Military Review

Four “Glory” battles, or the effectiveness of mine-artillery positions (part of 3)

45



New, 1917 year found "Glory" in the roads of the fortress Sveaborg. The ship was under repair. It was there that the battleship met the February revolution.

I must say that the crew of "Glory" in comparison with other ships met a revolution almost exemplary (if compared with other battleships). The team, united by the war, did not descend to the mass killings of the officers and did not allow reprisals against them by “foreign” sailors, preventing the “landing” forces from the “Andrey Pervozvanny” and “Emperor Paul I” battleships. But the revolutionary sailors of the latter reached the point that they aimed the guns of their ships at the Glory. They achieved, however, the opposite effect: you do not intimidate people who fought with the superior forces of the Germans in Moonsund, but there was a disturbance that the one who fought, fought in the rear and didn’t even smell gunpowder at you. Still, there were no casualties, the boatswain Vasilenko died. Interestingly, he was described as "the softest of all boatswains." In March, a new commander, VG, was assigned to the ship. Antonov, who had previously served on the "Glory" as a senior officer in the 1915 campaign and was respected in the sailor's environment.

But then it got worse. Part of the old servicemen left the ship, instead of them came a young recruitment, already "corrupted" by revolutionary propaganda. Those who remained in the crew first had a restraining influence on them, but in the end they got tired of it, and they moved away from politics.

On the whole, it can be said that, although revolutionary trends did not take on such “ugly” forms as on a number of other Baltic Fleet battleships, it is impossible to speak about a normal situation on the battleship. It is difficult to say how the exercises were conducted, because during the 1917, the logbook was almost not kept, records were made from time to time. On the one hand, given the revolutionary fermentation, one can hardly count on the fact that in 1917, the battleship intensively maintained its own combat capability. But on the other hand, Vinogradov mentions that since November, the nose tower of Glory 1916 made an 34 practical shot (meaning not stem, but full firing), which generally indicates a very intensive preparation. In any case, the discipline on the ship has not recovered. For example, having received an order to return to Moonzund, the battleship team refused to do this, arguing that neither “Andrew the First-Called” nor the “Republic” (the former “Emperor Paul I”) did not go to Moonzund and did not participate in the battles, so that and go. The situation was broken only by the statement of V.G. Antonov, that he will leave the ship-traitor, who has not fulfilled the military order. The team then adopted a resolution that with "it is ready to go anywhere."

Before proceeding to the description of the battle, let us pay a little attention to the geography of the Moonsund archipelago in the old (pre-revolutionary) names.



From the south, we see Kurland, located on the mainland, its most northern point, Cape Domasnes. Between this cape and the small island of Werder, located near the mainland coast, the sea crashes deep into the mainland, forming the Gulf of Riga. This bay is separated from the Baltic Sea by the island of Ezel, the largest island of the Moonsund archipelago. The southern extremity of Ezel ends at the Svorbe peninsula, where the Zusel Point is the southernmost point. Between the Peninsula Svorbe and Kurland is the Irbensky Strait. If we look at the northern tip of Ezel, then we will see between it and the mainland the smallest island of the Moonsund archipelago - Mawn. Between Mono and Ezel there is the Small Zund strait, between Mon and Werder, respectively, the Bolshoi Zund - however, this strait can only be considered large compared to the Minor Zund.

North of Ezel is the third island of the archipelago - Dago. Dago and Ezel are separated by the Soalosund Strait, which expands sharply to the east, forming the Kassar Reach. If we turn from the Gulf of Monon and Werder from the turn of the Bolshoy Zund Strait and further, having Dago on the left and the mainland on the right, then we rest on the island of Worms. This island is located between the northern tip of Dago and the continent, but much closer to the continent — between Moons and Dago is the Moonsund Strait, leading to the Gulf of Finland.

Two words about the main Russian bases. Ahrensburg was located on the island of Ezel, not far from the beginning of the Svorbe peninsula. Kuivast was on the eastern side of the island of Muon, opposite Werder Island.

The actions of the German and Russian forces during the period of September 29 - October 2 1917 d)

We will not describe in detail the “Albion” operation undertaken by Kaiserlhmarin in 1917, but will focus only on those aspects of it that are relevant to the defense of mine-artillery positions. The operation began on September 29 (old style). Of course, the Germans once again concentrated the naval forces, knowingly and overwhelmingly superior to the Russian Baltic fleet, and if in 1915 r, the dreadnoughts of the first series (“Nassau” and “Helgoland”) went to 1917 then in XNUMX, these were the newest Bayern (Baden, though not) type ships, the Koenig and the Kaiser.

Russian forces numerically outnumbered those who tried to defend Moonzund in 1915 r - 2 of the old battleship (“Glory” and “Citizen”), 3 cruisers (“Admiral Makarov”, 3 gunners, 26 large and medium destroyers, 7 small, 3 British men boats. But now this fleet was revolutionary and did not fight as commanders ordered, but at its own discretion.

