Facts and figures: what is more valuable?
Sea historical excrement is dedicated ...
Random link when searching brought me to a very interesting forum. A forum discussing the topics of Ekho Moskvy radio broadcasts. Well, we know whose echo it is, and to hell with it. And on this forum I got acquainted with the next rezunovets. Cattle, I must say, prepared, reasoning their conclusions, and so on. But something about something washed washed.
Mr. Rezun on the forum is called assault-50. At the end of the material, as expected, I will provide a link to his material, who wants to - get acquainted. The material is old, but has something to do with my articles, and besides, it is very high-quality fabricated. And, using this “material” as an example, I want to show HOW history is being remade. That is, how the facts are distorted so that everything looks believable.
I quote this:
“What are the losses of our fleet? During the Great Patriotic War (from June 22, 1941 to May 09, 1945), the Soviet Navy irretrievably lost the following ships of the main classes (in the fleets).
Northern Fleet:
destroyers: "Swift", "Smash", "Active";
submarines: K-1, K-2, K-3, K-22, K-23, D-3, U-401, U-402, U-403, U-421, U-422, C-54 , C-55, M-106, M-108, M-121, M-122, M-172, M-173, M-174, M-175, M-176, L-16 (11 October 1942 of the year the Northern Fleet was torpedoed in the Pacific either by the Japanese submarine I-25, or by the American submarine S-31), B-1 (former British S-21; 27 July 1944 of the year left the English naval base Scapa Flow, heading to the Soviet port of Polar, but the next day was mistakenly sunk by an English patrol plane);
special guard patrol ships: "Brilliant", "Pearl".
Baltic Fleet:
battleship "Marat" (September 23, 1941 attacked on the inner raid of Kronstadt German aviation, lost the bow on the 52nd frame along with the gun turret and all bow superstructures, the power plant was completely out of order, sank in shallow water on the upper deck, raised on September 17, 1942, the “stump” without bow was put into operation in mid-1943 years as a non-self-propelled floating artillery battery "Petropavlovsk". The loss was never officially recognized and continued to be considered a full-fledged battleship in Soviet public documents);
destroyers: "Yakov Sverdlov", "Volodarsky", "Artyom", "Engels", "Lenin", "Karl Marx", "Kalinin", "Angry", "Proud", "Sharp-witted", "Brave", " Severe "," stately "," fast "," angry ";
submarines: П-1, П-2 (damaged by German aviation, decommissioned), П-3 (damaged by German aviation, decommissioned), L-1, L-2, W-301, W-302, W-304, S -305, U-306, U-308, U-311, U-317, U-319, U-320, U-322, U-323, U-324, U-405, U-406, U-408 , W-411, C-1, C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6, C-7, C-8, C-9, C-10, C-11, C-12, M -71, M-72, M-74, M-78, M-80, M-81, M-83, M-94, M-95, M-96, M-97, M-98, M-99 , M-103, Ronis (formerly Latvian), Spidola (formerly Latvian), Kalev (formerly Estonian);
special patrol ships: “The Tempest”, “Cyclone”, “Purga”, “Snow”, “Coral” (formerly Lithuanian), “Virsaitis” (formerly Latvian).
Black Sea Fleet:
light cruisers: Chervona Ukraina, Komintern (outdated, commissioned in 1908, actually an artillery training ship);
the leaders of the destroyers: "Moscow", "Kharkov", "Tashkent" (formerly Italian);
destroyers: "Frunze", "Dzerzhinsky", "Shaumyan", "Fast", "Merciless", "Impeccable", "Vigilant", "Intelligent", "Able", "Perfect", "Free";
submarines: A-1, A-3, D-4, D-6, L-6, L-23, L-24, L-25, W-203, W-204, W-206, W-208 , U-210, U-211, U-212, U-213, U-214, U-216, C-32, C-34, M-31, M-33, M-34, M-36, M -51, M-58, M-59, M-60, M-118, TS-2 (formerly Romanian S-2).
In addition to the above mentioned once and for all dead, there were still sunk (usually in shallow water), but then raised and had time to re-enter service until the end of the war. These include the following ships of the main classes:
in the Northern Fleet - patrol ship of a special construction "Smerch";
in the Baltic Fleet - the heavy cruiser Tallinn (in fact, the unfinished Lutz obtained from 1940 from Germany, rarely used during the war as a self-propelled floating artillery battery), the destroyer Minsk destroyer, the destroyer destroyer Stereguschy built "Whirlwind".
During the war, almost all other (not sunk) Soviet surface ships of the main classes suffered damage of varying degrees of severity, including very serious ones. For example, in the Baltic near the light cruiser "Maxim Gorky" the bow was torn off, and on the Black Sea near the light cruiser "Molotov" - feed.
It is safe to say that all the Soviet main combat surface ships and submarines that were available would have been guaranteed to be destroyed during the four years of the war if they were used with proper intensity (say, like the British), and were not defended in the ports - away from the zone active fighting. This is especially characteristic of the Baltic Fleet, which was distinguished during the war by its rare mediocrity. The Black Sea Fleet acted a little better, but even the Northern Fleet, which stood out against their background in the advantageous direction, did not avoid an epidemic in the final year and a half of evading their direct duties (if you recall how, in the last months of the war, German submarines swept off its surface ships with extraordinary ease high seas on coastal bases). True, the sad results did not in the least prevent distributing ranks and awards and receiving Heroes of the Soviet Union on every trifling occasion. And compose "heroic" stories.
