Military Review

The real Soviet fleet of 1941

221

About boats



At the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, the quantitative composition fleet The USSR was, of course, huge, but ...

To understand, you must first understand the types of ships in service, and then with their distribution among fleets. And start, of course, with battleships, because Pearl Harbor did not exist yet, and it was the battleships that were considered the rulers of the seas. The USSR had three battleships, in two fleets.

Много это или мало?

With what to compare - the Germans, for example, on 22.06.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX had one battleship, plus two battle cruisers. So, it seems like parity, but the question was not quantity, but quality.

Battleships of the Sevastopol class were good ships at the time of laying in 1909. At the time of commissioning in 1914, they were already so-so, at the time of the end of the First World War - below average, and later twenty three (23) years it was possible to call them battleships only for propaganda purposes, they say, we also have.

Any battleship built in the 30s, including even underdogs like the Dunkirk and Scharnhorst, would have carried our trinity through one gate. Simply because of the superiority in speed, fire control devices and a new generation of artillery. I'm not talking about "Tirpitz", our artillery would not even scratch it in a hypothetical battle. Plus air defense, in the sense of outdated, ineffective, and even that was delivered during the modernization, that is, it was irrational.

When the Sevas were born, there was no air threat yet. No, they could be used - as floating batteries for firing on land. Or in mine and artillery positions, like coastal defense battleships, no more. In the Russo-Japanese, here "Peter the Great" was listed as an battleship, but for some reason did not go to the Pacific Ocean ...

To summarize, we had three coastal defense ships and zero battleships.

But what about the cruiser? Is there order here?

Yes, almost like.

As many as 8 pieces, of which 6 are on the Black Sea. True, one of them is the "Comintern", the buildings of the times of the Russian-Japanese and converted into a minesag, because it was impossible to use this old man in any other way. Another "improved" "Krasny Kavkaz" with a shot with the main caliber, the number of as many as four barrels. And two more - "Svetlana", ships of the same generation with battleships. I mean, you can still shoot along the coast, but go into battle with cruisers, perhaps, which is not worth it - they will drown and not even sweat.

As a result, we had 4 (four) cruisers - two in the Baltic and two in the Black Sea. Moreover, the cruisers are strange - the three-gun turrets of the main battery of irrational design with a caliber of 180 mm guns were pushed into the hull of the Italian light cruiser. The armor is weak, the anti-aircraft artillery is not very good. But new and fast. All four.


Destroyers?

It's easier with them.

True, to consider 17 Noviks as destroyers is somehow ... creative. For 1941, this is a TFR, and not bad, to drive submarines - quite suitable. But okay, but there were seven new leaders. And the destroyers of projects "7" and "7U" in the amount of 28 and 18 pieces, respectively. They had their own problems, both structural (the Italians still built ships for the Mediterranean, hence the weakness of the hull and air defense), and operational.

But who didn't have them?

In any case, 46 destroyers for 4 fleets is clearly not what was required.

The real Soviet fleet of 1941

What about submarines?

Was there a lot of them?

Yes, even a lot, as many as 271. The largest submarine fleet in the world at that time. But...

First, five of them during the First World War, American "AG", which, after decades, have dubious combat value. Not counting the three submarines of the "P" series, unsuccessful and incapable of combat. But the rest ...

And what about the rest, by the way?

Here is the "M" series 6, 30 units, two torpedo tubes, 0 torpedo stock, scanty autonomy ... Why did they build? And what they could, then they built, in the late 20s there was no time for frills. True, then, inspired by the cheapness, they built another 66 babies, slightly improved, but still stupid. That's the result - take away 104 boats from the Soviet submarine armada, divide them into four fleets and ... You will get a strong submarine fleet, approximately at the level of other states.

Well, if you don't look at this:

... lagging in submerged cruising range, immersion depth and sinking speed ... Domestic submarines by the beginning of the war did not have modern electronic detection equipment, torpedo automatic weapons, bubbleless firing devices, depth stabilizers, radio direction finders, shock absorbers, devices, etc. mechanisms, but they were distinguished by the great noise of mechanisms and devices. The issue of communication with the submarine, which is in a submerged position, has not been resolved. Practically the only source of information about the surface situation of a submerged submarine was a periscope with very unimportant optics. The Mars type sound direction finders that were in service made it possible by ear to determine the direction to the noise source with an accuracy of plus or minus 2 degrees. The operating range of the equipment with good hydrology did not exceed 40 kb.

But this is the main trump card of the Soviet Navy, in the absence of others. Well, the staff. Yes, building is not a problem, but where to get qualified submariners, if we build more than 12 boats in 200 years, and write off less than 20? Question.

But did we still have light powers?

Were

Here is a TKA type "G-5", as many as 300 pieces, however, seaworthiness as much as 4 points, and you can shoot at two maximum, but a lot ... And the speed is high, 50 knots in the absence of excitement. There were, however, still quite normal "D-3", but they began to build a year before the war. So TKA is also that ...

And again, the reasons are objective - they copied the British, not to rivet, of course, the concept. They copied, because they knew how to experience. As a result, the war was different, and TKA needed others.

You can also talk about minesweepers. "Fugas" is a good ship, but built so that both the TFR and the minesweeper, the keels were wildly lacking.

It is possible about the landing ships. They, in general, were not built, and then the whole war amphibious operations with improvised means. Or maybe about the Air Force, there were a lot of coastal-based aircraft in 1941, but there was very little sense, however, like all other countries. Coastal aviation requires perfect intelligence and jewelry engagement.

In the fleets



On the fleets, the picture was as follows - in the Baltic there were two cruisers, two leaders, 14 destroyers, 41 submarines (without babies, Pravd and ancient Latvians), 7 TFR and 7 Noviks, 24 minesweepers and many boats and purely auxiliary ships ... All this good was blocked by the Germans, come to their head to arrange sea battles, at once, despite the presence of two ancient dreadnoughts. It was also bad with the basing system, the Baltic ports returned home only in 1940, and the army's retreat was rapid. As a result, the only base is Kronstadt, which was blocked from land until 1944.

On the Black Sea, on the one hand, it was easier - two cruisers, three leaders, 11 destroyers, 25 submarines, 2 + 5 Novikovs were not opposed by anyone, that is, in general. Well, do not count the Romanian fleet as an enemy, in fact ... If the Baltic was not covered enough, then the Black Sea, where they were preparing for a new Crimean war, is redundant. Although it came in handy - it was on the Black Sea that large landings were carried out and defended Odessa and Sevastopol. The only thing - why the "Paris Commune" was there, I can't imagine - it belongs to the Baltic, the third floating battery for the defense of the Gulf of Finland and Leningrad.

In the North, everything was sad, how much it can be in the maritime theater, through which our communication with the allies was maintained. Six destroyers and 15 submarines, plus 2 Noviks and the TFR are not strong enough to cover even the country's shores. On the positive side were the Northern Sea Route and the White Sea Canal, which made it possible to transfer reinforcements from the Baltic and the Pacific Ocean. With the latter, however, not everything is so simple - there were two leaders, 10 destroyers (two of them "Novik") and 78 submarines, including useless "babies". Two cruisers were just being completed, they were just thinking about something bigger.

As a result, if you count only modern ships, no fleet was able to carry out its tasks. And this is an objective reality, if, of course, you do not play with numbers. Otherwise, one can count that the Baltic Fleet was stronger than the Kriegsmarine, and the submarine forces of the Pacific Fleet were superior to the Imperial Japanese fleet.

Why this happened is an interesting question.

Prepare



Well, firstly, the Soviet Navy did not come from nowhere, it is the heir and successor of the imperial fleet. And the inheritance passed to us in order pogroms, in the North and the Pacific Ocean there were no ships at all, only stubs passed from the Black Sea Fleet, many ships were lost in the Baltic, and most importantly - personnel.

All this was aggravated by the Civil War and the post-war devastation.

So, relatively good "Izmail" was not completed due to the impossibility of both work at domestic enterprises and the inaccessibility of foreign components, for example. The same thing happened - projects of the pre-war period, which by the beginning of the 30s no longer met the requirements of the time more than completely.

In the 20s, there was no time for the fleet, but when money appeared, it was decided to build light coastal defense forces, which is logical - both relatively simple and cheap. So more than controversial submarines like "M" and TKA "Sh-4" and "G-5" went into production.

In the early 30s, money seemed to appear, and factories were built, but ... practice has shown that the design school is lost. The firstborns among the relatively large ships of the TFR of the "Uragan" type and the submarines of the "Decembrist" type gave birth in agony, and it turned out, rather, as in the verse "the queen gave birth to a son or a daughter in the night." And if the Germans helped with the Decembrists, the Hurricanes were openly screwed up.

I had to buy, for this they chose Italy, which was clearly not an optimal solution, but a budget one. Still, most of the resources were consumed by the army, which is true, without it there is absolutely nothing with our borders.

The fleet was taken up seriously after the Spanish war, when it became clear that a strong and authoritative state was impossible without it. Only now they did not have time ...

More precisely - not everyone had time. With submarines of the "C" type, they managed, having received an analogue of their Series VII, the best boats of that war, which is nice - from the Germans, they purchased the drawings and part of the instruments. With mosquito forces, they almost had time, the hunters created and ran in, with seaworthy TKA they were late, and with large ...

The battleships of the project 23 frankly did not pull. Were it not for the war they would have been completed, perhaps, by 1944-1945. Battlecruisers, even with the purchase of German turret guns, are about the same. But the destroyers of project 30, leaders of project 48 and light cruisers of project 68 could well begin to enter service in 1942, so that the balance of forces on the seas could fundamentally change. But...

Couldn't, or rather - didn't have time. Alas, it is in fiction that Stalin needs to know the future, and the ships begin to bake like hot cakes. In a sad reality, everything is a little different. In any country, they do exactly as much for which they have enough strength and funds.

And what is not enough - they pay for the lack of iron in blood, and at a terrible rate.

And in that war, we paid, proving that even with a shortage of iron, you can fight and win. And submarine campaigns through minefields without sonar in the Baltic, and attacks by non-seaworthy TKA in the Arctic, and the Black Sea winter landings without landing ships and trained marines - all this was scary, bloody, but often successful.

And it was stupid to look for the guilty, which turned out that way, at first they could not, then they did not have time. There was also nonsense, of course, but not so critical, such as an incomprehensible love for the caliber of 180 mm or the construction of almost a hundred "Babies" and 300 TKA of a reduced type. You can understand this - it is better bad, but much than nothing at all.

The desire of some publicists is simply amazing - to show us strong (and therefore stupid, since that Hitler was not immediately erased into powder) where this power was not even close.

For example, in terms of the number of modern cruisers, we, of course, overtook Argentina, four against three. But they lagged behind the Netherlands, they had five of them ...
Author:
221 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Anzhey V.
    Anzhey V. April 1 2021 18: 11
    +16
    Very crumpled stuff, Roman.

    It is not entirely clear what thesis you wanted to put forward, how you proved it, and what can be considered a conclusion.

    Then it would be just right to fully develop the topic of the weakness of the Soviet Navy, including logistical and organizational factors, to identify the reasons why they arose, and so on and so forth.

    And so some big commentary came out about the fact that you disagree with some unknown publicists.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman April 1 2021 18: 23
      +13
      Quote: Anjay V.
      It is not entirely clear what thesis you wanted to put forward, how you proved it, and what can be considered a conclusion.

      This happens when there is nothing to say, but you want to talk.
      1. URAL72
        URAL72 April 1 2021 18: 44
        +15
        The author is right, I agree with him. Yes, a cry from the heart. Yes, the article is superficial, but if you look at the contingent that is now in the majority on the site, then it is just right. The point is not in detailed scientific research material, the point is to draw attention to the shortcomings in the construction of the Armed Forces of those years, from which heavy defeats result. The author slightly showed one side of the coin.
        1. Senior seaman
          Senior seaman April 1 2021 19: 53
          +12
          Quote: URAL72
          The author is right, I agree with him.

          I beg your pardon, but what is the author's right?
          Is it that he did not take the trouble to study the materiel that he undertook to describe in any detail?
          Or in making strange proposals, like transferring the third battleship to the Baltic?
          Or that he dragged Argentina neither to the village nor to the city?
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 20: 57
            +6
            I beg your pardon, but what is the author's right?
            Is it that he did not take the trouble to study the materiel that he undertook to describe in any detail?
            Or in making strange proposals, like transferring the third battleship to the Baltic?
            Or that he dragged Argentina neither to the village nor to the city?

            He hints at the current state of affairs in our Navy.
            All the same, only until the Russian Federation aircraft carriers were laid down. laughing
          2. Mooh
            Mooh April 1 2021 20: 57
            +10
            Made a light reviewer in a fictional style. Quite readable, seemingly without serious blunders. He expressed controversial thoughts, so he has the right. Not AiCh, of course, but against the background of the current "notes about your boy", filling the resource a little less than completely, it is quite a piece of material. Precisely not worse than the opuses of Ryabov and Samsonov.
            1. Andy
              Andy April 1 2021 22: 37
              -7
              Samsonov and his tartary are much closer to the truth than similar opuses.
              1. Mooh
                Mooh April 1 2021 22: 51
                +6
                Just don't talk about the benefits of Samsonov. Stupid propaganda instead of history. Moreover, the propaganda of what is not very clear. Apparently punitive psychiatry.
        2. 89268170588
          89268170588 April 23 2021 22: 15
          0
          What the author is right. Quote. "Any battleship built in the 30s, including even undersized ones like" Dunkirks "-" Scharnhorst ", would have carried our trio through one gate" Scharnhort was 10000 more and 10 knots faster, but he had 9 main guns versus 12 in Sevastopol ... By the way, he distinguished himself mainly on convoys.
  2. sergo1914
    sergo1914 April 1 2021 18: 15
    +8
    Eh ... hands itch, but there is no time. Yes, and Bismarck must be finished off



    Well ... the battleship was not built, but the model is there

    1. Flooding
      Flooding April 1 2021 18: 44
      0
      Quote: sergo1914
      the battleship was not built, but the model is there

      in four hands?
    2. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav April 1 2021 21: 21
      +4
      I collected a plastic bismarck
  3. Undecim
    Undecim April 1 2021 18: 30
    +37
    Poor history of the Soviet fleet. Roman Ivanov reached her. The assumption that the VO site has declared war on history, as such, has received another confirmation.
    1. Ryazan87
      Ryazan87 April 1 2021 18: 37
      +20
      Roman Ivanov is far from the worst thing that happens in the history section)
      1. Walking
        Walking April 2 2021 07: 18
        +10
        Roman Ivanov? Roman Skomorokhov? The surname was changed.
    2. Pane Kohanku
      Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 09: 57
      +4
      Poor history of the Soviet fleet.

      It seems to me, or in the last photo the cruiser pr. 68-K? A number of them were laid down even before the war; they had just been commissioned a few years after the Victory. hi
      1. Undecim
        Undecim April 2 2021 10: 23
        +8
        Yes, this is a Project 68-K cruiser. Laid down in 1939, commissioned in 1950. Until 1958 - "Valery Chkalov", in 1958 reclassified into training and renamed into "Komsomolets". In the photo - July 1975. Five years later - Liepaja, Vtorchermet.
        1. Pane Kohanku
          Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 10: 28
          +3
          Until 1958 - "Valery Chkalov", in 1958 it was reclassified into training and renamed into "Komsomolets".

          I, by a sinful deed, just did not try to read the title, but you specified it. Thanks! drinks
          Five years later - Liepaja, Vtorchermet.

          In Liepaja, my uncle served on small anti-submarine warplanes. soldier
          1. Undecim
            Undecim April 2 2021 10: 39
            +8
            Directly according to the saying "For one beaten, two not beaten ..." There was Khapaluzhny, they removed, and instead of him Frolova and Ivanov. Historians Ivanovs turn over in their grave.
            1. Pane Kohanku
              Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 11: 37
              +6
              Historians Ivanovs turn over in their grave.

