like Yes
                      1. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 22: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Minus earned nonetheless

                        The device is your minus .....
                        Once again, it was not free.
                        The Lend-Lease scheme itself provided for the recipient country to fulfill a number of conditions: 1) the materials destroyed, lost or lost during the hostilities were not payable, and the property that remained and was suitable for civilian purposes should be paid in full or in part in order to repay the long-term loan issued by ourselves USA; 2) the surviving military materials could remain with the recipient country until the United States requested them back 3) in turn, the tenant was obliged to help the United States with all the resources and information that he had available !!! By the way, this is also not enough who knows, the Lend-Lease Act obliged countries applying for American assistance to submit a comprehensive financial report to the United States.
                        As a little it pulls for free is not it ?? !!))
                        US Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr., during a Senate committee hearing, called this provision unique in all world practice: "For the first time in history, one state, one government provides another with data on its financial situation." American historian J. Herring frankly wrote that " Lend-Lease was not the most disinterested act in human history ... It was an act of calculating selfishness, and Americans have always clearly understood the benefits that they can derive from it. "
                        So let's not talk about free.
                      2. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 21 May 2016 23: 10
                        +2
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        1) materials destroyed, lost or lost during the hostilities were not payable

                        - remember ... it's that free ...

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        surviving property suitable for civilian purposes should have been paid in whole or in part in order to repay a long-term loan issued by the USA

                        - Duc, I told you about this (and before me, others said a hundred times). That is what the RF paid for, and before it, the USSR ...

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Lend-Lease Act obliges countries applying for American assistance to submit a comprehensive financial report to the United States

                        - um .. here, I found a translation of the text of the "Lend-Lease Law" (An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States):
                        http://www.grinchevskiy.ru/1900-1945/zakon-o-lend-lize.php
                        - it’s not like that

                        Good advice: provide links to documents confirming your words. Look differently .. ugly negative
                      3. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 23: 30
                        -3
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Good advice: provide links to documents confirming your words. Look differently .. ugly

                        You seriously think that this is "http://www.grinchevskiy.ru/1900-1945/zakon-o-lend-lize.php" the entire text.
                        Where is it written about the issued loan?
                        Where about the volumes?
                        Where about free?
                        Dates?
                        Where is the mention of the USSR?
                      4. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 21 May 2016 23: 52
                        +1
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Do you seriously think that this is "http://www.grinchevskiy.ru/1900-1945/zakon-o-lend-lize.php" all text

                        - Yes. Here is the link to the original: http://www.legisworks.org/congress/77/publaw-11.pdf

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Where is it written about the issued loan?
                        Where about the volumes?
                        Where about free?
                        Dates?
                        Where is the mention of the USSR?

                        - in the Lend-Lease Agreements with the corresponding country (after all, the lend-lease was not only applied to the USSR, right?), as well as in other documents "clarifying" the law

                        Voooot ...

                        I repeat the question, otherwise you will forget it:

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Lend-Lease Act obliged countries applying for American assistance, submit a comprehensive financial report to the USA

                        - there is no such thing in the law
                        - question: where are you? miracle have you found? Desirable link to the document, essno ...
                      5. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 00: 06
                        -1
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        I repeat the question, otherwise you will forget it:

                        Unlike you, I collected information on this topic, and I understand perfectly well that now it is almost impossible to find any documentation on this topic. Only the memories and works of historians.
                        And repeat like an ass: -Where the documents are meaningless.
                        And why do you have such selectivity?
                        Why didn’t you ask the author where he got the figures from? Where is the link to the documents ??))))))
                        And for more details please about "documents clarifying the law"!
                      6. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 22 May 2016 00: 20
                        0
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        I, unlike you, collected information on this topic

                        - and I, unlike you, know how to search and find confirmed information
                        - here, I give a beacon that it would be worth looking for:

                        Quote: http://samlib.ru/b/borisow_s_s/lend-liz4iiskusstwoistoricheskojmahinaciisostoron
                        ysssr-rossii.shtml
                        Deliveries from the USA to the USSR can be divided into the following stages:
                        pre-lease lease - from June 22, 1941 to September 30, 1941 (paid in gold)
                        first protocol - from October 1, 1941 to June 30, 1942 (signed on October 1, 1941)
                        second protocol - from July 1, 1942 to June 30, 1943 (signed on October 6, 1942)
                        third protocol - from July 1, 1943 to June 30, 1944 (signed on October 19, 1943)
                        fourth protocol - from July 1, 1944, (signed on April 17, 1944), formally ended May 12, 1945, but supplies were extended until the end of the war with Japan, into which the USSR undertook to enter 90 days after the war in Europe (that is, August 8, 1945) . On the Soviet side, he received the name The October 17 Program (1944) or the fifth protocol. From the American - "Program" Milepost ". Japan capitulated on September 2, 1945, and on September 20, 1945, all Lend-Lease deliveries to the USSR were discontinued.

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Now it’s almost impossible to find any documentation on this topic. Only the memoirs and works of historians

                        - I found the text of the Law for you
                        - the texts of the "Protocols" - 90 percent sure that you can find
                        - I just don't need it, because there is no "obligation to provide full financial statements" there - a hundred pounds - too ..

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        And why do you have such selectivity?

                        - because you said .. something strange that I had never heard before:

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Lend-Lease Act obliges countries applying for American assistance to submit a comprehensive financial report to the United States

                        - you cannot (or don’t want to) confirm this (at least by the "works of historians")

                        Hence the "selectivity" wink
                      7. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 00: 34
                        -4
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        texts of the "Protocols" - 90 percent sure that you can find

                        Good advice: provide links to documents confirming your words. Look differently .. ugly negative

                        As I said, I know where the article comes from and what is cut out of it. There, and about the financial reports and quotes of American historians and a lot of interesting things, and cut a paragraph from which it turns out that there does not smell free. With a stretch, you can call barter, but not FREE.
                        “In the framework of the so-called“ reverse Lend-Lease ”, Washington received the necessary raw materials with a total value of almost 20% of the transferred materials and weapons. In particular, 32 thousand tons of manganese and 300 thousand tons of chromium ore were shipped from the USSR, the importance of which in the military industry was extremely great. ”
                        And with the question “where are the documents”, let’s go to the author.
                        Enough I am going to sleep.
                      8. Pimply
                        Pimply 22 May 2016 12: 21
                        0
                        http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/wwii.asp
                    2. Pimply
                      Pimply 22 May 2016 12: 15
                      +1
                      Quote: Ramzaj99
                      Yes, I say that!
                      And ships stuffed with gold that still raise from the bottom do not give me to believe in FREE.

                      More specifically, my friend. There were ships with gold - but for very specific non-lendian shipments at the very beginning of the war. So, you got into a discussion. Bring something besides banging fists on the chest
                      1. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 22 May 2016 12: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: Pimply
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Yes, I say that!
                        And ships stuffed with gold that still raise from the bottom do not give me to believe in FREE.

                        More specifically, my friend. There were ships with gold - but for very specific non-lendian shipments at the very beginning of the war. So, you got into a discussion. Bring something besides banging fists on the chest

                        - there will be no specifics, I already tried to pull something out of the brow, besides words,
                        - I personally was amused by the following statement Ramzaj99

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Lend-Lease Act obliged countries applying for American assistance, submit a comprehensive financial report to the USA

                        - to confirm even this with something other than beating oneself with fists in the chest, people refused

                        And you say - specifics request
                      2. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 14: 31
                        -1
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        to confirm even this with something other than beating oneself with fists in the chest, people refused

                        Bring me at least one proof of the figures given in the article? And not a reprint from article to article.
                        Gentlemen (R. Goldsmith, J. Herring, R. Jones) are familiar to you ??
                        I advise you to read, cease to believe in fairy tales, and there are all the answers to your questions. And the numbers there are not as fabulous as those of the author, “all Soviet Union aid did not exceed 1/10 of Soviet arms production”, and the total volume of Lend-Lease deliveries, taking into account the famous American “Second Front” stew, amounted to about 10-11%.
                        And also I advise you to look at the works of the famous American historian. R. Sherwood in his famous two-volume “Roosevelt and Hopkins. Through the eyes of an eyewitness ”(M.,“ Foreign Literature ”, 1958), written in the midst of the Cold War, quoted Harry Hopkins, who said that“ Americans never believed that Lend-Lease assistance was the main factor in the Soviet victory over Hitler on Eastern Front. The victory was achieved by the heroism and blood of the Russian army. ”
                      3. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 22 May 2016 14: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Bring me at least one proof of the figures given in the article?

                        Dear .. What are you talking about?

                        - I am not defending the article at all. It is clear that "not everything is so" in it. In particular, there is not a word about "reverse lend-lease" (manganese, chrome ores, gold, platinum, ...)
                        - I only I’m trying to find out from you what you rely on, saying that:

                        1. The USSR paid for Lend-Lease supplies. As I understand it - that's it, right? Gold ..

                        This is not true No.

                        2. The Lend-Lease Act required countries applying for American assistance to submit a comprehensive financial report to the United States (what, by the way? Unclear...)

                        This is also not true .. there is no such thing in the "Lend-Lease Law" (which is An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States)

                        About Edinburgh - that was payment for deliveries "over Lend-Lease" and partly "reverse Lend-Lease" .. no need to drag Edinburgh here - he is not the topic here ..

                        That's something like request
                      4. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 15: 05
                        -2
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        About Edinburgh - that was payment for deliveries "over Lend-Lease" and partly "reverse Lend-Lease" .. no need to drag Edinburgh here - he is not the topic here ..

                        You have a very interesting way to communicate.
                        To any of my words, the answer is one: -Where are the documents ......
                        And excuse me about deliveries, take your word for it?
                        Incidentally, it was 42 years old, and only after sending this gold did the lend-lease work in full force.
                        If it’s so interesting for you, where does my information about financial statements, etc. come from? I advise you to read the works of the historian and publicist Yevgeny Spitsyn. Here is a quote - “Few people know that lend-lease military supplies were not for rent at all - Russia, as the legal successor of the USSR, paid the last debts on them already in 2006,” and you know somehow I inclined to believe the historian.
                      5. Pimply
                        Pimply 22 May 2016 15: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        And excuse me about deliveries, take your word for it?

                        My friend, why believe: your ignorance and banal inability to find documents confirming your allegations? Well, if you can’t, then it’s called a lie
                      6. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 15: 36
                        -1
                        Quote: Pimply
                        My friend, and what to believe:

                        With you rude)) There will be no communication. Communicate with friends like you ...
                      7. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 22 May 2016 15: 41
                        0
                        Arrows translate, please? You have two unanswered questions, remember?

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        And excuse me about deliveries, take your word for it?

                        We include the logic:

                        - if Lend-Lease deliveries in 1941-1945. weren’t paid, then gold is definitely not a payment for a land lease, right?
                        - look at the document:

                        Quote: http://allin777.livejournal.com/76942.html
                        LETTER OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE USA
                        D. ACHESON, AMBASSADOR OF THE USSR TO THE USA A.S. PANYUSHKIN
                        ON THE QUESTION OF SETTLEMENT OF CALCULATIONS ON LEND-LIZ
                        27 April 1951 city

                        Your Excellency,

                        ... The United States government does not require payment for items of a "military nature" (weapons, ammunition and weapons of war, with the exception of ships) that could remain at the disposal of the Soviet Union until the end of the war. However, the position of the Government of the United States is that the terms of any settlement should retain the right of the Government of the United States, as provided for in Article V of the Basic Lend-Lease Agreement, to return to the United States by the Soviet Government such items of a "military nature" and should contain the obligation of the Soviet Governments, as specified in Article III of the Basic Lend-Lease Agreement, obtain the prior consent of the United States Government before transferring Which items to a third party. The position of the United States Government in this matter is to adhere to the settlements already reached with other countries-recipients of Lend-Lease goods that have the Basic Lend-Lease Agreements, similar to those concluded with the Soviet Government.
                        The United States Government also does not require payment for items of a “civilian nature” that were lost, destroyed, or consumed during the war.

                        The Government of the United States asks for payment only for those “civil type” items that remained at the disposal of the Soviet Union until the end of the war, and proposed transferring the right to such items subject to payment of a mutually satisfactory amount on terms agreed between our two Governments. These “civil type” items consist of Lend-Lease supplies, which have peacetime value for the Soviet economy and remained under the control of the Soviet Government on September 2, 1945 or subsequently received by the Soviet Government, with the exception of ships, items of a “military nature” referred to above, and some Lend-Lease items, the ownership of which was transferred to the Soviet Government on the basis of the Agreements of May 30, 1945 and October 15, 1945.

                        (... hereinafter referred to mainly on the amounts ...)

                        Accept again, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration to you.
                        Dean ACHESON
                        WUA RF. F. 192. Op. 18b. P. 177. D. 1. L. 125-131. Copy.


                        Hence the conclusion:

                        - during the war (1941-1945), the Soviet Union did not pay for Lend-Lease deliveries ..
                        - and after the war - he paid only "what was left at the disposal", that is - unspent

                        Are you enough? wink
                      8. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 16: 15
                        -2
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Are you enough?

                        Not enough.
                        Each document has 100500 points and subclauses that are not included in the main document.
                        Lend-Lease protocols, there were at least 4. Each had its own changes. The first protocol - from October 1, 1941 to June 30, 1942 (signed on October 1, 1941); The second protocol - from July 1, 1942 to June 30, 1943 (signed on October 6, 1942); The third protocol - from July 1, 1943 to June 30, 1944 (signed on October 19, 1943); The fourth protocol - from July 1, 1944 to September 20, 1945 (signed on April 17, 1944).
                        I have already provided you with several names that claim: - There was no free. And if you delve into the Internet, I will randomly pull you out another hundred, and all very respectable people.
                        The fact that the USA on land lease is fabulously enriched, you hope you are not going to dispute? Let's argue about the wording?
                        As I said, I will not change my opinion. There was no free Lend-Lease. Paid up to, - with a loan for deliveries. They paid at the time - gold, platinum, wood, ore, reverse Lend-Lease and even more than anything. And they paid after - until 2006.
                        Call it free: -your right. Ships with gold that went in response to the technique, unprovenly call mythical extra charge: -your right.
                        I expressed my opinion.
                      9. Cat man null
                        Cat man null 22 May 2016 16: 35
                        +1
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Not enough

                        - sorry .. "Not enough", incidentally, writes together .. which indirectly indicates the level of the opponent fellow

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        Lend-Lease protocols, there were at least 4

                        - there were five of them. I already wrote about this above, by the way .. why did you say it again? wink

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        I have already provided you with several names that claim ...

                        - yo, yo-yo ...
                        - no names needed .. give links to specific articles, but better - documents .. do I bring you documents? What prevents you from doing the same?
                        - the fact that "names claim" is theirs, names, a private matter .. You also claim a lot, but you cannot confirm ..

                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        As I said, I will not change my opinion

                        - Yes, I have exactly your opinion
                        - You give statements that you are not able to confirm. You do not answer direct questions, but begin to carry a nonsense. Consequently, you - yap ordinary Internet.

                        I regret that I spent so much time on you. Without respect negative
                      10. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 17: 09
                        -1
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        sorry .. "Not enough", incidentally, writes together .. which indirectly indicates the level of the opponent

                        When the arguments end, the nitpicking of spelling begins. Well, excuse me, 30 years already there was no practice, only here I practice))))
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        Am I bringing you documents?

                        This is a letter of state. US Secretary, this is not a specific treaty.
                        It does not say ANYTHING.
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        yes to me exactly your opinion
                        - You give statements that you are not able to confirm. You do not answer direct questions, but begin to carry a nonsense. Consequently, you - yap ordinary Internet.

                        I regret that I spent so much time on you. Without any respect - forgive negative

                        You shouldn’t be so. It was interesting to me.
                        Not being able to listen to your opponent’s opinion does not honor you, nor does it add intelligence ...... Go to Nezalezhnaya, there is ONE RIGHT opinion for all questions, you will like it there.
                        Goodbye.
                      11. Ramzaj99
                        Ramzaj99 22 May 2016 14: 20
                        -3
                        Quote: Pimply
                        More specifically, my friend

                        You’ll call your partner .....
                        Where is it said that this is not Lenglisian supply ??
                        I do not intend to prove anything to you.
                        You will find hands yourself. About the cruiser Edinburgh, whatever you heard ?? About 5,5 tons of flooded gold?
                      12. Pimply
                        Pimply 22 May 2016 15: 30
                        +1
                        Quote: Ramzaj99
                        You’ll call your partner .....
                        Where is it said that this is not Lenglisian supply ??
                        I do not intend to prove anything to you.
                        You will find hands yourself. About the cruiser Edinburgh, whatever you heard ?? About 5,5 tons of flooded gold?

                        Morning, who got nervous with us 8) Our little unproven friend who cannot find his statements (scary to say) - confirmation. And from this nervous, suffering and worried. Well, the fact is to find it is not the language of grinding.
                        And what is this 5,5 tons of gold at Edinburgh? For a start, this is partly payment for Soviet purchases in Great Britain and the United States, made ABOVE the Lend-Lease program (supplies under Lend-Lease were not payable until the end of the war), partly - "REVERSE Lend-Lease": RAW MATERIALS FOR PRODUCING COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE USSR which was used for gilding contacts of all telephone, radio and navigation equipment manufactured for the Soviet army, aviation and navy.

                        And now our little illiterate friend, hearing the words GOLD, USSR, USA, immediately connected everything with Lend-Lease, accused the insidious Yankees of harsh self-interest and began to scream heart-rendingly "They all lie! They paid for Lend-Lease in gold !!!"
    3. The comment was deleted.
  4. kalibr
    kalibr 21 May 2016 07: 38
    +3
    It can only be added that indirectly the value of Lend-Lease is evidenced by the fact that the data on it in figures were published in the Pravda newspaper on June 11, 1944 in an official message, up to the indication of the number of army boots, something about 1,5, XNUMX million pairs and supplies by countries - USA, England, Canada. Obviously, this was done for a reason - where would such secret numbers come from in Pravda? - but in order to show both the Soviet citizens and the Germans how much they have set for us and that the Germans cannot win! Moreover, these figures are absolutely reliable, because the Truth was read in England, in the USA, and in Germany, and the role of this "information bomb" for the Germans was especially great!
    1. Papandopulo
      Papandopulo 21 May 2016 15: 18
      -3
      with boots means they threw ...
    2. The comment was deleted.
  5. rkkasa xnumx
    rkkasa xnumx 21 May 2016 07: 56
    +10
    It is certainly not worth minimizing the role of Lend-Lease, but when comparing the volumes of materials / equipment supplied by the Allies and produced during the war, we must take into account that before the war in the USSR there were already a certain amount of these materials and equipment.
    For example :
    "The USSR received 1900 steam locomotives and 66 diesel-electric locomotives (these figures look especially clearly against the background of its own production in 1942-1945 in 92 locomotives), as well as 11 cars (own production - 075 cars)"

    and at the beginning of the war, in the USSR there were about 25000 steam locomotives, and almost all of them were saved. Plus, most of the supply of locomotives for Lend-Lease fell on the 1944-1947 years. That is, the role of Lend-Lease in this case was not great.
    1. igordok
      igordok 21 May 2016 08: 46
      0
      Interestingly, lendleut locomotives and wagons came to us with our track, or did we have to "change shoes"?
      1. Amurets
        Amurets 21 May 2016 10: 34
        +3
        Quote: igordok
        Interestingly, lendleut locomotives and wagons came to us with our track, or did we have to "change shoes"?

