Military Review

Rifle battle cruisers. Large light cruisers "Koreydzhes"

50
Strictly speaking, the three "white elephants" fleet His Majesty, under the names Koreyges, Glories, and Furyes, has no place in our cycle. It is difficult to say for sure why John Fischer needed these ships, but there is no doubt about that - no one ever intended to oppose the Koreges and his sisterships to the German battlecruisers. Nevertheless, the story of the British battlecruisers would not be complete without Koreyges, Glories and Furyes, and therefore we dedicate this article to these strange ships in every way.


History their creation began almost simultaneously with the battle cruisers "Rhipals" and "Rinaun." Returning to the position of First Sea Lord, John "Jackie" Fisher initiated a giant shipbuilding program from more than 600 ships. The overwhelming majority of them were light - destroyers, patrol boats and minesweepers, submarines ... D. Fisher was absolutely right in the belief that ships of these types in war do not happen much. Rightly pointing to the lack of light forces of the fleet, he at the same time took into account the needs of the so-called “Baltic project”, whose ideas were then circulated in the Admiralty and the government of England. The essence of this project was the breakthrough of the Royal Navy to the Baltic Sea with the aim of landing a large landing of Russian or British troops on the coast of Pomerania - where, in general, Berlin could be reached.

In the previous article devoted to the Ripals and Rinaun battlecruisers, we already said that D. Fisher justified the need for their construction, including the need for high-speed, heavily armed ships with little draft for action in the Baltic. They also talked about the fact that this argument was very far-fetched, and that D. Fisher himself, having received a go-ahead for laying a pair of battle cruisers, immediately excluded a small draft from the project’s priorities, suggesting that the designers ensure it was possible. Most likely, the “Baltic project” was used by the First Sea Lord only as a “smoke screen” for dragging the battlecruisers dear to his heart, but this does not mean that he was not serious about the project itself. Apparently, D. Fisher considered the invasion of the Baltic and the landing of troops in Pomerania to be a very important and quite achievable task.

And yet, D. Fisher, apparently, could not reconcile with the fact that out of more than 600 ships of the new emergency program, high-speed and lightly armored ships with the heaviest guns are only two - Ripals and Rinaun. However, even the capabilities of the First Sea Lord did have limits, and he could not “advance” to construction a greater number of battle cruisers. The reason was quite banal - money. It is clear that, having entered the war, England began to bear the enormous costs of maintaining it, and the limits that the Treasury could scrape up for shipbuilding programs at 1915 g were exhausted by D. Fisher. Therefore, the Minister of Finance said that laying the new large ships is impossible, and there is no money in the treasury for anything bigger than light cruisers.

To great regret for British financiers, the minister did not specify what exactly should be considered a light cruiser. And the First Sea Lord, of course, immediately took advantage of this, including three “big light cruisers” in the shipbuilding program: this was the way Koreizhes, Glories and, a little later, Furyes appeared.

In accordance with the requirements of D. Fisher, the head of the military shipbuilding department, d'Eincourt, prepared a draft of the new ship. Its main features were:

1. A displacement sufficient to maintain travel speeds up to 32 knots. on a wave of medium height typical of the Northern and Baltic seas;

2. Draft equal to 6,71 m, that is significantly less than that of the battleships and battlecruisers of the Royal Navy. This would allow the “light cruiser” to operate in the shallow Baltic;

3. Armament of four 381-mm guns;

4. The thickness of the armor at the height from the waterline to the forecastle is not less than 76 mm;

5. The boules are installed in such a way that the most important spaces of the ship, including the engine and boiler rooms, are pushed as far as possible into the depths of the hull, and at least three longitudinal bulkheads should be separated from the board.

It was noted that the ship of this project will receive a very strong defense against mines and torpedoes, which should definitely be feared in the Baltic shallow waters. At the same time, heavy weapons will make him a dangerous enemy for a ship of any class, and a small draft will allow you to operate where the German ships have been ordered to move.

Of course, these qualities could not fit into the dimensions of the light cruiser - already in the original versions of the project, its normal displacement was, according to various data, from 17 400 to 18 600 t., And in the final version it reached 19 320 t from Koregides and "Gloriesa", while the sediment reached 7,14 m. But in a slightly larger "Furyes" it reached 19 513 t.

Artillery


Tower "big light cruiser" "Furyes"


The main caliber of Koreydzhes and Gloriesa were two two-gun towers, similar in their design to those installed on battle cruisers of the Rinaun type. Since the height of the axes of the guns above the waterline was 10,06 m for the nose tower and 7,01 m for the stern, we can say that their use was possible even in very fresh weather. As for the Furyes, this ship, the only one in the entire Royal Navy, received the 457-mm artillery system.

It must be said that the 457-mm guns were developed on the basis of the 381-mm artillery system, but were, of course, much more powerful than the latter. The weight of the projectile reached 1 507 kg, its initial speed - 732 m / s. However, it should be borne in mind that the data are given for a “hard-combat” charge containing 313 kg of gunpowder — with a normal, 286 kg charge; the initial velocity of the projectile was only 683 m / s. The maximum elevation angle was 30 degrees, which is 10 degrees. exceeded that of the Koreyges and Glories installations, while the range of 457-mm guns was 27 400 m or 148 cables, and with a reinforced combat 32 000 m or almost 173 KBT. Interestingly, even with such high rates, the barrel survivability was quite decent 250-300 shots.

The power of 457-mm projectiles was amazing. The content of explosive in the armor-piercing ammunition was 54 kg, in the high-explosive - enchanting 110,2 kg. At the same time, the armor-piercing projectile hit effortlessly crushed any conceivable armor - according to some information, he overcame the armor plate as thick as his own caliber (that is, 457-mm) at a distance of 75 kbt!

Nevertheless, even Koreydzhes and Glories, having four 381-mm guns, had some difficulty in zeroing, and even in those cases when they had the opportunity to conduct on-board fire, that is, to use both their towers and four guns. If it was necessary to pursue the enemy, or run away from him, then only two barrels could be fired, and this was completely insufficient for zeroing. Well, "Furyes", which instead of two-gun 381-mm towers received one-gun 457-mm, at some large distances could get into the enemy except by accident, especially since the maximum rate of fire of the artillery system was only 1 shot per minute.

Ammunition of the main caliber "Koreyges" and "Gloriesa" consisted of 480 shells, 120 shells per gun, originally - 72 armor-piercing. 24 semi-slaughter and 24 high-explosive. “Furyes” had the same 120 projectiles on the barrel - 40 armor-piercing and 80 semi-armored, high-explosive on it was not at all (by the way, the rest of the “big light cruisers” high-explosive shells were removed in 1917).

