Military Review

Myths of Tsushima

479
Myths of Tsushima

We must start with the fact that all the information has been posted long ago. And it's not secret.


Letters and diaries of the participants of the campaign. Their testimony to the commission of inquiry and in court. For amateurs - even Japanese documents ...

There are tons of papers (note, long ago digitized). You just need to read and think about them.

Not Soviet memoirs of the 30s from Kostenko and Novikov. Not yet imperial - Semyonova. And the testimony of people who were responsible for their words. And it was extremely difficult to lie to them.

In those days, they approached the matter responsibly. And hundreds of people were interviewed: from sailors to admirals. So what is said in the testimony is true. More precisely, how the participants saw it.

And the Japanese plans were published long ago. And they are also not secret.

So what about the myths.

The first myth. Wrong way


The first is the wrong choice of the breakout path.

In fact, the choice of the path itself was obvious. Due to the fact that the only target of the squadron could be only Vladivostok.

It can be accessed by three routes - the straits of Tsushima, Sangarsky and La Perouse. Being in Mozampo, about which Rozhestvensky was aware, the Japanese controlled all three routes.

Rozhestvensky himself says the obvious in his testimony:

“I decided to break through the Korean Strait, not the Sangar Strait, because a breakthrough by the latter would present more navigational difficulties and would be fraught with great dangers.

In view of the fact that the Japanese publications secured themselves the right to resort to the use of floating mines and obstacles in suitable places in that strait. And because the relatively slow movement of the squadron to the Sangar Strait would certainly have been accurately tracked down by the Japanese and their allies.

And the breakthrough would be blocked by the same concentrated forces of the Japanese fleetwhich were opposed to our squadron in the Korea Strait.

As for the passage in May from Annam to Vladivostok through the La Perouse Strait, it seemed to me absolutely impossible: having lost some of the ships in the fogs and having suffered from accidents and wrecks, the squadron could be paralyzed by a lack of coal and become an easy prey for the Japanese fleet. "

Madness to climb into Sangary. There are fogs and navigational hazards in La Perouse, which was proved by the fate of the captured "Oldgamia".

In the event of an accident of any ship of the squadron during the passage of the Kuril ridge or in the strait itself, just throw it. It is good if the transport.

And if Borodinets?

And if there are several?

In addition, in the end, it was still a battle, having a network of observation posts and fifty auxiliary cruisers and relying on a powerful basing system, the Japanese would intercept the squadron anyway.

The Tsushima Strait made it possible to try to play cat and mouse with the enemy, which was done - by sending empty transports to Shanghai, and by raiding auxiliary cruisers, and deliberately delaying the transition time.

It didn't work out. Not finalized.

But there was a chance.

The second myth. Distraction of forces


If the old ships were sent around ...

That would have lost the old ships.

Then there would be a picture - Zinovy ​​arrives in Vladivostok with 5 battleships, 6 cruisers and that's it.

We pay for this breakthrough with 3 battleships, an armored cruiser, three coastal defense battleships, two armored frigates, nine destroyers and transports. Knowing the results of the battle is fine. But on the squadron, either the crystal balls were outdated, or out of order ...

In short, ditching a large part of the squadron to save a smaller one did not seem like a smart idea.

Similarly, send a squad to make some noise off the coast of Japan.

They sent him.

The only ocean-going ships capable of both shooting and leaving are auxiliary cruisers. There were no other ones with decent speed and high autonomy.

Did not work.

I will even agree - it could not come out.

What about the alternatives?

Send slugs for slaughter? Tear off the Oslyabya squadron? Or drive both modern cruisers of the 1st rank, leaving the squadron without cover?

And if it doesn’t work out?

The third myth. Wok



Now, if "Russia" and "Thunderstorm" came ...

Well, first of all, would you come?

The previous blind rendezvous attempt ended with a date with Kamimura and the drowning of "Rurik", there is no direct connection.

If you inform in advance, there is a chance that the Japanese will find out about the plans.

Secondly, what's the point?

It's stupid to put two huge raiders in a line. It is pointless to pass it on to Enquist.

Whereas the risk of two relatively modern serviceable ships takes place.

And they are needed in case of a successful breakthrough and continuation of the war. And the elementary thing - to meet and cover the damaged ships must be present.

No documents.

But the logic is clearly visible.

The fourth myth. Intelligence service


Now, if they sent intelligence ...

Admiral's word:

“In their opinion, in order to remain true to the eternal youthful principle of surprise, when a slow-moving squadron breaks through a narrow area, knowingly defended by the strongest fleet, operating in connection with nearby coastal observation stations and strongpoints and sending a chain of scouts into the sea,

I should have sent the same chain no less than a hundred miles ahead of the squadron, so that this chain, suddenly falling on the enemy reconnaissance, would let the second squadron know by wireless telegraph about the location of the enemy reconnaissance,

at least ten hours earlier than the enemy chain could itself open the squadron, which was marching without scouts (if the squadron had gone without scouts). "

The thin chain would come out.

As much as one long-range scout with problem vehicles ...

"Aurora" is a slug, "Svetlana" is also. Pebbles are still invented for another, and autonomy ...

Well, okay, they sent, found, so what?

And so it is clear - the Japanese are here, attacking during the day, and then at night. You cannot pass unnoticed in narrowness. And what to scout then?

About "collapsing" - funny. An attempt to collapse would have resulted in the death of the cruisers. The Japanese have stupidly more ships of this class. At comparable speeds.

The fifth myth. Speed



Honestly, we got the tales about a column with transports, because of which the stroke was 9 knots.

Firstly, there were no transports or cruisers with destroyers in the line column. They walked separately. And they did not interfere with the main forces.

Secondly, 9 knots is the average speed of the squadron in the hospital.

And the participants saw the reasons differently:

“12 o'clock. 20 minutes. signal from Suvorov:

"I and II armored detachments have 11 knots in motion, turn sequentially 8 points to the right."

After 5 minutes from "Suvorov":

"II armored detachment (F) course NO 23 °" ...

From 1 hour 30 min. - from the haze to the right on the nose, the silhouettes of enemy battleships immediately appear. The leader is Mikaza, followed by Fuji, Shikishima, Asahi, armored cruisers: Kasuga, Nissin.

They are walking in one wake column, intending to cut our nose from right to left.

The distance to them is more than 70 cables; one can distinguish between their topmast and gaffer flags.

The admiral raises the signal:

"Have 11 knots to move."

And transmits the semaphore along the line:

"68 turns".

Here are excerpts from the testimony of the officers of the "Eagle". As you can see, there was no constant speed during maneuvering from 8 to 11 knots. No other way:

“On the 15th, the stroke of Apraksin was 11 knots, despite the fact that the machines worked at 110, and sometimes 115 revolutions;

such a bad move was because the bow section of the battleship was flooded, and he drilled heavily in the water;

I think that without a flooded bow compartment, he could give up to 12 knots. "

BBOs did not pull more than 12, and even those:

“There were no stops due to damage in the car (both during the battle and during the entire campaign), although every minute was expected during the battle, since the bearings, due to the long absence of repairs during the transitions and the general misalignment of the shafts, not eliminated during the equipping in Libau, they knocked heavily, due to which there was every minute the fear that the filling of the bearings would not withstand, break and stop the operation of the entire machine.

The non-stop operation of the machine had to be supported only by extremely strenuous artificial measures, such as strong lubrication, washing with warm water, flooding, etc., and one minute of oversight could ruin the whole thing. "

According to the chief mechanic of the battleship "Senyavin" KIM Fleet Lieutenant Yavorovsky, with difficulty. "Sisoy the Great" was quicker, if you believe his chief engineer Colonel Borovsky:

“The main mechanisms, auxiliary, tower, electrical for dewatering turbines and boilers were quite serviceable in battle on May 14.

The only drawback was the leakage of the refrigerator tubes, which had no effect on the course of the battleship - the machines worked without failure.

Since the battleship was overloaded during the battle, I think at 6 ", the most complete move could be no more than 14½ knots."

It could accelerate up to 14 knots for a short time. Constantly, it means, one or two less.

Borodintsy were the smartest of all:

“I think that the fullest speed, under all favorable conditions, with the use of the best screened coal and replacing tired stokers with another shift, could give (before getting a hole and water on the decks) - no more than 15-16 knots”.

14 knots were held easily.

Well, except for Borodino itself. The result is the maximum 12, squadron 10-11, which actually was without any transports.

Sixth myth. There was no battle plan


It reads:

“Order No. 243 dated May 10, 1905. Pacific Ocean.

Be ready for battle hourly.

In battle, battleships should bypass their damaged and straggled forward matelots.

If the Suvorov is damaged and unable to be controlled, the fleet must follow the Alexander, if the Alexander is damaged, then the Borodino, the Eagle.

At the same time, "Alexander", "Borodino", "Eagle" are guided by signals from "Suvorov" until the Commander's Flag is moved or until the Junior Flagship takes over.

The destroyers of Squad I are obliged to vigilantly monitor the Flagship battleships: if the Flagship battleship gets banked, or out of order and ceases to be controlled, the destroyers rush to approach to receive the Commander and the Headquarters.

The destroyers "Bedovy" and "Bystry" should be in constant readiness to approach the "Suvorov" for this purpose, the destroyers "Buyny" and "Bravom" - to other Flagship battleships.

The destroyers of Squad II are charged with the same duty in relation to the cruisers Oleg and Svetlana.

The flags of the Commander will be transferred to the corresponding destroyers until it becomes possible to transfer them to a battleship or cruiser. "

We also read:

“In the future, I prescribe to carry out zeroing of the head in each detachment simultaneously, if the enemy is under fire, or sequentially, as the enemy comes into fire.

When zeroing in, one should, without throwing the first shell, to throw the second one and, if the first one lay to the right, then by all means put the second to the left ...

Having taken the target at least in a wide fork, you should dispose of the third shot after thinking.

... For the future, I strictly forbid, both in training and in battle, to throw 12 "bombs without having corrected data 15 minutes before the shot."

And we also read:

Order No. 29 dated January 10, 1905.

“Our seven battleships with Nakhimov, seven cruisers with Almaz, seven destroyers and armed transports are a very great force.

If God blesses with a meeting with the enemy in battle, then it is necessary to take care of the combat reserves - not to throw them uselessly.

The signal will indicate the number of the enemy ship, according to the score from the lead in the wake or from the right flank in the front. The fire of the whole squad should be focused on this number, if possible.

If there is no signal, then, following the flagship, fire is concentrated, if possible, on the lead or flagship of the enemy.

The signal can also target a weak ship in order to more easily achieve a result and create confusion.

So, for example, when approaching with collision courses and after concentrating fire on the head, a number can be indicated to which the action should be directed by all artillery of the first (lead) squadron of the squadron, while the second detachment will continue to operate on the originally chosen target.

In all cases, if the distance is more than 30 cables, you should not open fire to everyone all of a sudden: you can’t take aim, you cannot tell where the shells are falling.

Let him begin zeroing at long distances always with the head on collision courses and the end on courses directed in one direction, if they are closer to the enemy, but let them not hesitate to show the distance and deviation of the rear sight of 6 "guns, as soon as they begin to put shells close."

There was no single document for idiots, whom Zinovy ​​did not consider junior flagships and caperangs to.

There was a set of instructions for subordinates. The last one was four days before the fight.

Citation can be continued, everything is written down.

Another question is that a lot of plans are on the conscience of junior flagships. But this did not work out - Baer died from the Oslyabya, not having time to give orders. And Nebogatov refrained from responsibility, although he had all the rights:

"Order No. 231 (dated April 27.04.1905, XNUMX)

In the event that the enemy meets while the squadron is following, in the afternoon, in marching order, I prescribe to be guided by my order of January 22 of this year. for No. 66 with the following addition:

The III armored detachment, maneuvering at the signals of its flagship, in all cases hurries to join the main forces, increasing the course for this as much as possible with the available number of boilers, and spreading pairs in the rest.

If the enemy in large forces appears from behind, then he must restrain his onslaught and cover the transports until the arrival of the main forces.

The procedure for maneuvering a detachment to the right, left, forward or backward from the marching formation, depending on the place of appearance of the enemy, has now to be developed and announced by the commander of the III armored detachment.

However, as well as from the development of instructions.

But at the trial he cut a fool. And he began to prove that he was in the house:

“There was no battle plan or instructions regarding its conduct; generally,

what intentions Admiral Rozhdestvensky had - that was completely unknown to me. "

That the truth is easy to understand - the capital punishment as a sentence did not suit Nebogatov. And I had to blame someone else. It is stupid for the Japanese, and suicidal for yourself. The commander remained.

Myths can be destroyed further.

They are all built on the same foundation - knowledge of what happened.

But even on May 13, 1905, no one on the squadron could even imagine this total.

And they acted accordingly - they were preparing for a breakthrough with the loss of several ships and for an artillery battle at long distances based on the Yellow Sea. For such a battle, a concentration of fire from heavy guns is needed - it was provided by combat in a single column, with a concentration of fire in detachments, paying increased attention to the controllability of the squadron.

Again, it didn't work out.

Is Rozhdestvensky guilty of this?

Like any commander, he is guilty.

Could he have done otherwise?

Based on his knowledge and experience, no.

Could someone else have done better?

Of course not.

This required a different fleet and state.

There are no guilty persons in tragedies.
Author:
479 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 25 February 2021 04: 05
    +9
    And the Japanese plans were published long ago. And they are also not secret.
    I don’t know ... I’m used to hearing that Japanese documents of the RYAV remain classified. And their "history of action at the Meiji Sea" is a false construct recourse
    1. Dmitry Trumpcard
      Dmitry Trumpcard 27 February 2021 08: 53
      0
      "Secret History" was also declassified and published
      1. geniy
        geniy 1 March 2021 22: 24
        +1
        The author of this article is a shameless deceiver who is trying to pull an owl onto the globe in an attempt to whitewash Admiral Rozhdestvensky. For example, the first deception of Roman Ivanov: "There are tons of papers (I note, long ago digitized)." They say everything is known to everyone. And I believe that only that which describes the events has been published, without the main technical details, especially artillery. For example, take a book by senior artilleryman Dmitriev from the battleship "Admiral Ushakov". As you know, this is an absolutely heroic ship, and Dmitriev himself is also a hero. But if you read his book, you will not find in it the slightest description of how the aiming of these guns and the organization of firing was carried out! And in general, in all the considerable historical literature there is no reliable description of the organization of the aiming of guns in the RYAV !!
        Would take the author of this article by the genitals and tie them with a tight knot, and kindly ask around: how did the ship's guns actually aim at the RYA? That is - everyone knows that there were battle dials - but how exactly the gunners of each gun were aiming - either they looked at the bursts of falling of their shells, or raised the barrels of the guns to an elevation angle looking at the battle dials. And why do you need a telescopic sight at the gun? And how exactly did they look into this optical sight if it had a full viewing angle of only 7 degrees, and therefore the optical axis of the sight from the shackles by 3,5 degrees - but this means that the Battleships of the Borodino type all the time of the battle were marching with a roll of 6-7 degrees - their gunners didn’t see anything in their sights at all!
        And how exactly did the sights work - were they rigidly attached to the gun mount, or to the barrel? Because if the sight is attached to the gun barrel, then with constant changes in the firing distance, the vertical elevation angle is constantly changing, which means that the optical axis of the sight also goes back and forth with it. And as a matter of fact, there was a sight installer in the servant of the gun. And if the sight is attached to the gun mount, how was the guidance carried out during the roll of the ship, because the gunner would not even see the sea level? And how the moment of the shot was actually determined - if at least one of you remembers physics, then the rocking of the ship is, in principle, ordinary vibrations, and the vibrating body (the ship and the weapon itself and each sight) passes the equilibrium position with accelerated speed (that is, when it at zero roll angle) and freezes slightly at the limiting roll angles? So at what point was it prescribed to shoot - when did the gun barrel rise or fall during the roll?
        Answer me, but not with your stupid reasoning, but with the exact phrase from the documents, of which you allegedly have a lot. BUT do not try to deceive me, I am absolutely sure that none of you, and even more so the author of this stupid article, has never seen with a single eye the documents on the organization of aiming from ship guns!
        1. your1970
          your1970 April 22 2021 23: 17
          +1
          Did you "dokolupalis" to the author or to the memoirs of Dmitriev ?? !!
          Quote: geniy
          But if you read his book, you will not find in it the slightest description of how the aiming of these guns and the organization of firing was carried out!

          He was obliged, according to yours, to dump on the reader's head, how strange it is, but NOT to the artilleryman technical instructions ???? Memoirs are not written in order to tell the reader- ".... After pressing button 62, pull on string 3 which will cause aberation of the solarium axis, followed by pressing the gaberfish to 3/4 ....".
          And if you want to know technical questions - these are not in memoirs - they are for you in instructions and textbooks of those times ...
          1. geniy
            geniy April 23 2021 09: 31
            -1
            Did you "dokolupalis" to the author or to the memoirs of Dmitriev ?? !!

            God bless him with Dmitriev! He was the only one in Tsushima! I ask - where are all these "tons of digitized information" but not empty talk about who saw what, but consideration of the most important technical issues that I mentioned. You tried to get me away somehow. And you yourself can answer at least one of my questions? So you are not the only one - everyone who grazes here, in fact, does not understand a whitewash! And they will not be able to answer a single technical question.
            1. your1970
              your1970 April 23 2021 15: 57
              0
              Quote: geniy
              You tried to get me away somehow.

              Why do you think so? I wrote that it is quite possible and probably necessary to delve into the jungle of the depths of technical subtleties, only one and a half people in the whole country will read this. Well, we do not have artillerymen in our country with pre-revolutionary experience ...
              And for the average military man and even a civilian, this is all far away ...
              We still call revolvers Nagans lol

              Once in Moscow in the library I took a book of 1903 - so before me it was taken once in 1931, and that's it ...
              Need to digitize it? It is necessary !!!!!!
              Urgently? Of course not .......
              Likewise, your royal textbooks on naval shooting are a rarity, but nobody needs them for nothing as a source of information that is too outdated ...
              1. geniy
                geniy April 24 2021 07: 50
                0
                I wrote that to delve into the jungle of the depths of technical subtleties
                But the point is not to go deeper into the jungle of technical subtleties - they say, it does not matter who and how for which cord pulled. In fact, the most important thing is classified - just amazing things. For example, I noticed that the cruiser Varyag had a photographic laboratory, and it was on Aurora, and on Ochakovo too. And this means that most likely the darkroom was on all Russian warships without exception! And moreover, perhaps a darkroom, as you know, photography was invented decades before the RYA, and moreover - in 1895 filming was invented - 10 years before Tsushima! And I'm sure that all the Russian officers knew about filming and some were doing it. That is, during the RYAV, filming was necessarily carried out from all Russian ships. But not only Russians - but Japanese too! Moreover, the kilograms of film must have been sent to the leadership of the fleet. This means that the entire battle in the Yellow Sea and Tsushima was filmed from dozens of ships. And not only Tsushima - but in general all small fights. And of course, not only RYAV, but the entire First World War and the Second World War - was filmed from ships on film.
                BUT ALL THIS IS CRUELY CLASSIFIED! And the author of this article shamelessly writes:
                all the information has been posted long ago. And not secret

                That would take all of you - such good "history experts" with red-hot tongs and torture until you admit that you know nothing about the existence of photography and filming on warships. But not because you are all so stupid and seem to have read and read those books a little, but because a HUGE PLAST of military history is kept secret from everyone. Of course, I could ask you about what orders dark laboratories were located on Russian ships - but you still don't know anything, because these orders are still absolutely secret. And your meanness - I mean all the so-called "experts in history" that you even refuse to talk about these secret secrets. And this applies not only to photographic laboratories - in fact, there are a lot of these amazing secrets of the fleet. But you cannot be forced to talk about it - only under torture can you confess that you do not know anything about the most important things of military equipment, and not about some minor insignificant details.
                1. your1970
                  your1970 April 26 2021 07: 48
                  0
                  Quote: geniy
                  And I'm sure that
                  all Russian officers knew about filming and some were doing it. That is, during the ROE with all Russian ships necessarily filming was carried out.

                  Yeah, and then they cut and sent the videos to Tiktok ... fool
                  You are out of assumption about theoretical (!!!!) the possibility of officers' knowledge of filming - made a conclusion about mandatory (!!!) filming .. That is, pulled by the ears to your dreams - the facts ...
                  So you can write that since one of the officers in the RI army heard about the Sklodowska-Curie experiments, it means that everything in WWII Russia had a nuclear bomb, or ... belay

                  Even after 40 (FORTY !!!!) years - in WWII - filming of military actions is not enough ... And a lot - staged ..
                  There are no cinematographers on the staff, no ...
                  1. geniy
                    geniy April 26 2021 21: 47
                    -1
                    I have no desire to prove anything to you personally. But I hope to create an overtone window - that is, to slightly shake the mind and sow doubt. And maybe out of a thousand readers, at least one or two people will think about this topic, and then they will begin to figure it out on their own.
                    This means that the essence of the topic is that huge layers of information are classified in naval history. And not only in Russia, but in all countries with a navy. That is, England, Germany, USA, France, Italy, Japan and, in general, all the fleets of the world, without exception.
                    And the principles of guidance of naval guns and mechanisms of firing a shot are kept secret from the public. And the filming is classified along the way. Nobody set out to shoot the course of any naval battle for history - initially, photography was apparently intended only to verify the results of artillery exercises.
                    And I asked my questions initially only about artillery. Do not think that I was just waiting for someone to answer - I don't need your answers. After all, I say that this whole topic is tightly classified, and none of you knows the truth. And the only thing you are all doing here is avoiding answers by any means - most often by silence. And this author of the original article - Roman Ivanov - he pretended that my questions did not apply to him and fell into silence - but there is nothing to answer! And no one answered at all! There is such a famous Andrey from Chelyabinsk - a few years ago I also asked him questions to convict him of ignorance - but not because he is stupid - no, he is very smart, but he does not understand that there are some topics that are tightly classified.
                    So - a fundamentally important question that I am asking you: is the topic of photography in the Navy classified or not?
                    Or do you think that no photographs were taken on the ships at all?
                    And the fact that there are no cameramen on the staff of the ships is well known to me. That's just done out of secrecy. By the way, curiously enough, I saw the list of the crew of the battleship Eagle - not only the cameramen, but even the ship's commander himself is not on the staff! And the staff of the battleship Eagle was supposed to be 754 people, but in reality 828-837. Can you tell us what exactly these supernumerary were doing? That is, I do not expect an answer from you, but hint that there may be cameramen among supernumerary ones. And if you start waving in front of my nose the list of the crew of any ship in the state, then do not forget that all these lists are fake.
                    1. your1970
                      your1970 April 27 2021 12: 37
                      0
                      Quote: geniy
                      And if you start waving in front of my nose the list of the crew of any ship in the state, then do not forget that all these lists are fake.

                      And you at Rezun-Suvorov apparently have a course of listening lectures .... The same cliches - "everything is classified, the states are fake ..."
                      Who will secret documents MASSIVE (!!!) use 150 (!!!!!!) years ago ????????
                      I hope you understand that the release of gunners from the Navy schools was not a piece of cake all over the world at the end of the 19th century ?? That all the gunners participating in the battles of the RYAV were born at least in 1875-1880 ?? That the textbooks released then were outdated by WWI due to the sharp development of technology at the turn of the century and they were simply thrown out? !!! Into the junk - how completely unsuitable for training?
                      What goof will keep something secret in states - which no longer exist nine (!!!) years (RI, Germany, Austria-Hungary) ????
    2. Silvio
      Silvio 27 February 2021 11: 00
      +2
      And yet, Zinovy ​​did not cut his dead chance to pass through Tsushima with the whole caravan. Five matelots could pass and even damage the main forces of Togo. But the rest of the ancient and slow-moving ones would have gone around to Korsakov and bunker there. It's easy to get lost in those fogs. Kutuzov always remembered who he was dealing with, so he crushed Bonaparte. Although I ran away from him, I waited for my chance. Zinov's mediocrity and nothing can be done about it.
  2. smart fellow
    smart fellow 25 February 2021 04: 11
    +9
    There was such an admiral Li Sun Xing, who with 13 ships entered the battle with 333 Japanese and won.
    1. saigon
      saigon 25 February 2021 05: 28
      +12
      Other times, other ships, everything else.
      Lee Sun Xing smashed the Japanese with enviable consistency, not once or twice.
      True, it is worth noting the Japanese at that time did not have artillery on their ships, unlike the Koreans.
      1. smart fellow
        smart fellow 18 March 2021 12: 02
        0
        Based on the 104-episode South Korean drama "The Immortal Naval Commander", Lee Sung Shin has 27 victories over the Japanese and no defeat. The Japanese tactics came from pirates - suppression of the enemy with musket fire and boarding. There were no guns. But after a series of defeats in naval battles from the Koreans, the Japanese began to install 2 guns each on the bow of the ship. They took captured guns from the captured Korean fortresses, but could not install them along the side. they broke their ships when fired. Korean military ships - phonaxons were flat-bottomed unlike the Japanese ones and sailed along the coast. it was dangerous to go to the open sea on them. But on the other hand, they were stronger than the Japanese and better suited for battles in the coastal zone.
    2. Astra wild2
      Astra wild2 25 February 2021 09: 07
      +3
      And it will not be difficult for you to say: in what century was it?
      1. BAI
        BAI 25 February 2021 11: 09
        +3
        In 16.
        https://pikabu.ru/story/pobeda_pokoreyski_li_sun_sin_protiv_yapontsev_5740219
        And on VO it was:
        https://topwar.ru/31413-genialnyy-admiral-li-sun-sin.html
        But we must understand that there was no particularly major defeat: the Japanese lost 30 (out of 333) ships and left. And the ships of the Koreans and the Japanese were very different.
        Well, the strong currents helped the Koreans - the Japanese had weak (not strong) ships (133 combat and 200 transports).
        1. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 25 February 2021 11: 33
          +3
          In short, a bunch of terms, and as a result, the victory of the Koreans
          1. BAI
            BAI 25 February 2021 11: 35
            +2
            Yes, it should also be taken into account that the Japanese did not have experienced sailors, and the hydrological situation was difficult.
        2. smart fellow
          smart fellow 18 March 2021 12: 25
          0
          31 Japanese ships were sunk, 92 ships were out of order. 18644 Japanese soldiers were killed. Series 96 "Immortal Naval Commander".
          Численность команды одного пханоксона https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BD
          was 125 people, i.e. 1625 Korean sailors on 13 ships.
          As for the Japanese military and transport ships, the difference is not clear. The main weapon of the Japanese in naval combat was boarding, although later the Japanese began to install 2 captured Korean guns on the ship. On board the Japanese ships was a 75-strong army to capture Seoul and the soldiers of this army could act as boarding teams - in fact, the Japanese did so throughout the war.
      2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 11: 19
        +1
        Quote: Astra wild2
        And it will not be difficult for you to say: in what century was it?

        At the turn of the 15-16 centuries!
        The Koreans used turtle ships (kobuxons).

        The first image is a turtle (although it was drawn two centuries after the Japanese-Korean wars).

