Military Review

Tsushima's last hero

173
The name "Dmitry Donskoy" - a landmark for stories domestic fleet. At different times it was worn by sailing ships of the line, a helical steam frigate and an unfinished cruiser of project 68 bis. To date, the Navy also has a ship bearing the name of the Grand Duke on board - the Project 941 Shark heavy nuclear submarine cruiser. However, without a doubt, the most interesting and glorious history of the service is the semi-armored cruiser Dmitry Donskoy, which will be discussed in this article.


Tsushima's last hero


His project was developed by the famous admiral A. Popov and was a development of his own ideas, implemented in the previously built cruisers Minin and General-Admiral, the main functional purpose of which was the extermination of British merchant ships (of course, in the event of the outbreak of war this power).

Since at the end of 1870's. England, to protect its trade, the Shannon and Nelson class cruisers were commissioned; they had impressive armor and strong armament, but a rather low maximum travel speed (12-14 knots), then Russia needed to respond by creating a high-speed ship that had the opportunity to “terrorize” defenseless “merchants” and dodge the battle with stronger enemy cruisers.


Admiral A.A.Popov


Based on these prerequisites, a draft cruiser with a displacement of 5.75 thousand tons, carrying eight-inch 4 and six-inch 12 six-inch guns, with incomplete armor, the thickness of which ranged from 4.5 to 6 inches, was revealed. The ship was supposed to have a maximum speed of 15-16 nodes and autonomy of at least 30 days, which was extremely important for the successful execution of raider functions.

Having passed a difficult process of coordination by various departments of the Marine Technical Committee, the Marine Ministry and the Admiral General’s office, the project was approved, and in September 1880 a new cruiser was laid on the stocks of the New Admiralty.

The construction of the ship was neither shaky nor shaky, despite the fact that its main builder, N.Ye. Kuteynikov, was a very energetic, educated and experienced craftsman. However, even it was not at all easy for him to cope with the manifold difficulties that arose during construction: interruptions in the supply of essential components and materials from Nevsky, Izhorsky and other factories, an extremely bureaucratic procurement procedure of the state shipyard, which required a lengthy coordination of the purchase of any small items not included in the original estimate (even such elementary as nails and ropes). But the main scourge, of course, was an endless stream of changes to the project, after the start of work.

On the latter circumstance, you probably should stop a little more. The fact is that the practice of constantly making certain improvements and improvements, improvements and simplifications to the ship's design, thanks to which, for example, the most modest BDK “Ivan Gren”, incorporated in the 2004 year, has not yet been accepted into the Navy, has in Russian shipbuilding long traditions that were already quite relevant at the end of the 19 century.

We briefly list what was revised and reworked during the construction of the cruiser, which was named after Dmitry Donskoy on March 28 on 1881 in March:

• the composition and location of the artillery of the main, middle and auxiliary calibers;
• material, configuration and thickness of armor plates;
• screw design;
• steering gear design;
• aft hull design.

Looking at this list, even to a person very far from shipbuilding it is quite obvious that until the moment of final definiteness with this or that construction it was absolutely impossible to continue construction, since they were fundamental for the ship as a whole.

The logical outcome of such an inconsistent approach to the creation of Donskoy was that a number of completely progressive technical solutions applied on it coexisted with obvious anachronisms.

So, for example, the overweight design of the propeller made senseless the presence of traditional masts with a full spar, since sailing became almost impossible due to the resulting retarding effect. And the installation of a modern steam steering gear was not supplemented with a logical installation of the second steering wheel on the front bridge.

Anyway, by the summer of 1885, the construction work on the cruiser was mostly completed. Its displacement was 5,806 tons with the following dimensions: length - 90.4 m, width - 15.8 m, draft - 7.0м.

The armament included two eight-inch guns located in the middle of the upper deck of the cruiser, fourteen six-inch guns encased in a dungeon, eighteen X-mine guns of 37-87 mm caliber and four torpedo tubes.

The maximum speed, demonstrated by Donskoy in testing, was slightly less than 17 nodes. However, the cruiser was unfortunately incapable of supporting it for a long time, because the unsuccessful ventilation system kept the temperature of the air in the stokers so high that the sailors who supplied coal to the fireboxes quickly overworked and could not work with the necessary productivity. .

The side of the ship was protected by ironclad plates, which had a height of 2.24 m, whose thickness varied from 156 mm in the middle part to 114 mm in the extremities. There was also an armored deck with a thickness of 13 mm, which served as additional protection for the cruiser’s engine room and boiler room.


Booking scheme for the Dmitry Donskoy cruiser


The low and relatively thin armor of the Donskoy could hardly serve the ship as an effective defense against eight- and ten-inch shells of the English cruisers of the Shannon and Nelson types. However, as we remember, according to the idea of ​​its creators, the Russian ship, due to the best speed, had to shy away from a battle with similar opponents. At the same time, his armor probably should have been able to withstand shells with a caliber of six inches and less, which would allow Dmitry Donskoy to feel confident enough in battles with lighter enemy ships, for example, Linder type armored cruisers in the middle of 1880's.

For twenty years after the surrender, the cruiser regularly served Russia in various parts of the world. Three times (in 1885-1887, in 1891-1892, and in 1895), as part of the ship detachments in the Mediterranean, as far as they were concerned, he contributed to the most successful resolution of conflicts involving the definition of the Afghan border, and then with the actions of the British in the Dardanelles.

From 1887 to 1889, in 1892, and from 1896 to 1901. Dmitry Donskoy was on duty at the Far Eastern borders of the country. During this time, the ship visited almost all significant ports of that part of the world, explored the still poorly studied coast of the Russian Primorye, and even took part in suppressing the “rebellion of boxers” in China.


The cruiser "Dmitry Donskoy" in the Vladivostok dock


In addition, in 1893, the cruiser visited New York, where, together with the ships "General-Admiral" and "Rynda", he marched in a naval parade dedicated to the 400 anniversary of the discovery of America by Columbus.

In the intervals between the voyages, the Donskoy was modernized and repaired. For example, in 1889, MTK agreed to dismantle its three heavy masts with subsequent replacement with lighter structures that do not involve the use of sailing equipment. Because of this, the cruiser managed to unload more than 100 tons.

In 1894-1895 the ship underwent a major overhaul, during which its outdated main artillery was replaced: instead of two eight-inch and fourteen six-inch guns, six six-inch and ten Kanet 120-mm guns were installed. At the same time the replacement of the boilers "Donskoy" and the reassembly of its machines was made.


The cruiser "Dmitry Donskoy" in the Far East, 1890's


After returning from the Far East to the 1902, the cruiser was actually withdrawn from the fleet combat and converted into an artillery training ship, for which, in particular, part of the 120-mm cannons on it was replaced with 75-mm.

A year later, "Dmitry Donskoy" was included in the squad of Admiral Virenius, sent to replenish the Pacific squadron, based in Port Arthur. Due to the frequent breakdowns of the destroyers traveling with the detachment, its advance was very unhurried. Therefore, by the beginning of the Russian-Japanese war in January 1904, the detachment managed to get only to the Red Sea, from where it was recalled back to Kronstadt. However, in the Baltic, the cruiser was delayed for a short time and in October left it, along with the rest of the squadron ships of Vice Admiral ZP Rozhestvensky.

So, by the will of fate, “Dmitry Donskoy” was forced to return to the Far East in a much more “disabled and weakened” state than the one in which he left him in 1901 (the definition in quotes belongs to the senior officer of the ship, captain of the second rank K. P. Blokhin).

However, during the unprecedented march of the Second Squadron, which had not entered any equipped naval base for eight months, the old cruiser overcame difficulties and, leaving a stern of about thirty thousand kilometers, reached the entrance to 13 in the evening of May 1905. The Korean Strait of the Sea of ​​Japan.

The technical condition of the ship at that time could be considered satisfactory rather arbitrarily. Watch officer, midshipman V.E. Zatursky, showed that "the 5-nd double boiler was strongly flowing and was brought out ... other boilers were also not entirely functional."

According to the report of Rear Admiral O.Enqvist, junior flagship - commander of cruisers, a signal from the squadron commander "on the morning of 14 ..." Dmitry Donskoy and Vladimir Monomakh were ordered to protect the transports in battle, the first on the left and the second on the right. " Thus, Zinovy ​​Petrovich Rozhestvensky severely limited the ability to maneuver his cruisers, linking them with low-speed transport ships.

Approximately in 13: 15, the main forces of the United Fleet were opened from the main armored ships of the Russian squadron. Half an hour later, opponents got close to the 60 cable distance and opened fire on each other.

A detachment of transports arrived in accordance with the only directive issued to him in the event of a battle: “stay on the side of our battleships opposite to the enemy”, and moved to the right side of the column. The Don and Monomachs who escorted them followed the same course.

Approximately forty minutes after the start of the battle, the transports and the ships guarding them (in addition to the two already mentioned above, they included Oleg and Aurora) were attacked by a squad of ten Japanese armored cruisers.

To repel their attacks, Rear Admiral Enquist, who was on the Oleg, decided to build a column of his four cruisers, for which he gave a signal to Monomakh and Donskoy to join the Avrora wake. According to the captain of the second rank, Blokhin: “... only Monomakh managed to enter the wake soon ... Donskoy could not fulfill this signal for some time, thanks to the vehicles that were confused and interfered with maneuvering ...”.

Almost at the very beginning of the battle on the "Donskoy" the steering machine was out of order, and therefore it was necessary to rule on the hand wheel located on the rear bridge of the ship. The control of the machine continued from the front bridge. This circumstance further complicated the conditions for maneuvering, and so hindered by the proximity of transport vessels to them, who, regardless of the risk of collision, in an effort to escape from the enemy’s fire, repeatedly, in a heap of slips, cut through the line of cruisers protecting them.

Because of this, “Donskoy” constantly had to shift the steering wheel, stop the car, or even back up. According to the captain of the second rank of Blokhin, in connection with these constant circulations and changes of the moves, “our shooting is generally bad, it has been done right nowhere.” Obviously, therefore, during the battle that lasted almost four hours, not a single Japanese cruiser was sunk or at least incapacitated. However, Dmitry Donskoy himself also did not receive critical damage.

After six o'clock in the evening, the Japanese cruisers retired. Instead, they appeared enemy destroyers, received orders under the cover of the coming night to conduct torpedo attacks on our ships.

During this period of battle, a convoy of Russian battleships, which had already lost four ships, was heading west. Cruisers and transports were located on its left beam at a distance of about 8 miles.

When the mine attacks began, the battleships, evading them, made a left turn and headed south. In order to give way to them, Rear Admiral Enquist ordered his cruisers to also turn south, believing that in this way he would move along one course with the main forces of the squadron. It is curious that while Oscar Adolfovich did not care at all that their speeds also coincided: at least in the testimony of the senior navigator officer of the Oleg cruiser Captain Second Rank Manturov says that “... we went to the south near 15 - 16 nodes; such a move had until four o'clock in the morning ... ". Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that very soon the “Oleg” and the Aurora that followed him into the wake of the Aurora left not only the battleships, but also the old cruisers - “Monomakh” and “Donskoy”, which, as shown by Rear Admiral Enquist himself , was one of the two quietest ships of the squadron and "gave no more 12 nodes".

About ten o'clock in the evening on the "Donskoy" finally ceased to distinguish between the silhouette of the Aurora who was walking in front. To discuss the plan for further action, the commander of the cruiser, captain of the first rank, N. I. Lebedev, assembled a council on the bridge.


Captain first rank N.I. Lebedev


Surprisingly, none of the officers who took part in it offered to continue moving south in order to leave the zone of domination of the Japanese fleet by morning. On the contrary, everybody unanimously spoke in favor of going to Vladivostok. By a majority of votes, it was decided that they should move to the exit from the Korean Strait along the shores of Japan, which was done.

"Donskoy" turned to the northeast, gradually taking more and more to the north, until it went to the course NO 23⁰.

In spite of the fact that the cruiser was moving with closed lights, after midnight two destroyers were seen, moving the same course as the Donskoy. A little later they were joined by a third. According to the testimony of KP Blokhin, the identification signaling system on the ships of the Second Squadron was poorly developed and poorly mastered, therefore, "... on the Donskoy" they equally hesitated to admit the destroyers who were stern, both for their own and for their enemies. It was decided to follow them strenuously and the night passed in terribly intense attention ... " Fortunately, after sunrise it turned out that all the destroyers were Russian: “Exuberant”, “Poor” and “Terrible”.

At seven o'clock in the morning, all four ships made a long stop, during which Vice Admiral Rozhestvensky and his staff officers rescued from Suvorov were transferred from the heavily damaged Violent to the Pobedovoi. In addition, members of the battleship Oslyabya team, picked up from the water the day before after the death of their ship, were transported from the Violent to Donskoy.

Two hours later, Donskoy and Violent continued on their way (Pobedovy and Grozny went separately to Vladivostok at a higher speed). Around ten in the morning, the destroyer showed a signal to the cruiser that he was in distress and asked to stop. The commander of the Violent, the captain of the second rank Kolomeytsev, who arrived aboard the Donskoy, reported that coal supplies had come to an end on the destroyer, and there were a number of injuries that did not allow him to maintain progress even at 10-11 nodes. In this regard, it was decided to transport the crew of the Violent to the cruiser, and to destroy the destroyer so that he would not get to the enemy.

When only his commander, a mine officer Wurm and a conductor Tyulkin remained on the destroyer, they attempted to blow up the ship, but it was not crowned with success.

In order not to waste time, it was decided to shoot "Violent" from the guns of "Dmitry Donskoy".

This episode should be well known to everyone, even a little interested in the topic of the Tsushima battle, and not least thanks to the novel by A.S. Novikov-Surf “Tsushima”, which, not stint on epithets, painted it as the brightest evidence of depressingly low combat training gunners cruisers, in particular, and the entire fleet, in general.

“Kandorov loaded six-inch gun. Both ships stood motionless, one and a half cable apart. The first shot rang out. By The second and third time the gun barked. "Violent" continued to remain safe and sound.

* * *

Commander Lebedev, who was watching the shooting from the bridge, felt uneasy, was nervous and, finally, when he missed the fourth and fifth time, he angrily exclaimed:

- Ugliness! A shame! A curse hangs over our fleet! All this is the result of what we did not do what we need.

Senior Officer Blokhin explained:

- I have repeatedly argued with our experts, argued to them that they incorrectly train their team ...

The commander interrupted him:

- It's not about individual experts. We must look deeper. The whole organization of service in our fleet is no good.

The sixth and seventh rounds hit the destroyer, and only the eighth hit them thoroughly in his nose.

* * *

An insignificant case revealed the essence of our backward fleet, where people engaged in more parades and not combat training. On a white day, we could not get a single shot at an object at such close range and standing motionless. Such were the gunners from the school created by Rozhestvensky ... "


Considering that Aleksey Silich didn’t have a “Donskoy” on himself, it’s most likely that he wrote the above passage under the impression of KP Blokhin’s testimony, which stated that “in the destroyer who was immobile, in some thirty fathoms from the immobile cruiser, hit only by the sixth shot from the modern six-inch gun ... ”

Not confining himself to a dry description of this fact, Konstantin Platonovich also gave in his testimony rather lengthy arguments that affected the following problems:

• lack of a single approved methodology for training naval gunners;

• confrontation between the flagship specialists of the squadron, on the one hand, and the ship commanders, on the other;

• the arbitrariness of the senior artillery officer of Donskoy, Lieutenant P.N. Durnovo, who, without the consent of the ship’s commander, gave the gunners “obviously false” instructions on how to fire the gun.

The author of this article believes that, on the basis of good intentions, to change the situation for the better, the captain of the second rank, Blokhin, somewhat distorted in his testimony the episode with the shooting of “Violent”: the sixth shot probably did not lead to the first hit in general, but to the first hit that caused significant damage to the destroyer.

The basis for this assumption is the testimony given by the watchman of Donskoy, the midshipman V.Ye. Zatursky, who by the nature of his service was not directly involved in the above-mentioned problems and therefore could be more objective.

“According to“ Violent ”, nine shots were fired from a six-inch gun, from a distance from 2 to 3 cable. One projectile did not hit, the remaining eight, although they did, but most of them did not explode, so 20-30 minutes had passed since the start of the shooting, before the destroyer sank ... ”.

Having lost at least four hours at the stops connected with the transportation of people from the Violent and its execution, on 12: the cruiser Dmitry Donskoy continued towards Vladivostok, which was still about four hundred miles to go.



In 16: 30, observers observed smoke from ships moving slightly to the right of the Donskoy course. Attempt to escape from the enemy, taking the left failed. Enemy ships — the Naniwa, Takachiho, Akashi, and Tsushima — accompanied by a division of the destroyers — began the pursuit of the Russian cruiser.

Half an hour later, two more Japanese vessels, the Otova and Niitaka, also accompanied by the destroyers, appeared to the left of the Donskoy course.

All the named enemy ships were armored cruisers with a displacement of no more than 4000 tons, the weapons of which were made by guns with a caliber 156 mm and 120 mm. Each of them individually was weaker than the “Dmitry Donskoy”, but when assembled together they were certainly stronger.

In this situation, it was important that the Japanese ships had a course of at least 17-18 nodes, while the Donskoy, despite the dedicated work of stokers and machinists, could not go faster than 13-13,5 nodes.

When it became obvious that the battle could not be avoided, captain of the first rank Lebedev made a decision to go to the island of Dagelet (Ullyndo), which was still about 35 miles away, and smash the cruiser on its cliff if there is a threat of capture of “Donskoy” by the enemy .

The Japanese signaled on Donskoy several times that the admirals of Nebogatov and Rozhdestvensky surrendered in captivity, and offered to follow their example. The Russian ship did not answer, did not change course and did not reduce the course.

In 18: 30, the Japanese cruisers, marching from the left, reduced the distance from the Donskoy to the 50 cable and opened fire on it. Fifteen minutes later, they were joined by four ships on the right.

The Russian cruiser answered them with a slight delay. According to the testimony of the captain of the second rank of Blokhin, he “twice turned to the commander for permission to break through the combat alarm, but Ivan Nikolayevich thought and was silent; at last he turned to me, with eyes full of tears, but smiling, he shook my hand and said: "If something happens to me, take care of my two little girls." The decision of the commander was obvious to me, and I ordered the alarm to be sounded. ”

The Russian cruiser raised flag flags and opened fire on the approaching Japanese ships.

