Military Review

110 years ago, the squadron battleship "Eagle" was launched

82
Construction of the squadron battleship "Eagle", one of the five existing ships of the "Borodino" type, was launched in 1900 in St. Petersburg.

The famous battleship "Eagle" - a famous participant in the Russian-Japanese war 1904-1905. The Eagle took part in the famous Tsushima battle. 14 May 1905, the ship received a huge number of enemy hits - at least a hundred. According to eyewitnesses, everything that was above the battery deck on the left side - absolutely everything was in the holes. In many places, the battleship was burning - smoke spread out over the decks, rolling overboard and spreading over the sea. Before the battle, it made a very terrible impression, the Eagle now looked much less impressive, if not to say sorry. The upper superstructures were destroyed, the anchor ropes were broken, and the mainmast barely held out, threatening to fall on the people scurrying below. Deck flooring was perforated. The battle itself was very hard - the horizon was hazy, from the fires on the ships everything was in smoke. The Japanese ships were of a dirty olive color, it was very difficult to aim at them in foggy conditions — the Eagle’s sights needed a clear image of the image and sufficient light power. Nevertheless, despite the harshest conditions, the battleship retained its combat capability. His fate, however, did not make it any easier. The next day, the "Eagle" passed into the possession of the Japanese, 17 May arrived in the Japanese port of Sasebo. The enterprising Japanese repaired it and considerably redid it - the 12 152 millimeter guns that were available were replaced with six 203 millimeters, after which the ship sailed to the open sea under Japanese flags in 1907.



He acted in the first division of battleships belonging to the second squadron "Iwami", participated in the battles for Qingdao in 1918, and then became one of the ships participating in the intervention of Vladivostok.

1 September 1921, the Eagle received a new name - the battleship of the 1 class coastal defense.

The fate of the battleship is unenviable. In April, 1921 removed all guns from the ship, and it becomes a floating warehouse ship. Six months later, in the autumn of 1922, the ship was excluded from the lists (some data, however, indicate 1923 year), and almost simultaneously, it was dismantled for metal.

If other information is to be believed, then the Iwami corps in July 1924 (at the same time as the Khizen died) was flooded under the blows aviation near the Miura Peninsula. That was the end of one of the most legendary battleships in all history Russian fleet (although some experts call it one of the worst designs). It is sad enough that such a majestic ship, which could have fired 5 (!) 150-mm shells in 152 minutes, ended up as a training target for Japanese aircraft.



