USSR Declares war on allies after berlin?

Good try but no cigar! In reality, once Stalin's Army stumbled into Eastern Europe it was short 13 million soldiers. Sea, economic, and air power would've belonged to the Allies. The mass of russian divisions, 2-6000 strong, would have smashed into a solid wall of allied artillery and ground support aircraft. While the russians were advancing in the motherland, they could replace their losses by gang pressing all males. With allied Lend Lease, they could keep up production. With the germans having zero strategic bombing forces, what would 1200 B29s do to the now defenseless russian railroad and industrial base? Yep. Also remember, the US only had a third bomb after beating Japan. The next bomb wasn't ready until 1946. Like the movie Patton, we'd have to had rearmed the germans and marched back into Poland. Like today, though, our military wouldn't have finished the job. They'd have stopped and negotiated. Stalin didn't have the economy to absorb more than he had and repair the 50% of russia that was laying in ruins. Stalin was also more paranoid about Zhukov and others challenging him politically with their successful military experiences. He was just as paranoid as Hitler and killed a lot more people than Hitler did. The strongest rumor is that in 1957, during a weak moment, Stalin was strangled to death because he intended to start another 20 million dead progrom to assure his job. Remember or not, Stalin was a train robber, bandit, and college student (along the same lines sometime!). And like Hitler, he wanted control of Europe and Asia and got it after WW2. The Russian army has always impressed me as a gypsy army...when they need something to accomplish a military thing,they take it. Or try to do it without it. Their tactics, line the guns up hub-to-hub, charge in compact groups across the open fields (with their soldiers blowing up the mines so the tanks and "real"soldiers could get through), and launch cavalry/tank raids. The russians didn't get so much better by 1945 as the now conscript poorly trained german army got slower and slower. And were overrun.

 

Stalin was not crazy. He had neither the popular support nor strategic reserves to fight another great war. Truman and Eisenhower were not crazy or evil. The Americans want peace; invading Russia without provocation would make it an unjust war.

The two sides were tactically well matched. In case of a shooting war, there would be bloodshed on an unimaginable scale which was why it never broke out.

 

Those were the same T-34/85's that American and British Tanks shot to pieces in Korea a few years later, using the same Shermans, Pershings and British tanks left over from WWII. The new HVAP ammunition that was then coming on line became the great equalizer between the Anglo-Americans and the Soviets.

 

No Dude ,The Shermans Suffered Severe Losses in Korea ,but The British Centurion MK3 (20 Pounder) had Saved The Situation!!
in Korea They were facing a newer Soviet Tanks like IS-3 & T-54!!

 

You are wrong on every count. The M4A3E8s slaughtered North Korean tanks. There were no IS-3 or T-54 in Korea at that time.

 

I only disagree with this part with any real feeling. The other points are "maybe, maybe not", and are really up to Stalin's abiltity to fool himself and others. I don't think he would consider attacking west, not for any reason other than when the idea was put to him he rejected it out of hand. I have seen the subject broached elsewhere, and while I cannot find the source right at the moment his response to generals who put it forward as an option (he had his Patton-like commanders as well), was something to the effect of; "..and who will feed these newly conquered millions? How will we control them if we cannot feed them? Starving people are desparate people."

Here is why the "next bomb in 1946" is wrong. First off, remember that when we exploded "Able" and "Baker" in the Crossroads tests of late 1946, we had nine in stockpile after they were used. Both of those bombs were ready for use before the end of 1946. "Able" was the un-named bomb sitting on Tinian Island with its core waiting in Los Alamos, and "Baker" was the case completed in late August, and it core completed in September.
Let’s not downgrade the atomic bomb too far here, there were a total of five (5) gun-type "Little Boy" bombs made, only one was dropped. The other four (4) were placed in storage and later disassembled and their fissionable U-235 used in the combination type bombs mentioned by Groves in the following memo to General Marshall.

And don't forget that both Oak Ridge and Hanford were just hitting their stride of fissionable material production when they were "shut-down". The number of bombs was estimated by Groves (supposing they were needed), and he was a well known conservative when he made production estimates. His projection was for between 18 and 20 bombs by early 1946 which could have been produced and deployed.