In the initial phase of the battle, Donskoy tried to maneuver by shooting down the enemy. When the distance was reduced, he went almost directly in order to improve the quality of his shooting.

At this time, getting into frequent and in the "Don". The shells of the Japanese, most likely, were not able to inflict critical damage to the ship’s vehicles or to pierce its side near the waterline protected by armor, but they caused fires in various cruiser premises, produced serious damage to the superstructures, pierced chimneys, reducing the speed of travel, and most importantly incapacitated people. Significant difficulties were delivered to the command of the "Donskoy" by the crew members of the battleship Oslyabya, who almost made a real panic on the ship.

About an hour after the start of the battle, the Japanese managed to get into the front bridge of the cruiser, resulting in the death of the senior artillery officer PN Durnovo, the junior navigator officer NM Girs, and several lower ranks. Commander N. I. Lebedev was also mortally wounded. Command of the cruiser took senior officer KP Blokhin.

"Donskoy" continued to fire at the enemy ships from both sides and quite successfully. Some members of the crew even believed that they managed to sink one of the Japanese cruisers, but, unfortunately, they desired what they wanted: the cruiser Naniwa, which received a serious lurch because of a hole in the underwater part, really got out of battle, but did not sink was going to.

At nine o'clock in the evening, when it was already dark, the cruiser approached the island of Dagelet so much that it became indistinguishable from its background, and this made it impossible to continue its bombardment. Wanting to destroy the stubborn Russian ship at any cost, the Japanese sent destroyers against it, who managed to launch three or four torpedoes, but none of them hit the target.

“Donskoy” was lucky and, according to the testimony of our sailors, as well as the author of the book “The fleet that had to die” (Richard Hou), even sank one or two enemy destroyers.

Around midnight, the battered cruiser approached the eastern tip of the Dagelet Island. By that time, the boilers that had significant leaks and severely damaged chimneys did not allow more than five knots to be developed. Ammunition was almost completely spent. At the closest to the waterline, the holes were flooded with water and therefore, despite the continuous operation of the drainage pumps, it was not possible to eliminate the ship’s substantial lurch on one side. From the crew of the 70 cruiser, a man was killed and around 130 was injured.

Taking into account all of the above, Konstantin Platonovich Blokhin abandoned the idea of ​​continuing to sail to Vladivostok. On his orders, the crew of the cruiser, as well as the sailors of Oslyabi and Violent, were brought ashore, after which the Donskoy was taken a mile and a half from the coast and flooded at a depth of at least two hundred meters.

“Struck to death, straining his last strength, the old cruiser reached the saving, though not its own coast, freeing those who were still on board from death. Having withstood the battle, having exhausted the forces, not having lowered the flag in front of the enemy and preserving the life of his crew, the ship fulfilled its mission to the utmost. The fate of such a ship can be justly called lucky (R.M. Melnikov, “First-class cruiser“ Dmitry Donskoy ”).
Author:
173 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich April 27 2018 05: 31
    +9
    Article plus for popularizing the history of the Russian Navy.
    A couple of comments. With its 12-13 knots of maximum speed, there was really no benefit from the Donskoy with the Monomakh in more speedy and maneuverable cruising operations at the time of Tsushima. Therefore, the protection of transports is also a combat mission. There, our old cruisers with their weapons at the level of Japanese cruisers 2 and 3 ranks are more useful.
    The number of drowned destroyers under Tsushima is known - 3. Moreover, one drowned from the damage received after the battle. So 2 write off on the "Donskoy" is very rash request
    hi
    1. Cat
      Cat April 27 2018 05: 49
      +11
      Not Rurikovich for promoting the Author is not just a plus, but a fat plus!
      I’ll even try to subtly hint that it’s good to write a series of articles on all Tsushima ships, look and the book will be released!
      Sincerely, Kitty!
    2. Ivanchester
      April 27 2018 10: 00
      +10
      At your first comment, I partially agree. In the sense that since ZPR decided to take the transports with them in a breakthrough, someone had to protect them. However, it would probably be much more convenient to do this if the transports and the ships guarding them were separated into a separate detachment, the commander, who, in turn, would obey Enquist. In this case, the transports would not go “in a pile formation” (cited by KP Blokhin), but would act in the most convenient way for guarding ships.

      As for the number of destroyers destroyed by the Japanese, before writing this article, I thought the same numbers were correct as you. But it was based on data from Russian-speaking sources. But the destroyers were very small and similar to each other, and they fought mostly in the dark ... That’s what the Japanese had the opportunity to hide the fact of the death of one - two of them without any particular difficulties. Therefore, he decided to indicate in the article that "Donskoy" in repelling mine attacks may have sunk one or two of them (or perhaps did not drown wink ).
  2. Moore
    Moore April 27 2018 06: 15
    +8
    Yeah ... Fates of ships and people are tightly bound. People with their actions either shame their ships, or glorify them before their descendants - it doesn’t matter the "old chests", according to Ilyich, or the newest units of the fleet. Here is Lebedev, here is Miklouho-Maclay. But Nebogatov ...
    1. Cat
      Cat April 27 2018 07: 16
      +2
      Subtlely spotted!
      By the way, our eternal "bad" with the ships "Eagle", then Senka Razin, then the Japanese!
    2. redf
      redf April 27 2018 10: 15
      0
      Quote: Moore
      Here is Lebedev, here is Miklouho-Maclay. But Nebogatov ...

      Indeed, the "good" without any prospects simply destroyed their own crews with the hands of the Japanese.
      Particularly striking in its incompetence is the "brave" Mikluha.
      And the “bad” Nebogatov saved hundreds of Russian lives.
      But he is bad. And obscurantists are good.
      1. lazy
        lazy April 27 2018 17: 31
        +13
        you still write about Vlasov that he saved hundreds of Russian lives. and Leningrad also had to pass the Germans?
        1. redf
          redf April 27 2018 17: 46
          0
          Have you tried to think of a head?
          1. lazy
            lazy April 29 2018 15: 46
            +2
            and what do you think, for people like you, "relax and try to have fun," and for the military, "life is a homeland and an honor to no one." he could act as a Varangian commander, but he was not familiar with the concept of honor, as it seems to you
            1. hdgs
              hdgs 1 May 2018 23: 17
              0
              Quote: lazy
              and for the military, "life to the homeland and honor to no one."

              Have you served in the army? It seems to me that no.
              Quote: lazy
              he could act as a Varangian commander, but he was not familiar with the concept of honor, as it seems to you

              Not for you to judge people like Nebogatov.
              1. lazy
                lazy 4 May 2018 05: 13
                +1
                did you serve? and everyone can express their opinion about each person, or you refuse me this right and keep it for yourself, but why on earth? but judges in court. "The court sentenced to death, replaced by ten years of the fortress." = For me it is so fair
                1. hdgs
                  hdgs 4 May 2018 08: 06
                  +1
                  Quote: lazy
                  "The court sentenced to death, replaced by ten years of the fortress." = For me it is so fair

                  But for me, no.
                  There was nothing for him to fight. And there was nothing to wash off. Therefore, he gave the only correct order then, to surrender.
                  1. shura7782
                    shura7782 4 May 2018 08: 40
                    +1
                    Quote: hdgs
                    Quote: lazy
                    "The court sentenced to death, replaced by ten years of the fortress." = For me it is so fair

                    But for me, no.
                    There was nothing for him to fight. And there was nothing to wash off. Therefore, he gave the only correct order then, to surrender.

                    Ten years ... he got off very easily.
                    A captive, how many ships were surrendered to the Japanese?
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. shura7782
                        shura7782 4 May 2018 09: 05
                        +1
                        Quote: hdgs
                        Quote: shura7782
                        How many ships were surrendered to the Japanese?

                        No one. Junk, buckets with nuts.
                        More or less decent ships were handed over to the Japanese in:
                        - Chemulpo (Varangian).
                        - Port Arthur (Retvisan, Poltava, Victory).
                        - Tsushima (Orel was very conditional, although the degree of his damage was such that even a Russian court recognized his surrender as legitimate).
                        More Japanese did not receive any normal ships.
                        Because almost no Russia had them during the war.

                        Is this your whole answer? He talks a lot about your deep knowledge. It’s not for nothing that they ban you, but you step on the same rake.
                        Conclusion: More, there is nothing to talk with you about!
                    2. hdgs
                      hdgs 4 May 2018 09: 20
                      0
                      Quote: shura7782
                      More, there’s nothing to talk with you about!

                      Of course, nothing. You have nothing to say. There are no arguments and cannot be.
                      People like you are generally funny.
      2. shura7782
        shura7782 April 27 2018 21: 37
        +12
        To judge, you, that here weave any x. ..Yu? who are you calling obscurantists? Those who did not give up? What court do you judge if you yourself did not take part in hostilities.
        You cannot be stopped in this way even before the defenders of the Brest Fortress get in your conclusions.
        1. redf
          redf April 27 2018 21: 55
          +1
          Quote: shura7782
          who are you calling obscurantists?

          The one who contributed to the destruction of my compatriots, having no chance of success.
          So do you understand?
          1. shura7782
            shura7782 April 27 2018 22: 00
            +6
            Quote: redf
            Quote: shura7782
            who are you calling obscurantists?

            The one who contributed to the destruction of my compatriots, having no chance of success.
            So do you understand?

            There is always a chance. My great-grandfather was in that battle on Ushakov with Miklouho Maclay.
            1. redf
              redf April 27 2018 23: 45
              0
              Quote: shura7782
              My great-grandfather was in that battle on Ushakov with Miklouho Maclay.

              He got lucky. And you too.
              And many were unlucky. And their non-random descendants, too.
              And why not?
              And because Mikluha decided to "courageously fulfill his duty."
              I do not know such a "duty" of Mikluha that would be worth at least one life. And he put there not one of them.
              We must learn to distinguish feat from stupidity and stupidity.
              1. shura7782
                shura7782 April 27 2018 23: 55
                +2
                Quote: redf
                Quote: shura7782
                My great-grandfather was in that battle on Ushakov with Miklouho Maclay.

                He got lucky. And you too.
                And many were unlucky. And their non-random descendants, too.
                And why not?
                And because Mikluha decided to "courageously fulfill his duty."
                I do not know such a "duty" of Mikluha that would be worth at least one life. And he put there not one of them.
                We must learn to distinguish feat from stupidity and stupidity.

                you better collect flowers in the field.
                .
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. shura7782
                    shura7782 April 28 2018 00: 14
                    +2
                    Quote: redf
                    Quote: shura7782
                    you better collect flowers in the field.

                    ...... You are not mature yet ......

                    Well, come on. We hope that in captivity you will be well. Maybe you will be a burden to them. Cut your throat and that's it.
                    1. hdgs
                      hdgs 1 May 2018 23: 09
                      0
                      Quote: shura7782
                      We hope that in captivity you will be well. Maybe you will be a burden to them. Cut your throat and that's it.

                      Cutting the throat of a prisoner of war is a war crime. In many countries, it is punishable by hanging by the neck.
                      A shootout without any chance of success (in fact, a kind of suicide by one of the parties) is interpreted by international law as a “battle of armed opponents”. Destruction of such an enemy is considered a duty of a soldier and is not punishable in any way.
                      You would at least learn elementary things for a start.
                      1. Saxahorse
                        Saxahorse 2 May 2018 18: 02
                        +1
                        No .. they can certainly not cut the throat. There is an option with castration and public burning in a flamethrower cage.

                        Good luck to you!
                    2. hdgs
                      hdgs 2 May 2018 18: 37
                      0
                      Quote: Saxahorse
                      There is an option with castration and public burning in a flamethrower cage.

                      Or maybe enough passion to tell?
                      Have you ever and somewhere heard that the Japanese during the REV somehow violated the rights of Russian prisoners?
                      I did not hear. Therefore, it is not necessary to fantasize not these topics.
                      1. shura7782
                        shura7782 3 May 2018 11: 34
                        +1
                        Quote: hdgs
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        There is an option with castration and public burning in a flamethrower cage.

                        Or maybe enough passion to tell?
                        Have you ever and somewhere heard that the Japanese during the REV somehow violated the rights of Russian prisoners?
                        I did not hear. Therefore, it is not necessary to fantasize not these topics.

                        I heard about this from my father, and his great-grandfather told him about his "rights in captivity". This is a separate topic. Therefore, the word "fantasize" should be used when I am 100% sure. You have a clear gap on this.
                    3. hdgs
                      hdgs 3 May 2018 16: 13
                      0
                      Quote: shura7782
                      I heard about this from my father, and his great-grandfather told him about his "rights in captivity".

                      And who told him?
                      Once again I repeat, re-read a lot of literature on the topic of REE. Never met about similar.
                      Quote: shura7782
                      You have a clear gap on this.

                      Or you have false information.
                      1. shura7782
                        shura7782 3 May 2018 22: 10
                        +1
                        And who told him?
                        Once again I repeat, re-read a lot of literature on the topic of REE. Never met about similar.

                        If you are so interested, then I repeat. My great-grandfather was in that battle on Ushakov with Miklukho-Maklai about which you spoke so badly. The surviving crew was not immediately picked up by the Japanese. After Ushakov hid under water, artillery fire was fought on the survivors for more than an hour. After they began to pick up the survivors. On board the Japanese ship they were treated without beating. All the "charm" of captivity, he drank in the camp. To begin with, they attended a public execution, where the samurai sword was used. The treatment of the prisoners was such that not everyone could bear it. There have been cases of suicide. Everything changed dramatically when the issue with prisoners was resolved at the state level. There they were dressed and photographed. I have a snapshot of this Japanese photo. I am not a writer, so so short. Draw your own conclusions. Great-grandfather was awarded George 3st. and a dagger. The dagger is now transferred to the Pacific Fleet every time according to the relatives of a young graduate lieutenant.
                        I also looked for at least some details of the captivity in the literature on the REV, but I did not find. Only the story of his great-grandfather.
                    4. hdgs
                      hdgs 3 May 2018 22: 44
                      0
                      Quote: shura7782
                      with Miklouho-Maclay about whom you spoke so badly.

                      I spoke objectively about his activities under Tsushima. If this activity deserves a bad assessment, then all the questions are not for me.
                      Quote: shura7782
                      The surviving crew was not immediately picked up by the Japanese. After Ushakov hid under water, artillery fire was fought on the survivors for more than an hour. After they began to pick up the survivors.

                      Those. the Japanese committed a war crime for more than an hour. And then they began to save the witness of this crime.
                      What for? Do you think they were crazy? Or was something wrong there?
                      Quote: shura7782
                      Only the story of his great-grandfather.

                      That is just the point. And people are sometimes prone to ... fantasizing.
  3. kvs207
    kvs207 April 27 2018 07: 15
    +3
    And exactly in the first photo A. Popov? Isn’t Makarov an hour?
    1. Ivanchester
      April 27 2018 08: 33
      +5
      You are right: the wrong admiral in the photo repeat
      Now I’ll fix it ...
  4. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 08: 52
    +3
    Many thanks to the author for a good article!
    But all the same, I am tormented by doubts about the true damage to the Japanese cruisers ... either 8 shells can hardly be drowned by the destroyer, then we successfully repel 6 cruisers and disable at least one ... Is there any data from the Japanese side that could shed light to this fight?
    1. Ivanchester
      April 27 2018 09: 43
      +5
      Unfortunately, I don’t speak Japanese, so I can’t work with primary sources sad
      As for the English-language sources about the Donskoy fight on 15 in May, there are few of them - at least those that I managed to find.
      More or less detailed descriptions are found in the books “Dawn of the rising sun” and “The fleet that had to die”. Both of them have an indication that the Naniva cruiser got hit (apparently, in the waterline area), as a result of which the ship started to roll at 7 degrees, because of which he was forced to leave the battle.
    2. 27091965
      27091965 April 27 2018 10: 57
      +4
      Quote: Trapper7
      Is there any data from the Japanese side that could shed light on this battle?




      There is no detailed consideration of damage in this book, but there are a number of hits in the cruiser of the Japanese fleet.
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 11: 00
        0
        Quote: 27091965i
        There is no detailed consideration of damage in this book, but there are a number of hits in the cruiser of the Japanese fleet.

        Cool! Thank! And if, in brief, are the data confirming that one Japanese cruiser left the battle? And then I can’t peek at the cover yet))))
        1. Ivanchester
          April 27 2018 11: 44
          +4
          In a very brief description of the battle with the Don, there is no information about the damage to Japanese ships.
          The summary of the damage to the ships says about the three dead destroyers, and the rest says that their damage is extremely minor.
        2. 27091965
          27091965 April 27 2018 12: 21
          +2
          Quote: Trapper7
          And if, in brief, are the data confirming that one Japanese cruiser left the battle?


          The armored cruiser "Kasagi" got hit below the waterline. Admiral Virgo withdrew from the battle, accompanied by the cruiser Chitose. The remaining ships of his detachment were commanded by Admiral Uriu. Due to the impossibility of further participation in the Kasagi battle, at 18-00 he transferred his flag to Chitose.
          1. Ivanchester
            April 27 2018 13: 23
            +3
            This fragment of the book refers to the battle of May 14.
            Question Trapper7, as I understand it, was specifically about the fight "Donskoy" 15 on May.
            1. Trapperxnumx
              Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 14: 28
              0
              Quote: Ivanchester
              This fragment of the book refers to the battle of May 14.
              Question Trapper7, as I understand it, was specifically about the fight "Donskoy" 15 on May.

              That's right. Although, if the answer is expanded and includes other episodes of that battle, I will be only glad.
            2. 27091965
              27091965 April 27 2018 15: 22
              +2
              Quote: Ivanchester
              that fragment of the book refers to the battle of May 14th.
              Question Trapper7, as I understand it, was specifically about the fight "Donskoy" 15 on May.


              "The flagship of Admiral Uriu, the cruiser" Naniva ", having got hit by a shell below the waterline, was forced to leave the battle and proceed to repair the damage."