Appreciations of the battleship "Eagle" after the Battle of Tsushima
[Center]
Photos used:
http://tsushima.su
82 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. Tirpitz
    Tirpitz 6 July 2012 09: 31
    +3
    His main caliber was 305mm. (4 guns) A 152mm for a squadron battle was then no longer relevant, unless against destroyers and cruisers.
    1. Civil
      Civil 6 July 2012 10: 42
      -1
      as always, the heroes were responsible for the mistakes of the rotten semi-oligarchic semi-autocratic regime of tsarist Russia, where there were no political processes, with the total illiteracy of the majority of the population.
      1. Rikoshet
        Rikoshet 6 July 2012 11: 09
        +4
        What familiar clogged phrases, especially about the illiterate population, totally !! But where could they be literate? They didn’t have gay parades or the Internet.
        1. mind1954
          mind1954 7 July 2012 04: 23
          -1
          And what's this?
          The famous phrase of V.I. Lenin about cinema sounded like this:
          "The most important of the arts are cinema and the circus, at least
          until the elimination of illiteracy! "And he, in fact, just like that words
          did not tell ! What year was he talking about? What by this time
          literacy fell at times ???
      2. Village
        Village 6 July 2012 14: 28
        -6
        Well, much less rotten tsarism before the red-assed ... he just didn’t bring people to millions and did not drive all this dumb cattle to camps ..... you are poor-minded, watch the bazaars and don’t open your rotten shit on the Russian Empire .. !!!
        1. Alone
          Alone 6 July 2012 20: 04
          0
          You, I see, are painfully clever like that. Personally, would a man speak the same way?
        2. smile
          smile 6 July 2012 20: 53
          0
          Village
          I greet such a bright representative of the palefoot and a fan of nicholas. who miscalculated two wars and the entire empire at the same time .... And illiteracy of 98 percent of the population - see another achievement of it? ... Yeahhhh, court of your great and mighty - it would be better if you really remained illiterate ... Forward - on Swamp, to p_ram, there you have a place. :))))))
    2. smile
      smile 6 July 2012 20: 49
      +2
      Tirpitz And here I have to agree with you - 152 mm artillery was called that - mine. In a squadron battle it should not have been used in principle - and the range was not enough and the power of ammunition. No wonder the Japanese replaced them with eight-inch .... It is strange that the author pointed to it as an important sign of combat capability ....
      1. Brother Sarych
        Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 22: 44
        +2
        This is you a lie - this is medium-caliber artillery and in the squadron battle she participated fully ...
        1. smile
          smile 7 July 2012 02: 21
          +1
          Brother Sarych
          I don’t want to admit to contradict you because our positions are similar ..... but, about the use of artillery at 6 dm in squadron combat, please do not say ... do not .... especially that. as for the full measure .... you know the range in the cable ones .... well, what to add, you all understand that this is your medium-caliber artillery ... well, not yours, well, as it is, it was quite effective .... a little earlier, it was the Russo-Japanese war that revealed its inefficiency in squadron combat, and it was then that the idea of ​​the Dreadnought was born .... by the way, in the fight in the Yellow Sea the 1st Pacific squadron did not have time and could not return a significant part of small-caliber and medium-sized infantry from battle formations artillery .... and also a significant part of the personnel that went into the infantry ... and as a result, the guns of this caliber had no value in the fray. except when some of the cruisers - Novik and Askold, broke through the ranks of six Japanese classmates, taking them to flight ... all ....
          1. Brother Sarych
            Brother Sarych 7 July 2012 09: 10
            +2
            At those distances that were taken at that time, medium-caliber artillery could participate and actively participated! Why it was introduced at that time - the difference in rate of fire made it possible to bring down a larger number of shells at the enemy with a much greater probability of being hit, because there were big problems with determining the exact distance ...
            They removed it more likely due to the fact that it became very difficult to control the fire, especially if you did not shoot high-explosive shells, by the way, this difficulty increased even more when they began to put eight-inch shells on armadillos ...
            1. smile
              smile 7 July 2012 13: 24
              0
              Brother Sarych
              As practice showed, battleships opened fire from extreme distances, the range of the main caliber was higher, sometimes, as, for example, in the battle in the Yellow Sea, the Japanese came closer, due to their superiority in medium caliber (our ships have a significant part of medium and small-caliber artillery was removed and sent to the land front). But precisely following the results of the 4th year war, they began to replace this artillery with larger calibers, reducing the number of guns ..... and so. of course you're right....
  2. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 6 July 2012 09: 34
    +2
    n-dy, for a squadron battle less than 8 inches was no longer relevant, but you could have won that war, not at sea so on land, revolutionaries, what would they be, Judas
    1. Ramses_IV
      Ramses_IV 6 July 2012 09: 45
      +12
      If it were not for the death of Makarov and Kondratenko, and if not for the mediocrity of Kuropatkin and the betrayal of Stessel in exchange for money from the Japanese for the early surrender of Port Arthur (which just passed the final sentence to the second Pacific squadron that died in the Strait of Tsushima) - chances to win Russia was considerable. The Japanese were very exhausted in this war.
      Well, our grandfathers took revenge on them at Khalkin Gol, Hassan, and then back in Manchuria in 45.
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        Yoshkin Kot 6 July 2012 09: 48
        +2
        and yet the main reason for the Empire’s exit from that war was internal unrest, it was enough just to fight another half a year with the same losses (very small by the standards of subsequent wars) Japan would simply collapse economically, besides they had terrifying losses on land
        1. smile
          smile 6 July 2012 20: 59
          0
          Yoshkin
          Cat After the complete loss of the fleet, in the absence of communications - one piece of iron and a ferry via Lake Baikal, we had no chance. We lost the war, having lost the fleet. And we did not lose the fleet because of the revolutionaries. For the very appearance of which we should be grateful to the clever nicholas, who drove the people into a frenzy.
      2. Tirpitz
        Tirpitz 6 July 2012 09: 50
        +3
        The chances of winning were very high, as Japan was already exhausted, and Russia was just beginning to enter the war for real. On land, they would definitely win and throw the Japanese into the sea.
        1. starred
          starred 6 July 2012 10: 07
          +8
          Brothers! It hurts to remember past events! Judas does not seem to be translated right up to the very end ...
          Eternal memory to Russian soldiers, heroes !!!
        2. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 12: 47
          +4
          What are the odds? Yes, Japan ran out of breath, bit a piece out of mouth, but Russia could not fight - read the memoirs of the participants!
          Still further got involved in the war from their borders ...
        3. smile
          smile 6 July 2012 21: 04
          +2
          Tirpitz
          And now I do not agree - having lost the fleet, we have lost the chance. And tell me - how many months did the train go, for example, from St. Petersburg to the theater of operations (via the Baikal ferry)? What would you supply and replenish the troops, which, because of the mediocrity of Kuropatkin and Alekseev, were given to the Japanese by the Yalu and Mukden rivers? Yes, it’s not even quite the point, the point is the flawed military construction, which was organized by completely non-mythical revolutionaries ... damn it. even the summer field-uniform shirt was white ... And the Japanese did not gouge us to pieces only thanks to the fighting qualities of a Russian soldier and middle and junior officers.
        4. Trapperxnumx
          Trapperxnumx 26 July 2012 17: 10
          0
          Tirpitz, wildly sorry, I wanted to spit it, but I made a mistake and squandered ... Guilty ... crying
      3. Brother Sarych
        Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 12: 45
        +4
        If, if, if, if, if and a hundred more times if - wouldn’t there be too many of these if there was an opportunity to win?
    2. REZMovec
      REZMovec 6 July 2012 14: 20
      +7
      Why pi .. not knowing anything about that time? What are the revolutionaries? Beleny overeat, dear? CIVIL wrote everything correctly! Sniffed nobles, a weak-willed tsar, corrupt senior officers (there weren't that many of them, but Russia had enough), stupid admiral generals ... What is the commander of the 2nd Pacific squadron, Admiral Rozhestvensky, worth? How did Tsushima get profiled? And what about the supply of ships of the same squadron during the transition to the Pacific Ocean? 2/3 of the powder charges were purchased from the British and the gunpowder turned out to be damp and the shells were spat out of the guns before reaching the target. The projectiles that flew fell apart when they hit the armored belts of (English) Japanese ships. The shells were also purchased from the British ... Fresh water bloomed, meat rancid, pasta moldy ... Should we continue? Read "TSUSIMU" Novikov-Priboy and documentary memoirs of participants in those events. Port Arthur was handed over by a trio of middle-ranking officers for a loot that was never received in the end. And you about the revolutionaries. It was the defeat of Russia in the Russo-Japanese War that agitated the masses, which the opponents of the autocracy took advantage of, and led to the 1905 revolution. Learn to think before commenting and work with documents.
      Good luck!
      1. Pessimist
        Pessimist 6 July 2012 17: 55
        +4
        Quote: REZMovec
        Snickering nobles, weak-minded tsar, venal high-ranking officers (there weren’t so many, but Russia had enough), stupid admiral generals ... What is the commander of the 2nd Pacific squadron, Admiral Rozhestvensky? How did Tsushima scam?

        I will support you! Moreover, with the continuation of the war, England, as an ally of Japan, threatened to get involved in it, and England also started this war with the hands of the Japanese! The USA also supported the Japanese (then they got Pearl Harbor !!!).
        But armor and shells - do not touch !!! If the Japanese battleships fired analogs of Russian armor-piercing shells, then our ships would have been sunk much EARLIER !!! And it wouldn’t have taken such a MONSTER number of hits that our battleships withstood before they perished ... Japanese 12dm landmines were held even by 2dm armor, and only the number of hits decided the outcome of the battle. Rozhdestvensky's mediocrity and tactics in general are a separate topic. For example, the famous Makarov also made some mistakes, mixing ships with different speeds in one wake line, thereby determining the overall speed of the squadron as the slowest battleship. Vitgeft, trying to break through the Port Arthur squadron, made the same mistake, although it was possible to leave Sevastopol and Poltava in the fortress and go to the breakthrough only with high-speed, 18-junction, battleships.
        And about the "shells-armor" I will add: in the battle on August 1 in the Sea of ​​Japan, the armored cruiser "Rurik" received, according to the estimates of the Japanese and crew officers, about 250 (!!!) hits, before it was flooded by the team, having opened the kingstones !! ! Russian armor-piercing shells were much more dangerous for ships of those years. I repeat - everything was decided by the concentration of artillery fire and the number of hits ... Eternal memory to our heroes ...
  3. Sakhalininsk
    Sakhalininsk 6 July 2012 09: 36
    +10
    From this series, the fate of the last ship "Slava" is much more interesting, as well as the selfless bravery of those who died, but did not lower their flags and glorified themselves with heroism, "Prince Suvorov", "Emperor Alexander 3" and "Borodino".
    And "Eagle" is a sad story with the surrender and shame of the Andreev flag, further service under the rising sun mikado ... and the shadow of shame over the famous name of the ship.
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 12: 50
      +2
      You reason almost on a song:
      Here they take me to the political department - why are you, s..ka, in the tank not burned out?
      Shame on the flag - well, shame, but what could they do? It was "lucky" not to roll up the keel like sisters-thorns, so it was necessary to voluntarily go to the bottom?
      1. Sakhalininsk
        Sakhalininsk 9 July 2012 02: 20
        +1
        Do you consider the shameful surrender as a standard of valor and heroism? Explain the heroism of the described ship and do not need voice statements.
        What could they have done .. to sink the ship, as did others who found themselves in a similar situation, for example "Admiral Ushakov", "Dmitry Donskoy" ..
        "Prince Suvorov" really heroically fought the battle, but was knocked out, but fought back to the last alone and no one raised the Japanese flag on it, although the ship was beaten to the extreme.
  4. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 6 July 2012 10: 14
    +4

    here is his diagram, we went along the French path and placed the same medium caliber in the towers
  5. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 12: 43
    +4
    Photos are very interesting, the article is worthless! It would be possible to write what project was the basis of this series, what became of this ancestor - yes there is much that could be written in this article about this very interesting ship with such a rather curious fate ...
    Oh, about why he did not follow his brothers to the bottom, it was possible and necessary to write ...
    1. Pessimist
      Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 01
      +2
      Quote: Brother Sarich
      the article is worthless! One could write which project was the basis of this series, what became of this progenitor

