That again?
My old post from February:
(1) Numbers. Soviet deivsions were way smaller than american ones (6000-9000 men vs up to 25000), still there were 6,7 mlm people in RA and its allies (like polish Ludowa) vs 4,6 million of Western allies troops. Plus, soviet infantry divisions had better AA and AT capabilities than their Western counterparts. American divisions, IIRC, didn't posess nor anti-aircraft neither 120mm mortars in their infantry formations - but the Soviets did. On the other hand Western inf. divisions are better in terms of motorization I guess.
(2) In terms of quality Soviet armoured formations are way better as well as AT-capabilities of the whole Soviet army. And when we talk about Oparation Unthnikable we talk about a tank assault by Allies. Doing this, they would have to deal with Soviet heavy tanks, soviet heavy tank destroyers and the whole AT-system of the Soviet army, which had been "calibrated" to deal with German heavies are awaiting this Medium tanks allies are going to send at 'em.
(3) Artillery is the next point were allies lacking, so not so soundly as in tanks. IIRC, Anglo-americans didnt have anything close to artillery divisions and artillery corps of SA, which means, I think, Soviet union would have it easier to concetrate a huge number of artillery pieces where they are needed.
(4) Air force could be a king of equalizer here. Soviets had more warplanes, WA had slightly better warplanes. On a long run there is one advantage of WA. Their course in flying school was 400 hours for a cadet, while in USSR it was only 100–150. But, in 1945 the majority of Soviet active pilots are vets with military experience. So, until they are down, this factor wouldn't play. So, no established air superiority for alllies
(5) Operational art. Americans have never experienced (in the course of 1944-45 campaing in Europe) going toe-to-toe with someone who has both - better tanks and the same amount of Air force as they did. It is even worse when it comes to holding its positions on a vast front agains mechanized enemy without the possibility to obliterate it with your own Air force. When SU is done with allied tank fromations and counterattack, I can't see WA being able to hold their ground until the Rhein at very least.
(6) Moral high ground.
Moral high ground. In this scenario SU is under an unprovoked attack. Soviet moral will be quite high, but as for Allies - they are aggressors here. It is a crucial factors, as due to the numbers of the battlefield, WA would need a courage and sometimes self sacrifice. Could WA troops, who were forced to a new war with their ex-friends by their own government provide it? I doubt so. There have already been disorders by U.S. soldiers “We want to go home riots” in late 1945–1946
My old post from February:
(1) Numbers. Soviet deivsions were way smaller than american ones (6000-9000 men vs up to 25000), still there were 6,7 mlm people in RA and its allies (like polish Ludowa) vs 4,6 million of Western allies troops. Plus, soviet infantry divisions had better AA and AT capabilities than their Western counterparts. American divisions, IIRC, didn't posess nor anti-aircraft neither 120mm mortars in their infantry formations - but the Soviets did. On the other hand Western inf. divisions are better in terms of motorization I guess.
(2) In terms of quality Soviet armoured formations are way better as well as AT-capabilities of the whole Soviet army. And when we talk about Oparation Unthnikable we talk about a tank assault by Allies. Doing this, they would have to deal with Soviet heavy tanks, soviet heavy tank destroyers and the whole AT-system of the Soviet army, which had been "calibrated" to deal with German heavies are awaiting this Medium tanks allies are going to send at 'em.
(3) Artillery is the next point were allies lacking, so not so soundly as in tanks. IIRC, Anglo-americans didnt have anything close to artillery divisions and artillery corps of SA, which means, I think, Soviet union would have it easier to concetrate a huge number of artillery pieces where they are needed.
(4) Air force could be a king of equalizer here. Soviets had more warplanes, WA had slightly better warplanes. On a long run there is one advantage of WA. Their course in flying school was 400 hours for a cadet, while in USSR it was only 100–150. But, in 1945 the majority of Soviet active pilots are vets with military experience. So, until they are down, this factor wouldn't play. So, no established air superiority for alllies
(5) Operational art. Americans have never experienced (in the course of 1944-45 campaing in Europe) going toe-to-toe with someone who has both - better tanks and the same amount of Air force as they did. It is even worse when it comes to holding its positions on a vast front agains mechanized enemy without the possibility to obliterate it with your own Air force. When SU is done with allied tank fromations and counterattack, I can't see WA being able to hold their ground until the Rhein at very least.
(6) Moral high ground.
Moral high ground. In this scenario SU is under an unprovoked attack. Soviet moral will be quite high, but as for Allies - they are aggressors here. It is a crucial factors, as due to the numbers of the battlefield, WA would need a courage and sometimes self sacrifice. Could WA troops, who were forced to a new war with their ex-friends by their own government provide it? I doubt so. There have already been disorders by U.S. soldiers “We want to go home riots” in late 1945–1946
