Military Review

Warships. Stubborn perfection

138

It probably looks a little strange, but I decided to start with the Japanese cruisers. Why? Well, firstly, they were interesting ships. Secondly, they, unlike many colleagues (Soviet, French, Italian, German), really plowed the whole war. Some even survived to an inglorious end, which does not detract from their military merits.


If you look biased, during the Second World War, only the cruisers of the British Commonwealth, the United States and Japan were engaged in business. The rest are so ... The French quickly ended altogether, the Italians and ours took care of the equipment from the gifted admirals, who, in general, were incapable of anything from the Germans ... There would be a separate discussion with the Germans about what they called cruisers and what it was practiced during the war.

So - let's talk about Japanese ships.


The impetus for the construction of these ships was all the same the Washington Sea Agreement 1922 of the year, which strictly regulated the arms race at sea. And heavy cruisers of the Myoko type were the first ships built in accordance with the Washington Treaty. Limited in displacement 10 000 tons and with guns 203 mm.

In Japan there were two wizards-shipbuilders. Yuzuru Hiraga and Kikuo Fujimoto. These two designers designed so many ships that it causes both surprise and respect. “Yubari”, “Aoba” - and here is the next step. Myoko.


Conceived by Hiraga in the end, embodied in a project that became for some time a classic in Japanese navy. Ten main-caliber guns in five two-gun turrets, three in the bow and two in the stern. Yes, in Europe and the USA they preferred three-gun towers on cruisers, but there was a certain logic in the work of Hiragi. One "extra" trunk 203 mm, which was hardly unnecessary in fact.

And such a scheme lasted quite a long time until the design of the cruiser Tone was developed, in which all four main-caliber towers were installed in the bow.

Hiraga generally wanted to go further, removing the torpedo tubes from armament in general, and in exchange to install another artillery tower. Thus, the output would be a ship with a very impressive airborne salvo, but the naval command decided differently, and not only were the torpedo tubes left, the caliber of torpedoes increased to 610 mm.

Japanese admirals liked the idea of ​​destroying the enemy fleet after an artillery duel with a sudden attack from a long distance, even at night, with the help of these “long-lances”.

And as a result, in the 1923-1924 years, four ships were laid, which during the 1924-1929 years were built by two state-owned (Myoko and Nachi) and two private (Haguro and Asigara) shipyards.

Warships. Stubborn perfection

Due to a combination of circumstances, the “Begin” was the first to be completed. But still, the series was called "Myoko", since this cruiser was the first to be laid down. Despite the fact that the Myoko entered the penultimate system. It happens.


By the beginning of the war, the cruiser underwent a number of modernizations, and as a result, the data on the Myoko type looked like this: the cruiser of the Myoko type had a length of 203,8 m and a width along the midship frame of 19,5 m.

Draft is 6,36 m. Full displacement is 15 933 t. Initially, cruisers developed full speed at the 35,5 node, but after mounting the boules the maximum speed dropped to the 33,3 node.

Power plant power - 130 250 hp The practical range of the 14 nodal course was 7500 nautical miles.

The number of teams of the cruisers "Haguro" and "Nachi" when using divisions as flagships was 920 people, the team "Myoko" and "Asigari" in the version of the flagships of the fleets - 970 people.

The cruiser’s onboard armor belt was 123,15 m long at a height at the edges of 3,5 and 2 m. The thickness of the armored belt was 102 mm, the inclination of the belt wall to the vertical was 12 degrees, the thickness of the armored deck was 35 mm, the bridge was not armored at all.

When compared with colleagues, cruisers of other countries, the Myoko looked very, very worthy. Only the Italian cruiser was faster than him, and in terms of armoring and armament (after replacing the 200-mm guns with the 203-mm) it was generally one of the best.


Armament. No less important component than the armor or driving performance of the ship.

The main caliber of the Myoko was ten 203-mm guns in five Model O two-gun turrets. Three towers according to the “pagoda” principle were located in the bow of the ship, two in the stern. All 10 guns could shoot aboard, four guns could fire forward or backward.


The artillery of medium caliber consisted of eight universal guns with the caliber 127-mm “Type 89NA”. The guns were installed in two-gun towers, two on board.

Anti-aircraft artillery, originally consisting of machine guns of caliber 13,2-mm, was subsequently supplemented by anti-aircraft guns “Type 96” caliber 25-mm. The machines were installed in a single-barrel (manual control) version and a two- and three-barrel version with electric drives.

The number of assault rifles during the war was growing, and in the 1944 year ranged from 45 to 52 per ship. True, the guns were not the best in their class, the light projectile could not provide an acceptable range, so compensating for the frankly weak machine gun with quantity was another option.


However, looking ahead, I note that from aviation only one of the four Myoko cruisers found his death. So we can say that the tactics paid off.

Torpedo weapons. Each cruiser carried four three-pipe torpedo tubes in 610 mm caliber. Ammunition torpedoes "Type 96" was 24 pieces.

Three seaplanes were supposed to be based aboard, but usually two cruisers were taken aboard.


In total, four Mioko-class cruisers were built. The lead Mioko and Nachi were built at state-owned shipyards in Yokosuka and Kura, and the other two ships were built at private shipyards. “Asigara” cost Kawasaki in Kobe, and Haguro was Mitsubishi in Nagasaki.

The four cruisers entered service between the 28 of November 1928 and the 20 of August 1929. The ships made up the 4th cruiser division, which entered the 2th fleet. Cruisers for the most part sailed together, took part in numerous exercises and shows of the 30's.


Naturally, the first swimming revealed the first "childhood" diseases. The main unpleasant discovery was that smoke from the chimneys threw onto the bridge, creating unbearable conditions for the command staff.

In order for Japanese sailors to be on the bridge without gas masks, a very original decision was made: the front chimney was extended by 2 meters. The measures helped, but the ship’s view became more than original. Although he was quite extraordinary and so.

The main modification of the cruisers was the replacement in 1933-1935 of the old 200-mm guns with the latest 203-mm, after which the artillery of the Myoko cruisers became the same as the heavy cruisers of the Takao type.

On the whole, the cruisers came to the beginning of World War II, so to speak, fully armed. They really were very good ships with modern weapons, designed for the most diverse applications.

After the start of the war, the four were divided, and Asigara became the flagship of the 16th division of the 2th fleet of Admiral Nobutaki. The fleet ensured the capture of the Philippines and further solved the tasks of countering possible attempts to return territories.


Haguro, Mioko, and Nachi became part of the 5 division commanded by Admiral Takagi. The 5 Division also took part in the occupation of the Philippines. Here, "Myoko" was the first to meet with American bombers, "catching" a bomb from the B-17, and was forced to go for repairs.

Then the four cruisers united, and it so happened that in the first battle they participated quite well. It was in the Java Sea, where the battle of the Japanese squadron of 4 heavy cruisers (known to us as “Haguro”, “Nachi”, “Myoko” and “Ashigara”), 2's light cruisers (“Youngets” and “Naka”) took place ) and 15 destroyers and squadrons of allies (USA, UK, Netherlands) as part of 2's heavy cruisers (American "Hauston" and British "Exeter"), 3's light cruisers (Dutch "De Reuters" and "Java", Australian “Perth”) and 8 destroyers.

The Allied squadron was commanded by the Dutch Admiral Doorman, holding his flag on the cruiser De Reuters.

The battle is noteworthy because it was here that the Allies felt in their own skin that there are Japanese "long-lances". Prior to this, torpedoes for the United States and its allies were not absolutely known, so Doorman made a rather big mistake, getting closer to the Japanese squadron.

The Japanese were delighted with the suddenly opened perspective ...

First, torpedoes fired from the Haguro hit Exeter. Three. The Exeter caught fire and drowned the next day, finished off by torpedoes. Then the torpedo “Haguro” hit the Dutch destroyer “Cortenauer” with a torpedo. The destroyer had only one torpedo for the eyes, especially since it hit the cellar area, the destroyer exploded and also went to the bottom.

Further, for the sake of diversity, the artillerymen of the Japanese cruisers sank the British destroyer with artillery fire.

Following the baton took torpedo from the "Nachi", sending a volley aboard the cruiser "Java". Java broke and drowned.

And the final point in the battle was put by the “Haguro” torpedo who entered the rage. Their torpedoes caught up with the De Reuters flagship and tore it apart. Three dozen people were saved from the entire team.

A heavy cruiser, two light and two destroyers. If this is not a rout, then I don’t even know what to call a rout ...

But the next morning, the beating continued. The Asigara sank the American destroyer Pillsmbari and the gunboat Asheville with artillery fire.

And the final point in the battle was set by the cruisers Mikuma, Mogami, and Natori with escort destroyers, who intercepted the fleeing cruisers of the Allies Hauston and Perth. Torpedoes and shells sent both cruisers to the bottom.

Surprisingly, for the entire duration of the battle, which lasted 2 days, not a single shell hit the Japanese ships!

Further, the cruisers took part in many operations of the Japanese fleet, landed troops on the islands of Kyska and Atta, evacuated the garrison of Guadalcanal, participated in the battle of Tarawa.

Here, such a useful option as speed was fully manifested. Cruisers were attacked many times by American submarines, but it turned out that getting into the cruiser, which was traveling at a speed of more than 30 knots, was not so easy.

Cruisers took part in the battle of the Philippines 19 June 1944 year, as a result of which the Japanese carrier-based aircraft suffered heavy losses in pilots and aircraft. Then the cruisers got into repair, where they got such a useful thing as the “22 Type” radar.

Then they were waiting for the battle in Leyte Gulf, which can be called "a disgrace in Leyte Gulf."

At the beginning of the battle, on 23 on October 1944, the US submarines “Darter” and “Day” staged a bloody show in the Palawan Strait, sinking torpedoes on two heavy cruisers, “Atago” and “Maya”, and damaging the heavy cruiser “Takao”. Then there was a massacre arranged by American pilots, as a result of which the Musashi superlinker and three cruisers sank, and a bunch of ships were damaged.

"Myoko" got a torpedo aboard, "Haguro" caught a bomb in the tower, which failed.

They decided to put the damaged "Myoko" for repair, and the ship went to Singapore, where it got up for repair. 13 December 1944, the cruiser left Singapore to Japan, and here the Americans got it. The submarine "Burgall" treated the "Meko" with two torpedoes, as a result of which the cruiser completely lost its course.

In tow, the cruiser returned to Singapore, where it was used as an anti-aircraft battery, having sunk in the shallow water next to the same unfortunate comrade Takao. After the liberation of Singapore, the British towed the damaged cruiser Meko to the Strait of Malacca, where they flooded.

The damaged Haguro also moved to Singapore, where it was put on the dry dock of the Selstar Naval Base for repairs. After the repair, Haguro regularly delivered people and goods to the islands of Dutch India and the coast of the Bay of Bengal. Speed ​​allowed.


On the night of May 16 of 1945, the Haguro, carrying loads of provisions to the Andaman Islands, was attacked by the British destroyers Sumares, Verulam, Vigilent, Venus and Virago.

The Haguro gunners immediately hit the Sumares shell, then the British decided not to wait for the torpedoes and fired the first salvo. The Haguro, having received three torpedoes aboard, sank within 40 minutes.

"Nachi" fought in the north, fought at the Commander Islands, and the American cruiser Salt Lake City parted in a draw, sending each other out for repairs. On 6 of September 1943, the cruiser received two torpedoes hit by the American submarine Halibat, but, strangely enough, the torpedo bombings did not cause serious damage to the cruiser.

In the Leyte Gulf massacre, the Nachi and Asigara took part in a night battle in the Surigao Strait, where the Japanese were defeated, and the Nachi collided with the Mogami and broke their nose. For repairs, the cruiser went to the Philippines, where in the harbor of the Caviti Naval Base “Nachi” the American aircraft finally finished off.


Nine torpedoes and at least 20 bombs once turned the cruiser into a pile of scrap metal, and it sank in the Gulf of Manila.

The cruiser Ashigara became the flagship of the Southern Expeditionary Fleet on 10 on April 1942 and escorted convoys for most of the war and delivered cargo to the islands of Dutch India.

Not far from Sumatra on 8 on June 1945 the British submarine Trent launched five torpedoes on the Asigara. At this, Asigara’s career was over.

Actually, a worthy end for ships that fought the whole war. And - definitely fought well. Of course, using a heavy cruiser as a transport is not the smartest idea, but nothing, we also drove the cruiser in a row.

What is worth saying about the project?

Successfully utterly. Especially in terms of weapons. 10 203 mm guns in five two-gun turrets - this is not the European standard 4x2 and not the American 3x3. Yes, despite the fact that target shooting could not be conducted from a large number of barrels, but only the cruiser “Pensacola” could be compared with the onboard volley from the Myoko.

Reservation, like all "Washington" cruisers, was, in general, no, that is, capable of protecting from small bombs and shells up to 152 mm.

But in general, in the “Washington” framework, creating a normal ship was simply unrealistic. The terms of the agreement clearly sacrificed speed, armor, weapons, or all at once.

But for the mid-20 of the last century, these were really very advanced ships.