In the NARA files General Groves' memos to General Marshall exist.

Leslie R. Groves' Memo to the
Chief of Staff (George C. Marshall)
30 July 1945
MEMORANDUM TO THE CHIEF OF STAFF

(the paragraphs after Groves describes the successful Trinity test to Marshall)

3. There is a definite possibility, [sensitive information deleted] as we increase our rate of production at the Hanford Engineer Works, with the type of weapon tested that the blast will be smaller due to detonation in advance of the optimum time. But in any event, the explosion should be on the order of thousands of tons. The difficulty arises from an undesirable isotope which is created in greater quantity as the production rate increases.

4. The final components of the first gun type bomb have (already) arrived at Tinian, those of the first implosion type should leave San Francisco by air-plane early on 30 July. I see no reason to change our previous readiness predictions on the first three bombs. In September, we should have three or four [more] bombs. One of these will be made from (U) 235 material and will have a smaller effectiveness, about two-thirds that of the test type, but by November, we should be able to bring this up to full power. There should be either four or five bombs in October, one of the lesser size. In November there should be at least five bombs [more], and the rate will rise to seven in December and increase decidedly in early 1946. By some time in November, we should have the effectiveness of the (U) 235 implosion type bomb equal to that of the tested plutonium implosion type.

5. By mid-October we could increase the number of bombs slightly by changing our design now to one using both materials in the same bomb. I have not made this change because of the ever present possibilities of difficulties in new designs. We could, if it were wise, change our plans and develop the combination bomb. But if this is to be done, it would entail an initial ten-day production setback which would be caught up in about a month's time; unless the decision to change were made before August 1st, in which case it would probably not entail any delay. From what I know of the world situation, it would seem wiser not to make this change until the effects of the present bomb are determined.

L.R. GROVES
Major General, U.S.A.

Source: Manhattan Engineer District -- Top Secret (de-classified), Manhattan Project File, Folder 4, Trinity Test, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

If we look at these it might extrapolate to these production estimates for bombs after August:

Sept. 3-4 bombs
Oct. 3-4 bombs
Nov. 5 bombs
Dec. 7 bombs

So it seems that 18-20 additional bombs could have been produced and dropped in late 1945- early 1946 beyond the Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the aforementioned third bomb whose core was sitting on Tinian Island, this is the assembled case on Tinian needed only its completed core to be air-shipped from Los Alamos).

However, after the Japanese surrendered (or rather accepted the Potsdam Declaration) the production of the plutonium cores was suspended at Hanford with only two more completed in 1945. Here is a good run-down of the Hanford plants reduction of production and change of hands from the MED to the AEC.

Goto:

Section 5

To think we (the west) would NOT use the atomic option if Stalin changed his mind and attacked the west is ludicrous. To think Stalin would attack to the west is also ludicrous as he was well aware of our atomic project through his spies in the project. The rapidity of our production of them was the only surprise in store for the man, the second one on Nagasaki was unexpected by both the German physicists and the Soviets. They all thought a single bomb would stretch any economy and production ability during war-time. So don't buy into that myth. So, not counting the four (4) remaining Mark 1 "gun-type" uranium bombs, only one of the five made was dropped on Hiroshima, were held in reserve in stockpile after 1946 (they were dismantled and recycled in early 1950 in the combination bombs mentioned by Groves). The US also had a stockpile of Mark 3 "implosion type" (fat-man) bombs, which stood at 120 by the time the USSR tested their first atomic in late 1949, this was in peacetime production-mode after the Hanford Plant was put back on line. These US atomics were all produced after April of 1947 when the Hanford plant went back to production under the AEC’s control, so those were made between '47 and '49. If it hadn't been slowed down, they could have been produced earlier that is clear.

The Mark 4 combination core bombs were the first assembly line designs and they had been perfected by late 1947, early 1948, this design was one which could be configured to for various yields; 1, 3.5, 8, 14, 21, 22, and 31 kilotons. This was the combination bomb type referred to by Groves in his July 1945 memo, but which was put "on hold" since it was thought it was more prudent to get the first functional bombs to the field of battle ASAP. It didn't take long to get the buggers up and going when we put our minds to it, but there was virtually NO production nor design testing between 1945 and 1947. We had also used up six atomic devices (2 of the Mark III design [1946], and 4 Mark IVs [1948]) in tests before the Soviet’s Joe One was detonated in 1949.

