Military Review

Strange projects of Soviet ships

171
Strange projects of Soviet ships

First



And the first number of strange ships was the tsarist cruiser, completed in the USSR according to the modified project "Red Caucasus" of the "Svetlana" type. When you get acquainted with the armament of a ship that is not bad, in general, for the First World War, one can only be amazed at how disfigured the formidable combat vehicle was. Nevertheless, the cruiser came in handy, fought, and even became a guard.

It is not surprising - helpless in battle against ships, he could well shoot along the coast. And the good state of the mechanisms allowed it to be actively used in the first period of the war. Although they built and planned it for something completely different ...

Lacking a powerful fleet, the Krasvoenmores, nevertheless, had to solve the problem of coastal defense, and a great idea came to the "genius" heads - to create a cannon capable of shooting at distances up to 38 km. Its essence was that even a light cruiser with such guns would be able to shoot even a battleship because of a mine-artillery position, remaining unpunished.

The engineer Chernyavsky made the cannon. But, as usual, it turned out not that very - extremely low survivability, crazy dispersion and the inability to shoot at full range, because there were simply no devices for over-the-horizon shooting.

It was for these guns of the B-1-K type that the unfinished "Admiral Lazarev" was identified.

Basically, the entire modernization project is an attempt to build the perfect Glory for the fight in Moonsund. Four single-gun turrets with superguns and four 76-mm Lenders for anti-aircraft fire. And that's all.

Later, the cruiser was rearmed and re-equipped. But all this did not affect the GC. As a result, a unique ship (a heavy cruiser according to the Washington agreements) would hardly have been able to fight off even a couple of destroyers, and was created for a kind of sphero-conical war, where it would shoot the Grand Fleet due to powerful minefields.

Kuznetsov understood all this:

“The shortcomings of the artillery of the main caliber of the“ Red Caucasus ”were so serious that in 1939-1940. the command of the Black Sea Fleet insisted on replacing the single-gun 180-mm towers of the cruiser with 130-mm twin mounts B-2-LM, the prototype tests of which were planned to be carried out from December 1940 to May 1941 on the leader Tashkent in Sevastopol. "

But in the end, nothing was done that way.

Second


Number two strange ships can be called heavy cruisers such as "Kirov".


The very idea of ​​equipping a copy of the Italian light cruisers of the Raimondo Monteccucoli class with three three-gun turrets with 180 mm guns is creative to the limit, especially due to the low rate of fire of such a design and the general weakness of the ship.

Nevertheless, according to the project 26 and 26bis, 6 cruisers were built - the only pre-war Soviet cruisers. Weak armor, insufficient anti-aircraft armament and an unsuccessful main caliber are their calling card. The pursuit of 180 mm caliber, as expected, did not bring to any good (except for the USSR Navy, in the interwar period only Argentines used this caliber, and the British on ships of the First World War).

As a result, the most massive Soviet cruisers were the ships of projects 68 and 68bis, with quite classic main guns of 152 mm.

But this does not mean that the pursuit of curiosities has stopped. On the contrary, under the leadership of the People's Commissar Kuznetsov, rather strange projects were developed.

The third


И number three - projects of heavy cruisers, more precisely, medium cruisers according to the Soviet classification, and even more specifically - the unborn offspring of admiral's wishes.


There were many projects.

Before the war, the project 69 cruisers developed, which began with artillery of 254 mm caliber, grew to 305 mm, and then redesigned for German 3X2 380 mm. But in the end, they were never built.

After the war, the cruisers of Project 66 with the main caliber of as much as 220 millimeters, which, in theory, were supposed to cut the American Des Moines, became the favorite brainchild of Kuznetsov. For 1953, the project provided for the construction of ships with a total displacement of 30 thousand tons, armed with 3X3 220/65 and with a main belt 155 millimeters. The construction never started.

Which is understandable. Surpassing the American in displacement, our cruiser was inferior to him in protection. And yet another 220 mm UWWAffe gave a lot of dispersion. As a result, the elaborated project remained in the archive. And the experimental main battery gun was quietly disposed of.

But this was not a reason to stop.

Fourth


Fourth project - project 84:

“In 1954, the design of the Project 84 light cruiser began.

The cruiser was supposed to have a displacement of 14-15 thousand tons, a speed of 32-33 knots and a cruising range of 5000 miles.

The cruiser's armament was supposed to consist of eight 180-mm universal guns SM-45, twelve - 100-mm universal guns in six two-gun turret mounts CM-52 and twenty-four - 50-mm machine guns in six quad gun mounts ZIF-75.

In addition, two helicopters were to be based on the cruiser.

For the project 84 cruiser, TsKB-34 developed new 180 / 65,5-mm SM-45 cannons in two-gun SM-48 turrets.

The firing range of their 97,5-kg projectile at an initial speed of 900 m / s was 36 m (234 cab.).

Unlike the old guns of the cruisers of the 26 project, the SM-45 gun had not a cartridge, but a separate cartridge case.

The elevation angle of SM-45 is from –3 "to + 76 °".

What were they going to shoot at in the early 60s (and earlier these cruisers would not have built) from universal 180mm guns? Big mystery.

Certainly not jet planes. For them, such a fire is harmless.

They did not build cruisers.

And they did the right thing. By that time, the naval air defense systems were being finalized. Yes, and aircraft carriers that would have to cover these, if I may say so, air defense ships, there were simply no ...

Designers' labor and resources went into the air.

Not the last time, though.


Fifth


Fifth project - project 63 nuclear missile cruiser:

“The ship provided for P-40 or P-6 projectile aircraft with retractable package launchers and ammunition providing three six- or eight-rocket salvos, the ability to receive two P-20 missiles, M-3 air defense systems with two launchers, SAM M-1 with 2-4 launchers, four twin 76-mm installations, two RBU-2500.

The standard displacement was set at 15-16 thousand tons, full speed - 32 knots. "

And he didn't take off either.

First of all, due to lack of demand.

For in the ocean, no air defense systems will help against the attack of the air wings of a pair of aircraft carriers. And there was no aircraft carrier of its own, and it never appeared. In short, useless ships. And the fact that the plans to build six of them were removed is an undeniable achievement of common sense.


About Soviet ship monsters, the largest ships in the world, projects 1144 and submarines water carriers of project 941 a lot has been written.

You can argue endlessly about their functionality. Let's just note - Project 1144 cruisers were built simultaneously with 1164. The size is much smaller, and the functionality is comparable.

And the alternatives to the 941 water carrier (underwater displacement of 48000 tons), much more modest in size, but more lethal and more reliable, still serve. Dolphins have been the main carrier of naval strategic nuclear forces for 20 years. And they cope with their task without a record size.

Sixth


And it is worth finishing with the last project of the Empire - the project 881 submarine.

The idea to create a killer anti-ship missile system, regardless of size and common sense, was in the air. And as a result, the RCC "Bolid" was released.

Range 800 km, speed 4 mach, but dimensions ...

According to estimates, the nuclear submarines of project 881 reached an underwater displacement of 25000 tons, which made them the second largest ships in the world (the first are project 941).

As a result, the huge submarine became critically vulnerable to the enemy's ASW. And the development (along with the collapse of the USSR) was stopped ...

Results


To summarize.

All our ships were divided into two groups: those that fully corresponded to global trends, and attempts to create a miracleweapon.

The former have always been quite up to par, but the latter ...

And miracle guns and miracle missiles did not give the effect that could be expected from them even once.

And vice versa. Built white elephants were quickly sawed for scrap, remaining some kind of naval curiosities.

At best, they were lucky. As the carriers of 180 mm guns were lucky during the Great Patriotic War, the guns were unusable at sea, they were quite able to work on the shore.

In the worst case, the patriots have long accused the authorities of destroying yet another superweapon. Without even thinking that similar tasks can be solved easier and cheaper.

And the good news is that most of the monsters remained only in the form of models and TTZ in the archives, never having gone to water.
Author:
171 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mastrer
    Mastrer 26 February 2021 18: 11
    +42
    The design of various miracle-yuds usually gives a good impetus to the development of the ideas of classical weapons. The main thing here is not to get carried away too much.
    1. Destiny
      Destiny 26 February 2021 18: 20
      +23
      Yes, it is not a completely useless occupation of designing unsuccessful products or not at all into a series of products, some of the developments may well be useful later on the farm.
    2. Alien From
      Alien From 26 February 2021 20: 19
      +4
      The main thing here is to be a good specialist)
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 20: 45
        +54
        The author mixed everything together, I don't even want to argue.
        My conclusion is that the Internet is harmful for people who ignore specialized literature. Google is good, otherwise lists are not a toy for children !!!
        1. Mik13
          Mik13 26 February 2021 22: 19
          +15
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          The author mixed everything together, I don't even want to argue.
          My conclusion is that the Internet is harmful for people who ignore specialized literature.

          So yes ... For example:
          What were they going to shoot at in the early 60s (and earlier these cruisers would not have been built) from universal 180-mm guns? Big mystery.
          Certainly not jet planes. For them, such a fire is harmless.
          The riddle is easily solved if we remember the existence of special ammunition (i.e. nuclear) under the main caliber. But the specifics and features of the use of products are still "under the head".

          For in the ocean, no air defense systems will help against the attack of the air wings of a pair of aircraft carriers.

          This is a very controversial statement. There are so many different factors to consider that oh ...
          And the biggest problem in overcoming the air defense of a large ship is the massing of the strike. And an aircraft carrier is not at all an airfield from which you can perform a massive takeoff ...
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 42
            +15
            The first naval generation of 180mm guns was developed a quarter of a century before the advent of nuclear weapons. The second one already outlined by the author had no shortcomings and was successfully used during the Great Patriotic War in the Baltic during the defense of Leningrad and on the Black Sea. The fact that the Germans did not throw against our Red Caucasus and projects 26 and 26bis, for example Prince Eugene, are the problems of the Germans, not ours !!! By the way, the Finnish BBO scrambled from our fleet along the skerries even more than the German one and shouted "banzai" into the Gulf of Finland! And why would it !!!
            1. Luty
              Luty 27 February 2021 08: 56
              +9
              All were sitting in the holes. Because there were more mines than could be drilled out at a time.
      2. Akuzenka
        Akuzenka 26 February 2021 23: 56
        +19
        All our ships were divided into two groups: those that fully corresponded to global trends, and attempts to create a miracle weapon.
        Whatever the topic of weapons do not touch, in EVERY country that could afford its production, there were similar projects and monsters. Everything is relative. No need to scold projects and "useless" ships of one country, compare with projects and "useless" ships of other countries. Incomplete article. And the USSR was belittled.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 09: 40
          +14
          Quote: AKuzenka
          Whatever the topic of weapons do not touch, in EVERY country that could afford its production, there were similar projects and monsters.