        Modern renovation.
        1. BAI
          BAI 25 February 2021 11: 40
          +3
          Yes, apparently, the Koreans did not have "turtles" in that battle:
          Won Gyun first slept through the landing of the Japanese invading army and then marched into the Japanese combined fleet at the head of 169 beautiful Korean ships with experienced crews. Only now he was not Li Sung Xing. The defeat of the Korean fleet was monstrous. Only returned from the battle 10 ships, among which there was not one of the seven once invincible "turtle ships"... failed - and he was shortened by the head.
          In a panic, the court urgently pulled Li Sung Sing out of the army, returned him the admiral's post and demanded to immediately save the dynasty and the country. True, due to the efforts of the court appointees, only a few ships remained from the fleet. But ... "you are a communist!"
          Nothing to do. The admiral patched up the remaining ships, hscraped together three more, and with this formidable armada set off to meet the main forces of the Japanese fleet in the Myonnian Strait, which is distinguished by extremely turbulent and unpredictable currents with an abundance of whirlpools. At the northern end of the strait, Li Sung Xing put out thirteen of his ships at anchor in a thin black line so as not to be carried away.
          1. smart fellow
            smart fellow 18 March 2021 12: 32
            0
            Admiral Won Gyun was killed in action. 12 phanoxons survived. Li Sung Xing was accused of cowardice by the king, brutally tortured and demoted to the ranks of the soldiers.
            In the drama "Immortal Naval Commander", Lee Sung Sin and Won Kyung were best friends and began their military careers as cavalry commanders, fought with the Jurchens on the border.
        2. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 25 February 2021 11: 44
          +3
          The turtle looks impressive, but let's make allowances for: "two centuries later" and oriental habits of brightness. I will not be surprised at all if it turns out that the Japanese fleet was commanded by some kind: "bearer, guardian, of the sacred fan" or some other magnificent title. A magnificent title is not yet a guarantee of knowledge. Perhaps his knowledge of maritime affairs was like that of my "girlfriend" in pistols or my cat Puzik in geometry
          1. smart fellow
            smart fellow 18 March 2021 12: 33
            0
            You're wrong.
            1. Astra wild2
              Astra wild2 18 March 2021 19: 13
              0
              Do you exclude that the head of the Japanese squadron was not a professional? Or do you think the "turtle" looked like that?
              1. smart fellow
                smart fellow 18 March 2021 21: 10
                0
                The first battle in the Imjin War was the storming of the Busan fortress. In 3 hours the Japanese took the fortress and killed 3 thousand soldiers and 2 thousand townspeople who were helping the soldiers to defend the walls of the fortress. The Japanese started the war with Korea after the end of the many years of civil war in Japan, and all Japanese generals naturally participated in it. Some (modern) historians write that after the civil war, it was necessary to put somewhere 100000 samurai who lived in war, and they decided to send them to fight. The Japanese learned to wield a sword from the age of 7, and a teenager, as the hero of the drama "The Immortal Naval Commander" says, could defeat 10 soldiers in battle with a sword.

                The Japanese fleet was commanded by the same generals who, in a few days, marched all over Korea in battle. In the first phase of the battle, the admiral's ship Li Sung-sin was attacked by a squadron of Japanese pirates, who several times took it on board, but the Koreans threw them overboard. The rest of the ships entered the battle later, when the time came for a reversal of the tide.
                The Myeongryan Strait has a peculiarity in that the current in it changes direction twice during the day. Here you need to understand that the Japanese were not just watched over in the strait. The date and place was appointed by Lee Sung Xing a few days in advance. The Japanese chose the time when the current favored them and reached the greatest strength. Korean ships were at anchor. Li Sung Sin had to hold out for 3 hours and when the current changed direction, he ordered an offensive. In these conditions, when a third of the ships were sunk or out of order, and the current was against them, the Japanese commanders ordered to retreat, and this was quite reasonable. The Korean ships were in a fist, and the Japanese were mixed in a heap.

                In the battle in the Myeongryang Strait, the Kobuxons did not participate - they were all previously destroyed by the Japanese (look in the comments of Won Gyun) - there were 12 phanoxons who survived the defeat of the Korean fleet and one arrived from Seoul with an order from Lee Sung Sin to lead the Korean fleet and defeat the Japanese on sea.
                1. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 19 March 2021 11: 12
                  0
                  I didn't know that. But in fairness: Seoul has never been the Japanese capital.
                  1. smart fellow
                    smart fellow 19 March 2021 21: 00
                    0
                    The capital of Japan was then Kyoto, Seoul was the capital of Joseon.
                    Now the capital of Japan is Tokyo, and Seoul is the capital of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
    3. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 11: 15
      +8
      unfortunately Rozhdestvensky was neither a strategist nor a tactician, he just walked, but needed an analysis of forces, and the development of tactical techniques in accordance with the situation ... and now there are people who are going to stupidly project force, that is, sit on AV where- then go without analyzing either their own capabilities of the enemy, or the means of defeat and ensuring this or that action ... and if someone explains to them the impossibility of their ideas, then they viciously minus, but these pink ponies are not able to think and understand the obvious ... Apparently Rozhdestvensky was one of those, and such parquet admirals hacked Makarov's sensible idea and squeezed him out to the east (why should they minus and intrigue, they just know how better), because "they don't do it like that in England" but they are only capable repeat after someone, but they themselves cannot think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh3k0qEFVk0
      1. Andy
        Andy 25 February 2021 11: 43
        +1
        such parquet admirals hacked Makarov's sensible idea and squeezed him out to the east

        Makarov did a great job - he made the shells easier, in Arthur the deaths of Terrible and Petropavlovsk were to be attributed to? not penetrated did not take into account, etc. it is clear that he is not alone (headquarters, commander of a destroyer detachment, commander of the Terrible), but then why do you impute everything to Rozhdestvensky?
      2. Ruby
        Ruby 25 February 2021 14: 44
        +9
        Actually, this "parquet" admiral in Russo-Turkish very successfully fought on minionosks with pole mines. It is not much different from kamikaze. Why not, but he had no courage.
      3. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 26 February 2021 17: 34
        0
        Quote: vladimir1155
        unfortunately Rozhdestvensky was neither a strategist nor a tactician, he just walked, but needed an analysis of forces, and the development of tactical techniques in accordance with the situation ... and now there are people who are going to stupidly project force, that is, sit on AV where- then go without analyzing either their own capabilities of the enemy, or the means of defeat and ensuring this or that action ... and if someone explains to them the impossibility of their ideas, then they viciously minus, but these pink ponies are not able to think and understand the obvious ... Apparently Rozhdestvensky was one of those, and such parquet admirals hacked Makarov's sensible idea and squeezed him out to the east (why should they minus and intrigue, they just know how better), because "they don't do it like that in England" but they are only capable repeat after someone, but they themselves cannot think https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh3k0qEFVk0

        It was conceived again ...
      4. antivirus
        antivirus 26 February 2021 18: 20
        0
        and only in the 1960s -100 years passed solidly in Primorye and the Far East.
        the gamble was - the Korean concessions and entry into China from scratch.
        it remained empty until the appearance of the ocean-going fleet in the USSR .. and the 2-track Trans-Siberian .. and the network of airfields .. and all the pribluda for 11 million inhabitants.
        and BAM is not completed + population outflow is in progress - prospects for 2050 ???
  3. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 04: 27
    0
    Could someone else have done better?
    Of course not.
    This required a different fleet and state.
    Somehow, our fleet did not show itself not in WWI, nor in the Great Patriotic War, but at least there were no such failures and fulfilled its task in both cases.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 06: 07
      +7
      Somehow, our fleet did not show itself not in WWI, nor in the Great Patriotic War

      I do not agree ... Marinesco alone sent a division of the Germans to the bottom.
      In Odessa and Sevastopol, the sailors pulled off part of Hitler's armada ... gaining precious time for the defense of Moscow.
      1. Momotomba
        Momotomba 25 February 2021 06: 29
        +4
        There was also escort escorting in the north. And how many Black Sea Fleet landing operations conducted ... Our fleet in major battles was not marked in the absence of these very battles near Europe.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 25 February 2021 09: 55
          +9
          Quote: Momotomba
          And how many Black Sea Fleet landing operations have been carried out ..

          Many and very successful ones WWI... Moreover, even on the territory of Turkey, for example, the Trapenzund landing operation is the BEST landing operation of the PMA.

          The Black Sea Fleet blocked the Turkish Bosphorus by installing thousands of mines (a unique operation in the world), the world's first AUG consisting of battleships, aircraft carriers, submarines carried out the world's first Pearl Harbor (Zonguldak) and supported the landing forces, the world's best Russian naval aviation bombed the Bosphorus, Istanbul, Varna, etc., etc.

          In WWI, the Black Sea became, in fact, internal Russian sea.

          In the Second World War, the Black Sea Fleet remained in 1942 with only one base in Poti.

          Of course, at the same time, the heroic defense of Sevastopol and Odessa is the glorious pages of the Black Sea Fleet
          1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 10: 31
            +7
            Quote: Olgovich
            the world's first AUG as part of battleships, aircraft carriers, submarines carried out the world's first Pearl Harbor (Zonguldak)

            By the way, the negligence with which the popularizers of Russian history treat this, without exaggeration, the most interesting episode of WWI, is always surprising. I'm even sure that some people here hear about him for the first time.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 25 February 2021 12: 13
              -1
              Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              By the way, the negligence with which the popularizers of Russian history treat this, without exaggeration, the most interesting episode of WWI, is always surprising. I'm even sure that some people here hear about him for the first time.

              VO paid enough attention to this: https://topwar.ru/90713-tegi-samyy-pervyy-udar-russkiy-prikaz-227.html

              And you can still remember how Russian naval pilots took prisoners ... Turkish ships!
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 25 February 2021 10: 59
            +9
            Quote: Olgovich

            In WWI, the Black Sea became, in fact, an internal Russian sea.

            In WWII, the Black Sea Fleet remained in 1942 with only one base in Poti.

            This is the reason for the low efficiency of the Black Sea Fleet in WWII. Of course, it is possible to fight without a rear, but badly and not for long.
            While shipbuilding and ship repair of Nikolaev and Sevastopol worked for the fleet - the fleet was "on horseback". When the army left the fleet only the ports of the Caucasian coast, in which even the repair of the KRL poured into a huge technical problem, the fleet was worn out for some time, knocked out the pre-war resource - and exactly by the summer of 1942 it had worn off to a flotilla of 1-2 combat-ready KRL, 1- 2 LD and 3-5 EM.
          3. Momotomba
            Momotomba 25 February 2021 16: 47
            -2
            Quote: Olgovich
            In the Second World War, the Black Sea Fleet remained in 1942 with only one base in Poti.

            It was enough to win hi
            Quote: Olgovich
            Of course, at the same time, the heroic defense of Sevastopol and Odessa is the glorious pages of the Black Sea Fleet

            Liberation is even more glorious
      2. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 06: 30
        +5
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        one Marinesco sent a division of the Germans to the bottom

        This is an undeniable success, but also an undeniably unsystematic case.

        Quote: Lech from Android.
        In Odessa and Sevastopol, the sailors pulled off part of Hitler's armada ... having won precious time for the defense of Moscow
        As the Marine Corps, no doubt, but not as the Navy.
        1. Momotomba
          Momotomba 25 February 2021 06: 38
          +5
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          As the Marine Corps, no doubt, but not as the Navy.

          And was there anyone for the navy to fight at sea? Was there any serious surface a fight between fleets in the Atlantic during WWII? Except for the destruction of Bismarck, nothing comes to mind on the fly ... Yes, and then they piled on one ship and pecked ...
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 07: 00
            +2
            Quote: Momotomba
            And was there anyone for the navy to fight at sea?
            Support for the actions of armies in the coastal strip at least.
            1. Momotomba
              Momotomba 25 February 2021 07: 21
              +4
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Support for the actions of armies in the coastal strip at least

              Those. we make a mobile water-based artillery battery out of ships, which cabotages, shoots along the coast and lands troops. This is what happened in the Black Sea.
              In the Baltic, a large fleet was locked in the Gulf of Finland and all it could do was support the army with its artillery. Those. did what you are talking about. But there were no large enemy surface forces either in the Black Sea or in the Baltic.
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 08: 06
                +2
                Quote: Momotomba
                But there were no large enemy surface forces either in the Black Sea or in the Baltic.
                Those. The USSR fleet did not fulfill its task, is this what you tend to do?
                1. Momotomba
                  Momotomba 25 February 2021 08: 51
                  0
                  I am leaning towards the fact that the USSR fleet carried out the tasks that the enemy set for it. And the fact that the USSR Navy did not participate in major naval battles during the Second World War is only the reason that the opposing side did not bring large surface forces to sea in the area of ​​responsibility of the USSR Navy. No more and no less.
                  1. Vladimir_2U
                    Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 09: 05
                    -1
                    Quote: Momotomba
                    the USSR fleet carried out the tasks set by the enemy.
                    The tasks are set by the command. At the very least, the USSR Fleet fulfilled its tasks.
                    1. Momotomba
                      Momotomba 25 February 2021 16: 43
                      +1
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      The tasks are set by the command.

                      I won't even argue. But the command sets tasks, having analyzed, among other things, the capabilities, forces and means of the enemy, his resources, etc. Let's not forget that the enemy's leadership also sets some tasks for him, by solving which the enemy violates our plans ... Thus, the enemy's actions directly affect the tasks assigned to the units ...
                  2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 10: 40
                    +7
                    Quote: Momotomba
                    I am leaning towards the fact that the USSR fleet carried out the tasks that the enemy set for it.

                    not bad, not bad. In the Baltic, the enemy set the task - to sit quietly behind mines and nets. The fleet complied.
                    1. Momotomba
                      Momotomba 25 February 2021 16: 56
                      +1
                      Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                      not bad, not bad. In the Baltic, the enemy set the task - to sit quietly behind mines and nets. The fleet fulfilled

                      Can you tell us why this happened? Can you recall how many ships were lost on the first day of the war and how many kilometers did the army roll back? By the way, the boats no, no, but they left the Gulf of Finland. And it turned out well to fight ...
                      1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 21: 47
                        -5
                        Quote: Momotomba
                        boats no, no, but they left the Gulf of Finland.

                        'No, no' is an excellent indicator. No, no, and some Marinesco recorded the sunk tonnage for himself, which in fact (oh!) Was not sunk. But the piglet and the order were attached.
                        Quote: Momotomba
                        how many kilometers did the army roll back

                        Well, then she rolled back, and it became possible to drown Gustlov and Steuben. And at the same time stick it with myths. Ranging from the idiotic “Hitler’s personal enemy” to the schizophrenic “the color of the German submarine drowned” and other nonsense. However, thanks to the Swedes. They were the first to start turning yellow in the press - 1945 is still in the yard, not 41.
                        Quote: Momotomba
                        And it was good to fight

                        Yeah. Sometimes they drowned the Swedes, and then hid with them) Or are you not familiar with this technique of our submariners?
                        For me personally, by the way, the C-13 attack on Steuben is much more remarkable than this exhausted so-called. "attack of the century" on G. Exhausted, exhausting, half-blind - this is aerobatics comparable to the Atlantic experts of the Kriegsmarine. Well, the fact that this is a hospital ship, which he took for a cruiser ... but no one cares, the winners are not judged.
                      2. Momotomba
                        Momotomba 26 February 2021 13: 10
                        +3
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Well, the fact that this is a hospital ship, which he mistook for a cruiser ... but no one cares, the winners are not judged

                        Well, is there an example in history when a German drowned some hospital steamer or a steamer with civilians? Or was it just Morinesco who did it?
                      3. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 26 February 2021 13: 30
                        -5
                        Quote: Momotomba
                        Well, is there an example in history when a German drowned some hospital steamer or a steamer with civilians? Or was it just Morinesco who did it?

                        Expectedly - "but the Nazis ....")
                        We are about MаRinesco said, didn't they? Why smear a theme with a thin layer?
                      4. Momotomba
                        Momotomba 26 February 2021 17: 18
                        +3
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Why smear a theme with a thin layer?

                        Well, if you say that he is so "bad", he attributed to himself a tonnage that actually did not exist (a crappy business, I don’t argue), and indeed he drowned a hospital ship, mistaking it for a cruiser at night ... then let's see, he one or not? Those. "Marinesco" is a particular case or system characteristic of that time for all the warring parties.
                      5. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 26 February 2021 19: 48
                        -3
                        Quote: Momotomba
                        Those. "Marinesco" is a particular case or system characteristic of that time for all the warring parties.

                        Well, take it more broadly, what really - all types of troops, including partisans, were engaged in postscripts and distortions of facts)
                      6. Momotomba
                        Momotomba 26 February 2021 19: 57
                        +2
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        all branches of the armed forces, including partisans, were involved in postscripts and distortions of facts)

                        with all the parties to the conflict))
                        So ... Marinesco "with his postscripts" is a hero of his time)
                2. Igor Kobernik
                  Igor Kobernik 27 February 2021 16: 09
                  +4
                  There is ... Google about the motor ship "Armenia", which followed under the sign of the Red Cross to Novorossiysk from Sevastopol and was sunk by the Nazis in the Yalta region in 1941 .... The exact number of the dead is still not known (wounded and civilians, evacuation was in progress) ... Historians call numbers from 5000 to 10000 people ... We managed to save 2 or 3 people ... Children ... And during the tragic Tallinn passage, the Germans and Finns drowned everyone, not figuring out where the warship was and where a hospital ship ... And your opponent, apparently, is from the breed of those who, after reading all kinds of Western rubbish, will continue to tell you that the soldiers and commanders of our army raped all German women (and more than once) in Germany, including babies ....
                3. Momotomba
                  Momotomba 27 February 2021 20: 28
                  0
                  Quote: Igor Kobernik
                  Your opponent, apparently, is from the breed of those who, having read all kinds of Western rubbish, will continue to tell you that the soldiers and commanders of our army raped all German women (and more than once) in Germany, including babies ...

                  Let it remain on his conscience))
                  Thank you
          2. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 18: 27
            -2
            Quote: Momotomba
            Can you tell us why this happened?

            This happened because of an objective map of the Baltic, where a fleet of battleships is useless, but why then Kuznetsov crammed battleships into the Baltic? did he not know geography? and why is there more NK on the Baltic Fleet now than on the Northern Fleet? the answer is, the weather there is better and it is more convenient to spend time on a wide deck so as not to shake .. "and in the north let the missilemen and the submarine serve in garrisons in all taiga",
          3. Momotomba
            Momotomba 26 February 2021 19: 03
            +2
            On a short wave of the Baltic, it rocks very unpleasantly ...
            Quote: vladimir1155
            did he not know geography?

            I probably knew ... Only now the Federation Council was created in 37. Maybe Kuznetsov understood that the ships needed piers and all kinds of support from the shore? I’m not ready to say, but from 37 to 41 it would hardly have been built. And in the absence of piers, they would have received a story like from Project 1143
          4. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 19: 49
            -2
            Quote: Momotomba
            understood that the ships needed piers and all kinds of support from the shore?

            but now the SF also has an infrastructure, but for some reason the BF is again inflated indecently, and the SF is too small for its tasks. There is a concept of mobilization, when something is needed, they do something, and when the admiral is satisfied with everything, then they do not build the infrastructure, the railway was already there, there were some port facilities, and the construction of pyros is a trivial task if the management is worried about this is money, and does not lay new unnecessary stolen cruisers ...
            And of course battleships were useless in principle. And in the north, they were just as meaningless as in the Baltic, more small ships of sea hunters and destroyers were needed (then these were very small ships). And I would send battleships to the Black Sea Fleet, try to gain control of the water area there, and not smear the fleet on earrings for all the sisters.And today, there is no worse fleet anywhere, but everywhere a little and where it is not necessary. And where it is necessary P-K it is not, or SF is not enough.
          5. Momotomba
            Momotomba 26 February 2021 20: 05
            +1
            Quote: vladimir1155
            I would send battleships to the Black Sea Fleet

            Lock up in the Black Sea and give it up to be torn apart by aviation?) Very controversial ...
            Quote: vladimir1155
            battleships were useless in principle. And in the north, it is just as meaningless as in the Baltic, more small ships of sea hunters, destroyers were needed (then these were very small ships)

            The commanders are preparing for the last war. I don't remember who said ...
            Quote: vladimir1155
            today there is no worse fleet

            God and the Andreevsky flag are with us :)
            And we will show it far from our shores!
      3. Revolver
        Revolver 12 March 2021 04: 17
        +1
        These royal battleships were a big misunderstanding. When designing, they gave free rein to the gunners, and as a result they got large self-propelled armored artillery barges, but not battleships. To drive up to the shore, turn it around, and change the topography of the terrain with the main caliber is yes, but a linear battle is not very good. The whole side only at a very small angle, and everything else is only one tower at the end. A three-gun battleship, despite the fact that competitors have 6 barrels at least at any angle, and the caliber is mostly larger. And seaworthiness, excuse me ... For the inland seas it is still somehow, but in the ocean, as the run of the battleship "Parizhskaya Kommuna", aka "Sevastopol", has shown, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, not very much. If a battleship is nearly drowned in a fairly ordinary ocean storm, it has no place in the ocean.
  • Serg65
    Serg65 25 February 2021 09: 23
    +2
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Those. the USSR fleet did not fulfill its task

    you decide on the tasks!
    What tasks did the fleet fail to fulfill?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 09: 31
      0
      Quote: Serg65
      What tasks did the fleet fail to fulfill?

      Master the whole phrase:
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Those. The USSR fleet did not fulfill its task, is this what you tend to do?
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 11: 01
      0
      water area control task
      Quote: Serg65
      What tasks did the fleet fail to fulfill?
      only submarines and partly SF were effective, despite the fact that all battleships were generally useless
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 20
        +2
        Quote: vladimir1155
        all battleships were generally useless

        useless against whom?
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 18: 28
          0
          Quote: Serg65
          useless against whom?

          against the fascists
        2. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 07: 35
          +1
          Quote: vladimir1155
          against the fascists

          And the fascists were going to fight in the Baltic Sea? Or did the Italian fleet enter the Black Sea? Vladimir, you probably know what no one in this world knows about! bully
  • BAI
    BAI 25 February 2021 11: 20
    +21
    "Prince Eugen" supported the Courland group with fire until April 20, 1945. Until the resource of the barrels and the stock of shells were exhausted. And neither the Baltic Fleet nor the aviation could do anything with it. And on the Black Sea, German aviation drove the Black Sea Fleet to the bases, under the shouts of Oktyabrsky "I won't let the ships be destroyed!" For that they killed the defenders of Sevastopol, threw them there. Why do we need a fleet if not to help the army?
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 25 February 2021 18: 41
      +1
      Quote: BAI
      "Prince Eugen" supported the Courland group with fire until April 20, 1945.

      Actually, until April 4th ... By that time, he had 40 main battery shells in his cellars.
      Until the 10th, he defended at Swinemunde. On the 20th left for Copenhagen. 3
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 10: 55
    0
    Quote: Momotomba
    But there were no large enemy surface forces either in the Black Sea or in the Baltic.

    because they are redundant there, these were already small reservoirs
  • Ryazan87
    Ryazan87 25 February 2021 11: 17
    +10
    But there were no large enemy surface forces either in the Black Sea or in the Baltic.

    1944-45 - for almost a year in the Baltic, large German ships fired at the advancing units of the Red Army until the barrels of the main ships - "Scheer", "Eugen" were worn out ..
    What even comrade Tributs wrote about:
    “... Despite the fact that the total depth of the enemy forces was no more than 7 kilometers, on November 22, our troops suspended movement. The cruisers Lutzov, Prince Eugen and Admiral Scheer fired at our regiments, pressing people to the ground. The artillery fire of the cruisers was supported by several destroyers .... "
    "... The German-fascist command decided to use large surface ships for fire support of the troops encircled from land. Several battle groups were created, which included the training battleship Schlesien, the heavy cruisers Lutzov, Admiral Scheer, Prince Eugen ", the light cruiser Leipzig and several destroyers. Firing from heavy guns, they greatly impeded our advance along the coast."
    Tributs V.F. The Baltic are fighting. - Moscow: Military Publishing, 1985.
    + The Germans organized the supply of the Courland grouping and a large evacuation by sea from the same East Prussia.
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 11: 22
      +1
      Quote: Ryazanets87
      The cruisers Lutzow, Prince Eugen and Admiral Scheer fired at our regiments, pressing people to the ground.
      Here I was not in the know, fucking!
    2. Serg65
      Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 24
      +14
      Quote: Ryazanets87
      Tributs V.F. The Baltic are fighting.

      But Tributs did not write why the fleet entrusted to him did not secure the flank of the advancing corps and blockade Courland?
      1. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman 25 February 2021 11: 54
        +4
        Quote: Serg65
        why did the fleet entrusted to him not secure the flank of the advancing corps and blockade Courland?

        Which fleet? The ships are empty, the crews, except, maybe, anti-aircraft gunners in the marines ...
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 26 February 2021 07: 45
          +5
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          Which fleet?

          At least underwater, as a senior sailor, what do you think ... why did not Moonsund have submarines?
      2. Roman81
        25 February 2021 22: 25
        0
        Than? Marat is destroyed, the Kirovs are not pulling ... the submarine from memory is already 7 serviceable ... the sun on the ships worked badly
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 26 February 2021 07: 46
          +4
          Quote: Roman81
          PL from memory as many as 7 serviceable

          All the same, 7 serviceable, and why the Germans were not drowned?
      3. mmaxx
        mmaxx 26 February 2021 17: 48
        +2
        In the Baltic, mines were swept after the war for more than 20 years
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 07: 36
          +1
          Quote: mmaxx
          In the Baltic, mines were swept after the war for more than 20 years

          Well, at least one person is aware of what was happening in those days !!!! good hi
    3. aglet
      aglet 27 February 2021 15: 35
      -3
      "Tributs V.F. The Baltic people are fighting"
      Your tribune is lying, like a gray gelding. Lyuttsov was sold to the USSR in 1940, and then it took a very long time to finish building, he could not press anyone to the ground. Prince Eugen fired a little along the coast (a little, because the ammunition for him was no longer produced in 1942), then, when our troops reached the coast of Germany, he finished shooting the bk and that's all. Red Army, in March 1944 began to be repaired. but these ships did not cause fatal damage, at least, the inaction of the Baltic fleet (and other fleets), this will not justify
      1. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 27 February 2021 16: 51
        +2
        your tributs lies like a gray gelding.
        - he is as mine as yours. He cited it as evidence even at the level of the Soviet officialdom.
        luttsov was sold to the USSR in 1940, and then it took a very long time to complete, he could not press anyone to the ground.
        - we are talking about the so-called. the "pocket battleship" "Deutschland", which by the time of the described events had been renamed "Luttsov" for 4 years already. The last volleys at the Soviet troops, he gave already in April 45th. By the way, "Prince Eugen" finally depleted the ammunition of the main battery also by about April 45th.
        Of course, the shelling of the coast could not stop the Soviet offensive, but they slowed down the pace, inflicted losses ...
        1. aglet
          aglet 27 February 2021 18: 48
          -2
          "we are talking about the so-called" pocket battleship "Deutschland, which at the time of the described events was renamed" Lutzow "
          "On April 16, 1945, while in Swinemunde, it came under a raid of the British Air Force and was seriously damaged. The ship landed on the ground, but continued to fire with its main caliber. On the approach of Soviet troops, it was blown up by the crew on May 4, 1945."
          also like that, did not fight much. hardly, it could have slowed down so much.
      2. Serg65
        Serg65 1 March 2021 08: 22
        +3
        Quote: aglet
        he could not press anyone to the ground.

        what If you really think of yourself as a historian, then do not disgrace yourself with your statements! Firstly, one should not confuse TKR Petropavlovsk with the pocket battleship Deutschland, which, in punishment for its first, but unsuccessful, raider campaign, in November 1939 was renamed Luttsov! This is the same Deutschland, for the successful bombing of which Ostryakov received the first "Red Banner"! It was this Luttsev who thwarted the attack of the 44th corps on the Syrve Peninsula in October 109th!
        1. aglet
          aglet 1 March 2021 12: 04
          -1
          "It was this Luttsev who thwarted the attack of 44 corps on the Syrve Peninsula in October 109th."
          about the fact that the luttsov ripped off and pressed, who wrote? correctly, the admiral tributs, more luttsov, and his villainous role was not separately mentioned by anyone, I, in a quick way, did not find any mention of this. he very quickly shot his bk, and dumped. Admiral Scheer inflicted more damage, at least shot more, although shooting from the sea, at unobserved targets, without adjustment, has a very low effectiveness
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 1 March 2021 13: 40
            +1
            Quote: aglet
            about the fact that luttsov tore off and pressed, who wrote? correctly, admiral tributs,

            No ... German historian Caius Becker ..... okay?
            Quote: aglet
            shooting from the sea, at unobserved targets, without correction, has a very low efficiency

            How did you decide that there was no adjustment?
          2. aglet
            aglet 1 March 2021 13: 59
            0
            "How did you decide that there was no adjustment?"
            and who would correct, there is no mention of but-
            "for this (September 21, 1944) and the next day, the" prince "fired 633 heavy shells, received gratitude from the command of the division" great germany ", but the real effect of his fire remained unknown"this is a potter's writing, so there was no adjustment
          3. aglet
            aglet 1 March 2021 14: 00
            -1
            "No ... German historian Caius Becker."
            I haven’t read the baker, but probably read the tributs. rewrote word for word
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 25 February 2021 11: 28
    +2
    Quote: Momotomba
    But there were no large enemy surface forces either in the Black Sea or in the Baltic.

