Cobras and Shermans: Did the USSR help American Lend-Lease?

73
Today, when some Western powers consider it possible to not invite the President of the Russian Federation to the anniversary of the celebration of the landing of troops in Normandy, the question again arises about the size of the contribution of each member of the anti-Hitler coalition to the defeat of the Third Reich. It is customary to point to the famous Lend-Lease, which was supported by the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War.





After the signing of the Moscow Protocol on October 1, 1941, tanks, planes, guns, automobiles, explosives, foodstuffs and much more began to arrive in the USSR from abroad. American Studebakers and stew have long been a legend. In parallel, by the way, there was a “reverse Lend-Lease”: allies of the war received Soviet manganese and chrome ore, platinum, gold and wood.

The Kremlin tried to maximally compensate for the weaknesses of domestic industry, in which the war dealt a heavy blow. For example, the volumes of deliveries of foreign army automobiles were one and a half times higher than the amount produced on their own. The same can be said about rolling stock. A large role was played by imported explosives. That is, underestimate the contribution of Lend-Lease to the construction of a mobilization military economics and victory on the battlefield is not worth it.

However, arms supplied from the United States and Great Britain were evaluated differently by the Red Army men. Something in our realities proved to be good, but something not very. For example, the famous Soviet aces Alexander Pokryshkin and Grigory Rechkalov achieved the greatest success in air battles with the Nazis on the American fighter R-39 "Cobra" ("Aero Cobra"). These aircraft and their continuation P-63 (“King Cobra”) had high speed and good armament, however, after firing all the ammunition, their alignment was broken and they could fall into a tailspin. The USSR received Lend-Lease 4423 R-39 "Cobra" and 2397 R-63 from the United States.

But the British Hurricanes did not impress the Soviet leadership. According to the recollections of the environment, I.V. Stalin complained:

Their "Hurricane" rubbish, our pilots do not like these airplanes.


The aircraft were inferior to the German in speed, aerodynamics and armament. London “shoved” such machines into the Soviet Union 3082. However, at the beginning of the war, and British fighters were used at the front. More modern Spitfires were delivered reluctantly and in limited quantities.

As for the tanks, everything here looked much less unambiguous. The light and medium British tanks “Valentine” and “Matilda” were poorly adapted to our conditions and the confrontation with German troops, therefore they suffered heavy losses. High, bulky and insufficiently protected M3 tanks "General Lee" from the USA, Soviet tankers bitterly dubbed the "mass grave". Almost one thousand were handed over to us. American "Shermans" looked incomparably better against their background, they were delivered to us over 3600 pieces. The British Churchilli were even more impressive in terms of performance, but the British were greedy, giving only three hundred.

Thus, the contribution of the Allies to the victory over the Third Reich cannot be denied, cannot be exaggerated, nor can be minimized. Historians evaluate the Lend-Lease program differently. It would be fair to say that the USSR could do without these supplies and ultimately defeat Nazi Germany, but the price of such a victory would be higher than what had to be paid.
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    13 June 2019 12: 42
    unfortunately, and to our happiness, this is so, we would have won the war without their help, but much more than 27 million of our ancestors could have died.
    1. +2
      13 June 2019 14: 39
      It is good that the supply of arms under Lend-Lease began in the fall of 1941, it was a great help in the battle for Moscow. If the Germans took Moscow, then the consequences would be extremely negative, Japan, Turkey, Finland were ready and waiting for the fall of Moscow.
      1. +1
        13 June 2019 16: 53
        Siberians saved skiing in Moscow!
      2. +4
        14 June 2019 06: 35
        .... Finland was ready and waiting for the fall of Moscow.

        From the first days, Finland fought against the USSR.
        On June 26, 1941, Finnish President R. Ryti announced that Finland “was at war with the USSR. On July 10, 1941, the commander-in-chief of the Finnish army Mannerheim publicly vowed that he “would not put his sword in the scabbard” and would not end the war until the Finnish troops liberated the White Sea and Olonets Karelia.
      3. +2
        14 June 2019 19: 29
        Quote: bobba94
        It is good that the supply of arms under Lend-Lease began in the fall of 1941, it was a great help in the battle for Moscow. If the Germans took Moscow, then the consequences would be extremely negative, Japan, Turkey, Finland were ready and waiting for the fall of Moscow.

