Why Allied & Soviet equipment was superior

[Twitch]

As in aircraft military personnel on all sides found ways to exploit the stronger points of their weapons and equipment and avoid their weaker points. They made the best with what they had and adapted to their uses. For me it's as simple as that. All this comparing specifications of impliments of war is senseless since they are nothing without humans employing them in skillful ways.

[loomaluftwaffe]

dude, axis machines were designed in the way Hitler or the RLM wanted it.
why was it easier to fly a Soviet plane than a German plane?

simply cause the Soviets couldnt afford better training, so they ordered a plane that can be flown by any random bystander.

[schwarzpanzer]

Have tried to avoid quoting as much as poss, as some people have complained.


gaussianum:

Yes, I have heard of Zeiss.

The thing is, you can compensate for an equipments 'quirks'.

However, this takes time and familiarity. Thee Soviets didn't usually have long in their equipment though, the Germans did.

I know what you mean, but it takes a huge difference in skill/technology to offset not much numerical superiority.

I wanted to make this all on aircraft, then set up another similar thread on WW2 General, but I thought this would be tidier?

I can still do that if people want?


loomaluftwaffe:

they wouldnt make it more complicated without making it better

Sometimes that is exactly what happened! The Merritt-Brown botch-up on the TigerI+ is a good example.

The twitchiness is fine for elites, but denying you have novices is asking for defeat.

Soviet equipment, whilst being simple, is certainly not comfortable.

(Something Allied equipment seemed to be).


R988:

The PPSh41 vs MP40 thing is a matter of opinion/situation. Some Soviets much preffered the MP40 to the PPSh and vice-versa. Also a soldier armed with a bolt-action rifle is gonna dump it for an SMG in a street-fighting situation anyway.

The Luger was a horrible weapon in WW2. Even SAS soldiers nicked them, but soon learnt not to.

I think the Me109 was actually good at landing. Taking off, especially in the Gustav onwards, was where the damage was done.

The Soviet's thoughts? "The death of one is a tradgedy..."


Erich:

none of the Soviet equipments were superior to anything of the Wehrmacht

Nothing?? Not the T34 over the PzIII/IV?? Or the SVT 40 Dogwalker mentioned over the G41??

These were obviously superior, else why would the Germans copiy them??

BTW: Not too well known is that some T34 attributes came from the PzIII!


syscom3:

The wheels are called bogies, but you can call them wheels and still remain accurate.

If an inner wheel had a problem then yes, it was a pain to fix.

The main problem is being close together caused them to clog.


KraziKanuK:

Are those prices accurate? If they are, thanks.

I can never understand why the Panther cost half the man-hours of the Tiger , but the quality was far, far inferior. It was even far worse than Soviet quality at times!!

This is another problem with complicated designs. Not only do they need highly skilled operators, but a highly skilled workforce and loborious construction too.

It's weird the Panther costing more $ than the Tiger.


I follow your point Erich. The workforce had to be happy, something I know the English made sure of.

The heavy Panzers should have had better powertrains too, you can thank a bean-counting screw-up for that one.


I agree with you Twitch, but you need good equipment. Would you take on AK47's with a baseball bat? - Kudos if you would BTW!


Hitler had some right ideas IMHO loomaluftwaffe. It was he that wanted the T34 copying, who ordered the Tiger and who wanted the PzIII to originally carry a 50mm L60.

He was overruled and these cost Germany dear.


All this talk about Soviet peasants doing the fighting. The Volksturm, Luftwaffe groundcrew and Hitler Jugend seem to be forgotten?

[lesofprimus]

Dude, ur crackin me up...

[schwarzpanzer]

You've nothing more constructive than that?

[Twitch]

Weapons and equipment can be good to very good and be quite effective where excellent to astounding things costs calculate into astronomical sums to be justified ONLY if they consistently win conflicts due to overwhelming superiority. One would not copete against an AK 47 with a bat but one certainly could be effective with an M-2 carbine.

