Military Review

The great campaign of "Sevastopol"

45
The great campaign of "Sevastopol"

Disputes over the only completed series of Russian battleships have not subsided since the days of the tsarist. And they will not subside as long as in Russia, in principle, there is a fleet and its historians. This is understandable: seven battleships of the "Sevastopol" class (and "Empress Maria" - albeit improved and slightly modified, but the "Sevastopoli") are the only battleships built in Russia. "Nicholas I", also a ship of this type, but brought to mind - was never completed, "Izmail" - too, but in Soviet times ...


In Soviet times, both battleships and battle cruisers were built, as many as three series, but all three were not commissioned. The reasons are different, but the fact is the fact: it is "Sevastopoli" - these are our only certificates that we were a member of the club of great maritime powers. Moreover, they consisted twice - both in the fact of the presence and in the fact of the construction of these giants. This is prestigious, this achievement, without irony, not so many states were able to build battleships on their own, only seven, and we are not the last on this list, but ...

It is practice that is the criterion of truth, and seaworthiness is still the main quality of a ship of the line. The guns themselves and tabular data on speed / range are letters and numbers that have no place in real life. And our giants did not work out with distant passages. Of the three Black Sea battleships, one left the Black Sea - "General Alekseev", aka "Volia", aka "Emperor Alexander 3". And then: from the Black Sea, he went only to the Mediterranean, reached Bizerte, where he quietly rotted. He rotted not because he was bad, but because the French did not give it to us, hoping to pay off the loans, and we did not have the opportunity to pressure on this issue.

The famous shipbuilder, seeing again his ships (dreadnought and destroyers), the design of which was carried out with his active participation, did not deny himself the pleasure of giving the French sailors accompanying him a short lecture on their excellent combat qualities. Then the French were especially interested in the dreadnought ... The lecture was a success and probably played its role ... The Soviet mission failed for "political" reasons.

The legend that the French were scared is worthy of "Wikipedia", in 1924 this morally obsolete battleship, and besides requiring serious repairs, could have scared Romanians or Bulgarians, while the Turks had something like that - "Goeben", so they had nothing to fear. At best, they would have put it in order and modernized it only by the beginning of the 30s, which the government and Krylov clearly understood. And the amount of royal loans was such that it was possible to build several fleets of dreadnoughts from scratch with this money (22,5 billion gold francs), including the cost of building production chains.

Whatever it was, it cannot be called an ocean voyage, a transition in greenhouse conditions, nothing more, which did not demonstrate the real seaworthiness of the ship.

In the ocean "Sevastopol" came out only once, it is about the transition of the "Paris Commune" to the Black Sea, where fleet we didn’t, in the sense - at all. The pre-revolutionary Black Sea Fleet was partly lost, and partly was hijacked to Bizerte, the new fleet was built with a creak, or rather - almost never built, it was even necessary to raise the drowned in 1918 from the bottom and put into operation, if possible, that's it ...

So it was decided to conduct a great campaign - the transfer to the Black Sea from the Baltic of the battleship "Paris Commune" and the cruiser "Profintern". The task for the pre-revolutionary fleet, in general, is routine, annually Russian ships sailed to the Mediterranean, at one time a whole squadron was based there, and even before the First World campaigns of ships with midshipmen were quite commonplace. After the First World War and the Civil, the Russian fleet, of course, lost many and a lot, but, say, Frunze led a squadron to the Kiel Bay. And nothing, a routine operation.