The Koreyges and Gloriesa mine caliber was represented by the same terrible three-gun 102-mm units that the Rinaun and Ripals received for armament and the shortcomings of which we analyzed in detail in the previous article. It was possible to install as many as six such installations on the “big light cruisers”, but this was the case when the quantity could not turn into quality. The British understood this very well themselves, but the 152-mm guns were too heavy for the "light" ships, and there were no other artillery systems. The Fury proved to be in an advantageous position - during its design they remembered that the fleet had sixteen 140-mm artillery systems requisitioned from ships under construction for Greece. These 140-mm guns were very formidable sea weapons, and were able to shoot 37,2 kg shells with an initial speed of 831 m / s. at a distance of 16 200 m or 87 cables. They were superior in all respects to 102-mm units, so that Furyes in its final version received 11 140-mm guns.

Anti-aircraft guns were represented by two 76-mm artillery systems, firing cannons on the "big light cruisers", apparently, were not installed (at least, no mention of this in the sources), except for Furyes, which received four 47-mm guns .

Torpedo armament consisted of two airborne torpedo tubes with a caliber of 533-mm, placed at the barbet of the nose tower. Ammunition made up 10 torpedoes. Surprisingly, the fact is - after the entry into service, the torpedo weaponry was significantly strengthened. So, Koreydzs received in addition 12 torpedo tubes in dual torpedo tubes mounted on the upper deck!

Reservation

In general, the level of body armor "Koreydzhes", "Gloriesa" and "Furyesa" slightly exceeded that of conventional light cruisers of the era.



The basis of the citadel consisted of 51-mm "armored plates", laid over the 25 mm boarding skin. The word "armored plates" is quoted because the 51 mm sheets, in fact, were not armor - they were made of so-called high-strength steel (NT or High Tensile). Such protection, unlike real armor, was not designed to fully resist the projectile, and assumed only that its fuse would work directly in the process of overcoming the steel sheet - in this case, the explosion energy could be held by the bulkheads inside the ship's hull. Still, the combination of 25 mm structural and 51 mm reinforced steel was not such a bad defense and could well reflect the 105-mm projectiles of German cruisers, and at long distances - probably 150-mm. The citadel began approximately from the middle of the barbet of the bow tower and to the end of the barbet aft. The only praiseworthy indicator was, perhaps, its height - 8,38 m, of which in the normal displacement of 1,37 m was under water. That is, the citadel's armor plates covered the cellars, machine and boiler rooms, and practically the entire surface of the ship, right up to the forecastle deck. In the stern, the citadel was “closed” by traverse, perpendicular to the diametral plane of the ship, but in the nose two rows of armor plates went at an angle from the side to the beginning of the barbet of the 381-mm tower. Traverses had a thickness of 76 mm.

From the citadel to the nose, the protection became thinner to 51 mm (probably 25,4 mm plating and the same amount of steel NT on top of it), while it was smaller in height and ended long before the stem, closed by traversing the same 51 mm thickness, the plates of which also converged ", That is, at an angle to the center plane of the ship.

The armored deck of the project was supposed to be even weaker than that of the Rinaun - instead of 25 mm in the horizontal part and 51 mm on the bevels Koreiges received 19 and 25 mm, respectively. However, after the Battle of Jutland, the project was hastily reworked, adding another 25 mm to the armored deck, so it reached the 44-51 mm. Interestingly, such an innovation, which significantly increased the protection of the cruiser, "cost" shipbuilders only 116 tons.

It must be said that the Koreydzhes horizontal defense was generally quite good - besides the above-mentioned armored deck, there was also the main deck, an inch thick (25,4 mm) above the citadel. The forecastle deck also received local reservation reinforcement — its thickness outside the citadel was 25 mm, and within the citadel its thickness reached 19-25 mm, but not over the whole deck area, but only at the sides. The lower deck was located below the waterline outside the citadel - it had a 25 mm thickness in the nose, and the same 25 mm in the stern, which increased to 76 mm above the steering.

The ships also received anti-torpedo bulkheads with a thickness of 38 mm, stretching across the citadel, from barbet to barbet - from the ends they “closed” 25 mm by traverses.

The towers of the main caliber had a similar booking with those that were installed on Rinaun-type cruisers - 229 mm front plate, 178 mm side plates and barbety. The latter, however, were heterogeneous - in the part facing the chimney their thickness decreased to 152 mm. It must be said that the barbettes had such a thickness down to the main deck, that is, for a considerable distance the feed pipes were protected not only by 178 mm by barbette, but also by 25 + 51 mm by bead steel or 76 mm by traverses. The 457-mm Furyes tower installations had similar protection, except that the side walls of the towers, like the front plates, were 229 mm thick.

The cabin had quite impressive 254 mm armor of the side walls, 76 mm flooring and roof thickness 51 mm. The aft wheelhouse (torpedo control) had 76 mm walls and 19-38 mm roofs.

Power plant


Glories, 1917


Unlike the Rinaun and Ripalsa, which “borrowed” the design of the machines and boilers of the Tiger battlecruiser, the Koreyjes power plant copied (with minor changes) the Kalliop-type light cruisers - only in double version, four turbine units instead of two and 18 boilers against 9. Due to the use of fine-tube boilers, this power plant had a better power density than the one on the Rinaun, which had a very beneficial effect on its weight. The nominal power should have been 90 000 hp, while the Koreyjesy should have steadily developed the 32 node, and the larger and wider Furyes - half a node less.

There are different opinions about what really happened. So, O. Parks writes that Koreydzhes and Glories in their daily use easily developed the 32 node, without giving any specifics, but VB Mujenikov gives the results of the run on the Arran measuring mile (where only the Glories was tested). According to his data, the power plant of the “big light cruiser” did not reach its planned capacity, showing only 88 550 hp, which ensured the speed of the ship 31,25 knots. However, the following fact leads to reflections: VB Muzhennikov indicates that the ship has developed this speed, being in its design normal displacement, that is, 17 400 t. But the actual normal displacement of the ship was 19 320 t, and even O. Parks indicates 18 600 t! Obviously, in such a normal displacement, the speed of the Glories would be even lower, apparently it would be somewhere between the 30 and 31 node, probably no more than 30,5 knots. On the other hand, VB Mujenikov points out that at Koreydzs with the power of 93 700 hp mechanisms showed 31,58 knots, and with 91 200 hp - 30,8 bonds, while the displacement of the ship was 22 100 t.

In other words, the data on the speed of the “big light cruisers” are very contradictory, although, no doubt, they were very fast.

The fuel reserves were at a normal displacement of 750 t for all three ships, with a full displacement - 3 160 t for Glories and Koreiges, and 3 393 t for Furyes. It was assumed that a full stock would give them a range in 6 000 miles at a speed of 20 knots, which would be an extremely outstanding result.

