US/UK vs USSR in the aftermath of WWII

This is a general forum for all types of posts related to Military models.

Moderators: dnichols, GHQ, Mk 1

Mk 1
E5
Posts: 2383
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:21 am
Location: Silicon Valley, CA

Post by Mk 1 »

DrBig offered for our consideration:

for the record, no JSIII's were used against Japan. They weren't even fit for action until the early 50's
Dr. B:

Could you offer some of the sources you may have used to come to such a definitive conclusion?

Do you mean that no JS-IIIs were even sent to the Far East for the Manchurian operations, or that none actually saw action?
-Mark 1
Difficile est, saturam non scribere.
"It is hard NOT to write satire." - Decimus Iunius Juvenalis, 1st Century AD

DrBig
E5
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:32 am
Location: North Carolina

Post by DrBig »

OK, the two I have are: "Red Star-White Elepnant? Were the IS-3 & T-10 Series Soviet Tanks the Monsters They Seemed in the 1950's? Not According to Russian Sources..."
by CWO2(ret.)Stephen L. "Cookie" Sewell in Armor Magazine Jul/Aug2002

and more recently "The IS Tanks" by Mikhail Baryatinskiy; Ian Allen Pub. 2006

It's really great that Russians are starting to publish in English, finally.

The JS-III was apparently ripe with serious structural problems which required 3 major refits to get them combat deployable by the mid-1950's. Isn't if funny, usually we only think of German tanks having these problems! :P

BattlerBritain
E5
Posts: 628
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Somerset, UK

Post by BattlerBritain »

Fantastic thread with some superb points and observations.

As an aside I tried a 'Patton was right' scenario some years back using 'The Operational Art of War' computer game.

The scenario was based in late 45/early 46 with what units were still in theatre or could be rushed back there. It used B-17s and B-24s.

The results were surprising in that it was basically a draw. On the ground superior Allied tactical performance helped to offset the greater Soviet numbers, but the Soviets just had so much stuff.

In the air the B-17s did their best but again the Soviet numbers blunted the qualititive advantage, sometimes with severe B-17 losses.

It all came down to which side could supply their forces the quickest.

In the end the Soviets got to the coast, but at a massive price.

On a (much) smaller scale I remember reading the history of the British 11th Armoured Division, which got to Kiel just before the Soviets did. The Brits had Brit Paras with them and apparently there was nearly a major punch-up with the Soviets in Kiel that first night of occupation as the Brits had occupied the hospital. What do you get lots of in a hospital? - Nurses! A memorable quote from one of the Paras: "F**k off - they're ours!" Would make for an interesting little scenario - first to get to the Nurses :-)

Mickel
E5
Posts: 321
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 2:00 pm
Location: Adelaide, Australia

Post by Mickel »

Yes... well... Paras. Quite.
In the end the Soviets got to the coast, but at a massive price.
If they did, that would a pretty much count as a win, wouldn't it? There is only one country that could get back on the continent, and they wouldn't really have that much vested interest in doing so would they? France and the UK couldn't have done it - their armies would have been spent in the withdrawal.

mlcolbert
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:39 am
Contact:

Post by mlcolbert »

this thread is possibly another case for us all to see if we can put into a seperate thread our preferred sources, ones which we have confidence in etc. I don't know this may assist with the conversation etc and it would help with those people wanting to do the extra research for the what if scenarios.

For some it may be a major undertaking, but if we were to limit it to 5-10 max???


michael

GMills
E5
Posts: 158
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:59 am
Location: Leavenworth,KS

Post by GMills »

For those of you that like "what if" battles I submit the following timeline for WWII.

Stalingrad 1946
“Die Mutter von alle Kampfâ€￾
Timeline of Events
31 May 1940 British withdrawal from Dunkirk and Narvik.

June 1940 France surrenders to German forces.

10 June 1940 Italy enters the war against the Allies.

July 1940 Germany invades England (Operation Sealion).

15 August 1940 British government surrenders.

30 August 1940 Scotland surrenders. Ireland declares for Germany.

Late 1940-1941 Strong pro-Isolationist forces in the U.S. declare the “European Warâ€￾ off-limits to interference by American forces.