[plan_D]

The thing is, you can compensate for an equipments 'quirks'. However, this takes time and familiarity. Thee Soviets didn't usually have long in their equipment though, the Germans did. I know what you mean, but it takes a huge difference in skill/technology to offset not much numerical superiority.

There is a reason the Soviet troops did not spend much time in their vehicles, to become accustomed. The reason was they'd be blown to pieces when they entered combat because of their inferior equipment.

Russian equipment was not easy to handle anyway. They were mostly clumsy, and the early T-34/76 was extremely cramped. It only had a two man turret, extremely inefficient. And the IS-2 had two-piece loading!

It does not take a huge technological advantage to offset numercial advantage. It can take only a minor technology advantage, such as superior optical equipment or a better small arm.

It is simple; imagine a Tiger without optical equipment compared to a Tiger with optical equipment engaging at 3,000 metres and closing. Who will win?

The twitchiness is fine for elites, but denying you have novices is asking for defeat. Soviet equipment, whilst being simple, is certainly not comfortable.

It must be true that the entire Wehrmacht was made up of elite troops, sailors and pilots then. Because they handled all of their equipment with skill and efficiency.

At least you're right that the Soviet equipment was not comfortable. They lacked all creature comforts, and that sometimes included optical equipment and seat covers ...

I think the Me109 was actually good at landing. Taking off, especially in the Gustav onwards, was where the damage was done.

The Me-109 was not 'good' at landing, it was no better than any other World War II front-line fighter. But most of the damage was done on taking-off, but this is probably most true for all the fighters, except naval fighters.

Nothing?? Not the T34 over the PzIII/IV?? Or the SVT 40 Dogwalker mentioned over the G41?? These were obviously superior, else why would the Germans copiy them?? BTW: Not too well known is that some T34 attributes came from the PzIII!

The T-34 was no better than the Pz.Kpfw IV. In 1941 it was, yes, but once the Pz.Kpfw IV F/2 was developed the T-34 lost it's edge. The T-34 was superior to the Pz.Kpfw III but that was simply because it was a different class, the Germans never intended the Pz.Kpfw III to face up to a T-34.

The Germans never tried to copy the T-34. Drawings were made up of the shell of the T-34, but the internal workings were to be all German design from scratch. It was quickly realised that this would be pointless as the Germans knew they could produce something better, and they did - the Pz.Kpfw V 'Panther' . The Panther was designed to counteract the T-34, but in no way was it a copy. And this is no due credit for the T-34 since war is all about trying to out-do your enemy, if you discover they have something better, you make something even better ... that is why technology moves so fast during wartime.

And nothing from the Pz.Kpfw III was used on the T-34. The development of the T-34 began in 1936, which produced the A-20. The Pz.Kpfw III (1 Serie ZW) was not produced until 1937, and even then only ten were.

I shall not be so upfront actually. I will let you prove this, if you can. What, if anything, was used on the T-34 that was directly copied from the Pz.Kpfw III?

The wheels are called bogies, but you can call them wheels and still remain accurate. If an inner wheel had a problem then yes, it was a pain to fix. The main problem is being close together caused them to clog.

Road wheels and bogies are different objects in the suspension system of a tank. The road wheel is the actual wheel which rotates, it's simple enough. The bogie is to what the spring for the suspension system is connected. This is easiest to describe by looking at a picture of a Sherman, the bogie is the arm to which the pairs of road wheels are attached.
Only on the Christie suspension can this be nullified because the springs attached to each individual wheel, which could then be refered to as a bogie.

If any road wheel, on any tank, needs replacing it is a 'pain to fix' - this is nothing against the Tiger. And it got stuck no more than most World War II armour in the given situations.

I can never understand why the Panther cost half the man-hours of the Tiger , but the quality was far, far inferior. It was even far worse than Soviet quality at times!! This is another problem with complicated designs. Not only do they need highly skilled operators, but a highly skilled workforce and loborious construction too. It's weird the Panther costing more $ than the Tiger.

