Warships. Cruisers. Original top of Japanese excellence

Warships. Cruisers. Original top of Japanese excellence

The logical conclusion of the conversation about the heavy cruiser of the Japanese imperial fleet will история about Tone cruisers. In the material about the Mogami, the moment was touched upon when Japan used all the unspent displacement under the contracts to create 6 class B cruisers. Four cruisers are just the Mogami, and two ... And two are our today's heroes: Tone and Tikuma.


The Mogami cruiser was taken as the basis for the design, but over time, the project was very radically redesigned.

Initially, the task consisted of the same fifteen 155-mm guns with an elevation angle of 75 ° (which “in which case” could be changed to 203 mm), eight 127-mm guns in twin installations, twelve anti-aircraft guns, six 610- mm torpedo tubes on board, four seaplanes.

The armor protection is the same as that of the Mogami, that is, it must hold 203 mm shells in the cellar area and 155 mm in the power plant area. The maximum speed is 36 knots (1 less than the Mogami’s), cruising range of 10 nautical miles with an 000-knot course.

However, by the time they were ready, the ships were completely different. All the alterations happened exactly when the first face of the project was not Fujimoto, but Fukuda, which I also mentioned. It was easier to pressure Admirals from the naval General Staff on Fukuda, and the captain of the first rank tried to accomplish everything that the gentlemen of the naval commanders wanted.

As a result, a completely different ship appeared outwardly. And not only externally, however, judge for yourself.


The main innovation: the number of HA towers was reduced by one, removing one tower from the stern in general, and moving the second to the bow. This epoch-making solution made it possible to solve several old problems at once and create a couple of new ones at the same time.

Most importantly, the stern of the cruiser was completely released, where an airdrome was equipped for 6 seaplanes (with catapults, of course), all aviation equipment from the middle was transferred to the stern.

Air defense at the same time reinforced with another pair of 127-mm guns.

Naturally, this still made the ship heavier, and therefore the cruising range was reduced to 8 miles.


The result was a class B cruiser, that is, such a light cruiser, with twelve 155-mm guns and an air group of 6 seaplanes. A sort of scout scout. Naturally, with the prospect of replacing the 155-mm guns of the main caliber with 203-mm.

As I said above, the project had both pros and cons.

The pluses can be considered that the concentration of all the HA barrels in the nose definitely had to increase the accuracy of the volley, reduce the dispersion of shells over long distances, in general, as the artillery platform the ship became much more stable.

The pluses include the transfer of torpedo tubes to the stern, where they could quite easily cripple the ship in the event of enemy shells falling into them. In general, these torpedoes, which the Japanese admirals elevated to the rank of ideal, sometimes caused more harm to their own than to other people's ships.

In addition, the separation of aircraft and artillery at different ends of the ship ruled out damage to one another. That is, obviously, the aircraft would not have to suffer from the firing of main-caliber guns, as it was when the aircraft were between the bow and stern towers.

By cons, I would attribute the appearance of a dead zone when firing the main caliber, especially when retreating, and indeed, the angle of fire as a whole turned out to be very limited. Well, if a shell from 380 mm and above would fly into the bow, this was clearly fraught with the loss of all artillery.

On the whole, it really turned out to be an interesting ship, a reconnaissance cruiser of a very decent range, not so much due to its range, but because of its air wing, which could conduct reconnaissance for almost 24 hours, replacing one aircraft with another as the crew refuel and rest.


So "Tone" in 1937, and "Tikuma" in 1938 became part of the Japanese imperial fleet.

And, of course, as soon as Japan said "Goodbye, America!" and on January 1, 1937, it withdrew from all maritime agreements, the plan for the re-equipment of the Tone cruisers, as well as the Mogami, from 155 mm guns to 203 mm was put into effect.

The ships were still heavier, the fifth pair of 127-mm station wagons were removed, but as compensation, the 13,2-mm machine guns were replaced with 25-mm twin machine guns.

They did not have time to make towers at all, because the alteration of the ships was delayed. But in the end, by 1940, both cruisers were ready and became part of the 8th division of heavy cruisers. The division consisted, in fact, of themselves. The flagship was appointed Tone.

What were cruisers.


The displacement under the project was 11 tons, full, of course, jumped for 230 tons.

The length of the waterline is 198 m. The width of the waterline is 18,5 m. Draft is 6,88 m when fully loaded.

Booking:
Bronepoyas: 18-100 mm (in the area of ​​the power plant), 55-145 in the area of ​​cellars.
Deck: 31-65 mm.
Towers: 25 mm.
Chopping: 40-130 mm.

Engines: 4 Kampon TZA, 8 Kampon Ro-Go boilers, 152 liters. with., 000 propellers. Speed ​​4 knots. Cruising range 35,5 nautical miles at 12 knots or 000 miles at 14 knots.

Armament:
Main caliber: 4 × 2 x 203 mm / 50, ammunition 120 rounds per gun.
Anti-aircraft artillery: 4 × 2 x 127 mm, 6 × 2 x 25 mm.
Mine-torpedo armament: 12 (4 × 3) 610-mm torpedo tubes, ammunition 24 torpedoes. Aviation group: 2 catapults type No. 2 model 5, 6-8 seaplanes.

The crew of the project was 874 people, but with an increase in air defense systems it increased to 1000 people.

The main caliber was a masterpiece of creativity of Japanese designers! Three towers were habitually set up according to the “pyramid” scheme, but the fourth had to be literally crammed into where there was a place. As a result, the tower turned out to be deployed backward and, as it was planned, was intended for firing back-on-board. But the dead zone still turned out to be pretty, and the cruiser reconnaissance, in the worst scenario, could only fight back with its torpedo tubes at the stern.


The guns were the same as on the Takao, the maximum firing range when the barrel was elevated 45 degrees was 29,4 km, the accuracy was very decent. It was believed that these guns could operate in a barrage mode against flying targets, but this was not practiced in realities. Two range-measuring posts on 2 and 4 towers with 8-meter range finders were responsible for guiding the guns. Later, a radar was connected to the control.