Declared in various Soviet official and semi-official publications as allegedly destroyed by the influence of the Soviet weapons German training artillery ship "Schleswig-Holstein" (the old battleship, in the Soviet publications designated by the OCs as "bat"); marked in the secret "Handbook ..." by 26 of the year) have no relation to the Soviet military efforts at sea, and the German training artillery ship "Schlesien" (the old battleship, in Soviet publications is designated as "battleship") and the German unfinished heavy cruiser "Zeidlits "(in the" Directory ... "from X NUMX of the year is listed as destroyed by the "cruiser", in other Soviet books - now destroyed, then damaged) are only indirectly. The real fate of each of these ships is well known.
Schleswig-Holstein in December 1944 was heavily damaged by British aviation, which made several raids on Gotenhafen, where the ship was at that time. He sat on the ground, then was raised and towed to Danzig. Here 21 March 1945 of the year and was flooded by his crew, pre-exploded the most important elements of the equipment of the ship.
"Schlesien" first hit a mine of unidentified accessories, and then underwent several raids of Soviet aircraft and received new damage. The 04 of May 1945, shortly before the capture of Swinemünde by Soviet troops, was blown up by the crew and flooded on the upper deck on the roadstead of this port.
"Seidlits" (part of the Kriegsmarine never entered) for the 1942 year was ready at 90 percent, and in 1942, they began to rebuild it into an aircraft carrier. In 1943, the hull (without superstructures) was towed to the wall of the Shikhau shipyard in Pillau (now the Russian Baltiysk). At the beginning of 1944, turned into a blockhash. (Blockhead - the hull of the vessel used in the port or on the roadstead as a floating warehouse or dwelling.) 09 on April 1945 of the year was damaged (moderately) during a Soviet air raid on the port and the next day was flooded by order of the shipyard administration.
In addition to surface ships, the Soviet can record at their own expense German submarines U9, U78, U144, U250, U362, U639 and the Italian ultra-small ("dwarf") submarine CB-5 that were reliably destroyed during the Great Patriotic War. Controversially supposedly Soviet armed forces sunk German U286 submarines (unlikely), U344 (possible), U387 (very possible), U585 (unlikely), U679 (very possible). For unknown reasons, the German U367, U479, U676, and U745 submarines were killed in the zone of the Soviet fleet. When Soviet ground forces approached their home ports, their crews flooded German U18 submarines (previously damaged by Soviet aircraft), U19, U20, U23, U24 (previously damaged by Soviet aircraft), U763 (previously damaged by British aircraft). The destruction of German submarines U7, U345, U382, U446, U580, U583, U702, U803, U854, U1000, U2331, U2342, is a Soviet propaganda propaganda claimed by the Soviet armed forces.
For acquaintance with the Soviet propaganda style of work, I will cite an excerpt from the book of a group of authors with titles ranging from candidate of military-marine sciences to candidate of historical sciences "Twice Red Banner Baltic Fleet", Military Publishing House, Moscow, 1990 year. Summing up the war in the Baltic, this book, on the 278 page, "voiced" the official Soviet version of the German losses to the Finns and the sea losses (I quote): "Among the dissimilar forces of the Baltic Fleet were the 2 battleship, the coastal defense battleship, the 3 cruiser, 16 destroyers, 18 patrol ships, 16 submarines, 59 minesweepers, 41 airborne artillery ship. " (end of quoting). Pay attention - this is only on the Baltic. The names and numbers of the destroyed ships and submarines are not given in the book, with the exception of the Schleswig-Holstein and Schleszien and Orion, Niobe and Zeidlitz cruisers already mentioned above. It is incredible that the historical department of the USSR Navy Headquarters, under whose leadership such books were produced, did not know a single name and not a single crew number of at least one of the ships drowned by "valiant Baltic" ships, from squadron destroyers, before 1990? ! Then how do we know who and how much they drowned ?! ”
Here is such parsley. That is, the Soviet Navy sucks, and Kriegsmarine taxis. On paper, everything looks quite meaningful, if not for a couple of moments.
The moment the first. Notice how the author presents the statistics. In the confrontation of the two sides are considered the loss of the Soviet Navy and the confirmed VICTORY of the Soviet fleet. That is, we consider EVERYTHING, and for the Germans, only that 100% is ditched by our sailors. I do not know about you, but I find it more than strange. What do we compare? To count victories - count on both sides. To count losses is similar. And so, sorry, another nonsense comes out. Yes, and with a specific purpose.
At the very first paragraph of our losses is the EM "Smashing". I had the honor to write about the tragedy of this ship, and I, as the author, wonder why in the context of the article the northern seas are enlisted as allies of the Germans?
Further. The German destroyers Z-35 and Z-36, which in December 1944 exploded in the Gulf of Finland and drowned.
Funny, right? Our destroyer who sank because of the storm is a loss. Yes, this is definitely the loss of our battle fleet by our fleet. And the two Germans who blew up on mines are not a loss of nichrome, so they are not considered. In, arithmetic, right?
An amusing approach: a Soviet ship that hit a mine is a ship SINGLELY hit by a German mine. Or Finnish. The German ship is in question. Well, can not a German destroyer fly into a Soviet mine in any way, right?
With regard to these two utopians, I will give this example.
I quote Sergey Patyanin and Miroslav Morozov "German destroyers of the Second World War:" On the eve of his (exit), Kote held a short meeting, at which he gave a number of instructions, which later played an extremely negative role. First, all subordinate ships were forbidden to use radio equipment, including the VHF range, and radar equipment.They could only exchange light signals, which was not quite suitable for the night time in the winter period. Secondly, the fleet headquarters Lee took full responsibility for the chart pad that under the disciplined German Navy led to the fact that it did not lead the rest of the navigators destroyers.
The flotilla went to sea in December 7.00 11. At first the weather was pretty good, but then it deteriorated noticeably - low clouds hung over the sea, it started to rain. Visibility at times dropped so much that neighboring ships could see each other only from the flames coming out of the chimneys. For one and a half hours with 16.25, destroyers could observe Faro’s lighthouse on the northern tip of Fr. Gotland, but none of the navigators (perhaps with the exception of the flagship) tried to establish the true place. ”
And it seems that because of this, the whole detachment climbed into its minefield and left two destroyers there.