But this transition did not turn out to be routine, rather - on the contrary, and the personalities of the sailors have nothing to do with it. The sailor commanded the battleship on the crossing just fine:


Konstantin Ivanovich Samoilov graduated from the midshipmen classes even before the revolution, fought in the Civil War, later - a scientific worker. He was not repressed, not convicted and did not receive a single reproach for the transition, which, even very mildly, can be called a failure. And the very practical detachment of the Baltic Sea Naval Forces was also led not by a commissar in a dusty helmet, but by a completely professional sailor - Lev Haller. Moreover, the transition was carefully prepared taking into account its, frankly, low driving characteristics:

“Designed under the strong influence of the artillery specialists of the Naval General Staff, our battleships were distinguished by a relatively low freeboard (height less than 3% of the ship's length), had practically no sheer and collapse of the frames in the bow and, in addition, had a trim trim on the bow. Therefore, at high speed, especially in fresh weather, significant masses of water fell on the tank, and the spray even reached the felling. "

To give the ship a relatively normal seaworthiness, it was decided:

"To carry out the collapse of the upper part of the side (with the help of attachments) and, perhaps, to continue the side in the bow up to the height of the rails."

The campaign was accompanied by bad secrecy - officially the ships went to the Mediterranean Sea in order to continue the training period, and from Naples to go ... to Murmansk. Which was later published in many works. The reason was that the Turks were completing the modernization of "Geben" and could create obstacles to the passage of our detachment. However, the problem was not politics and not the Turks, but the ocean, on which Sevastopoli were not intended to walk, from the word “absolutely”. Well, and the training of the teams, which after the experience of the country was, to put it mildly, low. First, the mechanics allowed the water to boil in the boilers, then the navigators screwed up:

“Assuming that we were being blown away by the tidal current, we took a course of 193 ° with the expectation to go to the Sandetti floating lighthouse by noon. But he found a solid fog, and at 11 hours 20 minutes. the commander of the detachment proposed to anchor. I remember that I was even angry, believing that I could walk calmly for another forty minutes. But the proposal turned into an order. "

And, if not for Haller's order, the battleship would have run aground, and then the Biscay began. The roll of the huge battleship into a storm, quite usual for those places, reached 29 degrees, the bulwark did not hold the ocean wave, and the ship took up to one hundred tons of water per hour. I had to go to Brest, especially since the "Profintern" plating in the area of ​​the boiler room was broken. By the way, apart from this accident, the cruiser behaved in the ocean much better than the battleship, it was built just for the open sea. It was stupid to sail on a non-seaworthy battleship in Biscay in early December, but Moscow was pushing ahead - the honor of the state and the fleet was at stake, the failure would be perceived as complete incompetence of the sailors and the inability to combat the fleet. On December 10, a storm destroyed the built-up bulwarks, and the ship was on the verge of death.

“I stood on the left wing of the navigating bridge, the detachment commander on the right. Suddenly he, embracing the gyrocompass pellorus, hung literally over me: the ship lay down completely on board and did not get up. It lasted for some seconds, but to me they seemed like an eternity! "

It was even possible to change course with difficulty - the battleship not only burrowed into the water, it lost controllability during a strong storm. Fortunately, we managed to go to Brest and get renovated. And only after repairs, taking advantage of the calm weather, reach Gibraltar. It was easier in the Mediterranean. And finally, on January 18, the detachment saw the coast of Crimea. There was an order from Muklevich:

“... today I had the opportunity with great satisfaction to report to the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR that the personnel of the battleship Parizhskaya Kommuna and the cruiser Profintern, having shown high political, moral and physical qualities in the conditions of a long and difficult voyage and having overcome all the difficulties that stood on the way, fully justified the hopes placed on him and successfully completed the task assigned to him. "


But there was also a fact: the second time "Sevastopol" was released from the Baltic Sea only eight years later - the battleship "Marat" visited England. But in general ...

Despite the heroic descriptions in Soviet sources, it became clear to everyone that we had no battleships. There are three coastal defense battleships, suitable only in closed theaters and only in good weather. No wonder our battleships were not sent to the coast of Spain during the civil war there, there was nothing to send.

Well, the experience for the crews turned out to be rather dubious, although not useless.

After that, Sevastopoli was modernized, but in general ...

In general, practice has shown that the first pancake turned out to be a lump, and the weakening of seaworthiness in favor of artillery power turned ordinary battleships almost into floating batteries.

