The shame of the Tirpitz, the Bismarck and the headache of the entire British fleet

246
The shame of the Tirpitz, the Bismarck and the headache of the entire British fleet

Probably, in the first lines it is worth immediately revealing everything written in the title, and there is no intrigue here: those who are knowledgeable in naval affairs will immediately understand who will be discussed. In my time I wrote quite a large number of articles about the cruisers of that war, and this trough was also called a cruiser, albeit an auxiliary one.

Who is to blame for the fact that the effectiveness of this pirate vessel turned out to be higher than that of the multi-thousand-ton giants, encased in armor and armed with guns of monstrous calibers? Who is to blame that two super battleships of the Kriegsmarine sank one ship with a displacement of 40 tons between them, and this misunderstanding sent ships with a displacement of 000 tons to the bottom?



And British fleet with its dozens of cruisers and hundreds of destroyers, it shouldn't stand aside either, since it was their ships that were being sunk. And all this "royal cavalry and royal army" couldn't do anything to counter... but who, actually?


The dry cargo ship Santa Cruz was launched in March 1938 and almost immediately purchased for its own needs by the Kriegsmarine. And in early 1940, it was converted into an auxiliary cruiser and given its own name, Thor.

In general, everything is like in the song from the cartoon: "What will you name the yacht..." The name turned out to be on topic, and one of the smallest raiders (only "Komet" was smaller) became one of the most terrible opponents of the allies.

But let's digress a little and try to imagine ourselves in the place of those who went to sea on these ships.

They left, knowing that they would most likely not return. To areas that are thousands of miles from their native shores, where there is no hope for any help, where the empire's fleet reigns, and whose ships they will have to hunt. And if something happens, you can only count on your crew.

Spiritual and romantic? Oh yes. One can only guess what kind of scumbags manned the crews that Germany called auxiliary cruisers and the rest of the world called raiders. And we'll go through history the most terrible of them.

Where Thor Began



The dry cargo ship Santa Cruz was launched on March 16, 1938 at the Deutsche Werft shipyard in Hamburg, and was one of two similar transport ships, but her sister ship was luckier: she was immediately bought by the Kriegsmarine and served as the submarine base Erwin Wassner.

Santa Cruz entered service in late 1939 - early 1940, and was converted into an auxiliary cruiser, receiving the designation "HSK 4" and the proper name "Thor".


The auxiliary cruiser Thor was commissioned on 15 March 1940. At that time, she was given the operational call sign Schiff 10. The British referred to Thor as Raider E, as she was the fifth raider discovered by British services.

The choice was quite good: Thor was a new ship, which meant that there were practically no problems with the machines and mechanisms. Yes, it was a steam-turbine ship, but even this turned out to be a plus: the raider did not consume scarce diesel fuel, its boilers ran on oil, freeing up fuel for submarines and units of the Deutschlands.

We had sorted out the basics, the new boilers and turbines could give the ship a speed of 17 knots, and the oil tanks provided a range of 40 miles. The large interior spaces of the dry cargo ship allowed for a lot of supplies, water, weapons and comfortable accommodation for the crew.

weaponry


As for the armament, there was no chic here. Naturally, such a phenomenon as a raider was armed on a residual basis. That is, they took from the arsenals the guns removed from the ships of the Kaiser's fleet.

In the case of the Thor, these were six 150 mm SK L/45 guns, model 1906, which had seen action in World War I. Most of the guns were pretty worn out, so the actual range of the barrels that had reached the end of their service life did not exceed 10 meters.


A 150mm gun on the deck of the Thor, disguised as a cable reel.

The ammunition complement of 300 high-explosive shells per gun consisted of shells with a base and head fuse. The shells also differed in the amount of explosives: with the same weight of 15,3 kg, shells with a base fuse carried 3,05 kg, and with a head fuse - 3,9 kg. A total of 1 high-explosive shells, 500 high-explosive tracer shells with a head fuse and 250 50-mm illumination shells were placed in the magazines.

Since Thor was smaller than its sister ships, the guns on it were placed slightly differently than on other ships:
- two were installed under the superstructure in front of the bridge;
- two - on the upper deck behind the superstructure;
- two - camouflaged in the extremities.


That is, the Thor could fire four guns simultaneously.

For the second voyage, the worn-out old guns were replaced with rapid-fire Tbk C/36 L/48 guns on a C/36 torpedo mount with a barrel length of 48 calibers, as on the Project 1936A destroyers.

Well, there was one more weapon: a 60 mm signal gun openly mounted on the forecastle, designed to give warning signals. It was a completely old gun with a firing range of no more than 4 meters. It was generally assumed that this gun and a searchlight were used to give signals to stop ships. And if the order was not followed, normal guns would fire to kill. But it turned out that the 000 mm boom gun was completely ineffective, and in the future, warning shots were fired from 60 mm guns.

Attention was also paid to anti-aircraft artillery. In the aft superstructure, a twin 37-mm anti-aircraft machine gun and four single-barrel 20-mm S/30 anti-aircraft machine guns with 2000 rounds per barrel were hidden. In general, small-caliber artillery, in addition to fighting aircraft, could normally make a hole in the radio room from which the ship under attack would begin transmitting, or a wooden sailing schooner (there were precedents).

In addition to the artillery, there were two twin-tube rotating 533-mm torpedo tubes, hidden behind the bulwark on the upper deck under the boats in the rear part of the superstructure. The torpedoes were steam-gas torpedoes, type S7a, capable of traveling 6 m at 000 knots, 44 m at 8 knots or 000 m at 40 knots. The warhead contained 14 kg of explosives. The torpedoes were equipped with a contact or magnetic detonator, but with both, they were extremely unreliable.

Unlike other first-wave raiders, Thor was not equipped to lay mines. Frankly, the ship was too small for a normal mine storeroom, but that was for the best: it is unknown what the Thor's list of victories would have been if it had also laid mines.

