View Single Post
  #27  
Old 06-22-2009, 02:56 PM
Jason Weiser's Avatar
Jason Weiser Jason Weiser is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
Why, exactly, would they be giving away their reserve military stocks? This doesn't make a lot of sense being as the USSR is engaged in a major war against China. I'm not sure why some folks are so quick to accept arguments that weaken the T2K v1 USSR and so quick to dismiss arguments that strengthen it. I should make this into my thesis statement. Perhaps this is why I feel the need to keep bringing this issue up.
I concede here, but YMMV.

Quote:
Never? This is a bit of an overstatement. By 1944, the Red Army was supporting massive numbers of troops, tanks, and aircraft in a steady, innexorable advance over hundreds of miles. I do see your point about the vulnerability of Soviet supply routes to the China front but I'm not sure how it's germaine to your arguments regarding the war in Europe where there would be hundreds of overland supply routes between Mother Russia and the front in Germany/Poland.
Actually, the major limiting factor in Soviet offensives during WWII was the spearheads outrunning their supplies. Yes, this occurred to all sides but the Soviets actually had a real problem with it especially since the Germans retreated sometimes faster than the Soviets could catch up (Then again, Hitler's meddling ameliorated this, much to the Soviet Army's joy). As for the Twilight 2000 side, it is germane. China is going to fall apart once NATO enters the war..The BAM and Trans-Siberian are going to be hit hard by cruise missiles and air attacks...and cut. Not to mention in the West, we're probably going to try to hit just about every bridge over the Warta.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
superiority a given? How is this not an underestimation? Is this based on the U.S.'s performance against the Iraqi AF? Serbia? We've already established that this is not a fair or accurate comparison. Even if the Soviet Air Force was as depleted as you claim, the Soviets still have a massive ground-based air defense network in eastern Europe. Whether it could be eliminated so easily is still up for debate. Even if Europe was stripped on first-line combat aircraft, much of it could and no doubt would be sent back to Europe ASAP after the German gambit. The Soviets always placed a huge emphasis on defending its airspace and NATO's AFs would have been a much greater threat than the Chinese AF. I would argue that the Soviet AF on the China front would be stripped and the bulk of its aircraft rushed west if for no other reason than to defend the Motherland from the mere threat of NATO air power.
Remember the Luftwaffe's already done some of the work penetrating that air defense network, and said network has been the subject of 40+ years of ELINT work. We know a lot about it...there will be losses, but in the end, we'll take it down. Canon agrees with us...see Black Madonna.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
Why, exactly, would they be giving away their reserve military stocks? This doesn't make a lot of sense being as the USSR is engaged in a major war against China. I'm not sure why some folks are so quick to accept arguments that weaken the T2K v1 USSR and so quick to dismiss arguments that strengthen it. I should make this into my thesis statement. Perhaps this is why I feel the need to keep bringing this issue up.
I concede here, but YMMV.

Quote:
Never? This is a bit of an overstatement. By 1944, the Red Army was supporting massive numbers of troops, tanks, and aircraft in a steady, innexorable advance over hundreds of miles. I do see your point about the vulnerability of Soviet supply routes to the China front but I'm not sure how it's germaine to your arguments regarding the war in Europe where there would be hundreds of overland supply routes between Mother Russia and the front in Germany/Poland.
Actually, the major limiting factor in Soviet offensives during WWII was the spearheads outrunning their supplies. Yes, this occurred to all sides but the Soviets actually had a real problem with it especially since the Germans retreated sometimes faster than the Soviets could catch up (Then again, Hitler's meddling ameliorated this, much to the Soviet Army's joy). As for the Twilight 2000 side, it is germane. China is going to fall apart once NATO enters the war..The BAM and Trans-Siberian are going to be hit hard by cruise missiles and air attacks...and cut. Not to mention in the West, we're probably going to try to hit just about every bridge over the Warta. Also, I don't know if you're aware of this, but EVERY truck driver in the Soviet Union was a military reservist. So, if you call these guys up, as well as reacquisition a lion's share of the air and rail transpo in the country, it's going to strain the civilian sector, a lot as time goes on..hence the economic collapse argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
I'm also of the opinion that you are overstating Soviet air losses in the East. For one thing, the Chinese AF of the v1.0 timeline could not have been as powerful in '95 as it was in reality, but Web and others seem to be predicating Twilight Chinese AF capabilities on relatively recent developments instead of in keeping with the alternate v1 timeline. With tensions high between the Soviets and Chinese, the Soviets wouldn't have sold SU-27s to China as they did IRL and China's indigenous air industry wouldn't yet be able to produce anything approaching that quality. They only just started to produce their own indigenous 4th generation fighter during the last couple of years, IRL. Aircraft provided to China by the West as military aid would take time to train on and deploy operationally and by that time, most of the "original" Chinese AF would be destroyed. It's not like if you can fly a MiG-21 knock-off, you can just hop into the cockpit of an F-16 and go to town- at least not very effectively. Imagine a fresh-out-of-training Chinese pilot in an F-20 or whatever going up against a Soviet ace in a MiG-29 or SU-27.