Yes, the Meoko entered the war, very different from what went into operation, since a lot of weapons were replaced, air defense was installed from scratch, radars appeared, but nevertheless, for the technological base that Japan had in those years , it was a real such a masterpiece.

What is successful until a certain point the military service of the cruisers only confirms.
Author:
138 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. ABM
    ABM 10 December 2019 18: 08
    +8
    Japanese heavy cruisers are my favorite subject :)
    1. Proxima
      Proxima 10 December 2019 18: 44
      +6
      If you look biased, during the Second World War, only the cruisers of the British Commonwealth, the United States and Japan were engaged in business. The rest are so ... The French quickly ended in general, Italians and ours cherished materiel from gifted admiralsnot capable, in general, of anything .. (from text) Strongly disagree with the Author. The Pacific Fleet is understandable. Baltic - one can also partly agree, did not fully realize its potential, was blocked for a long time. But the Northern Fleet plowed three hundred percent. fellow The same can be said about the Black Sea Fleet, the prohibitive logistics of the transfer of troops, ammunition and provisions. Many landing operations. And the battleship (which all the fleets of the world tried to protect) the "October Revolution" is so "shore materiel" that did not have time to change the trunks of the main caliber ...
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 10 December 2019 19: 20
        +8
        Quote: Proxima
        [i] And the battleship (which all the fleets of the world tried to protect) the "October Revolution" is so "shore materiel" that did not have time to change the trunks of the main caliber ...

        I apologize recourse "Paris Commune" of course. hi
      2. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 10 December 2019 19: 33
        +4
        But, you see, it was interesting to read ...
      3. Walking
        Walking 10 December 2019 19: 38
        +4
        Quote: Proxima
        If you look biased, during the Second World War, only the cruisers of the British Commonwealth, the United States and Japan were engaged in business. The rest are so ... The French quickly ended in general, Italians and ours cherished materiel from gifted admiralsnot capable, in general, of anything .. (from text) Strongly disagree with the Author. The Pacific Fleet is understandable. Baltic - one can also partly agree, did not fully realize its potential, was blocked for a long time. But the Northern Fleet plowed three hundred percent. fellow The same can be said about the Black Sea Fleet, the prohibitive logistics of the transfer of troops, ammunition and provisions. Many landing operations. And the battleship (which all the fleets of the world tried to protect) the "October Revolution" is so "shore materiel" that did not have time to change the trunks of the main caliber ...

        It is not clear what the fleets have to do with it, the author writes about the cruiser. And the Italian cruisers also fought a lot, only very unsuccessfully and with great losses for themselves.
        1. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 10 December 2019 22: 22
          +8
          Quote: Hiking
          And the Italian cruisers also fought a lot, only very unsuccessfully and with great losses for themselves.

          By the way, I agree with the author. Italians seemed to be able to build ships that were excellent in terms of performance characteristics, but to fight on them, and even more so to command formations .... You read Bragadin, since Italians are almost the elite at sea. And look at the results .... lol
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 11 December 2019 10: 58
            +5
            Quote: Rurikovich
            By the way, I agree with the author. Italians seemed to be able to build ships that were excellent in terms of performance characteristics, but to fight on them, and even more so to command formations ...

            The Italians have one excuse - since 1941, their fleet has been on a hungry oil ration. Neither to you a normal combat training of linear forces, nor to you regular exits.
            Bragadin’s memoirs now and then complain about empty tanks in the bases and even that they had to drain fuel from the tank to exit the EM.
            As mentioned earlier, the Italian fleet started the war with 1800000 tons of oil. Despite the savings and restrictions imposed immediately, as soon as it became clear that the war was dragging on, by February 1941, 1000000 tons of this reserve had been used up. It was the ninth month of the war. At such a pace, the Italian fleet would have to cease all activity in the summer. Representatives of the fleet repeatedly drew the attention of the High Command to this grave problem, but no agreement was reached with the Germans. Therefore, the Italians hoped that direct negotiations with the German commander, who, as a professional, understood the problem well, would provide a satisfactory solution to the problem. Indeed, the meeting in Merano attracted Raeder's attention to the problem. In the spring of 1941, a certain amount of oil began to arrive from Germany, but it was completely lacking even to meet the minimum needs. The supermarine was already forced to limit its monthly fuel consumption to a fleet of 100000 tons, which was half the fuel necessary to ensure operational freedom. In fact, for various reasons, this figure did not exceed 50000 tons, or one fourth of the need. The receipt of fuel not only did not ensure normal operations, but also the beginning had a serious effect on ongoing operations.
            In the summer of 1941, when only 103000 tons of oil arrived from Germany, the reserves of the Italian fleet were finally exhausted. From that moment, the Italian fleet was forced to conduct operations only when oil supplies allowed it. In those periods when they were delayed or interrupted, the activities of the fleet were completely paralyzed. Later we will see the crisis that erupted in the winter of 1941, and the real shackles in the hands of the fleet in mid-1942.
      4. antivirus
        antivirus 10 December 2019 19: 54
        +2
        Surprisingly, for the entire duration of the battle, which lasted 2 days, not a single shell hit the Japanese ships!


        -much spat on Tsushima. 1095 .. under certain conditions all countries fell into their Tsushima
      5. Tavrik
        Tavrik 10 December 2019 20: 31
        +2
        But is a cruiser built for the transfer of troops, ammunition and provisions? Or providing landing operations? Still, more for cruising, disrupting the navigation of the enemy or escorting battleships and their convoys. Everything else is from the evil one. It is necessary to use it for other purposes, because there is nothing else.
  2. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 10 December 2019 18: 25
    +1
    The Japanese know how to fight and build ships good
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 11 December 2019 08: 41
      +2
      Quote: Kirill Dou
      The Japanese know how to fight

      And how are you doing?

      Could overcome only Russian at sea
      Quote: Kirill Dou
      and build ships

      Technique created by geniuses
      1. Kirill Dou
        Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 11: 56
        -1
        And how are you doing?
        - quite good

        What about the photo of the car?
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 December 2019 20: 55
          0
          Quote: Kirill Dou
          - quite good

          Lost independence, becoming an American colony?

          Good results, nation of warriors)))
          1. Kirill Dou
            Kirill Dou 14 December 2019 15: 44
            0
            Lost independence, becoming an American colony?
            - First, read the definition of the word "colony", which Japan does not correspond to. Secondly, losing a war is the result of many factors, among which the ability to fight and military valor are not decisive.

            Well, before “becoming a US colony,” Japan ruined the nerves of one of the most powerful economic and military powers in the world. You can also play with dignity.
      2. Octopus
        Octopus 11 December 2019 12: 15
        -1
        Quote: Santa Fe
        Technique created by geniuses

        GT-R? Of course. And why is it here?
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 11 December 2019 20: 58
          0
          Quote: Octopus
          GT-R? Of course. And why is it here?

          Just don't pretend that the hint is unclear

          "I don't believe" - ​​Stanislavsky
          Quote: Octopus
          GT-R? Of course.

          Japanese Technique = Perfection
          Unlike cars, I can only judge Japanese ships from pictures. All that is known about them is respectful.
  3. Proxima
    Proxima 10 December 2019 19: 16
    +3
    Quote: Proxima
    [i] And the battleship (which all the fleets of the world tried to protect) the "October Revolution" is so "shore materiel" that did not have time to change the trunks of the main caliber ...

    I apologize, made a slip, naturally, “Paris Commune”. The name of the battleship with the name of the admiral confused belay (October).
  4. Blacksmith 55
    Blacksmith 55 10 December 2019 19: 23
    +4
    Not a sailor, but I read with great interest ALL about ships, especially military ones. Thank .
  5. Glory1974
    Glory1974 10 December 2019 19: 25
    +4
    Despite the good ships and the ability to fight, the Japanese lost. Yes, at the beginning of the war they broke into the enemy in full, but in the end it ended badly.
    This is of course not quite the topic of the article, but all the same. Great weapons give an advantage, but cannot win a war.
    1. ABM
      ABM 10 December 2019 21: 45
      +11
      Understand that NEVER a country with economic potential at the level of Belgium will defeat a country at the level of the USA. I understand that somehow it sounded unpatriotic now
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 10 December 2019 22: 34
        +11
        Quote: ABM
        I understand that somehow it sounded unpatriotic now

        Zatroleti.

        The calculation was that a) the Americans are not ready for war; b) the Americans are weak, they will cut off the samurai spirit. The first part was justified beyond all expectations, but the second part was not guessed.

        Oddly enough, conversations about weak American Americans nonetheless appear regularly.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 11 December 2019 11: 29
          +8
          Quote: Octopus
          The calculation was that a) the Americans are not ready for war; b) the Americans are weak, they will cut off the samurai spirit. The first part was justified beyond all expectations, but the second part was not guessed.

          The Japanese simply did not take into account "American Nazism", which was in no way inferior to the Japanese. The Americans sincerely considered themselves to be the superior race (white race), and the Japanese were treated as the second class. And the Japanese attack was interpreted as "what these japas allow themselves ?!".
          Hence, by the way, and the nature of the war on maintenance - all these skulls as a gift. And the main slogan of that war by Admiral Halsey was simple: Kill the Japanese, kill the Japanese, kill more Japanese!

          The flip side of this Nazism was the pre-war failure of US technical intelligence: the staff sincerely believed that, they say, some Asian non-women could invent something superior to the products of a white person: after all, every American knows that Japanese aviation flies on degraded copies of mediocre European models, the Japanese army is a bunch of bespectacled nedomer, armed with small things... As a result, all pre-war reports, for example, about "Zero" (and they were from the same American "volunteers" in China) were discarded as unreliable.
          1. Octopus
            Octopus 11 December 2019 12: 05
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            The Japanese simply did not take into account "American Nazism"

            As if in Europe it was different. Americans in general in those years did not mind fighting. And now it has passed much less than the couch patriots hope.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            The flip side of this Nazism was the pre-war failure of US technical intelligence

            No.
            This is a myth spread, in particular, by a midnike. American intelligence agents scouted the Japanese through the w, not because they were racists at mom, but because they did all. As if the German torpedo scandal and methods of using tank divisions, the British methods of organizing air defense and the principles of the formation of convoys, they explored better than Zero.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Kill the Japanese, kill the Japanese, kill more Japanese!

            So kill at least one!
            So kill him quickly!
            How many times will you see him,
            So many times and kill him!

            These are features personally of Halsey. Congress was not as bloodthirsty as Halsey or, say, Morgenthau.

            Specifically, about Halsey, it is appropriate to recall the order to drown the Japanese during the campaign to Wake. Compared to your stories that Kimmel and Short could not postpone the breakfast schedule at the air defense headquarters, and so the poor worked on Sunday morning.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 11 December 2019 15: 24
              +1
              Quote: Octopus
              Specifically, about Halsey, it is appropriate to recall the order to drown the Japanese during the campaign to Wake. Compared to your stories that Kimmel and Short could not postpone the breakfast schedule at the air defense headquarters, and so the poor worked on Sunday morning.

              But one should not confuse the base under consideration from Washington, almost in a magnifying glass, with the AUG bosses that have gone from under the hood, and, moreover, headed by Bychara himself.
              Also, remember how Halsey's Chief of Operations, Commander William Buckner, reacted to Battle Order Number One: "Damn it, Admiral, you cannot start your own war!"
              Goddammit, Admiral, you can't start a private war of your own!


              Halsey, for example, had no Hawaiian planters on the take-off deck who threatened to set the Senate and Congress on Short and Kimmel if they did not stop their stupid exercises with deployments in private territory. smile
              1. Octopus
                Octopus 11 December 2019 15: 50
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA
                You cannot start your own war! "

                Adopted advanced Japanese experience.
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Hawaiian planters threatened

                This reminds me of the problems of the Red Army with the chairmen of collective farms, which prevented the conduct of exercises.

                You can find a lot of excuses. According to the torpedoes, I remember that the trade unions prevented the detonator from making it explode. And then the village came, they radiate the cows, the milk goes sour right in the udder, why not.
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 11 December 2019 17: 02
                  +1
                  Quote: Octopus
                  This reminds me of the problems of the Red Army with the chairmen of collective farms, which prevented the conduct of exercises.

                  The collective farm chairmen did not own the land and did not have homies in the Senate and Congress (or did not sit there themselves). And they did not own construction companies that worked on naval contracts. In the course of the PX investigation, threats of overpricing and disruption of the terms of naval construction surfaced.
                  In Hawaii, planters considered themselves masters of life, local autocratic barons. This is my land, here I set laws - and I did not care about your army and navy.
                  1. Octopus
                    Octopus 11 December 2019 18: 10
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    In the course of the PX investigation, threats of overpricing and disruption of the terms of naval construction surfaced.

                    What a tenderness.

                    Again, few people know this, but President Roosevelt's America and Governor Roosevelt's New York State are described in the book "The Godfather" by Mario Puzo close to the truth. There, the local Navalny, who was inadvertently allowed into the Senate, was only engaged in investigating all these arts full-time (and not one).

                    Harry Truman was his name.