          In our twenties and thirties, they probably experimented more because of poverty, and not because of "foolishness", as in Britain, Japan, the United States and Brazil.
          1. Serg koma
            Serg koma 27 February 2021 14: 58
            +8
            Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
            probably more because of poverty experimented

            Behind a puddle and now they are experimenting, either with foolishness, or out of poverty laughing
        2. boris epstein
          boris epstein 27 February 2021 16: 18
          +6
          "And the USSR was belittled."
          So this goal stood. Otherwise, they remembered the US destroyers of the "Zumvolt."
  2. Oden280
    Oden280 26 February 2021 18: 20
    +31
    There is still no alternative to the 941 "water carrier". Not a single SSBN can emerge from under the thick ice and immediately launch missiles. And the 941 could thanks to its design. It is a pity that they are being written off.
    1. Ponchik78
      Ponchik78 26 February 2021 18: 53
      +42
      Well, in general, the monstrousness of the Sharks is not due to the thickness of the ice being broken (this is just a nice bonus), but to the size of their main weapon, the RSM-52 missiles. And they became water carriers not for the "victory of technology over common sense", but to ensure a draft acceptable to most of our bases.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 26 February 2021 19: 33
        +15
        .... and submarines water carriers of project 941 a lot has been written.
        It can be written a lot, but what kind of replacement has come by this, as you say to "water carriers". Which of our most modern strategists, having received an order and being under the ice, can shoot strategic missiles? There are examples where a "boolean" is shot breaking the ice or, at least, surfacing in the ice-hole among the ice of the north?
        1. New Year day
          New Year day 26 February 2021 20: 19
          +5
          Quote: Bad_gr
          and what kind of replacement came this very, as you say "water carriers". Which of our most modern strategists, having received an order and being under the ice, can shoot strategic missiles?

          Tell me, has the place of permanent deployment been prepared by him over the years? Superweapon still needs maintenance
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 26 February 2021 20: 23
            +13
            Quote: Silvestr
            Tell me, has the place of permanent deployment been prepared by him over the years?

          2. olegjuriewitch
            olegjuriewitch 27 February 2021 00: 52
            +11
            The location of the Typhoons was prepared for more than one year, everything was calculated. Omis and the miners worked hard, God forbid, subject to the secrecy of the work being carried out.
            I won't say anything more. Whoever knows Nerpich's lip will confirm.
            1. Bad_gr
              Bad_gr 27 February 2021 14: 00
              +8
              In my opinion, if a visit of the government level, for example, to New York, were made on this submarine (albeit by surface passage), it would look good on the roadstead, near the city

              and at the pier
              - much faster it would be possible to agree on many issues of interest to us.
    2. mvg
      mvg 26 February 2021 19: 59
      -2
      Not a single SSBN can emerge from under the thick ice and immediately launch missiles

      And the Sharks couldn't. The ice was scraped off with pens. Only then did they shoot. And by the way, all 6 are decommissioned or, as Donskoy is used, as a test bench.
      The question is, why would Ohio hide under the ice? What threatens them? 70 destroyers, 20 cruisers, 10 aircraft carriers and 50 submarines cover better than any ice.
      But Los Angeles rips the ice
      https://rg.ru/2018/04/19/video-kak-atomnaia-podlodka-probivaet-arkticheskij-led.html
      1. Ponchik78
        Ponchik78 26 February 2021 20: 11
        +18
        They could. Thanks to the special ice reinforcement of the bow limb and the deckhouse guard, the Shark breaks through up to 2.5 meters of ice. Of course, not with a ramming strike)
        Decommissioned (and cut) three out of six. One in the ranks, two in reserve.
        Judging by the "cap" in the Los Angeles wheelhouse, there is about a meter or so of ice.
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 26 February 2021 20: 34
          +17
          Quote: Ponchik78
          Judging by the "cap" in the Los Angeles wheelhouse, there is about a meter or so of ice.
          And compare with this
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 27 February 2021 01: 57
            +7
            The boat then required an average repair.
            1. Jager
              Jager 28 February 2021 14: 56
              +8
              In the event that an order is received and the BC is used, the issues of repair and the existence of the boat itself do not arise at all.
        2. mvg
          mvg 27 February 2021 04: 54
          -2
          One in the ranks, two in reserve

          I know that 2 are in reserve. But they do not return from such a reserve. There are no missiles for them. P-39 decommissioned.
          Taking into account that 949A and 971 will be modernized, there is no capacity for sharks.
          1. Ponchik78
            Ponchik78 27 February 2021 05: 19
            +3
            A couple of times on the network jumped that they want to re-equip with cruise missiles. In any case, the disposal planned for 2018 was canceled.
      2. ramzay21
        ramzay21 27 February 2021 03: 56
        +8
        Sharks are unique boats, they were created specifically for northern latitudes and have two independent strong hulls, so they have incredible survivability. What happened in Kursk on these boats is impossible. They could serve under the ice for months, the newest Boreas are quieter, but they cannot do much of what these boats could. The Americans understood the danger of these boats, and therefore paid ours in the 2000s to be cut into metal. The two remaining boats had their hatches cut off so that they could not be restored.
    3. dgonni
      dgonni 26 February 2021 20: 43
      0
      The number of the boat that surfaced in the ice in the north and was later written off from the hull, what can you name?
      It was cool for the submarine. I do not argue.
      But in terms of noise and response to threats? Nine!
      Here we walked up to the ice. Didn't find the wormwood? Breaking the ice. With shitty results. For a craft it is an expensive alternative though!
      P.S. A bomb on the propulsion system! Under the terms of the partnership? Sanatorium!
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 26 February 2021 21: 13
        +12
        Quote: dgonni
        Under the terms of the partnership? Sanatorium!

        Cabin company


        The gym
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 45
          +10
          Plus a sauna and pool! The best submarines in terms of habitability. Considering that in Los Angeles, the crew members do not have their own individual berths.
      2. Mik13
        Mik13 26 February 2021 22: 22
        +20
        Quote: dgonni
        The number of the boat that surfaced in the ice in the north and was later written off from the hull, what can you name?
        It was cool for the submarine. I do not argue.
        But in terms of noise and response to threats? Nine!
        Here we walked up to the ice. Didn't find the wormwood? Breaking the ice. With shitty results. For a craft it is an expensive alternative though!

        It was so. But in general, such boats are the Big Chpok's weapon. The possibility of using SLBMs has been proven. And after use, it doesn't matter what resource the case will have. This is a one-time event for the wholesale supply of heat and light to our esteemed political partners.
      3. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 27 February 2021 01: 57
        +8
        The boat was still quiet.
    4. justas-xnumx
      justas-xnumx 28 February 2021 09: 47
      -3
      Unfortunately, they have already been cut ... as far as I know, the last building is awaiting disassembly, the reactors have decided not to restart ...
  3. Krasnoyarsk
    Krasnoyarsk 26 February 2021 18: 32
    +17
    I still don't understand what the article is about? That common sense prevailed, or what?
    1. Freeman
      Freeman 26 February 2021 18: 47
      +7
      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
      I still don't understand what the article is about? That common sense prevailed, or what?

      request What's not clear then?
      An article that "Russia is the homeland of elephants" (c)
      - White elephants ... wassat
      Built white elephants were quickly sawed for scrap
    2. Ponchik78
      Ponchik78 26 February 2021 18: 47
      +25
      Yes, about nothing))) An article for the sake of an article.
      1. Ponchik78
        Ponchik78 26 February 2021 18: 56
        +2
        Why am I chasing a red gleam? I served in the Air Force)))
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 27 February 2021 13: 13
          +3
          Press on the shoulder strap. Color can be chosen
        2. seregin-s1
          seregin-s1 27 February 2021 18: 55
          0
          And I served in the Air Force after the Navy.
          Change the color of the shoulder strap!)
    3. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 26 February 2021 18: 58
      +31
      The author came to the site to stun everyone around him with intelligence and knowledge, but he still did not understand that he was bad at it ...
      1. Alf
        Alf 26 February 2021 22: 05
        +12
        Quote: Senior Sailor
        The author came to the site to stun everyone around with intelligence and knowledge,

        Stunned .. request
    4. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 20: 55
      +16
      Quote: Krasnoyarsk
      I still don't understand what the article is about? That common sense prevailed, or what?

      Yes, there is nothing, the Author threw pearls from the Internet, and did not bother to study the history and reasons for the creation of ships that he criticized. I was especially touched by the criticism of "paper projects"! Eco passions are full of pants, but there are dozens and hundreds of such “miracle-yuds”, however, not only in the USSR.
  4. Stas1973
    Stas1973 26 February 2021 18: 34
    +16
    Where do such articles come from? To draw profound conclusions without tying up tactics and strategies for the use of forces and means, taking into account the theater of operations, is not even stupidity, but just nonsense. Yes, the site falls into guano if it skips such articles in the hope of holivar. It should be a shame to administer the site
    1. Andy
      Andy 26 February 2021 18: 46
      +7
      probably because there are no good authors left.
  5. paul3390
    paul3390 26 February 2021 18: 35
    +18
    Well - let's put strange ideas, not only we were possessed .. There are a lot of dumb projects around the world, well, for example, the frog Surkuf. Well this is necessary - to add 2x203 to the submarine! And this is already in quite enlightened times, in 1927 ... And what about the British K-type submarines? Yell - with steam boilers !! So that..
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 48
      +5
      Quote: paul3390
      There are a lot of weird projects around the world, for example, the frog Surkuf. Well this is necessary - to add 2x203 to the submarine! And this is already in quite enlightened times, in 1927 ..