              It is a pity that Mikhail (with a trilobite prompter) is not published, and Vaschenko is rare ... request I liked Zhukov at one time, Denis Brig - generally remarkably "came in" - an easy syllable, read simply and, at times, cheerfully. good Well, it's very good when the authors of the articles also discuss. hi Among the "historians" this quality can be noted in Shpakovsky and Ryzhov. drinks
              1. Undecim
                Undecim April 2 2021 11: 53
                +6
                Ryzhov writes a historical novel in the genre. Like Pikul.
    3. Zug
      Zug April 2 2021 21: 43
      0
      Well, actually the author is right. The cruisers were built by Italians. The speed is, yes, impressive. But why is it? We re-facilitated the ships, 2 Non-contact explosions on mines. One in 42 year. A non-contact mine exploded 10 meters from the side. The cruiser was completely out of order. Generators and main battery guns, mismatch between the command post and the vehicle department, etc. Had to stop the raid to the Romanian shores and return home. 45 Such de explosion. If they had not dragged to the pier, the cruiser would have sank. And this is August 45! The commander did not turn on the demagnetizing equipment. Cruisers are rubbish, minesweepers at the request of Tributs required more than 100. In stock. 24 or something. For this they paid in blood in the Tallinn breakthrough. Plus the debelism of the command led by Kuznetsov. Brelin wanted to bomb him. 15 Thousand people went to the bottom for this. That's the price of stupidity and moronism.
      1. Sergey Zhikharev
        Sergey Zhikharev April 3 2021 08: 51
        +2
        The cruisers were built by Italians. Speed, yes, impressive. But why is it?

        Covering your destroyers when attacking enemy ships. A plus are the type of useless 180-mm guns that allow you to shoot from a long distance.
        2 non-contact explosions on mines. One in 42 year. A non-contact mine exploded 10 meters from the side. The cruiser was completely out of order. Generators and main battery guns, mismatch of the command post with the machine department, etc. Had to stop the raid to the Romanian coast and Return home. In 45 Such a detonation. If they had not been dragged to the pier, the cruiser would have sank. And this is August 45! The commander did not turn on the demagnetizing equipment. Cruisers are rubbish,

        If you can still agree with the first (1942), then what does 1945 have to do with it? A cruiser with an incomplete crew was blown up by a mine and was dragged to port. Or in foreign fleets in peacetime, blown up by a mine, continue to sail?
        At the request of the Tributs, more than 100 minesweepers were required, 24 or so, for which they paid in blood in the Tallinn breakthrough.

        Do other fleets (Great Britain, Japan) have a lot of minesweepers, and hunters for submarines, and transport ships heaped up?
        Plus the debelism of the command led by Kuznetsov. Brelin wanted to bomb him. 15 Thousands of people went to the bottom for this. That's the price of foolishness and moronism.

        If the Russians are bombing Berlin it is idiocy, if the Americans are bombing Tokyo (Doolittle raid) it is patriotism .....
        1. Zug
          Zug April 3 2021 09: 18
          -1
          On detonation at 45. The damage is the same. The ship is weakened, flimsy. The point is in 180 mm guns? In fact, it could shoot at visible targets, being in the distant defeat of other brothers. One shell hit the way. All air defense at the stern. The ship was being repaired and more than 1 people died. Unsuccessfully 'lightened' There is simply no depreciation of the mechanisms. And the price for Berlin is not high? Hit once. And then the first raid. That’s all. It might have been worth losing the islands and transferring people and saving lives and not waiting until the Germans put the newest guns on both sides and completely block the path to Kronstadt? The dulittle did not have a civilian population and thousands of soldiers flying into the bomb bay. Indicate the problem with minesweepers even before the war.
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 10: 54
            0
            Quote: Zug
            In fact, he could shoot at visible targets in the distant defeat of other brethren. One shell hit by the way.

            Where you can find more detailed statistics.
            1. Zug
              Zug April 3 2021 12: 56
              0
              Miroslav Morozov lectures on the Baltic Sea, he is KIN, Fleet Officer, Specialist for the USSR Navy
              1. Macsen_wledig
                Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 14: 06
                -1
                I know Miroslav Eduardovich personally ... If necessary, I will ask him this way.
                But in this case, I'm interested in getting information from you ...;)
                1. Zug
                  Zug April 4 2021 14: 51
                  0
                  And I received information from him, so I ask him questions about the documents and what he said in his lectures.
                  1. Macsen_wledig
                    Macsen_wledig April 4 2021 19: 16
                    -1
                    Quote: Zug
                    And I received information from him, so I ask him questions about the documents and what he said in his lectures.

                    Dexterously you transplant the monkey ... wink
                    1. Zug
                      Zug April 4 2021 19: 18
                      0
                      Why - I immediately said - information from a respected source. You are familiar with him. You do not trust your personal acquaintance?
                      1. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 4 2021 19: 19
                        -1
                        Quote: Zug
                        Why - I immediately said - information from a respected source. You are familiar with him. You do not trust your personal acquaintance?

                        Let's just say, but now I'm not discussing with MEM, but with you ...
                      2. Zug
                        Zug April 4 2021 19: 25
                        0
                        Let's just say, I am not discussing with you. I brought information from a respected and reliable source. The question is simple, do you not trust this source? Here's a little link, there are documents and reports on the combat capability of ships after the explosion and their (ships) shortcomings. If You are not satisfied with something in the documents in the transfer specified - bring your own, preferably to my mail and originals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piMyrsL_b54&list=PL9ybxsKzafo3u0PksF_9Ei2j-DQb2YhrP&index=3
                      3. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 4 2021 19: 31
                        0
                        Quote: Zug
                        Let's just say I'm not discussing with you.

                        Then what are you doing here? Are you broadcasting immutable truths? :)

                        Quote: Zug
                        I cited information from a reputable and reliable source. The question is simple - do you not trust this source?

                        Hooray ... Finally, you were able to link to the source ...
                        Progress on the face. :)

                        Quote: Zug
                        it is desirable for me to mail and originals.

                        Doesn't the crown press for you? :)
                      4. Zug
                        Zug April 4 2021 19: 36
                        0
                        Hooray ... Finally, you were able to link to the source ...
                        Progress on the face. :)

                        In principle, I immediately wrote about it, it's a pity that they did not see it.
                        Then what are you doing here? Are you broadcasting immutable truths? :)
                        No, it's just that there are reports and reports, their photos from the original. There can be no closer information. As if everything.
                      5. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 4 2021 19: 43
                        -1
                        Quote: Zug
                        In principle, I immediately wrote about it, it's a pity that they did not see it.

                        It's about specific source ...
                        As in this case - link.
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 10: 56
    0
    Quote: Zug
    We re-facilitated the boats, 2 Non-contact explosions on mines. One in 42. A non-contact mine exploded 10 meters from the side. The cruiser was completely out of order.

    Sometime at your leisure, read about damage from non-contact explosions, for example, "Belfast" and "Nelson" ...
    1. Zug
      Zug April 3 2021 12: 58
      0
      In this case, they exploded 10 and 25 meters from the ship. Watch Morozov's lectures. Informative. Reads the list of damage by report.
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 14: 03
        0
        Quote: Zug
        Reads out the list of damage by report

        Read British Damage Reports.
        Also informative reading.
  • clerk
    clerk April 1 2021 18: 53
    +10
    Battleships of the Sevastopol class were good ships at the time of laying in 1909. At the time of commissioning in 1914, they were already so-so, at the end of the First World War - below the average level, and twenty-three (23) years later it was possible to call them battleships only for propaganda purposes, they say, we also have.

    Any battleship built in the 30s, including even underdogs like the Dunkirk and Scharnhorst, would have carried our trinity through one gate. Simply because of the superiority in speed, fire control devices and a new generation of artillery. ABOUT .
    As for the "Dunkirk" and "Scharnhorst" one can argue - in their famous battles they did not show accuracy, and their artillery was clearly weaker than that of the Sev. In addition, the author forgot about the Italian and French aircrafts built by the PMV numbering about a dozen - against them Seva looked quite worthy. So the Sevas were unambiguously losing only LKs with a caliber of 14 "and above, and there were few of them among real opponents and it was too late.
    1. Engineer
      Engineer April 1 2021 20: 22
      +12
      One can argue about the "Dunkirk" and "Scharnhorst" - in their famous battles they did not show accuracy.

      subordinates of frigatten-captain Löwish felt hurt and hurt
      Starting at 17.38, three shells hit the Glories from a distance of about 23 m one after another
      1. clerk
        clerk April 1 2021 21: 27
        0
        ... Starting at 17.38, three shells hit the Glories from a distance of about 23 meters one after the other.
        In sequence. Within half an hour? From 20-23 km? I strongly suspect that if Glories had been a single (without EM) Seva, the Germans would have been just as easy to succeed. If you would have been able to.
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine April 1 2021 20: 57
      +1
      Quote: clerk
      in their famous battles, they did not show accuracy

      The longest successful WWII shots are Charles in Norway and the English grandfather in Calabria. Dunkirkas did not shoot at a record range, but I did not hear anything about any problems in their few battles (on the move only Mars-el-Kebir).
      Quote: clerk
      their artillery was clearly weaker than that of Sev

      Why would you?
      Quote: clerk
      Dunkirk and Scharnhorst are debatable

      No chance for sowing.
      Quote: clerk
      those among real opponents were few and late.

      Dreadnoughts / Superdreadnoughts in the main fleets for the summer of 41
      USSR - 3/0
      Germany - 0/3 (all new)
      Italy - 0/5 (2 new, I don't count Roma)
      Japan - 0/15 (no new)
      France - everything is complicated, but theoretically 2/6 (3 new)
      USA - 1/16 (2 new)
      Britain 0/16 (3 new, Duke of York count)

      Who else would you like to compare with? Turkey, Spain? South American countries, maybe?
      1. clerk
        clerk April 1 2021 21: 29
        -2
        ... The longest successful WWII shots are Charles in Norway and English grandfather in Calabria. Dunkirkas did not shoot at a record range, but I did not hear anything about any problems in their few battles (on the move only Mars-el-Kebir).
        And how many hits did the French LCs reach in this battle?
        ... Dunkirk and Scharnhorst are debatable
        //////
        No chance for sowing.
        Mantra.
      2. clerk
        clerk April 1 2021 21: 34
        0
        ... Dreadnoughts / Superdreadnoughts in the main fleets for the summer of 41
        USSR - 3/0
        Germany - 0/3 (all new)
        Italy - 0/5 (2 new, I don't count Roma)
        Japan - 0/15 (no new)
        France - everything is complicated, but theoretically 2/6 (3 new)
        USA - 1/16 (2 new)
        Britain 0/16 (3 new, Duke of York count)

        Who else would you like to compare with?
        If for the summer of 1941, then you need to compare with peers or similar in displacement LK hostile countries in a possible theater of operations. Considering that the ShiG were in Brest, only 3 old Italians remain.
        their artillery was clearly weaker than that of Sev
        /////:
        Why would you?
        Yes, even by the weight of the volley.
        1. Constanty
          Constanty April 1 2021 22: 04
          +3
          Considering that the ShiG were in Brest, only 3 old Italians remain.


          The Italians did not cross the Black Sea straits, so here (in the Black Sea) only Yavuz came into play. Almost not modernized and with the engine room in poor condition. No doubt the Paris Commune would have dealt with it - so it made sense to keep him in the Black Sea.
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine April 1 2021 22: 20
          +3
          Quote: clerk
          Yes, even by the weight of the volley.

          Why do you need the weight of a volley? Charles Sevu can penetrate from any distance, it is impossible to penetrate Charles Sevuet.
          Quote: clerk
          Mantra.

          The mantra is to make your grandfather fight the new wave battleship. Even small.
          Quote: clerk
          If for the summer of 1941, then you need to compare with peers or similar in displacement LC

          Is it a fig? Like, planting on seve 16 "is unsportsmanlike? You can not offend the veterans?

          In any case, we found only Arkansas, two Courbet, and heavily modernized old Italians from our peers. Frankly speaking, there are not so few Sverdreadnoughts against this background.
          Quote: clerk
          hostile countries in a possible theater of operations.

          Before the well-known events, Great Britain was the main enemy of the USSR.
          1. clerk
            clerk April 1 2021 22: 40
            -4
            ... Yes, even by the weight of the volley.

            Why do you need the weight of a volley? Charles Sevu can penetrate from any distance, it is impossible to penetrate Charles Sevuet.
            Well, strictly speaking, from 55-60 cab. Charles's board also begins to break through. But Charles has many vulnerabilities, and the deck penetration must be counted (especially at long distances). And just a shaft of 470 kg of "suitcases" would quickly force Charles to withdraw from the battle.
            If for the summer of 1941, then you need to compare with peers or similar in displacement LC

            Is it a fig? Like, planting on seve 16 "is unsportsmanlike? You can not offend the veterans?
            You can offend anyone. You cannot pull an owl onto a spherical horse in a vacuum.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine April 1 2021 23: 59
              0
              Quote: clerk
              You cannot pull an owl onto a spherical horse in a vacuum.

              Who has spherical horses?
              Quote: clerk
              So the Sevas were unambiguously losing only LKs with a caliber of 14 "and above, and there were few of them among real opponents and it was too late.

              We wanted to find 12 "LK in the 41st year. Besides those mentioned by me, we found it, no?
              Quote: clerk
              from 55-60 cab. Charles's board also begins to break through.

              In the sense of theoretically (practically - a fortune-telling question) Seva could break through the main belt (but not the bevel of the deck)? And Charles, what will he do all this time?
              Quote: clerk
              But Charles has many vulnerabilities, and the deck penetration must be counted (especially at long distances).

              What are the even greater distances? Has Seva ever fired long-range shots? Is it in the newspapers?
              1. Constanty
                Constanty April 2 2021 01: 57
                +2
                We wanted to find 12 "LK in the 41st year. Besides those mentioned by me, we found it, no?

                Is four enough?
                "Rivadavia",
                Moreno,


                "Sao Paulo".

                "Minas Gerais" after modernization during the Second World War

                1. yehat2
                  yehat2 April 2 2021 10: 26
                  +1
                  add French pre-war Dunkirk and Strasbourg with 330mm guns.
                2. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine April 2 2021 19: 21
                  +3
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Who else would you like to compare with? Turkey, Spain? South American countries, maybe?

                  Quote: Constanty
                  Is four enough?

                  Yes, you got it right, thank you. Compared to South Americans, Seva's LKs are not so bad. I don't remember, to be honest, whether there were superdreadnoughts there or not.
                  1. Constanty
                    Constanty April 3 2021 01: 17
                    +2
                    I meant this excerpt from your post
                    In any case, we found only Arkansas, two Courbet, and heavily modernized old Italians from our peers. Frankly speaking, there are not so few Sverdreadnoughts against this background.


                    Spanish dreadnoughts disappeared until 1941.
                    When it comes to superdreadnoughts in Latin America, the Chilean "Almirante Latorre" comes to mind.
                    1. Cherry Nine
                      Cherry Nine April 3 2021 06: 45
                      +3
                      Quote: Constanty
                      When it comes to superdreadnoughts in Latin America, the Chilean "Almirante Latorre" comes to mind.

                      )))
                      It was spinning in my head that one of them had ordered a sverdreadnought, but it was too lazy to look. Thanks.
                      Quote: Constanty
                      Spanish dreadnoughts disappeared until 1941.

                      You are right, you did not survive the civil. But in the 30s they were the most peculiar ships claiming the name "battleship". Sowing looks solid with them.
              2. clerk
                clerk April 2 2021 06: 23
                -1
                [/quote] [QUote]. Do not pull an owl onto a spherical horse in a vacuum.

                Who has spherical horses?
                Sorry, but you.
                So unambiguously Sevas lost only LC with a caliber of 14 "and above, and there were few of them among real opponents and it was too late. //////
                We wanted to find 12 "LK in the 41st year. Besides those mentioned by me, we found it, no?
                Why would I do this brooding? LK WWII are well known. I fully showed that at that time in Europe there were LKs, with which the Sevas could butt at about the same level. What you want to show is not clear to me.
                ... 55-60 cab. Charles's board also begins to break through.

                In the sense of theoretically (practically - a fortune-telling question) Seva could pierce the main belt (but not the bevel of the deck)? And what will charles do all this time?
                Run away so as not to get serious damage. All-so Seva is protected a little better than Glories and armed with slack stronger, so the German Lakichot from the third hit is unlikely. And 470 kg of land mines and PB for superstructures, SC, ZA, radars and other weakly protected systems of Charles will be very unpleasant. laughing
                But Charles has many vulnerabilities, and the deck penetration must be counted (especially at long distances).

