ME109K Fighter

[westwall]

IIRC, the T-34 tank was available, in the first production version, but in small numbers at the time of the start of Barbarossa.
About September 1940 saw the first production models.

T-34 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Both the T-34 and KV-1 tanks were available in small numbers. IIRC the Soviets had 400 to 500 T-34 and around 300 KV-1 in the field.

One strategically placed T-34 halted Army Group Center for an entire day.

4 guys stopped over 200,000!

 

[AZrailwhale]

Correct, and the fowler flaps prevent the tip stall that was a problem in the Mustang.

A skilled Lightning pilot could also force a single engined fighter to turn against the torque of its prop further reducing it’s maneuverability, the only real advantage the smaller Luftwaffe fighters had over the P-47s and P-38s was agility; they could get into maneuvers faster than the heavier American fighters could.

 

[westwall]

Wrong, production numbers favored Fighter Command. Plus every Luftwaffe pilot down over the UK and most over the Channel were lost forever and most RAF pilots shot down were back in a cockpit within hours. Plus the 109s were operating at the ragged edge of their range with less than ten minutes of combat time over Britain. Any bomber missions further in would have to be escorted by Bf-110s which were relatively easy kills for single seat fighters or be unescorted, in which case the lightly armed and armored Luftwaffe bombers would have been slaughtered. That’s why the Germans went to night bombing, He-111s, Do-17s and Ju-88s couldn’t survive in daylight over England.

So long as the Luftwaffe was attacking the airfields they were actually winning, albeit slowly. The second they switched to bombing the cities they had lost.

 

[Stryder50]

In 1941, there were a total of 900+ T-34 tanks in battle. Over 50% of them developed mechanical problems while the rest was lost by battle damage. The majority of the Soviet Tanks in 1941 were the KVs. What made the T-34 appear to be invincible was the fact it was produced for over 35,000 units during the war. It's success was for the same reason the US M-4 did so well. The US was not aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the T-34-85 until Korea where it was faced off by the M-26 which handled it with ease. Of course, the same was said for the German tanks against the M-26 but there were just too few M-26s at the end of WWII to make a big difference.

And most of the T-34-85s were built in factories supplied by the materials provided by the Lend Lease program. If one does not have to pay to build a factory, that factory can and will outproduce one that has to be paid for. Not one mention in Soviet/Russian history tells of this. And the M-4 Shermans seemed to have been left out of their history books as well.

Thanks.
I know all that and more, having studied such for about four decades now.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Both the T-34 and KV-1 tanks were available in small numbers. IIRC the Soviets had 400 to 500 T-34 and around 300 KV-1 in the field.

One strategically placed T-34 halted Army Group Center for an entire day.

4 guys stopped over 200,000!

You’re thinking of the KV-1 and it was only a few hours until an 88mm flak gun could be brought up. The crew of the KV-1 were so blind that they didn’t even see the barn-door sized gun until it opened fire.

 

[AZrailwhale]

So long as the Luftwaffe was attacking the airfields they were actually winning, albeit slowly. The second they switched to bombing the cities they had lost.

They weren’t winning, they were just forcing Fighter command back from the coastal airfields, thus slowing its response to incoming raids. By the time the Luftwaffe switched to night raids, Fighter Command actually had more aircraft and pilots than it had at the start of the BoB. The RAF never had a shortage of aircraft, it had a pilot shortage which was being addressed by converting FAA and Bomber Command pilots to fly Spitfires and Hurricanes.

 

[Vrenn]

No, they were merely holding their own

and germany began with more pilots snd aircraft

It was a battle of attrition that favored the Nazis

Wrong. When a Luftwaffe crew was shot down over Britain, they were lost and not to return even if they survived the crash or ejection. When a British Pilot was shot down and ejected safely, he would recover and just grab another fighter. It doesn't matter if the Luftwaffe had more of anything. It mattered that any losses were lost while the RAF could recycle it's downed air crews. And the battle attrition ended up favoring the Brits when Germany stopped with it's wholesale attack.

 

[Vrenn]

Thanks.
I know all that and more, having studied such for about four decades now.

what, Just 4 decades?

 

[westwall]

They weren’t winning, they were just forcing Fighter command back from the coastal airfields, thus slowing its response to incoming raids. By the time the Luftwaffe switched to night raids, Fighter Command actually had more aircraft and pilots than it had at the start of the BoB. The RAF never had a shortage of aircraft, it had a pilot shortage which was being addressed by converting FAA and Bomber Command pilots to fly Spitfires and Hurricanes.