Anti-aircraft weapons were completely standard. Eight 127-mm Type 89 guns in twin installations with shields. They were located on the sides of the chimney very close to each other. With a maximum elevation angle of 90 °, their effective reach in height reached 7400 meters. To control their fire, two type 94 self-propelled guns were used (on the sides of the superstructure), each with a 4,5-meter range finder, the ammunition counted 200 unitary shots per gun.

Six twin 25-mm Type 96 assault rifles were designed to fire up to 3000 meters. Their ammunition consisted of 24 shells (000 per barrel).

In general, the air defense system of cruisers was constantly strengthened, and by mid-1944, cruisers were armed with up to 60 25-mm units in various (from 1 to 3 barrels per installation) configurations. Plus, each ship received three radars, one “type 13” and two “type 22”, one of the “type 22” was used in the fire control system.

Torpedo weapons were located aft. It is difficult to say how profitable this was, since torpedoes were a constant source of problems for Japanese ships. Together with airplanes, that is, aviation fuel, ammunition and bombs, that explosive mixture in the literal sense of the word was obtained.


But 4 three-pipe torpedo tubes were placed under the shelterdeck (hinged deck, where the aircraft were in the stowed position), two on board. Between the devices there were special ports for reloading torpedoes with cranes.

The type 93 model 1 oxygen torpedoes used, with a launch weight of 2,7 tons, carried 490 kg of type 97 explosive and could go 40 km at a speed of 36 knots, 32 km at 40 knots and 20 km at 48. Of the total ammunition load of 24, there were twelve torpedoes were immediately in the torpedo tubes, and another twelve in the quick reload system. The torpedo warheads had protection from an armored casing.

Aircraft. All feed was given to the undivided use of seaplanes, on which the Japanese naval command had high hopes. The planes were supposed to conduct reconnaissance, detecting enemy ships, primarily aircraft carriers. If possible, strike at them, illuminate targets at night with the help of luminous bombs.

According to the project, 6-8 seaplanes were supposed to be based on Tone: two triple Type 94 on catapults and four double Type 95 on the rail system on the upper deck.

It was planned to equip Tikum with eight machines at once (four Type 94 and four Type 95).

Each cruiser was equipped with two powder catapults located on-board above the torpedo compartments and cranes for the installation of aircraft. It was possible to select the type of aircraft that could be quickly raised under the arrow of the crane and mounted on a catapult.

In reality, in the first year of the war, 5 seaplanes were used on both cruisers, and then 4 at all.

At various times, the Aichi E13A type 0, Nakajima E8N type 95, Kawanishi E7K and Mitsubishi F1M were in service with the cruisers. Aerial bombs (60 kg and 250 kg) were stored in an armored warehouse behind the 4th tower of the Civil Code, gasoline tanks (with a carbon dioxide filling system) were on the hold deck.

In principle, the unusual layout yielded results. Japanese designers managed to not only preserve the seaworthiness of the Mogami, but it turned out that the Tone was more stable than its predecessor.


In official tests in September 1938, the Tone with a power of 152 hp. and a displacement of 189 tons showed a speed of 14 knots, and the Tikuma in January 097 at 35,55 hp. and 1939 tons - 152 knots.

The successful form of the hull and the unusual layout of the ship allowed the Japanese to get a fast, maneuverable, stable ship with powerful, although not without flaws, weapons.


According to the project, the crew of cruisers consisted of 874 people, but as the small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery strengthened during the war, the number of the entire team exceeded 1000 people. Nevertheless, even in this situation, the Tone were considered the most comfortable ships in terms of crew accommodation.

The sailor had 4,4 cubic meters of living space, the officer - 31,7 cubic meters. m. Cabins and even sailor's cockpits were equipped with bunks instead of obsolete outboards. Ventilation has been improved by installing centrifugal fans in the living area. On the ships there were pantries for rice and pickled products (in the bow) and a freezer (in the stern), on the middle deck there was an infirmary, a sailor’s bathhouse and command and sanitary facilities. Galleys for officers and sailors were on the upper deck from the starboard side, at the front torpedo compartment.

According to the memoirs of former officers of the imperial fleet, the Tone and Chikuma enjoyed a reputation as the best Japanese cruisers in terms of habitat conditions.

The construction of both cruisers was conducted in an atmosphere of increased secrecy, which is why very few photographs of these ships were preserved, despite the general love of the Japanese for their fleet.

Cruisers Combat Service



After the cruiser Tone and Tikuma entered service, they were assigned to the Yokosuka naval base and became part of the 6th division of the 2nd fleet, but soon the ships were transferred to the 8th division of the same 2nd fleet. Before Japan entered World War II, both cruisers took part in exercises, mainly in Chinese waters.

Both cruisers took part in the campaign to Pearl Harbor, on December 8, seaplanes from the Tone and Chikumy carried out flights to assess the damage caused by the US Navy's decked air raids.

Then the cruisers supported the landing on Wake Island. After a scheduled repair in Kura, both cruisers operated in the area of ​​Rabaul, the Palau Atoll, the Banda Sea, their aircraft took part in a raid on the Australian port of Darwin.


As part of the Mobile strike fleet, consisting of cruisers, battleships and destroyers, the Tone and Tikuma, on March 1, 1942, the American destroyer Idsell and the Dutch mine loader Modeckerto were sunk.

On the morning of April 5, 1942, the Tone cruiser seaplane discovered the British heavy cruisers Cornwell and Devonshire in the Indian Ocean, both cruisers sunk by deck aircraft of Japanese aircraft carriers.

The 8th division, consisting of both of its cruisers, took part in the operation to invade the Midway Atoll. June 5, 1942 seaplanes of the cruisers were engaged in the search for ships of the American Navy. Then the seaplane from the cruiser Tone discovered enemy aircraft carriers. In that memorable battle, the cruiser was not damaged, although it was not marked by victories.

Following the battle of Midway Atoll, Tone and Tikuma took part in a campaign in the Aleutian Islands, and then returned to take part in the 3rd Fleet maneuvers in the Inland Sea.

In August 1942 - January 1943, Tone and Tikuma took part in the campaign on the Solomon Islands. During the second battle in the Solomon Sea on August 24, 1942, the Tone dealt with the task of rescuing the crew of the sunken aircraft carrier Ryuidze. Seaplanes from the Chikuma found the location of the US Navy.