                    As for the planters with whips, all this exotic has nothing to do with the work schedule of the air defense center.
          2. Fat
            Fat 12 December 2019 08: 35
            0
            By 1941, the radio tracking system for Japan and the Japanese fleet was probably the most advanced in the world. Its activities were divided into three large groups: the first - the interception and decryption of diplomatic reports, the second - the interception and decryption of the radio communication of the Japanese fleet, and the third - analysis of the movements of the imperial Navy. The accomplishments were so amazing that the Navy chief of staff, Admiral Stark, called the system "a great mechanism."
            The Americans had something to be proud of: 22 radio interception stations (PSA) monitored the air over the Pacific day and night (4 stations belonged to Great Britain and one to Holland). Theoretically, not a single Japanese message could pass by. This “mechanism” included four decryption centers with experienced teams of cryptologists and analysts [666]. The centers delivered intercepted dispatches to Washington, keeping the White House informed of all the intentions of the Japanese government.
            Radio communications in the Asia-Pacific region were monitored by 13 intercepting stations owned by the Navy and four army radio centers. However, there was no unified command; the naval command and control regiments were controlled by the US station located in the building of the naval ministry. The greatest volume in that work fell to the fleet. “Sile”, “Cast” and “Haipo” were regional (district) controlling centers, most of the intercepted information flowed here. Only in four places, Japanese dispatches were translated and decoded: “Cast” and “Haipo” in the Pacific Ocean, “US” station, and Army ICU in Washington. Sile PSA was limited in its capabilities and transmitted intercepted cablegrams to Washington.
            The US small Asian fleet and its commander, Admiral T. Hart, received the necessary information from the Kast station. It was a fully equipped radio interception and decryption center under the command of Lieutenants R. Fabian and D. Leitweler. The station staff consisted of 75 people, including radio operators, cryptanalysts, experienced direction finders and translators. In addition, “Cast” was a center for the exchange of decrypted data between the American, English and Dutch parties.

            In 1940, F. Friedman hacked the codes of the Japanese government, and managed to read and naval encryption.
            In your opinion, almost complete information about the activities of the Japanese, did the American command also ignore? Because of the "white nationalism" of the Americans?
            US actions in front of Pearl Harbor, more like a provocation.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 12 December 2019 10: 21
              +3
              Quote: Thick
              In your almost complete information about the activities of the Japanese, the American command also ignored?

              Yes.
              Quote: Thick
              Because of the "white nationalism" of the Americans?

              Due to stupidity. If more correct, due to the low interest of the country's political leadership in military matters, and, consequently, the extremely low quality of personnel in this area. Which is especially strange, given the course of this manual to enter WWII.
              Specifically, Roosevelt's naval minister was the publisher Knox, and the war secretary was a man of interesting work biography Stimson. For 5 years, from the spring of the 36th to the spring of the 41st, the Americans laid down 1 (one) aircraft carrier, Hornet. Mass production of PLO ships was launched at the end of the 42nd - beginning of the 43rd
              Quote: Thick
              US actions in front of Pearl Harbor, more like a provocation.

              There were provocations, not in PX, but in the Philippines. And the provocations were not against the Japanese, but against Congress. Yes, Roosevelt committed treason.
              1. Fat
                Fat 12 December 2019 10: 36
                0
                Quote: Octopus
                There were provocations, not in PX, but in the Philippines. And the provocations were not against the Japanese, but against Congress. Yes, Roosevelt committed treason

                Thank. What to look for provocation in the Philippines?
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. Octopus
                  Octopus 12 December 2019 14: 19
                  +2
                  Quote: Thick
                  What to look for provocation in the Philippines?

                  For some reason, they deleted the answer. LJ midnike, December 7, 15, for example.
          3. Kirill Dou
            Kirill Dou 14 December 2019 15: 52
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Kill the Japanese, kill the Japanese, kill more Japanese!


            Interestingly, I read Ehrenburg's article "Kill", where, in particular, there were the following words: "Count one thing: the Germans you killed. Kill the German! - this is the request of the old mother. Kill the German! - this is the child begging you. Kill the German! - this is the native land screams. Don't miss. Don't let it. Kill! " - is this also evidence of Russian Nazism then?
  6. Walking
    Walking 10 December 2019 19: 35
    +10
    The author, it would be necessary to determine the names, or Myoko, or Mioko, or Asigara - Ashigara. Correct. Mioko, by the way, is more correct. The conditions for the crew were poor, in the Japanese Navy it was usually.
    1. Wildcat
      Wildcat 10 December 2019 21: 04
      +2
      I like this.
      The author writes as he wants, "the look of the artist", so to speak. It's even more fun: "Allied cruiser Houston". And you can have fun looking for mistakes.
      laughing
    2. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 00: 39
      0
      To be more precise, "Ashigara" is a soft "u".
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 11 December 2019 12: 25
      +5
      Quote: Hiking
      The conditions for the crew were poor, in the Japanese Navy it was usually.

      Habitability in the japanese navy was hospital average. And she improved in line with global trends.
      Quibbles are observed in relation to ships of the 30-40s. when the “postulate” is used to explain the excellent fighting qualities of Japanese ships of this period that they were “bought” due to “deterioration” of habitability (and also seaworthiness, yes) - well, “white” (European / American / Russian) cannot recognize that Japanese shipbuilders not only achieved parity with them, but also surpassed it in some aspects.
      Somewhere until the end of the 20s. of the last century, hammocks everywhere served as sleeping places for lower ranks on ships of all fleets (and some of the people slept on the covers of lockers for things, if any). The hammock was very simple to manufacture and handle, it did not require specially adapted living quarters (it can be suspended almost everywhere, in casemates, corridors, workshops), it was checked by time, but progress did not stand still and for ordinary members it was thought up a rigid frame, which is considered more convenient and healthy for the spine. Such a berth is a rectangular, metal frame, which is filled with some kind of "placeholder" - we will conditionally call it that. This can be a panel of durable canvas (tarpaulin), which is attached to the frame with hooks or just an ordinary cord (like old Soviet folding beds, if one of the comrades found them). It can be a weave of leather or rubber belts. This can be a grid of metal hooks and ringlets (like old Soviet panzer beds, if one of the comrades found them).
      As far as I know, the first of the large fleets to introduce hanging bunks was the American one. But second, second, it seemed, was Japanese. The Japanese Navy thought about hanging bays on a rigid frame in the second half of the 20s, and introduced them on cruisers of the Mogami type of the 1st Fleet Replenishment Program (Maru Iti), 1931.
      Since that time, the crew’s cockpits on large Japanese surface ships (battleships, aircraft carriers, cruisers, floating bases) were equipped with hanging bunks. Such a berth in the Japanese fleet was a tubular metal frame with a length of 1850 mm and a width of 600 mm, tightened with a tight tarp (in Japanese terminology - canvas No. 1, the same as that used to make hammock panels). The bunks were usually suspended in three (sometimes two) tiers, and in the daytime they could be pulled “stacked” under the ceiling, freeing up the space of the cockpit. Along with the introduction of hanging beds, lockers were eliminated (which were no longer needed), and lockers were introduced to store uniforms and other things. However, a complete replacement did not happen and the hammocks were partially preserved on large ships. Smaller ships (destroyers, minesweepers, gunboats) preserved the traditional system with hammocks and lockers. You can, of course, blame the Japanese for not bringing the progressive initiative to its logical end, but remember that such “progressive” European fleets as the British or French did not have bunks for lower ranks even on the latest battleships and aircraft carriers. About the smaller ships and no speech.
      I won’t even talk about the presence of normal galleys, large chambers, bathhouses, infirmaries, laundries and even machines for the production of lemonade on large Japanese ships, this goes without saying.
      © V. Sidorenko
      https://sidorenko-vl.livejournal.com/20818.html
  7. Corn
    Corn 10 December 2019 19: 47
    +4
    But in general, in the “Washington” framework, creating a normal ship was simply unrealistic.
    or vice versa, agreements were a powerful incentive to build truly warships of sane displacement and cost, without being plunged into harmful gigantomania.
    The terms of the agreement clearly sacrificed speed, armor, weapons, or all at once.
    if nothing is sacrificed, then the battleship will be obtained from the cruiser, i.e. the machine is super expensive, piece-wise and incapable of controlling the open sea.
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 10 December 2019 22: 39
      +2
      Quote: Corn
      or vice versa, agreements were a powerful incentive to build truly warships

      "Restrictions" laid down the imbalance of armor and weapons. Either the ship is unarmored to fight with itself, or something else is wrong with it. Ships built without restrictions - primarily the Balt - did not become battleships, but they differed for the better from the Washingtonians.
      1. Corn
        Corn 10 December 2019 23: 12
        +1
        "Restrictions" laid down the imbalance of armor and weapons.
        The imbalance was laid by designers who consciously sacrificed protection for the sake of better mobility and firepower.
        The cruiser "Balt" entered service long before World War I, there is nothing to compare it with the "Washingtonians".
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 10 December 2019 23: 27
          +1
          Quote: Corn
          The cruiser "Balt" entered service long before World War I.

          I'm talking about CA-68 Baltimore
          Quote: Corn
          Imbalance was laid by designers

          10K and 8 "belts do not fit.
          1. Corn
            Corn 11 December 2019 00: 45
            -2
            I'm talking about CA-68 Baltimore
            The ship was created taking into account the first years of the Second World War and even in conditions when the level of industrial production in the USA is higher than that of all other warring countries combined. Why not gash a super cruiser? If they could, the Japanese would simply respond with a ship of the same displacement and the main caliber of 300mm ... but they could not, like the Germans could not even the modest “pocket battleships” in the product line, and even yesterday “the mistress of the seas” overtook the “Belfast ”
            10K and 8 "belts do not fit.
            200mm shells even for full-fledged battleships posed a serious danger. At the same time ...
            ... either the ship is unarmored for battle with itself ...
            The ship is created not for duels (at sea there will always be a ship with a more powerful gun and thicker armor), but for specific tasks, with specific limitations on the resources spent. No one was forced to put a battery of 200mm guns, hang dozens of medium artillery barrels, torpedoes and push boilers into 100k horses (as experience has shown, all this was not very necessary), but this was the technical task of the Admiralty.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 11 December 2019 01: 55
              +2
              Quote: Corn
              The ship was created taking into account the first years of the second world

              ))
              In May of the 41st it was laid down, in the summer of the 40th designing.
              Quote: Corn
              If they could, the Japanese would simply answer

              They answered in advance, the Japanese SRTs were 11K +. The point is that the heavy cruiser remained a cruiser, not a battleship.
              Quote: Corn
              as the Germans could not even modest "pocket battleships" in the product line

              A meaningless ship. Could only happen in post-Versailles circumstances. Early CRTs were already eggshell with a hammer, and this hammer is 2 times more.
              Quote: Corn
              even yesterday’s “mistress of the seas” overcame with “Belfast”

              The mistress did everything right. Fiji / Uganda is a much more intelligent ship than Cleve.
              Quote: Corn
              200mm shells even for full-fledged battleships posed a serious danger

              Beat all the windows.
              Quote: Corn
              The ship is not made for duels

              Just KRT was created for duels. Anti-raider.
  8. Taoist
    Taoist 10 December 2019 19: 53
    +6
    Well, to call the project "utterly successful" ... I would not get excited. The Japanese built excellent ships ... But there is one problem only the Japanese could fight on such ships. The habitability was not considered in the project as a fact. For them, the ships may have been successful. (Although an ambush with air defense, of course - there is simply no medium caliber, as a result, the ZKDB does not have enough rate of fire, and the MZK range is a dive bomber's dream).
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 10 December 2019 21: 30
      +10
      But here is one problem that only the Japanese could fight on such ships. Inhabitability was not taken into account in the project as a fact.

      The myth launched by the Americans

      Their sailors, accustomed to three types of juice for breakfast, the conditions of service on Japanese ships really seemed unbearable
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 11 December 2019 13: 52
        +2
        Quote: Santa Fe
        Their sailors, accustomed to three types of juice for breakfast, the conditions of service on Japanese ships really seemed unbearable

        Immediately remember the living conditions on the submarine "Archer-Fish", described by its commander:
        On board an American submarine, each crew member had his berth and could rest, simply wallow on it in his spare time. Usually sailors stood watch for eight hours, slept for eight hours, and had eight hours of free time. In the living compartments one could always see sailors playing in the ass, cribbage and other card games.
        In the sailor’s dining room and in the officer’s cabin, music was constantly playing - records were playing on the players. In the water position, we could listen to shortwave transmissions. Great success was enjoyed by Tokyo Rose. Everyone rolled with laughter, listening to her stories about the "victories of Japanese weapons."
        On the boat we had two cokes - Ed Kist and Joe Baroody and baker Pat Healy. Koki prepared delicious dishes for us three times a day. The baker got up daily at 3.00 to bake fresh bread, rolls, pies and cookies.
        Our fridge was stuffed with fresh meat, steaks, roast beefs, chops and hamburgers. On board most submarines in the galley, an open door policy reigned. This meant that any member of the crew at any time could open the refrigerator and take whatever his heart liked. There was always fresh coffee. There was always enough fresh water for our needs. There were two souls on the boat; however, their use was limited.
        The washing machine was almost always in action. A notice hung above her: "Save water."
        The crew loved to gather in the common dining room after the shift. But anyone, if desired, could find a secluded place to spend some time alone. Officers for communication usually gathered in the wardroom.
        Free time spent in conversation, playing cards, drinking coffee. We had several films for demonstration on campaigns. Usually sailors and foremen watched films from 17.00 p.m. in the forward battery compartment, and officers - from 19.00 p.m. in the wardroom.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 19 December 2019 15: 16
          0
          Complete moral decay. I also read that when the Hornet received a torpedo at Midway, everyone who did not belong to the emergency parties sat on the edge with their legs dangling from the deck and ate ice cream. Ice cream!!! fir-trees !! Dangling your legs !!!!!!!!!!! It is forbidden for us to sit anywhere on the upper deck. Dangling his legs - that way, any officer will have a heart attack from such impudence.
          With such a "mess", the Americans also managed to fight well like that. For some, this is unattainable.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 19 December 2019 15: 19
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            Complete moral corruption.

