Armadillos of the Peresvet type. Wonderful mistake. Part of 1

106

Armadillo squadrons like "Peresvet" occupy a special place in stories domestic naval fleet. These high-breasted beauties with a recognizable silhouette took an active part in the Russian-Japanese war, but their fate was sad. All three ships of this type were lost: Oslyabya rested at the bottom of the Tsushima Strait, and Peresvet and Victory went to the Japanese when they occupied Port Arthur. Nevertheless, Peresvet was destined to return to the Russian Imperial Fleet; it was bought out to participate in joint operations of the Allies in the Mediterranean Sea during the First World War. It seemed that fate gave the ship a second chance. But this did not happen, and his fighting career ended before he could begin: Peresvet died, having been blown up by German mines near Port Said before he could even begin to carry out combat missions.

It is believed that Peresveta proved to be an unsuccessful type of armored ships: occupying an intermediate position between the squadron battleships and cruisers, these ships did not become either. In this series of articles, we will not question such an opinion, but let us try to figure out how it happened that the country that had just built a series of very successful battleships for its time (and at the time of laying it was one of the best battleships in the world) Poltava "suddenly stumbled and created" not a mouse, not a frog, but an unknown animal. " It is known that the Peresvet project was greatly influenced by the British battleships of the 2 class of the Centurion type and the later laid out Rinaun. But how did it happen that the leadership of the Maritime Ministry took a model for its squadron battleship, i.e. potentially the most powerful ship of the fleet, lighter and obviously inferior to the modern British battleships of the 1 class?

In order to understand the history of squadron battleships of the “Peresvet” type, it is necessary to link their design characteristics with those ideas about the role and tasks of the fleet that existed during their design. Interestingly, the monographs of such respected authors as R.M. Melnikov, V.Ya. Krest'yaninov, S.V. Well done, in general, they give all the necessary information on this issue, and an attentive reader familiar with the history of both domestic and foreign navies can draw all the necessary conclusions for themselves. But nevertheless, respected masters did not focus the attention of readers on this aspect, we will try to reveal it as fully as possible (as far as possible for the format of the article, of course).

To do this, we will have to return to the 1881 year, when, under the chairmanship of Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich (the very “Seven pounds of the most August meat”, although for the sake of justice it must be admitted that in those years he had not yet gained proper weight) a special meeting was created. In addition to the future of General-Admiral (this position will be received by Alexey Alexandrovich after 2 of the year), this meeting included the Minister of War and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, as well as the head of the naval ministry. The task of this most respectable assembly was one: to determine the development of the military fleet, in accordance with the military and political demands of the Russian Empire.

The Black Sea Fleet was recognized as a primary concern, the rest of the fleets should be started only secondarily. But the Black Sea was an indoor pool and the fleet there were set specific tasks peculiar only to this theater: it must be much stronger than the Turkish naval forces and be able to ensure not only supremacy at sea, but also the support and support of the landing party in 30 000 will capture the mouth of the Bosporus and gain a foothold on its shores. The leadership of the Russian Empire assumed that the day of the collapse of Turkey was close and wanted to get the Straits - this was the leitmotif of the construction of the Black Sea Fleet.

With the Baltic Fleet it was also as if everything was clear:

“The main task for the Baltic Fleet is to bring it to the top priority compared with the fleets of other powers washed by the same sea, providing it with reliable bases in the least freezing parts of the Gulf of Finland.”


The tasks of the Pacific Fleet were very interesting. On the one hand, it was recognized that for the defense of "the most important points of the coast" the military fleet is not needed at all, and this can be achieved

"... some engineering and artillery means and minefields, and only to provide communication between these points, as well as for the intelligence service, it seems necessary to have a small military fleet of completely reliable vessels."


To this end, it was supposed to create and expand the Siberian flotilla, not trying, however, to make of it a force capable of independently fighting the naval forces of other powers. However, it does not follow at all from the foregoing that a special meeting refused to use naval force in the Far East, but these forces should have been fundamentally different in their composition depending on who they were to fight with the European or Asian power:

“... in the event of separate clashes with China or Japan in peaceful relations with the European powers, a squadron from the Baltic and Black Sea fleets will be seconded to the waters of the Pacific. In order to protect common interests, political and commercial, Russia needs to have enough cruisers in the waters of the Pacific, which could, in the event of a collision with European powers, seriously threaten trade by attacking their commercial ships, warehouses and colonies. ”


Thus, according to the conclusions of the special meeting, the needs of the Russian Imperial Navy looked like this: in the Black Sea - an armored fleet for domination of Turkey and capture of the Straits, in the Pacific Ocean - cruising forces for action in the ocean against communications of European powers, in the Baltic Sea it was necessary to build naval force so that it was able to surpass the combined forces of the German and Swedish fleets, which guaranteed an advantage at sea in the event of a conflict with one of these countries. And besides, the Baltic Fleet should have been able at any time to allocate the expeditionary corps of armored ships to send the latter to the Pacific Ocean or to another place where the emperor should like to:

"The Baltic fleet should consist of armadillos, without dividing them into ranks and categories, quite suitable for parcels, if necessary, into distant waters."


Such a formulation of the question was a certain innovation in the use of the fleet. The fact is that the battleships of those years, for the most part theirs, were not at all intended to serve in the ocean, although they had sufficient seaworthiness not to drown on the ocean wave. The same Britain did not at all presume the use of its battleships in the Indian or Pacific Ocean — they needed them to rule the seas washing Europe, and the protection of communications was entrusted to numerous cruisers. Therefore, the decision to build armadillos, which were supposed to go to the Far East and serve there, looked like something new.


Squadron battleship "Navarin"

And besides, a special meeting actually predetermined opponents for the Baltic ships. In the Baltic, the fleets of Germany and Sweden were to become them, in the Far East - the ships of China and Japan. Of course, the cruiser fleet, which was to be based in Vladivostok and threaten from there the sea lanes of England (or other European countries) should also be built in the Baltic.

After the fleet tasks were determined, the specialists of the Marine Ministry calculated the forces required to solve these tasks. The total need for ships of the Baltic Fleet (including cruisers for the Pacific), according to these calculations, was:

Armadillos - 18 pcs.
Cruisers of 1 rank - 9 pcs.
Cruisers of 2 rank - 21 pcs.
Gunboats - 20 pcs.
Torpedo boats - 100 pcs.

In addition, 8 gunboats and 12 destroyers for the Siberian flotilla should have been built.

This program of military shipbuilding was approved by the then reigning Alexander III and submitted for consideration by a special commission, which included representatives of various ministries. The Commission concluded that:

“Although this expenditure is very heavy for the state, however, it is recognized as necessary,”


but

"The implementation of the program to produce in 20-year term, as a shorter period is beyond the power of the funds of the state treasury."


What can you say about the national shipbuilding program 1881 of the year? We will not discuss the Black Sea theater in detail, since it does not belong to the topic of this article, but the Baltic and the Pacific ... Of course, the fleet planning planning organization itself looks very healthy - the naval and military ministers, together with the minister of internal affairs, determine the potential enemy, the naval ministry formulates the need for ships, and then the commission, with the involvement of other ministries, is already deciding how much this country can do.

At the same time, the fact that the Russian Empire did not lay claim to domination in the oceans, clearly realizing that at that stage of development such a task is beyond its power, draws attention to itself. However, Russia did not want to completely abandon the ocean fleet - it needed it, first of all, as a political instrument of influence on the technically advanced countries. Militarily, the Russian Empire needed to protect its coast in the Baltic Sea, and besides, it wanted domination in the Baltic and in Asia: but this, of course, only if the fleets of first-class maritime powers — Britain or France — were not intervening.

And these requirements lead to a dangerous dualism: not hoping to build a fleet capable of fighting in a general battle with the French or English, but wanting to carry out a “projection of force” in the world's oceans, all that was left for Russia was to build numerous cruiser squadrons. However, cruisers are unable to ensure dominance in the Baltic - for this, armadillos are needed. Accordingly, the Russian Empire was supposed to build, in fact, two fleets of completely different purposes - armored for the defense of the coast and cruising ocean. But could a country, which is not a world industrial leader, be able to create such fleets of sufficient size for solving their tasks?

Further events clearly showed that the shipbuilding program of 1881 was too ambitious and did not correspond to the capabilities of the Russian Empire. Therefore, already in 1885, the 1881 program was almost halved - now it was planned to build only:

Armadillos - 9 pcs.
Cruisers of 1 rank - 4 pcs.
Cruisers of 2 rank - 9 pcs.
Gunboats - 11 pcs.
Destroyers and counterminers - 50 pcs.

In addition, it suddenly turned out that in order to achieve not that domination, but at least parity with the German fleet in the Baltic it would have to exert much more effort than was previously thought. The only battleships to replenish the Baltic fleet in the first half of the 1890's were two rams: the Emperor Nicholas I and the Emperor Alexander II and the extremely unsuccessful Gangut.


Battleship Gangut, 1890 g

At the same time, in the period from 1890 to 1895, the German fleet replenished 6 coastline battleships of the Siegfried type and 4 squadron battleships of the Brandenburg type - and the Kaiser did not intend to stop there.

The problem was that Germany, which had a powerful industry at that time, suddenly wanted to build a navy worthy of itself. She certainly had no less opportunities than the Russian Empire, despite the fact that Germany could keep its entire fleet at its shores and send it to the Baltic if necessary. Russia, on the other hand, was forced to build and maintain a mighty Black Sea fleet in an isolated maritime theater, and it could hardly have come to the rescue in the event of war with Germany.

To be fair, it should be noted that this “sea jerk” of land Germany could hardly have been predicted in 1881 g, when the 20-summer shipbuilding program was created, but now the Russian Empire was in a situation when it was not that for domination, but at least for parity on the Baltic needed much more effort than previously planned. But the program 1881 g Russia refused to afford!



Nevertheless, the provision of a decent counterbalance on the Baltic saw the leadership of the Russian Empire more important than the construction of cruiser squadrons for foreign policy, so the construction of battleships received priority. The Baltic Fleet Accelerated Development Program planned to build 1890 battleships, 1895 armored cruisers, 10 gunboats and 3 destroyers in 3-50. But it was also failed: during this period, only 4 battleships (Sisoy the Great and three ships of the Poltava type), three coastal defense battleships of the Ushakov type (instead of gunboats), the armored cruiser Rurik and 28 destroyers were succeeded.

Thus, in the period 1881-1894. military and political necessity forced the Russian Empire to build two fleets - armored and cruising. But this practice led only to the fact that neither the battleships nor the cruiser could be built in sufficient quantities, and the very different requirements for these classes of ships in the Russian fleet did not allow them to replace each other. For example, the armored cruiser "Rurik" was a magnificent ocean raider, perfectly adapted for operations on ocean communications. However, the cost of its construction exceeded that of the battleships of the “Poltava” type, while it was absolutely useless to fight in the “Rurik” line. Instead of "Rurik" one could build something else, for example - the fourth battleship of the type "Poltava". Ships of this type would look great in line against any German battleship, but the Poltava were completely unsuitable for corsair operations far from their native shores.

As a result, an extremely unpleasant situation developed closer to 1894: huge funds were spent on the construction of the Baltic Fleet (by the standards of the Russian Empire, of course), but the fleet was not able to dominate the Baltic Sea (for which there were not enough battleships) or conduct large-scale operations in the ocean (because there were not enough cruisers), i.e. none of the functions for which the fleet was actually created was carried out. Of course, this situation was intolerable, but what were the options?

Additional funding was nowhere to get, to abandon the defense of the Baltic Sea or cruising operations in the ocean is unthinkable, which means ... So it only remained to design a type of ship that would combine the qualities of an armored cruiser raider, a la Rurik and a squadron battleship like Poltava . And to begin building ships that can stand in line against the battleships of the German fleet, but at the same time are capable of disrupting British communications.

Exaggerating: you can, of course, create 5 battleships of the Poltava type and 5 cruisers of the Rurik type, but the first ones will not be enough against Germany, and the latter against England. But if you build instead 10 battleships-cruisers capable of fighting both Germany and England, the matter will be completely different - at the same financial cost. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that in 1894 Mr. Admiral N.M. Chikhachev demanded that ITC create a draft design

"... a strong modern battleship, rather characterized by an armored cruiser."


Thus, we see that the very idea of ​​the “battleship-cruiser” did not appear at all from the bay-floundering, it was not at all some sort of admiral's whim. On the contrary, in conditions of limited funding, the creation of this type of ships remained, in essence, the only way to achieve the goals set for the Baltic Fleet.

But still, why was the British battleship of the 2 class taken as a guide? The answer to this question is much simpler than it may seem at first glance, and for this we should recall the features of the shipbuilding programs of Great Britain and Germany.

The Russian Empire for the war on the sea lanes created a specific type of armored cruiser, whose fighting qualities were sacrificed cruising. But still they remained quite formidable opponents for most foreign peer cruisers. Such were "Vladimir Monomakh" and "Dmitry Donskoy", "Memory of Azov" and "Rurik".


"Vladimir Monomakh"

The British also built armored cruisers, but two of their series, which entered service during the period 1885-1890. (we are talking about the Imperials and Orlando) were so unsuccessful that they disappointed the British sailors in this class of ships. In the future, the Royal Navy for a long time abandoned armored cruisers in favor of armored deck, which, as believed in the Admiralty, could well protect the British trade routes from Russian encroachments. But still the British admirals could not arrange a situation when they could only oppose enemy armored cruisers with armored deck, and besides, Britain did not want to sacrifice its interests in Asia at all. Not that the British seriously feared the Chinese or Japanese fleet (it’s about 1890), but in order to “admonish” the same China one should have ships capable of suppressing land forts, and the armored cruisers didn’t fit well for these purposes. Therefore, the British in 1890, laid the battleships of the 2 class of the type "Centurion". Intended for service in Asia, they exceeded in combat power any Russian armored cruiser and any ship of any Asian fleet, while having a draft allowing them to enter the mouths of large Chinese rivers. Then the British laid even more perfect "Rinaun".