Early 1941 Italy invades Egypt, seizes Suez ** CENSORED **.

December 1941 Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and invades Hawaii. U.S. declares war on Japan.

Early 1942 Japan sweeps the Far East, captures Singapore, Rangoon, Philippines, New Guinea, and Northern Australia. Other forces have taken the Aleutians, Manchuria, coastal cities of China, French Indochina, Thailand, Burma, and are well into India.

May 1942 Germany attacks Russia (Operation Barbarossa)

June 1942 Japan declares war on Russia, seizes Vladivostok, Sakhalin Island and the Kamchatka peninsula.

July 1942 Germany liberated Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. German forces on the outskirts of Leningrad. Finland enters War against Russia.

22 July 1942 Army Group South on outskirts of Stalingrad but is unable to take city. Stalingrad is razed. Battle stalemated.

1 August 1942 Leningrad falls.

15 August 1942 Army Group Centre on outskirts of Moscow but halted by furious Soviet assaults.

15 August 1942 U.S. invades Aleutians. First American amphibian invasion since 1846.

30 August 1942 Aleutians liberated, but costly.

30 Sept 1942 U.S. attacks the Hawaiian Islands, attack is repulsed at little cost to Japanese. U.S. loses 2 Fleet carriers.

15 Oct 1942 Japan invades Mexico. Mexico and Japan announce an alliance.

30 Oct 1942 Japan invades Southern California but invasion expected. Japanese losses high. Invasion repulsed.

1943 Germany goes to full war production against Soviets. War is stalemated.
War with Russia settles down to small isolated actions.
Japan consolidates Mexico, threatens U.S. southern flank. Japan consolidates gains in Far East. Production stepped up.
Italy sweeps unopposed through the Middle East seizes oil production facilities. All of North Africa under Italian control.

1944 U.S. invades Japan-held Mexico. Clears Japanese troops from North America, Mexico surrenders to U.S.
Japanese fleet masses off San Francisco, draws out remainder of U.S. fleet and destroys it. San Francisco is heavily bombed and bombarded. Japanese fleet withdraws.

Germany at stalemate with Soviets. Neither can gain significant ground. Germany proposes peace. Stalin refuses as long as German forces are on Russian soil.

1945 Japan invades Panama. U.S. broke their codes and is waiting. Invasion forces lose heavily and Japanese fleet takes worst beating of war.

1946 U.S. attacks and seizes Wake Island. Japan loses a good part of her remaining fleet. U.S. forces gain victory with only moderate losses. This battle may be the possible turning point in war against Japan.

Muslims declare a holy war against Italian troops. Italian Army routed from the Middle East, but holding a line along Suez ** CENSORED ** in Egypt.

Germany plans major offensive in Stalingrad sector. Equipment massed for push with Moscow as objective. Soviets learn of offensive and secretly mass forces of their own. Largest tank battle of the war is shaping up in what will become known as the Battle for Stalingrad or
The Mother of all Battles.

thetourist
E5
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:08 am
Location: Jacksonville

Post by thetourist »

I have been searching in vain for some statistics from the end of WWII regarding US/UK and Soviet army strenghts, tank numbers, air force strength and so on. Does anyone have any references which might shed some light?

ltcconard
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:51 am
Location: Seoul, ROK

The US in 1950

Post by ltcconard »

Take a look at the strength of the Army and Marines in 1950, the Army had about 10 (or eleven, (if you count the extra troops in germany on occupation) divisions. The USMC had the equivalent of one division. Most of those divisions (except for the 82nd) were at 2/3rds strength, and National Guard/Army Reserve divisions were even a lower level. Task Force Smith (summer 1950) had to borrow lieutenants from the rest of the regiment so that they could field a two-company battalion. No tank companies in the regiments, artillery battalions only had two firing batteries. Take a look at Rottman, Korean War Order of Battle. The cries to "bring the boys home!" in 1945/46 were being heeded. And rfemember, that America had "the Bomb" so we weren't going to fight any land wars any more. Omar Bradley said that there would never be another major amphibious assault (a couple years BEFORE Inchon. :oops:

Bruce
Conard

DrBig
E5
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:32 am
Location: North Carolina

Post by DrBig »