There is very little information about the composition of the SUAO. There is information that the "Thor" was equipped with two 3-meter rangefinders, which were located on each side above the radio room and the navigation room, in the rear part of the bridge. In principle, this was more than enough to fire at a distance of 15 km.


Well, the last thing that Thor was equipped with were two standard Arado Ar-196 sea reconnaissance floatplanes. The planes were lowered into the water one at a time by a lift behind the hold on the left side.

Disguise


This was one of the most important points. The later the raider was identified, the more chances he had for a successful outcome. Everything was decided by the images in Lloyd's reference books, so for the "stealth" mode the raider had to resemble a specific ship of another country.

The whole problem was that German merchant ships had a very specific appearance and it was difficult to camouflage them. It was not like attaching an additional funnel to a light cruiser, everything was much more complicated.

The Thor had two "doubles": the Soviet steamship Orsk and the Yugoslav Vir. The raider was more or less similar to them, and before going out to sea it was disguised as the obstacle breaker Sperrbrecher 26.


But even the relative external similarity was only half the story. Then the ship's silhouette was changed with the help of wooden shields and canvas. The smokestack was lengthened, the fan bells were moved, in addition to the real ones, large false ones were installed, it was possible to play well with the crane booms, turning them into different positions. Plus, each German raider had enough paint in the holds so that the crew could quickly repaint the ship if necessary.

A few words about rescue equipment. The peaceful steamship had two lifeboats for its crew, each for 50 people. The boat deck was located at the stern, the boats were placed on both sides. Since the raider's tasks were somewhat different, which required a larger crew, the boat deck was reconfigured and one boat was added to it on the left side, and a cutter appeared on the right, which was used by the boarding team. This was a very nimble watercraft, since its main task was to take the boarding team away from the ship, on which the fuse cords of the demolition charges were burning. The cutter could accommodate up to 30 people.

In addition to the boats and the launch, there were 20 inflatable rubber rafts measuring 5 x 2,5 m on board the Thor. Each raft could carry about 20 people. In general, considering that the raider's crew consisted of 350 people, then 580 places on life-saving equipment was a serious claim that it would be possible to be saved if something happened.

This is how the banana ship turned into an auxiliary, or as they were called then, commercial cruiser.


"Thor" at anchor in Kiel, behind it "Penguin", on the left is the training ship "Brummer".

Now that the ship has been introduced, we must also talk about its captain.


The captain of the Thor was the experienced 45-year-old Kapitan zur See (Captain First Rank in our language) Otto Koehler, who had fought in the First World War, during which he first served on the armored cruiser Roon, and then transferred to the submarine fleet and fought on the submarines UB-30 and UB-112. This, in general, testifies to certain qualities of Koehler, since people with a very specific mentality went to submarines. After the war, Koehler remained in the navy and was absolutely unpretentious in those conditions: he commanded a minesweeper, a tender, torpedo boats, even a training sailboat - but he did not go into the commercial navy.

Köhler was considered a very competent captain and navigator (he was a navigator on the light cruiser Karlsruhe for 3 years), and was famous for his truly Nordic calm, straightforwardness, and practicality. Köhler very quickly got along with the crew and gained the authority that allowed them to accomplish what the Thor crew accomplished.

By the way, the name "Thor" for the ship was chosen by Kohler himself. Until the flag was raised in March 1940, the ship was called HSK-4.

So, on March 15, 1940, the ship raised its flag and entered service with the Kriegsmarine as the auxiliary cruiser Thor. For three months, camouflaged as Sperrbrecher 26, the cruiser underwent sea trials and artillery firing, after which it went to Kiel for assembly. In Kiel, everything unnecessary was thrown off the ship (including the 60 mm cannon), everything necessary was loaded, and on June 6, 1940, Thor set out on its first voyage.

Step into the unknown



At 21:30, under cover of bad weather, Thor, still disguised as Sperrbrecher 26, escorted by the destroyers Falke, Jaguar and the real breakthrough ship Sperrbrecher IV, set out to sea and headed for the Danish Straits.

Then, having replaced the escort with the more effective submarine hunters Uj-A, Uj-C and Uj-D in those waters, on June 8, Thor entered the secluded Sørgulen Fjord, 50 miles north of Bergen. There, in two days of hard work, the crew turned Thor into the Soviet ship Orsk from Odessa, painting the hull and funnel black, all the superstructures white and raising the Soviet flag on the mast.

On the night of June 12, in the fog, accompanied by minesweepers, the raider went out to sea. And, literally the next morning, "Tor"-"Orsk" passed the first checks, since the weather improved and the raider was flown several times by aircraft from different countries, including a German reconnaissance aircraft. But without incident, "Tor" went out into the North Atlantic and headed for the Azores.

In general, the main area of ​​activity for the raider was defined as the southern part of the Atlantic Ocean, with the Indian and Pacific Oceans as backup. Therefore, after June 20, the "Thor" changed its appearance once again, turning into the Yugoslav "Vir": the presence of a Soviet steamship in those waters would have looked more than strange.

First victories



The first ship that the Germans stopped was the Dutch steamer Kertosono (9 GRT), which with its name painted over was sailing from New Orleans to Freetown. This happened on July 289, 1. The Dutch surrendered without any problems, and the cargo found in the holds (1940 tons of wood, 1300 tons of paper, 800 tons of steel, 280 tons of asphalt, 250 tractors, gasoline and machine oil in barrels, machine tools and spare parts for them) was considered so valuable by Kohler that he sent the steamer to Lorien under the command of a 12-man prize crew. Kertosono successfully arrived in Lorien (France) and was subsequently used as a submarine base.

On July 5, Thor crossed the equator, and on July 7, observers spotted a steamship, which they identified as British because of the easily recognizable 102mm deck gun mounted on the stern.

