Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtime
Just like in Red Storm Rising. I should read that book for the 100th time (not entirely kidding, I've read it a lot)!
|
One of the best books that Tom Clancy has written, and fairly accurate in a lot of ways, I read it until it literally disintigrated then bought a hard cover copy.
Technology trumps all, and since the T-34, the Soviet tank design has been fairly poor, they tried to automate loading which slowed down its reload cycles, they tried to lower the height of the tank which is a smart move, but they compromised on crew safety and survivability, the fire control was and remains a generation behind.
The M1 tank and the A1 would kill a Soviet tank long before the Soviet tank could accurately engage it, the American's would literally chop down the Soviet tanks from a distance.
Soviet doctrine always called for a 3 to 1 to 5 to 1 numbers advantage before jumping off and attacking, they would basically throw the kitchen sink at you in terms of mass artillary and frontal aviation, The American doctrine is based around the concept of fighting from a severe numbers disadvantage a long way from home, so they base their attack strategy around mobility instead of blind charge, and taking control of the air, and then using that air control to range out to destroy artillary and vehicles on the ground.
What made the Soviets frightening at the height of the cold war in the 70's and 80's is we made a lot of assumptions on the competance of their designs and the competants of their officer and NCO ranks. We found out after the cold war ended that they had severe design problems and their conscription and ranks system lead to what would probably be pretty bad leadership in the field.
the tanker that I talked to was officer level and he did give credit that the Soviets would gain a lot of ground in the first few days and then the American Technology advantage would eventually win out.