      The British managed to cross a 12-inch cannon with a submarine! laughing which was supposed to aim at the target horizontally by the body!
  6. Andy
    Andy 26 February 2021 18: 35
    +17
    why did the author of the 100mm gun of the Caucasus Mountains not take into account? and if I am not mistaken, other 180mm guns were installed on Kirov. moreover, pr26 was not weak - the explosions of Kirov, Gorky and Molotov are proof. not without flaws, but still ... the author has a personal dislike for ships
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 21: 03
      +11
      Quote: Andy
      why did the author of the 100mm gun of the Caucasus Mountains not take into account? and if I am not mistaken, other 180mm guns were installed on Kirov. moreover, pr26 was not weak - the explosions of Kirov, Gorky and Molotov are proof. not without flaws, but still ... the author has a personal dislike for ships

      The author has no idea that the 180mm guns were fine and coarse! By the way, 180mm cannons of both types were used in railway artillery. The fact that in the Red Caucasus they did not have time to replace the shot guns is our poverty, and not stupid commanders.
      However, if you quote from the memoirs of Kuznetsov, then it is necessary in full. As far as I remember below, he describes point by point what was planned to be done.
      1. Andy
        Andy 26 February 2021 22: 08
        +12
        I will add that the KR Kavkaz was essentially an experienced ship. when they realized that the Svetlana were hopelessly outdated, and they could not swing at Shakespeare due to lack of experience and money. late 20s early 30s. the unfinished building was redrawn, new guns were stuck in (powerful but unsuccessful) and in the 32nd the ship raised the flag. he did not become a masterpiece, but better than Svetlana.
      2. mmaxx
        mmaxx 27 February 2021 13: 15
        +3
        These guns were experimental. Nobody would do the same. And on prospect 26 there were already other weapons.
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 13: 59
          0
          Quote: mmaxx
          These guns were experimental. Nobody would do the same. And on prospect 26 there were already other weapons.

          There was at least one 180mm finely grooved rail battery.
          Regards, Kote!
    2. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 10: 42
      +2
      Quote: Andy
      and if I am not mistaken, other 180mm guns were installed on Kirov.

      Initially, the only difference was in the design of the bolt: on the "Caucasus" there were B-1-K guns with a wedge bolt. "After playing" a little decided to return to the "classics" and developed the B-1-P gun with a piston bolt, which was later installed on the KR pr. 26. The change in the breech design led to a decrease in the nominal barrel length by 3 calibers (57 versus 60). Then "games" were added with liners and rifling.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 14: 01
        +1
        The apogee of the 180mm caliber was the coastal "Sopki", quite successful and modern guns at the time of creation!
  7. max702
    max702 26 February 2021 18: 37
    -10%
    How are you naval then ... Oh gevalt..Black hole for Russia since the time of Ushakov ..
  8. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 18: 39
    -18%
    I fully support the respected Roman Ivanov, all these wishyards of sawmills who are afraid of pitching = stupidity, too bulky a thing is always vulnerable and costly,
    1. Andy
      Andy 26 February 2021 18: 52
      +8
      you, as a specialist in pulling an owl on the globe, know better. in the last article, you also saved on battleships. what the Russians didn’t do, the Japanese did great, but you’re not an argument. and so now, though your thought is generally impossible to grasp. you are against, but what does not matter ... ps I'm still waiting for a diagram from you how to use the aft tower of the battleships, applying the front system and turning it over to the enemy. apparently I can't wait
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 19: 28
        -21%
        Quote: Andy
        what did not work for the Russians, worked out great for the Japanese

        Yes exactly! the Japanese used smaller ships, smaller in displacement and even used the famous Esmeralda, and with the saved funds they built very small 60 destroyers. The Japanese stood side by side and fired all the towers.
        Quote: Andy
        how to use the aft tower of the battleships by applying the front formation and turning it on the enemy

        You do not understand the obvious, ... firstly, if there were single-turreted ships, then you would not have to turn .... secondly, I explain for the slow-witted, in order to go forward, you need to have a wide water area, and before the start of the battle line up in a line. Then move towards the enemy, and approaching him all at the same time start turning in one direction (for example, to the right) to connect the aft towers (and if we had small cruisers (large single-turret gunboats 2 x 305x30) of the Esmeralda type, then we would not have to turn. ) Why didn't Rozhdestvensky use this obvious fact? Yes, because on the edges of the strait destroyer flotillas were located, and he did not have the wide space he needed for movement in the front. Now attention! we begin to think logically (what those who minus me are unable to do in principle). 1 destroyers prevented from taking an advantageous position and therefore the Russian fleet died = means = 2 reason for the defeat the advantage in destroyers among the Japanese = means = 3 it was necessary to build destroyers in large numbers to win = means = 4 money was needed for destroyers that were wasted on bulky EBRs (which all drowned ingloriously into the empty space) at the instigation of the British, = means = 5 it was necessary to save on EBRs, and such savings are possible only by reducing the displacement = means = 6 in order to still have a caliber of 305x40, other carriers of a smaller displacement are needed means = 7 Makarov's idea about single-turret Esmeralda 3000 tons 2 x 305x40 was correct, ... that is, they would have had a hundred destroyers and even more 305x40 than we had ... but would not have stupid show-off pink ponies ready to project the force of a wake column, single monsters (4 pieces of 15000 tons each, or it would be 20 !!!! Esmerald, that is, 40x 305x40 guns) .. why only 4? turn on the logic again 1 large ship will not be a lot of it, = means = 2 series is small and the construction period is long = means + the ship becomes obsolete faster, because the design-descent cycle is long = means = 3 inevitably, obsolete battleships, incapable of combat, will accumulate in the fleet = means = 4 half of the squadron will be slow-moving and not very useful = means = 5 (captain is obvious) the concept of small-scale, but expensive ships is erroneous = means = 6 Makarov was right
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 21: 08
          +9
          Well, yes, if 2TOE and 3TOE were reinforced with a pair of Black Sea "Popovoks" we would have straightened everyone !!! wink
          1. Vladimir1155
            Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 21: 14
            -13%
            do not lie, not a pair, but 30 pieces, and not round, but oblong ..... then yes .....
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
              Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 21: 33
              +7
              Yes, it's hard with the neophytes!
              laughing then - an ellipse.
              Hello, smart head,
              Have you long been from foreign countries?
              By the way, what’s your “popovka”,
              Did you swim in the ocean?
              - Bad, the matter does not argue,
              Experience is no use
              Everything is spinning and spinning
              Everything is spinning - it is not swimming.
              - This, brother, is the emblem of the century.
              If you really understand,
              There is no person in Russia,
              Who wouldn’t be with him.
              Somewhere it’s all awkward,
              Something is a sin ...
              We spin like a "popovka"
              And forward to the top.
              - N. A. Nekrasov, "Popovka" (1875)

              Photographs of models and drawings "Popovok" of Novgorod and Kiev.





              1. Vladimir1155
                Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 22: 32
                -14%
                Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
                Photographs of models and drawings "Popovok" of Novgorod and Kiev.

                you do not have a single technical tactical logical argument, you can only let the dust in your eyes, copy-paste photos, make a smart face in case of a bad game
                1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
                  Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 09
                  +4
                  Quote: vladimir1155
                  technical tactical logical argument

                  Anto, What a beast and with what it is eaten !!!! wink
                  Drawings of the Black Sea monitors are given in dozens of reference books and encyclopedias, where one of the main technical characteristics of the description of their case is diameter! What is it for?
                  Not the VO audience is spoiled if you have to explain the obvious !!! Popovka did not make it to the shores of Japan, if only! And why, and were interested in autonomy? Years of construction? Armament? Yes, corny - speed!
                  However, in the Baltic, we also had another series of BBOs (one-tower monitors). Alas, the same problems. The only seaworthy Gangut was lost by that time. By the way, the history of the Mermaid is also known. It's amazing if you consider yourself an advanced "monomaniac" why don't you know about it?
                  And last but not least, the grandfather of all one-tower monitors named Monitor is drowned because of the open porthole by the cook !!!
                  Continue further? Learn materiel Vladimir!
                  Regards, Kote!
                  1. Vladimir1155
                    Vladimir1155 26 February 2021 23: 18
                    -12%
                    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
                    Learn materiel Vladimir!
                    Regards, Kote!

                    then give a hundred and fifty displacement of the Popovok, Mermaid, Monitor, and Hurricane listed by you ... and compare with 3000 tons of difference did not you see? despite the fact that the popovka had a draft limitation (and therefore it was round), and Esmeralda did not have such a limitation ... and could carry 3000x305 in 40
                    1. Senior seaman
                      Senior seaman 27 February 2021 09: 00
                      +7
                      Quote: vladimir1155
                      and Esmeralda did not have such a limitation ... and could carry 3000x305 in 40

                      I could not. She was wearing 25 ton 30 caliber ten-inches, and Obukhovskaya 305 \ 40 weighed almost twice as much.
                      1. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 09: 12
                        -7
                        Quote: Senior Sailor
                        She was wearing 25 ton 30 caliber ten-inches, and Obukhovskaya 305 \ 40 weighed almost twice as much.