            Yeah ... but it was these gouges who sent the largest warship of the sunk to the bottom. smile
            Quote: mmaxx
            I also read that when the Hornet received a torpedo at Midway

            Ummm ... maybe Yorktown after all? Hornet was nailed later, in the battle at Santa Cruz.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 19 December 2019 15: 47
              0
              And maybe "Yorktown" ...))). Insanity is close.
              But essentially the same thing.
      2. Taoist
        Taoist 11 December 2019 23: 10
        0
        Well, I don’t know how myth is, but a logical question arises .... due to what did the Japanese manage to cram more powerful weapons into equal displacement by almost a third without sacrificing speed or range?
        Our "sevens", having almost the same displacement as the Japanese "Kageros" had 4 main guns in shield mounts instead of 6 in turret mounts, I generally keep quiet about TA with their quick reloading system ... (again, 8 pipes instead of 6 and a larger caliber)
        At the same time, they had a three times shorter range ... The speed is also almost equal. And for the poor seaworthiness and durability of the hull 7ki only the lazy did not kick ... The Japanese were distinguished by seaworthiness ... A similar question also arises for cruisers. In all respects, they surpass classmates significantly - the question is, what did you donate?
  9. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 10 December 2019 20: 21
    +3
    Formally, the author retold the data from any monograph on a particular ship (type). The plus is that if a victim of the USE is too lazy to search for any thread, then such a presentation of the material is completely unreasonable. Therefore, in any case, plus yes
    Any major class ships built since the twenties Goths of the last century, after Fache ... sorry, the Washington Treaty, have been victims of restrictions. The attempt to limit the arms race resulted in the strange, bound by the restrictions, perverted in the ability to squeeze the maximum into what was proposed. Therefore, all the newly-minted cruisers look like a floating misunderstanding. For without these restrictions, countries would build BALANCED cruisers based on their views on their mission and financial and industrial capabilities. When ships were armored in accordance with the concepts of equality of defense with attack, they would have their own differences according to the shipbuilding schools. And so they gave everyone a problem with the initial input, everyone bowed their heads and created a type of heavy cruiser with their own views, sacrificing mainly defense, taking Fischer's "speed is the best defense" as a basis. So it turned out that even shell fragments were capable of knocking out such a "cruiser" ("Exeter" at La Plata).
    Of course, the Japanese squeezed the maximum out of the restrictions, getting their "Mioko", "Takao", "Mogami" in terms of attack, speed, but still the defense was negative ... The classic "armor thickness should be equal to the main caliber" was not maintained anywhere in Washington cruisers. Survivability was achieved mainly due to the thoughtful division into watertight compartments. And the fact that any relatively large ship can withstand single hits ...
    1. ABM
      ABM 10 December 2019 21: 59
      -1
      Washington, Fashington - are you talking about a country that has made a key contribution to the victory over fascism itself? Already twitched - without them, they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much. Japan’s attack on the USSR in 1941 guaranteed, unfortunately, our defeat
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 10 December 2019 22: 10
        +1
        Quote: ABM
        Already twitched - without them they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much

        Yeah, only this exceptional, white and fluffy, irreplaceable country, the country is now rewriting everything and everything for itself IGNORING past merits wink I understand that now they love to extol the Lend-Dys and that it was a panacea for all ills ... BUT for all weapons we paid in gold and people are fighting. Our people broke fascism, not the Americans. Because your
        Quote: ABM
        Already distorted

        I was not impressed. Now there, in Washington, there are hypocritical fascists and for me personally, their "merits" in helping us have been nullified wink
        They made a contribution .... After the USSR ground the German and drove him to the west ... And so they sat and waited for the end ... "Heroes"
        By one loss it is possible to judge who really fought with Germany. Or are you a supporter of the western version that the US defeated Germany?
        1. Avior
          Avior 10 December 2019 22: 42
          -1
          Are you a supporter of the version that the US of Germany lost?
          And about the pay for Lendliz gold is not even funny
        2. maden.usmanow
          maden.usmanow 10 December 2019 22: 46
          +1
          What opportunities did the Americans have to fight the Germans at 41? Or at 42?
          Open the map, take a look at the globe.
          The Americans helped not only the Union, but also Britain, China. And at the same time, they fought against Japan, at first losing the island purely for the island.
          Understand, this was not only the war of the Soviet Union with Germany, but the Second World War.
          In many ways, those huge losses, the direct fault of the Soviet leadership, the Americans are not to blame for this, they just saved lives, land lease.
          The fact that the Germans occupied during the first few months of the war beat off three years, and the Americans had nothing to do with it. They had a war with Japan.
          They did not sit out, and the British did not sit out.
          Where do you think all the German submarines have gone?

          The Soviet Union itself was substituted, itself. I overslept the beginning of the war.
          Why is it always necessary to blame some Americans, British, French, well, they themselves overslept, themselves.
          1. Octopus
            Octopus 10 December 2019 23: 38
            +4
            Quote: maden.usmanow
            What opportunities did the Americans have to fight the Germans at 41?

            Why should they fight the Germans? What did they do wrong to them?
            Quote: maden.usmanow
            Or at 42?

            In the 42nd just fought in Africa. Moreover, the main benefit from them is that the British acted politically, the French did not like the British after Mers-el-Kebir.

            From a military point of view, the Americans had a problem. Worker-peasant army. This is very little understood, unfortunately.

            “How many acres of land do you have?” Ike asked, perked up at the mention of his native state.

            “Twelve thousand, sir.”

            - Twelve thousand? Ike asked. - And how much do you have under wheat?

            - Nine thousand, sir,

            - And what is the harvest?

            “Forty-one bushels per acre.”

            “Mr.,” Ike said (passing this story to us, Ike grinned), try to remember my name. When the war is over, I will come to you to get a job.

            “When I was a kid,” Ike concluded, “having two hundred and fifty acres of Kansas land under wheat was the biggest dream for any guy from Abilene.” Yes, sir, it was very tempting for me, and for you, Brad, I think it would be nice.

            “In Moberly, I would agree to one hundred and sixty acres,” I replied.


            Even the commander in chief was not a military man in the full sense of the word. However, with the hereditary military - MacArthur - everything was even worse.

            (In parentheses, I note that the family of the conscript has 5 thousand hectares of land. Far Eastern hectare, yes)
            Quote: maden.usmanow
            The Soviet Union itself was substituted, itself. I overslept the beginning of the war.

            Not at all. There was a complex of reasons, but I didn’t oversleep for sure. By June 41st, he would soon be at war two years.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 10 December 2019 23: 50
              +1
              Quote: Octopus
              “Forty-one bushels per acre.”

              28 centners per hectare. Zoo, of course.
              1. pmkemcity
                pmkemcity 11 December 2019 05: 54
                +3
                Michurinians note. 70 percent of Russia's population lives where no one else lives. The north of the USA is the south of France, Sochi and Krasnodar. Stoke ships, potatoes are not your calling.
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 11 December 2019 07: 00
                  0
                  Quote: pmkemcity
                  Michurinians note. 70 percent of Russia's population lives where no one else lives

                  How interesting.
                  Why does it live there?
                  1. pmkemcity
                    pmkemcity 11 December 2019 07: 06
                    +4
                    There is such a word - Motherland, my eight-fingered friend.
                    1. Octopus
                      Octopus 11 December 2019 08: 04
                      -1
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      There is such a word - Homeland

                      What an interesting word.

                      It does not in any way change the fact that the potential fist Eisenhower, who wants to get 100 dessiatines for wheat alone for his only shameless snout (Stolypin's allotment in Siberia is 15 dessiatines, the average in the black earth is less than two in the Russia that we have lost, the yield is a quarter of the American) had to grab a pistol at the word "Bolshevik".
                      I’m not talking about this soldier, from undercutting landowners. 5 thousand desyatyins! Comrade Dzerzhinsky would have listened to this, and all three to the wall, Eisenhower, Bradley and the little bartender.

                      And here they still complain that the Americans badly loved the Soviet regime.
                      1. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 11 December 2019 08: 27
                        0
                        Even the octopus has a homeland. Or are you not an Octopus?
                        Do you know what "defarming" is? Have you heard about the Holodomor in the United States? Your consciousness is saturated with poison. Drink a course of milk, it remarkably removes henbane from the body. American agitation and others like them "We live on German good" are only suitable for wiping the sit-down. Learn history.
                      2. Octopus
                        Octopus 11 December 2019 08: 55
                        +1
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        Have you heard about the Holodomor in the USA?

                        Still would. Roosevelt Holodomor was revealed by principal post-Soviet historians almost immediately as Soros conducted the American Internet to them. I can be mistaken, but if most of these stories were invented by the Americans themselves (say, lunar conspiracy theology), then the Roosevelt genocide seems to be an intellectual victory for the Cyrillic segment.
                        The goblin American brothers reasonably responded to this with the Truman genocide of the Germans after the war, if I do not confuse anything.
        3. Octopus
          Octopus 10 December 2019 23: 02
          +2
          Quote: Rurikovich
          now rewrites everything and everything for himself IGNORING past merits

          The tradition of separating the Second World War and WWII led the Soviet authors.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          Our people broke fascism, not the Americans.

          Don't value a good attitude. Win even in 44th the position of Churchill and the American "realists", the position of the USSR by the 45th could have been much more difficult. And the winners could be written out immediately. Fortunately for the USSR, Roosevelt was not a realist.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          After the USSR grind the German and drove west

          Who cares? At the time of the conclusion of peace, it matters not how much who paid, but how much who has left.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          One loss can be judged

          No. The second after the USSR in terms of the losses of the winner - China - really was not even on the map. And after 3 years, the Americans completely surrendered the former ally of the USSR, without worrying at all.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          USA defeated Germany

          All three major Axis countries capitulated precisely to the Americans. Do not screw up Truman in May of the 45th with the repeated surrender of Germany (even Eisenhower was against it, a friend of the Soviet government there) - the question of the winner of WWII would not have stood at all.
      2. lucul
        lucul 11 December 2019 00: 37
        0
        Washington, Fashington - are you talking about a country that has made a key contribution to the victory over fascism itself? Already twitched - without them, they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much. Japan’s attack on the USSR in 1941 guaranteed, unfortunately, our defeat

        What a fun hutspa)))
        Lend-lease began to be delivered in 1942 (small lots), and reached a peak in deliveries by 1944. And still, it amounted to no more than 10% of the production in the USSR.
        Without Lend-Lease, the war would end in 1946, and not another 5 years, as you write ....
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 11 December 2019 14: 48
          +3
          Quote: lucul
          Lend-lease began to be delivered in 1942 (small lots), and reached a peak in deliveries by 1944. And still, it amounted to no more than 10% of the production in the USSR.

          Average temperature in a morgue hospital? wink
          What about 40% of artillery gunpowder in 1944? Weak to hold Ten Stalin punches without 40% artillery shots?
          Or what about high octane? What, triple the number of departures?
          What about half the copper? The transition to the 85-mm caliber of the T-34-85 is covered with a copper basin - there is no brass for the sleeves.
          I’m not talking about tungsten and aluminum.
      3. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 03: 32
        +2
        Japan was just very on time and rather painfully given in the teeth on Khalkhin Gol.
      4. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 11 December 2019 08: 50
        +1
        Quote: ABM
        Already twitched - without them, they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much.