During the battle of Santa Cruz on October 26, 1942, a bomb dropped from the Hornet aircraft carrier hit the Chikumu. A bomb explosion seriously damaged the cruiser superstructure, a fire started. An experienced ship commander ordered the crew to immediately send torpedoes overboard so that they would not explode. The order was given only on time and executed very promptly: three minutes after the last torpedo was dropped overboard, a 225-kg bomb dropped from another American deck aircraft fell into the torpedo tube.

After the repair, both cruisers participated in the Tokyo Express, delivered goods from Rabaul to Eniwetok, sometimes carrying out shelling of coastal targets.


On November 5, 1943, while in Rabaul, they were hit by American bombers. Both ships were damaged.

The 8th cruisers division was disbanded on January 1, 1944, the Tone and Tikuma became part of the 7th Mogami-class cruisers division.

On March 9, 1944, Tone and Chikuma operated together in the Indian Ocean. That day, the Tone cruiser sank the British Beher transport off the coast of Cocos Island.

Both cruisers took part in the battle in the Philippine Sea on June 19-20, 1944.


The battle in Leyte Gulf. Gambier Bay, an American light aircraft carrier, fired at the Tikuma Island on the island of Sam, but soon received a torpedo dropped from the Avenger torpedo carrier, which was based on the Netoma Bay light carrier. The torpedo made a hole on board in the area of ​​the boiler room, into which water began to flow. The cruiser lost speed. The Tikuma crew went aboard the destroyer Novaki, after which Novaki finished off the cruiser with the native Japanese torpedoes. The Tikuma sank on October 25, 1944. Soon, the American aircraft sank the destroyer Novaki, and no one was saved from the destroyer crew and the Chikuma sailors aboard the Novaki.

The Tone cruiser was attacked by torpedo bombers, with which dive bombers also worked. The raid took place on October 24, 1944, when the cruiser was sailing the Sibuyan and had not yet reached the San Bernardino Strait.

Three bombs hit the Tone, which, however, did not cause serious damage to the ship. After that attack, the Tone was next to the battleship Musashi.


The moment, to put it mildly, was not the best, a large group of American aircraft just flew into the battleship.


When the battleship was sunk, the Tone fought off the planes, but soon got hit by a 127 mm shell fired from the cannon of an American destroyer. God knows what, especially compared to the Musashi.


Already at the end of the battle, a 250-kg bomb hit the Tone. The damaged cruiser went to Brunei, and from there went to the home base of Maizuri, where he was put on a dry dock for repair and modernization.

During the repair on the ship, anti-aircraft weapons were strengthened to 62 automatic 25-mm anti-aircraft guns and installed instead of the radar for airspace survey No. 21, the radar for artillery control No. 22.

Repair continued until February 1945, and at the end of his Tone, he no longer left Japan. The war at sea for Japan actually ended, and the role of the training ship at the naval academy in Itayama became the last place of service for the Tone cruiser.


On July 24, 1945, in Tonejima, during a raid by American carrier-based aircraft, the Tone received three direct hits of 250-kg and 500-kg bombs and seven close explosions, as a result of which lay on the ground and was left by the crew. July 28, he received additional damage with a new raid.




Finally, the "Tone" in 1947-48 was raised and cut into metal.

What can be said as a result?

The Tone, like the Mogami, became the crown of the design mind of Japanese shipbuilders. These were very remarkable ships in all respects, with good navigational data, powerful, albeit original weapons, and, as practice has shown, quite tenacious.

But the most important “highlight” was the possibility of a very quick conversion of cruisers from light to heavy by replacing three-gun towers of 155 mm with two-gun 203 mm.

After breaking the restrictive maritime agreements, the Japanese quickly carried out this operation on ships built and under construction. As a result, Japan had 18 heavy cruisers, like the Americans, at the start of the war.

In fact, it is not as simple as it seems: to take and simply rearrange the towers. It was really just an incomparable mixture of engineering and oriental treachery. So cruisers like "Tone" really together with the "Mogs" are outstanding ships.

True, this did not help Japan at all in that war.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

70 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lamata 16 February 2020 07: 25 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Yes, there was essentially nothing to fight off the stern.
    1. lucul 16 February 2020 09: 46 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Yes, there was essentially nothing to fight off the stern.

      The main splinter was in 25mm anti-aircraft guns - there, only 2 km (or even 1500 m) in altitude, there was a range of action. That is, with 2 km, it was possible for aircraft to accurately place bombs.
      But if the Japanese had timely developed 30mm and 40 mm (a la Bofors) anti-aircraft automatic guns - then the war at sea could have developed differently ....
      But the Japanese did not calculate this.
      1. bk0010 16 February 2020 12: 13 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: lucul
        But if the Japanese had timely developed 30mm and 40 mm (a la Bofors) anti-aircraft automatic guns - then the war at sea could have developed differently ....
        It wouldn’t help: the Americans felt that a 76-mm gun was needed to disrupt the attack of a diving bomber (otherwise the height of the defeat was not enough). They built a light air defense cruiser (Worcester) with them. Its displacement turned out to be 18000 tons (not only because of 76 mm machine guns, mainly because of 152 mm station wagons, but still), more than the heavy Baltimore.
        1. Alexey RA 16 February 2020 16: 31 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Quote: bk0010
          It wouldn’t help: the Americans felt that a 76-mm gun was needed to disrupt the attack of a diving bomber (otherwise the height of the defeat was not enough).

          EMNIP, to disrupt the attack of a 40 mm dive, it was just enough - its effective firing height was greater than the height of the drop of bombs. This was not enough for the 20 mm submachine guns, and they could only hit bombers that had already been bombed. "
          The 76 mm appeared for another reason: the 40 mm proved to be ineffective in fighting the kamikadze, "when it was necessary not only to disrupt the attack, but inflict such damage on the attacking plane that it could not reach the attacked ship. 40 mm shells didn’t do this 127 mm shells could cope with the task, but their guns didn’t have enough rate of fire. caliber - its beats It is possible to reduce only under 127 "shell.
          So the 4 cm / 60 Type 5 assault rifles would be enough for the Japanese ... if there was an appropriate SuAO and provided that the production technology was developed.
          1. bk0010 16 February 2020 21: 21 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            I won’t argue much (I read about it for a long time), but I remembered that the task was to fire the dive pilot before he begins to dive, otherwise he begins to move at high speed in a dive, quickly changing altitude and knocking it down becomes very difficult.
          2. Octopus 16 February 2020 21: 31 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Alexey RA
            EMNIP, to disrupt the attack of a 40 mm dive, it was just enough - its effective firing height was greater than the height of the drop of bombs.