For example, excerpts from the “Report on the actions of the Naval Forces of the Gulf of Riga 29 of September - 7 of October of 1917” for October 1, signed by the Chief of the Naval Forces of the Gulf of Riga, M.K. Bakhireva:

“The Pripyat team, treacherously, almost without any risk, refused to perform the mine-laying operation. Neither the request of the commander, nor his indication of the extreme importance of the operation and the rarely favorable circumstances, nor the persuasion of two or three old sailors honored, nothing could induce people to fulfill their military duty. ”


Или:

"The chief of the 5 battalion of destroyers, captain of the 1 rank Green, voluntarily, without warning, despite my order to remain in the Ahrensburg patrol and support ground forces with my artillery, removed the post of communication service in Ahrensburg and around 19 hours with the Rider "and" Transbaikal "came to Kuivast".


The German plan was very different from what was planned in 1915. The previous time envisaged a breakthrough of large forces fleet to the Gulf of Riga, but only, while in 1917 it was planned to capture the islands of Ezel, Dago and Moon, that is, in fact, the entire Moonsund archipelago. The goal is to ensure the flank of the German troops and create an operational base for subsequent actions already in the Gulf of Finland.

Accordingly, the plan of operation has undergone significant changes. In 1915, the Germans sought to force the Irbensky Strait, whose minefields were covered only by fleet forces, but now everything has changed. Next to Cape Zorel in April 1917 g, the construction of the battery No.43 was completed consisting of four newest 305-mm guns, similar to those used for the dreadnoughts "Sevastopol". These guns could shoot at 156 kbts and almost completely blocked the Irben Strait, although, of course, the effectiveness of firing at such distances at a moving target is in doubt. But in any case, the new assault on the Irbensky Strait in the style of 1915 of the year could have cost the Germans much more than the previous one.

Four “Glory” battles, or the effectiveness of mine-artillery positions (part of 3)

305-mm gun "battery Tserel"


But the Germans were not going to beat their foreheads against the wall. Instead, they chose to land on Ezel, seize the island, including, of course, the Svorbe peninsula and Tserel Cape from land, and only then cross the Irben Strait. Nevertheless, the trawling of minefields in Irbeny started from September 29: but, if in 1915, Slava immediately went to the defense of minefields when an enemy appeared there, this time nothing like this happened. The destroyers went to patrol, and even M.K. Bakhirev on the Bayan cruiser checked for the presence of German ships, going as far as the Dominesnes position (i.e., along the entire Strait of Irbene, up to the coast opposite to Ezel), but no battleships were used for defense positions. Only on October 10, the Citizen (former Tsesarevich) was sent to Cape Tserel, but he was sent not for a sea battle, but for the shelling of the German ground forces moving towards Svorbe, i.e. for battery defense No.2 from sushi. Why did the fleet defending the Irbens in 43 r hardly take any measures to protect them in 1915 r? To all appearances, there were two reasons for this.

First, the battery No. XXUMX was introduced to the commander of the Baltic Fleet and M.K. Bakhirev cornerstone defense of the Irbene Strait. In fact, it was so - the four newest 43-mm / 305 guns exceeded the main caliber of "Glory" and "Citizen" combined in their effectiveness. Accordingly, the stability of the Irben mine position was entirely dependent on the ability of this battery to fight the enemy.

At the same time, the main threat to the battery №43 did not come from the sea, there the battery could fight with good chances of success almost against any opponent. The real threat was an attack from the land, where the Kaiser troops attacked. The coastal defense forces failed to repel the landing on Ezel, and it was hardly possible, because the defense of Taga Bay, where the Germans landed, was frankly weak, respectively, all hope remained for the ground forces. And their replenishment and supply depended entirely on who controls the Soelosund Strait (between Ezel and Dago) and Kassar Reach (also located between Ezel and Dago).

Therefore, the head of the Naval Forces of the Gulf of Riga forced him to prioritize the defense of Soelozund and the Kassar Reach, confining himself to the menacing patrols of the Irben position.

On the other hand, Soalosund was impassable for German heavy ships. Should the Glory be distracted by its cover, given that M.K. Bakhirev were quite impressive detachment of cruisers and destroyers? The Vice-Admiral himself later wrote in his “Report”:

"Glory" was necessary in the event of the overwhelming majority of enemy destroyers in the Kassar Reach. "


And he informed the fleet yusogram of 2 of October:

"Sozlozund distracts a large ship, boats and destroyers."


The author will allow himself to assume that in a normal situation, "Glory" was not necessary to protect Soelozund. But the problem is that the situation on the ships of the Baltic Fleet was anything but normal. M.K. Bakhirev was not, and could not be sure of his crews, and the presence of a “big heavy battleship” could obviously have a positive effect on the mood of the teams: one could expect that they would act more boldly with the support of the battleship.