        It’s a pity that the Germans didn’t have time to squeeze Anglo-Saxons before the war.
        FSA, as luck would have it, got into Britain with their help

        Without amer’s help from the island, by 1941, ruins would remain. And the Germans, we ourselves would have figured it out even faster if Standard Oil hadn’t delivered oil to the Reich, and Ford hadn’t sponsored German industry
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 11 December 2019 16: 17
          +1
          One more.
          Quote: Santa Fe
          Anglo-Saxons before the war

          You will be surprised, but the war between Germany and Britain and its allies became World War II.
          Quote: Santa Fe
          at the same time climbed with their help Britain

          1. The battle for Britain was won almost without the United States.
          2. If Britain had not fought (say, agreed), the United States would hardly fit into the USSR. So they would regret it more carefully.
          Quote: Santa Fe
          Oil standard did not supply oil to the Reich

          Did not deliver. Mom’s investigators present Franco’s deliveries, which the Americans, at the request of the British, made as payment and neutrality. Yes, Franco was not in himself so smart and neutral, he was well explained.
          Quote: Santa Fe
          Ford did not sponsor German industry

          Not sponsored. Ford factories have been nationalized. But in Britain, yes, in Britain, the Ford England plant at the end of the war was, for example, the main producer of Merlin engines.
      5. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 11 December 2019 13: 55
        +1
        Quote: ABM
        Washington, Fashington - are you talking about a country that has made a key contribution to the victory over fascism itself?

        And before that, she had done everything possible to provide the Nazis with a military-industrial base. Remember who credited the future leaders of the military-industrial complex of the Reich.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 11 December 2019 18: 00
          +3
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Remember who credited the future leaders of the military-industrial complex of the Reich.

          Remember at the same time, who did industrialization in the USSR, sold him Vickers and Christie tanks, engines of Spanish-Suiz, BMW, Wright, Gnome-Ron, set up production of Ford / GAZ and Avtokar / ZIS trucks, etc. etc.
          By the way, who organized it all, daredevil? Really the State Department and personally Corden Hull?
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 11 December 2019 21: 03
            0
            Quote: Octopus
            By the way, who organized it all, daredevil? Really the State Department and personally Corden Hull?

            Delivered - well done.

            Take everything from the Anglo-Saxons - and don’t give anything in return.
  10. Undecim
    Undecim 10 December 2019 20: 32
    +8
    Surprisingly, for the entire duration of the battle, which lasted 2 days, not a single shell hit the Japanese ships!
    Here the author was mistaken.
    Japanese ships also suffered damage, albeit incomparable. Damage was received by the cruiser Haguro and destroyers Jintsu, Asagumo and Tokitsukaze, and Asagumo was quite serious - the shell hit the engine room, killing four and injuring 19 people. In total, the Japanese lost 36 people dead.
  11. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 10 December 2019 21: 27
    +2
    Some even survived to an inglorious end, which does not detract from their military merits.

    Of all the Japanese cruisers, only the light cruiser Sakawa met the end of the war.

    Subsequently, the target turned into a nuclear test
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 10 December 2019 21: 57
      +4
      Of all the Japanese cruisers, only the light cruiser Sakawa met the end of the war.
      What do you mean by "met"? Did you meet it intact?
      Because the same Myōkō also met the end of the war in Singapore, but as a floating battery.
      There, the end of the war was met by the cruiser Takao, damaged by British "combat swimmers".
      Both were sunk in 1946, being used as targets.
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 10 December 2019 22: 18
        0
        Quote: Undecim
        Met in an intact state?

        Tavo Type smile Not only did he enter service at the end of 44, the last of the series, but in 45, due to a general lack of fuel, he did not take practical part in hostilities, "sitting out" in the Inland Sea as the leader of destroyers. Therefore, almost the only one who did not brag about welded holes yes
      2. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 11 December 2019 08: 34
        +1
        Quote: Undecim
        then you mean by the word "met"? Met in an intact state?

        Sakawa is the only Japanese cruiser to meet the end of the war:
        a) staying on track
        b) retaining its original purpose as a cruiser

        Since the end of 1944, Mioko and Takao did not go to sea due to damage from torpedoes. By the time of surrender - they left ruins
  12. Undecim
    Undecim 10 December 2019 22: 22
    +5
    [i] Yes, in Europe and the USA they preferred three-gun towers on cruisers ...

    British heavy cruiser Cornwall (County-class). The first British "Washington cruisers", construction of which began in 1924. Two-gun towers.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 10 December 2019 22: 29
      +5

      Italian heavy cruiser Fiume (Zara-class), Italian "Washington" cruisers built in 1929-1932. Two-gun towers.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 10 December 2019 22: 34
        +5

        The French heavy cruiser Algérie is the answer to the Italian Zara class cruisers. Laid down in 1931. Two-gun towers.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 10 December 2019 22: 43
          +5

          German heavy cruiser Admiral Hipper, which gave the name to the series of three ships. These are cruisers that the Germans began to design in 1934, right after the signed Anglo-German naval agreement freed Germany from Versailles restrictions and did not have to dodge, as with "pocket battleships".
          Two-gun towers.
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 10 December 2019 22: 52
            +4
            Well and the USA.

            The heavy cruiser Pensacola, the lead ship in a series of two, was the first American "Washington cruiser", laid down in 1926.
            Then the sympathy of the designers was divided equally - two towers two-gun, two three-gun.
            As you can see, at the time of the design and construction of cruisers such as Myoko, the three-gun turrets were exotic, found exclusively on American cruisers.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 10 December 2019 23: 05
              +1
              Quote: Undecim
              Then the sympathy of the designers was divided equally - two towers two-gun, two three-gun.

              )))
              The three-gun 1st tower did not fit into the contours.
            2. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 11 December 2019 14: 57
              +2
              Quote: Undecim
              As you can see, at the time of the design and construction of cruisers such as Myoko, the three-gun turrets were exotic, found exclusively on American cruisers.

              Moreover, the Americans were not towers. smile
              Towers (turrets) appeared on the American SRT only starting with the "New Orleans" (CA-32, 34, 36). AND "Pepsicola Pensacola, Norhamptons and Indianapolis were equipped with deck-tower mounts.
              And yes, individual VN at the barrels in the towers appeared only starting with "Wichita". And before that - one cradle for all trunks.
  13. Corrie sanders
    Corrie sanders 10 December 2019 22: 23
    +3
    Dear author, I draw attention to some flaws in proper names, which probably came from incorrect transliteration from Japanese.
    1. "Admiral Nobutaka" - "Nobutake" is the personal name of Full Admiral IJN Kondo, (Nobutake Kondo
    2. "Cruiser Yuntsu" - there was a cruiser "Dzintsu", LKR of the "Sendai" type
    3. "cruiser Houston" - was the American TCR "Houston" of the "Pensacola ++" type

    The article is very good, thank you very much! I would also like to see about the cruiser IJN Takao and Yahagi
    PS The type of myoko still had a serious drawback in the form of a third nose tower, which was heavily overstretched and having insufficient aiming angles; it was pushed into it due to some victims, in particular at the expense of turning and loading speed, this tower was inferior both in the sector and in the main parameters
  14. ABM
    ABM 10 December 2019 23: 05
    -3



    Well, do you at least understand that the US was not only NOT OBLIGED to help us, they could easily wait for the outcome of the confrontation and then enter the "cold war" with the Reich? we defended our homeland - we had nowhere to go, the situation with the help of the United States, which began to arrive in September 1941, is difficult to overestimate. Yes, what am I talking about, Stalin makes a toast at Churchill's birthday:

    “I want to tell you what, from the Soviet point of view, the President and the United States have done to win the war. The most important things in this war are the machines. The United States has proven that it can produce 8,000 to 10,000 aircraft a month. Russia can produce at most 3000 planes a month. England produces 3000-3500 a month, mostly heavy bombers. So the United States is a land of machines. Without these machines, supplied under Lend-Lease, we would have lost this war. "
    1. lucul
      lucul 11 December 2019 00: 42
      +3
      Yes, what I'm talking about, Stalin makes a toast at Churchill's birthday:

      And what else did Stalin have to say on that birthday? When do you finally open such a second front? That would be out of place. Flattered the allies on the holiday-business then ....
    2. Per se.
      Per se. 11 December 2019 08: 35
      +2
      Quote: ABM
      Well, do you at least understand that the United States was not only NOT OBLIGED to help us, they could easily wait for the outcome of the confrontation and then enter the "cold war" with the Reich?
      This can be countered with the words of Harry Truman, - "If we see that Germany is winning the war, we should help Russia, if there is Russia, we should help Germany, and let them kill each other as much as possible, although I do not want under any circumstances to see Hitler in the winners. Not one of them holds the promised word.". I would especially like to highlight the last phrase, the absence of which allegedly somehow distorts the meaning of what was said. Who would talk about keeping their word if the Anglo-Saxons simply turned a blind eye to all violations of the restrictions of Versailles and allowed Germany to arm, in addition, they came to power with American money Nazis, military power rose on them.Everything is simple, they made anti-USSR from Germany, they were going to fight communism with the hands of German Nazis.The Americans fought with Japan ... And the same States needed it, both to enter the war, and to Japan had virtually no chance of winning, well, if Alaska had been captured immediately after Pearl Harbor, the Hawaiian Islands or California had landed, maybe the brave Americans would have surrendered and signed peace.
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 11 December 2019 20: 06
        +1
        Quote: Per se.
        violations of Versailles’s restrictions allowed Germany to arm itself,

        Truman on the drum of Versailles. Congress drove Wilson with the idea of ​​fitting into this story.
        Quote: Per se.
        American money Nazis came to power

        Is it a working party, or was the State Department financing? Did Congress allot money, or who?
        Quote: Per se.
        Germany did anti-USSR

        Anti-USSR was made from Poland, one does not have to imagine so much about oneself.
        Quote: Per se.
        German Nazis were going to fight with communism

        I wonder what got in the way.
        Quote: Per se.
        Super Income from Military Supplies

        These incomes were provided to them by their own budget. That is, my friend public debt.
        Quote: Per se.
        if only Alaska were captured right after Pearl Harbor

        This is some kind of alternative Japan with alternative geology.
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 12 December 2019 07: 40
          +1
          Quote: Octopus
          Is it a working party, or was the State Department financing? Did Congress allot money, or who?
          You have pushed here out of context, and even with the verdict - "you don't have to imagine so much about yourself" ... I just don't imagine a lot about myself and don't give out verdicts. Now on the topic. Yes, the States somehow financed German Nazism, one way or another ensured Hitler's rise to power.

          The entire pre-war history of Germany shows that controlled financial shocks were used for the desired political course, and the organizers of these shocks were the Anglo-American financial clans (the highest world banking layer).
          Therefore, the Munich conspiracy was one of the links in the chain of events prepared in full accordance with the plans of the Anglo-American financial elite for organizing a military clash between the USSR and Germany.

          Poland, say, how was the anti-USSR appointed? Poland would not have pulled the war against the USSR, even Germany had to give after Austria and Czechoslovakia the same Poland and most of Western Europe, so that the economic and military potential of the Third Reich could pull the war against the Soviet Union.
          In general, the fate of world leadership in capitalism was decided, which by and large was achieved by the Anglo-Saxons, the whole post-war world was in bondage and under the dollar, and Germany and Japan were also under occupation, which remains to this day.

          There is no need for "songs" about an alternative history, especially with an alternative "geology". You deliberately distort the meaning of what has been said, where it was about virtually zero chances of Japan's victory against the United States, and they could have won purely hypothetically, with the eastern version of the blitzkrieg. For a long, drawn-out war, Japan had no options at all for victory. Be healthy, Mr. Octopus, do not get confused in your tentacles.
          1. Octopus
            Octopus 12 December 2019 10: 40
            +2
            Quote: Per se.
            top global banking

            Yes, something is difficult to explain.
            Quote: Per se.
            The Munich Agreement

            And then the American backstage?
            Quote: Per se.
            to organize a military clash between the USSR and Germany.

            It seems that you did not understand about Poland. In the 30s, the USSR considered few people. Either Eastern Poland, or Northern China.
            Quote: Per se.
            Poland would not have pulled a war against the USSR

            Pulled in due time, not so long ago. Another thing is that Poland, according to the ideas of the same Curzon, was supposed to border not with the USSR, but with the UPR. Here the Englishwoman, of course, blundered.
            Quote: Per se.
            so that the economic and military potential of the Third Reich could drag out a war against the Soviet Union.

            Half of the economic potential of the 39th Reich could drag out a war against the Soviet Union. This must be clearly understood. The failure of the war in the East was not predetermined; it became a series, among other things, of a number of mistakes by the German side and one correct Soviet decision.
            Quote: Per se.
            In general, the fate of world leadership in capitalism was decided.

            Capitalism is good because the issue of leadership by military means is impossible to solve.
            Quote: Per se.
            and Germany and Japan are also under occupation

            Poor thing. Very suffer. Especially in view of the GSVG, it is interesting to talk about occupation.
            Quote: Per se.
            with the eastern version of the blitzkrieg

            They had a blitzkrieg, more successful and more rationally planned than Barbarossa. Not enough.
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 12 December 2019 14: 29
              +3
              Quote: Octopus
              Capitalism is good because the issue of leadership by military means is impossible to solve.
              The main issue of leadership was precisely resolved in the First and Second World War, and, precisely by military means. Another thing is that raking in the heat with the wrong hands is much more effective than carrying the brunt of the war. Who suffered the main losses in the First World War? As a result of the First World War, everyone who could represent any competition to the Anglo-Saxons in Europe - the German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and even the Russian Empire. Only Japan remained, and the USSR did not happen, the new world socialist pole of power, instead of the final collapse of Russia, with pro-Western liberals from the February Revolution of 1917, the Anglo-Saxons would already become the main masters of the planet.

