[glider1]

Taking your points one at a time

Originally Posted by tcolvin

Glider1, we're getting completely off-topic, but I will briefly comment on your points.

1. The Mariensiel arsenal explosion has been covered in my reply to Kutscha. The raid did not set out what it aimed to do, which was to destroy submarines on the stocks in the Bauhafen, 4 kms away from Mariensiel.

This is covered, I did say it was a lucky hit and there is hardly a building left standing. Also all the vessels had been moved (as far as I can say) so it was a damn good try.

2.
- Crap infantry weapons; the British had nothing to equal the PPSh-41 or MG-42 in rate of fire, which is the important thing for infantry.

You are being a little selective here. The PPsh-41 is a sub machine gun and I did say that the Sten was total rubbish, so we agree on that. I also agree that the UK didn't have anything like the Mg42, but neither did Russia.

- Crap tanks; the only half-decent allied tank was the Churchill. The literature on this is extensive eg 'Death By Design' by Peter Beale.

As is the literature for the performance of the tanks as outlined in my previous posting.

- Crap artillery; the 25-pdr was 88-mm in calibre and could not match the weight of fire delivered by Russian 122-mm, or even German and US 105-mm artillery. No Katyusha or Nebelwerfer. No infantry divisional SP artillery after D-Day.

The 25pd was at least as good as the Germand and US 105. It had a longer range than the former, it was reliable, flexible and in service from the start in good numbers. To compare it against the 122mm is a little off as the 122mm should be compared with the 4.5in which is a good match.
I certainly agree that the British had no Katyusha but I notice that you don't deny that the British fire control system was far more flexible which is a significant advantage in this kind of combat.
I also agree that the British Infantry divisions didn't have SP Artillery, but then again, neither did the Russian Infantry units. However the British Armoured divisions did, how many Russian Tank Divisions had SP Artillery?.

- Crap tactical support; no accurate dive-bomber, and no armoured IL-2, only vulnerable and inaccurate Spitfire and Typhoon fighter-bombers and mediums.

No more vulnerable or inaccurate than the Il-2 as I said before there was a different approach. Typhoons were well armoured for a fighter bomber. One thing is for certain, the Typhoon was more able to defend itself against fighters. As for the mediums Russia didn't have anything close to a Beaufighter or Mosquito, let alone the mediums.

-Crap leadership; from Stalin down to battalion level, the Russians led everybody, including the Germans, in professionalism

That I would question, both countries had their good and bad moments.