America then produced a total of 550 of the Mark IVs before the even better Mark Vs began to appear and be stockpiled in early 1950. By the time the Soviets exploded "Joe One" in 1949, America had stayed on a peace-time production schedule, and had over 120 atomics in stockpile, and had used another 20+ in tests.

That is why he was less than "surprised" when Truman informed him of the successful test in Alamogordo, Truman thought he (Stalin) didn’t grasp the concept of the atomics, not that the news was known to Stalin before he officially received it.

 

No There were IS-3 or Su-100 & T-54s!! Coming Freshly From the Soviet Union!! But Only The Centurion & USAF AGMs Kicked their Asses!!

 

Not to take this subject off course but!

There was a interesting bit in Auschwitz ; A new history about Soviet prisoners of war. Did you know what most Soviet POWs ended up being either exiled or sent to gulags after the war? Stalin's reason: They gave up, they should have fought harder! (Traitors in his eyes) He really was quite crazy. This information became available after the fall of the Soviet Union, and Mr. Rees(who wrote the book) has done intensive research on it.


Yours,

Bill

 

Yeah I remember reading somethign similir to that:

After the end of the war, liberated Soviet prisoners were not welcomed back into their country as heroes but rather arrested as traitors. Their crime? Giving up instead of dieing like heroes.

But I would think that if Stalin continued his advace through Germany, he could conscript the able bodied men without a word in defiance.

 

I quick note on soviet unit sizes,
Soviet unit sizes were half the size of other countries,thus a russian army would only be corp size in any other army.
A soviet division would only be the same size as any other countries brigade.

 

Still, they had a uncountable amount of them.

 

You are off your rockers. The first T-54 hadn't seen sunlight when the Korean War was over. If you pay attention, the Korean War was over by 1953 and the T-XX in Russian tank nomenclature stands for Tank: Year of Introduction. The only armor North Korean Army had was 150 T-34-85s.

 

What about US National Debt which was 30% of GDP before WW2 and became 129% of GDP after the WW2 (even today the debt reach 80% although the economic crisis) how USA will get the necessary money to continue the war?

and UK was not better
on 10/12/2007the UK announces it is last payment of WW2 debt to the USA

 

The Russians had roughly 500 divisions at the end of WWII. Given most of them were half the size of their Western counterparts, that would make an army 250 divisions strong. The combined forces of US-UK-Fr had about 100 divisions in total. So, calculating very roughly, the Russians had an overall numerical superiority of 2.5:1. This make it an extremely dangerous situation for the Allies because the Red Army was renowned for its ability to mass its forces on a strategically decisive point by defending its front elsewhere with the absolute minimum of troops required. The Allies must fight defensively and America would need a total mobilization for this confrontation.

The Russians would be lacking in strategic reserves, however, and has no way to disrupting the American or British strategic depths.

 

No The 1st T-54 Prototype Was Created in 1947!! It has the Same Gun 100mm of The SU-100 Which was Superior to The US 90mm Gun ,but not to The 20 Pounder (84mm) of The British Centurion!!

 

Sorry ,T-XX is not always true
ok there were no IS-3 or T-54 in Korea but the first T-54 prototype appeared in March 1945, just before the end of the Second World War. The T-54 entered full production in 1947
T54/T55 Main Battle Tank
T-54/55 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Korea fielded about 150 of the T-34/85 variant at the beginning of the Korean War After that the Chinese built many of these tanks,which they armed the North Koreans with during the Korean War.


The T34/85 was the core of the North Korean and Chinese armoured units during the Korean War.and in the early days of the war North Korea's T-34/85s completely overwhelmed the American light M24 Chaffee tanks employed against them. They were soon matched, however, by increasing numbers of heavy tanks hurriedly shipped in from America, such as the M26 Pershing.


and I read about many Shermans captured by the north korea and they successfuly used them

 

OK, but there was still no T-54s, IS-3s or SU-100s in North Korean Army. When was the last time the Russians gave first line equipment to any communist bloc states except East Germany?