        With ours. 1524mm. On stock bases, Ea and Em steam engines of WWII release were stored at stock bases until recently.http: //topwar.ru/3253-snajper-semen-nomokonov.html
        Steam locomotives of type 1-5-0, regardless of indices, were called decapods (decapods)
      2. AK64
        AK64 21 May 2016 10: 57
        +2
        Interestingly, lendleut locomotives and wagons came to us with our track, or did we have to "change shoes"?

        What do you think?
        In fact, they were even released under the Soviet (not American) project. And differed in BIG power and traction.

        About "saving" your pre-war fleet of steam locomotives is generally so impudent that I don't even want to speak: after all, not only steam locomotives and carriages had to be transported from the Americas, but also ... rails. Yes, yes: in the USSR, all production, even rolled products, was spent only on weapons and armor. The production of rails was stopped, and even their stocks for hedgehogs were put in here and there. As a result, by the end of 1942, the track facilities were worn out before their foundations, and the train speed dropped somewhere to 5 km / h and below in some places, and the average speed became ... on foot. The capacity of the roads has also dropped accordingly. The rails were driving!
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 21 May 2016 12: 08
          +2
          Quote: AK64
          In fact, they were even released under the Soviet (not American) project. And differed in BIG power and traction

          I do not agree that it was a Soviet project. The project was Russian, even during the First World War.http: //dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/1086571 By this link, anyone can get acquainted with the steam locomotives that arrived in RI and USSR from the USA. Basically, according to the railway technology received from the USA, everything is correct.
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 12: 11
            +2
            I don’t agree that it was a Soviet project. The project was Russian, from the time of the First World War.


            OK, amendment accepted, plus delivered
        2. rkkasa xnumx
          rkkasa xnumx 21 May 2016 12: 39
          -2
          Quote: AK64
          About "saving" your pre-war fleet of steam locomotives, this is generally so impudent that I don't even want to talk: after all, not only steam locomotives and wagons had to be transported from the Americas, but also ... the rails ... The rails drove!.

          Insolently, this:
          1 when a person is completely off topic, but crawls with his opinion
          2 when, in evidence of his opinion, he cites facts that are not relevant to the topic

          What does it have to do with your rails on this issue of steam locomotives?
    2. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 10: 36
      +3
      Quote: rkkasa 81
      and at the beginning of the war, in the USSR there were about 25000 steam locomotives, and almost all of them were saved.

      strange, and then where is it from?
      The USSR, which was under occupation, was destroyed and plundered by the invaders 65 thousand km of railway [160] gauge. Damaged 15800 locomotives, 428 000 wagons
      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 21 May 2016 11: 31
        +3
        Atalef, and in the forty-first year, 100 thousand (100000) greenhouses were made. Each accommodated approximately 30-40 people. Again a question for you - what for?
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 May 2016 11: 40
          +1
          Quote: Mordvin 3
          Atalef, and in the forty-first year, 100 thousand (100000) greenhouses were made. Each accommodated approximately 30-40 people. Again a question for you - what for?

          Do not understand what the conversation is about?
          Who made?
          1. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 21 May 2016 11: 52
            +2
            The USSR manufactured by order of the People’s Commissariat of Defense. Beria complained about this to Stalin, but he sent him off.
            1. atalef
              atalef 21 May 2016 12: 15
              +1
              Quote: mordvin xnumx
              The USSR manufactured by order of the People’s Commissariat of Defense. Beria complained about this to Stalin, but he sent him off.

              Well, what is it for? or did 100t of greenhouses for America?
            2. Dimon19661
              Dimon19661 21 May 2016 13: 10
              +1
              You will find out what a teplushka is, and then write. A teplushka for 30-40 places is, well, just a masterpiece ...
              1. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 13: 21
                +2
                Quote: Dimon19661
                You will find out what a teplushka is, and then write. A teplushka for 30-40 places is, well, just a masterpiece ...

                The standard capacity of a heater on the basis of an NTV car (normal freight car) is 40 people or 8 horses (or 20 people + 4 horses).
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. murriou
                murriou 21 May 2016 17: 21
                0
                "It was written on the carriage: three tons of fertilizer for the enemy fields, forty little men or eight horses."

                Classics
              4. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 21 May 2016 17: 59
                +2
                That would be just right for you to find out.
      2. rkkasa xnumx
        rkkasa xnumx 21 May 2016 12: 42
        +2
        Quote: atalef
        Damaged 15800 locomotives, 428 000 wagons

        Most often in articles about railways in the Great Patriotic War, there is approximately the following phrase: "15 800 steam locomotives and diesel locomotives were destroyed, damaged and hijacked to Germany." 15800 locomotives - this is two-thirds of the number of the pre-war fleet of the NKPS, and this raises a natural question, what did they put under the military echelons. And the Germans only admit that they captured only an insignificant part of the NKPS fleet: Reinhardt in the same work reports that only 1941 steam locomotives were captured by October 1000. The inconsistency becomes clear if we take into account that the figure of losses comes from the materials of the Nuremberg trial, from the Statement of the Extraordinary State Commission on material damage caused by the German fascist invaders to state enterprises, institutions, collective farms, public organizations and citizens of the USSR (Document USSR-35). And it says this: "They destroyed, damaged and took away 15800 steam locomotives and locomotives and 428 wagons."
        That is, this is a loss not only of the NKPS, but also of all the steam and industrial vehicles, including narrow gauge locomotives, which could not be evacuated to the east due to the lack of a single network of narrow gauge railways. The losses of the NKPS, according to the already mentioned book by Kumanev, were the most severe from the summer of 1941 to the 1st quarter of 1943, when the locomotive fleet was reduced by 3900 steam locomotives, or 16%. And in 1943 the park again grew by 2 thousand cars.
        http://izmerov.narod.ru/rstories/reihsbahn.html
      3. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 21 May 2016 12: 47
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        strange, but where does this come from ?: 15800 steam locomotives, 428 wagons damaged

        The inconsistency becomes clear if we take into account that the figure of losses comes from the materials of the Nuremberg trial, from the Statement of the Extraordinary State Commission on material damage caused by the German fascist invaders to state enterprises, institutions, collective farms, public organizations and citizens of the USSR (Document USSR-35). And it says this: "They destroyed, damaged and took away 15800 steam locomotives and locomotives and 428 wagons."
        That is, it’s the loss not only of the NKPS, but also of all steam locomotives and industrial motor vehicles, including narrow gauge locomotives that could not be evacuated to the east due to the lack of a single network of narrow gauge railways.
    3. overb
      overb 21 May 2016 11: 21
      +3
      Quote: rkkasa 81
      Plus, most of the supply of locomotives for Lend-Lease fell on 1944-1947.

      Lend-Lease deliveries ended in the fall of 1945, after the end of 2MB.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 21 May 2016 12: 45
      +2
      Quote: rkkasa 81
      and at the beginning of the war, in the USSR there were about 25000 steam locomotives, and almost all of them were saved

      Once again: deliveries went at the request of the USSR and once there was an application for steam locomotives, then there was a need for them.
      By definition, it was impossible to save everything, part was destroyed during the hostilities, part was captured (from the summer of 1941 to the 1st quarter of 1943, the fleet was reduced by 3900 steam locomotives, or 16%). And it was distributed 25000 to the whole country and not only On the European part. Well, you need to look at the power-there is a steam locomotive that pulls a train of 50 cars and there is a train of 25 .... (As of January 1, 1940, at least 40 percent of the fleet was obsolete steam locomotives produced before the revolution)
      1. AK64
        AK64 21 May 2016 13: 35
        +2
        Well, you need to look at the power-there is a steam engine that pulls a train of 50 cars and there is a train of 25 .... (As of January 1, 1940, at least 40 percent of the fleet was outdated steam locomotives produced before the revolution)


        Exactly.
        Plus wear, especially military wear as a result of semi-skilled operation. Plus the lack of factory repair. Sormovo produced tanks instead of steam locomotives.
        In general, rolling stock (both locomotives and wagons) was already pretty much demolished by the end of 42nd.
        Otherwise, no matter what the devil the Amerovian steam engines would drag? What, were there empty seats in the tonnage of supplies, or what? No, it was not.
        But they couldn’t produce at home, because all the capacities went into the production of tanks.
      2. Stas57
        Stas57 21 May 2016 14: 10
        0
        Once again: deliveries went at the request of the USSR and once there was an application for steam locomotives, then there was a need for them.

        a common thing for topwar, rkkasa not in the subject but cuts off the shoulder, I wrote above that on average there are a lot of them in the hospital, but in reality, steam locomotives of types EA, EM series and ShA series are needed. as heavy and speedy are not suitable.
        Obviously, what rkkasa 81 does not know, from the end of 43 a sharp increase in the size of the liberated territory began, with a shitty way, there were enough locomotives before, now the lines increased, there were not enough trophies, there weren’t any of us, we don’t forget about Tehran43, therefore, additional trains were needed, without they won’t win, but our grandfathers would once again untie their navels.
        1. rkkasa xnumx
          rkkasa xnumx 21 May 2016 17: 03
          -1
          stas57, if you have taken on the occasion of the weekend, then this is not a reason to write all nonsense.

          In your opinion, it turns out that in the USSR there were two tens of thousands of unnecessary steam locomotives. You see, all the pre-war years, steam locomotives of the wrong system were built here, yeah. laughing

          Quote: Stas57
          obviously what rkkasa 81 does not know, from the end of 43 a sharp increase in the size of the liberated territory began

          Proof? In order not to pass you as a starball.

          Quote: Stas57
          come up with yourself?
          or in the newspaper Moscow Bogomolets read?

          OK. I took the data from here:
          http://izmerov.narod.ru/rstories/reihsbahn.html

          And now, your data on the number of necessary and unnecessary steam locomotives, and the source.

          Quote: Stas57
          Well, what for they were ordered, like they paid for gold, but were they all clogged up?

          Again, proof in my words - where did I talk about the uselessness of American steam locomotives? If you do not mind of course.

          PS Well, in theory, you would have to apologize for:
          Quote: Stas57
          rkkasa is not in the subject but cuts off the shoulder
          1. Stas57
            Stas57 21 May 2016 21: 42
            0
            In your opinion, it turns out that in the USSR there were two tens of thousands of unnecessary steam locomotives. You see, all the pre-war years, steam locomotives of the wrong system were built here, yeah.

            leg,
            for the children that I read and for you, before the war, the roads were peaceful. heavy trucks traveled along them, long-haul trucks, fast-moving ones followed them, with the outbreak of war they were not used for many reasons, including the quality of the track, although they were listed on the balance sheet.

            is it clear?


            obviously what rkkasa 81 does not know, from the end of 43 a sharp increase in the size of the liberated territory began

            proof In order not to pass you as a starball.


            how much proof are you? eight? or 8 years? do you know what happened in summer 10? Well, there is about a radical fracture? or there about "Bagration". and then we got to Berlin?

            And now, your data on the number of necessary and unnecessary steam locomotives, and the source.

            how much was known, how many models are the same at the beginning of the war, it's like 2 * 2, so can you? Do you know Cancer?


            Again, proof in my words - where did I talk about the uselessness of American steam locomotives? If you do not mind of course.

            there is such a thing, logic, do not bathe on this ..

            and at the beginning of the war, in the USSR there were about 25000 steam locomotives, and almost all of them were saved. Plus, most of the supply of locomotives for Lend-Lease fell on the 1944-1947 years. That is, the role of Lend-Lease in this case was not great.
            once again, if the USSR asked them, then not because of a whim, but because of the need for these types.

            PS Well, in theory, you would have to apologize for:
            Quote: Stas57
            rkkasa is not in the subject but cuts off the shoulder

            yes, if you’re not on the topic, even about the course of the war, you don’t know what I apologize for.
            you do not own the topic of locomotives during WWII from the word at all.
            but found it necessary to write.
            1. rkkasa xnumx
              rkkasa xnumx 22 May 2016 08: 45
              0
              Quote: Stas57
              Before the war, the roads were peaceful. heavy trucks walked on them, long-haul trucks, speedy ones went on them, with the outbreak of war they were not used for many reasons, including the quality of the track, although they were listed on the balance sheet.

              That is, in your opinion, to use peacetime trains during the war - is there no way? Even in the rear? If this is really so, give a link to the source, and do not get off with your little fairy tales.

              Quote: Stas57
              what proof

              Again they turned on the fool, like you don’t understand which proof I requested?
              Proof on where I deny / don’t know about the sharp increase in the size of the liberated territory.

              Quote: Stas57
              how much was known, how much is the same for the models at the beginning of the war, it's like 2 * 2

              You yourself are not disgusted, so get out and wag ... something? laughing
              You were asked to provide your data, and a link to their source.


              Quote: Stas57
              Again, proof in my words - where did I talk about the uselessness of American steam locomotives? If you do not mind of course.
              there is such a thing, logic, do not bathe on this ..

              More and more convinced that I communicate with a simple starball laughing

              Quote: Stas57
              yes ... what do I apologize for.

              In general, my friend you yap, which does not confirm your words, and besides, the hamlo is not brought up. It’s a pity that I spent time on you. Be.
    6. Stas57
      Stas57 21 May 2016 14: 02
      +2
      Quote: rkkasa 81
      and at the beginning of the war, in the USSR there were about 25000 steam locomotives, and almost all of them were saved. Plus, most of the supply of locomotives for Lend-Lease fell on the 1944-1947 years. That is - the role of Lend-Lease in this case was not great ..

      come up with yourself?
      or in the newspaper Moscow Bogomolets read?
      you know, then dofig steam engines, but only such as ICs could not be used, they needed a higher quality path, which wasn’t .. therefore orders placed in 1943-1944 by Baldwin and ALCo included 1622 steam locomotives of the EA, 412 series steam locomotives of the EM series and 200 steam locomotives of the ША series. *

      Well, what for they were ordered, like they paid for gold, but were they all clogged up?


      for example, the Americans supplied us with heavy-duty 4-axle platforms for transporting Soviet tanks. will you share how many such cars were built during the war? and before her? I'll tell you about 500pcs.

      --
      *
      By the way, Vasilevsky wrote that, emnip, locomotives of these types were supplied with special equipment for the transfer of troops to the east ...
  6. avia12005
    avia12005 21 May 2016 08: 20
    +4
    Are the Gas-67 and 3-bridge VMS - is it national economy cars?
    1. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 21 May 2016 12: 51
      +2
      Quote: avia12005
      Are the Gas-67 and 3-bridge VMS - is it national economy cars?

      and how many were produced?
      How not to twist a Studebaker and a lorry in different weight categories
      1. murriou
        murriou 21 May 2016 15: 35
        0
        "Whatever you do, but a Studebaker and a lorry in different weight categories"
        You are confused.

        A three-axle lorry is GAZ-AAA, they were also done a lot both before and during the war, and they worked well in the Second World War.

        The three-axle ZIS is the ZIS-6, it is strictly in the same weight category with the Studebaker. "Katyushas" were first made on them, on "students" and other chassis were transferred only later.
    2. murriou
      murriou 21 May 2016 15: 35
      +1
      Add another GAZ-AAA, this is a three-axle (and not a three-bridge, as you mistakenly write) version of a lorry.

      And before the GAZ-67 was still the GAZ-64 and BA-64 based on it.
  7. Erg
    Erg 21 May 2016 08: 56
    +3
    Bringing Hitler to power, organizing the World War, helping both parties, participating in the conflict for the sake of self, solving all his economic problems, leaving half the world in debt, enslaving Europe, the East, Japan and other states ... So, he inspired music. ..
  8. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 21 May 2016 09: 12
    +5
    Some more aspects of Lend-Lease.
    During the war years, amid a general drop in oil production, a huge shortage of oil refining capacities, the production of aviation gasoline in necessary quantities was called into question. Nevertheless, thanks in large part to the help of the Allies, the Soviet state managed to solve this problem. Under the Lend-Lease, 1 million 320 thousand tons of gasoline were delivered to the USSR, of which 1 million 163 thousand tons (88,1%) had an octane rating higher than 996. In addition, light petrol fractions were delivered under this program 834 thousand tons used in the production of aviation fuel7. To this must be added 573 thousand tons of gasoline delivered in addition to Lend-Lease from refineries in the UK and Canada8. In total, this amounts to approximately 2 million 727 thousand short tons or 2 million 479 thousand metric tons of jet fuel.
    It should be borne in mind that jet fuel imported into the USSR was used:
    in the supply of British and American aircraft supplied under Lend-Lease, which amounted to about 8-10% of the total demand for this type of oil products, to expand production and improve the quality of Soviet aviation gasolines. Soviet planes flew gasoline with a much lower octane {145} number; therefore, by mixing domestic and imported gasoline fractions, it was possible to increase the octane number of Soviet jet fuel and significantly, by an order of magnitude, expand its production volume.
    At the beginning of the war, a compounding formulation with imported high-octane components (stoctane gasoline, isooctane, alkylbenzene, etc.) was developed at domestic oil refineries. The involvement of light high-octane components in domestic aviation gasolines made it possible to increase the fractional composition of base gasoline and thereby increase its production and selection of raw materials. For the development and implementation of a compounding scheme for aviation gasolines to a group of Baku scientists and specialists as part of V.S. Gutyr, M.A. Gorelika, L.B. Samoilova et al. Was awarded the State Prize.
    Thus, aviation gasoline and high-octane components imported from abroad were largely included in the Soviet aviation gasoline production, which amounted to 4 million 900 thousand tons during the war years. aviation fuel production.
  9. Sarmat149
    Sarmat149 21 May 2016 09: 44
    -1
    Quote: Spartanez300
    Pokryshkin creatively approached the capabilities of the aircraft and developed tactics for the combat use of fighters against German aircraft, flying Airacobras since the spring of 1943, destroyed 48 enemy aircraft in air battles, bringing the total score to 59 victories. If you are interested.