              This hit is also voiced by Admiral Togo in his report on the battle of Tsushima.
              1. Ivanchester
                April 27 2018 17: 41
                +2
                That's right, but this passage also applies to the battle of May 14.
                1. 27091965
                  27091965 April 27 2018 18: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Ivanchester
                  That's right, but this passage also applies to the battle of May 14.


                  Honestly, I expected this answer. I had doubts about getting when I came across the French version of Meiji, some of the data published in it are different from the Russian edition. I wonder what YOU think about this?
                  1. Ivanchester
                    April 27 2018 18: 33
                    +2
                    If you ask about the Donskoy fight, which he waged on the 15 of May, then I think that the Naniva cruiser was really forced to leave the battle because of a strong roll on one side.
                    The reason for the roll was apparently the flow of water through a hole in the waterline area. It occurred as a result of a hit from the Donskoy or damage was discovered that was received in a battle the day before, I don’t know
  5. Andy
    Andy April 27 2018 09: 04
    -1
    I am amazed at the logic of the royal admirals, to disarm the cruiser and send it into battle! for a training clear, a 75mm shot is cheaper, but for a combat one, replacing 120mm with a 75-ki ... by the way, the 120mm gun after disarmament of D. Donskoy fell on Pearl or Emerald (I don’t remember exactly) ...
    1. 75 hammer
      75 hammer April 27 2018 09: 40
      +2
      In fact, there was a problem with the manufacture of gun barrels, the Obukhov plant could not close all the needs, and France during this period, under pressure from England, sabotaged the transfer of purchased trunks with might and main, and therefore engaged in the transfer from one ship to another, starting from 120mm.
      1. Andy
        Andy April 27 2018 09: 59
        +2
        but there was the Black Sea Fleet which did not go anywhere to fight! also with rangefinders / sights. all ships were not purchased, rearranged from one to another. Grigorovich, using his connections, he bought it for the Tsesarevich under construction and received a reprimand. the truth bought was left to the ship. (like MELNIKOV) I apologize, but I delete the materials after reading, and now find where it was problematic
        1. 75 hammer
          75 hammer April 27 2018 10: 05
          +3
          I ascertained the fact that it was very difficult for a country with a low level of industrial development to maintain a Fleet, heroism cannot be avoided here, production and specialists are needed. The same thing now, in fact, the loss in the war brought not Tsushima, but land actions. (personal opinion).
  6. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 09: 17
    +5
    Just a great article! Many thanks to the author! If there was an opportunity, I would put the author a hundred pluses!
    And now, in essence: so, out of 9 shots, 8. hit the target. Moreover, the first shot is essentially sighting, and it must be a miss. And it’s likely that with a close blunder - the shell simply fell very close to the destroyer, but didn’t hit it (maybe it just flew between the pipes. If the target were larger, then they would probably have achieved 100% of the target. And even if you take it very strictly, then 8 out of 9 give 89% of hits! And let everyone say that the firing range is extremely small, yes, it is. But the main thing is not at all - you will notice the stunningly low efficiency of Russian shells! Maybe some readers don’t know that the destroyer’s hull was lined with very thin sheets - about 6 millimeters thick, and this iron made its way very easily - literally like paper with 152 mm shells. And what is the result? Yes, practically no! There is no doubt that none of these shells exploded at all! That is 100% non-explosive shells!
    But after all, these shells got into thin, but still sheets of iron, not wood or water. The fact is that when a projectile nose falls on water, the nose of the projectile rises slightly and ricochet from the water at incidence angles of up to 13 degrees - it was at the same and lesser angles that the Tsushima battle passed. That is, during misses (of which the vast majority of the Russian shells fell into the water did not explode at all, but simply sank in the water, and probably now thousands of Russian shells still lie at the bottom of this strait. And you can raise at least some of them and explore for what reasons they did not explode.
    But the most important thing is that the Japanese shells, with close misses and falls on the water, exploded perfectly and bombarded Russian ships with clouds of shrapnel that sifted thin sides, boats, rangefinders and other light equipment, and flew into the embrasures of the towers and open half-shells of anti-mine weapons. Is this not the true reason for the Tsushima defeat of the Russian fleet - that the Russian shells did not explode at all?
    1. redf
      redf April 27 2018 10: 21
      +2
      Quote: geniy
      Is this not the true reason for the Tsushima defeat of the Russian fleet - that the Russian shells did not explode at all?

      Nah.
      Solar activity was increased. And so, wow, how heaped up.
      Oh, how heaped up.
      Dear, you can remember at least one victory of the Russian / Soviet fleet at sea, besides the time of the sailing / galley fleets?
      Any?
      At least over whom?
      So think about why and when this happened.
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 13: 10
        +3
        Quote: redf
        Dear, you can remember at least one victory of the Russian / Soviet fleet at sea, besides the time of the sailing / galley fleets?

        First World War. Black Sea. All clashes with Goeben ended in the victory of Russian weapons and the flight of the German "big cruiser."
        1. redf
          redf April 27 2018 13: 16
          +1
          Quote: Trapper7
          All clashes with Goeben ended in the victory of Russian weapons and the flight of the German "big cruiser."

          I just don’t know whether to cry over such a “fine example” or laugh.
          Oh, about Geben, one must be silent modestly. Because the whole Black Sea Fleet was chasing after one unhappy German skinny cruiser. And in the end he stayed with his nose.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 14: 42
            +13
            Everything as usual.
            - Show me at least one victory of the Russian fleet ..
            - Here you are.
            - This is not a victory!
            1. redf
              redf April 27 2018 15: 12
              0
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Show me at least one victory of the Russian fleet ..
              - Here you are.
              - This is not a victory!

              So what was the victory? The fact that the high-speed German cruiser evaded the battle with stronger slow-moving? Is that a victory?
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA April 27 2018 14: 48
            +10
            Quote: redf
            Oh, about Geben, one must be silent modestly. Because the whole Black Sea Fleet was chasing after one unhappy German skinny cruiser.

            Heh heh heh ... all you need is to omit the word "linear" in the classification of "Keben". And now the Black Sea Fleet is chasing after lean cruiser. smile By the way, it’s interesting - how did the EDB Black Sea Fleet chase “Goeben”, which exceeded them by 10 knots?
            The history of Goeben at the World Cup after the Sevastopol Wake-up is the story of a drape. German-Turkish LCR draped off LK. From sub. Even from the EDB, which he theoretically should have been "send to landfill“. Two battleships, and not even the last generation (Eustathius and John Chrysostom - these are our British counterparts,“ King Edward VII ”with the same alternatively gifted two-caliber SC) fought with“ Goeben ”on an equal footing, three EDBs were already forcing LKR get out of the battle.
            Unfortunately, due to the lack of a “high-speed wing” in the Black Sea Fleet, there was practically no chance to impose a fight on Goeben.
            1. redf
              redf April 27 2018 15: 19
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              The history of Goeben at the World Cup after the Sevastopol Wake-up is the story of a drape. German-Turkish LCR draped off LK.

              This is actually the norm. Because these are ships of a different class. In this case, the weaker ship takes advantage of its speed advantage.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Even from the EDB, whom he theoretically should have been "sent to landfill."

              Yeah. Especially when you consider that these EDBs never walked alone. Just in case.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Two armadillos, and not even the last generation (Eustathius and John Chrysostom - these are our British counterparts “King Edward VII” with the same alternatively gifted two-caliber SK) fought with “Goeben” on an equal footing, three EDBs already forced LCR to leave from the battle.

              In fact, Eustathius and John Chrysostom (2 x 4 x 305 mm + 2 x 4 x 203 mm) were supposed to tear Geben (10 x 280 mm) to shreds. But they couldn’t.
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Unfortunately, due to the lack of a “high-speed wing” in the Black Sea Fleet, there was practically no chance to impose a fight on Goeben.

              That's it. Russia could not build anything worthwhile and high-speed.
              I had to do slow-moving. And other floating sludge.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA April 27 2018 15: 54
                +8
                Quote: redf
                Yeah. Especially when you consider that these EDBs never walked alone. Just in case.

                This proves the presence of reason in the heads of the Black Sea Fleet command, who did not want to check in practice - and how the battle of one LCR with 10x280 mm and one EDB with 4x305 mm will end. smile
                It’s just usually claimed that all-big-gun ships sent the old battleships to the dustbin of history.
                Quote: redf
                In fact, Eustathius and John Chrysostom (2 x 4 x 305 mm + 2 x 4 x 203 mm) were supposed to tear Geben (10 x 280 mm) to shreds. But they couldn’t.

                The casino 203-mm can be immediately thrown back - "Goeben" after the first battle preferred to work with 80-100 kbt. And to reduce the distance inferior in speed to the EDB could not.
                Remain 8x305 / 40. And shooting at extreme distances in conditions when the head of the EDB is covered and forced to "chase the bursts."
                Quote: redf
                I had to do slow-moving. And other floating sludge.

                Nevertheless, these low-speed ships completely fulfilled the main task - ensuring local dominance at sea in the area of ​​operations of the Black Sea Fleet.
                1. redf
                  redf April 27 2018 16: 31
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  It’s just usually claimed that all-big-gun ships sent the old battleships to the dustbin of history.

                  This is a figurative expression. The detachments of these ships were very dangerous for the line. cruisers.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  And to reduce the distance inferior in speed to the EDB could not.

                  They could easily. But this required accurate shooting. And where did you get it, if in the battle of Sarych Goben was accidentally hit by a sighting salvo. And never hit again.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  And shooting at extreme distances in conditions when the head of the EDB is covered and forced to "chase the bursts."

                  Goeben, too, did not shoot because of a neighboring wave.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Nevertheless, these low-speed ships completely fulfilled the main task - ensuring local dominance at sea in the area of ​​operations of the Black Sea Fleet.

                  There were no "operations of the Black Sea Fleet". And those that were not even worth mentioning.
                  But huge amounts of money were spent on all this rubbish.
                  And on the battleships of the RJV, also colossal.
                  And on the surface fleet of the USSR of the times of WW2, also colossal.
                  Where is the exhaust? Where are the victories and successes? There were none. Some defeats and failures.

                  Russia needs underwater nuclear weapons. A newer and more solid population. And a surface mosquito fleet providing their activities.
                  And the rest of the floating surface junk, it’s under the knife. Ruthlessly. And the freed money for the fleet is underwater.
                  There is simply no other way for a poor country (Russia is a rather poor country). Costs need to be optimized, not overspend.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 17: 31
                    +10
                    Quote: redf
                    There were no "operations of the Black Sea Fleet". And those that were not even worth mentioning.

                    Oh ha ha ha !!!!! laughing
                    Okay, I’ll finish the Gotland combat cycle, so be it, I’ll take up the “not worth mentioning” World Cup operations :)))))
                    1. redf
                      redf April 27 2018 17: 38
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      I’ll finish the Gotland fight cycle, so be it, I’ll take up the “not worth mentioning” World Cup operations

                      Maybe we should not?
                      And do not finish.
                      And take it.
                      I already imagine what you will succeed in the end. The epic and even epoch-making battle of the infantry battalion with the cavalry squadron. With the support of battleships, armadillos and other little things. Small earth is resting and nervously smoking aside.
                    2. Rurikovich
                      Rurikovich April 27 2018 20: 00
                      +1
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Oh ha ha ha !!!!!

                      Is this the one I think of? what
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 21: 27
                        +4
                        Who else :)))
                  2. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA April 27 2018 17: 46
                    +1
                    Quote: redf
                    They could easily. But this required accurate shooting. And where did you get it, if in the battle of Sarych Goben was accidentally hit by a sighting salvo. And never hit again.

                    Sarych - this is a common battle that started a war, when theoretical pre-war calculations break up into practice. The battle at the Bosphorus is more interesting when both sides have already drawn conclusions. Then “Goeben” kept his distance and after several hits left. In those conditions, a truly golden hit was needed in order to halve the course of the LCR by half (otherwise not catch up).
                    Quote: redf
                    There were no "operations of the Black Sea Fleet". And those that were not even worth mentioning.

                    Let’s write it down - the defeat of the coastal flank of the Turkish army and the capture of the only Turkish port in the east of the World Cup not worth mentioning. Where the Black Sea Fleet to the results of the Dardanelles operation. smile
                    Quote: redf
                    Russia needs underwater nuclear weapons. A newer and more solid population. And a surface mosquito fleet providing their activities.

                    Welcome back, Jeune École и Doctrine of the Small Fleet. smile It’s just that it usually ends badly - mediocrely fond of money, lost time and a forced return to the traditional fleet.
                    The same surface mosquito fleet will not provide RPKSN PLO (just based on the dimensions of normal ASG) and even its own air defense.
                    1. redf
                      redf April 27 2018 17: 54
                      0
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      In those conditions, a truly golden hit was needed to halve the course of the LCR

                      Or a series of hits. But there was none of this. Goeben left perfectly when he needed to leave.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      the defeat of the coastal flank of the Turkish army and the capture of the only Turkish port in the east of the World Cup is not even worth mentioning.

                      Dear Black Sea Fleet, this is such a thing that walked (swam) through the water. On land, the Black Sea Fleet did not act. In addition to a small number of marines.
                      Therefore, it is not necessary to attribute to the BSF what he did not do.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      Welcome back, Jeune École and Doctrine of the Small Fleet. smile It’s just that it usually ends badly - mediocrely fond of money, lost time and a forced return to the traditional fleet.

                      Do not tell tales. The attempt to embrace the immense ends badly.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      The same surface mosquito fleet will not provide RPKSN PLO (just based on the dimensions of normal ASG) and even its own air defense.

                      And again, do not tell "passion."
                      Once again.
                      The most powerful submarine fleet armed with nuclear weapons + a mosquito fleet to provide it. Everything else on the water is superfluous. And there is not and will not be any extra money.
                      1. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA April 27 2018 18: 39
                        +3
                        Quote: redf
                        Dear Black Sea Fleet, this is such a thing that walked (swam) through the water. On land, the Black Sea Fleet did not act. In addition to a small number of marines.
                        Therefore, it is not necessary to attribute to the BSF what he did not do.

                        Dear, the fleet is a structure that has ships. And there are guns on the ships. Which shoot including along the coast. And without the fire of which the army could not break through the Turkish defense on the same river Arahva. And by the river Vice fleet in general had to help the army beat off the Turkish counterattack.
                        And on the ships you can transport soldiers. And land the troops. Having discovered a landing in their rear, the Turks usually turned down their defenses and quickly retreated. Thus, for example, the Turkish defensive position on the Buyuk-Dere River was breached, which was considered impregnable by our army men. Also, the forces of the landing, under the cover of the fleet, took the port of Rize, which made it possible to establish a normal supply of the Primorye detachment of Lyakhov.
                        Quote: redf
                        Do not tell tales. The attempt to embrace the immense ends badly.

                        For example, to ensure the release of the SSBNs and the defense of their positional areas by the mosquito fleet.
                    2. redf
                      redf April 27 2018 22: 06
                      0
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      Dear, the fleet is a structure that has ships.

                      And almost no infantry. And Venice is an exception to the rule. Therefore, fables about how some fleet conquered something there on land are fables.
                      Raid, that’s the maximum that the fleet can do on its own. Or else it can transport infantry like a truck. But that’s all.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      And without the fire of which the army could not break through the Turkish defense on the same river Arahva.

                      Maybe it could. Maybe she couldn’t. The story is silent about this. But the army acted on land, not the fleet.
                      In addition, firing along the shore from naval guns is redneck. This is how to heat a stove with bills. So expensive is a shot from such weapons.
                      For the fire along the shore, the fleet had a whole bunch of "small things":
                      Canlods of all kinds
                      Art platforms of all kinds
                      Battleships of coastal defense of all kinds
                      But with modern, expensive cannons along the shore, this is from a lack of intelligence. Or from the hopelessness of the situation.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      And on the ships you can transport soldiers.

                      Can. But this does not need battleships.
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      For example, to ensure the release of the SSBNs and the defense of their positional areas by the mosquito fleet.

                      You are again for yours. Neither small fry nor large-scale can provide the SSBN exit after the outbreak of a nuclear war. Therefore, this money for large size can be saved.
                      1. Trapperxnumx
                        Trapperxnumx April 28 2018 09: 02
                        0
                        Quote: redf
                        But with modern, expensive cannons along the shore, this is from a lack of intelligence.

                        Let’s write it down: "The British fleet was commanded by the poor in the First World War."
                        Mr. Hipper also, shelling the coast of Britain, showed his low intelligence ...
                        and other other other ....
                      2. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA April 28 2018 09: 59
                        +1
                        Quote: redf
                        In addition, firing along the shore from naval guns is redneck. This is how to heat a stove with bills. So expensive is a shot from such weapons.
                        For the fire along the shore, the fleet had a whole bunch of "small things":
                        Canlods of all kinds
                        Art platforms of all kinds
                        Battleships of coastal defense of all kinds
                        But with modern, expensive cannons along the shore, this is from a lack of intelligence. Or from the hopelessness of the situation.

                        KL worked on the Danube. There were no art platforms as part of the Black Sea Fleet. BRBO was - "Rostislav." smile
                        And most importantly - since when did the Rostislav Group of Companies, initially twice defective (the only shipboard 10 "at the Black Sea Fleet, and even the lightweight guns of the first series), become" modern expensive guns "? wink
                        Quote: redf
                        Can. But this does not need battleships.

                        Did I write somewhere about transporting soldiers to the LC?
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        these low-speed ships completely fulfilled the main task - ensuring local dominance at sea in the area of ​​operations of the Black Sea Fleet.

                        LCs are needed to ensure local dominance at sea during the transition and landing. That no LCR or KRL did not send soldiers to the bottom.
                        And other ships of the Black Sea Fleet, the same Elpidifora, were engaged in transporting soldiers. The fleet, you know, is not one of the LCs.
                      3. hdgs
                        hdgs 1 May 2018 22: 57
                        +1
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        And most importantly - since when did the Rostislav Group of Companies, initially twice defective (the only shipboard 10 "at the Black Sea Fleet, and even the lightweight guns of the first series), become" modern expensive guns "?

                        In fact, Rostislav with his cannons GK could just shell the coast. Well, the fact that he was called the EDB is just a traditional habit of saying things by the wrong name.
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Did I write somewhere about transporting soldiers to the LC?