                        go to the third grade of elementary school, a problem ... a pair of 250 guns is twice as light as one 305, will the weight of the artillery change if we replace this pair of 250 with one that is twice as heavy as them? at your leisure, calculate the weight of several 150 guns, do they weigh heavier all together than one 305? and how was the 305 gun placed on the alphabetical gunboats with a total of 500 tons of total displacement? Your popovka carried the sought pair 2500 on 305 tons, it only had the wrong shape, and the artillery was not bad.
                      2. Senior seaman
                        Senior seaman 27 February 2021 09: 20
                        +8
                        Volodenka, who wrote this?
                        Quote: vladimir1155
                        Makarov's idea of ​​single-tower Esmeralda 3000 tons 2 x 305x40 was faithful

                        Quote: vladimir1155
                        20!!!! Esmerald that is 40x 305x40 guns

                        Do not drive, all your moves are recorded :)))
                        But even one 305 \ 40, instead of two 254 \ 30 will not stand. There the recoil is stronger, so it is necessary to strengthen the body, increase the diameter of the barbet, and so on and so forth.
                      3. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 09: 41
                        -9
                        Quote: Senior Sailor
                        Do not drive, all your moves are recorded :)))

                        you could not master the arithmetic problem in grade 3 of primary school, you have a bad
                      4. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 10: 34
                        -8
                        I repeat for those who cannot read ... "the 305 gun was placed on the alphabetical gunboats with only 500 tons of total displacement"
                      5. Senior seaman
                        Senior seaman 27 February 2021 10: 56
                        +7
                        How many times did he swear to argue with idiots ...
                        Yes, they could, but nothing good came of it, and this (ingenious in its own way) idea could not stand a collision with reality.
                      6. Vladimir1155
                        Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 18: 52
                        -3
                        Quote: Senior Sailor
                        How many times did he swear to argue with idiots ...
                        Yes, they could, but nothing good came of it, and this (ingenious in its own way) idea could not stand a collision with reality.

                        not only withstood, but also survived the EDR of Borodino and others, and was still so good that she underwent modernization of weapons after 25 years of service, so I have to argue with the idiot ...
  • Senior seaman
    Senior seaman 26 February 2021 23: 06
    +10
    Makarov, unlike you, was not alternatively gifted and never offered anything of the kind.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 27
      +12
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      Makarov, unlike you, was not alternatively gifted and never offered anything of the kind.

      They do not know this and do not want to know! laughing
      Makarov is a brand of the Russian fleet, so everything can be blamed on him !!! Today we have the trend of the day - oblong Popovki! Vice-Admiral Popov turned over in his grave today from this blasphemy against his “children”!
      Although from the idea of ​​30 Popovoks with 11 and 12 inch guns to release against 60 Japanese destroyers - I rush like a cat from valerian !!! If one of our admirals in the years of the RYAV had dragged such a menagerie to the shores of Japan, it would definitely have to be recognized as the great naval commander of the world!
      1. andrew42
        andrew42 5 March 2021 15: 22
        +1
        Wouldn't have dragged. Is it possible to build antigrav into Popovka :) - It turns out who Rear Admiral Byrd uncovered near Antarctica! Flying popovki!
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 10: 36
      -5
      The Esmeralda cruiser, designed by designer George Rendel, is a development of the Arturo Prat armored cruiser with improved seaworthiness and autonomy. Designed by designer George Rendel, Esmeralda has captured the imagination of its contemporaries. Completely devoid of a mast, this long and narrow ship developed a record speed of 18,3 knots and carried an extremely powerful armament for its 2800 tons of displacement: two 254-mm and six 152-mm guns.

      "Esmeralda" is officially considered the founder of the so-called "Elsvik" cruisers, which vied with each other began to order from Armstrong many foreign countries. The Russian naval department highly appreciated the cruiser Esmeralda, so Admiral S.O. Makarov called it an “ideal combat vehicle”. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esmeralda_(1883)
      total weight 152 mm of the gun The total weight of the machine without the tool is 6290 kg, with the tool - 14 690 kg. in total, if we remove 6x15 tons, we get 90 tons + 200 tons of growth to 3000, almost 300 tons for the second 305x40 is enough for the eyes
      1. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman 27 February 2021 11: 25
        +6
        Damn, there was no autonomy (600 tons of coal) or seaworthiness there. (Low side, in the absence of a forecastle). The hull is weak, there is no double bottom, there is really no reservation, not even a conning tower ...
        Quote: vladimir1155
        record speed - 18,3 knots

        On trials, without supplies and weapons.
        Quote: vladimir1155
        total weight 152 mm of the tool Total weight of the machine without the tool 6290 kg, with the tool - 14 690 kg

        Well done! From Wiki data of six-inch Kane copiastil!
        Now tell me, sick one, where on the ship of 1884 would the weapon developed in 1889 come from?
        In general, the first thing that the Japanese did, who had experience in operating such ships, was to remove the nafig monstrous guns and install the Armstrong rapid-fire rifles.
        Have you calculated the weight of the shells? Feeder weight? Where did you put it?
        Although whom I ask ...
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 18: 56
          -4
          I don’t argue with idiots, you are smarter than Wikipedia and its designer and the two governments that bought it, and Makarov and in general almost 30 years of ship service ... and I'm really tired of arguing with idiots, I will ignore you
          1. Senior seaman
            Senior seaman 27 February 2021 19: 26
            +3
            Wiki is made up of people. But if this is a source for you, then read at least English.
            Quote: vladimir1155
            the designer and and the two governments that bought it,

            Don't confuse poverty with godliness.
          2. Jager
            Jager 28 February 2021 15: 09
            -4
            One "unsinkable" also ordered "Mistrals". Do we recognize Taburetkin as a genius?
      2. 27091965
        27091965 27 February 2021 14: 53
        +2
        Quote: vladimir1155
        "Esmeralda" is officially considered the founder of the so-called "Elsvik" cruisers, which vied with each other began to order from Armstrong many foreign countries.


        In 1897-1898, the British Admiralty made a comparison of warships built at British factories for foreign fleets with British ships. These data were compiled into one report. Several conclusions;

        ".....the capacity of the bunkers is indicated, and not the amount of coal loaded during the operation of the ship, when the coal is fully loaded, the ship receives a significant overload ...

        ..... the weight and strength of structures below the requirements of the Admiralty for strength in the construction of ships for the Navy of England ....

        ..... the routes on which the tests are carried out often allow tides and currents that significantly affect the speed, while the amount of coal and consumables on the ship does not correspond to the normal stock, which gives a fictitious high speed and underestimated displacement ...

        ...... in the normal displacement of British ships, the weight load is laid down in the calculation that one 6-inch gun should have 200 shots, on ships built for foreign fleets no more than 100 shots .....

        ...... the amount of consumable is much less than on the ships of the English Navy, which reduces the time spent by the ship at sea, increasing these supplies to the requirements of the Admiralty will lead to an increase in displacement, draft, lower ship speed and increased coal consumption ...

        .... the indicated maximum thickness of armored decks and vertical armor covers a much smaller area of ​​the ship compared to those built for our fleet.
        ... "1897-1898
        Find this report and your opinion of Elswick cruisers will change.
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 27 February 2021 13: 17
    0
    And the Iponians would have taken and began to dismantle this system from the edge. One by one. Superiority in speed allowed. wink
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 31
    +1
    Quote: Andy
    ps I'm still waiting for a diagram from you how to use the aft tower of the battleships, applying the front system and turning the side to the enemy. apparently I can't wait


    What's the problem !!! The aft tower will fire through (through) the bow tower! And why did we perverted with the Black Sea series of battleships - putting four 12-inch guns on the tank in drums!
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 51
    +6
    Quote: vladimir1155
    I fully support the respected Roman Ivanov, all these wishyards of sawmills who are afraid of pitching = stupidity, too bulky a thing is always vulnerable and costly,

    Vladimir share the secret of how the budget was cut back in 1932? laughing
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 09: 00
      -5
      At that time there was a syndicate or association for the sale of metal produced by different factories, under the abbreviated name "Prodameta".

      Having first found out from the heads of the Obukhov and Izhevsk factories what the price of a pound of these grades of steel would be, I invited the secretary in charge of all the affairs of Prodamet, the engineer Vurgaft, Veshkurtsev and the head of the Obukhov factory, Meller, to the Marine Technical Committee, saying that they were not called committee meeting, but just an information meeting in my office.

      At this meeting, I asked Wurgaft to report on the price of each steel grade, for a total of about 5000 tons for each ship, i.e. only about 20 tons, according to which Prodamet could take over the supply.

      As far as I remember, he stated approximately the following prices per pood: ordinary steel 3 r 25 k; steel of increased resistance 4 p 75 k - 5 p 10 k; high resistance steel 7 p 50 k - 7 p 75 k.

      I drew his attention to the fact that these prices are approximately 25% higher than the rates of our state-owned metallurgical plants.

      “Maybe their prices are like that, but these plants are too small to supply the required amount of steel in that short time [147], as you need, but we are uniting all metallurgical plants and we will not delay the supply of metal,” was the reply.

      - So you unite all the factories, and in the event of an auction for this supply of the flail, everyone will have the same?

      - Yes, approximately the same as I told you.

      - And is this very instructive book familiar to you? - and, having submitted to him the "Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments", I opened the corresponding article, punishing with imprisonment from 2 to 3 years for an act called "a strike at the auction for supplies and contracts for the treasury."

      “Here is a precise definition of this act,” I said, “consult your board's legal adviser. You are personally in this case as an employee whiter than snow, and this article does not apply to you, but according to the interpretation of the Chief Naval Prosecutor, with whom I consulted, this article is entirely applicable to the owners of those factories that are part of your association. I can illustrate this with an example: instruct your legal adviser to find a court report on a case that was sorted out 15 years ago in Omsk on the charges of the first guild of merchants, whom we will call conditionally Ivanov, Semyonov and Petrov, big Siberian millionaires, commerce advisers and gentlemen, and Ivanov was the mayor of the city in Tomsk, Semenov - in Omsk, Petrov - in Irkutsk. They arranged an agreement to unify the price for the supply of alcohol to the treasury. Alexei Ivanovich Perimov, manager of excise taxes in Western Siberia, opened a case against them "on charges of a strike at the auction" under the article that I showed you. The court sentenced Ivanov to 3 years in prison, and Semyonov and Petrov to 2 years 8 months each, and even ordered to recover from them some incredible, eight-digit fine. A.I. Perimov, my uncle, now lives in retirement in Kazan and will not refuse to teach me how to conduct such a business.

      You say that your office is approved by the government; but what is approved by the government can be canceled by the government. Keep in mind that we will look after the interests of the treasury and that the sympathy of the press, as well as the Duma and the State Council, will be on our side. Let me thank you for coming to this meeting.