Having seen the pursuer, the British vessel turned east, increased speed and tried to escape. The chase lasted for two hours, after which, from a distance of about 8 kilometers, the Germans fired three salvos from four starboard guns. After the third, the British steamer stopped. The crew did not try to report the attack by radio and did not fire back from the cannon. The prize crew reported that the steamer "Delambre" (7032 GRT) was indeed British, traveling from Rio de Janeiro to Liverpool with a cargo of cotton and skins. The prize crew destroyed the steamer with demolition charges, the crew was taken to the "Thor".

On board the raider, Koehler learned some interesting details from the captain of the Delambre, Pratt: it turns out that Pratt did not give the order to send an SOS by radio and open fire from the gun, because he mistook the Thor for a British ship! Interesting fact: Pratt had already been in a similar situation during the First World War, when his transport was sunk by the German raider Mowe. But according to the British captain, he could not even imagine that such a small ship would turn out to be a German raider!

On July 9, after the third warning shot, another candidate for sinking was stopped. The Belgian steamship Bruges (4983 GRT) with a cargo of wheat, en route from Mar del Plata to Freetown, was unlucky. A piquant detail: the Germans captured the former German ship Kybfels, captured by the British in 1914 and sold to a Belgian company. The former German steamship was also sunk using explosive charges.

On July 14, the British transport Gracefield (4631 GRT) was stopped, sailing from Montevideo to Freetown and London with a cargo of 7 tons of wheat. The ship was stopped almost at the end of the day, it was decided not to arrange for the delivery of explosive charges to the British, but to sink the transport with a torpedo. But one torpedo was not enough for Gracefield, so Koehler spent another 400 shells.

First blood


If all the previous attacks were bloodless, then the next incident, alas, was not.

On July 16, Thor crept up to the heavily smoking steamship almost unnoticed in its own smoke. But, approaching the ship, the Germans discovered two guns on the stern. Koehler ordered to open fire to kill without warning shots, in order to avoid an unnecessary battle. With the third salvo, the German gunners achieved coverage, and with the fourth they set the ship on fire, hitting the stern. Only after this did the radio of the attacked steamship start working, sending the signal "QQQQ" (I am under attack by an unknown ship) and a man was seen running to the stern guns. Koehler ordered to continue firing, the attacked steamship received two more hits, including one in the wheelhouse. The steamship stopped, the transmission stopped and the crew began to abandon the ship.

The boarding party found out that the British coal carrier Wendover (5489 GRT), heading from Great Britain to Buenos Aires with 7250 tons of coal, had been attacked. Of the forty crew members, two were killed in the shelling, including the radio operator. Two more died of wounds on board the raider. The Germans buried the dead with full honors, and sent the steamship to the bottom with explosive charges.

The day after this battle, fortune smiled on the Germans: the Dutch dry cargo ship Tela (3777 GRT) was stopped, sailing from Rosario (Argentina) to Liverpool with 489 tons of wheat, 2407 tons of corn and 2 tons of millet, but the most valuable were 555 tons of frozen poultry: turkeys, chickens and ducks. After all the food was transferred to the raider (and the number of people wanting to eat there was constantly increasing), the ship was sunk with explosive charges.

In his diary, Köhler noted that the ship had become a bit crowded: the number of prisoners had reached almost two hundred people (194), but overall the raider's actions were successful. In 17 days, sinking 6 ships with a total tonnage of over 35 thousand tons, and, apart from the collier, all were carrying food to Britain - this was a serious move. The command also held the same opinion and awarded 30 people from the crew with the Iron Cross of the 2nd class. A radiogram about this arrived on July 20, and on the same day a second one arrived, which spoke of sending the tanker Rekum to the Thor.

From the documents found on the Tela, the Germans received a description of the trade "Route 211", on which, in fact, the "Thor" was. And it was on this route that the raider met the last four ships. Naturally, Koehler decided to stay in this area and continue the search, but the ocean seemed to have died out, and for 10 days the search was fruitless. Even the first seaplane raised on the ship could not find anyone.

Fight in earnest



After 11 days of searching, masts finally appeared on the horizon. With great enthusiasm, the Thor approached, but, alas, the catch was not quite what the Germans had expected.

In fact, on July 17, having realized that ships were disappearing in the ocean, and also having received information from sailors who were captured on another raider (the “Widder” was operating in approximately the same area, only further north), the commander of the South American Division of the American-West Indies Station, British Rear Admiral Henry Harwood, realized that there was at least one more German raider on the communications.

In general, this is an unusual case: usually, the Kriegsmarine leadership very clearly placed the raiders across the oceans so that they would not interfere with each other. Perhaps, the episode with the Thor and the Widder is the only one in the entire war when the operations of one ship affected the actions of another.

But nevertheless: the auxiliary cruiser Alcantara (22 GRT), a former ocean liner with 209 passengers, was sent to patrol the Pernambuco - Trinidad Island area. It was a relatively new (1219) steamship, with a maximum speed of 1928 knots and armed with eight 22 mm guns and two 152 mm anti-aircraft guns.


Auxiliary cruiser Alcantara

The ships were comparable in terms of combat capabilities, but the British had a very large (5 knots) advantage in speed. When Koehler realized that he was facing a British auxiliary cruiser, he gave the command to "go away" according to instructions. "Thor" turned around and began to move away at full speed, but it was not to be. "Alcantara", using its speed advantage, began to catch up with the German raider.

With no other options, Koehler decided to give battle, hoping to damage the British ship enough to break away and escape. Slowing down to 15 knots so that the vibrations would not interfere with his fire, Thor turned to starboard, raised her battle flag and fired her first salvo from a range of approximately 13 metres. This happened at 800:13. At this point, Alcantara began making radio and searchlight inquiries, as Captain Igram was not sure that it was a raider. There was also the possibility that the panicked crew of the small steamer was simply trying its best to escape from a larger pursuer.

In general, a battle between two completely unarmored ships is a risk for both sides. And a question of military luck, multiplied by the training of the crew.