                        The cover of military transports was meant. From whom should battleships protect them? With whom did they have to fight on the Black Sea? Why were they needed there at all?
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        LCs are needed to ensure local dominance at sea during the transition and landing. That no LCR or KRL did not send soldiers to the bottom.

                        And again, where does the Turkish LCR come from on the Black Sea?
                        As for KRL Geben, the EDB on the Black Sea brigade was more than enough for him. During the escort of military transports by this brigade, no Goeben was terrible. And the Black Sea LKR was simply superfluous. I drank denyushek.
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        The fleet, you know, is not one of the LCs.

                        I know.
                    3. hdgs
                      hdgs 1 May 2018 22: 59
                      0
                      Quote: Trapper7
                      So let's write

                      Did you not learn to read at school?
                      Quote: Trapper7
                      Mr. Hipper also, shelling the coast of Britain, showed his low intelligence ...

                      Problems with intelligence when you can read what you wrote, but understand not.
              2. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 1 May 2018 08: 46
                0
                Quote: redf
                Because these are ships of a different class

                This song is endless - start over laughing
          3. Trapperxnumx
            Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 15: 17
            +5
            Quote: redf
            Because the whole Black Sea Fleet was chasing after one unhappy German skinny cruiser. And in the end he stayed with his nose.

            Or in another way - the newest battlecruiser, which had the most modern artillery, a guidance system and a machine, thicker armor and outperformed any large warship RICHF could not carry out a single military operation - did not even prevent shelling of the Bosphorus, could not interrupt the Caucasian naval supply army and obstruct landing, etc. etc.
            and prevented him from several old skinny slow-moving "large coastal monitors"))))
            1. redf
              redf April 27 2018 15: 59
              0
              Quote: Trapper7
              the latest battlecruiser, which had the most modern artillery, a guidance system and a machine, thicker armor and outperformed any large combat ship of the RICHF, could not carry out any military operations - it did not even prevent shelling of the Bosphorus, could not interrupt the naval supply of the Caucasian army and prevent the landing landings etc. etc.

              Take an interest in the composition and strength of the Black Sea Fleet. Then maybe you will understand what Geben could and what could not.
              In any case, there was no victory over Goeben.
              Quote: Trapper7
              and prevented him from several old skinny slow-moving "large coastal monitors"))))

              Black Sea battleship brigade (went together):
              - armadillo Panteleimon
              - armadillo Eustathius
              - battleship Rostislav
              - battleship Zlatoust
              When meeting with her, Goeben did not even have a theoretical chance of success.
              - the battleship Three Saints - often went with the above brigade of battleships.
              - battleship Masha
              - battleship Katya
              - battleship Sasha
              Any of the battleships in a one-on-one battle made a sieve from Goeben.
              So, do not exaggerate.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA April 27 2018 17: 58
                +2
                Quote: redf
                Black Sea battleship brigade (went together):
                - armadillo Panteleimon
                - armadillo Eustathius
                - battleship Rostislav
                - battleship Zlatoust

                In fact, “Rostislav” can’t even reckon with the WWI’s PMB - especially considering its GK from the “light” 10 "/ 45. However, as a big gunboat it was not equal to it - for shooting enemy trenches under machine gun fire from a distance of 3-5 cable it fit perfectly. smile
                Quote: redf
                - battleship Masha
                - battleship Katya
                - battleship Sasha

                Traditionally, they did not manage to enter the system either for the battle at Cape Sarych or for the battle at the Bosphorus. smile
                1. hdgs
                  hdgs 1 May 2018 21: 59
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  In fact, "Rostislav" to PMV EBR can not even reckon with a stretch

                  In fact, I agree. But it was called "EDB."
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  However, as a big gunboat he had no equal - to shoot the enemy’s trenches under machine gun fire from a distance of 3-5 cable he was ideally suited

                  I am glad that at least you understand what BWO is. This site is such a rarity.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Traditionally, they did not manage to enter the system either for the battle at Cape Sarych or for the battle at the Bosphorus.

                  It does not matter. The important thing is that Goeben had no chance against the EDB team. Therefore, he could only leave her.
  7. redf
    redf April 27 2018 10: 10
    +1
    Thus, Zinovy ​​Petrovich Rozhestvensky severely limited the ability to maneuver his cruisers, connecting them with slow-moving transport vessels.

    Monomakh and Donskoy were typical hospital cruisers who descended into this "glorious" category by old age. Because for nothing else, except for the convoy, guard, and representative functions, they were not for years.
    Old age, what can you do.
    It is very curious that at the same time, Oscar Adolfovich did not at all take care that their speeds also coincided: at least in the testimony of the senior navigator officer of the cruiser Oleg, captain of the second rank Manturov says that "... we went south about 15 - 16 knots

    Cheated, in other words. I must say that in the RIF of those years, this was a common occurrence. After the battle in ZhM, almost all the more or less salable ships from the squadron also took off. After which they interned safely (surrendered to the non-combatant) in neutral ports. "Heroes" what to say.
    The decision of the commander was obvious to me, and I ordered to break the alert

    After the “battle” he should be punished. And to punish severely, so many people because of them died in vain.
    From the cruiser’s team, 70 people were killed and about 130 injured.

    Here is the real result of their "heroism." The rest of the stories "for heroism", it's just verbal husk.
    1. Ivanchester
      April 27 2018 10: 59
      +9
      Here is the real result of their "heroism." The rest of the stories "for heroism", it's just verbal husk.


      You, apparently, believe that heroism should be as safe as possible.
      From this point of view, Nebogatov, Clapier de Colong, Stessel and the like officers are the main Russian heroes of that war.
      It is very surprising that ungrateful descendants do not call them streets and ships what
      1. redf
        redf April 27 2018 11: 14
        +1
        Quote: Ivanchester
        From this point of view, Nebogatov, Clapier de Colong, Stessel and the like officers are the main Russian heroes of that war.

        I do not understand the claims against Nebogatov.
        This is how to blame the bespectacled man for giving the mobile phone, and not piling a gang of gopniks on the street.
        A bespectacled man, he’s just smart. Mobile still can not save. But at least he saved on pills.
        Quote: Ivanchester
        It is very surprising that ungrateful descendants do not call them streets and ships

        Suicidal tendencies in the population began to be brought up even before the Bolsheviks. They simply deepened and expanded this education.
        It is necessary to distinguish heroic death from death by stupidity. Even in war.
    2. Andy
      Andy April 27 2018 11: 04
      +2
      1 ship was not handed over, 2 people were saved (for excl. Those who died during the battle).
      Offer your option to "heroism". how would you personally do? so much so as to preserve honor (although you don’t even know what it is)
      1. redf
        redf April 27 2018 11: 09
        0
        Quote: Andy
        (for excl. those who died during the battle).

        Indeed, some 70 people + some number of people who later died from wounds from 130. What are the losses for the Imperials? Ugh.
        Quote: Andy
        Offer your option to "heroism". how would you personally do? so much so as to preserve the honor

        To preserve the honor it was necessary to surrender, opening the kingstones. That's right when they were discovered and began to approach.
        The result would be the same, but more than 70 people would survive. And Honor would be preserved.
        There is no Honor in conscious suicide. It would be nice if the commander and the head officer shot themselves quietly in the cabins. But where does another 70 people have to do with it?
        To die by stupidity does not at all mean "to preserve Honor."
        1. Filxnumx
          Filxnumx April 27 2018 23: 38
          +1
          To preserve the honor it was necessary to surrender, opening the kingstones. That's right when they were discovered and began to approach.
          That is, you offer the MILITARY sailors to surrender without a fight, in disgrace, like some dodging merchants. Where did you see the honor for a Russian naval officer here? You are satisfied with the behavior of the bespectacled man who gave the cell phone, let. I won’t even take into account the likelihood (not sickly though) that bandits who would have grown tired of impunity would want to kick from the boredom of your bespectacled man (And cho and profit and have fun!). But you probably will not be in any way satisfied with the refusal of the policeman to protect your life from an armed bandit at the cost of your own. What if these bandits hurt him or even worse kill him, let him sit in the police station or at home, and let them rob and kill you. It is good to talk about honor or dishonor abstractly when they do not concern you personally. Military service is hard work, which nonetheless needs to work.
          There are such paradoxes of history: thanks to the heroes who sacrificed their lives to defend their country, their citizens, such citizens appear who claim that exploits are stupid, the military profession is utterly unnecessary for anyone, it’s necessary not to fight, but to surrender. Hey, redf, how many Russians survived in Japanese captivity in WWII, and Soviet prisoners of war in fascist captivity in WWII?
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Filxnumx
              Filxnumx April 28 2018 07: 00
              0
              492 Russians died officially in Japanese captivity before the signing of the Portsmouth Peace; they are buried in Japan. However, after the ceasefire, 70 former prisoners out of almost 000 returned to Russia.
              http://izron.ru/articles/aktualnye-voprosy-i-pers
              pektivy-razvitiya-obshchestvennykh-nauk-sbornik-n
              auchnykh-trudov-po-itogam-m / sektsiya-1-otechestve
              nnaya-istoriya-spetsialnost-07-00-02 / rossiyskie-v
              oennoplennye-v-yaponii-v-period-russko-yaponskoy-
              voyny-1904-1905-gg /
          2. garri-lin
            garri-lin April 28 2018 20: 58
            0
            Your words, yes, cast in bronze. Very correctly formulated
    3. Cat
      Cat April 27 2018 19: 52
      +8
      Cheated, in other words. I must say that in the RIF of those years, this was a common occurrence. After the battle in ZhM, almost all the more or less salable ships from the squadron also took off. After which they interned safely (surrendered to the non-combatant) in neutral ports. "Heroes" what to say.

      After this statement, I had a strong desire where they come from "similar commentators." Is it really anointing everyone and everything with mud - this is the panacea for life? Sadly, however, when a feat does not become a feat, the heroes are not heroes, betrayal is not betrayal .............
      1. redf
        redf April 27 2018 20: 47
        0
        Quote: Kotischa
        Is it really anointing everyone and everything with mud - this is the panacea for life?

        Do you have a complaint to the point? After all, they cut off the same.
        Then what are the problems? Don't like the truth?
        Quote: Kotischa
        Sadly, however, when a feat does not become a feat, the heroes are not heroes, betrayal is not betrayal ........

        It’s sad when it comes out as a feat ... that just doesn’t.
        And when the feat, real, is forgotten.
        This is really sad.
        I will not be unsubstantiated and will cite as an example one of the most talented and successful Russian admirals, Witgeft, who died at a military post while fighting a enemy squadron.
        Where are the monuments of Wittgeft?
        Where are the streets in his honor?
        Where are the ships named after him?
        They are not.
        But there are plenty of signs of attention to some maritime official Makarov, who died at least ridiculously.
  8. Nickname_2
    Nickname_2 April 27 2018 10: 26
    +1
    I am very grateful to the author for the article. A little to the side: My father went by transport to the USA for Lendliz equipment. And was intercepted by a Japanese armed icebreaker. This was one of our battleships captured at Tsushima. The Japanese scared a little unarmed vehicles, but left quickly enough. Maybe someone knows what kind of armadillo this could be? Once again, I thank the author - Nikita Bibikov.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Andy
      Andy April 27 2018 10: 47
      0
      https://topwar.ru/111579-bronenoscy-tipa-admiral-
      senyavin-plohie-korabli-ili-plohie-komandiry.html

      here is a photo of the Senyavin converted to the icebreaker. but in 1936 it was scrapped.
      1. Nickname_2
        Nickname_2 April 27 2018 12: 37
        +1
        The interception was in January 1945. It seems to be a squadron battleship without towers of the main caliber.
  9. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 10: 28
    +5
    The article is just wonderful, and really, it’s a pity that you can put up only one plus.
    I'll see a little later what can be said about the accuracy of the Donskoy in his last battle
  10. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 10: 44
    +1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    I'll see a little later what can be said about the accuracy of the Donskoy in his last battle

    Take your time to watch, dear Andrei. All your arguments about accuracy are deeply erroneous. But do not rush to be offended - you are not at all to blame for this at all, but those primary sources on which you are based. The fact is that the hit count was carried out incorrectly throughout the world - that is, there were many hidden, ineffective hits that simply were not taken into account, and all considered only large holes. And by the way, this shooting of the destroyer by the cruiser Dmitry Donskoy is a clear proof of this. There were 8 hits - and how many of them were effective: one or two?
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 11: 05
      +4
      Quote: geniy
      The fact is that the hit count was carried out incorrectly throughout the world - that is, there were many hidden, ineffective hits that simply were not taken into account

      One question. And how do you know about them? :)))))
    2. arturpraetor
      arturpraetor April 27 2018 11: 18
      +3
      Quote: geniy
      The fact is that all over the world the hit count was wrong

      And how then do you determine the real number of hits if they were not taken into account? Astral Hedgehog revealed the truth to you? laughing
  11. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 11: 41
    +1
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    One question. And how do you know about them? :)))))

    Counter-question: what are you asking about: that the whole method of counting hits around the world is wrong or about how I know about ineffective hits. By the way: in addition to the ineffective ones, there is also what I call them “duplicate hits” that is, hitting two or more shells practically in one place (and just don’t say that the shell doesn’t fall into the same place twice: just the opposite - there were two or three hits many times Here is a quote from Kostenko: To the nasal casemate through the gun port of a 75 mm gun two 8-inch shells flew in. Both guns on the port side were immediately rendered unusable.
    Then in the nasal casemate of 75 mm guns (that is, in the same place!), already broken earlier by two 8-inch shells, a 12-inch shell flew in, and, exploding inside the casemate, completely distorted it. Following this, a 12-inch shell exploded in an adjacent spire compartment, and caused the destruction of the spire devices completely. "
    So, given that the fourth shell actually exploded in the immediate vicinity of the first three - literally at arm's length, it turns out that as many as 4 (four !!) shells exploded in almost one place.
    It would seem - as counted by the Russian sailors - four. But the Japanese did not ask the Russian sailors - they just looked at the pile of ruins, and probably decided that there was supposedly only one Japanese shell. Of course, you all inattentively read historical literature, and I have repeatedly noticed such "duplicate" hits.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 12: 47
      +6
      Quote: geniy
      Counter question

      Are you Jewish?
      Quote: geniy
      Here is a quote from Kostenko

      Well it is necessary :))))
      Quote: geniy
      So, given that the fourth shell actually exploded in the immediate vicinity of the first three - literally at arm's length, it turns out that as many as 4 (four !!) shells exploded in almost one place.
      It would seem - as counted by the Russian sailors - four. But the Japanese did not ask the Russian sailors - they just looked at the pile of ruins, and probably decided that there was supposedly only one Japanese shell.

      And now we recall where Kostenko spent the entire Tsushima battle. Do you want to be reminded? :)))) At the hospital. That is, he himself considered the hit after the battle, and not during it, and the price of his opinion on four hits in one casemate is zero without a stick.
      Kostenko is an engineer, not an artilleryman, he has no experience in identifying hits, no one taught him this, he is not a sailor. And he limped along the ship, determined by sight about 300 hits and you believe him. But for British naval officers or the Japanese - for some reason not :)))
      The Japanese understood in detail every damage. And I’ll tell you, for example, such a military secret - the number and caliber of missiles hit are determined only in the second place by damage, and in the first - by shell fragments. That is, if 4 shells exploded in one casemate, there will be fragments of 4 shells.
      And yes, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question, how do you know about the many hits that are not recorded in the sources.
  12. kvs207
    kvs207 April 27 2018 12: 51
    0
    We are all sofa admirals. Interestingly, among the readers there is a ship commander, at least 3rd 4th rank?
  13. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov April 27 2018 14: 29
    +1
    The author is a well-deserved plus. I tried to find data on the re-equipment of our ships before going to the Far East. In many publications and articles, the words "several" or "about" are used instead of exact numbers. It’s precisely according to the Donskoy that I still haven’t decided and I don’t know exactly the composition of its weapons under Tsushima. The cruiser, if I may say so, was not entirely combat, but training. He was taken to the squadron so that the squadron gunners trained on it.
    Well, in the end I would like to share my latest (but not final) data on the Donskoy artillery weapons. These are 6x1-152 / 45 mm, 4x1-120 / 45 mm, 6x1-75 / 50 mm, 6x1-47 mm and 10x1-37 mm. If someone who knows, will correct my data, I will be very grateful.
    1. Ivanchester
      April 27 2018 17: 36
      +1
      Melnikov, whose book I used as the main source for the performance characteristics of Donskoy, points out 8x47mm.
  14. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 14: 42
    +3
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    And now we recall where Kostenko spent the entire Tsushima battle. Do you want to be reminded? :)))) At the hospital. That is, he himself considered the hit after the battle, and not during it, and the price of his opinion on four hits in one casemate is zero without a stick.
    Kostenko is an engineer, not an artilleryman, he has no experience in identifying hits, no one taught him this, he is not a sailor. And he limped along the ship, determined by sight about 300 hits and you believe him. But for British naval officers or the Japanese - for some reason not :)))

