Combat ships. Cruisers. Possibly the best, but very expensive

68

Very often in my stories I say that “the ship is not without flaws,” “it could have been better,” and so on. A sort of letting go of grumpy bubbles from under the water. In fact, of course, I adore these contradictory ships very dearly. But cruisers are a wonderful class, and most importantly - beautiful and independent. Not like trough-carriers and other floating hulks that require protection and defense.

Whoever has been looking at this cycle for a long time (and at least 52 articles have already been published), he probably already concluded that there are ships that I treat with more respect than others. These are definitely "Hippers" and "Mogami". Moreover, "Mogami" in its light hypostasis was even more interesting than in the heavy one.



And now there are still others in the company. Two of the finest British light cruisers, two jewels of the royal shipbuilding industry. According to their characteristics, they are definitely the top world-class cruisers, and there was probably only one drawback - a huge price. Comparable to the cost of building a heavy cruiser. But first things first, as always.

And - we meet, "Edinburgh" and "Belfast".


Scotsman and Irishman. Yes, only two ships were built. Their fate turned out to be different, but we can only say for sure that they were just beautiful ships. "Edinburgh" took part in the sinking of "Bismarck", "Belfast" - a participant in the battle in which the "Scharnhorst" was sunk. But about the track record in due time, let's go in order.

And the order was as follows: after getting their hands on the development and construction of the series of cruisers "Linder", "Arethusa", "Sydney" and "Southampton", British shipbuilders came to the crown - the series "Town", ships not without flaws, but very, very good ...

In principle, the "Towns" came very close to the heavy cruisers of the "County" in terms of the power of weapons and power plant, and even surpassed them in terms of armor.

The arms race was already in full swing in the world at that time, and the main shake-up was made by the Japanese, who created the "Mogami", which at that time consisted of 15 155-mm guns and had an armored belt 102 mm thick and armored cellars 140 mm thick.


"Mogami" is still in the form of a light cruiser

The Americans responded with "Brooklyn", which had even thicker armor (belt from 127 mm to 82, turret forehead 165 mm, barbets 152 mm, and so on) and armament of 15 152-mm guns.

Combat ships. Cruisers. Possibly the best, but very expensive

In general, given the higher rate of fire of 155-mm and 152-mm guns in comparison with 203-mm, the weight of the salvo of light cruisers approached the heavy ones.

In general, such an alignment of forces did not suit the British at all, and therefore it was decided to convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into light ones so that they could compete with the Mogs and Brooklyns. It is clear that with "Brooklyn" on paper, but the Japanese could easily become opponents.

But in order for the new ships to be comparable to the American and Japanese, it was required to bring the number of guns to 15. But with this there were problems. Five towers, as on Japanese or American cruisers, could not be placed on British ships, there would be a problem with docking, since the British docks could not accept ships longer than 188 meters. And the five-turret cruiser performed by British shipbuilders did not turn out to be shorter than 195 meters. A little, some 7-8 meters, but this is enough to start problems.

There was a project to equip ships with four towers, 4 barrels in each, which ended up giving 16 guns. However, in this case, too, the cruisers "eroded" in width, which entailed an increase in length, armor, and required other elevators for ammunition. Well, the new towers did not fit into the allotted volumes of the ships in any way, they had to be raised to the level of the forecastle. On the one hand, this worsened stability, on the other hand, it gave some advantage when shooting, especially when there was roughness at sea.

But in the end, the four-gun towers were not built. More precisely, it was not possible to solve the problem of dispersing shells with a full salvo. Powder gases from closely spaced barrels (just over a meter) negatively affected the projectiles and greatly increased dispersion. It was necessary to increase the distance between the trunks, and this entailed an increase in the width of the body.


In the end, they still decided to return to the usual three-gun barrels. But the enlarged deck made it possible to lay in the project at once 6 paired installations of 102-mm universal guns instead of the usual 4 and increase the fuel reserve by more than 300 tons, which increased the cruising range.

The use of standard towers made it possible to spend the freed up weight on armor and other useful things. The conversion began in 1936 and took quite a long time. It was necessary to reduce the artillery cellars, re-arrange all control posts, transferring them under the armored belt and armored deck, and design the box-shaped protection of the cellars.

102-mm anti-aircraft guns were smashed along the entire length of the ship, the four-barreled 40-mm "pom-poms" were replaced with eight-barreled ones and moved to the second chimney.


Belfast was laid down at Belfast, Edinburgh at Wallsend in December 1936. The "godmother" of "Belfast" was the wife of Prime Minister Chamberlain. "Edinburgh" entered service first, July 6, 1939, "Belfast" - August 3 of the same year.

Structurally, these ships did not differ much from the "Towns". The main difference from the "Town" series consisted in a different arrangement of boiler rooms and engine rooms and equipment in front of them with ammunition storage for 102-mm guns. Plus, the location of the pipes was changed to reduce smoke pollution on the bridges. And the cruisers acquired very characteristic and recognizable silhouettes.


In general, the ships turned out to be adequate in terms of stability and seaworthiness, however, the raised main turret towers still affected the stability of the ships, especially when the fuel from the bottom tanks was consumed.


Therefore, it was recommended to fill the vacated reservoirs with seawater. But the pitching on these cruisers was surprisingly smoother.

Reservation


The cruisers had an armor belt 114 mm thick, which covered the hull between the 26th and 238th frames. The belt dropped 91 cm below the waterline and rose to the level of the main deck, and in the area of ​​the power plant to the upper deck.

The armored deck had a thickness of 51 mm, in the area of ​​the artillery cellars, the thickness increased to 76 mm.

The steering mechanisms were enclosed in an armored box 25 mm thick, and the same 51 mm armored deck covered it from above.

The towers were armored with sheets 102 mm thick in the frontal part and 51 mm on the sides and top. The barbets of the towers were also 51 mm thick.

Universal guns had shields 13 mm thick, superstructures were armored with sheets from 6,5 to 16 mm thick. Rangefinder posts and crossings had 13 mm thick armor.

In general, it turned out that the Edinburgh and Belfast had more significant booking than even the heavy cruisers of the County type.

Power point


The main power plant consisted of four Parsons turbo-gear units and four three-collector steam boilers of the Admiralty type. The layout of the installation is echelon. Each TZA consisted of two high and low pressure turbines, which worked on one gearbox.