      When Wurgaft came out, my friend Meller jumped up:

      - Alexey, you're out of your mind, they will not appear at the auction, and you will be left without metal.

      - No, friend Sasha, Russia did not fit like a wedge on Prodamet. Here is a letter to me from the managing director of the Kulebak plants, which are not part of the syndicate, N.A. Danilov. Remember that the Kulebak factories work in the Vyksa forests of the Nizhny Novgorod province on wood fuel and produce excellent steel. 148]

      Their prices: ordinary steel 2 r 15 to poods; steel of increased resistance 3 p 50 k and steel of high resistance 4 p 25 k. These prices are such because I somewhat compromised the elongation rates, since wood fuel produces pure carbon steel, with a negligible addition of silicon, it contains neither chromium nor nickel , increasing the price of metal, absolutely not. Tomorrow I will go with Ouspensky to the assistant minister, and then Ouspensky will formalize this case accordingly. We will not be left without steel, but we will save 2 rubles. Wurgaft and Prodamet will remember my lesson, we still have to deal with them.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 09: 41
        +1
        Well, we examined the Russian Empire, the question was about the USSR!
    2. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 09: 07
      -4
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      sawed the budget back in 1932?

      The enraged Stalin wrote to his Politburo comrades-in-arms from Sochi, where almost the entire summer of 1932 he was correcting his damaged health: “We have a cult of new construction (which is very good), but there is no cult of rational use of ready-made factories (which is very bad and extremely dangerous). The People's Commissar for Capital Investments, you are reinforcing this abnormal and dangerous situation in industry. I am not even talking about the fact that you are creating the threat of new food difficulties ... We already have a lot of debts abroad, and we must ever learn to save on currency ".

      However, the financial crisis was not averted. Kaganovich wrote to Stalin: “I sent you a note on the financial situation. Now it is already facing us as a question of today. The situation is now quite difficult. The need for banknotes is growing every day and reaches a demand of 150-160 million per day, and the opportunity satisfaction 30-40, maximum 50 million rubles. Wage arrears are already being formed. "

      On Stalin's instructions, the Politburo began to cut spending, but the crisis could not be overcome. Mainly because, in addition to the economic component, the administrative component was clearly defined. It was reported to Stalin that in many republics and regions, instead of unquestioningly obeying orders from Moscow, local party and Soviet leaders hold meetings and adopt their own decisions that run counter to the Central Committee's decisions or act much tougher than was required of them ... On July 20, 1932, Stalin wrote to his comrades-in-arms to Moscow:

      "In recent years, theft of goods by rail transport has become more frequent (they are plundered by tens of millions of rubles), and secondly, theft of cooperative and collective farm property. Theft is organized mainly by kulaks (dispossessed) and other antisocial elements trying to shatter our new system. According to the law, these gentlemen are considered ordinary thieves, receive two or three years in prison (formally!), but in fact, after 6-8 months they are amnestied. A similar regime in relation to these gentlemen, which cannot be called socialist, only encourages them, in fact, a real counter-revolutionary “work.” It is unthinkable to tolerate such a situation any longer. I propose to issue a law (to withdraw or abolish existing laws), which would:

      a) equated in its importance railway cargo, collective farm property and cooperative property to state property;

      b) punishable for the theft (theft) of property of the indicated categories for at least ten years of imprisonment, and as a rule - the death penalty;

      c) canceled the application of amnesty to criminals of such "professions".

      Without these (and similar) draconian socialist measures, it is impossible to establish a new social discipline, and without such discipline it is impossible to defend and strengthen our new system. I think that we shouldn't hesitate with the issuance of such a law. "

      In the following notes to members of the Politburo, Stalin emphasized that the decision must be formalized in the form of a law: "I think ... you need to act on the basis of the law (" the man loves the rule of law "), and not on the basis of only the practice of the OGPU, while it is clear that the role Here the OGPU will not only not be belittled, but, on the contrary, will be strengthened and “ennobled” (“on a legal basis,” and not “arbitrarily”, the OGPU organs will operate). "

      Stalin's proposal was accepted almost unanimously. Only the chairman of the Ukrainian CEC, Grigory Petrovsky, objected, but he also left Moscow before voting at a Politburo meeting. On August 7, 1932, the decree "On the protection of property of state enterprises, state farms and cooperation and the strengthening of public (socialist) property" was signed by Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR Vyacheslav Molotov and Secretary of the Central Executive Committee Abel Yenukidze
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 09: 42
        +4
        I know this story, where is the cut, corruption and personal enrichment?
        1. Vladimir1155
          Vladimir1155 27 February 2021 09: 44
          -7
          Decree 7-8 is just against personal enrichment at the expense of the state ... is it not clear to you?
  • timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 27 February 2021 01: 58
    +4
    all these wishlist sawers who are afraid of pitching


    Does the mechanic not know how the pitching affects the ability to use the weapon? What a twist!
  • Hog
    Hog 26 February 2021 18: 51
    +14
    Some article, to put it mildly, is not reasoned. What is the weakness of the cruisers of the project 66 relative to the Des Moines? Etc.
    PS: Someone outplayed the "little boats" and came to write an indignant article.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 26 February 2021 20: 29
      +6
      Quote: Hog
      Some article, to put it mildly, is not reasoned. What is the weakness of the cruisers of the project 66 relative to the Des Moines? Etc.

      Everything was simple there:
      - at long distances, theoretically optimal for Project 66 (due to the greater maximum and effective firing range of the 220-mm main battery), the existing SUAO provided a too small percentage of hits - it was possible to use up the entire ammo and not sink the same Des Moines;
      - with the reduction of the range of "Des Moines" due to the higher rate of fire, the main battery simply filled up our CD with "iron".
    2. Sergey Sfiedu
      Sergey Sfiedu 26 February 2021 21: 28
      +2
      What is the weakness of the cruisers of the project 66 relative to the Des Moines?

      Probably because they were not needed. The Des Moines were by no means the US NAVY wunderwaffe and it was a waste of resources to design a special ship to deal with them.
    3. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 27 February 2021 13: 46
      +1
      The fact that pr 66 itself was a continuation of, to put it mildly, the strange approach of the Stalinist period.
      1. A ship is made, which in size corresponds to the small LK Dunkirk
      2. This small LC is called a large (and here it is already generally medium) CR.
      3. In almost all characteristics, it is comparable not with the LC, but just with the CD. Its kind of cheating 220mm caliber, in fact, has a shell only slightly heavier than the American superhevy. In other components, it is rather inferior to the American, and not to Des Moines, but to Balt. Given that the American is part of the AUG with the Forrestal AVU, what about this one?
      4. By the way about AUG. This dinosaur appears by the end of the 50s, when the Americans are already beginning to lay down EM URO such as "Adams", CR URO such as "Lagi", and of the AVA "Enterprise" to a heap. It is difficult to understand that in such a world to catch an MCT with a cheating GC from the 30s standard.
  • mr.ZinGer
    mr.ZinGer 26 February 2021 18: 59
    +8
    It is strange that the author did not mention ships such as "Kiev", "Minsk" ....
    1. Alf
      Alf 26 February 2021 22: 08
      +15
      Quote: mr.ZinGer
      It is strange that the author did not mention ships such as "Kiev", "Minsk" ....

      He just doesn't know about them ...
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 53
        +5
        Quote: Alf
        Quote: mr.ZinGer
        It is strange that the author did not mention ships such as "Kiev", "Minsk" ....

        He just doesn't know about them ...

        Alf my applause, they took it off the tongue!
        1. Alf
          Alf 27 February 2021 16: 27
          +2
          Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Quote: Alf
          Quote: mr.ZinGer
          It is strange that the author did not mention ships such as "Kiev", "Minsk" ....

          He just doesn't know about them ...

          Alf my applause, they took it off the tongue!

          hi
  • 27091965
    27091965 26 February 2021 19: 10
    +5
    The pursuit of 180 mm caliber, as expected, did not bring to good

    This is a table from the 1937 edition, in it you can see what the "chase" was for when developing the 180 mm gun.
  • Nestor Vlakhovski
    Nestor Vlakhovski 26 February 2021 19: 27
    +7
    The topic is extremely interesting, but the article is very weak.
    In Soviet shipbuilding (especially 1945-54) you can put together a real freak show.
  • Edwards_D
    Edwards_D 26 February 2021 20: 21
    +12
    The author, write better to the magazine "Murzilka", otherwise here you don’t dare, but I want to cry from your knowledge.
  • New Year day
    New Year day 26 February 2021 20: 24
    +9
    Any idea can be brought to the point of absurdity. The main thing is not to lose control over this idea, because it, the idea, will captivate you so much that you will become blind and deaf to common sense
    1. Lynnot
      Lynnot 26 February 2021 21: 04
      +2
      Yeah, like, "The cultivation process is endless, the main thing is to stop in time."
  • Constanty
    Constanty 26 February 2021 20: 56
    +10
    First few remarks.
    As a result, a unique ship (heavy cruiser under the Washington agreements)


    The author has written about cruisers so many times that it should be remembered that the division into light and heavy cruisers was introduced by the London Treaty of 1930, not the Washington Treaty.

    the inability to shoot at full range, because there were simply no devices for over-the-horizon shooting


    And although the 180-mm cannons actually seem to be a kind of fetish of Soviet designers - they were even supposed to be installed on the leader - such a project in 1925 was - with a displacement of 4000 tons, as well as 4 guns of 180 mm. ...
    It should be remembered, however, that the guns on the "Krasny Kavkaz" were not the same as on the cruisers of Project 26.
    Also, we must not forget that there was, for example, KOR-1.

    The pursuit of 180 mm caliber, as expected, did not bring to any good (except for the USSR Navy, in the interwar period only Argentines used this caliber, and the British on ships of the First World War).


    Argentines on Veinticinco de Mayo-class cruisers, and the British on old armored cruisers or Hawkins-class ships used 190-mm guns - not 180mm !!!