Project Evaluation


Koreydzhes when joining the system


As we have repeatedly said before, the ship should be judged by its ability to carry out the tasks assigned to it. And with this “big light cruisers” things are not just bad, but very bad - not because they did not meet their tasks, but because when they were created, no one has formulated a list of tasks for ships of such a strange class.

It is known that the “big light cruisers” appeared thanks to the views of the First Sea Lord, but, alas, D. Fisher himself voiced for them only one task - shelling the shores:

"" Furyes "and his tribe were not intended for battle with enemy ships. They were built for Berlin and had to penetrate the shallow waters, which is why they were so fragile ... their tools were so powerful, and the shells so huge. These ships were supposed to make impossible the opposition of the Russian landing on the coast of Pomerania. "The funnels from their shells" should have been so huge that the human eye could not reach completely, while the accuracy of the fire had to be very high ... This spectacle was supposed to accompany the German army during its flight from Pomerania to Berlin ".


The first sea lord was very poetic — the human gaze would easily cover even the crater of a megaton nuclear explosion, and, with all due respect for the British 381-mm artillery, its projectiles were a little less destructive. But logically, for the shelling of the coast, two characteristics of a warship are most useful - this is the firing range and draft. Obviously, the farther the ship's cannons can drop their shells, the more time the troops advancing will receive their support. It is no less obvious that the smaller the draft of the ship, the closer it will be able to approach the coastline.

Certainly, in the aggregate of these qualities, the “big light cruisers” surpassed any “capital” ships of the Royal Navy (at the expense of draft) and light cruisers (at the expense of powerful tools), but at the same time obviously lost to such a rather unusual class of warships as monitors. Let us take for comparison the Erebus-type monitors, which were installed later than Koreyjesov, but still in the same 1915.


Monitor "Erebus"


Their normal displacement was 8 000 t, the draft was only 3,56 m versus more than 7 and Koreyjes, and even if we compare the design draft of the light cruiser, 6,71, all the same, the advantage of the monitor is obvious. At the same time, “Erebus” had armament of two 381-mm guns located in one tower, but the maximum elevation angle was increased from 20 to 30 degrees, which gave a significant increase in firing range, which, unfortunately, various sources indicate differently . It is known that the firing range of 381-mm guns at 20 elevation angle was about 22 420 m or 121 cable. As for monitors, the range 29 260 m (158,5 kb) or even 33 380 - 36 500 m (180-197 kb) is attributed to them. Perhaps the last figures correspond to the use of a hard combat charge, but, without a doubt, the Erebus' gun mounts provided a much greater firing range than the Koreijes and Glories towers.

Thus, we can state that the “big light cruisers” were not the best class of ships for shelling the coast. But what other tasks could they solve? V.B. Mujeni points out that according to the English (most likely one Englishman named John Fisher), the Koreijes were needed to force the Danish straits and to support the light forces of the fleet. Well, let's see.

The Danish Straits are very narrow stretches of the sea between the Jutland and Scandinavian Peninsulas. To come from the North Sea to the Baltic Sea, you first need to cross the Skagerrak Strait (about 240 km long and 80-90 km wide), then Kattegat (about 200 km long, width at different sites - from 60 to 122 km). It is noteworthy that even the relatively shallow Kattegat still has a depth from 10 to 30 m and it is obvious that high-speed ships with a small displacement are absolutely not necessary to force them.

Rifle battle cruisers. Large light cruisers "Koreydzhes"


However, following the Kattegat strait, we stumble into a small archipelago blocking the passage from the strait to the Baltic Sea. Bypassing its islands, three straits lead to the Baltic - the Little Belt, the Great Belt and Oresund, the minimum width of which is 0,5, respectively; 3,7 and 10,5 km.



Obviously, it is here that the British would wait for the “hottest” meeting - to protect such straits based on coastal positions is very convenient, the defense will be extremely effective. But to break through such a defense using high-speed, but weakly protected ships of the Koreydzhes type is simply meaningless - here we need heavily armed and heavily armored ships capable of suppressing large-caliber coastal batteries, sustaining their return fire. In other words, for the breakthrough of the Danish Straits, battleships were needed, and it is difficult to figure out which class of ships would meet this assignment less than the small battle cruisers, which in essence were Korejges-type ships. Consequently, to break through the straits “big light cruisers” were not needed.

And finally, the last is the support of light forces. On this issue I would like to elaborate. Strictly speaking, there are two concepts of such support.

Option 1 - we a priori believe that our light forces should be able to “deal” with enemy ships of the same class and impute it to them. In this case, the task of the support ships is to prevent our light forces from “offending” the enemy support ships. For example, light cruisers and destroyers of the British and Germans were supported by battle cruisers, respectively, and both of them needed battle cruisers or similar ships as opposed to the "support" of the enemy. This does not mean, of course, that the battlecruisers should not have taken part in the rout of the enemy’s light forces, if they were given such an opportunity, but their main function is still not the case.

Variant 2 - we create ships not to fight with the support ships of the enemy on equal terms, but in order to quickly destroy enemy light forces and thereby ensure that our light forces carry out the tasks assigned to them. Take, for example, such an interesting class of ships as destroyer leaders. In those years when they appeared, light cruisers supported destroyers. The leaders, being, in fact, larger, high-speed and heavily armed destroyers, were still not able to fight equally with light cruisers, but they could quite effectively destroy enemy destroyers without distracting their own destroyers from the tasks assigned to them.

It is clear that such a division is very conditional, but the point is that ships of the Koreyges type did not answer the first, and were not optimal for the second of the concepts outlined above.

As we said above, support to the light forces of England and Germany was usually provided by the battle cruisers, but the Koreijzes, due to the extremely weak defense (compared to the battle cruisers), could not fight them on equal terms. Accordingly, they did not respond to the first of the concepts described above. On the other hand, the Koreyjes possessed an almost “unkillable” stronghold for medium caliber artillery at very high speed (surpassing that of light cruisers) and ultimatum-powerful guns. Thus, although they were not able to cover up their light forces from the enemy's battle cruisers, they could (at least in theory) quickly crush the enemy light cruisers, that is, disperse the light forces of the enemy and thus save their own; as if complying with the second concept we have outlined.

But the fact is that in order to destroy the enemy light forces, the “big light cruisers” were completely redundant. Recall that when England faced the task of protecting its communications from enemy light cruisers, it created the first heavy cruisers of the Hawkins type.