    Personally, this is very interesting and known to me. But the emphasis should be on the fact that only thanks to people like Pokryshkin, that is, our pilots used this aircraft. Only OURS showed the upper class on it, the rest REFUSED from this aircraft in favor of flight safety.
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 May 2016 11: 06
      +2
      REFUSED in favor of flight safety.


      No: they did not arrange the altitude and range
  10. vnord
    vnord 21 May 2016 10: 22
    0
    The most important thing is that they supplied to the USSR and could not produce it themselves - machine tools !!!
    The same problem at the checkpoint for the T-34 was solved only after the delivery of machine tools from the USA.
    God forbid war, Russia is stepping on the same rake of problems with the release of high-precision equipment.
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 May 2016 11: 11
      +1
      The most important thing is that they supplied to the USSR and could not produce it themselves - machine tools !!!
      The same problem at the checkpoint for the T-34 was solved only after the delivery of machine tools from the USA.
      God forbid war, Russia is stepping on the same rake of problems with the release of high-precision equipment.


      Exactly so: for example, the release of the T-34-85 was not possible due to the lack of a carousel for grooves. We got the machines - a tank appeared.
      1. murriou
        murriou 21 May 2016 15: 44
        0
        It’s interesting, for locomotive wheels of the same diameter (and more) there were rotary machines before the PMV, but the same machines were not found on the tanks, or what? wink
    2. murriou
      murriou 21 May 2016 15: 42
      0
      That's interesting, and how in the USSR did the T-34 in 1939, 2 years before the Lend-Lease? And even put in a series? wink
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 21 May 2016 21: 33
        0
        The diameter of the shoulder strap was different. And the machines ... are different. They were under one shoulder strap, but not under another. Then they appeared.
      2. overb
        overb 21 May 2016 21: 56
        0
        Quote: murriou
        That's interesting, and how in the USSR did the T-34 in 1939, 2 years before the Lend-Lease?

        Shoulder strap T-34/76 (and T-50) - 1420 mm, HF - 1535 mm, T-34/85 - 1600 mm.
        The matter there was not so much in uniform as in guns. 40 klb. three-inch, this is the maximum that in the USSR before the Second World War they could be mass-produced (except for 2 factories). But the three-inch was outdated in 1942, it needed to be replaced with something. And for this, equipment was needed.
        1. svp67
          svp67 21 May 2016 22: 04
          +1
          Quote: overb
          Shoulder strap T-34/76 (and T-50) - 1420 mm, HF - 1535 mm, T-34/85 - 1600 mm.

          But the pre-war T-28 = 1620 mm, and the wheels of Soviet steam locomotives reached 2200 mm, and I wonder what was the light of towers in the light of our destroyers and cruisers?
          1. overb
            overb 21 May 2016 22: 09
            0
            Quote: svp67
            And the pre-war T-28 = 1620 mm, and the wheels of Soviet steam locomotives reached 2200 mm

            That's right. But what does this have to do with the depth of precision drilling?
            Quote: svp67
            and I wonder what was the pursuit of towers in the light of our destroyers and cruisers?

            No no. The marine theme is an expensive small-scale production. For ground forces is not suitable.
            1. svp67
              svp67 21 May 2016 22: 22
              +1
              Quote: overb
              No no. The marine theme is an expensive small-scale production. For ground forces is not suitable.

              And the fact that the details of the armored hulls of tanks and ships were produced at the same enterprises, how is it? After all, the armored hulls were simply assembled from the parts sent
              1. AK64
                AK64 21 May 2016 22: 31
                0
                And the fact that the details of the armored hulls of tanks and ships were produced at the same enterprises, how is it? After all, the armored hulls were simply assembled from the parts sent


                Maybe you should spend 15 minutes of your precious time and look at the blueprints how towers are installed in tanks, but how about say destroyers? You would save both your and our time, and traffic, and a place in the comments.

                On ships, shoulder straps (sometimes 10-meter, and more) no one sharpened.

                And the enterprises were far from "the same"
              2. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 22: 43
                -1
                Quote: svp67
                And the fact that the details of the armored hulls of tanks and ships were produced at the same enterprises, how is it?

                From the entire list of military tank manufacturers, Sormovo can be signed as a maximum for this topic. Yes and that, with a big stretch.
                Quote: svp67
                After all, the armored corps were simply assembled from the parts sent

                Where did they send it from? From America? Or from Zhmerinka? Don't make up "facts".
                1. svp67
                  svp67 21 May 2016 22: 56
                  +1
                  Quote: overb
                  From the entire list of military tank manufacturers, Sormovo can be signed as a maximum for this topic. Yes and that, with a big stretch.

                  Do not mix tank-building enterprises and enterprises manufacturing body parts for them.
                  Initially, this enterprise was the Mariupol shipyard, which also produced parts for our ships. During the evacuation of the Mariupol plant, the main supplier of hulls was plant No. 264 (Stalingrad shipyard), then Krasny Sormovo (plant No. 112) and the main manufacturer Nizhniy Tagil, where the Mariupol plant was evacuated, joined. Soon Uralmash was connected to the production of armored hulls and the most recent Omsk Heavy Engineering Plant
                  1. overb
                    overb 22 May 2016 00: 11
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    During the evacuation of the Mariupol plant, the main supplier of hulls was plant No. 264 (Stalingrad shipyard), then Krasny Sormovo (plant No. 112) and the main manufacturer Nizhniy Tagil, where the Mariupol plant was evacuated, joined. Soon Uralmash was connected to the production of armored hulls and the most recent Omsk Heavy Engineering Plant

                    There were no suppliers of armored corps (except for UZTM) during the Second World War. Tanks were produced in factories from and to. There was nothing corny about carrying these pieces of iron back and forth.
                    1. AK64
                      AK64 22 May 2016 01: 37
                      0
                      There were no suppliers of armored corps (except for UZTM) during the Second World War. Tanks were produced in factories from and to. There was nothing corny about carrying these pieces of iron back and forth.

                      But why? The Stalingrad shipyard made hulls for the STZ. Since the machine tools at the shipyard were not rich, they were cut with autogenous: the photo shows how terrible these very buildings were.
                      However, in this case both plants are in the same city.
          2. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 22: 24
            0
            And the pre-war T-28 = 1620 mm,

            That's right: it was at the Kirovsky factory, where both the T-28 and the KV were produced, that were the only ones TO THE WHOLE COUNTRY, either one or two corrugated machines, which made it possible to sharpen shoulder straps more than 1,5 m.

            Have you heard about the problem of the T-34-85 shoulder strap? If you read at least something about installing an 85mm gun on the T-34, then it is precisely this increase in shoulder strap that is constantly referred to as the PROBLEM. It happens that you don’t know something - but why is this malice?

            and the wheels of Soviet steam locomotives reached 2200 mm,

            You still mention the mill wheels from water mills here - it’s just in context: both there is size, and here is size.

            and I wonder what was the pursuit of towers in the light of our destroyers and cruisers?

            Neither ours, nor even non-our ships are sharpening the shoulder straps of the towers. The towers of the ships do not rest on the deck. There is another device
            1. svp67
              svp67 21 May 2016 23: 04
              +1
              Quote: AK64
              That's right: it was at the Kirovsky factory, where both the T-28 and the KV were produced, that were the only ones TO THE WHOLE COUNTRY, either one or two corrugated machines, which made it possible to sharpen shoulder straps more than 1,5 m.

              Mabut mabut. And do not tell me where the heavy T-35 was produced
              Quote: AK64
              If you read at least something about installing an 85mm gun on the T-34, then it is precisely this increase in shoulder strap that is constantly referred to as the PROBLEM.
              This was a problem in the aspect that required a change in production technology and, accordingly, a decrease in the output of the tank
              Quote: AK64
              The towers of the ships do not rest on the deck. There is another device

              So the tank tower does not rest on the roof of the hull ...
              1. AK64
                AK64 21 May 2016 23: 16
                0
                Mabut mabut. And do not tell me where the heavy T-35 was produced

                You need to look who they made the armored corps. The main tower is identical to the T-28.

                This was a problem in the aspect that required a change in production technology and, accordingly, a decrease in the output of the tank

                A fundamentally different tower didn’t scare anyone - but did any of the epaulettes suddenly strain?

                So the tank tower does not rest on the roof of the hull ...

                But what does she rely on?
                On the drawing there is a kaz shoulder strap of the T-28 you mentioned. It is based on the housing
                1. svp67
                  svp67 21 May 2016 23: 38
                  0
                  Quote: AK64
                  You need to look who they made the armored corps. The main tower is identical to the T-28.

                  This tank was produced in Kharkov, and meaning the details of the armored hulls received from Mariupol, there was such a thing in the USSR - cooperation.
                  Quote: AK64
                  A fundamentally different tower didn’t scare anyone - but did any of the epaulettes suddenly strain?

                  And who said that the tower did not scare? I repeat once again, the main thing that scarecrow is a decrease in the number of tanks released, during a change in the lineup.
                  Quote: AK64
                  But what does she rely on?
                  so relies or rests, you already decide?
                  1. AK64
                    AK64 22 May 2016 01: 45
                    0
                    This tank was produced in Kharkov, and received the details of the armored hulls from Mariupol,

                    Look at the drawing --- the lower shoulder strap is a separate part. And the towers are identical with the T-28 towers.
                    Epaulettes could receive along with the towers. From Kirovsky.


                    there was such a concept in the USSR - cooperation.

                    (a) Do you believe that cooperation is a Soviet invention, and nowhere else is impossible?
                    (b) Do you believe that cooperation in the Russian Federation is impossible today?
                    (c) Do you think that the cooperation of Kharkov could only be with Mariupol, but not with Kirovsky?


                    And who said that the tower did not scare? I repeat once again, the main thing that scarecrow is a decrease in the number of tanks released, during a change in the lineup.

                    Once again: we were constantly talking about this pursuit. And precisely its larger size. The gun also strained - but they put up with it.

                    so relies or rests, you already decide?

                    When there are no arguments - you can always check the registration. Or grammar.

                    In general, the issue does not apply to ship towers: there are volumes and other and constructive solutions.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 22 May 2016 05: 16
                      0
                      Quote: AK64
                      Look at the drawing --- the lower shoulder strap is a separate part. And the towers are identical with the T-28 towers.
                      Epaulettes could receive along with the towers. From Kirovsky.

                      Such, but not such. Show me the T-28 with a conical tower - I agree
                      Quote: AK64
                      Once again: we were constantly talking about this pursuit. And precisely its larger size. The gun also strained - but they put up with it.

                      Two modifications of the T-34 with an 85-mm cannon were presented for testing, one with a shoulder strap -1400 mm, the second - 1600 mm. If so "frightened" epaulettes in 1600, they could leave the old one. But they were not afraid, maybe because of the fact that several experienced tanks with a new shoulder strap had already been produced and tested before.
                      Quote: AK64
                      When there are no arguments - you can always check the registration.

                      Wow, do you have one? And then I remember her ten years ago to change the registration ...
                      Quote: AK64
                      Or grammar.

                      Well, the meaning is different
                      Quote: AK64
                      In general, the issue does not apply to ship towers: there are volumes and other and constructive solutions.

                      Not at all and not always.
                      1. AK64
                        AK64 22 May 2016 09: 22
                        0
                        Such, but not such. Show me the T-28 with a conical tower - I agree


                        I don’t know how to insert multiple pictures, because links instead:



                        The conical tower is the 40th year. There were very few such T-28s, and I did not find the photo, only the blueprints.

                        Two modifications of the T-34 with an 85-mm cannon were presented for testing, one with a shoulder strap -1400 mm, the second - 1600 mm. If so "frightened" epaulettes in 1600, they could leave the old one.

                        About this they write different and contradictory. The guns were developed by at least two design bureaus, and they write that they PROMISED (well, villains rivals, who else) not to change the epaulette, but ... did not fulfill their promises.
                        That is, someone is lying in hindsight.

                        But they weren’t afraid, maybe from the fact that several experimental tanks with a new shoulder strap had already been released and tested before.

                        A hundred shoulder straps could be made in Leningrad on Kirovsky. Or manually rub.

                        In general, I thought that about this shoulder strap and the machine is widely known, but here you go ... The people look surprised.

                        Not at all and not always.

                        Indeed, there are far more solutions in naval artillery than in tanks.
                        But the scale of production is much smaller - by orders of magnitude. 100 destroyers - 300 towers. Another scale of the problem. In extreme cases, you can rub with a scraper.
                      2. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 11: 17
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        Two modifications of the T-34 with an 85-mm cannon were presented for testing, one with a shoulder strap -1400 mm, the second - 1600 mm. If so "frightened" epaulettes in 1600, they could leave the old one. But they were not afraid, maybe because of the fact that several experienced tanks with a new shoulder strap had already been produced and tested before.

                        A tank with an old shoulder strap (1420 mm) was not even allowed to be tested. Due to the apparent impossibility of the crew in the tower.
                        Moreover, even with a new shoulder strap when installing the 85-mm D-5T gun, the tower was double, there was not enough space for a third person. Such tanks were released 255 pcs.
                        The triple tower became only after the development of the production of the 85-mm S-53 gun in the spring of 1944. But she had some fatal design flaws. which were eliminated only in the autumn of 1944. in the 85 mm gun ZIS-S-53.
                        Along the way, in August 1944, the tower reservation was redone (they missed this spring of 1944).
                        As a result, the T-34/85 received its final form only in the autumn of 1944.
                        I note that his counterpart PzKpfw IV in the final form went into a continuous series since January 1943. And even since the fall of 1942. it was once produced in its final form. So the lag is clearly visible.
              2. Cat man null
                Cat man null 21 May 2016 23: 26
                -1
                Quote: svp67
                Quote: AK64
                Ship towers do not rest to the deck. There is another device
                So the tank tower on the roof of the hull does not rest...

                - under the table from terminology .. good laughing
              3. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 23: 28
                0
                Quote: svp67
                And do not tell me where the heavy T-35 was produced

                The T-35 in the USSR was not heavy, heavy tanks appeared later. The T-35 was a "special purpose" tank. The devil only knows, ceremonial, I guess. And, interestingly, the KV-1 did not go to replace him, he was on his own.
                Quote: svp67
                So the tank tower does not rest on the roof of the hull ...

                It rests. But through the epaulette. Its upper part is bolted to the tower, the lower part to the body.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 21 May 2016 23: 31
                  0
                  Quote: overb
                  T-35 in the USSR was not heavy,

                  Yes, at least "fluffy" is the main thing that it was not produced at Kirovsky
                  Quote: overb
                  Its upper part is bolted to the tower

                  Dead? Miracles, but what about it?
                  1. overb
                    overb 22 May 2016 00: 21
                    0
                    Quote: svp67
                    Yes, at least "fluffy" is the main thing that it was not produced at Kirovsky

                    Before the war, epaulettes could easily be made on Kirovsky, and sent to Kharkov. The trains then ran properly. And the production volume of the T-35 was trifling.
                    Quote: svp67
                    Dead? Miracles, but what about it?

                    Due to the balls, of course. There, a little higher in the drawing, they are visible. Round ones. After all, shoulder straps are a kind of large bearing. The tank tower also relied on these balls through the upper ring of the shoulder strap-bearing.
        2. svp67
          svp67 21 May 2016 22: 41
          -1
          Quote: overb
          The matter there was not so much in uniform as in guns. 40 klb. three-inch, this is the maximum that in the USSR before the Second World War they could be mass-produced (except for 2 factories). But the three-inch was outdated in 1942, it needed to be replaced with something. And for this, equipment was needed.

          That's right, and therefore in stock there was a draft 76mm S-54 gun with a 3K anti-aircraft gun. Just 85 mm was considered more promising and therefore on the S-54 did not become distracted.
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 22: 48
            0
            That's right, and therefore in stock there was a draft 76mm S-54 gun with a 3K anti-aircraft gun. Just 85 mm was considered more promising and therefore on the S-54 did not become distracted.

            Sorry, but also S-54 and 3K could produce the ONLY plant in the entire USSR - Plant No. 8 in Podlipki.
            Nowhere except there were machines on which such long channels could be drilled.

            Because at least S-54, even S-53 --- they had the same problem.
          2. overb
            overb 21 May 2016 22: 53
            0
            Quote: svp67
            That's right, and therefore in stock there was a draft 76mm S-54 gun with a 3K anti-aircraft gun.

            And even the ZIS-2 project was in stock. There was only one misfortune, that the ZIS-2, that something with a rifled part in general was longer than 104 inches in the USSR until 1943. it was impossible to do it in large quantities (except for 2 factories that were occupied with other products). There was nothing.
            Quote: svp67
            Just 85 mm was considered more promising and therefore on the S-54 did not become distracted.

            Just 3-K and 51-K anti-aircraft guns, and ammunition for them, by 1943. have already been discontinued.
          3. The comment was deleted.
  11. Pitot
    Pitot 21 May 2016 10: 37
    +3
    Also an interesting opinion. -----
    ....... Speaking about the role of Lend-Lease in the victory of the USSR, do not forget about two more points. Firstly, the vast majority of machinery, equipment and materials were delivered to the USSR in 1943-1945. That is, after a turning point during the war. So, for example, in 1941, Lend-Lease delivered goods worth about $ 100 million, which amounted to less than 1% of the total supply. In 1942, this percentage was 27,6. Thus, more than 70% of Lend-Lease deliveries came in 1943-1945, and during the most terrible period of the war for the USSR, the help of the Allies was not too noticeable. An even more significant example is automobiles: as of April 30, 1944, only 215 thousand units were delivered. That is, more than half of the Lend-Lease cars were delivered to the USSR in the last year of the war. Secondly, far from all the equipment supplied under Lend-Lease was used by the army and navy. For example, out of 202 torpedo boats delivered to the USSR, 118 did not have to take part in the hostilities of the Great Patriotic War, since they were put into operation after its completion. All 26 frigates received by the USSR also entered service only in the summer of 1945. A similar situation was observed with other types of equipment.

