General Patton's March to Moscow

[Lord MJ]

Say that it summer 1945.



If the US dropped a couple of nukes on Russia after VJ day, August 5th, how could Russia not lose?

America didn't have any nuclear weapons after VJ day, the used the only ones they had against Japan, and in the test.


It was several months before more were constructed.

[MKSheppard]

Patton gets his ass handed to him.

Nope. the USAAF just comes roaring out of the sky, with endless hordes of
P-51s, P-47s, B-17s, B-24s, and B-29s and makes COBRA look like child's
play, with entire Soviet Tank Corps (their equivalent of Armored divisions)
annihilated dozens of miles before they even reach the front lines.

And then the Soviet Artillery meets US Artillery, and the resultant counter
battery fire annihilates the miles upon miles of 152mm guns stacked wheel
to wheel.

And just for shits and giggles, we decide to invade the USSR deep behind
their own lines with a little group of people we like to call the United States
Navy and Marine Corps.

[phongn]

America didn't have any nuclear weapons after VJ day, the used the only ones they had against Japan, and in the test.

It was several months before more were constructed.

There was a third unassembled bomb after Nagasaki. Furthermore, while there would be a delay afterwards, mass production would allow for quite a few to be dropped against the USSR.

[phongn]

And then the Soviet Artillery meets US Artillery, and the resultant counter
battery fire annihilates the miles upon miles of 152mm guns stacked wheel
to wheel.

IIRC, Soviet artillery was very good for pre-planned barrages, but for on-the-fly fire support they were lacking. OTOH, the American command and control network was well suited for such things.

[MKSheppard]

IIRC, Soviet artillery was very good for pre-planned barrages, but for on-the-fly fire support they were lacking. OTOH, the American command and control network was well suited for such things.

You also forget that we were very very good with such arcane concepts
as "time on target" and "counter-battery"

[phongn]

IIRC, Soviet artillery was very good for pre-planned barrages, but for on-the-fly fire support they were lacking. OTOH, the American command and control network was well suited for such things.

You also forget that we were very very good with such arcane concepts
as "time on target" and "counter-battery"

Yes, though IMHO the American C2I capability is much more important here. COL Supatra once noted that when two armies have a meeting engagement it's more the C4ISR ability (limited really to C2I in WW2) that's important rather than the relative size of the armies (to an extent).

Guess who has the best C2I in the war?

[Sea Skimmer]

IIRC, Soviet artillery was very good for pre-planned barrages, but for on-the-fly fire support they were lacking. OTOH, the American command and control network was well suited for such things.

It was near impossible for lower level commanders to get support from more then the regimental 120mm mortars. There divisional guns where only 76, later 85mm, all 122,152 and the rare 203mm guns where held at higher levels as where multiple rocket launchers. While Russia's huge 20,000 gun barrages where unmatched, ever, it took months to get ready for them, and overall US artillery fired more rounds during the war.

American forces meanwhile once fired a 900-gun army wide TOT barrage on an Italian town, essentially on the fly at the request of forward units. Though it took over an hour to make all the required calculations.More routinely a single request for a fire mission would bring down the fire of every 105 and 155mm battalion in a division and likely some higher up 155mm guns as well.

[Patrick Degan]

Patton gets his ass handed to him.

Nope. the USAAF just comes roaring out of the sky, with endless hordes of
P-51s, P-47s, B-17s, B-24s, and B-29s and makes COBRA look like child's
play, with entire Soviet Tank Corps (their equivalent of Armored divisions)
annihilated dozens of miles before they even reach the front lines.

And then the Soviet Artillery meets US Artillery, and the resultant counter
battery fire annihilates the miles upon miles of 152mm guns stacked wheel
to wheel.

And just for shits and giggles, we decide to invade the USSR deep behind
their own lines with a little group of people we like to call the United States
Navy and Marine Corps.

Yeah, yeah, sure. Whatever helps you to get off, I suppose...

[MKSheppard]

Yeah, yeah, sure. Whatever helps you to get off, I suppose...

It's not my fault you're stuck in the entire process of thinking that
the Red Bear was an unbeatable monster. Hint: The Russians routinely
kept divisions in the fight until they were nothing but mere regiments,
and then simply created new divisions, so Soviet Division counts are
mis leading.

And of course, you also forget that we had a battle hardened amphibious
landing force that we could call upon to land behind enemy lines. It would
really have sucked for the Soviets to suddenly have to deal with 50,000
or so Marines marauding behind their lines in Poland, along with
the possibilities of having to deal with airborne landings behind their
lines to the tune of a full corps worth of troops (17th, 13th, 82nd, 101st Divisions)

And of course, the little fact that a single American INFANTRY division
had more tanks in it than a full-up German Panzer Division.

