Monitor vs drones

37
Monitor vs drones
Erebus monitor in Dover harbor in 1917


“... not a single oared vessel will enter there,
and no great ship will pass."

Isaiah 33:21

History weapons. Today application drones with a warhead on board, no one can be surprised. Moreover, these can be aircraft, and remotely controlled boats, and even obsolete ones loaded with explosives. Tanks and BTR. But everything that is thought up today, once already was before.



Perhaps what was created before was not as perfect as what is done today, but, in spite of everything, these “notions” worked. And they became the first, and maybe the second or even the third (who counted them?) step to the current perfection. And now, when a variety of technical innovations are used in the course of the CBO, we will now tell you about one such development ...

And it happened that even during the First World War, the British had to re-engage in the construction of monitors that could operate off the coast where "a large ship would not pass." The most powerful ships of this type in English navy were monitors "Erebus" and "Terror", the order for the construction of which was received in 1915.

Erebus, which we, in fact, will discuss, was built at the Harland and Wolf shipyard in Govan (Glasgow region), in the same place where the ill-fated Titanic was also built.

They built the ship quickly, paying attention to ensuring good seaworthiness and speed. And, careful study of its contours played a role: during the tests, the ship was able to develop a speed of 14,1 knots, while the power of its car was 7 hp. With. By the way, "Erebus" was the fifth ship of the British Navy, which bore this name.


"Terror" on slipway No. 3 of the shipyard "Harland and Wolfe" in Belfast. It was here that the monitor "Lord Clive" and the liner "Titanic" were built. Pay attention to the downright huge boules along the sides, running almost along the entire monitor body

The beginning of the First World War was marked by the death of several British ships at once from torpedoes. Therefore, for monitors that were supposed to operate off enemy coasts, where they could be subjected to torpedo attacks by both destroyers and submarines, as well as run into mines, protecting the hull from underwater explosions became a priority.

A section of the side of a merchant ship was tested and determined that a 350 meter (157 ft) wide boule would suffice to be protected against a 3 lb (10 kg) charge. Inside the hull, sealed steel tubes showed the best results.

Then the charges were blown up at the side of the unfinished battleship and found out that with a boule width of 2,3 meters, it can withstand the explosion of a 400-pound charge (180 kg), while the pipes inside were crushed, but the board itself was practically not damaged. Therefore, it was decided to "reward" the new ships with just such boules, designed to provide them with complete protection against the then torpedoes.

In addition, inside the boules were also divided by transverse bulkheads into as many as 50 compartments, which further strengthened anti-torpedo protection.

In general, the ship turned out and, moreover, was considered one of the most powerful ships in its class in the Royal Navy of the First World War. He could engage in battle with a cruiser, and even for shelling the coast of his weapons were more than enough. The seaworthiness of the ship was also considered by specialists to be very good for a ship of this class.


The tower with 381-mm guns of the Terror monitor, and exactly the same and with the same guns, stood on the Erebus. A conning tower with narrow horizontal slots is visible in front of the tower.

The armament of the Erebus was exceptionally powerful compared to other monitors and consisted of two 381-mm guns of the Mk I model in a turret in the forward part of the hull. Auxiliary caliber - 152-mm guns, stood on the deck behind the armor shields.

Due to the fact that the monitor tower was mounted on a high barbette, which, in turn, made it possible to increase the elevation angle of the gun barrels, it was possible to maximize the firing range of the main caliber, which was about 36 meters.


Armor scheme of the Erebus monitor. Interestingly, another rudder was provided in the bow of the hull to increase maneuverability.

The armor was quite solid and on the sides was 102 mm, which guaranteed protection against medium-caliber projectiles at any distance.

The monitor was put into operation in September 1916 and was immediately sent to serve where it was most expected - to support the flank of the British army, resting on the sea off the Belgian coast, with fire. The combat work of the monitor was to conduct regular shelling of German positions near Zeebrugge.

The Germans could do almost nothing to counter strikes from the sea. They attacked his sistership "Terror" with torpedoes from destroyers, but even if three torpedoes hit the side, they could not sink it! Therefore, it was decided to use the most modern and, in fact, experimental weapons at that time against Erebus - an exploding boat controlled by radio. At that time, the development of such boats, which had the designation FL-12 (Fernlenkboot, which literally means "remote-controlled boat"), was carried out by Siemens.


German FL-12 goes on the attack!