    This is the main accusation against Kostenko: that he spent the whole battle in the hospital, and in addition, he was not a professional artilleryman. So, I explain to you that Kostenko himself did not count anything, he just walked on the ship and interviewed all the sailors and officers who saw what they were. And Kostenko just wrote down everything he was told. That is, he presented the words of eyewitnesses and participants in the battle in documentary form. Thus, you do not blame Kostenko at all, but the participants in the battle, they say if Kostenko was in the hospital, then everything he wrote means Your opinion is a lie.
    But then the question arises: but after all, all the Russian sailors, and even the officers, took part in the battle for the first time — did they possess sufficient knowledge to determine the caliber of the shells hit? This can be answered with a counter-question: but after all, Japanese engineers who examined the battleship Orel did not participate in any naval battle in their entire lives — that is, Japanese engineers would have determined this even worse than Russian sailors.
    But how much knowledge is needed to determine the number and caliber of missiles hit? But Kostenko did not ask this question to one single person who would be responsible for the entire ship. No. he asked those who were in the bow - how many and what shells got into the nose casemate, from those who were in the bow tower - how many and when they got in, from those who were in the towers of the 152-mm guns, and from those sailors who were in the stern.
    And so, Andrei and others who do not believe Kostenko actually do not blame Kostenko at all, but all Russian officers and sailors of stupidity and banal inability to count to four. That is, some sailor who was in the back of the nose casemate nearby exploded the first 8-inch, then the second, then the third 12-inch shell exploded, then the fourth. And this sailor simply by the strength of the shock from the explosion (which, incidentally, from a 12-inch outfit, the explosion is 3 times stronger than from an 8-inch one, just knowing how to count to four, counted it and then told Kostenko, but he’s not alone, but a dozen or two sailors, and why shouldn’t they be trusted? But such denunciators of Russian history as Andrei from Chelyabinsk believe that Japanese engineers who were hundreds of miles from the Tsushima battle can count better than Russian sailors who were a few meters from the fall of Japanese shells.
    But Andrei suggested that the Japanese engineers say they determined the caliber of the shells by fragments from it. But this lie is very easy to expose. Although it is true - if only one single shell hit a certain place, then it is not difficult to determine the caliber from its fragments. But the trouble is, if there are several and one caliber shells, then there is no way to determine the number of shells by the fragments. The fact is that many Japanese shells that didn’t get into Russian ships exploded on the surface of the water, and shattered decks of ships with a hail of fragments. And if then we undertake to collect these fragments from shells of various calibers, then we would get such a numerical mishmash, we could only consider the number of fragments equal to the number of shells to be true.
    So not only that, Andrei’s lie with fragments is also exposed by the fact that when the night came after the battle, the whole team of the battleship “Oryol” (like other ships) - immediately took up the repair of damage and cleaning the ship from debris and debris. That is, fragments of Japanese shells were presented to Russian sailors not as museum rarities, but as ordinary garbage. Which they naturally threw overboard into the sea without any pity. And probably not a single fragment was left at all, so that, in principle, the Japanese engineers had no reason to study the caliber of the shells that hit the Russian ships (only if the size of the holes), but as I already said, the entire nose casemate was turned into a pile of debris and there was no hole, but was continuous scrap. Therefore, Japanese engineers probably thought that there was only one Japanese shell of an unknown caliber, but the Russian sailors who were during the battle knew for sure that there were not one, but 4 shells of different calibers. And by the way, there are several more places where it was impossible for the Japanese to establish the exact number and caliber of the missiles hit.
    But the trouble is, if you believe the Russian officers and sailors, and not the Japanese, then you will get a very large number of missiles that hit the "Eagle" and, therefore, other Russian ships. And if you calculate all this, then you get an extremely large percentage of hits of Japanese gunners - much more than the English and German gunners in the Jutland battle. It would seem - a mismatch. But personally, I know that this discrepancy is easily explained. That's just such "experts" as Andrei and others like him will still not be able to believe such an explanation. And that’s why many experts need to slander Kostenko (and in fact Russian officers) accusing them of allegedly not being able to count Russians, but Japanese who are able to. Because if you believe Kostenko - then it turns out too large a percentage of hits by the Japanese.
    1. redf
      redf April 27 2018 15: 33
      0
      Quote: geniy
      But such denigrants of Russian history as Andrei from Chelyabinsk

      He is not a slander, he simply does not understand much in the basic naval "little things."
      But really wants to.
      But it can’t.
      From this and "denigrating." Which is actually called simply incompetence.
      Quote: geniy
      But the trouble is, if you believe the Russian officers and sailors, and not the Japanese, then you will get a very large number of missiles that hit the "Eagle" and, therefore, other Russian ships. And if you calculate all this, then you get an extremely large percentage of hits of Japanese gunners - much more than the English and German gunners in the Jutland battle. It would seem - a mismatch. But personally, I know that this discrepancy is easily explained. That's just such "experts" as Andrei and others like him will still not be able to believe such an explanation

      And here it is no longer Angdrey, but one of his "colleagues" who "draws the most reliable information on special Japanese sites." And then it drains it to Andrei. Which then on the basis of this "information" will write its "extremely sensational articles."
      As a result, sometimes there is obvious rubbish, but the indication of this is very upsetting to the authors.
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx April 27 2018 16: 36
        +2
        Quote: redf
        He is not a slander, he simply does not understand much in the basic naval "little things."
        But really wants to.
        But it can’t.

        Nikolay? You again?
        1. arturpraetor
          arturpraetor April 27 2018 16: 54
          +2
          Not again, but again laughing
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 18: 31
      +4
      Quote: geniy
      So, I explain to you that Kostenko himself did not count anything, he just walked on the ship and interviewed all the sailors and officers who saw what they were. And Kostenko just wrote down everything he was told. That is, he presented the words of eyewitnesses and participants in the battle in documentary form. In this way, you are not blaming Kostenko at all, but the participants in the battle, saying that if Kostenko was in the hospital, then everything that he wrote is, in your opinion, a lie.

      That's right, a lie. Although, of course, unconscious. If you devoted more time to studying history and less to writing comments, you would know about it. There is such a proverb “Lying as an eyewitness” - here it very well describes the evidence.
      If you have not forgotten what it is like - a street fight, then you should remember that after a short time, you can no longer remember all the nuances of the held "machah" - who delivered what kind of blow, etc. In the best case, the memory will retain some of the most vivid moments - and that’s all.
      And here - the battle, adrenaline scales. This is a little more serious :))) Therefore, if there is anything to be surprised at, it’s only because from other people's words only 4, and not 44 shells got into the casemate :)))
      That is why Kostenko had an enchanting picture with 42 hits of 305-mm shells alone, that is, almost 10% of all shells launched by the Japanese hit Kostenko! :)))
      Quote: geniy
      And so, Andrei and others who do not believe Kostenko actually do not blame Kostenko at all, but all Russian officers and sailors of stupidity and banal inability to count to four.

      "genius", I do not blame for stupidity is not Russian officers and sailors :)))
      Quote: geniy
      oh, there’s some sailor who was in the back of the nose casemate and the first 8-inch exploded nearby, then the second, then the third 12-inch shell exploded, then the fourth. And this sailor simply by the force of the shock from the explosion (which, incidentally, from the 12-inch outfit, the explosion is 3 times stronger than from the 8-inch, just knowing how to count to four, counted this and then told Kostenko, but he’s not alone, but a dozen or two sailors, And why can’t they be trusted?

      Therefore, it’s impossible that the sailor has no time to consider hits in the battle, and he won’t do it - in the battle, generally speaking, knocking and thunder from all sides, volleys of one’s own guns, enemy hits, it’s impossible to isolate all of this in a neighboring casemate. . Would you even give yourself the trouble to think about how you can distinguish several hits according to one witness from several hits of another? Is it about the same hits, or about different ones? :)))
      Quote: geniy
      But such denigrants of Russian history as Andrei from Chelyabinsk believe that Japanese engineers who were hundreds of miles from the Tsushima battle can count better than Russian sailors who were a few meters from the fall of Japanese shells.

      Why are only engineers? Entire commissions worked there, including fleet officers :))) And those sailors who were a few meters from the hits of Japanese shells Kostenko could not tell anything
      Quote: geniy
      But Andrei put forward the assumption that Japanese engineers say they determined the caliber of shells by fragments from it

      This is not an assumption, this is a fact.
      Quote: geniy
      . But this lie is very easy to expose. Although it is true - if only one single shell hit a certain place, then it is not difficult to determine the caliber from its fragments. But the trouble is, if there are several and one caliber shells, then there is no way to determine the number of shells by fragments

      Bullshit, indicating that you have no idea how the fragments look.
      Quote: geniy
      The fact is that many Japanese shells that didn’t get into Russian ships exploded on the surface of the water, and shattered decks of ships with a hail of fragments.

      So what? You believe that it is impossible to distinguish the head or bottom parts of shells from the small fragments that showered the decks? :)))) Oh yes, I forgot, you don’t know what the fragments look like :))))
      Quote: geniy
      Moreover, Andrei’s lie with fragments is also exposed by the fact that when the night came after the battle, the whole team of the battleship “Oryol” (like other ships) - immediately took up the repair of damage and cleaning the ship from debris and debris. That is, fragments of Japanese shells seemed to Russian sailors not as museum rarities, but as ordinary rubbish

      Listen, well, you surpassed yourself :))) At least you could take a look at the photographs?



      Cleaning, huh? Not a single shard, right? :)))
      Quote: geniy
      But personally, I know that this discrepancy is easily explained. That's just such "experts" as Andrei and others like him will still not be able to believe such an explanation.

      And I won’t even try. The only advice is to study first the basics of what you take to talk about.
    3. kan123
      kan123 April 27 2018 18: 37
      0
      It only says that the Russian squadron was shot as in a dash. I don’t remember the tsifer, but the Japanese went to firing every week and their distance was set twice as much. And the Russian fleet fired once two times - just to know what to press. There was no question of targeted shooting at all. Because the shells - expensive - they are very expensive, and the marine department believed that this was an unnecessary expenditure of ammunition. But there were many priests - howled every day on the moon. There, in general, the heavy weapons of the Japanese gathered to “defeat” the campaign. What is the point of counting these holes if you do not see behind this the “stupidity or betrayal” of this whole company in St. Petersburg.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 21: 29
        +4
        Quote: kan123
        I don’t remember the tsifer, but the Japanese went to firing every week

        At the same time, Mikasa spent between battles with 1TOE and 2 TOE and 8 305-mm shells for training purposes. Eagle - 40
        1. Andy
          Andy April 28 2018 00: 05
          -1
          Andrey, the Mikasa crew had combat experience. Orla-no ... otherwise you are right
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 28 2018 16: 00
            0
            Quote: Andy
            Andrey, the Mikasa crew had combat experience. Orla-no.

            Without any doubt:)
  15. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 14: 53
    +2
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    300 hits

    This is not 300 hits of shells, this is the number of holes. And by the way, any holes, even small ones, were considered as holes. That is, if, for example, a Japanese 12-inch shell exploded near the side, then formally this fall should be considered a slip. But here the heavy fragments from the explosion of a Japanese shell sometimes scattered hundreds of meters, and easily pierced the thin skin of the superstructure (only 10 mm thick). And the holes from these fragmentation hits were also holes, although many of them were the size of a palm. And moreover, these holes in the superstructure were absolutely safe from the point of view of maintaining buoyancy - because they were a few meters above the waterline. So - 300 holes - this is a very real, true figure, only all readers need to understand that most of these three hundred holes are not from shells that pierced the board, but from their fragments. That is, both Kostenko and Novikov-Priboy wrote the truth, but modern laymen are not able to comprehend this.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 27 2018 18: 34
      +4
      Quote: geniy
      So - 300 holes - this is a very real, true figure, only all readers need to understand that most of these three hundred holes are not from shells that pierced the board, but from their fragments.

      Yeah, but "just" 42 305-mm and more than a hundred 152-203-mm got :) :)))) That is, almost 10% of all 305-mm shells fired by the Japanese in that battle got into one Eagle :)))))) )
      1. Comrade
        Comrade April 29 2018 04: 57
        +3
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Yeah, but there’s "just" 42 305-mm and more than a hundred 152-203-mm:

        Dear Andrey, this is a late version of Kostenko, at first it was about all 150 shells hit the "Eagle" were "suitcases", oh how! But over time, Vladimir Polievktovich realized that this was an overkill, and these figures you cited flashed.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 29 2018 11: 54
          +1
          Quote: Comrade
          Dear Andrey, this is a late version of Kostenko, at first it was a question of the fact that all the 150 shells that hit the Orel were “suitcases”, oh how!

          wassat good laughing They killed, stabbed and buried! One hundred fifty 305 mm shells !!!!
  16. Zhenyok Tashkent
    Zhenyok Tashkent April 27 2018 16: 43
    +3
    Very nice site. A lot of different topics, a lot of people familiar with weapons and history. It is very nice to read not only articles, but also comments. Thanks everyone!
  17. kan123
    kan123 April 27 2018 18: 28
    +1
    The heroism of sailors and sailors, there was no doubt - someone was debited from the ships of that squadron - but there were only a few. When the fleet was fed coal by water in the Pacific Ocean, it seemed, they were expecting a telegram from the king - to go on, not to go on. The king sent a telegram that he had to go - boch will help them. They immediately turned into a fleet of suicides. They were not even tasked to win the war — but to “slip quietly” into Vlad (!?!?) Through this river. They covered up this heroism - a crime simply, of His Highness. If the fleet had turned and survived, it would have been a shame - and the tsar would have sent the sailors for slaughter so as not to disgrace (!!!). Everyone knew about this from the admiral to the stoker, that this was their last trip. The sailors did not forgive the highness of the emperor, the sailors began the whole mess - they captured the flagship on the Black Sea, - they had service like a guardhouse, - they were completely disloyal. And no one could stand up and say, at the meeting - the king is with us -. Because he is a boarded up saint, innocent murdered. It only for the sailors had to be put against the wall. Therefore, heroism is undoubtedly - what else can I say - they were suicides - and to cover his asshole with these unnecessary victims is also not a topic.
  18. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 19: 32
    +3
    Quote: kan123
    The king sent a telegram that he had to go - boch will help them. They immediately turned into a fleet of suicides.

    In many ways I do not agree with you. Of course, the king is a criminal, and rightly so, only the daughters are sorry. And Rozhdestvensky is also a scoundrel and a criminal!
    But you are mistaken that they turned into suicides - I conducted a study and it turned out that if Rozhdestvensky showed at least a little talent, then with any version of the actions of the Russian fleet, the Japanese had no chance to win, and in many - the Japanese were waiting for a complete and unconditional defeat.
    Here's an example: the shells of the Russian fleet were unexploded - in essence they were armor-piercing blanks. So, if the Russian fleet went on a simple rapprochement with the Japanese and got closer to the Japanese at a pistol shot distance, then Russian shells would begin to pierce through the armor of Japanese ships. And they would quickly melt everything.
    However, numerous opponents will immediately begin to object to me - they say that the Russian ships had less speed than the Japanese. And especially in this Andrey who from Chelyabinsk will persist. I did not have time to write an article in his refutation. The fact is that, in fact, the speed of the new Russian battleships was approximately equal to the Japanese, or even slightly higher. All profane immediately say that this is nonsense. But in fact, when parking at Vietnam, the entire Russian squadron actively cleaned the sides of the fouling with scrapers, and completely cleaned it, so that the Japanese captured Russian ships wondered why they had such clean skin. And the Japanese, on the contrary, despite the fact that they were in their waters, but apparently did not have time to clean the skin, and instead of 18 knots in Tsushima, they never gave more than 16 knots, and often 12-13 knots. But of course you will immediately rush to object and look for fleas in one or two nodes. You understand that a small difference in speed would not make the weather, because the projectile flies anyway faster than the ship floats. This means that if a slow-moving ship took to catching a high-speed one, and at the same time actively shoots at it, then if the initial distance was small (for example, 10-20 cable - this is 1-2 miles) then with a speed difference of 2 knots, for example, with 20 cable Japanese run away for 60 cable (conditionally ultimate shooting distance) then with a difference of 2 knots of speed they would need 2 hours!! And in 2 hours of frantic shooting, you can use up all the ammunition. Moreover, non-explosive blank shells when fired through penetrate almost through and through the entire enemy ship from stern to bow. And he inevitably stops. You will say that hits will be in Russian ships. Of course! It was only that the Japanese had perfectly exploding shells and they fired immediately upon touching the skin, that is, they could only hit the stem, but in no case get to the steam boilers and vehicles of Russian armadillos. But in any case, several of the Japanese and Russian ships would be damaged and reduce the course. And here a sacramental question arises: "And will you give us your" trash "for us to eat?" That is, any group in a fight with another group faces a dilemma - if one of its members is severely beaten, then will this whole group be suitable for hand-to-hand fighting? All the so-called "experts" do not understand the simplest principle: that the accuracy of the hits and the breakdown power of shells are hugely dependent on the firing distance. That is, at close range almost point blank shells perfectly penetrate the armor and the accuracy of hitting from a distance, for example 5 to 10 cable, is almost one hundred percent. But from a long distance and firing accuracy is greatly deteriorated and armor penetration. Moreover, the Japanese shells exploded immediately after touching the armor, and generally had no armor penetration.
    That is, the bottom line is that if any of the Japanese ships is shot down, the Russian squadron comes close to him and begins to shoot him point-blank. And then the rest of the Japanese squadron must make a choice: either they should all come nearer to fight at pistol distances, where Russian armor-piercing shells quickly perforate them all, or the Japanese will slowly shoot from afar every ten minutes, and calmly wait for their brother.
    And only one version of the Russian defeat in this situation - if Russian ships behave as Rozhestvensky ordered them to - quietly go with a 9-knot speed. But this speed figure was chosen by Rozhdestvensky only on the condition that the speed of the entire squadron is equal to the speed of the slowest ship. And there were only two vehicles in the Russian squadron. If the rogue Rozhestvensky separated the transports and forced them to go either to Shanghai or around Japan, then the whole Russian squadron could have much greater speed and go to frontal rapprochement with the Japanese fleet.
    All ignoramuses will of course immediately say that the Japanese supposedly could run away (especially their high-speed light ships), but you understand that the Russians also had high-speed cruisers and destroyers, and they could attack the Japanese battleships, forcing them to slow down and then it happened would be a pistol fight. You all say that part of the Japanese squadron could still escape. But imagine that the commanders of the escaped Japanese ships stand in front of the Emperor of Japan and tell him that they got scared and fled from the battlefield, leaving their comrades on wrecked and damaged ships.
    In fact, the Japanese had no chance of winning this fight if Rozhdestvensky weren’t a fool. After all, he deliberately delayed the squadron for one day before entering the Strait to conduct a battle on the day of the namesake of Nicholas II, in order to glorify the emperor to the thunder of Russian guns.
    1. kan123
      kan123 April 27 2018 20: 20
      +1
      If you simulate any war, and go through it a thousand times, then there is a way out of any situation. Absolutely from any - you can even flood the entire fleet with just one cruiser. And if you studied - then from Rozhdestvensky, who was guilty only of not defending his opinion - that it was also a considerable crime for the admiral, - he had few new ships - he was detained, and it was not the transporters who forced him to go slower - which and quit to save the squadron, and it was delayed by obsolete ships - which were half the squadron - if he had turned on all the speed on high-speed ones, he would have lost half the guns. Sobsno, the Japanese were shot one at a time, as is customary - they were ordered by Murakami to concentrate fire on the main ships, one at a time they were disabled. And if you studied, you would have to know that the Japanese skill in shooting was simply incommensurable with the Russian gunners. The guns aimed at the ship - anyhow to get. And the Japanese _choice_ where to get, and at that from great distances - whatever they got up "on a pistol shot" - they would just have fun. They were aiming at the gun, aiming at the bridge, aiming at the waterline - and with comparable powers, the guns that the Rozhdestvensky fleet had — the cat was crying — our sailors could only get into force. They were completely unprepared for shooting. Just did not train. The Japanese fired hundreds of times, and the Russian ship went to sea, fired one or two shots - and the "exercises" were considered to be completed. And of course, there was no chance of breaking through - they were waiting there, they blocked everything - they went into the fog at night - but what's the point - this is an armada like that - where to encrypt them there. According to the descriptions, the Japanese admiral, when he realized that for some reason the Russians decided to go into a trap, almost jumped there for joy. He generally did not believe that such stupidity was possible.
      1. shura7782
        shura7782 April 28 2018 00: 41
        0
        . They were completely unprepared for shooting. Just did not train. The Japanese fired hundreds of times, and the Russian ship went to sea, fired one or two shots - and the "exercises" were considered to be completed.
        Sir, is this for you for the whole Baltic Fleet Rozhdestvensky personally told? Or maybe you were analyzing a combat training plan for a year?
        1. unknown
          unknown April 28 2018 05: 09
          0
          This is when the Japanese trained hundreds of times? Moreover, they didn’t produce 12 "shells themselves. But shooting guns? By the way, the destruction of the barrels took place among the British, even before the REV. The reason is the wire construction of the guns.
      2. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse April 28 2018 18: 18
        0
        Quote: kan123
        and he was delayed by obsolete ships - of which there were half the squadron - if he had turned on all the speed on high-speed ones - he would have lost half of the guns.

