Military Review

Warships. Cruisers. They would have built a bulk carrier right away ...

120

Continuing the theme of the Italian-French confrontation in the Mediterranean, we will analyze the next series of Italian light cruisers. "Condottieri B".


It is clear that, having burned themselves on series A, the Italians realized that the first pizza came out not just lumpy, but something terrible. And you need to do something. And preferably inexpensively and urgently.

So the project “work on mistakes” with “Condottieri A” appeared. That is, series B.




We worked hard on the project. They increased the strength of the hull, reduced the upper weight of the ship, removing the hangar for seaplanes. This facilitated the ship and lowered the height of the superstructure, which had a positive effect on stability. The catapult from the forecastle was moved to the stern.

Cruisers, in addition, received new 152-mm guns of the main caliber of the 1929 model in more spacious towers.

Warships. Cruisers. They would have built a bulk carrier right away ...

According to the program 1929-1930. two Kondotieri B-series cruisers were built; pleasure was not very cheap.

The cruisers received names in honor of the Italian marshals of the period of the First World War: “Luigi Cadorna” and “Armando Diaz”.

Let's not go into historical details, as in the previous article, how talented and successful these lords were, but since it was not the bunkers who named them, perhaps they were worth something.

And the ships, as always, were very beautiful.


You must agree that the B-Series cruisers had such a swift silhouette. If it would even slightly improve the combat characteristics ...

The technical characteristics of the ships were as follows.

Displacement: 5 tons standard, 323 tons full.

Length: 169,3 m.
Width: 15,5 m
Draft: 5,2 m.

Booking:
- belt - mm 24;
- deck and traverse - 20 mm;
- cutting - 70 mm.

Engines: 6 Yarrow-Ansaldo boilers, 2 Parsons turbines, 95 hp

Speed: 37 knots.

Cruising range: 2 nautical miles at 930 knots.

Like the ships of the first series, these cruisers were also a little champions. At the tests of “Kadorn” - 38,1 knots (power is estimated at 112 930 hp), and “Diaz” - as many as 39,7 knots (power 121 407 hp). But in the ordinary service, ships rarely went beyond 30-31 knots.

Crew: 507-544 people.

Armament:
Main caliber: 4 × 2 -152 mm guns.
Anti-aircraft artillery 3 × 2 - 100 mm universal guns, 4 × 2 - 37 mm anti-aircraft guns, 4 × 2 - 13,2 mm machine guns.
Mine-torpedo armament: 2 x 2 torpedo tubes with a caliber of 533 mm, mines up to 96 pcs.
Aviation Group: 2 x CANT 25 or IMAM Ro.43, 1 catapult.

Since the 37 mm assault rifles were not manufactured, 2 x 40 mm Vickers assault rifles were installed on ships similar to the Kondotieri A. In 1938, the Vickers were replaced with 4 x 2 20 mm submachine guns from Bred.

In 1943, a catapult was dismantled at the Luigi Cadorna, and 13,2 mm machine guns were replaced with a 4 x 1 20 mm machine gun. In 1944, torpedo tubes were removed from the ship.

Despite the strengthening of the hull in the power set, the cruisers' protection was left at the level of series A. That is, it did not exist in fact. The booking weight was only 8% of the displacement and, in fact, consisted only of an armored belt with a thickness of 18 to 24 mm.

There was a shatterproof bulkhead behind the belt, which was located at a distance of 1,8-3,5 m from the belt. The deck was 20 mm thick; on 25 and 173 frames there were armored 20 mm traverse sheets.

The conning tower had frontal armor 70 mm, 25 mm side armor and 20 mm armor of the roof and deck. The main-caliber towers had frontal armor 30 mm, on-board, roofs and barbets - 22 mm.

Italian engineers believed that such armor could withstand the hit of 120-130-mm shells. That is, the leaders and destroyers of the enemy. And from a stronger enemy, the cruiser will be able to escape at the expense of speed. In fact, practice has shown that 127-mm shells pierced the “reservation” easily, but not shells became a nightmare for Italian cruisers.


About the main caliber. In general, to say that the tools were new means a little sin against the truth. On the whole, these were all the same Ansaldo guns, but modernized by OTO. Actually, all the upgrades touched the loading mechanism, which allowed to accelerate recharging. If the Ansaldo guns it was 14 seconds, then the modernized - 9 seconds. Rate of fire was 7 rounds per minute. Practical combat rate of fire was 4-5 shots per minute.

Ammunition of the main caliber in peacetime amounted to 210 high-explosive and armor-piercing shells per gun. During the war, ammunition increased.

In the central artillery post (DAC) was a central automatic gun firing control system. On the "Cadorna" DAC system "Galileo", on the "Diaz" - "San Giorgio." Two DACs supplied the data to the DAC, and on the wings of the bridge there were special posts for controlling fire at night.

There was such an interesting innovation as airmail, which connected the main control posts of the ship, the conning tower with the post of chief power engineer or with the post of the struggle for survivability. Naturally, no one canceled the internal telephone and intercoms.

Even in the rank of new products, three steering wheel drives could be entered: hydraulic, electric and manual. That is, to disable the control of the ship was very difficult.

Universal artillery consisted of six 100-mm guns in the installations of the same Minisini system. Ammunition 560 high-explosive, 560 anti-aircraft and 240 lighting shells. During the war, ammunition was increased to 2000 shells. The fire control system consisted of two KDP along the sides of the superstructure. Data for the firing was developed in a separate artillery post.

With anti-aircraft artillery, everything was very sad. The same problems as the ships of series A: there were no automatic weapons for the average distance. They planned to arm the B-series cruisers with four twin 37 mm machine guns of the Breda company and four twin 13,2 mm machine guns.

And "Breda" very mildly, framed the fleet. I had to get out when it turned out that the production of 37-mm machine guns could not be established. And therefore, 2 single-barrel 40-mm automatic machines of the Vickers-Terni system of the 1915 model were temporarily installed ...

Yes, the Terni company carried out modernization in 1930, but the machine did not really satisfy the fleet in terms of its characteristics: due to the low initial speed - low effective firing range, low practical rate of fire, inconvenience of reloading - changing the box with a belt weighing under 100 kg in battle poured into an intractable problem and required the efforts of 4-5 people.

So two ancient machines instead of eight - the air defense rating is clearly unsatisfactory.

In 1938, the “Pom-Pom” was removed and instead installed 4 installations of paired automatic machines “Breda” with a caliber of 20 mm. It already looked like something. Ammunition 20 mm machine guns consisted of 3000 shells.

In 1943, machine guns that were useless at that time were removed from the Luigi Cadorna. Instead of machine guns, another 2 coaxial 20 mm Breda submachine guns and 4 single-barrel 20 mm submachine guns manufactured by the Isotta Fraccini factory of 1939 model were installed.

With such weapons, you could try to fight off the aircraft that attacked the ship.


Mine-torpedo armament was comparable to type A and consisted of two torpedo tubes located on the deck near the first chimney. The ammunition consisted of 8 torpedoes, spare torpedoes were stored in containers near the vehicles.

It was very decent anti-submarine weapons. 32 depth charges of the 1934 model weighing 128 kg and an explosive mass of 100 kg, which can puzzle any submarine.

The depth of the explosion could be set at 20, 40, 70 and 100 m. Bombs could be dropped from two bomb throwers of type 432/302 of the 1934 model. These were pneumatic bombers operating on high-pressure compressed air. Bomb bombs were placed on the side of the Utah.

During the war, the number of depth charges increased to 72, but these were smaller bombs, model 1936, mark 50T. The weight of this depth bomb was 64 kg, the weight of an explosive was 50 kg.

Naturally, like all Italian light cruisers fleettype B ships were equipped with rails for setting mines. Depending on the type, from 84 to 138 minutes could be loaded on board.


Mine weapons consisted of three paravanes, which provided a safe 100th lane, 9 m deep. In the stowed position, they were on a superstructure near tower No. 2 on the sides and one on the bow wall.

With electronic means it was about the same as with air defense, if not sadder. Despite the fact that Italian scientists are famous for a number of discoveries in the field of radio and sonar, the production of such important devices in Italy could not be established. Therefore, in addition to the radio station, only the passive receiving sonar station was installed on the cruisers.


Battle service cruisers.

"Luigi Cadorna"



Laid down on September 19, 1930, launched on September 30, 1931. On August 11, 1933, work on the ship was completed, tests began. On April 22, 1934, a ceremony of presenting the Battle Banner to a ship was held at a veneer of Venice.