The Germans had better training and luck. When the Thor fired the first salvo, the Alcantara turned to the right to fire a full broadside. And it came under the German shells, which covered the target. Plus, the clearly more experienced Koehler positioned the ship so that the sun would blind the British gunners. And the Thor began to pound the Alcantara, and with direct hits. A shell hit the stern, then between the bridge and the smokestack, breaking the steam line, the third broke the control cables for gun #4, but the fourth hit the bow right in the area of ​​the waterline. That is, it caused flooding. Well, another salvo again damaged the fire control system of the British cruiser.

The Alcantara crews could do little in such conditions, so, in fact, the only decent damage was caused by a shell that destroyed a motor launch and damaged a torpedo tube. At 13-13 the ships were at the minimum distance from each other during the entire battle - 9 kilometers. This is a pistol range by ship standards, so Koehler turned his ship by the stern, continuing to fire from the stern gun and began to put up a smoke screen with the aim of getting away from sin under its cover. But after a series of maneuvers, the ships were again in sight of each other and at 13.29 Thor opened fire again, and Alcantara did so a little later.

The result of the exchange of fire was that the Alcantara lost its speed and stopped, listing slightly to port. As much as Koehler wanted to win by finishing off the British ship, reason prevailed, and the captain zur See ordered a ceasefire and to start laying a smoke screen again for the retreat.

Kohler's practicality was justified by two things: first, even one shell that hit "where it shouldn't" could have put an end to the entire campaign of the Thor. Second, the Alcantara had probably already reported the German raider by radio, and there was a possibility that the Admiralty would send ships to help its auxiliary cruiser.

And here Kohler turned out to be absolutely right: the British command assessed the threat posed by the German raider and sent TWO heavy cruisers at once to intercept: the Dorsetshire left Freetown, and the Cumberland left Simonstown.


Heavy cruiser Dorsetshire

Any of these ships would have reduced Thor to rubble, so the Kriegsmarine command approved Kohler's decision, recognizing it as absolutely correct.

In the end, Thor, having fired 284 shells during the battle, calmly left under the cover of smoke, and Alcantara remained at the scene of the battle. But in the end, the British sailors were able to get going and the cruiser limped to Rio de Janeiro, where it was stopped for repairs. The most unpleasant thing in the situation was that one of the German shells disabled the pump control system, because of which Alcantara might not have reached Rio. But if the British shot so-so, then they fought for the life of the ship quite successfully, and they dragged the cruiser, beaten by the Germans, to the port.

And Thor calmly went to the latitude of the Tristan da Cunha islands, from where it turned east, into the “dead zone”, where the team began repairs.

Holidays in the South Seas


Throughout August 1940, Thor did not participate in combat operations, dealing with pressing issues: repairs, cleaning boilers, painting, and another change of appearance. On August 25, there was a meeting with the tanker Rekum. The meeting was somewhat overshadowed by the news that the tanker would not be able to pick up three hundred prisoners who were "guests" on the raider, and would have to share food supplies with the tanker's crew (like, you'll still loot, gentlemen pirates).


Transport "Rekum"

The Thor's floatplane flew around the meeting area and, finding no one, the ships spent two days pumping fuel to the Thor. Having taken on 1500 tons of oil, handed over mail and a copy of the combat log, the Thor left for Brazilian waters. On August 30, a radiogram arrived announcing that Kähler had been awarded the Iron Cross 1st Class and another 50 people had been awarded the Iron Cross 2nd Class.

But the raider's "vacation" lasted until September 26, when the crew of the scout "Arado" noticed a large vessel, which the raider stopped an hour later, firing two warning shots. It was the Norwegian whaling base "Kosmos" (17 GRT), heading from Walvis Bay to Curacao with 801 tons of whale oil on board.

The prize was very valuable (Kohler received a reprimand from the command for sinking the Kosmos), but the captain of the raider decided to sink it: the whaler's destination port was very close, the ship would be missed very soon, there was little fuel on the Kosmos, it was not enough to get to Europe, and the question of camouflage arose. Therefore, the Kosmos went to the bottom, and Koehler was criticized by the command. The Kosmos became the largest ship destroyed by the raider in all time.

On October 8, the refrigerator ship Natia (8 GRT), sailing from Southampton to Buenos Aires (apparently for food), happened to be on the Thor's way. Due to rough seas and the loss of a boat, Koehler ordered the ship to be torpedoed, but it took several more shells for the refrigerator ship to sink to the bottom.


Torpedo hits Natia

For the next month, Thor was looking for two things at once: enemy ships and a place to take prisoners, the number of which had reached 368 people, i.e. exceeded the number of crew members. Plus, constant breakdowns in the boilers required spare parts.

The command sent the blockade runner Rio Grande to meet Thor, which the raider met only on November 9.


The supply company provided the necessary tubes, pressure gauges, valves and other spare parts, various supplies and 246 tons of fuel. Kahler happily sent all the prisoners to the Rio Grande, leaving only the wounded and four captains from the British ships on the raider. To guard such a large number of prisoners, fifteen people led by a non-commissioned officer had to be transferred to the Rio Grande.

On November 16, the blockade runner left and reached Bordeaux on December 13. And "Thor" headed south to operate on the route from the mouth of the La Plata to the Cape of Good Hope.


But the trade routes were empty. The British were not fools and changed the usual routes of single ships. Plus the Admiralty decided to restore order in the waters there, on November 24 Kohler received a report from the Kriegsmarine headquarters, which stated the presence in the area of ​​1 battleship, 4 heavy, 6 light and 11 auxiliary cruisers. Plus, at the beginning of December, three more auxiliary cruisers, transferred from Australia, joined the British ships.

And these actions played their role: on the foggy morning of December 5, at 5.31, German signalmen spotted a very large vessel at a distance of about 4 miles. Koehler recognized the ship as a British auxiliary cruiser and gave the order to sound the alarm, turn left to the southwest and go full speed, hoping to hide in the fog. "Thor" began to flee, but the British were not fools and in the thick fog they followed the raider, gradually catching up with the German ship.

