Baltic, 1945. The actions of the Soviet submarines

29
Baltic, 1945. The actions of the Soviet submarines


The withdrawal of our troops in 1944 to the Baltic Sea and the withdrawal of Finland from the war radically improved the position of the Red Banner Baltic fleet (CBF). He left the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea. The German command tried its best to secure its sea shipping, the volume of which increased sharply, since the combat effectiveness of the Courland group, which turned out to be pressed to the sea, directly depended on them. In addition, it demanded all kinds of assistance from the ships to the ground forces, therefore, it strengthened the fleet in the Baltic Sea with the help of ships transferred from the North and Norwegian Seas.



By the beginning of the 1945 on the Baltic Sea, the Germans had a 2 battleship, 4 heavy and 4 light cruisers, more than two hundred submarines, over 30 destroyers and destroyers, about seven dozen torpedo boats, 64 minesweeper, almost two hundred landing craft and a significant number of patrol boats ships and boats.

Based on the current situation and the general plan of the offensive of the Red Army in the Eastern regions of Prussia and Pomerania, the Supreme Command headquarters set for the Red Banner Baltic Fleet in the 1945 campaign of the year the main task was to violate enemy sea communications. By the 1945 of the 20 submarines in the brigade of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet, six were deployed on enemy lines in the Baltic Sea.

Submarines were deployed in Kronstadt, Hanko, Helsinki and Turku. Combat control of them was carried out from the floating base "Irtysh", located in Helsinki. To ensure the interaction of submarine forces with aviation In Palanga, an external command post was created, which facilitated the exchange of information on the whereabouts of enemy convoys and command and control.

13 January 1945, the troops of the 3 of the Belorussian Front launched an offensive, giving rise to the East Prussian operation, and a day later the forces of the 2 of the Belorussian Front joined it. In early February, the forces of these fronts reached the Baltic Sea coast, as a result of which the East Prussian group was divided into 3 units: Heilsberg, Koenigsberg, and Zemland. All branches of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet forces participated in the liquidation of the Koenigsberg and Zemland groups along with the ground forces.

On the basis of the situation developing on the Baltic coast and in connection with the actions of the Soviet ground forces, Admiral V.F. Tributs set the tasks for the submarine brigade: to disrupt enemy communications in the southern and southwestern areas of the Baltic Sea, right up to the Bay of Pomerania, to interrupt the communications of the Courland group and to block the port of Libava together with the aviation forces. 6-8 submarines were to be at sea simultaneously. Those of them who operated in the area of ​​the maritime flanks of our ground forces were supposed to fight the enemy warships in order to prevent them from firing on Soviet forces. They also had to carry out operational reconnaissance of approaches to the German bases of the Nazis in the southern part of the Baltic Sea, to lay mines on the routes of the enemy convoys.

To accomplish these tasks, the commander of the brigade, Rear Admiral S.B. Verkhovsky decided to deploy active submarines in enemy communications to deploy areas that were located on the approaches to Vindava and Libau, the trap of Danzig Bay and the Brewsterort lighthouse meridian.

It envisaged the interaction of submarines with aviation, which was to be expressed in the continuous mutual information of the BPL and Air Force headquarters about aviation reconnaissance data and changes in the areas of operations of the submarines, their exit to positions and return to the bases.

The submarines moved to the positions from the bases through the skerry fairways under the pilotage escorted by the escort ship, and with the appearance of ice - and the icebreaker. The submarine went to the dive point, as a rule, after sunset, followed a submerged position of at least 25 miles, after which the commander, having assessed the situation, himself chose the method of moving to the position. The main method of operation of the submarines was cruising in selected limited areas.



Timely data received by air reconnaissance on the movement of convoys made it possible for submarine commanders to correctly assess the situation in their area, make the necessary calculations, go on the course of the movement of enemy ships and launch attacks. So, using data from aerial reconnaissance, they entered the enemy convoy courses and attacked the Shch-303, Shch-309, Shch-310 transports, etc.

The battle account in 1945 was opened by the submarine Shch-310 of Captain 3 of the rank S.N. Bogorada. On the night of January 7, 1945, being on the surface, the submarine discovered a caravan of 3 transports guarded by ships and boats. The boat moved to the positional position. (The positional position of the sub-boat is the surface position of a differentiated boat that can be submerged at any moment. In this position, tanks of the main ballast are filled, and the medium tank and the tank of quick submersion are blown out. In a positional position, the submarine has the lowest seaworthiness, can go with extremely low speed and be on the surface of the sea with a wave not exceeding three points.)

Having reduced the distance to the 3,5 cable, “U-310” made a volley on the head vehicle with three torpedoes in a fan. Two torpedoes hit a vehicle that sank. 62 days operated "U-310" in difficult winter conditions. During this period, she passed 1210 miles in submerged and 3072 in surface and in position. The boat performed the task of reconnaissance well, revealed the anti-submarine defense system and methods of actions of the enemy sentry ships, which was valuable information for our boats, which were to go on military campaigns.