    For the main types of deliveries, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of production and deliveries to the USSR does not exceed 28%. In general, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of materials, equipment, food, machinery, raw materials, etc., produced and delivered to the USSR. Usually estimated at 4%. Thus, it can be stated with a certain degree of certainty that Lend-Lease did not have any decisive influence on the capabilities of the USSR in waging war. Yes, Lend-Lease supplied such types of equipment and materials that accounted for most of the total production of such in the USSR. But would the lack of supplies of these materials become critical? No. The USSR could well redistribute production efforts in such a way as to provide itself with everything necessary, including aluminum, copper, and locomotives. Could the USSR do without lend-lease at all? Yes, he could. But the question is, what would it cost him.

    http://statehistory.ru/35/Lend-liz--Mify-i-realnost/
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 11: 09
      +5
      Quote: Pitot
      So, for example, in 1941, Lend-Lease delivered goods worth about $ 100 million, which amounted to less than 1% of the total supply. In 1942, this percentage was 27,6. Thus, more than 70% of Lend-Lease deliveries fell on 1943-1945

      And now what? From this, is it less valuable?
      You forget a little thing a little, the USA itself entered the war with Japan and they were absolutely unprepared for this, there was no army as such and military industry.
      At the same time, they vseravno found opportunities to deliver on Lend-Lease and note that the government paid all these deliveries from their own pocket, as the USSR did not pay anything for military equipment and military supplies.
      I am not saying how many land leases will save the lives of Soviet citizens and how much this can be measured.
      Let's look at it the other way.
      Assume no land lease. The war costs the USSR much greater losses and .... let's say no matter what the USSR wins in the Second World War ( at the same time, do not forget the second front had nothing to do with Lend Lease and would have been anyway ) i.e. the output is the result.
      Germany was defeated, the occupation zones remained as they should be, but there was no Lend Lease and America came out even stronger (maybe, she didn’t spend resources on Lend Lease), and the USSR was even weaker than she lost more lives and spent more resources.
      Total Lend-Lease deliveries amounted to about 50,1 billion US dollars (612,88 billion dollars in 2008 prices years [5]), of which $ 31,4 billion was delivered to the UK, 11,3 billion - in the USSR( about 160 billion dollars in 2008 prices ), 3,2 billion - to France and 1,6 billion - to the Republic of China.

      well, to the eyeballs, so that there would be less talk
      Thus, from the total volume of American Lend-Lease deliveries at $ 11 billion for the surviving equipment, according to the United States, it was necessary to pay $ 1,3 billion or about 12%. As a result, the USSR, and then Russia, from the amount of $ 1.3 billion was recognized, and then partially paid $ 722 million, or about 55%. [53] [54] In prices for 2015 Lend-lease supply value was $ 160 billion. [65]

      Do you have any conscience?
      The USA delivered 160 billion bucks at its own expense, the USSR paid 755 million.
      The United States forgave the rest. and remember one thing this America might not do. The USSR would have won all over Hemania (as everyone here says), and the post-war structure of Europe would have remained the same as it was, or do you think Stalin allowed America to land for a lease before the war?
      1. 1536
        1536 21 May 2016 11: 43
        0
        And the Krupp factories were funded by American banks.
        You have the flag of the State of Israel. So, you probably know this anecdote: “An Arab runs through the desert, fires back, and an Israeli tank follows him, but does not shoot. Finally, the Arab ran out of ammunition, he threw his machine gun, turned his face to the tank, waiting for death. an Israeli tanker pours cartridges from palm to palm and asks: “Well, are you out of cartridges? Maybe sell? "
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 May 2016 11: 50
          +3
          Quote: 1536
          And the Krupp factories were funded by American banks.

          I don’t know, you know, give the facts, preferably the source and do not forget to supplement the facts with the USSR / Germany trade agreement of 1939 and the quantity of strategic products delivered to Germany, I recall the last train with products for Germany crossed the border 4 hours before the start of the war.
          The continuation of your post, complete nonsense and not looking (as I understand your age) - nothing but the shkolota flood does not remind. hi
  12. Tektor
    Tektor 21 May 2016 11: 07
    +2
    I believe that the supply of our army with auto-cargo transport was of critical importance, because an army, in principle, cannot be combat-ready without supplying the front line with everything necessary, including ammunition and fuel. Of course, one can argue that if it were not for the supplies, we would have established the production of the required amount of equipment, but how would this affect the results? Therefore, we can unequivocally say that the victory in May 45 was ensured by supplies under Lend-Lease. Otherwise, the date would inevitably shift "to the right". And there Hitler could have gotten an atomic bomb ... But be that as it may, this is from the category of assumptions, but in fact the victory was won by the Soviet people.
  13. overb
    overb 21 May 2016 11: 10
    0
    Parallel functioned and "reverse lend-lease". During the war years, the Allies received from the USSR 300 thousand tons of chromium and 32 thousand tons of manganese ore, as well as wood, gold and platinum.

    There was no "reverse lend-lease". The USSR sold all this. Those. it was export. This money was used to buy machines and equipment, which were not supplied under Lend-Lease, but were bought by the USSR.
    For example, in 1943-44, these machines made it possible to master the production of the 85-mm S-53 tank gun and the 57-mm ZIS-2 arr. 1943, without which the USSR then could not do without it.
    1. 1536
      1536 21 May 2016 11: 34
      0
      False! My father worked in Zlatoust at a factory that let in these same ZIS-2. And my grandfather was an engineer at the same factory. There were no foreign machines there at all. They worked for ours, which before the war did. Perhaps under a foreign license, yes, but at our plants, by our workers.
      1. AK64
        AK64 21 May 2016 11: 42
        +3
        False! My father worked in Zlatoust at a factory that let in these same ZIS-2. And my grandfather was an engineer at the same factory. There were no foreign machines there at all. They worked for ours, which before the war did. Perhaps under a foreign license, yes, but at our plants, by our workers.

        Really a lie. Direct and impudent. Because ZiS-2 was released on ... Gorky factory number 92.

        What everyone can easily see: Google, thank God, has not yet been banned even in Russia.
        1. murriou
          murriou 21 May 2016 14: 54
          +1
          Is it such a big secret for you that there was more than one plant in the USSR, and during the Second World War every plant that was capable of doing this worked for the war?

          T-34 released, nask. I remember 8 factories, and components for them went there from several hundred other factories. In many factories, auxiliary production of PCA was deployed, etc.

          Therefore, the production of ZIS-2 at the Gorky plant and Votkinsk, which are really basic, does not mean at all that all other plants could not be involved in this.
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 15: 07
            -5
            Is it such a big secret for you that there was more than one plant in the USSR, and during the Second World War every plant that was capable of doing this worked for the war?


            "Blah-blah-blah, blah-blah-blah ..." --- the cockerel flew onto the fence and began to crow: "Crow, it's a secret for you - but it's not a secret for me !!! ku! "

            So name the NUMBER and the name of the plant, cockerel! Room!

            Bul-bul-bul, ku-ka-re-ku ..... Therefore, the production of ZIS-2 at the Gorky plant and Votkinsk, which are really basic, does not mean at all that all other plants could not be involved in this.


            Cockerel, the problem with ZiS-2 was the only one --- drill the trunk. It is about this one single problem that is being discussed.
            And the wheels, indeed, even the handicraft workshop "In the bright path" could somehow forge: not very good, but could.

            And in order to cut the shoulder strap of the T-34-85 tank (which the znayki likes so much), an American carousel was needed: as soon as it hit, the tank began to be produced.

            (Before the war, similar, that is, capable of cutting shoulder straps of precisely this diameter, machine tools in the USSR were either ONE, or TWO pieces, all over the country. And they were at the Kirov Plant, cutting shoulder straps to KV tanks.)

            So crow even further, cockerel.

            I’m going to read this post - and I’ll bring it in an emergency --- for I love absolutely stupid and equally arrogant boors
          2. overb
            overb 22 May 2016 02: 13
            0
            Quote: murriou
            Therefore, the production of ZIS-2 at the Gorky plant and Votkinsk, which are really basic, does not mean at all that all other plants could not be involved in this.

            There could be a number of those involved. For example, nuts could easily be received from the side. The same muzzle brake for the ZIS-3, which "Grabin made from everyone secretly" and apparently at its own expense from previously saved (let's say) funded materials, was made at another plant. Because of this, the version "about the initiative and hyperactive Grabin" somehow loses its former attractiveness.
            But I'm not talking about that. The supply of components for the ZIS-2 really went. There were not only planned trunks from Cherkasy. And by the end of the year, about 1000 carriages for the ZIS-2 had accumulated in the yard of the plant. At the end of the year, the plant received permission (without permission, and the mouse did not squeak in those days), and equipped these gun carriages with tank trunks (tank production could not keep up) of the F-34 guns with a Soviet-style muzzle brake (slotted). And in this form, these guns went to the front.
            Here they are, in the photo. Later, such a gun was altered in the ZIS-3 arr. 1942
      2. overb
        overb 21 May 2016 11: 46
        +3
        Quote: 1536
        False! My father worked in Zlatoust at a factory that let in these same ZIS-2. And my grandfather was an engineer at the same factory. There were no foreign machines there at all. They worked for ours, which before the war did. Perhaps under a foreign license, yes, but at our plants, by our workers.

        Guard!!!!!!!!!!!
        Robbed !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        The fact is that ZIS-2 was NEVER done in Zlatoust. First, from 1943 to 45 years it was made at the factory number 92 in Gorky. And then, from 1945 to the very end in Votkinsk, at factory number 235.
        1. murriou
          murriou 21 May 2016 14: 47
          0
          Quote: overb
          First, from 1943 to 45 years it was made at the factory number 92 in Gorky.

          The fact is that smart people learn from the mistakes of others, ordinary people, at least from their own mistakes, guys do not learn from anything and never.

          I already informed you, I remember that at first the ZIS-2 was not made in 1943, then the production, which had begun in 1941, was only restored. But up to you, this information is still strictly classified.
          Conclusion? wink
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 14: 59
            0
            The fact is that smart people learn from the mistakes of others, ordinary people, at least from their own mistakes, guys do not learn from anything and never.

            I already informed you, I remember that at first the ZIS-2 was not made in 1943, then the production, which had begun in 1941, was only restored. But up to you, this information is still strictly classified.
            Conclusion?

            Open our eyes, "smart man", at which plant the ZIS-2 was produced in 1941.
            Name and number of the plant.
          2. overb
            overb 22 May 2016 01: 44
            0
            Quote: murriou
            I already informed you, I remember that at first the ZIS-2 was not made in 1943, then the production, which had begun in 1941, was only restored.

            And I told you that in the Russian language the concepts "did" and "tried to do" have different meanings.
            In addition, the ZIS-2 mod. 1941 had differences from the ZIS-2 arr. 1943 (otherwise, why would these samples of different years?). Therefore, it is already inappropriate to talk about "restoring production".
            In fact, the history of ZIS-2 arr. 1941 as simple as the corner of a house. Trunks for her was to make a plant in Cherkasy. And the assembly was to be carried out by factory No. 92 in Gorky. But the plant in Cherkasy could not. I really don’t know whether the latest Soviet machine tools screwed up. Or something else. But the production of ZIS-2 trunks in 1941. was conducted by the pilot production of the plant №92. And in appropriate volumes. Temporarily, of course.
            But after the start of the war there was no longer any hope for the plant in Cherkassy. Therefore, the ZIS-2 at the end of 1941. removed from production. Because of its "excessive armor penetration", as some "experts" tell us.
          3. The comment was deleted.
    2. 1536
      1536 21 May 2016 11: 34
      -1
      False! My father worked in Zlatoust at a factory that let in these same ZIS-2. And my grandfather was an engineer at the same factory. There were no foreign machines there at all. They worked for ours, which before the war did. Perhaps under a foreign license, yes, but at our plants, by our workers.
  14. 1536
    1536 21 May 2016 11: 20
    0
    After reading the article, I want to ask: So what? We knew about this - about the assistance of the American and British governments in the struggle of the USSR against the Germans. Data on industrial output should be clarified, or at least indicate from which sources they were obtained. It should also be emphasized that this assistance was by no means gratuitous and charitable. They paid for everything in gold, currency, funds that, in the event of peace, could be used to develop their industry and improve the well-being of the people. There was a war and no one counted how much Stalin overpaid or gave just like that for, in general, consumables. Note that not a single American-English specialist went to the Urals and Siberia to develop military production there, help with technology, etc. Money is a commodity is money. Everything is according to Marx. And it is possible that the "Manhattan Project" was also financed by money received from the USSR for this Land Lease. Plus, after the war, literally on May 10, 1945, the Americans took all their "gifts" back and destroyed! So it turns out like in that joke: "Why, breadwinner, are you standing barefoot?"
    PS It would be better to remember the help of the Mongols, who provided our army with short fur coats and saved (really) hundreds of thousands of Red Army soldiers from frostbite!
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 11: 38
      +5
      Quote: 1536
      After reading the article I want to ask: So what? We knew about this - about the help of the American and English governments in the struggle of the USSR with the Germans.

      American. The British themselves received everything from the United States, and if the USSR received 11 billion (in 1941 prices), then England received 31 billion
      Quote: 1536
      Data on industrial output should be clarified, or at least indicate in which sources they are drawn

      Come on, did someone protest them?
      Quote: 1536
      It should also be emphasized that this assistance was by no means free and charitable.

      It was GET FREE on terms and conditions, only that which the USSR decided to keep after the war was payable, and if out of 160 billion you pay only 722 million, then it is practically free of charge.
      Quote: 1536
      . They paid for everything with gold, currency, funds that, in case of peace, they could use to develop their industry and increase the welfare of the people

      Not paid.
      And to get products for 160 billion, having paid 722 million - is that how?
      Ms, I still remember the students. And that was the beginning of the 70s.
      Quote: 1536
      There was a war, and no one considered how much Stalin overpaid or gave away just like that for, in general, consumables.

      Well, yes, Stalin got out of his inner pocket and no one knew how much he paid. Do not write nonsense.
      Quote: 1536
      Money is a commodity is money. All to Marx.

      And where is it here?
      Quote: 1536
      And it is possible that the "Manhattan Project" was financed, among other things, by the money received from the USSR for this Land Lease

      Brain rupture.
      The Soviet Union began to pay debts under a lease lease only in the 70s, and even then a penny
      Quote: 1536
      Plus, after the war, literally on May 10, the Americans took all their "gifts" back and destroyed!

      And why, after the victory of the USSR, was military equipment needed? American? Received for free during the war?
      The war was over, the USSR could buy it and keep it, or return that is not clear?
      Quote: 1536
      It would be better to remember the help of the Mongols, who provided our army with short fur coats and saved (really) hundreds of thousands of lives of soldiers of the Red Army from frostbite!

      Well, of course, where is the Lend-Lease with their unfortunate 159 billion dollars - a gift.
      Mongolia - this is really cool
      By the end of 1944, 8 trains with food and clothing worth over 25,3 million tugriks were sent from the MPR. At the beginning of 1945, the last, 9th echelon of gifts from 127 cars was sent.
      .
      1. Was mammoth
        Was mammoth 21 May 2016 12: 48
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        She was UNKNOWN ....

        But! Do you seriously believe that the United States can do something for free? How now "disinterestedly helps" Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, ..., Israel. The list goes on for all continents. Come on.
        Remember how the United States and its allies delayed the opening of a second front (the same stew was called the "second front"). Remember when the first attack on the USSR after the Victory was planned.
        The USSR was needed to defeat Hitler, and then Japan. So, the Lend-Lease was paid in full by the blood of Soviet soldiers, including your relatives. I do not want to cast a shadow on the dead English and American sailors and soldiers.
        "Everything for the front, everything for Victory!" Even the bank of the "second front" brought Victory closer. And the role of Lend-Lease is undeniable, just as undeniable is that the decisive role is still in the defeat of fascism among the Soviet people. That, all the same trying to challenge any scribes of history. In some places they succeeded.
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 May 2016 13: 29
          +1
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          However! Do you seriously believe that the United States can do something for free?

          Call it what you want.
          First, they might not have done this at all.
          The second - having spent 160 billion from my pocket and received 722 million as payment - I consider this free of charge.
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          How now "disinterestedly helps" Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine, ..., Israel.

          Well, you certainly sit in Syria solely out of a desire to achieve world justice wink
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          Come on.
          Remember how the United States and its allies delayed the opening of a second front (the same stew was called "the second front").

          Yes, they could not get into it at all, like dozens of countries of the world.
          From Europe to the States it is very far and not the fact that Germany would declare war on America.
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          Remember when the first attack on the USSR after the Victory was planned.

          There were geo-poetic reasons for this and one of them. The USSR liberated the countries of Europe (eastern), but for some reason I forgot to leave them.
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          The USSR was needed to defeat Hitler, and then Japan.

          Well, America would have definitely dealt with Japan.
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          So, the Lend-Lease was paid in full by the blood of Soviet soldiers, including your relatives.

          Paid or not - the conversation is not about that.
          Imagine that there would be nothing to pay. There would be no Lend-Lease.
          I just don’t understand why it’s so hard to say thanks, to the country that really helped in the Second World War, and even if it is called the USA?
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          I do not want to cast a shadow on the dead English and American sailors and soldiers.

          No, that’s what you’re doing.
          America climbed into its war, Americans died in the European War, at that time America was in no way concerned.
          The Americans fought in that war since 1939, when the USSR (at whose borders this war was fought) --- calmly delivered goods to Germany under the agreement of 1939 - or did I write something wrong?
          Quote: There was a mammoth
          Everything for the front, everything for Victory! "Even the bank of the" second front "brought Victory closer. And the role of the Lend-Lease is undeniable, just as it is undeniable that the decisive role is still in the defeat of fascism among the Soviet people

          Therefore, the United States nevermind under the nose, and not simple, thanks.
          It characterizes very well negative
          1. Was mammoth
            Was mammoth 21 May 2016 15: 35
            0
            Quote: atalef
            Paid or not - the conversation is not about that.

            Oh well!
            Quote: atalef
            Call it what you want.

            I understand that you all think in money.
            Quote: atalef
            Well, you certainly sit in Syria solely out of a desire to achieve world justice wink

            Well, of course not for Israel’s interests. Although, which side to look at.
            Quote: atalef
            Yes, they could not get into it at all, like dozens of countries of the world.

            Could not. Just like now, "US geopolitical interests." wink
            Quote: atalef
            Well, America would have definitely dealt with Japan.

            How much "shekels" would it cost? They know how to count. In your favor. Just like you!
            Quote: atalef
            No, that’s what you’re doing.

            You're lying, sir!
            Quote: atalef
            Therefore, the United States nevermind under the nose, and not simple, thanks.

            "On business, and honor"

            PS Poke a stranger- rudeness. Although, to whom is it?
          2. murriou
            murriou 21 May 2016 15: 53
            -2
            Quote: atalef
            America climbed into its war, Americans died in the European War, at that time America was in no way concerned.

