Artic Convoys

[-TBC-AeroAce]

I just watched a BBC documentary about the ill fated PQ17 convoy that was decimated traveling to Archangel.

 

In the documentary it states that during the battle of Moscow 75% of the tanks taking part in the campaign were supplied by the British/American merchant navies.

 

75% seemed a bit high to me so I was wondering if anyone knew more about this? And also if this is anywhere close to true shouldn't we need to have some British/American tanks in the BOM vehicle set!?

 

Thanks

[Sokol1]

Lee’s, Stuarts and Matilda’s?

 

 

 

shipments of tanks were dispatched in 1941, amounting to 487 Matilda tanks , Valentines and Tetrarchs from the UK and 182 M3A1 Stuart light tanks and M3 Lee medium tanks from the USA. In 1942, Britain provided a further 2,487 tanks and the USA 3,023 tanks. The first units equipped with Valentines and Matildas went into service in the Staraya Russa and Valdai areas in December 1941 and January 1942.

 

No thanks, better a Panzer IV, KV1 for BOS.

Edited December 20, 2015 by Sokol1

[Gunsmith86]

The first 6 convoys ( 44 ships together ) that were in time for the battle of Moscow supplied 800 fighter, 750 tanks, 1400 trucks, 100.000 Tonnen ammunition enough to make up for a larege part of the loss of material. Most of the supplied fighter and tanks were used and there were never enought spare parts to keep them runing for long. Also they were not made for the cold winter in Russia.

 

Total support:

14.795 airplanes

7.056 tanks

8.218 flakguns

131.633 maschineguns

105 U-Boot-hunter

15.417.000 boots

4.062.000 Tons food

2.540.000 Tons steel

728.000 Tons non-ferrous metal

764.000 Tons Chemikalien

77.900  Willys MB („Jeep“)

151.000 small transport vehicle

200.000 trucks

1.500.000 Km telephone cable

35.000 radio stations

380.000 field telephones

43 % of all tires

56 % of all rails

1/3 of all explosives

1900 locomotives ( Sowjet production of locomotives in the same time was 932 locomotives  )

58 % of all high-octane aviation gas

 

I hope i didn´t forget anything.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

In terms of the statistics of what vehicles were present in what number and when I find really wild variations after quick research.

 

But the overall theme I'm getting is that at some points of the BOM there was from 10 to 70 percent from Briton/Americas.

 

So the question (regardless if people want the more famous vehicles) is to be realistic should we have these lesser known lend types???

Edited December 20, 2015 by [TBC]AeroACE

[Wulf]

As an aside, my uncle was in the British merchant navy during the war and took part in the Arctic convoys.  I remember him telling me that he'd sailed into Archangel; I'm not sure now if he mentioned the year.  I don't know how many times he did it either, maybe just once.  I imagine once would have been enough for anyone.  He said they received a lot of attention from the Luftwaffe.  He was quite matter of fact about the whole business.  He had a document he received from the Soviets recognizing his participation as I recall.  He died last year.  

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Thanks for that Wulf! The artic convoys really were hell. No real chance of survival if you got hit because of the sea temp and location.

 

Its a shame (similar to RAF bomber command) that they did not get officially recognized by the west until this decade though the east recognized them way before.

 

Once again thank for sharing

Edited December 21, 2015 by [TBC]AeroACE

[9./JG52Gruber]

The drive on Moscow was one of the few times the Germans had a numerical superiority in armor. For further reading I highly recommend Tank Warfare on the Eastern Front 1941-1942: Schwerpunkt by Robert Forczyk. It's a great read. This source says that lend lease tanks made up 10% of the Red Army armored strength in November and December 1941.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

So if that is a credible source (my lower number was 10%) does that warrent a 3d model of lend tanks for BOM for historical accuracy???

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

I wish to fly a Fw-200 and hunt down convoys in the arctic

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

So if that is a credible source (my lower number was 10%) does that warrent a 3d model of lend tanks for BOM for historical accuracy???

Depends.

 

The first problem is that there were a few different models there, so these 10% were a combination of a few models.

 

Once you get the numbers down, let's guesstimate that 5% were Matildas. It's a significant number but I presume the defining factor is: if to include for example 5 tanks, were those 5% enough to make a Matilda one of the 5 most representative tanks?

 

I don't have the answer to that of course, but if I were calling the shots I would evaluate the numbers and see which 5 tanks the product could not live without historically speaking, then make them.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Ahh this really comes down to DEV resource and future(popular development) but to be accurate and a sim, history says we need these lend types!!

Ps I know this is rivet counting! But if anything I want people to know how much the west supplied the east.

