Clippers of the Russian Imperial Navy

The year was 1855 and it was decided to build steam ships in Arkhangelsk to protect the Russian North:

“With the receipt of ... a theoretical drawing, for the construction of six clippers here, the breakdown on the plaza is done, the templates are prepared, the keels and stanchions are tied and straightened for the type-setting members of the forest. For laying clippers in the Great Admiralty, on three uncovered and one covered slipway the slipway blocks have been laid, as well as the old two slipways in the Middle Admiralty are serviceable and in them slipway blocks are also in place; Now the launching foundations are coming to an end, but the construction of the clippers itself must be suspended due to the lack of practical drawings. Notifying the Shipbuilding Department about this, I ask you to hurry by sending here practical drawings of the aforementioned clippers or corvettes and a drawing of their armament. "

There were many problems, primarily with steam engines, but they were solved, and in January 1855 six ships ("Robber", "Oprichnik", "Shooter", "Plastun", "Rider" and "Dzhigit") were laid in Arkhangelsk Admiralty. The ships came out pretty good:

“… The clipper has all the qualities of an excellent seaworthy vessel. Its stability and buoyancy are amazing: roll in fresh wind and full sails up to 4? degrees; with great ocean waves there was no jolt either in the bow or in the stern ... The full wind stroke is satisfactory: with the reef-topsail wind, the clipper ran 11 1/2 knots; on the sidewind, one should expect the best ... Turning through the fordewind is good and calm, but the overstag is difficult and not always correct. This disadvantage can be positively attributed to the sails ... I suppose the sails to be resolutely ferried and to make the fore and a sail, they would make it possible to always be confident in the overstag turns, and by increasing the area of ​​the sails, they would add the downwind speed ... "

But they did not have time for the Crimean War, and it was decided to use them in the Far East. The decision is the only reasonable - in Europe, a big war in the near future became impossible, and to train personnel for a new steam fleet was necessary. And it is better to prepare them on long voyages and in an environment close to combat. Although at first there was the Baltic, where the newly built sail-propeller ships went immediately after construction. And from there, from 1857 to 1859, they went to the Far East. The ships gave the impression:

“In all ports, foreign naval officers admired the outward appearance of the clippers ... The formation of bow lines is excellent, corvettes and clippers freely cut the water, do not undergo blows to the bow and rise easily into excitement. The Dzhigit, having two steam boilers, never yielded to other ships of the detachment with three boilers, meanwhile it took fuel for seven days, when other clippers have it for no more than four or five days. At 24 pounds of steam (1,68 atmospheres), the stroke was six knots (11,1 km / h), and at 45 (3,15 atmospheres) it reached eight to nine (14,8-16,7 km / h). Most of the passage was done under sail. So, for "Dzhigit" in a 321-day voyage from Kronstadt to the Gulf of Kastri, out of 190 running days, only 15 days 9 hours fell on the machine, which worked mainly in calm and low wind. "

But their life turned out to be short and rather tragic. Two of the six ships perished - the Plastun in the Baltic in 1860 from the explosion of the cruise chamber, and the Oprichnik in the Indian Ocean simply disappeared, there are many versions, but the truth went to the bottom along with the ship. The rest of the four returned to another Kronstadt and to the other Baltic fleet, the steam and armored fleet, where there was no place for clippers of this type. Yes, and there was no money for repairs after the most difficult service and campaign, the fleet had a priority in the monitors for the defense of St. Petersburg. As a result, in 1866, very young ships were handed over to the port, and from 1867 they began to be excluded. One was disassembled, two became targets for mines and shells, the only "Shooter" became a hulk and held out in this capacity until 1878.

The ships left, but the beginning of a new class of ships in our fleet was laid.

Second series

The second series of sail-screw clippers turned out to be happier, maybe because they were "foreigners" in construction, but they were built and designed slowly and not during the war, or maybe because the experience of operating ships of this class has already accumulated ...

"Gaidamak", built in England in 1860, immediately went to the Far East under the command of Lieutenant Peshchurov.

"On September 4, 1860 in the Nartfleet Admiralty, in the presence of Count Putyatin, the screw clipper" Gaidamak "with a capacity of 1000 tons and a machine of 250 forces ordered by the Russian government was launched."