And right there I have a lot of questions:
1. Was the commander of the group Kote an idiot? Because as soon as an idiot can give such an order - do not use radars. No comments at all.
2. Does the exchange of light signals not suitable at night?
3. Were the German navigators morons who scored on their duties and did not bother to determine the location of the ship, watching the lighthouse for an hour and a half?
4. Taking into account p.3, where did the Germans get that they are in their field? Yes, there it says in the text that the navigator took the coordinates on one destroyer. Mines are torn, ships are sinking, and he, a poor fellow, does his job with a steady hand. Khira Reich, what can I say ... A true Aryan with a Nordic character, since he was able to do this. Previously, it was simply impossible to do, but now, regardless of the difficulties ... In short, the Soviet Information Bureau smokes nervously on the sidelines.
Okay, I’m ready to believe that pedantic and trained German navigators paved the way around the pack of “Belomor”, sailed with the radar turned off, didn’t determine their place because they made the course for them at headquarters (delirium!) ... Sorry I do not believe. What so gallant representatives Kriegsmarine floated closing their eyes on their own minefield ... Brad. And even if it is not nonsense, if all this is true, you can be glad for the death of a crowd of sheep. But personally, I think that they were blown up not by their mines. And all this nonsense was invented by them and fed to us. This is easier than to admit that they ran into our mines. Another question is, will they eat everything?
The history of the destroyers T-22, T-30, T-32 is written as a carbon copy. All the same: turned off radar, lack of communication, etc. Well, the fact was added that the mines were installed from the landing barges, without special binding, so that the theoretical and actual finding of the minefield might not be the same ... It was not until 1944 that the Germans knew where their minefield was? Oops ... Okay, drove by. But T-32 did not drown after activating two minutes (turned out to be strong), our aircraft finished off in half a day. And also does not count.
More about a couple of their fellows.
T-31. Drowned TK Senior Lieutenant Taronenko and Lieutenant Bushuyev. The German admiral F. Ruge claims that "the Russians attacked bravely, and their tactics were good." Probably two torpedoes hit the T-31, and he quickly sank 20 June in 0 hours 03 minutes at the point with coordinates 60 ° 16′N, 28 ° 17′O. Crew loss accounted for 82 man. Part of the survivors was raised aboard Soviet boats (6 people), 86 rescued by Finnish boats (including the commander of the destroyer captain-lieutenant Peter Pirkham). The Finns have seen, the Germans have seen ... who do not need - he did not see.
T-34. On the morning of November 20 1944, the T-34 conducted firing at the Hessen target ship, an explosion thundered under his keel. The stern part was destroyed, but a number of structural elements on the starboard side survived. Soon the destroyer lay on the port side and sank. 67 seamen were killed along with the ship. The place of death is the area of Cape Ancona at the coordinates of 54 ° 40'N, 13 ° 29'О. The cause of death is an explosion on a mine set by the submarine "L-3" (captain of the 3 rank, VN Konovalov). (No, mine was definitely English ... or Martian).
T-36. 4 May 1945 g. Goes out to sea with the floating base "Yagd" and a group of destroyers. The goal is to move from Swinemünde to Copenhagen. The destroyer returned to Swinemünde after a blast on a British aircraft mine. One turbine failed. The destroyer discovered 6 Soviet aircraft, it was the IL-2 from the 7 Guards assault regiment of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. During the attack, "T-36" was fired cannon-machine-gun fire, and then bombs were dropped on it. Several bombs fell into the destroyer, large losses occurred among the crew, and the ship sank.
Here is such a strange statistic.
About "Schlesien" I just keep quiet. Drowned and good. And who he was in life - the battleship, battleship, training ship or minesweeper - personally, I don't care how they call him. The essence is exclusively in the negative of four 280-mm guns that beat on our troops. And the fact that a start was made by an “unidentified mine” - excuse me, but who prevented me from going and establishing her nationality? Oh, her absence? So what are the problems ??? Aviation affiliation installed? Great, who is the last - that and dad.
Next, about submarines. Everything is clear, if our submarine went missing or it was blown up by mines - this is 100% German mine. And if something happened to a German submarine, that’s anything but our mines and ships.
About our submarines I have already said enough. But for the Germans I will argue slightly.
U286. (in the opinion of that author, unlikely). Probably because our Karl Liebknecht shot and threw bombs at her. 22 April 1945 of the Northern Fleet squadron Karl Liebknecht, commanded by Lieutenant Commander KD Staritsyn, while in the guard of the convoy, with the help of a hydroacoustic station, he found a submarine and dropped all the depth stock on it bombs. Four minutes later, the boat emerged with a strongly raised stern in 45-50 m from the side of the destroyer. Her cabin was broken, the periscopes were bent, the antennas were cut off. She was fired at by guns and machine guns, and she immediately sank. It is believed that so died U-286. Sank or plunged after it was thrown to the surface by an explosion - what's the difference? The fact that she didn’t contact her anymore. I suspect the sailors from the destroyer also didn’t care about the number of the submarine, they did their job. But I feel sorry for them.
U344 (possible), 22.8.1944 destroyer "Daring" about the seal bow bent?
U387 (very possible), a thorough comparison of domestic and foreign sources suggests that only the survivor "Zhivuchy" can claim victory, 8 December 1944, he rammed an unknown submarine, which can be identified as U-387. Yes, you can identify it, because there was no more news from her either. Not the Martians dragged ...