And we did not manage to bake the second pancake. Not to consider the Project 1144 cruisers as battleships? This is a completely different era and completely different ships.
Author:
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Comrade
    Comrade 29 May 2021 05: 48
    +11
    Roman, and you keep grumbling, grumbling at the Soviet fleet ..
    No desire to tell the public how the French battleship "France" got into difficult weather conditions, stumbled upon a rock and sank?
    We did not manage to bake the second pancake.

    Not "failed", but not were in time, the war prevented.
    The alleged appearance of the unfinished battleship Sovetsky Soyuz.
    1. vladcub
      vladcub 30 May 2021 12: 16
      -6
      "battleship" Soviet Union "-" Lutsev ". There are many materials about this. And Kuznetsov wrote
      1. Andy
        Andy 30 May 2021 13: 16
        +7
        what are you speaking about? Lyuttsov, the heavy cruiser Petropavlovsk, remained unfinished.
    2. yehat2
      yehat2 1 June 2021 13: 58
      0
      something not quite like those projects that I have seen.
  2. Dart2027
    Dart2027 29 May 2021 06: 57
    +13
    It is practice that is the criterion of truth, and seaworthiness is still the main quality of a ship of the line.
    On the other hand, these ships were intended for the war in BMZ. Both the Baltic Fleet and the Black Sea Fleet were supposed to operate in closed waters, from which, in principle, there was nowhere to go.
  3. 27091965
    27091965 29 May 2021 07: 10
    +4
    ... It was stupid to sail on a non-seaworthy battleship in Biscay in early December, but Moscow drove forward - the honor of the state and the fleet was at stake,


    At stake were oil loading facilities in the Black Sea and the oil trade, and not only oil.
  4. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 29 May 2021 08: 04
    .
    in general, battleships are an everlasting shame of our fleet, there are no and they did not have tasks and continuous worries and troubles, Tsushima, three were blown up by terrorists, only the battleship Slava was a little and heroically useful ... and then we had to flood it out of despair ...
    1. Andy
      Andy 29 May 2021 11: 07
      +10
      an everlasting shame is you on the site. the same Tsushima is a task for battleships. disruption of Operation Albion ... that they could not, the second question.
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 29 May 2021 20: 31
        .
        Quote: Andy
        the same Tsushima is a task for battleships.

        the problem has not been solved, the battleships were shot by small battleships and destroyers ...
    2. Aleksey Kuznetsov
      Aleksey Kuznetsov 3 September 2021 05: 25
      0
      And what have battleships got to do with it?
  5. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 29 May 2021 08: 44
    -5
    a good answer to a connoisseur from Chelyabinsk, who, in his article and comments, argued about the good seaworthiness of the Sevastopol type lx (the Black Sea lx had even more nose trim)
    1. vladcub
      vladcub 30 May 2021 12: 19
      +2
      Actually, Andrey from Chelyabinsk loves and knows the history of the fleet
  6. ban
    ban 29 May 2021 09: 38
    +15
    the author, well, before writing nonsense, if only they asked - the red wrenmores on the tank built a bulwark, which in the storm scooped up water like a spoon until it fell apart.
    Then we made a normal closed forecastle. Something like this...
  7. Constanty
    Constanty 29 May 2021 09: 52
    +14
    Two interesting photographs of the "Parisian Commune" in Brest with a visible forward bulwark.

    1. Constanty
      Constanty 29 May 2021 09: 59
      +13
      And here is another photo and drawing of the "oceanic" bow of the ship.