And when the ships emerged from the fog, Kohler and his crew were able to assess the size of their pursuer: it was a ship with a displacement of about twenty thousand tons (five times more than the Thor) and was clearly faster than the German raider.


It was the Carnarvon Castle (20 GRT), a former cargo-passenger liner, and the fastest on the pre-war route to South Africa. Its maximum speed was about 122 knots. The armament was standard for British auxiliary cruisers: eight old 20 mm guns, two 152 mm anti-aircraft guns and six Lewis machine guns. In principle, the opponents were equal, the only question was the condition of the guns and the training of the crew.

The Castle began to signal with its searchlight, demanding that the ship stop and identify itself. The Thor continued on its course. Around 7 a.m., English Captain Hardy got fed up with all this and ordered the flag signal to be raised, demanding that the ship stop and fire a warning shot.

It was a usual thing, Kohler changed course, set the Thor to the sun and fired a salvo at the Castle from 13 km. The British expected such a turn of events, because they fired a salvo almost simultaneously with the Germans. A carousel began at a distance of 8-10 kilometers, the ships went in a circle, showering each other with shells. At 7.30, the German torpedomen fired two torpedoes at the British ship, but they missed.

At 8.03, the British auxiliary cruiser suddenly ceased firing, turned north and began to withdraw, dropping three smoke buoys for cover. The Germans fired at the retreating ship, after which Thor turned south and also began to withdraw.

It was later discovered that during the hour of combat, trained German gunners had fired nine 150mm shells into Carnarvon Castle, which had caused several inconvenient fires. BUT the main damage had come from the last one, which had hit the bridge and destroyed the fire control instruments. In addition, one of the shells had made a hole through which water had flooded the artillery magazine.


Damage to Carnarvon Castle

If Thor had wanted to finish off the enemy, it would have been very easy to do. The damaged Carnarvon Castle crawled for two days to Montevideo, where it stopped for repairs.


Carnarvon Castle listing as it approaches Montevideo

But "Thor" did not receive any damage, the fire of the British gunners was unusually inaccurate. The only damage can be considered that the recoil mechanisms of some guns began to jam due to frequent (some fired more than a hundred shells) shooting. After all, in an hour of battle, the German gunners fired 593 shells.

There was about a third of the ammunition left in the magazines, and the Kriegsmarine command, although congratulating Kohler on his victory, hinted that engaging in such naval battles twice was clearly too much. But the reproach was indeed light, since, to be fair, the Thor simply could not escape from its faster opponents both times.

Merry Christmas


The shell consumption forced Koehler to request replenishment of the ship's supplies. And on December 21, at the secret point F, "Thor" met with a supply tanker, from which it took on fuel, shells and food. The heavy cruiser "Admiral Scheer" also came to the meeting point for fuel. A short propaganda film was even made about this meeting.


On December 27, the festivities continued: the naval tanker Nordmark approached the meeting point, towing the Scheer prize, the British refrigerated vessel Duquesa, with a cargo of 15 million eggs and 3500 tons of meat, which became a nice New Year's gift for the crews.


"Duquesa"

At Christmas, Köhler received a special gift: he was awarded the Knight's Cross.

The ship commanders held a meeting to discuss their future plans. Koehler rejected the proposal of the Scheer commander and his old friend Kapitän zur See Kranke regarding joint action, since in such a duet the Thor would be destined to be a floating prison, and no medals are given for such service. In addition, the Thor was significantly inferior to the Scheer in speed, so the Scheer went to plunder north of the 30th parallel, and the Thor went south.

January 1941 turned out to be absolutely unsuccessful, and the Thor, having replenished its supplies and finally got rid of all the prisoners, went beyond the equator, once again changing its appearance and turning into the non-existent Yugoslav steamship Vrats.


Drying brushes after another repainting of "Thor".

On February 15, 1941, Thor met the tanker Eurofeld, which filled the raider's oil tanks, and the supply ship Alsterufer, which delivered mail to Thor, a thousand 150 mm shells, 5 torpedoes, two spare engines for Arado, all kinds of supplies, and even reinforcements to replace those lost and killed.

The reloading of the delivered cargo took quite a long time, and then the mechanics of Thor began repairing the boilers, replacing half of the burnt-out smoke tubes.

Only on March 16 did a new search begin, which was initially unsuccessful (one ship managed to break away, the second turned out to be Spanish) and only on March 25 was another ship discovered.

The Tragedy of the Britannia



It was the cargo-passenger liner Britannia (8799 GRT), which had left Liverpool on 11 March with 327 passengers, many of them RAF and Royal Navy personnel, and about 200 crew.

The Britannia actively maneuvered, laid a smoke screen, and fired back at the raider with its stern gun. The Germans spent 159 shells before the steamer stopped, having taken several hits. But before that, the Britannia's radio operators raised a decent noise on the air.

Captain Koehler was put in a difficult situation: taking on board so many prisoners, half of whom had military experience, would be dangerous. In addition, Koehler was informed that a British warship was approaching the battle area, which was 112 miles from the Thor.

Koehler ordered the crew and passengers to abandon ship and sank it with artillery. He did not take prisoners on board, which resulted in the greatest loss of life from German raiders in the entire war.

After picking up one man who had been carried overboard during the chase and reporting by radiogram to headquarters that more than 520 people were currently drifting at sea, Koehler explained the reason for his departure and left the area.

In general, it turned out strange: later they never found out what kind of ship was sending signals that it was coming to help, but it is a fact that no one came to help the passengers of the Britannia that day. Only on the fourth day were the first people in distress saved, and out of the 527 people on board the Britannia, 122 crew members and 127 passengers died. True, a large number of the crew members, consisting of Asians, died primarily due to the fault of British soldiers who started a battle for places in the lifeboats.