Consequently, the decision not to withdraw "Glory", and "Tsesarevich" for the defense of the Irben position should be recognized as correct. Wrong in all this was a complete discouragement on the battery number XXUMX, whose personnel thought much more about retreat than about battles with the Germans.

The Germans started the trawling of the Irbensky Strait at the very beginning of the operation, on September 29, but on September 30, the Tserel battery gave a yuzogram (a telegram transmitted by the Hughes system) to the head of the mine division. Requested:

"Immediately send several destroyers and transports, because despite the decision of the team to stand up to the last shell and bring the guns to disrepair, they will have to flee with our help"


A detailed description of what happened on the battery number 43 in the period of September 29 - October 2 will require at least a separate article, if not the whole cycle. But, in short, the situation was as follows: in the period from 29 to 1 in October, the Germans trawled the Strait of Irbena smoothly. By October 1, their ground forces had practically already captured Esel, and in the southern part they reached the Svorbe peninsula. Ahrensburg was captured. To speed up the liquidation of the Russian troops remaining on the peninsula, the Germans launched a bombardment of battery # XXUMX from the sea, using the battleships “Friedrich der Grosse” and “König Albert” for this (it is mentioned in other sources that “Kaiserin” also took part in the shelling, but this seems to be a mistake).


"Koenig Albert"


The battery responded, and the official German история notes that

"The Tserelsky battery was adjusted very quickly and accurately, so the ships had to go dispersed and constantly change courses."


If the battery number XXUMX fought at full strength that day, it could inflict very sensitive damage on the German battleships. But alas: the servants of the two guns fled completely, at the rate of the third gun risked fighting only half, so that it led only episodic fire, but only one gun really fought. Nevertheless, even these guns and a half forced the German ships to retreat. The battle was fought at a distance from 43 to 60 KBT; neither Russians nor Germans suffered losses during it.

However, the morale of the “Zoerel Battery” turned out to be irreversibly undermined. At night, yuzograms were sent from her and demanded a fleet, but even the appearance of the “Citizen” could not help, the calculations ran. The next day, October 3, the German forces captured the Svorbe peninsula, while the battery number XXUMX was incapacitated, and the Germans got the 43-mm and 130-mm guns of the other two batteries located on the peninsula intact.

Mikhail Koronatovich Bakhirev characterized the following battery: No. XXUMX:

“The treacherous surrender of the 305-mm Tserelsky battery was of immense importance not only for the defense of the Gulf of Riga, but also predetermined the fate of Moonsund.”


Why didn't “Glory” and “Citizen” try to counteract the German breakthrough through the Irbensky Strait after the battery was dropped? Both Bakhirev and Razvozov (commander of the Baltic fleet) did not see any reason to defend the mine position, both of which were captured by the enemy, despite the fact that the enemy’s large (albeit light) forces could break into Kassar Reach and the Gulf of Riga through Soelosund at any moment. Therefore, it was decided not to enter into a decisive battle for the Gulf of Riga and focus on the defense of the Strait of Moonsund, leading from Riga to the Gulf of Finland. On October 2, M.K. Bakhirev received a telegram from the fleet:

"In the case of the fall of Tserel, considering the Strait of Irbena to be strategically lost and not finding expedient, having our land operation on Ezel developing in the rear, to defend Irben by the forces of the Gulf of Riga, in the absence of battery and observation it is now impossible, I order: by all means, strengthen the defense of the approaches to the southern the entrance to Moonzund; second, by minefields, by separate operations in the gulf, it is difficult for the enemy to use the Gulf of Riga and the ways to power the expedition detachment on Ezel, forcing him to conduct operations across the open sea; third, to increase Pernov’s defense capability with the help of obstacles, fourth, to help, as far as possible, from the sea, with ships to advance our detachment in Ezel; Fifth, certainly to secure the inner waters of Moonsund. No. 1655. Rear Admiral Razvozov ".


This decision made sense: while maintaining control over the Strait of Moonsund and Bolshoi Zund, there was theoretically the possibility of delivering reinforcements to all three Moonsunda islands, and indeed this water area was, in fact, the “last bastion” allowing us to hope for the archipelago. The Germans had already invaded the Gulf of Riga, but the lack of bases on the islands of the archipelago and the inability to control the Strait of Moonsund forced them to leave. This could be expected now.