      "Borodino" is a significantly improved version of the valiant "Tsarevich", which withstood the battle in the Yellow Sea when trying to break through to Vladivostok. And "Tsesarevich" is a logical continuation of the "Navarin" project, the first representative of ships of its class in the Russian fleet.
      1. smile
        smile 6 July 2012 21: 13
        +2
        Pessimist
        It would be better if they wrote about Cresarevich who had erupted despite the death of the command staff, or about Askold, and even better about Novik. who took the last battle already near Sakhalin, during the defense of which part of the artillery taken from the flooded crew of the cruiser was used .....
        1. Pessimist
          Pessimist 8 July 2012 23: 36
          +1
          Quote: smile

          Pessimist
          It would be better if they wrote about Cresarevich who had erupted despite the death of the command staff, or about Askold, and even better about Novik.

          I am fond of the marine theme of the Russo-Japanese war, time will appear, I hope I will write about the battle in the Yellow Sea.
          1. Trapperxnumx
            Trapperxnumx 26 July 2012 17: 11
            0
            Pessimist,
            will wait. Himself passionate about this topic ...
  6. 8 company
    8 company 6 July 2012 12: 55
    0
    The article is, of course, very incomplete. However, it is clear that the "rotten autocracy" created powerful, very tenacious ships of the "pocket" battleship class at domestic shipyards. It is a pity that the Russian squadron near Tsushima was led by a mediocre naval commander. Would Makarov, for example, and the result of the battle could be disastrous already for the Japanese. And so they lost the squadron, and gave rise to the defeatist revolutionaries to scream about the insolvency and rottenness of the regime.
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 14: 07
      +3
      What was their special survivability if almost all the participants in the battle turned over?
      But the enemy killed only two battleships, and even then on mines, and not in battle ...
      The trouble is that even the most famous naval commanders of Russia, and not only Makarov, would not have helped in the Tsushima battle - the ships have come a long way, some were worn out even before the campaign, low qualification of commandants, bad shells, wild overload of ships, the list goes on. ..
      The squadrons went to the slaughter, everyone understood that there could be a happy accident, but its probability tended to zero, not to mention the very ability to use it, so even the Japanese’s misses in maneuvering didn’t help ...
      1. 8 company
        8 company 6 July 2012 15: 14
        +2
        Quote: Brother Sarich
        The squadrons were slaughtering, everyone understood


        The squadron went into battle, that’s what everyone understood. You know perfectly well that the Japanese ships shot the whole squadron one at a time, and nothing will help in this situation, no supernova mechanisms and super-efficient shells. Rozhdestvensky simply led everyone into an ambush, arranged right before his eyes in the direction of movement.
        1. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 15: 49
          +2
          And who prevented the Russian ships from smashing the concentrated fire of the Japanese? A simple inability to do this is the right answer, they only learned how to do it after a few years ...
          There was no ambush, no need to fantasize ...
          1. 8 company
            8 company 6 July 2012 16: 45
            +1
            Quote: Brother Sarich
            There was no ambush, no need to fantasize ...


            Admiral Togo crossed the course of the Russian squadron, both main Japanese combat detachments left the port side of the Russian ships, heading west, and then at 13:45 began to make a sequential turn at 24 rumba, heading for the north-east at 67 °, i.e. almost parallel to the Russian squadron. At the beginning of the turn, Mikas was on the beam of the Eagle. This turn (later called the “Togo loop”), made at a distance of 38 cab. from the Russian flagship and lasting 15 minutes, put Japanese ships at an extremely disadvantageous position. Japanese ships circulated almost in one place, and if the Russian squadron opened fire on time and concentrated on the turning point of the Japanese fleet, the latter could have suffered serious losses. Rozhestvensky had a good chance to shoot enemy ships, until they could answer him with all their guns. To do this, he had to maximize the progress of the 1st detachment, approaching the 15 cable distance familiar to the Russian commandos, while trying to “push” the enemy ships to the column of older Russian ships with the help of the latest battleships. But he did not do this .. In the end, Togo swept the head of the Russian wake column, an extensive arc that allowed the use of almost all the artillery of the ships at the same time. The Russians, in turn, could not concentrate fire like the Japanese.
            It is difficult to admit, but the Russians were defeated by almost the same method that Admiral F.F. the Turkish squadron was turning into an uncontrollable mass. The difference was that, after the death of their flagship, the Turks usually rushed scattered, which, at least, saved most of the ship's crew, and the Russians stubbornly kept a single wake convoy, which allowed the enemy to consecutively destroy or capture all large ones ships.
            Thus, the victory of the Japanese is a direct consequence, first of all, of an advantage in tactics. It should also be noted that the Russians had 2 times more large-caliber guns, and if instead of the stupid Rozhestvensky there was a more skilled naval commander ...
            1. Andy
              Andy 6 July 2012 17: 34
              +2
              only the lazy does not kick Rozhdestvensky ... and if you think about it with your head, then he did what MTF did.
              started with the sending of a squadron-shells for practical firing did not send. conducted a short exercise from a regular ammunition.
              lack of battle plan. and what a successful battle can be with such a balance of power? The squadron went to HELP first, and not in an independent battle. After the fall of Port Arthur, the only chance was to avoid a breakthrough into Vladivostok to protect the approaches. Failed.
              I already said about the speed of ships.
              and to those who revere the tale of Surf, into the garden. there, a revolutionary-edited picture of a satrap, a drunken officer, with a dentist and revolver, drives a sailor into battle. in life, sailors at the death of ships rescued officers. and fought not from under the stick.
            2. Brother Sarych
              Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 18: 42
              +2
              And how did you find that Russian large guns have more?

              By the beginning of the battle, Japanese ships had advantages: in the power of artillery fire (910 barrels versus 228); the rate of fire of the guns (360 rounds per minute against 134, as well as the higher explosive action of shells); in speed (16-18 knots against 12-13); in booking (on average 60% against 40).
              1. 8 company
                8 company 6 July 2012 19: 28
                +2
                Quote: Brother Sarych
                And how did you find that Russian large guns have more?