            Everything is not easy there. The tracer burned out 2,7 km, the liquidator worked 4 km. But these 4 km upward the projectile flew for 10+ seconds, so getting into it was problematic, even with a late SLA. In the most lousy case, you will hit a plane and get it to the deck with a bomb.

            Divers needed to shoot down before entering the dive.

            This was best done, surprise, by fighters.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            76 mm appeared for another reason

            Americans found out from somewhere that their long-standing habit of using for air defense howitzers 5/25 with 36 kg unitaries, and then 5/38 howitzer cannons with separate shell loading is a disease, not a chip. As a result, in the fire department, as is customary for them, the order began to make anti-aircraft guns with a unitary, which crushes fire performance, and not caliber. But since changing the open installation of Bofors is much easier than the 5/38 tower, it was Bofors who changed it.
      2. Lamata 16 February 2020 12: 31 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        doubts that it would have helped, on the Yamato there was a cockle of 80 zentos of various calibers in his last campaign, it did not help. And from the stern, I mean, not aviation, but still an art battle.
  2. tlauicol 16 February 2020 07: 53 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Lexington-type aircraft carriers built in the ancient 20s.
    belt: 127—178 mm / 19 °
    traverses: 127—178 mm
    deck: 51 mm.
    PTZ: 4.8m
    eight 8 inches. 12 five inches. + 70-80 Normal aircraft yes
    but what the Japanese were trying to portray - it is not clear
    1. Senior seaman 16 February 2020 10: 38 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      And a total displacement of 50 thousand tons.
      1. tlauicol 16 February 2020 13: 09 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Senior Sailor
        And a total displacement of 50 thousand tons.

        I agree. But this is a ship. And what happened to the Japanese? Spoil the cruiser?
        1. Senior seaman 16 February 2020 15: 17 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Colleague, be at least a little objective. Compare the comparable. Let's say Lex. and Akagi.
          That's what the Japanese got when they “spoiled” the battlecruiser. stop
          1. tlauicol 16 February 2020 16: 02 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Senior Sailor
            Colleague, be at least a little objective. Compare the comparable. Let's say Lex. and Akagi.
            That's what the Japanese got when they “spoiled” the battlecruiser. stop

            I agree. in the case of Akagi, a good aircraft carrier with armor and powerful art was obtained. weapons. But why did they mutilate the Mogami? For the sake of 4 dead biplanes? And is this a model of shipbuilding?
        2. Alexey RA 16 February 2020 16: 40 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: Tlauicol
          I agree. But this is a ship. And what happened to the Japanese? Spoil the cruiser?

          The Japanese got the ships that they ordered - reconnaissance cruisers for Kido Butai.
          This is not an AB percussion. These are scouts. Which, due to the composition of the weapons, ended up in the KRT class.
    2. Lamata 16 February 2020 12: 32 New
      • 1
      • 4
      -3
      at that time, the doctrine was that the aircraft carrier itself could withstand the battle, at least with light forces, a cruiser and destroyers, and without the use of aviation.
  3. amax 16 February 2020 08: 40 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    In good terms, Tone and Mogami are not the pinnacle. There was also Ibuki - the first in a series of new cruisers. The project was based on the Mogami licked to shine with some additional significant changes, which allows it to be distinguished as a separate type of Ibuki. It was laid down during the war and was even built, but the Japanese suddenly had a karachun with aircraft carriers, so the hull launched into the water was rebuilt into a light aircraft carrier without leaving the factory wall. It would be interesting to read about him and compare him as the pinnacle of the development of Japanese cruisers with the regular fleet cruisers - Mogami, Takao and Meco. It would have turned out a peculiar finale of a series of articles about Japanese heavy cruisers.
  4. Rurikovich 16 February 2020 08: 53 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    The concentration of HA guns in the bow and the presence of a dead zone because of this is not such a big drawback, which, as the author said, is outweighed by other advantages. He would be critical if the Japanese, due to their characteristics of the ships, would have to constantly drape, but such a thing never occurred to them. For in speed they were superior to all their rivals (if such a situation arises that you have to leave), and when retreating, turning slightly to the side to introduce guns into the battle is much easier than cutting the enemy’s distance so that they are constantly in the dead zone of these guns cruisers. So this "flaw" is completely contrived. And the situation when, due to combat damage, the ship is immobilized and they just come in from the stern, suggests that such a cruiser is already a “corpse” in battle with peers regardless of where its guns are. But against the 380-mm shells, what’s the location guns like the "Tone" that any other cruiser can’t resist a priori. Again a far-fetched statement.
    And if you consider that the British had a similar arrangement with the “relatives”, the French had all the new battleships, then it’s not so bad if you weigh what ship you want to get in the end.
    The Japanese, due to the reduction of armaments per one turret of the Civil Code, received more balanced ships than the previous cruisers for the classic 10000 tons.
    But having an enlarged air group (compared to other classmates), this couple fully fulfilled what it was intended for - reconnaissance.
    In my opinion, “Tone” and “Tikuma” by their characteristics are generally the most advanced heavy cruisers of the “Washington” standard yes good
    hi
  5. unknown 16 February 2020 09: 33 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    The most successful Japanese heavy cruisers.
    Cruisers that did not have to be sent after commissioning for serious modernization work on the hull, such as strengthening it, and equipping with large boules to improve stability.
    On the sixth attempt, the Japanese managed to create a heavy cruiser with standard “Washington” weapons, good armor protection, high speed, and at the same time with good stability, excellent seaworthiness, and the best crew living conditions among ships of this class in Japan.
    And shove it all into a standard displacement of 11231 tons.
    No genius, just well-done work on the bugs.
    The first four Japanese heavy cruisers demanded serious modernization work, as a result of which, the standard displacement, the first pair increased to 8700 tons, and the second pair to 9088 tons. There were problems with stability and seaworthiness.
    The British, in a close displacement, had a pair of Exeter (8390 tons) - York (8250 tons). With the same weapons and armor, significantly better seaworthiness and crew living conditions.
    The Americans in a standard displacement similar to the displacement of the second pair of Japanese cruisers had two series: the Pensacola type with 10 * 203mm weaponry and the Northampton type with 9 * 203mm weaponry.
    In fact, the standard displacement of 10000 tons. The Japanese missed.
    Three subsequent series of heavy cruisers: types "Mioko", "Takao" and "Mogami" after modernization, during which the Japanese fought the same, from series to series, sores: a huge overload, weak hulls, low stability and seaworthiness, stepped over a standard displacement of 12000 tons.
    Of course, they were stronger, and carried more armor than their counterparts from other countries.
    But, in other countries, there were no heavy cruisers in the same standard displacement.
    The sixth attempt, finally, brought the expected result: no problems with the weakness of the hull, stability and seaworthiness. At the same time, it was possible to maintain good armor protection and high speed. They had to pay for it by reducing artillery weapons, which nevertheless corresponded to the Washington standard. But this solution had its advantages: reducing the number of towers and changing their location allowed us to get rid of stability problems and improve, together with more complete contours of the hull, seaworthiness.
    Among competitors, only Italians were able to create a heavy cruiser in a standard displacement of 11000 tons.
    And, in a standard displacement of 10000 tons, both the Americans and the French were able to do this.
    Americans are the types of "Portland" and "New Orleans." And if Portland is just loaded up to 1000t. The Northampton, then New Orleans, is a brand new ship. Very compact, well-armed and armored ship. The weight of the armor is 1507 tons, excluding the mass of deck reservations, with a standard displacement of 9950 tons. The Tacao, with a standard displacement of 12570 tons, carried armor weighing 2048 tons. The Americans managed to create such a compact ship thanks to significant success in ship power. The cost for compactness and security was a slight decrease in seaworthiness, but this was originally laid down in the project. No surprises, unlike the Japanese.
    The French created the ideal heavy cruiser with a displacement of 10000 tons.
    Unlike the Japanese, whose whole "genius" was limited to the maximum relief of the body, they went the other way. It was the improvement of KTU that gave the French such a big gain in mass.
    The mass of KTU "Tone" is 2471,5 tons with a power of 152000 hp Of course, this is better than the Tacao with its 2663,93 tons and 130000 hp. But, in terms of improving ship propulsion systems, the Japanese were quite conservative, like their teachers. the British.
    The weight of the KTU "Algeria" is 1347,45 tons. The rated power is 84000 tons. The improvement of the body contours made it possible to reach 33 knots in tests.
    1. tihonmarine 16 February 2020 12: 47 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      Quote: ignoto
      The most successful Japanese heavy cruisers.

