[dsfraser]

Hey Tom.

It strikes me that we have had this conversation before on AVMAS's forum, but I will repeat it here.

Lend-Lease was very important to the USSR. The military equipment sent was trivial. 17,000 aircraft, compared to 250,000 or more from Soviet production, etc.

The troopers of the Red Army loved the Sherman. They rode in Cadillacs, while their comrades rode in Chevys. It was a fundamental difference in design — the USA sought to make life easier for crews, the USSR merely sought to give them a weapon that would work. And it did, very well, thank you.

Tanks and aircraft deliveries were trivial in th eoverall context. More important were trucks, which allowed the Soviets to concentrate their production assets on building tanks. Much more important were foodstuffs, raw materials, and technology — items usually overlooked in descriptions of Lend-Lease. The USSR would not have had radar, reliable radios, or aluminum aircraft without US help. Much machinery was sent, lathes and milling machines that made it possible for the USSR to build the tanks they did to defeat the Germans. Rubber and rare metals for alloys to make their armour stronger, their tanks better. All these contributed to victory, much more than a few thousand tanks and aircraft. US technology made a difference, MUCH more than US equipment.

As to the outcome? After Moscow, the Germans were toast. They had no hope of prevailing in an attritional war with the USSR. They did not have the resources, and after Blitzkrieg failed, it was only a matter of time before the Red Army stood on the steps of the Reichstag.

Cheers
Scott Fraser
Canada