        In general, for such cases, a technique called maneuvering is used. In this single paragraph, about the obvious mediocrity of Rozhdestvensky, I perhaps agree with the previous speaker. :)
    2. Nehist
      Nehist April 27 2018 20: 40
      +2
      Enchanting !!! Especially about the fact that the Japanese had no chances to win this fight)))) And they didn’t have to win it, it was enough to inflict 2 TOE a lot of damage and let yourself go to Vladivostok and get the dead weight !!! Regarding the attack by destroyers or light cruisers of the EDB and in the daytime, guaranteed suicide.
    3. redf
      redf April 27 2018 21: 29
      +1
      Quote: geniy
      I conducted a study and it turned out that if Rozhdestvensky showed at least a little talent, then with any version of the actions of the Russian fleet, the Japanese had no chance to win, and in many - the Japanese were waiting for a complete and unconditional defeat.

      Already in the goiter stole.
      No, with the fact that there are warriors from the Japanese, like from gov ... but a bullet, I agree. But so that not only the chances to slip through, but also the defeat of the Japanese, this is already over the edge.
      2-3 TOE did not have such chances. Just even because 4 EBRs are class 1, this is power. A bunch of buckets with nuts is far from power.
      Quote: geniy
      That's just that the Japanese had perfectly exploding shells and they fired immediately upon touching the skin, that is, they could only hit the stem, but in no case get to the steam boilers and vehicles of Russian armadillos.

      Do not exaggerate. A pair of "Borodino" was sunk by armor-piercing shells. Because they simply could not be high-explosive.
      Quote: geniy
      Moreover, the Japanese shells exploded immediately after touching the armor, and generally had no armor penetration.

      Borodino and Alexander. Learn what they died from.
      Quote: geniy
      but you understand that the Russians also had high-speed cruisers and destroyers, and they could attack the Japanese battleships, forcing them to slow down and then there would be a battle at a pistol distance.

      1. How do we understand this? Especially given that all this was not.
      2. Cruisers could not attack the Japanese EDB. Because they themselves moved at about their own speed.
      Quote: geniy
      You all say that part of the Japanese squadron could still escape.

      There was no point in running to the Japanese. It's like four seven-graders will run from 10 first-graders. What for?
      You write like that because you are completely unaware of ships. You do not understand what the Russian "EBRs" really were. And what were the Japanese EDB.
      Quote: geniy
      In fact, the Japanese had no chance of winning this fight if Rozhdestvensky weren’t a fool.

      Rozhdestvensky, this is an ordinary Russian naval officer of that time. There were many, Makarov, Tyrtov, etc. etc. He was not a fool. But the naval commander, too. Like the others.
      Quote: geniy
      After all, he deliberately delayed the squadron for one day before entering the Strait to conduct a battle on the day of the namesake of Nicholas II, in order to glorify the emperor to the thunder of Russian guns.

      Leave the notions of Sovagitprop to the boys from school.

      Rozhdestvensky did not have a half chance of success. Since the Japanese, with their 4 first-class EDBs, managed to gouge the RIF in the Yellow Sea, and there were as many as 4 Russian EDBs (with the exception of Retvisan, all are weak), then what can we say about Tsushima. Where not a single EDB in the ranks of the RIF was.
      1. unknown
        unknown April 28 2018 05: 05
        +2
        Your research into the classification of ships is very curious, but it seems you are completely confused. From the meaning of the word AT ALL.
        In Tsushima, the Japanese had four battleships: one completely obsolete, with an incomplete belt, outdated GK installations, an open SK, and low speed; two armadillos with Harvey’s armor, and one modern armadillo. About the defective, the so-called armored cruisers, I already wrote, repeatedly. Their weapons did not allow to fight with armadillos, even with BWO. And the speed is generally lower than any criticism. What kind of cruisers are they who cannot go at the speed of an armadillo?
        PS In general, you should not take the REV for a real war. It is not known when this war was, who the opponents were, the composition and characteristics of the forces. The modern version is nothing more than a literary hoax.
        1. hdgs
          hdgs 1 May 2018 21: 48
          0
          Quote: ignoto
          one completely obsolete with an incomplete belt

          In fact, he was specially like that, "with an incomplete belt." This is called an EDB citadel type. Japanese EDBs, including new ones, were all like that. And in general, in those days in the world only such "wore". But the UGG type "Tsesarevich" and its Russian UGG replica type "Borodino", just did not "wear". It was still early, the nature of the reservation of these ships did not correspond to the level of development of technology of those years.
          In addition, ALL SHIPS 2 and 3 of the TOE were individually inferior to this "completely outdated" Japanese EDB. Including the "latest", such as Borodino.
          Quote: ignoto
          two armadillos with Harvey’s armor, and one modern armadillo.

          Apparently you should be surprised that "one of the newest battleship" was far from the strongest among the Japanese EDB under Tsushima. Much more powerful was Sikishima (with supposedly Harvey, but actually harvey-nickel armor, like Asahi). And the most powerful Japanese EDB at the beginning of the REV was Hatsuse, whom Witgeft killed at Port Arthur.
          What am I doing? It's me that the flagships are not the strongest.
          Examples?
          Mikasa is not the strongest.
          Tsesarevich is not the strongest.
          Russia is not the strongest.
          Petropavlovsk is not very strong.
          Admirals, they are also not suicides. For effective fighting, you need "bulldogs". "Thugs". Therefore, they were always in squadrons, being noticeably stronger than the flagships. From which these "bulldogs" were controlled.
          Quote: ignoto
          About the defective, the so-called armored cruisers, I already wrote, repeatedly.

          Repeatedly repeated nonsense does not cease to be it.
          Quote: ignoto
          Their weapons did not allow to fight with armadillos, even with BWO.

          I am very sad that you do not know what BWO is. Those. you do not understand the type of these ships. And you naively believe that they somehow must fight the armored defenders of trade. Or these same "defenders" must fight them. In fact, their paths could have crossed only thanks to adventures similar to the Russian adventure that led to Tsushima.
          Quote: ignoto
          And the speed is generally below all criticism.

          Below criticism is your constant quoting of a phrase, even in the original source indicated, as extremely doubtful.
          In fact, the practice just speaks of its doubtfulness.
          Quote: ignoto
          What are these cruisers who cannot go at the speed of an armadillo?

          Exactly. So you end up with "Pekingham reports." Stop grinding the obvious rubbish already.
          Quote: ignoto
          It is not known when this war was, who the opponents were, the composition and characteristics of the forces.

          Yes?
      2. Comrade
        Comrade April 29 2018 04: 48
        +2
        Quote: redf
        A pair of "Borodino" was sunk by armor-piercing shells.

        You have already repeated this a hundred times, and a hundred and first time I ask you, where is the evidence? In fact, no one knows what happened to these ships, there are only a few assumptions (not counting your IMHO).
    4. unknown
      unknown April 28 2018 05: 16
      +1
      The Japanese allegedly used "super shells."
      But, firstly, at that time the Japanese did not produce 12 "shells. So, the version with a shimosa duck.
      Secondly, pyroxylin has a explosiveness of 1,45 times greater than the so-called shimoza.
      Thirdly, ALL countries after the REV continue to improve armor-piercing projectile, and the Japanese to WWII are generally without a high-explosive projectile.
      The Japanese did not have any super shells.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 29 2018 11: 55
        +2
        Quote: ignoto
        But, firstly, at that time the Japanese did not produce 12 "shells. So, the version with a shimosa duck.

        Why? The high-explosive shell of England reloaded with a shimoza could well have been that suitcase
        1. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse April 29 2018 18: 56
          +1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          The high-explosive shell of England reloaded with a shimoza could well have been that suitcase

          Sorry, but making a shell from scratch is easier than reloading it with a shimoza.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 30 2018 11: 43
            +3
            Quote: Saxahorse
            Sorry, but making a shell from scratch is easier than reloading it with a shimoza.

            Much harder. Reloading shells with other explosives is not a problem at all
            1. Comrade
              Comrade 1 May 2018 02: 10
              +2
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              reloading shells with other explosives is not a problem at all

              That's it.
              1. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 1 May 2018 03: 24
                0
                Come on .. To put in a shimosa who is afraid of contact with iron instead of just black powder is not a problem? I'm afraid you do not understand the scale of reloading problems.
                1. YELLOWSTONE
                  YELLOWSTONE 1 May 2018 08: 17
                  +1
                  it turned out to be easier to add water to the black powder or something else
                2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 May 2018 12: 23
                  +1
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  Come on .. To put in a shimosa who is afraid of contact with iron instead of just black powder is not a problem?

                  EMNIP wrapped her up with something, just affairs
                  1. Saxahorse
                    Saxahorse 1 May 2018 16: 02
                    +1
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    EMNIP wrapped her up with something, just affairs

                    That's it! If black powder was poured into the shell (and TNT was poured), the shimosa should be invested, moreover, tightly, without gaps and backlashes. For this, the shell must suddenly become collapsible. If a small fuse-igniter is enough for black powder, then a large intermediate detonator is needed for shimoza. And it also needs to be fixed.

                    It turns out that to replace the filling the shell needs to be thoroughly redone. I do not claim that the Japanese did not buy shells on the side, especially since witnesses confirm the explosions of the Japanese shells in two colors, black and yellow. But alteration of the finished projectile is complex and clearly not practical.
                3. Comrade
                  Comrade 2 May 2018 02: 14
                  +1
                  Do you know what “Furoshiki” means? I mean, not what it is (this is a shell), but why the Japanese began to call their commons? That's when you find out whythen you will understand your wrong.
                  Andrey has a hint for you in the comment above, I’ll add that this is Japanese slang, the same as our “suitcase”.
                  1. Saxahorse
                    Saxahorse 2 May 2018 18: 24
                    +1
                    You are so cute! Already half a year answer specific questions in riddles :)

                    If you cannot confirm the accuracy of your information, you should not consider it the only true one.
            2. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 1 May 2018 03: 24
              0
              What are you saying!
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 May 2018 12: 24
                +1
                Well, what do you see the problem?
      2. Saxahorse
        Saxahorse April 29 2018 18: 53
        +1
        Quote: ignoto
        But, firstly, at that time the Japanese did not make 12 "shells. So, the version with a shimosa duck

        Where does this duck come from that the Japanese didn’t produce shells at 12 "? There are factories, there are arsenals, they produce explosives, fuses (tubes) are produced, but here are shells at 12" they didn’t produce "and that’s the point .. Where did this nonsense come from, who do I will explain?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 30 2018 11: 44
          +2
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Where did this nonsense come from, who will explain to me?

          This is not nonsense, but a fact - the Japanese did not produce 305-mm shells, they could not afford it then. I myself learned about this recently. I must note that a heavy projectile is an extremely difficult thing to produce.
          1. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 1 May 2018 03: 37
            0
            Unfortunately, no one explained why it suddenly became a "fact." Sorry, but this is just not serious.
        2. Comrade
          Comrade 1 May 2018 01: 58
          +3
          Quote: Saxahorse
          Where did this duck come from that the Japanese didn’t produce shells in 12? "Where did this nonsense come from, who can explain to me?

          Let me try. There is a multivolume source published in Russia under the heading "secret", one of the volumes is devoted to Japan, which describes in detail the composition of the naval forces, and ports, and infrastructure, and factories for the production of guns and ammunition. It says that the maximum caliber mastered by Japanese industry is 152 mm.
          As for the fact that
          Quote: Saxahorse
          making a shell from scratch is easier than reloading it with a shimoza
          then you are mistaken. The Japanese cast-iron large-caliber projectile was mastered, for example, for cruisers of the Matsushima type. But, firstly, this is small-scale production, almost artisanal, and secondly, the Japanese then did not have the technology for cooking steel of the required grades for the manufacture of thin-walled steel shells. Russia didn’t have such technology either, hence our ordeal with thick-walled shells, in which the explosive content is relatively low.
          Regarding the reloading of British shells with shimoza, this is a historical fact that I personally discovered for myself a few weeks ago when I read one of the reports of the English observer. In particular, he gives several tables with a qualitative and quantitative description of the Asahi ammunition, one table refers to the battle at Cape Shantung, the second to the Tsushima battle. Separate asterisks indicate the shells that the Japanese "craftsmen" tried to improve by loading them with shimoza. Alas, there is no information there, the shells arrived loaded, and the Japanese simply changed their explosives, or they received empty blanks, which were equipped with a "shimoza". It is simply said in a note that the shells marked with an asterisk were equipped with the Japanese.
          1. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 1 May 2018 03: 35
            +1
            I have already asked you several times to name this mysterious source to which you refer all the time. "Very secret" even after a hundred years is not an argument. Are you sure it really exists?

            I have to once again note that your statements about the impossibility of the Japanese to produce their shells do not withstand even elementary criticism.

            I am aware that in Japan there were problems with resources. About 60% of the steel they bought stupidly at that time and in the same way they are buying today. But this does not mean at all that they are not able to make the shell they need from the steel purchased.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk 1 May 2018 12: 27
              +2
              Quote: Saxahorse
              I have to once again note that your statements about the impossibility of the Japanese to produce their shells do not withstand even elementary criticism.

              Where is the criticism? There is a fact - the manufacture of a large-caliber projectile is a complex technological process. There is a second fact - in those years, Japan still could not do much on its own.
              1. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 1 May 2018 16: 11
                +2
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Where is the criticism? There is a fact - the manufacture of a large-caliber projectile is a complex technological process. There is a second fact - in those years, Japan still could not do much on its own.

                However, Japan made shells of smaller calibers. As did its explosives and its fuses. I gave you a description of Balakin: 1. "forged", 2. "cast" 12 "Japanese shells. Other authors, as we see, Japanese shells know.

                Complete dependence on the supplier located only at a distance of 18000 kilometers is contrary to common sense. Sudden cost overruns in battle, fire in the warehouse and crap, the fleet was left without a main caliber for six months or a year. Common sense is not always present in history, but its absence must be seriously confirmed.
                1. Comrade
                  Comrade 2 May 2018 01: 31
                  +1
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  I gave you a description of Balakin: 1. Forged, 2. "cast" 12 "Japanese shells.

                  Again. Balakin took this data from the report of the English observer, but there, in the original, it is not said that the shells are Japanese-made, as Balakin insists on this. Not only is Balakin a gag, but he also incorrectly indicated the shells.
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  Full dependence on the supplier located only at a distance of 18000 kilometers is contrary to common sense.

                  You will be very surprised, but the English 12 '' shells were bought not only by the Japanese, but also by the Americans, moreover, after the Spanish-American war. There are specific numbers, dates and prices for shells.
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  Sudden overrun in battle

                  Can you name the cases when the fleet of the era of armor and steam loaded and transported all their ammunition aboard battleships?
                  Quote: Saxahorse
                  fire in the warehouse and crap, the fleet was left without a main caliber for six months to a year

                  Again, it would be a good example when a fire in an arsenal would deprive any fleet of all ammunition.
                  And if there are no examples, then what is the point of creating horror stories? So you can refer to any hypothetical case, up to a meteorite falling on the shell depot, etc.
                  1. Saxahorse
                    Saxahorse 2 May 2018 18: 18
                    +1
                    Is Kronstadt an example? I remember the guys were lucky .. 10 kilotons of TNT just burned down, but it could have exploded :)

                    In addition to the fire, I want to recall a more than likely event called political disagreement. If you suddenly know - Britain still threw Japan in the 20s into an alliance with America. But they could have done it before. Nobody buys weapons without providing guarantees of the ability to supply them with ammunition ..
          2. 27091965
            27091965 1 May 2018 16: 57
            +4
            Quote: Comrade
            But, firstly, this small-scale production, almost artisanal, and secondly, the Japanese then did not have the technology for cooking steel of the required grades for the manufacture of thin-walled steel shells.


            " In May 1901, the production of nickel chromium steels began in the Osaka arsenal. This time is considered the start of nickel chrome steel production. In August of the same year, the first 12 and 6 inch shells were made. "Military Industries of Japan, Masuda Norimoto, 1922

            It is clear that they could not satisfy all the needs of the fleet, but the shells were produced not in a makeshift way.
            1. hdgs
              hdgs 1 May 2018 21: 29
              0
              Quote: 27091965i
              "In May 1901, the production of nickel-chromium steels began in the Osaka arsenal. This time is considered the beginning of the production of nickel-chromium steel. In August of the same year, the first 12 and 6 inch shells were made." Japanese Military, Masuda Norimoto, 1922

              It is clear that they could not satisfy all the needs of the fleet, but the shells were produced not in a makeshift way.