      Although I prefer Japanese battleships, beautiful.
  6. unknown 16 February 2020 09: 49 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    An ideal cruiser such as Algeria had a significant flaw.
    No stock on displacement.
    But, the French have found a way to improve this project.
    In the next series of heavy cruisers, they planned to move from 4 * 2 to the 3 * 3 layout, which made it possible to strengthen the armament without increasing its mass, while simultaneously placing it more compactly.
    They took the next step in improving KTU.
    High-pressure boilers of the Sural type appeared on the battleships of the Jean Bart type and the destroyers Le Ardi. Boilers that had the best weight and overall performance, with the best specific power among competitors, and high reliability.
    PS One can only be glad that the Germans passed by such an invention as high-pressure boilers, whose roots grow from Velox boilers created in Switzerland in 1931, preferring direct-flow boilers Wagner and Benson.
    1. Constanty 16 February 2020 10: 26 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Boilers Wagner and Benson were high-pressure - 70 atm. 460 C *, 110 atm 510 C *, respectively.

      for: battleships “Bismarck” and “Tirpitz”, Arseniy Malakhov, p.32
      1. unknown 16 February 2020 21: 58 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Semantics. Accepted. To separate these concepts, I propose the option: high-pressure straight-through.
        1. Constanty 16 February 2020 22: 08 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          I don’t know if my knowledge of the Russian language will help to understand the nuances? Have you written about these on "Superior Algerie"? :
          High-pressure boilers are called such steam boilers in the furnaces of which fuel is burned at a pressure significantly higher than atmospheric; 0,2 ^ 0,4 MP. The increased air pressure created in the furnace of the boiler significantly intensifies the processes of preparing the fuel mixture, fuel combustion, heat transfer in the furnace and convective heating surfaces, due to which the overall dimensions of the boiler decrease sharply, almost 7 ^ 8 times, its efficiency is improved and its efficiency is improved other characteristics.

  7. Constanty 16 February 2020 10: 32 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The ships are undoubtedly interesting, only the stubbornness of the Japanese and sticking to the 203-mm two-section towers are surprising, while replacing them with three-section towers would bring many benefits. Yes, both in terms of mass and space.
    1. NF68 16 February 2020 16: 15 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Constanty
      The ships are undoubtedly interesting, only the stubbornness of the Japanese and sticking to the 203-mm two-section towers are surprising, while replacing them with three-section towers would bring many benefits. Yes, both in terms of mass and space.


      The towers are not two and three-sectional, but two and three-barreled.
      1. Constanty 16 February 2020 16: 54 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Sorry, this is the "merit" of the translator. When I saw this and wanted to improve improve on two and three-equipment, but it was already too late.
    2. Alexey RA 16 February 2020 16: 47 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Constanty
      The ships are undoubtedly interesting, only the stubbornness of the Japanese and sticking to the 203-mm two-section towers are surprising, while replacing them with three-section towers would bring many benefits.