    We were in the Baltic.
    In 1941 - the Baltic Fleet, led by the "fresh" "Tirpitz" (plus "Scheer" and 4 KRL). However, ours had nothing to catch here. smile
    In 1944, our seaside flank was regularly nightmarized by the Panzerschiff and the KRT - "the biggest gunboats of the Baltic."
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 26 February 2021 09: 14
      +5
      Quote: Alexey RA
      1941 - the Baltic Fleet, led by the "fresh" "Tirpitz" (plus "Scheer" and 4 KRL)

      The squadron patrolled near the Aland Islands from 23.09 to 26.09. after which it was disbanded. The BF did not make any attempts to break through into the Gulf of Finland and destroy the BF, although it had the opportunity, but it missed the chance.
      Quote: Alexey RA
      In 1944, our seaside flank was regularly nightmarized by the Panzerschiff and the KRT - "the biggest gunboats of the Baltic."

      Well, Aleksey, the regularity was expressed only in the shelling of the Sõrve peninsula, Memel and the environs of Gdynia and Gdansk, although ... I agree that the actions of "Prince" and "Scheer" played a decisive role in the success of the evacuation of the Germans from Sõrve ... Samokhin!
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 26 February 2021 20: 18
        +2
        Quote: Serg65

        The squadron patrolled near the Aland Islands from 23.09 to 26.09. after which it was disbanded.

        Well, initially it was about the absence large enemy surface forces in the Baltic in general. smile
        And so, yes - the German BF patrolled, made sure that no one was going anywhere - and were disbanded.
        Quote: Serg65
        The BF did not make any attempts to break through to the Gulf of Finland and destroy the BF, although it had the opportunity, but it missed the chance.

        Fuck feathers - I want to see it! © smile - how the Germans drive a brand new, uncrumpled "Tirpitz" first into "soup with dumplings", and then - under the fire of coastal and floating batteries + underwater TA of base defense, also referred to as submarines of the "M" type.
        Quote: Serg65
        although ... I agree that the actions of "Prince" and "Scheer" played a decisive role in the success of the evacuation of the Germans from Sõrve .... for this, great greetings to comrade Samokhin!

        It seems to me that not only Samokhin was to blame for the unsuccessful "boar hunt", but also the common fifth point with the rear of the naval aviation. The same Presnyakov described how their mtap sat without rear for two weeks, and the last few days before the arrival of the rear, there was one torpedo for the entire regiment.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 09: 07
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Fuck feathers - I want to see it!

          Well, my friend, the Germans had an excellent experience of breaking through the mine and artillery positions of the First World War! Starting the breakthrough with the destruction of the coastal battery on Osmussaar, Tsilliax had a real chance! And no one would come to the rescue of the 314th battery!
          Quote: Alexey RA
          not only Samokhin was to blame, but also a common fifth point with the rear of the Navy aviation

          Moreover, this very fifth point for Samokhin was formed back in 41 and Nitscha, his uncle served, he received orders, he washed the stars on his shoulder straps!
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 1 March 2021 11: 26
            0
            Quote: Serg65
            Well, my friend, the Germans had an excellent experience of breaking through the mine and artillery positions of the First World War!

            Mine positions. There was practically no artillery there: the first time they simply did not have time to build the batteries, the second time ... well, Bertenev has a good description of the artillery component of the Irbensky Strait MAP.
            First they fled from the 2nd gun. Due to the badly corrected circular rail feed, after several shots, the trolley stopped approaching the charger.
            Apparently Warrant Officer Rodionov did not show the team the proper example and fled to the Central Post himself. Then at the 1st gun (after a close fall), tk. due to the departure of the feed and the lower servants, the feed has completely stopped. Warrant officer Polikarpov dismissed the gunners and the upper servants and made the last shot himself. At the 3rd gun, the team ran and returned. When the charger did not reach the place, the team ran completely. At the 4th gun, only a part of the serving servant ran and the gun fired before the shot signal. They fired at the fleeing from rifles from the 3rd gun and from machine guns on the 2nd diesel engine.

            Something tells me that in 1941 such a picture is unlikely. wink
            Quote: Serg65
            Moreover, this very fifth point for Samokhin was formed back in 41 and Nitscha, his uncle served, he received orders, he washed the stars on his shoulder straps!

            Nah, this fifth point was formed when suddenly The conventional air force and the navy air force switched to separate supply.
          2. Serg65
            Serg65 1 March 2021 11: 51
            +2
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Something tells me that in 1941 such a picture is unlikely.

            The 314 battery was a tough nut to crack, suppressing it, the Germans opened an unobstructed path to Tallinn ... and there panic, confusion and complete domination of the Luftwaffe ...
            Quote: Alexey RA
            the fifth point was formed when suddenly the conventional air force and the navy air force switched to separate supply.

            I am not only about supply, but about the complete picture of the actions of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet Air Force since 1941. Only one scandal with the incrimination of the Air Force headquarters in falsifying the facts and direct non-observance of orders ... but with documentary evidence of the fulfillment of these orders, which was worth it!
            Well, regarding the case we are considering .. the action of the 9th shad does not climb into any gate at all!
          3. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 1 March 2021 15: 20
            0
            Quote: Serg65
            The 314 battery was a tough nut to crack, suppressing it, the Germans opened an unobstructed path to Tallinn ... and there panic, confusion and complete domination of the Luftwaffe ...

            So Tallinn would have to go without the "Tirpitz" - from June 1941 it was brought to mind after test firing and was recognized as combat-ready only on September 20, 1941.
            And for everyone else there is Aegna's battery (one tower 2x12 "/ 52). smile
          4. Serg65
            Serg65 2 March 2021 07: 21
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            So Tallinn would have to go without the "Tirpitz" - from June 1941 it was brought to mind after test firing and was recognized as combat-ready only on September 20, 1941.

            what Are we not talking about the end of September?
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And for everyone else there is Aegna's battery (one tower 2x12 "/ 52).

            So this battery on September 22 already began to blow up ... by the way, for the period of 1941, it was armed with three B-13 and four B-34 ...
          5. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 2 March 2021 13: 41
            0
            Quote: Serg65
            Are we not talking about the end of September?

            And at the end of September Tallinn has been commissioned for a month already. And "Tirpitz" is already waiting for "Krasnaya Gorka", Izhora sector, Kronstadt, plus TM-1-14 with TM-1-180.
            Quote: Serg65
            So this battery on September 22 already began to blow up ... by the way, for the period of 1941, it was armed with three B-13 and four B-34 ...

            Hmm ... at Perechnev on about. Aegna generally indicated four 305 mm - as part of battery # 374.
          6. Serg65
            Serg65 2 March 2021 14: 44
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            at the end of September Tallinn has been commissioned for a month already

            wassat Pardonte, he reported it !!!! For August ...
            Quote: Alexey RA
            "Tirpitz" are already waiting for "Krasnaya Gorka"

            It was definitely deadly for him to meddle in there ...
            Quote: Alexey RA
            at Perechnev on about. Aegna generally indicated four 305 mm

            Confusion again, sir! Confused with 182 battery ...
  • aglet
    aglet 27 February 2021 15: 42
    -2
    "We have just been to the Baltic.
    In 1941 - the Baltic Fleet, led by the "fresh" "Tirpitz" (plus "Scheer" and 4 KRL) "
    where did you find them there?
    battle in the Irben Strait, July 6, 1941
    "On July 6, 1941, a detachment of ships of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet of the USSR consisting of the destroyers" Engels "," Angry "and" Strong ", as well as the patrol ships" Snow "and" Tucha "under the command of Captain 1st Rank B.V. Khoroshkhin went to Irbensky strait for setting a minefield ... According to Soviet data, one enemy destroyer was destroyed in the battle, as well as an auxiliary cruiser was damaged.However, it was later established that the Soviet ships were fighting with the floating base MRS-11 and minesweepers M-23 and M-31 [3] According to German data, the detachment did not receive a single hit and did not suffer losses, subsequently arriving in Riga [1]. It should be noted that this battle was the only battle of large Soviet ships in the Baltic during World War II, during which both sides fired artillery fire at each other.."
    "In 1944, our seaside flank was regularly nightmarized by the Panzerschiff and the KRT"
    what, and when, do not specify? just do not quote the tribune
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 1 March 2021 09: 08
      +1
      Quote: aglet
      where did you find them there?

      wassat It's not funny anymore! Better read Murzilka, it will be more useful!
      1. aglet
        aglet 1 March 2021 11: 16
        0
        "This is no longer funny! Better read Murzilka, it will be more useful!"
        very complete and detailed answer. it is useless for you and the murzilka, you will not understand anything
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 11: 25
          +1
          Quote: aglet
          you will not understand anything

          Yes, where am I? laughing
          Quote: aglet
          very complete and detailed answer

          what Have you been disconnected from the Internet?
        2. aglet
          aglet 1 March 2021 12: 23
          -1
          "Have you been disconnected from the Internet?"
          no, it's hard to do. just, the fact is that I asked you the question, not the Internet, and I expected an answer from you, not from myself
        3. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 12: 48
          +1
          Quote: aglet
          I asked you, not the Internet, and I expected an answer from you

          The actions of the German squadron of Admiral Zilliax at the end of September 1941 for people interested in naval topics are not Punchinel's secret, so before asking tricky questions, it would be good to ask about the topic of the question ... then you won't get into a trouble!
        4. aglet
          aglet 1 March 2021 15: 17
          -2
          "Actions of the German squadron of Admiral Zilliax"
          really, what secrets are there. stood quietly in Brest. I don’t understand one thing - how are the actions of Admiral Cilliax's squadron in Brest connected with the fighting in the Baltic in September 1941?
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 1 March 2021 11: 43
    +1
    Quote: aglet
    where did you find them there?

    Near the Aland Islands, in September 1941
    Quote: aglet
    what, and when, do not specify? just do not quote the tribune

    Why do we need Tributs when there is Goncharov? wink
    "Prince Eugen":
    On July 20, the cruiser was in the Gulf of Riga and fired at the Soviet troops that had broken through to the coast in the Tukums area. On October 11-12, he fired at the coast near Memel, firing 633 shells of the main caliber. On October 14, another 246 shells were fired.
    (...)
    On November 20-21, he participated in the shelling of the Soviet troops stormed the Sõrve Peninsula, firing 514 shells of the main and about 200 shells of the auxiliary caliber, and on January 29-30, 1945 he again fired at the coast, this time in the Danzig region (850 shells were fired) ...
    The last time "Prince Eugen" had a chance to shoot in late March and early April 1945 - from his parking in Gothenhafen again in the Danzig area.

    © warspot Vladislav Goncharov. German heavy cruisers in action: "Hipper" and others.
    "Admiral Scheer":
    The next time the artillery of the "Admiral Scheer" entered into action more than two years later, already in the Baltic. On November 22, 1944, he replaced the heavy cruiser "Prince Eugen", which had shot all the ammunition, and opened fire from a long distance on the Soviet troops that were storming the last German positions on the Sõrve Peninsula (Saaremaa Island). In two days, the ship fired on almost all the main battery ammunition.
    In February 1945, the "Admiral Scheer" was used to shell the coast in the area of ​​the Zemland Peninsula and Koenigsberg, this time firing without adjustment. In March, he fired on the coast in the Swinemünde area, and then went to Kiel to replace the worn out main caliber barrels.

    "Luttsov":
    In October 1944, it was actively used for shelling the coast in the Baltic States - as a rule, without adjustment from coastal posts. The ship no longer participated in naval battles; On October 14, he was attacked by a Shch-407 submarine, but both torpedoes did not hit the target. On February 8, 1945, "Luttsov" was used for firing at coastal targets near Elbing, on March 25 - near Danzig.

    © warspot Vladislav Goncharov. "Pocket Battleships": Loser and Lucky Hitler's Navy.
    Plus there is also Morozov - with a description of how the KBF Air Force tried to do something with the Scheer at Sõrve.
    1. aglet
      aglet 1 March 2021 12: 59
      -1
      "Why do we need Tributs when there is Goncharov?"
      Prince Eugen "On July 20, the cruiser was in the Gulf of Riga and fired at Soviet troops that had broken through to the coast in the Tukums area. On October 11-12, she fired at the coast near Memel, firing 633 main-caliber shells. On October 14, another 246 shells were fired."
      that is, he fired 879 main caliber rounds along the shore, provided. that the main battery ammunition had 120 rounds per barrel, that is, 8x120 turns out to be 960. It seems that everything is correct, but the main battery ammunition consisted of 4 types of shells - armor-piercing, semi-armor-piercing, high-explosive, illuminating. there were 40 lighting ones, they did not shoot along the shore, minus. There are 920 armor-piercing shells left on the shore, minus 320, 600 left. Semi-armor-piercing ones are also for armor, not for the coast, again minus 320. 280 high-explosive shells of the main caliber remain. and, as you remember, 879 was released along the shore. the question, where were they taken? about supply vessels that could carry shells, is not mentioned anywhere, he did not go to the base for reloading. where did the shells come from? and if you remember that shells for this boat were not made at every corner in the bed workshop, then there was nowhere to take them. what did the cruiser shoot along the shore? the main caliber, or all that was firing - auxiliary, anti-mine and anti-aircraft artillery? there is a lot of noise, no sense, only the tributs knows about him, about the sense, I mean
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 1 March 2021 16: 09
        +1
        Quote: aglet
        the question, where were they taken? about supply vessels that could carry shells, is not mentioned anywhere, he did not go to the base for reloading. where did the shells come from?

        The expert Kofman answers the question. smile
        During this and the next day, "Prince" fired 633 heavy shells, received gratitude from the command of the division "Great Germany", but the real effect of its fire remained unknown.

        After refueling and replenishing ammunition, "Eugen" a day later again fired at the shore, firing another 246 203-mm shells. Again, he had difficulty with the adjustment, but nevertheless, the next morning the cruiser was again at the coast (at night, he retreated to the open sea). He was joined by "Lyuttsov", who at last received his heavy shells. The consumption of 8-inch shells reached 368 pieces; a total of 18 targets were fired upon. Long did not release a single projectile the ship lost more than half of all the shells released for it in less than a week! I had to urgently organize the delivery of ammunition from the bases of Western Germany and even from Norway.

        In general, they collected shells for Eugen wherever possible. For there were no new ones.
        The last day of January was the last day of the operation for the "Prince". He used up most of his ammunition, which became more and more difficult to replenish, since the production of eight-inch rounds ceased back in 1942.

        The last firing "Eugen" carried out on April 4, 1945. After that, 40 shells remained in the cellars.
      2. aglet
        aglet 2 March 2021 08: 10
        -2
        "In general, for Eugen, they collected shells wherever possible. For there were no new ones."
        and where could they be collected? tea, not needles
  • aglet
    aglet 1 March 2021 13: 16
    0
    "Luttsov"
    both luttsov and sheer are reluctant to look for numbers, but their role is also greatly exaggerated by admiral tributs, who justifies his inability to command the fleet against the backdrop of a weak and untrained bf and air force of the fleet. who explain their inability to the fact that the enemy is stronger and better trained. in fact, until 1945, the bf stood at the base, but lost as many ships and aircraft as if it fought every day
  • Serg65
    Serg65 25 February 2021 09: 21
    +5
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Support for the actions of armies in the coastal strip at least.

    belay and there was no support?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 09: 32
      0
      Quote: Serg65
      Support for the actions of armies in the coastal strip at least.
      belay was there no support?
      Read the previous comment:
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      Quote: Momotomba
      And was there anyone for the navy to fight at sea?
      Support for the actions of armies in the coastal strip at least.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 25 February 2021 11: 25
    +3
    Quote: Momotomba
    And was there anyone for the navy to fight at sea?

    In the Baltic - with the Kriegsmarine surface ships working along the coast.
    Quote: Momotomba
    Was there any serious surface skirmish between fleets in the Atlantic during WWII?

    Wow, we would give them if they caught up with us! © smile
    This I mean that for a surface battle in the Atlantic, the Allies needed very little - to catch up with the Germans. What the Germans desperately didn’t want is the Tirpitz exits.
    Plus WWII is not WWI, the scale of the fleets is completely different. For example, the battle of "Alteration" with "Charles" and "Gnei" is a battle in which the entire German battleship took part. smile
    Quote: Momotomba
    Except for the destruction of Bismarck, nothing comes to mind on the fly ...

    New Year's fight.
    The sinking of the Scharnhorst (the only combat-ready LK of the Germans at that time).
    The battle of "Rhinaun" in 1940 for a serious fight, perhaps, should not be considered - both sides fought more with the weather than with each other. Suffice it to say that not a single range finder worked for the Englishman - the tower ones were flooded with water, and for those located higher up, the optics were covered with a mixture of water and ice faster than they could clean it.
    1. aglet
      aglet 27 February 2021 15: 46
      -1
      "Quote: Momotomba
      And was there anyone for the navy to fight at sea? "
      "In the Baltic - with Kriegsmarine surface ships working along the coast."
      why didn't you fight?
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 05
    0
    Quote: Momotomba
    Was there at least one serious surface fight between the fleets in the Atlantic during WWII

    And the large squadrons of the Germans did not go. 1-2 ships maximum. For they were ordered not to get involved in the battle if there was no advantage. That is why many English convoys avoided the fate of being defeated. For example, if my memory serves me Scharnhorst and Gneisenau phoned to contact Ramilles on February 8, 1941, fled from Rhinaun on April 9, 1940, between 7 and 9 March they attacked convoy SL-67, but were forced to retreat when the battleship Malaya appeared. And I generally keep quiet about our fleet. There were no large German ships in the Baltic or the Black Sea.
  • Revolver
    Revolver 12 March 2021 03: 27
    0
    Quote: Momotomba
    Was there at least one major surface skirmish between fleets in the Atlantic during WWII? Apart from destroying Bismarck, nothing comes to mind on the fly ..

    Well, supposedly there was the sinking of the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious with two escort destroyers by the nedolinkers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, there was the sinking of Scharnhorst itself at the North Cape, there was an Admiral Graf Spee raid across the Atlantic, which ended in a battle at La Plata. Certainly not Jutland or Tsushima, but not quite, as the English-speaking people say, non-event. This is what came to mind without looking; there were like several naval battles in the Mediterranean with the participation of Italians, including battleships, but I don’t remember offhand. And there were so many battles in the Pacific that it was not for comments or even for an article, but for a not weak cycle of articles. There, the whole war was mainly drawn by the fleets and marines; armies that the allies, that Japan participated only nominally, until the Red Army came in 1945 and broke Japan in full, paying off the debts for Mukden, and for Port Arthur, and for Tsushima with handsome interest.
  • Serg65
    Serg65 25 February 2021 09: 20
    +8
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    but not like a fleet.

    Take away the fleet and Odessa and Sevastopol and they wouldn't last a month!
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    undeniably unsystematic case

    What is not consistency?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 09: 33
      +2
      Quote: Serg65
      Take away the fleet and Odessa and Sevastopol and they wouldn't last a month!

      I agree with that.
      Quote: Serg65
      What is not consistency?
      The fact is that there were only two such CASES.
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 07
        +6
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        The fact is that there were only two such CASES.

        There were three such large ones, but there were also smaller transports, this was not the fault of the Soviet submariners, that the Germans used more often medium and low tonnage transports than large steamers!
    2. aglet
      aglet 27 February 2021 15: 49
      -2
      "Take away the fleet and Odessa and Sevastopol and they wouldn't last a month!"
      controversial statement. the fleet did not show itself in anything special, carried cartridges and stew, but constantly top, due to the shelling of German aircraft
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 1 March 2021 07: 11
        +1
        Quote: aglet
        controversial statement

        Of course, controversial, because in your opinion, in Odessa, there were the central warehouses of the People's Commissariat of Defense, and in the catacombs there are millions of thousands of reservists!
        1. aglet
          aglet 1 March 2021 12: 16
          0
          "there were central warehouses of the People's Commissariat of Defense"
          maybe there were no warehouses, but the fact that warships played only the role of cargo barges and dutifully sank under the blows of not very numerous enemy aircraft, and in the complete absence of comparable enemy warships, you won't argue? Or were there epic victories, just about them, except for you, no one knows?
          1. Serg65
            Serg65 1 March 2021 12: 41
            +1
            Quote: aglet
            warships played only the role of cargo barges

            what And they were supposed to play the role of battle tanks or what? Without these cargo barges, the Maritime Army would not have lasted a week!
            Quote: aglet
            obediently sank under the blows of not very numerous enemy aircraft

            And who is the drowning, more specifically please?
            Quote: aglet
            won't you argue?

            To argue in what, in the fact that there were no foreign fleets? Of course I won't!
            Quote: aglet
            Or were there epic victories, just about them, except for you, no one knows?

            I'd rather tell you about how Singapore, with its huge garrison, large reserves of water, food and ammunition, fell in 6 days ... without the support of the fleet ... or how in July 1942 without support fleet fell Sevastopol. But I can tell a story that is not so dramatic ... for example, about the evacuation by the Navy of the Maritime Army ... choose according to your taste!
            1. aglet
              aglet 1 March 2021 14: 23
              -1
              "And who is the drowning, more specifically please?"
              it's easier to list who's left. and generally "Have you been disconnected from the Internet?"
              "I'd rather tell you about how Singapore is."
              don't bother yourself, i don't care about singapore
              "or how in July 1942 unsupported fleetand Sevastopol fell. "
              where was Black Sea fleet at the time? really, in pot? Or are you talking about another Sevastopol, the one on Mars, where there is no fleet?
              "for example, about the evacuation by the Navy of the Primorsky Army"
              no, tell us better about how the fleet abandoned the army that defended Sevastopol
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 2 March 2021 07: 40
                +1
                Quote: aglet
                it's easier to list who's left. and generally speaking

                Those. into milk again!
                Quote: aglet
                and where was the Black Sea fleet at that time?

                Oktyabrsky heeded your requests and removed the fleet ..... you wanted it!
                Quote: aglet
                tell us better about how the navy abandoned the army that defended Sevastopol

                The story of the surrender of Sevastopol is the story of the betrayal of specifically two people, namely Vice Admiral Oktyabrsky and Divisional Commissioner Kulakov with the cowardly connivance of Major General Petrov! For the surrender of Sevastopol, the first two became Heroes of the Soviet Union, and the third was awarded the Order of Lenin ...
  • Richard
    Richard 25 February 2021 15: 17
    +3
    Quote: Lech from Android:one Marinesco sent a division of the Germans to the bottom

    Quote: Vladimir_2U (Vladimir):This is an undeniable success, but also an undeniably unsystematic case.

    Here I agree with Vladimir, but there were also "systemic cases". It's a shame that no one mentions the "Baltic Phoenix", the Red Banner gunboat "Red Banner" (the former BCL "Brave").


    The ship took part in the defense of the northern capital and in WWI and WWII.
    During the Great Patriotic War, she took part in the defense of the coast of the Gulf of Finland and Leningrad. On November 16, 1942, she sank off Lavensari Island after being hit by a torpedo fired by the Finnish V-2 torpedo boat.
    Was raised and delivered in Kronstadt for repairs, and while repairs were underway hit the enemy from the factory pier. They brought shells to her, changed the barrels on the guns, and she kept shooting and shooting ... the whole blockade.
    During WWII "Red Banner" fired more shells into the enemy than ANY OTHER SHIP OF THE COUNTRIES OF WWII PARTICIPANTS !!!!
    On September 17, 1944, after a major overhaul, the Red Banner was re-commissioned.
    No wonder this ship was honored to be presented in the Naval Museum


    and at the Museum of the Defense of Leningrad
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 1 March 2021 07: 30
      +2
      Quote: Richard
      Here I agree with Vladimir

      A non-systematic case is when you are sitting on the bridge drinking coffee and solving crosswords, and when you are in position and they start bombing you for preventive purposes, and you are in a place to go to a safe place, patiently waiting for the one for whom the anti-submarine men are clearing the way , this is already a system ... a system of combat use of the weapons entrusted to you!
      Quote: Richard
      and at the Museum of the Defense of Leningrad

      Interesting ... the layout in the TsVMM is very different from the layout exhibited in the Museum of Defense and Siege of Leningrad ... what
      1. Richard
        Richard 1 March 2021 08: 17
        +2
        Good morning, Sergey hi
        the layouts differ, because as a result of the repair, the stern of the gunboat was lengthened and the bow of the ship was replaced.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 1 March 2021 09: 19
          +1
          Quote: Richard
          the layouts differ, because as a result of the repair, the stern of the gunboat was lengthened and the bow of the ship was replaced.

          Thank you, interesting story! hi
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 25 February 2021 09: 27
    +1
    Voobsheto "in Odessa and Sevastopol" the marines fought. It should be remembered that the marines also defended Moscow, but this is a little-known episode of the Second World War
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 25
      +6
      Quote: Astra wild2
      "in Odessa and Sevastopol" the marines fought

      Well, not only the Marine Corps, besides, this is a necessary measure.
      1. Astra wild2
        Astra wild2 25 February 2021 11: 29
        0
        Agree with you. Sailors abandon ships as a last resort
        1. Phil77
          Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 55
          0
          And so it was. Extreme cases. It doesn't happen. It was about saving the country.
      2. Richard
        Richard 25 February 2021 17: 04
        +1
        It should be remembered that the marines also defended Moscow, but this is a little-known episode of the Second World War

        And Leningrad?

        1. Richard
          Richard 25 February 2021 17: 15
          +1
          What about Stalingrad?
          In principle, I do not give photos and links of the invaluable contribution of sailors to the protection of the city. They are already known to everyone.
          I will cite only the famous Stalingrad poster of Pyotr Tarasovich Maltsev
          "For Stalingrad, sailor!", Which the Red Navy men hung on the houses and streets of Stalingrad taken from the enemy
          1. Phil77
            Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 44
            +5
            Dmitry! Greetings!
            Here is a photo of the marines near Moscow.
            1. Phil77
              Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 45
              +2
              But at Stalingrad.


              1. Richard
                Richard 25 February 2021 19: 26
                +2
                Sergey, let me add a few more photos of the Stalingrad sailors








          2. Roman81
            25 February 2021 22: 27
            +1
            there are gunboats and city supplies and minesweepers and ...
        2. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 25 February 2021 19: 39
          0
          Colleague Richard, Leningrad is the cradle of the Baltic Fleet and Kronstad is nearby. It is widely known.
          And about Stalingrad is also known. When I was in the second grade, a boy sat with me, and his grandfather was a foreman of the second class, he defended Stalingrad. He gave me a medal to hold: "for the defense of Stalingrad."
          The fact that the marines took part in the defense of Moscow and that this is a little-known fact, I read in the Izvestia newspaper back in 1990.
          1. Richard
            Richard 25 February 2021 19: 58
            +2
            Colleague Richard, Leningrad is the cradle of the Baltic Fleet and Kronstad is nearby.

