trebizond wrote:
A Heer just shy of 13 million isn't going to beat a 35 million strong army equipped with T-34s.
And any observer would say the same in 1941...
Much of the aid can be better understood when considering the economic distortions caused by the war. Most belligerent powers cut back on production of nonessentials severely, concentrating on producing weapons. This inevitably produced shortages of related products needed by the military or as part of the military/industrial economy.trebizond wrote:
Say that the Kriegsmarine had 1000 U-Boats of various capabilities to call upon, and destroyed all hope of convoy traffic across the Atlantic.
The result would have been negligible upon the course of the war, except that Russia would destroy Germany alone, instead of a via a second front. As German advances were turned in '42 and '43, the war was essentially over. This was without the help of the Allies, except for some second-rate armour and deuce-and-a-halfs.
For example, the USSR was highly dependent on trains, yet the desperate need to produce weapons meant that fewer than 20 new locomotives were produced in the USSR during the entire war. In this context, the supply of 1,981 US locomotives can be better understood. Likewise, the Soviet air force was almost completely dependent on US supplies of very high octane aviation fuel. Although most Red Army tank units were equipped with Soviet-built tanks, their logistical support was provided by hundreds of thousands of high-quality US-made trucks. Indeed by 1944 nearly half the truck strength of the Red Army was US-built. Trucks such as the Dodge 3/4 ton and Studebaker 2.5 ton, were easily the best trucks available in their class on either side on the Eastern Front. US supplies of waterproof telephone cable, aluminium, and canned rations were also critical.