            Both in WWI and WWII, the Americans got into their own selfish interests, at the last moment, at the end of the war, so as not to be late for the pie section.

            Ordinary Americans died, difficult Americans received superprofits. Everything is fair wink

            Quote: atalef
            Americans fought in that war since 1939

            OU! Tell me more about this! belay

            Quote: atalef
            Therefore, the United States nevermind under the nose, and not simple, thanks.

            Thanks were told to them, and more than once, and not one thanks - they added something to it with gold and counter deliveries.

            But then there was the Cold War, which we did not start.
            1. murriou
              murriou 24 May 2016 06: 07
              0
              I see minuses here have been instructed me, and the answers to my questions are zero. What, really hurts my eyes, but I can’t argue with her?
              1. Artem Popov
                Artem Popov April 3 2018 14: 46
                -1
                what's the point of talking to the demented?
            2. murriou
              murriou 2 June 2016 01: 56
              0
              They never told me the story of an alternative Universe, in which the United States since 1939. fought in WWII fellow

              Here the unscientific science fiction can instruct the minuses, but in order to say something about the case, silently, sir ...
    2. St_tov
      St_tov 21 May 2016 20: 15
      0
      I remember that in the twenties, the Red Army saved Mongolia from tatal extinction (the entire population of 2/3 million), banally closing Buddhist monasteries. T.ch. debt payment is red. In the case of the States such salvation (from extinction) was not observed. American specialists started production in the 30s, after which they were told that the USSR no longer needed their services. But six orders of Lenin, those first of platinum and with a tractor, were handed, however, to the Americans. Revenue from deliveries to the USSR during the Second World War was completely insignificant, and was much less than 1% of the US budget. And again, we paid for a couple of percent of the delivered.
  15. Fly tsetse
    Fly tsetse 21 May 2016 11: 46
    +1
    The next replication of myths with a sauce of supposedly objectivity.
    And in fact.
    The 4 percent figure has never been confirmed by anyone!
    Anyway, measuring the effectiveness of supplies of materials and equipment in wartime with their price in rubles is at least ridiculous.
    For example, equipment, it may cost one percent of the cost of produced tanks, but without it the production of tanks is not possible, just like computer work without electricity, the cost of which will not reach one percent of the cost of a computer.
    Further, the ratio of supply to its own industry.
    These are off-digits, there are also big doubts about their reliability, most likely the share of deliveries was greater.
    Well, and most importantly, I completely disagree that the USSR would have won without Lend-Lease.
    It is only at first glance that it seems that if a person is fed 2 times less, he will weigh 2 times less, if he initially has a mass deficit, then he will die.
    The USSR no doubt surpassed Germany at the start of the war in economic terms, but by the end of the 41st it had de facto lost the war, the army was destroyed, the territory was occupied. Could he, under such conditions, not only restore, but also increase the production of armament, given that he had gathered a single army destroyed in six months before that? Of course not!
    But Germany, too, faced difficulties; it could hardly move on any further, no earlier than the summer of 1942.
    And without Lend-Lease, the war would most likely end in a positional confrontation along the Volga-Ural line.
    The USSR would preserve independence, but not territorial value.
    And this is in the best case, after the occupation of the USSR, it would no longer have a clear economic advantage, especially after the capture of the Caucasus.
    The United States understood this, it would not only be unprofitable for them to help the USSR in the event of its guaranteed defeat, but also in the event of its guaranteed victory, too, they fought with Japan themselves.
    1. svp67
      svp67 21 May 2016 17: 12
      +2
      Quote: Muhu TSETSE
      And without Lend-Lease, the war would most likely end in a positional confrontation along the Volga-Ural line.
      The USSR would preserve independence, but not territorial value.

      No, Not even when, even in the most difficult moments, our leadership did not think about surrender and the war would not end until the whole territory was liberated. The fact that Germany had already lost the war became clear in the winter of 1941, since it could not wage war on exhaustion for a long time, but the USSR could.
      1. overb
        overb 21 May 2016 17: 25
        -1
        Quote: svp67
        No, Not even when, even in the most difficult moments, our leadership did not think about surrender and the war would not end until the whole territory was liberated

        On the Volga and the North. Dvina would have thought.
        Quote: svp67
        The fact that Germany had already lost the war became clear in the winter of 1941, since it could not wage war on exhaustion for a long time, but the USSR could.

        With what kind of gingerbread cookies without Lend-Lease could the USSR wage war for a long time? He himself in peacetime, when the men were engaged in creative work, barely fed. And here, 11 million of the able-bodied population in the army, i.e. on the neck of the rest, in addition, the same minus of working hands.
        Once again, with what kind of business could the Soviet Union lead a long war without Lend-Lease? And yet, the supply of American food was a huge amount in the supply of Lend-Lease. Also remember the post-war famine in the USSR.
        1. svp67
          svp67 21 May 2016 17: 36
          -1
          Quote: overb
          With what kind of gingerbread cookies without Lend-Lease could the USSR wage war for a long time?

          And with the fact that the people were ready and ate porridge from quinoa for Victory. Therefore, this holiday is for us with a capital letter.
          Quote: overb
          And here, 11 million of the able-bodied population in the army, i.e. on the neck of the rest, in addition, the same minus of working hands.

          Women, old people and small children pulled this war through themselves. I’m telling you, if from childhood I didn’t understand this, then it is difficult to understand.
          The significance of this Victory was absorbed into mother's milk.
          Quote: overb
          And yet, the supply of American food was a huge amount in the supply of Lend-Lease. Also remember the post-war famine in the USSR.

          Yes, there was a post-war famine in 1947, but one should not forget that the USSR later FIRST canceled cards for the population from the warring countries, since no difficulties could break the Victorious People, and he was able to defeat this difficulty. Moreover, he was able to master nuclear energy and make a breakthrough into space.
          Quote: overb
          With what kind of gingerbread cookies without Lend-Lease could the USSR wage war for a long time?

          "Russia cannot be understood with the mind, cannot be measured with a common yardstick, it is special to become ..."
          1. overb
            overb 21 May 2016 18: 35
            -3
            Quote: svp67
            And with the fact that the people were ready and ate porridge from quinoa for Victory.

            He was eating it with a quinoa with Lend-Lease. And without Lend-Lease, even such a mess would most likely not have been.
            Quote: svp67
            The significance of this Victory was absorbed into mother's milk.

            The value apparently absorbed by you, do not share? In the cognitive plan. Compare with my own.
            Quote: svp67
            that the USSR later FIRST canceled cards for the population from warring countries

            He canceled it not because life became good. But because there was nothing to buy them. Those. the people were told by this, "survive as you can." Those. it was far from being an act of humanism.
            Quote: svp67
            no difficulties could break the Victorious People, he could defeat this difficulty

            Only on the way to victory, the ranks of this people have thinned greatly. Do you think it matters or not?
            Quote: svp67
            Moreover, he was able to master nuclear energy and make a breakthrough into space.

            And what is the people of this? Oh yes, forgot Chernobyl.
            Quote: svp67
            "Russia cannot be understood with the mind, cannot be measured with a common yardstick, it is special to become ..."

            I have known this nonsense for a long time.
            1. svp67
              svp67 21 May 2016 20: 37
              0
              Quote: overb
              He was eating it with a quinoa with Lend-Lease. And without Lend-Lease, even such a mess would most likely not have been.

              They ate the quinoa in the rear, there they could only dream of a Lend-Lease stew
              Quote: overb
              the apparition, apparently absorbed by you, do not share?

              How can I share what you don’t seem very clear about
              Quote: overb
              He canceled it not because life became good. But because there was nothing to cook them.

              What nonsense you just said, if my parents weren’t living at that time, I might have thought, or not, their stories about this time speak differently. Not only was there something to buy, but prices were reduced .. .
              Quote: overb
              Only on the way to victory, the ranks of this people have thinned greatly. Do you think it matters or not?

              Yes it is. And I am immensely grateful for the Lend-Lease, in the aspect that it helped to save at least one, and in fact much more lives.
              Quote: overb
              And what is the people of this? Oh yes, forgot Chernobyl.

              It seems to you that something with memory, apparently from a big fright from the Chernobyl tragedy.
              Quote: overb
              I have known this nonsense for a long time.

              Well, I’m saying, you don’t understand why we would have won, that with a land-lease, that without ...
              1. overb
                overb 21 May 2016 20: 57
                +1
                Quote: svp67
                They ate the quinoa in the rear, there they could only dream of a Lend-Lease stew

                I got there too. Although it was supplied by the Americans under Lend-Lease, i.e. strictly for the army.
                Quote: svp67
                What stupid thing you just said

                I do not have such a habit. And I do not advise you.
                Quote: svp67
                Not only was there something to buy, but prices were falling ...

                So take an interest in what and how much could be bought for a worker's salary at these "reduced prices". During the war, the salary of a turner at a military factory was 2 loaves of black bread per month, 1 kg each. If it were not for work cards and lunches (1 time) during 12 hour shifts, the fins would be glued together.
                Quote: svp67
                It seems to you that something with memory, apparently from a big fright from the Chernobyl tragedy

                How can cosmonautics and nuclear energy affect the life of ordinary people? Without pathos inflating cheeks.
                Quote: svp67
                You don’t understand why we would have won, that with a land-lease, that without ...

                Without Lend-Lease, the USSR in the pre-war borders would have ended already in 1942. This is an axiom, Americans are not fools. Just so to supply something somewhere for free, if it were not necessary, they would not. In the end, the U.S. government paid for Lend Lease, i.e. for Americans it was not free.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 21 May 2016 21: 10
                  +1
                  Quote: overb
                  How can cosmonautics and nuclear energy affect the life of ordinary people? Without pathos inflating cheeks.

                  But how does the development of civilization and technology affect people's lives? Improved weather forecasts, piloting ships through the ice, covering the vast country with television and radio broadcasting, etc., providing the country with a lot of electricity, which made it possible to smel a lot of aluminum, from which many passenger aircraft were produced, which ordinary citizens flew quickly and with possible conveniences. And this is so offhand.
                  Quote: overb
                  Without Lend-Lease, the USSR in the pre-war borders would end already in 1942

                  Yeah, right now ... keep your pocket wider.
                  Quote: overb
                  This is an axiom, Americans are not fools.

                  This is DUKE, although Americans are certainly not stupid and know what they are doing.
                  Quote: overb
                  In the end, the U.S. government paid for Lend Lease, i.e. for Americans it was not free.

                  Of course, when a competitor can be removed with the wrong hands, then why not pay.
                  1. overb
                    overb 21 May 2016 21: 32
                    -2
                    Quote: svp67
                    But how does the development of civilization and technology affect people's lives?

                    You will be surprised, but the Swiss, for example, do not fly into space. And the reactors are not building. And somehow, they live with sin in half. Poor, probably hungry and cold? You have not been, not seen?
                    But sowing. Kreuts, those are exactly the opposite. That’s where the ghost is, probably? You have not been, not seen?
                    Conclusion, there is nothing to be proud of any interesting invented crap.
                    Quote: svp67
                    which allowed melt a lot of aluminum, from which many passenger aircraft were produced, on which ordinary citizens flew quickly and with possible amenities

                    Aircraft output does not correlate with aluminum smelting, as you suggest. And with the availability of technologies and factories for their production. And the smelting of aluminum is most often just trading it in ingots. Low redistribution.
                    Quote: svp67
                    And this is so offhand

                    So offhand you just rubbish and brought. Nothing specific as you were asked.
                    Quote: svp67
                    This is DUKE, although Americans are certainly not stupid and know what they are doing.

                    You contradict yourself. You decide there, within yourself. And then write.
                    Quote: svp67
                    Of course, when a competitor can be removed with the wrong hands, then why not pay.

                    Absolutely.
                    Exactly the same story as in the USSR was in Kuomintang China. In relation to the Japanese. Only now, after the victory over the Japanese, the "grateful victorious people" (the Chinese) barely let their generalissimo (Chiang Kai-shek) loose their skin. He barely managed to take refuge in Formosa (Taiwan). All because of the huge casualties among the Chinese.
                    I’ve written this for you, for general development.
                    1. AK64
                      AK64 21 May 2016 22: 53
                      0
                      You will be surprised, but the Swiss, for example, do not fly into space. And the reactors are not building.


                      They are not the subject of politics either - they are only her the object.

                      Russia also tried it: somehow I didn’t like it. It may be over for small countries, this is the way out --- but large ones in this position immediately tear on slippers.
                      1. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 23: 09
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        It may be over for small countries, this is the way out --- but large ones in this position immediately tear on slippers.

                        No question, I'll give you Brazilians with Mexicans as an example. Turks. Not small countries. And also somehow without space and reactors do. And they live richer than the Russians. Mexicans 2,2 times, Turks 1,64 times, and Brazilians 1,5 times.
                        http://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/index.cfm?fileid=C26E382
                        4-E868-56E0-CCA04D4BB9B9ADD5
                      2. AK64
                        AK64 21 May 2016 23: 24
                        0
                        No question, I'll give you Brazilians with Mexicans as an example.

                        Neither one nor the other is not the owner. Therefore they live as they are allowed to. Does Russia need it?
                        And besides, khak of Russia may NOT be ALLOWED (because there is a bit too much "permissive" around)

                        Turks.

                        Is it a sovereign state? Is this the subject of politics?

                        Not small countries. And also somehow without space and reactors do. And they live richer than the Russians. Mexicans 2,2 times, Turks 1,64 times, and Brazilians 1,5 times.

                        All of the above live exactly as they allow.
                        And about the "richer": I was in Mexico. I don't believe in "richer" --- I have eyes. I was in Turkey too - that is why Turks go to Russia as guest workers. (Somehow I haven't heard about Russians traveling to Turkey as guest workers. Maybe you have heard?)

                        In addition, it is for Russia that the level of well-being and, say, GDP are poorly correlated --- the process has not settled down yet.
                      3. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 23: 43
                        -1
                        Quote: AK64
                        Neither one nor the other is not the owner. Hence live as they are allowed

                        Everyone in this world lives as they are allowed to. Even the Chinese. Globalization.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Is it a sovereign state? Is this the subject of politics?

                        And what does the population care about? What profit do you get from this? Cabbage soup is fatter or jeans are brandier?
                        Maybe you are planning to replace Comrade Kim, scare people? So then you say so. Because only he has a profit from all missiles Sev. Korea. And no one else.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And besides, kraz Russia may NOT ALLOW

                        They can. But from space and reactors, NOTHING will change. See Sev. Korea.
                        Quote: AK64
                        I somehow never heard of Russian migrants going to Turkey as guest workers. Maybe you heard?)

                        Hear more.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And about the "richer": I was in Mexico. I don't believe in "richer" --- I have eyes. I was in Turkey too

                        I gave you a link to the annual Credit Suisse report. A serious organization, in fact.
                        Quote: AK64
                        In addition, it is for Russia that the level of well-being and, say, GDP are poorly correlated --- the process has not settled down yet.

                        Everything has long been settled. In addition, GDP, although important, is only one of many economic indicators.
                      4. AK64
                        AK64 22 May 2016 02: 06
                        0
                        Everyone in this world lives as they are allowed to. Even the Chinese. Globalization.

                        The Chinese - as much as you like: let this be the problem of the Chinese.
                        But the trouble will be when the Chinese decide how to live Russian.

                        And what does the population care about? What profit do you get from this?

                        Huge - because the state of Mexico does not belong to the Mexicans. That is, not Mexicans decide what and how to do it. Decide for them. And so the Mexicans are poor, and there will be poor.

                        How did Argentina go bankrupt in due time? That is what it means to not have real sovereignty.

                        Or when the Russian Federation paid a contribution.
                        Or when she entered the WTO.

                        Cabbage soup is fatter or jeans are brandier?

                        Uh-uh ... For people, the main thing is not the fat content of the cabbage soup. Check out Maslow's pyramid. By the way, he is not one of the "Orthodox" - an American psychologist and sociologist.
                        Overall people the fatness of cabbage and branded jeans from some moment cease to excite.


                        Maybe you are planning to replace Comrade Kim, scare people? So then you say so. Because only he has a profit from all missiles Sev. Korea. And no one else.

                        And why the US 11 nuclear carriers?
                        Think about it: ELEVEN!
                        In the Cold War, 5 of them were enough - and now, when there is no one to fight, there are 11 of them.
                        What for?

                        So why are you telling all these horrors HERE? You would go to the amerovsky forum, and there you would spread the question "why do we need 11 nuclear aircraft carriers? Why do we need these wasps? Who are you going to fight with?" - and all takeo different stuff.
                        But I see that the Amers have 11 aircraft carriers - and therefore Europe is likely to sign this Transatlantic Agreement. Even though it is economic suicide.
                        So tell us further about the fat content of cabbage soup.


                        They can. But from space and reactors, NOTHING will change. See Sev. Korea.

                        There is no space in North Korea. And there are no normal reactors either.
                        But in France there are reactors and space - and for some reason they don’t interfere.


                        Hear more.

                        It sounds like a threat.
                        And for this, space and reactors are also needed - so as not to hear this.

                        I gave you a link to the annual Credit Suisse report. A serious organization, in fact.

                        Oh thanks, we don’t need this.
                        You see what the matter is: I WAS, personally, in that Mexico. And I have eyes - I’m not blind yet. And he didn’t seem to survive from the mind either. I can, in general, draw some conclusions.


                        Everything has long been settled.

                        Of course you know better. Do you live in Russia?

                        In addition, GDP, although important, is only one of many economic indicators.

                        Well, now tell us about economic indicators and their correlation.
                      5. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 12: 27
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        But the trouble will be when the Chinese decide how to live Russian.

                        I don’t think this will ever happen in principle. Although, "never say never."
                        Huge - because the state of Mexico does not belong to the Mexicans.

                        Think about yourself more than the Mexicans. To do this, carefully count again what belongs to you. If you get bored, you can remember what belonged to you in the "great and mighty USSR". Except the old pants, the crystal vase and the old carpet on the wall, of course. Although, some special lucky people still owned a Moskvich or Zhiguli car.
                        And "think globally" is not necessary. First, we need to wash the spit and clear the bulls from the staircase in our entrance. And find HER among the heap of rags. The very shirt that is closer to the body. And now he will focus on her completely.
                        For people, the main thing is not fat content.

                        Just for people, the fat content of cabbage soup, this is the most important thing.
                        In general, people are fat and branded jeans from some point cease to excite.