        To drink - to harm health. Do not eat bitter!
        1. Japan after the Halkin Gola was not ready for war - she was trembling with one word - Zhukov
        2. Turkey watched the entry of Soviet troops into Iran - trembled at the sound of tank engines
        3. Finland fought since the beginning of the war, a knife in the back, it's about the Finns. Finns slaughtered Russians in the north of the Leningrad region. They fought very well with the unarmed and wretched.
        In the fall of 1941, a lease-lease agreement was only drawn up. Deliveries that really influenced something began in the spring of 1942. Until that time, the Allies merged convoy after convoy.
        1. 0
          15 June 2019 07: 33
          These deliveries influenced at the most critical moment of the winter of 1941 --- 1942. The Japanese fleet could cut off the supply of gunpowder and explosives from the USA, Canada and England, passing through Vladivostok and deprive the USSR of everything that was mined in Kolyma and transported only by sea from Magadan.



        2. 0
          16 June 2019 04: 29
          Quote: 17085
          In the fall of 1941, a lease-lease agreement was only drawn up.

          The USSR was included in the Lend-Lease program on 01.10.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX.
          Prior to this, the supply of military products went to the USSR through foreign trade (on credit). After the war, the USSR gave this credit for a long time and painfully. Lend-Lease supplies were free.

          Quote: 17085
          Deliveries that really influenced something began in the spring of 1942. Until that time, the Allies merged convoy after convoy.

          In 1941, 7 Arctic convoys arrived in the USSR. Until March 1942, another 6 Arctic convoys arrived in the USSR. In addition, there were supplies along the Far Eastern and Iranian routes.
    2. -2
      13 June 2019 16: 57
      Lend-Lease is a sabotage. We "Timurovites" heard the terrible truth about foreign technology, which broke down and slowed down the offensive. And many planes themselves fell into a tailspin, and the tanks were a good target and could not stand the cold ... So Lend-Lease is a diversion for which we paid gold and lives. ”Import substitution would play a more favorable role, since lend-lease accounted for only 1% of all equipment in the USSR!
      1. +2
        13 June 2019 17: 38
        You tell me, dear man, for which International you will be, for the 2nd, al for the 3rd. Simply put, what kind of Timurovites will you be ..... Arkady Gaidar or his grandson?
      2. 0
        14 June 2019 10: 40
        Dear, did you know that out of almost 10 billion "those" dollars in which the supplies to the USSR were estimated, about 5% was paid in the end? And where did you find exactly 1% of the volume of supplies from that produced on your own. Your nonsense regarding the quality of foreign technology, I will not even undertake to comment ...
      3. -1
        16 June 2019 04: 40
        Quote: prosepoetry
        So Lend-Lease is a diversion for which we paid with gold and lives.

        Lend-lease was free.

        Quote: prosepoetry
        Since Lend-Lease was only 1% of all the equipment of the USSR!

        Amazing nonsense.
        For example, the Americans fed all the armed forces of the USSR. Fully and in accordance with your standards.
        But in the Red Army, the norms were much less. As a result, their food partially went to the civilian sector too. If not for it, the Soviet rear would simply be bent from hunger. The victims of starvation in the rear of the Red Army were enormous, there was simply no food, there was no one to grow crops.
        Without American food supplies, things would have been much worse. By the spring of 1942 there would be no Red Army or Soviet rear.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. +2
      14 June 2019 06: 29
      .... 27 million of our ancestors.

      This figure is not appropriate in the topic under discussion. Since the lion's share of this number is the civilian population. The presence or absence of Lend-Lease would have little impact on civilian casualties.
      1. 0
        14 June 2019 07: 54
        In this case, I do not agree. It is the absence of Lend-Lease that would increase civilian casualties.
        1. +1
          14 June 2019 18: 08
          Bakhit, this is a controversial issue from the category of "what would happen if". Here we are talking about something else - yes, there would have been more losses, but they could. And this is beyond doubt.
          1. +1
            14 June 2019 18: 41
            I also think that they could. In any case, I want to believe it. But it would be nice to know the supply structure by year. The hardest time is 1943. Take an interest in the rules of issuance. By the fall of 1943, the bread delivery standards were reduced. Discontent began to build up in the country. Therefore, in an application for 1943, the USSR did not request weapons, but food. Stew and egg powder saved the country.