With a design power of 82 hp the maximum speed was supposed to be 500 knots. On trials "Edinburgh" showed the capacity of the machines 32,5 81 hp. and reached a speed of 630 knots with a standard displacement of 32,73 10 tons. The cruising range was calculated to be 550 miles at a cruising speed of 12 knots with a fuel supply of 200 tons.

The standard test displacement was 10 tons. The cruising range is 550 miles at a 12-knot economic speed with a fuel supply of 200 tons of oil.


Crew


The peacetime crew consisted of 781 people. The flagship had a crew of 881 people, of whom 36 were officers and persons equated to them (such as a chaplain and a flagship doctor).

The living conditions were very good. Senior officers lived in single cabins, junior officers in double cabins. The sailors lived in cabins for 12-24 people and slept in hanging bunks.

The cruisers were equipped with everything necessary for long voyages: an infirmary, medical offices, a church, a bakery, a ship's shop, and showers.

weaponry


The main caliber of the cruisers consisted of 12 Mk-XXIII 152-mm guns in four three-gun turrets.


All three barrels in the towers were located in individual cradles, and the middle gun was carried back 760 mm so that the gases when fired from it did not affect the shells flying out of neighboring barrels during a volley so much.

The guns could be loaded at elevation angles from -5 to +12,5 degrees. The rate of fire of the guns was limited by the rate of supply of shells and charges from the cellars, namely 12 rounds per minute.

The main caliber fire was controlled by two directors located on the stern and bow superstructures. The information was sent to the central fire control post and processed on a mechanical computer.

The 152-mm Mk-XXIII cannon sent a projectile weighing up to 14,5 kg at a distance of up to 23 km with an initial speed of 841 m / s.

Flak


Long-range anti-aircraft artillery consisted of 12 102-mm guns in twin mounts.


The guns sent shells weighing 15,88 kg at a range of up to 18 km and 11,89 km in height with an initial speed of 854 m / s.

The estimated rate of fire was 12 rounds per minute, but in real combat it was lower and was also limited by the rate of ammunition supply from the cellars.

At medium range, two eight-barreled Vickers Mk-IVA Pom-pom 40-mm assault rifles operated.


The initial velocity of the projectile is 732 m / s, the firing range is 6 220 m, the height reach is 3960 m. The effective rate of fire is 98 rounds per barrel.

The closest anti-aircraft armament consisted of two 12,7 mm Vickers four-barreled machine-gun mounts.


Mine torpedo armament


The ships were equipped with two three-tube torpedo tubes of 533-mm caliber.


Ammunition consisted of 12 torpedoes, 6 spare torpedoes were stored in a special armored room between the torpedo tubes. Armor thickness 16 mm.

The cruisers' anti-submarine armament consisted of Mk-VII depth charges. Six bombs were on the rails on the upper deck in combat readiness, and 15 spare bombs were in a special room on the starboard side.

Aircraft Armament


The cruisers were equipped with a 1-meter long D-28H powder catapult with a Supermarine "Walrus" seaplane.


Two more of his brothers were housed in two hangars in the bow superstructure. Two 7-ton electric cranes located behind the catapult along the sides served to lift the aircraft aboard.

Upgrades


Naturally, they worked very actively on the ships, modernizing them to meet the requirements of the time. A special feature of the ships was the primary equipping of them with radars. Edinburgh received its first Type 279 radar in the first half of 1940.

In 1941, the cruiser's air defense was reinforced by installing 6 single-barreled 20-mm Oerlikon assault rifles.

In March 1942, the Type 279 radar was dismantled and three were installed instead: Type 284, 285 and 273. In this regard, "Edinburgh" became one of the best ships fleet... British radars, I must say, were only slightly worse than American ones, but they were superior to similar devices created in other countries.

"Belfast" was very radically modernized during the renovation, which was done after the cruiser was blown up by a mine in 1940. Anti-torpedo bullets were installed on the sides, which increased the width and draft of the cruiser (up to 20,22 m and 7 m, respectively) and reduced the speed to 30,5 knots. But it was clearly worth it.

In the course of this repair / modernization, the installations of 12,7-mm machine guns were removed and instead of them, 5 double-barreled and 4 single-barreled installations of 20-mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft machine guns were installed.
In addition to machine guns, five radar stations were installed, types 281, 282, 284, 285 and 273.

In June 1943, anti-aircraft armament was strengthened by 4 single-barreled Oerlikon submachine guns, a year later, in May 1944, instead of one twin installation, 6 single-barreled submachine guns appeared.

In 1944, during another repair, the Belfast lost two twin mounts of 102-mm guns and eight single-barreled Erlikons. Instead, they installed 4 quad and 4 single-barreled 40-mm Vickers Mk-IVA anti-aircraft guns. The catapult was dismantled and everything was removed aviation property, removed radars of types 273,281 and 284, and instead installed radars of types 281b, 274, 277, 293 and 268.

In August 1945, 2 more twin installations of "Erlikon" were removed and 5 single-barreled "Bofors" of 40-mm caliber were installed, two of them with "Boffin" power drives.

During the post-war modernization "Belfast" lost all small-caliber anti-aircraft artillery, instead of which were installed 4 single-barreled and 6 twin 40-mm Bofors "with servos and modern CRBFD fire control systems. The 102mm gun mounts were also equipped with servos and the latest MRS-3 control systems.

New radar equipment was installed:
- airspace control station type 960;
- station for determining the height of air targets, type 277Q;
- station for detecting surface targets type 992;
- navigation station type 974.

Only the Type 274 radar station remained unchanged, which provided data to the artillery directors.

Combat application


"Edinburgh"


The cruiser's combat service began in October 1939. Together with the Aurora and Southampton, Edinburgh searched for German raiders in the Atlantic.


Then "Edinburgh" as the flagship of the 2nd cruising squadron participated in escorting convoys to Norway.

In May 1940, "Edinburgh" became a participant in the hunt for the "Bismarck", in which it took the most direct part, plus it intercepted the German blockade breaker "Lei".

In July 1940, "Edinburgh" took part in escorting a large convoy to Malta with 65 thousand tons of various cargoes. Then the cruiser was again sent to the north, where she was involved in escorting convoys to the ports of the USSR.


The first convoy for Edinburgh was convoy PQ-6. The convoy arrived in Arkhangelsk without loss. The cruiser left for Great Britain with a return convoy QP-4. After scheduled repairs, the cruiser entered the PQ-14 convoy. As part of this convoy, only one ship was lost, but 16 transports were forced to return due to difficult weather.