            Allow me to correct not Kronstad, but Kronstadt.
            Most likely, you simply described yourself, but you should have seen the reaction of the Leningraders when on July 26 on central television they announced the holding of the Main Naval Parade of 2020 in St. Petersburg, Kronstadt and Botаnic (??? !!!) bay belay
            And I on the Embankment, having become an unwitting witness, heard a lot of "good" about the Central Television, Moscow, the Unified State Exam and modern education yes
            1. Astra wild2
              Astra wild2 25 February 2021 20: 03
              +3
              Botanical Bay is power. I wonder where he is?
              1. Richard
                Richard 25 February 2021 20: 21
                +1
                And only in the "helluva lot of literate" heads of TV workers. In the rest of the world, it is called Bothnian. And the bay itself is not located near St. Petersburg, or Kronstadt, but (ink !!!!!) ...... between Sweden and Finland
                1. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 25 February 2021 21: 27
                  +1
                  Well, about the Gulf of Bothnia and where I know. Perhaps they were thinking about: "The Gulf of Finland" or, which is most likely: to receive a fee and "wash" it, or maybe the day before "washed"?
                2. aglet
                  aglet 27 February 2021 15: 59
                  -1
                  "And only in the" helluva lot of literate "heads of TV workers., And (ink !!!!!)"
                  and where does ink? Or are they very literate now that they write the word - "tush"? by the way, what does it mean?
                  1. hjvtp1966
                    hjvtp1966 2 March 2021 06: 24
                    +2
                    The literacy level is growing so rapidly that soon we will stop understanding each other and the Russian language will disappear, and then Russian itself ... In general, I got the impression that now in schools they only teach to smoke and swear laughing
            2. Phil77
              Phil77 25 February 2021 20: 09
              +2
              Dmitry!
              +++++++++++ !!!!!
              1. Richard
                Richard 25 February 2021 20: 53
                +1
                Cool. Someone diligently began to minus all my comments laughing
                1. Phil77
                  Phil77 25 February 2021 21: 45
                  +1
                  Dmitry, you are not the first and you are not the last in this list. Take this for a compliment. In the sense of * minus from around the corner *. Or ... * minus in civilian clothes *?
    2. Phil77
      Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 21
      +2
      Seven naval rifle brigades, 12000 sailors, foremen, a special artillery group of the Navy. This is only near Moscow. Call it a little-known fact? Well ... I don’t know. What's little known about that.
      Perhaps for you and participation in the battle of the Moscow militia too ... * little-known fact * of the battle for Moscow. I would put a photo, but there are a lot of them, if you want to look, you will not regret the right.
      1. Phil77
        Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 25
        +2
        Okay, here are a few: the Moscow militia.


        1. Catfish
          Catfish 25 February 2021 21: 27
          +3
          Well, you and Dima, of course, are great, but you forgot about Sevastopol. negative
          Painting by Alexander Deineka "Defense of Sevastopol".

          1. Phil77
            Phil77 25 February 2021 21: 42
            +1
            Constantine, they have not forgotten, they have not forgotten at all.



            1. Catfish
              Catfish 25 February 2021 21: 44
              +2
              Corrected. smile I express gratitude on behalf of the Revolutionary Military Council! soldier
      2. Phil77
        Phil77 25 February 2021 18: 53
        0
        Also, 15000 border guards took part in the battle for Moscow.
      3. Astra wild2
        Astra wild2 25 February 2021 20: 13
        +1
        Sergei, I said where I read it. "Participation in the battle of the Moscow militia is also a" little-known fact "don't you think I am a round idiot ?!
        I thought you were more attentive and noticed that I like the story. Or maybe you just see my grammar?
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 25 February 2021 09: 40
    0
    Marinescu was trite lucky that the fat target, as in the exercises itself, sailed. Similarly, we drowned "Shinano", just for free.
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 30
      +5
      Quote: EvilLion
      Marinescu was trite lucky

      Probably the same as with Goya? And Konovalov was probably the same lucky with Steuben .... lucky! They did not hit a finger on a finger, and they were just so lucky !!!
    2. Roman81
      25 February 2021 22: 29
      +1
      I will reveal a secret - in any victory of submariners there is banal luck, but there is also a skill - otherwise you will not survive on the submarine
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 1 March 2021 09: 12
        +1
        Quote: Roman81
        I'll reveal a secret

        The secret is, my friend, that without skill there will be no luck!
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 09: 52
    +3
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    In Odessa and Sevastopol, the sailors pulled off part of Hitler's armada.

    that is, they fought on foot. The tasks of the fleet are, in a way, completely different.
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    one Marinesco

    and about his successes to February 1945, is it possible for more details?
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 25 February 2021 11: 31
      +2
      Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      in a way, completely different.

      Certainly others, but do not surrender Odessa with reinforcements in the form of sailors!
      1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 11: 36
        -3
        Quote: Serg65
        but do not surrender Odessa with reinforcements in the form of sailors!

        so passed the same.
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 26 February 2021 09: 17
          +4
          Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          so passed the same.

          For what reason?
          1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 26 February 2021 09: 44
            -1
            Quote: Serg65
            Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            so passed the same.

            For what reason?

            and for what?
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 1 March 2021 10: 24
              +2
              Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              and for what?

              For the reason that the infantry of the Germans was allowed into the Crimea!
              Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Can you tell us more about his successes until February 1945?

              in 1942 he sank two Finnish transport, in 1944 he sank transport Siegfried.
              1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 1 March 2021 10: 27
                0
                Quote: Serg65
                in 1942 he sank two Finnish transport, in 1944 he sank transport Siegfried.

                He didn't sink a damn thing. In the report only. For which he received a cap3 and two orders.
                1. Serg65
                  Serg65 1 March 2021 11: 26
                  +1
                  Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                  He didn't sink a damn thing

                  Do you have irrefutable proof?
                  1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 1 March 2021 11: 32
                    0
                    Quote: Serg65
                    Do you have irrefutable proof?

                    Do you have proof of the opposite?
                  2. Serg65
                    Serg65 1 March 2021 11: 53
                    +1
                    Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    Do you have proof of the opposite?

                    I have Marinesco's minute-by-minute report on this fight! What are you based on?
            2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 1 March 2021 13: 11
              0
              Quote: Serg65
              in 1942, he sank two Finnish vehicles

              And Marinesco what side to these transports ?? C-13 who commanded Malanchenko during this period, no?
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 1 March 2021 13: 45
                +1
                Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                And Marinesco what side to these transports ??

                Here I confess I was mistaken ...
            3. aglet
              aglet 1 March 2021 13: 28
              0
              "For the good reason that the German infantry let in the Crimea!"
              what was the navy doing at that time? escaped in Novorossiysk and Poti?
              As the Crimea was surrendered, so the infantry is to blame, and that the Germans had torn the entire Black Sea Fleet with only a few dozen planes, who is to blame, also the infantry?
              1. Serg65
                Serg65 1 March 2021 13: 43
                +1
                Quote: aglet
                as the Crimea surrendered, so the infantry is to blame

                Well, ships on wheels have not yet been invented!
                Quote: aglet
                the Germans torn the entire Black Sea Fleet with only a few dozen planes

                Once again, the facts in the studio ... about the fact that the entire Black Sea Fleet and the number of aircraft!
                1. aglet
                  aglet 1 March 2021 15: 02
                  +1
                  "Well, ships on wheels have not yet been invented!"
                  but they came up with big guns in the navy, with which the Germans, according to you, fought off the entire Baltic region from the red army. Crimea, probably from a battleship, can you shoot right through? and even more than 600 combat aircraft of the KCHF Air Force. could something be done?
                  "about the fact that the entire Black Sea Fleet and the number of aircraft!"
                  Cruiser Chervona Ukraine sunk November 13, 1941, Sevastopol, aviation
                  "Frunze" sunk September 21, 1941, sowing. Tendra Spit, aviation
                  "Perfect" damaged on September 30, 1941, Cape Chersonesos, mine; damaged on November 12, 1941, Sevastopol, aviation (in the dock);
                  Shch-204 sunk on December 6, 1941, 20 miles from Varna, Ch. bombs and artillery fire
                  minelayers
                  "Ostrovsky" sunk March 23, 1942, Tuapse, German. aviation
                  T-504 ("Worker") sunk November 5, 1941, m. Ai-Todor, German. aviation
                  T-507 ("Delegate") sunk October 27, 1941, Kerch, German. aviation
                  T-491 ("Kiziltash") damaged on December 27, 1941, Kerch pr., German. aviation;
                  etc. I do not want to take a place. If you are interested, lope in grams-Internet. I hope you haven't been turned off?
                  more "October 6, 1943 became a" black "day for the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, when the Stukas from III./StG3 sank three ships southeast of the Crimean Peninsula within a few hours - the leader of the destroyers" Kharkov "and the destroyers" Merciless " and “Capable.” For almost a year, until September 9, 1944, hostilities were fought on the Black Sea, but all Soviet destroyers, cruisers and battleship of the Black Sea Fleet from that ill-fated day defended in bases on the Caucasian coast and did not fire a single shot at to the enemy. "
                2. Serg65
                  Serg65 2 March 2021 08: 34
                  +1
                  Quote: aglet
                  Cruiser Chervona Ukraine sunk November 13, 1941, Sevastopol, aviation

                  Oktyabrsky deliberately set up Chervona Ukraine under attack in order to get a pretext for the evacuation of the fleet to the Caucasus and to get away from the front himself.
                  Quote: aglet
                  constantly top, due to the shelling of German aircraft

                  Quote: aglet
                  "Perfect" damaged on September 30, 1941, M. Chersonesos, mine

                  I was blown up by a Soviet mine.
                  Quote: aglet
                  damaged on November 12, 1941, Sevastopol, aviation (in the dock);

                  Well then, let's say it was not sunk, but abandoned when Sevastopol was surrendered.
                  Quote: aglet
                  Shch-204 sunk on December 6, 1941, 20 miles from Varna, Ch. bombs and artillery fire

                  There are 4 versions of the death of the Lamprey, it is controversial to write off the death from aviation.
                  Quote: aglet
                  "Ostrovsky" sunk March 23, 1942, Tuapse, German. aviation
                  T-504 ("Worker") sunk November 5, 1941, m. Ai-Todor, German. aviation
                  T-507 ("Delegate") sunk October 27, 1941, Kerch, German. aviation
                  T-491 ("Kiziltash") damaged on December 27, 1941, Kerch pr., German. aviation;

                  If all the scows are counted, then yes ...
                  Quote: aglet
                  all Soviet destroyers, cruisers and battleship of the Black Sea Fleet since that ill-fated day defended in bases on the Caucasian coast and did not fire a single shot at the enemy. "

                  what You should have written an angry letter to Comrade Stalin on the basis on which he forbade the use of large ships in hostilities! bully
                  Quote: aglet
                  etc.

                  As of May 1945, the Black Sea Fleet had 1 battleship, 4 cruisers, 6 destroyers, 2 TFR and 54 submarines of different types .... so your statement about constant drowning is, to put it mildly, lies! And the losses from aviation were in all the fleets of the world, and some of them were catastrophic!
                3. aglet
                  aglet 3 March 2021 11: 56
                  -1
                  "Oktyabrsky specially framed Chervona Ukraine under attack,"
                  that is, he is not drowned?
                4. aglet
                  aglet 3 March 2021 15: 30
                  -1
                  "If all scows are considered yes"
                  scows, not scows, but the fleet included and were warships and were sunk
                  "You should have written an angry letter to Comrade Stalin on what grounds"
                  I will not write a letter to Comrade Stalin, because I understand his motives - the complete inability of the fleets and his admirals to conduct hostilities. this is both bf and bf. puffing up the cheeks before the war, and pouring huge amounts of money into the war did not help. Comrade Stalin could not personally keep track of everything. in these "victories" the undoubted merit of the tributs, October and personally, Kuznetsov. Only the northern fleet fought a little, and escorted the convoys. but his royal navy strengthened, and the Royal Air Force defended
                  "If all the scows are counted, then yes .."
                  this is only a small part, and only for 1941, and only the Black Sea Fleet. and only warships
            4. aglet
              aglet 1 March 2021 15: 06
              0
              "and the number of aircraft!"
              for each sunk ship, not a hundred million planes flew, a dozen, no more. and they were drowned, with a few exceptions, not at the same time. so, there weren't many planes. jump in grams - in the same place
  • Roman81
    25 February 2021 22: 32
    0
    Attack on transport and landing of DRG. Series 12 is not bad for a baby. Transport damaged on C-13 in 1944
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 26 February 2021 09: 40
      0
      Quote: Roman81
      Transport attack

      Well, yes, well, yes ... Gorgeous attack) The only torpedo that "accelerated" to 70 knots (!!!), "drowned" the "transport" in 7000 brt ... laughing For the "sinking" he received the Order of Lenin, and cap3 - not bad for a "baby", of course. True, then (in 1946) the intact floating battery went to the USSR for reparations.
      Quote: Roman81
      Transport damaged on C-13 in 1944

      not a transport, but the trawler "Siegfried" in 560 grt, which Marinesko "raised" to a transport of 5000 (!) grt and, of course, declared sunk. And the beating of the fisherman was just epic, yes - a three-torpedo fan with 5 cables. past. Then 39 shots 100mm and 15 high. 45mm. And a statement about 11 hits. And, of course, drowning. And the order of KZ. And the trawler just banked and lost speed, and was towed.

      Do you call all this success?
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 1 March 2021 10: 27
        +1
        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        trawler "Siegfried" 560 brt

        Who told you about the trawler?
        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        the trawler just banked and lost speed and was towed.

        Again from where infa?
    2. Serg65
      Serg65 1 March 2021 10: 25
      +1
      Quote: Roman81
      damaged transport in 1944

      Damaged or sunk by artillery fire?
  • aglet
    aglet 27 February 2021 15: 14
    0
    "I do not agree ... only Marinesco sent a division of the Germans to the bottom"
    moot point, but even if. and besides marinescu who and what?
  • Artyom Karagodin
    Artyom Karagodin 25 February 2021 09: 18
    +4
    at least there were no such failures and fulfilled its task in both cases

    During the Second World War, several German and Finnish mines, mostly converted from civilian ships, locked our Baltic Fleet for two years in the Gulf of Finland. All of Tributs's attempts to break through failed. Isn't this a failure?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 09: 35
      +4
      Quote: Artyom Karagodin
      locked our BF for two years in the Gulf of Finland. All of Tributs's attempts to break through failed. Isn't this a failure?
      Leningrad was defended in many, if not in all, thanks to the fleet. At other theaters, they managed at the very least.
      1. Ryazan87
        Ryazan87 25 February 2021 11: 21
        +10
        The only problem is that the fleet is still not floating batteries and not a supplier of very expensive infantry. BF is exactly how the fleet failed everything and everyone. The Black Sea Fleet performed better, but there are also a lot of questions there. The Northern Fleet acted better than others and precisely as a fleet, albeit a small one.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 25 February 2021 11: 24
          -2
          Quote: Ryazanets87
          The only problem is that the fleet is still not floating batteries and not a supplier of very expensive infantry. BF exactly how the fleet failed everything and everyone
          But nevertheless, without the artillery of the fleet, Leningrad was unlikely to be defended.
          1. Ryazan87
            Ryazan87 25 February 2021 13: 42
            +4
            naval artillery is an important aid to defense, who argues, but by itself it could not stop the Germans. Many restrictions and the accuracy of fire are also questionable - adjusting something in those conditions is a very non-trivial task.
            The problem is that the Baltic remained a German "pond" for almost the entire war: the Germans carried out the transportation of raw materials and troops quite freely. Moreover, they carried out amphibious operations, and the Soviets mostly stopped them (one tragedy with the landing on the Sommers is enough to remember with the "great" naval commander Levchenko).
            Of course, a number of important points must not be overlooked:
            1. Indeed, the Baltic is a very complex theater of operations, especially for submarine operations;
            2. Yes, Finland's entry into the war made the situation extremely difficult (although it was predictable, and the Finnish Navy cannot be called a very formidable enemy);
            3. A very motley fleet, questions about the quality of ships, the level of training and qualifications of the crews;
            4. The quality of military planning and staff work.
            The list can be continued.
            That is, roughly speaking, on paper the Baltic Fleet is a formidable and numerous force. In fact - an armada. There were enough brave men, but not enough for an effective naval war.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 25 February 2021 15: 56
              +2
              Quote: Ryazanets87
              naval artillery is an important aid to defense, who argues, but by itself it could not stop the Germans. Many restrictions and the accuracy of fire are also questionable - adjusting something in those conditions is a very non-trivial task.

              There were no problems with the adjustment in September 1941 - the Germans came so close that the same "Luttsov" fired from the Seaport at the observed targets.
              Quote: Ryazanets87
              Moreover, they carried out amphibious operations, and the Soviets mostly stopped them (one tragedy with the landing on the Sommers is enough to remember with the "great" naval commander Levchenko).

              EMNIP, there was a whole series of tragedies. And everything is like a blueprint: ours in winter 41-42 leave island N, the Germans or Finns occupy it, ours catch on and sometimes even recapture the island, then a German / Finnish group of KL and other trifles with a landing party on board comes up and knocks ours off the island. BF cannot oppose anything to the enemy.
              With such an organization, it is strange that our Lavensaari did not lose.
              Quote: Ryazanets87
              2. Yes, Finland's entry into the war made the situation extremely difficult (although it was predictable, and the Finnish Navy cannot be called a very formidable enemy);

              There, the problem was not so much in the Finnish naval forces as in the Finnish bases at the German disposal (for the same TKA flotillas), skerry fairways (bypassing all our MZ) and the Finnish coastal defense.
              Quote: Ryazanets87
              3. A very motley fleet, questions about the quality of ships, the level of training and qualifications of the crews;
              4. The quality of military planning and staff work.

              Uh-huh ... I immediately recall the battle of two EMs of the project 7-U with a floating base and a pair of TSC in 1941 - when instead of an "empty" EM that covered the group of laying mines, an EM with mines on board was sent into battle.
              1. aglet
                aglet 27 February 2021 19: 11
                0
                "There were no problems with the adjustment in September 1941 - the Germans came so close that the same" Luttsov "fired from the Seaport at the observed targets."
                Luttsov appeared in the Baltic at the end of 1943, or at the beginning of 1944. Where was the seaport from which he fired direct fire in 1941?
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 1 March 2021 11: 51
                  +1
                  Quote: aglet
                  luttsov appeared in the Baltic at the end of 1943, or at the beginning of 1944.

                  "Luttsov" appeared in the Baltic on July 1, 1939, when it was launched. smile
                  Quote: aglet
                  where was the seaport from which he fired direct fire in 1941?

                  As where? In Leningrad, of course. The heavy cruiser "Luttsov" of the "Hipper" type fired at the advancing German troops from the Coal Harbor of the Seaport of Leningrad. Surreal picture, isn't it? wink
                  And here he is in position (glory to the camouflage service!):
                  1. aglet
                    aglet 1 March 2021 13: 39
                    -2
                    "Luttsov appeared in the Baltic on July 1, 1939, when it was launched."
                    luttsov was launched on May 19, 1931
                    "How where? In Leningrad, of course. The Hipper-class Luttsov heavy cruiser fired at the advancing German troops from the Coal Harbor of the Leningrad Seaport."
                    what are you smoking? I would not like to expand reality like this
                    "" Luttsov "appeared in the Baltic"
                    speaking in the Baltic, I mean the Soviet Baltic, and with the beginning of the war, if anything
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 15: 33
                      +1
                      Quote: aglet
                      luttsov was launched on May 19, 1931

                      Nope. On May 19, 1931, the Deutschland panzerschiff was launched. smile
                      Quote: aglet
                      what are you smoking? I would not like to expand reality like this

                      Why smoke when reality is enough? Here is "Luttsov" in Leningrad - unfinished and unfinished. smile

                      Quote: aglet
                      speaking in the Baltic, I mean the Soviet Baltic, and with the beginning of the war, if anything

                      So I also meant the Soviet Baltic. The Soviet "Luttsov" opened fire on September 7, 1941, firing 676 shells in a week (Kofman will not let him lie). smile
                    2. aglet
                      aglet 1 March 2021 15: 38
                      -2
                      maybe it's enough to juggle names? if Soviet, then not luttsov. is there anything on the topic? about the fatal losses of the Red Army from thousands of millions of large-caliber shells? or about how long, at least in weeks, they, these ships, shelled the positions of the red army throughout the war
                    3. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 16: 19
                      +1
                      Quote: aglet
                      about the fatal losses of the Red Army from thousands of millions of large-caliber shells?

                      Would you mind citing a quote from my posts where I stated this?
                      Or did you decide to use Czapek's Imago technique in the discussion? wink
                      Quote: aglet
                      or about how long, at least in weeks, they, these ships, shelled the positions of the red army throughout the war

                      The above is given.
                      It is not the duration that matters. The moment is important. "The largest gunboats of the Baltic" processed our troops at a critical moment in the formation of the cauldron - when the units that cut the Germans went to the Baltic coast. This was usually followed by a blow to our units and the connection of the boiler with the main forces.
  • Artyom Karagodin
    Artyom Karagodin 25 February 2021 12: 05
    +2
    Nobody disputes this feat of the Baltic sailors. The point is that the fleet could act MUCH more efficiently than it was in reality.
    1. aglet
      aglet 27 February 2021 19: 15
      +1
      "The point is that the fleet could operate MUCH more efficiently than it was in reality."
      in general, the fleet did not fight, but portrayed combat activities. the heroism of individual people cannot overcome this sad fact.
      “However, in general, the communications of the Third Reich in the Baltic Sea worked effectively until May 9. More than 1.000 German transport ships took part in the sea voyages. They carried about two million people. 70 ships were sunk, which killed no more than 30 thousand passengers. in military terms, the overall percentage of casualties was negligible. "
      and this is not the Germans claim, but our historians have discovered
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 25 February 2021 11: 42
    +4
    Quote: Artyom Karagodin
    During the Second World War, several German and Finnish mines, mostly converted from civilian ships, locked our Baltic Fleet for two years in the Gulf of Finland. All of Tributs's attempts to break through failed. Isn't this a failure?

    The only failure here is that in 1943 there was no need to pound your forehead into the Nargen-Porkallaudd PLO line. Especially in summer, during short or even white nights.

    BF was not locked by minefields. The fleet was closed by the front line, which approached the only base left by the fleet, which was also in the blockade ring. What kind of active actions of the fleet can we talk about if both shores of the Gulf of Finland are at the enemy? Here it will not even be possible to cover ships normally from the air. The forward airfield at Lavensaari is extremely inconvenient for basing and supplying, and the Air Force of the Fleet until 1943 did not shine in the number and quality of aircraft (plus they were occupied over Ladoga and on the land front).
  • aglet
    aglet 27 February 2021 16: 03
    0
    "they locked our BF for two years"
    actually, almost until 1945
  • Serg65
    Serg65 1 March 2021 12: 13
    +3
    Quote: Artyom Karagodin
    All attempts by Tributs to break through failed.

    In order for Tributs's attempts to be successful, he would have to destroy the Luftwaffe, he also had to capture both shores of the Gulf of Finland, he also had to build 5 dozen minesweepers, and after the above-mentioned month, sweep the passage for the fleet! Well, so that you understand what this is about, here is a diagram of the minefields of the Gulf of Finland ...
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 12: 02
    +2
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    but at least there were no such failures

    if there were battles, there would be failures.
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 18: 24
    +1
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    but at least there were no such failures

    Yeah, if you stand in the port, then there will be no failures
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    fulfilled its task

    it's you about the battleship Slava, go about Marinesco ... and where are the battleships?
  • Destiny
    Destiny 25 February 2021 04: 34
    +12
    Here all spears have already been broken about Tsushima: "but if, but if, then it would ... no, because if, then then .." There is a good quote for this case
    "History does not know the word" If ". What happened happened ...
  • Momotomba
    Momotomba 25 February 2021 05: 35
    +9
    And the ships were not bad, and there was a battle plan, and reconnaissance was organized - everything was fine ... And the result was so great. What is the reason ??? Is it really simple and beloved by all of us: "It happened?"
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 06: 53
      +12
      A smart refutation of myths based on the memoirs and notes of the admiral who blew the battle!
      There is a well-known Russian proverb - "if it weren't for - mushrooms grew in your mouth"!

      The first and second myth!
      "Making noise with old ships" is at the level of "couch hamsters" at the sight of a cat to faint! It was necessary to distract and harass the enemy with high-speed ships with autonomy, and not in the Korea Strait. Through which it was possible to drag the slugs.
      Sending empty transports to Shanghai as a red herring? Do not rush my slippers - this is just a banal drain of information. Where were the auxiliary cruisers sent to make noise? They were sent to fight smuggling, which they did. If they were directed to make a distraction, they would act in a group. The effect would be much more effective. And so - zilch.
      The same thing about!
      “I decided to break through the Korean Strait, not the Sangar Strait, because a breakthrough by the latter would present more navigational difficulties and would be fraught with great dangers.

      This is a painting in its powerlessness, like a sailor! How many times did a detachment of Vladivostok cruisers pass through this strait? The loss of one prize in the La Peruzov Strait is not a reason.
      1. rytik32
        rytik32 25 February 2021 08: 42
        +8
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        How many times did a detachment of Vladivostok cruisers pass through this strait? The loss of one prize in the La Peruzov Strait is not a reason.

        WOK even sent prize ships to Vladik through La Perouse - successfully. And "Novik" passed. And the author draws conclusions from a single case with "Oldgamia"
      2. Artyom Karagodin
        Artyom Karagodin 25 February 2021 09: 20
        +4
        Thank you, Vladislav, for reasoned counter-arguments. Very useful.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 10: 07
          +4
          Quote: Artyom Karagodin
          Thank you, Vladislav, for reasoned counter-arguments. Very useful.

          To be honest, dear Artyom, I do not consider my conclusions well-reasoned, they, as it were, “lie on the surface”.
          There is a deeper analysis of the myths of the St. Petersburg military historian Dotsenko.
          In fact, Our "hero" could not win, but he had every chance to get out and situations with less losses. He also quote “The Second and Third Pacific Squadrons, together with supply vessels, were doomed to be slaughtered, acting predictably and obviously”!
          I repeat the words of the famous commander "if you want to win, surprise!"
          Regards, Vlad!
          1. Artyom Karagodin
            Artyom Karagodin 25 February 2021 12: 10
            +3
            It's just that the history of the naval battles of the Russian-Japanese one is known to me only in the most general outline, so it was useful for me, as an amateur in this matter. It would be nice to read Dotsenko. Thank.

            But as for the "young man" Rozhestvensky, there, after all, from the very beginning, as far as I understood, the goal was not to defeat the Japanese fleet, but to create problems for them by constraining their actions. And the forces of the Second Squadron were quite enough for this. If not for the "successful" actions of the admiral.
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
              Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 12: 23
              0
              Quote: Artyom Karagodin
              was helpful. It would be nice to read Dotsenko.

