Lend-Lease tanks and aircrafts

P-63 Kingcobra lend-lease aircrafts for Russia

Bell’s plant at Buffalo delivered well over 2,000 P-63 Kingcobra to Russia, where they stood up well to the harsh environment.

Lend-Lease tanks and aircrafts for Russia 1941-1945

Lend Lease Tanks

The Red Army used extensive quantities of Lend-Lease tanks and other armoured vehicles from the USA, Great Britain and Canada. A total of 22,800 armoured vehicles were supplied to the Red Army during the war, of which 1,981 were lost at sea on the one or other dangerous Arctic convoy .
In total, Lend Lease armoured vehicles amounted to about 20 per cent of the total number of armoured vehicles manufactured by Russia in WW2. These shipments were the equivalent of 16 per cent of Soviet tank production, 12 per cent of self-propelled gun production, and all of Soviet armoured troop transporter production, because the Soviet Union did not produce armored troop carriers during the war.

Valentine tanks in Iran during transit to Russia

Valentine Mk VIII tanks with 6pdr gun awaits unloading in Iran during transit to Russia.

The first shipments of tanks were dispatched in 1941, amounting to 487 Matilda II, Valentines and Tetrarch tanks from the UK and 182 M3A1 Stuart light tanks and M3 Lee medium tanks from the USA.
In 1942, Britain provided a further 2,487 tanks and the USA 3,023 tanks. The first units equipped with Valentines and Matildas went into service in the Staraya Russa and Valdai areas in December 1941 and January 1942.

At the beginning of 1943, there were 1,023 Lend-Lease tanks in Russian units although 6,179 had been received since 1941. In 1944 and 1945, with a major influx of American M4A2 Sherman medium tanks, some tank corps and mechanized corps were equipped entirely with this tank type. The M4A2 Sherman was not as brilliant a design as the T-34, but in post-war encounters between them in Korea and the Middle East, the US tank was invariably the victor despite the superiority of the T-34 on paper (but probably because of the better trained crews in Western style armies).

Far more critical to the Soviet war effort was the supply of tactical vehicles, primarily from the United States. During the war, Russia produced only 343,624 cars and lorries due to the heavy commitment of major automobile factories like GAZ to armoured vehicle production. The USA alone provided the Russians with 501,660 tactical wheeled and tracked vehicles, including 77,972 jeeps, 151,053 1-1/2-ton trucks, and 200,622 2-1/2-ton trucks.
The aid was vital, not only because of the sheer quantity, but because of the quality. While Soviet auto­motive production concentrated almost exclusively on antiquated copies of American 1930 lorry designs, the vehicles provided under Lend-Lease were modern military designs with multiple powered axles and useful cross-country capability.

In addition, 15,631 artillery guns and 131,633 sub-machine guns were supplied by the Allies to Russia.

Lend-Lease Armoured Vehicles supplied to the Red Army 1941-1945
Armored vehicles supplied lost on sea arrived
US armored vehicles
M3A1 Stuart1,676 4431,233
M5 Stuart 5 - 5
M24 Chaffee 2 - 2
M3 Lee1,386 ? 969 (?)
M4A2 Sherman2,007 (M3+M4 total 417)2,007 (?)
M4A2(76mm) Sherman2,095 ?2,095 (?)
M26 Pershing 1 - 1
M31 ARV (tank recovery) 115 - 115
M15A1 MGMC (37-mm AA gun) 100 - 100
M17 MGMC (quad AA MG)1,000 -1,000
T48 tank destroyer (57-mm AT) 650 - 650
M18 Hellcat 5 - 5
M10 Wolverine 52 - 52
M2-M9 Halftrack1,178 541,124
M3A1 Scout Car3,340 2283,112
LVT 5 - 5
US Universal Carrier T16 96 ? 96 (?)
US total13,7131,14212,571
British armored vehicles
Valentine2,394 320 (including Canadian)2,074
Valentine Bridgelayer 25 - 25
Matilda Mk II1,084 252 832
Churchill 301 43 258
Cromwell 6 - 6
Tetrarch 20 - 20
Universal Carrier1,212 224 (including US and Canadian) 988
British total5,042 8394,203
Canadian armoured vehicles
Valentine1,388 ?1,388 (?)
Universal Carrier1,348 ?1,348 (?)
Canada total2,736 ?2,736

see also: Russian vs German tanks in WW2

Lend Lease Aircrafts

British Hurricane pilots were playing football

British Hurricane pilots were playing football in the snow at Murmansk.