Accordingly, in the waters of the Pacific and Indian Oceans, it was “Rinaun” that was supposed to be that maximum of combat power that the Russian “cruiser-battleships” could encounter. As for the German fleet, its development paths also looked very tortuous and unclear. After the Germans decided to strengthen the sea, they laid a gigantic series of eight battleships of Siegfried-type coastal defense for those times, but in combat terms they were very mediocre ships. Yes, and how much can fit in the displacement of 4 100 — 4300 tons? Three 240-mm and a dozen 88-mm guns would look great on a gunboat, but for a battleship such a composition of weapons didn’t fit. The reservation was not bad (up to 240 mm belt) but ... to tell the truth, even “one mast, one pipe, one gun - one misunderstanding” “Gangut” even looked like a superdreadnought against them, unless you remember that “Gangut” was one, and Siegfried eight. The next series of German battleships seemed to be a significant step forward: four Brandenburg ships had a much larger displacement (over 10 thousand tons) with speed for 17 nodes and armor in 400 mm.


Squadron battleship "Brandenburg", 1893 g

But it was obvious that the German shipbuilders, ignoring the experience of the world bronchotmosting, were proceeding along their national path to some kind of their own, and only visible, goal: the arming of the German ships was like nothing. The main caliber already consisted of six 280-mm guns of two different types. All of them could fire on one side, and thus favorably differed from artillery of battleships of other powers, most of which could conduct onboard fire only 3-4 with large cannons (which were usually only four), but the firepower of the newest German battleships was exhausted - eight 105-mm cannons were virtually useless in linear combat. The author of this article does not have data on whether the naval battleships, newly designed in Germany, were known to the Naval Ministry, but looking at the general development of the German fleet, it was possible to assume that in future Germans would build battleships whose fire power would be equivalent to 2 battleships. class, not 1.

Here, strictly speaking, is the answer to why “Rinaun” was taken as a guideline for the Russian “battleships-cruisers”. No one set the task of the Baltic Fleet to confront battleships of battleships of the 1 class of England or France. In case of their appearance in the Baltic Sea, it was supposed to defend overland fortifications, attracting ships only as an auxiliary force, and it was not worth waiting for such battleships on the oceanic communications — they were not created for that purpose. And therefore there was no extreme need to provide the "battleships-cruisers" with combat power equivalent to the first-class battleships of the leading world powers. It would be enough to ensure that the newest Russian ships surpassed second-class English battleships in their fighting qualities and were not too inferior to the newest German ships.

In addition, the Russian “battleship-cruiser” was supposed to be a compromise between combat and cruising capabilities, because its value should not exceed the usual battleship, and it would be better for it to be even smaller, since the money from the Russian Empire was not the best .

All the above reasons seem quite logical and seemed to lead to the creation of letting unusual, but in their own way interesting and very balanced ships. But what went wrong then?

To be continued ...
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    24 October 2016 14: 44
    In general, there are a lot of plans, and the output is zilch. The miscalculation was almost complete for the future real enemy and for the types of ships. In the memoirs of those years, the sailors wrote that they were waiting for armored ships with tower weapons, and above there were orders for ruriks, etc.
    1. +4
      24 October 2016 15: 18
      Well, as a vessel for cruising operations, Ruruk was not bad than what he proved during the Russo-Japanese war. Moreover, it should be borne in mind that our cruisers did not operate in very favorable conditions - constrained by a relatively small theater of war, and of course the Paris Declaration of 1856 made a great bandwagon, which seriously limited the possibility of introducing cruising war. British diplomacy considered this declaration one of its best victories.

      By the way, the autonr forgot that Germany was a colonial power and, as it were, it was not limited to its interest in the Baltic alone. For example, parts of the 1st Pacific Squadron were interned in Qingdao which was Germany’s naval base in China.
      1. +4
        24 October 2016 16: 12
        Quote: kayman4
        By the way, the autonr forgot that Germany was a colonial power and, no matter how interesting it was, they were not limited to the Baltic

        Well, they weren’t serious at that time when they could confirm their colonial policy. Even in the WWI, when the Hochseeflotte was firmly in the position of the 2nd fleet of the world after the British, they were able to send only a couple of armored cruisers and some light
      2. +3
        24 October 2016 19: 10
        Quote: kayman4
        Well, as a vessel for cruising operations, Ruruk was not bad than what he proved during the Russo-Japanese war.

        Как vessel "Rurik" may have been good. But as a ship - no longer. The raider must be able to deal with the weakest and get away from the strongest. And in the opponents of "Rurik" - superior in speed and onboard salvo "Asamoids". Plus, theoretically - all sorts of "Cressy" and the company, whose speed is also higher and which is stupidly more.
        1. +3
          24 October 2016 19: 17
          Quote: Alexey RA
          And in the opponents of "Rurik" - superior in speed and onboard salvo "Asamoids".

          Welcome hi At the time of construction and commissioning of "Asamoids" in opponents, "Rurik" did not have wink But given that it was at that time that shipbuilding was developing at a frantic pace, adequate opponents appeared in it literally for a dozen years, which made the characteristics of the ship already obsolete. He would fight against one-year-olds - there would be a different conversation winked
          1. 0
            25 October 2016 08: 30
            And what was the situation with regard to - autonomy - especially for a CRISER-raider, a state that has no bases around the world is a serious argument. Plus ocean seaworthiness.
            1. +1
              30 October 2016 19: 52
              Quote: kayman4
              And how was the matter regarding autonomy

              Also not very good, because % 10-15 of the range he didn’t get. Because during construction it was a semi-armored cruiser raider with sailing weapons. And in the days of the RPE - armored (semi-armored ships in the RIF at the end of 19 at once everyone became armored, which made the fleet's power more abruptly - on paper) a cruiser-raider WITHOUT sailing weapons.
              Only one armored cruiser-raider with more or less decent performance characteristics was built in Russia, this is BrKr Russia. But by the beginning of the RYAV he was already old (with his real performance characteristics). Therefore, it was dangerous to let him out into the sea alone. So these "modern warships" went in a herd called VOK.
          2. 0
            26 October 2016 10: 42
            Quote: Rurikovich
            At the time of construction and commissioning of "Asamoids" in opponents, "Rurik" did not have

            At the time of construction and commissioning - I agree, it was not.
            But the original post said:
            Well, as a ship for cruising, Ruruk was not bad as proved during the Russo-Japanese War.

            During the Russo-Japanese War all of the above has already happened. So I wrote about "Rurik", proceeding from this specified time, when he proved something there.
        2. +1
          24 October 2016 21: 37
          Quote: Alexey RA
          As a ship "Rurik" was probably not bad. But as a ship - no longer.

          That you are in vain, the ship is not so bad. And even somewhat good for his time :)
          Quote: Alexey RA
          The raider must be able to cope with the weakest and get away from the strongest

          And he was. He has in his weakest - British cruisers of the 2nd class, this khan without options. And in the strongest - armadillos who will not hunt for him at all - will not catch up. But the armored cruisers of England - the Imperial or Orlando - are pretty disgusting ships that Rurik will not catch up with, and if they catch up, it’s not a fact that they can do it :))) Well, he could quite fight against large armored ones.
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Plus, theoretically - all sorts of "Cressy"

          Well, I'm sorry - Cressy was laid down 8 years later, for those times - a whole era. What is surprising - they do not have an overwhelming advantage over Rurik
          1. +1
            25 October 2016 13: 00
            Rurik justified himself at the time of construction, it was still possible to refute the construction of Russia, but Gromoboy was already superfluous given the timing of their construction and the development of ships
            1. 0
              26 October 2016 16: 01
              Quote: Nehist
              Rurik justified himself at the time of construction, it was still possible to refute the construction of Russia, but Gromoboy was already superfluous given the timing of their construction and the development of ships

              But there was a chance ... The Baltic Shipyard proposed to build a tower-based BRKR instead of "Thunder-Boy".
              When discussing the project, the Baltic Shipyard proposed making the new cruiser a tower. The preliminary design of such a cruiser with a displacement of 15 tons, developed by the plant, was approved by the tsar in December 000 and, obviously, was based on the experience of creating the battleship cruiser "Peresvet". The plant energetically developed the design of this battleship, and in May 1895 proposed to the Committee an improved version with a 1896-knot speed. The new cruiser could be a lightweight option in the group of tower ships being developed by the plant, which promised both the acceleration of the construction and the similarity of their tactical properties when combined with armadillos. And such a task became common: the Russian fleet began to be replenished intensively with armadillos, and the requirements for their seaworthiness were constantly increasing. So it was with armadillos for the Black Sea and the Baltic. The center of gravity of the policy moved to the East, the squadron of the Pacific Ocean steadily replenished; tactics increasingly insisted on the requirements for cruisers to be able to fight in the same ranks with armadillos, and the seemingly tower cruiser, equally suitable for cruising operations and for fighting in a squadron formation, met these requirements to the greatest extent.
              But that was not done.
              © Melnikov R. M. Rurik "was the first.
              1. 0
                30 October 2016 19: 57
                Quote: Alexey RA
                The Baltiysky Zavod proposed to build a tower BrKR instead of "Thunder Boy".

                Actually, it was an alternative project of "Peresvet". And Stormbreaker was built according to this project, and the bottom remained almost unchanged (theoretical drawing), and the top was completely redesigned.
          2. 0
            30 October 2016 19: 54
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            the ship is not so bad. And even somewhat good for his time :)

            And list items weakly?
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And he was.

            Those. a real case in the Korea Strait passed your attention. Read something about it.
        3. 0
          30 October 2016 19: 44
          Quote: Alexey RA
          The raider must be able to cope with the weakest and get away from the strongest.

          Briefly and to the point.
      3. 0
        30 October 2016 19: 42
        Quote: kayman4
        Well, as a vessel for cruising operations, Ruruk was not bad than what he proved during the Russo-Japanese war.

        Those. the fact that the armored trade defenders (direct counterparts of the armored raiders) easily caught up with him and drowned (which was practically corrupted) does not matter?
  2. +5
    24 October 2016 15: 06
    Thanks to the author for the article. It painfully recalls the current situation with the fleet, which has developed, inter alia, due to the economic situation in the country as well as in the events described.
    1. +1
      25 October 2016 11: 18
      Unfortunately you are right: we need modern ships of the 1st rank, but the economy allows us to build 1-2 ships, but we need 6-8 of a certain type
      1. 0
        30 October 2016 19: 58
        Quote: Monarchist
        we need modern ships of rank 1

        Yes? Who is it for us?
  3. avt
    +4
    24 October 2016 15: 12
    All the above reasons seem quite logical and seemed to lead to the creation of letting unusual, but in their own way interesting and very balanced ships. But what went wrong then?

    To be continued ...
    Posted by Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Well, judging from the entry, Andrei decided to plant a cool series laughing Let's see. As for the first part - well, yes, it was really throwing in terms of finding a strategy for armored ships in the technical capabilities of that time. I would not judge this project so harshly. All the same, despite looking back towards the Angles, the ships actually built ocean ones under the "distant zone" and with the possibility of a cruising war ... well, at least cover for the raiders - ,, trade fighters. " The highest point of this theory was the raid of the Germans, which ended with a "battle of giants with dwarfs". "Fischer's giants, it was true, then got mixed up at Jutland ..." .... Well, except for Oleg's beloved ship, and even then constructed by pests, according to his own statement. bully
    1. +4
      24 October 2016 16: 09
      Quote: avt
      I would not judge this project so strictly

      I would say "judge and shoot", but these ships were shot long before us, so we will judge lovingly :)))
      Quote: avt
      The culminating point of this theory was the raid of the Germans, which ended in a "battle between giants and dwarfs"

      And the Bismarck raid? :))))
      1. avt
        +4
        24 October 2016 18: 34
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And the Bismarck raid? :))))

        No. Well, firstly, sa-ah-a-avsem other ships; secondly, the peak was precisely in the First World War, and then the sausages, in spite of their gloomy genius, prepared for the past war, not even taking into account the experience of aviation development. And Dönitz too! After all, he ordered the diving boats and attacking them according to the initial plans from the surface in packs. The Germans were lucky that the Angles didn’t even prepare for the past war and actually lost even their previous experience of escorting convoys. A project from the end of World War I would have been driven under water from the very beginning.
        1. +4
          24 October 2016 19: 17
          Quote: avt
          The Germans were lucky that the Angles didn’t even prepare for the last war and actually lost even their previous experience of escorting convoys, otherwise their replicas of a successful project from the end of the First World War would be driven into the water from the very beginning.