U585 (unlikely), March 30 1942, the Thunderstorm destroyer (commander of 2 rank 2, A.I. Turin) found the submarine and attacked it, dropping 9 large and 8 small depth charges. At the dive site of the submarine surfaced debris, paper, oil stains appeared. Presumably, it was a submarine U-585.
U679 (very possible). January 9 This submarine, located in the Baltic Sea northeast of Pakri Lighthouse, was attacked and, possibly, destroyed by the depth bombs of the MO-1945 submarine hunter. Officially confirmed by the enemy.
It turns out that the MO-124 account is already the second problem: according to a number of 26 sources, December 1944 of the year he sank the U-2342 submarine of the XXIII series. The Germans, she is listed as dead on a mine.
For unknown reasons, German U-boats were killed in the area of the Soviet fleet.
U367. The most likely cause of death of the submarine - minefield, delivered by the Soviet submarine L-21.
U479. Officially, the Germans "went missing." According to our data - it was rammed by the Soviet submarine "Lembit". Although, our historians note that Lembit has no traces of such a ram. Yes, the incident with the damage of the nose of the submarine was, but agreed on the opinion that it was not a German submarine.
U676. Mines
U745. Mines
U-416. The reason for her death of 12 December 1944 of the year is also attributed to mines. Perhaps it was a mine, exhibited by the Soviet submarine L-3.
A little different arithmetic. In general, the approach that “the Germans were great, our wooon how many lost, the Germans were great, and ours are not, because they drowned so little”, to put it mildly, it is biased. And roughly speaking ...
If we take the losses of our submarines on the same Baltic, then 4 boats were lost from the actions of the German fleet and 5 from the actions of the Finns and Swedes. The rest - the same mines, aircraft, in two cases, land artillery. But we are talking about all 46 ... And then, again, about accuracy and honesty. Our submarines that were blown up in the roadstead of Tallinn are a loss, but the German ships that were finished by our aircraft and that were flooded by crews are not. Strange ...
It is indisputable (and in this I agree with the excreters) that in our fleet headquarters we had ... not very smart men. Which did not really understand how you can use combat surface ships, except in the role of floating artillery batteries. And the submarines shoved through the nets and mines, instead of taking and breaking the setting of these mines. As in 1918 on the same Baltic. Just do not compare the crews of those years, because there were more problems in 1918. And in the Great Patriotic War could well happen. Because the fleet was quite impressive. And two battleships (albeit old ones, like mammoth excrement) could well disperse German minelayers. About the herd of cruisers, I am silent. And about the morale of the sailors, too. Instead, the fleet was locked in a puddle, the sailors were sent to the front, they were fired from guns somewhere at the accumulations of troops. I personally am very skeptical of such shooting. Especially when I read how the “Parisian Commune” on the Black Sea in 6 — a point storm led fire to the area of Old Crimea ...
Nowadays, many writers are prone to generalizations. Knocked into the head to someone in Ukraine to make another statement on the topic "Russia - the enemy of Ukraine No. XXUMX" - it means that all Ukrainians consider us enemies. And in this way a lot of things are considered. "Stalin (Zhukov, Konev, the list is long) won the war with pure blood ..." And when was the war with candies won?
For such historical excrementators, who can easily operate with numbers, it seems that war seems to be a computer strategy. There is a headquarters moving the figures back and forth, and there are figures. Ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, no more. And so the war is going on, all according to Hasek: “Di стеrste column marshirt ...”
And, starting from tsiferok, high-intelligence conclusions are made, such as the one I quoted. All that can be said to such (without the use of appropriate vocabulary) historical geek is only one thing: “Do you yourself imagine what you are croaking about?”.
Of course he is. It was he who blindly (without radar and computers) calculated the combat course of the submarine and successfully hit three out of three torpedoes. For him it was not a problem to lay bombs on the deck of a ship moving and firing from all anti-aircraft barrels. He can do everything. Therefore, he dares to evaluate the actions of others. And for some reason, such evolutionary errors are becoming more and more. The aforementioned assault is resting compared to other history buffs. With affectionate description of the performance characteristics and the actions of the German ships, hanging themselves on the title of the Reich ... But I still come back to them. There is something to talk about.
Probably, to the great surprise of such excreters, I will report the following: the navy is not only admirals. And not only ships. It is also people.
These are people of the fleet who gave themselves to the fleet despite the most idiotic orders from above. Sailors, mechanics, torpedoists, gunners, signalmen, signalmen ... hundreds of thousands. It was they who inflicted damage on the enemy, and not your colleagues, armchair warriors. And inflicted in the end. Yes, the fleet was nothing more than an assistant to the ground forces in this war, mostly, yes, due to the limitations and stupidity of its leaders. But he was a fleet. On the contrary, at the beginning of the century, were there intelligent and experienced generals and admirals in the army and navy? Were What could they do when the army and navy collapsed due to the propaganda of the European Bolsheviks? Never mind! Hence morality — a general without an army — is an empty place. Conversely, an army, even without a general, is an army. And the fleet without admiral is also a fleet. What, in fact, was proven during the Great Patriotic War. The fleet was, and fought the enemy, and inflicted damage no less.
In the old days there was a saying: “I have the honor!”. By saying this, he made it clear that he had the presence (estate, possession) of this very honor. Well, I can not understand why the opposite is happening. Why did the honor of German sailors and submariners raped our Internet (and not only) hacks?
http://www.nazireich.net.
http://www.forum-tvs.ru/index.php?showtopic=59806
Achkasov, V.I., Basov A.V., Sumin A.I. and others.
"The Battle Way of the Soviet Navy"
S. Patyanin and M. Morozov "German destroyers of the Second World War"
Random link when searching brought me to a very interesting forum. A forum discussing the topics of Ekho Moskvy radio broadcasts. Well, we know whose echo it is, and to hell with it. And on this forum I got acquainted with the next rezunovets. Cattle, I must say, prepared, reasoning their conclusions, and so on. But something about something washed washed.