              It was from the defeated Germany that they had to make the anti-USSR, and not in any way from the pshek. Germany was not ready in 1939 for a war against the USSR, it took a "strange war", in which the Anglo-Saxons actually surrendered almost all of Western Europe to the Germans. Hitler stopped Guderian's tanks for three days, allowing the British to evacuate from near Dunkirk, and received rich trophies. Only by 1941 was Germany fully ready for a war with the USSR.

              The Japanese "blitzkrieg" on the conquest of endless islands in the Pacific Ocean and the smearing of forces there was a doomed business, which led to the results that happened. Even the success of Pearl Harbor could not have been successful for the Japanese, the Yankees simply did not expect that the Japanese would adapt aircraft torpedoes for shallow depths, and would quickly get armor-piercing bombs from ordinary large-caliber artillery shells, having welded stabilizers to them. A Japanese attack was expected, Japan itself was provoked into war.
              1. Octopus
                Octopus 12 December 2019 22: 43
                +3
                Quote: Per se.
                The main issue of leadership

                Austria-Hungary and the Russian Empire, which began the bazaar station?
                Quote: Per se.
                USSR, the new world socialist pole of power

                The USSR was not considered any pole until the end of the 40s. Perhaps this really was a mistake behind the scenes.
                As for the February liberals, they just drowned for a single, indivisible, this is one of their main mistakes.
                Quote: Per se.
                Hitler stopped Guderian tanks for three days

                Kleist and Goth. This is a bike, Hitler did not give a stop order. Rundstedt then decided that he was entering a bag. Not without reason.
                Quote: Per se.
                getting rich trophies

                English and even French "trophies" in Barbarossa had no meaning. Only the Reich, taking into account Bohemia.
                Quote: Per se.
                Germany was ready for the war with the USSR completely.

                Germany could would be ready for war if would Hitler had a plan "b", not for 5 months, but for 5 years. Comrade Stalin had such a poor plan, but there was, the Reich did not have it at all.
                Quote: Per se.
                The Japanese "blitzkrieg" to conquer endless islands in the Pacific Ocean and smear forces there was a doomed business

                The only option. Or so, or leave China.
                Quote: Per se.
                Even the success of Pearl Harbor could not work for the Japanese

                This is an alternative reality with alternative Americans. If would the Americans were ready, the Japanese blikrig choked would blood is already at the start. True, for the USSR, the option with smart Americans also does not bring anything good.
                Quote: Per se.
                Waiting for the Japanese attack, Japan itself was provoked to war.

                Yes, but both opponents made the same mistake - they believed that the enemy would act in the way that suits them best. The Americans believed that the whole battle would be limited to the Philippines, which were Roosevelt before the light bulb. The Japanese believed that having received the tough teeth, the Americans would cry and run away.

                Both those and those did not guess.
                1. Per se.
                  Per se. 13 December 2019 06: 17
                  +2
                  Quote: Octopus
                  This is a bike, Hitler did not give a stop order
                  This is not a bike, on May 24, Hitler ordered the German tank divisions advancing along the coast of the English Channel to stop the offensive at the line of the Aa channel and withdraw the units that had advanced on Hazbruk. This "bike" is also reflected in Halder's "War Diary" dated May 24, 1940 (20 hours, 20 minutes).
                  The mobile left wing, in front of which there is no enemy, is stopped at the urgent request of the Führer! In this area, the fate of the surrounded armies should be decided by our aviation


                  About "If the Americans were ready, the Japanese blikrig would have choked with blood at the start." Naturally, American industry at that time did not go on a war footing, but in general, the US Navy and Air Force was quite ready for the initial confrontation with the Japanese forces. It was the loss of almost all battleships in Pearl Harbor that gave Japan a head start. The Yankees lost their battleships precisely because they hoped for shallow depths in the base and the Japanese lack of armor-piercing bombs to break through the decks of battleships. This is not an "alternative history" at all, but a fact. The aircraft carriers at Pearl Harbor were absent, the battleships should not have suffered significantly, but instead of the expected farce in the attack, the Yankees got a pogrom. Nevertheless, the pretext for entering the war was received, as well as the "righteous wrath", for the treacherous attack that was expected and provoked.

                  For the rest, I already said that Japan had no chance of winning the war, only hypothetical, if they all after striking Pearl Harbor would also land on the Hawaiian Islands, create bases for bombing the west coast there, attack the Aleutian Islands, landed on the coast of Alaska. Success was not developed; what happened happened. Thank you for the attention.
                  1. Octopus
                    Octopus 13 December 2019 07: 00
                    +2
                    Quote: Per se.
                    On May 24, Hitler ordered German tank divisions.

                    Rundstedt
                    https://vakhnenko.livejournal.com/233100.html
                    All post-war work of German generals is devoted to how Hitler prevented them from fighting.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    but in general, the fleet and the US Air Force were quite ready for an initial confrontation with the forces of the Japanese.

                    Quote: Octopus
                    and 5 years, from the spring of the 36th to the spring of the 41st, the Americans laid down 1 (one) aircraft carrier, Hornet. Mass production of PLO ships was launched at the end of the 42nd - beginning of the 43rd

                    Quote: Per se.
                    It is the loss of almost all battleships in Pearl Harbor

                    It was a great luck for the Americans. If Kimmel Nagumo was caught in the sea, it would not have been worth the 3 thousand dead.
                    In the 41st and even in the 42nd year, the Americans did not have an understanding of how to wage war at sea. They prepared for war until the 43rd inclusive. In this they really resemble the Red Army.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    The Yankees lost the battleships precisely because they hoped

                    A million excuses then came up with. Let me remind you that the Japanese made a strike at peaceful airdromes not only in PX, but also in the Philippines, about 12 hours after PX.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    There were no aircraft carriers at Pearl Harbor

                    And even if they were present. There are two of them. And Nagumo has 6.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    as well as "righteous anger," the treacherous attack that was awaited and provoked.

                    They waited and provoked, but not there and not like that. True, "there" it turned out even worse, MacArthur is an American October.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    if they all after striking Pearl Harbor, and carried out landing on the Hawaiian Islands,

                    It is impossible.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    set up bases for bombardment of the west coast

                    Find a map and ruler.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    attacked the Aleutian Islands

                    They attacked. Pretty useless activity.
                    Quote: Per se.
                    landed on the coast of Alaska

                    What should they do there?
                    Quote: Per se.
                    Success was not developed; what happened happened.

                    Even as it was, they melted the entire south of the Pacific and the east of the Indian Ocean. But that was not enough.
  15. lucul
    lucul 11 December 2019 00: 09
    0
    In Japan there were two wizards-shipbuilders. Yuzuru Hiraga and Kikuo Fujimoto. These two designers designed so many ships that it causes both surprise and respect.

    So this is the state’s task - to find these nuggets in time, train them and put them at the head of the design bureau, like S.P. Korolev and others.
    And the task of the enemy state (for example, arrogant Saxons) is the same to find these nuggets, but just not to allow them to develop, preventing or physically eliminating them.
    And the campaign of the enemies is not bad ....
    1. Kirill Dou
      Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 00: 47
      0
      "Anglo-Saxons" (although Americans are full of descendants of the Spaniards, French, Germans, Irish, Slavs and other peoples) - so, the Americans are much smarter than you and do not "spread rot nuggets", preventing them from developing, but make them thinner and more elegant - lure them to themselves with high salaries, career growth, etc.
    2. Undecim
      Undecim 11 December 2019 01: 00
      +2
      And many were removed, they were not allowed to develop? Can you give examples?
      1. Kirill Dou
        Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 02: 21
        -3
        Lukul was not allowed to develop. It shows
  16. Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 11 December 2019 00: 21
    0
    But all the same, handsome! Thanks to the author for the article!
  17. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 00: 48
    -3
    I noticed that the Japanese ships of the time of the DVD are simply huge, tall add-ons. They had such a chip, or what?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 03: 44
      0
      Quote: Kirill Dou
      what do Japanese ships of the times of the DVD

      You obviously deliberately switched the layout, usually in this way they express neglect, or even contempt for the subject. What are some special reasons?
      1. Kirill Dou
        Kirill Dou 11 December 2019 12: 01
        -1
        You obviously intentionally switched the layout,
        - again your speculation. I have Punto Switcher on my computer. Sometimes he throws out such fortels. I have no contempt for World War II.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 12: 03
          0
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          What are some special reasons?

          He asked, there are no more questions. There were no complaints at all.
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 11 December 2019 15: 00
        +1
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        You obviously deliberately switched the layout, usually in this way they express neglect, or even contempt for the subject. What are some special reasons?

        You are clearly not aware of the existence of Zgtesh Ytsheshesruk ... oh, that is, Punto Switcher. smile
        This infection even with the checkmark off prohibiting the correction of abbreviations sometimes still changes the layout in them.
    2. pmkemcity
      pmkemcity 11 December 2019 06: 00
      0
      I sit high - I look far.
  18. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 03: 51
    -2
    True, the guns were not the best in their class, the light shell could not provide an acceptable range All the same, the author is lightweight, this is clear without even going into any details. The scientific fact that a large initial range is provided by the high initial velocity of the projectile, and it is precisely the relief of the projectile, often intentional, allows this to be achieved.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 11 December 2019 07: 47
      +1
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      The scientific fact is that a large initial velocity is ensured by a high initial velocity of the projectile,
      For the moon and other airless worlds - that's it.
      For planets with the atmosphere, it is necessary to find a compromise between the mass of the projectile (caliber, density, elongation), its design (aerodynamic shape, the presence of gas generators, jet engines, etc.) and speed (pressure in the barrel, barrel length).
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 08: 18
        0
        Quote: Simargl
        For planets with the atmosphere, it is necessary to find a compromise between the mass of the projectile (caliber, density, elongation), its design (aerodynamic shape, the presence of gas generators, jet engines, etc.) and speed (pressure in the barrel, barrel length).
        The author does not seem to bother with this. His words do not allow double interpretation. But I will complement their words: The scientific fact that a long initial range is provided by a high initial velocity of the projectile, but just by the relief of the projectile, often intentional, one of the methods to achieve this. This confirms the use of sub-caliber shells for long-range artillery, not for the purpose of anti-tank missions, but in order to increase range.
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 11 December 2019 08: 24
          -1
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          This confirms the use of anti-caliber shells for long-range artillery
          Intrigue of intrigue !!! Can I see it ?!
          By reference, or whatever! Or is it someone's fantasies?
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 08: 54
            +1
            Certainly a fantasy, but not mine:
            It was unprofitable to create gigantic guns of Soviet Russia, and it was not really necessary. The “ultra-long” shells for the existing sea guns, which could be placed on both stationary and railway installations, seemed more interesting. Moreover, for battleships and coastal batteries, the ability to bombard targets from 100 km would also be out of place. We experimented for a long time with subcaliber shells. Another long-range Russian artilleryman E.A. Berkalov. The caliber of the “active” projectile was less than the caliber of the barrel, so the gain in speed was accompanied by a loss in “power”. In 1917, a projectile of the Berkalov system to the sea gun “flew” 1930 km.
            I’m surprised that this is news for you.
            http://www.vokrugsveta.ru/vs/article/2251/
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 11 December 2019 15: 56
              -1
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              I’m surprised that this is news for you.
              http://www.vokrugsveta.ru/vs/article/2251/
              Can you master the text?
              Quote: experiments of the USSR
              In 1937, due to the combination of a bore drilled up to 368 mm, a 220 mm shell weighing 140 kg, a "gusset" pan and a powder charge of 223 kg, an initial speed of 1 m / s was achieved, which ensured a range of 390 km. That is, the same range as that of the German Colossal was achieved with a heavier projectile, and most importantly, on the basis of a gun with a barrel length of only 120 caliber.

              Quote: Paris Cannon
              The mass of the projectile is about 120 kg, the powder charge is 200 kg, the firing range is 130 km, the initial velocity of the projectile is about 1600 meters per second. The barrel with a caliber of 210 mm was 28 m in length (i.e. more than 130 calibres) and was equipped with an additional 6-meter smooth-bore extension installed at its output end.