Heavy cruiser "Effingam", 1936 g


These ships had a sufficient combination of protection, speed and power of their 190-mm artillery, so as not to leave any of the light cruisers armed with 105-152-mm cannons, but their displacement did not exceed 10 000 t (in fact, about 9 800 t ). Such cruisers would be quite enough to lead the light forces - like the Koreijs they were able to smash the enemy light cruisers, just as the Koreijs could not withstand the battlecruisers, as well as the Koreizhes could escape them along with other light forces.

On the one hand, it can be argued that one “big light cruiser” can perform the functions of both the monitor and the heavy cruiser, but the monitor and the heavy cruiser cannot replace each other. But one monitor (8 000 t) and one heavy cruiser (9 800 t) together would appear to have a comparable price to the Koreijes, while the Royal Navy would receive two ships instead of one. And this gave a certain advantage: yes, Koreyjes could perform the functions of both of them, but could not do it at the same time. At the same time, the smaller firing range than that of the monitor seriously limited the range of tasks on the shelling of the shore, which he could perform. So, for example, the huge range of fire of the Erebus was dictated by the desire to get a ship that could fire at coastal targets outside the German 280-mm and 380-mm coastal guns located in Flanders, and Koreyjes obviously had this advantage. not possessed (or possessed, but to a much lesser extent). He, perhaps, could destroy enemy light cruisers somewhat more efficiently than the Hawkins would have done, but its size and cost did not allow to consider the Koreijs as a consumable material, which, by and large, recognized the English cruisers. In other words, it was too big a ship to risk it as much as lighter ones could risk.

Pocket battleships of England and Germany

The author of this article has repeatedly met "on the Internet" this point of view: the possibilities of "large light cruisers" of the "Koreydzhes" type and the Germanic "pocket battleships" of the “Deutschland” type are quite comparable. However, the Deutschlands are considered very fortunate ships, while the “White Elephants” of the Koreijs type are a deafening failure, and this is incorrect in relation to British shipbuilding.

Of course, there is a certain rational grain in such arguments, but still they cannot be considered true, and the thing is this. As you know, the Germans, designing their "pickpockets", wanted to get at the exit raiders, "destroyers" of the British trade, able to cope with its "defenders". In those years, the strongest ships, which were charged with protecting British communications, were "Kent" cruisers of the Kent type, which had a standard displacement of up to 10 000 and armament from 8 * 203-mm guns capable of speeds up to 31,5 knots.

What did the Germans do? They created a ship with a slightly larger displacement (the standard displacement of “pocket battleships” ranged from 11 700 to 12 100), which, due to the lower speed, received much more powerful weapons (6 * 283-mm) and had significant, if not the overwhelming advantage over the "Washington" cruiser in firepower. As a result, Germany’s “pocket battleship” was a type of ship that was really faster than almost everyone who could destroy it and stronger than anyone who could catch up with it - the only exception was the three battlecruisers of England, but you need to understand that they were sent to protect communications , in general, did not guarantee success in finding raiders, but significantly weakened the fleet of the Metropolis.

Of course, the Deutschland type ships were not ideal ships - here both features of the diesel power plant, and the relative weakness of the armor, which did not guarantee protection against 203-mm projectiles, and the number of high-speed heavy ships capable of charging and destroying “pocket battleships”, in the British and French fleets constantly grew. But still they retained their combat significance for a long time, at least as ships capable of "unraveling" the forces of the Grand Fleet and thus ensure the actions of the kriegsmarine battleships. And most importantly, being really stronger than the "Washington" cruisers, they were, at best, on 10-15% larger than the latter. In fact, the "pocket battleships" were a rather specific kind of heavy cruisers - and that’s that.

And what about Koreyjes? Of course, his range, seaworthiness and speed made him a very formidable ship for counter-raiders. He was faster, better armed, more protected ... But at what price were all these improvements bought? Beginning with 1914, the Germans laid down the Konigsberg-type light cruisers, which turned out to be the most modern, but also the largest among all German ships of this class. Their normal displacement was 5 440 T. And the “counter-trader” Koreizhes, as we recall, had a normal displacement of 19 320 T, that is, not by 15% and even not by 30%, but more than 3,5 times larger than it had German light cruisers, for which he should hunt. And the author of this article is quite sure that if the Germans instead of their “pickpockets” created ships in 35 thousand tons capable of destroying the “Washington” cruisers, but absolutely helpless in front of high-speed battleships and battle cruisers, then no one would call them great achievement of the German shipbuilding.

Продолжение следует ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
Battle Cruiser: Fon der Tann vs Indefatigeble
Battle Cruiser: Fon der Tann vs Indefatigeble. H.2
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Moltke vs. Lion
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Moltke vs. Lion. H. 2
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Moltke vs. Lion. H. 3
Rifle battle cruisers. "Seidlits" vs "Queen Mary"
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Derflinger vs. Tiger
Congo-class battlecruisers
Rifle battle cruisers. "Derflinger" against "Tager". H. 2
Rifle battle cruisers. "Derflinger" against "Tiger"? H. 3
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Rinaun and Mackensen
Line Cruiser Rivalry: Rinaun and Mackensen
50 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Proxima
    Proxima 21 June 2018 15: 18
    +6
    As a result, Germany’s “pocket battleship” was a type of ship, who really was faster than almost everyone who could destroy him and stronger than everyone who could catch him .. (from text)
    This author was very witty. Mother Nature followed the same path in the process of evolution, "creating" for example a leopard. Most importantly, such “pocket battleships” could catch almost any civilian vessel (tanker, dry cargo ship ..) and even more so destroy it. hi
    1. Saxahorse
      Saxahorse 21 June 2018 22: 06
      +1
      Quote: Proxima
      As a result, the "pocket battleship" of Germany was a type of ship that was really faster than almost everyone who could destroy it and stronger than anyone who could catch up with it ..

      Sly wording however. As they say - "The crowd of hares and a lion will tear." “Spee” at La Plata forgot about it and immediately paid. A lone, slow-moving raider has no chance against Group high-speed, albeit weaker ships.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        22 June 2018 14: 11
        +6
        Quote: Saxahorse
        A lone, slow-moving raider has no chance against a group of high-speed, albeit weaker ships.