                What are the even greater distances? Has Seva ever fired long-range shots? Is it in the newspapers?
                Remind - from what distance did Katya cover Breslau?
                1. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine April 2 2021 20: 06
                  +3
                  Quote: clerk
                  I fully showed that at that time in Europe there were LKs, with which the Sevas could butt at about the same level. What you want to show is not clear to me.

                  I want to say that you have serious problems with arithmetic. We found 3 old Italians who can be somehow compared with Seva. All three were decommissioned in the 42nd. All three are much better upgraded than Seva.
                  We also found more than fifty ships against which there is no chance of sowing. Of these, 9 are German or under German control in Europe. 15 Japanese without Yamato and Musashi, but we don't count them, they have no chance of crossing with the sows.
                  Quote: clerk
                  Run away so as not to get serious damage.

                  The stories about Germans fleeing from this disabled person are especially good. Did you confuse seva with Rhinaun, or with Duke?
                  Quote: clerk
                  A 470 kg land mines

                  Yes, I remember. One well-known author here drowned 6 "Hipper bombs, I think.

                  But the battle of battleships on land mines is a new level.
                  Quote: clerk
                  from what distance did Katya cover Breslau?

                  From the distance of fiction stories. No, won't the answer go?
                  1. clerk
                    clerk April 2 2021 22: 39
                    +1
                    I fully showed that at that time in Europe there were LKs with which the Sevas could butt at about the same level. What you want to show is not clear to me.

                    I want to say that you have serious problems with arithmetic. We found 3 old Italians who can be somehow compared with Seva. All three were decommissioned in the 42nd. All three are much better upgraded than Seva.
                    We also found more than fifty ships against which there is no chance of sowing. Of these, 9 are German or under German control in Europe
                    Your attempts to pull an owl onto a spherical horse in a vacuum are simply ridiculous. Seva could, not without real chances, butt with ships close to him in displacement and armament. There were about a dozen of them in pre-war Europe. Which is a sufficient reason to keep it in the ranks. The rest is demagoguery.
                    Run away so as not to get serious damage.

                    The stories about Germans fleeing from this disabled person are especially good. Did you confuse seva with Rhinaun, or with Duke?
                    No, I didn't mix it up. For Charles, the 12 12/52 guns of Seva were slightly less dangerous than those of Duke or Rhynown.
                    A 470 kg land mines

                    Yes, I remember. One well-known author here drowned 6 "Hipper bombs, I think.

                    But the battle of battleships on land mines is a new level.
                    And if without antics ?! Those shells are used that are most effective for a specific target at a particular moment. I repeat - there are many targets on the ShiG for land mines and PB, including those that are quite critical for its combat effectiveness.
                    ... from what distance did Katya cover Breslau?

                    From the distance of fiction stories. No, won't the answer go?
                    No, it won't work. Lazha.
                    1. Cherry Nine
                      Cherry Nine April 3 2021 07: 36
                      +2
                      Quote: clerk
                      Seva could, not without real chances, butt with ships close to him in displacement and armament. There were about a dozen of them in pre-war Europe.

                      Those in pre-war Europe, there were 6, 3 battleships of the "Deutschland" type and 3 heavily modernized Italians. Deutschland yes, but it's a cruiser, to be honest. Climbing in the North against the LK Novorossiysk is, to put it mildly, a desperate event. Courbet in the 38th transferred to training, to fight with Brittany is not an option. Another thing is that for some reason you want to sign Seva for battle with much larger and stronger small battleships. Apparently, you really do not like Russians.

                      Of the large new WWII ships, only Alaska is under-armored. But firstly, she is only under-armored from the side, her deck is quite battleship. Secondly, its guns and its FCS are quite suitable for combat at the distances of deck armor. And thirdly, 4 Essexes are somewhere nearby.
                      Quote: clerk
                      For Charles, the 12 12/52 guns of Seva were slightly less dangerous than those of Duke or Rhynown.

                      12/52 and for the Germans, PMA is not particularly dangerous, and even more so for the twins. And you yourself confirmed this by arranging a battle with land mines. While you and your land mines are cosplaying Tsushima, the German will play a battle in the Danish Strait. One hit in the GHM and hello.
                      Quote: clerk
                      including those that are critical enough for its combat effectiveness.

                      This is if the German has the task of maintaining combat effectiveness and there is no task to destroy the enemy.
                      By the way, in this you are right. If, for example, the anti-historical Charles meets Seva between Sweden and Germany, a nightmare of communication, then he is unlikely to get on the rampage. Will maintain radar contact and wait for torpedo boats and / or backlashes, which will resolve the issue without unnecessary risk. But they will decide without a doubt.
                      Quote: clerk
                      is a sufficient reason to keep it in the ranks

                      Surprisingly, in this you are also right. A credit for a battleship - in order to drown it in an artillery battle, another battleship is needed, for ships of other classes it is too dangerous - Seva handed over.
                      Quote: clerk
                      Lazha

                      Yeah. Self-critical.

                      Firstly, most likely you are confusing Breslau and Catherine's shooting with 120, EMNIP, cable in Goeben. Secondly, Goeben, as was often the case with the Germans, did not have the task of leaving for the ship's Valhalla together with the enemy, but the task of maintaining pressure on the Black Sea communications with his presence. Therefore, not "covering", but the very presence of Katya forced the German to leave. Naturally, in such a situation, not only LK, but any BrBO could well drive away LKR.
                      1. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 09: 17
                        +1
                        ... Seva could, not without real chances, butt with ships close to him in displacement and armament. There were about a dozen of them in pre-war Europe.

                        Those in pre-war Europe, there were 6, 3 battleships of the "Deutschland" type and 3 heavily modernized Italians. Deutschland yes,
                        If we consider pre-war Europe (1938-39), then 7 old francs, 4 Italians and ShiG.
                        .12 / 52 and PMVs are not particularly dangerous for the Germans, and even more so for the twins. And you yourself confirmed this by arranging a battle with land mines. While you and your land mines are cosplaying Tsushima, the German will play a battle in the Danish Strait. One hit in the GHM and hello.
                        The 28 cm ShiG cannon is not the best tool for this.
                        . Climbing in the Seva against LK "Novorossiysk" is a desperate event, to put it mildly
                        For a specific Oktyabrina with boules and reinforced deck armor - not at all.
                        ... including those that are critical enough for its combat effectiveness.

                        This is if the German has the task of maintaining combat effectiveness and there is no task to destroy the enemy.
                        By the way, in this you are right. If, for example, the anti-historical Charles meets Seva between Sweden and Germany, a nightmare of communication, then he is unlikely to get on the rampage.
                        Exactly. And that's what we need.
                        ... Will maintain radar contact and wait for torpedo boats and / or backlashes, which will resolve the issue without unnecessary risk. But they will decide without a doubt.
                        Of course. If they are nearby and the weather is right. But the point is that in a 1: 1 situation for ShiG, Seva will not be an easy target that can be dealt with in passing and without risk.
                      2. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 09: 37
                        +1
                        ... Firstly, most likely you are confusing Breslau and Catherine's shooting with 120, EMNIP, cable in Goeben. Secondly, Goeben, as was often the case with the Germans, did not have the task of leaving for the ship's Valhalla together with the enemy, but the task of maintaining pressure on the Black Sea communications with his presence. Therefore, not "covering", but the very presence of Katya forced the German to leave.
                        It does not matter what made the German leave, it is important that the fact of the cover took place. This is the answer to your question - did the sevas shoot from long distances? As it turns out, they were shooting. And 23 years earlier than the Germans smashed the Glories from the same distances. But I wrote about shooting at "Breslau" six months later from distances 114-95 cab., When there was also a cover.
                        is a sufficient reason to keep it in the ranks

                        Surprisingly, in this you are also right. Credit for a battleship - another battleship is needed to drown it in an artillery battle, for ships of other classes it is too dangerous -
                        Exactly. And even for the 11-13 '' battleship close in displacement, Seva was not an easy prey. However, I never claimed that Seva would tear Yamato or even Type R, like Tuzik a heating pad. Then the question is - what is the dispute about?
                      3. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 3 2021 12: 23
                        +3
                        Quote: clerk
                        what is the dispute about?

                        That you are trying to drown the seva by urging it on normal battleships. Grandpa, who doesn't need to face any other battleship, may well be useful too. Like Arkansas.
                        Quote: clerk
                        As it turns out, they were shooting. And 23 years earlier

                        Katya is not sowing, but oh well. More importantly, not only the subordinates of Admiral Kolchak were able to shoot in the white light as a pretty penny at the maximum elevation angles. But only the Germans from Norway and the British from Calabria were hit (there was also a topic with Yamato at Leite, but everything is not clear there).
                        Quote: clerk
                        Seva will not be an easy target to be dealt with casually and without risk.

                        What an optimist you are. In passing and without risk and with an auxiliary cruiser, you cannot cope, as history has shown.
                        Quote: clerk
                        For a specific Oktyabrina with boules and reinforced deck armor - not at all.

                        And, well, that is, we came to the conclusion that well, at least somehow one LK could fight. And not with ShiG, but at least with someone. By the way, I would not recommend it either.
                        Quote: clerk
                        28 cm ShiG cannons are not the best tool for this

                        Not better than what? Than 16/50? Seva 28cm is punched at any distance.
                        Quote: clerk
                        7 old francs, 4 Italians and Shig.

                        France went to the bottom in 22nd, Jean Bar was decommissioned in 36th. I strongly advise against climbing under Brittany. So 2-3 Frenchmen.
                        The Italians had a complete analogue of Seva's Dante, which they sawed in the 28th as hopelessly outdated. Conti and Andrea Doria were considered stronger in the 20s, and even more so with modernization.
                        Your desire to kill Seva about the twins is openly Russophobic. The twins are well-armored, and their guns in the North Sea had to pierce the Queen, not like Seva.
                      4. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 13: 14
                        +1
                        ... France went to the bottom in 22nd, Jean Bar was decommissioned in 36th. I strongly advise against climbing under Brittany. So 2-3 Frenchmen.
                        The Italians had a complete analogue of Seva's Dante, which they sawed in the 28th as hopelessly outdated. Conti and Andrea Doria were considered stronger in the 20s, and even more so with modernization.
                        Your desire to kill Seva about the twins is openly Russophobic. The twins are well-armored, and their guns in the North Sea had to pierce the Queen, not like Seva.
                        EMEP "Dante" is 3 kt lighter than Seva. One third at the expense of the reservation. I suspect that the real armor penetration of 28 cm will be much less than the calculated one, and the concussion from the suitcase will always be. With the possible disabling of devices and weapons and without proper penetration. Moreover, whatever one may say, but only GK sowing barbets will be completely transparent, and this is 50:50.
                        ... 28 cm ShiG cannons are not the best tool for this

                        Not better than what? Than 16/50? Seva 28cm is punched at any distance.
                        225 + 50 or 125 + 19 * 2 + 50 and in general? I strongly doubt it.
                        As it turns out, they were shooting. And 23 years earlier

                        Katya is not sowing, but oh well. More importantly, not only the subordinates of Admiral Kolchak were able to shoot in the white light as a pretty penny at the maximum elevation angles. But only the Germans from Norway and the British from Calabria got
                        The gap 10 m from Breslau is also a good result. Moreover, over 23 years, the SUAO have developed somewhat, In addition, 3-4 28 cm hits from 20 km for sowing are uncritical, and in 30-40 minutes of fire and Shigi something would be shocked in response.
                      5. Cherry Nine
                        Cherry Nine April 3 2021 13: 58
                        +3
                        Quote: clerk
                        In addition, 3-4 28 cm hits from 20 km are uncritical for sowing,

                        You know how it gets there. I remembered the Danish Strait for a reason.
                        Quote: clerk
                        over 23 years SUAO has developed somewhat

                        On the crops?
                        Quote: clerk
                        225 + 50 or 125 + 19 * 2 + 50 and in general? I strongly doubt

                        You shouldn't doubt it. 125 where they got it, three inches on the Comunne. But against the decks, the German projectile is not particularly, it has a flat trajectory.
                        Quote: clerk
                        The real armor penetration of 28 cm will be much less than the calculated one,

                        Uh-uh, well, if we can write as a fascist "real armor penetration" which we like best, then there is no question, we will win without options.
                      6. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 14: 19
                        +1
                        Quote: clerk
                        I suspect that the real armor penetration of 28 cm will be much less than the calculated one, and the concussion from the suitcase will always be.

                        According to German data (for 1940), the 28 cm Pzgr. L / 4,4 (m.Hb) pierced armor equivalent to KC n / A 18400 ... 300 mm thick at a distance of 320 m.
                      7. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 15: 24
                        0
                        ... According to German data (for 1940), the 28 cm Pzgr. L / 4,4 (m.Hb) pierced armor equivalent to KC n / A 18400 ... 300 mm thick at a distance of 320 m.
                        Thanks. Similar data are given in Suliga's monograph on ShiG. But since these data are at least 1,5 times higher than the data on the armor penetration of 28 cm of PMA shells, the question arises about the likelihood of such a penetration.
                      8. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 15: 36
                        0
                        Quote: clerk
                        But since these data are at least 1,5 times higher than the data on the armor penetration of 28 cm of PMA shells, the question arises about the likelihood of such a penetration.

                        Well ... You can't check it now.
                        The Germans built their penetration curves on the basis of test firings at the Meppen training ground and used them to determine the tactics of battles.
                      9. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 16: 02
                        +1
                        Well ... You can't check it now.
                        The Germans built their penetration curves on the basis of test firings at the Meppen training ground and used them to determine the tactics of battles.

                        .
                        You can't check. But you can compare. British 14-16 '' at a distance of 14 km pierced 330-365 mm armor, 18 '' Yamato 500 mm at 20 km, and 11 '- 300 mm at 18? It's hard to believe '
                      10. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 16: 19
                        +1
                        Quote: clerk
                        It's hard to believe '

                        Quite possibly.
                        I read the opinion of Soviet naval artillerymen who were on business trips to Germany in 39-40: they also considered the data on armor penetration to be overstated, linking this with the test methodology.
                        The Germans fired at, so to speak, a "bare" plate - the plate was vertically fixed on the stand, resting on several "frames", behind the plate there was no imitation of the ship's side structures (set, lining for armor, etc.).
                      11. clerk
                        clerk April 3 2021 16: 28
                        +2
                        The Germans fired at, so to speak, a "bare" plate - the plate was vertically fixed on the stand, resting on several "frames", behind the plate there was no imitation of the ship's side structures (set, lining for armor, etc.
                        Thanks for the info. More data: “If 470,9 kg, according to Soviet calculations (hereinafter, the armor penetration data are given by S.I. Titushkin and L.I. Amirkhanov) punched 100 mm of vertical armor per 207 cables, then 581,4 kg projectile per 90 cable could penetrate 330 mm armor plate .... It is interesting that the Americans, having returned to the 305-mm caliber on "large cruisers" of the "Alaska" type, used such ammunition as the main one. Their guns fired 516,5 kg armor-piercing shells with an initial speed of 762 m / s, which is at a vertical aiming angle of 45 degrees. provided a firing range of 193 cables and pierced 323 mm armor at a distance of 100 cables. " (with)
            2. clerk
              clerk April 3 2021 16: 54
              +2
              In addition, 3-4 28 cm hits from 20 km are not critical for sowing,

              This is how it gets, whether for. I remembered the Danish Strait for a reason.
              Exactly. Possible trajectories of 800 kg Lacichot are comparable to sowing in terms of protection. Therefore, there are strong doubts that this trick could be repeated with a 300 kg projectile.
              ... over 23 years SUAO has developed somewhat

              On the crops?
              AKURs were installed on the Commune and Parizianka.
              ... 225 + 50 or 125 + 19 * 2 + 50 and in general? I strongly doubt

              You shouldn't doubt it. 125 where they got it, three inches on the Comunne. But against the decks, the German projectile is not particularly, it has a flat trajectory.
              125 - casemate armor. I doubt it in vain - the details are below.
            3. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine April 3 2021 17: 28
              +2
              Quote: clerk
              125 - casemate armor

              Vertical? It’s not easier yet.
              Quote: clerk
              details below.

              Are you talking about it?
              Quote: clerk
              at least 1,5 times higher than the data on the armor penetration of 28 cm of PMV shells

              What kind of shells? Moltke? Seydlitz? This cannot be related to the fact that we are talking about a different weapon and other shells?