Not to mention that we were very very good in chewing up enemy
divisions moving towards the frontlines by tacair.

A good example is the August 7th attack at Mortain by a full
SS Panzerkorps led by Paul Hausser, and consisting of crack
troops:

For the elite divisions of the Waffen SS the two months
since the Allied invasion had been bitter and frustrating. They
were not accustomed to failure. Even during the great retreats
in the East, an all-out assault by two elite SS panzer divisions
invariably resulted in at least a local victory. But in the West,
the SS troops had to face what they bitterly called the
Materialschlacht. Against heavy naval fire, unending streams of
tanks, fully motorized infantry, superior artillery, and above all
crippling attacks from the air, even the determination of the
SS troops came to nothing.

[Vympel]

Nope. the USAAF just comes roaring out of the sky, with endless hordes of
P-51s, P-47s, B-17s, B-24s, and B-29s and makes COBRA look like child's
play, with entire Soviet Tank Corps (their equivalent of Armored divisions)
annihilated dozens of miles before they even reach the front lines.

And then the Soviet Artillery meets US Artillery, and the resultant counter
battery fire annihilates the miles upon miles of 152mm guns stacked wheel
to wheel.

And just for shits and giggles, we decide to invade the USSR deep behind
their own lines with a little group of people we like to call the United States
Navy and Marine Corps.

USAAF planes at low level trying to pull what they did in France 44 will die horribly. Plane for plane, the Yaks and Las are better fighters at low level than the P-51, P-47 etc ever were, and the pilots a damn sight better than the Luftwaffe turkeys they were facing by that time. Better they stay up with the strategic bombers where it's relatively "Safe". At low level the VVS will rule the sky. Il-2s and Il-10s will make the experience for US ground forces decidedly ... unpleasant.

As for the USMC, bah- I think they'll find figthing the Red Army in a European environment rather more difficult than fighting the pathetic Japanese in jungles. They'll shit their pants when they see that the Red Army actually has (gasp!) tanks ... and .... (gasp!) artillery!

(For the record, I have never been too impressed with the USMC- the US Army is a far more credible warfighting organization).

[HemlockGrey]

I think they'll find figthing the Red Army in a European environment rather more difficult than fighting the pathetic Japanese in jungles.

Yeah, because fighting fanatically determined enemies in extremely harsh terrain against viciously hostile civilian populations and taking horrible casualities is a real walk in the park.

[Vympel]

Yeah, because fighting fanatically determined enemies in extremely harsh terrain against viciously hostile civilian populations and taking horrible casualities is a real walk in the park.

In comparison to the Red Army and the Wehrmacht, yes it is. The Japanese were a light infantry force with no credible armor, no credible artillery, and crappy infantry weapons. They were fanatics. Big whoop. So were the Red Army, and so were the SS. The Japanese were nothing special.

[MKSheppard]

USAAF planes at low level trying to pull what they did in France 44 will die horribly. Plane for plane, the Yaks and Las are better fighters at low level than the P-51, P-47 etc ever were

Problem is, if you're at high level, you've already won the fight. There
are reports of Bf-109s actually turning away from fights with I-16 Ratas
when the Ratas had the altitude advantage over them before enaging,
while we do have examples of a P-38 vs Yak enagement that ended pretty
even with both sides scoring two kills on each other.

[Vympel]

Problem is, if you're at high level, you've already won the fight. There
are reports of Bf-109s actually turning away from fights with I-16 Ratas
when the Ratas had the altitude advantage over them before enaging,
while we do have examples of a P-38 vs Yak enagement that ended pretty
even with both sides scoring two kills on each other.

*cuts and pastes ICQ conversaiton*

[Sea Skimmer]

USAAF planes at low level trying to pull what they did in France 44 will die horribly. Plane for plane, the Yaks and Las are better fighters at low level than the P-51, P-47 etc ever were,

Too bad its not plane for plane, the US had an overwhelming production advantage and a massive training base to back it up. During the war America never had a pilot shortage while actually expanding the flying hours in its training program considerably.

Better they stay up with the strategic bombers where it's relatively "Safe". At low level the VVS will rule the sky. Il-2s and Il-10s will make the experience for US ground forces decidedly ... unpleasant.