    ...
    1. Sergey Sfiedu
      Sergey Sfiedu 26 February 2021 21: 35
      0
      Three guns in one cradle at a close distance from each other naturally led to a decrease in firing accuracy. It is good that the cruisers had to shoot mainly at areal targets throughout the war. But when it was necessary to get into something more specific, problems arose.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 26 February 2021 21: 58
        +7
        Many countries were faced with the problem of placing the guns too close in the turret, which led to a decrease in accuracy. Technically, it turned out to be quite simple to solve them - a minimum delay in firing from a medium gun is enough.

        Of course, placing guns in one cradle posed other threats - for example, immobilizing all guns with one shell, but yes, in the case of Kirov and Maxim Gorky, and with other ships of these projects, it turned out to be a theoretical problem. They did not participate in any battles with other ships.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 10: 50
          +5
          Quote: Constanty
          Of course, placing guns in one cradle posed other threats as well - for example, immobilizing all guns with one shell, but yes, and in the case of Kirov and Maxim Gorky

          So this was the "reason" for the creation of the swinging part of the B-27. Initially, Ave 26 was supposed to have two-gun turrets. But the designers, having reasoned that if they hit the turret, two barrels would die, they decided to add a third, deciding that six barrels in the remainder are better than four. :)
          1. evmarine
            evmarine 27 February 2021 12: 29
            +3
            When adding a third barrel, a single cradle was made based on the unacceptability of increasing the mass of the towers, in the first place, since the design overload was already obvious at that time.
            In addition, in the 30s, one cradle was used on cruisers in many fleets, including the American one.
            1. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 13: 51
              +2
              Quote: evmarine
              When adding a third barrel, a single cradle was made based on the unacceptability of increasing the mass of the towers, in the first place, since the design overload was already obvious at that time.

              So the twin installation had a single cradle.
              And the weight of the towers still increased, EMNIP, by 30 tons.

              Quote: evmarine
              In addition, in the 30s, one cradle was used on cruisers in many fleets, including the American one.

              In general, three (except for ships sold abroad): the United States, Italy, the USSR.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 1 March 2021 12: 09
          +1
          Quote: Constanty
          Many countries were faced with the problem of placing the guns too close in the turret, which led to a decrease in accuracy. Technically, it turned out to be quite simple to solve them - a minimum delay in firing from a medium gun is enough.

          Well, somebody at first I tried to solve the problem "mechanically" - by moving the middle barrel of the tower back. It didn't help - I still had to introduce a delay. smile
    2. mmaxx
      mmaxx 27 February 2021 13: 29
      0
      Well, there were no other weapons. And that's all. The 180-mm was developed in many ways like a coastal one. And so that you can manually control and load the cannon. So we got 180 mm as the optimal figure. And when the 152-mm cannon was developed, they began to design ships for it.
      The approach paid off completely. It turned out to be a good decision for the war that began. Both on land and at sea.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 27 February 2021 14: 24
        +1
        There were no other guns, of course, although the Bolshevik plant was still developing 152-mm B-10 and B-30 guns, and the Barrykada plant was developing the Br-2.
        Using their ballistics, it was easy to develop a ship cannon simultaneously with the B-1-P.

        It was difficult to load the cannon manually already with 152 mm guns, so the Japanese (for this a little less) switched to a 140 mm caliber.
        In sections B-1-K, it is difficult to speak strictly about manual loading, although in fact, during the charging process, a significant proportion of manual operations remained, as a result of which, the practical rate of fire was 4 rounds per minute, and the real continuous rate of fire did not exceed two rounds per minute.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 27 February 2021 15: 17
          0
          When the "Red Caucasus" was being completed and the "Kirovs" were being built, there was no. Waiting for a 6-inch cannon meant being left without cruisers. And although this approach to weapons that they have to work on muscular strength and retrograde, nevertheless it fully justified itself in the war that happened.
          1. Constanty
            Constanty 27 February 2021 15: 38
            0
            If you look at the chronology, the B-1-K cannon was not yet ready when the Krasny Kavkaz was built (more precisely, completed). In the same way, there was no B-1-P cannon for Kirov at that time. Also, guns and towers were built simultaneously with the construction of these ships.
            For example, Kirov began to be built. By order of the Labor and Defense Council dated July 11, 1934, No. 58ss, but the experimental swinging part of the B-27, manufactured at the Bolshevik plant, was delivered to NIAP only in November 1936.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 27 February 2021 16: 21
              +1
              So the question is about priorities. The 6-inch cannon was not such a priority. And the ships were built under 180 mm. By the time of the war, 6-dm were already in the project. They had to go to battleships and new cruisers.
              The Bolsheviks clearly ruled industrial policy.
              And they were right here. The sailors weren't happy with the 180mm. And in reality at sea 180 mm was useless. But in our war, 180 mm were more needed in place.
              1. Constanty
                Constanty 27 February 2021 16: 49
                0
                We disagree - in my opinion, the 180-mm guns - especially the B-1-K - performed poorly in the war - a service life of 55-60 rounds meant that the "Red Caucasus" ended its participation in the war as a de Facto cruiser in February 1943, and also mainly served as a military transport - precisely because of the low strength and durability of the barrels. The defeat of the command of Captain II Rank Resentment and the ban on the fighting of larger ships took place only in October 1943.

                Also, Kirov's actions against the Finnish batteries should be considered a failure (who knows, if not partly because of the 180-mm guns).
                1. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 27 February 2021 17: 39
                  0
                  The 180-mm cannon of the "Kr.Kavkaza", in general, is not indicative. Yes, they were bad. The war has already fallen into disrepair. They wanted to replace it with 130 mm turrets. Did not make it. All Yes. It was immediately an experimental cruiser.
                  And "Kirov" and any other cruiser against coastal batteries will not work. Kabanov wrote about the then correct coastal batteries, in particular the Finnish ones. It is unrealistic to suppress them with naval artillery. And the Americans and the British in Normandy did not really suppress them. This is with the same composition of forces! For suppression, howitzer fire was needed. There is no such thing on ships. Or hitting straight into the barrel. In Normandy, the batteries were knocking out commandos. The shelling of the ships drove the infantry into cover and it became possible to come close to the guns. For battleships, the Americans made special shells lighter and the charge for them is half. So that the projectile descends more vertically. At the same time, the barrel resource was saved. In general, in that war, competently built coastal artillery was suppressed by ships just by accident.
                  Yes, everything is the same before. Been on Electric Cliff. How to suppress this battery? Only a random direct hit directly into the cannon. Or lower the entire cliff into the sea. The Americans could do it)). A dozen battleships and all their ammunition.
                  1. Constanty
                    Constanty 27 February 2021 17: 53
                    0
                    You did not write that the B-1-P guns were justified, but in general - 180mm. So it is in the Caucasus.
                    And this is already controversial.

                    Since the fight against coastal batteries requires more power, why was the Kirov sent there, and not, for example, the Marat?

                    And in the same way in Constanta - why the Tirpitz batteries and the port were supposed to fire on the leaders of Moscow and Kharkov from 130-mm B-13 guns, and not Voroshilov from 180-mm guns - from a greater distance, from missiles with much more firepower and without having to enter the range of Romanian minefields?

                    Maybe the problem of the Soviet fleet was not only in technology?
                    1. mmaxx
                      mmaxx 27 February 2021 18: 34
                      0
                      Why, what and how was used, I do not know. The navy requires tradition. They are in the army. As soon as they start appearing in the navy, we arrange a revolution for ourselves. So we have not yet received the need for the fleet. Once it is needed, and then suddenly it is not. There is not enough country for everything. The same can be seen throughout history. Despite the fact that the thrust of our people, through and through the land, to the sea is amazing.
                      And Marat would hardly have suppressed the Finnish batteries. Kabanov described these batteries. Closed courtyard parapet. There is a cannon inside. With a flat fire, you can only get into the barrel. All. Or you need a random and successful hit in the courtyard. And so, the shells either fly past overhead, or burst nearby, but the parapet saves both from fragments and from waves. The same is true for all modern batteries. The allies in Normandy received the same. And this is with an overwhelming advantage.
                    2. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 13: 07
                      +2
                      Quote: Constanty
                      Since the fight against coastal batteries requires more power, why was the Kirov sent there, and not, for example, the Marat?

                      Because the Military Council of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet needed to demonstrate the activity of the fleet. Therefore, the commander of the OLS received an order "shell the battery about. Russare"but at the same time"not under fire".
                      At 21.20 BP Ptokhov received an order from the Military Council of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet, which confirmed his previous missions on patrol, and, in addition, contained an order “to fire on the battery of Fr. Russare ". No specific clarifications regarding the purpose of this operation were received from the headquarters of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. Intending to fire at the Finnish battery, the command of the fleet did not have accurate information about its location and composition, as well as about the presence of minefields on the approaches to the island. From the very beginning, the operation, not being backed up by reconnaissance data and preliminary trawling, looked like a gamble.

                      Approaching the island of Russare at a distance of 110 kbt, the cruiser lay down on a combat course of 240 °, which, as it turned out after the war, led directly to the minefield. At 10.55 the 234-mm battery of the island opened fire on the Soviet ships. Having the order not to be under fire, the commander of the OLS, who was holding the flag on the Kirov, ordered an increase in speed to 24 knots and lie on a course of 210 °, turning to the right side towards Russare.

                      The last order and the fervor of the Finns saved the cruiser: if the Finns had not lost their nerves and they had not opened fire (after which the KR changed course and began to leave), then following the previous course through a pair of cable Kirovs, it would have flown into a minefield.
                      Quote: Constanty
                      And in the same way in Constanta - why the Tirpitz batteries and the port had to fire at the leaders of the Moscow and Kharkov from 130-mm B-13 guns, and not Voroshilov from 180-mm guns

                      It seems to me that this is an "echo of the Finnish", namely - that very ill-fated shelling of Russare. The command of the Black Sea Fleet decided that it was a bad omen to send the CD to shell the unexplored coast in the first days of the war. smile
                2. mmaxx
                  mmaxx 27 February 2021 17: 52
                  +1
                  Yes, in general, and the battleship "Paris Commune" was also really incapable of war. The cannons were also shot. Where he was shooting there is generally incomprehensible. Here the king-father is to blame laughing
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 1 March 2021 14: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: mmaxx
                    Yes, in general, and the battleship "Paris Commune" was also really incapable of war. The cannons were also shot.