The Luigi Cadorna received the Battle Banner from women in the city of Pallazza, the proud city of General Luigi Cadorna. The following text was embroidered in gold on the banner:

“In memory of the great man, the ship is called the Cadorna.” The flag of this ship will fly over the waves. “The whole world will see him, and all the time his fate will be connected with the Italian fleet.”

In general, it almost worked out.

The service of the cruiser actually began on August 4, 1934 with large naval maneuvers, which B. Mussolini observed. And then the routine began in the Mediterranean. The ship staggered across the water area, it was difficult to find a port where he had not visited.

January 1, 1937 "Luigi Cadorna" arrives in Tangier. The civil war that began in Spain and the subsequent assistance of Italy to General Franco demanded the protection of convoys with weapons and technology going to Spain.


A very funny page began in the history of the cruiser: first, the ship guarded the convoys from Tangier to Geuta, and then the fun began. Throughout the second half of 1937, the cruiser hunted for ships carrying military smuggling to Spain and at the same time ... drove it yourself!

However, this was how many vessels from the countries participating in the Committee on Non-Intervention “worked”. They helped General Franco with all their might and eventually led him to victory, defeating the Soviet Union, which helped the Republicans.

Meanwhile, the Second World War was approaching, but Italy started it a little earlier, in April 1939, by the occupation of Albania. "Luigi Cadorna" takes part in the operation to capture Albania.

In general, the Navy had already realized by then that Type B is not much different from Type A Kondotieri for the better. And on the first occasion, they wrote off the cruiser to the training squad. However, in 1940, the training ship again became a warship.

June 10, Italy entered the Second World War. But for Kadorna, the war began a day earlier. The military trick of the Italians was that as early as June 9 a very secretive small detachment consisting of the cruisers Di Barbiano and Luigi Cadorna and the destroyers Corazstsmeri and Lanzieri entered the Sicilian Gulf and set there more than 400 minutes. Apparently, just in case.


July 7, 1940 "Cadorna" again goes to sea. Then, almost the entire combat-ready Italian fleet participated in the operation to cover the huge African convoy. It all turned into disgrace, which some invoke the battle of Calabria, others the battle of Punto Stilo, but the mess reigning at sea is difficult to call a battle. The only one who was more or less involved in the business at that time was the crew of the battleship Worspite.

The Cadorna checked its guns and air defense. No success was achieved, but they managed to escape from "greetings" from British bombers and torpedo bombers.


In 1941, the cruiser again engaged in the escort of supply vessels going to Africa.

On the whole, the Italian fleet in the Mediterranean operated so successfully that the position of units in Africa became catastrophic in terms of supply.

It’s hard to say who is in the fleet’s command to use the Kondotieri as transports. But such an experiment was delivered. The Luigi Cadorna took on board 330 tons of fuel oil, 210 tons of gasoline and 360 boxes of ammunition. In addition, about 100 people replenish and vacationers.

November 22, 1941, having in custody the only destroyer "Augusto Riboti", the cruiser went to Brindisi. On the way, the cruiser was attacked by a British submarine, firing a torpedo along it, but safely dodged.

On November 23, the ship arrived safely in Brindisi. 103 Italian, 106 German troops and 82 British prisoners of war took aboard the cruiser. On the evening of the same day, the cruiser lay back on course and on November 25 returned without incident to Taranto.

In the first half of December, the cruiser repeated the raid, delivering to Benghazi and Argostoli 10 cans of gasoline, 000 tons of fuel oil, 100 boxes of ammunition.

The ground command praised the cargo delivered by the crew. But while the “Luigi Cadorna” played the role of supply transport, the fate of the fleet was decided at the headquarters of the fleet.


After the death of December 13, 1941, in the battle at Cape Bon, the cruisers "Da Barbiano" and "Di Giussano", it was decided to use the cruiser as a training ship to prepare for the replenishment of sailors.

And from that moment until 1943, “Luigi Cadorna” carried out work on the training of cadets of naval schools, performing campaigns, shooting and other tasks.

While the "Cadorna" performed the tasks of training personnel, the Italian fleet lost a large number of ships. At the end of May 1943, the fleet had only 6 light cruisers. Therefore, it was decided to return the cruiser to the ranks of warships and at least somehow use it.

Happened. Having trained the crew, the cruiser delivered the soldiers to Albania, but mostly put mines. Until the surrender of Italy.

On September 9, the Italian squadron of Admiral Da Zara left the Taranto raid and headed for the British Navy base in La Valletta in Malta. Under the command of Da Zara were the battleships Andrea Doria, Cayo Duilio and the cruiser Luigi Cadorna, Magna Pompeo, and the destroyer Da Recco.

On September 10, ships came to Malta and surrendered to the British. On September 16, the Italian squadron was transferred to Alexandria, where it awaited a decision on its fate.


On September 23, British Admiral Cunningham and Italian Naval Minister Admiral De Courten concluded an agreement on the use of Italian warships and merchant ships by the Allies.

Thus, the “Luigi Cadorna” again became a transport. Unarmed, because just in case the ammunition was quite naturally unloaded from the ship. He only drove British soldiers not as prisoners of war, but vice versa. The ship transported equipment and personnel from North Africa to Taranto and Naples. 7 raids were committed, after which the war for the “Luigi Cadorna” ended.

Further, the cruiser was put into reserve and stood until 1947. Further, "Luigi Cadorna" remained in the Italian fleet as again a training ship. And from 1947 to 1951, cadets for the Italian fleet were again trained on it.

In 1951, the ship was finally decommissioned and disassembled for metal.

Armando Diaz



The cruiser was laid down on July 28, 1930, launched on July 17, 1932, handed over to the fleet on April 29, 1933. The ship entered the ship before Luigi Cadorna, although the series was named after Cadorna.

On April 22, 1934, at the Naples raid, the ceremony of awarding the Battle Banner was held. A golden inscription was engraved on the box for storing the banner: “Valor. Victory at Veneto. Rome remembers. The enemy is defeated. ” Pompously, but fate was not affected in any way.

Then began the routine training and combat coordination of the crew. An interesting nuance: the first commander of Armando Diaz was Captain 1st Rank Angelo Yakino, famous for the fact that ALL the ships he commanded until he became an admiral subsequently died.

In the first half of 1936, Armando Diaz was engaged in the escort of ships going to Spain with cargo and replenishment for General Franco. And in the second half I was already looking for ships with “military smuggling”.

The second half of 1938 and the first half of 1939 were for the cruiser in the ordinary peacetime service. In December 1939, work was done to replace anti-aircraft artillery.

The first Armando Diaz operation in World War II was the exit on July 7, 1940, which led to the battle of Punt Stilo.

An accident in the mechanisms occurred on the way to the battlefield on board the Armando Diaz. The squadron commander ordered him to go to the base with the Luigi Cadorna. But the ships did not have time to leave, the battle began. At the Armando Diaz, shells hit the Giulio Cesar and even fired two salvos with the main caliber of the enemy destroyers. When returning to the Luigi Cadorna, the steering gear also crashed, but somehow the two cruisers got into Messina.

Having been repaired, Armando Diaz, together with Di Giussano, took part in the Italian invasion of Greece, the planned capture of the island of Corfu. Three times went on patrol of the Albanian coast.

In late 1940 - early 1941 was included in the detachment of ships engaged in the posting of supply convoys for units in North Africa.


On February 23 and 24, 3 convoys with troops were sent to North Africa. The Bande Nere and Armando Diaz plus destroyers Avneri and Carazzieri came out as a cover unit at sea on the morning of February 24. The compound entered the guard of the Marburg convoy on February 25 shortly before midnight.

Security ships followed the convoy: cruisers with anti-submarine zigzag, destroyers carried security and sonar surveillance.

At 3 hours 43 minutes, the Armando Diaz was shocked by explosions: two torpedoes hit the bow of the ship. At 3 hours 49 minutes, the cruiser sank. After the explosion of torpedoes, the cellars of the bow towers of the main caliber and boilers No. 3 and No. 4 detonated. The nasal superstructure and foremast rose into the air and collapsed into the water.

The commander of the ship, Captain 1st Rank Francesco Mazzola, senior assistant, senior artilleryman, almost all the officers in the conning tower were killed. What happened behind the sides, in boiler rooms and other rooms, you can guess, but the fact that there was hell is understandable.

The destroyer Askari saved 144 people, including 14 officers. In total, 464 people went to the bottom together with Armando Diaz, including 13 officers, 62 foremen, 3 air force military personnel, and 7 army officers.

The Armando Diaz was sunk by the British Upright submarine commanded by Lieutenant Norman. The attack was carried out flawlessly, plus the Italian destroyers, who openly missed the submarine, helped.