Mr. Rezun on the forum is called assault-50. At the end of the material, as expected, I will provide a link to his material, who wants to - get acquainted. The material is old, but has something to do with my articles, and besides, it is very high-quality fabricated. And, using this “material” as an example, I want to show HOW history is being remade. That is, how the facts are distorted so that everything looks believable.
I quote this:
“What are the losses of our fleet? During the Great Patriotic War (from June 22, 1941 to May 09, 1945), the Soviet Navy irretrievably lost the following ships of the main classes (in the fleets).
Northern Fleet:
destroyers: "Swift", "Smash", "Active";
submarines: K-1, K-2, K-3, K-22, K-23, D-3, U-401, U-402, U-403, U-421, U-422, C-54 , C-55, M-106, M-108, M-121, M-122, M-172, M-173, M-174, M-175, M-176, L-16 (11 October 1942 of the year the Northern Fleet was torpedoed in the Pacific either by the Japanese submarine I-25, or by the American submarine S-31), B-1 (former British S-21; 27 July 1944 of the year left the English naval base Scapa Flow, heading to the Soviet port of Polar, but the next day was mistakenly sunk by an English patrol plane);
special guard patrol ships: "Brilliant", "Pearl".
Baltic Fleet:
battleship "Marat" (September 23, 1941 attacked on the inner raid of Kronstadt German aviation, lost the bow on the 52nd frame along with the gun turret and all bow superstructures, the power plant was completely out of order, sank in shallow water on the upper deck, raised on September 17, 1942, the “stump” without bow was put into operation in mid-1943 years as a non-self-propelled floating artillery battery "Petropavlovsk". The loss was never officially recognized and continued to be considered a full-fledged battleship in Soviet public documents);
destroyers: "Yakov Sverdlov", "Volodarsky", "Artyom", "Engels", "Lenin", "Karl Marx", "Kalinin", "Angry", "Proud", "Sharp-witted", "Brave", " Severe "," stately "," fast "," angry ";
submarines: П-1, П-2 (damaged by German aviation, decommissioned), П-3 (damaged by German aviation, decommissioned), L-1, L-2, W-301, W-302, W-304, S -305, U-306, U-308, U-311, U-317, U-319, U-320, U-322, U-323, U-324, U-405, U-406, U-408 , W-411, C-1, C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6, C-7, C-8, C-9, C-10, C-11, C-12, M -71, M-72, M-74, M-78, M-80, M-81, M-83, M-94, M-95, M-96, M-97, M-98, M-99 , M-103, Ronis (formerly Latvian), Spidola (formerly Latvian), Kalev (formerly Estonian);
special patrol ships: “The Tempest”, “Cyclone”, “Purga”, “Snow”, “Coral” (formerly Lithuanian), “Virsaitis” (formerly Latvian).
Black Sea Fleet:
light cruisers: Chervona Ukraina, Komintern (outdated, commissioned in 1908, actually an artillery training ship);
the leaders of the destroyers: "Moscow", "Kharkov", "Tashkent" (formerly Italian);
destroyers: "Frunze", "Dzerzhinsky", "Shaumyan", "Fast", "Merciless", "Impeccable", "Vigilant", "Intelligent", "Able", "Perfect", "Free";
submarines: A-1, A-3, D-4, D-6, L-6, L-23, L-24, L-25, W-203, W-204, W-206, W-208 , U-210, U-211, U-212, U-213, U-214, U-216, C-32, C-34, M-31, M-33, M-34, M-36, M -51, M-58, M-59, M-60, M-118, TS-2 (formerly Romanian S-2).
In addition to the above mentioned once and for all dead, there were still sunk (usually in shallow water), but then raised and had time to re-enter service until the end of the war. These include the following ships of the main classes:
in the Northern Fleet - patrol ship of a special construction "Smerch";
in the Baltic Fleet - the heavy cruiser Tallinn (in fact, the unfinished Lutz obtained from 1940 from Germany, rarely used during the war as a self-propelled floating artillery battery), the destroyer Minsk destroyer, the destroyer destroyer Stereguschy built "Whirlwind".
During the war, almost all other (not sunk) Soviet surface ships of the main classes suffered damage of varying degrees of severity, including very serious ones. For example, in the Baltic near the light cruiser "Maxim Gorky" the bow was torn off, and on the Black Sea near the light cruiser "Molotov" - feed.
It is safe to say that all the Soviet main combat surface ships and submarines that were available would have been guaranteed to be destroyed during the four years of the war if they were used with proper intensity (say, like the British), and were not defended in the ports - away from the zone active fighting. This is especially characteristic of the Baltic Fleet, which was distinguished during the war by its rare mediocrity. The Black Sea Fleet acted a little better, but even the Northern Fleet, which stood out against their background in the advantageous direction, did not avoid an epidemic in the final year and a half of evading their direct duties (if you recall how, in the last months of the war, German submarines swept off its surface ships with extraordinary ease high seas on coastal bases). True, the sad results did not in the least prevent distributing ranks and awards and receiving Heroes of the Soviet Union on every trifling occasion. And compose "heroic" stories.
Declared in various Soviet official and semi-official publications as allegedly destroyed by the influence of the Soviet weapons German training artillery ship "Schleswig-Holstein" (the old battleship, in the Soviet publications designated by the OCs as "bat"); marked in the secret "Handbook ..." by 26 of the year) have no relation to the Soviet military efforts at sea, and the German training artillery ship "Schlesien" (the old battleship, in Soviet publications is designated as "battleship") and the German unfinished heavy cruiser "Zeidlits "(in the" Directory ... "from X NUMX of the year is listed as destroyed by the "cruiser", in other Soviet books - now destroyed, then damaged) are only indirectly. The real fate of each of these ships is well known.