 

And what is really sad is the east recognized and remembers this better than the West

Edited December 21, 2015 by [TBC]AeroACE

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

If you want a heartwarming story, on this year's 9th May parade since many Western leaders turned down the invitation Russia gave the front-row seats to a group of five Royal Navy vets from the Arctic Convoys. Their faces were glowing.

Also, there is a very popular old Soviet movie called Torpedonostsy which you may find in English online, about Il-4 pilots covering a convoy.

Edited December 21, 2015 by Lucas_From_Hell

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Please give a link to that soviet film! Western peoples think we are better!!

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Clear your inbox so I can send you a link to it

 

And you know, I think more than anything when it comes to war both in the East and the West the biggest problem (among the people, not governments - those are a different story altogether) is miscommunication. People in the West who hear about Soviet exploits they didn't know about are usually impressed, curious and respectful, and in the East people will also be very open and excited to hear about sides of the war they didn't know about. For example I spent a good 15 minutes quoting statistics and stories about the 1st Brazilian Fighter Aviation Group in Italy to a group of Russians who were no particular war buffs and they all listened with eyes wide open, asked questions then went to tell stories they knew about.

 

If only people were taught about the real, full-blown scale of the war as it happened, things would be simpler.

 

Zhukov himself was very vocally against anyone who tried to erase the importance of lend-lease supplies. According to him, the side people don't see but which was the most important all the way to 1945 was that because secondary supplies like food, radios, trucks and so on were coming in such insane numbers, the Soviet industry was able to allocate nearly all of its resources towards war machinery (tanks, aircraft, guns, etc.) It made logistics and production much simpler and faster.

[TheBlackPenguin]

If you want a heartwarming story, on this year's 9th May parade since many Western leaders turned down the invitation Russia gave the front-row seats to a group of five Royal Navy vets from the Arctic Convoys. Their faces were glowing.

 

Also, there is a very popular old Soviet movie called Torpedonosty which you may find in English online, about Il-4 pilots covering a convoy.

 

The Russians have always treated the Royal Navy vets well it seems, I recall seeing a documentary (maybe the same one) where a high ranking official from the Russian embassy personally delivered their medals.

 

Interesting link here:

 

http://ww2-weapons.com/lend-lease-tanks-and-aircrafts/

 

No way I can verify the amounts listed.

[Dakpilot]

Valentine medium Tanks outnumbered Matilda by 3 to 2

 

The trouble with percentage figures is how they are applied, whether to the whole Moscow campaign of individual Battles within that campaign, I understand that the lend lease tanks were used in independent units/regiments 

 

What is clear is that during the earlier phases of the campaign the lend lease British tanks played an important part in the defense of Moscow suffering heavy losses, which were replaced with locally produced Tanks featuring more in the counter attack phase

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[xvii-Dietrich]

Arctic convoys...

 

We need that Murmansk map, along with Hurricanes, FW-200s, Ju-88s and He-115s!!!

[Blitzen]

Arctic convoys...

 

We need that Murmansk map, along with Hurricanes, FW-200s, Ju-88s and He-115s!!!

I hope we do get something like this & these planes for some future add-on to BoS or BoM,but for the time being there is an excellent stand-in for Murmansk camapagn with a faux version in CloD with Hurricanes , Spitfires,FW-200's ,Ju-88's etc. & Italian aircraft as stand-in for Russian forces,and may I say its not bad.Its very interesting seeing the difference between the snow maps between the two sims.....

Edited December 21, 2015 by Blitzen

[Brano]

http://www.victorydaylondon.co.uk/victory-day-2015/

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Actions like that are incredible, it's always great to see veterans being well-treated and particularly amazing is to see a Russian and British veteran clinking their glasses.

[Monostripezebra]

Also, there is a very popular old Soviet movie called Torpedonostsy which you may find in English online, about Il-4 pilots covering a convoy.

 

I saw that a ong time ago in the cinemas.. a very good movie! A german equivalent would be the book by Erwin Morzfeld "Er flog an meiner Seite"

[DD_Arthur]

Apart from the armour,  these convoys also brought the Hawker Hurricane fighter.  At the start of the battle this made up the largest single type being used by the Soviets over Moscow.

 

Why aren't we getting it here? 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I see this repeated time and again and I always wonder, where are you guys getting this stuff from?

 

The Hurricane did arrive at the time of the Battle of Moscow, but its service was restricted to Northern units since the logistics made it easy to receive the aircraft, the spares, put everything together and fly off in the same region.