                    Were not. The resource of the barrels was knocked out only by March 1942.
                    During the fighting from November 1941 to March 1942, the battleship traveled 7700 miles, having consumed 1159-mm, 305-mm and more than 1169 anti-aircraft shells.
                    (...)
                    Despite the absence of combat damage, the battleship was in need of serious repair: six of the 305-mm guns had cracked trunks at the muzzle, and at some ends of the trunks were torn off, the resource of the guns (250 battle shots per barrel) was completely used up.
                    © A.M. Vasiliev. Line ships of the "Marat" type.
  • Escobar
    Escobar 26 February 2021 21: 41
    -1
    WIGs from the same opera
  • Undecim
    Undecim 26 February 2021 21: 59
    +15
    A self-respecting resource should not post such a "level". What a pitiful, illiterate parody of Shirokorad.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 26 February 2021 23: 55
      0
      Quote: Undecim
      A self-respecting resource should not post such a "level". What a pitiful, illiterate parody of Shirokorad.

      Yes, Shirokorad in comparison is generally handsome !!! A beacon of thought and a storehouse of knowledge !!!
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 27 February 2021 00: 03
        +7
        So the type obviously copied from Shirokorad. Some of its turns are striking. Only with zero knowledge, any attempt to repackage the original ends with the creation of such a "masterpiece".
    2. Comrade
      Comrade 27 February 2021 04: 16
      +6
      Quote: Undecim
      A self-respecting resource should not post such a "level". What a pitiful, illiterate parody of Shirokorad.

      In style and manner of presentation, this Roman Ivanov strongly resembles Roman Skomorokhov.
      By the way, Roman Ivanov, as well as Roman Skomorokhov, does not participate in discussions of his "gems".
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 06: 33
        +1
        Quote: Comrade
        In style and manner of presentation, this Roman Ivanov strongly resembles Roman Skomorokhov.

        This is closer to the truth, but I don’t believe it at such a weak level.
        In Sestroretsk, a periodical magazine on the fleet of the Author S. Ivanov was published, but this is heaven and earth.
      2. unknown
        unknown 27 February 2021 10: 27
        +3
        I started reading.
        I decided that Skomorokhov.
        I read it.
        It turns out to be a different author.
        And this is exactly another author?
        Or rebranding?
        1. Walking
          Walking 27 February 2021 10: 56
          +1
          Quote: ignoto
          I started reading.
          I decided that Skomorokhov.

          I, too, at first decided that it was Skomorokhov.
          1. Alf
            Alf 27 February 2021 16: 46
            +1
            Quote: Hiking
            Quote: ignoto
            I started reading.
            I decided that Skomorokhov.

            I, too, at first decided that it was Skomorokhov.

            It seemed to me that it was Kaptsov. By the way, he hasn't posted his fantastic opuses for a long time ...
      3. Constanty
        Constanty 27 February 2021 14: 28
        +1
        reading, I was convinced that it was Roman Skomorokhov. Even the first paragraph of my first commentary was written with Him in mind as the author.
  • Alf
    Alf 26 February 2021 22: 12
    +9
    insufficient anti-aircraft weapons

    And name at least one cruiser built in the mid-30s with powerful air defense.
    There were no other anti-aircraft guns in the USSR, what the industry could do, it gave. By the way, the Britons suffered even more from the same, especially the cruisers. In fact, the most successful small-caliber anti-aircraft gun was Bofors.
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 27 February 2021 15: 54
      +4
      Hr. Ms. "De Ruyter" - 10x40mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns, which is important at stabilized Hazemeyer bases,


      not counting the 12,7 mm machine guns.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 26 February 2021 22: 36
    +9
    KR 26 projects against the background of the stop. the ship structure of the USSR Navy in those years was not bad.
    With regards to the nuclear submarine 941 project. I was on the lead with the delivery team during sea trials. Huge ship. But the size can be explained by the "main caliber" - the R-39 BLP itself was a huge 90-ton cylinder. And 20 pcs. such "toys" + huge volumes of equipment and mechanisms = 48 tt. "water carrier"
  • zwlad
    zwlad 26 February 2021 23: 24
    0
    I understand that the bottom line of the article is - well, we could not build normal aircraft carriers.
  • Free wind
    Free wind 27 February 2021 02: 57
    +3
    There was also the Ural, a radio reconnaissance ship. Built, transported to the Far East and decommissioned.
    1. Ponchik78
      Ponchik78 27 February 2021 03: 46
      +2
      Well, in the case of the Urals, the overall situation in the country played a role more than the failure of the project. He probably would have been brought to his senses. But it was already easy for everyone to spit.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 06: 36
        +1
        The Urals in the Navy were catastrophically unlucky, either in Tsushima or in the case you mentioned! Not destiny, however, as with the Eagles!
        1. Ponchik78
          Ponchik78 27 February 2021 06: 42
          +1
          Spit))) One of the LK-60Ya Ural is called so)))
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 27 February 2021 06: 53
            +1
            In the civilian fleet with the Urals, the mustache is normal, but in the military, it is clearly not good. Apparently the extreme quasi-natural rejection of mountains by the sea!
            By the way, he himself is from the Urals, but here he is so bad!
  • Potter
    Potter 27 February 2021 09: 29
    0
    I can't put a plus in any way. To classify cruisers of the Kirov type as heavy, provided that the USSR did not sign the London and Washington agreements and could build anything it wanted, is a perversion. To call the booking of cruisers like Kirov, in particular pr. 26-bis, weak - by the author, look at the booking of "heavy" cruisers, built in Great Britain, with cardboard boards and 25mm turrets! If we simulate the collision of Maxim Gorky and some "Kent" - with the advantage of Maxim Gorky in speed, firing range and armor, the flawed Englishman had little chance of getting out of the one-on-one fight alive. And the very classification generated by the London and Washington agreements is flawed. "Heavy" cruisers appeared in it thanks to freaks like "Hawkins", who were really strange ships (raider hunters). Further, when the author tries to braid pr. 84 with a universal main caliber, we immediately recall similar ships with a universal main caliber that were carried out at the same time in the west. This was the general trend in the development of technology at that time, and the development of this direction stopped at the moment when it became clear that some advantage of the anti-aircraft missile system over artillery became clear. At the same time, the advantage of the anti-aircraft missile system over the large-caliber ZA was not very great - the rate of fire of the gun was several times higher than the speed of reloading missiles at that time, the reach in height and range + radio fuse left the chance of anti-aircraft artillery in the 1950s. And the SAMs of the mid-1950s became obsolete very quickly.
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 10: 53
      +2
      Quote: Potter
      To classify cruisers of the Kirov type as heavy, provided that the USSR did not sign the London and Washington agreements and could build anything it wanted, is a perversion.

      But he signed the Anglo-Soviet Maritime Agreement, which was a compilation of both treaties.
    2. Sergey Sfiedu
      Sergey Sfiedu 27 February 2021 17: 01
      +1
      If we simulate the collision of Maxim Gorky and some "Kent" - with the advantage of Maxim Gorky in speed, firing range and armor, the flawed Englishman had little chance of getting out of the one-on-one fight alive.

      The Italians also thought they would easily beat the British. In extreme cases, they will run away - after all, the speed is higher! In reality, it turned out exactly the opposite. And given the disgusting accuracy of the main caliber of our cruisers, you can doubt about your conclusion, who is lucky enough to get out of the fight alive.
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 10: 27
    +1
    Interestingly, collecting "horses and people", the author was interested, so to speak, in the genesis of projects?
    Why did they turn out the way they turned out?
  • Shiden
    Shiden 27 February 2021 12: 03
    +1
    Before criticizing the author of the article, you need to read it carefully. In my opinion, the author tried in the article to concisely convey the idea that the mistakes of the past fleet are repeated today.
  • evmarine
    evmarine 27 February 2021 12: 22
    +1
    The article is about nothing. Horses, people mixed up in a heap ... In historical digging, one must always understand why this was done then, and not deduce, as should have been done from a modern point of view. Everything has its time.
  • Igor Kobernik
    Igor Kobernik 27 February 2021 12: 36
    +2
    The "author" obviously re-read the site "Alternative History" ... Well, there were no guns "50-mm machine guns in six ZIF-75 quad artillery mounts". From the word "never" ... ZIF -75 - 57 mm cannon ... Small lies are already causing great distrust ... And about the "Red Caucasus" is clearly overdone ... And about the cruisers of the project 26 and 26 bis too .. Normally, those 180 mm cannons beat the Germans near Leningrad, and in Sevastopol - right up to the railway station. Bakhchisarai station got out .... The guns were problematic, I do not argue, but at that time they were fulfilling their task .... His grandfather, a staff member, at one time served in the "Red Caucasus" ....
  • looker-on
    looker-on 27 February 2021 12: 40
    -1
    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
    The British managed to cross a 12-inch cannon with a submarine! which was supposed to aim at the target horizontally by the body!

    French people
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 27 February 2021 13: 32
      +1
      Her. Angles. In WWI.
    2. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig 27 February 2021 13: 54
      +1
      Quote: looker-on
      French people

      There were only 8 "on" Surkuf ".
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 14: 12
      +1
      Quote: looker-on
      French people

      The British.
  • exo
    exo 27 February 2021 19: 24
    +3
    The cruisers pr-26 bis were very decent ships. About what Andrey wrote a series of articles from Chelyabinsk, whom I completely trust.
    Project 941 SSBN turned out to be forcedly large, but obviously not useless and disastrous.
    About 1144, I agree. The very concept of a nuclear-powered cruiser is more than controversial, and the story of the transformation of a nuclear-powered anti-submarine ship into a nuclear cruiser is more than interesting.
    And so, both we and the Americans had projects that, having devoured money and resources, brought nothing. Here, only the Yankees have more resources.
  • Dilettante grandfather
    Dilettante grandfather 28 February 2021 05: 36
    +1
    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
    In our twenties and thirties, they probably experimented more because of poverty, and not because of "foolishness", as in Britain, Japan, the United States and Brazil.