              Quote: Finely shaved case
              at the beginning of 1943, one of two experimental 203-mm “high-speed” Vickers-Armstrong cannons with a barrel length of 90 calibers was mounted in St. Margaret. Her fragmentation shell weighing 116,3 kg with ready-made protrusions at an initial speed of 1 m / s in experimental firing flew to a range of up to 400 km
              HE shells for the B-4 weighed a little over 100 kg.
              BOPS subcaliber is not to lighten the projectile, but to increase the pressure per unit area: it is about 7 times smaller in area, and about the same mass as the caliber.
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 11 December 2019 16: 40
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                In 1937, due to the combination of a bore drilled up to 368 mm, a 220-mm shell weighing 140 kg, a "girdle" pan and a powder charge of 223

                Those. didn’t you realize that a 220 mm shell was fired from a 368 mm barrel? Can you imagine the mass of a 368 mm full-body shell? The 356 mm gun the barrel of which was drilled had a heavy HE projectile weighing 747 kg !! There was also a light HE projectile - just 512 kg, though it flew some 18 km further. Do you pick up communications? 140 kg, 512 kg and 747 kg, 97 km, 52 km and 31 km with the same weight of gunpowder. Teach me to learn texts.
                Quote: Simargl
                with a barrel length of only 52 caliber

                Quote: Simargl
                i.e. more than 130 calibres

                Quote: Simargl
                barrel length 90 calibers

                It looks like the barrel length in calibers is incomprehensible to you, but nonetheless: for a 220 mm shell, a barrel with a length of 18490 mm will be 84 calibers! For a 203 mm projectile, the relative length will be even greater! You don’t even understand the difference between a BOPS and a caliber projectile for a rifled gun. The teacher from the basement!
                1. Simargl
                  Simargl 11 December 2019 22: 00
                  0
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  Those. didn’t you realize that a 220 mm shell was fired from a 368 mm barrel?
                  First, carefully read what the opponent writes:
                  Quote: Simargl
                  and speed (pressure in the barrel, barrel length)
                  It just so happened that you can disperse the projectile in only one way - push it from below. The resulting speed will be affected by the force with which the pressure is pressed. Duration is the length of the barrel. Strength is the product of pressure and area. It was possible to shoot 220 mm from the barrel, but with a pressure of 2,8 times greater - the result would be the same.

                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  You don’t even understand the difference between a BOPS and a caliber projectile for a rifled gun.
                  You will not believe! I not only understand that you are confusing concepts, confusing them and not understanding what is being discussed, but also not trying to understand.
                  To begin with, in the above experiments, the projectile was twisted during firing along with the insert (for stability), it had no plumage (ordinary projectile), БOPS has plumage, but it does not untwist it.
                  The whole point of the experiment with a bored barrel is to develop a pressure in the barrel greater than that of the "Paris Cannon", and to increase the buoyancy force by 5 times.
                  However, a heavy projectile, at the same speed, would fly further.
                  But! Since we talked about 25 mm anti-aircraft guns, and not about 127 mm anti-aircraft guns, then you need to think about how it was possible to lighten a projectile weighing about 250 g so that it would fly further.
                  1. Vladimir_2U
                    Vladimir_2U 12 December 2019 05: 06
                    0
                    Quote: Simargl
                    First, carefully read what the opponent writes:

                    Oh yes, your attentiveness is so great that you did not notice a minor detail, a trifle:
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Do you pick up communications? 140 kg, 512 kg and 747 kg, 97 km, 52 km and 31 km with the same weight of gunpowder
                    the same weight of gunpowder!! Everything, your further "speculations" are no longer consistent.
                    The charge of the "fr. Cannon" started from 150 kg, the charge of the 356/52 mm gun was about 120 kg.
                    Quote: Simargl
                    The whole point of the experiment with a bored barrel is to develop a pressure in the barrel greater than that of the "Paris Cannon", and to increase the buoyancy force by 5 times.
                    How can I develop more pressure with a larger diameter of the bore and with a lower charge weight? You somehow learned to add words, but the meaning of even your own words does not reach you.
                    Quote: Simargl
                    the shell was twisted during firing along with the insert (for stability), it did not have plumage (a conventional shell), BOPS has plumage, but it does not untwist it.
                    Well, at least here you guessed right, but not really. The plumage of domestic BOPS has an oblique edge and unwinds the projectile in flight, but not as surely as the rifled shells unwind.
                    Quote: Simargl
                    BOPS subcaliber is not to lighten the projectile, but to increase the pressure per unit area: it is about 7 times smaller in area, and about the same mass as the caliber.

                    What incompetence! Domestic crowbars are not just easier than HE shells, they are noticeably lighter than CS shells of the same gun!
                    Quote: Simargl
                    BOPS sub-caliber not to lighten the projectile, but to increase pressure per unit area

                    I'm not sure that you are so clumsy about the increase in lateral load, but this is one of the most important parameters of the BB projectile, but I'm not sure because you did not show your "incompetence", you flashed her!
                    Quote: Simargl
                    Since we talked about 25 mm anti-aircraft guns, and not about 127 mm anti-aircraft guns, then you need to think about how it was possible to lighten a projectile weighing about 250 g so that it would fly further

                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    True, the guns were not the best in their class, the light shell could not provide an acceptable range

                    The author of the article wrote that way. But the light weight of the projectile is not the reason for the insufficient range.
                    http://wunderwafe.ru/Magazine/MK/2001_05/06.htm
                    Small projectile weight and range of fire 25-mm guns did not provide effective destruction of diving bombers and torpedo bombers until they used weapons.
                    The claim for low weight is not tied to the range of fire, but tied to a lack of effectiveness. You don’t just don’t understand the specific issue, you don’t seem to understand the basics.
                    1. Simargl
                      Simargl 12 December 2019 17: 54
                      0
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      that you did not notice a minor detail, a trifle:
                      the same weight of gunpowder !! Everything, your further "speculations" are no longer consistent.
                      What are not wealthy? The fact that the energy of the shot is about the same?

                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      The charge of the "fr. Cannon" started from 150 kg, the charge of the 356/52 mm gun was about 120 kg.
                      AND? With the same gunpowder?

                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      How can I develop more pressure with a larger diameter of the bore and with a lower charge weight?
                      For example, the composition of gunpowder, the size of the "grain". The hunters figure it out. With the same volume, the pressure, with a smaller grain, will grow faster ...
                      However, I mentioned both pressure and the resulting force acting on the projectile (pushing).

                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      Well, at least here you guessed right, but not really. The plumage of domestic BOPS has an oblique edge and unwinds the projectile in flight, but not as surely as the rifled shells unwind.
                      No. Do not spin. Even Mayer's bullet does not unwind with slanting ribs. And domestic BOPS with straight lines.
                      1. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 12 December 2019 19: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Simargl
                        What are not wealthy? The fact that the energy of the shot is about the same?
                        Yes? But what about:
                        Quote: Simargl
                        The whole point of the experiment with a bored barrel is to develop a pressure in the barrel greater than that of the "Paris Cannon", and increase the buoyancy force by 5 times

                        Quote: Simargl
                        The charge of the "fr. Cannon" started from 150 kg, the charge of the 356/52 mm gun was about 120 kg.
                        AND? With the same gunpowder?
                        But no, the Germans had a special powder. Domestic was the same, though naval, but ordinary. And even if we consider them the same, then 150 kg (minimum 150) versus 120, in your opinion, will develop less pressure, so what? And in the barrel is much smaller in diameter! This is nonsense, and stupid.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        How can I develop more pressure with a larger diameter of the bore and with a lower charge weight?
                        For example, the composition of gunpowder, the size of the "grain". The hunters figure it out. With the same volume, the pressure, with a smaller grain, will grow faster ...
                        Oh shit, I'm not a hunter! Although wait ... I understand too. Oh, your wagging. It will grow faster, only it will fall faster, art. gunpowder is deliberately made "progressive" to avoid this. But you don't know, it seems.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Well, at least here you guessed right, but not really. The plumage of domestic BOPS has an oblique edge and unwinds the projectile in flight, but not as surely as the rifled shells unwind.
                        No. Do not spin. Even Mayer's bullet does not unwind with slanting ribs. And domestic BOPS with straight lines.

                        Mayer's "impeller" has just the ribs, not the plumage. BOPS - br. FEATHERED sub. a projectile with an oblique blade edge, and we are not talking about sweep. You are welcome!

                        Description: The lateral bevels of the stabilizer blades provide rotation of the projectile, fending off the eccentricity of the air resistance forces, which increases the accuracy of fire and although we are talking about the COP, the same applies to BOPS, albeit to a lesser extent.
                        Summarizing: reducing the weight of the projectile, one of the methods of increasing the firing range, the caliber projectile for long-range shooting was created precisely as a lightweight projectile. Author phrase:
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        True, the guns were not the best in their class, the light shell could not provide an acceptable range
                        wrong, maybe not intentionally. You don’t bite into the topic and don’t even try, you clearly don’t understand why they switched to a smooth barrel in tank guns, otherwise BOPS would not be pulled into the subject.
                      2. Simargl
                        Simargl 13 December 2019 00: 25
                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Author phrase:
                        ***
                        wrong, maybe not intentionally.
                        Perhaps misunderstood. The point is that the cruiser was fed with almost useless small fry. He has no complaints about the Type-89, sort of.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        the same applies to BOPS, albeit to a lesser extent.
                        Does not apply: stabilization by rotation of shells of large elongation is an so-so idea.
                        With the COP too: at the initial stage, it still does not rotate.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        And even if we consider them the same, then 150 kg (minimum 150) versus 120, in your opinion, will develop less pressure, so what?
                        Can we judge that? Between the firing 20 years have passed. The trunk was almost 2 times shorter, the cross-sectional area was 2,7 times the difference ...

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        And I also understand. Oh, your wagging. It will grow faster, only it will fall faster, art. gunpowder is deliberately made "progressive" to avoid this. But you don't know, it seems.
                        What kind of wobble? Gunpowder under a light projectile, a large amount. Even with the same pressure - the area is 2,7 times larger, the acceleration, respectively, is as much higher with the same projectile mass. In this case, the pressure to the cut of the barrel is likely to drop less than for a long barrel, i.e. in general, gunpowder consumption is more efficient.
                      3. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 13 December 2019 04: 36
                        0
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Does not apply: stabilization by rotation of shells of large elongation is an so-so idea.
                        With the COP too: at the initial stage, it still does not rotate.

                        The idea is so-so, I agree, but we are not talking about stabilization, we are talking about compensation! Approximately (approximately) as the promotion of the RS "Hurricane" or RPG shot, the blades (feathers) stabilize, and the twist compensates for the inevitable eccentricity. And in the case of domestic BOPSs, at least early mods, the projectile was unwound on purpose, even in the bore! But mostly to dump the pallet. The CS begins to rotate at least immediately after the plumage is revealed, or even earlier, because the plumage still needs to be opened.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Can we judge that? Between the firing 20 years have passed. The trunk was almost 2 times shorter, the cross-sectional area was 2,7 times the difference
                        German chemistry was abruptly both tsarist and Soviet (at the stage of formation for sure), one can judge.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        In this case, the pressure to the cut of the barrel is likely to drop less than for a long barrel, i.e. in general, gunpowder consumption is more efficient.
                        Oh well, burnout of gunpowder, is this your effective consumption? By the way, they suggested that, thanks, I won’t be surprised if the weight of gunpowder for a sub-projectile was less than for a typical one.
                      4. Simargl
                        Simargl 13 December 2019 11: 52
                        -1
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        And in the case of domestic BOPS, at least of the early modes., The projectile was unscrewed intentionally, even in the barrel!
                        How's that?
                        The development of armor-piercing shells is approximately the following (as a keepsake):
                        1 - hardened pointed steel gauge,
                        2 - hardened blunt-pointed steel gauge with a ballistic tip,
                        3 - "coil" sub-caliber with a shock core of high density and hardness, where to include the conical Gerlich - I have no idea, probably here ...
                        4 - sub-caliber feathered with a detachable pallet ...
                        The first three - I do not know: were there smooth-bore guns for such?

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        German chemistry was abruptly both tsarist and Soviet (at the stage of formation for sure), one can judge.
                        After 20 years, they caught up. Not?

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Oh well, burnout of gunpowder, is this your effective consumption?
                        Rather, more efficient use of barrel length.
                        Watch a video with nozzles on a smooth trunk. Of course, there is still need to be wise with gunpowder, but it’s significant.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        By the way, they suggested that, thanks, I won’t be surprised if the weight of gunpowder for a sub-projectile was less than for a typical one.
                        You can think anything. The hitch and type of gunpowder is selected so as to develop maximum pressure for the barrel, depending on the mass of the projectile.
                      5. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 13 December 2019 12: 29
                        -1
                        Quote: Simargl
                        How's that?
                        To educate you, thankless task, but so be it, type in the search "tank shell 125 mm" and you will find.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        After 20 years, they caught up. Not?

                        Before the revolution, Russian chemistry was much inferior to German, so even without taking into account the Civil War and the devastation, Soviet chemistry began from weaker positions than German, did it ever occur?
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Watch a video with smooth bore tips
                        What a smooth trunk ?! The ship’s tool of pre-revolutionary development in the subject! Chock and pay on the gun GK, it's an extravaganza!

                        Quote: Simargl
                        By the way, they suggested that, thanks, I won’t be surprised if the weight of gunpowder for a sub-caliber projectile was less than for a typical
                        Quote: Simargl
                        You can think anything. The hitch and type of gunpowder is selected so as to develop maximum pressure for the barrel, depending on the mass of the projectile
                        Pts, and this miracle teaches me
                        Quote: Simargl
                        carefully read what the opponent writes
                        Hand in the face!
                      6. Simargl
                        Simargl 13 December 2019 14: 08
                        -1
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        type in the search "tank shell 125 mm" and you will find.
                        A smooth barrel does not twist the projectile - for that it is smooth. And it makes no sense to spin.
                        And in the early stages, rifled guns were used everywhere.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        it never occurred to you?
                        Chemistry in general is worse now. Specifically in gunpowder - there is a lag, as before, by 20 years ...