Schleswig-Holstein in December 1944 was heavily damaged by British aviation, which made several raids on Gotenhafen, where the ship was at that time. He sat on the ground, then was raised and towed to Danzig. Here 21 March 1945 of the year and was flooded by his crew, pre-exploded the most important elements of the equipment of the ship.
"Schlesien" first hit a mine of unidentified accessories, and then underwent several raids of Soviet aircraft and received new damage. The 04 of May 1945, shortly before the capture of Swinemünde by Soviet troops, was blown up by the crew and flooded on the upper deck on the roadstead of this port.
"Seidlits" (part of the Kriegsmarine never entered) for the 1942 year was ready at 90 percent, and in 1942, they began to rebuild it into an aircraft carrier. In 1943, the hull (without superstructures) was towed to the wall of the Shikhau shipyard in Pillau (now the Russian Baltiysk). At the beginning of 1944, turned into a blockhash. (Blockhead - the hull of the vessel used in the port or on the roadstead as a floating warehouse or dwelling.) 09 on April 1945 of the year was damaged (moderately) during a Soviet air raid on the port and the next day was flooded by order of the shipyard administration.
In addition to surface ships, the Soviet can record at their own expense German submarines U9, U78, U144, U250, U362, U639 and the Italian ultra-small ("dwarf") submarine CB-5 that were reliably destroyed during the Great Patriotic War. Controversially supposedly Soviet armed forces sunk German U286 submarines (unlikely), U344 (possible), U387 (very possible), U585 (unlikely), U679 (very possible). For unknown reasons, the German U367, U479, U676, and U745 submarines were killed in the zone of the Soviet fleet. When Soviet ground forces approached their home ports, their crews flooded German U18 submarines (previously damaged by Soviet aircraft), U19, U20, U23, U24 (previously damaged by Soviet aircraft), U763 (previously damaged by British aircraft). The destruction of German submarines U7, U345, U382, U446, U580, U583, U702, U803, U854, U1000, U2331, U2342, is a Soviet propaganda propaganda claimed by the Soviet armed forces.
For acquaintance with the Soviet propaganda style of work, I will cite an excerpt from the book of a group of authors with titles ranging from candidate of military-marine sciences to candidate of historical sciences "Twice Red Banner Baltic Fleet", Military Publishing House, Moscow, 1990 year. Summing up the war in the Baltic, this book, on the 278 page, "voiced" the official Soviet version of the German losses to the Finns and the sea losses (I quote): "Among the dissimilar forces of the Baltic Fleet were the 2 battleship, the coastal defense battleship, the 3 cruiser, 16 destroyers, 18 patrol ships, 16 submarines, 59 minesweepers, 41 airborne artillery ship. " (end of quoting). Pay attention - this is only on the Baltic. The names and numbers of the destroyed ships and submarines are not given in the book, with the exception of the Schleswig-Holstein and Schleszien and Orion, Niobe and Zeidlitz cruisers already mentioned above. It is incredible that the historical department of the USSR Navy Headquarters, under whose leadership such books were produced, did not know a single name and not a single crew number of at least one of the ships drowned by "valiant Baltic" ships, from squadron destroyers, before 1990? ! Then how do we know who and how much they drowned ?! ”
Here is such parsley. That is, the Soviet Navy sucks, and Kriegsmarine taxis. On paper, everything looks quite meaningful, if not for a couple of moments.
The moment the first. Notice how the author presents the statistics. In the confrontation of the two sides are considered the loss of the Soviet Navy and the confirmed VICTORY of the Soviet fleet. That is, we consider EVERYTHING, and for the Germans, only that 100% is ditched by our sailors. I do not know about you, but I find it more than strange. What do we compare? To count victories - count on both sides. To count losses is similar. And so, sorry, another nonsense comes out. Yes, and with a specific purpose.
The girl looks at the destroyer of the Northern Fleet "Smashing" in the harbor
At the very first paragraph of our losses is the EM "Smashing". I had the honor to write about the tragedy of this ship, and I, as the author, wonder why in the context of the article the northern seas are enlisted as allies of the Germans?
Further. The German destroyers Z-35 and Z-36, which in December 1944 exploded in the Gulf of Finland and drowned.
Funny, right? Our destroyer who sank because of the storm is a loss. Yes, this is definitely the loss of our battle fleet by our fleet. And the two Germans who blew up on mines are not a loss of nichrome, so they are not considered. In, arithmetic, right?
An amusing approach: a Soviet ship that hit a mine is a ship SINGLELY hit by a German mine. Or Finnish. The German ship is in question. Well, can not a German destroyer fly into a Soviet mine in any way, right?
With regard to these two utopians, I will give this example.
I quote Sergey Patyanin and Miroslav Morozov "German destroyers of the Second World War:" On the eve of his (exit), Kote held a short meeting, at which he gave a number of instructions, which later played an extremely negative role. First, all subordinate ships were forbidden to use radio equipment, including the VHF range, and radar equipment.They could only exchange light signals, which was not quite suitable for the night time in the winter period. Secondly, the fleet headquarters Lee took full responsibility for the chart pad that under the disciplined German Navy led to the fact that it did not lead the rest of the navigators destroyers.
The flotilla went to sea in December 7.00 11. At first the weather was pretty good, but then it deteriorated noticeably - low clouds hung over the sea, it started to rain. Visibility at times dropped so much that neighboring ships could see each other only from the flames coming out of the chimneys. For one and a half hours with 16.25, destroyers could observe Faro’s lighthouse on the northern tip of Fr. Gotland, but none of the navigators (perhaps with the exception of the flagship) tried to establish the true place. ”
And it seems that because of this, the whole detachment climbed into its minefield and left two destroyers there.