                The 2nd Pacific Squadron outnumbered the United Fleet in the number of large-caliber guns (254-305 mm) by more than twice (17:41), yielding 30:12 in the intermediate (203-229 mm) and this despite the fact that the side salvo of the Russian squadron in this category there was even less 8 "(6x8" "Nakhimov" and 2x9 "" Nicholas I ", several times inferior to 8" guns in rate of fire, as well as more than significantly in range and mass of shells), 162: 92 on average (120 -152 mm) in calibers [13]. At the same time, the Russians were noticeably inferior to the Japanese as shells: the Japanese shells weighed more [14] [15] [16] [17], had a much greater high-explosive effect [18]. But, despite some myths associated with shimosa, the use of this explosive brought the Japanese more trouble than the Russians — the use of pyroxylin [19]. The armor of the Japanese was somewhat better protected [20]. The decisive factor in favor of the Russians were 4 new Borodino-class battleships with 17-18 knots speed and a turret arrangement of medium-caliber artillery, built in 1901-1904 just counting on the supposed opponents - Japanese battleships of the Fuji and Shikishima types. ... And in this sense, all Japanese ships, except for the Mikasa, were considered by the Russians to be their “legal victims”. The correct use of these ships in battle was a decisive moment for the possibility of success. If the 1st armored detachment was a completely floating formation with gunmen well trained for squadron firing, and act on the battlefield relatively independently, maneuvering at full speed, it could and should (according to calculations) turn the tide of the battle in favor of the Russian squadron. However, in reality, these ships were placed in completely abnormal conditions, which paralyzed their main fighting qualities.
              2. Pessimist
                Pessimist 6 July 2012 20: 09
                +3
                Quote: Brother Sarich
                And how did you find that Russian large guns have more?

                The Russians had six battleships with four 12dm guns each, plus "Oslyabya" with 4mya 10dm, br. cruiser "Nakhimov" with 8yu 8dm guns.
                The Japanese have four armadillos with 4 12dm guns each, eight br. cruisers with 4 8dm guns each.
                Russian coastal defense battleships do not count, since they are not adapted for squadron combat and are outdated. The weight of the Russian salvo is about 9 tons (of the indicated ships). The weight of the Japanese salvo is about 9 tons 300 kg, so the enemy's salvo is equivalent. But the concentration of artillery fire is incomparable! Plus the fact that Japanese ships, and very often, left the battle to eliminate damage and then re-entered service, and the Russians did not have such an opportunity, even based on speed and tactics. Likewise, the PRELIMINARY PLAN OF A POSSIBLE ENTRY CLOSE HAS NOT EVEN BEEN DEVELOPED, WHAT'S THE "MERIT" OF ROZHESTVENSKY AND HEADQUARTERS ...
            3. Alex
              Alex 19 February 2014 22: 37
              +2
              8 company, You are all so smart and correct that you wonder how you are not yet at the Naval Headquarters? Or not the commander-in-chief of the Navy? Even textbooks have been written about this notorious "Togo loop". Strategists like you all shout: "You should have started shooting ..." and so on. And just to think that in 1904 rangefinders gave errors that were corrected only by sighting. That shooting from a moving ship at moving ships and even at a virtual aiming point is still aerobatics. That even with centralized fire control on one battleship there were serious problems, let alone fire control for the entire squadron. That our and Japanese ships during the course of time can be at different distances and angles (when turning, I repeat) and the data obtained for one battleship will not always correspond to the data for another. I am already silent about the experience of our gunners, the quality of the shells and so on.
          2. Pessimist
            Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 14
            +4
            Quote: Brother Sarich
            And who prevented the Russian ships from smashing the concentrated fire of the Japanese?

            Lack of speed and variety of ships built in one wake !!! Having 9 knots versus 15 knots won't maneuver much! At least it was necessary to separate the new battleships, together with the Oslyabey, into a special detachment that would use the operational space regardless of the rest of the squadron! Then there would have been speed and maneuver, and not the shooting of the Oslyabi, which stalled the course, because of the mess in the ranks ...
            1. Brother Sarych
              Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 18: 32
              +2
              Even if they walked on five knots, the possibility of concentrated fire was preserved, another thing is that they simply did not know how! No interaction was established, no one even thought about it ...
              1. Pessimist
                Pessimist 6 July 2012 20: 21
                +3
                Quote: Brother Sarich
                Even if they walked on five knots, the possibility of concentrated fire was preserved, another thing is that they simply did not know how!

                Do you generally have that concept of an ESCAPE battle ??? CROSSING "T" - favorite maneuver of Togo and do you know the British? This is coverage of the head of the enemy column with the advantage of speed. In the battle in the Yellow Sea "Mikaza" came under such Russian fire for about ten minutes and was severely damaged already in the initial phase of the battle! Even the flagship mechanical engineer Saito, a member of the Hiroyasu imperial family, was killed. Mediocre Rozhdestvensky ALSO ORDERED ALL SHIPS TO SHOOT AT MIKAZA, what came out of it everyone knows ... And you [/ b] "there was still a possibility"
                1. Brother Sarych
                  Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 20: 34
                  0
                  Much more than you think ...
                  The opportunity remained, but the Russian ships did not know how to shoot - I wrote ...
                  Only after more than ten years in the battle was it possible to shoot a whole detachment at one target, and even then it didn’t work the first time ...
          3. Region-25.rus
            Region-25.rus 21 July 2012 08: 48
            0
            Brother Sarych!
            you are apparently not familiar with such a term as "crossing the T" (put a stick over the T) ie "covering the head of the enemy column and concentrating the fire of a group of ships on the enemy's flagship!"
            Further - the author of the "crossing the T" tactics was none other than S.O. Makarov, but (!!!) was not adopted for service in the Russian Navy (but studied by the British and Japanese)
            Further - "crossing the T" is achieved, provided the predominance of the squadron speed over the enemy!
            Further, the Japanese squadron was mostly of the same type (Togo's battleships and Kammimura’s armored cruisers), had the same squadron speed and armaments close in caliber (305-203 mm main calibres)!
            Further, in the Russian squadron, only the first detachment of ships was balanced (4 battleships of the Borodino type - 305 mm main guns and 18 knots of progress) and the flagship of the second squad armored cruiser Oslyabya (254 mm main guns and 18 knots). The remaining ships were obsolete and slow-moving squadron battleships and coastal defense battleships - 305-254mm GK, shorter firing range (some ships used smoke powder).
            Next - the status of ships, crews and supplies:
            The Japanese fleet, although it suffered significant damage after an attempt to break through Admiral Witgeft, had near it a metropolitan base (Sasebo in particular), repair facilities, docks, and more! Consequently, they passed the docking, cleaned the hulls of growths of living creatures, carried out repairs and more! The Japanese crews had rich combat experience in the confrontation with the First Pacific Squadron, the Vladivostok detachment of cruisers, as well as in the Sino-Japanese War! also Japanese crews had the opportunity to relax on their native shores (which is very important)!
            Russian ships made an almost round-the-world voyage far from bases and workshops (the Kamchatka floating workshop as part of the squadron could not provide all the needs). The sailing took place in the most difficult conditions of storms, tropics, coal bunkering at sea) do you personally know what it is like to spend several months in a tropical climate in an iron box? I know! 10 years went to the seas). The crews of the 2nd and XNUMXrd squadrons were often formed from free kicks, airmen, and other unreliable ones, which they tried to get rid of! the development of the material part by the crews (especially the lead detachment of ships) took place in the process of moving to the East, therefore it is not necessary to talk about the combat experience and the amalgamation of the crews! Combat firing was carried out once or twice (the "Gull incident" and off the coast of Madagascar, practical firing without replenishment of the loss of ammunition!).
            It is also important - in the plans of the headquarters of Rozhestvensky there was an option to bypass Japan from the Pacific side with a breakthrough of the Sangarsky or Laperuzov Strait! Therefore, many ships were overloaded with coal far beyond the norm with the placement of coal reserves on the upper decks and premises! As a result, the metacentric height (google if you don’t know what kind of animal it is) has shifted strongly upwards and as a result - a strong deterioration in stability during the battle! The increase in draft also exceeded the permissible limits, as a result of which the armored belt almost went under water leaving an unarmored side above the waterline with many lap ports of 75 mm artillery batteries and other technological cutouts in the sides!
            During the battle, these factors did not decide the outcome in our favor! As for the overturning of three of the four ships of the lead detachment - this fact does not at all indicate the failure of the project or the incompetence of the sailors and officers !!! If you're not aware, the storms in the Sea of ​​Japan end around April-May! And on the day of the battle, the weather was not particularly indulgent - waves up to 2 x 3 meters! Yes, the Japanese shells with shimoza did not penetrate the armor belt, but they made holes in the non-armored freeboard, caused the strongest fires, and at close explosions, bursts at the level of "mars" that fell on the decks of ships! At the same time, the emergency parties fought the fires by pouring water from the "sleeves", the same water overflowing into the holes and spreading over the premises of the ships! Further, as you know, the gun magazines are located at the bottom, and during the battle, of course, they are gradually emptied, the stokers take coal from the bunkers, which are also located below the waterline! And what do we have? And we have an even greater loss of stability - the center of gravity slowly but surely moved higher and higher! Further, during the battle there was an irreplaceable loss of the crew! So gradually there was no one to deal with the damage (((
            So much for "inability" and "not wanting" and the "correct" answer!
            And the reasons are the same - corruption at the top, stupid careerism, and in general the decay of the system headed by the "holy" (ugh !!!) alcoholic Nikolasha! They planted around themselves corrupt sycophants, swindlers and mediocre relatives (governor Alekseev in particular) ..... and there are many more reasons!