The reasons for which Mikhail Koronatovich Bakhirev made the decision to fight the enemy, many times overwhelming him in strength, are remarkably expounded by him in his “Report”:

“Despite the great inequality of forces in order to maintain the spirit of the Moonsund garrison, based on the minefield to S from Kuivast, I decided to accept the battle and, as far as possible, delay the capture of the enemy by the southern part of Moonsund. If I succeeded in this and his appearance with Moonzund was ineffectual, his position in the Gulf of Riga, if he had decided to stay there for a while, without a base for large ships, if there were submarines in the sea and mined cans set at night. Moreover, it was made very possible attacks of our destroyers. With the departure of the German fleet from the Gulf of Riga and the slowing down of southern Moonzund even for a short time, it was still possible to bring fresh infantry and cavalry units and artillery through Möhn and through Ezel to it and, therefore, there was still hope for improvement. In addition, I believed that the withdrawal of the naval forces without a battle would have led to the rapid retreat of our unstable ground units not only from Werder, but also from points to N and O from him and even from the island of Dago. ”


It was necessary to fight in much more constrained conditions than was possible with the Irben position, but there was nothing to choose from. In order to go to the Moonsund Strait, the Germans had to overcome the Bolshoi Zund, located between the islands of Moan and Werder, it was there that the Bakhirev ships were to defend. If you look at the map, there seems to be a lot of places, but the problem was that large ships could go along the Big Zoo by only a very narrow fairway. Accordingly, while in the 1915 battles of the year, “Glory” calmly moved along minefields to the south, then to the north, here she had to fight almost at anchor.

On the other hand, on the side of the Gulf of Riga, approaches to the Big Zundu were covered with two minefields, set up one after the other with a small gap between them: closer to Mon and Werder there was an obstacle exposed in the past, 1916, and a bit more seaward - the second, which was put in 1917 d. In order to break through to the Big Sound it was necessary to overcome both of them. But the Russians had one more advantage - the battery No.36, located on the south coast of the island of Muon, consisting of five 254-mm guns.


254-mm battery tool №36


In addition, the batteries of the 32 and 33 batteries with four 152-mm guns were also located on the Món and Werder.


152-mm gun on Werder Island


Unfortunately, the Germans already knocked to the rear of this position - starting October 10, their destroyers under the cover of heavy artillery of battleships passed through Soalosund, and then independently (they could not pass through the battleships of Soalosund) and were active in Kassar Bay. M.K. Bakhirev tried to fight with them, involving not only destroyers and gunboats, but also the cruiser “Admiral Makarov”, as well as the “Glory” itself. By October 1 in the north of the Moonsund Archipelago, the picture was as follows: German troops almost completely captured Ezel and fought already on the defensive Russian positions of Orissara. The value of this position was difficult to overestimate, because it covered the dam connecting the islands of Ezel and Mawn. Understandably, if the Germans invaded Mawn with land forces and captured it, the defense of the Bolshoi Zunda would be extremely complicated, if possible, so that the ships of Bakhirev and the heavy guns at Kuivast supported the defenders of Orissard. The German destroyers, on the contrary, supported the troops, the attacking Orissar drove them away, but they returned again.

As for the situation around the Strait of Irbena, here the Germans managed to get rid of the barricades by October 3. The entrance to the Gulf of Riga was open.

Events 3 October 1917 g

The Citizen has returned to 09.00 in Kuivast. British submarines turned around in positions in the Gulf of Riga, but the Russians didn’t fit, which Bakhirev notified the fleet. Suddenly, it turned out that enough Russian troops had retreated to the southeastern coast of Ezel, and Bakhirev sent a detachment of light ships to help them gain a foothold and support them with fire. Then enemy destroyers appeared on Kassar Reach - our gunboats entered the battle with them, and Bakhirev sent destroyers to support them, and also ordered the cruiser Admiral Makarov "to approach the shallow water of the Kassar Reach as much as its draft allows it to take 5 degrees and be ready to support the destroyers with fire. Glory received a similar order.

At this very time, the fleet commander telegraphed to Bakhirev that the Germans were preparing a night landing on the Mone from Kassar Reach. The head of the Naval Forces of the Gulf of Riga was forced to prepare a night battle plan, intending to attack the German ships with destroyers. But on the whole, the circumstances were such that the German ships quite freely acted at the entrance to the Small Sund from the side of the Kassar Reach and could not be driven out from there, even with the use of the newest destroyers, the Novikovs. By evening, the fleet reported to Bakhirev that the Germans had postponed the landing on Mone. "Glory" and the batteries at Kuivast that day shot at German troops on the other side of the dam on Ezel.

While the Russian ships 3 of October defended Mawn, a large German squadron forced the Strait of Irbene. Despite the fact that the fairway was trawled, no one wanted to risk, so 26 minesweepers and 18 minesweeper boats were ahead, and in the KNT cable 6 behind them, the light cruiser Kohlberg, the dreadnoughts König and Kronzprinz and two light cruisers , "Strasbourg" and "Augsburg". Destroyers and transports were five miles behind them.

Between 11 and 12, the squadron entered the Gulf of Riga, climbed north, past the Svorbe peninsula and stood within sight of Arensburg. Here, at 13.30, Vice-Admiral Behnke, commander of the ship group in the bay, received an order "to attack Russian ships in Moonsund and the Gulf of Riga with all available forces." In pursuance of the order, Behnke divided his forces - he left Augsburg and transports in the Arensburg raid, while he himself, having an 2 battleship, 2 light cruisers, 10 destroyers, 16 minesweepers and 9 boats and minesweepers, together with their base, Indianola, moved to Monon . They walked slowly behind the trawl caravan, fearing the mines, but because of this the detachment became vulnerable to attacks from under the water. In 19.00, the British submarine C-27, which torpedoed Indianola, was under attack. The base of the minesweeper boats did not sink, but was forced to return to Ahrensburg.