It's not that hard to understand, the Panther was a simple machine compared to the Tiger. It also used less material than the Tiger. It was in no way inferior in quality to the Tiger, or any other machine for that matter. Calling the build quality far worse than Soviet build quality is just beyond idiotic! You're comparing the build of machine that did, admittedly, lack manganese and had to make up for it with inefficient materials to the build of machine (In question IS-2) that did not even have it's frontal armour tempered ! And that was under perfect conditions with plenty of men and material!

The high labour related to the Panther was, in fact, not that high for the amount of damage one Panther did to the enemy. If the Panther would destroy several T-34s, it's paid for it's man hours with the enemies man hours in building those T-34s. The Panther, and the Tiger, could pay for themselves many times over in combat.

The Panther did not cost more than the Tiger. Read KKs post again ...

Hitler had some right ideas IMHO loomaluftwaffe. It was he that wanted the T34 copying, who ordered the Tiger and who wanted the PzIII to originally carry a 50mm L60.

If Hitler did, in fact, order the T-34 copied then he is less intelligent than I thought. The Waffenamt ordered a closer look at the T-34 to gain ideas from it, never to actively copy it. As it was, we all know the Germans were right - they could build a better machine, called the Panther.

Hitler did not order the Tiger, it had been in development since 1937. The Waffenamt had ordered a breakthrough tank back then which led to the Tiger appearing in August 1942.

Correct on the final point. Hitler was correct in ordering the L/60, but it hardly cost Germany the war!!

All this talk about Soviet peasants doing the fighting. The Volksturm, Luftwaffe groundcrew and Hitler Jugend seem to be forgotten?

The fighting of Volksturm, Luftwaffe and Hitler Jugend is far from forgotten. But those actions were out of desperation. In fact, the Volksturm were German equal to the British Home Guard - only the Volksturm had to be used.

This does not take anything away from Germany who were in desperate times. The Red Army consisted of troops worse trained than these old men and boys throughout the entirety of the war !!

And the reason people get annoyed with your quotes is because you quote single words, or a collection of one or two. Quote the entire statement instead of nit-picking .

[loomaluftwaffe]

If the british home guard was used why did i hear a story of spitfire pilot, in flames, shot down a 109, parachuted and was shot inaccurately by ome british home guards, then the pilot got a Victoria Cross

[plan_D]

That made no sense. I will say this though, the British Home Guard was not used in combat. Because Britain was never invaded, funnily enough.

[Soren]

Schwarz, since I own both weapons, how exactly is the Mosin more simple to use than the K98k ? Don't you rotate and push the bolt back and forth on the Mosin, or does it have some kind of magical reloading system I don't know about, cause if it does please let me know

No, the Mosin is infact a far inferior rifle to the K98k, as it could take far less chamber pressures and is much less safe for the shooter. The strong M98 action of the K98k is still considered the best bolt action design today, and has been copied over a million times to this day because of it. Most modern hunting rifles as-well as Sniper-rifles still use the M98 action, and the reason is simple - it is simply as good as it gets.

[schwarzpanzer]

PlanD:

Yep, a lot of Soviet tank stuff was hard to use.


I don't think any technology advantage can be considered small, even if it is unreliable?

It is simple; imagine a Tiger without optical equipment compared to a Tiger with optical equipment engaging at 3,000 metres and closing. Who will win?

Yes, but they are the same vehicle. I could argue that if one is mobile, the other is not. Who will win?

It must be true that the entire Wehrmacht was made up of elite troops, sailors and pilots then. Because they handled all of their equipment with skill and efficiency.

To a point I'd agree. Low-skilled German personnel were the exceptions from the rule, 'till late in the war. Visa-versa for the Soviets, again changing at the end of the war.

The Me-109 was not 'good' at landing, it was no better than any other World War II front-line fighter.

I've heard the fuselage-mounted wheel spars did well in crash-landings. The photographic evidence of crashed 'Schmitts seems to prove this?

Aircraft carrier based planes also have their wheel spars mounted on the fuselage because of this, I believe?

Also, my grandad's squadron used Spifires near a cliff in '45, the "Spitfire bounce" meant that they embedded themselves (and their pilots) in the cliff face a few times too often.