            I apologize for the somewhat messy presentation)))
            just outraged by the statements of "professionals" who do not understand the difference between a toilet and a latrine !!!
        2. Andy
          Andy 6 July 2012 17: 24
          +4
          but how could he get around it (ambush) if the speed is 9 knots, and the Japanese have 15? not evade, not approach
          1. Pessimist
            Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 16
            +2
            Quote: Andy
            but how could he get around it (ambush) if the speed is 9 knots, and the Japanese have 15?

            That's for sure!!! There was only a variant of a separate detachment of new battleships and Oslyabi, free in maneuver from the rest of the squadron ...
        3. smile
          smile 6 July 2012 21: 22
          +3
          8 company
          In principle, yes - the Japanese beat us with the technique introduced by Makarov - "stick over T", but the squadrons were actively maneuvering, and the difference in speed was known in advance. Why send a combined hodgepodge of ships, the performance characteristics of which excluded the possibility of effective maneuvering? The result was logical. This should have been known at the stage of the formation of the squadron. Especially later, when it became known about the destruction of the Port Arthur squadron ..
          1. 8 company
            8 company 6 July 2012 22: 12
            +3
            Quote: smile
            Why send a hodgepodge of ships whose performance characteristics precluded the possibility of effective maneuvering? The result was logical


            A smart commander would turn flaws into strengths. It was possible to use the "slow-moving ships" as a "floating fortress" to distract Togo's attention, and the "fast ships", among which there were 4 most powerful battleships, could be made a maneuverable detachment. This detachment would make counter-maneuvers, preventing the Japanese from driving the entire squadron into a trap.
            1. Brother Sarych
              Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 22: 48
              +1
              "Fast ships", like the rest of the ships, walked almost along the battery deck in the water - what maneuver if there was coal all around the ship?
            2. smile
              smile 6 July 2012 23: 15
              +2
              8 company
              If ... good words .... go have to admit. that our naval commanders (in contrast to the commanders of ships and crews), except for Makarov (and Essen had no real power at that time), were inferior to Togo ... and to others too ... the selection of personnel for command posts, to put it mildly, was very lame .... like in the Army. So, it’s unlikely that Rozhdestvensky could handle such a difficult maneuvering ..... Yes, and as far as I remember, 2 Pacific Squadron was intended to act together with the 1st ... and by the time the straits passed, it was already destroyed ..... By the way, I I am surprised that Witgeft, with all his not the best qualities, almost succeeded in breaking through to Vladivostok ... if it were not for the destruction of the entire command personnel of the Squadron, which followed the disagreement in the action of the detachment of cruisers, linear forces ..... moreover, the minutes decided ... . pancake. again, if it’s a shame ... here!
              1. 8 company
                8 company 6 July 2012 23: 47
                +4
                Quote: smile
                pah. pancake. again, if it’s sad ... here!


                Of course, very disappointing! The Russian fleet, with its outstanding victories in the very recent past, did not deserve such a shameful defeat, but subjective circumstances expressed in the appointment of a fool as commander decided everything.
              2. Vyalik
                Vyalik 7 July 2012 13: 23
                0
                If you mean Nikolai Ottovich von Essen, then at that time he was the commander of the battleship "Petropavlovsk".
      2. Pessimist
        Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 07
        +1
        Quote: Brother Sarich
        What was their special survivability if almost all the participants in the battle turned over?

        But before that they withstood the HUGE number of hits delivered under concentrated fire Rozhdestvensky's mediocrity ... Japanese battleships in the battle in the Yellow Sea received heavy damage with much, at times, fewer hits by "bad" Russian armor-piercing shells !!! The Togo squadron was repaired in Sasebo for more than a month and a half afterwards!
        1. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 18: 36
          0
          And so the Japanese were interested in why the Russians were shooting at them so "deadly"! There were no grave injuries, no need to feed yourself with fairy tales ...
          Armor-piercing outfits were really useless at such a distance, and high-explosive ones created terrible destruction on unarmoured sections, which is why ships with a relatively intact citadel turned over - the result is more important ...
          1. Pessimist
            Pessimist 6 July 2012 20: 31
            +3
            Quote: Brother Sarich
            There were no severe injuries, do not feed yourself with fairy tales ...