Benke did not expect to start operation 3 of October, but he wanted to come as close as possible to the Russian positions in order not to waste time on this the next day. The German squadron stopped for the night in 35 miles from Moonsund in order to begin the operation with the dawn of October 4.

To be continued ...
Author:
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 4 December 2017 06: 54 New
    15
    There’s nothing to even comment on. Everything is painted quite informatively and clearly. The sore topic of the real combat effectiveness of the crews of the Navy ships and the calculations of coastal batteries has been fully raised. Well, for the uninformed, the atmosphere before the last battle of “Glory” is perfectly pumped yes Everything about the case good
    Great, five! fellow good drinks hi
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 4 December 2017 11: 36 New
      10
      hi Greetings, my Belarusian friend! drinks
      Quote: Rurikovich
      There’s nothing to even comment on.

      That's for sure! The third part of Andrey turned out to be glorious bully glory about the "Glory") !!!
      Andrey, thank you very much!
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        4 December 2017 12: 23 New
        +5
        Quote: Serg65
        Andrey, thank you very much!

        And thank you, always happy :)!
      2. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 4 December 2017 20: 46 New
        +1
        Hello buddy! drinks hi
        Quote: Serg65
        The third part of Andrei turned out to be glorious

        And he doesn’t succeed differently. wink
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      4 December 2017 12: 23 New
      +5
      Thank you! hi
      Soon I’ll sit for the end - the last battle, well, the organizational conclusions, where can I go without them ... The idea is to fit in one article :)
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 4 December 2017 20: 44 New
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Soon I’ll sit for the end - the last battle, well, the organizational conclusions, where could I go without them ...

        We will wait - and what to do ... wink yes drinks
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        The idea is to fit in one article :)

        Then you, Andrey Nikolaevich, decide how the article should look what
        It is important that everything turns out balanced, reasoned and interesting.
        And there, either with a shield ... or on a shield winked repeat
        In any case, we are waiting, with impatience, with hi
  2. Romario_Argo
    Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 11: 18 New
    +1
    all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent. except 2's
    1. our armored cruiser Rurik 1906 year, the flagship of the BF, which was treacherously cut into metal, with the cries of Kaiser Germany, however, as always in our history
    2. and the same type Averof (Italy / Greece (museum ship)) who single-handedly defeated the Turkish fleet twice in a row, an extreme battle against 8-mi
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      4 December 2017 12: 27 New
      +6
      Quote: Romario_Argo
      all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent. except 2's

      What casemate ships? :)))) What are you talking about? :))) For WWI, Russia did not have a single casemate battleship (there were ships with casemates). I understand that you do not know the terminology, but to manage to call the casemates the ships whose average artillery was in the towers ...
      Quote: Romario_Argo
      our armored cruiser Rurik 1906, the flagship of the BF, which was treacherously cut into metal, with the cries of Kaiser Germany

      Through a spiritual saucer, or what? :))) Rurik was sent for scrapping in 1923, when no Kaiser Germany already existed in nature
      Quote: Romario_Argo
      Averof of the same type (Italy / Greece (ship-museum)) who single-handedly defeated the Turkish fleet twice in a row, an extreme battle against 8

      Just the same and alone? :)))
      1. Romario_Argo
        Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 13: 02 New
        0
        it’s very convenient to pull words out of context, discarding the essence and imaginative thinking.
        the armored cruiser Rurik 1906 of the year, was and remains in history a project ahead of time
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          4 December 2017 13: 22 New
          +4
          What kind of figurative thinking are we talking about when Rurik is a predecessor cruiser obsolete on a slipway and unable to act as part of a dreadnought squadron or to oppose battle cruisers?
          1. Romario_Argo
            Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 13: 54 New
            0
            I understand your train of thought. he is only yours and is not faithful. I will not argue anymore.
            it's pointless!
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. Romario_Argo
                Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 14: 23 New
                0
                on the basis of what you attributed "Rurik" to the casemate ships

                "Rurik" is not a casemate ship
                1. Curious
                  Curious 4 December 2017 14: 24 New
                  +1
                  "... all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent. except for 2
                  1. our armored cruiser Rurik 1906, the flagship of the BF, which was treacherously cut into metal, with the cries of Kaiser Germany, however, as always in our history. "

                  Who wrote this?
                  1. Romario_Argo
                    Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 14: 27 New
                    0
                    all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent

                    .

                    except 2's

                    The armored cruiser Rurik of the 1906 of the year also has artillery in the casemates, but not as "expressed" as on the battleship Slava
                    You can do the analytics yourself.
                    1. Curious
                      Curious 4 December 2017 14: 38 New
                      +2
                      Do you catch the difference between a casemate ship and a ship that has an auxiliary caliber in the casemates?
                      1. Romario_Argo
                        Romario_Argo 4 December 2017 14: 44 New
                        0
                        the armored cruiser Rurik 1906 of the year, was and remains in history a project ahead of time

                        do you agree? not? then we have nothing to talk about!
                        look about the same type of ship-museum Averof
                    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      4 December 2017 17: 36 New
                      +2
                      Quote: Romario_Argo
                      You can do the analytics yourself.