              A nightmare is a nightmare. A complete break of the template from the main naval writers of this site.
              1. Comrade
                Comrade 2 May 2018 02: 03
                +3
                Quote: hdgs
                A nightmare is a nightmare.

                Man, I’m trying to sprinkle an article here, on the Tsushima anniversary, so I beg your kindness to number that way 12 or so laughing Come in easily, according to old memory, let's talk wink
              2. 27091965
                27091965 2 May 2018 11: 26
                +1
                Quote: hdgs
                A nightmare is a nightmare. A complete break of the template from the main naval writers of this site.


                If you have noticed, I prefer to provide a comment on my commentary on the source of information and the date of publication. If you have other data, provide them, but with a source of information and the date of publication. It is not worth referring to Internet sites without indicating their name.
                1. hdgs
                  hdgs 2 May 2018 11: 34
                  +2
                  Quote: 27091965i
                  If you have noticed, I prefer to provide a comment on my comment on the source of information and the date of publication.

                  Actually, this is exactly what I had in mind. And by "naval writers of this site" I meant, just NOT you. And even put a comment to the little commenter that I do kryne infrequently. winked
                  1. 27091965
                    27091965 2 May 2018 12: 03
                    +1
                    Quote: hdgs
                    And even put a comment to the little commenter that I do kryne infrequently.


                    Thank you, but to be honest I do not understand the meaning of the plus or minus. In my opinion, first of all, on the forum, we exchange the knowledge that we have, learn something new.
                    1. hdgs
                      hdgs 2 May 2018 12: 34
                      0
                      Quote: 27091965i
                      Thank you, but to be honest I do not understand the meaning of the plus or minus.

                      This is for the kids.
                      And for those who are from childhood and not higher.
                      And for those who have already returned to it.
                      Everyone else is not interested.
                      Quote: 27091965i
                      In my opinion, first of all, on the forum, we exchange the knowledge that we have, learn something new.

                      It would be nice if, in fact, everything would be so. But not everyone is doing it.
            2. Comrade
              Comrade 2 May 2018 01: 49
              +1
              Quote: 27091965i
              In May 1901, Osaka began manufacturing nickel-chromium steels in its arsenal.

              There is obviously a mistake, they don’t pour steel in the arsenals, they do it in steel mills. The Japanese have this (in the period under discussion) a plant in Yawata. At first, 60 000 tons (the range included four types of products).
              Quote: 27091965i
              In August of that year, the first 12 and 6 inch shells were made

              And here is an inaccuracy, 6 '' the Japanese began to make shells from steel much earlier.

              Quote: 27091965i
              It is clear that they could not satisfy all the needs of the fleet, but the shells were produced not in a makeshift way.

              By this time, no longer, no one argues. But after all, a cruiser of the Matsushima type did not come to Japan in 1901.
              Cast-iron shells of all calibers, up to 320-mm, the Japanese mastered, but with steel not very glued. In any case, the reports of the English observer from Asahi did not say that the steel 12 '' shells were made in Japan, but it was said that some of the shells used by the 28 on July were equipped by the Japanese.
              The last truth in the instance is Japanese documents that anyone can look at, but read ... Here it takes time or a lot of money for a translator.
              By the way, one more interesting fact. During the Tsushima battle, the 75-mm Mikasy guns fired with shells of French manufacture, specifically the Hotchkiss company. It would seem that there are ours, so why was it necessary to bring from France? But they drove.
              1. 27091965
                27091965 2 May 2018 09: 50
                +1
                Quote: Comrade
                There is obviously a mistake, they don’t pour steel in the arsenals, they do it in steel mills. The Japanese have this (in the period under discussion) a plant in Yawata. At first, 60 000 tons (the range included four types of products).


                In Japan at that time, the term arsenal meant the union of military-industrial enterprises. Osako's arsenal included a military uniform factory, an artillery factory, and a metallurgical plant.

                And here is an inaccuracy, 6 '' shells made of steel by the Japanese began much earlier


                My previous comment implied steel shells, the industrial production of which began in the 1901 year.
                Since 1884, Italian engineers and military specialists were invited to manufacture guns and shells.
                In 1888, Japan modernized artillery and foundries, purchased equipment for the manufacture of shells for new types of guns.
                In August 1890, a comparative test of shells made of cast iron of Italian and Japanese production was carried out. They showed equal characteristics in the quality of cast iron.

                But after all, a cruiser of the Matsushima type did not come to Japan in 1901.


                It is difficult to give an exact answer for shells for the main caliber guns of these cruisers, only three guns. To begin the industrial production of shells for them, it seems to me, it would not be reasonable.

                Thanks for the scan, I read this edition. In my opinion, this book has been saved with me, I need to look.
                1. Comrade
                  Comrade 3 May 2018 05: 25
                  +2
                  Quote: 27091965i
                  Osako's arsenal included a military uniform factory, an artillery factory, and a metallurgical plant.

                  Could you put the page from some source confirming this statement?
                  Quote: 27091965i
                  My previous comment implied steel shells, the industrial production of which began in the 1901 year.

                  And on the page I laid out it says that the production of such shells began long before the 1901.
                  Quote: 27091965i
                  To begin the industrial production of shells for them, it seems to me, it would not be reasonable.

                  Perhaps you mean medium or large-scale production?

                  PS I’m sorry, I can’t answer more in this thread, there’s almost no time. So whether to answer me or not is up to you.
                  1. 27091965
                    27091965 3 May 2018 07: 57
                    0
                    Could you put the page from some source confirming this statement?




                    It is better to read the whole book, during the period before the Russo-Japanese War, changes occurred in the arsenal, some plants were withdrawn from its structure, others were added.

                    And on the page I laid out it says that the production of such shells began long before the 1901.


                    The grade used is implied, that is, Japan received in 1901 the opportunity to produce better shells, as well as thin-walled ones.

                    Perhaps you mean medium or large-scale production?


                    Absolutely.
              2. Saxahorse
                Saxahorse 2 May 2018 18: 36
                +1
                Quote: Comrade
                There’s an obvious mistake, they don’t pour steel in the arsenals, they do it in steel mills

                In addition to the "blast furnace", "open-hearth furnaces" and "converters" in the technologies of modern civilization from the 18th century there are "horns" directly intended for the smelting and preparation of steel of the required composition directly at the plant. Any self-respecting instrumental workshop has such. Not to mention arms factories.
  19. geniy
    geniy April 27 2018 22: 15
    +3
    Quote: Nehist
    Enchanting !!! Especially about the fact that the Japanese did not have any trenches to win this fight))))

    Yes, the Japanese had no chance. And you are considering only one option - the battle in the Korea Strait, and I considered 5 options: Passage through the Sangarsky Strait, passage around Japan through the Laperuzov Strait, Based on the Pacific Islands and attacks such as guerrilla warfare, Battle in the Korean Strait near Tsushima Island, and secret passage without battle past the island of Tsushima. But the difference between me and everyone else is that other history buffs assume that Russians in any case will act like fools, and I considered that they would be smart.
    Now it’s hard for me to remember all the details of my plans. So sorry.
    Well, for example, a secret passage past the island of Tsushima. Firstly, the main condition is that there is no fool of Christmas. And the admiral instead sent him to Shanghai all low-speed transports, and hospital ships too. And under this condition, it was possible to count on a squadron move of about 14 knots. I know that you all operate with a move figure of 12-13 knots, but this is your mistake, because before cleaning it from fouling.
    And if you remember, it is precisely that one of the hospital ships, according to the law on navigation, carried all the required distinctive lights, while the rest of the Russian squadron went in complete blackout. And the sentinel Japanese cruiser discovered the lights of a hospital ship. Novikov surf perfectly wrote about this. And if there were no lights, then there would be no timely detection. Of course, the Russian squadron was necessarily found in the morning somewhere around 7-8 hours, but the fact is that the main Japanese squadron stood at the port, and it took two hours to breed couples and assemble the team, preparing for the exit, and this time it received due to the detection of lights hospital ship and scoundrel Rozhestvensky. But if the Japanese had discovered the Russians at 2 o’clock in the morning, and Rozhdestvensky would not have forbidden to prevent the Japanese from telegraphing, then the Russian signalmen could arrange a huge amount of interference that looks like ordinary lightning discharges and it is impossible to understand what it is. Therefore, any Japanese fast ship would have to go to the port and spend 8 hours personally bringing a report to the admiral of Togo. Even if an order is issued for an urgent removal from anchor, there is another 2 hours of loss to raise vapors, and another 2 hours to arrive in the middle of the Korea Strait. Total: 2 + 2 + 2 = 2 hours late. And during these 6 hours, the Russian squadron passes 6x6 knots = 14 miles. Even if the Japanese squadron goes at a maximum speed of its EDB = 84 knots, then in fact the difference is only 16 knots, and dividing 2 miles of the original distance, we get that the Japanese will catch up with the Russians in 84: 84 knots of the speed difference = 2 hours (almost two days. And the Russian squadron to go to Vladivostok 42 miles at a speed of 500 knots = 14 hours. It turns out that under such conditions, the Japanese squadron, in principle, could not catch up with the Russian before it entered Vladivostok.
    1. Nickname_2
      Nickname_2 April 27 2018 22: 30
      +1
      I support Mr. H. It is difficult to explain the defeat of Rozhestvensky’s squadron, although historians of many generations are trying to do this. There are many great reasons ... but all of them are not fatal. HIS MAJESTY CASE! As well as the death of Makarov ... I support Mr. X.
      1. redf
        redf April 27 2018 23: 53
        +1
        Quote: Nick nick_2
        It is difficult to explain the defeat of Rozhestvensky’s squadron, although historians of many generations are trying to do this.

        In fact, the defeat of Rozhestvensky’s squadron is clear and understandable, as twice as two. And everything has long been explained.
        Quote: Nick nick_2
        HIS MAJESTY CASE

        What, what?
        Quote: Nick nick_2
        As well as the death of Makarov

        And the death of this officer of the naval department has to do with it?
        1. Nickname_2
          Nickname_2 April 28 2018 10: 14
          0
          Poor fellow! ... The British in the description of each officer had a graph - LUCKY (or luck). That was until the 60s (at least)
    2. unknown
      unknown April 28 2018 04: 53
      +2
      The maximum speed of the Japanese squadron is 15 knots. It was slowed down by Fuji and Azuma.
    3. Comrade
      Comrade April 29 2018 04: 36
      +4
      Quote: geniy
      and I considered: Passage through the Sangar Strait, passage around Japan through the Laperuz Strait

      Everything was mined there in advance, and in an adult way. The Japanese created a special committee, which for quite some time studied the straits for mining, and made recommendations on how to best mine the straits, taking into account tidal phenomena, and at the same time not interest the local caboters.

      Quote: geniy
      And if there were no lights, then there would be no timely detection.

      You are mistaken, in fact, the squadron of Rozhestvensky was discovered several times, just the discovery of it by the cruiser Izumi became the most famous.
      Our observers were the first to see two observers from one of the reefs where the SNiS post was equipped, then they were spotted by Japanese fishermen, and only then the Izumi spotted the lights of the hospital ship.

      Quote: geniy
      the main Japanese squadron stood at the port, and for 2 hours it made couples and gathering a team, preparing to leave

      In fact, after an hour and a half, the Japanese went to sea, the benefit of the couple was always divorced from them, and the team had nowhere to gather, because the United Fleet was in the Puto Strait, and there was simply nowhere to go to the dismissal.
  20. Vedzmin
    Vedzmin April 27 2018 22: 34
    +2
    Thank you for covering this page of the history of our fleet. Difficult working fate and a worthy death of the cruiser.
  21. Comrade
    Comrade April 28 2018 03: 28
    +8
    Quote: redf
    I do not know such a "duty" of Mikluha that would be worth at least one life. And he put there not one of them.

    Kolya, you are not given to understand the people who performed debt of honor and observing maritime regulations.
    This is secondly, and firstly, since we started talking about "saving lives" in the war by surrendering together with the weapons entrusted, Nebogatov’s excuses about the allegedly saved by him 2 000 lives - the miserable babble of Judah and coward. At Admiral Ushakov from 406 crew members died in two days of fighting 94, on the "Rurik" of 800 died around 200. Therefore, to say that giving up the battle with the Japanese for the sake of salvation is exactly 2 000 lives is a demagogy for liberals and the liberal press, easily refuted by historical facts.
  22. geniy
    geniy April 28 2018 21: 35
    +3
    Quote: redf
    Do not exaggerate. A pair of "Borodino" was sunk by armor-piercing shells. Because they simply could not be high-explosive.

    The question is: what kind of shells really were in the Russian-Japanese war is so important that it needs to be disassembled first of all, Andrei from Chelyabinsk will wait with answers. And the topic of Japanese and Russian shells is the most important thing that needs to be considered in how the Russo-Japanese war took place, because at the beginning of the war the Japanese shells acted in one way - they often did not explode, and at the end of the war they exploded completely, but more often even in the trunks of their own Japanese guns. And from this ignorance comes the second misconception of redf - as if the difference in the two battles as ships, but in fact in these two battles in the Yellow Sea and Tsushima, Japanese shells exploded in fundamentally different ways. And therefore, the word "gouging RIF in the Yellow Sea", unrecognized readers must understand correctly. Despite the fact that it was a hard long battle, but not a single Russian ship was sunk in it! Yes, at the end of the battle the Russian squadron scattered in different directions, and many of our ships were seriously damaged, but the Japanese, too, received many serious injuries! So essentially the success of the Japanese in the Yellow Sea was only moral. But in Tsushima, most of the Russian ships were sunk, while others surrendered.
    managed to gouge the RIF in the Yellow Sea ... what can we say about Tsushima.
    But the Russian shells in all the battles of the strategic nuclear forces acted in exactly the same way - they simply did not explode.
    None of you actually know how the shells of both sides actually acted in the REV. I have conducted many years of research, and now I am the only person in the world who knows the truth about ammunition. But I am too lazy to describe in detail this whole huge story, and now I will reveal to you only a small piece of truth. The fact is that all this is highly classified, and all naval historians carefully hide the truth from ordinary lovers of military history. I was able to reveal this secret bit by bit, and not completely. But you, everyone else, remain at the mercy of many years of myths and delusions.
    So: many years before Tsushima, Russian naval gunners carried out special experiments, trying to improve the armor penetration of armor-piercing shells with new types of armor: Harveyev, steel-nickel and Krupp armor already appearing. And during these experimental shootings (which are now strictly classified, despite the past almost one and a half hundred years), a striking unpleasant effect was found - the shells did not want to penetrate new armor for anything, but immediately exploded when it was touched. (but this has not been written anywhere and none of you will be able to find any descriptions). The fact is that when a shell hits an armor, then if the armor is thick enough - for example, 300-400 millimeters
    Harvardian or steel-manned, then an almost instantaneous stop of the projectile occurs, and the overload reaches tens or even hundreds of thousands g. This causes an instant compression of the explosive filling of the projectile, and it explodes in millions of seconds, so that the nose of the projectile, without having time to penetrate and pierce the armor, immediately shatters into small fragments. Thus, such a premature explosion on the outer surface of the armor does not cause penetration, but leaves only deep scratches on the surface of the armor.
    And so the Russian gunners set a goal - to achieve one hundred percent penetration of thick armor, so that the shell during the passage of the thickness of the armor plate would remain intact, and the explosion would necessarily occur from the opposite side of the armor. But it turned out that fulfilling this condition is incredibly difficult, almost impossible. Russians
    the gunners tried to use any types of explosives known at that time, but all of them could not withstand the impact of the shell on the armor and spontaneously detonated prematurely.
    But here, most likely, very competent experts will immediately recall trinitrotoluene, that is, TNT, which withstands even firing with rifle bullets and does not explode spontaneously. However, I recall that trinitrotoluene appeared much later on the border of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and received widespread use only during the First World War. So the Russian artillerymen of the nineteenth century did not know anything about TNT and could not have it. And so they tried different types of explosives, and it turned out that none of them can withstand the impact of the projectile on the armor: dynamite explodes spontaneously (dynamite is essentially a simple nitroglycerin placed in a sponge). Ordinary black powder - explodes with a large thickness of armor, dry pyroxylin explodes, and picric acid (melinite) also explodes. But here the Russian gunners noticed one important circumstance: if you increase the humidity of pyroxylin, then it begins to better withstand the force of impact.
    The fact is that Russian shells of ordinary field guns were equipped with wet pyroxylin, which included about 20% of ordinary water. But it turned out that raising humidity much more than 20% does not succeed. And so the Russian gunners made a large number of experiments that are still classified, apparently invented some special technology not known in other countries, and they managed to increase the humidity of pyroxylin to about
    30-33%. And then Russian armor-piercing shells began to normally penetrate thick armor. And on top of that, how to noted ignoto: "pyroxylin has a site of 1,45 times higher explosive than the so-called shimosa". That is, the Russians created the best shells in the world. But then the fuses made a giant meanness to them ...
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 29 2018 12: 03
      +3
      Quote: geniy
      But it turned out that raising humidity is much more than 20% does not succeed. And so the Russian gunners made a large number of experiments that are still classified, apparently invented some special technology not known in other countries, and they managed to increase the humidity of pyroxylin to about
      30-33%.

      I will prompt. Take water and dilute :)))))
      Quote: geniy
      And in addition to this, as ignoto correctly noted: "pyroxylin has a 1,45 explosive capacity higher than the so-called shimoza."

      Yeah. Only here it drains the chimose outright for brisance, and also - the pyroxylin has a higher explosiveness, those 20 or 33% of the water in its composition do not have a high explosivity :)))))
      At the same time, one should take into account the need to “wrap” pyroxyln in special waterproof packaging, which also takes away weight.
      Quote: geniy
      That is, the Russians created the best shells in the world.