        This has already been taken apart - if Langsdorf fought as it should, Harwood would have stayed there with all his beaters
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer 22 June 2018 15: 57
          +1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          This has already been taken apart - if Langsdorf fought as it should, Harwood would have stayed there with all his beaters


          Well, criticize the commander ... Held the helm Andrei? Before making comments about a particular commander? :)
          He fought well, but lost his nerves - he bought into disinformation, did not double-check.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            22 June 2018 16: 21
            +8
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            Well, criticize the commander ... Held the helm Andrei? Before making comments about a particular commander? :)

            Vladimirovich, well, damn it, what kind of children's tricks? :)))) OK, it’s not a question, just be consistent - don’t criticize the seller who has tricked you in the store - you didn’t stand behind the counter? Do not criticize the dentist who removes your nerve without anesthesia - you did not hold the boron machine in your hands? Do not criticize the tailor who sewed the sleeves of his jacket on the halyards. But you never worked in the atelier?
            And, yes, why are you criticizing me? You haven’t written a single article on VO! laughing drinks
            Quote: DimerVladimer
            He fought well

            He fought excellently for the first 7 minutes, and then heroically dodged from 2 KRLs, managing to light the fire of 2 towers for different purposes, constantly zigzagging, putting smoke curtains and doing other things that would be appropriate if he fought against Rinauna with Ripals
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                23 June 2018 19: 09
                +1
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                And I don’t have the time to write for free

                Yes, I, as it were, too :))))) Do you think that I put all these articles solely out of love for art? :)))
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Historians have a specific term for such articles.

                So bring him, why are you embarrassed at the most interesting place?
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Let’s not repeat the discussion about your article on a pocket battleship, which is very interesting, but with a completely odious conclusion, which is strange to hear from a theoretician who was not under fire. Such a conclusion is in no way supported by practitioners - military sailors.

                As a practitioner, as I understand it, you offer yourself? :))) Well, well. Honestly, after your epic mistakes with geometric dimensions, target area and inability to read an elementary diagram, I would be ashamed to recall that discussion in your place. And your stunning statement about the division of the main caliber shooting, as the only right decision? :)))
                By the way, German officers who rated Langsdorf’s behavior as not aggressive enough, as I understand it, do not have a decree for you either.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Those. I didn’t go to sea myself, I didn’t answer for the people / vessel, but I’m going to judge - Andrey, doesn’t this seem like an overly odious statement to a man who didn’t hold the helm at all, even a fishing boat or a sailing yacht?

                Absolutely not. Langsdorf violated the basics of naval combat rules, and this is not explained or justified by any reasons for “holding the helm”.
                Quote: DimerVladimer
                Yesterday we went on a twelve meter boat to the islands off the coast of Kemer.

                I'm sorry, but this is not an experience that will help you in evaluating the naval battles of old or new times. Like the World of Worths, by the way
        2. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse 23 June 2018 19: 41
          0
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          This has already been taken apart - if Langsdorf fought as it should, Harwood would have stayed there with all his beaters

          Exactly what they were sorting out ... Let me remind you that you couldn’t offer any positive tactics for Spee. If it weren’t for Commander Bell’s “Dementia and Courage”, it’s not a fact that “Spee” could have reached La Plata alive. And even more so he did not have any chances after the approach of “Cumberland”.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            23 June 2018 19: 47
            0
            Quote: Saxahorse
            Exactly what they were sorting .. Let me remind you that you couldn’t offer any positive tactics for Spee.

            I formulated my proposals EMNIP very clearly :)))
            However, after these 7-10 minutes have passed, instead of finishing the Exeter and then concentrating the fire on one of the light cruisers, unnerving the other with the fire of the 150-mm guns

            and in many other places in the article. Alas, no sensible counterargument was noticed
            1. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 23 June 2018 19: 52
              0
              Yes Yes i remember. Quickly draw together and destroy. True, as at 26 knots, it will "quickly come close" to 32 knot cruisers, you did not bother to explain.

              Langsdorf squeezed the maximum out of that situation, if he had tried to embark on a "combat course" (as Bell had foolishly done), he would immediately have caught suitcases by the most "I don't want".
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                23 June 2018 20: 05
                0
                Quote: Saxahorse
                Yes Yes i remember. Quickly draw together and destroy.

                no don't remember.
                1. Saxahorse
                  Saxahorse 23 June 2018 20: 23
                  0
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  no don't remember.

                  Here is how. Hmm .. Okay, please repeat briefly your arguments. All your readers will be grateful.

                  Let me remind you that you were unable to offer tactics guaranteeing the victory of Spee in a battle against two light and one heavy cruiser of the British, each of which has an advantage in speed. In any situation, while one cruiser dodges the fire of the main caliber of Spee, the other two with impunity shoot the not-so-well-armored raider.

                  We saw the result. Serious damage and self-destruction. Explain why this result is incorrect.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    23 June 2018 20: 37
                    +1
                    Quote: Saxahorse
                    Here is how. Hmm .. Okay, please repeat briefly your arguments.

                    They are presented in the article here https://topwar.ru/135295-o-karmannyh-linkorah-cus
                    imskom-sindrome-i-sumrachnom-tevtonskom-strategic
                    heskom-genii.html
                    The article is small, written very briefly. You are quite capable :)))
                    Quote: Saxahorse
                    you were not able to offer tactics guaranteeing the victory of Spee in the battle against two light and one heavy cruiser of the British, each of which has an advantage in speed.

                    It seems that he described the situation in Russian in white. The Exeter was knocked out about 7-10 minutes after the start of the battle, and Langsdorf was left with two cruisers attacking him. All he needed was to keep within the effective fire of his 283-mm (that is, at a distance of 80-90 KB, but better, of course, less) focus the fire on one of the British light cruisers and destroy it by firing at this time from 150-mm guns toward the other - just to unnerve and reduce accuracy.
                    The gunners of Langsdorf, while they were given the opportunity to work normally (that is, they did not zigzag the ship and were not forced to shoot each turret for their own purpose) for 7 (maximum - 10, but unlikely) minutes disabled the heavy cruiser. They would have dealt with the lung faster :))) If the British LKR fled for 90 KBT - well, allah is with them, from there the 152-mm shells are useless, it’s unrealistic to hit the target. In general, reducing the distance would allow Langsdorf to shoot faster at one of the cruisers, increasing it would devalue the accuracy of the British (for 152-mm cruisers, the percentage of hits at distances of about 10 miles is negligible) - in any case, the Germans win.
                    In general, Langsdorf should finish off Exeter (or not even finish) and transfer fire to LKR without fussing and not twirling, but acting calmly - exactly as he fought the first 7 minutes
                    1. Saxahorse
                      Saxahorse 24 June 2018 21: 32
                      0
                      The dear author does not seem to have noticed that all these arguments were refuted in the comments of that first article. And not just me.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      It seems that he described the situation in Russian in white. Exeter was disabled approximately 7-10 minutes after the start of the battle

                      "Exterminated" Exeter left the battle only at 7:40 minutes, 1.5 hours after the start of the battle, the last volley of the aft turret on Spee made at 7:30. It’s another matter that, due to the loss of the SAD, the shooting became slow and ineffective.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      The gunners of Langsdorf, while they were given the opportunity to work normally (that is, they did not zigzag the ship and were not forced to shoot each turret for their own purpose) for 7 (maximum - 10, but hardly) minutes disabled the heavy cruiser. With a light they would have cope faster :)))

                      In an hour and a half, Spee achieved only one single hit on Ajax. Getting into energetically maneuvering LCR at 70 kb is a very non-trivial task, so “they would have done it faster” is all your good wish. In reality, 75% of the ammunition flew into the sea.

