Importance of American lend-lease to Soviet war effort in WW II?

[David Floyd]

Katyushka launchers were very often mounted on US Studebaker trucks.

Further, those US trucks were able to slog through the mud of Western Russia, which is more than one can say for most Soviet vehicles (outside of the T-34 anyway).

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Well, AFVs were never carried by trucks.

Arty pulled? Yes.

Most especially supplies carried. The ability of trucks to enable an offensive is quite clear, unless you want to trust to old Bessie and the hope that your enemy doesn't move faster than you.

Again I am amazed at the ignorance of posters on this thread. Far less than 20% of the German army was motorised in 1941. The figure never got close to 20% for the entire war. Most of the German army relied on horse drawn transport. Horse drawn transport actually increased during the war in Russia due to the condition of the roads. The Russian army had even less motorisation and was still fielding cavalry armies (really mounted infantry) right through war. The Germans started doing this too, they were still raising new cavalry units in 1944.

So trucks were pretty irrelevant to both sides.

[notyoueither]

And I am surprised by the trolling in this thread.

BTW Horse. Do you think they used wagons to supply the Panzers on an advance, or trucks?

The fact that neither the Sovs nor the Germans could fully motorise does not diminish the usefullness of the truck. Except maybe to a propagandist...

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Well, AFVs were never carried by trucks.

In World War II? Oh really?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
The Germans started doing this too, they were still raising new cavalry units in 1944.

The Germans never stopped doing it, so I guess your comment about beginning is kind of moot.

They were also arming 14 year olds. Does that make 14 year olds a better idea for combat on a 20th century battlefield?

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


The Germans never stopped doing it, so I guess your comment about beginning is kind of moot.

They were also arming 14 year olds. Does that make 14 year olds a better idea for combat on a 20th century battlefield?

I wish you'd stop talking crap. The cavalry units were raised to meet the fighting conditions. The horse and the train were the major transport means on the Eastern Front.

Can a horse drawn cart keep up with a panzer unit in the field? Yes it can. How fast do you think they move?

What a dumb ass

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


In World War II? Oh really?

Yeah. how many trucks did the Germans have that could carry a 10 ton Mk IV around?

And how many of them advanced into combat with the tank on the deck?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


I wish you'd stop talking crap. The cavalry units were raised to meet the fighting conditions. The horse and the train were the major transport means on the Eastern Front.

Can a horse drawn cart keep up with a panzer unit in the field? Yes it can. How fast do you think they move?

What a dumb ass

My wish also Horsie.

The Germans used Cav because they didn't have enough AFVs and never could have.

How many Cav units did the much better equipped Commonwealth and Americans have? Hmmm? As you said, stop talking crap.

Can horses easily fill the needs of an armoured formation? Of course they can't. Idiot.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Yeah. how many trucks did the Germans have that could carry a 10 ton Mk IV around?

And how many of them advanced into combat with the tank on the deck?

We aren't talking about combat use, we're talking about transport. What part of this sentence don't you understand?

But hey, keep digging. You're as bad as Floyd on basic knowledge of the campaign.

[notyoueither]

So trucks were pretty irrelevant to both sides.

I'll let that stand as a testament to ignorance.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


We aren't talking about combat use, we're talking about transport. What part of this sentence don't you understand?

But hey, keep digging. You're as bad as Floyd on basic knowledge of the campaign.

Yes, and we're talking about the efficiency of the truck vs the horse in moving goods.

Why are no horses used these days, Horse? Oh sorry, I may have just discovered the bug up your ass.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Yes, and we're talking about the efficiency of the truck vs the horse in moving goods.

Horses are much more efficient on unpaved roads prone to dust, mud and ice, impassable to trucks for at least half the year.

Why are no horses used these days, Horse?

Because we have paved roads. Russia didn't.

Oh sorry, I may have just discovered the bug up your ass.

I just wish you'd go away and do some basic research on the campaign instead of spouting nonsense.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


Horses are much more efficient on unpaved roads prone to dust, mud and ice, impassable to trucks for at least half the year.



Because we have paved roads. Russia didn't.



I just wish you'd go away and do some basic research on the campaign instead of spouting nonsense.

Sorry Horse, no horse is ever faster on any dry, dirt road than a truck is.

Furthermore, we are talking about moving supplies not 5 miles but maybe 50 or 100 or 200 miles beyond a rail head.

Anyone who would say that horses are better for all conditions on the steppes of Russia, or the Canadian prairies has a few problems. I believe.

Especially when it means hauling an engine or a transmission for a 10 or 15 ton tank for a hundred miles. Quite simply put, no horse drawn transport known to man is up to it quite the way that large trucks are. Thank you very much.

[Alexander's Horse]

Do you know anything about the Russian campaign at all?

Your points just aren't even worth answering - go and read the history - we're not talking here about your worthless opinion but about what happened and horse and rail transport was used

[notyoueither]

Waiting for some citations here Horse.

Who exactly, other than you, has proclaimed the superiority of the horse on the Eastern front? Come back soon.