      Works? Do not touch! © smile
      The Japanese had the experience of their teachers, the British, before their eyes. Which decided to go on battleships from two-gun to three-gun towers - after which they brought the BS Nelson and Rodney to the mind until the end of the 30s. And, without completing the debugging, they set about four-gun towers ... with a predictable result. smile
      1. Constanty 16 February 2020 17: 17 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        A likely adversary is the USA, however, except for the first type, the Pensacola had three-gun towers.
        Besides the fact that changing the caliber of 155 mm was not a reasonable step, especially considering their exceptional accuracy - for example, on August 7, 1938, Mikuma launched several volleys at a distance of 20 meters with a spread of only 000 meters!
        Pragmatic Americans tried to follow the Japanese path and built the Wichita cruiser, and although they got one of the best armored heavy cruisers, with guns in the turrets with more accuracy than their other ships of this class (of course, before the war) due to the increased distance between weapons (from about 115 to 178 cm) And all this with a standard displacement slightly exceeding the "Washington" limit - 10 tons.
        . but they did not rearm the Brooklyn-class light cruisers after the fall of the London Treaty. And rightly so!
        1. unknown 16 February 2020 22: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          In my comment, I did not mention Wichita (or Wichita as you like) specifically. The ship had poor stability and did not have a reserve for displacement, which made it difficult to modernize during the war.
  8. Romka47 16 February 2020 11: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It's nice to start Sunday with an interesting article. To the author +. With the Japanese, Roman, as I understand it, I finished wondering who the next ones, I suppose, are the Americans.
  9. tihonmarine 16 February 2020 12: 45 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    The Tone, like the Mogami, became the crown of the design mind of Japanese shipbuilders.
    I was always amazed and still amazed by the small, until the 20th century, archaic country, but having created such a powerful fleet, and most importantly, its technical thought was more advanced than that of its teachers. I envy the Japanese fleet and those who created the yoke, designers, engineers and workers.
    1. Undecim 16 February 2020 14: 59 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      that her technical thought was more advanced than that of her teachers
      What was it more advanced?
      1. Engineer 16 February 2020 17: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        What was it more advanced?

        Everything seems to be known
        Technical innovations introduced before the British and / or on a larger scale:
        Bulb, transom stern, undulating hills of the hull.
        Oxygen torpedoes are absolute leadership.
        Deck Aviation - Total Excellence.
        Organizational excellence - kido butai - "no analogues." All old ships underwent 2-3 major upgrades. Limes have horror in this regard.
        Superiority in the characteristics of the main classes of ships, from destroyers to battleships and aircraft carriers

        Aspects of British superiority can be counted on the fingers - the main one is the radar
    2. Octopus 16 February 2020 21: 09 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Quote: tihonmarine
      I envy the Japanese fleet and those who created the yoke, designers, engineers and workers.

      There is nothing to envy there. Wildest militarization to the detriment of the quality of life of the population. Take an interest in the share of military spending in the budget of Japan and the USA in the 37th.

      About the same thing the poor and technically backward USSR turned out to take on reason. Fortunately for the Japanese, their brains were set much earlier.
  10. Undecim 16 February 2020 15: 17 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Engines: 4 TKAMPON
    No site "warlords" can figure out the Japanese ship’s GEM and stubbornly confuse them.
    TZA "Kampon" equipped ships built on the tops of the company "Kawasaki". Kampon turbines are designed on the basis of an active Brown-Curtis type turbine.
    Ships built at the Mitsubishi shipyards were equipped with Gihon TZA. Gihon turbines are based on Parsons jet turbines.
    Therefore, Tone class cruisers had Gihon-type MZs. These are turbines that are fundamentally different in design.
  11. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 15: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    But the most important “highlight” was the possibility of a very quick conversion of cruisers from light to heavy by replacing three-gun towers of 155 mm with two-gun 203 mm.

    What is this highlight?
    “Overcoming” by “Mogami” is undoubtedly a good move, but it has generated so much bunt for the Japanese that Mama is not grieving: starting from the development of a separate design of the towers, ending with the impossibility of their production and repair. Or do you think Mogami rebuilt from a good life into a semi-aircraft carrier?
    As for the Tone, it was only lightweight on paper; it was built as heavy under the E model towers, without any hint of rearmament.
    1. Constanty 16 February 2020 22: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      “Overcoming” “Mogami” is undoubtedly a good move, but it gave rise to so much bunt for the Japanese that Mama don’t grieve: starting from the development of a separate design of the towers, ending with the impossibility of their production and repair.


      In my opinion, a doubtful or bad move. Even your words testify to this.
      Examples of warfare, such as the Battle of Cape Esperance and the activities of the USS "Helena," show that Brooklyn-class cruisers fought on equal terms with Japanese ships equipped with 203 mm guns. So what was the exchange for?
      1. Engineer 16 February 2020 22: 40 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Examples of warfare, such as the Battle of Cape Esperance and the activities of the USS "Helena," show that Brooklyn-class cruisers fought on equal terms with Japanese ships equipped with 203 mm guns.

        Esperance’s fight is about when one of the opponents crawls into “Crossing T”, and not about Brooklyn’s fighting qualities.
        The second phase of the battle is much more indicative for me when the old Kinugasa drove away the Boys and wrote out a pink Salt Lake City
        1. Constanty 16 February 2020 22: 46 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          At the combat distances encountered at that time, 155 and 203 mm shells could damage or even destroy enemy ships. Given the difference in rate of fire and the likelihood of artillery hit (on average about 3% of the projectiles fired), 155 mm guns could be even more effective.
          1. Engineer 16 February 2020 22: 51 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            At longer distances, heavier projectiles have better accuracy.
            On small issues, the moot point is that a higher rate of fire or increased power is better.
            It is noteworthy that Esperance showed that if you remove the moment of surprise that is not the merit of the Brooklyn designers and their 6 inches, Brooklyn will merge even the old Kinugas
            1. Constanty 16 February 2020 23: 11 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              You are right, Over long distances, heavier shells have better accuracy, but in a real war there probably wasn’t a single collision so that the ships could put the “safety zone” principle into practice. At combat distances near Savo, Esperanto ... even heavy cruisers were sensitive to firing from 155 mm guns.

              There was not a single case where the 203 mm caliber decided to battle, while the 155 mm could not answer so menacingly. Even the Battle of the Java Sea was not such an example
              1. Engineer 16 February 2020 23: 18 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                There was not a single case where a 203 mm caliber decided to battle

                203 mm projectile disabled Khia's steering.
                203 mm projectile demolished radar on Scharnhorst.
                Do 6-inch have similar successes?
                1. Constanty 16 February 2020 23: 30 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  203 mm projectile disabled Khia's steering


                  Could this have been done by a 155 mm shell from a given distance? No doubt about it. USS San Francisco, however, had 203 mm guns. If there were 152 mm guns, the effect would be the same. But because of the number of shots, 6 inches would be more likely.