No, they were winning. Fighter Command was stretched very thin, they were losing more fighters than they could afford to lose at that stage of the battle. Further, the Empire pilot traing program was just getting started so pilot losses were having an effect. Not deaths, but wounded pilots were depleting the ranks at a high raye.

 

[westwall]

You’re thinking of the KV-1 and it was only a few hours until an 88mm flak gun could be brought up. The crew of the KV-1 were so blind that they didn’t even see the barn-door sized gun until it opened fire.

No, it was a T-34 and while it had lost both of its tracks, it's gun was still operational. There is a famous photo of it, and a Stug IIID 25 meters apart duking it out.

The KV1 was Army Group North. And it was knocked out by a 45mm AT gun that hit the drivers observation glass, which killed him, so the tank drove in to a ditch and got stuck.

The remainder of the crew eventually surrendered when an MP40 started popping rounds into the turret through a pistol port.

 

[Stryder50]

what, Just 4 decades?

Maybe five, but study being different than just having an interest in before that.

BTW, my military history interest has included what is referred to as table top war gaming* during that time, so study of many aspects essential when doing "Critical Results Tables" - CRT

* See Avalon Hill, Simulations Publications Inc. (SPI), Game Designers Workshop (GDW), etc.

 

[Vrenn]

Maybe five, but study being different than just having an interest in before that.

BTW, my military history interest has included what is referred to as table top war gaming* during that time, so study of many aspects essential when doing "Critical Results Tables" - CRT

* See Avalon Hill, Simulations Publications Inc. (SPI), Game Designers Workshop (GDW), etc.

And, not only am I a retire Military Member (usaf) I was also a tournament director for a large military European War Game Club. My two favorite board games was World at War and Airwars. But that didn't mean I get to rewrite history even though it seems to be an American Pastime these days.

 

[Mac-7]

Wrong. When a Luftwaffe crew was shot down over Britain, they were lost and not to return even if they survived the crash or ejection. When a British Pilot was shot down and ejected safely, he would recover and just grab another fighter. It doesn't matter if the Luftwaffe had more of anything. It mattered that any losses were lost while the RAF could recycle it's downed air crews. And the battle attrition ended up favoring the Brits when Germany stopped with it's wholesale attack.

Thats all true

but still the germans had enough reserves to win if they pushed on in spite of the losses

 

[westwall]

Thats all true

but still the germans had enough reserves to win if they pushed on in spite of the losses

Maybe, had they not shifted to bombing the cities I figure they had about a 60% chance to win the BofB. Once they switched they had zero chance.

 

[Stryder50]

And, not only am I a retire Military Member (usaf) I was also a tournament director for a large military European War Game Club. My two favorite board games was World at War and Airwars. But that didn't mean I get to rewrite history even though it seems to be an American Pastime these days.

Would that be this;

A World at War: Second World War in Europe and the Pacific

The world's mightiest superpowers clash in this epic and intense WWII board game.

boardgamegeek.com

 

[Stryder50]

And, not only am I a retire Military Member (usaf) I was also a tournament director for a large military European War Game Club. My two favorite board games was World at War and Airwars. But that didn't mean I get to rewrite history even though it seems to be an American Pastime these days.

But one does get to explore the alternates of history, FWIW.

 

[Mac-7]

Maybe, had they not shifted to bombing the cities I figure they had about a 60% chance to win the BofB. Once they switched they had zero chance.

Again, hitler and goring were clever at some things but overall fatally stupid

And that was lucky for us

 

[westwall]

Again, hitler and goring were clever at some things but overall fatally stupid

And that was lucky for us

Indeed it was. Their decision to ignore the Chain Home radars as a for instance.

Tactically they were pretty good, but strategically they sucked.
Thankfully.

 

[Vrenn]

Thats all true

but still the germans had enough reserves to win if they pushed on in spite of the losses

Maybe and maybe not. But with the plan to attack the Soviets, they did what made the most militarian decision.

 

[Vrenn]

Would that be this;

A World at War: Second World War in Europe and the Pacific

The world's mightiest superpowers clash in this epic and intense WWII board game.

boardgamegeek.com

That would be the one.