                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      In general, Langsdorf should finish off Exeter (or not even finish) and transfer fire to LKR without fussing and not twirling, but acting calmly - exactly as he fought the first 7 minutes

                      Langsdorf had to start fussing as both LKRs shot at Spee in the 7th minute and a series of coverings and hits started. You were reminded that the average percentage of hits in the WWI is 3.5%, and the British cruisers in some battles reached 5-8% of hits. Try Langsdorf to maintain serene calm and Spee shone no 20 and from 70 to 300 hits with 6 "suitcases. Let me remind you that Oslyabya was scored in just 20 minutes of the battle.

                      All this you already wrote in the comments to your article about Spee, so we just went back to where we started. There are no options guaranteeing victory for Spee. Exeter’s bad luck simply delayed the inevitable denouement, and Spee would have caught an additional 10-20 8 ”shells in the first hour of which, as it turned out, his armor did not hold at all.
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        24 June 2018 23: 55
                        +1
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        Dear author, it seems that I did not pay attention to the fact that all these arguments were refuted in the comments on that first article.

                        Saxahorse, you there refuted my arguments, but ... well, I don’t know whose :)))
                        I am writing to you - Exeter was disabled for 7 minutes. You write
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        “Exterminated” Exeter left the battle only in 7: 40 minutes, 1.5 hours after the start of the battle

                        So who are you talking to now?
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        It’s another matter that, due to the loss of the SAD, shooting became slow and ineffective.

                        Yeah. You didn’t notice the death of all officers who were on the bridge except the commander, the failure of one third of the artillery of the Civil Code, the destruction of all navigational aids and the failed steering
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        In an hour and a half, Spee achieved just one single hit on Ajax

                        Correctly. Because instead of shooting at Ajax (or Achilles, but to someone alone), Langsdorf arranged a polka-butterfly. In general, you do not understand one thing - it seems to you that the absence of hits in the British KRL is some kind of maneuver (I will not even ask where these fantasies come from), in fact, these are the actions of Langsdorf who nullified the power of his artillery with senseless maneuvers. And proof of this is the excellent shooting at Exeter, while Langsdorf shot CORRECTLY.
                        No, well, I understand that in your universe the heavy cruiser Exeter in 8,5 KT and 32 knot speed is a huge slow target, but light Ajax cruisers weighing almost 7 Kt and 32,5 knot speed are just fluttering butterflies in which impossible to get laughing
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        You were reminded that the average percentage of hits in the WWI is 3.5% and the British cruisers in some battles reached 5-8% of hits

                        And I explained that the KRL of England during WWII was never the dreadnought of the WWII, because the latter had an order of magnitude better OMS. And that the British KRL did not nearly show similar results, except for the north, when they fired at the radar.
                        Quote: Saxahorse
                        All this you already wrote in the comments to your article about Spee

                        And all this is complete nonsense, alas
                      2. Senior seaman
                        Senior seaman 25 June 2018 07: 28
                        +1
                        In reality, 75% of the ammunition flew into the sea.

                        hmm ... if the rest of 25% got where it should, then this is just an enchanting result :)
  2. anzar
    anzar 21 June 2018 15: 43
    +6
    To the author +++, as always, a wonderful staty.
    ... The funnels from their shells "were supposed to be so huge that the human eye could not completely cover,

    Yeah, apparently Fisher supplied them armor-piercing shells- against tanks ... :))))
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      22 June 2018 14: 10
      +1
      Quote: anzar
      Yeah, apparently for the sake of Fisher supplied them with armor-piercing shells against tanks ... :))))

      Not for the sake of argument, clarification for - the ammunition was assigned to Koreans after Fisher’s resignation
  3. arturpraetor
    arturpraetor 21 June 2018 15: 48
    +2
    So what do you say that? Like so, why are bad ships? They can drive any trifle unchallenged! Second Helgoland, and all that laughing In my opinion, an extra (or even two) Ripals for the same money would be much more preferable.
    1. also clean
      also clean 21 June 2018 17: 26
      +1
      Helgoland-17 really took place on November 1917, 2. Among other things, Ripals, Koreges, Glories participated - the results were not impressive
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor 21 June 2018 17: 49
        +1
        Yes, it was my sarcasm on the topic of one ... Discussions in which light linear cruisers (large light cruisers) were declared weapons of mass destruction according to the results of the 2 Helgoland. Colleague Andrei also participated in it, which is why I wrote it like that. And so - superiority over light cruisers, achieved by increasing displacement in 3-4 times - this ... No, I will not swear))
        1. also clean
          also clean 21 June 2018 19: 30
          0
          By the way, Wilson writes that Koreiges received damage from the fire of German light cruisers. And von Reuter reports as many as 5 (!!) hits. Interesting: fairy tales or how was it really?
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            22 June 2018 14: 09
            +2
            Quote: alsoclean
            Interesting: fairy tales or how was it really?

            I myself would like to know - the second Gotland is completely unpopular in the sources request
  4. pacific
    pacific 21 June 2018 15: 51
    +2
    Perhaps the Deutschlands are the best illustration in naval history as admirals prepare for past the war.
    Pocket battleships would indeed be the ideal type of raider ship, but only in PMV conditions.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 21 June 2018 16: 30
      +4
      Quote: pacific
      Pocket battleships would indeed be the ideal type of raider ship, but only in PMV conditions.

      I’m afraid that in the last war the pickpockets would turn out to be of little use. The Germans then had a fleet comparable to the British, chained the main forces of RN to the North Atlantic. But even in this case, the British were able to allocate a couple of LCR for the destruction of the Spee squadron.
      Quote: pacific
      Perhaps the Deutschlands are the best illustration in naval history as the admirals prepare for the past war.

      Duc ... in the Second World Atlantic, tactical groups from LKR and AB plowed through which the pickpocket was one bite. Actually, Spee was blown up when they received news about the approach of such a group (in real life, it was true to the north - but it was already going to help Harwood's group).
      1. pacific
        pacific 21 June 2018 21: 49
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        I’m afraid that in the last war the pickpockets would turn out to be of little use. The Germans then had a fleet comparable to the British, chained the main forces of RN to the North Atlantic. But even in this case, the British were able to allocate a couple of LCR for the destruction of the Spee squadron.