On the same day, March 25, at 17.13:5047, the raider stopped the Swedish collier Trolleholm (19.06 GRT) with a signal shot, with a cargo of coal from Newcastle to Port Said via Cape Town on a British charter. The ship was sunk at 31:XNUMX with explosive charges, and its crew of XNUMX people transferred to the cruiser.

Third fight


At 6.15 a.m. on April 4, 900 miles west of the Cape Verde Islands, the Thor's signalmen spotted a ship heading in the opposite direction. The ship did not maneuver, and the Germans assumed it was neutral, but just in case, a combat alert was declared. However, when the ships approached to a distance of less than 20 km, Kohler ordered the German flag to be raised and a warning shot fired in the direction of the ship.

And then it turned out that a British auxiliary cruiser was coming towards them, quite normally armed. The third for the raid. And Kohler ordered to open fire from all guns, which was done at 6.46.


The enemy was identified as the auxiliary cruiser Voltaire (13245 GRT), armed with the standard eight 152mm guns and two 76,2mm anti-aircraft guns.

The battle began at a dagger-like distance of 9 kilometers. The first salvo of the German raider hit the bridge, destroying the radio room and the electric generator of the fire control system. The British cruiser responded with a salvo, but since the control system was destroyed, the British fired completely inaccurately. Suffice it to say that during the entire battle, the only success that the British achieved was the torn off antenna of the "Thor" by a shell flying over the ship.

And the Germans fired a salvo every 6 seconds and hit. At 7.15 the torpedomen fired a torpedo, but missed again at a distance of 7 meters. But the gunners were able to destroy the steering control and as a result the burning Voltaire began to describe a circle at a speed of 000 knots, continuing to fire from two guns.

But the Germans also began to have problems: the guns began to fail again due to overheating, glycerin was leaking from the recoil motors. Thus, guns No. 3, 4 and 5 stopped firing. Koehler turned the Thor around and began firing from the starboard guns, but they also soon fell silent. The Thor began to maneuver to give the torpedo men another opportunity to attack, but at 8.06:XNUMX the British lowered their flag.


The flaming Voltaire continued to circle and sank at 8.35. The Thor remained in the area for five hours, fishing the British ship's crew out of the water. Apparently, the Britannia incident was not typical for Kohler and his crew. Of the 269 crew members, 197 were saved, including Captain Blackburn.

In 55 minutes of combat, the Thor's gunners fired 724 shells, more than half of their ammunition. When the antenna was repaired, a report on the battle was sent to Berlin, and here the Kriegsmarine made a stupid mistake by blaring about the success to the whole world. Thus, the British Admiralty learned about the fate of the Voltaire and the approximate area of ​​the Thor's raid. The crew had to work again, turning the Thor into the Soviet Orsk.

On 12-13 April a rendezvous with a supply tanker took place, during which Thor received fresh provisions and surrendered 170 of the 227 prisoners.

On 16 April, Thor intercepted her last victim on this voyage. The victim was the Swedish ore carrier Sir Ernest Cassel (7739 GRT), which was heading to Lorenzo Marques to pick up a load of ore for Great Britain. The ore carrier was sunk with explosive charges.

Two days later, Thor moved towards the Bay of Biscay, where after a short stop in Cherbourg, on April 30, 1941, having spent 329 days at sea and covered 57 nautical miles during this time, the raider stood at the berth of her native Deutsche Werft in Finkenwerder.

The results of the combat activities of Captain zur See Otto Köhler and his crew were 12 sunken and captured as prizes ships with a total capacity of 96 GRT, as well as three battles with auxiliary enemy cruisers. During the campaign, only three people died on the raider itself.


Raider's Hike Map

Then the paths of Keller and Thor diverged; the captain no longer went to sea, continuing to serve on shore.

Between trips


The Thor crew went to rest, and the Deutsche Werft shipyard was in full swing: preparations for the second raid began. The old and rather worn-out guns were removed and replaced with 150-mm Tbk C/36 guns, the same as on the Type 1936A destroyers. In addition to the guns, there was a modern fire control system with new rangefinders. The biggest innovation was the radar. True, the radar still had to be sorted out.

Well, the captain was also new: Kapitan zur See Günther Gumprich was appointed to replace Köhler.


Together with the captain, the crew was also renewed, which was logical, after a year of sailing, many wanted to walk on land. However, there were those who decided to go on the "Thor" again in search of adventure. There were quite a few of them: 6 officers and 43 sailors. That is, a fifth of the new crew were veterans of the first voyage.

Finally, all preparations were completed, and on November 19, 1941, Thor set out on her second voyage. According to the headquarters plans, Thor was to replace the raider Kormoran, which was causing trouble in the Indian Ocean. But on that very day, Kormoran clashed with the light cruiser Sydney, as a result of which both ships sank to the bottom of the sea. Things did not go as planned for Thor either: the voyage ended almost before it had begun. In the November fog and darkness, at 21.39:20.11.1941 on November 1356, XNUMX, Thor rammed the Swedish ore carrier Botnia (XNUMX GRT), which was anchored in the roadstead and was poorly lit for wartime. The ore carrier sank, and Thor went to the shipyard for repairs.


"Thor" in barrier-breaker livery

But, they say, it turned out even better, because English intelligence worked well and Thor was in for a more than hot reception in the area of ​​the straits. But even without that, it became clear that they would have to break through the English Channel, since in other areas everything was tightly blocked by the British fleet.

On December 2, Thor's second voyage began, but it was only on January 17 of the following year, 1942, that the raider broke out into operational space. The command tasked Gumprich with repeating the brilliant success of the auxiliary cruiser Penguin commander Kruder and attempting to capture the Allied whaling fleet in Antarctic waters.

But it turned out that the new captain of the Thor did not have the luck of the old one. The radar worked, and radio intercepts showed that whalers were present in the area where the Thor had arrived, and the scout Arado made more than 80 flights - and all to no avail, in the end Gumprich gave up and decided to change the search area, without finding the whalers.