Then, in April 1942, the epic began, which made the "Edinburgh" such a famous ship. Before going to sea on the return route, 93 boxes of gold with a total weight of 5,5 tons were loaded onto the cruiser. It was payment by the United States and Great Britain for the delivered military cargo outside the Lend-Lease framework.

On April 28, Edinburgh, escorted by the destroyers Forsyth and Forester, sailed to sea as part of the escort of convoy QP-11. The convoy consisted of 13 transports, the cruiser itself, 6 British destroyers, 4 corvettes, an armed trawler, minesweepers, as well as the Soviet destroyers Thundering and Crushing.


On April 30, Edinburgh was sighted by U-456. The cruiser headed the convoy in a wide anti-submarine zigzag. The German boat maneuvered for a long time, trying to take the correct position for the attack and eventually fired a three-torpedo salvo at the cruiser. Two of the three torpedoes hit, one in the aft and the other in the central. The stern was torn off along with the rudder and two propellers, the Edinburgh lost control and speed.


The crew was able to stop the flow of water, level the roll on board and localize damage. U-456 attempted a second attack, but was driven away by the destroyers. An attempt to take the cruiser in tow was unsuccessful, but the stubborn crew was able to start the turbines and, with the help of the two remaining propellers, give a course of about three knots.

The cruiser was steered by two destroyers with the help of wound tugs. There were about 250 miles to Murmansk that you could try to overcome. Over time, they were able to raise the speed to 8 knots.

On May 1, a convoy, from whose escort 5 warships departed, attacked German destroyers. There was a battle, as a result of which the Germans sank the Soviet steamer Tsiolkovsky and went to look for the damaged cruiser. And they found him on May 2.

Another battle took place. The practically immobilized cruiser, nevertheless, fought, and, moreover, did it with one second turret. Aft tower # 4 was jammed after the explosion of a torpedo, towers 1 and 3 simply did not see the enemy. Naturally, the fire control systems did not work. However, the level of training of the Edinburgh artillerymen allowed them not only to shoot exclusively at the rangefinder, but also to plant two shells in the destroyer Herman Sheman with the second salvo of tower No. 2.


The Sheman choked on the Edinburgh shells and stopped. Both engine rooms were disabled. Meanwhile, the Germans fired 8 torpedoes at the Edinburgh. The torpedo from the "Schumann" from the bow device did not hit the cruiser, but the torpedo from the Z-24 or Z-25 exploded on the left side of the ship.

The British destroyers Forester and Forsyth drove away the Germans, who removed the crew from the Schumann and finished it off. The British did the same, the crew of the Edinburgh switched to the convoy's minesweepers and the Forsyth finished off the cruiser with another torpedo.


The last minutes of the cruiser

Many researchers after the war "rolled" on the British sailors, saying that the cruiser could be saved. It's hard to judge, but I don't support these people. Three torpedoes are three torpedoes. Moreover, two British destroyers also had two German ones, who were not particularly in a hurry to leave the area. The Soviet destroyers left by the time the Germans arrived in Murmansk, they were running out of fuel. So - 2 x 2. In the conditions of the northern seas, with the enemy on the tail of the convoy, and even torpedo bombers flew in, and a German submarine ...

In general, it seems to me that the Edinburgh crew did everything they could in those conditions.


He did not let the cruiser sink, tried to reach Murmansk, fatally damaged a German destroyer ... I believe that the conscience of the sailors of the "Edinburgh" is clear. Moreover, the crew lost 57 people killed and about 30 wounded. And then they raised the gold anyway.

Belfast


The Irishman started the war on September 8, 1939, when she went to sea in search of German ships. But success came only on October 9, when the cruiser intercepted the German liner "Cap Norte" and the Norwegian dry cargo ship "Tai Ying" with cargo for Germany in the Atlantic. The ships were sent to British ports

On November 21, 1939, a German bottom magnetic mine exploded at the exit from the Firth of Forth near the Belfast. The cruiser lost speed and numerous compartments were flooded. The Belfast was towed to Rosyth, where it was found that the damage was significant. Deformation of the hull, displacement of the keel, destruction of frames.


On November 4, 1940, Belfast was expelled from the fleet and put in for repairs, which lasted until December 1942. On December 8, the cruiser returned to service and was sent north to guard the Arctic convoys.

During 1943, he took part in escorting convoys JW-53, JW-54A, JW-54B, participated in mine laying SN-123B and SN-123C, covered minelayers.

On August 15, 1943, Belfast was honored with a visit by King George VI.


In December 1943, "Belfast" was part of the cover of the convoy JW-55B together with the battleship "Duke of York" and the cruisers "Norfolk", "Sheffield", "Jamaica".


It was Belfast's radar that on December 26 discovered the Scharnhorst, which was heading for the convoy. At that time, there were only Belfast and Norfolk next to the convoy, which went towards the German ship and opened fire. The deal was so-so, but luck was on the side of the British sailors. The Sheffield's shell knocked out the German battleship's forward radar, and it retreated.

Everyone knows what happened next. The Scharnhorst stubbornly climbed on the convoy, the British cruisers stubbornly repulsed its attacks with shells and torpedoes. When the Duke of York approached, everything became sad for the Scharnhorst, and she sank, pierced by British shells.

During the battle, "Belfast" fired 38 volleys, using up 316 152-mm shells, 77 102-mm shells and three torpedoes. The cruiser was not damaged by German fire and achieved at least five hits on the German battleship.


On June 6, 1944, Belfast, as the flagship of Formation G, took part in Operation Neptune, covering, along with the cruisers Sirius, Diadem, Orion, Emerald and Ajax, the landing in Normandy, shelling German coastal batteries.

On July 8, 1944, Belfast, together with the battleship Rodney and the cruiser Emerald, supported the attack on the city of Caen.


The end of the won "Belfast" met in repair, after which the ship was transferred to the Pacific Ocean. Until the fall of 1947, the cruiser served as the British representative in the eastern waters, cruising between Japan, India and New Zealand.

In June 1950, the Korean War broke out. "Belfast" at that time was off the coast of Japan and was sent in accordance with the UN resolution to support the army of South Korea. The cruiser fired at the positions of the North Korean army, covered the landing at the mouth of the Taedong River, and repeatedly fired at Wonsan.


