Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In its time the T-35 was a viable design, for a very short time. You need to read up on the T-60, being small has advantages and as I said it was real handy when it came to evicting German troops from their holes. They also made great resupply vehicles because of their mobility.
We all know who made the best tank of the war.
Best tank of the USSR maybe? Quantity is not a quality. 1 to 3 kill ratio and 80% of T-34's were knocked out of action with a higher loss of life than any nation in history.
Best tank of the USSR maybe? Quantity is not a quality. 1 to 3 kill ratio and 80% of T-34's were knocked out of action with a higher loss of life than any nation in history.
Like it or not, quantity is a quality all it's own. As for the statistics prove it. You can't because the USSR did not keep such statistics as crew survival rates and if memory serves me SPECULATIONS considering crew casualties state that on average the survival rate was 60 to 80% when a tank was hit. Wounded crewman were much more common obviously.
Russia paid the highest cost because they fought the hardest battles, they carried the load.
Like it or not, quantity is a quality all it's own.
Quoting Stalin eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrat335
Russia paid the highest cost because they fought the hardest battles, they carried the load.
This is fact. Deal with it.
No, they paid the highest cost because they were ill equipped and ill prepared thanks to Uncle Stalin. Sheer will and tenacity of Russians overcame this handicap but at a terrible price.
No, they paid the highest cost because they were ill equipped and ill prepared thanks to Uncle Stalin. Sheer will and tenacity of Russians overcame this handicap but at a terrible price.
No, they paid the highest cost because they were marked for extermination - as simple as that.
That Stalin was not quiet ready for war - that comes secondary.
Best tank of the USSR maybe? Quantity is not a quality. 1 to 3 kill ratio and 80% of T-34's were knocked out of action with a higher loss of life than any nation in history.
The T-34 was the greatest tank of its time, and was revolutionary in its design that influenced future tanks around the world. This is basic knowledge for anyone who has an interest in WW2 and tank history.
There are a couple of reasons for the high losses, poor training and despite the great design, poor quality craftsmanship, not design. But having the largest invasion in history slam into you, does not leave much time for training and quality control, essentially learn a few things, toss things together, deal with it on the battle field.
The US was not ready for war either, luckily we did not share a land border with Japan and Germany. Pearl Harbor was bad enough.
It was in this respect (talking about the unpreparedness.)
But...
As for the rest - even the treatment of POWs was different ( talking about Russians - about three million of them, that were initially captured in the first few months of war. Most of them were inexperienced 18-20 years old.)
And here lies the difference.
No, they paid the highest cost because they were ill equipped and ill prepared thanks to Uncle Stalin. Sheer will and tenacity of Russians overcame this handicap but at a terrible price.
Stalin prepared the country for war. It is a fact. He made industrialization, repressed potentially dangerous people. The price was high, many suffered accidentally. But history shows that he was right.
The best for cheap production but not the best for kamikazee crew
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.