    2. Catfish
      Catfish 29 May 2021 15: 18
      +3
      Good afternoon, Konstanty! hi

      I wonder how the French took the name of the ship - "Paris Commune"? I can hardly imagine the arrival of a British aircraft carrier in the Odessa port under the name "October Revolution". smile
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 30 May 2021 12: 06
        +3
        Quote: Sea Cat
        and how the French took the name of the ship - "Paris Commune"

        Just like Alexander 3 Marseillaise
        On July 13, 1891, a French military squadron came to Kronstadt on an official visit. Her visit was an impressive demonstration of Franco-Russian friendship. The squadron was met by Alexander III himself. The Russian autocrat standing, bareheaded, humbly listened to the revolutionary anthem of France "Marseillaise", for the performance of which in Russia itself people were punished as a "state crime."
      2. vladcub
        vladcub 30 May 2021 12: 53
        +4
        Kostya, hello. Only we could have it: "Sun Yatsen", "Marat", "Paris Commune", and in Britain there were enough of our own to use other people's names. In 1943 they thought of returning the previous names
        1. Catfish
          Catfish 30 May 2021 15: 59
          +1
          Good afternoon, Slava. hi
          Under the tsar-priest, this was also "sinned" smile
          Russian battleship Sultan Makhmud. The ship was named after the Turkish Sultan Mahmud II, with whom the Adrianople Peace Treaty was signed on September 2 (14), 1829.
        2. Earthshaker
          Earthshaker 30 May 2021 16: 10
          +1
          "Goto Predestination" is the original Russian name for the ship.
          1. Aleksey Kuznetsov
            Aleksey Kuznetsov 3 September 2021 05: 27
            0
            Absolutely! laughing lol
    3. Xnumx vis
      Xnumx vis 29 May 2021 21: 50
      +9
      ... It was renamed twice from "Sevastopol" to "Paris Commune" and back.
      Photo of a battleship somewhere in the early 50s. Father-in-law passed through the pestilence practice on this ship. Photo in our family archive.
  8. Senior seaman
    Senior seaman 29 May 2021 10: 11
    +20
    As usual for the "author", I heard a ringing, but did not understand where he was.
    Indeed, even in the Baltic Sea, a battleship was made just like that.

    however, in the Bay of Biscay it suddenly became clear that its shape, to put it mildly, is not optimal.
    The repair in Brest boiled down to the fact that this attachment was stupidly removed, and seaworthiness magically returned.
    As for, pearl
    seaworthiness is still the main quality of a ship of the line

    then I recommend the "author" to familiarize himself with the course of the battle at Ulsan. The seaworthiness of the "Rurik", in contrast to the "Asamoids", was excellent ... and how did it help Jessen?
    In general, here:
    https://topwar.ru/60675-linkory-tipa-sevastopol-uspeh-ili-proval-chast-3.html
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Senior seaman
        Senior seaman 29 May 2021 20: 59
        +2
        Quote: Benzorez
        Although why a knock-off! In the shipbuilding, I have not heard the term-forgery!

    2. yehat2
      yehat2 1 June 2021 14: 02
      +1
      even better, the issue of seaworthiness reflects the American battle of monitors, one of which drowned without assistance, and the second tried several times, but still remained to swim.
    3. Region-25.rus
      Region-25.rus 14 August 2021 12: 20
      0
      to get acquainted with the course of the battle at Ulsan. The seaworthiness of the "Rurik", in contrast to the "Asamoids", was excellent ... and how did it help Jessen?
      "There is no reception against the scrap (weight of the side salvo)! If there is no other scrap." And he was not. Against our six (in an onboard salvo) 203mm detachment, 4x4 = 16mm from Kamimura's detachment. "Rurikovichi" are still more raiders than ships of the line. hi
      ps
      by the way, I passed the Tsushima Strait a couple of times. I even saw the island of Ulleungdo (Dazhelet). There, at 97m (it seems), an acquaintance of mine died. On m / v "Agan". Broke on a wave with a load of scrap metal.
  9. Doctor
    Doctor 29 May 2021 10: 39
    +1
    After the First World War and the Civil, the Russian fleet, of course, lost many and a lot, but, say, Frunze led a squadron to the Kiel Bay.