Belfast and Ocean in Korea 1952

On July 29, 1952, during the shelling of Volsari, the Belfast received a direct hit from a 76-mm shell from the North Korean coastal battery. The shell exploded in the forward cockpit, one person was killed and four more were injured.

During the Korean War, the Belfast used 7 rounds of 816 mm caliber.

From 1959 to 1963, the cruiser was used as a training ship, after which it was withdrawn from the fleet and made a museum.


On October 21, 1971, the cruiser Belfast was opened to visitors as a museum ship in London, and in this capacity it remains to this day.

What can be said as a result? What the British shipbuilders have done can be appreciated very, very highly. The result is truly magnificent ships, with good weapons, powerful air defense, radar equipment at the highest level and - which is not quite typical for British cruisers - excellent armor protection.

Yes, the cost of the ships was criticized, which was at the level of a heavy cruiser. But nevertheless, in the conditions of war, these turned out to be very, very decent ships. It can be pointed out that Belfast spent a lot of time in repairs, however, this may be the reason for such a long service life of the cruiser. And not as a floating barracks, but as a full-fledged ship.


In general, "Edinburgh" and "Belfast" turned out to be really outstanding representatives of the class of light cruisers, and not only in terms of performance characteristics, but also in terms of how these ships were used. Although, of course, it is worth making curtsies in the direction of the training of the crews, which was clearly at a very high altitude. But this is an even more valuable component than tools or turbines.
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -6
    28 October 2021 18: 19
    the author again plunges into the deepest awesomeness))) compare "county" and "town"))) ships of different classes, built at different times, for different purposes. About the fact that the last "towns" were super - duper, one can argue, for example, the American "Brooklyn".
    1. +12
      28 October 2021 19: 00
      Quote: TermNachTER
      compare "county" and "town"))

      The author compares them in terms of security. And here, however, he is right. The later, lighter "town" is much better protected than the cardboard "trade protector" with 203mm art. Those. "towns" are much better balanced than "counties" request
      1. -2
        28 October 2021 19: 51
        So the "counties" were created as defenders of trade, for actions in remote theaters, and the "towns" as opposed to the Japanese "mogami". All first-generation Washington cruisers had weak armor.
        1. +1
          30 October 2021 01: 48
          Not all.
          The first Italian "Washingtonians" had a belt along the waterline from the first tower to the fourth, 70 mm thick and a deck up to 50 mm. At the same time, the mass of armor was less than on the British "Washingtonians".
          That is, it was not the bobbin ...
          1. 0
            30 October 2021 09: 39
            And what did the 70 mm thickness protect them from? From 152 - mm. and then the maximum distance, and from their own 203 - mm. at any distance. So there is practically no difference - at least 50 - mm., At least 70 - mm.
            1. 0
              31 October 2021 10: 53
              The 152 mm belt did not provide much protection either.
              The area is very small.
              There is a point of view that the belt is superfluous for WWII cruisers.
              More important is the armored deck.
              How can you not remember the armored cruisers with their carapace deck.
              1. 0
                31 October 2021 11: 00
                Armored deck is also not a panacea. Air bomb weighing 500 kg., Dropped from a height of 3 km. pierced 75 mm. armor, even if it is not armor-piercing, simply due to kinetic energy. Semi-armor-piercing or armor-piercing pierced and more. Have an armored deck 130 - 150 mm. only battleships could. The absence of an armored belt is also not a gut - any projectile that pierces the side and gets into the engine room or ammunition cellar makes a very big boom. Here you need a reasonable balance and a considerable amount of luck, so that during the war you do not fall under the distribution.
    2. +10
      28 October 2021 19: 35
      The ships were equipped with two three-tube torpedo tubes of 533-mm caliber.

      However, in the photo in the article, the torpedo tubes of the American light cruiser Omaha-class, presumably the cruiser Memphis (CL-13).
      1. +12
        28 October 2021 19: 49
        On the British cruisers Town-class, the torpedo tubes looked like this.
      2. +1
        28 October 2021 19: 52
        You demand too much from the author))) he picked up so many vershoks from Wikipedia. His articles are designed for a very weak amateur.
    3. +12
      28 October 2021 20: 19
      the author again plunges into the deepest fucking
      And I am plunged into this state by the abundance of photographs.
      There was a battle, as a result of which the Germans sank the Soviet steamer "Tsiolkovsky"
      1. +11
        28 October 2021 20: 21
        Report from the leadership of the Murmansk State Shipping Company to the first secretary of the regional committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks M.I. Starostin about the circumstances of the sinking of the motor ship "Tsiolkovsky"
        June 10, 1942 Secret