What can be said in the end?


Beautiful ships. Very beautiful. But not beauty is fighting, but fighting qualities. And here is complete sadness and longing. The combat value of the Condottieri B was minimal. They understood this in the Navy, and therefore they tried at the first opportunity to put them in training or in reserve.

Yes, the improvement work was carried out, but the flaws that the Condottieri of the first A series were so rich were, by and large, failed to be overcome in the work on the bugs.

The cruisers remained “cardboard” and not very fast. The same British and French ships issued the same 30-32 knots, but possessed thicker armor and a large number of trunks.

In general, the cruisers did not find application in the Mediterranean Sea. The convoys they were supposed to attack were guarded by both heavy ships and aircraft, with which the Italian cruisers had nothing to fight.

Plus, the British possessed more advanced means of detecting you as a radar, which the Italians could not oppose.

So the only thing that the cruisers were suitable for was the role of mine-layers, training ships and transports.

Agree, somehow it’s even a shame for the cruiser.
Author:
120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 20 June 2020 06: 17 New
    0
    Thank. Interestingly, like the previous article on cruisers.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 21 June 2020 23: 13 New
      +5
      The article is in the same ironic style. negative
      Haha, two cruisers died here, heh hey three cruisers died here.
      There were large and heavy naval battles, with huge losses and casualties.
      The author would try in the same ironic style to describe the death of ships
      Black Sea or Baltic Fleet in the same war!
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 22 June 2020 07: 53 New
        -3
        I agree that this style of the author is hard not to recognize. But I mark in a positive way those of his articles that are not categorical. After all, he often has - he named a figure and "... it's a fact!"
        But knowledgeable people see no correspondence and begin to argue: "... no, not a fact"!
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 18: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins

          But knowledgeable people see no correspondence and begin to argue: "... no, not a fact"!

          But this does not make sense, for the author does not return to his opus ...
  2. Sergey M. Karasev
    Sergey M. Karasev 20 June 2020 07: 46 New
    +4
    Throughout the second half of 1937, the cruiser hunted for ships carrying military smuggling to Spain and at the same time ... drove it yourself!

    However, this was how many vessels from the countries participating in the Committee on Non-Intervention “worked”. They helped General Franco with all their might and eventually led him to victory, defeating the Soviet Union, which helped the Republicans.

    "Nothing is new under the moon ..." (C) The policy of double standards was then, is now, and in the foreseeable future it will not go anywhere. lol
  3. unknown
    unknown 20 June 2020 08: 13 New
    +3
    The return to the armored cruisers booking scheme, i.e. replacing two thin vertical barriers and a thin deck with a ramp deck, plus a small additional load on the weight of the armor, would enhance the booking of cruisers of this type, like the previous one.
  4. Mark kalendarov
    Mark kalendarov 20 June 2020 09: 19 New
    +1
    [/ quote] The combat value of the Condottieri B was minimal. They understood this in the Navy, and therefore they tried at the first opportunity to put them in training or in reserve. [Quote]

    Where is the logic?
    Why build ships whose value is minimal ???
    1. stoqn477
      stoqn477 20 June 2020 09: 50 New
      +1
      Maybe, in principle, something bad is better than nothing. winked
    2. Simargl
      Simargl 21 June 2020 05: 40 New
      +2
      Quote: Mark Kalendarov
      Why build ships whose value is minimal ???
      The value is normal, but to deceive physics and fate, relying on the speed and probability of defeat is a so-so decision.
  5. Vladimir Mashkov
    Vladimir Mashkov 20 June 2020 10: 03 New
    +3
    I agree. Thank you Roman for another wonderful historical article. When your topic is NOT modern politics, you get small masterpieces!
    Ships are my first and second hobby in my life. He himself worked for many years in fishermen and sailors. Yes, and childhood passed on Lugovaya opposite the "Dalzavod" and the Golden Horn ...
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 20 June 2020 11: 11 New
      +9
      Quote: Vladimir Mashkov
      you get small masterpieces!

      Hmm.

      Once upon a time in VO there were works of people who really understand the fleet, at least at the amateur level. By amateur I understand the level of tsushima and profile LJ.

      And now Skomorokhov’s fleet is embracing. Masterpieces, yes.
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig 20 June 2020 12: 01 New
        +4
        Quote: Octopus
        And now Skomorokhov’s fleet is embracing. Masterpieces, yes.

        I can’t wait until the author takes the Germans ...
        Here we read the revelations. :)
      2. Vladimir Mashkov
        Vladimir Mashkov 20 June 2020 13: 12 New
        +2
        Octopus.
        I do not argue. I believe your hobby (and, possibly, a profession) of the Navy, you know the subject better. But - I'm an amateur. And I like Roman's articles ON THE HISTORY OF AVIATION AND NAVY. Although he sometimes makes mistakes and incorrect conclusions in them.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 20 June 2020 13: 50 New
          +7
          Quote: Vladimir Mashkov
          And I like Roman's articles ON THE HISTORY OF AIRCRAFT AND NAVY. Although he sometimes makes mistakes and incorrect conclusions in them.

          Excuse me, why read Patyanin in the retelling of Skomorokhov, if you can read Patyanin himself?
          It's like listening to Rabinovich's "Beatles" ... :)
          1. Vladimir Mashkov
            Vladimir Mashkov 20 June 2020 14: 25 New
            +4
            I completely agree with you that Patyanin is encyclopedic. But, unfortunately, I just don’t have time to read it all: the process of cognition is endless, and life is finite and I am not far from its end. I read something Patyanina, I want to read something (if I have time). Therefore, Roman’s articles are more suitable for me.
            I have a friend (also an old man) who dropped everything and only reads these books binge. And sees nothing else!
          2. unknown
            unknown 21 June 2020 06: 29 New
            +1
            And also Balakin, Kofman, Suligu ...
            1. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 10: 42 New
              0
              Quote: ignoto
              And also Balakin, Kofman, Suligu ...

              And them too ...
              Just Patyanin wrote about the "condottiers".
              1. unknown
                unknown 21 June 2020 15: 13 New
                0
                And also Trubitsin.
                1. Macsen_wledig
                  Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 16: 11 New
                  0
                  Quote: ignoto
                  And also Trubitsin.

                  No comment ... (c)
                  1. unknown
                    unknown 21 June 2020 16: 36 New
                    0
                    SB Trubitsin "Light cruisers of Italy".
                    The series "warships of the world".
                    Eastflot 2008
                    Two parts.
                    1. Macsen_wledig
                      Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 18: 07 New
                      0
                      Quote: ignoto
                      SB Trubitsin "Light cruisers of Italy".
                      The series "warships of the world".
                      Eastflot 2008
                      Two parts.

                      I know...:)
                      I'm a little about something else.
  6. Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig 20 June 2020 12: 00 New
    0
    They would have built a bulk carrier right away ...

    Should the British have built bulk carriers instead of "Abdiels"? Nu-nu ...

    But in the ordinary service, ships rarely went beyond 30-31 knots.

    Italian sources say 30 ... 32 knots to the beginning of WWIIwithout specifying the state of the machines.
    In general, as usual: the best way to lie is to tell the truth, but not the whole truth. :)

    Even in the rank of new products, three steering wheel drives could be entered: hydraulic, electric and manual.

    This "novelty" was already implemented on the "A" series ... :)

    That is, to disable the control of the ship was very difficult.

    The author as usual did not bother searching and did not look at the drawings ... :)
    1. unknown
      unknown 21 June 2020 06: 40 New
      +2
      Miracles do not happen.
      You always have to sacrifice something.
      Especially if the displacement is limited.
      This was proved by the British.
      When the armored cruisers designed by them for Japan, in real life, the armadillos that they modern did not exceed in speed. And the buildings of Germany and France were also inferior.
      And Italians have already stepped on the same rake.
      Cruisers of the "Garibaldi" class from the same series. "Fast" slugs.
      But, apparently, it doesn’t.
      Without a breakthrough in the creation of KTU, which was implemented only by France and the United States, nothing sensible happened.
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 11: 31 New
        0
        Quote: ignoto
        Cruisers of the "Garibaldi" class from the same series. "Fast" slugs.

        Here is an interesting question ...
        From the available sources, it is not entirely clear what they wanted, in order to understand how much the received, corresponds to the "wishlist" ...

        Quote: ignoto
        Without a breakthrough in the creation of KTU, which was implemented only by France and the United States, nothing sensible happened.