The disastrous course of the initial Russian response to the German invasion, and the resulting enormous losses suffered by the Red Air Force, made it necessary for the Allies to provide massive reinforcements until Soviet industry could produce modern aircraft in large quantities. The first foreign aeroplanes to arrive were two squadrons of Hawker Hurricans, which were flown in combat by RAF pilots in the autumn of 1941 and then handed over to the Russians (see picture on the right).

Under the Lend-Lease act large numbers of American aircraft were assigned to Russia. A total of 14,833 US aircraft of all types were sent to Russia between 1942 and 1944.
Russian aircraft production 1942-1944 was 42,427 fighters and 11,797 bombers (additional 30,506 ground attack planes), which results that approximately 20 per cent of the fighters and 30 per cent of the bombers of the Red Air Force were American-built and approx. 10 per cent of the fighters were British-built.

Russian aviation made full use of American and British aid throughout the war, in many cases using Western aircraft as the basis for new Russian designs. A number of American types, notably the Douglas C-47 Dakota and Boeing B-29 Superfortess, were simply copied without permission.

Lend-Lease aircrafts supplied to the Red Air Force 1942-1944
US and British aircrafts Total
US aircrafts Total
Curtiss P-402,097
Bell P-39 Airacobra4,746
Bell P-63 Kingcobra2,400
P-47 Thunderbolt 195
B-25 Mitchell 862
Douglas A-20 Boston2,908
US total13,208
British aircrafts Total
Curtiss Tomahawks, Kittyhawks 270
Hawker Hurricane2,952
Spitfire Mk V 143
Spitfire Mk IX1,188
Handley Page Hampden 46
Armstong Albemarle 14
British total4,613
Related Reports:
Bookmark the permalink.


  1. You spelled “Armoured” wrong it should be Armored, unless you’re British… in which case its still spelled wrong, because the Brits messed up their dictionary, but good job m8 I r8 8/8.

  2. Hey John I think you’ll find it’s the Americans that messed up their dictionaries. Seeing as the English language existed before the United States did I’ll take British English, thanks.

  3. This isn’t the place for a debate about British vs American spelling. Both are usually 100% readable by the other.

  4. The soviets got the license rights to the DC-3 before WW2, as well as the Japanese, and while admitting they produces a little over 2000, actually built at least a few thousand more.

  5. So much for the progressive lies that the Russians beat the Germans all by themselves. What isn’t included is that America give the red army about a years worth of food …. the rest of their provisions were from forage. Virtually none of the filibuster by the Russians came from Russia.

    • Russians never say that they fought alone. They always mention allie’s help during the ww2..On the contrary, Americans like to say that they saved the world without mentioning somebody else. Allies help was tremendous and helped to earn approximately 1.5 year of peace, but the main force in the land war was USSR. Period.

    • Thanks for selling us shit during war; sitting back; dropping nukes on the Japanese civilians; and joining the European theater at the end of the war, just before USSR took Berlin. Didn’t even join the battle for Berlin.


      You’re welcome for having the greatest impact on the German army. Maybe if mainland US is invaded, we can sell you shit next time.

      • Soviet propanga always mentioned that USSR beat Germans with help of the USA and Britain. Always. Help from USA was tremendous but it started not from the beginning. As a matter of fact when Germans were near Moscow in October 1941, Stalin just met with American representative to discuss this help. Period. If USSR didn’t have American help it would fought another year or so, according to comment of Mr. Mikayan who was very close to Mr. Stalin all years from the 1917 to the 1953. Help was huge and loss of the soviets life’s were huge as well. So, every side gave as much as it can under their circumstances. Problem is today that a lot of times American propaganda says that Americans saves the world. Propagand fogot to add “together with Russians.”
        At the end of the soviet movie “Libearation” the people can read on the screen that Americans lost about 300000 people in this war. Soviets lost about 20 millions.
        Can you point to American movie which will introduce similar data?
        Thank you.