          In fact, the Angles have not forgotten anything - they organized convoys, approach commands and other ASW very quickly. The problem was that in the interwar period there was not enough money for the construction of both the Fleet and the escort - and the Limes decided to build the ships of the Fleet first (as longer-term projects). As for the escorts, their construction was scheduled for 1939-1940. - all sorts of universal TSC and "flowers". I., accordingly, they did not have time to develop production by the time of the war.
          However, lime still had safety bag - Converted obsolete boats and mobilized trawlers.
        2. +2
          24 October 2016 21: 46
          Quote: avt
          Well, firstly, sa-ah-a-avsem other ships; secondly, the peak was precisely in the First World War

          Well, why? The Germans and Bismarck, and Scharnhorst, and cruisers in the New Year’s fight, and pickpockets in the ocean ... And so, yes, others. I just didn’t understand - I saw that you are capturing the WWII, well, I thought that you are by all means feel
          Quote: avt
          And Dönitz too! After all, the boats he ordered diving and attack, they should have been according to the original plans from the surface in packs

          So they attacked and harvested excellent. And what were the options? The mover was not normal.
          Quote: avt
          And then their replicas of a successful project from the time of the end of the First World War would be driven under water from the very beginning

          This is unlikely, they and the destroyers could not drive full-fledged under water - they usually attacked at night.
          1. avt
            +2
            25 October 2016 12: 09
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            The Germans and Bismarck, and Scharnhorst, and the cruiser in the New Year’s battle, and pickpockets in the ocean ...

            If you like, lyrically in Kaptsovsky laughing , it was a beautiful sunset. Just like the battle of Jutland, the last hassle wall to wall. The war of systems and tactics of using dissimilar forces based on the network basic infrastructure came in exchange. And now no super ship can break anything, but actually dangle like Francis Drake too.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            So they attacked and harvested excellent.

            They attacked and assembled, right up to the moment when it came to the lords that under the spire it was all over and returned to what they had already felt at the end of the First World War, but they raised the technical level. Kaput came to the bots.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            ? The mover was not normal.

            laughing I am begging you! And on the XXI project there were reactors ???? It's just that the project was made for the tactics of use, but it changed specifically and from the UF series from which the Germans boats actually came out in 1935, only by the end of the war they came to an understanding of the XXI level. Classic - "generals are preparing for the last war" request Just imagine that Dönitz would have issued an order for the development of XXI in 1935. Moreover, Goering would have been pressed and the same “Condors” and the multi-engine Junkers would have been subordinate to the Krigmarine. Yes, they would not have let the Angles breathe! And this is not fantasy, here the guided weapons were developed by the sausages before the First World War and brought to Fritz "and a cruise missile by the end of the Second for quite objective technical and production reasons, and with the XXI project there were no such intractable problems.
            1. +1
              26 October 2016 11: 03
              Quote: avt
              They attacked and gathered, right up to the moment when the lords under the spire realized that everything was okay and returned to what they had already felt at the end of the First World War, and they raised the technical level.

              The Lords under the spire still reached in 1939 - the convoy system and the command of the cover of approaches were organized even then. The problem is that, despite the US help, it was possible to fill the organized squadron ships with normal escort ships and patrol aircraft only by the end of 1942. Prior to this, only important KOH received full cover, the rest came with an escort capable of driving off a maximum of 1-2 submarines . By the way according to the experience of PMV this escort would be quite enough. smile

              The turning point of 1943 was not associated with a return to the tactics of the end of the WWII, but with the strengthening of the air component of the PLO. Firstly, the distant patrolmen finally closed the patrol zone. Secondly, AVE began to enter the KOH escort en masse, whose planes drove submarines under water within a radius of 100-150 miles from KOH, preventing them from taking a comfortable position or overtaking KOH after night attacks (which was done in the surface position).
              In WWI, none of this happened.
              Quote: avt
              Moreover, Goering would have been pressed and the same "Condors" and multi-engine Junkers would have been subordinate to the Krigmarine.

              Farewell, "Condors" and "Junkers" ... for the backlashes already had the experience of transferring scouts under the control of the naval at the beginning of WWII. It all ended with the fact that the squadrons had to be taken back. For the sailors, for example, demanded to fly out for reconnaissance at zero visibility at the airfield.
              Quote: avt
              Just imagine that an order to study the XXI Dönitz would issue in 1935.

              In response, he would be told that this is technically impossible. For the XXI project is a brainchild of wartime, when the service life was sacrificed by the performance characteristics. Before the war, no one would allow massively building submarines with batteries with a 2–2,5 times reduced service life.
  4. +1
    24 October 2016 15: 52
    Familiar song. As usual, traditionally: ships of the "Peresvet" class cannot be considered the "forerunners" of battle cruisers. And the "miracle Yudo" ships of the "Asama" type, therefore, can. The real speed of the "aces" is from 15 (!) To 17 knots, that is, at the level or even less than that of modern battleships. The firing performance is at the level or even less than that of armored cruisers of lower displacement (in Chemulpo, in 14 minutes of battle, "Asama" fired 27-8 "(95 kg) and 103-6" (45.5 kg) shells. TOTAL (!).
    The real problems of "Peresvetov" are not in artillery: "Asams" carried only 8 "guns with a projectile mass of 95 kg (elevators were not adapted to lift heavy 113 kg shells.) Thunderstorm" Slava "- German" Alsace "with a caliber of 283 mm had a mass projectile 240 kg.
    The real problems of "Peresvetov" and not in booking: "Asahi" and "Shikishima" carried the same harvey and about the same thickness; and not in the absence of a belt at the extremities: "Fuji" did not have it either, the rest of the Japanese were thin, like the "Retvizan", which, however, on the eve of the release, was hit under the belt by a projectile of only 120mm caliber (!). The main problem was a large construction overload, due to which, when taking in a full supply of fuel, the main belt went under the water, the bow and stern carapaces became ineffective, and the waterline was protected by a short, narrow, thin upper belt.
    Pobeda had the least problems because of the least overload.
    In addition, she and "Peresvet" did not accept more than 1500 tons of coal to get out of Artur. And "Oslyabi" has the greatest construction overload and a full supply of fuel. Plus bad damage control.
    1. avt
      +2
      24 October 2016 15: 59
      Quote: ignoto
      ... And the "miracle Yudo" ships of the "Asama" type, therefore, can.

      And who broadcast such nonsense? "Asama" as an armored cruiser was one of many, it remained so. Its only advantage was that after the Japanese had uncovered the Chinese with cruisers, they created a draft armored cruiser for a very specific theater of operations and quite prepared for its use But a further attempt to develop its own path of this type ended in complete failure and again, like with battleships, I had to go for the project to the Angles for "Fisher cats".
      1. +1
        24 October 2016 18: 03
        Quote: avt
        they created a project of an armored cruiser for a very specific theater and quite prepared for its use command and crews.

        Well, yes, they took the Armstrong "O'Higgins" as a basis, shoveled a little under the conditions of the upcoming battles and got their "Asams"
    2. +1
      24 October 2016 16: 01
      Quote: ignoto
      Familiar song. As usual, traditionally: ships of the "Peresvet" class cannot be considered the "forerunners" of battle cruisers. And the "miracle Yudo" ships of the "Asama" type, therefore, can.

      Excuse me, who are you talking to now? If you are with yourself, there are no questions. If with me - do I have even a word about "Asams"?
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. +2
      24 October 2016 18: 20
      Quote: ignoto
      The real speed of the aces is from 15 (!) To 17 knots, that is, at the level or even less than that of modern battleships

      Well, in the battle on August 1 in the Korea Strait, the Japanese four "Izumo", "Tokiwa", "Azum
      and "and" Iwate "kept a squadron speed of 19 knots (well, we will knock off a knot, let's say at least 18). Well, certainly not 15! There is information that" Asama "itself had problems with fire tube boilers, and as the firstborn of the series was worse. But the rest calmly kept their 18-19 knots, which was quite enough for that war, for the Russians did not even have such a speed, if we do not take into account several foreign-built cruisers. wink hi
    5. Cat
      +4
      24 October 2016 18: 38
      And all the same "Peresveta" is one of the most beautiful ships of the era of the armored fleet. With all the minuses and shortcomings, not one of them lowered the flag in sea battles and their names are worthy of being worn by modern ships of the Russian Navy.
    6. 0
      30 October 2016 20: 16
      Quote: ignoto
      The real speed of the aces is from 15 (!) To 17 knots, that is, at the level or even less than that of modern battleships

      Write 1,5-1,7 knots. It will be even more terrible.
      Quote: ignoto
      "Asams" carried only 8 "guns with a projectile mass of 95 kg (elevators were not adapted to lift heavy 113 kg shells).

      Nope. Such guns stood on Japanese armored decks. And on the BrKR there were full-fledged 8-inches. On the Garibaldians, even 45-gauge.
      Quote: ignoto
      The real problems of "Peresvetov" are not in artillery

      Watching how to watch. If we consider Peresvet and Oslyabyu, too, the EDB (albeit 2 classes), then they had problems with artillery.
      Quote: ignoto
      The real problems of "Peresvetov" and not in the booking: "Asahi" and "Shikishima" carried the same harvey and about the same thickness

      Well, to begin with, it’s not a harvey, but a nickel harvey. In addition, Japanese 1st-class EDBs were not complete 1st-class EDBs. Those. they were rather weak (for class 1 EDBs) ships reserved for overhead lines (at the level of class 2 EDBs). But they also had a very noticeable advantage over Peresvet and Oslyaby - due to the very powerful internal armor (on bevels).
      Well, what to do, any more or less complex product, it is a complex of compromises.
  5. +3
    24 October 2016 15: 56
    Wow, unexpectedly !!! And even more interesting))))
    Thank you, I look forward to continuing !!!
    ps and the boat is actually very beautiful turned out))))
    1. +5
      24 October 2016 16: 07
      Thanks for your kind words! drinks
      Quote: Trapper7
      ps and the boat is actually very beautiful turned out))))

      That's for sure :))) One of the most beautiful Russian EDB :)
      1. +3
        24 October 2016 18: 10
        Interesting topic. Thank you for raising.
        Quote: Trapper7
        ps and the boat is actually very beautiful

        It's a matter of taste, but I like Retvizan more winked About the battle in the Yellow Sea, when will there be a continuation? I look forward with great impatience, read with great pleasure! good
        1. +3
          24 October 2016 18: 22
          Quote: Vladislav 73
          It's a matter of taste, but I like Retvizan more

          Well, taste and color - felt-tip pens are different :)))) Of course, this is a matter of individual preference.
          Quote: Vladislav 73
          About the battle in the Yellow Sea when will there be a sequel?

          Yesterday posted for moderation, perhaps tomorrow. hi
          1. +1
            24 October 2016 21: 53
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Yesterday posted for moderation, perhaps tomorrow.

            I will repeat once again - write very interestingly and in detail, with a detailed "debriefing", I look forward to it with great impatience! good I understand that both "Peresvet" and "Fight ...." are serious topics that require a lot of time. I would very much like to arrange the same analysis for battleships like "Borodino". I have a lot of different material, but I would also like your opinion in the form of the article. Well, that's it, a wish! hi
            1. +2
              24 October 2016 22: 38
              Quote: Vladislav 73
              I would very much like to arrange the same analysis for battleships of the Borodino type

              Someday I’ll get to him necessarily :))) drinks
              1. +1
                24 October 2016 23: 08
                We will wait! Good luck! hi
              2. 0
                25 October 2016 08: 26
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Quote: Vladislav 73
                I would very much like to arrange the same analysis for battleships of the Borodino type

                Someday I’ll get to him necessarily :))) drinks

                Yes Yes! Very very!!!
              3. +2
                25 October 2016 11: 36
                Yes, Andrey, it seems time to publish monographs on your articles in separate editions. Have you thought about this?
                1. 0
                  30 October 2016 20: 18
                  Quote: Hiking
                  Yes, Andrey, it seems time to publish monographs on your articles in separate editions.

                  Oh, time, brother, time. Only now Murzilka magazine went bankrupt.
                  Trouble.
  6. +1
    24 October 2016 17: 14
    Interesting - thanks.
  7. +2
    24 October 2016 18: 14
    A large seaworthy hull here can be experimented with SU. Less coal and more boilers would turn out to be a high-speed battleship, which would be very useful in the PA. IMHO
    Brandenburg as a prototype of battleships. On a pocket quite pulls.))
  8. +4
    24 October 2016 18: 31
    Oops ... I came home from work and hoped to see the continuation of the battle in the Yellow Sea what smile
    My respect, Andrew! Bold plus article good
    For me personally, everything is clear and understandable. I’ll just add that any ship is designed under certain conditions. And assuming that these operating conditions are not met, the ship may not justify its characteristics. This is the moment many critics miss! That’s why there were problems when this ship did not collide with those against whom it was built or placed where it couldn’t justify its obligations ... That’s the whole trouble of worldview. request
    The beginning is good. The main idea is given, which (if anyone understands) and gives an answer to the question why these ships appeared. hi
    1. +3
      24 October 2016 21: 49
      Quote: Rurikovich
      My respect, Andrew! Bold plus article

      Thank! And all the best to you :)
      Quote: Rurikovich
      The main idea is given, which (if anyone understands) and gives an answer to the question why these ships appeared

      Generally speaking, yes, because there are so many things on the Internet on the topic of "Peresvetov" that are wrong. And they are recorded in battle cruisers, and in battleships of the 2nd class ... and they are just an attempt to answer all the calls at once :))))
      1. +1
        24 October 2016 22: 22
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Quote: Rurikovich
        The main idea is given, which (if anyone understands) and gives an answer to the question why these ships appeared

        Generally speaking, yes, because there are so many things on the Internet on the topic of "Peresvetov" that are wrong. And they are recorded in battle cruisers, and in battleships of the 2nd class ... and they are just an attempt to answer all the calls at once :))))

        You started "for health" and very interesting. We started, so to speak, from the very origins, which many do not know and because of which misinterpretations may arise. hi According to the TTX, people are trying to guess what purpose these ships were built for. You have a great chance to dispel all doubts. wink and try to tell the very essence of this project. I hope you succeed.
        For me personally, it has always been a question why these relatively strange ships ended up in situations that led to their death. It seems that the weapons of relatively "real" EBRs are weaker, and the dimensions are larger, and the booking seems to be at the level, but in fact not very in terms of placement ... In short, there are a lot of questions, but the answer itself why it happened this way seems to be clear, but not completely. what Using them raises questions, especially considering the "strange" characteristics ....
        You have a large amount of information and you are good at explaining (albeit from your point of view) such materials. So I'm waiting for good material and answers to many questions hi drinks
      2. 0
        30 October 2016 20: 22
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Generally speaking, yes, because there are so many things on the Internet on the topic of "Peresvetov" that are wrong. And they are registered in battle cruisers, and in battleships of the 2nd class ...