        Well ... "Syurali" was saved from "shame" only by the rapid defeat of France, otherwise (judging by the reviews) they could have become the same talk of the town as the Wagners ...
        For Americans, there is an interesting question: there are no widespread access to ZhBD machines in order to determine how the GEM did work.
        1. unknown
          unknown 21 June 2020 15: 24 New
          0
          Perhaps the Italians initially wanted to get a high-speed armored cruiser.
          And, with the first ships of the series it rolled.
          The long speed is 17 knots compared to 15 to 16 knots of armadillos.
          Although, not always.
          Spanish "Christobal Colon" could not get away from the slow-moving American battleships.
          The last ships of the series, which went to the Japanese, were the heaviest.
          They carried an outdated CMU, and the speed of the armadillos pulled up.
        2. unknown
          unknown 21 June 2020 15: 28 New
          0
          However, a breakthrough was.
          Without him, “Algeria” would not have happened.
          There was not enough reliability, but over time it would have been tightened.
          Unlike the Germans, who chose a dead end.
  7. Hog
    Hog 20 June 2020 13: 33 New
    -1
    And the ships, as always, were very beautiful.

    I don’t know, I never considered Italian ships to be beautiful, but battleships like Littorio still have nothing.
  8. bk0010
    bk0010 20 June 2020 14: 04 New
    +3
    Could you write an article about Des Moines? Still, the last heavy cruisers. And the rate of fire of the main battery is like a 6 ".
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 20 June 2020 21: 46 New
      +2
      If we take the development of the class of cruisers after the WWI, then for all countries and types the author needs a couple more years to go over in passing wink so wait with repeat
  9. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 20 June 2020 22: 05 New
    +2
    What can I say...
    If you draw parallels with life, then the Italians made an emphasis on speed data, so that in the event of a faunal banal escape. But then again, if you turn on the brain and analyze it, in collisions at sea it may turn out that you will be caught or discovered before you can escape and then combat stability and artillery quality come on the scene. And with this, the Italians have absolutely trouble aaaaa. So it turned out that Kondotieri A and B in terms of combat value is zero. If the Italians had sensible admirals with ship captains who could tactically use the speed data of their cruisers and level the monstrous quality of artillery with protection, then wherever it went. But this is from the realm of fiction ...
    Because once again I repeat that the Washington accords gave birth to perverted unbalanced cruisers ... request
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 20 June 2020 23: 09 New
      +3
      Quote: Rurikovich
      Because once again I repeat that the Washington accords gave birth to perverted unbalanced cruisers ...

      It would seem, what does Luzhkov have to do with it? .. (c)
      Sorry, the Washington Treaty ...
      "Condottiere" was never limited by the Washington Treaty. They were limited by the wishes of the admirals and the availability of money.

      If the admirals did not have "Freudian problems" (the largest permitted caliber is the maximum permitted displacement), then, quite likely, in the period from February 22nd to April 30th, all kinds of goods were built (limited only by budgets) " Towns "," Brooklyn "and other" Mogami "...
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 20 June 2020 23: 24 New
        +2
        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
        If the admirals would not have "Freudian problems" (the largest permitted caliber - the maximum permitted displacement)

        So what am I talking about? ... wink
        that the Washington accords gave birth to perverted unbalanced cruisers ...
        hi smile
        Everything that was built in Italy, France, Japan, Great Britain and the USA after 1922 a class above destroyers was regulated by restrictions and general tonnage for the participating countries. Because the designers and perverted in their countries and in a limited framework based on their preferences yes request
        1. unknown
          unknown 21 June 2020 06: 45 New
          +1
          But there was no need to pervert.
          Return to karapas, and the security of the cruisers will increase.
          And not only light, but also heavy.
        2. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 11: 33 New
          0
          Quote: Rurikovich
          Everything that was built in Italy, France, Japan, Great Britain and the USA after 1922 a class higher than destroyers was regulated by restrictions and general tonnage for the participating countries.

          Restrictions were regulated by the decommissioning of obsolete ships. :)
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 21 June 2020 00: 00 New
      +2
      Quote: Rurikovich
      If you draw parallels with life, then the Italians emphasized and speed data, so that in the event of a faunal banal escape.

      Or to catch up with the banal. Or at least hold on to the goal for some time. For their neighbor and main rival in the Mediterranean, building their light forces, also ran into speed.
  10. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 20 June 2020 23: 51 New
    +2
    In general, the cruisers did not find application in the Mediterranean Sea. The convoys they were supposed to attack were guarded by both heavy ships and aircraft, with which the Italian cruisers had nothing to fight.

    The Maltese KOH had a strong cover only on part of the route. In the last section, only KR and EM covered them.
    However, this did not help Supermarine - even with 1 LK ("Littorio"), 2 SRT and 1 KRL, they managed to merge the battle of five Royal Navy KRLs. And not even the "colonies", but the undersized ones - three "Dido", one "Aretuza" and the PMV-shnom "Carlisle", converted into the Air Defense KR (the main ship was replaced by eight 4 ").
    1. unknown
      unknown 21 June 2020 06: 50 New
      +1
      The Italians were unlucky with the enemy.
      The totem animal of Italy is the Dragon. The sign is not marine. Air.
      The totem animal of Great Britain is the Rat. Water.
      The French, too, were unlucky with Britain.
      The totem animal of France is the Goat.
      Any astrologer will say that people born in the year of the Goat are strongly discouraged from engaging in POLICY, COMMERCE and MILITARY AFFAIRS.
  11. Aleksandr72
    Aleksandr72 21 June 2020 09: 24 New
    +1
    The cruisers received names in honor of the Italian marshals of the period of the First World War: “Luigi Cadorna” and “Armando Diaz”.
    We will not go into historical details, as in the previous article, how talented and successful these lords were, but since it was not the bunkers who named them, maybe they were worth something.

    Luigi Cadorna is an Italian marshal. During the First World War, he was actually the commander-in-chief of the Italian royal army. Considering how she "distinguished herself" in that war, I suppose there is no need to talk about any outstanding military leadership talents of the Marshal. As a result, Luigi Cadorna was dismissed from his post after a crushing defeat in a battle near a hitherto unknown village, whose name the Italians, with the active "help" of the Austro-Hungarians, inscribed in golden letters in military history - Caporetto. In the battle near this village, the Italians lost 10 thousand killed,
    30 thousand wounded, 256 thousand prisoners and an unknown number of deserters. And this is from 400 thousand who took part in the battle (against 350 000 Austro-Hungarians)!
    Armando Diaz - Italian general (since 1924 - Marshal) more deserved to be named after a warship. Being the chief of the general staff, he managed to organize resistance and stop the advance of the Austrians under the ill-fated Caporetto, thanks to him he managed to prevent the final rout of the Italian army. Then he commanded a victorious offensive on the Italian front at the end of 1918 - in the battle of Vittorio Veneto, when the Italians and allies finally managed to defeat the Austro-Hungarian army. Thanks to which, at the end of the First World War, he received the honorary title of Duke of Victory.
    1. Liam
      Liam 21 June 2020 09: 26 New
      +3
      Quote: Aleksandr72
      Considering how she distinguished herself in that war,

      And how did she distinguish herself in that war? Won the war. Unlike the Russian army, for example
      1. Snail N9
        Snail N9 21 June 2020 19: 54 New
        0
        In my opinion, some English admiral said: "The Italians have always built ships better than they knew how to fight on them."
        1. Liam
          Liam 21 June 2020 20: 28 New
          -1
          )))
          And what did this anonymous English admiral say about, for example, the ability to fight the French or German fleet?) About the ability to fight the Russian fleet, even asking is inconvenient.
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 20: 47 New
            +1
            Quote: Liam
            or the German fleet?)

            It will be more difficult with the Germans: the experience of the First World War, and then the Bismarck, showed that it is necessary to reckon, if not with the German sailors, then at least with their hard-to-kill ships.
            1. Liam
              Liam 21 June 2020 21: 00 New
              0
              Quote: Macsen_Wledig
              with their hard-to-kill ships.

              Let me remind you that Bismarck had a low-power torpedo of an archaic biplane.
              Just 90% here are sharing empty Internet memes without knowing and not wanting to know the story. Starting with the author)
              And the Italians in the first world sank 2 battleships of the enemy and two in the second too. Can many fleets boast of such results?
              1. Macsen_wledig
                Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 21: 19 New
                +1
                Quote: Liam
                Let me remind you that Bismarck had a low-power torpedo of an archaic biplane.

                "Prince of Wells" too ... :)
                But after the torpedo, the British had to torment themselves in order to complete the operation.