        According to the report of Art. assistant captain of the motor ship "Tsiolkovsky" comrade Ostroumov and 3 mechanics comrade. I inform Kurt about the loss of the Tsiolkovsky motor ship:
        The motor ship "Tsiolkovsky" on April 28 left Murmansk as part of a convoy en route to Iceland. The motor ship had a cargo of 255 forest standards *. The transition continued safely until May 1. In the area of ​​Bear Island on May 1 at 5:35 am, four enemy aircraft appeared, a combat alert was played on the ship, people took their places, according to the combat schedule. The planes, dropping their bombs, flew away, there was only one enemy plane, apparently a reconnaissance officer who directed his surface and submarine forces.
        At 13 hours 35 minutes, i.e. 8 hours later, enemy surface and submarine forces (destroyers and submarines) appeared.
        The crew of the ship "Tsiolkovsky" was at their places on the alert. Near the caravan, a battle began between British and German destroyers, and enemy shells exploded nearby. The captain of the ship comrade Levitsky ordered to put a smoke screen to cover the caravan.
        At 14:25, a strong explosion was heard from the left side of the vessel, the torpedo hit the engine bulkhead. The ship was trimmed aft and began to sink. The ship's crew calmly began to lower the boats into the water and save themselves. After some time, a second explosion was heard on the ship, it is impossible to establish the identity of the explosion, but by the strength of the explosion and the action, it can be assumed that the second torpedo hit the ship. By the second explosion, everything on the upper deck was thrown overboard, and boards were thrown out of the holds.
        Some of the people were thrown by a push, some were thrown overboard themselves, having life belts. Once in the water, people fled on boards thrown out of the hold and overturned boats.
        An English minesweeper approached the crash site and, at a low speed, threw out the nets and ends, which were grabbed by people, and they were picked up on board the minesweeper, which turned out to be 14 people.
        Off to the side was a battle between British and German destroyers. The minesweeper was ordered to stop picking up people and go to join, which he did. The unselected crew members apparently died, some crew members, including Captain Levitsky, drowned with the ship, since none of the survivors saw them on the water.
        The ship sank within 2-3 minutes. The action of the personnel was extremely heroic. Without panic, people descended into the icy water, being in the latter for over an hour.
        The death of the brave died the captain of the ship, Comrade. Levitsky, who did not leave the ship, wanting to remove secret documents, for which he went to the cabin and did not have time to throw himself overboard. In conclusion, we consider it necessary to file a petition for a pension for the families of those killed in the battle with the Nazis in the performance of the Government's combat mission.
        1. List of dead comrades.
        2. Flight report Art. captain's mate
        "Tsiolkovsky" comrade Ostroumova
        3. Explanation of the 3rd mechanic comrade. Kurt ***
        And about. chief of Murmansk
        State Shipping Company Ulitsky
        Head of the Political Department of Murmansk
        State Shipping Company Zubov
        Deputy chief of Murmansk
        state shipping company
        military captain 1st rank Dianov
        Resolution: Comrade Smirnov. Together with the political department of the shipping company, to present some of the dead comrades for a government award, and as for pensions, there is apparently a certain order in this regard. June 15, 1942 I. Fedorov
        GAMO, f. P-1, op. 2, d. 79, ll. 3-3 ob. Typewritten original.
        *** List of the dead members of the crew of the motor ship "Tsiolkovsky", route report of Art. the assistant to the captain of the motor ship "Tsiolkovsky" A.S. Ostroumova, explanatory note of the 3rd mechanic of the motor ship "Tsiolkovsky" Kurt N.T. See: GAMO, f.P-1, op. 2, d. 79, ll. 4 - 6 rev.
        1. +3
          29 October 2021 18: 13
          Tsialkovsky was sunk by U589.U589 was destroyed with the entire crew on 14.09.42/XNUMX/XNUMX at Svalbard.
  2. +7
    28 October 2021 18: 33
    Isn't Edinburgh the prototype for Ullis from McLean Alistair's Polar Convoy?
    1. +8
      28 October 2021 18: 52
      Nope, most likely "Dido", considering 5,25 "GK" Ulysses "... EMNIP ... what I read it for a long time feel
    2. +7
      28 October 2021 18: 58
      It was more of a Dido-class cruiser
    3. +2
      28 October 2021 19: 04
      Quote: Bad Pig (Ham)
      Isn't Edinburgh the prototype for Ullis from McLean Alistair's Polar Convoy?

      No...
      Technically, the Ulysses was a light cruiser. She was the only one of her kind, a 5,500-ton modification of the famous Dido type, a forerunner of the Black Prince class.
    4. -3
      28 October 2021 19: 53
      The prototype of the Ulysses was the Tribal-class destroyers.
      1. +2
        28 October 2021 20: 01
        Quote: TermNachTER
        The prototype of the Ulysses was the Tribal-class destroyers.

        What a news.... wassat
        IRL, "Tribbles" spun off from the TK issued for what will later become "Dido"
        1. -2
          28 October 2021 20: 07
          McLean writes about "four towers", "dido" was designed with five towers, already during the war it began to be made with four towers, due to the lack of towers. And the speed of 40 knots, this is clearly not about the "dido". Then let it be "abdiel".
          1. 0
            28 October 2021 21: 00
            Quote: TermNachTER
            McLean writes about the "four towers"

            Modifided Dido aka "Black Prince" type don't tell you anything?

            Quote: TermNachTER
            And the speed of 40 knots, this is clearly not about the "dido".

            This is the author's fantasy, especially since I quoted the quote from the original source above ... :)
            1. 0
              28 October 2021 21: 03
              Why is the author's fantasy? "Tribels" gave from 35 to 37 knots, "Abdiels" somewhere the same. But the "Dido" had standard cruising 32 - 33 knots.
              1. +1
                28 October 2021 21: 04
                Quote: TermNachTER
                Why is the author's fantasy? "

                Because the question about the book (novel by Alistair McLean) HMS Ulysses ... :)
                1. -1
                  28 October 2021 21: 22
                  Well, so we are not talking about the fact that the book describes a real ship and crew, we are talking about what could serve as a prototype for McLean, especially since he himself went with northern convoys.
                  1. +2
                    28 October 2021 21: 31
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    we're talking about what could have served as a prototype for McLean,

                    Repeat
                    Technically, the Ulysses was a light cruiser. She was the only one of her kind, a 5,500-ton modification of the famous Dido type, a forerunner of the Black Prince class.

                    And the real prototype was the Royalist, on which McLean served ...
                    1. -2
                      28 October 2021 21: 51
                      McLean talks about Ulysses' record speed several times in his book. "Dido" in terms of speed were average, with their 32 - 33. Displacement is also a relative parameter. It happens - empty, standard, full, overload. 5.500 is what?
                      1. +1
                        28 October 2021 21: 56
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        McLean talks about Ulysses' record speed several times in his book. “Dido” in terms of speed were average, with their 32 - 33.

                        We have a work of art ... :)

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Displacement is also a relative parameter. It happens - empty, standard, full, overload. 5.500 is what?

                        As a rule, this is how the standard VI is indicated.
                      2. -2
                        28 October 2021 22: 29
                        If we have a work of art, then the displacement can be anything. A light cruiser can be from Yubari to Edinburgh, French counter-torpillers, especially which of the latter, are also quite good. And by the number of towers, and the caliber of the main battery and speed.
                      3. +3
                        28 October 2021 22: 37
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        If we have a work of art, then the displacement can be anything.

                        As I understand it, your English is hard. :)
                        Here is the Russian translation.
                        Ulysses was a light cruiser, one of a kind. With a displacement of 5500 tons, it was a modification of the famous Dido type, the predecessor of the Black Prince class.
    5. 0
      28 October 2021 22: 07
      no ... there was a Dido-type Cr ...
  3. +12
    28 October 2021 18: 40
    In general, such an alignment of forces did not suit the British at all, and therefore it was decided to convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into light ones so that they could compete with the Mogs and Brooklyns.

    Can anyone translate this phrase into Russian?

    "Belfast" was very radically modernized during the repair, which was done after the cruiser was blown up by a mine in 1940.