            Do not forget a well-known document

            We have lost more than 70 million people, more than 800 million pounds of bread per year and more than 10 million tons of metal per year. We now no longer have predominance over the Germans either in human reserves or in stocks of bread.

            Of course, the Shermans and Cobras could not save the country. Helped very, very little. But high-octane gasoline, gunpowder, chemicals, food, transportation literally saved the country.
            The USSR produced about 10 locomotives during the entire war and practically did not release rails. All received Lend-Lease. But how to stretch communications to the front without rails.
            -------------
            And now it would be nice to draw a parallel to the present. Quite often you can hear that Russia is preparing for war. And who will help this time? China? Unlikely. Maybe Gref, who refuses to finance the military-industrial complex because of US sanctions. For one of his refusals to work in Crimea, he must be tried (well, at least dismissed)
            1. +1
              14 June 2019 18: 52
              And here I disagree with you at all

              Maybe Gref, who refuses to finance the military-industrial complex because of US sanctions.

              - as soon as in martial law some abomination vyaknet about the refusal, so immediately the forehead will be smeared with green stuff. And even with the introduction of martial law, the state has the right to almost any reprisals and all sorts of "gas defenders" immediately go in orderly rows to the mines or to rake snow in the north. Martial law is like that - here the "bangs" of any freaks can end at the firing squad ... they put it down for less (do you think they don't use vyshak here? ... I doubt - it's just that it's all strictly classified and it's not covered in the media to us ordinary citizens) ...
              1. 0
                14 June 2019 19: 17
                We will see
                I try to know the truth and to minimize or exaggerate the significance of any factor, I consider it self-deception. Better to know the truth. And here are Lend-Lease quotes.

                Lend-Lease food supplies were of paramount importance for the Soviet Union in general and for the Red Army in particular (1 tons were delivered from the USA alone). Almost the entire army, as well as a significant share of the “citizen” (mainly employees of key military factories and nomenclatures), were mainly provided with Lend-Lease food supplies with stew, butter, chocolate, etc. And besides, we must remember that food supplies in any case could be easily consumed and in this case were not subject to return or payment. Moreover, it can be confidently argued that, with the exhaustion of reserves at the beginning of the war, in 1943-1945, domestic agriculture, for the most part devastated by the war in the occupied granaries of Ukraine, the North Caucasus, the Black Earth region and remained untouched only in the part of the Non-Black Earth Region and in the Volga Region ( and the virgin lands of Kazakhstan and Southern Siberia had not yet been developed), was not able to feed a multimillion army and "citizen". By 1943, an acute food crisis erupted, when already meager food distribution standards were secretly reduced by almost a third. Therefore, by mid-1944, food supplies supplanted metals and even some types of weapons in Soviet applications. In the total volume of goods imported at the end of the war, food occupied more than 25% of the tonnage. According to the calorific value of this food, based on the norms of wartime, it should have been enough to maintain a 10-million-strong army for more than three years

                Or such an opinion. The film is long for almost an hour. But it's worth watching

              2. -2
                16 June 2019 06: 15
                Quote: A.Lex
                And even with the introduction of martial law, the state has the right to almost any repression, and all sorts of "gas defenders" immediately go in orderly rows to the mines or to rake snow in the north.

                And why did you decide that you would start with them, and not with you?
                1. 0
                  18 June 2019 12: 46
                  And even with the introduction of martial law, the state has the right to almost any repression, and all sorts of "gas defenders" immediately go in orderly rows to the mines or to rake snow in the north.

                  And why did you decide that you would start with them, and not with you?

                  Because I have nothing to do with this shoble.
                  1. -4
                    18 June 2019 15: 29
                    Quote: A.Lex
                    Because I have nothing to do with this shoble.

                    Well, that doesn’t matter at all, that’s exactly it.
                    "The forest is being cut, the chips are flying."
                    Or do you think that millions of repressed (and hundreds of thousands of executed) in 1938-39. were all anti-Soviet and foreign spies? Naive young man.
                    Therefore, do not hesitate, if something happens, they will start with you and people like you. "Don't be dashing while it is quiet."
            2. -3
              16 June 2019 06: 14
              Quote: Bakht
              The hardest time is 1943.

              The most difficult time was winter 1941-42. "Leningrad" was all over the country. The victims were huge.

              Quote: Bakht
              Quite often you can hear that Russia is preparing for war.

              Yes? With whom?

              Quote: Bakht
              And who will help this time? China?