                Quote: Liam
                And the Italians in the first world sank 2 battleships of the enemy and two in the second too. Can many fleets boast of such results?

                This is not about diversion units ... :)
                1. Liam
                  Liam 21 June 2020 21: 35 New
                  0
                  Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                  had to suffer

                  Shot as in a dash. I am afraid or there wasn’t even one return hit from Bismarck?)
                  Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                  Prince of Wells

                  But you read the author and the sinking of the Italian light cruiser with two torpedoes clearly indicates the inability to build ships
                  Quote: Macsen_Wledig

                  This is not about diversion units ... :)

                  We are talking about the fleet. In World War II, the Italians lost the war to the fleet, which was much more technologically powerful - radars, decryption of Enigma and naval codes. At the same time they fought with dignity and caused a lot of damage.
                  The British fleet at that time would have lost any other fleet except the American one, and no one in their right mind would argue with this. But you read the local figures, except for jokes and tales they don’t know anything)
                  1. Macsen_wledig
                    Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 22: 01 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Liam
                    Am I mistaken or there wasn’t even one return hit from Bismarck?)

                    It seems like a couple of fragments flew into the Rodney ... :)
                    But in general, it is difficult to shoot with a non-operational SUAO.

                    Quote: Liam
                    But you read the author and the sinking of the Italian light cruiser with two torpedoes clearly indicates the inability to build ships

                    IMHO, the author's work is pure graphomania. :)

                    Quote: Liam
                    In World War II, the Italians lost the war to a fleet much more technologically advanced - radars, decryption of Enigma and naval codes.

                    "Ultra" - perhaps ... But radars - no: they appeared en masse only by the end of 42.
                    What did the Italians do for 2,5 years?

                    Quote: Liam
                    But you read the local figures, except for jokes and tales they don’t know anything)

                    Afterglow - it is ... :)
                    1. Liam
                      Liam 21 June 2020 22: 27 New
                      0
                      Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                      What did the Italians do for 2,5 years?

                      Basically the transfer and supply of the German-Italian group in North Africa. This is for a million people if that. Thousands of tanks, tens of thousands of artillery, etc., etc. And the fight against the English convoys
                      1. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig 21 June 2020 22: 34 New
                        +1
                        And there were several battles that the Italians fought so indistinctly that neither in a fairy tale nor a pen to describe ...
                      2. Liam
                        Liam 21 June 2020 22: 35 New
                        -1
                        Which ones?
                      3. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 19: 03 New
                        0
                        Teulada
                        Recession
                        2nd Sirte
                        Convoy Attempt Attempts
                  2. Rakovor
                    Rakovor 22 June 2020 12: 46 New
                    0
                    What are "thousands of tanks", what are you talking about? And he reproaches others with stories-anectotes.))
                2. Liam
                  Liam 21 June 2020 22: 40 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                  But radars are not:

                  At 20:32 p.m., the cruiser Ajax with the help of a radar discovered the motionless “Paul
                  This is Matapan. 41 year
                  1. Macsen_wledig
                    Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 19: 14 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Liam
                    This is Matapan. 41 year

                    A type 279 DEC radar provided detection of sea targets at distances up to 12000 yards. The radar did not provide target designation.
                  2. Liam
                    Liam 22 June 2020 19: 25 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                    The radar did not provide target designation.

                    ))).
                    Listen. I have your codes, I always know your plans, strengths and area of ​​operations, I have an advantage in battleships, I have aircraft carriers, I have radars and the ability to detect you first night and day. You have none of this. How much do you have the odds against me and how the courage of sailors or TTX ships can change this state of affairs. With such an advantage, it is surprising how the Italian fleet survived for the most part and still managed to supply the group in SevAfric for 3 years
                  3. Macsen_wledig
                    Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 20: 04 New
                    0
                    Quote: Liam
                    With such an advantage, it is amazing how the Italian fleet survived for the most part and still managed to supply the group in SevAfric for 3 years

                    It is somehow surprising that with such an advantage, the British were waiting for the moment when the Italian fleet would come to Malta to surrender. :)))
          2. Engineer
            Engineer 22 June 2020 12: 10 New
            0
            At that time, the English fleet would lose to any other fleet except the American one, and no one in their right mind would argue with that.

            The Japanese are a definite favorite as for me. The Britons have not created an analogue of Kido butai, which means that there will be a massacre.
            1. Liam
              Liam 22 June 2020 13: 08 New
              -1
              Quote: Engineer
              Japanese is a definite favorite as for me

              Hardly. The Japanese are stronger than Italians, but they would still lose to the English fleet.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 22 June 2020 15: 18 New
                +1
                Quote: Liam
                Hardly. The Japanese are stronger than Italians, but they would still lose to the English fleet.

                It depends on which year to take. For 41-42 years. the British AB air groups are the fodder for the Zero. And at 43, too. Avoskas are good when the enemy's Navy and Air Force are in a cold war. As soon as they reconcile - and it turns out "Cerberus".
                And their replacement ... "Interesting design, but I don't think it can replace airplanes. " (Yankees about "Barracuda"). smile
                And without carrier-based aircraft, it is difficult to fight the Japanese. Especially having air defense on "pom-poms" and 5,25 ".
              2. Engineer
                Engineer 22 June 2020 18: 46 New
                0
                Yes, and for 43, too

                I would have put Yapov in the 44th. 450 carrier-based aircraft off the Mariana Islands is power.
                Plus, again, Yamato and Musashi against the Kaliky King.
                Removal of the carcass of the former mistress is almost 100%
              3. Liam
                Liam 22 June 2020 19: 38 New
                -1
                Angoski British fought against whom it was enough-Germans and Italians, who had no carrier fleet. Against the Japanese they would have used something else, do not consider them idiots. They would create something themselves. They would take something from the Americans
              4. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 23 June 2020 09: 58 New
                0
                Quote: Liam
                Angoski British fought against whom it was enough-Germans and Italians, who had no aircraft carrier fleet. Against the Japanese they would have used something else, do not consider them idiots.

                so what other was on the deck of the Hermes in 1942? wink
                And yes, even in a war against the Germans and Italians, an airplane looks great, which cannot catch up with the enemy or go into attack positions due to the headwind. At least twice the wind thwarted the British attack.
                Quote: Liam
                Something they would have created themselves.

                Yeah - Fulmar and Barracuda. laughing
                Quote: Liam
                Something they would have taken from the Americans

                Wildcat and unarmed Avenger. Because the Mark 13 does not work, and nothing else fits into the torpedo compartment. Well, SBD.
                And the Americans have nothing else until 1943.
              5. Fyodor Demidovich
                Fyodor Demidovich 1 August 2020 00: 49 New
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA

                Wildcat and unarmed Avenger. Because the Mark 13 does not work, and nothing else fits into the torpedo compartment. Well, SBD.
                And the Americans have nothing else until 1943.


                Note that this did not prevent the Americans from conducting 4 battles against the Japanese, none of which fits the concept of "crushing defeat".

                The Japanese, in general, as part of their air groups (except for their very good carrier-based fighter) had a torpedo bomber of unremarkable characteristics and a dive bomber - a proud carrier of a 250 kg bomb, the effectiveness of which against new British aircraft carriers should not have been very high.
          3. Fyodor Demidovich
            Fyodor Demidovich 1 August 2020 00: 37 New
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA

            It depends on which year to take. For 41-42 years. the British AB air groups are the fodder for the Zero. And at 43, too.


            Popular claim) There are different opinions regarding the comparative characteristics of the A6M2 and Hurricane
            https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/hurricane-mk-iic-vs-a6m2-zero.18853/
            Regarding the Martlets and Zeros, there is a wealth of statistics; the results of the aircraft carrier battles do not show any transcendent advantage of the Japanese aircraft.



            Quote: Alexey RA
            And without carrier-based aircraft, it is difficult to fight the Japanese. Especially having air defense on "pom-poms" and 5,25 ".


            You make it sound like it's worse than a 25mm Hotchkiss assault rifle and a 127mm Type 89 gun)
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 22 June 2020 15: 12 New
      0
      Quote: Liam
      At that time, the English fleet would lose to any other fleet except the American one, and no one in their right mind would argue with that.

      IJN would argue with that. wink
  • Engineer
    Engineer 22 June 2020 12: 08 New
    0
    The Germans defeated the British at sea in WWII more than once or twice. Usually in the minority. This is even without taking into account submarines.
    The funniest thing is that among the Western amateur moroman it is a very common theory that the Germans forgot how to build ships in WWII. Not that I support her, but there is a fair amount of sense in this
    1. Liam
      Liam 22 June 2020 13: 12 New
      0
      Quote: Engineer
      The Germans defeated the British at sea in WWII more than once or twice

      Objectively, the British have melted everything that dared to leave German ports
      Quote: Engineer
      This is even without taking into account submarines.