In January, our other submarines also operated successfully. The first, released in the sea in the new 1945 year, was the "U-307" captain 3 rank MS Kalinin. On January 4, she left the base and at midnight on January 7 took the position assigned to her on the way to Libava. In the evening of January 9 “U-307” lay on the ground, when the acoustics reported on the noise of the screws of the convoy ships. Coming up in a positional position, the commander discovered the lights of a large transport and escort ships. Having deployed a boat for attack with stern torpedo tubes, Kalinin from the 6 cable distance produced a two-torpedo salvo. Both torpedoes hit the transport, which quickly sank. For more than two hours, patrol ships were aggressively pursued by Shch-307, dropping 226 depth charges onto it; 70 of them exploded near.

Having fixed the damage, the boat continued to search for the enemy. At night, she searched, being in the surface position, during the day - under the periscope. In the evening of January 11 the boat was in a cruising position. The cruising position of the submarine is the surface position of the differentiated submarine, with a fast-dive tank filled with and empty main ballast tanks and a medium tank. In the cruising position, the submarine is capable of fast diving.

Soon the running lights of two transports and two patrol ships were seen from the submarine. Shch-307 began maneuvering to enter the torpedo attack. At this point, the escort ships noticed the boat, lit it with rockets and began to bypass from both sides. She had to turn on the countercourse and plunge. After making sure that the enemy stopped the pursuit, the commander decided to surface and continue the attack. “U-307” got close to the enemy and from the distance 5 the cable produced a three-torpedo salvo on the transport, which caught fire and sank.

The success was accompanied by other crews. For example, the submarine "K-51" captain 3 rank V.A. Drozdov, on January 28, attacked a transport vessel standing on the Rugenwaldemünde raid and sank it. February 4 in the area of ​​Libau, submarine "U-318" captain 3 rank L. A. Loshkarev, despite the difficult weather conditions and strong opposition of anti-submarine defense ships, one enemy transport sank, and the second damaged.



February 10 ground troops by the forces of the two Belarusian fronts launched the East Pomeranian operation. Our armies split the enemy group and at the beginning of March reached the Baltic Sea. In February and March, the German command was engaged in an intensive redeployment of troops from Courland to Danzig Bay and East Prussia. The movement of transports between Libau and Danzig Bay has increased significantly, in connection with which our submarine forces intensified their combat activities in the area.

So, February 18 left the base of the guards submarine "Sh-309" captain 3 rank PP Vetchinkin. February 23 morning, when the boat was maneuvering in a position near Libau, signalman foreman 1 articles by K. T. Alshanikov and sailor F.I. Korobko in moonlight (visibility was up to 15 cable) discovered a transport vessel, going to guard a pair of patrol ships. Having reduced the distance to 9 cable, “U-309” sank the transport with a three-curtain salvo. One of the escort ships opened artillery fire on the boat, and the other began pursuit. It lasted 5 hours. Bombs burst very close. As a result of 28 bombs explosions, the command periscope and some other devices were damaged. Despite this, the boat made a number of attacks, and then returned to base. February 24 in the Danzig Bay launched a transport vessel to the bottom and damaged the patrol ship of the K-52 submarine of Captain 3 of rank I.V. Travkina.



To combat the Soviet submarines and to ensure the safety of their naval communications, the Germans launched a reinforced patrol service with surface ships and submarines, and created special search and strike groups from ships equipped with sonar equipment. The main task of these groups was to destroy our boats or oust them from the area of ​​movement of the convoy. To this end, the enemy made prophylactic bombing ahead in the course of following convoys. Having found the submarine, the escort ships for some time pursued it with the aim of driving it to the depth and giving the opportunity to go through the transports. At the same time, they called up search groups in the area of ​​detection for the long pursuit of the boat. It could last up to two days, while the order dropped 200 depth charges.

In the southwestern part of the Baltic Sea area, the Germans used aircraft during daylight and on bright moonlit nights to search for our submarines, and when they found a boat using rockets or other means, surface ships were alerted to its location. In order to PLO enemy widely used submarines, masking, using acoustic ratchets, which did not give the opportunity to listen to the noise of the propellers of ships. To avoid encounters with our boats, the fascists made transitions at night or in poor visibility. And to impede the actions of our boats, the enemy transported in high-speed transports. The convoy included 2-3 vehicles, which were guarded by destroyers, patrol boats and boats.

However, the Soviet submariners continued to increase the power of their attacks. As a result of the withdrawal of Soviet troops to the southern shores of the Baltic Sea and the encirclement of the Koenigsberg and Danzig factions in March, the enemy began an intensive evacuation of troops, equipment and valuable property removed from the occupied territories to the West German ports. This caused the movement of transports from the ports of Danzig Bay to the ports of Pomerania. Therefore, the main part of our boats was deployed in this direction. The activity of submariners has become even more efficient.

So, March 1, in the afternoon, conducting a search in a submerged position, the K-52 boat detected the noise of the propeller of the transport vessel, but a large wave did not allow attacking it at the periscope depth. Then I.V. Travkin plunged the boat to a depth of the order of 20 m and decided to carry out an attack using data from hydroacoustic instruments. Due to the high skill of the commander and excellent training, the acoustics of the first Baltic-free attack on the Baltic were carried out successfully. Launching two more ships to the bottom and having spent all the torpedoes, the K-52 11 of March returned to the base.