                        These are not ordinary people, they are fanatics. They do not need to be leveled. Fanaticism in any form has not brought anyone to good.
                        And why the US 11 nuclear carriers?

                        What do you care? So it’s necessary. What are you up to? Do they interfere with your superyacht? Fairway not divided?
                        and therefore Europe is likely to sign this Transatlantic Agreement. Even though it is economic suicide.

                        Unlike you, I am somewhat happy person. I don’t even know what the Transatlantic Agreement is. And even after learning from you that something like that exists, I was not at all upset for Europe. Because the fate of Europe is a star to me. And I recommend you not to worry much about her. From experiences, cancer happens. As well as vomiting and diarrhea.
                        And for this, space and reactors are also needed - so as not to hear this.

                        And how does it depend on one another? How do space and reactors feed the population? Why are they in Sev. Korea does not feed the population, although this is very necessary?
                        I WAS, personally, in that Mexico. And I have eyes - I’m not blind yet. And he didn’t seem to survive from the mind either. I can, in general, draw some conclusions.

                        Right in all of Mexico? Have you been to Russia? Right in all.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Well, now tell us about economic indicators and their correlation.

                        There are special textbooks for this. But I’ll write about GDP briefly. This is income. For example, your salary (pension). The value is certainly interesting. But without knowing the amounts of obligatory expenses, this figure does not mean anything at all. It may happen, by chance, that with a large salary you have a lifetime mortgage + other required expenses. And the remainder is 5000 rubles per month. And the neighbor Vasya’s salary is half as much, but his own apartment. Those. There is no mortgage, but there are mandatory costs. And the remainder of 20000 rubles per month. Guess which one of you has higher wealth? Although income (such as GDP) is more with you.
                      6. AK64
                        AK64 22 May 2016 13: 51
                        0
                        I don’t think this will ever happen in principle. Although, "never say never."

                        If there are reactors and missiles, then this will not happen.
                        And if they don’t, then it will definitely happen.

                        You think more about yourself, not about Mexicans.

                        You think about Mexicans - it’s you who have been dragged out as an example.
                        And about myself, I think you don’t worry about me.


                        And "think globally" is not necessary.

                        Yes, no one forces you.

                        First you need to wash off the spits and clean the gobies in your stairwell from the gobies.

                        I have a clean summer cage: a Mexican woman washes. My office is polka soap; then she got bored - "pointless", she says, "and hopeless."
                        My apartment (I have a tiny one, I live alone) washes ... a Venezuelan or something ... I don’t know for sure, but I don’t want to ask --- I’ll be offended that he knows them.

                        So teach your grandmother, it will be more reliable.

                        Just for people, the fat content of cabbage soup, this is the most important thing.

                        Well, as old Freud said, "every other by oneself judges ".
                        I won’t even say that I feel sorry for you - because no, I’m not sorry: cabbage soup is probably fat.

                        These are not ordinary people, they are fanatics. They do not need to be leveled. Fanaticism in any form has not brought anyone to good.

                        Oooo ...
                        Not even funny.

                        You know, I’m not interested in talking to you: I’ve heard it so many times that .... You say to yourself "broke, emelya ...", and you will end the conversation
                      7. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 16: 11
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        If there are reactors and missiles, then this will not happen.

                        By sowing You can't say that to Koreans.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And if they don’t, then it will definitely happen.

                        Are you applying for the vacant seat of Grandma Wang?
                        Quote: AK64
                        And about myself, I think you don’t worry about me.

                        Well done. So focus on these thoughts. And stop advising foreigners how to live, from your "beautiful distant".
                        And if unbearable, then advise how the Spaniards live. Then write to us where in return they advised you to go.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Yes, no one forces you.

                        It seems so to you.
                        Quote: AK64
                        I have a clean flying cage:

                        Perfectly. Already you can go to search for shirts.
                        Quote: AK64
                        So teach your grandmother, it will be more reliable.

                        And yours? Is yours possible?
                        Quote: AK64
                        I feel sorry for you

                        And me to you. However, in the Looking Glass, such views as yours were purposefully inculcated and welcomed. Later, not everyone managed to recover from them. It turns out, even in Spain.
                        Quote: AK64
                        cabbage soup is probably fat.

                        Yes, enough rich. I would still like more porridge. Yacht and plane. But so far, this is all bad. We will work on it.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Not even funny.

                        Those. I realized you have nothing to object to.
                        Quote: AK64
                        You know, I'm not interested in talking to you

                        I'm directly killed. Directly trampled. Maybe something to do with yourself? What? Maybe have some tea? And for sure, instantly felt better.
                        You see. Even from a seemingly hopeless situation there is always a way out.
                        Get well. From looking-glass disease, if you don't understand. That plague.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
                      10. The comment was deleted.
                      11. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 17: 48
                        0
                        Quote: AK64
                        Kolya, as always, is silly and rude.

                        No, this is clearly not from Ilf and Petrov, as I suggested at first.
                        In fact, the Gishpan guy turned out to be a complete boor.
                        Quote: AK64
                        and the tram boom from Cherepovets is visible.

                        Here is what I said. He also doesn’t like Cherpovets for something. Apparently they poked him on the neck there at one time. On the tram.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And the whole inferiority complex is damned

                        Yeah. Apparently for the inferiority complex and hardened. It happens, sir Andrew.
                        Quote: AK64
                        I'll wait half an hour, and delete it in an hour.

                        Grandfather got ahead of grandmother.
                      12. AK64
                        AK64 22 May 2016 16: 35
                        0
                        Kolya, I’m tired of you once again.

                        At first, I did not recognize you in a new mask - but now I see: Kolya, as always, is silly and rude. While in the field of competence, he is trying to somehow keep within the framework. But it falls out of this area quickly - and here, nature manifests itself, and the tram boom from Cherepovets is visible.

                        And the whole inferiority complex is damned.

                        I'll wait half an hour, and delete it in an hour.
                      13. The comment was deleted.
                      14. svp67
                        svp67 21 May 2016 23: 25
                        +1
                        Quote: overb
                        And they live richer than the Russians. Mexicans 2,2 times, Turks 1,64 times, and Brazilians 1,5 times.

                        Yes, it looks like we even have a different internet:
                        Minimum monthly salary, $

                        Russia - $ 165

                        Ukraine - 140 dollars.

                        Mexico - $ 110

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_wages_by_country

                        List of countries by income inequality

                        The ratio of 10% of the richest people to 10% of the poorest.

                        Ukraine - 5,9

                        Russia - 12,7

                        Mexico - 21,6

                        For comparison, indicators of social inequality in two more countries: the Central African Republic - 69,2, the Czech Republic - 5,2.

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

                        PPP GDP per capita, USD

                        GDP is gross domestic product, PPP is purchasing power parity. World Bank data.

                        Russia - 21246

                        Mexico - 15266

                        Ukraine - 7208

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
                      15. overb
                        overb 21 May 2016 23: 58
                        -2
                        Quote: svp67
                        Yes, it looks like we even have a different internet:

                        I gave you a rating of the welfare of the population of some countries according to Credit Suisse. And I gave the link for a more detailed review. And you, excuse me, some kind of nonsense. GDP at PPP, minimum wage, etc. You would not write on topics that you do not understand, or what.
                      16. AK64
                        AK64 22 May 2016 02: 12
                        0
                        I gave you a rating of the welfare of the population of some countries according to Credit Suisse. And I gave the link for a more detailed review. And you, excuse me, some kind of nonsense. GDP at PPP, minimum wage, etc. You would not write on topics that you do not understand, or what.

                        Citizens from Russia neither to the States, nor to the EU as guest-arbeiters have long been traveling.
                        And from Mexico and Brazil go.
                        I think this is a pretty accurate indicator.

                        Even the Poles do not want to anymore --- they came to the conclusion that home is better. And the Mexicans continue ...
                      17. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 02: 27
                        -2
                        Quote: AK64
                        Citizens from Russia neither to the States, nor to the EU as guest-arbeiters have long been traveling.

                        Give a deadline. Everything can change quite quickly.
                        Quote: AK64
                        I think this is a pretty accurate indicator.

                        No, this is an indicator of another. In Russia, they rarely even go to another city. They are waiting for the highly paid and relaxed work itself to come and find it, the beloved. Mentality.
                        Quote: AK64
                        Even the Poles do not want to anymore --- they came to the conclusion that home is better.

                        Yes, no, they do. But already much less than before. They have a level of well-being, be healthy. 208% of the Russian level, according to the same Сredit Suisse. Not Estonia (303%) or Turkmenistan (383%), of course. But also, far from bad. More Latvia (179%) and Lithuania (193%). And more China (192%), where, as everyone has known for a long time, "the Chinese work from dawn to dusk for a cup of rice." The earth is full of myths.
                        Quote: AK64
                        And the Mexicans continue ...

                        They have where and what to fight for. This is also not given to everyone. So they use it.
                      18. The comment was deleted.
                      19. Orionvit
                        Orionvit 22 May 2016 12: 37
                        +1
                        You can put Credit Suisse ratings in one place. They are completely custom-made and in no way reflect reality.
                      20. overb
                        overb 22 May 2016 12: 58
                        -1
                        Quote: Orionvit
                        Credit Suisse ratings can be put in one place

                        You? Are you a fan of such sensations?
                        Quote: Orionvit
                        They are completely custom-made and in no way reflect reality.

                        So give us the correct ratings. Reflective reality.
                        For example, a rating of the level of accumulated welfare per capita from Allianz will suit you?
                        Russia - 100%
                        Argentina - 145%
                        Brazil - 219%
                        Turkey - 232%
                        Mexico - 710%
                        https://www.allianz.com/v_1443702256000/media/economic_research/publications/spe
                        cials / en / AGWR2015_ENG.pdf
                        Don't like the numbers? Me too. Do you think it's the "mirror"?
                  2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Artem Popov
          Artem Popov April 3 2018 14: 44
          0
          Quote: overb
          And here, 11 million of the able-bodied population in the army
          more.
          4,5 million by June 22, by August 10, another 8 million were mobilized by two waves. In total, 33 million during the war, of which 13,5 million were irretrievable losses.
  16. Ivan Ivanych
    Ivan Ivanych 21 May 2016 12: 21
    0
    Thanks for the help of course I must say. But we must not forget that the "partners" financed all the participants in the war, that is, Germany and their allies
  17. sigdoc
    sigdoc 21 May 2016 12: 49
    0
    It would be interesting to know about the volumes of supplies to Germany from "neutral" countries and their allies and compare. And so one-sided articles about Lend-Lease are just an attempt to belittle the role of the USSR in the victory over Germany, since in the first difficult and decisive two years of the war, supplies were penny.
  18. Timyr
    Timyr 21 May 2016 12: 59
    +1
    Quote: AK64
    And then, in some heads, they say that Lend-Lease immediately went in all volumes and was strictly carried out.

    Tell us exactly how the lend-lease should have gone "right away". Through teleports, I suppose?

    Here is your opinion, in detail.

    And we will listen.

    And we will listen to how you will explain the failure of Lend-Lease in the early years. And did I say something about teleporters. I indicated that the first two were 30% complete.
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 May 2016 13: 15
      +1
      And we will listen to how you will explain the failure of Lend-Lease in the early years. And did I say something about teleporters. I indicated that the first two were 30% complete.


      So you don’t know?
      And you didn’t have an opinion as it should.
      Well, okay....

      And tell me, WHERE did you need to deliver the goods? AND HOW?
      Ah, Arkhangelsk ... Well, well ...
      The Arkhangelsk port was so ... of local importance that even moorings were not enough there. There were no cranes - a floating crane was driven from England to have something to unload. And Arkhangelsk was connected with Russia by a tiny railway with an insignificant throughput --- as a result of which the stacks of unloading goods lay there until the end of the war.

      Ah, there’s Vladik ... And a find.
      But this is for those who can not imagine what TransSib is today, and what TransSib would be THEN: The bandwidth of TransSib is negligible, in comparison. And besides, because of the war between the USA and Japan, it was impossible to use the American fleet for deliveries. But actually TransSib, its throughput, would be enough.
      As a result, the goods assigned to the USSR were used by Britain (with the permission of Stalin - and where to go?).

      And only when the Americans took up the problem themselves - that is, they themselves and built a road through the whole of Iran --- then deliveries went CORRECTLY.

      But the price of this method of transportation ... But somehow there were no other options.

      But you do not know or understand any of this. But there is a lot of scream.
      1. Timyr
        Timyr 21 May 2016 15: 10
        +1
        This is a lot of scream from you. And where Murmansk disappeared or the Germans took it. By the way, Arkhangelsk freezes in winter. Yes, and you think two years goes stupid Americans figured out what is wrong with the Lend-Lease. And after the Kursk, they finally understood. 9
        1. AK64
          AK64 21 May 2016 15: 20
          0
          This is a lot of scream from you. And where Murmansk disappeared or the Germans took it.

          Uti-pusi what ...
          And look at the map: where is the railway at Murmans, and where is the front?
          Do not fate look at the map?

          From Mkrmansk, goods were dragged to Arkhangelsk (except for those that were used on the spot).
          Secret, huh?


          By the way, Arkhangelsk freezes in winter. Yes, and you think two years goes stupid Americans figured out what is wrong with the Lend-Lease. And after the Kursk, they finally understood. 9

          The flow of Lend-Lease began before the Battle of Kursk. BEFORE.
          Yes, the Americans just "thought for two years" --- because they believed that local problems should be solved by local personnel. And the "local cadres" could not decide anything --- the floating crane to Arkhangelsk had to be dragged from England.
          So.

          In the 42nd, the Americans realized that the local cadres were hopeless, and even could not provide transportation INSIDE. And they got down to business themselves: they built routes through Iran themselves, and assembly plants directly in Iran. It was through Iran, as a result, that no more than half (!!!) of Lend-Lease cargo passed through.

          And in Arkhangelsk the stack until the end of the war lay unassembled. Like this.
    2. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 13: 33
      +2
      Quote: timyr
      And we will listen to how you will explain the failure of Lend-Lease in the early years.

      And that in the 41st the infrastructure was established, the American economy that entered the war with Japan itself did not need anything?
      They generally could not supply anything.
      Quote: timyr
      I indicated that the first two were 30% complete.

      And thanks for that.
      1. Timyr
        Timyr 21 May 2016 15: 13
        0
        And you can ask where the figure is from 160 billion. It seems to be put on 10 billion.
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 May 2016 15: 28
          0
          Quote: timyr
          And you can ask where the figure is from 160 billion. It seems to be put on 10 billion.

          This is a question for understanding (I have shown in the quotation) 10.1 billion (in 1945 prices) - this is 160 billion in 1975 prices, just as the USSR began to pay off debts under the lend-lease, which amounted to 722 million dollars.
          Follow the branch, there are quotes and links
          1. Timyr
            Timyr 21 May 2016 16: 07
            0
            ATP for the answer. But explain why the Britons were forgiven, but not the Union
            1. AK64
              AK64 21 May 2016 16: 19
              +1
              But explain why the Britons were forgiven,

              The fact of "forgiveness" had no place: Britain made the last payment of its war debts as if not in 2004.
              (I don’t remember exactly the year, but what exactly in the 2000s)
  19. realist
    realist 21 May 2016 13: 04
    +3
    The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR was very great! but not decisive, even without taking it into account, the red army fought in 1941, 1942 and 1943. then realizing that the USSR was winning the war, American politicians decided to "participate" in the victory. Yes, it would be harder for us without the supply of this equipment, but for these supplies the USSR paid with the lives of soldiers, the war would simply have lasted longer and the result would have been the same!
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 13: 13
      0
      Quote: realist
      The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR was very great! but not decisive, even without taking it into account, the Red Army fought in 1941, 1942 and 1943

      In 42 and 43 years, Lend Lease worked hard
      Quote: realist
      then realizing that the USSR was winning the war, American politicians decided to "take part

      What do you mean, they decided to take part? Did they shove it forcibly, like 160 billion, and the USSR courageously resisted this?
      But they could not give anything, but continue to drive England. France and even a little China
      Quote: realist
      but for these deliveries the USSR paid the lives of soldiers, it’s just that the war would last longer and the result would be the same!

      Of course, only the result would not be the same.
      The USSR would have lost a couple more or more lives. And America would not have thrown 160 billion bucks into the air - would have come to be stronger.
      That's all.
    2. svp67
      svp67 21 May 2016 13: 27
      +4
      Quote: realist
      The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR was very great! but not decisive, even without taking it into account, the Red Army fought in 1941, 1942 and 1943.

      Yes, she could fight without the "Lend-Lease", not only in these years, but also in 1944, 1945,1946,1947,1948, 1949, 1950, XNUMX, XNUMX and XNUMX ...
      Quote: realist
      Yes, it would be harder for us without without the supply of this equipment, but the USSR paid the lives of soldiers for these supplies, it’s just that the war would last longer and the result would be the same!

      That is, you think that if the war lasted longer, and without saturating our army with a huge number of American vehicles for various purposes, we simply would not be able to carry out those rapid operations that we conducted and, accordingly, would not have defeated the Germans in 1945, our country would have lost fewer people? No, it is not. In addition, the supply of high-octane gasoline helped our Air Force to gain air supremacy, and then to maintain it, as it allowed more intensive use of aircraft, because after using our high-octane gasoline, due to the use of a lead additive, after three sorties, we had to remove the spark plugs and service them, otherwise the engine threatened to fail. And this is all a waste of time. And these are only two items from the extensive list of "Lend-Lease"
      1. overb
        overb 21 May 2016 14: 13
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        because after using our high-octane, due to the use of lead additives,

        "Our high octane" gasoline was made from our low octane and American TPP additive. Without this additive, American high-octane gasoline would not be in the sky of our aircraft. Here's how in 1941. There simply would be no powerful motors for them, they cannot be made without high-octane gasoline.
        1. svp67
          svp67 21 May 2016 15: 54
          +1
          Quote: overb
          "Our high octane" gasoline was made from our low octane and American TPP additive. Without this additive, American high-octane gasoline would not be in the sky of our aircraft.

          Yes, the situation with high-octane gasoline was bad with us ...
          And in order to understand what this meant for the USSR, we turn to the data on aviation fuel consumption given in Colonel-General V.V. Nikitin's book “Fuel to the Front”: “Over the years of the war, the Red Army consumed more than 4 million 481 thousand tons of gasoline, including high-octane 2 million 998 thousand tons ”[39]. A simple calculation shows that Lend-Lease high-octane aviation gasoline accounted for almost 40% of the total fuel consumed by new types of Soviet fighters and bombers. At the same time, it should be noted that octane-boosting additives obtained from the USA were widely used to produce high-performance jet fuel at Soviet plants. The military historian Mikhail Yanovich emphasized in this connection: the fact that “in the last war years the production of aircraft fuel in the USSR was two-thirds dependent on imported high-octane components was not advertised among specialists for obvious reasons
      2. Papandopulo
        Papandopulo 21 May 2016 16: 49
        -2
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: realist
        The value of Lend-Lease for the USSR was very great! but not decisive, even without taking it into account, the Red Army fought in 1941, 1942 and 1943.