      Starting from the achievement of technological superiority (including radars on airplanes, and again the decoding of Enigma), from the end of 42 / spring 43, the Doenica boys turned from hunters to whipping boys
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 22 June 2020 14: 08 New
        +1
        Objectively, the British have melted everything that dared to leave German ports

        We discussed fleets, and you give the results achieved by the entire British military machine imprisoned at sea, first of all, plus US assistance.
        The British fleet was especially effective and successful in sinking Tirpitz.
        The Germans carried out a landing operation in Norway, although this was considered impossible due to enemy dominance at sea
        The German fleet evacuated even in 1945 on an unprecedented scale.
        The Germans inflicted a lot of sensitive slap on the British fleet with much less strength.
        The Japanese are stronger than Italians, but they would still lose to the English fleet

        The 1942 campaign is very revealing. The British fleet escaped. Implemented a strategic retreat, so to speak. For even the "enlightened navigators" realized that there was no chance.
        1. Liam
          Liam 22 June 2020 19: 55 New
          -1
          Quote: Engineer
          We discussed fleets

          And who shoved almost all German battleships, pocket and non-pocket, heavy cruisers, staged genocide against German submariners and destroyers?)
          Quote: Engineer
          The German fleet evacuated even in 1945 on an unprecedented scale.

          Is it in the Baltic or what? What sea power was there to fight the Germans?)
          Quote: Engineer
          The Germans carried out a landing operation in Norway, although this was considered impossible due to enemy dominance at sea

          Which opponent? Neutral at the time of Norway?). Remind me what happened to Hipper, Karlsruhe, Koenigsberg, Luttsev, Blucher with the Holocaust of German destroyers at Narvik?
          Quote: Engineer
          Campaign 1942

          What% of the English fleet was in Asia in 1942?
          Quote: Engineer
          no chance.

          The Americans did not have any chances after PX, however, no one can deny that the Americans were stronger despite this defeat.
          And the Japanese fleet would not have shone so much after the initial effect of surprise. And inexorably moved from disaster to catastrophe over the following years.
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 20: 02 New
            0
            Quote: Liam
            Which opponent? Neutral at the time of Norway?). Remind me what happened to Hipper, Karlsruhe, Koenigsberg, Luttsev, Blucher with the Holocaust of German destroyers at Narvik?

            The Norwegians can only be credited with Blucher and the damage to Lyuttsov ...
            The rest is all British.
            What happened to "Hipper"?
            If you are talking about the Gloworm, then this is again a British ship.
            1. Liam
              Liam 22 June 2020 21: 02 New
              0
              Exactly, the German invasion fleet in Norway was defeated by the British, and if it weren’t for the operation in France, the Germans would be thrown out of Norway
            2. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 21: 12 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              And if not for the operation in France, the Germans would be kicked out of Norway

              War is a complex of decisions ...
              At that stage, the allies could not oppose him and lost.
            3. Liam
              Liam 22 June 2020 21: 54 New
              -1
              We are talking about fleets in this case. The Norwegian operation for Kriegsmarine is not a special reason for pride. The operation against a neutral country, sparsely populated, with a large practically unprotected territory, practically without a fleet and without aviation. And with all these starting conditions, there are huge losses
            4. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 22: 00 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              And with all these starting conditions, huge losses

              Let's look from the other side.
              The Norway sank the Blucher.
              The rest of the ships were sunk or damaged by aliens or by the British, who "fit" for the Norwegians?
              First, they framed by allowing the capture of "Altmark", and then fit in ...
            5. Liam
              Liam 22 June 2020 22: 08 New
              -1
              The British of course. I’m talking about the same thing. It went that the Italians and Germans didn’t really shine against the British at sea. It’s just because the British were above the class. And any special successes of the Germans in the naval war compared to the Italians are not visible. But for some reason only Italians find fault)
            6. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 22: 20 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              And some special successes of the Germans in the naval war in comparison with the Italians are not visible.

              Do the Italians see any special successes?
              Most of the major irretrievable British losses on the account of German aircraft or submarines.
              Again, I will leave the actions of the 10th flotilla of the MAS behind the scenes.
            7. Liam
              Liam 22 June 2020 22: 42 New
              0
              It depends what you mean by the actions of the fleet. You can only mean by this "shooting games" (for some reason, excluding the most successful and technologically advanced Italian unit from them, but for some reason leaving the German aviation ... although submarine saboteurs are certainly closer to the fleet than the Luftwaffe), but you can look not at the shooting games, but at the real goals of the fleet - the protection of communications. The Italian fleet, at least for 3 years, provided a large-scale theater of operations where there was a real war and through which a million soldiers and tens of thousands of pieces of equipment and weapons passed. All this had to be delivered to SevAfrica and supply with the necessary. And this is a continuous chain of convoys back and forth.
              It can’t boast of anything like Kriegsmarine. The Norwegian operation is the delivery of a pair of divisions with huge losses in the initial phase. And then these divisions did not fight at all and did not require supplies even close comparable to the African theater. Apart from countless Italian garrisons on the Greek islands and in general in the balkans
            8. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 23 June 2020 17: 50 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              .And this is a continuous chain of convoys back and forth.
              He can’t boast of anything like Kriegsmarine.

              You are confusing different entities: an operation to seize territory, which turned into a counter battle, and a supply "conveyor".
              The fact that the conveyor has worked for so long is not a merit of the Italians, but a shortage of the British.
            9. Liam
              Liam 23 June 2020 18: 37 New
              0
              Quote: Macsen_Wledig
              defect of the british

              An incomplete list of British losses in the Mediterranean during the period 1940-1942. In brackets, who drowned)

              1940

              Cruiser HMS Calypso (it.)

              8 submarines, the first of them is HMS Odin (it)

              Destroyer HMS Hostle (it)

              Heavy cruiser HMS Kent (um)

              1941

              Illustrius Aircraft Carrier (Germany)

              HMS Southampton Cruiser (germ)

              Heavy cruiser HMS York (um)

              Cruiser HMS Bonaventure (it)

              Destroyers HMS Aukland
              HMS Wertrum
              Hms defender
              HMS Vendetta (all sunk together it. And German aviation)
              In May-3 cruisers, 6 destroyers were sunk. Damaged are the Formidable aircraft carrier, 2 battleships, 5 cruisers, 8 destroyers (germans), an Italian-1 destroyer
              10 submarines for the entire 1941
              German submarine - Arc Royal aircraft carrier, battleship HMS Barham, cruiser HMS Galatea.
              Italian cruiser HMS Neptune, destroyer HMS Kandahar, damaged cruisers HMS Aurora and HMS Penelope
              Italian - battleship HMS Valiant
              battleship HMS Queen Elisabet
              1942

              From the beginning of the year to June, germ + ital.

              The destroyer HMS Maori + 3 destroyers in May + from June 12 to 16 -1 cruiser + 5 destroyers.
              The defeat of the English convoy (Operation Pedestal) from August 11 to 15 was sunk by the joint actions of aviation submarines of torpedo boats and surface fleets:
              Aircraft carrier EAGLE
              cruisers HMS Manchester, HMS Cairo, 1 destroyer, 10 transports from 15. Damaged-1 aircraft carrier, battleship HMS Rodney, 2 cruisers, 3 destroyers.
              Matapan wasn’t even nearby with the losses of the British in this operation.

              Ital. Cruiser HMS Coventry +2 destroyer -HMS Sikh and HMS Zulu

              Germ. 2 destroyer HMS Martin and HMS Isaac Sweers.

              By November 1942, the Italians, with the help of the Germans, held the Middle East confidently enough if that. The turning point came in 1943 with the entry into the game of the Americans
            10. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 23 June 2020 18: 40 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              Heavy cruiser HMS Kent (um)

              Can you find out the date of the sinking of the "Kent"?
            11. Liam
              Liam 23 June 2020 19: 06 New
              -1
              Not sunk. Heavily damaged on the night of September 17-18 by a torpedo from an Italian torpedo bomber
              SM79. Pilot - Carlo Emanuele Buscaglia. The stern was completely demolished. The destroyers were dragged in tow and then for a one-year repair to England.
            12. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 23 June 2020 19: 07 New
              0
              Quote: Liam
              Not sunk. Heavily damaged on the night of September 17-18 by a torpedo from an Italian torpedo bomber

              Then you need to separate the flies from cutlets ... :)
            13. Liam
              Liam 23 June 2020 19: 10 New
              -1
              I, as it were, translated and wrote by hand. Some inaccuracies are quite possible.
              The fact that Kent was not completely sunk but only tear off the stern, fundamentally changes the whole situation in the Mediterranean)
  • Liam
    Liam 23 June 2020 00: 58 New
    0
    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
    Do the Italians see any special successes?