              By the way, what did they not break through in WWI? Cruiser 125mm? LCR 225mm? I don’t remember.
              Quote: clerk
              British 14-16 '' at a distance of 14 km pierced 330-365 mm armor, 18 '' Yamato 500 mm at 20 km

              )))
              No, it doesn't work that way.
              Quote: clerk
              AKURs were installed on the Commune and Parizianka.

              Well done. And how are you doing?
              Quote: clerk
              Possible trajectories of 800 kg Lacichot are comparable to sowing in terms of protection.

              They wrote something awkward. Cellars, boilers - everything is breaking through. One hit on the spot and you're done. Landmines, yes. Fight for 40 minutes, yeah.
            4. clerk
              clerk April 3 2021 19: 03
              +2
              ... What kind of shells? Moltke? Seydlitz? This cannot be related to the fact that we are talking about a different weapon and other shells?
              The difference at one distance is, of course, related to the weapon. The difference under the same conditions (500 m / s and 15 degrees angle of encounter with the armor) can be associated with different shells, but it seems too big to me (221 mm for Seidlmz and 291 mm for Scharnhorst).
              ... AKURs were installed on the Commune and Parizianka. /////
              Well done. And how are you doing?
              Do not know. But this is the answer to your question about improving the SUAO sowing.
              ... Possible trajectories of 800 kg Lacichot are comparable to sowing in terms of protection.

              They wrote something awkward. Cellars, boilers - everything is breaking through. One hit on the spot and you're done. Landmines, yes. Fight for 40 minutes, yeah.
              The citadel hardly breaks through.
            5. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine April 3 2021 19: 15
              +2
              Quote: clerk
              The Citadel does NOT break through.

              If you have alternative armor penetration, then yes, no more questions.
            6. clerk
              clerk April 4 2021 00: 21
              +1
              .The Citadel is NOT breaking through.

              If you have alternative armor penetration, then yes, no more questions.
              It is not alternative - it is closer to reality. Citadel Sev began to break through GK ShiG from about 15 km.
  • clerk
    clerk April 3 2021 13: 27
    +2
    ... what is the dispute about?

    That you are trying to drown the seva by urging it on normal battleships. Grandpa, who doesn't need to face any other battleship, may well be useful too. Like Arkansas.
    This is understandable without discussion. The point is that in their "weight category" the sevas were not hopeless in the Best Male class either. Of course, you don't need to ask for trouble, but it's dangerous to climb up to it.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 2 2021 15: 09
    +1
    Quote: clerk
    If for the summer of 1941, then you need to compare with peers or similar in displacement LC

    you initially started comparing incorrectly
    the line of artillery in the crop fields at the time of the laying of the ships, and by the end of the PVM, was the steepest in the world in terms of ballistic characteristics.
    The same applies to the enlarged guns, which (356 and 406 for Izmail), the Americans gladly stole (RI placed orders for manufacturing with all the documentation in the USA) and put them on their LKs, having received the famous 406mm guns of a number of battleship series.
    and the Russian 356mm gun was in power (non-explosive) quite comparable to the English 381 without greenboy, and these guns went through the Second World War without changes.
    So, only an amateur who does not know the details can call the guns of the Sevastopol GK weak.
    Even at the beginning of ww2, the guns of Sevastopol, although they were not the most powerful, remained very relevant and for the same Tirpitz they could cause a lot of problems.
    Only the ship itself was frankly outdated - from the engines to the armor and even the elevation angles of the guns.
    1. clerk
      clerk April 2 2021 17: 47
      +2
      ... If for the summer of 1941, then you need to compare with peers or similar in displacement LC

      you initially started comparing incorrectly
      And where do you see the incorrectness of the principle I proposed for comparison?
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 2 2021 22: 21
        0
        this is not the only criterion you have proposed.
        and about the displacement ... Both Sevastopol and Nelson are ships specially built for operations in the shallow Gulf of Finland.
        Not everything is measured directly by displacement. I will give another example - American battleships, which, due to their speed, had dubious combat effectiveness.
        1. clerk
          clerk April 2 2021 22: 53
          +2
          ... this is not the only criterion you have proposed.
          Almost the only one. Displacement and armament.
          ... Both Sevastopol and Nelson are ships specially built for operations in the shallow Gulf of Finland.
          Chivo, chivo?
          Not everything is measured directly by displacement. I will give another example - American battleships, which, due to their speed, had dubious combat effectiveness.
          I did not understand the tortuous course of your thoughts. Please try to decode
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 April 6 2021 11: 19
            -1
            Quote: clerk
            Chivo, chivo?

            teach history, I'm not going to chew it on you.
            1. clerk
              clerk April 6 2021 14: 50
              0
              ... Chivo, chivo?

              teach history, I'm not going to chew it on you.
              That's not necessary. And it turns out not very much laughing
              1. yehat2
                yehat2 April 6 2021 15: 18
                -1
                so teach her yourself, and do not ask strange questions. The leading question is the conclusions of the British after the hostilities of the fleet in the Gulf of Finland and why 2 ships of the Nelson series turned out to be 3 times more expensive than their analogues.
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine April 2 2021 20: 23
      +3
      Quote: yehat2
      The same applies to the enlarged guns, which (356 and 406 for Izmail), the Americans gladly stole (RI placed orders for manufacturing with all the documentation in the USA) and put them on their LKs, having received the famous 406mm guns of a number of battleship series.

      In reality, both the Ishmael guns and one 16 "prototype of the 1914 model were made by Vickers. Of the 16 14" guns, 10 were delivered. Three were used by the British in the railway artillery. They have nothing to do with the KD5 guns.
      Quote: yehat2
      very relevant and to the same Tirpitz, they could cause a lot of problems.

      It's not good to mock old people like that.
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 6 2021 14: 57
        -1
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        In reality, both the Ishmael guns and one 16 "prototype of the 1914 model were made by Vickers. Of the 16 14" guns, 10 were delivered. Three were used by the British in the railway artillery. They have nothing to do with the KD5 guns.

        for the laid down 4 Izmail, an order was placed in full for ALL guns.
        Not for one, not for two, but for 12x4 barrels and paid for. 3 or 4 of them were placed with us, like at the Izhora plant, some in Germany, and some ended up in the USA. It was assumed at least 3 more guns for the training ground. There were no drawings of 16 "installations, there were only 14". But the Americans quickly adapted the increased caliber.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine April 6 2021 20: 10
          +2
          Quote: yehat2
          placed an order for ALL implements.
          Not for one, not for two, but for 12x4 barrels and paid for. 3 or 4 of them were placed with us, sort of like at the Izhora plant, some in Germany, and some ended up in the USA

          We ordered 76 guns, 36 from Vickers, 40 from Obukhovsky. Vickers managed to do 16, Obukhovsky 3 or 4. It's hard to understand why you clung to the Americans. Their first 14 "LC - New York - 11th year bookmarks.
          Quote: yehat2
          paid

          I won't even find out. RI for the 14th year is in debt up to its ears, the old regime still has nothing of its own. If they paid, they were borrowed.
          Quote: yehat2
          There were no drawings of 16 inch installations

          There are not only drawings, they made a prototype there.
  • Kostya Lavinyukov
    Kostya Lavinyukov April 1 2021 23: 13
    0
    Turkish Geben smokes quietly on the sidelines.
  • Kostya Lavinyukov
    Kostya Lavinyukov April 1 2021 23: 14
    0
    Turkish Geben smokes quietly on the sidelines.
  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav April 1 2021 21: 25
    +1
    eugen you are wrong, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau shot at ripals very well, but the weather did not allow
    1. clerk
      clerk April 1 2021 22: 16
      +1
      ... eugen you are wrong, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau shot at ripals very well, but the weather did not allow
      They fired with a total accuracy of less than 1%. About the same as Repals for them. After which it was the Germans who retreated.
  • alekc75
    alekc75 April 1 2021 18: 58
    -3
    as the author described our ships lousy !!!
    1. Zug
      Zug April 2 2021 21: 51
      0
      But it’s true. It's a shame of course. But it’s true.
  • aleks neym_2
    aleks neym_2 April 1 2021 19: 09
    +1
    Well, it depends on how you look at it: if you have ... if you don't.
  • knn54
    knn54 April 1 2021 19: 14
    +4
    As for the G-5 torpedo boats, they were designed by the Tupolev Design Bureau. In fact, they were FLAT-BOON ships with aft torpedo (not tube) tubes. that is, the volley was fired not from the bow, but from the stern. There was a chance to get hit by your own torpedo. Therefore, the accuracy was not high. There was only ONE plus-speed.
    Unfortunately, ours were not interested in the German keel TK of the company "Lursen". During the Second World War, not a single Nazi boat was sunk on the Black Sea. And they acted throughout the entire water area, up to Poti.
    1. aleks neym_2
      aleks neym_2 April 1 2021 20: 40
      +1
      If you believe the history, then the G-5 is, in principle, an outboard fuel tank, only of a large size - according to eyewitnesses who served on boats of this series, it was problematic to move around the deck - it was CONVEX!
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka April 1 2021 20: 49
      +6
      Quote: knn54
      "G-5" They were designed by the Tupolev Design Bureau. In fact, they were flat-bottom vessels with aft torpedo tubes (not tube). i.e. the volley was fired not from the bow, but from the stern

      If it is correct, then the boats were with a redan.
      In addition to them, the D-3 with drag torpedo tubes were in service.
      Later, Komsomolets and Jung were launched into Meru.
      Komsomolets had tube torpedo tubes.
      TC Komsomolets in the exposition of the Museum of Fighting Glory of the Urals (V. Pyshma)


      Praising the German "Esski", one must remember that they broke their teeth on our "small minesweepers and hunters" armed with 45s.
      Well, the last one our designers tried to put on the redanny boat G-6 or G-8 (I forgot a little) a rotary torpedo tube, but it did not grow together.
      However, before writing about the fleet, at least it is necessary to look through the Soviet encyclopedias on this topic, especially about the mosquito fleet.
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 2 2021 10: 21
        +2
        in the photo there is already a post-war version of the Komsomol member, which had similar characteristics since the age of 43.
        in 41, Komsomolets looked much more modest.
  • antivirus
    antivirus April 1 2021 19: 17
    +3
    cranks on the "M".
    there are many such authors.
    For several years I have been reading advanced and unaware of cause-and-effect ...

    1 years before design school - need teachers for all children in the country - highlight talents
    2. more janitors with milkmaids to feed and serve those pupils-future geniuses.
    3. Even 20 years before item 1, teachers are needed to select children inclined to pedagogy, future teachers (see item 1)
    4. 20 years before p3. patient devotees are needed - to single out future teachers of teachers from illiterate children.

    total life of two or three generations ------- THE TOTAL IN PROBLEMS AND LOSSES OF WWII IS ALEXANDER'S GUILTY 3.
  • Catfish
    Catfish April 1 2021 19: 19
    +12
    Before the war, an unfinished heavy cruiser "Luttsov" was bought from Germany, it was called "Petropavlovsk", by the beginning of the war they did not have time to finish building, but, standing on the Neva as a floating battery, it took an active part in the defense of St. Petersburg.
    Exterior for 1943.

    Photo 1953 of the year.

    And this is how it would have looked if it had been completed.
    1. Macsen_wledig
      Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 10: 52
      +2
      Quote: Sea Cat
      And this is how it would have looked if it had been completed.

      This is the Eugen model.
      1. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 11: 41
        +2
        This is the Eugen model.

        Maxim, but these cruisers were of the same type? drinks
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 11: 58
          +2
          Quote: Pan Kohanku
          This is the Eugen model.

          Maxim, but these cruisers were of the same type? drinks

          Formally, yes. In fact, the bow superstructure of the cruisers K and L was rebuilt a little less than completely, the power plant is different.
          "Eugen" in May 41st


          "Luttsov" according to the project
        2. Catfish
          Catfish April 2 2021 15: 29
          +2
          Kolya, hi. hi Do not argue with experts, the "spindle" is welded on the wrong side, so it is not that. smile
          "Daddy is your Studebaker?" laughing
      2. Catfish
        Catfish April 2 2021 15: 12
        +3
        Nikolay has already written to you that these are ships of the same type. And the size of the superstructure somehow did not greatly affect the performance characteristics of the ships. By the way, performance characteristics during the war, even on ships of the same type, were constantly changing, the armament, the power plant were changing, not to mention the fire control devices and the installation of new equipment (radar, for example). So the original appearance of the ship and its power have changed considerably over time.
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 19: 02
          +2
          Quote: Sea Cat
          So the original appearance of the ship and its power have changed considerably over time.

          In this case, we are not talking about modernization during service, but about adjusting the project ...
          These are slightly different things.
  • Constanty
    Constanty April 1 2021 19: 21
    +6
    The author's truly strange approach to reducing the size of the Soviet fleet as much as possible in order to justify its position and effectiveness in wartime.
    So it's better not to count the old ships and damn it, that no fleet in the world is not only modern ships. The Germans even used the predecessors of the drednots Schleswig Holstein, Schlesien, "Emdena", Falke and Mowe (analogues of the "Uragans"). It doesn't matter that the Koln-class cruisers were unsuccessful, like all torpedo boats and destroyers, and the fleet was actually built only from 1935.
    The British used Royal Sovereign-class ships, C-class cruisers, V / W destroyers, French Courbety and Bretagne, Italians Andrea Doria and Conte di Cavour, even San Giorgio, old American dreadnoughts, S-type submarines ...
    And it could have been so long
    This was not a problem
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 April 1 2021 19: 45
      +3
      Quote: Constanty
      This was not a problem
      The problem was that the enemy also had modern ships that would have come out against our old men. And so yes, the old battleship may well wrestle with the new heavy cruiser (if it does not escape), it will not remain idle.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty April 1 2021 21: 07
        +5
        I would agree, if not for ... the Black Sea Fleet.
        Romania, even Turkey did not have modern ships, German submarines transported by land, and the Danube were also small units - the equivalent of the "M" type.
        The Soviet fleet in this area had a colossal advantage, bases since 1917, so what? A thread. Virtually nothing and the losses are huge.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 2 2021 12: 41
      +1
      Quote: Constanty
      The British used ships of the "Royal Sovereign" class,

      Which were two generations superior to "Seva".
      Quote: Constanty
      cruisers type C

      Mainly for the restructuring of the air defense in the Kyrgyz Republic and the subsequent escort of the KON.
      Quote: Constanty
      destroyers V / W,

      They also used smooth decks. smile But again, mainly in the role of escort ships.
      Quote: Constanty
      Italians Andrea Doria and Conte di Cavour,

      Rebuilt into high-speed aircraft and re-equipped with a new main ship. Our industry was only able to increase the firing range of the main battery and only on the Parizhanka.
      Quote: Constanty
      even San Giorgio,

      Even "Comintern" and "Standart-Marty". smile
      Quote: Constanty
      old dreadnoughts of americans

      In addition to the Orc of Kansas, all the old USN dreadnoughts were at least a generation superior to the Seva.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty April 2 2021 13: 19
        0
        Aren't you going to write about "Schleswig-Holstein" i "Schlesien"? wink
        1. Macsen_wledig
          Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 13: 32
          0
          Quote: Constanty
          Aren't you going to write about "Schleswig-Holstein" i "Schlesien"?