The path was not easy: Brazil - Batavia - Hong Kong - Shanghai, and then there was a service. Exploration of the Peter the Great Bay and the discovery of the Gaydamak Bay, the exploration of the Nakhodka Bay, a trip to Sakhalin, where in Douai, when loading coal, the clipper was stranded. They wanted to write off the ship, but in the end they rescued and the service continued.

Trips to China, Siam, the Philippines, the future writer Stanyukovich served on the clipper. Popov's Pacific expedition to the United States to support the North against the South (in fact, against England).

“In the event that any corsair, equipped by the outraged states, appears in the port, the senior commander present in the port makes a signal to the other ships 'prepare for battle and separate the pairs.' If the corsair who burst into the port directly starts hostile actions, then the senior of the commanders must immediately give a signal to the other ships "to un-anchor according to their ability" and attack the disturber of public peace. "

The Clipper traveled many miles and many countries, but the "Haidamaks" returned home only in 1864. He returned for repairs and training, so that in 1869 he again went to the Far East. The second trip was much more boring and calmer, for three years the clipper was essentially used as a transport.

There was also a third campaign, and research in the Polar region, and a new expedition to the United States, and the inclusion of Lesovsky in the squadron in 1880. Five years later, one of the most famous Russian ships of the 19th century was decommissioned.

The second clipper "Abrek", built in Finland, largely repeated the fate of "Gaydamak", with the exception of the final. After the disbandment of Lesovsky's squadron, the clipper remained in the Far East, guarded the fur seal fisheries, then served as a block ship in Vladivostok. Indirectly, the hull took part in the Russo-Japanese War, serving as a heater for a submarine detachment. The blockchain was disassembled only in 1908.

The "Horseman", under the command of Lieutenant-Commander Birilyov, turned out to be less happy, having started his service with a run aground during tests in the Baltic. In 1866, he also went to the Far East, where he served on Sakhalin. The second trip - exploration of the coast of Chukotka and the Second American Expedition. Decommissioned in 1881 in the Baltic.

Third episode

"Kamushki" ("Pearl", "Almaz", "Izumrud", "Yakhont") were built in Russia in 1860-63. A little more displacement, higher speed under steam (13 knots), higher range and more modern weapons. Their fate was also typical for ships of that time - campaigns to the Far East were replaced by exercises and repairs in the Baltic, in order to go to the Far East again. The "Izumrud" clipper, who took part in the Miklouho-Maclay expedition, became famous. The ships were reliable even after many years of service.

“The clipper is completely intact, has no leaks, not a single bolt has moved, not a single groove has come apart; after Kronstadt he was never caulked; until now, not only has it not had any serious damage, but not even a single fox rail has broken on it ... A beautiful drawing and a good and conscientious construction of it, of course, play the first role here. "

But their time has passed, and no one began to spend money on the modernization and rearmament of wooden cruisers. Despite the quality of construction and the reliability of the mechanisms, completely different ships already reigned in the sea.

Fourth series

Ten years after the pebbles, the construction of the second generation clippers - of the "Cruiser" type, began. They were perfect for their class, once again proving the benefits of serial construction and the smooth development of a ship type from type to type, but they were late. This is not the fault of the designers: at the time the construction of the Cruiser began, such ships were still relevant, by the time the Oprichnik was completed, in 1881 they were already outdated. In that era, when the ships were still outdated on the stocks, the result, in principle, was normal, the more they brought benefits to the fleet, and two of them took part in the Russian-Japanese war, on roles, of course, tertiary, but still in quality combat ships.

“The length of the clipper at the cargo waterline was 63,25 m, width 10,1 m, draft 4,1 m forward, 4,4 m stern. Displacement 1334 tons. Machine with a capacity of 250/1500 (nominal / indicator) liters. with. The maximum speed under steam reached 12 knots. At full speed, with a coal reserve of 200-220 tons, the clipper could travel up to 1600 miles. Clipper sailing armament of the bark type (with "dry", that is, without yarns, mizzen-mast). The mast weight is about 55 tons, the sail area is 1230 sq. m. "

They were already conceived of steel, but in the end only three became such - expensive and corrosion, which they still did not know how to effectively deal with, and these cruisers are designed for long-distance cruises and service where there are no normal bases and are not expected. As a result, after the campaigns to the Far East, these ships became training ships, although their page in stories fleet they painted in bright colors. For example, the "Robber" made two trips around the world, participated in the founding of Anadyr, visited England ... The "Rider" went to the homeland of this class of ships - the Russian North, where he fought against poachers and explored the local waters. Vestnik had the same tasks in 1893.