              If I have not forgotten his book is called “Myths of the Russian Fleet”.
              1. Artyom Karagodin
                Artyom Karagodin 25 February 2021 12: 33
                +2
                Very grateful hi
    2. Roman81
      25 February 2021 22: 33
      -1
      logistics, balance of power and quality of shipbuilding
  • Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 05: 35
    +11
    As they say, the victory of a thousand fathers, the defeat of one orphan.
    If only ... the enemy took advantage of all the shortcomings of the Russian fleet and defeated Rozhdestvensky's squadron ... that's a fact.
    The fathers of the commanders did not take advantage of the shortcomings of the Japanese fleet and did not defeat it, this is also a fact.
    The winner is the one who is ready for war ... the Armenians will not let them lie ... unless Pashinyan says something about 10 percent of exploded shells, the same picture is for the Tsushima battle.
    You don't have to blame except yourself.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 10: 13
      -3
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Armenians will not let them lie ... if only Pashinyan

      You, dear, with your pitiful maxims remind an extra from a theatrical crowd, who wanders around the stage, muttering the sacramental "what-to-say-when-to-say-nothing ...".
      If you have nothing to say on the subject - just enjoy the discussion of those in the subject. There are some. Without Armenians.
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 11: 23
        0
        "what-to-say-when-to-say-nothing ...".

        So really there is nothing special to say ... on the Tsushima battle, everything has long been laid out ... the author correctly noticed here. And who writes a dissertation in the subject ... well, your pathetic lectures also resemble the screams of Signor Tomato from Chipollino ... like to be silent ... you began to talk too much ... to be silent ... you should not have your own opinion .. . be silent ... smile
        That's why I like it because I can freely express myself and listen to the opinion of any person ... even who does not like you personally, dear paragraph Epitafievich Y.

        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 11: 33
          +1
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          that I can speak freely

          Certainly. If Armenians and Marinesko are brought into the topic of Tsushima, it will sparkle with new colors. laughing
          1. Lech from Android.
            Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 11: 44
            0
            But what about ... smile dry numbers are boring and you quickly fall asleep from them ... the topic should be covered brightly and tastefully and not just in academic language ... the audience on VO is the most diverse from a kid to an old man with gray hair ... hi
            On VO there are authors who brilliantly master this skill.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 11: 45
              -1
              Quote: Lech from Android.
              the topic should be covered brightly and tastefully and not just in academic language

              Are Armenians "bright" or "tasteful"?
              1. Lech from Android.
                Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 11: 52
                0
                Are Armenians "bright" or "tasteful"?

                And I don't know without a difference ... the defeat of Armenia in the war with Azerbaijan is somewhat reminiscent of the defeat of the Russian fleet in Tsushima ... that's why he made this comparison ... in both cases, the enemy turned out to be head and shoulders above because of the bungling of the command staff ..
                1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                  Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 11: 55
                  -4
                  Quote: Lech from Android.
                  the defeat of Armenia in the war with Azerbaijan is somewhat reminiscent of the defeat of the Russian fleet in Tsushima ... that's why he made this comparison.

                  Clear. After such a dull allusion, I have no more questions.
                  1. Lech from Android.
                    Lech from Android. 25 February 2021 12: 04
                    +2
                    Finally, you will leave me alone ... smilebored with you.
            2. aglet
              aglet 27 February 2021 16: 06
              0
              "There are authors on VO who master this skill brilliantly."
              without saying anything on the topic of discussion
          2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 13: 20
            +6
            Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            Quote: Lech from Android.
            that I can speak freely

            Certainly. If Armenians and Marinesko are brought into the topic of Tsushima, it will sparkle with new colors. laughing

            The paragraph is not to your liking! Miklouho-Maclay was the captain on Svetlana. Papua New Guinea has such a coast, so who the hell is not kidding, at least one Papuan in the squadron was. Well, or a brother - a Papuan.
            Although Miklouho-Maclay is not joking with this, a real Russian hero, unlike his superiors.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 25 February 2021 13: 26
              +4
              Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
              at least one Papuan in the squadron was. Well, or a brother - a Papuan.

              Maxim? laughing
              1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 13: 42
                +3
                And what is logical! Now we need to hire the hysterical Greta "Trumbler" or whatever, and set her on the Japanese samurai for violating the rights of dark-skinned Russian sailors, who against her essence during the years of captivity were fed sushi and sake, instead of bananas and pineapple juice! Barbarians in one word. laughing
              2. Catfish
                Catfish 25 February 2021 21: 42
                +1
                In fact, "Maxima" was called some vile swill like diluted technical alcohol, or something worse. laughing
            2. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 19
              +3
              Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
              Miklouho-Maclay was the captain on Svetlana

              Actually, on the battleship "Admiral Ushakov". And not Miklouho-Maclay but V. N. Miklukha
              1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 20: 16
                -3
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Actually, on the battleship "Admiral Ushakov". And not Miklouho-Maclay but V. N. Miklukha

                Yes, you are right, I deliberately distorted reality so as not to offend V.N. Miklukha.
  • A_Mazkov
    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 08: 01
    +11
    In addition to speed, maneuvering, or rather its absence, played a role in the battle of Tsushima. Rozhdestvensky lane heading NO23 for all 40 minutes until Suvorov lost control. In 40 minutes (from 13.49 to 14.35), the course was changed only twice! Which, in fact, was used by Togo, destroying the lead ships of the squadron.
  • mark1
    mark1 25 February 2021 08: 43
    +7
    What should a competent admiral who received a notification of the surrender of Port Arthur have to do? That's right - to deploy your "Invincible Armada" and blow back to St. Petersburg (well, as an option, in the process of leaving, you could break up into detachments and play around for a couple of months on communications in the Indian and Pacific oceans). Because with the loss of Port Arthur, there was no longer any sense of a large-scale naval war with Japan. How to do this politically competently, so that in St. Petersburg they would understand the correctness of actions and not "swear" much - this is already a sign of the deep abilities and personal qualities of the naval commander.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 11: 05
      -1
      Quote: mark1
      What should a competent admiral who received a notification of the surrender of Port Arthur have to do? That's right - to deploy your "Invincible Armada" and blow back to St. Petersburg (well, as an option, in the process of leaving, you could break up into detachments and play around for a couple of months on communications in the Indian and Pacific oceans).

      Essentially true. Moreover, tools in the form of auxiliary cruisers - 5 units and 2-rank cruisers - 3 units were.
      But there was no point in returning to St. Petersburg. It was possible to patrol in the latitude of St. Francisco, frightening Japan with their presence. To be aware of the movement of Togo, one could have a couple of ships with a powerful radio station in Shanghai or other major ports in East Asia. There has always been a leak of information about the Togo movement, the most important thing here is to buy morning newspapers and have time to warn.
      But what happened, it worked!
      1. mark1
        mark1 25 February 2021 11: 12
        +4
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        But there was no point in returning to St. Petersburg.

        The problem is the absence of its own MTO items. The squadron was not so eagerly accepted along the way, and if they started to raid, in the end such a terrible howl would rise that there was no place at all to drop an anchor. So two or three months is probably the most optimal.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 25 February 2021 11: 23
          0
          Then you could go to San Francisco, where to split the squadron.
          1. mark1
            mark1 25 February 2021 14: 35
            +1
            Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
            Then you could go to San Francisco

            Let's proceed from autonomy - 10/30 days (you can't feed the entire squadron with captured steamers). I came in and you were either interned (which the Americans did with the cruisers), or (if I don’t agree) they would be thrown back into the sea-ocean. So raiding is not so simple (I didn’t write it in vain - “as an option”), and if b lasted a couple of months gradually moving to the Suez Canal - already convincing success.
    2. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 25
      +1
      Quote: mark1
      (well, as an option, it would have been possible, in the process of departure, to break up into detachments and play around for a couple of three months on communications in the Indian and Pacific Oceans)

      Where are you going to get coal? And against whom are you going to disgrace in the Indian and Pacific Oceans? At that time it was possible to disgrace only against ships with military contraband. And even then in the places of hostilities. To remember Vitgeft almost crap when mines were placed in neutral waters
      1. mark1
        mark1 26 February 2021 19: 32
        -1
        Check out how our auxiliary cruisers misbehaved (to be honest, most of them are shameful).
        Quote: Pilat2009
        Disgrace then could only be against ships with military contraband.

        Disgrace in the sense of seizing in the form of a prize or sinking yes - ships with military contraband. But in order to find it, the ship must be stopped and inspected, i.e. panic and disorganization of streams is ensured in any case.
        This action is secondary, but for some reason everyone clings to it. The main idea is not to arrange a meaningless breakthrough to Vladivostok (since initially the squadron went to Port Arthur), but to return.
  • rytik32
    rytik32 25 February 2021 09: 12
    +16
    The author again repeats well-known myths
    In addition, in the end, it was still a battle, having a network of observation posts and fifty auxiliary cruisers and relying on a powerful basing system, the Japanese would intercept the squadron anyway.

    Togo himself understood that it was impossible to intercept 2TOE from Mozampo if it went through the Sangar Strait, so he was going to go north, but ... the steamers noticed Rozhdestvensky's maneuvers near the Saddle Islands (who does not know, opposite Shanghai) and Togo was left to wait.
    The second myth. Distraction of forces

    It is necessary to divert enemy forces by groups of fast ships: cruisers, auxiliary cruisers, destroyers. None of this has come close. Cruisers and destroyers were escorting. The auxiliary cruisers went into raiding.
    Now, if "Russia" and "Thunderstorm" came ...

    I remind the author that the task was "to seize the Sea of ​​Japan" and not "to break through to Vladivostok." It was possible to meet with the WOC even at the parking lot in Indochina.
    How to use in battle? At least throw in the attack on the lagging Asama.
    It could accelerate up to 14 knots for a short time. Constantly, it means, one or two less.

    Strange conclusions from the quote where it is written in black and white about 14,5 knots of full speed.
    For 1 TOE, a breakthrough speed of 14 knots was chosen, for a short time they even gave 15. And Rozhestvensky did not try to give the maximum speed, so all the talk about "could not give" is a later excuse. Now, if they tried, but someone broke, then it would be possible to take the argument into account. In the meantime, he only has the erroneous concept of Rozhdestvensky, for whom 2TOE was presented as a fortress floating on 9 knots, to which the Japanese are afraid to approach. What these fantasies were based on is not clear.
    Sixth myth. There was no battle plan
    This is not a battle plan you brought, but a plan to repel attacks on the marching formation of the squadron long before the Tsushima Strait.
    There was no single document for idiots, which Zinovy ​​did not consider junior flagships and caperangs to
    But Togo wrote combat instructions for his fleet. http://tsushima.su/RU/libru/i/Page_7/page_18/page_20/bibl-jap-port-artur-doc/japonskije-bojevyje-instrukcii/
    And which of them?
    with a concentration of fire, one by one

    And in the artillery instructions it was written to hit on the head. Or did Ber and Nebogatov have to break the instructions?
    1. 27091965
      27091965 25 February 2021 10: 23
      +5
      In the meantime, he only has the erroneous concept of Rozhdestvensky, for whom 2TOE was presented as a fortress floating on 9 knots,

      One can only assume that Z.P. Rozhestvensky chose the speed of 9 knots on the basis of a study conducted in England in 1898-1902 on the effect of speed on accuracy. From them it followed that the best accuracy of firing from large-caliber guns is obtained at a speed of 8-9 knots, an average caliber of 13-14 knots. But I have not seen any documentary evidence that this was the reason for the adoption of the squadron speed of 9 knots.
    2. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 00
      +2
      Quote: rytik32
      Togo himself understood that it was impossible to intercept 2TOE from Mozampo if it went through the Sangar Strait, so ...

      ... so he mined it.
      Quote: rytik32
      For 1 TOE, a breakthrough speed of 14 knots was chosen.

      Does Vitgeft know?
      1. rytik32
        rytik32 25 February 2021 12: 18
        +4
        Quote: Senior Sailor
        ..therefore he mined it.

        There are more questions than answers with this mining:
        1. Great depth - cannot be anchored.
        2. Strong current - floating mines will be carried away.
        3. And how do the Japanese themselves go?
        Quote: Senior Sailor
        Does Vitgeft know?

        These 14 knots of the planned speed are in the readings ... I read it just yesterday. Moreover, the coal reserve was designed for a 14-knot course all the way to Vladivostok.
        And a lot of questions about the amount of loaded coal and its consumption at the "Tsesarevich" ...
        1. Senior seaman
          Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 39
          +2
          1) Floating.
          2) Not right away. But to cover the direction at the most probable time of the breakthrough of the WTE is quite enough.
          3) Is the traffic in those places so big and how critical is it? And a week later see your point # 2 :))))
          Quote: rytik32
          These 14 knots of planned speed are in the readings

          And in fact, even 13 were held with difficulty, every now and then there were problems ...
          1. rytik32
            rytik32 25 February 2021 12: 47
            +3
            15 knots as the maximum speed is in the testimony of Matusevich, Essen, Ukhtomsky. 14,5 is seen in a couple more places. But for 13 knots ... sorry!
            1. Senior seaman
              Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 53
              +1
              I have neither the time nor the desire to climb according to the testimony, but I remember exactly what Szczensnovich wrote about the order for the squadron to have 13 nodesthat his battleship had to deal with. You will remember that he has a hole in the side. I also remember that at the very beginning, a couple of battleships were out of order, unable to maintain the course, and in the second phase, "Sevastopol" and especially "Poltava" seriously lagged behind.
              1. rytik32
                rytik32 25 February 2021 17: 13
                +1
                Szczensnovich wrote about 13 knots, but in the context that at one moment at the end of the battle he set corrections based on the course of ours at 13 and the Japanese at 17 knots.

                About the hole, he wrote that he allowed 15-16 knots to go. It is later in the book that he will change these numbers ...

                And here is a reserve of coal for a course of 14 knots
        2. mmaxx
          mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 49
          0
          I have a hypothesis. The Tsarevich joined in 1903, just before the war. Then winter standing, then damage and repair. Then standing again. Then the fight. The team just had no practice. The coal was ignorantly burned and that's it.
    3. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 28
      0
      Quote: rytik32
      destroyers

      Generally epic: the supply of coal on a destroyer for 1 day.
      1. rytik32
        rytik32 26 February 2021 22: 01
        0
        How fast?
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 25 February 2021 10: 20
    +9
    Everyone is so smart after the fact ... request
    Everywhere Rozhdestvensky is to blame, that would give me, I would have these Japs laughing
    Gentlemen, how many copies have already been broken, and you are all yours, if only ...
    I will add
    1. Rozhestvensky led the squadron to the Far East. He knew better than you WHAT he brought. Therefore, 2TOE was moving at the speed that allowed it not to crumble.
    2. Rozhestvensky kept in mind the results of the battle in the Yellow Sea on 28.07.1904. Therefore, I assumed that in a classic linear battle, when everyone is shooting at their counterparts (one on one, well, or 2 on one), then he has a chance to go through with acceptable losses.
    3. Do not forget that there is also the enemy factor. The Japanese had a larger squadron move, and therefore they have a tactical advantage. In any case, due to the speed, they were where they needed to. Therefore, they were in front and concentrated the fire on the leaders. No matter how you maneuver, they will still be ahead. And they took advantage of the tactical advantage 100%.
    ALL! The rest is no longer important. The Russians were shooting well, this is proved by the statistics on the start of the battle. But the Japanese did not have the pressure that our heads received from the concentration of fire. And it was due to the advantage in speed.
    All these nuns about the division there, diversionary maneuvers are also not relevant because Rozhestvenskooo had a SPECIFIC TASK, on ​​the basis of which he acted.
    Findings . The Japanese won due to their speed advantage, which allowed them to exert pressure on part of the squadron, knocking out ships one by one at the expense of concentration of fire. It is a fact. And nothing would have changed, even if any of you were in the place of Rozhdestvensky. Stop pouring from empty to empty.
    Personally, my opinion.
    1. rytik32
      rytik32 25 February 2021 10: 36
      +13
      Quote: Rurikovich
      3. Do not forget that there is also the enemy factor. The Japanese had a larger squadron move, and therefore they have a tactical advantage.

      In WM, the Japanese also had an advantage in speed, but this did not prevent Witgeft from maneuvering and successfully fighting.
      How so ???

      Quote: Rurikovich
      The Russians fired well, too, as the statistics on the start of the battle prove.

      Do you have these statistics? Can you share?

      Quote: Rurikovich
      The Japanese won the victory due to their speed advantage, which allowed them to put pressure on part of the squadron, knocking out ships one by one at the expense of concentration of fire. It is a fact.

      And here is a big mistake.
      I have now begun to deal with the organization of shooting in Tsushima: target selection, methods of zeroing in and firing, fire control methods, etc.
      Preliminary findings are the reason for Tsushima here. The difference is huge. And what is written in the "Organization of the Artillery Service on the Ships of the 2nd Squadron of the Pacific Fleet" is a very weak and unprocessed technique, which obviously could not give an acceptable percentage of hits in a real battle.
      I promise one or more articles on this topic. But not quickly - it takes time to figure everything out.
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 25 February 2021 10: 55
        0
        In the Yellow Sea, the difference was 1-2 knots. Under Tsushima, more. Moreover, Togo drew conclusions and maneuvering was better than in the Yellow Sea.
        Shooting. Questions to the General Staff, the Naval Ministry as a whole, and not to Rozhdestvensky alone, as to the commander. The problem is bureaucracy, economy before the war and misunderstanding of the development of artillery. With the improvement of artillery in general, rangefinders, and an increase in the distance of the battle, they frankly lost their hearts, and therefore devoured the fruits in the RYA. ZPR also had a hand in this before the war, but this does not ONLY impute to him the blame for the defeat.
        According to statistics in Kolobov's cycle, it is inconvenient for me to search from my phone now, if only from a computer in the evening. hi
        1. rytik32
          rytik32 25 February 2021 11: 18
          +4
          Quote: Rurikovich
          In the Yellow Sea, the difference was 1-2 knots. Under Tsushima, more.

          There are 2-3 knots in Tsushima. The difference is not important. And the fact is that they didn't even try to give the maximum speed, and it is very sad. And these questions are not for the General Staff and the Marine Ministry as a whole.
          Quote: Rurikovich
          With the improvement of artillery in general, rangefinders, and an increase in the distance of the battle, they frankly lost their hearts, and therefore devoured the fruits in the RYA.

          The 2nd TOE had more advanced rangefinders and also had optical sights, which were not on the 1st TOE. And nevertheless, the 1st TOE managed to hit from great distances. And "Retvizan" guessed to fire volleys in order to see their bursts. And these questions are not for the General Staff and the Marine Ministry as a whole. And in Tsushima they beat the rangefinder into a white light like a pretty penny and did not even see the results of their shooting. And what kind of accuracy can there be?
          1. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 25 February 2021 12: 24
            +3
            It is fundamental if she allowed Togo to choose the distance and time.
            Togo was not afraid to go under Tsushima to reduce the distance of the battle for the sake of efficiency, leveling the response by tactically staying ahead of the Russian column, and this is possible only with superior speed. Thus, some of the enemy ships were excluded from the effective shelling of their main forces.
            1. rytik32
              rytik32 25 February 2021 12: 28
              +8
              Quote: Rurikovich
              and this is only possible with superior speed.

              ... and no counter-maneuvers.
              Have you noticed how our squadron immediately learned to evade coverage and turn "under the tail" and deviate along the inner radius, as soon as the command left Rozhestvensokgo?
              In fact, our squadron did not shy away only in two episodes: at the beginning, when it was led by Rozhestvensky, and at the very end, when the squadron was led by the helmsman from Borodino ... This is how I compared the level of tactical skill so softly ...
              1. Rurikovich
                Rurikovich 25 February 2021 13: 06
                +3
                And what helped? As soon as they began to evade, Togo "all of a sudden" turned around and again waited for the Russians to rest against him. We have already analyzed all the maneuvers before, do not step on the same rake. Maneuvering at a lower speed saves you for a short time. And it does not cancel the execution of the main task. In the end, no matter how you dodge, Togo was constantly on the way of the Russians.
                For he could, at will, be where he needed.
                1. rytik32
                  rytik32 25 February 2021 13: 14
                  +3
                  Quote: Rurikovich
                  And what helped?

                  And you will compare how much time led the squadron "Borodino", and how much - other ships.
                  1. Rurikovich
                    Rurikovich 25 February 2021 13: 30
                    0
                    In the opposite direction to the original? I beg you, you make me smile smile
                    As soon as "Borodino" came out after its turn on the main forces, he died. And while the squadron was making a maneuver to evade the Japanese, they calmly turned around and took an advantageous position for themselves. Maneuvering a squadron at a lower speed is in most cases FORCED and obviously losing, unless the squadron aims to end the battle. Then any lapel will be a maneuver to achieve the goal. And in this case, there can be no talk of any effective maneuvering. Do not substitute concepts, this does not change the essence
                    1. rytik32
                      rytik32 25 February 2021 14: 10
                      +5
                      Quote: Rurikovich
                      As soon as "Borodino" came out after its turn on the main forces, he died.

                      You forgot to clarify that "as soon as" is 1,5 hours.
                      And now compare how much "Oslyabya" and "Suvorov" took out.
                2. A_Mazkov
                  A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 13: 22
                  +3
                  Quote: Rurikovich
                  And what helped? As soon as they began to evade, Togo "all of a sudden" turned around and again waited for the Russians to rest against him. We have already analyzed all the maneuvers before, do not step on the same rake. Maneuvering at a lower speed saves you for a short time. And it does not cancel the execution of the main task. In the end, no matter how you dodge, Togo was constantly on the way of the Russians.
                  For he could, at will, be where he needed.

                  It actually helped. While Togo's 1st detachment was making "all of a sudden," at 14:42, the battleship Fuji was hit by a 12-inch projectile, which exploded in the charging compartment of the aft tower. The 12-inch shells that were there could detonate and the ship would inevitably die, but due to the weak high-explosive action of the Russian shells, the shells did not detonate, and the water from the cooling pipe destroyed by the explosion helped extinguish the fire. A minute later, Asama again received two shells, both in the stern. The ship settled for 1,5 meters, stopped for a while, then went on, trying to follow its squad. He entered service only at about 17:10.
                  And Togo did not wait for the Russians to rest against him, but moved after (overtaking) the head of the Russian squadron.
                  And later, Togo lost the Russian squadron in the fog 2 times in the fog.
                  1. Rurikovich
                    Rurikovich 25 February 2021 14: 17
                    0
                    And what, the tactical pattern of the battle has changed from the hit of a shell in the Fuji tower or with the temporary outage of the Asama?
                    Can't anyone accept that speed advantage is the key to Tsushima?
                    1. A_Mazkov
                      A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 14: 36
                      +4
                      Quote: Rurikovich
                      And what, the tactical pattern of the battle has changed from the hit of a shell in the Fuji tower or with the temporary outage of the Asama?
                      Can't anyone accept that speed advantage is the key to Tsushima?

                      Everyone understands that speed advantage is the key to combat. But Rozhdestvensky should have understood this too! The question is, what did he do to counter this advantage of Togo?
                      1. Rurikovich
                        Rurikovich 25 February 2021 14: 52
                        -1
                        Back to technical condition yes Only the new "Borodino" and "Oslyabya" could theoretically give a speed comparable to the Japanese. The rest are only under 12-13 knots for a short time. The real combat speed, when the ship can go without breakdowns for a long time, was even less. I repeat, Rozhestvensky knew what he was under his command and what he was capable of. Alas, this is reality. request
                      2. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 15: 05
                        +5
                        What Ignatius was suggesting was to change course to prevent the Japanese from targeting.
                        After 15.00, the opponents lost each other due to the fog.
                        It would have been possible, in general, to hold out until 15.00 and dump.
                        It is clear that Togo would have caught 2TOE on the outskirts of Vladivostok, but a fight near his base is a completely different alignment!
                      3. Roman81
                        25 February 2021 22: 38
                        +2
                        ..and knock down your sight, leveling the advantage in the main battery
                      4. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 22: 59
                        +1
                        Quote: Roman81
                        ..and knock down your sight, leveling the advantage in the main battery

                        Togo's 1st squad has already rushed ahead, and your end caps cannot shoot at it. Moreover, when the "Eagle" finally, even at the beginning of the battle, completed the maneuver, its stern tower could no longer shoot at the "Mikasa", they opened fire on the "Iwata". But Togo concentrated the fire of his squad on Suvorov. Presumably, any advantage, the enemy has already leveled.
                        The situation itself offered only one option - evasion, in order to reduce the effectiveness of enemy fire and hold out until the evening, because the enemy had the advantage in experience and speed.
                      5. rytik32
                        rytik32 25 February 2021 23: 18
                        +4
                        Was this sighting?
                        Who saw her?
                        Was there anything to shoot down?
                        I have information that "Suvorov" switched to a fugitive, without completing the zeroing. And the rest of the ships of the 1st detachment were ordered to "hit the head" without transmitting zeroing data.
                      6. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 23: 36
                        0
                        As far as I understand, "Suvorov" switched to rapid fire after the loss of rangefinders, closer to 14.30.
                        Otherwise, it is not clear, and to whom did Vladimirsky transfer the data?
                      7. rytik32
                        rytik32 25 February 2021 23: 59
                        +1
                        Do you understand the term "quick fire" correctly?
                        Zeroing is shooting singles to check the distance and corrections.
                        Rapid fire is firing with all guns when ready at the distance obtained by the rangefinder and corrections (according to the tables).
                      8. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 00: 25
                        +1
                        Quote: rytik32
                        Do you understand the term "quick fire" correctly?
                        Zeroing is shooting singles to check the distance and corrections.
                        Rapid fire is firing with all guns when ready at the distance obtained by the rangefinder and corrections (according to the tables).

                        Well, the Japanese kind of fired with half-volleys and volleys from the main battery. To be honest, I don’t know how the Yapas beat them with a medium caliber, but it seems like they were also in volleys.
                        As for ours, there, due to the release of the head Togo from the firing of stern guns, in general there was group fire, and I think it was in volleys.
                        They couldn’t make out the bursts anyway, imagine what would happen if, when ready, each gun fired at one target, and even from different ships.
                      9. rytik32
                        rytik32 26 February 2021 08: 37
                        +3
                        Quote: A_Mazkov
                        They could not make out the bursts anyway, imagine what was happening if, when ready, each gun fired at one target, and even from different ships

                        You understand correctly. And so it happened.
                        And the main argument why, according to all the instructions, they switched from volleys to rapid fire, was the speed factor. Don't wait for the slowest weapon.
                      10. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 11: 05
                        +1
                        Once upon a time I read either the instruction, or the manual on artillery shooting of the RIF of that time, and so, I do not remember that I would have encountered the concept of "rapid fire" there.
                        Group and plutong, yes. But that means shooting on command, not when ready.
                        So, the question is, what did Slavinsky mean when he said that the bow group switched to rapid fire?
                      11. rytik32
                        rytik32 26 February 2021 11: 23
                        +2
                        This method of control can be central, group or plutong, depending on who controls the fire. Central - from the conning tower. Group - from a group (4 groups in total, on the "Orel" groups in corner 6-inch towers). Plutong is a tower or several casemate guns with the same firing angles.
                        Quote: A_Mazkov
                        But that means shooting on command, not when ready.

                        Where does this information come from? And how was the command to fire transmitted? :)
                      12. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 12: 02
                        +2
                        For the plutong, the command is given by the plutong commander.
                        For the group - by voice, over the trumpet, the command is given by the group commander.
                        The point is, in general, that even during the sighting of the bursts among strangers they could not make out.
                        Accordingly, if each gun fired independently, when ready, then there would be a little less sense than none. Bursts are still not visible, this is not field artillery. How to shoot?
                      13. rytik32
                        rytik32 26 February 2021 12: 07
                        +2
                        What was the name of the team?
                        How was it transferred under central control?
                        Why was there no such command in the Geisler device?
                        Quote: A_Mazkov
                        Accordingly, if each gun fired independently, when ready, then there would be a little less sense than none. Bursts are still not visible, this is not field artillery. How to shoot?