          Why pass off poverty as a virtue?
          The training and artillery ships were dragged out to war not because of a good life ... :)
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 2 2021 17: 49
          +1
          Quote: Constanty
          Aren't you going to write about "Schleswig-Holstein" i "Schlesien"? wink

          How could I forget about KL "Red Banner"! laughing
  • lelik613
    lelik613 April 1 2021 19: 33
    +10
    How many battleships did Hitler have in the Baltic? And in the Black Sea? And in the north, too, somehow ... The ruin was in the heads of the gentlemen of the odmirals, the load was not in their weak brains. They were hanging out in the deck, periodically flogged, but there was no result. And the heroism of the Marine Corps, which covers everything ... the result of the incompetence of the fleet as an organization.
    1. Tochilka
      Tochilka April 1 2021 20: 21
      +1
      On YouTube there is a thread "marines" from Ozerov's film "Stalingrad". Phrase - Guys! We don't have enough strength .. But Polundra remained! ... Let's serve the Motherland for the last time ... And we got up and went. Powerful scene!
  • clerk
    clerk April 1 2021 19: 36
    0
    . Another "improved" "Krasny Kavkaz" with a shot with the main caliber, the number of as many as four barrels. And two more - "Svetlana", ships of the same generation with battleships. I mean, you can still shoot along the coast, but go into battle with cruisers, perhaps, which is not worth it - they will drown and not even sweat.
    It would be interesting to see the fight between Svetlan and Condottieri A and B, English C, D, E or Duguet-Truin.
  • Ryaruav
    Ryaruav April 1 2021 20: 19
    +1
    the author of the article is either not literate in this area or an outright historical enemy, let's start with the LC and their suitcases 470 kg is not enough for you? yes 180mm guns for the navy were not very good, but we won the city of Leningrad with these guns, but the resource was small, but the German batteries of large caliber worked out amazingly, one close gap was enough and the whole battery (dangerous) did not work anymore, but the Germans could not withdraw from building our heavy battery
    1. Vovk
      Vovk April 1 2021 20: 34
      +4
      Here I read the chronicles of the Second World War on the Black Sea ... where the courage of the sailors of the Black Sea Fleet is shown, but the actions of the command ... the technical backwardness of weapons and equipment of the fleet ...

      The beginning of the war!
      On June 25, 1941, the leader "Kharkov" accompanied the leader "Moscow" in his first and last battle (the raid on Constanta), and when he was blown up, the "Kharkov" was forced to leave the crew of the drowning leader, which had broken in half and to escape the shelling of the coastal battery "Tirpitz" ”, Submarine attacks and aerial bombardments at the same time. During a hasty return to base, several times the leader encountered breakdowns in the boilers (tubes burst), and because of this, the leader's speed often dropped to 5-6 knots (until troubleshooting in any of the boilers), but despite this, the ship successfully dodged bombs and repelled air attacks (shot down one Junkers Ju 87). After some time, the damaged leader dodged torpedoes from the attacking Soviet submarine Shch-206, which was immediately sunk by the destroyer "Savvy" who arrived in time to help the "Kharkov".

      In the early morning of July 2, 1942. after a rainy night, a German reconnaissance aircraft was seen in the sky of Novorossiysk at an altitude of 5000 m, which, without any opposition from Soviet aviation, managed to take aerial photography of the entire port water area and return to the home base. It became obvious that an air raid would soon be carried out, and already at 11 a.m. a large group target was detected on the radars, approaching the city from the land side at a low altitude. Despite this, the ships' air defense means were not put on alert, as well as an air raid was not announced in the port..

      At 11:20 am, the port was attacked by 64 bombers escorted by 15 Messerschmitt Bf.109 fighters. In 15 minutes of the raid, 170 bombs weighing from 250 to 1000 kg were dropped on the port, two of which fell directly on the deck of the Tashkent - one in the area of ​​the utah, and the second pierced the deck in the area of ​​the engine room, where an explosion immediately occurred. Then one of the torpedo tubes detonated. In addition to the leader, that day the destroyer "Vigilant", the ambulance transport "Ukraine", the unfinished transport "Proletary", the rescue tug "Chernomor", three fishing boats and a barge were destroyed in the Novorossiysk port, and other ships received varying degrees of damage.

      Middle of the war!
      6 1943 October, the
      The ships were spotted by the Germans on the high seas. After the first bombing raids, "Kharkov" and "Merciless" lost their speed, and "Capable" began to tow them in turn. But on the leader, one of the boilers was put into operation, and the half-sunken ship was able to give a 9-knot stroke aft forward. Soon from the direct hits of six bombs "Merciless" fell on board, broke and sank, and later, sinking nose forward and at the same time firing from the main battery gun and anti-aircraft machine gun, disappeared under the water and the leader. After 2,5 hours, the "Capable", which picked up the surviving sailors from the water, was hit by an aerial bomb, a fire broke out on board, and the destroyer took off from the explosion of its own depth charges. Torpedo and patrol boats, as well as seaplanes, picked up 123 people from the water. 780 sailors were killed, including the commander of the leader "Kharkov" 2nd rank captain P.I. Shevchenko. The loss of three ships led to the fact that all the large ships of the Black Sea Fleet were transferred to the reserve of the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. They did not participate in hostilities anymore.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 April 1 2021 23: 19
        -4
        Quote: Vovk
        780 sailors were killed, including the commander of the leader "Kharkov" 2nd rank captain P.I. Shevchenko. The loss of three ships led to the fact that all the large ships of the Black Sea Fleet were transferred to the reserve of the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief. They did not participate in hostilities anymore.

        proof of the ineffectiveness of the surface fleet as such ... but in general, this whole article proves the simple truth, "pull your legs on your clothes" and objectively strikes the aircraft carrier lobby, members of the totalitarian destructive sect of the aircraft carrier and battleship = destroyer witnesses. A surface ship is visible to everyone as slow-moving, ... expensive, which means it becomes obsolete faster than decommissioning ...
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 2 2021 12: 49
          +3
          Quote: vladimir1155
          proof of the ineffectiveness of the surface fleet as such ...

          Proof of the ineffectiveness of a surface fleet without aviation cover.
          And also proof of the low efficiency of coastal aviation: for a constant watch over the ships of just one link of fighters, an entire squadron was needed on the coast.
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 2 2021 12: 45
        +5
        Quote: Vovk
        After some time, the damaged leader dodged the torpedoes from the attacking Soviet submarine Shch-206, which was immediately sunk by the destroyer "Savvy" who arrived in time to help the "Kharkov".

        Only two days after its sinking, Shch-206 contacted the base.
        False detection of torpedo tracks at the beginning of the war plagued all fleets. And how many submarines were attacked and "sunk" ... and from all sides.
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka April 1 2021 21: 09
      +8
      Quote: Ryaruav
      the author of the article is either not literate in this area or an outright historical enemy, let's start with LK and their suitcases 470 kg is not enough for you?


      If we take iron, then the long-barreled 12 "guns of Sevastopol, are better than the 11" of the German battlecruisers, but worse than the 380mm Bismarck cannons.
      Control devices, so that to use them against the USSR, the Germans at least had to crawl into the Marquis's puddle. To be fair, they didn't even try. However, like the Finns, they have one battleship of coastal defense. Everyone sat in their holes, and so if, hypothetically, the line fleet of the high seas could enter the Gulf of Finland for only one thing - to drown. As for the rest, our battleships and cruisers in the Baltic have coped. They helped to defend Leningrad unequivocally.
      1. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav April 1 2021 21: 16
        0
        You are holding a rader for an idiot, but the Germans did not want to shove into St. Petersburg, any sensible person will not go through a limited channel under the blows of 305 mm with again with the same traumatic 470 kg suitcases
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
          Kote Pan Kokhanka April 1 2021 21: 29
          +3
          Again, I quote from my comment above. True, to consider 17 Noviks as destroyers is somehow ... creative. For 1941, this is a TFR, and not bad, to drive submarines - quite suitable.
      2. Konnick
        Konnick April 1 2021 21: 43
        +5
        As for the rest, our battleships and cruisers in the Baltic have coped. They helped to defend Leningrad unequivocally

        The long-range artillery of these ships helped a lot in repelling attacks on Leningrad. The firing range of naval artillery made it possible to quickly transfer fire to the desired place on the Leningrad Front and Orainbaum bridgehead, as well as to conduct counter-battery combat, remaining inaccessible to the German field artillery.
        1. Pane Kohanku
          Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 11: 47
          +3
          The long-range artillery of these ships helped a lot in repelling attacks on Leningrad.

          Either Leeb or Halder wrote in his diary at the beginning of September: "Today again both cruisers caused a lot of trouble. " They meant "Kirov" and "Maxim Gorky". Their fire incapacitated dozens of soldiers every day.
          I quote from memory from this book - the author compares two diaries of the above German generals. hi
      3. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 2 2021 18: 11
        +2
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        If we take iron, then the long-barreled 12 "guns of Sevastopol, are better than the 11" of the German battlecruisers, but worse than the 380mm Bismarck cannons.

        If you take iron, then do not forget that all "Sev", except for "Parizhanka", have a UHV limit of 25 degrees. wink
    3. Zug
      Zug April 2 2021 22: 00
      0
      Miroslava Morozov's lectures on the ChWF look at leisure. There, they explain on the fingers what it grew from and where it "sailed" from. You listen and wonder what you fought on, how you fought and how you won in general. Probably on the courage and perseverance of the sailors and their transcendental bravery. There people-rocks fought.
  • 27091965
    27091965 April 1 2021 20: 37
    +5
    Moreover, the cruisers are strange - the three-gun turrets of the main battery of irrational design with a caliber of 180 mm guns were pushed into the hull of the Italian light cruiser. The armor is weak, the anti-aircraft artillery is not very good. But new and fast. All four.


    ... The only thing - why the "Paris Commune" was there, I can't imagine - it belongs to the Baltic, the third floating battery for the defense of the Gulf of Finland and Leningrad.


    In this matter, one will have to turn to the foreign economic activity of the USSR. In 1929-1931, the Soviet Union managed not only to enter and gain a foothold in the oil market in Europe, but also to begin to supplant such companies as Standard, Shell and Anglo-Persian at the expense of the lower price, which caused very great discontent in England .
    An analysis of the trade activities of the USSR was published and discussed. It was called Fighting the Red Trade Threat. Due to the supply of oil and fuel oil, the USSR received not only foreign currency, for example, the Italian government allowed the Soviet Union to periodically order ships, equipment and weapons for the Soviet Navy from Italian firms in the amount of no more than $ 5 million.
    Attempts to negotiate with the British did not lead to anything, the sea trade must be protected or show that we are ready to defend it. This is one of the reasons.
  • Charlie
    Charlie April 1 2021 20: 52
    +3
    Quote: Tochilka
    On YouTube there is a thread "marines" from Ozerov's film "Stalingrad". Phrase - Guys! We don't have enough strength .. But Polundra remained! ... Let's serve the Motherland for the last time ... And we got up and went. Powerful scene!

    Astafyev wrote that the Germans did not understand and were not afraid of the shouts of "polundra". There he described somewhere these "powerful scenes" how, after the fruitless winter attacks, in the spring, corpses in vests thawed out in neutral. There were many of them
    1. Konnick
      Konnick April 1 2021 20: 57
      +3
      Astafyev wrote that the Germans did not understand and were not afraid of the shouts of "polundra". There he described somewhere these "powerful scenes" how, after the fruitless winter attacks, in the spring, corpses in vests thawed out in neutral. Many

      Read more about this collector of black front-line myths. And they also said how the sailors went on the attack in deep snow, and remained standing until the spring, until they thawed. That just did not compose the travel agents.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ April 1 2021 21: 39
        +4
        That just did not compose the travel agents.

        He was a company telephonist, but a very odorous writer, especially by the end of the 80s, did not go far from the columnist.
      2. Pane Kohanku
        Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 11: 54
        +3
        And they also said how the sailors went on the attack in deep snow, and remained standing until the spring, until they thawed. That just did not compose the travel agents.

        EMNIP, there is something similar in the memoirs of Nikolai Nikulin - about the 54th army in the Pogostya area. Maybe he was later a good art critic ... but he wrote about the war only "chernukha". Including about colleagues. He also cheated on the commander of Fedyuninsky. By the way, he really was a "messenger" - a radiotelephone operator at the headquarters. request
        1. Konnick
          Konnick April 2 2021 12: 04
          +4
          He also cheated on the commander of Fedyuninsky.

          And my wife's grandfather spoke very well of Fedyuninsky. Was his driver.
          1. Pane Kohanku
            Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 12: 15
            +5
            And my wife's grandfather spoke very well of Fedyuninsky. Was his driver.

            Photo from your personal archive? drinks Is the wife's grandfather on the right? Wonderful! good
      3. Zug
        Zug April 2 2021 22: 10
        0
        I read a veteran. According to him, if there was a normal, regular warhead opposite us and not "assembled on a string" to plug holes, the Germans did not care deeply who was attacking them, whether sailors or infantry. All machine guns were put in and, according to him, the Germans have repeatedly shown in hand-to-hand combat how to "hold the bayonet."
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka April 1 2021 21: 14
    +11
    From the article.
    True, to consider 17 Noviks as destroyers is somehow ... creative. For 1941, this is a TFR, and not bad, to drive submarines - quite suitable.

    In order to drive, sonar equipment was needed, and with these it was not so simple.
    1. Pane Kohanku
      Pane Kohanku April 2 2021 11: 58
      +3
      In order to drive, sonar equipment was needed, and with these it was not so simple.

      Vlad, I thought about it too ... what
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka April 2 2021 14: 34
        +2
        Hi Nikolay, our most successful sonar destroyers have been American smooth decks. Paradox, but true.
  • Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter April 1 2021 21: 29
    +4
    Ghostly - Everything! In this raging world.
    The conclusions are powerful / decisive.
    You have to understand that tezis - money appeared ...
    It depends on what kind of money? There is not much money. There are few / very few of them. What was the vision of doctrine back then / today. Nobody will ever guess.
    Well, for the TC (as for me, as a light-alloy shipbuilding, with a high-speed slope), it even felt a little offensive. Well, that is ...
    Again, the landing party landed on rafts ...
    Why don't we build further the Zubr M DKVP, for example?
    What are the people to land on today? ..
    Fast / soon / efficient! Everything was invented before us.
  • Konnick
    Konnick April 1 2021 21: 33
    +6
    Here is a TKA type "G-5", as many as 300 pieces, however, seaworthiness as much as 4 points, and you can shoot at two maximum, but a lot ... And the speed is high, 50 knots in the absence of excitement.

    The author is clever, but does not understand the combat purpose of the planing TC G-5. The task of the G-5 torpedo boats was to prevent enemy ships from approaching naval bases and large ports, i.e. a short-term high-speed exit to the sea at a speed of under 100 km / h, a torpedo attack and a quick retreat to the base, by the way, due to such tactics, these boats did not even have a latrine. And with an excitement of 4 points, no one will fire, unless psychologically. The most dangerous and accurate shelling in calm weather, with minimal excitement. The people who gave Tupolev the terms of reference for such boats were definitely better than the author of the article who understood the tactics of naval combat.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 2 2021 08: 54
      +2
      Quote: Konnick
      And with excitement 4 points, no one will fire, unless psychologically

      With such excitement, the Battle of Tsushima took place. Bismarck took the last battle with excitement of 4-6 points, and this did not prevent the British from carving him into a nut. But when firing stationary targets, of course, it's impossible to shoot at 4 points. wassat
      1. Konnick
        Konnick April 2 2021 09: 07
        -1
        In these sea battles, the percentage of hits was minimal. In rough seas, coastal artillery has a great advantage. And in calm weather, the forces of naval and coastal artillery will already be equal, here it makes sense to use high-speed TC for the speedy destruction of enemy ships.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 2 2021 09: 55
          +1
          Quote: Konnick
          In these sea battles, the percentage of hits was minimal.

          In Tsushima - the maximum. And in the last battle, Bismarck was not bad
          Quote: Konnick
          In rough seas, coastal artillery has a great advantage. And in calm weather, the forces of ship and coastal artillery will be equal,

          They are NEVER equal. Land, other things being equal, is more accurate, but more usable
          1. Konnick
            Konnick April 2 2021 11: 30
            +1
            They are NEVER equal. Land, other things being equal, is more accurate, but more usable

            Do you want to say a 35 armored turret battery in Sevastopol would be more vulnerable than any cruiser? Amazing! I mean, has no maneuver?
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 2 2021 13: 01
              0
              Quote: Konnick
              I mean, has no maneuver?

              Of course. It is much easier to shoot at a stationary target than at a moving one
              1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Konnick
            Konnick April 2 2021 11: 48
            0
            And in the last battle, Bismarck was not bad

            But with Sheffield 100% miss on both sides.
            1. Macsen_wledig
              Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 12: 42
              +1
              Quote: Konnick
              But with Sheffield 100% miss on both sides.

              When the SUAO does not function normally, it is rather difficult to hit the target ...
              Yes, and no one set the task of Larkom to sink the Bismarck: Sheffield indicated the presence and enough.
  • Charlie
    Charlie April 1 2021 21: 46
    0
    Quote: Konnick
    Astafyev wrote that the Germans did not understand and were not afraid of the shouts of "polundra". There he described somewhere these "powerful scenes" how, after the fruitless winter attacks, in the spring, corpses in vests thawed out in neutral. Many

    Read more about this collector of black front-line myths. And they also said how the sailors went on the attack in deep snow, and remained standing until the spring, until they thawed. That just did not compose the travel agents.