    It turns out that he is also an admiral.))
    1. aleks700
      aleks700 29 May 2021 12: 43
      +1
      The man and the ship.
      1. vladcub
        vladcub 30 May 2021 12: 56
        +3
        "to comrade Nete man and ship"
  10. xomaNN
    xomaNN 29 May 2021 13: 11
    +6
    After the collapse and chaos of the Soviet Navy in the 90s, the analogies of the 1920s are very striking. It is also surprising how in a war-torn country, in the absence of trained command personnel, two battleships of the beginning of the century were at least relatively combat-ready.
    1. boris epstein
      boris epstein 29 May 2021 17: 02
      +8
      In fact, THREE battleships of the beginning of the century were made combat-ready: "October Revolution", "Marat" and "Sevastopol", renamed "Petropavlovsk" in 1942. They changed the superstructure, increased the angle of elevation of the guns, which increased the firing range, installed, at least slightly, but anti-aircraft artillery.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 31 May 2021 13: 39
        +1
        Quote: Boris Epstein
        In fact, THREE battleships of the beginning of the century were made combat-ready: "October Revolution", "Marat" and "Sevastopol", renamed "Petropavlovsk" in 1942. They changed the superstructure, increased the angle of elevation of the guns, which increased the firing range, installed, at least slightly, but anti-aircraft artillery.

        In fact, all three LCs were modernized according to their own unique designs.
        "Marat" received the most economical version of modernization (even the boilers were not changed on it), "Oktyabrina" - a little more expensive.
        And only "Parizhanka" received a complete set, including enlarged HVN main battery and reinforced PTZ. Baltic LKs did not have increased UVN and bullets of PTZ.
  11. Khibiny Plastun
    Khibiny Plastun 29 May 2021 15: 43
    +5
    Yes, the level of scribbling on VO is rolling lower and lower. There is no comparison with what was before, but what interesting comments ... were ...
    To the author of this umm .. reading, read the series of articles about "Sevastopoli" by Andrey from Chelyabinsk, there was an analysis of this transition and the comments are very interesting.
  12. Looking for
    Looking for 29 May 2021 18: 05
    -2
    And where did you come from such a "whistleblower" Roman Ivanov. It seems that he got out quite recently. January 31, 2021, but he poured mud on our fleet, real Americans need years.
  13. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 29 May 2021 19: 10
    +1
    No wonder our battleships were not sent to the coast of Spain during the civil war there, there was nothing to send.

    The problem was with communication with our ships, it was at this time that long-distance radio communication with our ships, carrying equipment to the Republicans, was being worked out.
  14. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 29 May 2021 19: 29
    +12
    Unfortunately, the facts presented in the article do not correspond to reality.
    "Sevastopol" had problems with seaworthiness exactly until the moment when the bow attachment collapsed, which was invented in the USSR, was tested under the conditions of the Baltic, and which fully justified itself there. They did not think that LK would get into a strong storm with a completely different wavelength.
    1. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav 29 May 2021 21: 27
      -8
      Well, where did the Baltic LKs go to the Baltic and what about the wavelength of the sailor from the stove bryak
    2. Olezhek
      Olezhek 30 May 2021 06: 05
      0
      Unfortunately, the facts stated in the article do not correspond to reality.