                        You think absolutely right!
                        And the trouble is that during the exercises there was no such problem, and the bolt was hammered into the experiment of the 1st TOE. And the artillery instruction for the 2nd TOE turned out to be very crude and unsuitable for real combat.
                      14. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 15: 44
                        +2
                        "And the artillery instruction for the 2nd TOE turned out to be very crude and unsuitable for real combat."
                        Was there really a separate instruction for 2TOE?
                        I thought that there was a single RIF for the whole ...
                        Can I have a link where you can read it?
                        I also read about Geisler's devices for a long time, like in the magazine "Fortress Russia". But I really don't remember, but there, and it was not about the times of the RYAV.
          2. A_Mazkov
            A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 08: 18
            +1
            Slavinsky showed that the "Eagle" switched to rapid fire at the "Mikasa" according to the rangefinder data, since they could not make out the bursts from the medium caliber. But did he mean the concept of "rapid fire" in the same sense that is used in field artillery?
            The "Borodins" had sighting bow and stern turrets of medium caliber, but as far as I understand, they fired the first 1 - 2 shots from them to clarify the distance to the target, and that was all. Then they fired in volleys, the whole group (bow or stern).
            In the RNP, as far as I remember, having received the initial data from the art officer, they aimed the gun, reported readiness, and after the command "volley", waiting for the direction of the inclinometer arrow, they fired a shot (there was no electrical system at that time yet). Since all people are different, it is clear that at the same time, up to a second, the guns did not fire in a volley. The adjustment was carried out using the optical sight of the gun.
          3. rytik32
            rytik32 26 February 2021 13: 20
            +3
            But I have no information that ours in Tsushima fired volleys. The maximum is a turret salvo, and there is no direct information about this. Only indirectly, for example, double hits on Japanese ships.
          4. A_Mazkov
            A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 16: 29
            +1
            It seems that Jackson mentioned in his report that the Japanese fired precisely in a centralized manner, when all the guns were ready, they simultaneously fired at the same target on the orders of the chief artilleryman.
            The main guns were zeroed in with half-salps, the left gun was the right gun.
            By the way, Semyonov himself mentions "suitcases" flying and tumbling with absurd muttering as soon as the Japanese opened fire. hardly he meant six-inches.
            I don’t know how the SKs were targeted by the Yap.
            I believe that the RIF was shot in the same way, on the same principles.
            The "Borodiners" of course had optical sights on the guns, and there was an opportunity to shoot with each gun, but what's the point if the fire control system is intact?
            When "Suvorov" after 14.00 lost both rangefinders, then yes, most likely they fired with a gun.
            And again, pointing to the rapid fire, Slavinsky mentions "by the rangefinder".
            With all the desire, I do not understand how you can shoot based on the data of the rangefinder, but scattered about the gun? They weren't hitting the squares with howitzers, but at a moving target, moving at the same time ...
            Maybe by "runaway" he meant that it was overwhelmed?
          5. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 26 February 2021 21: 20
            +3
            Quote: A_Mazkov
            Maybe by "runaway" he meant that it was overwhelmed?

            Under "rapid fire" it is customary to mean several shots in a row, without adjusting the sight.
          6. A_Mazkov
            A_Mazkov 28 February 2021 17: 02
            +1
            Quote: Saxahorse
            I have information that "Suvorov" switched to fugitive, without completing zeroing

            You're right!
            But all our correspondence with rytik32 arose because of his phrase "I have information that" Suvorov "switched to a fluent one without completing the zeroing".
            As if not to relate to the ZPR, but he graduated from the St. Petersburg Mikhailovskaya Artillery Academy as a naval artilleryman, and from 1894 he served as commander of the Training and Artillery Detachment of the Baltic Fleet.
            Open quick fire without having verified zeroing data ...
            Well, even I would not have dared to do this, let alone ZPR!
          7. Saxahorse
            Saxahorse 28 February 2021 21: 34
            +1
            Quote: A_Mazkov
            Open quick fire without having verified zeroing data ...
            Well, even I would not have dared to do this, let alone ZPR!

            You are thinking like a normal person. Admiral Rozhdestvensky by the time of Tsushima was definitely not like that. Well, the position held had nothing to do with his real knowledge and skills either. A career is not made with brains, especially at court.
    2. A_Mazkov
      A_Mazkov 28 February 2021 17: 44
      0
      Quote: rytik32
      But I have no information that ours in Tsushima fired volleys. The maximum is a turret salvo, and there is no direct information about this. Only indirectly, for example, double hits on Japanese ships.

      I have read the Instruction, thanks!
      I rummaged in the internet, but I didn't find anything special.
      But I found that the Yapas used the Italian system.
      I read about her in "Sea Collection" No. 11 for 1903.
      So there the principle is simple - a fork. Sight and rear sight installations solely on the basis of constant monitoring of shell drops. The main battery of the Italians is aimed at independently, not focusing on the data of the UK.
      As I already wrote, according to Semyonov, the Yapi began zeroing in from the main battery immediately (the "suitcases" flew).
      How they shot, either "quick fire" or in one gulp. Moreover, it was believed that at least volleys "slower", but preferable.
      Shcherbachev writes about the shelling of the Oslyabya:
      "First, the undershoot is about 1 cable, then the flight is about 1 cable, and the water column rises much higher than the Oslyabya forecastle when the shell bursts against the water. Against the gray background of the horizon, such a black column should be clearly visible. Then, after a quarter of a minute - hit. The shell bursts against the light side in the cheekbone of the Oslyabi with bright fire and a thick ring of black smoke. huge holes are visible on board. And again flight, undershoot and volley ".
      So everything is clear with the Japanese, they used the developments of the Italians.
      In theory, our principles should be the same, I do not think that ZPR, being previously the commander of the Training and Artillery Unit of the Baltic Fleet, began to reinvent the wheel.
      Our main battlegrounds were guided only according to the zeroing data of six-inches, but how much did this affect in terms of accuracy?
  • rytik32
    rytik32 26 February 2021 00: 37
    +3
    "Aurora" showed 19,2 knots on tests.
    In Tsushima - 18 knots.
    Where did you get the confidence that the other ships are doing so badly with speed?
    They didn't even try to accelerate! Therefore, all crying about speed is a banal excuse, invented later.
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 26 February 2021 06: 53
    0
    "Aurora" showed 19,2 knots on tests.
    In Tsushima - 18 knots.

    Aha, and "Navarin", and "Sisoy", and "Nakhimov", and all the non-rich stuff ???? They also gave 15 knots on tests. And how much did they give in reality after 15 years of service ???
    Enough to fight on paper, appeal with reality. Sane people have long been spreading Tsushima on the shelves and came to the conclusion that under Tsushima several negative factors had developed that led to the pogrom. And all sorts of "if bydakabs" would not have changed anything.
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 09: 05
    -3
    Quote: Rurikovich
    And all sorts of "if bydakabs" would not have changed anything.

    if, on the advice of Makarov, one-turret high-speed ships of 3000 tons, 2x 305x40 were made (for a pair of three (and for the money so for 4, that is, there would be 64 305x30 guns in one salvo) instead of one EBR), then the outcome of the battle would be different, and the ability to shoot all the weapons at the same time, and quickly maneuver, catch up with the enemy, go out into his tail and mane ...
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 35
    0
    Quote: Rurikovich
    And how much did they give in reality after 15 years of service ???

    Moreover, the bottoms are overgrown
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 45
    0
    Quote: Rurikovich
    And how much did they give in reality after 15 years of service ???

    Moreover, the bottoms are overgrown
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 26 February 2021 21: 23
    +2
    By the way, under Madagascar divers cleaned the bottoms. The blessing of time was heaps.
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 27 February 2021 08: 28
    -1
    Uh-huh, and after Madagascar, how many squadrons were in warm waters? And what, divers will clean the bottom more efficiently than workers in a dry dock ??
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 27 February 2021 19: 35
    0
    The very fact of a fairly well-established diving service at that time is interesting. Not expected.
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 54
    +2
    Yes. And it is overwhelming. Which Rozhdestvensky just gave the One.
  • rytik32
    rytik32 26 February 2021 00: 28
    +2
    Quote: Rurikovich
    Maneuvering at a slower speed saves a short time

    Tell it to Admiral Scheer laughing
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 26 February 2021 06: 47
      +2
      It's time to go to work and there is no time to "butt" with you ...
      Scheer actually performed two maneuvers, both from the enemy. Show me Scheer's maneuvers, where he used them to solve tactical tasks to improve the position. Scheer was fleeing from a stronger enemy, Scheer was at his bases and did not pass half the world before that. Sheer was also rescued by the clumsiness of the British, who looked forward, not back. And in the morning Sheer was in fact at the house at home, and the remnants of the Russians on the high seas. Therefore, I don’t need Jutland. The circumstances and technique are completely different. But in terms of speed - Scheer had speed along the slowest. He could not give more than 16uz or he had to throw his old "Braunschweig". Reminds nothing ???
      And all this whining about "Rozhdestvensky could have given more" is childish babble! COULD NOT! Because if it accelerates more, everything will fall out of the old system. Cars will start to break down, you will have to throw one, then the second ...
      All the admirals sitting on the couch ... request
      1. rytik32
        rytik32 26 February 2021 08: 45
        +4
        Quote: Rurikovich
        And all this whining about "Rozhdestvensky could have given more" is childish babble! COULD NOT! Because if it accelerates more, everything will fall out of the old system. Cars will start to break down, you will have to throw one, then the second ...

        Unfortunately, your assumption is not supported by the facts.
        Here "Aurora" wanted - and squeezed 18 knots.
        "Emerald" - 21 knots.
        "Seva" in ZhM on the report of Essen issued 15!

        And to hear excuses about speed from those who have not even tried to develop it is ridiculous.
        1. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 26 February 2021 09: 27
          0
          Kindergarten request "Aurora" new ship, "Emerald" too! "Sevastopol" is newer than "Navarin" with "Nakhimov". The author has already written about the state of the BRBO machines. The general speed of the squadron is measured by the slowest. Find specific data on the speed capabilities of each ship of the squadron at the time of the battle and stop already living in your world.
          For example. The same "Pearl" for PMA, after 10 years of formal operation, was crawling at 18 nodes. With passport 22,5.
          The same applies to half of Rozhdestvensky's squadron. All the junk of the 2nd and 3rd detachments could give a maximum of 12 knots. Add fouling of the bottoms due to a long stay in the tropics. And even less for a long time. So draw your own conclusions, and do not persist on the capabilities of the new "Aurora" ....
        2. rytik32
          rytik32 26 February 2021 10: 01
          +4
          Quote: Rurikovich
          The same applies to half of Rozhdestvensky's squadron. All the junk of the 2nd and 3rd detachments could produce a maximum of 12 knots.

          Well, not a maximum, but quite a long squadron move 2TOE was 12 knots. Evidence:
          1. Rozhestvensky knew this very well and even before Tsushima gave orders to be ready for the 12th key move.
          2. The movement of the squadron on the night of May 15 was also about 12 knots (unfortunately, the readings differ greatly in both directions, but if you average them, you get about 12).
        3. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 26 February 2021 11: 19
          -2
          Once again, I repeat, you are arguing after the fact, and Rozhestvensky was directly involved and proceeded from what was reported to him, so he knew better what the old part of the squadron was capable of. You need to operate with ALL data, not selective. He may have known that theoretically you can count on 12 knots, but he kept it in reserve in order to hypothetically use it during the battle. Maybe 9 knots were a guaranteed constant movement of the entire squadron. And give a stroke of 12 knots, the same bearings on the same "Apraksin" would melt, in the end, think whether to throw or move on .... But you are all the same reasoning after the message, "if bydakaby" At the same time, you yourself admit that 12 knots are a very conditional reading. Do not forget that the speed was calculated based on the revolutions of the cars, and not reality, because due to fouling of the bottom, it could be less than on the revolution counter. For an objective picture, we need data on the daily consumption of coal on each ship, we need reports on all incidents during the voyage on each ship. Then the real picture will become clear why Rozhdestvensky walked with 9 nodes, and not 13, like Vitgeft. And since the real superiority of the Japanese became clear within 20 minutes, then an extra couple of knots of the Russians would not have saved. This is reality....
        4. mmaxx
          mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 59
          +1
          If the squadron was TRYING to go 12 knots and it didn’t succeed, then we could say that it was useless.
        5. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 27 February 2021 08: 26
          +1
          You were not in the place of Rozhdestvensky. He had to correlate his capabilities with the tasks set. He chose this option based on his knowledge and assumptions. And on the couch and I can dream - if only
        6. mmaxx
          mmaxx 27 February 2021 11: 17
          +2
          I can also push it in: it is you on the couch justifying Rozhdestvensky.
          I don’t remember any of my contemporaries who would support the decision of the ZPR for the battle. From the lieutenant and above, everyone was perplexed. And unlike us, the same Novikovs, Stepanovs, Kostenko and others were there.
          My opinion is based on the results. And the complete passivity of the squadron's behavior in battle. That was the plan. His plan. Which was carried out on duty, but no one understood. All that remained was to perish.
        7. Rurikovich
          Rurikovich 27 February 2021 13: 47
          -1
          Quote: mmaxx
          it is you on the couch justifying Rozhdestvensky.

          I am not making excuses for him in any way !.
          All my comments boil down to the fact that everybody is smart after all. Everyone scolds him, but for some reason they rarely remember the task at hand! If they said - look at your discretion, you can not go to Vladivostok, then it would be a different story. But he was assigned a specific combat mission, and he fulfilled it. HOW did it - that's a different story. And again - everyone is smart now. And then Rozhestvensky had the results of the battle in the Yellow Sea and he tritely assumed that according to that scenario, it was possible to complete the task with acceptable losses.
          The Japanese simply thought differently. That's all! For some reason, no one takes into account the enemy's factor that the enemy is fighting on the basis of his capabilities and tasks. And the enemy simply tactically created an advantage on one flank and ruled out their play at the very beginning, some of the Russian heavy guns.
          And whether any other admiral was in the place of Rozhdestvensky, the conditions were impracticable at those introductory dates. Well, one would have turned around and left without fulfilling the order and would have received a tribunal. Another would increase the speed of the squadron, simply prolonging the agony. The third would go around, but the Japanese would still have met them and there would still be a fight. For the Japanese were in the mood for battle and used their strength to the maximum. In any case, they had a larger squadron move, and this is the choice of the battle conditions for themselves.
          Rozhdestvensky was given the task of mastering the Sea of ​​Japan, so he fulfilled it with what he was given and based on the experience of ITOE request
        8. mmaxx
          mmaxx 27 February 2021 15: 03
          +3
          We are constantly discussing why CRA has disdained all breakout opportunities. Conversely, why did he provide the Japanese with every opportunity for a whirlwind. This can be analyzed and needed.
          And the task of taking possession of the Yellow Sea was beyond his strength even if he had freely led the entire squadron to Vladivostok. The Japanese couldn't really do anything from Vladik.
          And the entire subsequent history of peace and wars in the Far East suggests that the Japanese were terribly lucky in the Russo-Japanese War. Literally. They tried, of course. But what the Russian bosses were doing is just incredible.
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 26 February 2021 18: 34
    0
    Quote: rytik32
    In fact, our squadron did not evade only in two episodes: at the beginning, when it was led by Rozhdestvensky

    Ignatius asked to turn it by 2 rumba, with which Rozhestvensky agreed. And then, before that, Togo made a loop and the ebr fired, why should they maneuver?
    1. A_Mazkov
      A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 19: 15
      +3
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Quote: rytik32
      In fact, our squadron did not evade only in two episodes: at the beginning, when it was led by Rozhdestvensky

      Ignatius asked to turn it by 2 rumba, with which Rozhestvensky agreed. And then, before that, Togo made a loop and the ebr fired, why should they maneuver?

      Actually, no, I didn't agree! He said to Ignatius: "Wait, we took aim too!"
      Semyonov, who voiced a similar request from Redkin, shrugged his shoulders and replied: "Let the fires be put out, there is nothing to help from here."
      After a few minutes, he really turned away, and then reluctantly. And five minutes later, he returned to NO23 again, it is not clear why. The result of this return is the loss of both rangefinders in 10 minutes, a bunch of wounded people in the wheelhouse, including the ZPR itself, the death of the helmsmen, rangefinders and Ignatius.
      Awesome talented maneuvering! He really is a genius of tactics and strategy!
  • 27091965
    27091965 25 February 2021 13: 23
    +3
    Quote: Rurikovich
    With the improvement of artillery in general, rangefinders, and an increase in the distance of the battle, they frankly lost their hearts, and therefore devoured the fruits in the RYA.


    Dear Rurikovich. I think it’s impossible to give such a generalized definition that we were "screwed up", shooting at 1500 yards, I will take the English definition, was carried out in all the fleets of the world. It was necessary for training and improving the coordination of the calculation, at this distance the gunner could visually see the fall of the projectile. When they achieved good coordination of the calculation and satisfactory accuracy, then they switched to "long range firing" or "combat shooting" using the central firing control. But in this matter it is necessary to look at when rangefinders appeared on our ships and how they were used.
    1. Rurikovich
      Rurikovich 25 February 2021 13: 49
      0
      So, while at all the exercises before the RYA, the distance was 20kbt, then the development for long-range shooting had only to dream and learn already during the war ...
  • Senior seaman
    Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 01
    +5
    Quote: rytik32
    this did not prevent Witgeft from maneuvering and fighting successfully.

    I'm sorry, where was it successful?
    1. A_Mazkov
      A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 14: 08
      +5
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      Quote: rytik32
      this did not prevent Witgeft from maneuvering and fighting successfully.

      I'm sorry, where was it successful?

      Considering that the fire was opened at 12:20, and Vitgeft died at 17.30, the battle ended due to the onset of darkness at all at about 20.20, and the Russians and Japanese ships were seriously damaged during the battle, but not a single ship was sunk. then, in comparison with the Tsushima defeat, the Battle in the Yellow Sea is far from "beating up babies." Moreover, Witgeft until his death managed to achieve the main thing - to prevent the coverage of the head of his squadron. Actually, I believe that if Vitgeft commanded in Tsushima 2TOE, and not Rozhestvensky, the results might not be so sad.
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 25 February 2021 14: 39
        +4
        The battle in the Yellow Sea is described and arranged on the shelves by Andrey from Chelyabinsk.
        I will only say that Togo's excessive caution allowed Witgeft to deceive him and be ahead. The Japanese had to catch up with the Russians for a long time, because the speed advantage was not critical, and therefore they were spread out in time. If you put Vitgeft instead of Rozhdestvensky, nothing will change - the Russians will lose.
        And not beating, because the distance was greater and during the battle there was no head coverage, they fought mainly with sides on almost parallel courses until the fatal hit in the "Tsarevich"
        1. A_Mazkov
          A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 14: 52
          +6
          Quote: Rurikovich

          And not beating, because the distance was greater and during the battle there was no head coverage, they fought mainly with sides on almost parallel courses until the fatal hit in the "Tsarevich"

          Well, under Tsushima, thanks to his loop, Togo immediately got the opportunity to cover the head. Let's say that the ZPR did not immediately assess the situation and the danger correctly ... But then?
          "- Your Excellency, - as always, gesturing animatedly, the commander said, - we need to change the distance! They have taken aim very much - and they are frying!
          - Wait. After all, we also took aim! .. - answered the admiral. "
          Well, and how did Rozhestvensky prevent the coverage of the head of his squadron?
      2. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman 25 February 2021 16: 30
        0
        Sorry, but all this talk is in favor of the poor.
        There is only one criterion of success - a completed combat mission. In this case, it was a breakthrough of the PTE to Vladivostok. This task was not completed. This is the first thing.
        The results of the artillery battle are also not at all impressive. On 32-33 hits of the Russian artillerymen, the Japanese responded with at least 150th. That is, there is no success here either. This is the second.
        After the defeat of Rozhdestvensky's squadron, Nebogatov handed over four battleships, one of which was outdated, and three small. It is sad, but a direct consequence of the failure of the battle in the ZM was the sinking of the inner roadstead and the subsequent resurrection under the Japanese flag of four much more modern and large battleships, as well as two cruisers of the first rank. This is the third.
        Quote: A_Mazkov
        Actually, I believe that if Witgeft, and not Rozhestvensky, commanded in Tsushima 2TOE, the results might not be so sad.

        You can assume anything you like, but if VTE were engaged in combat training in the same way as Vitgeft did with the first, the situation would be even worse. Although, it would seem, where else ...
        1. A_Mazkov
          A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 16: 50
          +4
          [quote = A_Mazkov] Actually, I believe that if Vitgeft commanded in Tsushima 2TOE, and not Rozhestvensky, the results might not be so sad. [/ quote]
          You can assume anything you like, but if VTE were engaged in combat training in the same way as Vitgeft did with the first, the situation would be even worse. Although, it would seem, where else ... [/ quote]
          In fact, in the battle in the Yellow Sea, the Japanese were well battered.
          Besides, first of all I mean that Vitgeft at least tried.
          Rozhestvensky fought precisely "passively", generally not reacting in any way to Togo's actions.
          Moreover, unlike Vitgeft, Rozhdestvensky already had infa about the Battle in the Yellow Sea, and if he was warned, then he was saved! There Semenov was at his side, a participant in the battle.
          Well, how did Rozhestvensky, such a talented naval commander, use the information he received?
          1. Senior seaman
            Senior seaman 25 February 2021 17: 15
            +1
            Quote: A_Mazkov
            In fact, in the battle in the Yellow Sea, the Japanese were well battered.

            In which place?
            Their main losses are in combat effectiveness from the imperfection of their own ammunition.
            Quote: A_Mazkov
            Besides, first of all I mean that Vitgeft at least tried.

            But he did not succeed, and we are exactly what about "success".
            In addition, all Vitgeft's "successes" are a consequence of Togo's mistakes, and in Tsushima Heihachiro Idzhuinovic did not do such garbage anymore.
            Quote: A_Mazkov
            Well, and how did Rozhestvensky ... use the information he received?

            In the most direct way. Since the failure came from the loss of control due to the death of the commander, he ordered the next matelot to lead the column.
            But he (and Semyonov too) did not know that the effectiveness of the Japanese fire would increase.
            1. A_Mazkov
              A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 17: 43
              +2
              Quote: Senior Sailor
              In addition, all Vitgeft's "successes" are a consequence of Togo's mistakes, and in Tsushima Heihachiro Idzhuinovic did not do such garbage anymore.

              In fact, Togo did exactly the same thing under Tsushima that he tried to portray on July 28, 1904 - he covered the head of the Russian squadron.
              According to Fillipovsky:
              "At 2 we changed course to the right by 07 R. in order to change the distance, as the enemy was well aimed.
              At 2 hours 15 minutes. lay down on the old course NO 23 °. About this time the admiral, the flag-captain was wounded, the 2nd change of helmsmen and 2 galvaners were killed while measuring the distance. The left rangefinder of Barr and Stroud was broken, they moved the right rangefinder to the left side, but after a few minutes it was also broken.
              At 2 o'clock. 30 min. they stalled the rudder on the left side, tried to stay on course, driving the cars, but this failed and the Suvorov went out of order. "
              According to Clapier de Colong:
              “2 o'clock in the afternoon. We turned two points to the right - the distance to the head Japanese cabin 28, along which the fire of our XNUMXst armored detachment was concentrated whenever possible. It seemed that the enemy concentrated fire on the Suvorov and Oslyabya.
              2 hours 15 minutes We turned to the left and lay down on the previous course NO 23 °. The shells hit continuously.
              2 hours 25 minutes We turned 4 rumba to the right.
              2 hours 26 minutes The admiral was wounded with a shrapnel in the head in the left frontal part and the flag-captain again in the back of the head, Colonel Filippovsky's face was covered in blood.
              A fire started around the conning tower; Lieutenant Sverbeev went to extinguish it and was wounded in the back and went to bandage. Broke the clock in the wheelhouse. The bottom is 120 mm. shell flew into the wheelhouse and killed the helmsman and another lower rank. "Suvorov" stopped obeying the steering wheel and, rolling to the right, turned 16 points to the right of the course. "
              So, in Tsushima Heihachiro Idzhuinovich did not reinvent the bicycle, and he did exactly the same garbage, and Rozhesvensky, keeping the NO23 course, helped him in every possible way in this.
              1. Senior seaman
                Senior seaman 25 February 2021 18: 00
                +2
                What is this set of copies for?
                In the initial phase of the fight in ZhM Togo twisted pirouettes at a long distance, either luring Witgeft to mines, or even why, as a result of which PTE was able to disperse with him in counter courses, and in Tsushima he immediately went into a loop and clinched. If ours had more sane shells, this somersault would have cost the Japanese dearly, but chogo nema - that nema.
                And the ZPR did exactly what the IHK subordinates should have done. Namely, grit your teeth and go forward.
                1. A_Mazkov
                  A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 18: 48
                  +3
                  And I didn’t claim that he had to go back. Simply, Rozhestvensky himself, in one of his reports, wrote that Togo turned 16 points, laying down on a "parallel or converging course." That is, the result of this maneuver was not a surprise for Rozhestvensky (since the course is converging)! At the same time, Rozhestvensky knew that Togo had more speed! When the Japanese took aim, Ignatius suggested that His Excellency change the course in order to knock down the enemy's sighting. What did the great naval commander do?
                  1. A_Mazkov
                    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 18: 58
                    +3
                    And about the effectiveness of Japanese fire: what exactly did the Japanese "suitcases" do? Fires and a bunch of debris. They could not break through the citadel of the battleship, at least from the "Borodino". Then again, maneuver, knock the Japanese out of sight, as Ignatius suggested, and reduce the number of hits. After 15.00, because of the fog, the Japanese generally lost the Russian squadron 2 times (like Kamimura, they even lost Togo and rushed in a completely different direction). Rozhestvensky had options to hold out with less losses, and get out of Togo.
                  2. Senior seaman
                    Senior seaman 25 February 2021 20: 17
                    +1
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    Fires and a bunch of debris. They could not break through the citadel of the battleship, at least from the "Borodino"

                    Afterglow.
                    but the Japanese succeeded in the main thing - to destroy the fire control devices, after which the hits on them became only random.
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    as Ignatius suggested, and reduce the number of hits.

                    It is also necessary to get in response. Who knew our shells were so ineffective.
                    You see, colleague, you are now reproaching Rozhestvensky for not being so smart tolike your mother-in-law after... Within the framework of the information available to him, the ZPR acted not flawlessly, but it was quite logical.
                  3. A_Mazkov
                    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 21: 34
                    +3
                    Quote: Senior Sailor
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    Fires and a bunch of debris. They could not break through the citadel of the battleship, at least from the "Borodino"

                    Afterglow.
                    but the Japanese succeeded in the main thing - to destroy the fire control devices, after which the hits on them became only random.
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    as Ignatius suggested, and reduce the number of hits.

                    It is also necessary to get in response. Who knew our shells were so ineffective.
                    You see, colleague, you are now reproaching Rozhestvensky for not being so smart tolike your mother-in-law after... Within the framework of the information available to him, the ZPR acted not flawlessly, but it was quite logical.

                    Again, I was reproached here for copy-paste. So, Semyonov, having witnessed the conversation between Ignatius and Rozhdestvensky, did not just come to the wheelhouse, but at the request of Redkin. And he asked to change the course, since the smoke from the fires interferes with the firing of the stern guns!
                    That is, the situation with "it is also necessary to get in response" is not so unambiguous.
                    Since you, due to the enemy's precise fire, do not have the opportunity to hit him in response (you yourself write that the Yap managed the main thing - to destroy the fire control devices, although the "Prince Suvorov" lost both rangefinders after 14.00), then you have only one way out - to shoot down sight to the enemy. Especially if the power of fire was added to its advantages in experience and speed. I want to remind you that Rozhestvensky was also listed as a specialist in the artillery unit.
                    Therefore, when analyzing Tsushima so often questions arise specifically to him. Why, with certain knowledge and information, Rozhdestvensky does nothing at all?
                    In the hand, everyone has been wounded more than once, "Mikasa" cuts the course ... Semyonov just told him that the case is a pipe, and everything sucks, what "afterword" is there?
                  4. Senior seaman
                    Senior seaman 25 February 2021 22: 04
                    -1
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    what other "afterword"?