                      Yeah. The main caliber of Glory - 305 mm guns - in the towers
                      The average caliber of Glory - 152-mm guns - in the towers
                      Mine Glory caliber - 75 mm - in casemates
                      Glory - a casemate battleship wassat
                      Rurik's main caliber - 254 mm - in the towers
                      Rurik's average caliber - 203 mm - in the towers
                      Rurik's anti-mine caliber - 120 mm - in casemates
                      Rurik is not a casemate cruiser wassat laughing
            2. netslave
              netslave 4 December 2017 14: 45 New
              +6
              They wrote nonsense - so have the courage to admit it: sorry, they say, without thinking, he blurted out. Why build an incomprehensible outcast genius from yourself?
          2. kapitan281271
            kapitan281271 4 December 2017 14: 28 New
            +3
            I didn’t understand why the “Rurik” was outdated, because it was inferior to the battlecruisers of that era, and didn’t fit for the dreadnought squadron, and that by that time the armored cruisers had disappeared, and remained only with us. I would like to understand the idea a little deeper, I am interested in amateurish, so to speak, in general, not special, but I have been interested in the topic since childhood. And Pikul’s well, it’s understandable, but in various other sources the fact of being hit in the October battle is confirmed. You write that there were no losses. If it’s not difficult, please explain. I am always looking forward to your articles with interest!
            1. Cartalon
              Cartalon 4 December 2017 15: 01 New
              0
              Rurik was outdated with the construction of the first British LCs, since he could not fight them and could not get away from them.
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              4 December 2017 17: 00 New
              +5
              Quote: kapitan281271
              I would like to think a little deeper

              Everything is very simple here. A ship is created to perform certain tasks, and it becomes obsolete when it loses its ability to perform these tasks.
              In the pre-dreadnought era, when the squadron speed of the battleships did not exceed 18 knots, the purpose of the RBKR like Rurik looked like this: they formed the so-called high-speed wing. While the battleships would have fought each other in wake columns, this wing could have crossed the enemy’s course by putting a wand over T or in other ways poking over the enemy (is the term crossing T familiar to you? If not, I’m ready to explain). BRKR like Rurik, although inferior to the classic battleships in the power of artillery, but still were strong enough to cause severe damage.
              In addition, such cruisers were good raiders, because they were faster than those who were stronger and stronger than those who were faster. In other words, the BRKR detachment could intercept the same BRKR detachment but nothing more.
              However, dreadnought appeared. DBKR immediately became too slow for a high-speed wing and too weak to damage the dreadnought. In addition, the dreadnoughts were practically inferior to them in speed and could intercept the same Rurik, and for battle cruisers, he was generally legal prey.
              And put yourself in the place of the admiral. In the pre-dreadnought era, he could send Rurik villain in the Baltic, while the Germans could only intercept him with their new armored cruisers, any of which was weaker than Rurik (if you compare the TTX even a couple of the best German BRKR-Scharnhorst and Gneisenau are generally equal one rurik). And this couple was still hanging out in the Far East, in general ... We can say that the Germans could intercept Rurik only with great luck and with forces not exceeding his own.
              And another situation - you are an admiral, you have Rurik, and the enemy has two dozen ships each of which can intercept and destroy Rurik, and the time of the appearance of these ships in the Baltic is unknown but you can expect at any time (Kiel Canal).
              You understand how severely your operations will be limited in the second case.
              Quote: kapitan281271
              but in various other sources the fact of being hit in the October battle is confirmed. You write that there were no losses.

              The fact is that Russian historiography (USSR) on this issue operated exclusively on domestic sources (Bahirev’s report, reports of ship’s commanders, logbooks, etc.) There is information about hits.
              But hits should always be looked at according to the party that received them. In battle, alas, too often you see what you want to see and not what actually happens
              A classic example is British aces, professionals, and torpedo bombers attacking Dunkirk in excellent conditions. Report 7 torpedo hits. In fact, not a single torpedo hit the Dunkirk :)))) The torpedo hit a nearby destroyer, which went to the bottom, and which detonated deep bombs from which the Dunkirk’s board was torn for a long distance.
              In general, the proverb "lying as an eyewitness" did not arise from scratch
              And now, when the German data became known (their reports, magazines, etc.) - our hits are not confirmed, alas
              1. kapitan281271
                kapitan281271 5 December 2017 08: 34 New
                +2
                Thank you for the detailed explanation, we are waiting for the continuation, I'm sorry that I had to spend time answering, thanks again, more or less now it’s clear, I really liked this boat. hi
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  5 December 2017 09: 11 New
                  +3
                  Quote: kapitan281271
                  sorry to have to waste time answering

