ORIGINAL: Japan
@Ok Jim D Burns, here is the point, if you read the souses i sent you, you will see what Soviet wanted and to large degree used the trucks for in 1943, you will get surprised.
Here is the point in my meaning, Soviet had received so much already by 43, that from there on they would be good, the Trucks they got from late 43+ did to a very large degree not see any military or logistical use, but simply aided the process of re-building Soviet Union, and the work had already started in late 43. Read the books i referred to above, and you will get suprised how little "in %" of the Trucks and Trains they received after Mid 43 who actually ever saw military or military support use.
And due to that is why I say that from 43 they could done it alone (and of course that includes the equipment they had in 43, who was a lot, and also a lot more then what they ever would need for military operations, and yes a lot of it comed from the west) But Logistic recourses sent to them from Early 44 was more "rebuild Soviet" type of support, simply because they had all the Trucks they ever would need for the Army by then. That is why they would been able to do it alone from late 43, point again is that Operation Overloard was not necessary.
Regarding raw materials this was something Soviet indeed needed within several areas due to lack of logistics, and they did receive this support. See the bocks i referred to above if you want more details about this.
Well assuming after 1943 that all lend lease aid was stopped, then it is a good bet that a significant portion (80% or more perhaps) of the following USSR production would not have occurred due to severe shortages of Rubber, Sulphur and Molybdenum (used in the production of steel alloys).
Soviet Production for 1944:
Tanks and self propelled guns: 28,963
Trucks: 52,600
Military aircraft: 40,246
Soviet Production for 1945:
Tanks and self propelled guns: 15,419
Trucks: 68,500
Military aircraft: 20,052
A case could be made that things like artillery pieces and machine guns would also have been affected, but that is debatable. The above items though, there can be no debate, without lend lease aid Russia would not have been able to produce them in such numbers.
Too many people try and equate lend lease aid with actual finished military equipment sent. But as an earlier link I provided shows, only 20% of the total lend lease aid was actual finished goods. The other 80% allowed Russia's industry to achieve the massive production numbers of modern equipment that it did. Without that *other* 80%, Russia's industry would have been a fraction of what it was.
Jim
