Could Germany have done anything to make its allies more effective, especially on the easteren front. I know that the German army was itself short of many essential equipment. But it seems to me that the major shortage was in fighting personnel.
What about for example delivering a fair ratio of acceptable AT guns to the Italian, Romanian, Hungarian and Bulgarian allies ? As said before the German army was short on these itself, but would a diminished supply of these to the wehrmacht itself not be more than offset by having improved effectiveness of the allied armies, which in 1942 made up a lot of the troops on the active part of the eastern front.
What about sharing technical expertise (designs of weapons, tactics, schooling of troops on new weapons, improving industrial output trough standarisation....)
It seems to me that the Germans were more out on trying to profit from its allies in stead of actually making them better equipped allies (compare with the western allies (mostly) who closely worked together, with for example the Polish supplying the first steps to breaking the enigma to the western allies).
what about sharing radar, radio, engine designs, hollow charge weapon designs etc....
Was Germany so distrustful of its allies ? Did they regard them as mere cannon fodder ? Did they not want to make them too strong to be better able to subjugate them in case of winning the war ?
Okay Romania, Bulgaria Italy and Finland did switch sides, but apart from Italy this was IMHO at a moment that the war had been completely lost and its was just a gesture of these countries of trying to save them from complete destruction.
I've read somewhere that the limited "help" of Germany to Allies (tanks, AT guns, aircraft engines etc...) was effected at a very monetary high price, more on the principle to extract the maximum amount of money out of these products. Is this true ?
any thoughts appreciated,
Edited by Inhapi, 19 November 2017 - 0937 AM.