        And really, how can these villains record ships that were built as class 2 EDBs in class 2 EDBs? Outrage.
        Although, about Peresvet and Oslaby, you are right. As EDB 2 classes they could not be built. Only the Victory survived. And then, at the level of old classmates.
        And then, where in the time of the squadron battleships could battlecruisers come from? This is only later, later, during the time of the linkovrov, the second-class EDB in them transformed.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        and they are just an attempt to answer all calls at once :))))

        Extremely unsuccessful, I must say.
  9. +3
    24 October 2016 18: 49
    So it only remained to design such a type of ship that combines the qualities of an armored cruiser-raider, a la "Rurik" and a squadron battleship like "Poltava". And to begin the construction of ships that can stand in line against the battleships of the German fleet, but at the same time they will be able to disrupt British communications.


    Hello Andrey. You give a very interesting look at the creation of ships of this type. But there is another point of view.

    “During the Napoleonic Wars, two main strategies for protecting merchant shipping were worked out; movement as part of convoys and patrolling communications. In modern warfare, both strategies must be used. Convoys guarded by old slow-moving ships will ensure the safety of British shipping. Patrolling squadrons of modern high-speed ships will search for enemy squadrons and single cruisers in the "outer" areas of the oceans. "British battleships with steam engines will be able to increase the" certainty of the blockade "of enemy ports and, regardless of the excitement and direction of the wind, prevent cruisers from leaving enemy bases." The Protection of our Commerce in War // The Nineteenth Century. 1896.

    The convoy should have included old battleships or cruisers, depending on which country the fighting will take place. BC "Rurik", "Russia" and "Thunderbolt" could not have inflicted serious damage on the convoy consisting of old battleships.
    Cruiser battleships had every chance of incapacitating the protection of the convoy and its destruction. The increased firing range of the main caliber is directly related to this.
    1. Cat
      +3
      24 October 2016 19: 47
      Japan in 1904-1905 had no spare battleships. Even the old Chinese Chin-yen went to squadron combat. History does not like syllabic declension, but if "Peresvetov" could be taken out of the trap of Port Arthur, it is not a fact that they did not show themselves in communications. Even in pre-revolutionary Russia, Z. Rozhdestvensky was accused of having released only four auxiliary cruisers to hunt for prizes. If he divided the ships into two squadrons and sent the old men to China or the Philippines, it would still not be known how it all ended. Maneuver and again Maneuver.
      The Vladivostok cruisers managed to cheat fate twice. Than Oslyabya and cruisers of 1 and 2 ranks were worse. An example of "Diamond" and "Emerald" which broke through, although the latter was destroyed more than mediocre.
      1. +3
        24 October 2016 19: 59
        Quote: Kotischa
        Even the old Chinese Chin-yen walked in a squad battle.

        what “Chin-Yen” was good in that it still managed to stay afloat. And its combat value consisted only in the fact that with the same "exhibits" "Hasidate", "Matsushima" and "Itsukushima" they constituted a separate detachment and showed only presence, mass character. In short, they were an eyesore and made it clear that the Japanese are always on guard. lol
      2. 0
        30 October 2016 21: 01
        Quote: Kotischa
        but if "Peresvetov" could be taken out of the trap of Port Arthur, it is not a fact that they did not show themselves in communications.

        The range in combat-ready condition of Peresvet was 2600 m.m, Victory 4250 m.m. (bingo, still among the old class 2 EDBs), Oslyaby 880 (!!!) m. What communications can be?
        Quote: Kotischa
        If he divided the ships into two squadrons and sent the old men to China or the Philippines

        And what would you be left with? All ships 2 and 3 of the TOE were "oldies". If not by years, then by execution. Even Oleg got close to Tsushima with 1,5 cars (one worked only partially).
        Quote: Kotischa
        Than Oslyabya and cruiser 1 and 2 ranks were worse.

        To everyone. See above. They were goners, not warships.
        Borodins were similar to them.
    2. +2
      24 October 2016 22: 34
      Hello Igor! hi
      Quote: 27091965i
      The convoy should have included old battleships or cruisers, depending on which country the fighting will take place. BC "Rurik", "Russia" and "Thunderbolt" could not have inflicted serious damage on the convoy consisting of old battleships.

      a bit wrong :) England could not send guard squadrons of armadillos to guard :)) If she does, France can always seize the moment and crush British rule. What else to send? Inflexibles with muzzle-loading guns? Casemate armadillos? So their cruiser with modern artillery will eat and not choke. I'm not talking about the complexity of introducing convoys in the Indian and Pacific. Those. You can enter something, but even in the Atlantic the convoy system reduced turnover by 25% with the mere fact of its introduction, and even in distant seas ... there, try to collect this convoy altogether. To someone from India, to someone from China ... brrr ...
      Quote: 27091965i
      The increased firing range of the main caliber is directly related to this.

      He has nothing. All these dozens of cables are interesting only for shooting at Chinese forts, but no one was going to shoot at such distances in battle, why read a little bit in sources about the shortage of 120 kb ... funny
      1. +1
        25 October 2016 09: 43
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        England could not send guard squadrons of armadillos :)) If she does, France can always seize the moment and crush British rule


        I can’t agree with you, England was pursuing a policy towards France, which in the early 1900s resulted in the signing of a “cordial agreement” to withdraw claims to each other. An agreement was also signed with Japan, which did not allow France to enter the war on the side of Russia.

        In 1897, battleships of the Admiral type began to be transferred to the second line, while rangefinders were installed on them, and artillery was partially modernized. I don’t think that armored cruisers could manage to guard the convoy if it included several ships of this type.

        All these dozens of cables are interesting only for shooting at Chinese forts, but in battle nobody was going to shoot at such distances,


        Ammunition at that time included the so-called "cast-iron and steel bombs" equipped with head detonators designed to fire on coastal fortifications, unarmored ships at long distances, and shooting. Therefore, shooting at convoy vehicles at a distance of 40-50 cable is quite acceptable.
      2. 0
        30 October 2016 21: 04
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        England could not send guard squadrons of armadillos :)) If she does, France can always seize the moment and crush British rule.

        Enchanting. You even managed to surpass yourself.
        For reference, after Napoleon, France sat all the way and sits on the pope exactly. Because he knows his bitch. From this and flourishes.
    3. 0
      30 October 2016 20: 53
      Quote: 27091965i
      Cruiser battleships had every chance of incapacitating the protection of the convoy and its destruction.

      Find out which cruiser armadillos you have in mind.
      At the turn of the century, there were several types of battleships-cruisers:
      1. Armored cruisers - trade fighters (armored raiders).
      2. Armored cruisers - defenders of trade. Actually, ships of counteraction to armored raiders.
      3. Armored cruisers - scouts. Actually, ships of counteraction to armored raiders. That is, the younger ones take the ships specified in paragraph 2.
      4. Armored cruisers - budget battleships. Actually, extremely cheap and reduced ersatz-EBR for poor countries. With a stroke more than a class 2 EBR. They are "battleships for the poor".
      Which of them was supposed to attack the convoys?
  10. +2
    24 October 2016 20: 55
    Interesting, interesting ... and there will be more ....
    Regarding the Brandenburgs - EMNIP, the main guns there were almost the same, only the central ones had a shorter barrel (35 clb instead of 40) stupidly in order to fit. At the time of construction, the distances of the artillery battle were seen to be small (relatively), so they did not bother with flaws when zeroing in.
    1. +2
      24 October 2016 22: 37
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      EMNIP, there the main guns were almost the same, only the central ones had a shorter barrel (35 klb. Instead of 40) stupidly to fit.

      Yes. But the ballistics is still different, and the actual distances turned out to be greater than the expected ones and this became a problem.
      1. 0
        25 October 2016 23: 01
        The Germans designed ships under the specific conditions of the North Sea, with limited visibility (small firing ranges). Hence the smaller caliber GK, up to the dreadnought.
  11. +3
    24 October 2016 21: 03
    And, by the way, IMHO one of the battleships-cruisers, namely - "Oslyabi", had a real chance to prove itself precisely in the cruising hypostasis (at the time of the beginning of the RJV, the Virenius detachment was in Djibouti, ie Suez had already passed), it was possible to make a fool on communications and then try to break through to Vladivostok. Maybe something useful would come out ...
    1. +1
      24 October 2016 22: 30
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      one of the battleships-cruisers, namely "Oslyabi", had a real chance to prove itself precisely in the cruising hypostasis (at the time of the beginning of the RJV, Virenius's detachment was in Djibouti, ie Suez had already passed), it was possible to fool around on communications and then try break through to Vladivostok. Maybe something useful would come out ...

      Well, this is how we reason, looking through time. And you do not forget that then there were other views, everything was different. Even people thought differently winked To dream, if the Oslyabya broke through, even to Arthur, it would be possible to form a separate wing of three ships of the same type, which, hypothetically, of course, could increase the tactical variability of the squadron. the Japanese and Kamimura's advantage would not have been so tangible. But this is again alternatives and dreams. The reality turned out to be different request Now it’s more important to find out why everything happened SO, and not otherwise. hi
      1. 0
        25 October 2016 12: 45
        Kamimura didn't really have any advantage, except for the number of ships. In terms of travel speed, then the brake "Azuma" with its 15 knots, like the "Rurik". In terms of firepower, the three Russian cruisers are at least as good as the four Aesams.
        Another question is if instead of these unnecessary ships the Japanese would have received at least two (in accordance with the cost) battleship.
        Albeit outdated, like "Fuji". The speed is the same, 15 knots, but 12 "guns. First, damage is dealt to" Thunderbolt "or" Russia ", and not the high-speed Rurik" itself will not go anywhere.
        1. +1
          25 October 2016 23: 07
          6 203 mm on board are not inferior to 16 203 mm? Even without taking into account that the "Rurik" guns were outdated 35-caliber, black powder, more than two-fold superiority.
        2. 0
          26 October 2016 02: 02
          You somehow forgot, apparently, that it was Rurik and not Stormbreaker who created the problem with his machines, because of which the overall speed was reduced to a minimum, which allowed the Japanese to catch the cruiser, and so you would look at a distance and reach the twilight
    2. +3
      24 October 2016 22: 37
      That's right, dear doctor!
      Some were strongly opposed to the recall of the detachment.
      1. +2
        24 October 2016 23: 23
        Duc Makarov was directive. And there was a reason - even if the detachment of Virenius would not have drowned anyone, but at least just loomed, there would have been a great effect. But the super-careful gentlemen decided not to risk it, and to include the ships in the 2nd Pacific. Okromya Osipovich seeds there were no risky ....
        By the way, the only option for a victory in the RYAV (or at least a draw) is if he avoided death at Petropavlovsk, IMHO.
    3. 0
      25 October 2016 18: 09
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      And, by the way, IMHO one of the battleships-cruisers, namely - "Oslyabi", had a real chance to prove itself precisely in the cruising hypostasis (at the time of the beginning of the RJV, the Virenius detachment was in Djibouti, ie Suez had already passed), it was possible to make a fool on communications and then try to break through to Vladivostok. Maybe something useful would come out ...

      Why rave?
      The Russo-Japanese war was not waged between backward Russia and small impudent Japan. This was, as always, the confrontation between Russia and the Anglo-Saxons, if not directly, then indirectly.
      Egoriev "Operations of Vladivostok cruisers ....."
      For cruising operations against Japan during the war, in addition to the Vladivostok cruisers (and the small destroyers of the Vladivostok base), auxiliary cruisers from the Volunteer Fleet and randomly warships of the Russian fleet accidentally located abroad were also used.
      The actions of the auxiliary cruisers on the sea communications of Japan in areas remote from the theater of operations were quickly eliminated by the unfavorable foreign policy situation (threats to England).

      I read somewhere that the United States threatened to fly the fleet if our cruisers did not cease to be outrageous. The United States drove food to Japan, while we interfered. To business!
      1. +1
        25 October 2016 21: 36
        There, then, someone S.O. Makarov insisted on carrying out cruising operations by the forces of the Virenius detachment. So the nonsense has some historical reasons.
        And the United States at that time did not have very much strength. In fact, they became one of the leading naval powers according to the results of the WWII.
    4. 0
      26 October 2016 01: 58
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      it was possible to misbehave on communications and then try to break into Vladivostok

      Tried to hooligan, dear colleague, somewhere I have a screenshot from an old newspaper with a list of inspected English ships. Ours in the Red Sea languished and searched them. Then a scream from Albion arose, and someone in St. Petersburg lost their nerves and ordered them to stop cruising operations. So everything died out, not having time to really begin.
      1. +1
        26 October 2016 11: 12
        In "Gangut" 12-bis there was an article "The case of the steamer" Malacca "- about the actions of the VSKR detachment in the Red Sea.
        Nerves then surrendered at the Foreign Ministry.
        On July 10, a meeting was held in St. Petersburg on the capture of the English ship “Malacca”.