The German superweapon was a 17 m long motorboat loaded with 700 kg of explosives, which was specifically designed to aim at Royal Navy monitors off the coast of Flanders. The boats were equipped with internal combustion engines and were controlled by wire from the shore. The length of the wire was 20 kilometers, and the coil itself with wires weighed 800 kg. It was possible to use an airplane to transmit signals to the coast station by radio.

The commands that the operator could execute were as follows: check the system, start the engine, stop the engine, set the rudder, turn on the lights so that the boat could be tracked in the dark, detonate the charge in case the boat was captured if it did not hit the target. The boats could reach speeds of up to 30 knots (56 km/h).

On March 1, 1917, an FL boat crashed into the Newport pier, and on October 28, 1917, the boat attacked the Erebus monitor, thus becoming the first ship in history to be attacked by a remotely controlled combat device.

On this day, the Erebus was 40 miles away from the Belgian port of Ostend. Naturally, the German command knew about the presence of a British monitor in that area and decided to use a remotely controlled exploding boat against it.

In this case, the boat involved was carrying not 700, but 230 kg of explosives. He went to sea at 13:20 and at first 25 minutes was controlled by wire from the shore, and then the aircraft took control of the boat, at 14:18 sent it to the monitor. FL-12 struck "Erebus" almost in the middle of the side. But a large explosion could not inflict fatal damage on the monitor, although it did a large hole in its bule. But the board was not broken. Therefore, the monitor returned to the base under its own power, and was repaired for only two weeks.

So it can hardly be considered a success. But the example itself was very revealing. The British were unable to sink the attacking boat, and most likely did not even understand what it was. And if he had not 230, but 700 kg of explosives on board, the damage from his detonation could be much more serious.


Erebus main battery guns and 4-inch anti-aircraft gun

So this explosion did not affect the military career of Erebus. In 1919, he was involved in the Baltic and the White Sea, participating in the intervention against Soviet Russia, and after the outbreak of World War II in October 1940, he fired at German positions at Dunkirk. Sent in 1942 to the East, he participated in the battles with the Japanese near Ceylon, was damaged, and then repaired in Bombay.

Returning from the Indian Ocean at the end of 1942, he was sent to the Mediterranean in 1943, where he provided artillery support for the Allied landings in Sicily and southern Italy. In July, he fired on German troops in the Syracuse region, and in September he supported the landing of the British in Calabria.


Erebus in 1944

Erebus also took an active part during the landing operation in Normandy ... On August 10, in a battle with the coastal batteries of Le Havre, he was damaged and was out of action for some time. Nevertheless, he showed excellent shooting results: 30 shells out of 130 fired hit enemy targets.

After the end of the war, they again wanted to send the monitor to the East, but in 1946 it was written off and in 1947 it was scrapped. On this, the fate of the ship - the first victim of remote-controlled weapons, ended successfully!


Another photograph of an Erebus monitor in 1944 with Wilkinson's distorted coloration. Two anti-aircraft "pom-poms" are visible under the main caliber tower

PS


Photographs from the Imperial Archives of the War Museum were used as illustrations.
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    9 July 2023 05: 48
    Yes, the ship fought, and on such different theaters, you just wonder!
    1. +12
      9 July 2023 07: 57
      There are a lot of photos of "Erebus" in the article, and "Terror" is just one photo on the slipway. Not fair. Let's fix it - photo monitor "Terror"






      1. +12
        9 July 2023 08: 03
        Two sisterships from the same angle:
        Monitor "Terror" 1916

        Monitor "Erebus" 1927
      2. 0
        10 July 2023 12: 40
        Lucky ship came out! Although it looks awkward) A sort of frigate with a battleship tower)
        1. +2
          11 July 2023 02: 47
          Only now the protection against mines and torpedoes was better than that of any battleship! And they were lucky not to get hit by bombers
    2. 0
      11 July 2023 10: 14
      Quote: andrewkor
      Yes, the ship fought, and on such different theaters, you just wonder!

      Exactly! It turns out that he is not a victim, but a victim. feel
  2. +9
    9 July 2023 05: 48
    Vyacheslav Olegovich!
    After the title of the article, it would be appropriate to insert as an "epigraph-explanation":
    Monitor (English monitor "observer, controller") - a class of low-sided armored ships with powerful artillery weapons, mainly coastal or river action, to suppress coastal batteries and destroy enemy coastal targets.

    So that some civilians who are far from nautical terms and word formations do not need to monitor Wikipedia.
    hi
    1. +11
      9 July 2023 06: 07
      Quote: ROSS 42
      there was no need to monitor Wikipedia.