                  In no case should you apologize - ask, if possible I will always answer
          3. Comrade
            Comrade 6 December 2017 03: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            What kind of figurative thinking

            This is not thinking, this is trolling :-) Specially nonsense to enjoy the reaction.
    2. belost79
      belost79 4 December 2017 12: 42 New
      +3
      And where are the casemates in the “Glory” and “Tsesarevich”? Is that mine artillery. “Rurik” was disarmed this year in the 22nd, the next year they cut it. From Kaiser Germany, then the memories only remained.
    3. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx 4 December 2017 13: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: Romario_Argo
      all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent. except 2's

      There remains a persistent feeling of incompleteness of your phrase.
    4. Kibb
      Kibb 5 December 2017 13: 15 New
      0
      In general, everything is bad. Casemate ships, Rurik II (same type with Averof?!))))! - these are generally five and both casemate must be assumed? !!!)))) "cut to the screams of Germany." Let me go, I want this too.
  3. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 4 December 2017 13: 25 New
    +1
    Quote: Romario_Argo
    all these casemate ships were already obsolete during the descent. except 2's
    1. our armored cruiser Rurik 1906 year, the flagship of the BF, which was treacherously cut into metal, with the cries of Kaiser Germany, however, as always in our history
    2. and the same type Averof (Italy / Greece (museum ship)) who single-handedly defeated the Turkish fleet twice in a row, an extreme battle against 8-mi

    Never "Rurik" was not the same type of Greek "Georgios Averof". They belonged to the same class - heavy cruisers. And "Georgios Averov" is the same type of Italian armored cruiser type "Amalfi", but with changes in artillery. And Rurik proved all his “value” in the battle with the weaker German armored cruiser “Roon.” Having an enormous advantage in artillery, he almost never hit the enemy in almost an hour of battle. He himself “grabbed” about 10-11x105 mm hits.
  4. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 4 December 2017 13: 30 New
    +1
    With the advent of a new class of ships, a battlecruiser, our Rurik with its speed of 21 knots was outdated and did not fully meet modern requirements. And an armored belt of 152 mm made its way through German guns of 280 mm caliber at almost all combat distances. The only plus of our ship is its artillery. 254 mm guns fired at 117 cable.
  5. Curious
    Curious 4 December 2017 15: 03 New
    +2
    Romario_Argo,
    Do not sculpt the humpback against the wall. We discuss your thesis that (hereinafter referred to as your words) "all these casemate ships were already obsolete during descent. Except for 2
    1. our armored cruiser Rurik 1906, the flagship of the BF, which was treacherously cut into metal, with the cries of Kaiser Germany, however, as always in our history. "
    That is, you claimed that the armored cruiser "Rurik" - a casemate ship.
    The thesis "... the armored cruiser Rurik of 1906 was and remains in history a project ahead of time" - we did not discuss at all. Let's finish the previous topic. There is nothing reprehensible in admitting your mistake.
    And if you will be a "builder" on the site (build from yourself) - you won’t earn credibility. So "builder" and stay.
    1. Monarchist
      Monarchist 4 December 2017 17: 22 New
      +1
      I support your suggestion.
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      4 December 2017 17: 31 New
      +5
      Quote: Curious
      And if you will be a "builder" on the site (build from yourself) - you won’t earn credibility. So "builder" and stay.

      Everything is really bad there. Romario_Argo found out that Averoff had something in common with Rurik, he vaguely heard about Averoff’s exploits, he certainly had no idea what the Turkish fleet that Averoff fought was (to drown this fleet would have been enough for the pair of the worst Christmas battleships) ... . well, in general, it only dawned on him that Averof allegedly fought with the whole Turkish fleet and won, and we had a similar cruiser, then he concluded that Rurik was a wunderwaffe :)))))
      1. Curious
        Curious 4 December 2017 17: 40 New
        +2
        "Everything is really really bad there."
        Comrade, he’s silent, maybe he is working on bugs and is he still lost?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          4 December 2017 17: 42 New
          +3
          Let's hope. Anyone can become smarter tomorrow than they were yesterday - just force yourself to learn. hi
  6. The Siberian barber
    The Siberian barber 4 December 2017 17: 12 New
    +2
    "Neither give nor take")
    Andrei writes that many "marinists" will envy), only with a deep and objective analysis
    Bravo!
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      4 December 2017 17: 46 New
      +2
      Thank you! hi
      But in fairness - today truly serious people like Vinogradov, Balakin, Polutov and many other articles in the Internet will not write articles.
  7. Monarchist
    Monarchist 4 December 2017 18: 46 New
    +1
    Andrey, you have an informative article as usual. When I read: "the revolutionary sailors of the latter got to the point that they put guns on the" Glory "of the guns of their ships," I recalled someone’s phrase read on the site: "soldier idle, potential begin." This phrase can be slightly corrected to local conditions: "that idleness to direct treason is one step." After all, what did the sailors do: “Paul” and “Andrey” were celebrated thanks to!
    That “Glory” was included in the detachment of ships of the Gulf of Riga is understandable: it is a relatively disciplined crew and knows local conditions.
    You must admit that Fortune was on the German side: qualitative superiority, desertion of ground units, betrayal of the Pripyat minzag and captain Zeleny. All the same, the Germans, roughly speaking, “bzdel. Fighting spirit and discipline is half the success
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      4 December 2017 19: 00 New
      +4
      Thank you! hi
      Quote: Monarchist
      I remembered someone’s phrase read on the site: “soldier idle, potential start”