        • The loss of life was huge because Stalin and his generals did not care how many men died. There were disastrous offensives that cost half a million casualties that were swept under the rug until Glasnost. Then there were the 100,000 or so men executed to stiffen the resolve of the others, or for being taken prisoner. That is about the equivalent of nearly 10 Soviet divisions. When one knows that Joe Steel killed 20 million of his own countrymen to make collectivization happen, starving the Ukrainian and Russian kulaks to death, it makes you wonder if we were really fighting the right guy. Stalin’s pre- war, war and post war death count makes Hitler look like Mother Theresa. Stalin was having to deal with wars of independence in the Soviet occupied territories until the late 1950’s. One could say based on the events of the early 1990’s that the Warsaw Pact countries were not really allies of the Soviets as much as slave states.

          There is not doubt Hitler was a bad guy, but just comparing numbers Stalin was by far the worst of the two. Many Holocaust scholars believe that if Hitler had not started in on the Jews, that Stalin would have eventually, just like he did with the Polish Intelligentsia after the partition of Poland. I suggest you read, Bloodlands: the land between Hitler and Stalin. It gives a pretty horrific account of the mass murder on both the German and Soviet sides.

          • We are not talking about reasons for loses but we are talking about that soviets always mentioned participation of another allies and Americans do not mention at all.
            Why Russians had such loses is a completely different story and will be subject of another discussion if you are willing to participate in it.
            The only thing is that not you or myself have a full and complete information about that time, so both of us rely only on information we can read. But here is a catch for you: I was born and grew up in Odessa, USSR, so Russian language is my native one. I am reading about this war since I was a kid, also in my time almost anyone from previous generation took participation in this catastrophic event including my father ( Jew, Officer, communist – automatic death penalty if caught) who started to fight on June 24, 1941 (2 days after Hitler bombed USSR) and finished on May 9,1945 in Berlin. War stories were all over when I grew up, and stories about putting kulaks in prison were next to zero.
            Huge loses were due to mistakes of Stalin and generals. Nobody will take their mistakes from them. But…
            If you want to discuss it then be my guest. Thank you for your time.

      • Have you ever heard the phrase “you reap what you sow”?

        Russia earned everything that happened to it during ww2. They earned it in Finland and in Poland. Try to remember the Russian invasion of two sovereign nations when you complain about “going it alone”!

        • ^ Completely irrelevant, Jim. The Russian invasion of Finland and “Poland” has nothing to do with the effectiveness of Lend-Lease as it happened. Please try to keep your own personal insecurities to yourself.

          • American production defeated the Germans. Period. there is a reason the Germans were so careful about the US for as long as they were. They weren’t scared of anyone else and had no reason to be scared of anyone else they all got their asses handed to them. But they really would have lost in 1942 without the massive amounts of supplies they were given.

        • invasion in Finland and Poland are different things. War in Finland is not a Part of WW2. It is absolutely different wars. “invasion” in Poland was to get back just Ukrainian and Belorussian west lands which Russia lost 20 years earlier. Nobody today in Ukraine, Belorussia and Poland want to give this land back to Poland, because it was a proper move by USSR.

  6. Nice write-up on the Combat Effectiveness of the various combatants in WWII. I read the original Trevor Dupuy study which was somewhat more qualitative than later numbers I read. I cannot for the life of me recall what book I read it in. It gave numbers of CE of 3-1 on the Russian Front and a bit more even odds on the western. I want to read your numbers to digest the statistics a bit more. Do you have more recent citations of studies upon which you based your tables?

    On another point, I raise the ire of our Russian friends on the Quora forum (from which I have since been banned…lol) by pointing out, much as you have that the Soviets could not have won without the west. I made the same Identical points you do along with a few others.

    Your tables of Soviet tank, artillery, and transport production would have to all be scaled down due to the fact that Soviet industrial capacity would have been bled off to produce such things a locomotives, boots, wire, and all the sundry other things the US and Britain sent the Russians, not the least of which was food. Without the ability to focus on building tanks, planes, artillery and trucks how many fewer of each would they have produced. In the dark days of 41 and 42 US and British production filled the gap. How much farther might the Germans have gotten without Lend Lease equipment.

    Have a great day and keep up the good works.

Leave a Reply