        Opinions are divided. Foreign Minister V.N. Lamzdorf proposed the release of the arrested ships. Moreover, if the order to terminate the cruising operations is late and the arrests of the vessels will continue for some time, they, from his point of view, should not be recognized.

        The naval authorities defended the legitimacy of their actions.

        Later, after the meeting, the head of V.N. Lamsdorf concluded that it was necessary to continue cruising operations, but outside the Red Sea. And then, during a heated discussion, it was he who convinced those present in the inevitability of the severance of diplomatic relations and the beginning of hostilities with Great Britain. As a result, on July 10, the prevailing point of view was the need to stop cruising operations and the release of all arrested ships.

        In total, 19 vessels were stopped and inspected by the Black Sea detachment of auxiliary cruisers, four of which were arrested, and mail addressed to Japan was seized from one. The incident with "Malacca" ended his activity.

        The list of ships with military smuggling for Japan, arrested by the auxiliary cruisers Petersburg and Smolensk in the Red Sea
        June 30, 10.15 - "Malacca"
        July 4, 14.45 - “Ardova”
        July 5, 11.40 - “Scandia”
        July 11, 17.15 - “Formosa”
    5. 0
      30 October 2016 21: 18
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      And, by the way, IMHO one of the battleships-cruisers, namely - "Oslyabi"

      Was not Oslyabya an armadillo cruiser. That's right, not a single day. Neither the project nor the fact.
      Quote: doktorkurgan
      it was possible to misbehave on communications and then try to break into Vladivostok

      Oslyaby had an effective range in fact of 880 m.m. Economical move. Complete, many times less. From Kamrani to Vladik 2285 m.m. From the beam Jeju (now very, very Japan) to Vladik 685 m.m. How was Oslaby commander supposed to figure out where he would meet with the Japanese? And how was he supposed to leave them with an economical move of 10 knots?
      There Peresvet nafig was not needed, not that Oslyabya.
      And then, what for there needed a low-speed galosh Aurora?
  12. 0
    25 October 2016 09: 59
    The generally unsolvable tasks faced the Russian strategy at the turn of the century, to oppose Germany and Britain at the same time, the best solution would be not to spend money on these pieces of iron, but to develop industry.
  13. +3
    25 October 2016 10: 01
    In general, this is our eternal misfortune, there is no normal calculated naval doctrine and there is no technical support for it, respectively. As a result, we rush from one extreme to another and constantly build some kind of team hodgepodge "do not sing, nor bury" ... It is clear that all this is due to the scattering of maritime theaters and their specifics, but still it was possible to deduce a certain common denominator. And he still does not exist ... which is sad ...
    1. 0
      25 October 2016 18: 14
      Quote: Taoist
      In general, this is our eternal misfortune, there is no normal calculated naval doctrine and there is no technical support for it, respectively. As a result, we rush from one extreme to another and constantly build some kind of team hodgepodge "do not sing, nor bury" ... It is clear that all this is due to the scattering of maritime theaters and their specifics, but still it was possible to deduce a certain common denominator. And he still does not exist ... which is sad ...

      Well, if possible, then derive the doctrine and the denominator to it. Only the problem is 200 years old, and things are still there. Well, now it will be easier, there are planes, rockets, space .... Or is it harder to get everything together?
      1. +1
        25 October 2016 20: 28
        It’s possible to deduce, the question is who needs to ... after all, keep in mind that in addition to theoretical calculations, there are economics, technological and time factors.
        Well, and most importantly, a competent and related doctrine should be based on coherent and at least permanent geopolitical goals ... In the United States, they have not changed for the last 100 years, at least ... but with us?
    2. +1
      25 October 2016 23: 18
      Very rarely, anyone recalls 4 unconnected maritime theaters. On each of which you need to be strong. So you have to contain 4 times more ships, because fleet mobility is lost.
      Any of our adversaries - England, Germany, the USA, Japan - could (and even now can), if necessary, transfer ships from one theater to another. Russia and the USSR are very limited in this possibility (mosquito fleet and small submarines along the railway, maximum destroyers along the White Sea-Baltic Canal).
  14. 0
    26 October 2016 01: 49
    A good article, dear Andrei, was pleased to read +!
    The design of these ships is quite good, and the survivability demonstrated by Peresvet in the battle at Cape Shantung is proof of this. I believe that "Prince Suvorov" received fewer "suitcases" at the time of failure than "Peresvet" by the end of the battle on 28 July.
    The armament is not very, of course, but here, IMHO, it was necessary not to experiment with ten-inch undeclared ones, but to put two one-armed towers with twelve-inch guns.
    1. 0
      30 October 2016 21: 28
      Quote: Comrade
      and put two one-armed towers with twelve-inch guns.

      Wah, you are just an "innovator".
      But nothing that the guns of the Peresvet Group of Companies simply did not work out? Well, i.e. there was a firm belief that they would hurt, and they sucked. But it became clear later, after installing them in the tower.
      Do you propose making new towers, elevators, cellars, etc.?
      Isn't it easier to quit with "economy", and then, after mastering the manufacture of normal guns, just change the defective guns for normal ones?
      And where to attach 10 "weakened guns, there would be a million options.
  15. +1
    26 October 2016 02: 03
    Quote: Rurikovich
    There is information that Asama itself had problems with fire tube boilers, and as the firstborn of the series was worse.

    Dear colleague, I assure you, during the Russian-Japanese war it was a very high-speed cruiser. My article on this ship is almost ready, there are all the details.
    1. 0
      26 October 2016 11: 23
      Article? There is also a monograph by S. Balakin "Asama" and others ".
      The first and last pairs in speed are approximately equal: for a short time, with great difficulty, up to 18 knots, long up to 17. German speed failure. Frenchman is a complete failure, due to poor assembly of the CMU.
      Fire tube boilers also had an advantage: large reserves for afterburner. Therefore, until the water pipes were finally worked out by design, combinations of fire and water pipes were put on separate series of German and English ships. And they got the advantage of both.
      1. 0
        30 October 2016 21: 30
        Quote: ignoto
        The first and last pairs in speed are approximately equal: for a short time, with great difficulty, up to 18 knots, long up to 17. German speed failure. Frenchman is a complete failure, due to poor assembly of the CMU.

        One can only wonder how in the KP these "sludge" caught up and overtook (covered the head) the FOC. And not even the whole FOK, but Rurik. Which started as a rearguard and chuhal all the way at a speed of 17,5 knots.
  16. 0
    26 October 2016 02: 12
    Interesting article, thanks, plus
  17. 0
    26 October 2016 10: 31
    Peresvet is good because for once in the minds of the Russian Admiralty the suspicion crept into the minds that "speed + firepower" would soon steer in full. But, after a half-step in the form of "Peresvet", this thought and froze. As a result, the Russian squadrons could not win, first of all, because of their slow speed, and the admirals were forced to dance one way or another to the music ordered by the enemy. In 1904, we would have 3-4 ships in the "ancestor" class of the future British battle cruisers of WW1. And for other tasks, the BBO would be enough. Then everything would have turned out differently in the Yellow and Japan Seas. Eh, speed, speed - the scourge of the Russian imperial fleet.
    1. +2
      26 October 2016 11: 21
      Quote: andrew42
      In 1904, we would have 3-4 ships in the "ancestor" class of the future British battle cruisers of WW1.

      Giggles ... suggesting to order "Vickers" a series of "Rurik-second" in 1901? wink
      Because there is no hope for the domestic industry - for a long time, expensive, but the output is not at all what was in the original TK.
    2. 0
      26 October 2016 11: 37
      The sluggishness of the Russian ships was determined rather not by technical characteristics, but by intellectual ones. So, for example, during the debriefing of the battle on July 28, the idea was expressed that finding "Poltava" and "Sevastopol" in the head would increase the speed.
      And what is the speed of 9 knots in Tsushima?
      "Eagle" after the battle gave 16 knots. And this is the most congested of the series. By the way, most of the construction overload is equipping the cockpits with heat shields for swimming in the tropics. For the Japanese, trying to overload ships with combustible material? The speed of the Japanese is limited to 15 knots by the Fuji and Azuma brakes.
      The decision on the allocation of four "Borodino", "Oslyabi", "Oleg" and "Aurora" in the high-speed detachment suggests itself. Kamimura with his cruisers will not be able to cope with the rest of the Russian ships: too tough.
      1. +2
        26 October 2016 15: 07
        Quote: ignoto
        The decision on the allocation of four "Borodino", "Oslyabi", "Oleg" and "Aurora" in the high-speed detachment suggests itself. Kamimura with his cruisers will not be able to cope with the rest of the Russian ships: too tough.


        Mistaken judgment, you are considering Tsushima from the point of squadron combat, and this is not entirely true. Rather, the battle of Tsushima is a convoy posting.
        The 2nd squadron was weighed down (connected) by slow-moving transports and a hospital ship.
        What's the use of a high-speed and maneuverable formation, if it is forced to defend a slow-moving "train" - a cruising detachment, thwarted attempts by Japanese cruisers to attack transports during the Battle of Tsushima. In addition, both Oleg and Aurora are armored, not armored - they cannot be in line - in close combat, "cardboard" sides are shot through with any caliber, including mine. The Varyag was forced to withdraw from the battle having received three 203 mm shells.
        1. 0
          27 October 2016 08: 54
          1. Who prevented the slow-moving transports and a hospital ship guarded by auxiliary cruisers led by Amur to be sent around Japan?
          2. You have a wrong opinion about armored cruisers. In the battle in the Yellow Sea, "Askold" in the absence of two 6 "guns, respectively, having six guns in an onboard salvo, the main battery broke through successively two armored cruisers.
          About the "cardboard boards". Reservation schemes are now available: the Japanese "Miracle Yudo" cruisers have their armor covered most of the waterline, most of the guns, but there are enough "cardboard" parts. For armored carapaces, the deck protects the CMU and the entire waterline with bevels. In the battle in the Yellow Sea, the Askold's deck was not pierced. It took only about 100 tons of water, and the Retvizan, with a full belt, took up to 400 tons from a projectile with a caliber of only 120mm (Novik's main cruiser, rank II) of an unidentified artillery system.
          Of course, an armored cruiser is more stable in a prolonged combat encounter: time works for it. But, given that the fire performance of the Russian armored decks is higher than that of the Japanese armored ones, the two cruisers could well have worn out the Nissin, against which they would have to act. In those conditions, even the exchange of "Oleg" and "Aurora" for "Nissin" ... And before them "Oslyabya". who would have had to act against the Kassuga. An battleship with 10 "guns against an armored cruiser.
          3. "Varyag" left the battle not for technical reasons. Rudnev did not use the capabilities of the cruiser. The damage to the cruiser, with the exception of personnel casualties, was not significant. "Asama", which in 14 minutes of battle fired 27-8 "(from four barrels, and" Korean "from two obsolete 8" -22) and 103-6 "(from seven barrels, and" Korean "-27 from one) did not suffer at all, but for some reason disappeared for two months.
          3. I do not see Tsushima as a battle, which has received a reliable description. Like the whole REV.
          According to traditional history, Japan before the Meiji revolution was isolated and very far behind the "civilized world".
          But on the surviving photographs, the architecture of Japan in its style is not just similar, but completely identical to the architecture of St. Petersburg, European and North American cities. But do you know that before the REV, the Japanese seriously considered the possibility of moving the capital to Seoul? And the problem of the islands: four Japanese islands naturally close the Kuril ridge. So what was this war, with whom and for what? The modern description of the REV is a literary hoax.
          1. +1
            30 October 2016 21: 44
            Quote: ignoto
            In the battle in the Yellow Sea, "Askold" in the absence of two 6 "guns, respectively, having six guns in an onboard salvo, the main battery broke through successively two armored cruisers.

            This is from a series of anecdotes about the elusive Joe. I wouldn't be surprised if I soon see that he "defeated them." And a little later that he drowned them altogether.
            In fact, Askold did not break through. And taking advantage of the huge advantage in the course simply bypassed the enemy in an arc.
            Quote: ignoto
            But, given that the fire performance of Russian armored decks is higher than that of Japanese armored

            Enchanting. I will tell you even more, the fire performance of the Maxim machine gun is also much higher than the German 37-mm door knocker. But if you pull up a dozen Maximoks, then nothing, even BT-2, you will not destroy. On the contrary, he will in turn pass all your Maxims. But it costs him once a naughty thing from the door knocker. And kirdyk him.
            Is the meaning clear?
            If you are comparing "fire performance", then please compare comparable things. Comparing Oleg and Aurora against Nissin is barbaric. He would just crush them one or two. Just like that, in between times. And without straining at all.
            Quote: ignoto
            Rudnev did not use the capabilities of the cruiser.

            What if not a secret?
            Quote: ignoto
            I do not see Tsushima as a battle that has received a reliable description.