        Yes, she could fight without the "Lend-Lease", not only in these years, but also in 1944, 1945,1946,1947,1948, 1949, 1950, XNUMX, XNUMX and XNUMX ...


        The lack of Lend-Lease for the USSR would drag out the Second World War for no more than six months.

        The WWII was actually delayed for 3 years, since the Germans before the attack on the USSR had strategic materials only on Blitzkrieg, in the future they were delivered from the United States to the Nazis by American firms through neutral countries.
    3. overb
      overb 21 May 2016 14: 04
      +1
      Quote: realist
      but not decisive, even without taking it into account, the Red Army fought in 1941, 1942 and 1943.

      It has long been calculated and calculated that without Lend-Lease there would most likely have been no war in 1943. It would have ended apparently in 1942. on the line Astrakhan-Kazan-Kotlas-Arkhangelsk along the Volga and the North. Dvina.
      Quote: realist
      After realizing that the USSR was winning the war, American politicians decided to "participate" in the victory

      And again it is estimated that if not for the second front in Europe in the summer of 1943. in Italy and the third front in 1944. in France, then, even if there was a lend-lease, the war would most likely end on the same line Astrakhan-Kazan-Kotlas-Arkhangelsk along the Volga and the North. Dvina somewhere around 1944-45. Of course, this option is only theoretical, because the Yankees could not allow their money (invested by the US government in Lend-Lease) to be wasted. Therefore, they opened new fronts in Europe. But strictly as necessary (for them).
      1. murriou
        murriou 21 May 2016 15: 59
        0
        Quote: overb
        Once upon a time counted and calculated

        * sighing heavily * there were so many "calculations and calculations" that they are not even accepted for recycling, everything is overwhelmed. You give specifics, and not references to different balabolki.

        Quote: overb
        It would have ended apparently in 1942.

        That is, when the volume of deliveries under Lend-Lease was still practically zero, but its influence was already decisive, yeah wink

        Quote: overb
        And again counted

        And again, it is not known by whom, it is not known on what grounds and for what reasons wink
  20. Pcorda38
    Pcorda38 21 May 2016 13: 04
    +3
    The thing is, I think this is:
    USSR: 23000000 deaths (136,4 / 1000)
    US: 413 deaths (000 / 3,1)

    War and consists of alliances and friends. Allies Germany Good enough ... but friends? When budgets all experts forget Sweden. Sweden, Germany provided up to 10000000 tons / year of iron.

    Brief description of events:
    - During and after the war, Europe and the USSR destroyed ... reconstruction and the hungry.
    - USA, during and after the war, an economic boom !!!!!!

    Prof. Wilson, University of Kansas: “What America experienced during the war is fundamentally different from the trials that befell its main allies. Only the Americans could call World War II “a good war,” because it helped to significantly raise living standards and demanded too few victims from the vast majority of the population ... ”


    everything else is a frame ... and propaganda!
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 13: 17
      +2
      Quote: PCorda38
      During and after the war, Europe and the USSR destroyed ... reconstruction and the hungry.

      Well, so the war was like in Europe
      Quote: PCorda38
      USA, during and after the war, an economic boom !!!

      Well, not a boom, but you somehow forgot a little that the states could calmly (like Argentina, Brazil and a bunch of countries) sit quietly and watch while the Europeans calmly re-manipulate each other, and even sell weapons with creditworthy - and that was only hitler.
      Interestingly, if America didn’t give (practically) Lend-Lease weapons to the USSR, England, France and China, but would sell to Hitler (like Argentina and Brazil, meat), where would you be now?
      1. Pcorda38
        Pcorda38 21 May 2016 13: 31
        0
        and yes, after the war, the US is a superpower. Argentina and Brazil ... de facto colonies!

        Everything is according to plan ... and as Roosevelt said: "a profitable investment of capital" !!!.
      2. Ramzaj99
        Ramzaj99 21 May 2016 20: 51
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        Interestingly, if America didn’t give (practically) Lend-Lease weapons to the USSR, England, France and China, but would sell to Hitler (like Argentina and Brazil, meat), where would you be now?

        Another GIVER.
        And ask another question. If the United States did not help ANYONE AT ALL, What would be the outcome ?? Maybe war would not be at all?
        Half of German industry worked for American money.
        Naturally, after the outbreak of the war, they turned something off, but not all, a sense of self-preservation is also inherent in them.
    2. St_tov
      St_tov 21 May 2016 20: 25
      -1
      I have never met the use of such a term "good war" in the States. What prof. from the American backwoods, does not have to be true - such a thought did not occur? And yet, you will not believe what kind of nonsense you hear from the lips of the professors there, before the extension of the contract, the allocation of a grant.
  21. kvs207
    kvs207 21 May 2016 13: 15
    +1
    Objective enough
    http://army.armor.kiev.ua/hist/lend-liz.php
  22. Stas57
    Stas57 21 May 2016 13: 25
    +2
    I was no doubt that the topic will cause srach ...))
  23. Bosk
    Bosk 21 May 2016 13: 44
    +2
    Before scolding Lendliz from the beginning, we recall that at the time of the first deliveries, somewhere around 70% of the industry was either in the occupied part of the Union, or was in the process of moving to the East ... was under occupation ...
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 23 May 2016 18: 24
      0
      "[without the Lend-Lease. It [the war] would have ended apparently in 1942.
      Astrakhan-Kazan-Kotlas-Arkhangelsk along the Volga and North. Dvine. "////

      I think you're exaggerating. Having not won the blitzkrieg,
      Hitler would most likely withdraw his troops to somewhere east of Ukraine
      and from Leningrad to the Baltic. And a positional war in the East would drag on for years.

      Rather, before the completion of the Manhattan project.
      1. overb
        overb 23 May 2016 21: 47
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Having not won the blitzkrieg,
        Hitler would most likely withdraw his troops to somewhere east of Ukraine
        and from Leningrad to the Baltic.

        Why? In reality, he won the blitzkrieg in 1941. did not achieve. But the troops did not withdraw anywhere. But the company of 1942, which ended so badly for the USSR, without Lend-Lease would most likely have ended in a final defeat.
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Rather, before the completion of the Manhattan project.

        Yes, Germany was somewhat lucky that it was not able to defeat the USSR in 1941-42.
  24. Timyr
    Timyr 21 May 2016 14: 18
    +1
    Quote: Fly Tsetse
    The next replication of myths with a sauce of supposedly objectivity.
    And in fact.
    The 4 percent figure has never been confirmed by anyone!
    Anyway, measuring the effectiveness of supplies of materials and equipment in wartime with their price in rubles is at least ridiculous.
    For example, equipment, it may cost one percent of the cost of produced tanks, but without it the production of tanks is not possible, just like computer work without electricity, the cost of which will not reach one percent of the cost of a computer.
    Further, the ratio of supply to its own industry.
    These are off-digits, there are also big doubts about their reliability, most likely the share of deliveries was greater.
    Well, and most importantly, I completely disagree that the USSR would have won without Lend-Lease.
    It is only at first glance that it seems that if a person is fed 2 times less, he will weigh 2 times less, if he initially has a mass deficit, then he will die.
    The USSR no doubt surpassed Germany at the start of the war in economic terms, but by the end of the 41st it had de facto lost the war, the army was destroyed, the territory was occupied. Could he, under such conditions, not only restore, but also increase the production of armament, given that he had gathered a single army destroyed in six months before that? Of course not!
    But Germany, too, faced difficulties; it could hardly move on any further, no earlier than the summer of 1942.
    And without Lend-Lease, the war would most likely end in a positional confrontation along the Volga-Ural line.
    The USSR would preserve independence, but not territorial value.
    And this is in the best case, after the occupation of the USSR, it would no longer have a clear economic advantage, especially after the capture of the Caucasus.
    The United States understood this, it would not only be unprofitable for them to help the USSR in the event of its guaranteed defeat, but also in the event of its guaranteed victory, too, they fought with Japan themselves.

    But the men did not know that they were defeated in 41. They took the Germans near Rostov and Tikhvin and defeated near Moscow. And it’s just that the Germans were tired and decided to let us leave for a little rest from Moscow. Since this non-existent German army defeated in December 41.
  25. max73
    max73 21 May 2016 15: 08
    +2
    how many copies were once again broken on the next article about Lend-Lease .... someone from ignorance of history, someone, on the contrary, from its knowledge, someone just blathers just to blather and get a "plus" ...
    just give 4 facts
    1.Hero of the Soviet Union, tank battalion commander D.F. Loza - "Emcha" Lend-Lease put it higher than the T-34-85 in many parameters, the main of which was that the ammunition rack did not explode ... and the penetration of shells was approximately the same by the way
    2. in the summer of 1945, the 6th GvTA was transferred to Mongolia without tanks ... at all ... and there they received new materiel for the attack on the Kwantung army of Japan, and these were also "Shermans" ...
    3. My grandfather, sergeant of the 43rd OIPTABR RGK, a driver with 40 years of experience, called the "Studebaker" the best car that he drove ...
    4. all armored personnel carriers - land lease ...
    I think you should not argue. The USA helped and it’s great ... for what purpose and why, this is the next question ..., alas ...
    1. atalef
      atalef 21 May 2016 15: 12
      +1
      Quote: max73
      I think you should not argue. USA helped and great.

      I think the same is worth saying thanks for it
      Quote: max73
      for what purpose and why, this is the next question ..., alas ...

      What for ? To defeat the fascist reptile and save more lives of Soviet citizens.
      They certainly didn’t earn money on this.
      1. Papandopulo
        Papandopulo 21 May 2016 15: 43
        +1
        Well, they would have landed with the British and Canadians in Murmansk, Vladivostok, Birobidzhan, Tashkent or through Iran, and would have helped soldiers on the Eastern Front, instead of supplying the Nazis with strategic materials, without which the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe had lost their combat potential back in 1942

        The Germans counted on blitzkrieg, because they did not have these materials (oil, rubber, tungsten) for a long war with the USSR.
  26. loginovich
    loginovich 21 May 2016 15: 18
    +1
    Pokryshkin said about the aerocobra that the plane had a bad stabilizer. And the pilots, when leaving the plane, were injured on the stabilizer. Otherwise, he praised the plane. The armament is powerful, the engine is powerful.
    1. max73
      max73 21 May 2016 15: 38
      +1
      with all this, Pokryshkin won most of the victories on the "cobra" ...
      1. Papandopulo
        Papandopulo 21 May 2016 15: 44
        +1
        More Kozhedub won on La-5
  27. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 21 May 2016 15: 57
    -1
    By the end of the Great Patriotic War, Guard Major Ivan Kozhedub made 330 sorties and conducted 120 air battles, shooting down 64 of the enemy aircraft. This number does not include the X-NUMX American fighter P-2 Mustang, which the Soviet ace shot down in the spring of 51. In this case, the Americans first attacked the fighter La-1945, which was operated by the Soviet pilot. According to the American pilot who survived this air battle, they confused Kozhedub La-7 with the German fighter FW-7 and attacked him. The third “Golden Star” Ivan Nikitovich Kozhedub received after the war for high military skills, personal courage and bravery.

    Among the enemy planes shot down by Ivan Kozhedub were:

    21 Fighter FW-190;
    Me-18 fighter 109;
    18 Ju-87 bombers;
    3 attack aircraft Hs-129;
    2 bomber He-111;
    1 Fighter PZL P-24 (Romanian);
    1 jet aircraft Me-262.
    1. Spartanez300
      Spartanez300 21 May 2016 16: 19
      -1
      I think it will be interesting to you and our descendants.
  28. Timyr
    Timyr 21 May 2016 16: 25
    -1
    Quote: AK64
    This is a lot of scream from you. And where Murmansk disappeared or the Germans took it.

    Uti-pusi what ...
    And look at the map: where is the railway at Murmans, and where is the front?
    Do not fate look at the map?

    From Mkrmansk, goods were dragged to Arkhangelsk (except for those that were used on the spot).
    Secret, huh?


    By the way, Arkhangelsk freezes in winter. Yes, and you think two years goes stupid Americans figured out what is wrong with the Lend-Lease. And after the Kursk, they finally understood. 9

    The flow of Lend-Lease began before the Battle of Kursk. BEFORE.
    Yes, the Americans just "thought for two years" --- because they believed that local problems should be solved by local personnel. And the "local cadres" could not decide anything --- the floating crane to Arkhangelsk had to be dragged from England.
    So.

    In the 42nd, the Americans realized that the local cadres were hopeless, and even could not provide transportation INSIDE. And they got down to business themselves: they built routes through Iran themselves, and assembly plants directly in Iran. It was through Iran, as a result, that no more than half (!!!) of Lend-Lease cargo passed through.

    And in Arkhangelsk the stack until the end of the war lay unassembled. Like this.

    There is no need to lie, the first Lend-Lease protocol is 30% complete and the second is 30% complete with American numbers. Google when the Lend-Lease protocols were run.
    1. AK64
      AK64 21 May 2016 16: 28
      -1
      the next boor will be recorded in the emergency in half an hour
    2. The comment was deleted.
  29. iouris
    iouris 21 May 2016 16: 40
    -1
    I will add from myself.
    Lend-Lease is an important component of US policy, which includes war.
    The significance of the two world wars lies in the destruction of the European system of production and, more broadly, of the social organization in "old Europe" and their replacement with American ones. This process will be completed after the entry into force of the TTIP (Transatlantic Partnership and Investment Agreement).
    The world has switched to American products and standards.
    It was paid for by the destruction of significant industrial potential and infrastructure, which were not just restored, but modernized.
    As a result of the war, the USSR gained access to some German and American critical technologies.
  30. murriou
    murriou 21 May 2016 17: 27
    -1
    A funny thing here turned out to be: "Pend-Lease"
  31. Operator
    Operator 21 May 2016 17: 56
    +1
    All American politicians, including Franklin Roosevelt, were guided by the slogan publicly voiced by Senator Harry Truman on the second day after Germany's attack on the USSR in the New York Times:
    "If we see that Germany is winning, then we should help Russia, and if Russia is winning, then Germany should be helped, and thus let them kill each other as much as possible!"
    Harry Trumzn had a reputation for being a simpleton and said out loud what was carefully hidden.

    The position of the US leadership was known to J.V. Stalin, who personally did everything possible to prevent provocations that could be interpreted as Soviet aggression against Germany. This was the focus of the official publication in the Izvestia newspaper on June 14, 1941:
    "TASS states that
    1. Germany did not make any claims to the USSR and does not propose any new, closer agreement, which is why negotiations on this subject could not take place;
    2. According to the USSR, Germany is also steadily complying with the terms of the Soviet-German non-aggression pact, as is the Soviet Union, which is why, according to Soviet circles, rumors about Germany’s intention to break the pact and launch an attack on the USSR are devoid of any soil, and the recent transfer the German troops liberated from operations in the Balkans, in the eastern and northeastern regions of Germany is connected, presumably, with other motives that have no relation to Soviet-German relations;
    3. The USSR, as it follows from its peace policy, has observed and intends to abide by the terms of the Soviet-German non-aggression pact, in view of which the rumors that the USSR is preparing for war with Germany are false and provocative;
    4. The current summer training camp of the Red Army reserves and the upcoming maneuvers are aimed at nothing more than training the reserve and checking the operation of the railway apparatus, carried out, as you know, every year, which is why it is ridiculous to portray these measures of the Red Army as hostile to Germany. . "

    In order to avoid unauthorized actions of the Soviet troops a few days before the German attack in the western military districts of the USSR, fighter aircraft were disarmed and artillery units were assigned to training camps.

    These measures allowed the US leadership to recognize the USSR as a victim of aggression and extend the effect of the Lend-Lease Act to it.

    Another thing is that in 1941-42, the US economy was rebuilt on a war footing, and military products were primarily sent to American and British troops operating in the Pacific Ocean and North Africa. The United States was able to deliver supplies to the USSR under Lend-Lease only from the second half of 1943 after saturating its armed forces with equipment - this "accidentally" coincided with the landing of American-British troops in Europe (Italy).

    Therefore, Lend-Lease for the USSR was not critical in World War II, since a strategic turning point on the Eastern Front had occurred earlier in Stalingrad and the Kursk Bulge. Lend-Lease, like the Second Front, was an attempt by the United States to make amends for the 1938-1941's erroneous policy of supporting the wrong side of the conflict - after Germany lost.

    PS By Germany in the Great Patriotic War it is necessary to understand the whole of Western, Central and Eastern Europe (with the exception of Great Britain) Therefore, the well-known price of the victory of the Soviet Union, who fought alone for two years, looks low in comparison with the military, technical and economic potential of the enemy.
    Americans and British participated only at the stage of his finishing.
    1. overb
      overb 21 May 2016 18: 09
      0
      Quote: Operator
      All American politicians, including Franklin Roosevelt, were guided by the slogan publicly voiced by Senator Harry Truman on the second day after Germany's attack on the USSR in the New York Times:
      "If we see that Germany is winning, then we should help Russia, and if Russia is winning, then Germany should be helped, and thus let them kill each other as much as possible!"

      Exactly the same in 1939, but not so publicly, said Dzhugashvili. Only business concerned Germany and France with Britain.
      This is a big policy, everything is right. Of course, the fact that France refused to fight for British interests is a pity.
      1. Operator
        Operator 21 May 2016 18: 36
        +1
        I apologize, but Germany’s ally in World War II France (from 1940 to 1944 years) why is it mentioned here?
        1. overb
          overb 21 May 2016 19: 03
          -1
          Quote: Operator
          and Germany’s ally in World War II, France (from 1940 to 1944) why is it mentioned here?

          Enchanting. You immediately sit down for a dissertation. Immediately after the doctoral, not exchanging for trifles.
      2. AK64
        AK64 21 May 2016 22: 42
        -1
        Of course, the fact that France refused to fight for British interests is a pity.