      It is enough to look at the weight of the explosives in the Russian shell to understand how absurd this statement is.
      In general, for example, after the war, the fleet preferred to leave a cruiser of the Bayan type AT ALL without armor-piercing shells than to carry the Dotsushima
      1. geniy
        geniy 5 May 2018 23: 55
        +1
        The dispute over shells is only part of the debate about the reasons for the monstrous defeat of the Russian fleet in Tsushima, so almost all armored ships were sunk in this battle, and those that did not have time to sink would have been easily shot the next day, but they surrendered. But despite over a hundred plus years, absolutely nobody (excuse me except me) has been able to guess for what reason this happened. Many history buffs put forward their often absurd versions. And even the most intelligent and knowledgeable, such as Andrei from Ch and some others possess only small pieces of knowledge, or even completely distort the facts.
        This is due to the fact that most people tend to look for simple explanations, albeit completely incorrect, if only they confirm the fact they describe. This is called fitting the solution of the problem to the result. That is what bad students do in a modern school. That is, in our times it was necessary to solve problems independently. And now, in school textbooks, the answer is written in advance, and the student must choose the right solution for the answer given to him. But this is at school that the teacher knows how to solve the problem correctly, and can check the student, and many students, hoping for the teachers' carelessness, brazenly write completely stupid solutions to the problems, and in the end they simply put the correct answer they took from the textbook.
        And in such a complex case as the analysis of the Tsushima battle no one knows the right solution. But then everyone knows the end result: the Russian fleet is defeated and sunk. And so the majority of "experts" and history buffs in relation to the Tsushima battle, just like bad students at school, fit the well-known answer (the rout of the Russian fleet) to any explanation they like. And in order to explain the defeat, these “experts” use the simple rule: if the Russians lost, then everything was supposedly bad: the ships were bad, the guns were bad, and the shells were bad, and the sailors were bad, and the gunners were bad. And such people include Andrei from Ch and hdgs, and all the others. And often, in order to show those readers who know history even worse than Andrei from Chelyabinsk, they do not shy away from brazenly misinterpreting the facts.
        So for example Andrew writes
        At the same time, one should take into account the need to “wrap” pyroxyln in special waterproof packaging, which also takes away weight.
        But in reality, this drawback did not belong at all to pyroxylin in Russian shells, but quite the contrary to shimose in Japanese shells. The fact is that pyroxylin is a fairly calm substance from a chemical point of view, it does not tend to come into contact with other substances - the metals surrounding it.
        But shimoza (Shimose melene) is just picric acid, which, as all acids should be, happily comes into contact with most metals (especially iron) and picric acid salts are formed - picrates, which are extremely explosive. And I have an assumption that, despite the careful closure of shimoza in Japanese shells, but apparently Japanese masters of shelling allowed marriage during the Tsushima battle when such shells with internal marriage were loaded into the barrel, then the Japanese had explosions of their own guns, of which several .
        And unlike shimosa, pyroxylin is quite stable. Akndrey from Ch apparently does not understand that the explosive pyroxylin is an almost complete chemical analogue of the smokeless pyroxylin Russian (and German) gunpowder, which naturally served as an excellent propellant for shells of any caliber (while the British used nitroglycerin gunpowder, and they had them in Jutland several battle and armored cruisers exploded in battle). Well, I will not write a long post, exposing the rest of Andrei’s mistakes, maybe I’m going to cover these issues in subsequent posts.
    2. hdgs
      hdgs 1 May 2018 20: 57
      +1
      Quote: geniy
      And from this ignorance comes the second misconception of redf - as if the difference in the two battles as ships, but in fact in these two battles in the Yellow Sea and Tsushima, Japanese shells exploded in fundamentally different ways.

      You know how to make fun. It is necessary to DO NOT UNDERSTAND in the ships so as not to see the difference between the EDB, even if they are not very good (Tsesarevich, Poltava and Pobeda, only Retvisan was not bad) and the set of buckets with nuts that Russia drove to Tsushima.
      I remind you that all of the Russian "Tsushima EDB" were of domestic production. Except the ancient Navarin. And this is a bad sign.
      The second bad sign was that the ships were on the domestic element base (although sometimes licensed).
      The third bad sign was that they were ships of the Russian project. Everything, even the Borodino people.
      The fourth bad sign was that RIF was very fond of calling ships the word EDB. At the same time, the mass of them was not fully or partially any EDB (even outdated).
      At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the maximum that Russia managed to do on a fully domestic element base is the obsolete (even at birth) EDB 2nd class Victory. The rest was either imported (Retvizan and Tsesarevich), or on imported element base (Poltava).
      Using the method of simple comparative analysis, we are convinced that in the 2nd and 3rd part of the TOE there simply could not be an EDB. Despite the fact that there were a lot of ships with that name.
      I would be able to describe in detail all the jambs of "the latest Russian EDB type Borodino." But you look for it yourself. There are sites where these shoals are described quite fully.
      + In addition, the incompetence of Rozhdestvensky and other “personnel”. The result of Tsushima simply could not be different. And do not poke around in Japanese and Russian shells. The root is not there.
      Quote: geniy
      So essentially the success of the Japanese in the Yellow Sea was only moral.

      The fact that 1 TOE ceased to exist, and then almost all was captured by the Japanese, is it "moral success"?
      Quote: geniy
      I have conducted many years of research, and now I am the only person in the world who knows the truth about ammunition.

      Wah!
      Quote: geniy
      That is, the Russians created the best shells in the world. But then the fuses made a giant meanness to them ...

      You know, I don’t believe you.
      Why?
      Because I’ve heard 1386 times about the "best in the world." True, this was more about the Soviet period. And you dig this "best in the world", and inside the trash. Verbal crap.
      Therefore, I do not believe it. And because I do not believe that Russia was far from the most advanced country of those years. And not the most advanced are diligent; they, as a rule, are not the most advanced in everything. After all, it’s a strange thing, the best shells in the world, and fuses are nonsense.
      The best shells in the world, and guns are nonsense.
      The best shells in the world, and ships are nonsense.
      It does not happen.
  23. Senior seaman
    Senior seaman April 29 2018 16: 40
    +3
    Quote: kan123
    . And the Russian fleet fired once two times - just to know what to press. .

    Ten firing in Reval, and five during the campaign. True Novikov did not write about what was happening in Revel, because the “Eagle” was still under construction at that time and did not have time to complete preparation.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 29 2018 18: 13
      +2
      Ivan, I welcome categorically! I am glad to see you :)))
      1. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman April 29 2018 18: 41
        0
        Mutually, dear colleague drinks
  24. shura7782
    shura7782 3 May 2018 11: 36
    +1
    Quote: hdgs
    Quote: shura7782
    We hope that in captivity you will be well. Maybe you will be a burden to them. Cut your throat and that's it.

    Cutting the throat of a prisoner of war is a war crime. In many countries, it is punishable by hanging by the neck.
    A shootout without any chance of success (in fact, a kind of suicide by one of the parties) is interpreted by international law as a “battle of armed opponents”. Destruction of such an enemy is considered a duty of a soldier and is not punishable in any way.
    You would at least learn elementary things for a start.

    You would at least learn elementary things for a start
    Thanks, I studied in Afghanistan.
    Let me curiosity. Are you a practitioner or a theorist?
    1. The comment was deleted.
  25. Tomato
    Tomato 3 May 2018 17: 57
    0
    Great article. Thanks to the author. All I wanted to say. said before me.
    I will only leave it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj1nvwTyeBo
    Watch on the big screen.
  26. geniy
    geniy 6 May 2018 07: 43
    +1
    So, I will remind everyone of the essence of our differences. According to my version, the Tsushima defeat did not occur at all from the fact that the alleged Russian ships were bad, the Russian sailors were bad, the Russian gunners were bad, the Russian guns were bad, and the Russian shells were bad. But in fact, during this battle with shells (both Russian and Japanese), simply incredible, paradoxical phenomena occurred. But the trouble is that the Russian sailors knew absolutely nothing about these phenomena. The Japanese did not know either. And in general, not a single person on earth understands this - I was the only one who got up, although I found on the Internet one writer who, by the edge of his knowledge, began to reveal this secret, but unfortunately he stopped halfway, and then got confused in the wilds and stopped continuing solve this mystery. And personally, my super task is to try to make all of you think, and not to try to find information about the Tsushima battle in books, because not even the most intelligent analyzers have figured out what really happened with the shells, although if you read carefully, some hints of the strange behavior of shells in Tsushima sometimes slip.
    And so, to make you think, I will first expose the mistakes of Andrei from Chelyabinsk. Although he knows more than many, his mistakes are still very great. And now, having clearly demonstrated these misconceptions, I hope to make a break in the pattern of the brain for you to finally begin to think that everything was not so simple in Tsushima regarding the falls and explosions of shells.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Yeah. Only here it drains the chimose outright for brisance, and also - the pyroxylin has a higher explosiveness, those 20 or 33% of the water in its composition do not have a high explosivity :)))))

    Andrei writes that shimoza has “brisance” higher than pure pyroxylin, and he is absolutely right in this. But professionals versed in chemistry and pyrotechnics will immediately understand that Andrei is a complete ignoramus in this matter. The fact is that the brisance and explosiveness of explosives are their two directly opposite properties. Explosiveness - this is essentially the volume of gases formed during the explosion. And brisance is the speed of detonation of explosives. High explosiveness is needed in order to throw out a large amount of land or water, and brisance is needed to crack any solid substance (for example, shell shell) into small fragments. So, for example, if you mix any gas or gasoline with air - figuratively speaking, you will get a big explosiveness but a weak blasting effect - that is, a relatively small shock wave velocity. This is clearly seen in the most common gasoline engines: there, the fast detonation combustion of fuel is a terrible harm, but figuratively speaking, the "high explosiveness" of a gasoline explosion in the engine cylinder is just very important.
    And the most brilliant are types of explosives such as explosive mercury and lead azide, which are used only in capsules.
    And Andrei and you all the others apparently don’t know that explosive scientists still don’t even know by which particular parameter they need to measure the effectiveness of explosives: by explosive capacity or by brisance?
  27. geniy
    geniy 6 May 2018 08: 18
    +1
    And now Andrei is trying to prove to all other readers that the alleged Russian shells were bad because I had much less explosive weight (if my memory serves me, then Russians seem to have 2,5%, and Japanese high-explosive ones as much as 10%. Excuse me - I’m not interested in exact numbers right now, I don’t want to waste my precious time searching for them, although they are definitely in my home library.The main thing is that the weight of the explosives in Russian shells was several times less than in Japanese - and this is what Andrei absolutely right, and besides, part of the weight of explosives in US shells were occupied by water (approximately 33%). To all amateurs (and Andrei) it seems that this ratio is one hundred percent proof that Russian shells were worse than Japanese, because they have not only brisance, but also a higher explosiveness. But this is yours general misconception.
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    That is, the Russians created the best shells in the world.
    It is enough to look at the weight of the explosives in the Russian shell to understand how absurd this statement is.

    and also - the pyroxylin has a higher explosiveness; those 20 or 33% of the water in its composition do not have a pyrogenic :)))))

    In fact, amateurs do not understand at all that the main thing in the explosion of a shell is its fragmentation effect, but not high-explosive or brisant. The fact is that heavy fragments of large-caliber shells fly a huge distance from one hundred meters to half a kilometer (this is in radius, that is, they hit an area with a diameter of about a kilometer). But of course there are few such fragments, and not every one of them hits the target. But a high-explosive explosion in the open air creates a very small zone of destruction - with a diameter of about 10 meters, and if it exploded outside the ship - then a high-explosive explosion does not matter at all, while fragments from a shell that exploded on water can fly half a kilometer. This is very important for a torpedo because of the explosiveness of the explosion, because the explosion of a torpedo takes place outside the side of the ship, and moreover there is usually a thick layer of water from 3-8 meters above it, and the density (and weight) of water is 800 times more than the specific gravity of air and a high-explosive torpedo explosion should either push apart hundreds of tons of water or break through the side of the ship, which he does with great pleasure, creating holes tens of square meters in size. A high-explosive shell explosion inside the ship pushes only light air, well, and the thin structures adjacent to it, but a high-explosive explosion is not capable of damaging the armor. I remember as a child I was arguing with a fool who claimed that a high-explosive explosion pierces armor, and the Japanese, in his stupid opinion, had cumulative shells burning through their armor.
    So, although shipboard high-explosive shells (Russians) had rather thick walls, and due to their thickness, the kinetic force of their blow (since they had slow-blow fuses) were able to penetrate armor with a thickness equal to half their caliber. But if you take a high-explosive shell with thin walls, it will not penetrate any armor. For example, as Kostenko notes, Japanese twelve-inch high-explosive shells have never been able to penetrate even the three-inch armor of the casemates of Russian ships, or the two-inch armor of the deck.
    And I will give you an example read from a book of memoirs of a Soviet tanker. He watched a startling battle, as in 1944 one Soviet T-34 tank was shot down and remained on German territory at a very short distance from a group of other Soviet tanks, which completely ran out of shells. And the German soldiers brazenly surrounded this T-34 and tried to smoke Soviet tanks from it in full view of ours. And our had nothing to shoot. But there was a Katyusha division nearby, and then our fighters drove one of the Katyushas and set it directly on fire and fired on this T-34 (and it seems that the tankers of this tank themselves asked them about it!). So - of course, the whole German soldier was swept away by Katyusha shell explosions, BUT the tank remained intact! That is, the thin-walled 130-mm high-explosive Katyusha shells do not penetrate even the 40-mm thickness of the T-34 armor. Just like the Japanese twelve-inch high-explosive shells did not penetrate the thin armor of Russian ships.
    1. geniy
      geniy 6 May 2018 09: 05
      +1
      Few of you know that during the Russo-Japanese War (and generally all the wars at that time) it was considered an axiom that an armored ship can only be sunk if shells pierce its side armor, and through this cause flooding of the hull. At the same time, I omit torpedoes and ram attacks from consideration. And in Tsushima and in other battles of the REV, there was no penetration of thick armor, that is, Russian armadillos, in principle, could not sink. But all the ignoramuses: amateurs and connoisseurs of history see the end result: the Russian fleet is completely defeated and drowned in the majority, but is this not proof of the superiority of Japanese shells over Russians? But in fact, this defeat and sinking of the armadillos is due to completely different factors. And all the lovers and connoisseurs of history - how bad students at school see a clear answer in front of them, and pick up the wrong wrong explanation in it!
      And so, in my opinion, Russian armadillos (especially the latest ones like Borodino), if you didn’t break through their armored belts, then it was impossible to drown them with Japanese high-explosive shells. And Kostenko and some others agree with me, who believe that if the Japanese had effective armor-piercing shells, they would be able to sink the Russian fleet much earlier, and not be tormented with it for five whole hours.
      And now all the ignoramuses think that the Russian armadillos were sunk by magnificent Japanese shells. But firstly: you remember the battle in the Yellow Sea - after all, not a single Russian ship was sunk!
      But here you tell me - but after all, many Russian armadillos were sunk in Tsushima, is this proof of the superiority of Japanese shells?
      No! Take for example the battleship “Suvorov” it was sunk by explosions of three torpedoes from one side, and as I have already shown, torpedoes are a completely different weapon - much more powerful than shells.
      Or take the Battleship Borodino - yes, he died not from torpedoes, but from an explosion in the ammunition depot. But this explosion was caused not by the advantages of Japanese shells, but by the shortcomings of service on Russian ships. The fact is that the explosion on Borodino occurred in the right aft caliber turret , due to the fact that there was an admiral’s cabin directly below it, designed specifically for the admiral, who was Rozhdestvensky, if he accidentally moved to any other battleship instead of “Suvorov” and now in his cabin there were a lot of combustible things: tables, tables Leah, cabinets with clothes, bedding. And all this burned and heated the supply pipe to the turret of a 1520mm caliber gun, which contained shells and powder charges. And then they warmed up and finally exploded, and Borodino capsized and sank. But not a single ship in the world can withstand the explosion of cellars, but all the profane immediately say that it was the Japanese shells that caused a fire in the admiral's cabin, which means that this is supposedly the merit of the Japanese shells in the sinking of the battleship Borodino? No, this is a misconception! This is very easy to guess: the fact is that on the port side under the aft turret of medium caliber was exactly the same cabin of the battleship commander. But. the fact is that before the battle, the Borodino sailors did their best to clear their ship of any combustible things, so that less fires occurred. Although of course there were still small fires, they successfully fought with them on Borodino and Orel, unlike the battleships Alexander the third and Suvorov - where no combustible things were removed at all. But the commanders of the two battleships Borodino and Suvorov were modest people - and they apparently ordered all combustible things to be removed from their cabins. Therefore, there were no noticeable fires in the commander's cabins on the port side on these two ships. But in the admiral's cabins of Borodino and Orel a big fire raged, and Borodino exploded first, and the Eagle would also explode in a few minutes - because he also had a supply pipe for the ammunition of the aft tower above the admiral's cabin red-hot. and the shells in it were ready to explode. but at that moment the battle ended, and the sailors with hoses were able to approach this room and extinguish the fire.
      But Battleship Alexander the third died not so much from the action of Japanese shells as from the negligence of his officers. The fact is that on the upper part of the battleship - in the middle part (called a quarterdeck) there were boats, and they were set up on three floors, one above the other, these boats were naturally broken by Japanese shells and set on fire. And by the way: smart officers offered to take off all the boats before the battle and transfer them to transport ships, because they would still be perforated and burnt, but Admiral Rozhestvensky forbade the boats to be removed.
      And in the battle, rubber hoses with a supply of water were stretched out to extinguish them, which of course were broken by hundreds of fragments, and there was tons of water pouring. And since the well-known rule applies: water flows down, this water from fire hoses poured into the middle casemate of 75-mm guns in streams. And because of this, water stood knee-deep in the casemate, and during the turns it flowed in torrential streams from side to side. Therefore, all 4 battleships of the Borodino type staggered like drunken men and kept walking with a slight roll of about 5-6 degrees. And at the end of the battle, the battleship Alexander the third was so tilted that his main-caliber guns almost touched the waves - and turned over. But the main role in his death, I believe, was played not by Japanese shells, but by the fact that his officers were negligent in ensuring the survivability of the ship.