              It’s not quite the opposite.
          2. -3
            16 June 2019 06: 11
            Quote: A.Lex
            Here we are talking about something else - yes there would have been more losses, but we could have.

            No, they couldn't. And even Dzhugashvili himself has repeatedly stated this to his "comrades".
            1. -1
              18 June 2019 12: 47
              Ndam ... a bad case ...
        2. +1
          14 June 2019 19: 31
          Quote: Bakht
          In this case, I do not agree. It is the absence of Lend-Lease that would increase civilian casualties.

          Babi Yar "left" due to the lack of a Lend-Lease !?
          1. +1
            14 June 2019 19: 48
            And what does Babi Yar have to do with it? Hunger in the rear do not consider?
            Have you read K. Simonov "Soldiers are not born"? Or Vigdorov "Chernigovka"? Or other literature on the rear of the USSR during the war. Can you remember the Weiners "Era of Mercy"? Have you heard anything about the 1946 famine?
            In connection with the food situation, I always remember the summer of 1942. Why did Stalin not allow the evacuation of Stalingrad? Googling is interesting. I will not tire of repeating that during the war years, twice, Stalin had to make the most difficult decisions. And God forbid anyone to face this dilemma. What to choose ...
            1. 0
              15 June 2019 11: 19
              Do not confuse cause and effect. And where is the Lend-Lease?
              Could Genocide Victims Reduce or Avoid Lend-Lease? This is exactly what I see in your comments, as long as you don’t start to turn the weather vane.
              1. 0
                15 June 2019 15: 18
                What genocide are you talking about? Do not confuse round with warm. Lend Lease saved thousands and millions of lives with its product component. One of the causes of the 1946 famine was the cessation of food lending.
                If you knew history as Comrade Stalin knew it, then you would not be surprised at such an order

                Order of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief on May 1, 1944 No. 70
                I.V. Stalin
                ------
                Our great allies have contributed significantly to these successes. - The United States and Great Britain, which hold the front in Italy against the Germans and divert a significant part of the German troops from us, supply us with very valuable strategic raw materials and weapons, systematically bombard German military installations and thus undermine the military power of the latter.

                One of the reasons for the defeat of Russia in World War I and the growing revolutionary situation is the collapse of the food supply system in large cities. Stalin was not going to allow this.
                You did not understand anything in my comments. For the gifted, who are rigidly fixed at their point, Lend-Lease deliveries saved the USSR from economic collapse in 1943.

                PS "A person has a point of view. When he narrows down to one point, then the person says - I have a point of view."
                1. 0
                  15 June 2019 15: 27
                  Getting into the conversation, take the trouble to find out about the subject of the dispute.
                  We talked about 27 million Soviet people who died in the war. How would a Lend-Lease help occupied Kiev, which during the occupation had lost about two million inhabitants?
                  How did Lend-Lease help defend Moscow?
                  1. -1
                    15 June 2019 15: 43
                    Who "got" into the conversation is still a question. Without Lend-Lease, the number of deaths would have been much higher. And what leshoy could you bring Babi Yar to Lend-Lease?
                    Lend-Lease helped win the war. Without it, I'm afraid that approximately 100 million people were subject to destruction.
                    Is this clear to a person with a clear mind?

                    Super sonic (Super sonic)
                    but much more than 27 million of our ancestors could die.

                    This is the first message where the figure of 27 million appears. Read carefully and think the main thing. Without this process, all your phrases here have absolutely no meaning.
                  2. -4
                    16 June 2019 06: 21
                    Quote: 17085
                    We talked about 27 million Soviet people who died in the war.

                    And we must talk about 42 million. Dead.

                    Quote: 17085
                    occupied Kiev, which during the occupation lost about two million inhabitants?

                    By the time of the capture of Kiev by the Germans, about 300-400 thousand people remained there. In general, at the beginning of the war, 846 thousand people lived there.

                    Quote: 17085
                    How did Lend-Lease help defend Moscow?

                    M-yes.
            2. 0
              16 June 2019 12: 14
              Memories of Siberian women:

              War, worked more and less supply. Plot 6 acres, but you can’t plow! This is state land. Let it empty and swell with hunger ..
      2. -2
        16 June 2019 04: 42
        Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
        The presence or absence of Lend-Lease would have little impact on civilian casualties.