By 1904, there were two clippers in Port Arthur - "Dzhigit" and "Robber", in the rank of training ships. For obvious reasons, the bright page long outdated clippers, renamed to fear enemies, were not included in the second rank cruisers, but their sailors and guns fought on land, and the hulls themselves were flooded when the fortress was surrendered.

The rest were quietly written off, the lead "Cruiser" served the longest, as a transport "Volkhov", and then it lasted until 1925 as a block ship. The rest left earlier, like the era that gave rise to sail-propeller-driven ships.

Mark on history

For relatively little money, Russia, at the most difficult moment in its maritime history of the 19th century, received steam ocean-going ships, which trained the seamen of a new generation. Serial construction was worked out with improvements to one type of ship, the practice of ocean voyages appeared and whole generations of sailors who were at sea at home. Clippers contributed both military (containment of England by the threat of a cruising war), and scientific - the study of the coast of Russia. The most successful type of ships of that time in terms of price-quality ratio and, probably, the most useful both in terms of results and miles traveled. It is especially pleasing that with the exception of one - they are all products of Russian shipyards. Alas, it was no longer possible to work out the continuity of the types of cruisers of the new generation, which turned out to be what it turned out for Russia.

Comments

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

in January 1855 six ships ("Robber", "Oprichnik", "Shooter", "Plastun", "Rider" and "Dzhigit") were laid down in the Arkhangelsk Admiralty.

Then two of them, half a century later, will perish in Port Arthur.

[faiver]

Have you read the article carefully? In Port Arthur, ships of the fourth series will perish to the ships laid down in the Arkhangelsk Admiralty, which have nothing to do with, and now our warships do not serve for half a century, let alone the wooden clippers of the 19th century.

[Crowe]

Thanks for the story! Regarding the death of "Plastun" - and today in the "Plastun" case there are much more questions than answers ... Having received a report from the head of the detachment about the tragedy, General-Admiral Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolayevich approved a special commission to investigate the causes of the clipper disaster. Vice-Admiral Panfilov, a member of the Admiralty, a hero of the Sevastopol defense, was appointed its chairman. The Commission of Inquiry was charged with:
"1. Consider the report of the head of the detachment about the death of the clipper and all the following attachments to it.
2. According to the content of the information in mind, explain and bring to the accuracy all the details that accompanied the death of the Plastun clipper and the rescue of the survivors.
3. Pay strict attention to the reasons why an explosion in the clipper's cruise chamber could have followed, and bring this subject through examination into as perfect clarity as possible.
4. Decide your opinion on the above.
5. Forward the investigative case and opinion to the Fleet Department of the Auditor General.
The gunpowder explosion of the Plastun's cruise chamber occurred at 5 hours 8 minutes in the afternoon on August 18, while sailing at the point with coordinates: latitude 57 degrees 45 minutes, longitude 20 degrees 5 minutes. After the explosion, the clipper stayed on the water for no more than three minutes and went to the bottom. The explosion killed: the commander of the clipper, Baron Disterlo, senior officer Lieutenant Rosenberg, Lieutenant Gavrilov, Warrant Officer Lehman, warrant officers of the corps of naval navigators Evdokimov and Kochetov, free mechanic Helm and 68 lower ranks. To help the dead, three boats, a whaleboat and a four-row boat were immediately launched, which saved Lieutenant Litke, warrant officers Knoring and Berezin, junior doctor Johanson and 30 sailors. Five rescued had serious burns and bruises, as a result of which one of the sailors soon died.