The submarine “K-52” went out on April 17 on its next combat campaign, and it lasted until April 30. During this time, "K-52" sank 3 enemy transport, despite the strong opposition of the enemy. So, during the pursuit of April 21, patrol ships dropped 45 depth charges on it in 48 minutes. All day on April 24, the area where the boat was located, bombed the planes, dropping bombs around 170. In total, during the hike, the planes and ships launched bombs on K-52, 452 of them exploded at a distance of fifty to 54 meters. However, the commander skillfully maneuvering detached from the enemy. The crew skillfully fought for the survivability of their ship. The submarine safely returned to base.



He boldly, calmly, resolutely acted, actively searching for enemy ships in the bay of Danzig, the commander of the underwater minzaga "L-2", Captain 2 of the rank of S. S. Mogilevsky. Using sonar equipment, he 6 once detected fascist convoys, five times brought the boat to attack. On the morning of March 25, when the boat was going at a depth of about 25 meters, the acoustics recorded the noise of the propellers of the ships and the operation of the sonars. The boat floated to periscope depth, and the commander saw a convoy of 6 transports, destroyers, and patrol ships. By reducing the distance to the 6,5 cable, the L-21 produced a three-shot volley at a transport vessel and sank it. It was the third victory of the minelayer in this campaign.

By the end of March, the Soviet troops completely cleared Eastern Pomerania from the fascists. Our connections were occupied by the ports of Gdynia and Danzig. In April, the Red Banner Baltic Fleet was tasked with assisting the Red Army in eliminating the German groups that were surrounded in the areas of Koenigsberg, Pillau (Baltiysk), Swinemünde and Hela. The positions of our submarines, which destroyed enemy ships and ships making sea crossings, moved to these areas. Having received a military order, March 23 left the base in the direction of the Danzig Bay Guards submarine "L-3" of the captain 3 of the welt V.K. Konovalov. She achieved great success on April 17. In 00 hour. 42 min. acoustics distinguished the noise of propellers of transport ships and patrol ships. The boat began to maneuver for a torpedo attack. To catch up with the convoy, the submarine had to go surfaced on diesel engines. In 23 hours of 48 minutes from the 8 cable distance, a three-torped volley “L-3” sank the ship “Goya”, which transported about 7000 people, among whom there were over a thousand German submariners, and most of the Wehrmacht soldiers. Recently it has become fashionable to present the death of the Goya as a crime of Soviet submariners, since there were a certain number of refugees among the military on board. At the same time, the authors of these statements completely ignore the fact that the sinking vessel could not be considered hospital or civil in any way. The transport went as part of a military convoy and had on board Wehrmacht and Crigsmarine soldiers. The vessel carried military camouflage paint, and also had anti-aircraft weapons on board. At the same time, there was no sign of the Red Cross, which uniquely excluded vessels from the objects to be attacked. Consequently, Goya was a legitimate target for the submariners of any country of the anti-Hitler coalition.



The March and April boat trips indicated that the German command had significantly increased the strength of the PLO. In some cases, the opposition of the enemy was so great that Soviet submarines had to stop the attack and leave the area of ​​movement of the enemy convoy.

In addition to the torpedo weapons, boats used and mine. Thus, the submarine minzagi "L-3", "L-21" and "Lembit" put on the paths of movement of the German convoys and on the approaches to the German 72 bases mines. Approximate areas of mines were appointed by the brigade commander. The commanders of the boats put mines after the production of additional exploration and identification of the fairways of the enemy. Thus, the Lembit underwater minzag of the captain 2 of rank A.M. Matiyasevich 30 March put in the way of the enemy ships 5 cans, 4 mines in each. In April, these mines killed transport, two patrol ships and the enemy's PLO ship.

In addition to the violation of maritime communications, the Red Banner Baltic Fleet submarines resisted the shelling by enemy ships of our military units in the coastal region, conducted reconnaissance of enemy bases, places suitable for the landing of assault forces. For example, the submarine Shch-407 reconnoitered the landing place on about. Bornholm. Guards submarine "L-3", making a mine statement and a series of torpedo attacks at the approaches to Vindava in late January, 2 February, on the orders of the BPL commander, moved to the Brewsterort-Zarkau area to attack ships firing on our units on the Zemlanda plenum. February 4 submarine fired three torpedoes at a destroyer. After the attack "L-3" the enemy stopped the shelling of the Soviet troops. Also at this time, "L-3" put mines in the paths of the movement of the Nazi ships. March 10, by order of the fleet commander, in order to prevent shelling of the coastal flanks of the Soviet troops stationed on the Pomeranian coast, the submarine L-21 and the Guards Shch-303 were deployed in the bay of Danzig.

The success of the submarine warfare depended on the combat skills of the personnel. From submariners required excellent knowledge of the material, tactical and technical data of the ship, so the commanders paid great attention to combat training. The training of officers mainly consisted of the analysis of military campaigns with a detailed analysis of the actions of submariners. So, at the collection of the commanders of the mine-torpedo warhead submarines, passing from 1 to March 3, the successful torpedo attacks of the U-307, C-13, K-52, etc. submarines were analyzed. A similar gathering was conducted heads of groups, squad leaders, staff torpedists and miners, which contributed to the improvement of their skills, skillful actions during torpedo attacks and mine settings. Only from January to March 1945, in order to transfer combat experience, 14 classes were held with officers and foremen of electromechanical units. The commanders of submarines C-13, D-2, U-310, U-303, and others gave reports on them.