      You are evil, unkind
      I read the article, I was empathized ... crying
      And you ruined everything.
  15. vladcub
    vladcub 30 May 2021 13: 22
    0
    "during the civil war there, our battleships did not send, there was nothing to send" the author once again demonstrated the lack of knowledge of the material. Only Italy and Germany openly helped Franco, while the Soviet Union concealed that it was helping Spain. If the author in the "scrap" carefully reads the documents, let him at least look at x / f: "Volunteers", "Officers", "Archive of Death", where it is openly mentioned that the Soviet Union is openly helping?
    Comrades, let the author read himself, but I am not delighted with him
  16. ecolog
    ecolog 31 May 2021 01: 02
    +3
    I am never a specialist (not even close) in shipbuilding, and who is more seaworthy, but correct me if I'm wrong, the respected author justifies the good seaworthiness of Sevastopol only by the fact that Derflinger went with low FODDER and nothing. And Hochseeflotte is like Caesar's wife - beyond suspicion.
    I have absolutely no desire to discredit our battleships, but let's proceed from the fact that our navies were not complete idiots and hardly dreamed of squadrons of dreadnoughts plowing the oceans. It was physically impossible to surpass Germany and Britain. This means that our few battleships, especially in the Baltic, against two dozen German dreadnoughts, this is not serious. This means that some defensive tactics were planned and no one dreamed of any squadron battle a la Tsushima.
    And what to dream of? Almost six years from foundation to commissioning. Compare with the performance characteristics of the battleship Iron Duke commissioned in the same year ... seaworthiness ... for what and against whom? For the Black Sea - the norms, for the Baltic, or rather, parts of it will also go. And then it is already redundant, both for financial reasons and for common sense. Against the Turks, and so it will come down, but it was clearly not planned to fight one-on-one with the fleet of the open sea.
    1. Senior seaman
      Senior seaman 1 June 2021 11: 24
      +1
      Quote: ecolog
      The respected author justifies the good seaworthiness of the "Sevastopol" only by the fact that the "Derflinger" supposedly went with low FODDER and nothing. And Hochseeflotte is like Caesar's wife - beyond suspicion.

      If you're talking about Andrey, then no.
      He fully agrees that the seaworthiness of the Baltic battleships is far from being the most outstanding, but he believes that this shortcoming is not critical.
      Quote: ecolog
      Compare with the performance characteristics of the battleship Iron Duke commissioned in the same year ...

      Any first-generation battleship looks pale compared to the Iron Duke.
  17. yehat2
    yehat2 1 June 2021 13: 55
    0
    the Turks had something similar - "Goeben", so they had nothing to fear.

    Goeben was significantly better protected.
  18. Frank Muller
    Frank Muller 7 June 2021 00: 33
    0
    And where did the author get the idea that the USSR was going to send heavy warships to Spain, covered by an unpredictable "citizen"? Read at least "On the distant meridian" by N.G. Kuznetsov, who was our naval advisor during the Spanish events (his pseudonym is "Don Lepanto"). Soviet deliveries to the republic in the fleet were limited to torpedo boats and the dispatch of military specialists. The latter had a particularly difficult time, being directly on the republican ships, where the positions of the anarchists were strong, who ignored discipline as remnants of the monarchist army. The republic's fleet consisted of: a battleship, 3 light cruisers, 14 destroyers and 6 numbered destroyers, 12 submarines, 6 sea gunboats, not counting auxiliary ships. In terms of power, it surpassed the rebel Navy, which had in its composition: a battleship, two heavy (being completed) and two light cruisers, a destroyer and half a dozen numbered destroyers, 9 gunboats and a dozen auxiliary ships. In addition, the presence of Soviet warships in the Mediterranean (the main naval theater of the Spanish war) meant an open violation of the officially declared non-interference in Spanish affairs, formally supported by the USSR, and a direct confrontation with the navy of fascist Italy, which openly supported the Franco regime. And, considering that at that time the Italian military fleet would have fought, in fact, at home and was the fifth in power in the world ... In general, there is room for the assumptions of historians. But not history that does not recognize the subjunctive mood.
    1. Aleksey Kuznetsov
      Aleksey Kuznetsov 3 September 2021 05: 31
      0
      And where did the author get the idea that the USSR was going to send heavy warships to Spain, covered by an unpredictable "citizen"?
      is an alternative history. wink laughing
  19. Usher
    Usher 4 August 2021 18: 13
    0
    The legend that the French were scared is worthy of "Wikipedia", in 1924 this morally obsolete battleship, and moreover requiring serious repairs, could have scared Romanians or Bulgarians
    And what did the French have? Nothing, from the word at all. An even poorer Brittany? And the "Turkish" "Goeben" also could not really do something, only the speed and armor were better. And that's not a fact.