        You are very mistaken. Read, I’ve already written about this somewhere nearby. I do not want to repeat myself.
    5. -2
      16 June 2019 06: 07
      Quote: Super soniC
      unfortunately, and to our happiness, this is so, we would have won the war without their help

      Actually, you place accents wrong.
      These are not they to us, it was we who helped them. And for this they supplied us with equipment, weapons, etc.
      Those. the boss was different, not the one you mean.
      So, without all this, by the spring of 1942, the USSR would have no army or rear. So would die of hunger.

      Quote: Super soniC
      but much more than 27 million of our ancestors could die.

      And so much more perished. According to the data of the USSR State Planning Commission declassified in 2017, direct losses amounted to 42 million people. And another 11 million people, indirect losses.
  2. +2
    13 June 2019 16: 51
    Would the price be higher without "mass graves"? Something I doubt. Without this rusty and broken, according to veterans, technology, for which they paid in gold, the war would have been won faster. Lend-Lease is not help, but sabotage !!!
    1. +1
      14 June 2019 10: 56
      Examples in the studio, pliz ...
    2. -3
      14 June 2019 17: 12
      You carry nonsense, dear, and stupidity.
      Both Mikoyan and Zhukov in their memoirs say that without a Lend-Lease warrior would have ended in 1942.
      Victory is not the Soviet Union.
      1. 0
        14 June 2019 17: 52
        They didn’t say that. No need to lie ....
      2. 0
        14 June 2019 18: 10
        Igorzxc (igorzxc), well then - give a link, read WHAT exactly and HOW they said about l / l.
    3. -2
      16 June 2019 06: 27
      Quote: prosepoetry
      Without this rusty and breaking technology according to veterans, for which they paid for gold, the war would have been won faster. Lend-lease is not help, but sabotage !!!

      It seems not spring and not autumn. Why then exacerbation?
    4. -2
      16 June 2019 12: 19
      The turn of the war allegedly in Kursk. The industry recovered and began to drive allegedly modern weapons (but the T-34-76 against the Tiger turned out to be obsolete). So why did Kingcobras order at 44 and 45? They didn’t reach the front, supposedly in the rear air defense, but in reality their mustached shore for the next war with the Anglo-Saxons.
      1. -2
        23 June 2019 23: 22
        Quote: ar-17
        but the T-34-76 against the Tiger turned out to be obsolete

        Outdated?
        Yes, approximately, like a barrow against the F-16. Those. they had only a common name, "tanks". Nothing else.
  3. +5
    13 June 2019 17: 42
    ... they almost never write about the help of such a country as Mongolia. They selflessly supplied everything that their country produced - horses, sheepskin short fur coats, beef, etc.
  4. +4
    13 June 2019 17: 53
    Quote: Yuri 5347
    ... they almost never write about the help of such a country as Mongolia. They selflessly supplied everything that their country produced - horses, sheepskin short fur coats, beef, etc.

    The irony, by the way, is inappropriate. In war, you need beef, and short fur coats, and horses. The Germans won themselves, to a large extent, on horseback.
  5. +3
    13 June 2019 18: 15
    It would have helped us more if the mattresses had not supplied the Hitlerites with oil and other military products !.
    http://artyushenkooleg.ru/wp-oleg/archives/12140
    1. -3
      16 June 2019 06: 28
      Quote: Robert Robertovich
      It would have helped us more if the mattresses had not supplied the Hitlerites with oil and other military products !.