                  The Scharnhorst radar was destroyed from 12 km. It was not armored enough to withstand 152 mm shells.

                  Thus, there is no advantage of 203 mm. If the ships were
                  only 152 mm guns, they could also cause such damage.
                  This is not an alternative story, but an analysis of technical capabilities.
                  1. Engineer 17 February 2020 08: 07 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    No doubt about it. USS San Francisco, however, had 203 mm guns. If there were 152 mm guns, the effect would be the same

                    Most likely not, the power of the 152-mm ammunition is several times lower and not the fact that he would have done as much trouble
  12. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 15: 27 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Lamata
    Yes, there was essentially nothing to fight off the stern.

    If they wanted to live, they would have done like Scharnhorst in the last battle: they would have turned 45 degrees off the general course onto the sideboard, fired five or six full salvos and turned back.
  13. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 15: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: ignoto
    But, the French have found a way to improve this project.
    In the next series of heavy cruisers, they planned to move from 4 * 2 to the 3 * 3 layout, which made it possible to strengthen the armament without increasing its mass, while simultaneously placing it more compactly.

    Only after all the cuts from the initial projects (C5 A3 and C5 SA1) it turned out that the standard displacement of the Saint Louis type SRT crawled from 10349 tons to 14537 tons.

    Quote: ignoto
    High-pressure boilers of the Sural type appeared on the battleships of the Jean Bart type and the destroyers Le Ardi. Boilers that had the best weight and overall performance, with the best specific power among competitors, and high reliability.

    The reliability of the Sural is a myth.
    In fact, French high-pressure boilers had the same problems as German ones.
    It's just that the problems of Wagners, Bensons and La Montov are more publicized.
    1. Alexey RA 16 February 2020 16: 50 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Macsen_Wledig
      The reliability of the Sural is a myth.
      In fact, French high-pressure boilers had the same problems as German ones.

      PMSM, the French simply surrendered on time - before the number of reports of problems with boilers exceeded the critical threshold. smile And after the surrender, the fleet almost all the time stood in the bases.
    2. unknown 16 February 2020 22: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Perhaps 14537 tons - is it still a complete displacement?
    3. unknown 16 February 2020 22: 28 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      All the same, Sural boilers in real operation proved to be much better than German high-pressure once-through boilers. True, the installation itself, in comparison with the boilers of the previous types, was more complicated and required more qualified personnel.
  14. alsoclean 16 February 2020 15: 56 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Undecim
    Engines: 4 TKAMPON
    No site "warlords" can figure out the Japanese ship’s GEM and stubbornly confuse them.
    TZA "Kampon" equipped ships built on the tops of the company "Kawasaki". Kampon turbines are designed on the basis of an active Brown-Curtis type turbine.
    Ships built at the Mitsubishi shipyards were equipped with Gihon TZA. Gihon turbines are based on Parsons jet turbines.
    Therefore, Tone class cruisers had Gihon-type MZs. These are turbines that are fundamentally different in design.

    Well, you said ..... You would also have asked the “voenmore” how the active differs from the reactive one - would have laughed at the answers and attempts quite sincerely)))
    1. Octopus 16 February 2020 21: 02 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: alsoclean
      You would also ask "warlords" how active differs from reactive

      Well, how. A jet turbine is a dviglo from an airplane that was screwed to a ship. Active is a working turbine. So if the Japanese welded a jet engine to the ship and turned it on, then it is an active jet. And if you didn’t turn it on, they just carry it like cargo or ballast - then it’s passive reactive.

      Guessed, yes, guessed? wassat
      1. alsoclean 16 February 2020 22: 08 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Comrade! Not a word about orientations! Fraught with stop
    2. unknown 16 February 2020 22: 33 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      In 1990, Lev Shapiro's book, The Heart of the Ship, was published. This book is available online. This book quite correctly describes the evolution of shipboard installations. After reading this book, you will be able to understand why some ship turbines were called "active" and others were "reactive."
  15. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 16: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Constanty
    The ships are undoubtedly interesting, only the stubbornness of the Japanese and sticking to the 203-mm two-section towers are surprising, while replacing them with three-section towers would bring many benefits. Yes, both in terms of mass and space.

    Weight is a moot point.
    Japanese two-gun turret Model-E weighed 175 tons
    American three-gun (for Wichita) - 319 tons
    That is, we have 700 tons versus 957.
    Space is also a moot point, since it will be necessary to place cellars of even greater volume because of the "extra" trunk, and the case should be wider, since the diameter of the barbet will be larger.
    In general, not everything is so simple ...
  16. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 16: 10 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: Undecim
    Engines: 4 TKAMPON
    Therefore, Tone class cruisers had Gihon-type MZs. These are turbines that are fundamentally different in design.

    Langerer writes about TPA Type Kanpon
    Lacroix also writes about TPA Type Kanpon
    So the question is controversial.
    1. Undecim 16 February 2020 17: 20 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Langerer writes about TPA Type Kanpon
      Lacroix also writes about TPA Type Kanpon

      Have you not looked at the Shipbuilding History of the Japan Shipbuilding Society? Or Miwao Matsumoto books, for example, Reconsidering Japanese Industrialization: Marine Turbine Transfer at Mitsubishi.
      Given that the license for Curtis turbines expired in 1923 and the Parsons turbines in 1928,
      The Imperial Technical Department of the Japanese Navy (abbreviated kampon / Kanhon) in the early 1920s took care of the development of its own turbines. Therefore, since 1920, all Japanese ships, in principle, have turbines developed by the Imperial Technical Department of the Japanese Navy - Kampon. Usually they are also called in the literature, without delving into the subtleties.
      However, given the fact that Mitsubishi produced Parsons turbines and Kawasaki Curtis, Japanese turbines developed were also of two types. Mitsubishi's jet turbines were called Gihon, and Kawasaki's active turbines were called Campon.
      So the question is controversial.
      So there is no reason to argue.
  17. NF68 16 February 2020 16: 14 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Engines: 4 Kampon TZA, 8 Kampon Ro-Go boilers, 152 liters. with.,


    Novel. In this case, we are not talking about engines, but about power plants. When you copy someone’s articles “creatively”, it doesn’t stop you from understanding a bit about what’s being said.
  18. Bormanxnumx 16 February 2020 16: 17 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    After the cruiser Tone and Tikuma entered service, they were assigned to the Yokosuka naval base ...
    Both cruisers took part in the campaign to Pearl Harbor, December 8 seaplanes from the Tone and Chikum.