In 1945, the intensity of the work of mechanisms compared with 1944, has increased significantly. For example, the L-3 submarine passed 1945 miles in three months of the 3756,8 of the year, and only 1738 miles went through the entire previous year; The C-13 submarine for the 1944 year passed 6013,6 miles, and in one 1945 campaign of the year - 5229,5 miles. In addition, mainly in night attacks and the search for the enemy in the surface position increased the load on diesel engines.

Despite the increased tension in the work of the mechanisms, there were no failures due to the fault of the personnel, and when damage appeared, the submariners quickly removed them on their own. So, the “U-307” failed the coupling-bamag. Sergeants N. I. Tanin, A. P. Druzhinin and V. N. Sukharev put it into operation in 12 hours. A similar malfunction in 16 watches was eliminated by foremen A.I. Dubkov and P.P. Shur on “U-310”. In the factory, according to the technical standards for this work, 40 hours were assigned.

For four months 1945, the Red Banner Baltic Fleet submersibles sank 26 transports. On the mines exposed under boats, 6 of the German ships and 3 of transport were blown up. The Nazis lost 16 submarines that were involved in the PLO. Our losses in the 1945 year were one submarine - the C-4, which died in the area of ​​Danzig Bay. The actions of the underwater forces of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet contributed to the success of the ground forces in the Baltic States, East Prussia and Eastern Pomerania.

Sources:
Achkasov V., Basov A., Sumin A. The Battle Path of the Soviet Navy. M .: Voenizdat, 1988. C. 318-324.
Achkasov V., Pavlovich N. Soviet naval art in the Great Patriotic War. M .: Voenizdat, 1973. C. 302-321.
Yemelyanov L. Soviet submarines in the Great Patriotic War. M .: Voenizdat, 1981. With 48-67.
Morozov M. Submarines of the Soviet Navy in the Great Patriotic War 1941-1945 Chronicle of military campaigns. Part of 1. Red Banner Baltic Fleet. M .: Polygon, 2003. C. 3-94.
Chirva E. Submarine war in the Baltic. 1939-1945 M .: Yauza, Eksmo, 2009. C. 18-34, 127-146.
Sparrow V. Fighting submarines of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet // VIZH. 1971. No.1. C. 31-39.
Zolotarev V. Kozlov I. Three centuries of the Russian fleet. 1941-1945. SPb .: Polygon Publishing House LLC, 2005. C.112-119.
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    27 September 2016 07: 03
    Recently, it has become fashionable to present the death of Goya as a crime of Soviet submariners, since there were a certain number of refugees on the ship among the military.
    There is such a thing, they and Marinesco accuse that he drowned civilians. Along the way, our submariners had to come up and demand documents for cargo from each transport going to the convoy, and then decide. Well, God bless them with these modern pseudo-historians.
    The article mentions Travkin. I read in Soviet books that the Germans warned their ships and vessels about Travkin's going to sea about it. Just like about Pokryshkin: "At sea, Travkin!" I don't know how reliable this is, but I read about it from at least two authors.
    1. +7
      27 September 2016 11: 06
      [quote Along the way, our submariners had to come up and demand documents for cargo from each transport going to the convoy, and then decide. Well, God bless them with these modern pseudo-historians.] [/ Quote]
      By May daylight, it was still possible (?) To consider the type of ship or vehicle. And in the autumn-winter period it was possible to see lights from afar (and you come closer - and you will fall under the influence of PLO ships), detect noise with hydroacoustics.
      As for the fate of the civilian population evacuated by transport from Courland, Koenigsberg, Danzig and other ports by sea - this is a war ... Let Aloizych be asked what bombings the evacuated from the western regions of the USSR were subjected to in the 41st and 42nd years. Both on foot and by car, by rail.
  2. +4
    27 September 2016 07: 57
    Recently, it has become fashionable to present the death of Goya as a crime of Soviet submariners, since there were a certain number of refugees on the ship among the military.
    ... like Soviet crimes, and the Germans drowned Soviet vessels even with the Red Cross, purely out of humane motives ...
  3. 0
    27 September 2016 10: 11
    Damn, author: “Marinesco - no, I don’t know”
    1. +4
      27 September 2016 11: 16
      Damn, author: “Marinesco - no, I don’t know”

      It should be emphasized that, despite the fact that the majority of Gustlof’s casualties were refugees and wounded, the liner itself was a legitimate target for a torpedo attack. Like the vast majority of other kriegsmarine support vessels, he carried camouflage paint and light anti-aircraft weapons, which he would surely have used if he had found the German S-13 signalmen at a short distance before the attack. On the other hand, the commander of the "eski" had the order to conduct an "unlimited underwater war" within the position, so if he had missed the liner, he would have had to answer for it to the full extent of the laws of war. There was no choice, no restrictions - it was necessary to drown the target, which Marinesco successfully completed.