Think about it.

 

The US Airforce was shooting tanks with Air launched Guided Missles during the Korean War?

I find that hard to believe

 

The treadheads always think of a land war, and not the air dimension.

"The first lesson is that you can't lose a war if you have command of the air, and you can't win a war if you haven't."
Jimmy Doolittle

Compare air forces. The US had the largest air force in the world. Most strategic bombers and fighters. The P-51 was superior to the best the Soviets had in the Yak-9 at the time, and the Lockheed P-80 was about to enter service.

Then there's the Navy. Quite useful in making places like Vladisvostok an uncomfortable place to be. Not easy to wage war on the front door (Europe) when the back door is getting kicked in. And of course the havoc that could be created by the Navy in the Black Sea with Turkey's help. Turkey never liked Russia, if you will recall. So the oil fields in southern Russia could be a risk from air attack as well.

If Turkey allowed US bases on their mainland, there's your B-29 staging area.

I do wonder what would have happened with the Chinese revolution had there been war going on along their northern border? And US forces still stationed in China because of the "new" war?

 

People do tend to forget just how good the P-80A was, and how many of them could have been produced and deployed if the Soviets (for some odd reason) decided to advance to the west after they took Berlin. Stationed in Turkey (as you suggest), or Italy, or Greece, they would have had a great time in the air over the USSR's western area.

Not only did the Soviets have no match for the P-51, they had trouble finding any plane which could combat the high-altitude bombers of the likes of the B-29, and carrying incendiary instead of atomics they would lay the crop-land of the USSR to waste.

The initial production version of the Shooting Star, the P-80A, was ordered on April 4, 1944, when a Letter Contract for two batches of 500 aircraft was issued. In June of 1945, 2500 additional P-80As were ordered. However, following V-J Day this second contract was canceled in its entirety and the first contract was cut back to 917 aircraft.

The P-80A was much the same as the YP-80A which preceded it, differing only in minor details. The P-80A introduced under-fuselage dive brakes which opened forward at the wing join, and had a landing light installed behind a transparent fairing in the upper nose. The intake lip was moved slightly further aft, and the tailplane incidence was raised by 1.5 degrees.

The first 345 aircraft of this contract (serials 44-84992 to 44-85336) were designated P-80A-1-LO. Some of them were powered by the 3850 lb.s.t. General Electric J33-GE-11 turbojet, the production version of the I-40 which had powered the XP-80A and the YP-80A. Others were powered by the Allison J33-A-9, a version of the same engine built by the Allison Division of the General Motors Corporation.

The next 218 aircraft in the contract (44-85337 to 44-85941 and 45-8301 to 45-8262) were built as the P-80A-5-LO production block and differed by being equipped with the more powerful 4000 lb.s.t. Allison J33-A-17. The -5 also introduced a boundary layer control splitter plate inside the air intake. The landing light was relocated from the nose to the nosewheel landing gear strut. Later, the initial production P-80A-1-LOs were retrofitted with the uprated Allison engine during routine engine overhauls.
Specification of the P-80A:

Engine:

One General Electric J33-GE-11 or Allison J33-A-9 turbojet, rated at 3850 lb.s.t. Later production blocks powered by 4000 lb.s.t. Allison J33-A-17.

Dimensions:

wingspan 38 feet 10 1/2 inches (without wingtip tanks), length 34 feet 6 inches, Height 11 feet 4 inches, and wing area 237.6 square feet

Weights were 7920 pounds empty, 11,700 pounds gross, and 14,000 pounds maximum takeoff. Fuel load: 425 US gallons normal, 885 US gallons maximum.

Performance:

Maximum speed was 558 mph at sea level and 492 mph at 40,000 feet.
Initial climb rate was 4580 feet/minute, and an altitude of 20,000 feet could be attained in 5.5 minutes.
Service ceiling was 45,000 feet.
Normal range was 780 miles, and maximum range was 1440 miles.

Armament:
Six 0.50-inch machine guns.

From:

Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star