            I repeat: after the battle in the Yellow Sea, the Japanese squadron was under repair for a month and a half in Sasebo. Study history, not the tales of the Japanese and then the Bolsheviks.
            Quote: Brother Sarich
            Armor-piercing outfits were really useless at such a distance,

            What distance ??? More details! The battle in the Yellow Sea was at a distance of 51 cables, Tsushima - from 34 to 55 cable. I don’t see a huge difference in distance, the difference is only in the number of hits ... In the battle of Tsushima, Togo succeeded in maneuvering with the course crossing and covering the head of the column, but in the Yellow Sea Witgeft did not allow this to be done with maneuvers and the battle was on parallel courses, since the Japanese had only two knots of speed advantage, not SIX !!! ...
            1. Brother Sarych
              Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 22: 58
              0
              For especially talented people, I can retell smart books describing them, the distances at which naval battles of this war were usually held were previously considered unavailable and even guns were not counted on them, therefore all the mechanisms flew ...
              Russian armor-piercing shells turned out to be much lighter than Japanese ones, they were easier for greater speed, but at a long distance it only harmed, because a light shell lost speed faster than a heavy one ...
              In general, it turned out to be full ... ass ...
              In most cases, they did not display high-explosive actions on the enemy ship, since they either penetrated both sides of the ship before they exploded, or, when they exploded, inflicted insignificant damage.
              The Russian shell, which hit the unarmored side of the enemy ship, left a round hole in it, approximately equal to the caliber of the shell; the outlet either corresponded to the inlet, or slightly exceeded its size.
              That's all your heavy damage that got clogged with ordinary traffic jams ...
              1. Pessimist
                Pessimist 9 July 2012 00: 23
                0
                Quote: Brother Sarich
                The Russian shell, which hit the unarmored side of the enemy ship, left a round hole in it, approximately equal to the caliber of the shell; the outlet either corresponded to the inlet, or slightly exceeded its size.
                That's all your heavy damage that got clogged with ordinary traffic jams ...

                Propaganda of the Bolsheviks! The warship is not an empty barrel and the shell is SIMPLY SO, without causing troubles, it cannot flash both sides, since between the sides there is the internal filling of the ship. "Mikaza" got in a battle in the Yellow Sea about FIFTEEN hits main caliber. Result - one of the GK towers did not turn, jammed, one of the guns was broken in the second GK tower. Total: out of four 12dm guns ONE left in the ranks! From artillery 6dm shooting board also remained ONE gun towards the end of the battle. "Tsarevich" also received FIFTEEN hits the main caliber. Result: wheelhouse and bridge are broken, out of order one gun GK and TWO guns 6dm shooting board. So, excuse me, WHOSE APPLIANCES ARE BETTER-WORSE ???
        2. Vyalik
          Vyalik 7 July 2012 13: 30
          0
          As far as I remember, our ships fired armor-piercing shells equipped with pyroxylin and a smaller content in shells. Our shells sometimes pierced both sides and did not explode. And the Japanese fired shells stuffed with shimoza, the explosive effect of which was very great. Of course, our ships were sitting deeper in water and almost the entire armor belt was in the water played a shitty role.
          1. Pessimist
            Pessimist 13 July 2012 00: 52
            +1
            Quote: Wyalik
            .And the Japanese fired shells stuffed with shimoza whose high-explosive action was very great.