    In general, this "collector of black front-line myths" fought on the front end himself. Not in the infantry, of course, but grabbed the war up to the throat
    1. Konnick
      Konnick April 1 2021 21: 56
      +5
      In general, this "collector of black front-line myths" fought on the front end himself. Not in the infantry, of course, but grabbed the war up to the throat

      Did he grab? A person who could blurt out something like that - "freshly burning machine gun grease" is not a soldier, but a columnist who does not know the principles of caring for weapons. If he had seen the front line, he would have seen machine gun fire, and he would not have written such nonsense.
      "Ah, Holbach, Holbach! Ah, empty-headed drunkard! Why did the Lord connect me with you?" - filling a new, five hundred-cartridge belt into the charging chamber with a blue barrel of a machine gun smoking from freshly burning grease, the second issue, Max Kuzempel, cursed and grieved. "
      This is with his Cursed and Forgotten. The German hasn't removed the excess grease?
      500-cartridge tape, yes, you can dock two standard 250-cartridge belts, but why, imagine a 250-cartridge box the size of a suitcase for a bath.
      And the continuation of the masterpiece is

      Holbakh walked long and heap along the freshly poured breastwork, behind which Russian barriers lay down and scribbled on their own. Having knocked out the red dust, Holbach cleaned up in someone else's trench,
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Zug
        Zug April 2 2021 22: 22
        +2
        Especially I was "finished off" about the barriers by a detachment of the NKVD with its DShK. "Oh, if these DShK were on the front line and not at the NKVD" Red-faced NKVD officer with DShK, firing off the retreating infantry .... I read his story. "The Shepherd and the Shepherdess", nothing So. But Cursed and forgotten, something like too much ... Yes, and his last video interviews "smack" of rottenness. He fought himself, nothing at all. He shot a German signalman there, grabbed a lot of worries about this. And went to get treatment. I've heard enough tales in the hospital ...
  • Tests
    Tests April 1 2021 22: 10
    +4
    Dear author! On the Baltic Fleet, in addition to the ancient Latvians, there were not very ancient Estonians, aviation and railway. batteries that helped hold Leningrad. How to evaluate their contribution to the Victory? And how to assess the secrecy of the "Babies" that our scouts were landed and evacuated after completing assignments?
    And through Iran and the Far East we received much more from the allies than through the Arkhangelsk and Murmansk ports.
  • Aleksandr97
    Aleksandr97 April 1 2021 22: 14
    +2
    The navy is the quintessence of military development of decades, and then taking into account the personnel school and centuries !!!
    Nobody says there were no problems!
    And of course, you can supplement the review with a complete and unconditional defeat of all 4 Sevastopol in the battle with Yamato!
  • north 2
    north 2 April 1 2021 22: 31
    +7
    But what if the Baltic Fleet of the USSR had been strong in 1941 and even stronger than the fascist fleet, then the main battles of the Second World War would have been victoriously played out at sea, and not near Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk? And what if the fascist fleet in 1941 was stronger than the Baltic Fleet of the USSR, this is the reason why the Red Army had to retreat so far inland and then decide everything on land near Moscow, Stalingrad and Kursk? What if Balt. the fleet would be very strong, then the fascists would not have been able to blockade Leningrad from land? A strong fleet, all four strong fleets, Russia always needs. It should be so. But even a very strong Baltic Fleet during the Second World War would not have greatly reduced the rapid advance of the Nazis deep into the USSR in 1941. The USSR was not, like England, an island, and the Nazis planned and carried out the intervention in the USSR on land and the main battles that decided the fate of the Second World War took place on land. I wrote only about the significance of the DKBF in the Second World War and wrote with respect to the sailors and commanders who had to fight and die in the ranks of the infantry, and not in naval battles. And eternal memory to those who died in the passage from Tallinn to Kronstadt and gratitude for the fact that those ships that came to Kronstadt, then from their artillery helped to restrain the Nazis rushing to Leningrad by land ...
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 April 1 2021 23: 32
      0
      Quote: north 2
      And eternal memory to those who died in the passage from Tallinn to Kronstadt and gratitude for the fact that those ships that came to Kronstadt, then from their artillery helped to restrain the Nazis rushing to Leningrad by land ...

      and also eternal memory to the Peterhof landing party who died completely and without special meaning. Are the sailors and officers to blame? no But the guilt of Kuznetsov Haller Alafuzov Stepanov is obvious, proven by the court. They were obliged to develop the fleet in such a way that neither the sailors in the infantry nor the ships had to be taken to ports for the whole war ... unfortunately, the honest position of the admirals should have been to write off obsolete and unnecessary surface ships (battleships) in transferring guns to railway traction , in the reduction of the surface fleet ... well, what kind of official will go to the reduction of managed and budgets? they were not patriots, but officials ... ... and now maintain the bloated Baltic Black Sea and Caspian fleets and maintain an unnecessary useless, faulty and super-long Kuzya for the sake of posts. And the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet are too small. not according to tasks
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 2 2021 13: 23
        +2
        Quote: vladimir1155
        They were obliged to develop the fleet in such a way that neither sailors in the infantry nor ships had to be taken to ports for the entire war ..

        To do this, the fleet had to subordinate the army. For the fate of the closed sea fleet depends only on the army.
        No matter how you develop the fleet, if the army rolls back to Tallinn and Kronstadt in a couple of months, then the fate of the fleet will be unenviable.
        Quote: vladimir1155
        in the translation of guns to railway traction,

        What's the point? If the enemy has a normal air defense system, the waiting aircraft can fire from one position for no more than 5 minutes. Tower batteries are more stable in this sense.
      2. Zug
        Zug April 2 2021 22: 23
        -3
        Thanks to Zhukov for the Petergovsky landing. Four times the guys were landed in the same place. More than 1300 guys remained there.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 3 2021 13: 01
          +4
          Quote: Zug
          Thanks to Zhukov for the Petergovsky landing. Four times the guys were landed in the same place. More than 1300 guys remained there.

          Thank you for the Peterhof landing, not Zhukov, but Tributs. For the organization of the landing was entirely on the Red Banner Baltic Fleet.
          The same is incomprehensible to the mind: to lose troops in an area that is covered even by "hundreds" - not to mention one hundred and thirty and larger calibers (despite the fact that the support of the infantry advancing in the coastal zone with naval artillery fire and the adjustment of this fire was successfully practiced by the RIF back in the days PMV). Lose contact with the landing party, landing it twelve kilometers from the main base of the fleet.
          1. Zug
            Zug April 3 2021 13: 06
            -3
            The landing order of Zhukov. And on whom he was entrusted with the third task. On his signal, the guys were taken to machine guns
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 3 2021 14: 02
              +4
              Quote: Zug
              The landing order of Zhukov. And on whom he was entrusted with the third task. On his signal, the guys were taken to machine guns

              That is, if the front commander gives the order to attack, and the division commander leads the division head-on to a fortified point, full-length to machine guns - is it the fault of the commander who gave the order, and not the division commander who scored all the regulations? belay
              The fleet complied with Zhukov's order in the style of "on, and fuck off"- the people were landed, they provided fire support, they fired at the squares. And that there is no result and the landing party disappeared - it's all Zhukov's fault.
              Where is the connection with the landing party? Where are the spotters? Well, they drowned and smashed all the radios - but Kronstadt was in direct line of sight. Where is the coastal corps, where are the flags, where are the signaling lights, where is everything that the RIF used a quarter of a century before? Where are the spotter groups from the ships of the landing fire support group?
              The landing has no artillery, which means that the fire support falls on the fleet. And this is his main task after the landing. Which the fleet did not fulfill.
              And yes, the commander of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet Tributs commanded the landing operation:
              The report of the headquarters of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet states that "the command of the operation was entrusted to the commander of the OVR GB, Captain 2nd Rank Comrade Svyatov, and the military commissar of the OVR GB, Brigadier Commissar Comrade Radun." At the same time, the actions of the aviation and artillery groups were planned in time and were led by the commander of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet Air Force and the chief of artillery of the Kronstadt naval base. Well, who was in charge of the entire amphibious operation? As stated in the report, “In view of the fact that the actions took place in the Kronstadt-Peterhof area, there was no direct interaction between Captain 2nd Rank Svyatov, on the one hand, the commander of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet Air Force and the chief of artillery, on the other, there was no direct interaction between all forces. The Military Council of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet located in Kronstadt ".
              Thus, it can be seen that legally the commander of the operation was listed as the commander of the OVR, Captain 2nd Rank Svyatov, but in fact he was the commander of the fleet, because Svyatov had nothing at his disposal except the ships of the landing forces, and therefore to control the landing on the shore and provide its actions with artillery and aviation he could not. In addition, this is also evidenced by the fact that all the main documents for the operation were signed by the Chief of Staff of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet and their approval by the Navy's Military Council. Captain 2nd Rank Svyatov signed and approved the documents either as the "landing commander" or as the "detachment commander". Therefore, it should be considered that the commander of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet was in command of the operation, and Captain 2nd Rank Svyatov was the commander of the landing forces.
              © Platonov
              Gorgeous, but - the commander of the landing forces does not interact with the artillery and has no right to dispose of it. That is, you need to call fire on newly identified targets right through the Red Banner Baltic Fleet.
              1. Zug
                Zug April 4 2021 14: 54
                0
                Yes, the landing had no chance from the very beginning. Well, it didn’t work once, well, twice. So why continue to send people to death by YOUR order?
  • ramzay21
    ramzay21 April 1 2021 23: 47
    0
    The Northern Fleet actually appeared in the 30s, in the ice-free port of Murmansk built at the same time. Before that, there were no warships at all.
  • dgonni
    dgonni April 2 2021 00: 44
    +1
    I.e! On the Black Sea, not having an enemy, the fleet drowned on its minefields more ships than from the enemy aircraft. Was he still weak?
    And this fleet took out the main stocks of shells from Seva and then could not deliver them back, how did they doom Sevastopol to surrender due to the lack of ammunition for the artillery?
    I don’t want to talk about the absence of even an attempt to evacuate the garrison!
    Baltic! Tallinn crossing is a parable in tongues!
    I knew the grandfather of one. If he met Tributs personally, he would strangle him.
    At the mere recollection of that transition, he was shaken, so mama do not worry!
    The only sensible thing they did was that destroyers and some of the boats were partially overtaken to the north.
    And then there the Deutsches wandered around as they wanted and where they wanted.
    Fucking donated Arkhangelsk! And they could not shoot normally with the main caliber and the Angles with the afig saw one barrel with a rusted projectile in the barrel!
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 2 2021 18: 35
      +2
      Quote: dgonni
      And this fleet took out the main stocks of shells from Seva and then could not deliver them back, how did they doom Sevastopol to surrender due to the lack of ammunition for the artillery?

      Sevastopol was doomed to surrender by the Crimean Front, which left the Kerch Peninsula to the enemy. In the absence of air cover for the "Great Land - Sevastopol" route, only some TF could break into the base.
      Quote: dgonni
      I don’t want to talk about the absence of even an attempt to evacuate the garrison!

      And there is nothing to evacuate. During the war year, the Black Sea Fleet was reduced to a flotilla. For all the shipbuilding and ship repair facilities of the Black Sea Fleet were either abandoned by the army, or were in the enemy's zone of influence.
      And the ports of the Caucasus and the only composite floating dock remained for the fleet: 2x5000 tons. They were afraid to use it in the kit, because its loss left the fleet without docks at all.
      Quote: dgonni
      The only sensible thing they did was that destroyers and some of the boats were partially overtaken to the north.

      Uh-huh ... and almost ditched them there - because the technology refused to endure the hardships and deprivation of service in an unequipped base. EMNIP, by the beginning of the war, a third of the EM SF required overhaul.
    2. Zug
      Zug April 2 2021 22: 26
      -4
      Tributs is not particularly guilty in Tallinn. This is a complaint to Kuznetsov. And to everyone that the passage was built this way and how the court was placed in the order of the court. I read here an eyewitness about this breakthrough.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 3 2021 13: 05
        +3
        Quote: Zug
        Tributs is not particularly guilty of Tallinn, this is a complaint against Kuznetsov.

        The organization of the transition was exactly on the Tributsa. And the mess in the main base of the fleet during the evacuation is also the merit of the commander and staff.
        The bet was placed on 53 minesweepers located in Tallinn. But the trouble is that about half of them - twenty-three - minesweepers, ten - basic minesweepers and twenty - slow-moving. There were no trawls on eighteen minesweeper boats. They failed during the previous trawlings, while the rest had one or two sets, and they were clearly not enough. At the same time, in the warehouses of the Main Base, subversive teams destroyed trawls and minesweepers that were transported from Kronstadt to Tallinn just before the war.

        Despite the presence in the governing documents of instructions on the obligatory obstruction of the edges of the trawl strip when crossing obstacles, this simple tactic, which allowed the conducted ships to stay in the trawl strip, was not provided for in the transition plan, although there were stocks of milestones on the island of Aegna. For veneering cleared of mines the fairways could be used minesweeping boats, sailing without trawls.
        © Yoltukhovsky
        1. Zug
          Zug April 3 2021 13: 08
          -1
          Direct execution, yes. Who was the convoy and the location in it, minesweepers, etc. It's all directly on him and his subordinates.
        2. Zug
          Zug April 3 2021 13: 11
          -1
          And by the way, there were landmarks, but in a hurry they did not know where they were naturally put in. What ship they were on. Well, yes, it's a mess and once again a mess.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 April 2 2021 02: 12
    +2
    More emotional stuff, but I was curious to see the whole picture.
  • Unknown
    Unknown April 2 2021 07: 43
    +3
    Normal material. It is not necessary to hush up the pre-war problems of the fleet, they were. Thanks to the memories of the admirals, Kuznetsov, Isakov and others about the pre-war Navy, a mythical idea was formed as an ideal indicator of combat readiness for the Second World War, in contrast to the Red Army, where everything was bad from the hands. But this is not so. There were problems, and the author correctly wrote about them. What kind of war at sea did our admirals see? Teachers, and some admirals in their youth, served in the tsarist fleet, the same I.S. Isakov, L.M. Haller and they naturally prepared for the war that took place without taking into account the increased role of aviation. Therefore, they clung to the old L.K., with their main caliber, without giving due attention to anti-aircraft weapons. KBVF from the end of G.V. was locked in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. The sailing conditions there are complex, a number of islands
    Shallow water, banks, in winter can completely freeze, and free from ice only in April. L.K is like an elephant in a china shop. The Finns truncated this, and built their own coastal battleships of the Väinämöinen type.
    .Plus the mosquito fleet left over from R.I. The Germans kept large ships in the Western part, in the East they preferred
    minelayers and Siebel ferries
    Who roamed the Gulf of Finland, like at home. With the beginning of the war, K.L. from various ships. We understood what kind of fleet is needed in the Gulf of Finland.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 2 2021 14: 43
      +2
      Quote: Unknown
      With the beginning of the war, K.L. from various ships. We understood what kind of fleet is needed in the Gulf of Finland.

      It's not about "understood" or "misunderstood." The conversion of various civilian ships into TSC, TFR and KL is not an impromptu, but a planned mobilization process, approved even before the war.
      EMNIP, during the SFV the Baltic Fleet was also replenished with mobilized ships.
      1. Unknown
        Unknown April 2 2021 19: 25
        +2
        Quote: Alexey RA
        It's not about "understood" or "misunderstood." The conversion of various civilian ships into TSC, TFR and KL is not an impromptu, but a planned mobilization process, approved even before the war.
        EMNIP, during the SFV the Baltic Fleet was also replenished with mobilized ships

        I completely agree with you that all ships are subject to mobilization for military purposes, but I had something else in mind. The author correctly noted that there were no special landing craft in the RKKF, their role was played by various civilian ships. Taking the landing party aboard is half the battle, providing full artillery support during the landing, is not an easy task. Therefore, they converted fishing and stove steamers into gunboats ...
        type Amgun, Bira. Agree that in the USSR there was no marines as a kind of troops. Only in July 1939, a Separate Special Brigade was created in the Baltic Fleet, which in 1940 was renamed the 1st Marine Brigade. In addition to this brigade, there were separate companies of the marines as part of the Danube and Pinsk military flotillas.