 

The Moscow Air Defence units mainly flew the MiG-3, then followed by the I-16 and only then came the I-153, Yak-1, LaGG-3, some Pe-3s and lastly a few P-40s, most of them Tomahawk IIs. The situation in nearby fronts was the same.

[DD_Arthur]

[Dakpilot]

I have read that article (a while ago though)  and think a little was lost in translation and context of timeline with a number of his points, one thing i think must be noted is that the PVO 'Defence of Moscow' was pretty much an operation of the whole war and not necessarily the actual 'Battle of Mosow'

 

I believe at the time of BoM the units flying Hurricanes were based further North, however i do not pretend to be an expert and if their is any proof of Hurricane squadrons taking part fair enough   happy to learn new things

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[DD_Arthur]

Goodness gracious!  The man is quite specific about locations, dates and numbers.  This interview appeared in FlyPast magazine in December 1996.

 

http://www.theaviationindex.com/publication/number-185-december-1996/article/hurricanes-over-artic-and-moscow

[MiloMorai]

 

More info http://www.o5m6.de/Routes.html

 

Of the 836 ships sailing to Murmansk/Archangel only 58 were sunk.

[xvii-Dietrich]

More info http://www.o5m6.de/Routes.html

 

Of the 836 ships sailing to Murmansk/Archangel only 58 were sunk.

Only 58? Really?!

 

But there were 24 sunk from convoy PQ17 alone. Surely there were more losses than 58 during the entire Arctic convoy series, no?

[Dakpilot]

Goodness gracious!  The man is quite specific about locations, dates and numbers.  This interview appeared in FlyPast magazine in December 1996.

 

http://www.theaviationindex.com/publication/number-185-december-1996/article/hurricanes-over-artic-and-moscow

 

I agree he is specific about dates in some things but many people here on this forum have referred to the 1000 Hurricanes defending Moscow info.

 

It is clear when you read it carefully that he is referring to PVO Moscow defense for the Whole War using 1000 Hurricanes and Spitfires (the MkIX) the MkV's were used for the first time in may 43 in Caucasus.

 

When he talks of October 12/13 1941, being detached to Moscow for training organising and instruction of ground crews for Hurricanes, it is very well documented that at that time all Hurricanes were in Murmansk region, and the very first combat victory for a Russian pilot in a Hurricane was on 26 Oct 41 (Murmansk) First operational Hurricane Regiments 41/42, 152 and 760 IAP belonged to VVS Karelian front, and 72 and 78 IAP were part of the Naval air Regiments 

 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/sheppard/hurricanes/

 

The arrivals of, and Regiments using Hurricanes were quite well documented, not at all looking for an argument at all, and as I said if there is any evidence of Hurricane regiments in combat at Moscow during the actual BoM I would welcome seeing it, and happily learn something new,  but during the Battle of Moscow as we will have in BoM I am pretty sure (and I do not pretend to be an expert) some were present, but to the Northern part  of Battle for Moscow, and at Karelian/Leningrad  front. The only Hurricane Regiment, 195 IAP, which I know of that was  present was at Kalinin region (Andreapol Airfield) arriving with 15 combat a/c and starting operations on 13th march 42, after two weeks of busy operational sorties they were reduced to 6 combat a/c and eventually withdrawn on 1 April 42 to be re-organised and converted to different a/c the remaining Hurricanes being transferred (i believe) to other units in the North

 

again if anyone else has any other info it would be interesting

 

It is not that no Hurricanes operational in 41/42 just the amount at Moscow that I query (not 1000)

 

Timeline wise I would have loved to have a Hurricane as it fits perfectly   and Kalinin is on the map! not sure about Andeapol airfield though, time will tell

 

 

Only 58? Really?!

But there were 24 sunk from convoy PQ17 alone. Surely there were more losses than 58 during the entire Arctic convoy series, no? 

 

Good article about arctic convoys with link to info and losses on each one

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_convoys_of_World_War_II

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited January 31, 2016 by Dakpilot

[MiloMorai]

Only 58? Really?!

 

But there were 24 sunk from convoy PQ17 alone. Surely there were more losses than 58 during the entire Arctic convoy series, no?

 

My addition might be off 1 or 2 but there was 30 convoys when no ships were sunk.

 

From the link posted, http://www.o5m6.de/northern.html

[Heliopause]

 

 

 

It is not that no Hurricanes operational in 41/42 just the amount at Moscow that I query (not 1000)

 

Did any of the Luftwaffe's fighter pilots claim Hurricanes during the attack on/towards Moscow, I wonder.

[MiloMorai]

http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RN-II/index.html

WAR AT SEA 1939-1945

There are several chapters on the Arctic convoys.