      Looking at the monitor! wink
    2. +3
      9 July 2023 14: 45
      So that some civilians who are far from nautical terms and word formations do not need to monitor Wikipedia.

      Now it remains for little, to show off knowledge and name at least one ship of this type, which officially as a "monitor" was listed as part of the Russian Imperial Navy. good
      1. +2
        10 July 2023 20: 37
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka

        Now it remains for little, to show off knowledge and name at least one ship of this type, which officially as a "monitor" was listed as part of the Russian Imperial Navy. good
        Monitor "Mermaid"
        "Sister" "Mermaids" - "Enchantress"
        In September 1893, the Rusalka monitor sank in a 8-magnitude storm... the remains of the ship were found in 1932 by EPRON divers.
        hi
  3. +1
    9 July 2023 05: 52
    An interesting historical fact. But in general, 700 kg of explosives were on board the boat and the damage to the monitor was not limited to a hole in the bule, but they report the detonation of one of the cellars, or shots from the first stage of anti-mine guns.
  4. +6
    9 July 2023 06: 28
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, Thank you!
    And the fate of the "Terror" was apparently not as eventful as that of the "Erebus"?

    PS. We often already, when reading the headline, make assumptions about the main text that is yet to be read. So I immediately had questions about how the choice of a monitor can affect the speed of detection of an enemy UAV. )
    Thank you!
    1. +2
      9 July 2023 09: 33
      Quote from Fangaro
      And the fate of the "Terror" was apparently not as eventful as that of the "Erebus"?

      Equally intense, but less happy. If my memory serves me right, sunk by the German-Italians in the Mediterranean Sea in 1943. off the coast of Tunisiahi
  5. +2
    9 July 2023 07: 49
    That's interesting.
    I thought there would be a post about the fact that the monitor (ship) is the best tool against modern drones. They say underwater protection, thick armor, low silhouette (semi-submerged), plus camouflage, make such a ship ideal in general for the revival of "river battleships" (from the "battleships will return" sect)
  6. +16
    9 July 2023 07: 52
    At that time, the development of such boats, which had the designation FL-12 (Fernlenkboot, which literally means "remote-controlled boat"), was carried out by Siemens.




    The boats were called Fernlenkboot. The numbers are the serial number of the boats produced. A total of seventeen were released.
    The boats were equipped with internal combustion engines and were controlled by wire from the shore. The length of the wire was 20 kilometers, and the coil itself with wires weighed 800 kg. It was possible to use an airplane to transmit signals to the coast station by radio.

    Here the case is the other way around. Since it is impossible to visually observe the boat at a distance of 20 kilometers (and subsequently the cable length was increased to 50 kilometers), it was possible to control it from an airplane or airship. The system was quite complex, since at that time commands could only be transmitted in Morse code.
    The command from the aircraft was received by coastal equipment and transmitted via cable to the boat.
    There were attempts to install a control panel to transmit commands via cable to an aircraft, airship or other ship, but they remained at the experimental stage.
    In this case, the boat involved was carrying not 700, but 230 kg of explosives.

    The boat carried the prescribed 700 kg. But since the impact fuse did not work, the boat was blown up remotely, so the effect was much lower.
    And the first ship in history attacked by naval drones was the British M24 monitor.



    On September 6, 1917, he was attacked by the FL 8 boat. But the crew noticed the threat in time and sank the boat when it was only 300 meters from the target.
    1. +7
      9 July 2023 13: 00
      Good afternoon, Vic.
      The M24 was lucky, but the M28 of the same type was very quickly sunk by the Goeben off the island of Imbros during a sortie by German cruisers to the Mediterranean.
      1. +3
        9 July 2023 13: 18
        M28 was very quickly sunk by the "Goeben" off the island of Imbros during a sortie of German cruisers in the Mediterranean




        Monitor, the Germans, of course, sank, even two. But then they hit a minefield. The cruiser Breslau caught five mines and sank, and Goeben, blown up by three mines, ran aground and then was repaired for more than two months.
        1. +3
          9 July 2023 13: 42
          Yes, I know. I was glad that Breslau finally "jumped". wink
          By the way, do you know what his Turkish name "Midilli" means?
          1. +5
            9 July 2023 15: 44
            By the way, do you know what his Turkish name "Midilli" means?