        The fact of the matter is that the British for the entire WWI only once sent a linear connection to the "distant seas": 2 LKR + 3 KR of other classes under the command of the adm. Come on. And it was sent against squadron Spee. Against single German raiders, mostly single ships hunted.
        And just to confront the single cruiser, the defender of trade (and indeed - any cruiser except LKR) "pocket battleships" were best suited.
        But the British in WWII broke the whole raspberries to the Germans, sending them to protect communications cruiser groups, and even LC in addition.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 22 June 2018 09: 54
          +1
          Quote: pacific
          The fact of the matter is that the British for the entire WWII only sent a linear connection to the “distant seas”: 2 LKR + 3 KR of other classes under the command of the adm. Come on. And it was sent against the Spee squadron. Against single German raiders, mostly single ships hunted.

          Single german raider in PMV, it’s an armored deck or light cruiser with a dozen 10,5-cm guns. Against him, a single “Kent” or “Sydney” is enough.
          When a raider with 28 cm cannons appears on the communications, he will already be hunting for him. In which, quite possibly, LCR will be included, because this raider is a completely different level of threat.
          1. pacific
            pacific 26 June 2018 04: 42
            0
            So I don’t argue - in WWI armored deck or light cruisers were really raiding.
            But the concept of the “Deutschlands” and their performance characteristics fit perfectly into the tasks that were solved by the German cruisers-raiders in the WWI.
            1. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 26 June 2018 23: 38
              0
              For me, the speed was the most critical TTX. In the PMV, 28 knots were generally enough.
      2. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer 23 June 2018 17: 27
        +4
        Quote: Alexey RA
        I’m afraid that in the last war the pickpockets would turn out to be of little use. The Germans then had a fleet comparable to the British, chained the main forces of RN to the North Atlantic. But even in this case, the British were able to allocate a couple of LCR for the destruction of the Spee squadron.


        Well, this is not true - both raiders distracted the military vessels with a displacement of tens of times more - from 7 to 12 pennants.

        But the question was not how many raiders flooded, but how many cargoes didn’t reach their destination on time, how many ships were waiting for the convoy, idle in the ports. So calling pocket battleships ineffective does not correspond to real events.
  5. NF68
    NF68 21 June 2018 17: 42
    +2
    Interesting article.
  6. 27091965
    27091965 21 June 2018 17: 42
    +3
    their guns were so powerful and the shells so huge




    Hitting such an 18-inch shell in a ship or coastal fortification would bring little joy to the crew or the defenders.
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 21 June 2018 18: 56
      +5
      Quote: 27091965i
      Hit such an 18 inch shell in the ship

      As the author has already said, this is really impossible, unless the ship has lost its course or is in distress, because at a decent distance without sensible shooting from two guns you can only shoot for luck. And on a maneuvering target and even more so smile
      But on the shore, yes, I agree with this - two large clubs will be enough to fire at a fort thread outside the range of its guns. The argument is weighty .... Just do for this an expensive high-speed, lightly armored ship somehow irrational ... The monitors itself ....
      1. 27091965
        27091965 22 June 2018 13: 29
        +1
        Quote: Rurikovich
        As the author has already said, this is really impossible, unless the ship has lost its course or is in distress, because at a decent distance without sensible shooting from two guns you can only shoot for luck. And on a maneuvering target and even more so


        " These ships were the subject of great criticism, but, nevertheless, their concept was fully justified. In Germany, there were many light cruisers with very high speed, and we had many similar cruisers with almost the same weapons. Lord Fischer strove for supremacy, and light battlecruisers were designed to pursue and destroy German light cruisers. "Admiral RH BEACON 1929

        As we see the opinions differ, at that time we thought that this wasn’t anything complicated, it’s hard for us to understand the views and thoughts of people of those years.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          22 June 2018 14: 07
          +1
          Quote: 27091965i
          As we see opinions differ,

          They weren’t just diverging, just the Royal Navy officers were seriously worried about the honor of the uniform and did not expose their mistakes to the public. At the same time, as I said above, “Korejdes” is completely suboptimal as a counter-trader. The British themselves built the Hawkins - and these were h-ski good ships
          1. 27091965
            27091965 22 June 2018 15: 11
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            At the same time, as I said above, “Korejdes” is completely suboptimal as a counter-trader. The British themselves built the Hawkins - and these were h-ski good ships


            "The consideration of this problem indicates the desire to have additional battlecruisers conveniently located to intercept any efforts of the enemy battlecruiser on our lines of communication with America."

            This is a look at the action against raiders, it was published in 1922. Even then, they understood that the Hawkins did not solve the problem. In these reviews, they examined the possible actions of the German raiders, it is interesting that the Germans in the 2nd World War they repeated almost one to one.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              22 June 2018 15: 21
              +1
              Quote: 27091965i
              Even then, they understood that the Hawkins did not solve the problem.

              Koreans did not solve it in the same way against German LCR
              1. 27091965
                27091965 22 June 2018 16: 10
                +1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Koreans did not solve it in the same way against German LCR


                Light battlecruisers were not planned for battle with battlecruisers in Germany. Having completed the creation of the linear fleet, Fisher decided to create a ship, several hits from which disabled weakly armored enemy ships. He was impressed too much by one of his hits in the Japanese cruiser Matsushima, in the Sino-Japanese War. He himself writes about this in his memoirs.
  7. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 21 June 2018 18: 50
    +3
    Um ... Article is an absolute plus! For your opinion expressed analytically good
    The apotheosis, as I understand it, will be the "Mighty Hood", which are the crown of development of the British battle cruisers PMV. Though reworked from Fisher’s ideas after Jutland into a practically fast battleship, it’s still called a battle cruiser.
    The German line ended (well, not to consider the continuation of the rivalry “Scharnhorst” and “Gneisenau”, which were battleships, although some experts attribute them to battlecruisers along with a couple of “Dunkirk” - “Strasbourg”), and therefore this beautiful cycle is actually approaching completion. Personally, I would finish it on the chapter with the Mackensen, for everything that happened after, albeit with 15 "artillery, and even with the 18" broads described today, are not serious squadron ships. Unlike the same "Hood" .... wink
    We are waiting for the next chapter !!! hi drinks
    1. falx
      falx 21 June 2018 21: 55
      +2
      and even at sunset PMV (or immediately after its completion) began to build Akagi, Saratoga.
      the islanders also had some kind of line cruiser designs with 16-inch guns.