    Out of sporting interest, I’ll try to calculate what losses the British had in the Mediterranean in 1940-42 and from whom. There are dozens and dozens of everything and everything. From aircraft carriers and battleships to cruisers and destroyers. The Atlantic was a quiet paradise in comparison with the Mediterranean Sea. during that period
  • Fyodor Demidovich
    Fyodor Demidovich 1 August 2020 01: 51 New
    0
    Quote: Macsen_Wledig

    The Norwegians can only be credited with Blucher and the damage to Lyuttsov ...
    The rest is all British.


    I would not write off the damage by the Norwegian coastal artillery of Konigsberg.
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig 1 August 2020 10: 26 New
    +1
    Quote: Fyodor Demidovich

    I would not write off the damage by the Norwegian coastal artillery of Konigsberg.

    I wouldn't do it either, but I forgot ... :)
  • Engineer
    Engineer 22 June 2020 20: 20 New
    0
    And who shoved almost all German battleships, pocket and non-pocket, heavy cruisers, staged genocide against German submariners and destroyers?)

    So I think who drowned Gneisenau, Tirpitz, Scheer, Lutzov, Eugen and Hipper, Blucher. Really great and terrible Royal Navi?
    And a pack of destroyers and destroyers who not without success fought already in 1944.
    Holocaust of German destroyers at Narvik?

    Heh, it would be better to recall the overall balance of losses at sea in the Norwegian operation
    What% of the English fleet was in Asia in 1942?

    4 aircraft carriers of which 3 new large and 6 battleships at Somerville in the spring of 42
    There were no chances for Americans after PX

    ???? After PX, the American fleet in a light version stopped the Japanese ice rink in one year.
    And the Japanese fleet would not have shone so much after the initial effect of surprise. And inexorably moved from disaster to catastrophe over the following years.

    So who is arguing. That's only in the rivals they had No. 1 capable of building not only aircraft carriers, but also aircraft for them. And also landings laughing

    Of course. This Teutonic masterpiece hid in different "holes" throughout the war). Italian ships even fought

    So for the Italians and did not run such a pack as for this prima.
    1. Liam
      Liam 22 June 2020 21: 25 New
      -1
      Quote: Engineer
      So i think

      After the bashing from the British, the entire surface fleet of Germans came under house arrest and burned uselessly in short dashes from one hole to another. The fate of Eugen is indicative. The biggest gunboat in the Baltic). The seediest Italian cruiser or destroyer was more useful and fought more
      Quote: Engineer
      4 aircraft carriers of which 3 new large and 6 battleships at Somerville in the spring of 42

      And how much is this from the entire English fleet? We compare globally fleets and not a separate part of them against the entire Japanese fleet. The Japanese were far away from the British as the seaman. The catastrophe near Midway and the subsequent showed huge problems with the strategy and tactics of war at sea. Attacking a sleeping base without declaring war is a one-time luck and not fundamental skill. And their main striking force - aircraft carriers - turned out to be flammable powder barrels that were enough for a couple of low-powered bombs on the deck to turn into pioneer bonfires. This indicates serious problems with the design school, too. The sad fate of the Japanese superlinkors is also indicative. In what the Japanese were stronger, as aviation and pilots, and then only in the initial period of the war. This is not enough to defeat the British.
      Do not forget that the Japanese fleet at the peak of power was enough to defeat Midway with the scraps of the US Pacific fleet without any combat experience, only 6 months after the PX.
      Let's talk about the failure of the full escort service and guarding their transports by the Japanese? The Americans sawed everything that was floating in Japan at 0, and this is one of the main tasks of the fleet. The British in this are from a different planet in comparison.
      Other issues such as resources - there’s nothing to compare at all.
      Quote: Engineer
      so hard as this prima

      So there was no one else to drown especially)
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 23 June 2020 11: 53 New
      0
      Quote: Liam
      And their main striking force, the aircraft carriers, turned out to be flammable powder barrels that were enough for a couple of low-powered bombs on the deck to turn into pioneer bonfires. This indicates serious problems with the design school, too.

      Any aircraft carrier is a barrel full of fuel and ammunition. In a similar situation, "Essex" in the same way needed one or two hits to go virtually irrevocable (formally they were put under repair, after which they were taken out of the active fleet into reserve).
      Quote: Liam
      Do not forget that the Japanese fleet at the peak of power was enough to defeat Midway with the scraps of the US Pacific fleet without any combat experience, only 6 months after the PX.

      Without experience, it's Hornet. Big E and especially Yorktown already had experience.
      Quote: Liam
      Let's talk about the failure of the full escort service and guarding their transports by the Japanese?

      And this is the result of an incorrectly chosen strategy. More precisely, the wrong assessment of the enemy. The calculation of the Japanese was on the quick surrender of the “pampered Yankees” after a series of defeats. In a quick war, convoy forces are not needed - the enemy, losing forward bases, simply will not be able to properly deploy the submarine and will not have time to inflict sufficient damage to the transport fleet.
      And due to the abandonment of escort ships, it is possible to build squadrons to further strengthen the fleet and inflict even greater defeat on the enemy, from which he will even more quickly request peace. smile
    3. Liam
      Liam 23 June 2020 14: 01 New
      0
      Quote: Alexey RA
      Any aircraft carrier is a barrel full of fuel and ammunition.

      On May 7, the light aircraft carrier Sokho was sunk. The next day, the Yorktown dive bombers hit the Shokaku aircraft carrier. But the Japanese K5 BXNUMXN torpedo bombers and Val dive bombers broke through to the American aircraft carrier, despite the tight fighter order and anti-aircraft fire. One of the bombs hit the flight deck, causing significant damage. Before bursting, the bomb pierced three decks. There were numerous fires that were extinguished, and the ship was able to return to Pearl Harbor for repair
      And then Midway
      . After the attack by diving bombers from the Hiru at Yorktown, a fire broke out and it lost its course. The fire was extinguished, and the aircraft carrier began to move at a speed of 18 knots. Only after two torpedo hits from the Japanese aircraft of the Hiru aircraft carrier did the ship finally fail. The aircraft carrier was badly damaged (lost speed and tilted by 27 °), left by the team, but remained afloat. By dawn on June 6, emergency groups liquidated the fires and started pumping water from the flooded compartments. The ship was towed to Pearl Harbor, guarded by seven destroyers, but the order was attacked by a Japanese submarine I-168, which fired four torpedoes. One of them fell into the middle of the Hamman destroyer, as a result of which it broke and sank almost instantly, while the other two hit the Yorktown. Yorktown sank the next morning
      Quote: Alexey RA
      And this is the result of a wrong strategy

      Exactly.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 23 June 2020 16: 00 New
      0
      Quote: Liam
      On May 7, the light aircraft carrier Sokho was sunk. The next day, the Yorktown dive bombers hit the Shokaku aircraft carrier. But the Japanese K5 BXNUMXN torpedo bombers and Val dive bombers broke through to the American aircraft carrier, despite the tight fighter order and anti-aircraft fire. One of the bombs hit the flight deck, causing significant damage. Before bursting, the bomb pierced three decks. There were numerous fires that were extinguished, and the ship was able to return to Pearl Harbor for repair

      In "Bunker Hill" were hit by two kamikaze - "Zero" with 250-kg bombs. The ship survived, but was no longer used as AB, and in 1947 it was withdrawn from the active fleet.
      The Franklin was hit by two 250 kg bombs. With similar consequences.
      So it all depends on where you go. In the case of "Akagi", "Kaga" and "Soryu", the situation was aggravated by the fact that they were completing rearmament and preparation for the departure of the second shock wave, and even the "conveyor" was working for refueling and replenishing the air defense missile unit Zero. If in their place were "Essex" - his fate would be the same.
    5. Liam
      Liam 23 June 2020 17: 46 New
      0
      I modestly remind you that just a 250 kg bomb and a kamikaze plane with a 250 kg bomb are slightly different things in terms of power).
      In the bottom line, none of the Essexes were sunk, although some suffered very serious injuries, and if you summarize everything that came to Yorktown in two battles, it’s enough to sink the entire aircraft carrier fleet of Japan), which went to the bottom almost on the first try. Chain of randomness-regularity
    6. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 23 June 2020 18: 19 New
      0
      Quote: Liam
      I modestly remind you that just a 250 kg bomb and a kamikaze plane with a 250 kg bomb are slightly different things in terms of power).

