I've heard various stories (don't know how many are true), from either people IN World War 2 or people who had fathers who served in WW2. I even heard from people who knew Germans in WW2. Pretty much everything I've heard supports one common thought between U.S. and Soviet artillery.
U.S. artillery was very effective at what it did. It "seemed" like a lot because it was accurate and therefore effective. The Soviets, on the other hand, had a MASSIVE amount of artillery. It wasn't as effective as U.S. artillery, but it didn't have to be. Where the Americans used 4-5 guns to do something and do it with less shots, the Soviets used 20-30 guns to do it. The Soviets used more rounds, but eventually they accomplished the same thing.
I have a feeling that, based on the Soviets WW2 experience, they kept that same principle of thought for their artillery. I'm friends with a Marine that was in Artillery while in the USMC. While he was in, he was all gung-ho and "we'll kick their ass" and the U.S. was the biggest, baddest mamma-jamma out there. Now that he's been out a while, he admits that the biggest threat to them was the sheer quantity of the Soviet equipment. Sure, they could counter-battery two, or even three Soviet batteries pretty quickly (in practice), but there was so much Soviet artillery they were pretty sure they'd have to vacate their position pretty quickly or the numerical superiority would eventually zero in on them.
That's all it takes. Sure the U.S. can do a lot with their pieces, but the Soviets could do a lot with all their pieces as well. NATO would take out their fair share and then some, but the sheer size of the Soviet artillery branch would eventually leave them with artillery cover.
I, personally, don't view arial counter-battery to be all that effective against something like the Soviet army. Oh, it'll work some, but the Soviet ADA as well as the rather massive Soviet Air Force would make most arial counter-battery would likely turn into a pretty big blood bath for BOTH sides.
The biggest question mark for the whole thing is how much of a drain the Chinese front would be. Would it be enough to reduce the artillery forces in the West? Somehow I doubt that the Soviets woud weaken themselves against a more modern, possibly even more aggresive enemy in the West to fight a mostly foot army in the East. If China ever made a strong push into the USSR proper, then I could see a much greater amount of power being drawn the from West and pushed into the East.
|