      of course all these "projects" were cut off by the Washington agreement, but it would still be interesting to compare them ...
  8. doktorkurgan
    doktorkurgan 21 June 2018 20: 51
    +2
    For some reason, after reading the article, I remembered the Japanese armored cruisers of the Matsushima type. Also controversial concept of ships ...
  9. Potter
    Potter 21 June 2018 21: 40
    0
    Thank! Great presentation and analysis.
    However, the appearance of these ships initiated the discovery of a completely new class of ships - aircraft carriers! It was necessary to find application for high-speed and not very durable cases!
  10. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 21 June 2018 22: 03
    +2
    But I waited for this article. Bookmark made, plus set. I will read on Saturday. With feeling, really, with arrangement. Wait, no leisure, unfortunately.
  11. faiver
    faiver 22 June 2018 06: 21
    +1
    it is a pleasure to read the author’s articles good
  12. K-50
    K-50 22 June 2018 09: 56
    +1
    Ships intended for shelling the coast did not have high-explosive shells (Furyes), or a quarter of the ammunition (the rest). recourse
  13. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 22 June 2018 16: 18
    +4
    I actually do not understand sarcasm.
    Ships were created for the Baltic? The author in the article gives this answer.
    Would their hulls be effective in the shallow Baltic? Perhaps yes - seaworthiness suitable for the conditions of the Baltic.
    Could these ships support the landing? Quite.
    But was it possible to shift this task to monitors? No - they have an insignificant speed, disgusting seaworthiness, they themselves require constant protection - monitors are a burden for the fleet. They can act only in conditions of complete domination in the Baltic Sea - which, of course, could not be achieved.
    But such "high-speed monitors" in the bodies of cruisers, very much.
    Very narrowly specific ships.
    Such a “high-speed monitor” can fight off light forces, and, if necessary, run away from battlecruisers.
    Imagine if there were a similar 32-node “cruiser monitor” among the Germans / Turks at the Black Sea theater, he could theoretically terrorize the Black Sea coast of Russia with impunity - the “empresses” would not have time to react to the raids and would have to block the Bosphorus constantly, which is impossible.

    If the idea of ​​boosting Kattegat had been realized - these three monitor cruisers - would have become a serious headache for the hemani land forces and coastal batteries.

    Ships look strange if they are not represented in the navigation of the Baltic - there they would look very organic.
  14. adena
    adena 22 June 2018 22: 57
    0
    Oresund is Zund (in any case, the name was fixed in Russian marine terminology). After all, you use the correct Russian version for the names "Belts", and you called the Sound in the Scandinavian manner.
  15. sds127
    sds127 23 June 2018 22: 20
    0
    as always, interesting. as always, informative. as always, thanks. and the question is Ishmael, when?)
  16. Potter
    Potter 24 June 2018 20: 48
    0
    Quote: sds127
    as always, interesting. as always, informative. as always, thanks. and the question is Ishmael, when?)

    I am joining! In your account of the history of battlecruisers, you have touched on almost all of both built and unfinished ships. And only the Ishmael-Kinburn branch remained unexamined. But the Germans and the British could not help but respond to the construction of such powerful ships in the Russian Empire.
    The volley is more powerful than the 15-inch battleships in the UK and Germany!
  17. Potter
    Potter 24 June 2018 22: 00
    0
    I am joining! In your account of the history of battlecruisers, you have touched on almost all of both built and unfinished ships. And only the Ishmael-Kinburn branch remained unexamined. But the Germans and the British could not help but respond to the construction of such powerful ships in the Russian Empire.
    The volley is more powerful than the 15-inch battleships in the UK and Germany!
  18. Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 26 June 2018 00: 23
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    I am writing to you - Exeter was disabled for 7 minutes.

    I’m reading and thinking with what words you can explain what is obvious to others. The fact that Exeter “incapacitated” fought another battle for an hour and a half. He shot, fired torpedoes, maneuvered, even hit! The huge, photogenic hole in Spee’s forecastle is exactly the second hit of the 8 "projectile at 7:10, an hour after you finally wrote it off. And each such hit is deadly for Spee with a miserable 20-30mm armored deck and narrow belt breaking through Exeter shells.

    Why did you decide to finish Exeter easily and simply? Despite the painful plumes, the cruiser’s cars weren’t injured and the ship retained mobility, albeit with some control problems. The fact that he can no longer go faster than 18 knots, Bell reported only at 11:05, 3.5 hours after the fight! Spee was forced to reduce speed to 22 knots during the battle. After the last episode at 16:42, Bell finally realized that the maneuver was good for health and that Spee's success ended there, an hour before the end of the battle, Spee did not achieve any more hits in Exeter. And he couldn’t get close .. So why did you decide to finish off Exeter just to spit ??

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    It seems to you that the absence of hits in the British KRL is some kind of their maneuvers (I will not even ask where these fantasies come from), in fact, these are the actions of Langsdorf who nullified the power of his artillery with senseless maneuvers. And proof of this is the excellent shooting at Exeter, while Langsdorf shot CORRECTLY.

    Having written the word “correct” in such capital letters, you were too lazy to look at the battle plan first. Otherwise, you would certainly notice that Langsdorf spent his second, and last, a series of excellent hits on Exeter at 16: 40-16: 42, turning around from the course east to almost 6 degrees north-west after a dizzying turn . The maneuver itself doesn’t interfere with the shooting so much, you just need to shoot right on the circulation, but you should wait for the first platform in 36-180 seconds. The sight and rear sight has already been calculated, only restore the tip and you can give a volley.

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    in your universe, the heavy cruiser Exeter at 8,5 Kt and a speed of 32 knots is a huge slow target, but light cruisers like Ajax weighing almost 7 Kt and a speed of 32,5 knots are just fluttering butterflies that you can’t get into

    The speed of 32 knots is about 16 m \ s, the flight time of the projectile is 70-80 kbl approximately 30-40 seconds. So the “butterflies” are not “butterflies” but from the calculated point of impact they can fly away at a distance of up to 480-640 meters, depending on the chosen course. Notice that when Bell remembered this, Exeter immediately became a “butterfly”. Langsdorf could not get on it anymore.

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    And I explained that the KRL of England from WWII was never the dreadnought of the WWII, because the latter had an order of magnitude better OMS. And that the British KRL and did not show similar results

    However, we see that it was not Spee with his three KDPs and two SUAO, but the British LCR drove the Germans 18 shells in exchange for a single hit on Ajax. Moreover, continuously maneuvering from extreme distances. Do you not like the facts again? Why do you think that if Spee stops dodging, then the percentage of hits will drop? The first episode of Ajax and Achilles on the smoothly moving Spee at 6:30 went very well. Sorry, but your theory of courageously accepting bricks with your forehead looks inconclusive. This will not give a strong increase in accuracy, but 3.5–5% of hits will easily become a reality.

    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    And all this is complete nonsense, alas

    Troll little by little? :)