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        The ship’s tool of pre-revolutionary development in the subject!
                        Nuclear? I have not even heard of "reel-to-reel" subcaliber shells of naval artillery.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Chock and pay on the gun GK, it's an extravaganza!
                        I suggested that you see how the length of the barrel beyond the dimensions of 35 calibers affects by analogy, and you are trying to absolutize ...

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Pts, and this miracle teaches me
                        Well, my opponent has the audacity to mislead: he "shouts" about the charge of the "Parisian cannon" from 150 kg (in sources 200 kg), and ours shot with a charge of 120 kg ...
                        We read your source:
                        Another long-range Russian artilleryman E.A. Berkalov. Caliber "active"The projectile was less than the caliber of the barrel, so the gain in speed was accompanied by a loss in" power ". In 1930, a projectile of the Berkalov system to the sea gun “flew” 90 km. In 1937, due to the combination of a bore drilled up to 368 mm, a 220-mm shell weighing 140 kg, a "gusset" pan and a powder charge in 223 kg managed to get an initial speed of 1 m / s (from the "Paris cannon" - 390 m / s), which provided a range of 1600 km. I.e the same range as the German Colossalreached with heavier shell
                        So yes: "Hand on all face": "Parisian Cannon" has everything in your opinion: the shell is lighter, and the speed is higher, but ...!
                      7. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2019 06: 31
                        -1
                        You are well done, you have found a mistake, albeit annoying, but nevertheless not fundamental, and even less intentional, you are growing. However, as you inattentively read the words of the "opponent", you still do not read:
                        Quote: Simargl
                        A smooth barrel does not twist the projectile - for that it is smooth. And it makes no sense to spin.

                        Quote: Simargl
                        And in the case of domestic BOPS, at least of the early modes., The projectile was unscrewed intentionally, even in the barrel! But mainly to reset the pallet.
                        It’s not the barrel that spins, and the meaning for the promotion is indicated!
                        Here for reliability:
                        Expandable type master device; oblique holes are drilled in the sectors through which powder gases pass, spinning a projectile in the barrel. When the projectile leaves the bore, the host device is separated by centrifugal force. From the same opera, the turbine in the RPG shot, I hope you find it yourself.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        The ship’s tool of pre-revolutionary development in the subject!
                        Nuclear? I have not even heard of "reel-to-reel" subcaliber shells of naval artillery.
                        356 mm / 52 sea gun - 356 mm gun, developed by the Obukhov plant. Adopted by the Russian Imperial Navy in 1913
                        ... it was decided to create a fundamentally new ultra-long-range projectile for 356/52 mm guns. The projectile was called "combined", later such projectiles were called sub-caliber ...
                        . Did you talk about this cannon, which nuclear ones? Do you naturally need to chew every word?
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Well, my opponent has the audacity to mislead: he "shouts" about the charge of the "Parisian cannon" from 150 kg (in sources 200 kg), and ours shot with a charge of 120 kg ...

                        And how not to "shout" if you are "stupid"! And there is no mistake or deception, because:
                        Due to the peculiarities of firing from a gun, the mass of the charge was unstable: the main part of 70 kg, enclosed in a brass sleeve; in a silk cap there was 75 kg of gunpowder in the middle part of the charge and, finally, the front part — it was its mass that was selected based on specific conditions.
                        Quote: Simargl
                        about the charge of the "Paris Cannon" from 150 kg
                        FROM 150kg !!! Not less, not exactly, but STARTING FROM and higher. And I deliberately gave the minimum possible mass of the charge, because I mistakenly considered the weight of the charge of the domestic gun at 120 kg. Those. in favor of your "argument" led, but you did not understand it. You wrote nonsense about the pressure?
                        Quote: Simargl
                        The whole point of the experiment with a bored barrel is to develop a pressure in the barrel greater than that of the "Paris Cannon", and increase the buoyancy force by 5 times
                        They wrote. Did we agree that the gunpowder was about the same? At least I didn’t see any objections from you, but the words about the grain, the compositions, and from myself I add the density and temperature of the charge make sense when the battle is for interest, and not just. The meaning was in sharp reduction in diameter and therefore sharp, at least 4 times reduction mass a shell with the same as a conventional shell of gunpowder for a conventional shell. I mistakenly counted her at 120 kg, and she was at 220 kg, but one hell for all shells guns 356/365 mm. But speed and range varied significantly! You can’t argue with that.
                        Completely your comment:
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Simargl (Andrey) December 11, 2019 08:24

                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        This confirms the use of anti-caliber shells for long-range artillery
                        Intrigue of intrigue !!! Can I see it ?!
                        By reference, or whatever! Or is it someone's fantasies?

                        Did you doubt that the caliber shells were used as super long-range? Doubted. Now have you seen that it was? I really hope so. The rest went beyond the initial question. About domestic bops Any objections yet?
                      8. Simargl
                        Simargl 14 December 2019 07: 37
                        -1
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Expandable type master device; oblique holes are drilled in the sectors through which powder gases pass, spinning a projectile in the barrel.
                        This is ridiculous. Slanting holes? Most likely - the need for obturation of the gaseous medium (there is such a way when it is not pressed tightly, and the gas breakthrough must be reduced) if there is a need for a technological gap.
                        During rotation, uncontrolled derivation appears.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        And how not to "shout" if you are "stupid"! And there is no mistake or deception, because:
                        120 kg - not a mistake, not a hoax? And then what? After all, no matter how many parts had a charge, the lower bar did not reach 120.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        You wrote nonsense about pressure?
                        Nonsense? It is by the maximum allowable pressure that the charge is selected. In addition, the type of gunpowder is selected according to the mass of the shell and the length of the barrel.

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        I mistakenly counted it at 120 kg, and it was 220 kg, but one devil for all 356/365 mm gun shells. But speed and range varied significantly! You can’t argue with that.
                        I have already written several times, once again:
                        1 - the mass (maximum charge) and the type of gunpowder are selected according to the mass of the projectile, the maximum allowable pressure and barrel length (if the gunpowder for a heavy projectile is slow, equip it under a light one - it will simply spit out partially unburned, if on the contrary, the gunpowder for a light projectile is fast , equip under a heavy projectile - the pressure can be exceeded, the barrel can break),
                        2 - trunks of larger calibers, usually have a higher maximum allowable pressure,
                        3 - the difference in cross-sectional area for 368/220 = 2,8 times, at the same pressure and the force acting on the projectile is more than 2,8 times.
                        4 - we did not mention the mass of the pallet, which was almost equal to the mass of the projectile, i.e. the projectile-pallet system weighed under 250 kg, i.e. a decrease in the mass of the shell, in fact, by 3 times ... but the acceleration in the barrel increased by 9 times ... almost ...

                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Did you doubt that the caliber shells were used as super long-range? Doubted. Now have you seen that it was?
                        No! Data that PS were used - no. There is data on experiences.
                      9. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 14 December 2019 10: 19
                        -1
                        Sorry, but you are now engaged in intellectual "masturbation"
  19. ABM
    ABM 11 December 2019 11: 25
    +1
    Quote: Rurikovich
    Quote: ABM
    Already twitched - without them they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much

    Yeah, only this exceptional, white and fluffy, irreplaceable country, the country is now rewriting everything and everything for itself IGNORING past merits wink I understand that now they love to extol the Lend-Dys and that it was a panacea for all ills ... BUT for all weapons we paid in gold and people are fighting. Our people broke fascism, not the Americans. Because your
    Quote: ABM
    Already distorted

    I was not impressed. Now there, in Washington, there are hypocritical fascists and for me personally, their "merits" in helping us have been nullified wink
    They made a contribution .... After the USSR ground the German and drove him to the west ... And so they sat and waited for the end ... "Heroes"
    By one loss it is possible to judge who really fought with Germany. Or are you a supporter of the western version that the US defeated Germany?


    Quote: lucul
    Washington, Fashington - are you talking about a country that has made a key contribution to the victory over fascism itself? Already twitched - without them, they would have fought for five more years and would have buried twice as much. Japan’s attack on the USSR in 1941 guaranteed, unfortunately, our defeat

    What a fun hutspa)))
    Lend-lease began to be delivered in 1942 (small lots), and reached a peak in deliveries by 1944. And still, it amounted to no more than 10% of the production in the USSR.
    Without Lend-Lease, the war would end in 1946, and not another 5 years, as you write ....


    On August 31, 1941, the Dervish convoy arrived without loss in Arkhangelsk and became the real embodiment of Anglo-Soviet military cooperation. The fact is that along with trucks, mines, bombs, rubber, and wool, 15 disassembled English Hurricane fighters were unloaded onto the berths of the Arkhangelsk port. Until the end of 1941 another 10 convoys were carried out in both directions.
  20. ABM
    ABM 11 December 2019 16: 05
    0
    Quote: lucul
    No. The second after the USSR in losses of the winner - China


    first by loss, officially between 37 and 50 million in world war 2 lost China
  21. ABM
    ABM 11 December 2019 16: 15
    0
    Quote: Octopus
    Not at all. There was a complex of reasons, but I didn’t oversleep for sure. By June 41st, he would soon be at war two years.


    with whom in 1941 did the USSR fight before the German attack?
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 11 December 2019 17: 44
      +1
      In the 41st of the active fronts, only the Far East, the 40th year of formation. Prior to this, Belorussian, Ukrainian, Northwestern 39th year of formation, and Southern 40th year were formed and disbanded for their companies.
      1. ABM
        ABM 12 December 2019 12: 46
        0
        Active ... Well, the terms are new to me! Let's call it pseudo-passive? Okay, that's me. Total, the USSR did not fight with anyone before the Reich attack for a year
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 12 December 2019 14: 15
          +2
          Quote: ABM
          Total, the USSR did not fight with anyone before the Reich attack for a year

          The USSR in the 39th and 40th years formed 5 fronts. Take an interest. how the front differs from the military district. If in such a situation, having even one formed front, the General Staff "slept" the beginning of the war at the other end of the country - this raises some doubts.
          1. ABM
            ABM 12 December 2019 14: 36
            0
            formed and disbanded when necessary. The presence of a front in the Far East does not in any way affect the defense capability in the western arms of the USSR. Likewise, the US "Atlantic Patrol" did nothing to repel the attack on Pearl Harbor. The USA "slept through" the beginning of the war in the same way
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 12 December 2019 14: 57
              +2
              Quote: ABM
              The USA "slept through" the beginning of the war in the same way

              You're right. It was a day of shame.
  22. kupitman
    kupitman 11 December 2019 16: 48
    +1
    In my opinion, Japanese ships had the most beautiful appearance. Only Yamato is worth it ...
  23. NF68
    NF68 11 December 2019 16: 48
    0
    When compared with colleagues, cruisers of other countries, the Myoko looked very, very worthy. Only the Italian cruiser was faster than him, and in terms of armoring and armament (after replacing the 200-mm guns with the 203-mm) it was generally one of the best.


    In theory, the armor of the Japanese Meko-class TCs was not bad, but one should not forget that the quality of Japanese naval armor was very low. This lack of armor was also present on ships of later construction.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 11 December 2019 17: 30
      +1
      Quote: NF68
      In theory, the armor of the Japanese Meko-class TCs was not bad, but one should not forget that the quality of Japanese naval armor was very low. This lack of armor was also present on ships of later construction.

      But the Americans, who tested Japanese armor plates after the war, do not agree with this opinion. The Japanese made excellent armor of medium thickness. It was with the "Yamatov" super-thick slabs that there were problems (and it is not yet clear which slab the Yankees took for testing, high-quality or defective).
      ... post-war shooting in the USA of a trophy plate from VH type armor with a thickness of 660 mm (intended for the unfinished Sinano, but not installed on it; it was air-conditioned or rejected, this is not known). Only 2 (!) Shots were fired with 16 dm shells. According to the test results, the protective effectiveness of Japanese armor is estimated at 0,86 from the American type A. But then and there the Americans tested another plate of armor of the same type VH of smaller thickness (183 mm), which was recognized as the best plate of all the plates ever tested by the American Navy.
      © V. Sidorenko
      1. NF68
        NF68 11 December 2019 17: 47
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Here are just the Americans who experienced Japanese armor plates after the war, do not agree with this opinion. Japanese armor of medium thickness was excellent.


        This is when compared with American armor. And if with the English cemented type CA is the best in the world in the 30s-40s or with not much inferior to the German type KS, then the Japanese cemented armor was much inferior to both English and German.
  24. Bear040
    Bear040 17 December 2019 00: 07
    0
    In Europe and the USA, ships were built with weapons from 4 three-gun turrets, so everything is relatively
  25. Barb
    Barb 17 December 2019 10: 40
    0
    Quote: Octopus
    English and even French "trophies" in Barbarossa had no meaning. Only the Reich, taking into account Bohemia.

    Add that the vehicles and gasoline captured in France in 41 on the side of Germany did not play ...
    Measure in polemic enthusiasm still need to know.