      If we evaluate the general merits of the commander of the S-13 submarine, then Marinesko, in fact, went to the "penalty boxes" at the command of the Baltic Fleet.
      Suddenly the fallen fame on the head of Alexander Ivanovich Marinesko did not bring him happiness. The fact that he sank the Gustlof, it became known, apparently, in the middle - the end of February from the messages of the Finnish and Swedish radio. The boat returned from the campaign on the 15th, and a few days later the commander Oryol wrote in the submission of the S-13 commander to the title “Hero of the Soviet Union” “... The sinking of the liner Wilhelm Gustlof inflicted an irreparable blow on the submarine fleet of fascist Germany, so how during the drowning, so many submariners died that would be enough to equip 70 submarines of medium tonnage. With this strike, the S-13 submarine under the command of the 3rd rank captain Marinesco thwarted the plans of the Nazi invaders at sea. ”

      The response resolution was expressed in the form of a stamp on the submission: “Order of the Red Banner pr. KKBF No. 30 of 13.3.45.” Apparently, the command of the submarine and Baltic fleet brigade calculated according to the formula “Hero of the Soviet Union minus the crime committed is equal to the Order of the Red Banner”. Obviously, Alexander Ivanovich did not agree with this decision. Maybe he wanted him to be treated the same way as the Marquis Lantenac with the guilty sailor in the novel “The 93rd year” by V. Hugo — first awarded for courage, and then put him on trial and shot for negligence. If so, then the valiant S-13 commander should have known that the Soviet court not only punished the perpetrators, but also automatically deprived them of all state awards.
      One way or another, but the next trip, made by a submarine in the last weeks of the war, revealed the stories of a completely different Marinesco. Here are just a few excerpts from the conclusion about the results of the military campaign made by the division commander and brigade commander:
      "1. Since being at sea, at a position in the zone of intense enemy movement since 23.04.45/7/XNUMX, he has XNUMX times found targets for attack, but could not attack ... (the following is a concrete description of all cases).
      Conclusion: The submarine did not fulfill the combat mission. The actions of the commander are unsatisfactory (Captain 1st Rank Eagle).
      ... Being in position, the submarine commander had many cases of detecting enemy transports and convoys, but as a result of improper maneuvering and indecision, he could not get close to attack ...
      Conclusions: 1. Actions of the submarine commander at the position are unsatisfactory. The submarine commander did not seek to search and attack the enemy ...
      2. As a result of the inactive actions of the commander of the S-13 submarine, they did not fulfill the assigned combat mission. The assessment of the combat campaign of the S-13 submarine is unsatisfactory (brigade commander Captain 1st Rank Kournikov). ”
      The fact that low combat performance was not accidental confirms the behavior of Marinesco on the shore. On the morning of May 23, the boat moored in Turku, and already on the 31st the division commander submitted a report that “Submariner No. 1 had been drinking all this time, with no official duties engaged and his continued tenure as an unacceptable commander
      1. +5
        27 September 2016 15: 19
        Well, what the hell did you give the subjective opinions of bl..day (never went out on military campaigns) about the "low combat performance" of the commander of the submarine S-13?

        It is better to familiarize yourself with the sunk tonnage on the account of C-13 under the command of the captain of the 3 rank A. Marinesko (46000 tons) and compare with the sunk tonnage on the account of all the other submarines of the Baltic Fleet.

        Instead of circulating libel on the Hero of the Soviet Union Alexander Marinesko, it would be nice to get acquainted with the characteristics of his immediate military commander of the submarine division of the submarine, captain of the 1 rank Orel Alexander Efstafevich, who forced the crew of the C-13 after a triumphant but exceptionally difficult military campaign three hours to get under the ice to the Finnish port of Turku, after which (and not before) deigned to meet the C-13 on the icebreaker, using the latter as a traveling boat.

        And this despite the fact that at that time the base of the division was the Soviet naval base on the island of Hanko, from where C-13 came out on its military campaign.

        Pasquille on A. Marinesco was compiled based on the results of the last C-13 military campaign from April 20 to May 23 1945, when Rear Admiral A.M. Stetsenko was on board the submarine (for the first time in the war), who for this campaign was awarded the Order of Nakhimov.
        The presence on board of an armored naval commander who organized a field trip for an order in the last days of the war was the reason for the refusal of the C-13 commander to attack the enemy.
        1. +2
          27 September 2016 21: 08
          Quote: Operator
          Well, what the hell did you give the subjective opinions of bl..day (never went out on military campaigns) about the "low combat performance" of the commander of the submarine S-13?

