[dvwjr]

Originally posted by muawiyah:

"The Tu-4 was a bolt for bolt copy of the B-29."

"There were others as well. Still, existing Russian bombers in production in 1944 were satisfactory for hitting American positions in Western Europe. It was not until 1949 that a threat to America itself by the Tu-4 became a big issue."

And as the source I pointed out to you in my message #85 the fact that the initial copies of the B-29 were made in 1947 did not mean that sufficient production levels were achieved until 1950-1953. Your contention that the Soviet Air Force had "existing Russian bombers" available in 1944 for "hitting American positions" in Europe is just laughable. The end of WWII found the Soviets with a large, tactical air force that had absorbed the 'strategic' bomber command, which had in its entire existence performed a few raids on Berlin in the early part of the war, then had hit the capitol of Estonia late in the war. Take a look at the twin-engine 'bombers' that were the mainstay of the Soviet Air Force in WWII. The Soviets copied the Germans in air doctrine, they created weapons for tactical air operations and ignored strategic air doctrine (and the necessary aircraft)...

Look at the table below. You will see that the most numerous twin-engined bomber of the USSR was the IL-4, with about 6,800 produced during WWII. The only four-engined bomber was the Pe-8, which had about 145 produced before and during the war. The USSR had no strategic bomber force, nor the long-range fighter aircraft necessary to escort said non-existent bombers to targets in Western Europe. The Russian fighters were optimized for high-performance, short range combat against the fighters of the Luftwaffe. The Soviet Air Force simply had NO P-51D long-range fighter escort equal... You also might be surprised to find out where most of the USSR's high-octane AVGAS for high-performance engines came from during WWII - the U.S. via the Iranian oil, refineries, pipe-lines and rail tank-cars run by the United States Army.

Design Bureau	Aircraft	Type	Year	Engines	Range, km	Crew
Tupolev	TB-3 (ANT-6)	Bomber	1931	4x715 V	3225	10-Jun
Tupolev	SB-2 Katiusha	Bomber	1936	2x830 V	1200	3
Polikarpov	I-15 Chato	Fighter
Polikarpov	I-16 Mosca	Fighter	1937	1x775 rad.	800	1
Ilyushin	IL-4 Bob	Bomber	1940	2x1100 rad.	4260	4-Mar
Petliakov	Pe-8	Bomber	1940	4x1350 V	4700	11
Sukhoi	Su-2	Bomber	1940	1x1400 rad.	1100	2
Lavochkin	LaGG-3	Fighter	1941	1x1050 V	650	1
Mikoyan-Gurevich	MiG-3	Fighter	1941	1x1350 V	820	1
Petliakov	Pe-2	Bomber	1941	2x1100 V	1000	3
Yakovlev	Yak-4	Attack	1941	2x1050 V	1200	2
Illyushin	IL-2 Shturmovik	Attack	1942	1x1600		2
Lavochkin	La-5	Fighter	1943	1x1700 rad.	765	1
Tupolev	Tu-2	Bomber	1943	2x1850 rad.	1400	4
Yakovlev	Yak-9	Fighter	1943	1x1250 V	1330	1
Illyushin	IL-10	Attack	1944	1x2000 V	800	2
Yakovlev	Yak-3	Fighter	1944	1x1400 V	900	1

In the sources listed below is an account of the USSR bomber 'raids' on Berlin during the early stages of WWII. Think of these raids on Berlin as on the same scale of the USAAF "Dolittle Raid" on Tokyo in 1942. Strategic air capabilities did not enter the USSR inventory until the 1950s.

Source: The Other Air Forces of the Second World War
Source: Specifications of WWII Soviet bombers
Source: Red Stars over Berlin

dvwjr

[muawiyah]

What you have there is the Soviet response to the solidification of positions on the ground. Turn a George Patton loose leading the remnants of the German army against the Russians, and Joe Stalin and his guys would undoubtedly have revised their position on the utility of strategic bombing!

In many references concerning Soviet long-range aircraft available during WWII, you will find notice of a "show aircraft" Stalin sent on various long range trips for the purpose of propaganda.

Up until a decade or so ago the "official" position taken by Janes and others was that the particular aircraft never existed and was certainly never observed in the United States.

It landed at Bolling AFB in Washington DC in 1944 and was seen by thousands of people. All the "official" position folks finally agreed it really did exist so it's OK to talk about it. At the same time no one knows how many of that model the Soviets actually had.

Now, back to the issue of how many atom bombs the US had ~ there was no major production line set up in 1945 to produce large quantities of atom bombs. That said, we note that the Russians didn't have a major production line set up until 1947 to produce large quantities of the TU-4.

So, how long did it take us to start making lots of bombs and for the Russians to start making lots of TU-4s?

Now, add to that rough equation the question of how long it would take for the US to push the Red Army back beyond Poland, or to degrade it's effectiveness?

Reflect on how long it took us to prepare for the Normandy landing. Then figure in what happens when the unexpected happens as at the Battle of the Bulge.

I think we have a large enough timeframe here to allow for the Russians to push the TU-4 production schedule up, and for us to start building more nukes which we would undoubtedly have started tossing all over Western, Central and Eastern Europe as the Red Army began bleeding us white.

This would probably have been viewed quite negatively by the people on the ground.