      Why write nonsense?
  6. +2
    14 June 2019 00: 12
    I would thank the Allies for the petroleum products they sent to the USSR.
    1. +2
      14 June 2019 18: 11
      Bakht (Bakhtiyar), and we would have thanked them even more if they hadn’t delivered ALL THIS to the Nazis - that’s for sure the war would have ended earlier!
      1. 0
        14 June 2019 18: 26
        Officially not delivered. Through shell companies, yes, that was. Well, deliveries went to Sweden, Spain. Formally neutral countries.
        Specifically for oil - supplies went to Kriegsmarine. Held the German submarines. The Wehrmacht was supplied from Romania, Hungary and its own production. Moreover, own production by 1944 amounted to 50% of the needs of the ground forces.
        1. 0
          14 June 2019 21: 01
          It’s useless to explain. They don’t read anything, they don’t know anything. They only remember how they were told in pioneers how we defeated Germany without damned capitalists and do not want to know anything else. I myself was like that and reasoned the same way until I became interested in the issue of lend-lease and re-read a lot of literature.
  7. +3
    14 June 2019 00: 28
    History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood. Lend-Lease was, and played a significant role in our victory. The "second front" stew and egg powder fed the army (although the Mongols supplied no less). Explosives and aluminum made it possible to build aircraft and equip shells. Wilis and Studers transported everything: from personnel to Katyushas. Valentines and Matilda fought decently in the south of the Union. Shermans were very fond of all tankers. "Hurricanes", and together with the British pilots, we received in the most difficult time - in the fall of 1941, when there was a lack of not only aircraft, but also combat pilots. "Airacobra" was tested at the Flight Research Institute, some changes were made to the design (in particular, some of the weapons were removed), and the plane began to fly in such a way that the Americans are still proud of it, and the "King Cobra" was generally called a Russian plane, and it flew with us back in the 50s. Even Colts and Tommy Guns entered the army. There is no need to ask the question: what would have happened without Lend-Lease. You just need to say "thank you" for him. We defeated the Germans ourselves, but thanks anyway.
    1. +1
      14 June 2019 10: 54
      Well, why not raise this question? Because the answer will be scary - even years and millions more, and not the fact that you could win at all?
    2. -3
      16 June 2019 06: 33
      Quote: av58
      The "second front" stew and egg powder fed the army (although the Mongols supplied no less).

      Why would it be no less?

      Quote: av58
      "Airacobra" was tested at the Flight Research Institute, some changes were made to the design (in particular, some of the weapons were removed), and the plane began to fly in such a way that the Americans are still proud of it.

      But LII, what is this? LII during the war improved the American design. It’s even somehow not funny.
      And it’s ridiculous to talk about "Soviet changes".

      Quote: av58
      We defeated the Germans ourselves,

      You are an American?

      Quote: av58
      You just need to say "thank you" for him

      Not necessary. Americans tried for themselves.
      1. 0
        18 June 2019 12: 53
        Well, at least, they took an interest in the network before showing their ignorance -

        But LII, what is this?

        LII - Flight Research Institute named after M. M. Gromov
        1. -3
          18 June 2019 15: 22
          Quote: A.Lex
          LII - Flight Research Institute named after M. M. Gromov

          I am aware of this.
          I don’t know on what basis it was concluded that after the adjustment by those "experts" of first-class American products, these very products allegedly became better.
          This cannot be, because it can never be. Remember this.
          And yet, if they were such "tough spotters", why did they not correct Soviet products? And Soviet pilots throughout WW2 had to fly in any UG.
          And one more thing, and who is Gromov?
          I know Chkalov. He is known for the fact that with his complicity in the armament of the Red Army was adopted the complete UG I-16. Moreover, this UG (I-16) was not just a UG, but a conceptual UG. Dead end aviation branch.
          And what did Gromov do?
          1. +1
            21 June 2019 17: 55
            semsemch, tell us about the shift of C.M. on the P-39 during the battle. Indicate the reason and result. The ONLY merits of this aircraft (which the Americans and the Angles SAVED in the USSR) are the high security of the pilot and the cannon - 37mm (true rate of fire ...). Almost all planes flew only experienced pilots, as He was very capricious in piloting, especially during the battle. These aircraft began to arrive in the USSR during the Second World War. At the time r-39 entered the Amer forces (after 1938), the civil war in Spain had already ended, in which I-16 took part ...
            The I-16 is the foremost aircraft of its time, as the war in Spain proved, until Bf appeared. Well, the fact that the Soviet design aviation school was lagging behind the western one is understandable - there were few PREFERRED constructors ... The consequences of civil and intervention were to blame, as well as the not-so-competent economic and social policy of the leadership of Soviet Russia at the initial stage of state building ( which is understandable - for the first time a state of this type was created).
            and yes - do not tell everyone present here about the "first-class" American products that were supplied to the USSR - they were shaking off the OLD, basically saying that it was "super-duper") but when our people asked to supply B-17, B-24 and B- 29, then they got a refusal (why is that ???), and this is only one OUT ...
            1. -1
              22 June 2019 01: 19
              The ONLY merits of this aircraft (which the Americans and the Angles SAVED in the USSR) are the high security of the pilot and the cannon - 37 mm (true rate of fire ...). Almost all planes flew only experienced pilots, as He was very capricious in piloting, especially during the battle.