      Franklin had exactly "clean" bombs. AB type "Essex" lasted 2 x 250 kg.
      Quote: Liam
      And if you summarize everything that got to Yorktown in two battles, enough to sink the entire aircraft carrier fleet of Japan). Which went to the bottom almost on the first try.

      6th DAV would not agree with you. smile
      And three ABs from the 1st and 2nd DAV were simply not lucky. Real survivability can be estimated by "Hiryu" - 1-2 454-kg and 2-3 227-kg in the bow of AB (upper hangar hangar with 19 "Zero"). An hour and a half later, the notorious Dick Best, who returned to control the target, found that AB was on fire, but kept its course (28 knots).
  • Fyodor Demidovich
    Fyodor Demidovich 1 August 2020 01: 37 New
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA

    Any aircraft carrier is a barrel full of fuel and ammunition. In a similar situation, "Essex" in the same way needed one or two hits to go virtually irrevocable (formally they were put under repair, after which they were taken out of the active fleet into reserve).


    There is some difference between "just one or two hits were enough to go into non-return" and "once one of more than ten ships of this type that received combat damage from bombs, torpedoes or kamikaze, after being hit by two bombs They repaired 250kg, but decided to leave it in reserve, because the war ended, and with the other, such a decision was made after two kamikaze with 250kg bombs hit it ")
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 21: 27 New
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    Wake up

    Was the Eugen drowned?
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 23 June 2020 10: 39 New
    0
    Quote: Engineer
    So I think who drowned Gneisenau,

    Royal Navy. "Gnei" never recovered from the consequences of "Cerberus" - got up for repairs, from which he never left.
    Quote: Engineer
    Tirpitz

    Together RN and RAF. But the final point put Dambusters.
  • Engineer
    Engineer 23 June 2020 10: 54 New
    0
    I'm sorry, but nonsense. Both sunk by the bomber command. Even the mine that Gnei caught during Cerberus was from airplanes. Gnei is not sunk de facto, but incapacitated until the end of the war.
    GF fans stubbornly do not want to see how bombers did time after time what the fleet could not.
  • Fyodor Demidovich
    Fyodor Demidovich 3 August 2020 01: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Engineer

    4 aircraft carriers of which 3 new large and 6 battleships at Somerville in the spring of 42


    At the time of the only encounter with the Japanese, Sommerville had:
    two new large aircraft carriers
    air transport without air group
    4 of the oldest and weakest British battleships
    1 old British battleship

    And the defensive task that he had done.
  • Liam
    Liam 22 June 2020 19: 56 New
    -1
    Quote: Engineer
    The British fleet was especially effective and successful in sinking Tirpitz

    Of course. This Teutonic masterpiece hid in different "holes" throughout the war). Italian ships even fought
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Victor Leningradets
    Victor Leningradets 22 June 2020 13: 53 New
    0
    Thank you, Roman!
    The article, as they said in my time, is "ideologically correct" and the assessments are quite objective, and nevertheless:
    To say that "Condottieri B" is different from "Condottieri A" for the better for me is incorrect. As a vessel for maneuverability, stability and comfort for the crew - yes (and even then - insignificantly). And like battleships in a frenzy called cruisers - both series for their class are nothing.
    They would not have been saved by the semi-fantastic modernization of the air defense cruiser from the point of view of execution, nor by the efforts of alternative specialists to re-equip modern artillery.
    Their only possible use is a theater of operations on which the enemy fleet is practically absent. There they can come in handy for their good speed and main caliber.
    I am referring to the Black Sea, characteristic of the Black Sea Fleet operations of 1941-1942. Yes, it would be necessary to strengthen air defense and anti-mine equipment along the way, but the benefits of such ships instead of leaders and old cruisers are beyond doubt.
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 22 June 2020 19: 22 New
      0
      Quote: Victor Leningradets
      There they can come in handy for their good speed and main caliber.

      Is it you again that they had to be bought?
      1. Victor Leningradets
        Victor Leningradets 23 June 2020 10: 58 New
        0
        No, not about that.
        This is all just an opportunity for the sale. The answer is perhaps.
        It is more interesting to play a game with the four "Condottieri A" in the Black Sea Fleet. Here and raiding operations, and supply + artillery support of Sevastopol, and the Kerch-Feodosiya operation. I wonder if they could, with competent command, change the situation in the theater of operations?
        And what if the opposite: the fictitious sale of four Condottieri A and Giulio Cesare to Romania in exchange for German radars and full-fledged air support in the Mediterranean?
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 23 June 2020 12: 04 New
          +1
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          It is more interesting to play a game with the four "Condottieri A" in the Black Sea Fleet. There are raiding operations,

          With the same result - either they will catch a torpedo or fall into the sight of "pieces" of the 8th Air Corps. The fleet has neither long-range fighters in sufficient numbers (a squadron above ships requires a regiment on the shore), nor a ship's air defense.
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          and supply + artillery support of Sevastopol

          Again, all this will last until the arrival of the 8th air corps.
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          I wonder if they could, with competent command, change the situation on the theater of operations?

          The situation in the theater is determined by the actions of the army. The fleet of the inland sea in its operations is completely dependent on the army. If the army cannot keep Perekop and the Kerch Peninsula, the fleet is powerless here.
          1. Victor Leningradets
            Victor Leningradets 25 June 2020 09: 52 New
            0
            More attentively!
            I wrote: with competent command.
            And the appearance of four super-leaders in the Crimean operation allows the transfer of significant reinforcements, which casts doubt on Manshtein’s success (in the end, he was not the OKW prima in June 1942).
            Catching bombs and torpedoes is the result of the immobility of the target and the squalor of air defense. "A fireman with one 76-mm twin and then managed to fight back!
            So options are possible.
        2. strannik1985
          strannik1985 23 June 2020 13: 21 New
          0
          Yes, not about that.

          To do this, you need to win or draw in a border battle. German reserves (including the Luftwaffe) are stuck in Belarus / Ukraine, freer at the World Cup.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 23 June 2020 16: 04 New
            0
            Quote: strannik1985
            To do this, you need to win or draw in a border battle.

            I’m afraid that such a Soviet Union, which can draw a border battle with the Germans in a draw, doesn’t need Italian ships - it already has its own pr. 47 and pr. 68 ... and even pr. 69. smile
            1. strannik1985
              strannik1985 23 June 2020 17: 13 New
              0
              I'm afraid that such a USSR

              Easy - the fleet once again drove past the budget laughing
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 23 June 2020 17: 37 New
                0
                Quote: strannik1985
                Easy - the fleet once again drove past the budget

                And then where did he get the money to buy ships in Italy? And not just money, but foreign currency.
                So in this case, the Italians remain at home. smile
                1. strannik1985
                  strannik1985 23 June 2020 18: 47 New
                  0
                  So in this case, the Italians remain at home.

                  It seems to me that they wouldn’t sell the whole series of cruisers for money wink Easier to leave out of scope.
                2. Victor Leningradets
                  Victor Leningradets 25 June 2020 09: 41 New
                  0
                  The Italians did not participate in the golden blockade of the USSR.
        3. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 23 June 2020 17: 53 New
          0
          Quote: Victor Leningradets
          And what if the opposite: the fictitious sale of four Condottieri A and Giulio Cesare to Romania in exchange for German radars and full-fledged air support in the Mediterranean?

          Indicate the date ... :)
          1. Victor Leningradets
            Victor Leningradets 25 June 2020 09: 44 New
            0
            Summer 1940 After the accession of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina to the USSR.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 25 June 2020 14: 36 New
              0
              Quote: Victor Leningradets
              Summer 1940 After the accession of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina to the USSR.

              For Italy, this is the beginning of the African campaign and the fight at Punto Steel. And something, I doubt that after the Supermarine clashed with Royal Navy on the Mediterranean, the Italians would sell ships to their fleet to someone.
              1. Victor Leningradets
                Victor Leningradets 26 June 2020 09: 42 New
                0
                The assistant professor will order - they will sell.
                However, this is obviously a fantasy. If the sale in 1938 - 1939. Four Condottieri A is mutually beneficial, then a fictitious (ie, without financial receipts, and even with sending trained crews to the Black Sea) sale in 1940 to Romania is not beneficial to anyone. And for Hitler, this is a gesture unmasking the preparation of "Barabarossa".
  • The comment was deleted.