                    Read more carefully. You wrote that the Japanese shells could not penetrate the Borodino GBP. This is the afterthought, because how could the ZPR know the characteristics of their shells?
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    What did

                    He held the line, diverting the fire to himself.
                  5. A_Mazkov
                    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 22: 41
                    +4
                    Quote: Senior Sailor
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    what other "afterword"?

                    Read more carefully. You wrote that the Japanese shells could not penetrate the Borodino GBP. This is the afterthought, because how could the ZPR know the characteristics of their shells?
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    What did

                    He held the line, diverting the fire to himself.

                    What has it to do with, does ZPR know that "suitcases" do not pierce the belt? ZPR knows for sure that Togo has a speed advantage. Knows that Togo has pulled ahead and cuts the course. Knows that the Japanese have shot. I just heard that aimed shooting is impossible due to fires and smoke. From two people came a sensible proposal to change course and shoot down the Yapam sighting. Already 4 reasons for changing the course were known to him at that time! We, now, about Tsushima do not know much more than Rozhdestvensky, otherwise there would not have been so many heated disputes around this battle.
                    About "kept the line". I'm not saying that you need to get out of the battle ... Just start to maneuver more often, not allowing the enemy to shoot!
                    After all, the squadron, in fact, held the formation and carried out his instructions to follow the lead. The primary task is to hold out until dusk with less losses. And in fact, in general, to the fog (which the ZPR of course did not know, here I will agree).
                    I just do not see with what action he, as a naval commander, performed this task.
                  6. rytik32
                    rytik32 25 February 2021 22: 44
                    +3
                    Quote: Senior Sailor
                    You wrote that the Japanese shells could not penetrate the Borodino GBP. This is the afterthought, because how could the ZPR know the characteristics of their shells?

                    There was information about the action of Japanese shells in previous battles.
                    but the Japanese managed the main thing - to destroy the fire control devices

                    Only two questions are open:
                    1. How many shells did the ships on which the instruments were destroyed receive?
                    2. And where did those ships on which the instruments were intact shoot? Not everyone was immediately rolled out ...
            2. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 26 February 2021 21: 42
              -2
              Quote: A_Mazkov
              and what exactly did the Japanese "suitcases" do? Fires and a bunch of debris. They could not penetrate the citadel of the battleship, at least from the "Borodino".

              Is it okay that the towers got hot and the ammunition was ignited?
            3. A_Mazkov
              A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 23: 43
              +1
              Quote: Pilat2009
              Quote: A_Mazkov
              and what exactly did the Japanese "suitcases" do? Fires and a bunch of debris. They could not penetrate the citadel of the battleship, at least from the "Borodino".

              Is it okay that the towers got hot and the ammunition was ignited?

              That is, with the conclusion about the need to maneuver in order to knock down the sight, do you agree?
              Semyonov wrote that the Japanese ships periodically, as soon as they were targeted, described the coordinates, leaving the column for a short time.
              What prevented Russians from doing this?
            4. rytik32
              rytik32 27 February 2021 13: 43
              +3
              Quote: A_Mazkov
              Semyonov wrote that the Japanese ships periodically, as soon as they were targeted, described the coordinates, leaving the column for a short time.
              What prevented Russians from doing this?

              Rozhestvensky strongly cursed at those who got out of the wake.
              But Makarov, in his "instructions for walking and fighting," easily allowed ships to break down as needed.
            5. A_Mazkov
              A_Mazkov 27 February 2021 15: 19
              +1
              Quote: rytik32
              Quote: A_Mazkov
              Semyonov wrote that the Japanese ships periodically, as soon as they were targeted, described the coordinates, leaving the column for a short time.
              What prevented Russians from doing this?

              Rozhestvensky strongly cursed at those who got out of the wake.
              But Makarov, in his "instructions for walking and fighting," easily allowed ships to break down as needed.

              That is why it is difficult to evaluate him as a tactician and strategist.
              It is clear that he was afraid of the collapse of the column and loss of control.
              But his instructions would work well for the simplest battle of sailing ships in wake columns.
              Once he himself pointed out that he assumed that the enemy had an advantage in speed, which would allow Togo to take a more advantageous position, in theory, he should have initially come to the conclusion that it was necessary to maneuver.
              He was also dissatisfied with the result of the shooting practice, respectively, he could come to a logical conclusion: the Japanese would be more accurate and inflict more damage in some theoretical period of time.
              Here, according to the circumstances, one could either:
              1. Reduce the distance to the enemy (controls the head column by moving the course converging with the enemy),
              2. Break the distance (the head makes lapels, leading the head enemy to his traverse, or, thanks to the location of the SC in the towers, not allowing him to run far ahead, and the rest, if they endure heavy fire, simply make coordinates away from the enemy, knocking down the sight) ...
              Considering that Rozhestvensky seems to be also a specialist in artillery, his tactics, or rather its absence, is simply amazing!
              What did he even count on, to slip through the fog and darkness?
              But, in fact, it was, at 15 and 16 o'clock because of the fog they lost contact. The last battle of the squadrons on May 14 at 17.42 began, ended somewhere at 19.30, it seems.
              Develop a ZPR, based on the knowledge he had at that time, at least some kind of plan, Togo could not roll out 2TOE due to at least weather conditions (cloudy and foggy) and late (after all, 2 nd half of the day) start of the battle.
            6. rytik32
              rytik32 27 February 2021 16: 04
              +3
              Yes, and it was necessary to slip the Tsushima Strait at full speed. To put up reconnaissance ahead so that the main forces of the Japanese were noticed, and to get away from them himself - it would be so dark and would hold out. And at night there is every chance of getting lost, if you go not stupidly NO23, but a more tricky route, for example, closer to Japan.
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 25 February 2021 12: 40
    +2
    "I promise one or articles on this topic", but I promise: to look more often in: "History" and "Armament"
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 10: 51
    -5
    there were exits, and they are obvious 1) go not in a column, but in a front, in a line, for which to send cruisers and destroyers forward to destroy enemy destroyers, and then withdraw the cruisers and destroyers and push the battleships forward, while turning the side towards the enemy, for a fundamental drawback the battleship is two-turret and the inability to shoot the stern tower forward (Makarov suggested single-turret gunboats of 3000 tons 2x 305x40) 2) go to Petropavlovsk Kamchatsky 3) instead of erroneous EBRs and cruisers, instead of erroneous EBRs and cruisers, gunboats of two types of single-turret large-caliber gunboats 3000 tons 2x 305x40 tons and conventional gunboats with anti-destroyer guns (Koreets type)
    1. Andy
      Andy 25 February 2021 11: 32
      +2
      Makarov offered one-turret gunboats of 3000 tons 2x 305x40
      ---
      all in the world were idiots - they built seaworthy and stable platforms-battleships. your 3000 tons would be thrown up like a float

      push the battleships forward, while turning the side to the enemy
      ---
      This is something new. do you know what the front line looks like? show the schematic how to fire with the side.
      1. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 03
        +6
        No use, colleague.
        Vladimir fervently believes in his fantasies and if the facts contradict them, then ... so much the worse for the facts :)))
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 18: 06
          0
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          if the facts contradict them, then ... so much the worse for the facts :)))

          well, you can hardly argue with me, only you can throw dirt and minus from around the corner ... insert your five cents
          1. Senior seaman
            Senior seaman 25 February 2021 20: 11
            0
            What am I to argue with you if all that you are saying is nonsense?
            Quote: vladimir1155
            Makarov offered one-turret gunboats of 3000 tons 2x 305x40

            It never happened.
            1. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 4 March 2021 10: 50
              0
              Quote: Senior Sailor
              What am I to argue with you if all that you are saying is nonsense?
              Quote: vladimir1155
              Makarov offered one-turret gunboats of 3000 tons 2x 305x40

              It never happened.

              Makarov offered to build many light cruisers, apparently he was impressed by the Japanese victory at Yalu
              1. Senior seaman
                Senior seaman 4 March 2021 11: 19
                0
                Quote: Pilat2009
                Makarov offered to build many light cruisers

                But, by no means, not tower gunboats with a battleship main battery !!!
                Look at his "armored cruiser" project, he is on the net. There is no such delirium anywhere near!
      2. Lynnot
        Lynnot 25 February 2021 16: 06
        +2
        Quote: Andy
        push the battleships forward, while turning the side to the enemy

        I read that there was such a popular version. Like, Borodintsy had to meet Togo's column with a frontal front and at the same time would have an advantage in the weight of a salvo of guns, especially due to the fire of 8 six-inch guns of each Borodinets. He would have turned away in order to bypass the front line along the edge, and during this time Borodintsy would have reorganized into a line for the classic linear battle. There is another option that the ZPR wanted to use a weak 2 armored squad as a decoy, so that Togo would first want to attack it, and then rebuild so that Togo rested on Borodintsev. But for such a "ballet" the speed and maneuverability of battleships, as well as the experience of such skillful joint maneuvering, would obviously not have been enough.
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 25 February 2021 16: 39
          +11
          If Rozhestvensky wanted to use the 2nd brigade as bait, he would not have climbed convulsively to occupy the head of the wake column by the "Borodinites". And this suggests that Z.P. it was not in his head, so he stupidly put the best EBRs in the head, which was burned in order of priority. The battle in 2 units did not fit in his head. Such is the naval commander. He could well have taken the "Mikasov detachment" in ticks, if he had let his troughs go ahead with a northeast-ost deviation. If the “Borodinians” were in the left column lagging behind the right “slow-moving” one, Togo would have gotten into his loop. It was necessary to quickly make a decision on the divided but coordinated actions of the 1st and 2nd detachments, but Z.P. the stupor was evident. Straight! that's where we need it, straight ahead! - neither give - nor take Alyosha Popovich. The most interesting thing is that the "lawyers" are constantly discussing the tale that Rozhestvensky allegedly "outplayed" Togo at the stage of entering the battle. Pff .. no words.
          1. A_Mazkov
            A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 17: 03
            +1
            Quote: andrew42
            The most interesting thing is that the "lawyers" are constantly discussing the tale that Rozhestvensky allegedly "outplayed" Togo at the stage of entering the battle. Pff .. no words.

            This is from the testimony of Rozhdestvensky.
            “Obviously, due to circumstances, although not depending on me, the first blow of our squadron was placed, by the movements of my flagship, in unusually favorable conditions: at the moment of the first shot from the Suvorov, the lead Japanese battleship alone could respond to fire 12 - or (if we assume that the "Oryol" did not come out even then from the side of the "Oslyabya", then) 11 — our battleships, and then, within ten minutes, while the Japanese were assembling their line, the most distant of our ships could and should was to reduce its distance from the Japanese line from 42½ cables to 35 cables.While the loop of the Japanese battleships was untied, the Suvorov passed forward, and from the traverse ending the circulation of the Japanese battleships, the flagship of our II armored detachment was closer to Suvorov. “Oslyabya.” Naturally, the first volleys of enemy ships were directed at it, starting, perhaps, from the third or fourth ship in order of formation and ending with the twelfth, - they were sent to those very moments nty, when each of them finished their circulation.
            Then, as they moved forward, they transferred volleys to the Suvorov and Alexander. "
            1. andrew42
              andrew42 25 February 2021 17: 42
              +6
              There is a cognitive dissonance in these "explanations" of Rozhdestvensky. The fact that the enemy significantly surpasses his 9-knot "united column" in the speed of maneuver is what Z.P. for some reason I forgot to insert. wishful thinking is presented as valid. It was not Rozhdestvensky who "played enough" in the initial phase, but Togo jumped in and caught him in the fight "without options." You can say a lot, but the dynamics of the battle clearly testifies: Togo burned the best head EBRs one after another. Whom did Rozhestvensky outplay here? - Himself, no one else.
              1. A_Mazkov
                A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 17: 59
                0
                Quote: andrew42
                There is a cognitive dissonance in these "explanations" of Rozhdestvensky. The fact that the enemy significantly surpasses his 9-knot "united column" in the speed of maneuver is what Z.P. for some reason I forgot to insert. wishful thinking is presented as valid. It was not Rozhdestvensky who "played enough" in the initial phase, but Togo jumped in and caught him in the fight "without options." You can say a lot, but the dynamics of the battle clearly testifies: Togo burned the best head EBRs one after another. Whom did Rozhestvensky outplay here? - Himself, no one else.

                No, in fact, Rozhdestvensky did not hide it (about speed). I just gave the answer to one of the questions of the investigation commission, No. 34.
                It's long there:
                "... I was not so paralyzed with horror at the appearance of the enemy, as a publicist, an employee of the Grand Duke, who apparently has access to all the official information of the Naval Ministry, is trying to prove it. So, the head of the first detachment (Suvorov) leaned to the left at 1 o'clock. 20 m., And at 1 h. 49 m. Straightened on the course NO 23 ° ahead of the columns of II and III armored detachments; the 2nd, 3rd and 4th matelots of I - the detachment kept him in the wake all this time.
                To determine what distance was at 1 h. 49 m between the head of the first squad and the head of the second squad, we can assume that the first was walking, with an average speed close to 11¼ knots, along a line close to the hypotenuse of the triangle, 29 minutes (and walked, therefore, about 5,5 miles), and the other walked on a large side, at a speed of 9 knots, and passed 29 4/1 miles in 3 minutes. Since the small leg of the same triangle (the distance between the columns) was 0,8 miles, the entire length of the large leg should have been equal to 5,4 miles, and the distance between Suvorov and Oslyabya was 1 hour 49 m. it should have been 5,4 - 4,33 = 1,07 miles.
                Thus, I brought the squadron into battle in such a way that by the time my flagship turned to the course of the columns of the II and III armored detachments, all the ships of the I squadron could fit between my flagship and the battleship Oslyabya, even counting two-cable distance of the ship from the ship, not between their centers (midpoints), but between the stem of one and the sternpost of the other. When at 1:49 pm "Suvorov", leading to NO 23 °, opened fire, it seemed to me that "Oslyabya" was not on the alignment of the masts of "Suvorov", but somewhat to the left, ten, fifteen fathoms. Therefore, I ordered to raise the signal: "II detachment will be in the wake of the XNUMXst."
                At the present time, apparently, it turns out that the battleship "Eagle" (4th - in the 1st detachment), with the above formation, pulled back and at 49:XNUMX pm was not in its place, but behind the starboard side of "Oslyabya ". I have no right to dispute this.
                Maybe "Oryol" was delayed due to its own fault or the fault of the third in the line (the second number followed "Suvorov" in an impeccable distance).
                If this is true, then it means that by the time of my first shot, I brought into battle not 12 ships, but only 11. However, it should be borne in mind that when the first shot was fired from the Suvorov at the battleship Mikaza, from a distance of 32 cables, then the Mikaza was less than one point ahead of the Suvorov traverse; and, since the length of the formation of the three battleship detachments of the second squadron was to be 2,8 miles, the distance from the terminal matelot in the III detachment to the battleship Mikaza should have been no more than 42½ cables. Thus, I brought into battle the second squadron in a formation in which all my battleships had to be able to fire at the first moment at the head of the Japanese line from the distances of its aiming reach for the main calibers. Not because of my quick wits, but because of my self-reliance, which was justified, and, perhaps, by the mistaken calculation of the Japanese admiral, at the moment of the first shot from the Suvorov, the battleship Mikaza alone managed to lay on a course parallel or somewhat converging with the course of the second squadron. Of the other Japanese battleships, two were deployed after the Mikaza, and the other nine had not yet approached the point of sequential turning and lay in relation to the second squadron, bowed behind the Mikaza in the SW-th quarter. Therefore, the point at which the Mikaza was located at the time of the first shot from Suvorov and to which, after the Mikaza, another 11 Japanese battleships came in succession, remained under the shots of the entire second squadron (under the so-called first blow of it) for so long how long it took a Japanese line, 2,8 miles long, to run through this point. If we assume that the Japanese circulated even at a tremendous speed of 16 knots, then they needed at least ten minutes to run 2,8 miles. And during these 10 minutes our squadron nevertheless moved forward at a speed of at least 9 knots. This means that the end of our III armored detachment could advance along the course NO 23 ° by 1.5 miles; and, consequently, its distance to the point at which the Japanese ships came one after the other could continuously decrease and, by the end of the rebuilding of the Japanese, it could decrease to 35 cables, moreover, all the guns on the left side of the squadron could be directed to this point and all turrets with large caliber guns. Obviously, due to circumstances, although not depending on me, the first blow of our squadron was placed, by the movements of my flagship, in unusually favorable conditions: at the moment of the first shot from the Suvorov, the lead Japanese battleship alone could respond to fire 12 - or ( if we assume that the "Eagle" did not come out even then from the side of the "Oslyabya", then) 11 — our battleships, and then, within ten minutes, while the Japanese were assembling their line, the most distant of our ships could and should reduce its distance from the Japanese line from 42½ cables to 35 cables. While the loop of the Japanese battleships was untied, the Suvorov passed forward, and from the traverse ending the circulation of the Japanese battleships, the flagship of our II armored detachment, Oslyabya, was closer to the Suvorov.
                And then, that's not all!)))
                But it is worth noting that over time, in the testimony of eyewitnesses, some kind of nightmare happens.
                The beginning of the Tsushima battle is, in general, the most "muddy" topic!
                1. andrew42
                  andrew42 25 February 2021 19: 47
                  +4
                  And nevertheless, the emphasis is on the state of the battle in a very short period of time (the "untie" of the loop by the Japanese, as our chief naval commander put it). This is a short-term situation that obviously could not persist for a long time in order to somehow influence the course of the battle, moreover, at long firing distances. And what, Rozhestvensky did not understand what would happen next? -Kindergarten of some kind. I never heard any reasonable explanation for the setting of the "Borodinites" at the head of the column, and no one will ever hear it. Reading this long answer No. 34 from Rozhdestvensky, I cannot help feeling that this is a battle of battleships of the 17th century. Well, just "de Ruyter versus Monk", although in fairness there were such dog fights there that Rozhestvensky never dreamed of.
                  1. A_Mazkov
                    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 21: 07
                    +5
                    Well, Rozhestvensky pointed out that based on the technical condition of the ships, including the "Borodino", the speed of battle for him was limited to 10 knots. Based on this, the formation of a separate high-speed detachment was impossible. He also believed, and quite rightly, that Togo had an advantage in speed anyway, and accordingly, the latter could break the detachments separately. So, a column with "Borodino" at the head is quite a logical decision.
                    It is also logical to try to knock out the Japanese flagship at the beginning of the battle. Togo stood openly on the bridge, and he could have gotten lucky.
                    Everything further is not logical.
                    And with the very maneuver to bring the 1st detachment into the head of the 2nd and 3rd, not everything is clear.
                    The answer to the problem with a triangle given by Rozhdestvensky (and, by the way, has anyone tried to recalculate it?), Does not correspond at all to the result.
                    "Oslyabya" had to slow down, the 1st detachment was not in the head of the second, but lay down on the NO23 course in parallel, and even not entirely ("Eagle" definitely "did not fit").
                    Why didn’t they maneuver to shoot down the Yapam's sighting?
                    I already wrote that after 15.00 the Japanese lost the Russians for the first time in the fog.
                    The battle began at 13.49, that is, Rozhdestvensky had to hold out for just over an hour!
                    Break free from the strait, and roll on all four sides, let Togo catch you near Vladivostok. There the base is nearby, there you can give "the last and decisive"!
                    There are more chances that some ships will be able to break through.
                    1. andrew42
                      andrew42 26 February 2021 11: 38
                      0
                      "Break free from the strait, and go on all four sides, let ..." - that's really, no cowards, no cross .. How, where to blame? on 9 knots in the gap? from 4 Japanese units? Rozhestvensky acted in the mode of escorting the convoy, I think this is recognized by everyone. Well, how should the breakthrough of the head forces, the most efficient and fastest, lead to such a posting? - No way. Or recall how the Varyag did not break free, refusing to leave the Koreyets? (and there the minutes decided). In this situation, the 1st BO had to be separated, the forces of the 6nd BO had to enter the battle with the Togovskaya 2th, and the forces of the 1st BO had to maneuver at full speed, putting him in front of the task "for 2 birds with one stone." If we do not drive Togo into a disadvantageous position, then at least disorient, and use the 1st BO as efficiently as possible, albeit with a later exit to the targeted shooting range. Yes, the 2nd BO would receive pretzels, but the main impact force would be retained until the decisive phase of the battle. In any convoy, caravan, the most efficient forces should be located abeam the middle of the convoy - this is the alphabet, even on land, even at sea. Since our gentleman-careerist was afraid to divide 2 TOE into 2 detachments by different routes, since he went to escort escorting all in a crowd, then why the hell is it to expose the main security forces under the first blow? - Anyone who does not surprise the enemy is doomed to defeat. It is not even necessary to read Sun Tzu here. He substituted the 1st BO and washed his hands. That's all handsome.
                      1. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 15: 33
                        +3
                        Quote: andrew42
                        “Rozhestvensky acted in the mode of escorting a convoy, I think this is recognized by everyone. Well, how should a breakthrough of the main forces, the most efficient and fast, lead to such a escort?”

                        Well, the question about the transport workers, and why they were dragged, even arose from the historical commission. It seems that they came to the conclusion that in case of a breakthrough, it was not the most successful idea and the breakthrough had to be carried out only by warships.
                        About four sides.
                        As far as I remember, when the Yapas lost their squadron for the second time due to the fog at about 16.40 pm, Kamimura found it 50 minutes later, although Kamimura managed to lose the Togo squadron.
                        That is, there were chances anyway.
                        You look, and Kamimura without Togo's support would have gotten stronger.
                        Still, an armored cruiser is not a "Borodinets".
                    2. andrew42
                      andrew42 26 February 2021 11: 48
                      +6
                      Rozhestvensky did not have a clear concept of the upcoming battle. The entire course of the Tsushima massacre proves this. I was hoping for a chance. At the same time, for all his whining about the superiority of the Japanese, he did not bother either to strain his convolutions, or to take responsibility for a risky plan. He left "everything as it is", so he entered the battle. No excuse. An army of any lions is doomed to defeat if they are commanded by a ram.
                      1. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 15: 37
                        +1
                        Quote: andrew42
                        Rozhestvensky did not have a clear concept of the upcoming battle. The entire course of the Tsushima massacre proves this. I was hoping for a chance. At the same time, for all his whining about the superiority of the Japanese, he did not bother either to strain his convolutions, or to take responsibility for a risky plan. He left "everything as it is", so he entered the battle. No excuse. An army of any lions is doomed to defeat if they are commanded by a ram.

                        Yes, it was not! He generally recognized this, and pointed out that there was no battle plan because of the enemy's advantages, including speed.
                        According to his idea, literally I do not remember, but something like "Keeping the battle moving to the north."
                        It turned out so-so of course ...
                    3. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 32
                      +6
                      The fact that the speed could only be 9 knots is Rozhestvensky's fabrications at the trial. There are no documents confirming this. Nobody said during the investigation (maybe I don’t know?) That the headquarters was engaged in work on calculating speeds, time and maneuvering. Everything was provided with the abuse of the ZPR. But when it was necessary, without ZPR, the squadron developed even more. Only at this speed - 9 knots, he could control the squadron. This is the speed, yo-mine, of the convoy. Civil ships in convoys of 50 units. with random teams it went like that. Moreover, an order, not a wake. Managed to dodge attacks and get back together.
                      1. A_Mazkov
                        A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 18: 52
                        +4
                        Quote: mmaxx
                        The fact that the speed could only be 9 knots is Rozhestvensky's fabrications at the trial. There are no documents confirming this. Nobody said during the investigation (maybe I don’t know?) That the headquarters was engaged in work on calculating speeds, time and maneuvering. Everything was provided with the abuse of the ZPR. But when it was necessary, without ZPR, the squadron developed even more. Only at this speed - 9 knots, he could control the squadron. This is the speed, yo-mine, of the convoy. Civil ships in convoys of 50 units. with random teams it went like that. Moreover, an order, not a wake. Managed to dodge attacks and get back together.

                        Your remarks are absolutely correct.
                        But they only add questions about Rozhestvensky's actions.
                        The most surprising thing is that due to the positions he held earlier, he should not allow such "blunders". Someone generally believes that ZPR is one of the outstanding, well, or the most suitable naval commanders available in the Republic of Ingushetia. Those who dispute this thesis are called couch experts based on the aftermath.
                        True, no one could confirm his genius especially.
                        What at least was it?
                      2. Saxahorse
                        Saxahorse 26 February 2021 21: 32
                        +3
                        Quote: A_Mazkov
                        Someone generally believes that ZPR is one of the outstanding, well, or the most suitable naval commanders available in the Republic of Ingushetia.

                        Alas and ah, at first glance it is clear, and a detailed analysis only confirms .. Admiral Rozhdestvensky was corny stupid, and in addition, he was completely cut off from power and impunity.

                        And all the time, you can see it ... that his formation was a "poker" before opening fire, that the ridiculous movements of the reconnaissance detachment back and forth. It's just the convulsive body movements of a tyrant who guesses that he needs to be the type to lead before a fight, but has no idea how to do it.
                  2. Pilat2009
                    Pilat2009 26 February 2021 21: 54
                    0
                    Quote: A_Mazkov
                    Break free from the strait, and go on all four sides

                    Forward or backward? If forward then the remnants of the squadron could not break away during the night. If backward, then what next?
                    1. A_Mazkov
                      A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 23: 31
                      +1
                      Quote: Pilat2009
                      Quote: A_Mazkov
                      Break free from the strait, and go on all four sides

                      Forward or backward? If forward then the remnants of the squadron could not break away during the night. If backward, then what next?

                      To Vladivostok! But it is not necessary to strictly follow the NO23 course.
                      He knows where the Russian squadron is heading, but what is the route?
                      He has only one choice, to wait for her near Vladivostok, but the battle near the Russian base is no longer Tsushima!
                      And what do you mean by the "remnants of the squadron"?
                      If they were cruisers, then by 16.30 they were holding on, though with difficulty. Then they just received unexpected support from the main forces of the Russian squadron, which "taxied to the banquet" out of the fog. Kamimura also glanced at the noise of the firing later, but since he, having lost Togo, was in splendid isolation (although maybe it was Togo who lost him), he almost lost Nissin and Kasuga. In short, Kamimura, realizing that he was an uninvited guest at this celebration of life, made a reasonable decision - to dump nafig.
                      The last time on May 14, the parties "found each other" after 5 pm. It was getting dark ...
                      Unfortunately, thanks to various unfavorable factors (magnetic storms, spots in the sun, lovers enchanted to look at the loops being untied, etc.), this meeting finished off the remnants of the strongest ships of the squadron, which had already been pretty damaged.
                      Had less beaten, they would have piled in the darkness of the night, and Togo would have had to arrange a solemn meeting near Vladivostok, with murky results, but at the expense of the meeting side.
        2. Pilat2009
          Pilat2009 4 March 2021 10: 56
          0
          Quote: andrew42
          If Rozhestvensky wanted to use the 2nd brigade as bait, he would not have climbed convulsively to occupy the head of the wake column by the "Borodinites". And this suggests that Z.P. it was not in his head, so he stupidly put the best EBRs in the head, which was burned in order of priority. The battle in 2 units did not fit in his head. Such is the naval commander. He could well have taken the "Mikasov detachment" in ticks, if he had let his troughs go ahead with a northeast-ost deviation. If the “Borodinians” were in the left column lagging behind the right “slow-moving” one, Togo would have gotten into his loop. It was necessary to quickly make a decision on the divided but coordinated actions of the 1st and 2nd detachments, but Z.P. the stupor was evident. Straight! that's where we need it, straight ahead! - neither give - nor take Alyosha Popovich. The most interesting thing is that the "lawyers" are constantly discussing the tale that Rozhestvensky allegedly "outplayed" Togo at the stage of entering the battle. Pff .. no words.