              No, well, it’s clear that Pokryshkin (Rechkalov, etc.) was a fool. I did not know what to fly on. I did not consult with you on time.
              Although, most likely they did not trust them La and Yak. Probably.

              Quote: A.Lex
              These aircraft began to arrive in the USSR during the Second World War.

              During WWII, these aircraft were not delivered to the USSR. They were supplied to the USSR during his participation in WW2.

              Quote: A.Lex
              I-16 - the advanced aircraft of YOUR time

              I-16 is a flying nonsense. And above all, conceptual. An attempt by "Soviet aircraft designers" (without higher education) to surprise the world with some exoticism.

              Quote: A.Lex
              what the war in Spain proved

              The war in Spain proved that this is nonsense.

              Quote: A.Lex
              The consequences of civil and intervention are to blame,

              Just in case, let me remind you that the Bolsheviks launched a massacre called "Civil War" in Russia.
              There was essentially no intervention. This is largely an invention of the same Bolsheviks.

              Quote: A.Lex
              (which is understandable - for the first time a state of this type was created).

              In fact, theocratic slaveholding societies in the history of mankind have been darkness. And the Bolsheviks (specifically Dzhugashvili) did not come up with anything new. In addition to a specific type of pseudo-religion. In the USSR (since 1927) it was Marxism-Leninism.

              Quote: A.Lex
              don't tell everyone here about "first class" American products

              What products should I talk about? American "high-end products"?
              1. +1
                26 June 2019 21: 14
                There was essentially no intervention. This is largely an invention of the same Bolsheviks.

                More and more I have no questions about such "expedition", everything is clear with you.
                1. -4
                  26 June 2019 21: 41
                  Quote: A.Lex
                  More and more I have no questions about such "expedition", everything is clear with you.

                  I have your questions to the stars.
                  Foreign troops LEGALLY were in Russia under the Entente treaty. At the request of the LEGAL AUTHORITIES of Russia. And they did not give a damn about the opinion of a handful of rootless ragged Putschists.
                  Therefore, foreign intervention is an invention of the Bolsheviks. And nothing more.
                  1. 0
                    26 June 2019 22: 09
                    Ndaaaaa ...... Everything is sad with you ... very sad ...
  8. +1
    14 June 2019 05: 58
    I liked the last paragraph in this article. Zhukov wrote about the role of the Siberian division in his memoirs. At the beginning of my career, I worked on American machine tools. Fine machines.
    1. +1
      14 June 2019 21: 08
      In the mid-60s, I accidentally heard from my uncle that he was working on an American lathe. I, then a schoolboy, did not believe it, came to his work and looked. A large lathe, on a bed a plate in English - Ohio, 1940 and the name of the company, I already forgot which one.
  9. +3
    14 June 2019 06: 54
    This article is intended primarily for the Russian reader. Then why do we say such words.

    Thus, the contribution of the Allies to the victory over the Third Reich cannot be denied, cannot be exaggerated, nor can be minimized.

    For what? Who denies or understates?
    An absolutely unnecessary topic for discussion. Western historians and politicians misinterpret the results of WWII. And such a protrusion of the notorious Lend-Lease only pours water on their mill of "truth". Lend-Lease is constantly in the spotlight. Thanks to this, the younger generation gets the impression that lend-lease was the main factor in victory.
    Much more important is an article on how a Soviet soldier saved the world from the brown plague. And he would have saved the world without Lend-Lease. And there are practically no such articles. request
    1. 0
      14 June 2019 10: 52
      Rather, it will be said that there is no desire to search. There are articles and books ... You just need to set a goal and find what you need.
    2. +1
      14 June 2019 17: 27
      In December 1941, the strategic supply of gunpowder of the USSR ended. Gunpowder plants were in the west of the country, that is, lost at the beginning of the war. In the winter of 1941 --- 1942, the Red Army fought with English, Canadian and American gunpowder.
      1. -1
        16 June 2019 12: 23
        And why are these plants so close to the border? According to Suvorov, to carry closer, conquering Europe according to the Stalin plan of capture.
    3. -3
      16 June 2019 06: 46
      Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
      Western historians and politicians are misinterpreting the results of WWII.

      In fact, this has long been successfully done in Sovagitrop.

      Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
      The younger generation thanks to this creates the opinion that Lend-Lease was the main factor in victory.