          October campaign of 1944
          It would seem that the long-awaited moment - the Baltic submarines again broke out into the operational space, but no.
          On October 1, the boat left Kronstadt, passed through the inner fairways of the Finnish skerries, and already on the morning of the 8th took the assigned position north of the Hel Peninsula, on the approaches to the Danzig Bay. The discovery of the target in the area where the two main maritime communications of the Germans in the Baltic at that time (Gotenhafen - Libava and Gotenhafen - ports of the western Baltic) converged was not long in coming. At the end of the first day, in the early morning of October 9, a single vehicle was discovered (Siegfried, 563 gross vehicles). Approaching him, Marinesco fired a three-torpedo volley. In this case, the distance was only 4,5 cable, and still there was a miss. The miss repeated two minutes later, when the last torpedo in the nasal apparatus also missed the target. On this occasion, in the posthumous conclusion, the division commander A.E. Eagle (whom many ardent Marinesco apologists paint as an envious and evil genius of a national hero) wrote: “The commander’s statement that the TR at the time of the 3-torpedo salvo stopped the course, and at the moment of the single shot it gave the course, and this explains the misses, incorrectly, since the torpedo was supposed to hit the TR in 32 seconds, and the TR stopping the course and immediately suppressing the inertia (which cannot be), would not have reached the point of encounter with the torpedo only 90 meters, which when fired with a dissolution of 2 degrees 20 minutes in both directions at such a distance would still lead to a hit. The same calculation can be made for the re-launch of a single torpedo at a valid TR. ”
          In this case, it is not the fact of a slip that is depressing, but the fact that Marinesco was cunning, did not want to admit his mistake. Once again, he cunning a few minutes later, when, firing 39 100-mm and 15 45-mm shells on vehicles and counting a total of 11 hits, he declared the ship sunk. In fact, the transport only lost speed and banked, which did not stop the Germans from leaving the S-13 and giving them a chance to run into the shallows at Hel Spit. By the spring of the 45th, the ship was put into operation, participated in the evacuation of the Germans from the Danzig Bay and sailed in the West German merchant fleet until 1954, when it was scrapped. An even more annoying and incomprehensible fact is Marinesco’s attempt to “raise” the attacked cabot to the rank of 5000-ton transport. An accidental error in this case is again excluded, since Marinesco not only had the opportunity to view the vessel for an hour from any distance, but also as a former merchant marine sailor had to know the overall dimensions and architectural differences between different classes of vessels. One way or another, even this modest little ship cannot be credited to the account of "Submariner No. 1", which, however, was not an obstacle to awarding the Order of the Red Banner to Marinesco
          And how many such "5-thousanders" in 46000 sunk tonnage according to A. Marinesco's reports?
          V. Dotsenko in his book “Myths and Legends of Russian Maritime History” wrote that, by exalting Marinesco, we undeservedly offend other submariners. It seems to us that it would be more correct to say differently. Glorifying Marinesco and his “feat”, we first of all demonstrate ignorance of history, disregard for facts and flagrant violation of universal values. Once again we are proving to the “light” that kvas patriotism, implicated in imaginary exploits, is prettier to us than the true heroes of the war, whose true accomplishments are perhaps less impressive. In order to feel full, for some reason, we always need “left-handed people who woo a flea”. Perhaps, in order to make it easier to hide from society the unpleasant facts of numerous defeats or the numbers of scanty military successes due to vicious military organization, poor training and backward technical equipment behind their high-profile fame. After all, it would be time for us to understand that the feat of our sailors was not that they drowned as many or more ships as the British or Germans, but that, despite a host of unfavorable factors and circumstances, they honestly performed their duty to the Motherland and damage the enemy as much as possible for them.
          1. 0
            27 September 2016 23: 03
            Yes, yes, everyone knows - Marinesco attributed to himself the sinking of Gustlof and Stoiben with a total tonnage of 40000 tons am

            Once again, and without demagoguery - how much sunken tonnage is on account of the remaining Baltic Fleet submariners in WWII?
            1. +3
              27 September 2016 23: 20
              Quote: Operator
              Yes, yes, everyone knows - Marinesco attributed to himself the sinking of Gustlof and Stoiben with a total tonnage of 40000 tons

              Quote: stalkerwalker
              Suddenly the fallen fame on the head of Alexander Ivanovich Marinesko did not bring him happiness. The fact that he sank "Gustlof", it became known, apparently, in the middle - the end of February from messages of the Finnish and Swedish radio

              Draw a conclusion: went on the attack, drowned ships and transports. It was not possible to record the outcome of the attack — either poor visibility or the opposition of the anti-aircraft forces (and, more often, both), forcing the submarine to urgently leave the position.
              The example of the Siegfried transport, 563 gross vehicles, lies in the same plane as the declared number of enemy aircraft shot down by ALL participants in the air battles in World War II. Checking the archives of the warring parties, as a rule, significantly reduced the declared victories. Both in the air and at sea.
              Nobody crosses out neither the Steuben nor the Gustlav from the list of those sunk by Marinesco. But do not make him an infallible idol. He knew how to fight. But he fought when he wanted to, i.e. through time. And do not forget that in addition to Marinesco, other submariners also distinguished themselves in the Baltic - see the article.
              1. 0
                27 September 2016 23: 55
                No need to juggle - I noticed that the author of the article, claiming to be objective, “forgot” to mention the most productive submariner in our country.

                As for the "idol" - in wartime, the most important thing is what damage have you done to the enemy, and not how much you drank / smoked / played preference in between battles. See x / f Boat.
                1. +3
                  28 September 2016 00: 09
                  Quote: Operator
                  No need to juggle

                  Who? Yes
                  Quote: Operator
                  the author of the article, claiming to be objective, “forgot” to mention the most productive submariner of our country.