And right there I have a lot of questions:
1. Was the commander of the group Kote an idiot? Because as soon as an idiot can give such an order - do not use radars. No comments at all.
2. Does the exchange of light signals not suitable at night?
3. Were the German navigators morons who scored on their duties and did not bother to determine the location of the ship, watching the lighthouse for an hour and a half?
4. Taking into account p.3, where did the Germans get that they are in their field? Yes, there it says in the text that the navigator took the coordinates on one destroyer. Mines are torn, ships are sinking, and he, a poor fellow, does his job with a steady hand. Khira Reich, what can I say ... A true Aryan with a Nordic character, since he was able to do this. Previously, it was simply impossible to do, but now, regardless of the difficulties ... In short, the Soviet Information Bureau smokes nervously on the sidelines.
Okay, I’m ready to believe that pedantic and trained German navigators paved the way around the pack of “Belomor”, sailed with the radar turned off, didn’t determine their place because they made the course for them at headquarters (delirium!) ... Sorry I do not believe. What so gallant representatives Kriegsmarine floated closing their eyes on their own minefield ... Brad. And even if it is not nonsense, if all this is true, you can be glad for the death of a crowd of sheep. But personally, I think that they were blown up not by their mines. And all this nonsense was invented by them and fed to us. This is easier than to admit that they ran into our mines. Another question is, will they eat everything?
The history of the destroyers T-22, T-30, T-32 is written as a carbon copy. All the same: turned off radar, lack of communication, etc. Well, the fact was added that the mines were installed from the landing barges, without special binding, so that the theoretical and actual finding of the minefield might not be the same ... It was not until 1944 that the Germans knew where their minefield was? Oops ... Okay, drove by. But T-32 did not drown after activating two minutes (turned out to be strong), our aircraft finished off in half a day. And also does not count.
More about a couple of their fellows.
T-31. Drowned TK Senior Lieutenant Taronenko and Lieutenant Bushuyev. The German admiral F. Ruge claims that "the Russians attacked bravely, and their tactics were good." Probably two torpedoes hit the T-31, and he quickly sank 20 June in 0 hours 03 minutes at the point with coordinates 60 ° 16′N, 28 ° 17′O. Crew loss accounted for 82 man. Part of the survivors was raised aboard Soviet boats (6 people), 86 rescued by Finnish boats (including the commander of the destroyer captain-lieutenant Peter Pirkham). The Finns have seen, the Germans have seen ... who do not need - he did not see.
T-34. On the morning of November 20 1944, the T-34 conducted firing at the Hessen target ship, an explosion thundered under his keel. The stern part was destroyed, but a number of structural elements on the starboard side survived. Soon the destroyer lay on the port side and sank. 67 seamen were killed along with the ship. The place of death is the area of Cape Ancona at the coordinates of 54 ° 40'N, 13 ° 29'О. The cause of death is an explosion on a mine set by the submarine "L-3" (captain of the 3 rank, VN Konovalov). (No, mine was definitely English ... or Martian).
T-36. 4 May 1945 g. Goes out to sea with the floating base "Yagd" and a group of destroyers. The goal is to move from Swinemünde to Copenhagen. The destroyer returned to Swinemünde after a blast on a British aircraft mine. One turbine failed. The destroyer discovered 6 Soviet aircraft, it was the IL-2 from the 7 Guards assault regiment of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. During the attack, "T-36" was fired cannon-machine-gun fire, and then bombs were dropped on it. Several bombs fell into the destroyer, large losses occurred among the crew, and the ship sank.
Here is such a strange statistic.
About "Schlesien" I just keep quiet. Drowned and good. And who he was in life - the battleship, battleship, training ship or minesweeper - personally, I don't care how they call him. The essence is exclusively in the negative of four 280-mm guns that beat on our troops. And the fact that a start was made by an “unidentified mine” - excuse me, but who prevented me from going and establishing her nationality? Oh, her absence? So what are the problems ??? Aviation affiliation installed? Great, who is the last - that and dad.
Next, about submarines. Everything is clear, if our submarine went missing or it was blown up by mines - this is 100% German mine. And if something happened to a German submarine, that’s anything but our mines and ships.
About our submarines I have already said enough. But for the Germans I will argue slightly.
U286. (in the opinion of that author, unlikely). Probably because our Karl Liebknecht shot and threw bombs at her. 22 April 1945 of the Northern Fleet squadron Karl Liebknecht, commanded by Lieutenant Commander KD Staritsyn, while in the guard of the convoy, with the help of a hydroacoustic station, he found a submarine and dropped all the depth stock on it bombs. Four minutes later, the boat emerged with a strongly raised stern in 45-50 m from the side of the destroyer. Her cabin was broken, the periscopes were bent, the antennas were cut off. She was fired at by guns and machine guns, and she immediately sank. It is believed that so died U-286. Sank or plunged after it was thrown to the surface by an explosion - what's the difference? The fact that she didn’t contact her anymore. I suspect the sailors from the destroyer also didn’t care about the number of the submarine, they did their job. But I feel sorry for them.
German submarine U-250 (type VII-C) in dry dock in Kronstadt. 30 was sunk on June 1944 of the year in the Bjorke-Zunda area by the depth charges of the MO-103 submarine hunter (commander senior lieutenant AP Kolenko). X-NUMX crew members "U-46" died. Six, including the commander managed to save. 250 September 14, the submarine was raised, towed to Koivisto, and then to Kronstadt where it was docked
U344 (possible), 22.8.1944 destroyer "Daring" about the seal bow bent?
U387 (very possible), a thorough comparison of domestic and foreign sources suggests that only the survivor "Zhivuchy" can claim victory, 8 December 1944, he rammed an unknown submarine, which can be identified as U-387. Yes, you can identify it, because there was no more news from her either. Not the Martians dragged ...