      If literally
      A frightened sailor is disposed to outrages, this is a potential criminal, future killer and rapist.

      The phrase is attributed to Vice Admiral Radzievsky.
      Quote: Monarchist
      That “Glory” was included in the detachment of ships of the Gulf of Riga is understandable: it is a relatively disciplined crew and knows local conditions.

      Of course, these considerations played a role. But the main reason is that Glory could pass through the Strait of Moonsund, while Andrey or Pavel didn’t.
      Quote: Monarchist
      Agree that Fortune was on the side of the Germans:

      Well, I won’t say anything about Fortune, but when the superiority is so overwhelming, and the enemy almost does not resist ... why is Fortune also here?
      Quote: Monarchist
      All the same, the Germans, roughly speaking, "bzdel.

      Not really. They just did what they had to.
      And I simply admire Bakhirev and other officers who managed to lead their revolutionary crews into battle against such an enemy. But more on that later:)
  8. Comrade
    Comrade 6 December 2017 02: 56 New
    +1
    Thank you, dear Andrei, for continuing, I read with great interest.
    the Germans launched shelling of the 43 battery from the sea, using the battleships Friedrich der Gross and Koenig Albert for this purpose (other sources mention that Kaiserin also took part in the shelling, but this is apparently a mistake).

    In addition, Russian coastal batteries were also subjected to night air raids. So, October 1, 5, 9 and 10 on batteries, including No. 43, where as a result of bombing detonated 43 shells, 5 900 kg was dropped. bombs.
    On the night of 24 on 25 of September, the Germans dropped 43 3 kg onto battery No. 700. bombs, the next night - 2 000 kg. bombs. And on the evening of October 1, two German bombers from a height of about 1 200 m dropped a total of 43 8 kg onto battery No. 000. bombs.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      6 December 2017 12: 25 New
      +2
      Greetings, dear Valentine!
      Quote: Comrade
      So, October 1, 5, 9 and 10

      In a new style?
      Quote: Comrade
      where 43 shells detonated as a result of the bombing,

      Mikhail Koronatovich in his report indicates the date of the explosion of the 17 cellar of September according to the old style.
      1. Comrade
        Comrade 7 December 2017 01: 56 New
        +2
        Hello, dear Andrey!
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        In a new style?

        According to German data (gleaned by me from the book of G. Staff), it turns out a new style.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Mikhail Koronatovich in his report indicates the date of the explosion of the 17 cellar of September according to the old style.

        17 + 13 = 30 of September. This is not October 1, of course, but after all, the Germans then started bombing in the evening, but ended after midnight. If we assume that the shells detonated on 30 on September evening, as follows from the report, and the Germans recorded in the report that the attack was on 1 on October, then everything converges. Although, in fact, the raid was not on October 1, but on the night of September 30 on October 1.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          7 December 2017 09: 44 New
          +3
          Quote: Comrade
          If we assume that the shells detonated on September 30 in the evening, as follows from the report, and the Germans recorded in the report that the raid was on October 1, then everything converges

          I completely agree with you :) And in any case, the explosion did not occur at all as a result of the shelling of the German battleships (but I also encountered such a version :))
          1. Comrade
            Comrade 8 December 2017 02: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            And in any case, the explosion did not occur at all as a result of the shelling of German battleships (and I had to deal with such a version :))

            I wonder what other versions are there? This topic is interesting to me, of course, but not enough to study it in depth. All I know about this detonation is information from Staff's book, based on German data. According to the Germans, the shells detonated as a result of the explosion of one 12 '' shell, and it, in turn, exploded as a result of the impact of aircraft bombs.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              8 December 2017 10: 42 New
              +1
              Quote: Comrade
              I wonder what other versions are there?

              Yes, it seems - no :)))
  9. Comrade
    Comrade 6 December 2017 03: 09 New
    +2
    It's to blame, in the last three cases the bombs were dropped not by airplanes, but by airships (L37 and LZ120).