      For the USSR, yes, it may be the main thing.

      Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
      Much more important is an article on how a Soviet soldier saved the world from the brown plague.

      Is the whole world right? And how would she, this plague, spread to the whole world?
      Yes, and one more thing, the USSR was among the countries of the Anti-Hitler coalition, which won in WWII. There were several dozen countries in this coalition. Something around 2 or 40. This is if you are not in the know.
      And yet, Dzhugashvili defined the role of the USSR in WW2 in Europe as "one of three". The fruits of victory were divided in about the same proportions. Those. somehow it turns out that he did not agree with you.

      Quote: gorbunov.vladisl
      And he would have saved the world without Lend-Lease.

      But then, what did the USSR ask for in the Anti-Hitler coalition and request a Lend-Lease if it could handle it itself?
      What beauty was outlined - they themselves defeated the Germans, all of Soviet Europe. But no, they ran to the Anglo-Saxons with outstretched hands. It turns out that everything was not as in write?
  10. +1
    14 June 2019 08: 40
    Lord, again a half-empty article.
    Is it difficult to at least collect information? See the numbers, go to the website of the State Reserve?
    No, again a little numbers and a lot of water ....
    1. 0
      14 June 2019 10: 49
      The article is intended for those who do not know anything real about LL and do not want to know. In addition, focus only on tanks and planes to obscure questions about factory equipment, railway transport and food.
  11. +2
    14 June 2019 17: 32
    Helped win? Yes!
    Have secured a victory? Not!
  12. 0
    15 June 2019 16: 15
    Land Liz supplies were supervised by A.I. Mikoyan
    - And how do you assess Lend-Lease, its role in the armed struggle of the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War?

    “I value military-economic supplies to us from our Western allies, mainly American Lend-Lease supplies,” Mikoyan answered, “although not to the same extent as some Western authors.

    And, explaining his statement, he added:

    - Imagine, for example, an army equipped with all the necessary weapons, well trained, but whose warriors are not fed enough or worse. What kind of fighters will these be? And so when the American stew, the oatmeal, the egg powder, the flour, other products began to come to us, what weighty additional calories our soldiers received right away! And not only the soldiers: something was falling to the rear.

    Or take a car supply. After all, we received, as far as I remember, taking into account losses in the way of about 400 thousand first-class cars of the time, such as Studebaker, Ford, passenger Willis and amphibians. Our entire army was actually on wheels and what wheels! As a result, its maneuverability increased and the pace of advance significantly increased.

    Yes ... - Mikoyan said thoughtfully. - Without Lend-Lease, we would probably have fought for another year and a half.
  13. 0
    23 June 2019 16: 04
    Assessing the significance of Lend-Lease supplies, in December 1943, at the Tehran Conference, Stalin rightly remarked that "without American production, this war would probably have been lost."
    Anastas Mikoyan, as the People’s Commissar of Foreign Trade of the USSR directly involved in accepting Lend-Lease deliveries, said many years after the war: “Without Lend-Lease, we would certainly have fought for an extra year and a half.”
    1. -2
      23 June 2019 23: 29
      Quote: the lucky one is healthy
      Anastas Mikoyan, as the People’s Commissar of Foreign Trade of the USSR directly involved in accepting Lend-Lease deliveries, said many years after the war: “Without Lend-Lease, we would certainly have fought for an extra year and a half.”

      Lied, like all the Bolsheviks.
      Without Lend-Lease, the war would not have lasted beyond the spring of 1942. By this time, the Red Army and the territories left under the Bolsheviks would have died out of hunger so much that there would have been no one to "arm" with the rubbish that they could still "forge in the rear". To tell the truth, they could not forge anything sensible there. There were no explosives, no gunpowder, not even gasoline.
      Therefore, it would be written to the Bolsheviks at the latest in the spring of 1942 to surrender and set off "to build socialism" across the Volga and the Northern Dvina (between Astrakhan and Arkhangelsk, to the east).
  14. +2
    25 June 2019 08: 03
    The cobras received by the USSR were planes that England refused, because of their low flight characteristics and their propensity for a corkscrew ... Sherman received the nickname from the English Rolson (lighter), because it burned like a match. In the US Army, the tank received the nickname (fried ass) ... Tank General Lee (Grand) received the nickname in the USSR (mass grave for seven). That, I think, says it all ...