U585 (unlikely), March 30 1942, the Thunderstorm destroyer (commander of 2 rank 2, A.I. Turin) found the submarine and attacked it, dropping 9 large and 8 small depth charges. At the dive site of the submarine surfaced debris, paper, oil stains appeared. Presumably, it was a submarine U-585.
U679 (very possible). January 9 This submarine, located in the Baltic Sea northeast of Pakri Lighthouse, was attacked and, possibly, destroyed by the depth bombs of the MO-1945 submarine hunter. Officially confirmed by the enemy.
It turns out that the MO-124 account is already the second problem: according to a number of 26 sources, December 1944 of the year he sank the U-2342 submarine of the XXIII series. The Germans, she is listed as dead on a mine.
For unknown reasons, German U-boats were killed in the area of the Soviet fleet.
U367. The most likely cause of death of the submarine - minefield, delivered by the Soviet submarine L-21.
U479. Officially, the Germans "went missing." According to our data - it was rammed by the Soviet submarine "Lembit". Although, our historians note that Lembit has no traces of such a ram. Yes, the incident with the damage of the nose of the submarine was, but agreed on the opinion that it was not a German submarine.
U676. Mines
U745. Mines
U-416. The reason for her death of 12 December 1944 of the year is also attributed to mines. Perhaps it was a mine, exhibited by the Soviet submarine L-3.
A little different arithmetic. In general, the approach that “the Germans were great, our wooon how many lost, the Germans were great, and ours are not, because they drowned so little”, to put it mildly, it is biased. And roughly speaking ...
If we take the losses of our submarines on the same Baltic, then 4 boats were lost from the actions of the German fleet and 5 from the actions of the Finns and Swedes. The rest - the same mines, aircraft, in two cases, land artillery. But we are talking about all 46 ... And then, again, about accuracy and honesty. Our submarines that were blown up in the roadstead of Tallinn are a loss, but the German ships that were finished by our aircraft and that were flooded by crews are not. Strange ...
It is indisputable (and in this I agree with the excreters) that in our fleet headquarters we had ... not very smart men. Which did not really understand how you can use combat surface ships, except in the role of floating artillery batteries. And the submarines shoved through the nets and mines, instead of taking and breaking the setting of these mines. As in 1918 on the same Baltic. Just do not compare the crews of those years, because there were more problems in 1918. And in the Great Patriotic War could well happen. Because the fleet was quite impressive. And two battleships (albeit old ones, like mammoth excrement) could well disperse German minelayers. About the herd of cruisers, I am silent. And about the morale of the sailors, too. Instead, the fleet was locked in a puddle, the sailors were sent to the front, they were fired from guns somewhere at the accumulations of troops. I personally am very skeptical of such shooting. Especially when I read how the “Parisian Commune” on the Black Sea in 6 — a point storm led fire to the area of Old Crimea ...
Nowadays, many writers are prone to generalizations. Knocked into the head to someone in Ukraine to make another statement on the topic "Russia - the enemy of Ukraine No. XXUMX" - it means that all Ukrainians consider us enemies. And in this way a lot of things are considered. "Stalin (Zhukov, Konev, the list is long) won the war with pure blood ..." And when was the war with candies won?
For such historical excrementators, who can easily operate with numbers, it seems that war seems to be a computer strategy. There is a headquarters moving the figures back and forth, and there are figures. Ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, no more. And so the war is going on, all according to Hasek: “Di стеrste column marshirt ...”
And, starting from tsiferok, high-intelligence conclusions are made, such as the one I quoted. All that can be said to such (without the use of appropriate vocabulary) historical geek is only one thing: “Do you yourself imagine what you are croaking about?”.
Of course he is. It was he who blindly (without radar and computers) calculated the combat course of the submarine and successfully hit three out of three torpedoes. For him it was not a problem to lay bombs on the deck of a ship moving and firing from all anti-aircraft barrels. He can do everything. Therefore, he dares to evaluate the actions of others. And for some reason, such evolutionary errors are becoming more and more. The aforementioned assault is resting compared to other history buffs. With affectionate description of the performance characteristics and the actions of the German ships, hanging themselves on the title of the Reich ... But I still come back to them. There is something to talk about.
Probably, to the great surprise of such excreters, I will report the following: the navy is not only admirals. And not only ships. It is also people.
These are people of the fleet who gave themselves to the fleet despite the most idiotic orders from above. Sailors, mechanics, torpedoists, gunners, signalmen, signalmen ... hundreds of thousands. It was they who inflicted damage on the enemy, and not your colleagues, armchair warriors. And inflicted in the end. Yes, the fleet was nothing more than an assistant to the ground forces in this war, mostly, yes, due to the limitations and stupidity of its leaders. But he was a fleet. On the contrary, at the beginning of the century, were there intelligent and experienced generals and admirals in the army and navy? Were What could they do when the army and navy collapsed due to the propaganda of the European Bolsheviks? Never mind! Hence morality — a general without an army — is an empty place. Conversely, an army, even without a general, is an army. And the fleet without admiral is also a fleet. What, in fact, was proven during the Great Patriotic War. The fleet was, and fought the enemy, and inflicted damage no less.
In the old days there was a saying: “I have the honor!”. By saying this, he made it clear that he had the presence (estate, possession) of this very honor. Well, I can not understand why the opposite is happening. Why did the honor of German sailors and submariners raped our Internet (and not only) hacks?
http://www.nazireich.net.
http://www.forum-tvs.ru/index.php?showtopic=59806
Achkasov, V.I., Basov A.V., Sumin A.I. and others.
"The Battle Way of the Soviet Navy"
S. Patyanin and M. Morozov "German destroyers of the Second World War"
Information