>in July 1941 was the experimental Soviet BM-13 Katyusha multiple rocket launcher (later dubbed by the German soldiers ‘Stalin's organs’). This new weapon delivered 320 132mm rockets in a ten-second barrage. The effect was devastating and the weapon was soon moved into mass production. One soldier who had fought in Poland, France and later Italy described his first experience of the Katyusha battery as ‘the most terrible and shocking thing I have ever encountered’.>Under the conditions of static warfare now beginning along the vast eastern front, the pre-eminence of the infantryman was on the rise, no longer in just securing the territory won by the panzers, but now holding the long front together. In this role the German infantry proved themselves well trained, but their equipment was deficient, especially in comparison to their Soviet opponents. One officer from the 4th Panzer Division remarked after the war: ‘The equipment, which had proved efficient in the previous campaigns, was not robust enough for battle under the conditions prevailing in Russia. Russian equipment seemed to be more robust and less sensitive. Therefore, whoever got hold of a Russian tommy-gun kept it.’
>An Italian officer who inspected a Russian machine gun for the first time remarked: ‘I loved the simplicity, easy handling and firepower of this gun.’152 Likewise, Colonel-General Ewald von Kleist, who later rose to the rank of Field Marshal and remained on the eastern front until March 1944, stated after the war: ‘[The Soviet] equipment was very good even in 1941, especially the tanks. Their artillery was excellent, and also most of the infantry weapons – their rifles were more modern than ours, and had a more rapid rate of fire.’153 Colonel-General Erhard Raus, another former German commander with extensive experience on the eastern front, wrote for a post-war US military study:>The best weapon of the Russian infantryman was the machine pistol. It was easily handled, equal to Russian winter conditions, and one which the Germans also regarded highly…The mortar also proved highly valuable as the ideal weapon for terrain conditions where artillery support was impossible. At the beginning of the Eastern Campaign, Russian infantry far surpassed the German in mortar equipment and its use. The same was true for the Russian anti-tank gun, which at the beginning of the campaign considerably surpassed the anti-tank gun of the German infantry divisions in efficiency, and therefore was readily put to use whenever captured.
If you have literally more than 2 braincells you can answer your own question by reading what you have yourself posted
>>18510492More natural resources and generous allies.
>>18510507>''generous allies''...muh lend lease copeLike pottery. Those paragraphs are from only 5 weeks in the war and the Germans are expressly talking about soviet made weapons (not that there were others anyway since again it was only the fifth week of Operation Barbarossa). Also natural resources don't magically assemble themselves into superior weaponry, y'know
>>18510495The polish slav jew who spams these threads does not have even that many brain cells.
>>18510492SlavGods always win and rape germs
>>18510562>slavGods always win and ra- ACK!
>>18510492Not only is that extremely subjective, if the soviet weapons were so superior, then why did they lose fuckin 20 million more soldiers?
>>18510856They didn't, nazis mass murdering civilians doesn't count as having killed 20 million more soviet soldiers. Maybe stop getting your history lessons from weaboos
>>18510492The USSR mogged everyone
>>18510922*wehraboos
>>18510493>>An Italian officer who inspected a Russian machine gun for the first time remarked: ‘I loved the simplicity, easy handling and firepower of this gun.’that's only because the Italians had the absolute worst piece of shit ever referred to as a machine gun. Being able to fire off a whole clip with it without jamming would practically get you a medal.
>>18510922You still lost 13 million men to a force that rode on horses and had its air force annihilated by the Western Allies. And the only reason the nazis could mass murder 20 Million Civilians is ebcause they pushed you back hundreds of kilometers in a few weeks while you took 3 years to fuly push them out.Superior my ass, we saw how superior your gear was when it was by countries that didn't enjoy overwhelming advantages.And just the cream of the top, the Nazis rebuilt Germany which is now the 4th strongest economic power, I don't see any Soviet Union on the map. Where was your superior technology when it collapsed and all the Soviet States became aids ridden shitholes?>>18510931Couldn't mog an American super market. Couldn't mog Afganistan. Their ''Victory'' over Finnland was utterly pathetic, they only have WW2 where they fought a country a fraction of its size and a bunch of irrelevant shitholes with the help of the largest empire in history and the largest industrial power.
>>18510985I still don't understand why Italians didn't Villar Perosa maxx. These were literally the coolest thing. Just find a way to modify the magazine placementhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mycT3Flp8b8
>>18511058>help of the largest empire in history The Brits got BTFO instantly, they are irrelevant. > and the largest industrial powerIrrelevant as they entered the war too late.
>>18510922Only counting soldiers Soviets still had double the amount killed or incapacitated
>>18511130because it was in essence an SMG, and thus pretty light and erratic. It bounced around way too much and fired a pistol cartridge. Every army in WW2 needed and adopted a larger squad-level automatic weapon capable of accurate sustained fire of rifle calibre rounds over several hundred metres. smaller SMGs that spat out a stream of small-calibre rounds were sophisticated enough to be readily hand-held.
>>18511058I'm not a slav, the quotes are literally out of the mouth of nazi generals 5 WEEKS in the war, they already realized they were utterly fucked after mere weeks>The Russian is very strong and fights desperately, driven by his commissars. Worst of all are the forest battles. Everywhere the Russian suddenly appears and shoots, attacking columns, single transports, dispatches, and so on. The war here is without doubt very bad and to this must be added the tremendous road difficulties, the enormous spaces, the unending forests, the difficulties with the language and so on. All past campaigns seem like child's play in comparison with the present war. Our losses are heavy …105>Describing the heavy fighting on the army group's southern flank one junior doctor, Gerhard Meyer, wrote home in a letter on 23 July:>After weeks of very tiring marching my division reached the Dnepr, at that place the Russians in a great counterattack crossed the river to the west. This first encounter against the superior enemy, unable to be softened up with artillery, cost us much blood. In four places there was an enduring and very costly back and forth, whereby the two or threefold Russian superiority, above all in artillery, was very noticeable. The active strength of the division has sunken to less than half, with 80 per cent of the officers lost.
>>18511058>to a force that rode on horsesthe USSR made heavy usage of horses and mules as well. >and had its air force annihilated by the Western Alliesthe Luftwaffe was, by and large, still largely intact and in good fighting shape until early 1943. >they pushed you back hundreds of kilometers in a few weeks while you took 3 years to fuly push them outThe push-out was permanent. The push-back was temporary. >we saw how superior your gear was when it was by countries that didn't enjoy overwhelming advantageslike North Vietnam and the Taliban lol? for those two entities it was RPGs and AKs all the way. >they only have WW2 where they fought a country a fraction of its size and a bunch of irrelevant shitholescould say the same about the US after the mid-19th century lmao