        Hehe ...
        I remember you expressed bewilderment when someone above called France "an ally of the 3rd Reich"
        1. overb
          overb 21 May 2016 22: 49
          0
          Quote: AK64
          I remember you expressed bewilderment when someone above called France "an ally of the 3rd Reich"

          Refusing to fight for British interests does not mean at all to be an ally of Germany. There were also neutral countries, among which the Vichy government strove to get. Together with the Franco government, for example.
          1. AK64
            AK64 21 May 2016 22: 56
            +1
            Refusing to fight for British interests does not mean at all to be an ally of Germany. There were also neutral countries, among which the Vichy government strove to get. Together with the Franco government, for example.

            Nevertheless, the USSR of 1939-1940 in the same England is often called "Germany's ally".
            I have heard it many times, and by no means from uneducated fools
            1. overb
              overb 21 May 2016 23: 17
              -1
              Quote: AK64
              Nevertheless, the USSR of 1939-1940 in the same England is often called "Germany's ally".

              And where does the USSR? What does he have to do with Vichy?
              1. AK64
                AK64 21 May 2016 23: 28
                0
                And where does the USSR? What does he have to do with Vichy?

                You mind when France is called an ally of the Reich.
                I tell you that the USSR is called an ally of the Reich.
                Both are to some extent (very conditional) justified - and to call Vichy an ally of the Reich is justified to a much greater extent.
                1. overb
                  overb 22 May 2016 00: 01
                  0
                  Quote: AK64
                  and calling Vichy an ally of the Reich is justified to a much greater extent.

                  You know better. Probably.
                2. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. murriou
            murriou 24 May 2016 06: 14
            0
            Nevertheless, the Vichy "government" supported the Reich not only economically, but also with military forces. In North Africa, it was the French forces that were the first to engage the Americans who landed, and before that, it was the British who shot the French fleet at Mers al-Kebir. Now they don't like to remember it, but it was like that.
            1. overb
              overb 24 May 2016 09: 46
              0
              Quote: murriou
              In North Africa, it was the French forces who were the first to engage in battle with the landed Americans, and before that it was the British who shot the French fleet in Mers al-Kebir

              It remains to remember exactly where the Yankees landed in the North. Africa. And the Britons attacked the Vichy fleet themselves. What if someone defends their interests (defends), is this already a military alliance with Germany? Or did part of France (Vichy) have no interests and colonies? There were.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. Artem Popov
              Artem Popov April 3 2018 19: 38
              0
              Did not support. The landing was a direct attack by the French overseas territories, but most of the French units still had no resistance.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  32. Orionvit
    Orionvit 21 May 2016 18: 36
    -2
    Quote: iouris
    1) There are no techniques without flaws.
    2) The disadvantages of technology - a continuation of its advantages.
    3) The USA supplied under Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.
    4) The creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries began long before the German attack on the USSR: what does this mean ?!

    This speaks to how the author said "marriage of convenience". It is a well-known fact that the states were most welded on the Second World War. And ours paid in gold. Yes, the supplies of the allies helped a lot, they reduced the war by two years, but they were not decisive. But in general, to whom the war, and to whom the mother is dear. And I hope no one will argue that the main burdens of the war to defeat Germany and the ground operation against Japan fell on the USSR.
    1. overb
      overb 21 May 2016 19: 19
      -1
      Quote: Orionvit
      And ours paid in gold.

      And where did you see that foreign trade supplies were free? Yes, they paid with gold and raw materials. There was no currency. It didn’t concern only Lend-Lease deliveries, it was not foreign trade.
      Quote: Orionvit
      And I hope no one will argue that the main burdens of the war to defeat Germany and the ground operation against Japan fell on the USSR.

      Will, of course, be relative to Japan. The Kwantung army is relative nonsense. The Kuomintang China, the main US ally in the Far East, grinded more than one such army.
    2. kalibr
      kalibr 21 May 2016 22: 02
      0
      The United States supplied Lend-Lease only equipment that was not in service with the US Army.
      4) The creation of equipment for Lend-Lease deliveries began long before the German attack on the USSR: what does this mean ?!

      Who wrote such nonsense? You at least look at the photos of the war and the identification marks on the tanks and armored personnel carriers. Well, a photo from the TRUTH for those years I will soon provide you. Material is ready ...
  33. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 21 May 2016 18: 56
    +1
    On the effectiveness of Lend-Lease. Not everything that was stated in the article from the technology reached the USSR. Much has drowned in the Atlantic. In addition, for example, aircraft were loaded like this: only one fuselage on one ship, and wings on the other. After the torpedoing of one of the ships, the cargo of the second became a regular scrap.
    1. Bosk
      Bosk 21 May 2016 19: 11
      0
      Perhaps I'm wrong, but the planes were fully loaded, like, say, for the same fighters, the wings were removed and packed in one "box" ... I don't remember with the "bombers" ... although most likely most of them "went" through Iran and "Dalnik" self-propelled (though it was already from the second half of the war). The Americans can be scolded in many ways, but in the supply, they basically tried to complete the "product" in full, they knew how to organize such things, you immediately feel that the "island" power ...
  34. Alexy
    Alexy 21 May 2016 19: 23
    -4
    I liked the so-called "reverse lend-lease" in gold and platinum.
    And yes, our friends, the Americans, delivered everything to us almost for nothing. And then they also wanted to cut money.
    The author was clearly mistaken by the site.
  35. sivuch
    sivuch 21 May 2016 20: 33
    0
    Sorry if I missed. Is anything said about the supply of drugs, in particular, penicillin?
    1. Orionvit
      Orionvit 22 May 2016 12: 06
      0
      Americans kept penicillin secret. By 1943 in the USSR they developed the technology of their penicillin, which was more effective than the state. A well-known spy story is connected with this, when the NKVD, instead of ours, threw their own drug to the Americans.
      1. AK64
        AK64 22 May 2016 12: 19
        0
        Americans kept penicillin secret. By 1943 in the USSR they developed the technology of their penicillin, which was more effective than the state. A well-known spy story is connected with this, when the NKVD, instead of ours, threw their own drug to the Americans.


        It's a miracle what is ...
        And where do these myths come from?
        Read about penicillin at least at the wiki level, huh?
      2. overb
        overb 22 May 2016 12: 25
        +1
        Quote: Orionvit
        By 1943 in the USSR they developed the technology of their penicillin, which was more effective than the state.

        The fable that the USSR invented something a little later, but much more effective than a foreign one, is "our everything." Wherever you spit, you will bump into this story. Some people believe.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  36. Des10
    Des10 21 May 2016 21: 11
    +1
    Good spoon for dinner.
    The help of the Americans helped a lot, starting from the production of felt boots (they themselves didn’t know this, because they learned the technology from white emigrants), a field worker according to our requirements (they changed their production), uniform (brother in the 70s in the construction battalion - issued with buttons from Rindmond ) and much more.
    At one time - when Caucasians ran into me in SA - a hunt stood next to me (Vasya Toporkov - thank you!)) And I didn't care about his bronze complexion and narrow-eyed. And now I always remember with gratitude. But from their - "titular" - nationality - they all pissed off.
    Because - helped --- thanks.
  37. rubin6286
    rubin6286 21 May 2016 21: 52
    0
    Probably not a single country in the world has written so much about the past war - from newspaper articles to various kinds of literature, scenarios of theater plays and feature films. Over time, there are fewer and fewer people who are able to tell about the war, not “candy,” but the real truth about the terrible misfortune that entered our home on June 22, 1941 ....

    Articles devoted to the economy of the USSR during the war and Lend-Lease, in particular, were also written a lot and the leit-motive of most of them was the assertion that Lend-Lease helped our country, but without it we would have defeated fascism, only the struggle was even longer and bloody. So the author of this article claims that "for sure our country could survive and win, but it is not possible to determine how much the price of victory would increase."

    It's time to put everything in its place. If from abroad 53% of gunpowder and explosives, 76% of copper, 106% of aluminum, 223% of tin, 138% of cobalt, 102% of wool, 66% of sugar, 480% of canned meat were obtained, then without this raw material many industries of our industry would simply become, not to mention railway transport, where the share of foreign traction composition exceeded the domestic one by 21,4 times, and wagons by more than 10 times. How would our army manage without 447 cars, which was 785 times more than our own cars. Having read the “books”, you can compare the tactical and technical characteristics of foreign and Soviet military equipment as much as you want, argue hoarsely which was better, but 1,5 airplanes delivered under Lend-Lease were not at all redundant for us, as well as more than 8918 tanks that can they were worse than the German ones, but much better than our T-500s and BTs. For some reason, no one writes about American aviation gasoline and lubricating oils, submarines, torpedo boats, minesweepers, Browning heavy machine guns, shoes, underwear, flight uniforms, radio stations, sea mines and torpedoes, amphibious vehicles, bandages and medicines and other There was an American stew at the front, as well as pork lard, margarine and other products, which there was simply nothing to replace in the country.

    My father served in the Far East in the late 40s and flew on the Kingcobra P-63, and before it on La-9 and La-11. He said that the post-war Lavochkins were worse than the Cobra and the German FV-190D9. From "Cobra" he switched to the MiG-15 and fought on it in Korea. According to the recollections of his mother, who was evacuated in Uzbekistan and returned to Odessa in 1944, if not for American transports with food, people would simply starve to death. The stew went to the front, and the civilian got the “lard" on the cards, some flour, cereals. Her neighbor, who had gone through the entire war as a driver, said that by the end of the war “the whole army was in American cars.” “Willys,” “doji,” “studentbackers” - everything was theirs.

    Lend-Lease helped defeat fascism and saved the lives of many Soviet people. President Roosevelt, the American government and the people of America correctly assessed the threat and rendered all necessary assistance to our country. Thanks to them for that.
  38. pafegosoff
    pafegosoff 21 May 2016 22: 39
    +1
    Quote: ShadowCat
    It’s ridiculous to say - since the pepelats is so cool, why did most of the cars were delivered to the USSR and not to the army of the same states?

    Those. bad?
    For our pilots, the Cobra is better than many wooden airplanes. As one teacher told us in the early 1970s (in our school 70% of the pilots and navigators were): "The main thing is not to give the gas abruptly during takeoff - the plane could turn over - and remember about the corkscrew" Well, the peculiarities of centering, landing .. And if you get used to it - a thing! No wonder, even at the end of the Great Patriotic War, Stalin ordered Bell P-63 Kingcobra.
    Studebakers also mainly exported. But how industry was raised on military orders!
    The USSR, too, on such a rise crawled to stagnation ... All Khrushchev's achievements began in the 1940-1953s. Even the famous "Khrushchevs"
    And how did the US aviation and motor vehicles during the war affect the post-war development trends and the culture of the USSR automobile and aviation industry? In general, the benefits are gigantic.
    About quality ... A friend still has a shovel from a Lendliz engine. Steel, handle - excellent quality! So the Papelans ... We had some railway workers on the street (now they are not alone). So, the same father comrade drove the trains to the front. And the American steam engine was perfect. Up to the supply of coal: with a screw from a tender and a jet of compressed air - into the furnace! Just clean, straighten with a shovel ...
    And why didn’t they leave them to themselves? Probably, they had steam engines like planes and cars - heaps. Industry has bloomed! To whom is war ...
  39. The comment was deleted.
  40. nosferatus2
    nosferatus2 22 May 2016 00: 33
    +1
    Thanks to the author, great article.
  41. Orionvit
    Orionvit 22 May 2016 07: 50
    0
    I didn’t understand something here. Who will deny that the Soviet Union made a decisive contribution to the defeat of the enemy? And the Allies pushed the law on land lease not from the desire to help, but from the desire to earn. As a matter of fact, they themselves created Hitler, unleashed a war and earned more and more. Yes, we won the war, but the Americans won. The main world outcome of the Second World War is the agreement in Bretten Wood, where the dollar was declared the world reserve currency, after which the war quickly ended. Yes, Western deliveries greatly helped, but this was not done for free. Before minus, read and compare well-known facts.
    1. Artem Popov
      Artem Popov April 3 2018 20: 51
      0
      Distributing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of goods to the world for free is a great way to make money. Have you tried it yourself, advise?
  42. Lelek
    Lelek 22 May 2016 10: 01
    0
    (History would have liked to order that the post-war prosperity of the United States would be paid for to a large extent by the blood of Soviet soldiers. For the USSR, Lend-Lease was almost the only way to reduce the number of victims on the way to Victory. This is such a “marriage of convenience.)

    Len-Lease undoubtedly played a positive role for the USSR, but supplies for America were primarily of a mercantile interest (supplies of strategic materials and equipment were carried out by the states simultaneously to Hitler's Germany and Nazi Italy) to the sound of shimmy heels and the rhythms of Glenn Miller's jazz when Soviet soldiers in the thousands lay down on the ground. As our sworn "friends" in the United States like to say: "Nothing personal - just business."
    1. Artem Popov
      Artem Popov April 3 2018 20: 56
      0
      Of course, you have not heard of the complete blockade and total accounting of the waybills of each individual ship in the world. All that could "reach" Germany was several flights of specially trained German "blockade-breakers", they were loaded in Japan. As for the neutral countries - they were put on such strict control that even Spain lacked oil for their own domestic needs, they were allowed to import at a minimum so that nothing could "leak" into the Reich through France.
  43. Orionvit
    Orionvit 22 May 2016 11: 58
    0
    Quote: overb
    Quote: Orionvit
    And ours paid in gold.

    And where did you see that foreign trade supplies were free? Yes, they paid with gold and raw materials. There was no currency. It didn’t concern only Lend-Lease deliveries, it was not foreign trade.
    Quote: Orionvit
    And I hope no one will argue that the main burdens of the war to defeat Germany and the ground operation against Japan fell on the USSR.

    Will, of course, be relative to Japan. The Kwantung army is relative nonsense. The Kuomintang China, the main US ally in the Far East, grinded more than one such army.

    What is there China grind is rubbish. the Japanese have been making them like children since 1933. But the millionth Kwantung army is your trifle? Surrendered a month later. Before you write and put down the minuses, teach the story.
    1. overb
      overb 22 May 2016 12: 44
      0
      Quote: Orionvit
      But the millionth Kwantung army is your trifle?

      Relative, of course, a trifle. In addition, in the fall of 1945. she was of little interest. Even the Japanese, they had more serious problems. Therefore, their expeditionary force (Kwantung Army) in Manzhou-Guo (the state was then then) was not of primary interest to them.
      Quote: Orionvit
      the Japanese have been making them like children since 1933.

      Did or did not, and the Chinese fought against the Japanese. And they fought for a long time. As a result, they were the winners, not the Japanese.
      Quote: Orionvit
      teach a story

      Same to you.
      1. AK64
        AK64 22 May 2016 14: 04
        0
        the Chinese fought against the Japanese. And they fought for a long time. As a result, they were the winners, not the Japanese.


        Yeah, after all, the French were winners in WWII. Why not be the Chinese?
        1. overb
          overb 22 May 2016 14: 16
          0
          Quote: AK64
          Yeah, after all, the French were winners in WWII. Why not be the Chinese?

          Take an interest in this story. Then you will understand. We do not know her at all, the history of China in the USSR began from the moment of the accession of Mao.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  44. Orionvit
    Orionvit 22 May 2016 12: 26
    0
    Quote: atalef
    Quote: murriou
    The enterprises did not work for free, the US state budget paid for their work, and then the calculations could be different.

    The state budget is formed from taxes, therefore, the entire land lease was paid by the American people. (With the exception of the returned $ 722 million)

    But what about the fact that after the war ended, most of the world's gold was in the United States. Or did it flow there?
    1. overb
      overb 22 May 2016 13: 40
      0
      Quote: Orionvit
      But what about the fact that after the war ended, most of the world's gold was in the United States. Or did it flow there?

      Ask about the essence of the Marshall Plan. Then you will find out how and why "it flowed there." By the way, now it is gradually flowing back.
  45. nosferatus2
    nosferatus2 22 May 2016 12: 47
    0
    Quote: Aspeed
    For some reason, it is always forgotten how the Americans helped the Reich.

    There is an interesting book on this subject: Highham Charles. Trade with the enemy
  46. Torins
    Torins 23 May 2016 22: 47
    0
    Quote: veteran66
    Quote: Nehist
    mostly at heights of 2000-3000 thousand!

    so this is because Soviet aircraft at high altitudes lost to German aircraft. In general, whoever is taller is stronger, remember the formula for Pokryshkin's victory, by the way he flew in a "cobra".

    Not because of this, but because the USSR had a large number of attack aircraft which was harmful to fly high)) In order to cover their troops from them, the Germans had to rise no higher than 5000 meters, otherwise you will notice FIGs, our same escorting attack aircraft would not go far from them Do not miss the attack of German fighters. And in general, you forgot about such an aircraft as MiGG-3, which only showed itself at great heights, and was no worse than what was done in general) So we had something to hit the Germans on the head with an altitude of 7-8 thousand meters, but because . neither we nor Germans flew MiGG there)
    1. murriou
      murriou 24 May 2016 06: 02
      0
      Quote: Torins
      such an aircraft as MiGG-3

      There was no such plane wink

      You confuse among themselves the MiG-3 and LaGG-3, which are really close in many ways, both high-altitude and high-speed, both have shown themselves well in the air defense regiments.
  47. Torins
    Torins 28 May 2016 17: 56
    0
    Quote: murriou
    Quote: Torins
    such an aircraft as MiGG-3

    There was no such plane wink

    You confuse among themselves the MiG-3 and LaGG-3, which are really close in many ways, both high-altitude and high-speed, both have shown themselves well in the air defense regiments.

    Well, yes, a little sealed up)
  48. den-protector
    den-protector 22 November 2016 15: 55
    0
    So commerce in another can not and do not want. For them, war is a mother. And they cut the loot on the blood. Allies ...
  49. Artem Popov
    Artem Popov April 3 2018 21: 05
    0
    Quote: Orionvit

    What is there China grind is rubbish. the Japanese have been making them like children since 1933. But the millionth Kwantung army is your trifle? Surrendered a month later. Before you write and put down the minuses, teach the story.

    China has been at war with Japan for 12 years, suffered the largest civilian casualties from all countries, even impossible to count, from 25 to 40 million people. Of the 27 million people we have, almost half are military losses. And with all this, he continued to resist, did not give up.
    This crap about the "million Kwantung army" is the litmus test of an ignorant patriot. By 1945, all combat-ready formations on the Pacific and Burmese fronts were taken from the Kwantung army, there remained about 400 thousand people of the rear garrison, who covered the border with a total length greater than the sum of the Western and Eastern European fronts. It is not surprising that the Soviet tank armies "went like a knife through butter" - it’s hard to call it even “border protection forces”, the 6th category of reserve men who were sitting in rare towns — they could only protect something from the Chinese partisans.