He said the Spit's could get off the ground with absolutely no problems though.

I believe both these factors + - are due to the wide-track landing gear?

The T-34 was no better than the Pz.Kpfw IV. In 1941 it was, yes, but once the Pz.Kpfw IV F/2 was developed the T-34 lost it's edge.

I know, I meant the early pre-Special L24 PzIV's.

The T-34 was superior to the Pz.Kpfw III but that was simply because it was a different class, the Germans never intended the Pz.Kpfw III to face up to a T-34.

Guderian and Hitler expected it. It's purpose was to engage enemy tanks, after all.

There was a tip-off from the Soviets on the Pz's failings during the mutual co-operation era.

Ministry of Armaments bean-counting (& possibly also pride) was responsible for ignoring this as well.

What, if anything, was used on the T-34 that was directly copied from the Pz.Kpfw III?

The link:

http://www.battlefield.ru/index.php?... d=50&lang=en

Well it shows how quick progress was!

The implemented features were:

immediately

good mobility

mechanical reliability (save gearbox)

eventually

comfortable

3-man turret

commanders cupola

radio

intercom for all crew members

good ammo layout

never!

low noise

quality optics

I guess that this was an export spec PzIII, I think you understand what this means? (Pig-spec in Russian)


I take bogie to mean unsprung weight, you are correct - I will use your system from now on - it's a lot better/easier.

And it got stuck no more than most World War II armour in the given situations.

Well it was worse than the T34 and Churchill, but I suppose it was OK.


The Panther did suffer from quality control issues, I've proved it on another thread, but I don't think the TigerI ever did?

The early IS2 quality control was beyond shocking, admittedly. The thing is, they were upgunned IS1's - and probably meant to be only prototypes!

There is a Russophobic propaganda-ish rumour that they were deliberately unhardened to increase production/reduce costs. Though this wouldn't surprise me.

Did you know that some combat StuG's were made of mild steel? - their crews found out about this and unsurprisingly weren't best pleased about it!


I agree with you that the Tiger and Panther were very cost-effective, despite what historians say, I've always thought this.

After that, there's always the cost in lives. Though Stalin was not as bothered about this 'resource'.

The Panther did not cost more than the Tiger. Read KKs post again ...

Silly me!


It was suggested the T34 be directly copied. German pride and lack of experience and materials prevented this, so a 'Germanised' T34 was deigned by DB along with a 'Sovietised' Panzer by MAN.

Hitler preferred the former, but was again overruled. Surprisingly seemed to happen quite a bit, didn't it?


A point I don't get is MAN invented the Diesel engine, yet didn't use it in the Panther.


I know about the DW tank, but the Tiger design brief called for a different type of vehicle entirely.

The experience of the DW was all that was carried through, as it was the heaviest and most technologically advanced design available as a base.


I think if the PzIII had had the L60 from the start, that it would have been almost decisive.

This does not take anything away from Germany who were in desperate times.

It does not excuse needlessly sacrificing women, children and old men. If they want to, then maybe, but like the Soviets, they were often forced into it.

Soviet troops were just flung into battle, but I feel so sorry for them, as not only did Hitler want them dead, but Stalin too! - poor beggers.


I'll try to better my quotes, but I hate posting a huge part as I feel it detracts greatly. (Also with my colossal nattering, I need all the space I can get! )


The British home guard did kill a deaf kid when he failed to hear "who goes there? Stop!" - I rember hearing of that incident.

I think they were used against bailing Luftwaffe crews too? (Think Spike Milligan)

[the lancaster kicks ass]

why did i hear a story of spitfire pilot, in flames, shot down a 109, parachuted and was shot inaccurately by ome british home guards, then the pilot got a Victoria Cross

i don't believe this is true, as you don't get a VC for being fired at by your own troops, and as i understand it only one VC was awarded to fighter command, to that guy that chopped off the tail of a -110 with the wing of his hurricane...........

[loomaluftwaffe]

stupid rumors

[Gnomey]

It is true and it was a DO-17 that was headed towards Buckingham Palace...

[cheddar cheese]

Yup...