    21 November 1939 year.

    In May 1940, "Edinburgh" became a participant in the hunt for the "Bismarck"

    The author never ceases to amaze ...:?)

    Everyone knows what happened next. The Scharnhorst stubbornly climbed on the convoy, the British cruisers stubbornly repulsed its attacks with shells and torpedoes.

    Another new word in history ...

    In general, everything is as usual: as long as Balakin or Pyatyanin are quoted (in this case), everything is fine, as soon as the author begins to bear the gag - at least stand, at least fall ... :)
    1. 0
      28 October 2021 19: 54
      you demand a lot from the author))) his articles are designed for a novice amateur)))
      1. +7
        28 October 2021 21: 02
        Quote: TermNachTER
        you demand a lot from the author))) his articles are designed for a novice amateur)))

        And then such an amateur will refer to this, if I may say so, "creativity" and prove something with foam at the mouth. :)
    2. 0
      30 October 2021 01: 58
      They do not like to quote Balakin.
      He swung at the sacred.
      In his monograph on Japanese battleships he wrote that "Fuji in the years of the RYAV could not develop more than 15 knots, and in collaboration with Aleksandrov about Japanese armored cruisers, that" Azuma "in the RYA years could only develop 16 knots, and then , only for a very short time.
      But what about the Japanese (English) superiority in speed?
      Not an order.
      How can Rozhdestvensky be justified now?
  4. +6
    28 October 2021 18: 43
    The 152-mm Mk-XXIII cannon sent a projectile weighing up to 14,5 kg at a distance of up to 23 km with an initial speed of 841 m / s.


    I sincerely doubt wassat Other data on these guns, such as the rate of fire, also appear to be erroneous with the 102mm guns.

    1. +11
      28 October 2021 20: 02
      I also drew attention to this. It's just that the author was in a hurry, and gave the weight of the reinforced charge 14,5 kg for the weight of the projectile. BL 6 inch gun Mark XXIII cannon, two types of shells - semi-armor-piercing with a ballistic cap CPBC and high-explosive HE. The weight of both was 50,8 kg; the weight of the explosive in the first 1,7 kg (3,35%), in the second - 3,6 kg (7,1%), the main charge weight - 13,62 kg, reinforced - 14,5 , XNUMX kg. Well, the man hurried, well, it happens! wink Yes
  5. +5
    28 October 2021 18: 57
    At that time, only "Belfast" and "Norfolk" were next to the convoy, who went to meet the German ship and opened fire. The deal was so-so, but luck was on the side of the British sailors. Shell "Sheffield" disabled the nose radar of the German battleshipand he walked away.


    I see some kind of illogicality here.

    Prescribe more carefully and without repetition, as with the fuel supply and cruising range. lol
    1. +3
      28 October 2021 19: 05
      Quote: Constanty
      I see some kind of illogicality here.

      Everything is illogical here .... :)
      1. +6
        28 October 2021 19: 09
        I wanted to be gentle and I showed an example of inconsistency in the text, and not complete nonsense, like this one

        and therefore it was accepted the decision to convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into light ones


        cruisers of the Town series, they have always been light cruisers ...
        1. +2
          28 October 2021 19: 43
          Konstantin, the phrase must be read in full
          In general, such an alignment of forces did not suit the British at all, and therefore it was decided to convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into light ones so that they could compete with the Mogs and Brooklyns.

          The author most likely meant that the last light cruisers in the series of light cruisers would turn out to be more powerful light cruisers to combat the indicatedYes And the rehearsals of the creation of such are described request
          The author is forgivable, for this is already a tradition smile
          1. +4
            28 October 2021 21: 55
            convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into light ones so that they can compete with the Mogs and Brooklyn.


            I wouldn't be angry if this fragment was voiced to "convert the last two cruisers of the Town series into such" light "ones that would be able to compete with the" Mogs "and" Brooklyn "" however in the form, in which it was written, it came out crap.
  6. +5
    28 October 2021 19: 40
    "The rate of fire of the guns was limited by the rate of supply of shells and charges from the cellars, namely 12 rounds per minute."
    But Patyanin writes about 6-8 rounds per minute. Probably lying?
    1. +4
      28 October 2021 20: 12
      combat capabilities start from feeding - from cooks. and the number of "big squats". and energy from delicious and healthy food.
      the morale of the sailors is lost behind the calibers
      1. 0
        30 October 2021 02: 04
        Combat capabilities start with mass. Bodies.
        With manual loading, the optimal mass of a projectile is the mass of a 120-127 mm projectile.
        Of course, with separate loading.
        Not for nothing, the Japanese switched from 152 mm to 140 mm.
        According to the experience of WWI and the British were planning to switch to this caliber.
        1. 0
          30 October 2021 07: 31
          and for the weight and height of the sailor's body - food. cook and galley.
          including the dimensions of hatches and doors.
          the classic has a proportionate crew ..

          own school of design and comprehension of life, in tch wars at sea
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. +5
        28 October 2021 22: 15
        Quote: MooH
        Who the hell is this dwarf Patyanin against the giant of thought Skomorokhov)))

        laughing laughing
  7. +11
    28 October 2021 20: 02
    April 28 "Edinburgh" accompanied by the destroyers "Forsyth" and "Forester" went to sea
    On board was the commander of the 18th cruiser squadron, Rear Admiral Stuart Bonham-Carter.
    Captain Faulkner and Admiral Carter
    Among the sailors, there was a belief about him that any ship under his flag was in for misfortune. It was Bonham Carter who was on the Trinidad when this cruiser was damaged by her own torpedo in a battle with German destroyers. Therefore, the crew of the "Edinburgh" did not expect anything good from their admiral.
    On April 30, Edinburgh was sighted by U-456.
    Der erste Mann meiner Mutter und Vater meines ältesten Bruders war 1. Offizier auf dem U-Boot 456.
    Commander Max-Martin Teichert
    1. +14
      28 October 2021 20: 07
      In general, it seems to me that the Edinburgh crew did everything they could in those conditions.
      I join - we turned it around gloriously