Meanwhile, it was already March 1942, but only on March 23rd, Thor was able to actually open its combat account:
The Greek transport Pagasitikos (3942 GRT), which was sailing from Andros to Montevideo with a cargo of coal, was stopped and sunk by a torpedo. 33 crew members were captured.


Transport "Pagasitikos"

Next came a rendezvous with the supply ship Regensburg, which refueled the Thor and transferred provisions, and Gumprich used the supply ship as a radar target to calibrate his radar at night. It turned out that the radar could see a ship-type target at a range of only 14,5 km, but in the iceberg-filled Antarctic waters, that was much better than nothing.

New interception tactics


And while all these periods of inaction lasted, Gumprich developed a new tactic for the Thor: following the example of the pilots of the First World War, the ship's Arado was equipped with a device very similar to those with which pilots initially fought balloons and airplanes: a weight on a rope. Only Gumprich intended to use such a simple device to tear the ship's antennas, depriving the ships of the opportunity to call for help or report what was happening.

And already on March 30, an opportunity presented itself to test the new tactics in action: "Thor" discovered the transport "Wellpark" (4649 GRT) and sent "Arado" to try to tear off the antenna and fire machine guns at the wheelhouse and bridge.


The captain of the British vessel Alexander Kant was not deceived by the American naval signs painted on the hull and wings of the Arado, and therefore the German reconnaissance aircraft was met with a warm welcome from all guns. The plane was damaged, but was able to tear the antenna, which decided the fate of the Wellpark. With the second salvo, the gunners of the Thor covered the British ship and achieved two hits. The crew abandoned the ship, and the boarding team found out that the Wellpark was carrying spare parts for aircraft and armored vehicles, which decided the fate of the ship: it was sent to the bottom with explosive charges. During the shelling, seven people died, the remaining 41 were taken prisoner.

Captain zur See Gumprich called this tactic "silent", and he liked it. "Detection of the ship - breaking the antenna - stopping the ship" with the complete inability of the attacked ship to call for help was indeed a good solution. Its effectiveness was finally tested on April 1, when the "Arado", disguised as an American plane, detected another ship.


"Arado-196" and "Thor"

"Thor" approached, and the seaplane flew again to the discovered ship. Approaching from the sun, "Arado" tore off the antenna and dropped two 50-kg bombs (they missed the ship). The anti-aircraft gunners on the attacked ship greeted the Germans (the navigator-observer was wounded), but after 17 minutes, shells from "Thor" began to explode around the victim, which turned out to be the British steamship "Willesden" (4563 GRT), sailing from New York to Alexandria.

The British responded with as many as six shots from a 102 mm cannon mounted on the stern, but they were unable to hit the Thor. However, the German raider's shells set fire to the cargo placed on the deck - oil in barrels.

The crew abandoned the burning ship and the Willesden was finished off by a torpedo.

On April 3, the Norwegian steamship Aust (5 GRT) was stopped, sailing from Brooklyn to Bombay with military cargo, including army vehicles. Everything went according to the tried and tested scenario: first, a seaplane spotted the ship and aimed its Thor at it, then tore off the antenna and dropped (again without result) two bombs, and after several salvos, the transport stopped at approximately 630 miles. The boarding team sent the Aust to the bottom with the help of demolition charges.

And on April 10, they had to test the radar in action. In the evening, at about 19 p.m., a single target was detected, which the Thor initially mistook for an auxiliary cruiser. The raider, guided by the radar data, crept up close (the distance was 2 m) and, having made sure that it was not a military ship and not neutral, attacked, launching two torpedoes and firing a salvo from the guns. The torpedoes, as usual, missed, as did the first salvo, but after the second, a fire broke out on the ship.

Gumprich ordered the firing to cease, but then the searchlight showed that the burning ship was heading for a ram. The guns opened fire again and fired another 14 salvos before the ship lost its speed. It so happened that all the boats of the ship under attack were destroyed, and the crew began to simply jump into the water. The Thor lowered its boats and began to rescue the enemy crew. It took more than three hours to rescue the crew of the sinking ship from the water in the darkness.

It turned out that the British Kirkpool (4 GRT) was attacked, no one was going to ram Thor, it was just that after the first hit to the wheelhouse the steering wheel was left unattended. The transport was finished off with a torpedo.


Sinking Kirkpool

Gumprich had every reason to be satisfied: five ships sunk with a total tonnage of 23 GRT in 626 days. After this event, Thor received orders to leave the South Atlantic and go on raiding missions in the Indian Ocean.

Indian Ocean



On May 6, 1500 miles off the west coast of Australia, the air controller spotted another target: the cargo-passenger liner Nankin (7 GRT), en route from Fremantle to Bombay with general cargo and passengers, including military personnel. The liner also spotted an aircraft, and in its honor they gave a salute from anti-aircraft guns and personal weapons the military.


The first attempt to tear off the antenna failed, so the pilot made another approach under fire and everything worked out. Then the Thor guns came into play, which began firing at the ship, which was zigzagging from a distance of 12 meters. The British fired back from the cannon mounted on the stern, making 000 shots, but all the shells missed.

Only after an hour and a half of chase and shooting, the Germans hit the Nanking for the first time, which was more than enough: Captain Stratford ordered the crew and passengers to abandon the ship. But everything turned out so that the passengers soon returned: with the help of the ship's English mechanics, the Germans repaired the damage to the engines, transferred all the prisoners to the Nanking and set off with two ships to meet the supply ship Regensburg.

Gumprich renamed the Nankin to Leuthen, transferred some supplies from it to the raider, and the supply ship and the prize left for Japan, while Thor continued its raiding.

The next incident occurred almost a month later, on the night of June 14. Radar showed the presence of a vessel and Thor was able to approach it undetected to a distance of 1 meters. And from this distance the gunners fired a salvo in the hope of hitting the wheelhouse and bridge.

The result was horrific: the attacked vessel turned out to be the tanker Olivia (6 GRT), sailing fully loaded from Abadan with a crew of 307 people on board.