            Of course. Everyone knows that the RIF defeated everyone.
            1. 0
              31 October 2016 10: 18
              1. Read carefully. Already good. But, apparently, not everyone can learn at once. It happens. Therefore, I repeat.
              Fire performance. The ability, in this case, of a ship to release a certain number of shells over a certain period of time.
              In Chemulpo, Asama produced 27-8 "(95 kg each) and 103-6" (45 kg each). Fight "Vyaryag" - 14 minutes. The real performance of "Nissin" is not much higher (towers and feed 8 "are the same, feed 6" is slightly better). Although you divide them into "cruisers-defenders" and "battleships for the poor" in reality, according to their characteristics, they are twins. Now calculate the rate of fire with which "Oleg" must respond in order to release no less metal in bulk. Eight 6 "airborne. Let the turret three rounds per minute. Four airborne four rounds. Total 28 6" rounds per minute. And in 14 minutes? The Aurora has an airborne side of 5-6 ". 20 6" shells per minute. And in 14 minutes? This is at a rate of fire of 4 rounds per minute. The real feed, on that on the other, provided up to 6 rounds per minute.
              2. I never wrote that the RIF defeated everyone.
              I wrote that not only the REV, but also all the events of the late 19th and early 20th centuries are not reliable. Not only Russian, but also world-wide. For example, Japan, in the style of architecture does not differ from other countries. And this is a country that came out of isolation only after the Meiji revolution. Before the REV, the Japanese seriously considered the possibility of moving the capital to Seoul (!?). Four actually Japanese islands are only the natural completion of the Kuril ridge. Not for nothing, studies have appeared that examine the possibility of a united world state at the turn of the century, which has collapsed as a result of civil wars. Moreover, the reality of traditional dynasties, that of English, that of Russian is being called into question. For example, the current English queen, who ascended the throne a couple of weeks after the assassination of Stalin, has no pedigree at all. That is, on paper, everything is fine, and when deepening into the details, it’s a complete shwak. The same with the Romanovs.
              Your argument with Andrei is actually natural even within the framework of traditional science. Andrey is too academic. You are completely non-academic. In history, there is such a section as historiography, which is designed to consider all points of view. To find something valuable, sometimes you have to shovel a large amount of waste rock.
              1. 0
                31 October 2016 14: 42
                Quote: ignoto
                Fire performance. The ability, in this case, of a ship to release a certain number of shells over a certain period of time.

                It could be. Only now it is worth comparing comparable fire performance. And not just what.
                Quote: ignoto
                In Chemulpo "Asama" released 27-8 "(95 kg each)

                113,4 kg. Shells weighing 95,26 kg were from Japanese armored decks. On them were also lightweight 8 "cannons.
                Quote: ignoto
                Although you divide them into "defensive cruisers" and "armadillos for the poor" in reality, they are twins in their characteristics.

                Not at all. They are even completely different in design.
                Garibaldians, these are typical cheap battleships of the citadel booking scheme.
                Asam, these are traverse armadillos. Those. nothing at all in terms of design.
                As for the characteristics, they are also VERY different. Especially the nature of the reservation. The Garibaldians are more balanced because they were expected to clash with more powerful ships. Asams (I would still separate Asama and Tokiva themselves, it hurts they are not very much) are more sharpened by the beating of relatively weak raiders. Iwate / Izumo, Azuma and Yakumo were some intermediates between the Asams and the Garibaldians.
                At the same time, based on the overall profitability of the Russian armored raiders, the Garibaldians in the IAF could play the role of armored defenders. And based on the profitability of ships 2 and 3 of the TOE, they were even obliged to fulfill the role of squadron battle ships. Because specifically for battles with ersatz-EDB (not a single real EDB was included in 2 and 3 TOEs) and were built. At the same time, they are ersatz-EDBs (some call them class 3 EDBs, but this is an unofficial name).
                Quote: ignoto
                Now calculate the rate of fire with which "Oleg" must respond in order to release no less metal in bulk.

                What for? What is the meaning of "metal in bulk"?
                I have already given you an example somewhere with a tank, a "door knocker" and a Maximka machine gun. Read it again and try to understand what it says.
                Quote: ignoto
                but all the events of the late 19th and early 20th centuries are not reliable.

                I'll tell you even more, they are unreliable from time immemorial to this day. Just because there is no such SCIENCE "History". They don't exist. And what is called "the science of history" has no signs of science.
                Quote: ignoto
                Your dispute with Andrey

                I have no "dispute with Andrey". I pointed out to the author of this opus the bulk of his mistakes based on a misunderstanding of the essence of things. That's all.
                Unfortunately it turned out long. But it didn’t work out briefly, because the author does not understand the basic things. Those. the basics of what he undertook to write about.
                Quote: ignoto
                Andrey is too academic.

                You are a great diplomat. I usually prefer to be more specific.
                Quote: ignoto
                You are completely non-academic.

                How "academic" can there be in technical matters?
                "Academicity" can be present in matters of "science history". But this question is too technical to be able to talk about "academic".
                Your Andrey does not understand the structure of the armored fleet at the beginning of the 20th century. He does not understand what the design features of the ships really meant.
                I had a lot of vershoks from "authoritative authors", writers of historical sciences. And spit in a written way. This is nonsense, of course. And many believe him.
                "Academics", is that what they should be called?
                Quote: ignoto
                To find something valuable, sometimes you have to shovel a large amount of waste rock.

                Shoveled already, do not hesitate.
              2. +1
                1 November 2016 11: 18
                Quote: ignoto
                In Chemulpo, Asama produced 27-8 "(95 kg each) and 103-6" (45 kg each). Fight "Vyaryag" - 14 minutes. The real performance of "Nissin" is not much higher (towers and feed 8 "are the same, feed 6" is slightly better). Although you divide them into "cruisers-defenders" and "battleships for the poor" in reality, according to their characteristics, they are twins. Now calculate the rate of fire with which "Oleg" must respond in order to release no less metal in bulk. Eight 6 "airborne. Let the turret three rounds per minute. Four airborne four rounds. Total 28 6" rounds per minute. And in 14 minutes? The Aurora has an airborne side of 5-6 ". 20 6" shells per minute. And in 14 minutes? This is at a rate of fire of 4 rounds per minute. The real feed, on that on the other, provided up to 6 rounds per minute.


                It is only programmers who consider the "performance" of the guns, while completely ignoring the complex reservation of the target - they calculate the "probability" of damage, which is usually taken "from the ceiling".
                Only programmers take the maximum rate of guns for the source data.

                We are technically competent people, we will not be like "theorists".
                Understanding that the rate of fire depends not only on the reload speed, but also on guidance, distance (the flight time of the projectile to the target to make adjustments), the rate of supply of ammunition from the cellar, when the charges of the fenders of the first shots run out, the servant will begin to fail from the fragments and shock wave (the shell-shocked is no longer able to act or loses in dexterity). Possible impacts are dozens of factors.
                And at the same time, even Asama alone will defeat both armored decks, since he has covered casemates with art servants
          2. +1
            1 November 2016 10: 59
            Quote: ignoto
            2. You have a wrong opinion about armored cruisers. In the battle in the Yellow Sea, "Askold" in the absence of two 6 "guns, respectively, having six guns in an onboard salvo, the main battery broke through successively two armored cruisers.


            I do not agree
            booking cruiser Askold:
            The armored deck was the main defense. It was called karapasnaya, as in shape it resembled a turtle's body. The armor deck consisted of two layers of plates: the lower of shipbuilding steel 10 or 15 mm thick and the upper of alloyed nickel armor of 30 and 60 mm. (is it not cardboard? - shipbuilding steel 10 mm-15 mm for a 150 mm projectile? And alloy steel 30-60 mm will not constitute a serious obstacle for a 150 mm projectile - perhaps a high explosive one.
            The horizontal part of the armored deck had a thickness of 40 (10 + 30), bevels 75 (15 + 60) or 100 (10 + 30 + 60) mm.

            AsK type Asama Reservation:
            main armor belt: 88—178 mm
            upper armor belt: 127 mm
            barbets, towers, casemates: 152 mm
            deck: 51 mm
            Deck bevels: 76 mm
            shields of 152 mm guns: 115 mm
            conning tower: 356 mm

            Given the difference in armor and armament - no one in their right mind would put and put in line armored against the armored.

            What we have? An armored cruiser doesn’t even have to shoot armor-piercing shells, it’s enough landmines - which will destroy superstructures and artillery servants and damage open-standing guns, reducing artillery fire of the armored deck to zero, damaging chimneys and reducing its only advantage - speed.
            At the same time, in order to inflict any damage to the armored cruiser, the armored deck will be forced to fire armor-piercing shells with less explosives. The resistance of the armored cruiser to artillery fire of 150 mm shells is much higher.
            The armored cruiser has one chance - this is an escape with an advantage in speed.

            Quote: ignoto
            1. Who prevented the slow-moving transports and a hospital ship guarded by auxiliary cruisers led by Amur to be sent around Japan?


            It was not anyone who interfered, but what prevented them - fuel supply limitations, low speed - almost 100% probability of intercepting a convoy - the convoy was under the supervision of the Japanese LCR and even if the squadron was separated from the convoy on the eve of the battle, it would not be difficult to catch slow-moving transports , including the blockade of Vladivostok.
            In addition - you don’t understand the meaning of a hospital ship - it should go in the fleet, since only in the conditions of such a ship you can save some seriously wounded - one ship doctor, two paramedics and a dozen orderlies - can not save most seriously wounded on a ship, without a hospital ships - they are doomed to death from wounds! It’s not even convenient for me to explain such common truths ...

            "Varyag" left the battle not for technical reasons. Rudnev did not use the capabilities of the cruiser. The damage to the cruiser, with the exception of personnel casualties, was not significant.


            Not technical - the openly located artillery servant was knocked out (1 officer and 30 sailors were killed, 6 officers and 85 sailors were wounded and shell-shocked, about 100 more were slightly injured), a hole at the waterline did not allow to develop a full speed.
            What does it mean Rudnev did not use the capabilities of the cruiser? Are you familiar with the swimming area? If the Japanese squadron blocked access to the sea (and the Yellow Sea is shallow, especially off the coast and the exit from the fairway is blocked by an enemy squadron - where will you break through? Banks, shallows? What would make the cruiser aground and die heroically or pass it whole?

            3. I do not see Tsushima as a battle, which has received a reliable description. Like the whole REV.
            It depends on the number of studied versions - 20-30 sources - contemporaries of the event, will give some picture that can be analyzed not at the level of guesswork from a particular author or historian, but at the level of accumulated events, to analyze their reliability.
            Well, for example, the doctor who operated during the battle will give a relatively accurate number of the wounded or killed and their composition, but will not give a picture of the battle - the doctor is in the infirmary, so his story will be based on some general information from other officers and may carry inaccuracies or generalizations. An artillery officer may observe several ships and not see the battlefield as a whole, but he is a source of data on hits on targets, etc.
      2. 0
        30 October 2016 21: 35
        Quote: ignoto
        The decision on the allocation of four "Borodino", "Oslyabi", "Oleg" and "Aurora" in the high-speed detachment suggests itself.

        And Oleg and Aurora are here from what side? Or, "what for goat button accordion"? To sneak under the cover of the Borodino suicide bombers?
        1. 0
          31 October 2016 09: 32
          Why is it, "Borodino" suicide bombers? Quite normal battleships for a squadron battle. Used them stupidly. But the words purpose and use have different meanings. "Oleg" and "Aurora" in terms of fire performance surpassed the "Nissin" each separately, and even more so together. Of course, in a real battle, they would have received heavy damage, real, and not imaginary, like "Varyag". But, in those conditions, it was permissible. And “Oslyabi” against “Kassuga” would have a very good chance. Of course, this is the version.
          In reality, Rozhestvensky had no chances. The wrong tactics, possibly consciously, the betrayal of Nebogatov, did not leave the Russians, in the framework of the traditional literary version, any chances. Spoiled shells on this background is already a trifle.
          1. 0
            31 October 2016 10: 22
            Quote: ignoto
            Quite a normal battleship for squadron combat.

            Due to the nature of the GP booking, there were essentially just "holes". 2 from each side.
            In addition, from Kamrani to Vladik 2285 m. And the range of action in a combat-ready state of Borodino (a very "cool" domestic project was, "improved" Tsarevich) was from 2300 to 2700 mm. This is an economical stroke of 10 knots. And if you give in, as you wanted, defining the Borodino people in the "speed squad", then many times more. In addition, due to the operational overload when sent to the Far East, they did not nurse the above-mentioned miles in a combat-ready state. Those. at least part of the way were FORCED to go in a partially combat-ready state (with submerged in excess of the maximum possible GP). This is the one in which the Japanese caught them at Tsushima.
            Oslyabya would have looked even funnier in this "high-speed detachment". With its operational range of 880 m. economical course of 10 knots.
            Quote: ignoto
            "Oleg" and "Aurora" in terms of fire performance surpassed the "Nissin" each separately, and even more so together.

            Nissinu their "peas" (152 mm) was up to the star. But even his anti-cruising caliber (152 mm) was extremely dangerous for them. And the main one (203 mm), and even more so.
            Once again, I repeat, the way you do it, fire performance is not compared.
            Quote: ignoto
            And “Oslyabi” against “Kassuga” would have a very good chance.

            Real Oslaby did not have such a chance. Due to overload. And the ideal (virtual) had no chance to catch up with this very Kasuga. Although in this case Oslyabya was stronger than Kasuga. Still, even a second-class EDB that did not turn out to be stronger than a budget armadillo (i.e. conditionally a third-class EDB).
            Quote: ignoto
            In reality, there was no chance for Rozhdestvensky.

            I agree to all 100. Tsushima, this is a gamble of pure water. The total and complete incompetence of the highest naval leadership of Russia.
            Quote: ignoto
            betrayal of Nebogatov

            Betrayal? What was "Nebogatov's betrayal"?
            Quote: ignoto
            Spoiled shells on this background is already a trifle.

            And what, there were some "damaged shells"?
            I know only armor-piercing, CONSCIOUSLY deteriorated due to the wild desire of the marine department to buy only caps of Makarov's design. Exclusively. Exclusively. Makarov himself, of course, has nothing to do with this. Pure water is a coincidence.
          2. +1
            1 November 2016 11: 51
            Quote: ignoto
            "Oleg" and "Aurora" in terms of fire performance surpassed the "Nissin" each separately, and even more so together. Of course, in a real battle, they would have received heavy damage, real, and not imaginary, like "Varyag". But, in those conditions, it was permissible.