      details of these events were reported by Evgeny Aleksandrovich Radugin, the commander of the signalmen squad of the patrol ship Rubin, sent by the fleet headquarters to the area of ​​hostilities (by this time, the Rubin's crew had shot down planes and a sunk enemy submarine in their combat account). During the naval battle, the situation was constantly changing, visibility was poor, so Radugin only communicates some of the battle's touches - as he remembered them.
      “On April 30, 1942,” writes Radugin, “a patrol ship left Polyarny and headed north with the task of finding and joining the escort of the British cruiser Edinburgh, torpedoed by a German submarine at a point 250 miles north of Kola bay. The headquarters reported: there are two British destroyers near the cruiser (apparently, just at this time our destroyers left for bunkering - VM), the cruiser is badly damaged, but still has a course of about six knots and is moving towards our shores; five British minesweepers and one Soviet tug came to his aid from the Kola Bay; according to intelligence data, several destroyers and submarines went to sea from fascist bases on the Norwegian coast.
      The Barents Sea was relatively calm (4-5 points), but continuous snow charges limited visibility at times to zero. It was not easy to get out in these conditions exactly on the cruiser (in the absence of a radar). But the "Rubin" left - on May 1 at 17:30 we exchanged identification signals with the cruiser and entered into its guard from submarines. Our coordinates were requested from the cruiser. We immediately informed them.
      What did Edinburgh look like? Shortened. The explosion of torpedoes blew off the stern along with the lower three-gun turret of the main caliber. The deck sheets were bent upward and almost covered the upper tower ... He stood on an even keel. The minesweepers and the tug, which left four hours earlier than us, appeared at about 23 pm on May 1, and not from the south, like us, but from the north-west. From that moment on, the towing of the Edinburgh began. At the same time, not everything went well, since the tug was low-power. Then on the morning of May 2, two minesweepers stood on the sides, and the tugboat - in front, and in such a team, things immediately went smoothly - the speed noticeably increased. But at the beginning of the ninth, German destroyers appeared, as announced by a cannon shot on the left side of the cruiser. The tug immediately moved to the southwest, and all the minesweepers and both destroyers moved to the port side. We found ourselves on the starboard side, remembering that enemy submarines had also come out in search of the Edinburgh. The battle flared up, but the snow charges hid not only the Germans, but also the British from us. How many German destroyers were there and how they were located, one could only guess from the shots.
      Knowing that from the British side seven warships are participating in the battle, we paid all our attention to the surface of the sea, waiting for the appearance of the periscope or the submarine's deckhouse. And when suddenly a destroyer appeared from the snowy shroud, we could only guess - whose is it? - since the silhouettes of the English and German ships are similar. Then events developed very quickly. The destroyer, turning 90 ° to the left, raised the fascist flags on the masts, fired a volley at our ship and at full speed rushed towards the cruiser. Having skirted him from the stern, he lay down on a parallel course and fired torpedoes. An English destroyer was in a hurry to meet him. But it was too late: at that moment, when both destroyers, almost ramming each other, turned away from the cruiser - one to the left, the other to the right - a powerful explosion rang out - the torpedo hit the side of the cruiser, and he began to roll. The destroyers were moving away, but the distance between them did not exceed 50 meters. The first fired a volley from the guns of the English destroyer - and missed. The return volley of the Germans reached the target - the shell hit the engine room, a column of steam rose, and the British destroyer stood up. And on the departing Nazi destroyer, the cruiser fired a volley from the bow tower. But further we could not see anything - the snow again covered the ships ... "
      1. +11
        28 October 2021 20: 14
        The death of the "Edinburgh" caused a stream of mutual reproaches among the Soviet and British sailors. The British emphasized that the tragedy took place in the zone of responsibility of the Soviet fleet and, despite this, only one patrol ship was sent to help the cruiser. The British were especially outraged by the behavior of "Thundering" and "Crushing"
        after all, their 130-mm cannons would be very useful in a battle with German destroyers.
        In turn, the commander of the Northern Fleet, Admiral A.G. Golovko wrote in his memoirs: “Everything on the cruiser was in good working order, except for the rudder and propellers. Having solid weapons, moreover, protected by other ships, he could fend for himself. Nevertheless, the crew of the Edinburgh, when the cruiser was damaged, left the ship, transferring to the destroyer that approached the side, and without taking anything - neither personal belongings, nor boxes of gold bars ... "The groundlessness of these accusations is obvious. Until the last third torpedo hit, the cruiser retained its combat capability and even destroyed an enemy destroyer. As for the reloading of gold, it was impossible, since the bomb compartment, where it was stored, was instantly flooded after the explosion of the very first torpedo.
        1. 0
          20 November 2021 15: 29
          But the British expressed their admiration for the crew and the commander of the "Rubin" TFR (commander-Zhukov A.V.) ...
  8. +3
    29 October 2021 03: 48
    Two of the finest British light cruisers, two jewels of the royal shipbuilding industry. According to their characteristics, they are definitely the top world-class cruisers, and there was probably only one drawback - a huge price. Comparable to the cost of building a heavy cruiser

    Where does this data come from, Roman?
    1) According to the Admiralty, the preliminary estimated cost of the English light cruiser "Belfast" was 2 141 514,00 pounds.
    2) The cost of building the German heavy cruiser "Admiral Hipper" was 85 Reichsmarks, which in the mid-860s was equivalent to about 6 868 800,00 pounds.

    3) The difference in the cost of building two cruisers of the same age - the English light and the German heavy - is more than three times.
    1. 0
      29 October 2021 16: 05
      Quote: Comrade
      3) The difference in the cost of building two cruisers of the same age - the English light and the German heavy - is more than three times.

      I am afraid that when comparing the cost of construction, the MRT was taken incorrectly from you. "Hippers" from the Germans turned out to be extremely expensive ships.
      The Hipper and its sister ships were exceptionally expensive ships. There are many reasons for this, in particular, the high cost of labor in Germany (fascism paid well for skilled labor at military enterprises), but the high cost of science-intensive weapons and equipment, which were saturated with heavy cruisers, also played a significant role. Their value rose steadily: from "Hipper" (85,9 million Reichsmarks) to "Prince Eugen" (104,5 million). It is enough to compare these figures with the price of "pocket battleships" (80-90 million) and real battleships of the Scharnhorst type (about 175 million) and Bismarck (180-200 million) to understand how dearly they were bought not too many advantages of German heavy cruisers.
      © Kofman
      1. 0
        30 October 2021 00: 50
        Quote: Alexey RA
        I am afraid that when comparing the cost of construction, the MRT was taken incorrectly from you. "Hippers"

        No problem, dear colleague.
        In this case, please suggest another heavy cruiser-peer.
    2. 0
      29 October 2021 18: 03
      Quote: Comrade
      2) The cost of building the German heavy cruiser "Admiral Hipper" was 85 Reichsmarks, which in the mid-860s was equivalent to approximately 000,00 pounds sterling.