There's a nice huge photo of a German airbase half obscured by carpet-bombing floating around. That's going to happen a lot to the IL-2's. Too bad Russia stopped producing strategic bombers in 1941. The favor will not be often returned. Railway yards also make nice targets, Sure you can fix the track fast enough, but those locomotives take a rather long time to replace, and Germany had a rather large deficit of rolling stock and engines for its track. I suppose the Russians will save time converting it to broad gauge if American bombs tear everything up first..

As for the USMC, bah- I think they'll find figthing the Red Army in a European environment rather more difficult than fighting the pathetic Japanese in jungles. They'll shit their pants when they see that the Red Army actually has (gasp!) tanks ... and .... (gasp!) artillery!

They're not going to like that. Remember, the secondary battery on a light cruiser and above or the main battery of a destroyer consists of guns that are corps level for a Russian or German formation. Well the Germans did begin to throw in some 15 and 17cm guns into divisions towards the end of the war but never more the battalions worth even in the best SS units. Anyway land guns can't match the rate of fire of warships which can be very telling.

(For the record, I have never been too impressed with the USMC- the US Army is a far more credible warfighting organization).

A Marine division had twice the engineer complement, more signals ; more mortars, and far more machine guns and more bazookas then an Army infantry division. It had slightly less artillery and half the anti tank guns, but this was the result of development during the Pacific and could have been easily rectified had there been a demand. However 16-inch shells that send Tigers flying through the air work plenty well for both roles, which was why they didn't bring along as many guns but had three times the communications gear.

Both types went into action with one to three tank battalions depending on the years of the war and twelve amphibious tractor battalions where split among six Marine divisions as needed, though more where forming when the war ended. They had basically the same abundance of motor transport of halftracks as Army units. In theory anyway, a lot of surpluses vehicles got quietly added into US divisions while they sat in England waiting for Overlord while the marines generally had little need for mounted mobility in action, so all the trucks where kept busy shuttling up vast amounts of ammo over ultra shitty roads.

[Sea Skimmer]

In comparison to the Red Army and the Wehrmacht, yes it is. The Japanese were a light infantry force with no credible armor, no credible artillery, and crappy infantry weapons.

Actually Japans infantry weapons worked quite well, there rifles where low power by the standards of the time but in fact worked quite well and had more then enough power, they and one of the best light machine guns of the war and there medium and heavy machine guns worked superbly. on the defensive they also deployed ample artillery and ammunition on the defensive, no one would do well under the conditions, which they had to mount their offensives against the Marines. There mortars where also as good as anyone's, and they proved very accurate in action. The Japanese also fielded some of the best fortifications ever.

[Crayz9000]

USAAF planes at low level trying to pull what they did in France 44 will die horribly. Plane for plane, the Yaks and Las are better fighters at low level than the P-51, P-47 etc ever were

Problem is, if you're at high level, you've already won the fight. There
are reports of Bf-109s actually turning away from fights with I-16 Ratas
when the Ratas had the altitude advantage over them before enaging,
while we do have examples of a P-38 vs Yak enagement that ended pretty
even with both sides scoring two kills on each other.

]

How about all the P-39 Airacobras? Those were supposed to excel at low-altitude fighting...

[Vympel]

Actually Japans infantry weapons worked quite well, there rifles where low power by the standards of the time but in fact worked quite well and had more then enough power, they and one of the best light machine guns of the war and there medium and heavy machine guns worked superbly.

They also had hardly any submachine guns in comparison to other forces.

on the defensive they also deployed ample artillery and ammunition on the defensive, no one would do well under the conditions, which they had to mount their offensives against the Marines.

In jungle they were fine. Fighting the Red Army on more open ground is an entirely different matter. They were equipped experienced in battling light infantry in close quarters, not a combined arms force like the Wehrmacht on far more open ground- it would take far more than simple equipment changes to make them effective.

There mortars where also as good as anyone's, and they proved very accurate in action. The Japanese also fielded some of the best fortifications ever.

Good fortifications for jungle warfare where the use of armor etc was minimal and limited to close range battles with things like flamethrower tanks etc. Unfortuantely, on open ground, fortifications would be tank fodder- and the Japanese anti-armor weapons, and tanks, sucked arse.

[Sea Skimmer]

How about all the P-39 Airacobras? Those were supposed to excel at low-altitude fighting...

The US army ceased using them early in the war, and used few of the replacement P-63's. Most went to the Soviets. Anyway the P-47 and P-51 both worked better as fighters then the P-39 even at low level.

Course those Russian examples wont be working real well once the supply parts pipeline shuts down. I also wonder how well Russia was set up to supply spare parts and tires to its largely American trucks.