            Do not repeat the stories about "our bad shells"! Here is how it was written in the "Marine collection" (No. 4 for 1905), "... according to the English magazine" Engineer ", it turns out that the flagship of Admiral Togo the battleship Mikasa nearly died in the battle on 28 July. 12 "a shell on it tore off one sheet of the outer skin at the very waterline, and through the hole the water poured into the ship in a strong stream (there were "Mikasa", "Asahi", "Fuji", "Shikishima", "Nissin", "Kasuga"). And only thanks to the absolute calm was it possible to apply a plaster and stop the leak. "
        3. Region-25.rus
          Region-25.rus 21 July 2012 09: 04
          0
          You forgot one moment! - For the 2nd and 3rd squadrons, taking into account the transition in the tropics, shells were stuffed with pyroxylin of high humidity! Therefore, the high-explosive action was insignificant! And on some ships the shells were generally cast iron! Which, when hit in the armor belt, simply cracked! (((
    2. REZMovec
      REZMovec 6 July 2012 14: 30
      -3
      It would be Makarov ... The Japs made sure in advance that SMART admirals would not be able to resist them! There is a version that "Petropavlovsk" was blown up not by a mine, but was blown up by a bribed Russian officer ...
      1. Andy
        Andy 6 July 2012 17: 25
        +5
        fiction department on the next floor. Such nonsense even to refute laziness.
    3. Alex
      Alex 19 February 2014 22: 26
      +2
      Quote: 8 company
      The article is, of course, very incomplete. However, it is clear that the "rotten autocracy" created powerful, very tenacious ships of the "pocket" battleship class at domestic shipyards.
      Strange to hear ... What kind of pocket battleships are these? German TKR type "Deutschland"? And where "Borodino" were standing next to them? How can you compare an early-century battleship and a heavy cruiser at the end of its third? Or is it so, anyhow to blurt out the tongue? Sorry, something on the keyboard.
  7. nnz226
    nnz226 6 July 2012 13: 03
    +8
    Don't write about that, Panov! We are not discussing the results of the Russian-Japanese war here, but the fate of the battleship. The author did not indicate the most important thing in the article: only on the battleship "Eagle" did the ship engineer put into practice the theory of unsinkability of ships developed by Academician Krylov !!! I explain that when a compartment on one side is flooded, to reduce the roll and trim, the corresponding compartment on the other side is flooded, and the ship, having lost in draft, remains on an even keel! Of the FOUR ARMORED CARRIERS OF THIS CLASS, PARTICIPATING IN THE BATTLE OF TSUSIMA, only the Eagle remained afloat, the other three ships (Alexander 3, Borodino, Suvorov) capsized and sank with almost the entire crew (from the crew of Borodino survived only 1 person thrown into the sea by a blast wave, a few minutes before capsizing) The ship fought no less heroically than its sisterships, but remained afloat, confirming Krylov's theory in practice !!! And this is the main merit of the battleship "Eagle" !!!
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 13: 09
      +3
      Here I am about this, but no one remembered Kostenko ...
      1. valerei
        valerei 6 July 2012 21: 55
        +1
        Finally, the name of Kostenko sounded and, unfortunately, only once. Kostenko took part in the construction of Oryol, and then was appointed a ship engineer. Because Since these four battleships were not fully run in and fired upon, naval engineers were assigned to each of them. The war was pressing. The eagle was the last of the series and, accordingly, was the least finished. Kostenko was the only engineer who introduced the newest system of unsinkability and bank straightening on Oryol. In addition, the commander of the ship took into account the opinion of Kostenko and on the fire-prevention preparation of the ship, in particular, before the battle, the entire ship was freed from the tree on the advice of Kostenko. Subsequently, Kostenko became a major Soviet shipbuilder. About the Tsushima battle, he wrote the book "On the Eagle in Tsushima". I recommend reading and many of the questions asked today will disappear by themselves.
  8. askold
    askold 6 July 2012 14: 03
    +5
    Yes, the pedigree of squadron (not squadron) battleships of the "Borodino" class began in France in 1899, at a shipyard in Toulon, with the construction of a squadron battleship "Tsesarevich" for the Russian Imperial Navy. In Russia, one or two years later, a whole series of five ships of the same type ("Borodino", "Imp. Alexander III", "Eagle", "Prince Suvorov" and "Glory"). The French project was slightly modified, in the direction of increasing the total reservation area, while reducing the thickness of the armor, so "Tsarevich "did not have the protection of 20-75mm guns, while on ships of the" Borodino "type, 12 guns in an anti-mine battery and 8 guns at the extremities were protected by 76mm armor. At the same time, the thickness of the lower and upper armored belts of the" Tsarevich "was, respectively: 160 -250-170,145-200-120 the height of each belt is 1,88 m along the entire length of the ship, and at Borodino 125-145-195-145-125 the lower belt is 1.66 m high, 102-152-102 the upper belt is 1,68 m high. the entire length. The design of the anti-torpedo bulkhead was also improved: if the Che "the lower armored deck with a thickness of 40 mm did not reach the sides of about 2 meters, smoothly bending into a vertical wall and attached to the bottom, then at" Borodino "the lower armored deck with a thickness of 43 mm was extended from side to side and was attached to the lower cut of the main armor belt, forming a bevel similar to the shell of a turtle, while its upper part was above the waterline. To the base of the bevel of the armored deck (above the waterline) and to the very bottom, an anti-torpedo bulkhead with a thickness of 43mm was attached, about 2 meters from the side. The same scheme was then applied on dreadnoughts of the type "Gangut". And so, by 1906, the Russian fleet was to receive 7 latest squadron battleships, 6 of which, due to their uniformity and uniformity of weapons, and T.T.Kh.
  9. Village
    Village 6 July 2012 14: 26
    -10
    all the ships of this series of construction were full H..O ..... they sank not even from breaking through the armor below the waterline .. but simply from breaking the stability .. because the cross-eyed thrashed at us with hot high-explosive shells ... I repeat .. all these the ships were full g .. that's just not clear .. why these monsters sank almost all of them .. but only the armored "Varyag" fought with a whole squadron and did not even sink ... this is not clear to me ..... and Tsushima is a super shame Russian Empire .. !!! incredible but true ... the macaques tapped the giant in the nose .. a miracle .... in short, the second after the Second World War, the disgrace of the Russian fleet ...
    1. Brother Sarych
      Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 15: 51
      0
      Sir, you are tired ...
    2. askold
      askold 6 July 2012 17: 06
      +8
      Ну с "Варягом" все более менее понятно,для себя я это объясняю так:первый бой с новым противником,которому предложили сдаться,а он стрелять начал-мандраж.Цель большая, ну все разом и стали шмалять, а кто куда, поди ж ты разбери, зато красиво-весь в фонтанах воды идет,ага вот и попадание- а кто попал,а черт его знает все в кучу смешалось.Вот так и лупили 45минут,спасло только то что у нас при постройке частенько защиту артиллерии приносили в жертву скорости и дальности плавания(крейсера типа "Диана",крейсер"Рюрик",и да янки"Варяга" строили,но заказчик то русские,сами по себе строители никаких изменений в проект не вносят все согласовано было с Морским Техническим Комитетом.)Это называется отсутствие тактики эскадренной стрельбы,это потом мы в Цусиме показали.А потонули три броненосца не потому что они Г...О,а потому что каждый из них подвергся сосредоточенному обстрелу сразу 6 японских кораблей,которые к тому времени имели годичный опыт практической стрельбы и грамотную тактику эскадренного боя плюс сплаванность кораблей и экипажей(охват головы такназываемый маневр" палочка над Т")Мы себе такого позволить не могли ,выражение Рождественского,-"идем каким- то стадом",мы там себе вообще ничего, кроме героической гибели позволить не могли.Авантюра, простая военная авантюра и преступление.Да, был у французского проекта существенный недостаток- это близкое расположение противоминной артиллерии к поверхности воды как результат на"Цесаревиче" при полном ходу решили проверить управляемость, ну и переложили руль "на борт" и вода стала вливаться в бортовые открытые орудийные порты,только уменьшение хода до "малого"и перекладка руля на другой борт спасли новейший броненосец от гибели.7мая 1904г.броненосец "Орел",находясь в достройке у стенки Кронштадского порта,при сильном понижении уровня воды в заливе сел одним бортом на грунт,накренившись на противоположный борт.Бронирование еще не было закончено,и в корабль стала поступать вода через отверстия для броневых болтов,увеличивая крен.Когда крен достиг 15градусов вода хлынула через порты центральной батареи 75мм пушек.Только посадка броненосца всем корпусом на грунт спасла корабль от опрокидывания.Существенным недостатком, именно кораблей построенных в России, была строительная перегрузка,так по пректу главный броневой пояс эскадренного броненосца "Бородино" должен был возвышаться над ватерлинией на 50см,а после ввода в строй он ушел под воду.Усугубило ситуацию и командование эскадры приказав взять сверх нормы увеличенный запас угля по 850тонн на корабль.Ведь планировали дойти до Владивостока,без дозаправок.Врезультате тяжело груженые корабли с ушедшими под воду броневыми поясами превратились по сути в безбронные плавучие мишени.Да японские фугасы не могли пробить борт ниже ватерлинии,но создаваемые ими при близких разрывах гигансткие фонтаны воды попадая внутрь кораблей через тотально развороченные(смотри фото)надстройки приводили к накоплению воды в верхних частях судна, что приводило к крену который был губителен для броненосцев этого типа.Также к накоплению воды приводили пожары которые нужно было тушить, врезультате всех этих факторов порты противоминной артиллерии входили в воду и корабли мгновенно переворачивались.Итог "Бородино" 865 чел погибших,1!спасен-счастливчик,"Император Александр III"867чел погибших,"Князь Суворов"вышел из строя бился до последнего,с него был эвакуирован штаб эскадры,добит японскими миноносцами,после того как утратил способность к сопротивлению 925чел погибших.На "Орле" сумели под руководством корабельного инженера Костенко,200тонн воды перекачать в трюм а затем за борт и этим спасли броненосец.Кстати при модернизации японцы срезали часть корпусных конструкций в какой то степени облегчив корабль и он приобрел более приземистый силуэт.
      1. Andy
        Andy 6 July 2012 17: 38
        +3
        it was not the Tsarevich who drew the water on board, but the Alexander3 from the circulation. after that the design of the keels was changed
        1. askold
          askold 6 July 2012 17: 56
          +3
          Yes, yes, sorry while writing this opus I was mistaken, it was really "Emperor Alexander lll".
          1. askold
            askold 6 July 2012 18: 26
            +2
            And one more mistake: the design of armored decks and anti-torpedo bulkheads on the battleships Borodino and Emperor Alexander lll was identical to the Tsarevich, and on the other three ships of the series it was modified as described above. Even the article is not very good, some kind of scanty.
      2. Pessimist
        Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 30
        +2
        Quote: askold
        so, according to the design, the main armor belt of the battleship Borodino was supposed to rise above the waterline by 50 cm, and after commissioning it went under water.