        However, despite the fact that such a brigade appeared, there was no marines as such, since there was no special amphibious training. After all, the failures of the landings in the Peterhof-Strelna area were partly due to the lack of artillery support and means of reinforcement. KL type Amgun were not suitable for such a role. You can still drag the 53-K gun aboard, but deliver it to the shore is a problem. The Germans also did not have a Marine Corps, but they often landed a simple one, and Siebel was created for this business ........
        He could deliver both equipment and provide artillery support himself. Of course, we couldn't pull such a self-propelled barge at that time, for objective reasons, but they could have come up with something like that.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 3 2021 13: 15
          +1
          Quote: Unknown
          The author correctly noted that there were no special landing craft in the RKKF, their role was played by various civilian ships.

          Such were the remnants of the former luxury from the RIF: "elpidiforos" and "bolinders". The latter could even be used as a TDK.

          Landing and multi-purpose transport boats were planned to be built in 1941. In real life, the universal boat went to the Navy in 1942 (the famous "tender").
          Quote: Unknown
          The Germans also did not have a Marine Corps, but they often landed a simple one, and Siebel was created for this business.

          And this is also, to some extent, the remnants of the former luxury - the legacy of Zeelöve. smile
          1. Unknown
            Unknown April 3 2021 13: 30
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Such were the remnants of the former luxury from the RIF: "elpidiforos" and "bolinders". The latter could even be used as a TDK.

            They were all at the Black Sea Fleet.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And this is also, to some extent, the remnants of the former luxury - the legacy of "Zeelöve"

            I agree .
    2. Vovk
      Vovk April 2 2021 14: 45
      -3
      Quote: Unknown
      Therefore, they clung to the old L.K., with their main caliber, without giving due attention to anti-aircraft weapons.

      And what kind of anti-aircraft weapons of the USSR Navy against rapidly maneuvering aircraft for the fleet could we talk about?
      About DShK, which is guaranteed to wedge after a long burst, or 61-K, which has 5-shot clips?
      And what equipment of the USSR Navy with anti-aircraft guns could we talk about, if they were not enough even to cover the ground units?
      About the quality of production of DShK and 61-K - a separate speech, about the combat capabilities of anti-aircraft 45-mm and 76-mm guns generally keep quiet, as well as about quad maxims.
      How to pay attention to what the USSR military industry could not provide physically?
      1. Macsen_wledig
        Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 15: 08
        0
        Quote: Vovk
        And what kind of anti-aircraft weapons of the USSR Navy against rapidly maneuvering aircraft for the fleet could we talk about?

        Was the competition much better?

        Quote: Vovk
        or 61-K, which has 5-shot clips?

        Did the "bofors" have a larger clip?
        1. Vovk
          Vovk April 2 2021 15: 17
          -3
          Quote: Macsen_Wledig
          Was the competition much better?

          Competitors Fascist Germany, Italy, USA, Great Britain ... all by 1942 had already solved the problems with anti-aircraft guns ... and the USSR, based on fishing schooners and a transport fleet with 45-mm single-shot anti-aircraft guns and quad maxims, fought until the end of the war ...
          Quote: Macsen_Wledig
          Did the "bofors" have a larger clip?

          The Bosphorus had the workmanship from a different opera.
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 15: 55
            +1
            Quote: Vovk
            and the USSR, on the basis of fishing schooners and a transport fleet with 45-mm single-shot anti-aircraft guns and quad maxims, fought until the end of the war.

            Why are you sure that the mobilized ships from the "foreigners" were better armed than ours?

            Quote: Vovk
            The Bosphorus had the workmanship from a different opera.

            Sorry, we're not talking about quality now, but about exchange nutrition ... :)
            1. Vovk
              Vovk April 2 2021 21: 55
              -4
              Quote: Macsen_Wledig
              Why are you sure that the mobilized ships from the "foreigners" were better armed than ours?

              Because only in the USSR and Japan the problem with a reliable large-caliber machine gun was not solved until the end of the war, not in the land army, not in the navy. We will not talk about the Berezin machine gun for aviation ... after the war, it was practically removed from service.
              Sorry, we're not talking about quality now, but about exchange nutrition ... :)

              Why was it chosen exactly 5 clip-on power for the Bosphorus: 1) it is convenient for the loader 2) the anti-aircraft gun fired at a certain rate without overheating 3) the simplicity of the clip.
              And now about 61-K ... it's no secret that this anti-aircraft gun was hard in production ... and where the Bosphorus fired at a faster pace, with a large number of clips without problems, then on 61-K a wedge could occur on the first clip ...
              1. Macsen_wledig
                Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 11: 13
                0
                Quote: Vovk
                Because only in the USSR and Japan the problem with a reliable large-caliber machine gun was not solved until the end of the war, not in the land army, not in the navy.

                I'm not talking about particulars, but about the whole picture ...

                Quote: Vovk
                Why was it chosen exactly 5 clip-on power for the Bosphorus: 1) it is convenient for the loader 2) the anti-aircraft gun fired at a certain rate without overheating 3) the simplicity of the clip.

                Again you are talking about something else ... :)
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA April 2 2021 17: 46
            +1
            Quote: Vovk
            Competitors Fascist Germany, Italy, USA, Great Britain ... all by 1942 had already solved the problem with anti-aircraft guns ...

            Especially Germany, yeah ...

            Or the United States, which only by the end of 1942 barely began to replace "Chicago pianos" with 40-mm automatic machines. The volume of production was such that at first the 40-mm was not enough even for the ships of the first line operating in the Solomon Islands.
            Britain, by the way, had no less problems - for the "pom-poms" with their ballistics anti-aircraft guns were a stretch.
            1. Vovk
              Vovk April 2 2021 22: 02
              -3
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Or the United States, which only by the end of 1942 barely began to replace "Chicago pianos" with 40-mm automatic machines. The volume of production was such that at first the 40-mm was not enough even for the ships of the first line operating in the Solomon Islands.
              Britain, by the way, had no less problems - for the "pom-poms" with their ballistics anti-aircraft guns were a stretch.

              And the USSR had nothing at all until the end of the war, DShK, which everyone lacked. 61-K - there was a problem to create a paired version and launch it into production, and there were not enough of them either.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA April 3 2021 13: 26
                0
                Quote: Vovk
                61-K - there was a problem to create a paired version and launch it into production, and there were not enough of them either.

                Ahem ... 70-K in the USSR was so "lacking" that by 1944 they were put even on serial small hunters.
                For the USSR, the problem was not in the guns, but in the MPUAZO. Where the rich and healthy put MZA with electric drives and control from the director (first visual, and by the end of the war with a radar channel), the USSR was forced to make do with manual drives and, at best, a portable rangefinder.
                Although, on the other hand, our main enemy fought with exactly the same materiel. And even worse - given the absence of a serial MZA larger than 20 mm on its ships until 1944 (except for the Norwegian "Bofors"). And at the same time, the anti-aircraft fire of German ships was considered accurate and deadly both in our Air Force and in the British.
                1. Vovk
                  Vovk April 3 2021 13: 54
                  -3
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Ahem ... 70-K in the USSR was so "lacking" that by 1944 they were put even on serial small hunters.

                  Yeah, a lot for 1941-1945 as many as 1671 pieces for the entire Soviet Navy. Pilots of German squadrons in 1944. straight into the "pants" when only 1 5-charge 37mm anti-aircraft gun 70-k and, at best, a dual DShK fired at them with plugs from the nose of a small hunter ... it was scary, already horror.
                  1. Macsen_wledig
                    Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 14: 31
                    0
                    Quote: Vovk
                    Pilots of German squadrons in 1944. straight into the "pants" when only 1 5-charge 37mm anti-aircraft gun 70-k fired at them with plugs from the nose of a small hunter

                    And you seem to have not read the instructions for this tool ... From the word at all.

                    1. Vovk
                      Vovk April 3 2021 14: 58
                      -3
                      Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                      And you seem to have not read the instructions for this tool ... From the word at all.

                      This is a manual for a land anti-aircraft gun, i.e. to a gun perfectly fixed to the ground and with verified platform levels.
                      But we are talking about the naval version of the anti-aircraft gun ... isn't it? Can we imagine anti-aircraft fire at sea in waves?
                      1. Macsen_wledig
                        Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 15: 06
                        0
                        Quote: Vovk
                        But we are talking about the naval version of the anti-aircraft gun ... isn't it?

                        Is the design of the naval and land gun magazine radically different?

                        Quote: Vovk
                        Can we imagine anti-aircraft fire at sea in waves?

                        Quite ... There is enough video with shooting from "bofors".
                        Or "You don't understand: this is different ..." :))))
                  2. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA April 3 2021 18: 12
                    +2
                    Quote: Vovk
                    Pilots of German squadrons in 1944. straight into the "pants" when only 1 5-charge 37mm anti-aircraft gun 70-k fired at them with plugs from the nose of a small hunter

                    Do you think that Bofors was loaded with 5 rounds? And only after they were shot, the next ones were charged?
                    "Bofors" was fed from clips that allowed continuous loading: shells of two clips in the receiver, the third clip in the hands of the loader.
                    1. Vovk
                      Vovk April 3 2021 18: 30
                      -3
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      Do you think that Bofors was loaded with 5 rounds? And only after they were shot, the next ones were charged?
                      "Boforsov" was fed from clips that allowed continuous loading: shells from two clips in the receiver, the third clip in the hands of the loader.

                      He was charged before the battle with one clip, so that if there was a delay, he could quickly solve it. And so the conversation is about the sea version - then other materials for the gun, in addition to the barrel, have already been used, including for the clip, in order to withstand not only wild temperature changes, but also corrosion from sea water.
        2. Zug
          Zug April 2 2021 22: 29
          -1
          Firlings and 40 mm submachine guns were better, and it's even a shame to compare.
      2. Unknown
        Unknown April 2 2021 21: 16
        0
        Quote: Vovk
        And what kind of anti-aircraft weapons of the USSR Navy against rapidly maneuvering aircraft for the fleet could we talk about?

        It was bad with anti-aircraft weapons, thanks to Tukhachevsky with his universal guns, and this is a separate topic. But when the fleet got hot, then everything was immediately found, the example of L.K. Paris Commune in 41 ... They installed two paired 76,2-mm gun mounts 81-K, placing them on the stern sections and removing for this two stern 120-mm casemate guns;
        All quadruple 7,62mm machine guns were removed;
        Installed 12 of the latest 37-mm 70-K assault rifles (three each on the 2nd and 3rd towers and three each on the bridges and wings of the foremast and main masts);
        Installed four single-barreled and two coaxial machine guns DShK;
        Installed two quad 12,7 mm Vickers machine guns;
        Four 120-mm guns were removed and transferred to the land front. Then, in the same 41 ... Four 37-mm 70-K assault rifles were installed;
        Installed one twin 76,2 mm gun mount 81-K;
        Installed a quad 37-mm 46-K assault rifle, which means that the fleet had the necessary weapons.
        Quote: Vovk
        About DShK, which is guaranteed to wedge after a long burst or 61-K, which is with clips for 5 shots

        Let me ask you, where did you get such information about the DShK? This is the first time I've heard of this. During the service in S.A., I was often present at work, although the DShKM, and I never saw or heard from the guys that it was guaranteed to jam with a long queue.
        Quote: Vovk
        How to pay attention to what the USSR military industry could not provide physically?

        For objective reasons, there were problems with the release of anti-aircraft guns. But the leadership of the Navy had to monitor and insist that the produced machines entered the fleet.
        1. Vovk
          Vovk April 2 2021 21: 38
          -3
          Let me ask you, where did you get such information about the DShK? This is the first time I've heard of this. During the service in S.A., I was often present at work, although the DShKM, and I never saw or heard from the guys that it was guaranteed to jam with a long queue.

          Because DShKM is a deep modernization in terms of production technology. Take a look at the pre-war paper manual for the DShK ... it says - shoot only in very short bursts - otherwise a wedge.
          1. Unknown
            Unknown April 3 2021 06: 27
            +1
            Quote: Vovk
            Because DShKM is a deep modernization in terms of production technology. Take a look at the pre-war paper manual for the DShK ... it says - shoot only in very short bursts - otherwise a wedge.

            I looked and found this .. 73. Give the command "Fire" after the report or the second number sign about the readiness of the machine gun to open fire.

            274. Fire in bursts to conduct with interruptions. The duration of the breaks between bursts is determined by the time required to check the aiming and to observe the results of the shooting.

            275. In tense moments of battle, fire from a machine gun continuously until the amount of cartridges specified in the command is used up or until the command "Stop".

            Open fire in bursts by the command "Bursts (or two, three bursts) - fire".

            Example. "Right by the bush, a machine gun, five, aim at the target, three bursts - fire."

            To fire in bursts, the gunner, with his index fingers, presses the trigger hooks and holds them in this position until 5-10 rounds are consumed and then quickly releases the trigger hooks. After that, the gunner, if necessary, corrects the aiming, again presses the trigger hooks and produces the next round. It does this until the designated number of queues is released or the "Stop" command is given. The length of the line is regulated by the ear gunner.

            276. Continuous fire should be conducted without interruption until the number of cartridges indicated in the command is used up. This is a manual for specifically DShK 38 years old. Didn't find about shooting only in short bursts.
            1. Vovk
              Vovk April 3 2021 08: 53
              -3
              This guide is for specifically DShK 38

              Let me guess you gave me quotes from this book, 1971 release?

              Nothing, even parts from the pre-war edition remained in it.

              500-600 shots refers to the DShKM, for the DShK arr 1938 fired during the war years - 50-100 shots.
              1. Unknown
                Unknown April 3 2021 14: 01
                +1
                No, from here ... 12,7 mm machine guns mod. 1938/46 and 1938. Manual on shooting ... And it is precisely for the DShK in '38. This is also from there 3. Firing from a machine gun, depending on the nature of the targets, is carried out in short bursts (5-10 shots), in long bursts (15–20 shots) and continuous fire.

                Combat rate of fire of the machine gun up to 80 rounds per minute.

                4. Cartridges are fed from a metal strip, designed for 50 cartridges. The tape fits into a metal box. This manual says 3. Shooting from a machine gun, depending on the nature of the targets, is carried out in short bursts (5-10 shots), long bursts (15-20 shots) and continuous fire.

                Combat rate of fire of the machine gun up to 80 rounds per minute.

                4. Cartridges are fed from a metal strip, designed for 50 cartridges. The tape fits into a metal box. Further, it indicates 89. A well-prepared machine gun, with proper handling, careful care and conservation, is a reliable and trouble-free weapon. Let's go further ... during breaks in shooting, periodically check the condition of the machine gun parts and mechanisms, remove thickened grease and dirt, as well as lubricate all moving parts;

                - during prolonged firing, if the situation permits, periodically clean the gas holes of the barrel, chambers and regulator, clean the gas piston from carbon deposits and wipe the barrel bore and chamber with tow (rags) soaked in alkaline composition;

                - if the barrel overheats during intense shooting, as well as when significant malfunctions appear in the barrel, replace the barrel, guided by the instructions of Art. thirty;

                - with prolonged firing, shooting at low air temperatures, as well as with frequent repetition of delays associated with the operation of the gas regulator, move it to the next gas hole, guided by the instructions of Art. 31 ... Hence the conclusion that there will be no breakdowns when caring for the DShK. Experience in combat use .... To enhance the firepower of cavalry regiments and air cover, the divisions transferred 26 separate air defense battalions, which had DShK machine guns. They had to act in places where even regular carts could not pass, therefore "metal front ends from plows with a team of one horse for one machine gun were adapted to machine guns."

                As a result of the raid, the headquarters of the cavalry division wrote a separate three-page report about the DShK listing the combat episodes and conclusions: The disadvantages of the DShK machine gun include the following:

                1. Insufficient heat treatment and striker thickness.

                2. Insufficient heat treatment of the receiver, which led to cracks.

                3. Insufficient heat treatment of the ejector (scrubbing of the ejector).

                It is necessary to have about two DShK machine guns to increase the power of the machine-gun platoon. ”Such disadvantages.
        2. Zug
          Zug April 2 2021 22: 35
          -3
          There were no anti-aircraft weapons standards on the BF. The Germans had an overwhelming superiority in the ZA. Armament of heavy floating batteries look. A magic order or whatever order from May to July inclusively on SeeIgel 4 dropped 61 attack and bomber aircraft into the Baltic. pe54 and il2. Three regiments fell into the water. The Firlings, you know, beat well
          1. Macsen_wledig
            Macsen_wledig April 3 2021 11: 08
            0
            Quote: Zug
            Take a look at the armament of heavy floating batteries.