                  The name of Marinesco is associated, first of all, with a series of myths as about "Hitler's personal enemy" and so on in a similar spirit.
                  As befits a glorified feat, the story with "S-13" and "William Gustlof" has an extensive historiography. Her rigorous study showed that all the works are conditionally divided into two unequal groups. Their common part is the very fact of the sinking of the vessel, which, as a rule, is accompanied by a ready-made set of stamps, such as “Germany’s largest and most comfortable liner”, “attack of the century”, “destruction of 8000 Nazis, which included 80 manned submarine crews, and the rest of the SS men and fascist bonzes, "the announcement of the boat commander Alexander Marinesco as the" personal enemy of the Fuhrer ", the shooting of the convoy commander and, finally, the announcement in Germany of a three-day mourning over the death of Gustloff.
                  Further directions of work branch out. Most of them say that Alexander Marinesko is a true national hero whose feat “shocked the Hitler Reich to the ground” and almost saved England from defeat in the total underwater war that the dead submariners were going to wage. “Why is Marinesco not a Hero of the Soviet Union?” - the authors ask (in publications before May 1990), or “The Motherland paid the hero what he deserved, but very late” (in publications after 1990). In a smaller part of the work it is written that Marinesco is not at all a hero, but an undisciplined officer, whose share was accidental success. Another thing is curious: in their publications, authors of both directions do not disdain rude distortion of facts, stopping history and other unworthy tricks - if Marinesco is a hero, so is a hero in everything, and all who wrote critical evaluations on him are at least staff rats and slime-dogs ; if the commander of the S-13 is an immoral type and a drunkard, then he was like that in everything.

                  The author of the article, perhaps, deliberately escaped the mention of Marinesco in order to recall other heroes-submariners in the Baltic.
                  1. 0
                    28 September 2016 00: 32
                    “Whom” - Russian is not your native language?

                    The author will fill up in life, he will only write about graduates of the Institute of Noble Maidens. Like - I'm not like that, I go for the most part with roses.
                    1. +2
                      28 September 2016 00: 43
                      Quote: Operator
                      “Whom” - Russian is not your native language?

                      And you, in any way, a teacher of the Russian language?
                      wassat
                      Quote: Operator
                      The author will fill up in life, he will only write about graduates of the Institute of Noble Maidens.

                      This, please, to the author ... fellow
                      I will put an end to the question of the hero-submariner.
                      ... In October 1941, Marinesco was expelled from the candidate for membership of the CPSU (b) for organizing gambling card games in the division and drunkenness. It is interesting to note that the battalion commissar A.G. Dymsky received 10 years of forced labor camps with a delay of punishment until the end of the war and sending him to the front for allowing such a thing in his division ...

                      ... In the area of ​​the Finnish lighthouse Porkkalan-Kal boda was discovered by a convoy consisting of vehicles and two schooners (really - heavy artillery batteries "Helene" and "West", it was not clear from the German documents that the third ship was in the squad), guarded by three watchmen boats, Marinesco, commanding the M-96 submarine at 11.17 attacked him. On transport from a distance of 12 cable one torpedo was fired. A minute later, a crack was heard on the boat, which was taken as a sign of a hit. After two minutes, the submarine, as a result of which it was not clear why the medium tank was purged, jumped 4,8 meters so that a periscope, and possibly a wheelhouse, appeared above the water. Through him, the commander allegedly managed to see a transport that had trim on his nose and was drowning. Since in reality the Helena floating battery, next to which the torpedo passed, escaped with only a “slight fright” (in 1946, the Soviet Navy received the “sunken” floating battery for reparations), the case of fictitious sinking of the 7000-ton transport can only cause annoyance and disappointment among fans of Alexander Ivanovich. From our point of view, the opposite result would have been far more surprising - a boat with an unprepared crew and imperfect equipment with a single torpedo drowned an enemy ship from a relatively large distance. Another “spot on the tunic”, which had already come down upon returning from the campaign, was entirely on Marinesco’s conscience. Without warning the headquarters on the radio about early return from position, he unwittingly endangered the life of the entire crew. The M-96, which did not immediately recognize the signals, attacked their own MO boats. Fortunately, tragedy was avoided...

                      So much for the 40 or more thousands of sunk tonnage.
                      The second short-term campaign, which occurred 2,5 months after the first, had a special task - landing a reconnaissance group on the coast of Narva Bay. Although there were no meetings with the enemy, two small “breaths” of military air inspired Marinesco, gave him new interest in the service and restored it in the eyes of his superiors. For the "sinking" of transport, he received his highest lifetime award - the Order of Lenin, the rank of captain of the 3rd rank, he is again accepted as a candidate for the party, they write good certification and even sent to study at the Naval Academy. The peak of the career ladder was the April 1943 appointment as commander on the S-13 medium-sized submarine.

                      The topic is exhausted, I hope.
                      1. 0
                        28 September 2016 01: 01
                        Russophobe delirium is satisfied.
                    2. +1
                      28 September 2016 07: 03
                      He seems to many democrats, liberals and other fans of the tan a political officer. But for me it’s so simple a patriot who doesn’t like obgazhivaniya his country.
                      1. 0
                        28 September 2016 11: 39
                        Therefore, he discovers it himself - such as hushing up the exploit of Alexander Marinesco.
  4. +3
    27 September 2016 10: 57
    Thanks to the author for the material. In the book of V.E. Korzha "Safety factor" is well described as our sailors repaired boats at sea. This is not about the fact that the boats were bad, but about the fact that at the end of the war the equipment was used for wear and tear, just to hold out until the end of the war. And I read about this not only in the memoirs of the Baltic submariners, but also in the Northern Fleet, where the conditions for repairs were much worse than in the Baltic.
  5. +4
    27 September 2016 12: 06
    Our submariners fought well, but there were too few of them and the Nazis, basically, managed to carry out large-scale evacuations by sea of ​​more than 2 million civilians and soldiers from East Prussia (Operation Hannibal), and 11 divisions from the Kurland cauldron ....
    1. 2-0
      +3
      27 September 2016 14: 31
      For "Hannibal" the Fuhrer had, even was obliged, to reward the entire command of the Baltic Fleet and the Soviet theater air force. Well, comrade. Stalin of all of the above in the frosty air with saws Druzhba-2 ...
    2. 0
      28 September 2016 12: 11
      The Baltic Sea is too shallow, enemy transports were surrounded by numerous guard ships, weather conditions during the Hannibal operation were very severe.