            Why would this be acceptable? Thousands of miles from the base, heavy combat damage is the death of a ship or surrender!



            Somehow to tie the "fire performance" of armored decks to the Nissin armor - in reality NISSIN would have badly battered both Oleg and Aurora taken together, without serious structural damage and artillery. At the same time, Oleg, somewhat more resistant to combat damage, and with open artillery Aurora - would have suffered significant losses in artillery servants, structural damage to the hulls and were forced to leave the battle - these cruisers have no chance in a linear battle with the armored cruiser Nissin.
  18. 0
    27 October 2016 00: 49
    Quote: Alexey RA
    In "Gangut" 12-bis there was an article "The case of the steamer" Malacca "- about the actions of the VSKR detachment in the Red Sea.
    Nerves then surrendered at the Foreign Ministry.

    And even earlier, the ships of the Virenius detachment were engaged in this, immediately after the outbreak of the war. They stopped and inspected several ships when they were ordered to stop the operation.
  19. 0
    29 October 2016 15: 46
    The article is interesting.
    the concept of "battleships" as raiders has always seemed strange to me, but so what's the matter ..

    waiting for the continuation!
  20. 0
    30 October 2016 19: 33
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Squadron battleships of the Peresvet type occupy a special place in the history of the Russian Navy.

    Yes? Why would it all be? Normal garbage like "made in Russian Empire" (and the USSR, if anyone is interested).
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    All three ships of this type.

    Apparently it will be worthwhile to dazzle the author with the news that there were only 2 battleships of the “Peresvet type” type, Peresvet and Oslyabya itself. Both belonged to the courts of the category "goner is finished." Those. were Russian-built. Although Oslyabya, of course, was much lighter than Peresvet.
    And Victory was already being built according to a slightly different project. In addition, he had other GK guns, the type of armor and the nature of the reservation. Even Victory’s cars were different, four-cylinder, instead of three-cylinder.
    Not to say that at birth, Victory was somehow good, no. But he could make up a company for the elderly from birth “squadron battleships of the type of Petropavlovsk” as an EDB of the 2nd class (as “relights” were conceived). The trouble was that in fact there was only one squadron battleship of the Petropavlovsk type in the RIF, this is the 1st-class EDB (according to the British classification) Poltava. The remaining "squadron battleships of the type of Petropavlovsk" (Petropravlovsk and Sevastopol itself) were about the same substandard and junk (for a squadron battle, of course), like Peresvet and Oslyabya.
    At the same time, both Poltava and Pobeda, despite their unconditional belonging to the ships of their classes (the first, this is an EDB of the 1st class, the second, this is an EDB of the 2nd class), at birth could be equal only to their old classmates. And certainly not for contemporaries.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Nevertheless, Peresvet was destined to return to the Russian Imperial Fleet, it was bought out

    Yes, then the Japanese sold to Russia all their captured and slag that they did not need. The result is a double benefit.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    It seemed that fate gave the ship a second chance.

    He didn’t have the first one either. At least as a linear battle ship, as he was listed in the RIF. It is characteristic that he was already enrolled in the Nuclear Physics Institute as a ship of linear battle. Which was quite sensible.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    occupying an intermediate position between squadron battleships and cruisers

    And the next news for the author, the “cruiser”, is not a type of ship at all. Therefore, "to occupy an intermediate position between the squadron battleships and cruisers" is impossible. That's even just a bare theory.
    Although in parallel worlds of author "from Chelyabinsk" this is not the case.
    Just in case, I want to draw the author’s attention to the “auxiliary cruisers”. Those. on civil steamboats with a gun bolted to them. Hint, hopefully understood? Or traditionally, no?
    And yet, do not literally rewrite the nonsense on this topic of one of the "respected Soviet authors." You will not find competencies there, but expose yourself to everyone’s ridicule.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    these ships did not become either one or the other.

    Well, why? If you bring everything together, then I want to inform you that the Victory was still a second-class EDB. True, from birth is old. But, nevertheless, it was the same.
    Overexposure from birth was quite a normal coastal defense battleship. And it wasn’t his fault that they called him “squadron battleship” in the RIF and tried to use him for a linear battle.
    What was Oslyabya from birth difficult to say. For it was a rare hoopoe. Most likely, something like a self-propelled seaworthy armored floating battery.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    however, let's try to figure it out

    When I hear this from a person who does not understand the basics of shipbuilding and naval warfare (does not understand what is there, why, and why), then I feel not funny, but scared. After all, someone can believe him.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    just built a series of very successful battleships of the Poltava type for their time (and at the time of laying - one of the best in the world)

    And the “pearls" were not long in coming. The first one turned out instantly.
    You’re an eccentric “from Chelyabinsk”. When constructing ships of the Petropavlovsk type, only Poltava at birth corresponded to the level of old class 1 EDBs. And even then, due to British cars and the abundance of imported armor.
    Sevastopol’s armor was also imported (not all), but budget (cheaper). From this, in terms of security, he did not fall into the category of EDB class 1 in any way. In addition, his cars were not British, but from a “screwdriver”. Those. from the Franco-Russian plant. Those. French but Russian assembly. And at first there were problems with them. “Quality build,” you know.
    Cars "Petropavlovsk" were normal, ie British But the armor was domestic. Ie outdated. All. From this category, the first-class EDB “Petropavlovsk” corresponded even less than the “Sevastopol”. Those. just like “Sevastopl”, it did not correspond almost in any way. Only the guns of the Petropavlovsk and Sevastopol GCs at a range of no more than about 1 kbt corresponded to the class 1 EDB class. And the "Russian classification". More from the 40st class EDB there was nothing there.
    From this, incidentally, the most profitable of Petropavlovsk "Petropavlovsk" and used as a flagship. For the flagship, it is ALWAYS not the most powerful ship in the warrant. At least in those days.
    For those who would like to clarify, I clarify, Mikasy is also fully concerned with this. Sikishima and Hatsuse were noticeably stronger than Mikasy, although older. In addition, Hatsuse was also an excellent walker. Even compared to Sikishima. Those. It was the most powerful Japanese EDB. Before the mine operation by Admiral Witgeft. After her, Sikishima became such.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    suddenly stumbled and created "not a mouse, not a frog, but an unknown animal".

    Everybody, everybody. See above.
    It’s just not worth trying to scoop up the soup with a fork. Those. call "squadron battleships" that this is not known. And even more so, join IT in a linear battle. But it was such a feature of RI (and the USSR, if that), apparently they did not know how to do it differently.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    But how did it happen that the leadership of the Ministry of the Sea took the model for his squadron battleship, i.e. potentially the most powerful fleet ship, lightweight and obviously inferior to modern British armored ships of the 1st class ships?

    Those. about the squadron battleships of class 2, the mobile wing of linear forces, the author had never heard of. This is sad, especially considering the fact that the 2nd class EDBs later transformed into battlecruisers. Unlike battleships, which transformed the first class EDB.
    Yes, and in itself the feasibility of having lin. cruisers (EDB class 2) the author calls into question. Giant, nothing to say. The whole world is not in step, but the author "from Chelyabinsk", in the leg.
    1. 0
      30 October 2016 19: 34
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Therefore, the decision to build armadillos that were supposed to go to the Far East and serve there looked like something new.

      I repeat once more for those who are "from Chelyabinsk." Armadillos in those old days were called armored ships. Those. ships with the main armored belt. At the same time, ships that are now commonly called armored in Runet were NOT considered armadillos. And in general, they did not stand out in any separate group.
      But in a separate group stood out, for example, AFFLESS cruisers. I hope, of course, the armored vehicles (armadillos) and the armored vehicles stood out. The rest were considered ordinary and had no special name.
      Therefore, your surprise at the “Russian innovation” is nothing more than a misunderstanding of the basics.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Of course, the cruising fleet, which was supposed to be based in Vladivostok and threaten the sea communications of England (or other European countries) from there, should also be built in the Baltic.

      Of these ships, I can only recall the semi-armored (later retrained, like all Russian semi-armored pelvis, armored) Rurik (at birth). Russia at birth, although to a lesser extent, could still be considered an armored fighter cruiser (armored raider). And that’s it. No more trade cruiser fighters were built in Russia. Yes, and not built much. Yes, and not particularly procured. Those. Russia didn’t make a bet on the cruising war (through raiders).
      Although it included Varangian, Boyarin and Retvizan (about it below).
      So, the author in vain “translates arrows” into maritime communications. Actually, the next move of this "grandmaster" is understandable, it’s a mobile wing of linear forces (class 2 EDB, the forerunner of battle cruisers), which will quickly switch to "enemy communications." But this again, from ignorance and misunderstanding of the basics. Because this has never been in principle. Class 2 EDB operated exclusively on warships. And as part of armored units. What follows even from their name - "squadron". But the author is traditionally not up to date.
      The trouble is that EVEN ON THE PROJECT, the range of “overexposure” (we will take it broadly, with “Victory”) was much less than what the armored raider needed. Yes, and the tower raider again, to anything - overweight. Yes and ... However, I am getting ahead of myself. Maybe it still does not translate the arrows.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Armadillos - 18 pcs.
      Cruisers of 1 rank - 9 pcs.
      Cruisers of 2 rank - 21 pcs.
      Gunboats - 20 pcs.

      I applaud with my ears. the author can write a lot without saying anything. “Cruiser 1st rank”, for example, is a ship of a certain displacement and range. Having weapons of a certain level. AND EVERYTHING. The purpose of the pepelats described in this way is not clear in principle. And is it important.
      The same applies to the concept of “battleships”. And even the gunboats.
      Those. the author out of habit cited information about nothing. That's exactly about anything. And, apparently, he was very pleased with himself.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      We will not analyze the Black Sea Theater in detail

      Already good. Now fine.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Russia only had to build numerous cruising squadrons

      Did Russia build “numerous cruising squadrons”? What, if not secret? Really "dash with a broadsword and arashka" in the amount of 3 pieces?
      If you look at those cruisers that were built abroad, then they were all different. Those. Among the cruisers built abroad (Svetlana, Novik, Boyarin, Varyag, Askold, Bogatyr and Bayan) you will not find ANY classmate (for clarification see below). Because in fact, these were various “probes” for trying out concepts (approximately the same was true for Retvizan and Tsesarevich). How was it possible to form “cruising squadrons” from them?
      Perhaps only Askold and Bayan were quite a classmate. But at the same time they were of completely different designs.
      In addition, fighter cruisers, i.e. there were as many as 2 ships built for operations on enemy communications; these were Varyag (distant) and Boyarin (near). And it was they (and also the obviously unsuccessful Askold) that were not further cloned. Well, Russia had no plans for a cruising war.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      However, the cruisers are unable to ensure dominance in the Baltic - for this we need armadillos.

      Here we again catch the author on incompetence. He clearly does not know about the existence of armored cruisers, who were also armadillos. Those. (by author), if you build armored cruisers, calling them armadillos, then domination could be achieved. But if the enemy sweeps them to smithereens, then we will understand that in fact they were cruisers.
      In other words, do not read the opuses of this author. He often cannot understand himself.
      By the way, what about the coastal defense battleships (BrBO)? After all, the author will not deny that they were armadillos? Or will it?
      So maybe it was worth mass building BrBO?
      Or it's time to start calling a spade a spade. That is, to begin with, stop equating the EDB with the concept of “armadillos”. Misleading readers. For the EDB, this is just a special case of the general concept of “armadillos”. But the concept of “armadillos” in itself is broader.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      The Russian Empire was supposed to build, in fact, two fleets of completely different purposes - armored for coastal defense and ocean cruising

      Measurement in exhaustion. It turns out that the author had in mind the fact that it was necessary to massively build brbo. But how then did he plan to “ensure supremacy in the Baltic”. How to achieve this without EDB?
      And if you build an EDB, then why should they “defend the coast”?
      No, still the Internet, this is apparently evil. Various kinds of “publications” of some author’s “from Chelyabinsk” with their twists can even bring the telegraph pole to the pen.
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Russia was forced to build and maintain a powerful Black Sea Fleet in an isolated maritime theater

      I’m embarrassed to ask, why? That is why RI for many years built on the Black Sea Fleet all sorts of "a bunch of nonsense"? Saving a few appropriations into that hole. How many times was the Black Sea Fleet about to defeat Turkish? 5? 10?
      Moreover, nothing standing there was built anyway (and never). And just one normal modern German lin. the cruiser drove all this numerous horde as soon as he wanted it.
      1. 0
        30 October 2016 19: 35
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        managed to lay only 4 battleships ("Sisoy the Great"

        Sisoy, this is a masterpiece of the ship. Actually, this is an attempt to build a “correct class 1 EDB” on a FULLY domestic element base. Those. From a technical point of view, Sisoy is the crown of technological capabilities of the Russian Empire in those days. And from the point of view of the theory of shipbuilding, it’s impossible to get to Sisoy in principle, since everything is right there.
        But he also had his own “trick”. Cool Russian shipbuilders managed to create such a project, and then to translate it into metal so that it was IMPOSSIBLE to bring Sysa into a fully operational state. Even TOTALLY WITHOUT COAL, he was still overloaded with respect to his project. And his GP was drowned above the maximum permissible level. And given that it was an armadillo of a completely correct citadel reservation scheme, more or less noticeable damage to the extremities would automatically lead him to death.
        But that is not all. His reservation (which is overhead lines, which is higher than the GP) was so dead that he could more likely be called (if you use the "high calm") "squadron half-armored carrier". This was due to the fact that in the Republic of Ingushetia new types of armor were made with a noticeable delay, therefore, ships of domestic construction and on the domestic element base were mostly armored with outdated armor.
        The only thing he had from the EDB was the GK guns. See above for more details.
        Instead of quietly and without much fanfare renaming it Brbo (although in fact an armored and preferably non-self-propelled floating battery), he was thrown into battle. And even with the EDB. C is a predictable result. Uma - the chamber. And competence, even more.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        For example, the armored cruiser "Rurik" was a magnificent ocean raider, perfectly suited for operations on ocean communications.