DrBig
E5
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:32 am
Location: North Carolina

Post by DrBig »


DrBig
E5
Posts: 227
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:32 am
Location: North Carolina

Post by DrBig »

Four years after the end of World War II the number of Regular Army divisions had fallen to ten. Overseas the 1st Infantry Division was scattered among installations in Germany, while the 1st Cavalry Division and the 7th, 24th, and 25th Infantry Divisions were stationed throughout Japan. In the United States the 2d Armored Division was split between Camp (later Fort) Hood, Texas, and Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The 2d Infantry Division was based at Fort Lewis, Washington; the 3d Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Georgia, and Fort Devens, Massachusetts; the 11th Airborne Division (less one inactive regimental combat team) at Fort Campbell, Kentucky; and the 82d Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The twenty-five Organized Reserve Corps and twenty-seven National Guard divisions were at various levels of readiness.

RoughRIder
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 8:49 pm
Location: Indiana

Post by RoughRIder »

There is a computer game called Hearts of Iron II - Doomsday which will allow you to play out this very same scenario.

http://www.heartsofiron2.com/dd/

I have included a link to anyone that is seriously interested in finding out the outcome of this event. From what i have seen from the startup of the game, it looks like it would take at the least several weeks of serious play before you found out about the outcome.

Doug

thetourist
E5
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 3:08 am
Location: Jacksonville

Post by thetourist »

Was looking through the archives and thought I might bump this one due to the influx of 47 what ifs hitting the market!

suisse6
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 3:21 am
Location: Phoenix, Arizona

US v. Soviets

Post by suisse6 »

I have actually played the "doomsday" scenario on Hearts of Iron II and took care of the soviets with little problem. However, I have to mention this caveat, I did so because I knew I would be fighting them at the end. Thus, I was able to conserve my resources to really pour it on them. Had I not done so, I think I still could have beat them, but it would have been much more difficult and I may not have.

This brings me to this question, I think the outcome of a "what if" between the Soviets and the Western Allies is somewhat predicated on how early the Western Allies made that decision. If it was planned, I think they would have been quite successful, especially if it was considered by the end of 1944. If however it was an unforeseen spur of the moment conflagration, then, I think they would have been hard pressed to successfully repel the Russians, let alone be victorious.

piersyf
E5
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 1:59 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Post by piersyf »

There are a lot of difficult questions in this scenario, which in many ways also leaves a lot of options! To my mind, the primary triggers in 1945 would have been one of 3 things;
1) the original reason for WW2 in Europe was the liberation of Poland. Churchill tried to get US backing for the self determination of Poland in 1945 but failed. If the US had backed the claim, you have a trigger for continued conflict.
2) The US decides that Stalin can't be trusted. Only happen after Truman becomes president, which sets a date. US becomes far more aggressive in the division of Europe (ie, self determination for all, no satellite states)
3) Stalin goes for broke.

In reverse order, Stalin may have used the ending of Lend Lease as a trigger (September 45) for conflict with the West (no more goodies, nothing left to lose). I am certain this was considered, but the US having nukes would have put him off. Also, the Soviet economy was in dire straits; US food aid during Lend Lease may have constituted a small part of Soviet food reserves during the war, but the component of that food was not minor; approximately 90% of the fats in the Russian diet came from the US. Coupled to that the damage to farms in the Ukraine and you have a very restrictive diet. Also, some ridiculous proportion of explosives were supplied by the US (50%?), which isn't an issue after a war, but curtailing Russian ammunition supplies by half would be an issue during a war. Of course the US would have considered an attack by Stalin as a greater act of treachery than Pearl Harbour.

The US may have argued over sovereignty but I doubt would have gone to war over it. Maybe pick one country that was worth fighting for and have a 'limited war' over that. The greater likelihood was a joint US UK support for an independent Poland. That would have got right up Stalin's nose.

Oh, something else worth mentioning... the Soviets had no navy to speak of. The US Navy and RN could have guaranteed raids anywhere along the Arctic coast during summer. The US and China attack across Siberia, The US and UK also had access through Iran. Also, I suspect that B29's could reach large parts of Russia from all directions, maybe even over the North Pole.

Plenty of scope though!

Post Reply