    No, I disagree. They always tried to find money for the needs of the Red Army. In my opinion, all these experiments were primarily due to the fact that a huge number of engineers and designers were educated already in adulthood. And then, let's say, it is far from academic. When designing and creating new types of weapons, any gaps in education were supplemented, let's say, by Wishlist. As a result, it turned out what it turned out.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 15: 05
      0
      Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
      No, I disagree. They always tried to find money for the needs of the Red Army.

      We tried - yes. But they did not find it. Otherwise, there would not have been only 30 personnel divisions in the Red Army in the mid-25s - from Leningrad to Vladivostok. And there would be no need to experiment with territorial and collective farm divisions, which took about two months to bring to a combat-ready state during mobilization.
      Money for the fleet was found only in the second half of the 30s. And before that, they could not scrape together the money even for the normal modernization of two LK BF ("Marat" generally did a collective farm tuning). For the Navy initially wanted for all three LKs "Parizhanka mod.41" - with PTZ and increased HVN main engine.
  • cdrt
    cdrt 28 February 2021 15: 42
    0
    You can still remember Ubewaflu 705. Loafs with their displacement
  • bbss
    bbss 28 February 2021 17: 00
    +1
    Everything is bad, everything is bad, and yet ... what is not bad is even worse. And in the midst of this g ... the author in a white suit.
  • Old26
    Old26 1 March 2021 02: 26
    +2
    Question to the author: and since when did the cruisers like "Svetlana" or "Kirov" suddenly become heavy, as in the article by the author ??

    Quote: Ponchik78
    The shark breaks through up to 2.5 meters of ice. Of course, not a ramming strike)
    Decommissioned (and cut) three out of six. One in the ranks, two in reserve.

    Two sucked, not in reserve. Yes, and there are no missiles for them
    1. Grossvater
      Grossvater 1 March 2021 08: 55
      0
      Formally, yes, the Civil Code is more than 155. It is just that in such border situations it is considered good form to use the classification adopted in the country by the owner of the vessel. But to understand this, you need to read a lot. What is called, to be in the subject.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 1 March 2021 11: 22
    +1
    Its essence was that even a light cruiser with such weapons would be able to shoot even a battleship because of a mine-artillery position, remaining unpunished.

    Not only because of the mine-artillery position, but also in the open sea, this weapon and superiority in speed made it possible to hit the Turkish battleship Yavuz (Goeben) and the Finnish battleships while remaining out of the reach of their artillery.
    The engineer Chernyavsky made the cannon. But, as usual, it turned out not that very - extremely low survivability, crazy dispersion and the inability to shoot at full range, because there were simply no devices for over-the-horizon shooting.

    The survivability and dispersal of this cannon are not bad. It shot very accurately. Over the horizon, it could shoot from air guidance, but it was not necessary to shoot at Yavuz and Ilmarinen beyond the horizon in order to remain out of the reach of their artillery.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 1 March 2021 11: 31
    +1
    Nevertheless, according to the project 26 and 26bis, 6 cruisers were built - the only pre-war Soviet cruisers. Weak armor, insufficient anti-aircraft armament and an unsuccessful main caliber are their calling card.

    1. No reservation will save the cruiser from the main caliber of Yavuz and Ilmarinen. Only the speed and range of the artillery ("unsuccessful" main caliber) could help.
    2. No anti-aircraft armament could save from aviation - it was maneuverability and speed and "weak" armor. None of the cruisers were lost in the war, despite their active use for two years under the Luftwaffe's domination in the air.
  • Old26
    Old26 1 March 2021 17: 08
    +1
    Quote: Grossvater
    Formally, yes, the Civil Code is more than 155. It is just that in such border situations it is considered good form to use the classification adopted in the country by the owner of the vessel. But to understand this, you need to read a lot. What is called, to be in the subject.

    With the caliber of the main caliber, everything is clear. But in addition to the caliber, there is also a question of displacement and booking. Otherwise, it turns out nonsense, if you try to place the main caliber of about 6000 or 7000 mm on a cruiser with a displacement of 306-354 - this will not make the cruiser linear ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 March 2021 19: 03
      0
      Quote: Old26
      With the caliber of the main caliber, everything is clear. But in addition to the caliber, there is also a question of displacement and booking.

      And this problem was not only with us. Suffice it to recall how the Yankees had a pair of initially light Pensacols CL-24 and CL-25, due to their 8 "caliber, suddenly became heavy CA-24 and CA-25. smile
      Quote: Old26
      Otherwise, it turns out nonsense, if you try to place the main caliber of about 6000 or 7000 mm on a cruiser with a displacement of 306-354 - this will not make the cruiser linear ...

      Worse - it will formally become a battleship.
  • Old26
    Old26 1 March 2021 19: 28
    +2
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Old26
    With the caliber of the main caliber, everything is clear. But in addition to the caliber, there is also a question of displacement and booking.

    And this problem was not only with us. Suffice it to recall how the Yankees had a pair of initially light Pensacols CL-24 and CL-25, due to their 8 "caliber, suddenly became heavy CA-24 and CA-25. smile
    Quote: Old26
    Otherwise, it turns out nonsense, if you try to place the main caliber of about 6000 or 7000 mm on a cruiser with a displacement of 306-354 - this will not make the cruiser linear ...

    Worse - it will formally become a battleship.

    Alexey, I absolutely agree with you. The question is whose classification. Ours or Western. On the western side, probably "Kirov" could be classified as heavy. On ours - to the lungs.
    In the future, there was also a discrepancy in the classification. Either the destroyers were reclassified into cruisers (project 58), then the ships of projects 1134, 1134A and 1134B were classified differently in different countries. We have as a cruiser (1134) and BOD (1134A and B) - they have - as a cruiser
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 March 2021 12: 33
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Alexey, I absolutely agree with you. The question is whose classification. Ours or Western. On the western side, probably "Kirov" could be classified as heavy. On ours - to the lungs.

      Still, it is better to work in a single classification (and this will most likely be the western one - they just have a more classified ship base).
      Working with different classifications, we can at any time encounter features of national classifications... For example, with the fact that some ship with three two-gun 38-cm towers was considered a heavy cruiser - a classmate of Pensacola, Furutaki, or even Hipper with Baltimore (a kind of repetitive bully smile ).
      Quote: Old26
      In the future, there was also a discrepancy in the classification. Then the destroyers were reclassified as cruisers (project 58)

      Well, we are not the only ones to indulge in such things - it is enough to remember the history of "Tiki".
      Quote: Old26
      then the ships of projects 1134, 1134A and 1134B in different countries were classified differently. We have as a cruiser (1134) and BOD (1134A and B) - they have - as a cruiser

      He-he-he ... so we ourselves did not know how to classify Project 1134 - they were listed as BOD for the first ten years and only then became RRC.
  • pin_code
    pin_code 2 March 2021 07: 40
    0
    article is a big minus. cruisers pr. Chapaev and Akula are one of the best. the author of the article ... rather a clerk than a writer, no justification ... chirkanul (farted) and FSE ... let's say ... 6 Sharks will be in the ranks ... someone will sit on the p (g) opera exactly and squeak as much as possible , like a mouse ... I will not further disclose the topic ... who understood, salute.
    1. agond
      agond 2 March 2021 09: 45
      0
      It must be 941 this is our strangest project, and we are still enthusiastically rubbed in the same strange arguments in its favor, the main one of them concerns the huge size of the submarine, probably so that the average person, upon learning about its completely wild dimensions, felt pride for the country, and enemies began to react inappropriately (......)
      1. pin_code
        pin_code 3 March 2021 07: 27
        0
        and why is it strange? the fact that there are 20 missiles on board, each with 10 warheads? of course strange..6 boats - 1200 warheads. Someone wrote and pooped, and then bam! and everything on the ointment ... destroyed.
  • FCSO
    FCSO 2 March 2021 10: 50
    0
    The author is generally unaware of most of the issues he is trying to judge.
    Let's take the same Project 26 cruisers.
    It is enough to compare the ballistic characteristics of Soviet 180-mm guns and 150-155-mm guns of foreign light cruisers (the mass of the projectile is almost twice as high on average, and the speed at the barrel cut is 100 m / s higher!) To understand that the accuracy shooting 26 times exceeds the same parameters of their opponents.
    It turns out that at the same distance, our cruisers could shoot with significantly lower (!) Elevation angles, and this automatically reduced the take-off to the pillar (lead). Add in speed superiority and the outcome of a duel with an opponent is not difficult to predict.
    1. Sergey Sfiedu
      Sergey Sfiedu 6 March 2021 01: 11
      0
      "the shooting accuracy of the 26s is several times higher than the similar parameters of their opponents" - well, this is purely in theory. In practice, everything was exactly the opposite.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 2 March 2021 13: 34
    0
    Kirov and even more so M. Gorka have some superiority over the heavy cruisers Heeper.
    At a course angle of less than 30 degrees, Kirov has a zone of "invulnerability" 3-4 kilometers (approximately at a distance of 21-25 km) in relation to the 203 mm Heper gun (this certainly does not apply to towers). And the projectiles of the 180 mm Kirov gun with a low-combat charge (800 m / s) pass through the Heeper deck in this zone. It is not easy to realize this superiority in real combat, but it is still there.
  • seacap
    seacap April 6 2021 17: 56
    0
    If there were no such projects, there were no real successful ones, so everywhere, for sure, from these projects, as well as from hundreds of others, something was taken for modern ships, and maybe for future ones. Therefore, statements, such as an underwaffle or a waste of funds, so a person who is not competent in this matter and is far from the essence of the issue can say, all the progress of design rests on these miracles of technology.
  • Ghoul_Local
    Ghoul_Local April 24 2021 20: 22
    0
    Everything is confused, horses, people ...
  • north 2
    north 2 13 May 2021 07: 47
    0
    I want to remind the author of the words of the great poet, - ... that experience is the son of difficult mistakes ... In other words, it is those who think that all projects of their planes and ships will be successful, without erroneous ones, do not fly and do not go on the seas ... ...