        Not bad (but not at all magnificent) Rurik was at the time of the existence of half-armored cruisers. What he was in fact himself. In the days of armored cruisers (at the very end of the 19th century) it was already sucks. Which is clearly confirmed in the Strait of Korea. Even the extremely unsuccessful Japanese armored cruiser defenders (the GK was incorrectly selected) were able to deal with it. Moreover, if they did not have this jamb, no one would return to Vladik.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        despite the fact that for the battle in the line "Rurik" was absolutely useless.

        Well, nifiga yourself. I am amazed. Even this author, “from Chelyabinsk,” at last, finished to the point that armored (and at first semi-armored) trade cruiser-fighters (raiders) were not intended for linear combat at all. Apparently because the merchant ship is not very similar to the EDB. And the armored cruiser-defender of trade, their antipode, too.
        And then I’ll fight the author’s battle on the spot, these same armored cruisers-defenders of trade (the Japanese had 6 of them) were also not intended for this.
        Also, armored reconnaissance cruisers were not intended for linear combat (in the REV this is the Bayan in the singular).
        For linear combat, the EDBs of both classes were intended (this can be seen even from their name, “squadrons ...”). In addition, budget battleships (“battleships for the poor”) were often used as EDBs for linear battles in poor third world countries. For example, the same "Garibaldians." Although for the Nuclear Physics Institute they were procured for the role of armored cruisers-defenders of trade. Because the Japanese seriously feared a cruising war. Which RI did not actually lead.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        however, the "Poltava" completely unsuitable for corsair operations away from their native shores

        The stump is clear. Squadron battleships (of both classes) were not created at all for this.
        Offhand, just one EDB capable of raider operations comes to my mind. This is Retvisan. But there raider abilities were obtained by saving money on its construction. Those. Crump has filed for approval a project for a fully-armored class 1 EDB. Not worse than the same Japanese Sikishim (the most powerful Japanese EDBs from the time of the REV). But the Maritime Department decided that the armor to Retvisan would be too much. And she was worth the money. And it can be cut in places. And cut back. But the project, this thing has already been calculated in advance. And there it was impossible to simply cut off and throw something away. Therefore, the weight of the trimmed armor Kramp "threw" an additional supply of coal. As a result, in fact and completely inadvertently, he turned out to be an EBR raider. Although, as a raider, Retvisan was not used for a single day. And it was not even planned to use it like that. Although it was quite possible.
        Despite the reduced weight of the armor, Retvisan still remained the most powerful Russian EDB of the time of the REV. Although even before Asahi and Mikasa he was far away.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        So it only remained to design such a type of ship that combines the qualities of an armored cruiser-raider, a la "Rurik" and a squadron battleship like "Poltava".

        The author’s insanity did happen. But he crept on the other hand, not from the “sea lanes”, as I had previously suggested. He crept from the mythical "ideal ship." To, then, and the Shvets, and the Reaper. And the dude is on the pipe.
        That is what it means to not understand the essence of the matter. And invent something that cannot be in principle.
        In fact, there was a big problem in RI, it did not have its own cars. The ship. And to buy abroad, as in the case of the "Peter and Paul", was expensive. Therefore, they threw themselves into various kinds of “bold excrement”. Here and "overexposure." Here and "dasha with a broadsword (and arashka)." But the crown of this epic senility became, of course, a musk ox of unknown purpose, nicknamed "Stormbreaker".
        Those. They tried to build class 2 EDBs mainly because it was impossible to build class 1 EDBs on the existing domestic materiel (see Sisoy). And to buy components abroad, as is the case with the Peter and Paul Fortress, is expensive. But class 2 EDB, as calculations showed, could still be built on the Russian materiel. As a result, one class 2 EDB was built (Victory). But it is very unimportant when compared with his contemporaries.
        Then, however, I still had to buy licenses for cars. The most powerful were bought from the French (Tsesarevich, Bayan and Borodins further). And 2 types of weaker bought from the Germans. And only after that they began to build something, at least somehow similar to normal ships. At the same time, I emphasize, "at least somehow similar."
        But just to the cruisers-raiders "overexposure" had nothing to do. And this is clearly visible in a number of ways. Some of them I have already described above. I recommend that you familiarize yourself.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And to begin the construction of ships that can stand in line against the battleships of the German fleet, but at the same time they will be able to disrupt British communications.

        I repeat once again, no one has ever built such ships. And he was not going to build. For they are insanity. Retvisan was the only one, but it happened there. Especially it wasn’t built like that.
        In addition to this, Peresvet and Oslyabya were just unable to stand in line. Even with novya. True, it happened to some extent by chance, including because outdated armor was delivered. But the fact remains.
        And they got the GK guns weakened, simply because they didn’t work out. Could not master the production of high-grade. And on the "Relight" were defective and repaired guns. And on Oslyab, previously weakened. At the same time, the ballistics of these guns were far from the level of the EDB. Powerful guns of the GC level of the EDB received only "Victory".
        And the range of action, which was not raider at all (but just peculiar to class 2 EDB), was laid down in the project. True, as a result of design and construction errors, it turned out to be completely microscopic. But we are not talking about this, but about the project.
        1. 0
          30 October 2016 19: 36
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          But if instead we build 10 battleships-cruisers capable of fighting both Germany and England, then the situation will be completely different - at the same financial cost.

          Well, that’s it. the author has left us. He went into complete inadequacy.
          The next move, he will conclude that 1000 well-booked, high-speed and powerfully armed combat kayaks are much better than the rest. And cheaper.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Admiral N.M., Manager of the Ministry of the Sea Chikhachev demanded that MTK create a preliminary design
          "... a strong modern battleship, rather characterized by an armored cruiser."

          Have you demanded? Why are you rewriting any rubbish from RuNet?
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          that the very idea of ​​a “battleship cruiser”

          Just in case, I want to inform you that there were many types of battleships-cruisers.
          This armored cruiser defenders of trade.
          These are armored trade fighter cruisers (armored raiders).
          These are armored reconnaissance cruisers.
          These are budget armadillos (actually also armored cruisers). They are “battleships for the poor.”
          Why are you “making up new facts”? And cast a shadow on the wattle fence?
          That's a stubborn creature. And incompetent. Not only does he not understand at all, he also “thinks” in every way the meaning of the terms “battleship” and “cruiser”.
          And now, he took, and even called 2, failed 2nd class EDBs and 1 2nd class EDB turned out to be “battleship-cruisers”. Which is not so at all.
          No, I’ve met such insanity before in RuNet. But there, I also met about reptilians more than once. What now, to repeat all nonsense?
          I highly recommend the author to discover British Class 2 EDB. He may not look for them at the Nuclear Physics Institute, where Sikishima and Hatsuse combined both the best performance characteristics of the 1st class and the best performance characteristics of the 2nd class. Therefore, YaIF did not need a class 2 EDB. Their functions (functions of the mobile wing of linear forces) were performed by these 2 ships. Hatsuse was especially good. But Mikasa was worse. Although better than Asahi.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          On the contrary, in conditions of limited funding, the creation of this type of ships remained, in essence, the only way to achieve the goals set for the Baltic Fleet.

          Insanity grows stronger. Some kind of “unsolvable problem” has already been invented, and even a way to solve it has been found. It's only the beginning …
          Still, “3 damn clever overexposure” from the author didn’t somehow really excite me. I am for 1000 combat kayaks.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          But still, why was the British 2nd class armadillo taken as a guideline?

          Yeah, after all, there was a scummy 2 class! {For readers, when this author writes "battleship", it is necessary to read "EDB"}. But this rogue, it turns out, was just purely as a guide. So to speak, it was just a guiding light. Just in the design assignment prescribed TTX EBR class 2. But built, of course, unknown to anyone (except author) cruiser armadillos.
          By the way, “brilliant Russian specialists” once again missed. This time, with speed (I have not written about this yet). The fact is that all overexposures, including the Victory, were slow-moving by the standards of the 2nd class EDB. No, as it was planned that they would not be slow-moving. But there were problems with the competence of the designers. Therefore, the overexposure rate was underperformed. What was actually a disaster for them, their weapons and security were obviously weakened.
          But there was an option to avoid this. And he was even offered. This is a rejected project of the Baltic factory. Then they made an incomprehensible musk ox on its contours, nicknamed "Stormbreaker", reworking the top. I will not dwell on this misunderstanding in detail, but he issued his 19 knots (and even with copecks). And exactly on the same machines as the “Victory”. So, on the Peresvet-Oslyaby machines, 19 knots would go easily. And this speed was already acceptable for class 2 EDB.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          The Russian Empire for the war on sea lanes created a specific type of armored cruiser, in which fighting qualities were sacrificed cruising.

          Bah! the author also does not know about the existence of armored cruiser trade fighters (armored raiders). The question involuntarily arises, but what, apart from empty verbiage, does he know?
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          but nevertheless, in order to “admonish” the same China, it was necessary to have ships capable of crushing land forts, and armored cruisers were not very well suited for these purposes.

          Actually, this is the task of coastal defense battleships. Armored cruisers-hospitals or gunboats of various stripes could also do this if the forts were not very powerful.
          But where does the linear forces and ships for naval operations?
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Three 240-mm and a dozen 88-mm guns would look great on a gunboat, but for the battleship such a composition of weapons was not enough

          Are you friends with yourself? You yourself wrote that they were coastal defense battleships. And Brbo, this is precisely the crown of development of the gunboat line. Those. Brbo, is, roughly speaking, a powerful and well-protected gunboat. Her next step. Although I understand your amazement, it is from a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word “battleship”.
          Yes, and what BrBO you absolutely do not know. BrBBOs “worked” mainly on ground targets. Therefore, their artillery had some specific features. But for sea purposes, they too could well work. Although with protection they were not good.
          This did not apply to “battleships” -pensioners. There, how it goes.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          eight 105-mm guns were almost useless in a linear battle.

          I’ll tell you one secret thing, the 152-mm guns were also useless in a linear battle against such ships as Sikishima, Hatsuse, Mikas, Asahi, Retvisan and the Borodino. Well, God bless him, we add here the Tsesarevich, although this is already an obvious stretch.
          Although, and this is indisputable, the 102-mm caliber for the EDB is clearly chosen incorrectly. But not at all for a linear battle, but to repel torpedo attacks of armored cruisers of the 1st and 2nd ranks.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          And therefore there was no urgent need to provide the “battleships-cruisers” with combat power equivalent to the first-class battleships of the leading world powers.

          the author came to an “unexpected” conclusion. It turns out that an EDB of class 2 (he stubbornly calls them “battleships-cruisers”) did not need the fighting power of an EDB of class 1. Who would have thought? And tsifirki, meaning a different class of EDB, they just wrote? In the British Navy, of course.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          It would be enough to make the latest Russian ships surpass second-ranking English battleships in their combat qualities

          Yeah! Well, tell us faster, how did they surpass their British classmates, contemporaries? Well, for simplicity, using Swiftshur and Triumph as an example? And, God bless him, I am good today, omit Peresvet and Oslyabyu, as a clear substandard. We focus on the comparison with the Victory ... We are waiting for a list of the benefits of the Victory.
          1. 0
            30 October 2016 19: 36
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            All of the above reasons

            Those. and the author is not aware of the problem in Russia with ship engines. And again, I'm interested, but about what is he in the know? Why write about what you have no idea?
            Some German EDB dragged. British Communications in a dense linear system.
            But the casket simply opened; it was not in Russia at the end of the 19th century. normal ship vehicles. So far, the old French ones have smoothly evolved in Russia (they existed in 2 versions, conditionally speaking “battleships” and “cruising”; on “Thunderhead” and “Victory” they even evolved up to 4 cylinder variations, which is not very helped), the world in this area galloped far ahead.
            I already wrote above, after several years of "throwing" and actually throwing money away (in the form of 3 "dashas", 2 "overexposures", "Victory" and "Thunderbolt"; you can still remember "Diamond", but this is a trifle) nevertheless, it was decided to purchase licenses for the production of cars abroad. As a result, 1 bought in France and 2 in Germany.
            After that, a new stage in the construction of warships began in Russia. And all these “Borodins”, “Olegs” and other “pebbles”, they are from there, from the next stage. And also nukoleshili there pretty much.
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            as if they were supposed to lead to the creation of unusual, but in their own way interesting and very balanced ships.

            Actually, there was nothing unusual or interesting in the 2nd class EDB. Not in Russian, but in general globally. It was quite ordinary products. True, Peresvet and Oslyabya did not reach the 2nd class EDB. And Victory, from birth, has grown only to the level of old class 2 EDBs.
            1. +2
              30 October 2016 21: 58
              Here is the exhaust! Bravo!
              Sorry, but to me all this nonsense even to read lazily, not that to answer it. Look for a peer for communication, now children from 5 years old climb the Internet.
  21. 0
    1 November 2016 02: 50
    A new cycle, however GOOD!
  22. 0
    5 November 2016 10: 41
    I liked the article, well written, easy to read. Thanks to the author for the work done. good

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"