    The author should decide on "Chikuma" or "Chikuma"
  19. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 16: 34 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: BORMAN82
    After the cruiser Tone and Tikuma entered service, they were assigned to the Yokosuka naval base ...
    Both cruisers took part in the campaign to Pearl Harbor, December 8 seaplanes from the Tone and Chikum.

    The author should decide on "Chikuma" or "Chikuma"

    Rather, with the one who impresses him more: Hepburn or Polivanov. laughing
  20. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 17: 00 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
    The reliability of the Sural is a myth.
    In fact, French high-pressure boilers had the same problems as German ones.

    PMSM, the French simply surrendered on time - before the number of reports of problems with boilers exceeded the critical threshold. smile And after the surrender, the fleet almost all the time stood in the bases.

    Quite an option for explanation. :)
    Well, then (after WWII) all sorts of “Jean Bars” and “Richelieu” no longer interested anyone.
  21. Engineer 16 February 2020 17: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It seems to me that if the ships had 2x3 towers in the bow it would be even better in terms of balance
    But the Japanese comrades have already suffered and there was no stopping it)
    GA carrier cruiser (namely scouts) is a very correct idea
  22. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 17: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Undecim
    Have you not looked at the Shipbuilding History of the Japan Shipbuilding Society? Or Miwao Matsumoto books, for example, Reconsidering Japanese Industrialization: Marine Turbine Transfer at Mitsubishi ...

    Interesting details ...
    I'm not so keen on the Japanese fleet: reaching for the mainstream - the German "big pots". :)
    1. Undecim 16 February 2020 20: 24 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I'm not so keen on the Japanese fleet
      And I don’t get carried away with it, just having found conflicting information, I became interested and found out that before the reorganization of 1926, the Imperial Technical Department of the Japanese Navy, which was kampon / Kanhon, was a research and production department and was called Gihon.
  23. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 18: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    It seems to me that if the ships had 2x3 towers in the bow it would be even better in terms of balance

    And what is meant by balance?

    Quote: Engineer
    GA carrier cruiser (namely scouts) is a very correct idea

    But, apparently, the Japanese did not like it: the second pair of SRT for the 8th Sentai (5th replacement program) was to be built as ships of the W-103 project, modified by the Suzuya (from which the Ibuki project later grew )
    1. Engineer 16 February 2020 18: 05 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      under balance?
      The set of characteristics. There would be a reserve for armor, and especially FOR.
      But the armor suited them, and everyone had problems with the ZA. Therefore, exotic weapons are natural and logical.
      But, apparently, the Japanese did not like it: the second pair of SRT for the 8th Sentai (5th replacement program) was to be built as ships of the W-103 project, modified by the Suzuya (from which the Ibuki project later grew )

      Maybe they just thought that a couple of scouts with kido butai are enough?
  24. Macsen_wledig 16 February 2020 19: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Maybe they just thought that a couple of scouts with kido butai are enough?

    Everything is simpler. Tone-type CRTs turned out to be too "exotic" ships - the Japanese needed "normal" SRTs to break through the enemy curtain.
    In general, we can say this: "Experimented, and that's enough ..."
    1. unknown 16 February 2020 22: 45 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      The most advanced heavy cruisers, and engaged in escorting aircraft carrier groups.
      In real clashes with surface ships, they practically did not participate until 1944.
      For escort, the cruiser "Yodo" would also be able to cope with the function of air reconnaissance.
      If we consider that forty-three Japanese cruisers took part in the war, and only eighteen of them were heavy, the light ones were completely outdated, or new, but in terms of armament they could not even reach the standard 8 * 6 ", not to mention the standard 12 * 6 "then it is a waste of pure water.
  25. pmkemcity 17 February 2020 12: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Chikuma - Chikuma ... We need to bring to the standard, I think Chikuma will be more pleasant for hearing.
  26. Macsen_wledig 17 February 2020 18: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    203 mm projectile demolished radar on Scharnhorst.

    In that case, the shell did not solve anything.
    All the same, Bey did not use any radars or other REOs throughout the battle, so that, according to the Germans, the British could not reveal the ship’s position in terms of REO radiation.
    The presence / absence of a working radar did not affect the course of the evening battle: even using only optics, Scharnhorst kept DoI under cover.
  27. Private SA 17 February 2020 18: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: lucul
    .Te. From 2 km to the planes it was possible to accurately place bombs.

    From a horizontal flight from a height of more than 2 kilometers, put exactly a bomb in
    a cruiser maneuvering at full speed? Even with the Norden M air sight
    super luck. Many hits from horizontal bombing of army aircraft
    was under Midway?
    Not for nothing were dive bombers coming down, dropping bombs from much
    smaller height (Rudel from what height bomb dropped into a standing Marat?),
    Top-mast bombing and torpedo bombers. Here to fight the last
    really would be better caliber MZA more.
  28. Private SA 17 February 2020 20: 03 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Tlauicol
    Lexington-type aircraft carriers built in the ancient 20s.
    belt: 127—178 mm / 19 °
    traverses: 127—178 mm
    deck: 51 mm.
    PTZ: 4.8m
    eight 8 inches. 12 five inches. + 70-80 Normal aircraft
    but what the Japanese were trying to portray - it is not clear

    Do not forget that both Lexington and Akagi were rebuilt from battlecruisers
    At Lexington, the armored deck walked along the upper level of the armored belt.
    The hangars were higher, which allowed the Japanese bombs to get through
    unarmored flight deck to gasoline storage facilities.
    On the Akagi, the armored deck covered only the citadel (60%) of the length
    the ship. Which led to a comparable fate.
    The first aircraft carriers with an armored flight deck were built by the British. AT
    1937 laid the "Illastries" in 1940 put into operation.