[Crowe]

In his answers to the questions asked by the chairman of the commission, the commander of the ship detachment showed the following: during a meeting with Plastun in Cherbourg, he examined the clipper, finding him in a state "capable of satisfying the most demanding vanity." After inspection, Popov ordered Lieutenant Disterlo to transfer to other corvettes most of the gunpowder, which was running out there. After the transfer, according to the report of the Plastun commander, only six poods of gunpowder remained on the clipper. While staying in Copenhagen, Popov made an artillery review to "Plastun", inviting all officers from both corvettes to study there. This two-hour show also showed a good material content at Plastun and a high level of skill of the team. However, a number of comments from the detachment commander were quite serious. There were no pampushi in the kryuyt-chamber (special slippers, which are supposed to be worn while in the kruyt-chamber, in order to avoid striking a spark). According to the clipper commander's report, the old donuts are worn out. In the corner of the cruise chamber, a bunch of combat missiles was found, which were to be stored in special suitcase boxes far from gunpowder. In addition, powder dust was found on the floor in the hook-chamber. Pampushi Popov ordered to sew, remove the missiles, and wash the floor in the pit-chamber. The commander of Plastun himself, Lieutenant Disterlo Popov, described himself as a serviceman and pedant, whose notions about the charter were such that he demanded the fulfillment of not only its meaning, but also the letter. "I never wish I had a better companion!" - said Popov. However, everyone understood that in this situation he simply could not say anything else about the clipper commander, because he personally nominated him for a command position during the voyage, and therefore all claims to the late clipper commander automatically turned claims to the living detachment commander.

[Crowe]

The surviving Lieutenant Litke testified that he had succeeded Baron Knoring at four in the morning, less than ten minutes before the explosion. Upon intercession, he received a report that the senior officer was in the cruise cell and was observing the work carried out there.
The artillery conductor Fyodorov, who was also rescued, said that he participated with other sailors in moving the boxes from the cruise chamber to the wardroom. Having finished his work, he went to ask if anything else needed to be moved, and at the entrance to the cruise chamber he met the keeper of the cruise chamber, conductor Savelyev. The latter told Fedorov that nothing else was needed and that he himself was going to report to the auditor about the order in the cruise chamber. As soon as Fedorov went down to the engine room, there was an explosion. Therefore, Fedorov believes that at the time of the explosion, only Savelyev could have been in the cruise chamber. Suddenly, special attention of investigators was attracted by the phrase of non-commissioned officer Fedorov about the long-standing conflict between the conductor Savelyev and the then senior officer, Lieutenant Disterlo. It happened while the clipper was staying in Hakodate. Then Disterlo ordered to put rockets and grenades in the cruise chamber, Savelyev opposed this, saying that it was not allowed to store ammunition there. To which Disterlo stamped his foot and shouted: "Go away!" At the same time, Fedorov added that, however, Disterlo always acted this way when he listened to the reports of his sailors.
In addition, in the course of further interrogation, it was revealed that there was much more gunpowder on board the Plastun than the six pounds reported to the detachment commander by Lieutenant Disterlo. According to the testimony of the sailor Kilek, during his stay in Nikolaevsk, four barrels of gunpowder were additionally delivered on board the clipper, which remained standing in the aisle of the cruise chamber. This was also confirmed by other sailors from among the rescued.

[Crowe]

The nature of the explosion was described by both sailors and officers in different ways, to some it seemed like a very strong shot, to others - like a lingering noise, to the third - just a deafening crackle. Sailor Alekseev, whom the explosion found near the foremast, generally described it as a kind of shrill squeal. Yunga Mirtov said that it seemed to him that shock tubes began to burst just before the shot. The same idea was expressed by Lieutenant Litke, who put forward a version that in the process of moving the boxes in the cruise chamber, the sailors could accidentally press the box on one of the tubes, and that could burst and ignite the gunpowder scattered on the deck, then detonation and explosion followed.
In order to fully understand Litke's version, the commission was forced to conduct several experiments. However, after they were held, the general opinion of all agreed that such a course of events was too unlikely and almost impossible, because accidentally crushing the pipe with a box was simply unrealistic.
It was then that the first assumption arose about the possibility of a deliberate detonation of the ship. In a subsequent poll, all but one of Plastun's crew members rejected this possibility. That one was NCO Fedorov. He said that after much deliberation, he came to the conclusion that the explosion was the result of the deliberate actions of the keeper of the cruise chamber, conductor Savelyev. According to Fedorov, Savelyev was very angry with the commander. The treatment of the team by the clipper command was generally very bad, but it was Saveliev who especially got it. He was literally hated by both the commander and the senior officer. It got to the point that both of them even beat him often.