          It does not occur to you that there would be no loop, because Togo began to rebuild so as not to expose his armored missiles to the Borodinites.
      3. Roman81
        25 February 2021 22: 42
        0
        We worked it out on the way. It turned out so-so and apparently decided not to check whether it would come out under fire if it did not work out in the exercises
      4. mmaxx
        mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 42
        +2
        Fighting in front formation is, of course, nonsense. Forehead to forehead is just stupidity. For this it is necessary to come to an agreement with Togo. And to lead with the nose against the side, it is unprofitable in any way.
        1. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse 26 February 2021 21: 36
          +3
          How many minutes is nose against side? Five or eight? Then the Borodino people are individually attached to the rear of Togo's battleships, and how can he answer them? Longitudinal fire was invented a long time ago, back in the sailing fleet. Reception begs itself.
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 26 February 2021 22: 39
            0
            Somehow strongly incredible. Taking into account the very easily maneuvering Japanese and almost nothing of ours ...
            1. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 27 February 2021 01: 04
              +4
              You should not attribute the unsurpassed oakiness of the ZPR to the entire squadron. Remember how Essen spun under fire. Well, the Japanese are immediately big troubles. They do not understand where to turn away .. They are all on board, but here Borodinians always play up in the ass. In general, it is clear that in close, nimble combat, the Japanese are losing here.
          2. rytik32
            rytik32 27 February 2021 11: 43
            +2
            That's right!
            This is a great way to realize the benefits:
            1. Strong fire to the bow and stern. The Japanese with their casemates have almost nothing to answer.
            2. In the booking. Our extremities have the main and upper belt. The Japanese have only a thin main one, and only Mikasa has a krupp, but a special hello to her with 152-mm traverses! And "Fuji" in the extremities has nothing at all except karpas.
            3. By shells. Our armor-piercing shells were capable of penetrating armor and bursting behind it. And from close range, even in KO and MO. Japanese - no.
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 18: 04
      0
      Quote: Andy
      all in the world were idiots - they built seaworthy and stable platforms-battleships.

      here is your logic "everybody does it" and this is your only argument! and did not try to think with your head, or at least understand why they do it and why? you are a typical Christmas, he is your like-minded person
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 26 February 2021 21: 57
        +2
        Quote: vladimir1155
        s typical Christmas, he is your like-minded person

        Let's start with the fact that in 3000 tons you won't fit any armor or supplies or 12 "guns. It will be just a cruiser.
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 22: 28
          -3
          Quote: Pilat2009
          and no armor squeeze in any supplies or 12 "guns. It will just be a cruiser

          why do you think so? we remove the second tower 8000/2 = 4000, and small medium artillery, 4000-1000 = 3000 studied arithmetic?
          1. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 4 March 2021 11: 36
            -1
            Quote: vladimir1155
            Quote: Pilat2009
            and no armor squeeze in any supplies or 12 "guns. It will just be a cruiser

            why do you think so? we remove the second tower 8000/2 = 4000, and small medium artillery, 4000-1000 = 3000 studied arithmetic?

            You probably designed a lot of ships. 3600 tons had the Naniwa cr. In general without armor and with 2 cannons 260 mm + 6 152 mm. And the guns were not in the towers
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. Pilat2009
            Pilat2009 4 March 2021 11: 40
            -1
            Quote: vladimir1155
            Quote: Pilat2009
            Let's start with the fact that you won't squeeze any supplies or 3000 "guns into 12 tons.

            Built 11
            Main characteristics
            Displacement up to 450 tons
            Xnumx length m
            8,8 width m
            Draft 2,9 m
            Armor cabin and gun shield: 12,7 mm
            PM motors
            Power up to 400 hp from.
            Mover 2
            Maximum speed up to 10 knots
            Crew up to 60 people
            weaponry
            Artillery 1 × 280-mm or 1 × 305-mm ("Gamma" and "Delta")
            2 × 76 mm or 2 × 57 mm (Gamma and Delta)
            4 mitrailleses ......
            The Rendel gunboat was a small and fairly cheap ship for coastal navigation, which, nevertheless, had weapons comparable in power to a battleship ...
            источник https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BB%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BA%D0%B8
            so they pushed them not into 3000 tons, but into 450 tons ... really, at the expense of 2500 tons, it is impossible to provide them with a high-speed movement and seaworthiness

            What ships will you fight on them? Well, the phrase "in terms of power is comparable to lx" just kills. I remember Goeben sank 2 such troughs in PMV
    3. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 18: 10
      0
      Quote: Andy
      This is something new. do you know what the front line looks like? show the schematic how to fire with the side.

      first straight, then right, circulation
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 25 February 2021 16: 07
    +5
    Quote: vladimir1155
    3) instead of erroneous EBRs and cruisers, build two types of single-turret gunboats of large caliber 3000 tons 2x 305x40 and ordinary gunboats of 1500 tons with anti-destroyer guns (Koreets type)

    The Japanese have fulfilled your dream by ordering the Elsvik cruisers. And then for a long time and stubbornly they had to throw out a large caliber from them and re-equip them with medium-caliber quick-fighters. smile
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 25 February 2021 18: 18
      0
      Quote: Alexey RA
      Your dream has been fulfilled by the Japanese - by ordering Elsvik cruisers
      that's why they won
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 25 February 2021 18: 25
        +3
        Quote: vladimir1155
        that's why they won

        Because they threw out the large caliber from the "Elswick KR", replacing it with 152-mm and 120-mm? Undoubtedly. smile
    2. Kayuk
      Kayuk 2 March 2021 20: 31
      0
      Quite right. This concerns "Naniw". And on more modern "dogs" there is not a single mention of at least one hit of the GC. And it's only 203mm. And here they offer 305mm. laughing And about the mention of 450 tons - so this is in shallow water and attached to the island or at anchor, so as not to accidentally roll over !!! fellow
  • Senior seaman
    Senior seaman 25 February 2021 12: 06
    +6
    Is it so possible? !!
    I read "The Myths of Tsushima" and decided that my colleague Andrey from Chelyabinsk returned to the topic and made another post, so to speak, "due to newly discovered circumstances."
    What an abyss of disappointment!
    Well, at least let's flood ...
    1. andrew42
      andrew42 25 February 2021 12: 49
      +9
      The article had to be signed "Personal lawyer of ZP Rozhestvensky". And to announce a fundraiser to perpetuate the memory of the "great naval commander."
      1. Kayuk
        Kayuk 2 March 2021 20: 34
        0
        perpetuating the memory of the "great naval commander

        Such "pearls" do not paint you ...
    2. A_Mazkov
      A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 16: 03
      +2
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      Is it so possible? !!
      I read "The Myths of Tsushima" and decided that my colleague Andrey from Chelyabinsk returned to the topic and made another post, so to speak, "due to newly discovered circumstances."
      What an abyss of disappointment!
      Well, at least let's flood ...

      And, at the same time, we will find explanations for a bunch of "but" and "if", of which Tsushima has a wagon and a small cart.)))
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 25 February 2021 12: 32
    0
    "this requires a different fleet and state" the author, but you don’t think this is already from the realm of fantasy. I am a land person, but I read something and my colleague Yura told me that even on the eve of the Second World War, the Soviet fleet was not fully prepared for war.
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon 25 February 2021 12: 36
    -1
    In short, it was necessary to self-flood in any suitable harbor, the way of fighting enemies is loved.
  • A_Mazkov
    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 14: 13
    +3
    Quote: Rurikovich
    In the opposite direction to the original? I beg you, you make me smile smile
    As soon as "Borodino" came out after its turn on the main forces, he died.

    Do not invent! "Borodino" sank at about 19:12!
  • A_Mazkov
    A_Mazkov 25 February 2021 16: 09
    +6
    Long ago "Suvorov" is burning out behind ...

    For a long time "Alexander" has been leading the column ...

    Only fresh nord-ost dispersed the smoke and gunpowder,

    Where the fleet ended its "round the world voyage" ...
  • boris epstein
    boris epstein 25 February 2021 18: 13
    0
    The "Paris Commune" ("Sevastopol") smashed the German ground forces both near Odessa and near Sevastopol. The cruisers "Red Crimea", "Red Caucasus", "Chervona Ukraine", "Slava" also helped the defenders. "Krasny Krym" and "Krasny Kavkaz" landed the Kerch-Feodosia landing and smashed the coastal fortifications of the Germans. Destroyers and destroyer leaders (especially "Tashkent") were very active, but they also suffered the greatest losses. They not only supported the defenders with their artillery, but also transported reinforcements, fuel, ammunition, evacuated civilians and the wounded. Even dying, they continued to "live" - ​​from the guns removed from them, they built coastal batteries and the Zheleznyakov armored train.
    In the Baltic, the Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya, Marat, the cruisers Kirov and Maxim Gorky fought counter-battery. Yes, the Marat was heavily damaged, but it was raised and the three remaining main-caliber turrets continued to fire.
    1. Astra wild2
      Astra wild2 25 February 2021 21: 04
      +1
      I will add. The guns were removed from the Aurora and installed on the shore. The fate of one of the guns is not known. The Germans allegedly captured or destroyed it.
      Р
      S
      By the way, do you know that not a real Aurora has been installed in St. Petersburg?
      The lower part of the cruiser was cut off and replaced with another, and the base of the Aurora was filled with stones and flooded to protect the mouth of the Neva from ice. Residents of coastal villages, with the present: "Aurora" stole everything they could. Someone now has preserved in the shed, doors from the cruiser, royal pennies, a porthole. They talked about it on TV
      1. mmaxx
        mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 16
        +4
        The lower part of the Aurora rotted away before the war. During the war, the holes were filled with concrete. And this concrete was smeared over the entire underwater part. Therefore, it could not be repaired and was cut off. Aurora was incapacitated for many years before the war, and during the whole war she stood with a meager crew. Any ship in such conditions would be in very poor condition.
        There is no need to compose that the plant needed it so. Like, cut some money. In Soviet times, factories had enough work and funding. Such things are decided by serious people and serious commissions.
        NOBODY EVER hid it.
        1. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 26 February 2021 21: 15
          0
          I DID NOT COMPLETE ANYTHING, but simply retold what I learned
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 26 February 2021 22: 36
            +1
            You didn't write. This is the total turnover. And it was Polenov himself. In one show in the 90s.
    2. Astra wild2
      Astra wild2 25 February 2021 21: 12
      0
      "Chervonnaya Ukraina", "Glory", I remember that "Slava" sank in the spring of 1917 during the Battle of Moonsun. So Andrey wrote from Chelyabinsk
      Perhaps you wanted to say: like "Glory"?
      1. boris epstein
        boris epstein 26 February 2021 18: 13
        0
        No, it was not the same "Glory". The battleship Slava was sunk in Moonsund in 1916 to block the strait for the German fleet. And in 1941-1944 in the Black Sea Fleet there would be a light cruiser "Slava", of the same type as the "Kirov" cruiser. At first "Slava" was called "Molotov", then it was renamed into "Glory".
    3. Catfish
      Catfish 25 February 2021 21: 34
      +1
      The cruisers Krasny Krym, Krasny Kavkaz, Chervona Ukraina, and Slava also helped the defenders.


      Excuse me, cruiser "Slava", what kind of ship is this and what fleet was it in?

      "Marat" was heavily damaged, but was raised


      Nobody lifted it, just sat on the "belly" and sat there, drained the compartments and used it as a battery.
      1. boris epstein
        boris epstein 26 February 2021 18: 23
        +1
        At first it was called "Molotov", then in 1942 it was renamed "Glory". He served in the Red Banner Black Sea Fleet. In 1941, she was blown up by a magnetic mine (propeller-steering group), they pulled it to the dock, cut off the stern of the unfinished cruiser Frunze and mounted it on the Molotov. That is why it was renamed into "Glory".
        Cruisers of the "Kirov" class were first named after Soviet figures - "Kirov", "Kalinin", "Maxim Gorky", "Voroshilov", "Molotov", "Kaganovich".
        About "Marat". He was really drained, lifted, run aground on an even keel.
  • boen
    boen 25 February 2021 18: 41
    +2
    It seems useful to find out what prevented Rozhdestvensky from using the peculiarities of the geometrical conditions for choosing the moment of passage through the Korea Strait. For example, stormy or close to such conditions would make artillery combat and torpedo attacks almost impossible ...
    1. Roman81
      25 February 2021 22: 44
      +2
      he wanted to go in February. Nikolai detained in Madagascar
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 25 February 2021 20: 15
    0
    Quote: Phil77
    Also, 15000 border guards took part in the battle for Moscow.

    Nobody seems to have thought of the border guards.
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 25 February 2021 23: 05
    +5
    The author pulled out and comments for the most part the most uninteresting myths. What he called myths from the first to the fourth did not have much influence on the result of the battle. Well, yes, the passage by the Sangar Strait would have somewhat complicated the deployment and basing of Togo. Plus, it is less to go to Vladivostok after the battle, on damaged ships. However, there are two straits around Tsushima Island, difficulties for the enemy could be created here too. Reconnaissance, distraction, all this makes sense if there are plans to create difficulty for the enemy. Rozhestvensky did not try to do anything of the kind; he simply and primitively walked along the shortest line. The famous NO23 is, by the way, the shortest course and is, the Japanese ZPR did not take into account the maneuvering of the Japanese.

    The 5th and 6th author himself inflates the myth. And Togo had old and worn-out ships in the line, the myth here is just the supposed superiority of the Japanese in speed. The fact that Rozhestvensky had some plans for a battle is even ridiculous to talk about. If they were, then no one knew about them. Not a single squadron commander. But Rozhestvensky loved orders, gushed them continuously. Well, of course each of them changed or contradicted the previous ones. For example, it is enough to recall the reconnaissance detachment. It will include some ships in it, then others, then push it forward, then why then back (That's why the reconnaissance from behind? Nobody guessed ..). As a result, we find out that the "pebbles", for example, were engaged in a battle, who did what .. One rehearses the signals, the other guards the transports and, which is typical, all the commanders are sure that they are executing some sort of order from the ZPR. Forgive not the plans, this is a mess and chaos in the management of the squadron at full height.

    And the main thing that immediately calls into question the very adequacy of the admiral is the lack of preparation for battle. Normal people before the battle the ships facilitate, remove all unnecessary. As in the 1st TOE for example. Rozhestvensky, on the other hand, is trying to fill the warships with coal up to the pipes. As a result, everyone has overload, battleships go into battle already with armor under water. At the 1st TOE, after all the fights with the Japanese, there were only two or three cases of armor penetration by the Japanese. Therefore, all the ships came out of the battle pretty skinned but alive. And ZPR solved the problem of drowning his ships by two-thirds himself. And he was warned, but what other people's advice to a madman and tyrant ..

    "Better to roll over with coal than without coal!" (c) Rozhdestvensky.
  • A_Mazkov
    A_Mazkov 26 February 2021 00: 10
    +4
    In short, dear Andrey from Chelyabinsk is urgently needed.
    He here now would quickly explain to everyone about the plans, intentions and ideas of Rozhdestvensky and Togo. Who and what he wanted, where he shot and steered.
    And, at the same time, he probably explained why the brilliant naval commander and specialist in artillery had such an indigestible, sad and muddy story at the exit.
  • Petrik66
    Petrik66 26 February 2021 12: 57
    +1
    And if we put the question differently - were there precedents in the history of the Russian or Soviet Navy in the second half of the 19th and 20th centuries, when our Navy successfully fought the enemy at sea? let's not talk about mines and the actions of a couple of destroyers, we are talking about squadrons, battleships, battleships, cruisers, you get the idea. The heroism of sailors on land is a separate topic, the landing of assault forces is also a separate topic. Interested in the campaign of the main forces of the fleet, or on the extreme of a pair of cruisers, battles, sunk enemy dreadnoughts? It is also not necessary to include the topic of torpedoing Tirpitz, and Marinesco cannot take the rap for the entire fleet. And then, you can estimate the amount of funds spent on the construction of fleets of the high seas and estimate the efficiency.
    1. rytik32
      rytik32 27 February 2021 13: 51
      +3
      Goeben was chased, and even with old battleships.
    2. Viktor Afanasev
      Viktor Afanasev 27 February 2021 14: 56
      +2
      It is with this logic that the fleet is being built lately. And when, a built dinghy with a "pupa"
      instead of a battleship - loses the battle, then for some reason the Navy becomes to blame, and not those who were engaged
      State program for the construction of the fleet. And about the efficiency - and estimate it for the Strategic Missile Forces laughing
      they do not have historically great victories and won battles ... In your opinion, they are not needed? And stand
      expensive...
      There are many reasons for the absence of naval victories with the participation of large formations ...
      suggests that the Fleet is unnecessary or ineffective.
      Since the Russo-Japanese War, it must be admitted that our Fleet (precisely for the reason
      unfulfilled or reduced or somewhat erroneous shipbuilding programs) was not
      fully combat-ready at the start of the war. Not in the sense of an individual ship or crew, but as a whole,
      by location (Varyag, Koreets, etc.) and by ship composition, as well as by the number of implementation
      modern weapons. In the Baltic and on the Black, previously on the Yellow, the loss of fleet bases (through no fault of
      Fleet) did not allow the full use of even the existing ship composition. Pay
      attention to how the Baltic Fleet became more active, after the liberation of the Baltic States and the exit from the sealed Finnish
      bay.
      The time of large squadrons and major battles has gone down in history. Now, theoretically possible
      only a battle of two or more AUGs (China and the USA), but unlikely ... Since 1853, less and less
      less in history, there are large sea battles ... And more and more, battles with a small number
      ships.
      Fleet strategy and tactics have changed over time, due to technical progress, changes in
      shipbuilding, weapons. Once upon a time, hundreds of galleys, dozens of sailing
      multi-gun battleships ... At a certain stage of development, linear tactics were effective,
      then they abandoned it ... After the Battle of Sinop, in 1853, the development of the "steel" fleet began.
      Admiral Butakov, developed the foundations of tactics completely different from the sailing era. Ships
      became more expensive and much larger in size, firepower increased significantly both in damage and
      range and accuracy of ammunition delivery.
      The technical side began to play a significantly larger role in combat., influence the result of the battle,
      in comparison with roughly the same capabilities of sailing ships. Submarines,
      aircraft carriers, again forced to reconsider the war at sea. Later, rocket armament appeared, and
      everything changed again.
      Another important point for us is the remoteness of maritime theaters. If England is easy, over
      for several days it was (and is now) to collect its entire fleet at one point, then for Russia it is
      just impossible. And this is the main vulnerability. For example, during the Second World War I had to keep the Fleet
      divided in the west - Black, Baltic, Barents for the war with the whole Europe (under the control
      Germany) and keep a decent part of the fleet in the Far East - to confront Japan. And here
      "if" all the forces were collected in the Northern Fleet, I think, then there would have been many victories and
      formations of surface ships and a greater amount of sunk tonnage by submariners. But with
      the rest of the maritime theaters would not be covered at all. And whatever the losses there are, it's hard
      count ...
      Also, the fleet plays the role of a deterrent. For example, the presence of submarines is highly
      increases the risk on sea lanes, before gaining complete domination at sea, the Japanese (in
      Russo-Japanese War) were shackled in the delivery of supplies and troops to the mainland, etc. Not speaking about
      the fact that for the exit and deployment of strategic submarine cruisers, a certain
      the number and several classes, types of ships - and this is already a flotilla / fleet.
      And how do you propose to fight the enemy fleet? Tanks soldier fire on submarines with cruise missiles? To search for a submarine, it is necessary to spend, sometimes, several days, how can aviation do this? Can an airplane "listen" to several hundred square miles for at least 2-3 days? And some areas, even coastal waters, are so far from the nearest airfield that an aircraft (and then only a distant PLO) will be able to search in general, minutes ...
      a few miles ... And under the ice of the Arctic ??? If the entire NATO fleet strikes at the same time with winged
      missiles, the possibility of our nuclear retaliatory strike, under strong doubt, especially in full
      its volume ...
      So You propose to give the enemy the opportunity to approach our shores absolutely
      safely?
      1. Petrik66
        Petrik66 4 March 2021 13: 13
        0
        Tell us in more detail about the activity of the Baltic Fleet after leaving the Gulf of Finland in 1944. Maybe we stopped the transfer of Wehrmacht units from the Kurland cauldron to Germany? Maybe they were able to cover the troops during the assault on Klaipeda and Liepaja from the fire of the main caliber of German cruisers?
    3. Kwas
      Kwas 5 March 2021 09: 52
      0
      "The navy has an impact by the mere fact of its existence," said one of the British naval theorists. And this is the truth. Otherwise, it is quite possible to say that the entire huge British Grand Fleet in WWI was also completely useless, since it did not sink a single German heavy ship!
      1. Petrik66
        Petrik66 5 March 2021 11: 11
        0
        Losses of the German fleet from the British:
        1. Dogger Bank - the armored cruiser "Blucher" was sunk, the battle cruiser "Seydlitz" was significantly damaged
        2. Battle of Jutland - sunk: 1 battle cruiser, 1 battleship, 4 light cruisers, 5 destroyers
        3. Falklands Battle - sunk; 2 armored cruisers 2 light cruisers
        1. Kwas
          Kwas 5 March 2021 14: 57
          0
          At the same time, the LINKORS did not sunk a single HEAVY ship (rank of armored cruiser and higher). Hence the conclusion - "they are useless!". After all, they were not built for the purpose of drowning light cruisers? Is not it?
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 26 February 2021 18: 07
    +7
    The plan was good. Rozhestvensky did what he could and was right in everything. Yes.
    Only the result is known to everyone. And he says that the plan is bad, the execution is also bad, and Christmas is a loser.
    If he died, you could at least make a hero out of him. Like, he died, not having time to fulfill his excellent plan. The performers failed.
    Only it turned out that the squadron can somehow maneuver and incur lesser losses, precisely when its commander is not there. Under him, Oslyabya was sunk in record time and destroyed as a combat unit by Suvorov. That's the whole cost of the right plans. He made it possible for the Japanese to take the necessary position in the outset of the battle, completely unhindered, and to focus the fire as they needed.
    Moreover, after the loss of the flagships, the Russian squadron became WEAK, but the following battleships held out longer.
    We know Rozhdestvensky's plans. And we know the result of these plans. There was only one plan worse: just self-flooding before the fight.
    1. Saxahorse
      Saxahorse 26 February 2021 21: 46
      +1
      Quote: mmaxx
      We know Rozhdestvensky's plans. And we know the result of these plans. There was only one plan worse: just self-flooding before the fight.

      This plan was brilliantly executed by the 1st TOE. And the ZPR received a separate piston about the inadmissibility of this. In France, during the revolution, commissars were appointed to ships. Approximately for this case. Alas, in Russia, the revolution happened only after this epic-fail in the Sea of ​​Japan. :(
      1. mmaxx
        mmaxx 26 February 2021 22: 41
        0
        The commissar could accidentally self-flood during self-flooding laughing
        1. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse 27 February 2021 01: 05
          +3
          After Rudnev was awarded for self-flooding, self-flooding of the entire 1st squadron became inevitable. This is how to explain to caperangs that this is also possible ..
          1. Petrik66
            Petrik66 10 March 2021 10: 08
            0
            it was necessary to somehow raise the spirit of the population and the army. at that time, they considered that this particular option was the best.
  • Viktor Afanasev
    Viktor Afanasev 27 February 2021 15: 14
    +1
    The main reasons for the defeat still remain the same ...
    1. Low surface armor belt due to excess supplies on board
    2. Lower speed of the squadrons, in comparison with the Japanese, giving the enemy an advantage of maneuvering
    3. The problem with the shells, a lot of the Japanese were pierced, but they did not explode
    4. The absolutely mediocre command of Admiral Rozhestvensky and, as one of the reasons for this mediocrity, defeatist sentiments in his head, perhaps partially spread to some senior officers. Lack of well-thought-out clear tactics and initiative.
    1. rytik32
      rytik32 27 February 2021 16: 07
      +1
      Quote: Viktor Afanasev
      3. The problem with the shells, a lot of the Japanese were pierced, but they did not explode

      How many shells didn't explode?
      You have read https://topwar.ru/174809-cusima-snarjadnaja-versija-razryvy-i-nerazryvy.html
      ?
      1. Viktor Afanasev
        Viktor Afanasev 27 February 2021 17: 59
        +1
        The article is interesting and detailed. But how accurate are the statistics from these sources?
        There is such information: "Vladimir Kofman notes, on the one hand, the objectivity and scrupulousness of the data of Japanese specialists, and on the other hand, the impressive result of Russian shooting. Based on these data: 45 heavy shells (8 inches or more), in addition to 50 six-inch, corresponds to about 4% of hits for Russian heavy guns "
        In your article hits "from 27 to 34".
        And in terms of the number of unexploded items, different sources have different numbers, but you took the smallest amount from all sources, which cannot be objective.
        Unfortunately, there is no absolutely accurate and reliable source of unexploded ordnance statistics, but most sources give a much higher percentage than indicated in your article.
        1. rytik32
          rytik32 27 February 2021 18: 46
          +2
          I took the data https://naval-manual.livejournal.com/58524.html
          And the author of this blog is from the SSS, which is freely available, only in Japanese.
          Something I took from the SSS directly, at least pictures :)
          And all these hits are described in one form or another in a series of my articles.
          If you name any hit as a heavy projectile, not included in this list, I am ready to discuss it.
          1. Viktor Afanasev
            Viktor Afanasev 27 February 2021 19: 07
            0
            Indirect evidence is the fact:
            After the battle in the Korean Strait, when the "Rurik" was killed on the return of the cruisers to Vladik, firing was carried out. from Rear Admiral K.P. Jessen had doubts about the quality of the ammunition.
            Of all the shells fired, 2 out of 3 exploded ... about 30% did not explode.
            The same armor-piercing shells were used on the ships of the 2nd TO Squadron.
            If we stop at the figure of 45 hits of heavy shells with the same 30% lack of detonation, then this is serious. Though not critical. At least 1-3 ships could be withdrawn from the battle or sunk. And then - if we remove the rest of the factors ...
            1. rytik32
              rytik32 27 February 2021 20: 01
              +1
              The shooting was carried out almost a year after the death of "Rurik", already based on Tsushima.
              Quote: Viktor Afanasev
              Of all the shells fired, 2 out of 3 exploded ... about 30% did not explode.

              Aren't you funny from such a "representative" sample?
              And the very conditions of the experiment are very cloudy. Do you know the thickness of the metal hit by the shell? Its speed?
              Quote: Viktor Afanasev
              If we stop at 45 hits of heavy shells

              The number 45 is a pitchfork on the water ...
              And I am ready to defend my figure for each shell. I am ready to name the ship, the place of hit and the time (with rare exceptions, there are several without indication). Here's how someone will give a similar alignment for 45 shells - then this figure can be taken seriously.

              I have damage diagrams for most Japanese ships.

              For example, Iwate. Hits for each caliber are marked with a separate sign.

              Izumo. There is an explanation for the scheme with time and caliber
            2. Saxahorse
              Saxahorse 27 February 2021 20: 01
              +2
              Quote: Viktor Afanasev
              on the return of the cruisers to Vladik, firing was carried out. from Rear Admiral K.P. Jessen had doubts about the quality of the ammunition.

              Jessen's tests are not complete. They fired at several old cauldrons. We found out that although the cauldrons are thick enough, some of the armor-piercing ones penetrate them without detonating. Which is also logical, after all, the boiler is not armor. In general, we came to the conclusion that the fuses are a little tight.

              In general, this is correct, but it does not mean at all that the shells that hit the enemy ships did not explode without e