            City on the island of Lesbos. The famous Hayreddin Barbarossa is from there.
            1. +4
              9 July 2023 15: 56
              Thanks Vic. For some reason, I thought that this was a female name, it sounds like the chime of bells - Mi-di-ll-i. smile
              1. +4
                9 July 2023 16: 13
                For some reason I thought it was a female name

                Male. The name of the city - from the male name Muwatalli - the Hittite king.
                1. +4
                  9 July 2023 17: 00
                  However...how could you be wrong. request Well, no romance! laughing
  7. +4
    9 July 2023 09: 46
    Describing the fate of the ship (s), the author could mention that these monitors were also the first carriers (as an experiment) of 18-inch (451 mm) guns of 1918, like, and attempts to use them in combat. Single-gun shield installation closer to the stern.
    1. +9
      9 July 2023 11: 09
      Describing the fate of the ship (s), the author could mention that these monitors were also the first carriers (as an experiment) of 18-inch (451 mm) guns of 1918, like, and attempts to use them in combat. Single-gun shield installation closer to the stern.

      The Erebus-class monitors mentioned in the article were never armed with the BL 18-inch Mk I naval gun. This gun was mounted on a General Wolfe monitor, which belonged to the Lord Clive-class.

      1. +5
        9 July 2023 11: 31
        Well, sorry for the distortion. Memory is not like a computer request
        Thanks for the fixhi
        Isn't your series of articles on GB monitors in WWI published on one site? The illustrations and your knowledge of the topic are suggestive.
        1. +6
          9 July 2023 11: 44
          No not my. I am very tense with inspiration, so it is very rare that I manage to be honored with a publication.
          1. +7
            9 July 2023 11: 46
            This does not beg for the pithiness of your comments. Sincerely hi
      2. +5
        9 July 2023 15: 21
        The Erebus-class monitors mentioned in the article were never armed with the BL 18-inch Mk I naval gun. This gun was mounted on a General Wolfe monitor, which belonged to the Lord Clive-class.

        Hello Viktor Nikolaevich, the Britons on the General Wolf not only managed to squeeze in an 18 inch gun, but also kept 2 12 inch guns on the tank. True, the main caliber could only shoot to the side (if I'm not mistaken, within 10 degrees). There was also a second HMS (I forgot the name), but it was actually late for the theater (it managed to fire three times). Wolf, as far as I remember, fired a little over 80 shots.
        In our domestic qualification, monitors would be considered coastal defense battleships, or even gunboats. In the Soviet period, monitors were purely river ships. The only exception is the Hasan series, which had a river-sea class.
        1. +4
          9 July 2023 16: 08
          a series of Hassan who had a river-sea class

          Rather, "river - strait."
          1. +4
            9 July 2023 19: 50
            Quote from Frettaskyrandi
            a series of Hassan who had a river-sea class

            Rather, "river - strait."

            Agree! One of the reasons why fairly fresh and powerful ships were written off so early is the low seaworthiness even in the waters of the Amur mouth.
  8. +2
    9 July 2023 17: 42
    Instead of a booking scheme, a general arrangement scheme seems to be. Inches there, the caliber of the guns is indicated
    1. +2
      9 July 2023 19: 54
      Quote: Tlauicol
      Instead of a booking scheme, a general arrangement scheme seems to be. Inches there, the caliber of the guns is indicated

      There is this and that. One number is the thickness of the barabet armor, the second is the caliber of the gun..
      1. +2
        10 July 2023 04: 49
        No, there all the numbers are the calibers of guns or shells in the names of cellars and towers. And the guidance angle of the main gun.
        The booking scheme looks like this
        https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRKhHlns5m0LC_FnSWRzpp7z77F_cAlI2VH_A&usqp=CAU
  9. +1
    10 July 2023 08: 22
    Hmm...Oct 28, 1917
    Thanks to the author .. I did not know the details of the use of the first remote-controlled weapon.
    We have a revolution, they have the first kamikaze tele-boats.
    1. +3
      10 July 2023 08: 47
      I did not know the details of the use of the first remote-controlled weapon.

      This is not the first remotely controlled weapon. And not even the second. The first appeared in the XNUMXth century.



      Torpedo Ley. Approximately 1892. Controlled by a five-core cable.
  10. 0
    10 November 2023 10: 29
    Episode missing. In 1919, Erebus, as part of a squadron, came to Koporye Bay near St. Petersburg and fired at the Gray Horse fort, and one day came too close and received a 12" shell from Krasnaya Gorka. The damaged one went home in tow.
  11. 0
    17 November 2023 14: 42
    Rather, it’s not the monitor against the drones, but the drones against the monitor.