[Crowe]

Immediately 18 people showed that the commander and the senior officer beat Savelyev in the face every day, put him on the shrouds, put him on the tank, and flogged him with molts. Boatswain Larionov admitted that, on the orders of the commander, he personally beat the keeper of the boat with molts on more than one occasion.
However, the sailors spoke only positively about all other officers, except for the commander and the senior officer.
On this, the commission completed its work. The case of the death of the clipper threatened to grow into a case of the order that reigned on the ships of the Russian fleet and the humiliating and disenfranchised position of the sailors. Similar proceedings have already gone beyond the competence of the commission. It seems that neither the members of the commission nor its chairman, Vice-Admiral Panfilov, had any particular desire to deal with this topic. In the "Final Opinion" submitted to the Admiral-General, the commission stated the approximate course of events. Noted the possibility of a version with crushed shock tubes. As for the version of the conductor Savelyev's deliberate detonation of the cruise-camera, the commission wrote down the following about this: “Savelyev was a lazy, careless and not entirely sober man. The severity of the commander and senior officer often reached the point that, in addition to corporal punishment, they put him on the shrouds, tied him to a bowsprit and beat him in the face, so that a rare day could pass him without offense. It is clear that such a life for three years could bring a person to despair; just before the explosion, a senior officer ordered him to go to the tank for punishment at the end of the work. Savelyev, for some time, indulged in excessive use of wine, and, as it must be believed, in consolation from the punishment he was experiencing, on that day also drank a double portion of rum; and although after that five hours had already passed, but, working in a stuffy and cramped kruyt-cell, driven to the extreme by beatings and threats, he, under the influence of the impending punishment, could, with his spinelessness and cowardice, in a moment of annoyance decide to put an end to everything - to take his own life along with all his colleagues on the clipper. It is impossible, however, not to notice that the majority of his colleagues reject the possibility of this intent, assumed only by the conductor Fedorov. "
Since the point about the conductor Savelyev was the last one, therefore, the commission unobtrusively made it clear that it was leaning towards the version of the deliberate blowing up of Plastun.

[Crowe]

Having finished the work, the commission of Vice-Admiral Panfilov transferred all the materials to the Naval General Auditorium (the prototype of the current military prosecutor's office). There, having carefully studied the papers, the question was posed: could the explosion have been caused by any design flaws in the cruise camera itself? The study of this issue was entrusted to the famous navigator Rear Admiral Unkovsky. He studied the clippers of the same type as the "Plastun" and interrogated the builder of the "Plastun" staff captain Vasilevsky. However, no serious flaws in the construction of the clipper cruiser were identified. But it turned out that the true state of affairs on "Plastun" was very different from the one presented. Contrary to the requirements of the Naval Regulations, the commander and senior officer should inspect the cruise chambers once every four months and each time after a strong pitching, on Plastun they were examined once a year, no one instructed or checked the sailors involved in working in the cruise chamber. there were no periodic inspections of the safety of the lanterns, and they remembered about the unfortunate donuts. In addition, the fact was revealed that the devil knows what was kept in the plastun's cruise chamber: not only rockets with grenades, but also purchased beans for the galley. During one of the storms, they blocked up the front door so that they could not open it for a long time. The auditors were also surprised by the complete ignorance of the state of naval artillery by the surviving officers, while the chiefs of watch should have mastered this issue.
The audience general, on the whole, fully agreed with the conclusions of the commission, admitting that he too is inclined to the version of the deliberate explosion of the clipper by conductor Savelyev, although in the absence of proper control over the contents of the ship's cruise chamber by the command, anything could happen there. Due to the lack of specific facts about the owner of the cruise chamber, it was determined: “In the absence of any suspicion of Savelyev in a deliberate explosion and in the absence of any indication of such an intention on his part, the Marine General Auditorium, bearing in mind that not only the fate of the defendant, but also the memory of the deceased person should be dear to the judges, he decided: to eliminate any suspicion of the deceased conductor Savelyev in committing a deliberate explosion. " In the end, the audience general came to the conclusion that “the omissions and illegal actions discovered from the investigation file should be attributed solely to the fault of the clipper commander and senior officers - lieutenants Baron Disterlo and Rosenberg, for which, in terms of their importance, they should have been betrayed the military court, but, after the death of both, the conclusion will not be made. "