      Where did the numbers come from?
      1. +1
        30 October 2021 01: 00
        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
        Where did the numbers come from?

        1)


        2)


        3)

        1. 0
          30 October 2021 11: 04
          Thank...
          But it still somehow does not fit.
          1. +1
            31 October 2021 02: 49
            Quote: Macsen_Wledig
            still somehow does not fit.

            If we compare not the total cost, but the cost of a ton of standard displacement of two cruisers, we get the following figures.
            "Belfast": 2 / 141 = 214,1514 £ / t.
            "Admiral Hipper": 6 / 868 = 478,00 £ / t.

            The difference is no more than three times, but two times and a quarter.

            It is not difficult to explain this difference, it is enough to remember that there were a number of factors that directly influenced the cost of a ton of displacement in one direction or another.
            For example, the general the weight of the armor of the English cruiser was 1 tons, and the German one was 610 tons (and this without tower armor weight).
            The power plant of the "Englishman" weighed 1540 tons, and the "German" - 3 tons.
            And so on. Again, the difference in the wages of the labor of the two countries.

            Of course, it would be best to compare the cost of building the cruiser "Belfast" with the cost of building an English heavy cruiser of the same age. Alas, there is no one to compare with, so I had to stop at the German heavy cruiser.
            1. 0
              31 October 2021 10: 56
              Quote: Comrade
              If we compare not the total cost, but the cost of a ton of standard displacement of two cruisers, we get the following figures.

              I'm not planning to double-check your calculations.
              It is necessary to look at the comparative cost of a ton of VI for all classes.
              Something seems to me that the mark-pound rate that you used is akin to the rate of the Soviet ruble against the dollar ...

              Quote: Comrade
              It is not difficult to explain this difference, it is enough to remember that there were a number of factors that directly influenced the cost of a ton of displacement in one direction or another.

              And these factors too ...
              In general, the cost of ships is difficult to compare.
              1. 0
                1 November 2021 00: 42
                Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                I'm not planning to double-check your calculations.

                These are just arithmetic operations.

                Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                It is necessary to look at the comparative cost of a ton of VI for all classes.

                For what purpose ?

                Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                Something seems to me that the mark-pound rate that you used is akin to the exchange rate of the Soviet ruble against the dollar

                No problem, please submit your version of the 1936-1939 Reichsmark exchange rate.


                Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                In general, the cost of ships is difficult to compare.

                It is a matter of having the necessary information.
                The author of the article under discussion does not possess such information, which is why he replaces the facts with conjectures.

                A question for the author.
                With the cost of which heavy cruiser you, Monsieur Skomorokhov, compared the cost of the "Belfast" cruiser, writing the following:
                According to their characteristics, they are definitely the top world-class cruisers, and, perhaps, there was only one drawback - a huge price. Comparable to the cost of building a heavy cruiser.


                ?
                1. 0
                  1 November 2021 17: 46
                  Quote: Comrade
                  For what purpose ?

                  Purely sports interest ...

                  Quote: Comrade
                  No problem, please submit your version of the 1936-1939 Reichsmark exchange rate.

                  Again, no claim against you ...
                  There is just a feeling that the course is conditionally "fictitious".
                  1. 0
                    2 November 2021 05: 03
                    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                    Purely sports interest ..

                    Me too.
                    The author regrets and worries that the cost of building the light cruiser "Belfast"
                    comparable to the cost of building a heavy cruiser.
                    .

                    I have good news for Roman, it was a common thing in the States.
                    Let's look overseas and compare the cost of building light cruisers of the "Brooklyn" class (nine units)

                    and heavy cruisers like "New Orleans" (seven units).

                    With almost the same standard displacement of these light and heavy cruisers (in the region of ten thousand tons), the cost of their construction was close and amounted to 11 677 000,00 $ and 11 720 000,00 $ respectively.
  9. +1
    29 October 2021 09: 04
    > In general, given the higher rate of fire of 155-mm and 152-mm guns compared to 203-mm, light cruisers are close to heavy ones in terms of salvo weight.

    And the weight of the salvo takes into account the rate of fire, can you ask?

    I also noticed a duplicate of information about 2260 tons of fuel and a typo - The end of the won, this is for Roman's information.

    Many thanks for the interesting article!
    1. +2
      29 October 2021 10: 13
      There is no salvo weight, but taking into account the amount of metal and explosives sent to the enemy per minute (theoretically, of course) yes.

      For example, the ships' guns of the "County" 8 "/ 50 (20.3 cm) Mark VIII type cruisers had a rate of fire of 2-6 rounds per minute. HMS Kent's test documents have been preserved on reaching a rate of fire of 5 rounds per minute.

      With HMS Kent - 5 rds / min and 8 203mm guns, the mass of the 116,1 kg projectile is 4644 kg per minute.
      In the case of HMS Belfast and 8 rds. / Min / 12x152mm and a projectile mass of 50,8 kg we get 4876 kg.

      The difference is so small that it can be assumed that the mass of bullets per minute is practically equal to
  10. +3
    29 October 2021 16: 32
    after which they removed from the fleet and made it a museum.


    Here is the most rewarding career ending for a well-deserved ship. Metal, of course, is a necessary thing for the economy, but how can economic benefits be compared with the memory of the achievements of your country?
  11. +1
    31 October 2021 09: 12
    "The 152-mm gun Mk-XXIII sent a projectile weighing up to 14,5 kg at a distance of up to 23 km with an initial speed of 841 m / s." - An obvious mistake, a six-inch shell weighs about 50 kg.
    1. +1
      31 October 2021 10: 59
      Quote: Vlad09
      An obvious mistake, the six-inch round weighs about 50 kg.

      6 "CPBC weighed 50.8 kg
  12. 0
    4 November 2021 23: 55
    How strange ... At the museum ship "Belfast" the mast was "eaten away" by rust. The new mast was made with money collected in the Russian Federation. The equipment of the masts was restored, the old masts were removed and new masts were installed by the employees of the Severnaya Verf enterprise. Completed work in the fall of 2009.
  13. -1
    21 December 2021 11: 00
    great article - thanks!