        Armored belt "Borodino" 2,6m wide, 1,6m topside, and everything else to the point, dear! With overload is also true ... Blessed memory of our sailors ... Fuck them with a radish instead of the Kuriles .. !!!!
      3. Village
        Village 6 July 2012 18: 33
        -1
        Askold .. I am delighted with the answer .... worthily clearly and clearly .. without rushing and dust .. no disgusting insults .. you are a real and worthy participant in this site .. respect and respect .... I read Tsushima surf in childhood and Port Arthur ..... it was so insulting ..... yes, tin ... and despite the fact that they were red .... sorry for our lads from the squadron .. my heart is full of sadness ....
    3. Drednout
      Drednout 6 July 2012 18: 11
      +2
      Quote: Village
      second after vov disgrace of the Russian fleet

      And what was a disgrace during the Second World War? Was there Tsushima after the Great Patriotic War? It smacks of delirium.
      1. Village
        Village 6 July 2012 18: 36
        -4
        no .. just the failure of the Red-bellied fleet I put in first place in history .. well, Tsushima is 2nd place .... and to those who say that they didn’t need to heat the Eagle, but they did it right ... I’ll answer. ... remember captain Kazarsky .... they nailed Andreevsky flag to the mast .. loaded kryut with charges for undermining .. put a gun for the last survivor .. and no one squealed like a fucker .. you have to give up .. that’s what I understand Russian heroes ... this is RESPECT ... !!!!!
        1. Brother Sarych
          Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 20: 39
          +2
          Mercury entered the battle and fought, the Eagle also fought with dignity and turned into a helpless trough, barely kept on the water with a bunch of wounded on board - it was already impossible for him to fight the next day ...
    4. Pessimist
      Pessimist 6 July 2012 18: 25
      +3
      Quote: Village
      because the squint-eyed thrashed at us with protested high-explosive shells ... I repeat .. all these ships were full city .. that's just not clear .. why these monsters sank almost all .. but only the armored "Varyag" fought with a whole squadron and did not even sink ... this is not clear to me ...

      The armored "Varyag" received in battle about Seven hits, and the armored "Rurik", in battle on August 1 in the Sea of ​​Japan, about TWENTY FIFTY! Feel the difference ??? In "Prince Suvorov", according to the Japanese, about STA 12 inch shells "Eagle" also received about a hundred hits ... And you grind only nonsense in your comments ...
      1. Village
        Village 6 July 2012 18: 38
        -1
        clearly .. it wasn’t the bobbin ...
      2. Brother Sarych
        Brother Sarych 6 July 2012 18: 46
        -2
        The Japanese wouldn’t have enough shells for such a quantity of 12 inch hits, because the shells flew past - you have some fantastic sources, in my opinion ...
        1. Pessimist
          Pessimist 6 July 2012 20: 38
          0
          Quote: Brother Sarich
          The Japanese wouldn’t have enough shells for so many 12 inch hits,

          Ammunition load of 100 shells per gun, a total of 1600 shells 12dm. PLUS ANOTHER 8dm for "Suvorov", at the moment of confusion on the course.
  10. byrnas
    byrnas 6 July 2012 19: 37
    +1
    "The famous battleship" Eagle "- a famous participant in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905."

    The only thing he was famous for was that he participated in this war, and at the same time lowered his flag to the enemy, there were practically no such cases in the Soviet fleet, as a rule, the crews died in battles .............
    1. Pessimist
      Pessimist 6 July 2012 20: 41
      0
      Quote: byrnas
      The only thing he was famous for was that he participated in this war, and at the same time lowered his flag in front of the enemy, there were practically no such cases on the Soviet fleet

      The very name "Eagle" is apparently unfortunate. The first "Eagle" was burned by Stenka Razin in the Caspian Sea, with 22 pishchal.
      1. byrnas
        byrnas 6 July 2012 20: 49
        0
        A shameful defeat, shameful of which was not, the Japanese took part of the fleet to themselves, even those ships that lay at the bottom, and the king also paid pensions to his admirals who at that time rested in Japanese captivity wondering what for?
  11. x45ssdffsf
    x45ssdffsf 7 July 2012 00: 58
    0
    Well, from what have already reached, imagine there is a site http://poisski.notlong.com
    In which you can find any person only by last name, or first name,
    Collected information from the social. networks, police, etc.
    Our specials are even involved here. service, I don’t know, the truth is - but all the information about me, my husband and my children was here.
    Even photos that I never threw on the Internet, I’m at a loss.
    It’s good that I deleted it on time, which I advise you
  12. mind1954
    mind1954 7 July 2012 04: 25
    0
    Thank you for the article ! I have never seen these pictures.
  13. CARBON
    CARBON 7 July 2012 23: 21
    +1
    Ships, like people, someone lives happily ever after, and someone dies early and not always heroically. My opinion is that the battleships of the "Prince Suvorov" type were certainly not a masterpiece of shipbuilding (a strong middling), but they died in the battle "Suvorov", "Borodino", "Alexander III" at Tsushima in 1905, "Glory" in Moonsund in 1917. Died they are like soldiers, from the "Alexander" team, by the way no one escaped, from the "Borodino" team 3 sailors were saved. After considering the case on the delivery of the "Eagle", the commission concluded that it had lost its combat effectiveness: the ammunition load was practically exhausted, and only one of 4-305 mm remained active. So, what a shame on Admiral Nebogatov and not on the Eagle's crew.
    No matter how their fate develops, a heroic death in battle is better than on the command to open the kingstones and self-flood, like the "Vepik" Hochseeflot in Scapa Flow in 1919, without causing damage to the enemy.
    Glory to the Russian fleet!
    1. Pessimist
      Pessimist 9 July 2012 00: 29
      0
      Quote: CARBON
      My opinion is that the battleships of the "Prince Suvorov" type were certainly not a masterpiece of shipbuilding (a strong middling), but they died in the battle "Suvorov", "Borodino", "Alexander III" at Tsushima in 1905, "Glory" in Moonsund in 1917.

      Very worthy ships! The example of "Glory" is just what you can see! Withstood the battle with the dreadnoughts! Although he died ...
  14. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 26 July 2012 17: 42
    +1
    And here I liked the debriefing on Tsushima:
    http://tsushima.su/RU/libru/i/Page_7/page_18/page_19/Page_32/kofman-analiz/
    Dry, strict, concise, and no politics. All answers to all questions - and about the quality of the shells, and about the commandants, and about much more ...
    1. Pessimist
      Pessimist 7 August 2012 01: 13
      0
      Quote: Trapper7
      And here I liked the debriefing on Tsushima

      Thanks for the link! Very interesting findings.
  15. Sower
    Sower 27 December 2015 07: 05
    0
    Thank you for the article!