[Crowe]

The final act read:
"1. The death of the "Plastun" clipper is attributed to misfortune due to negligence, as a result of the disorder on it in the maintenance of the artillery unit.
2. Since the perpetrators of these riots died in the ensuing explosion, then the present investigation case should be left without further consequences, and the losses at the cost of the clipper and all the state property that was on it and at the lower ranks, as well as the costs used in the examination of the case, should be taken into account treasury.
3. The officers, medic and lower ranks who escaped from the clipper "Plastun", as if they had nothing to do with the death of the clipper, should not be credited with ... officers half-year, but lower ranks annual salaries and, in addition, issue uniforms to the lower ranks, which one to follow will".

Having looked through the papers presented to him, Alexander II inscribed on top of the final act: "Therefore, to be." No one else has ever investigated what happened at Plastun.
Shigin Vladimir Vilenovich "Sails torn to shreds. Unknown catastrophes of the Russian sailing fleet in the XVIII-XIX centuries"

[volodimer]

Thank you for such a detailed story about Plastun. It would be possible to issue a separate article. Sincerely!

[Alex 1970]

Regarding the death of the "Oprichnik", there was an interesting article in "Technology of Youth" in the late 80s, a version of a "gentle wave" hitting the clipper's stern was put forward, which is why it sank.

[Undecim]

Wooden steam cruising ships of the 50-60s of the XIX century - this is a fresh and very interesting topic for the site authors-marine painters who cannot tear themselves away from their endless Tsushima "jam".
After all, there were only 21 sail-screw clippers in the Russian Imperial Navy.
As for the division into "series" and "types" - these are today's conventions, adopted for the convenience of description. They were not so classified by their contemporaries.

1. Clipper of the 1st series (Arkhangelsk). 2. Clipper of the 2nd series. 3. "Gaydamak" 4. Clipper of the 3rd series.
5. Clipper of the 4th series. 6. "Bully".

As a result, in 1866, very young ships were handed over to the port, and from 1867 they began to be excluded. One was disassembled, two became targets for mines and shells

On July 2, 1869, the body of the "Dzhigit" clipper without masts and bowsprit, with the dismantled aft wheelhouse and with the propeller removed, was flooded by artillery fire during maneuvers on the Transund roadstead.
Currently, the fully preserved hull of the ship is at a depth of about 13 meters. With a high degree of probability, it can be assumed that a steam engine with boilers has also survived. The lifting of the ship for subsequent restoration does not present any particular difficulties with the current ship-lifting technique.

[Undecim]

This is how a contemporary of "Dzhigit", the Danish sail-and-screw wooden frigate "Jylland", looks like today.

[BAI]

Something the speed is not impressive: 12-13 knots.
We are looking at the "Cutty Sark" clipper built in 1869. Speed ​​- 21 knots. Took part in the Second World War. Sailing away from a German submarine. He is still alive, as a museum.

[BAI]

And this is he in the sea.

[Alex 1970]

Cutty Sark is an exception to the rule, the same American "super frigates", gave out no more than 9 knots under optimal conditions, while the average speed was within 6,5 knots. So it's quite normal speed under steam. But with the preservation of ships as museums, yes, our trouble. How many ships have gone to "needles", after all, these are not only possible museums, it can also be the choice of the life path of thousands of boys when visiting such museums. I was in Novorossiysk on Kutuzov, an adult is breathtaking from such a colossus, but imagine the boys!

[Evil troll]

The Cutty Sark was originally built for the tea race, not the war.

[mmaxx]

The fact that he once developed such speed does not mean that it has always been that way.
And the sailing equipment is worth seeing. No car, no screw. The cargo was carried light.

[mmaxx]

And they burned it above the overhead line. In 2006 or 2007. I didn't have time to look at it then.

[Senior seaman]

So "Cutty Sark" is really a clipper with, one might say, the crown of sailing equipment. "Vijhammer". And Russian clippers are such only in name. The first series were generally haffle schooners, then they were converted into barges. From the point of view of control, this scheme is the simplest, but one should not expect super-speed about it.

[Markus wolf]

Very interesting, but catastrophically few illustrations ...