I think Webstral's China timeline, although of excellent quality overall, departs somewhat liberally from canon in the beefing up of the Chinese AF.
True, but you underestimate the other factors that China would have...a ton of gun based ADA assets...supplemented by Western supplied GFCS systems and missiles...and those don't need as MUCH training. As that equipment arrives in theater, Soviet losses are going to go up. Also, Chinese militia units are going to hit airfields in the Soviet rear any way they can. Will they get to the SU-24s and TU-22s? No, but they will give the SU-25 and MiG-27 bases a rough time. Not to mention? Manchuria, flying in winter and with Tchaikovsky, most of the raids are at night...accidents and PM failures happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
And once again, by the time that W. Germany launched its forced reunification, Soviet war industries would be operating at close to full swing. As long as attrition of trained pilots wasn't too high, replacement aircraft could eventually be fielded. In this regard, at least, the WTO would have a leg up on NATO.
They are, with no slack if anything else happens....NATO entering the war broke the back of the Soviet Union economically. The trained pilot numerical advantage would only last for a while....

Quote:
I see your point here, and I think it's a good one. Perhaps I understated the negative effects of the war with China while trumpetting the valuable tactical and operational experience the Red Army would gain from it. But, I think that Abbot makes an important point that the Soviets would not trust the West enough to severely deplete their "occupation" armies there by shipping them all off to Europe. Although canon describes the strain on the Red Army's forces in Europe, I'm not sure where it mentions only one CA army and several AA armies left behind. If this is canonical, I apologize and I will have to rethink this point.
The Soviets are doing this because they are desperate. They didn't commit enough troops to decide the matter in the first place in Manchuria. And GSFG isn't going to be invading Germany anytime soon, so moving a Category I Army East is not going to be a disaster. It's alluded to in canon...as with the earlier comment, I will post the quotes when I get home, am at work now(things are a bit slow right now). Those Cat I forces in Germany are required...and why mobilize Mobilization Only divisions if things aren't going badly.

Quote:
No Soviet Navy? Now I'm confused. Even if, as canon describes, the Soviet surface navy was bottled up and destroyed early on in the war, there would at least be a few SSNs, SSGNs, and diesel boats out there, staking out the sea lanes. Also, if the Soviets could somehow neutralize or suppress NATO airpower in the GIUK gap, they could still strike at convoys with land based Backfire and Blackjack bombers. I would never argue that those assets would be used to attempt conventional bombing of targets in the CONUS.

No, the Soviet navy couldn't cut the sea lanes, even temporarily. But just one large RO-RO ship sunk and the U.S. could lose close to an armored bigade in one fell swoop. How long would it take for that kind of loss (of tanks and such, not shipping) to be replaced? Would the NATO armies have time to wait? I'd argue that the strategic supply lines between the U.S. and Europe are far more vulnerable to interdiction than the lines between the U.S.S.R. and Europe. To suggest that the Soviet navy would be impotent against NATO is the ultimate in underestimation.
They aren't...We have the Soviets doing things like Primus and other actions to attempt to do SOMETHING. But the fact is, by early 1997, the Soviet fleet is gutted and most of their forward bases around the world have either been badly damaged (Camn Rahn Bay) or occupied (Aden). Cuba is neutral and the Backfire regiments have had the heart ripped out of them. In short, they could kill NATO merchants, but not in any significant number to prevent the reinforcement of Europe. Therefore...those units must not be allowed to leave the US.

Quote:
In closing, I just can't see how canon can be supported if the v1 timeline's Soviet military is as crap-tastic as some folks seem to be claiming. Against NATO air superiority and naval superiority, and a fast, uninterrupted flow of fresh U.S. troops and hi-tech (read "superior") weapons and equipment that you are arguing for here, how could the WTO hold out as long as canon describes? Are you suggesting that the use of tac-nukes is the only way the Soviets are able to compete on the European battlefied? If so, then I've got to stick by my assertion that the Soviet military is being wilfully underestimated.
In this scenario...in a Soviet thrust towards the Rhine, it's different...they aren't having competing strains on their logistical networks, they aren't in a war that's eating whole divisions by the battle and flooding hospitals in the Soviet Union...The Soviet Army was a OFFENSIVE instrument. It was designed to strike hard, and strike first. In a defensive arrangement in a fight not on Soviet soil with a ruinous war that's sending thousands of shattered vets home and making the breadlines long even by Soviet standards? That's a damn open question.
__________________
Author of "Distant Winds of a Forgotten World" available now as part of the Cannon Publishing Military Sci-Fi / Fantasy Anthology: Spring 2019 (Cannon Publishing Military Anthology Book 1)
Reply With Quote