            Can you remind me when they appeared?
        3. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 3 2021 13: 42
          +2
          Quote: Unknown
          It was bad with anti-aircraft weapons, thanks to Tukhachevsky with his universal guns

          You shouldn't blame Tukhachevsky too much - there are so many sins behind him. They tried to create small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery for the Red Army all the 30s. But they regularly ran into the capabilities of our industry and our design bureaus. First, the Kalinin plant filled up work on setting up a series of 20-mm and 37-mm German assault rifles. Then Kondakov worked long and painfully his AKT-37 - and could not. Shpitalny, who worked in parallel, was also unable to work in the MZA.
          The importance of the development of MZA in the USSR in the 30s is evidenced by the fact that in 1935 a Resolution of the Council of Labor and Defense was issued on this issue.
          Quote: Unknown
          But the leadership of the Navy had to follow up and insist that the produced machines entered the fleet.

          At the beginning of the war, the USSR Navy had 127 MZA 70-K - no more "MZA type Bofors" than other fleets of the world. smile
        4. bk0010
          bk0010 April 3 2021 18: 07
          0
          Quote: Unknown
          It was bad with anti-aircraft weapons, thanks to Tukhachevsky with his universal guns
          Isn't it the other way around: they began to invent universal guns, since everything was bad with anti-aircraft guns?
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA April 3 2021 19: 28
            +1
            Quote: bk0010
            Isn't it the other way around: they began to invent universal guns, since with anti-aircraft was everything bad?

            Everything is bad - that's putting it mildly.
            Here is the main anti-aircraft gun of the military air defense of the Red Army at the time of the beginning of the development of a universal divisional gun:

            And taking into account the results of the work of the plant. Kalinin at the beginning of the 30s - there was no guarantee that the 3-K would be put into production at all or that the serial guns would be enough for the army.
      3. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 April 2 2021 22: 24
        -3
        Quote: Vovk
        How to pay attention to what the USSR military industry could not provide physically?

        industry loves money like a machine lubricates ... based on the law of conservation, if we keep three unnecessary battleships, then there is no money for air defense, the battleship eats a lot, there is food, repairs, fuel, ammunition ... so there will be no money left for air defense ... Kuzya 5000 crew, this is almost the entire Pacific Fleet, there is as much paint as literally for the entire Russian Navy, there is a railway tank of fuel per day there is a dock for billions ... but for minesweepers and planes, then nothing remains, everything Kuzya eats ... "If you want to ruin a small country, give it a cruiser ..." - Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill.
  • bbss
    bbss April 2 2021 09: 23
    0
    "Chief, everything is gone!" ... (film "The Diamond Arm").
  • Vitaly Dnepr
    Vitaly Dnepr April 2 2021 09: 54
    -1
    Greetings to all readers of the VO resource! From my point of view, the main thesis of the article is that "any country is doing exactly as much for which there is enough effort and money.

    And what is not enough - they pay in blood for the lack of iron, and at a terrible rate. "Briefly and to the point !!!
  • Dimon-SPG
    Dimon-SPG April 2 2021 09: 57
    +3
    Well, yes, the USSR was not a great maritime power, well, they did not enter Berlin on battleships either. A powerful fleet was necessary for the island states, the USA, Britain, Japan, and we have land in priority.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 2 2021 10: 18
    +6
    Roman pulled a whole flock of owls onto the globe.
    His battleship turns into an battleship (well, compare the combat power of Marat and the battleship Väinemäinen)
    Marat's side armor was designed to repel Finnish-level artillery.
    And the boats he had that D3, although in March 41 the release of, for example, the project 123 Komsomol members began, and the submarines are poor, and the cruiser is an overgrown destroyer, although the roots rather go from the leader, who was already like an overdeterminer, and the artillery is poor, although GK installations, as on cruisers like Kirov, were popular on various foreign projects. The cruiser turned out to be unbalanced - it's true, but not weak. They also installed anti-aircraft artillery minisini installations, which were not very bad.
    In my opinion, the Kirov series greatly lacked radars, adequate equipment for adjusting fire and booking like the new Italian cruisers. In the conditions of the Gulf of Finland, where 4 years of war had passed, a weakly armored ship constantly risked getting a bun from the shore, and that's not counting the aviation. Svetlana's ships were old and not in the best shape, but they were pretty serious ships. To write them off for scrap is somehow strange. Even one such ship could arrange a blood bath for the Romanians in the Crimea.
    Yes, if you objectively look, our fleet was far from the strongest, but part of its potential was simply not used due to inability. As an example - Stalin's personal ban on the use of large ships in the Crimea. As they say, it boiled.
    Another important aspect is that the fleet lacked qualified personnel. Not only officers and sailors, but also corny engineers, as well as specialized equipment in factories for the production of structures. Some draftsmen of the USSR experienced a shortage of about 40 thousand by the beginning of the war.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 2 2021 14: 51
      +2
      Quote: yehat2
      And the boats he had that D3, although in March 41, the release began, for example, of the project 123 Komsomolets

      Hasn't started. TKA project 123 was released in a single copy, after which the design bureau began to eliminate the shortcomings of the project, which dragged on until 1944.
      And the head 123rd from the D-3 differed little in terms of armament - the same drag-type TA and the same turret DShK.
      Quote: yehat2
      The cruiser turned out to be unbalanced - it's true, but not weak. They also installed anti-aircraft artillery minisini installations, which were not very bad.

      "Minisini" went to "Svetlana". And Project 26 and 26-bis received the domestic B-34.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 2 2021 10: 35
    +3
    Here is the "M" series 6, 30 units, two torpedo tubes, 0 torpedo stock, scanty autonomy ... Why did they build? And what they could, then they built, in the late 20s there was no time for frills. True, then, inspired by the cheapness, they built another 66 babies, slightly improved, but still stupid.

    So the submarine type "M" is a domestic version of the German "sewing machine" UB during the WWII. The main task is to protect the bases (a kind of mobile underwater torpedo tube).
  • Macsen_wledig
    Macsen_wledig April 2 2021 11: 00
    +5
    An article about a spherical horse in a vacuum without taking into account the factors that influenced the development of the fleet in the USSR after the revolution.
    With the same success, you can compare the Kriegsmarine with the Royal Navy on 03.09.39 and complain: "What kind of Raeder, did not prepare for the war at all ..."
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 2 2021 11: 40
    +7
    I had to buy, for this they chose Italy, which was clearly not an optimal solution, but a budget one. Still, most of the resources were consumed by the army, which is true, without it there is absolutely nothing with our borders.

    There it was not so much about the budget as about the fact that fascist Italy cooperated surprisingly well with the Soviet Union. The Italians, for example, had no jokes like "prohibit the sale of equipment samples put into service less than 10 years before the date of the contract." When the USSR began to design the first submarines, the Italians handed us the documentation for their submarines. When the USSR needed EM and KR, the Italians sold us documentation, mechanisms, PUAO and anti-aircraft weapons. When the USSR ran into an impasse in the design of the aircraft, the Italians developed for us the documentation for the high-speed aircraft, which formed the basis for work on pr. 23. Moreover, they sold us the PTZ system.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN April 2 2021 18: 41
    +1
    The author's swing was serious, but ... somehow it ended abruptly. Or will there be a sequel? And the topic is worth investigating. Only now is access to the primary ALL materials on this topic available?
  • Protos
    Protos April 3 2021 21: 36
    0
    Roman Skomorokhov wink
  • Protos
    Protos April 3 2021 21: 49
    0
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Konnick
    I mean, has no maneuver?

    Of course. It is much easier to shoot at a stationary target than at a moving one

    Manstein fired at our Sevastopol BB # 30 from 250 guns, 27 of which were of special power!
    The first hit happened after 4 months of shelling!
  • evmarine
    evmarine April 4 2021 08: 53
    +1
    Who thinks - he understands what's what. Plus, in hindsight, we're all strong.
    Then it was what it was, and not the fact that it would have been better. The author himself writes that the s / s school was lost, then during the revolution and the civil one, now - during perestroika and the 90s. Therefore, they used the import of ideas and technology, their brains were still studying, and this is not a year, not five ... While the school was being revived, and naval science, then 1941 rolled up.
    Much has already been said about the KR pr.26, but again the "irrational" tools were pushed in ... They do not push in the tools, but something else, if available ... A single cradle was the norm then, the desire to increase the striking power of a light KR, NOT CHANGING KORUS, is understandable ... What's the question? Recycling the project takes time, money, and all this was in short supply. Fussing with heavy ships of the oceanic zone (pr. 23, 69), so that there was a lot and at once, did not allow balancing the fleet in terms of urgent sea and coastal tasks - that's what is most important.
    And the boats are not 271, but about 211. And without the M-6 -160 units. normal combat boats, no matter what they say. Series M-6 (50 units), frankly, none, but their own, not bought ... And the "Decembrists" are not German, but Italian roots.
    What the author wanted is not entirely clear.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 5 2021 11: 37
      +1
      Quote: evmarine
      And the "Decembrists" have not German, but Italian roots.

      There, EMNIP, a funny story came out. At the beginning of the design of the first Soviet submarine, ours sent a delegation to Italy to get acquainted with the achievements of Italian submarine building. The Italians accepted the delegation, they were not allowed to look at the submarine documentation officially, they only showed them one submarine - "on the run." And then, unofficially, the submarine drawings were handed over to the delegation.

      In general, there were a lot of funny moments with the Decembrists. One order of equipment abroad is worth it. We ordered two types of pumps "for civilian needs" (secrecy) from the Rato company (one - high capacity with low back pressure, the other - low capacity with high back pressure). And they got the answer: "It is clear from your request that you are building a submarine. Our company offers you a newly developed universal pump that combines the two types specified in your request.". We ordered ventilation equipment from another company - also" for civilian needs. "The company pretended to believe it. fleets of the world. smile
  • sleeve
    sleeve April 4 2021 14: 37
    +1
    Hmm ... What is this? Cry from the heart? Then what about? About what "are trying to make strong where they have never been"? But someone like Rezun can do this with his "theory of aggression". Was the fleet weak? Yes, he was weak in comparison with the powerful sea powers. But he did not have the task of defeating the Royal Nevi or the Americans or the Germans. By 1941, the fleet even had surplus supplies for its missions. Take or block the Bosphorus (optional). Provide an end to the Turkish communcations on the Black Sea, support for their troops and landings (the whole set of PMA), please. Fighting in mine positions in the Baltic and possible landings on Allandy - please (the goal is to seal communications from Finland and protect from the landing). Northern Fleet and the Pacific Ocean? Well, yes, but coastal defense in the most important places and some kind of operation on communications was possible. So who else made the Stalinist fleet out of measure? I haven't read it. I would be glad to read and consider the arguments. Well, the author still should not have engaged in "taking away" submarines from their combat potential. You need to start with simpler things. For example, your own little finger, since it is small and crooked (on the leg, of course, on the leg). Fleet is a continuous development of thought. Erroneous, successful ... But one way or another, any derivative of these processes finds its place. The "Malyutki" turned out to be quite heroic boats, despite their misuse (a submarine for coastal defense and defense of mine positions, as well as a reserve available for transfer by railway).
    Now, if the author wrote about the mistakes of the fleet command, operational omissions, unused opportunities. That would be yes. And we would discuss. And "comments to the list of performance characteristics of ships of the Soviet Navy in 1941" is of course a necessary thing in the literature, but ... Well, in short, "but".
  • Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene April 4 2021 16: 02
    0
    The topic is interesting, but after reading it, an unpleasant aftertaste remains. An overly cheeky frivolous tone of presentation. In a word - Khlestakovshina.
  • yehat2
    yehat2 April 6 2021 11: 33
    0
    Quote: clerk
    I fully showed that at that time in Europe there were LKs, with which the Sevas could butt at about the same level

    The Sevastopol (and the Izmail family) had very weak armor, mounted by archaic methods. Unfortunately, the maximum they could do was to withstand the shelling of a part of 240mm guns (not all of them!) For a short time. In addition, they had the old booking scheme, where the deck was poorly protected. These ships were completely unprepared to withstand the shelling of "heavy" shells.
    Therefore, they were completely unsuitable for linear combat. In reality, this was confirmed during the bombing of Marat - even close-range bomb explosions caused him serious damage.
    And therefore, there could be no talk of any butting with the majority of 1-1 battleships. And the artillery, which was really very powerful, could not compensate for the problem - this was shown by the Germans during the skagerrak, where it became clear that even much better, but insufficiently protected battleships simply die when firing with not the most powerful calibers - the Germans made several very unpleasant hits with 280mm guns ... Thus, Soviet battleships were only very powerful monitors and, in a sense, battlecruisers, but never battleships.
    1. aleks399
      aleks399 April 7 2021 01: 37
      0
      Forgive me, you are an amateur !!! Sevastopol and especially the Izmail family had the most efficient and modern booking !!! and you judge only by the thickness of that tembomee DILETANT !!!!!! this is about how to judge a person by the thickness of his cock ..... !!!
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 April 7 2021 08: 05
        0
        these are not my conclusions, but the commission of the imperial fleet, which conducted experiments on the durability of the side armor. Then, in the USSR, they conducted tests and came to similar conclusions. Check it out, and then spit with saliva.
  • aleks399
    aleks399 April 7 2021 01: 34
    +1
    Another speech of mediocrity narcissism! Durkenk or Shanhorse would "take out" Sevastopol? nothing is confirmed and in general it is simply not true! Well, first of all, no one would fight with them on the high seas! neither the situation nor the concept! and so the battle on the good old mine-artillery position! and on it GREAT 12-inch Russian shells of the 11-year-old model, especially the French one "from ass to ass!" with a German, all the same, the belt is 350! but if the deck is kirdyk! so that both they and ours were "glass" who is the first to hit (the golden shot) will win !!! only ours have old dreadnoughts and they have the newest battle cruisers! denyushek are worth! so think yourself would have poked! and there were also minks! It's a pity that Poltava was not restored! just 2 at the BF and the Black Sea Fleet were optimal !!!
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 April 7 2021 08: 08
      0
      one of the main advantages of both lines of battleships was the speed of the ledge zeroing.
      you rightly said that accuracy decided a lot, but to risk a huge ship, which can go to the bottom from 1 suitcase or mine or torpedo - does someone need it?
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 7 2021 07: 59
    0
    But lagged behind the Netherlands


    At that time, a powerful colonial power that had all of Indonesia. And centuries before, it had hit even the British in the neck. They seemed to need cruisers more than we did.
  • fomin
    fomin April 18 2021 17: 09
    0
    Another stupid denouncer and digger of history out of the blue, he crap the Soviet fleet, but except for what he poured out from the author, he did not give anything concrete where the facts are the author? You have to answer for the market! Everything is learned in comparison, and if you compare the efficiency of the German fleet favored by the aphor with the "antediluvian and frail" Soviet one, you get a very unattractive picture. There is practically zero sense from the German super-battleships, if someone does not agree, I will give an example in 1942, theirs Fuhrer, offended by the parasites in naval uniforms, ordered ... the fleet to be eliminated i.e. sawn and melted, only thanks to the efforts of the new naval minister Doenitz, the ships were transferred to the category of training and calmly waited (though not all) for the end of the war, by the way, "Tirpitz" standing idle throughout the war in the Norwegian fjord was nicknamed "Lonely Queen" by the locals. Our ships, especially in the Baltic, took an active part in the defense of Leningrad, the front there stabilized only when the Germans entered the zone of effective fire of naval artillery.
  • Vladimir Lenin
    Vladimir Lenin 18 May 2021 23: 22
    0
    Judging by the style of writing, the author is clearly an overgrown schoolboy! Is it scary to imagine that the author will talk about the river fleet of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War? And he, too, was and fought! And in the Soviet fleet, to carry out combat missions, there were both large and small hunters, civilian ships converted into light cruisers, and armed tugs, and even gunboats with monitors!