      The objective circumstances of the combat work of Soviet submariners in the Baltic differed sharply from those of the German in the Atlantic and the American in the Pacific.

      This is in every way hushed up by homegrown bl..di, zampolitov and foreign Russophobes of all stripes.
  6. 0
    27 September 2016 21: 03
    at the expense of Marinesco, the moral issue ... some thought if the Germans were fiends it means there is no demand from us; beat everyone else will destroy the deaths of 3600 children on that airliner consider it anti-human ... by the way, less than half of the German Navy died .. the majority are civilians .. If I return to the arguments of the first, I quote. Soviet transports with refugees and wounded during the war have repeatedly become targets for German submarines and aircraft (in particular, the ship "Armenia", sunk in 1941 in the Black Sea, was carrying more than 5 thousand refugees on board and the wounded. Only 8 people survived. However, "Armenia", like "Wilhelm Gustloff" violated the status of a medical vessel and was a legitimate military target) [tooth by tooth?
    1. +1
      28 September 2016 12: 40
      Instead of worrying about morality, it’s more useful to understand the rules of war at sea - “Armenia” was an unarmed sanitary vessel with the corresponding coloring and signs of the red cross, “Gustlof” was an armed military transport in camouflage without the signs of the red cross.

      The enemy did not possess x-ray vision to discern who and what was on board these ships, but for the decision to attack / abandon it, it was quite enough to have external signs.

      It is from this simple fact that all the local and foreign guardians of “morality” are still writhing - such as why you do not poop roses (for themselves, they are reserved the right to proceed in principle).
      1. 2-0
        0
        29 September 2016 22: 49
        Difficult in "Armenia". It was like a torpedo bomber drowned it, but on a combat course at TN, it doesn't hurt to see a red cross on the deck and on the sides ??? if they were even there. Besides, "Armenia" seems to be ??? was armed with anti-aircraft guns, but whether she was really armed in that confusion no one will say. In addition, "Armenia" was escorted by patrol boats and under a fighter "umbrella". Everything is complicated ...

        But "Gustloff" ... Even there can be no question. Camouflage, escort, night - to its bottom !!!!

        By the way, citizen "Operator". About "Hannibal" and the shallow Baltic Sea. Okay, boats, and where was our "October Revolution", "Kirov" and destroyers, under the rule of our aviation?
        And how many "Scheer" fired with impunity at Swinemunde and other places in the 45th? So, it's not worth talking about FACTS !!!

        And ave Marinesco. He did not perform any feats. He did his job as a submarine commander in the war. Here is Prien, yes, he accomplished the feat, went to Scapa Flow. And those who sunk "Ark Royal", "Barham", "Shinano" and others did not perform feats, they did their job.
    2. 0
      1 October 2016 11: 40
      The Germans started a total war at sea against civilian ships first - back in 1940.
      Therefore, the actions of Marinescu are legitimate.
  7. +5
    28 September 2016 01: 28
    Operator,
    Quote: Operator
    Russophobe delirium is satisfied.

    For the orphaned and the wretched ....
    The command of the Wehrmacht in April-May of the 45th noted the not very successful opposition of the Soviet Navy in the evacuation of combat units from the ports of Vindava, Libava, Koenigsberg and Danzig on Swineemunde and Stettin, which then took part in battles with the 2nd and 1st Belorussian fronts on The final stage of the Great Patriotic War.
    The "false idol" of Marinesco did not save thousands of lives of Soviet soldiers and officers. allowed himself to abandon attacks on transportand, transporting parts of the Wehrmacht, field parts of the Luftwaffe, the Marines to cover the Berlin and Stettin directions.
    Watch the bazaar, shkolota ...
  8. +1
    28 September 2016 18: 09
    Operator,
    I am not keeping silent, a separate article will be devoted to the January campaign of the C-13.
    So, a little patience ...
    1. 0
      28 September 2016 19: 38
      Thanks for the reply.
  9. +1
    29 September 2016 11: 34
    He was in the museum on D-2 in August 2015 in St. Petersburg. Even now, almost 90 years after the construction of the submarine, its appearance evokes a sense of admiration. The interior of the museum, the exhibits, I also liked everything ... By the way, in Russia we do not have many museums of submarines from the time of the Second World War, there is another boat like a museum in Vladivostok.
  10. 0
    1 October 2016 11: 37
    "By the beginning of 1945, on the Baltic Sea, the Germans had 2 battleships, 4 heavy and 4 light cruisers, more than two hundred submarines, over 30 destroyers" /////

    You already mention that all the large ships were half sunk as a result of German air raids aground in Kronstadt.
    And then questions arise, why didn’t they fight?