Picture of the day

Good day Gunnutz :) New day new picture :)

254870_10150258947830664_2144830_n.jpg


Cheers
Joe

"Comrad... push as I let out the clutch. Watch for backfire."
 
bigger payload on a lighter chassis, higher rate of fire, and cost. the down side is the ease of locating and lack of accuracy

Accuracy was not so much an issue when you have a nearly unlimited supply of the stuff to saturate the enemy with. It was most often used en masse for shock..and no doubt a lot of awe. Each regiment had 36 firing trucks with (BM 8-48) 48 rails each of 82mm (thats 1728 warheads) that could be fired in a very quick time. I would not want to be a footslogger caught out in the open or in a soft skinned veh when that began to rain down.
 
A LOT of those trucks were American-built Studebakers, which Stalin called "the best truck in the world".

Russia got a LOT of aid from the US, including 2/3 of the entire production of Bell P-39s, the best ground-attack aircraft in the world up to 1944.

We didn't have P-39s.

We didn't have Valentines, either, although we had a factory for them. They ALL went to Russia.

OUR guys trained in Ford-built copies of 1917 Renault FTs.
 
A LOT of those trucks were American-built Studebakers, which Stalin called "the best truck in the world".

Russia got a LOT of aid from the US, including 2/3 of the entire production of Bell P-39s, the best ground-attack aircraft in the world up to 1944.

We didn't have P-39s.

We didn't have Valentines, either, although we had a factory for them. They ALL went to Russia.

OUR guys trained in Ford-built copies of 1917 Renault FTs.

did the p-39 not have a central engine? iirc it had a big issue with flat spins
 
Back
Top Bottom