A wall of fire arose in the place of the tanker after the hits, and only one person was saved – an artilleryman thrown from the deck by the explosion. However, it later became known that during the fire, 12 people from the crew (4 Dutch and 8 Malays) were able to lower a boat and escape. After 30 days, they were able to reach Madagascar, but only 3 Dutch and one Malay survived.

On June 19, in the same area, a tanker sailing from Abadan was stopped again. This time, everything developed according to the classics: the Arado fired at the ship's bridge, tore off the radio antenna and missed with bombs. After a warning shot from a cannon, the Norwegian tanker Herborg (7 GRT) stopped. The tanker was carrying 892 tons of crude oil from Abadan to Fremantle. It was very stupid to sink such a valuable prize, and Gumprich, having renamed the tanker Hohenfriedberg, sent the prize to Japan, where it arrived on July 11.


Later converted into a blockade runner and sent to France, she was intercepted by the British heavy cruiser Sussex on 26 February and sunk.

On July 4, another Norwegian tanker, Madrono (5 GRT), was captured just as quietly, sailing in ballast (empty) from Melbourne to Abadan. Gumprich named the prize Rossbach and also sent it to Japan.

On July 20, Thor encountered the British refrigerator ship Indus (5 GRT). Captain Brian decided not to surrender without a fight, sent the gunners to the only gun on the stern, the radio operator to the radio, and he himself stood at the wheel and began to dodge the Thor's shells at full speed. But it was not his day.

Several ships received the Indus's radio signals, but they were all far away and could not come to the rescue. The Indus's gunners fired two shots, then a German shell destroyed the gun and killed the crew commander, then another shell flew into the radio room and killed the radio operator, who remained at his post until the end. But the engine crew, consisting mainly of people from Asia, abandoned the engines at the first hits and began to save themselves. The ship was burning so badly that there was no point in boarding it, so after pulling 49 crew members out of the water, Thor left the Indus to burn out.

"Hindu" became the last, tenth victim of "Thor" in the second campaign.

The raider remained in the Indian Ocean for some time, and then received orders to go to Japan for repairs, rest, and replenishment of supplies. On August 30, Thor headed towards Japan, and on October 10, dropped anchor in Yokohama.


The second voyage lasted 314 days, during which time Thor destroyed 10 ships with a total tonnage of 55 GRT (according to other sources, 587 GRT).


A very peculiar ending


In Japan, the raider had to prepare for its third voyage, but it turned out to be something completely stupid. On October 30, 1942, exactly one year after Thor left Kiel, the work was almost finished. Thor was moored to the German tanker Uckermark, which all connoisseurs of maritime history knew by its first name, Altmark, a supply ship for the heavy cruiser Admiral Graf Spee in 1939. On Uckermark, the tanks were being cleaned, and the Thor's crew was clearly relaxing.

During these days, the first international friendly football match between the Japanese and German national teams took place. The sailors from the Thor crew also played on the field. Incidentally, the Japanese won with a score of 8:7. And that day, there were guests on board the raider, journalists, for whom a show of the ship was organized. After lunch, Gumprich left on a boat to visit the Nanjing, which he had captured earlier.

At 13.20, three explosions were heard on the tanker one after another. The third, the strongest, demolished the bridge of the Uckermark and damaged the superstructure of the Thor. When part of the tanker's bridge fell, one end landed on the raider and the other on the quay wall, which allowed people to leave the burning ship. The ignited oil from the tanker's tanks began to spill over the surface of the harbor, and as a result, the Thor, already damaged by the explosions and debris from the tanker, burned to the ground.


Gumprich returned and organized the rescue of people in the water. However, as a result of the explosion and fire, 13 people from the raider's crew, 53 people from the "Uckermark" crew died, and the number of Japanese and Chinese shipyard workers who died remains unknown. No official investigation was conducted, but possible causes of the disaster could have been a spark from the work being carried out or smoking by one of the workers in the tanks saturated with oil vapors.

This is how the story of the most successful surface ship of the Kriegsmarine ended, frankly absurdly.

This is where the story of the “most warlike” auxiliary cruiser of the Third Reich ended.

In general, of course, the situation is unique in many ways.

Small (only the Komet was smaller) in size, the Thor spent 642 days in campaigns, sank an auxiliary cruiser and sent two for serious repairs, sent 17 merchant ships to the bottom and captured 4 as prizes. Damaged the enemy in the astonishing amount of 152 GRT. Fought three naval battles, from which she emerged victorious.

Plus, the new method of using an onboard seaplane resulted in a very effective "silent" tactic during the second campaign. Yes, Captain Gumprich did not have the luck and calculation of Kohler, but nevertheless, everything worked out perfectly for him too.

When the efficiency of a steamship, with a displacement smaller than a cruiser, unarmored and armed with six old guns, exceeds the efficiency of a battleship, this indicates that the strategy was chosen crookedly.

Yes, almost all ships of the Kriegsmarine were involved in raiding, from the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to the Komet and Thor. The question is who was more effective. And who knows, if the explosions that marked the end of the auxiliary cruiser Thor's career had not occurred on that day, November 30, what the final score of this ship might have been.

So it turned out very well, although, of course, the raider’s fate was more than remarkable even without it.

Sources:
Galinya V. Hitler's Raiders. Auxiliary Cruisers of the Kriegsmarine. Eksmo. Moscow, 2009.
Patyanin S., Morozov M., Nagirnyak V. Kriegsmarine. The Navy of the Third Reich. Eksmo. Moscow, 2009.
Freivogel Z. Deutsche Hilfskreuzer des Zweiten Weltkriegs
246 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +20
    8 January 2025 05: 20
    A very interesting story! But I was interested in such an important detail: the organization of supplying raiders with support vessels in transoceanic spaces! I would like this topic to be covered by the respected Author!
    1. +8
      8 January 2025 06: 39
      Quote: andrewkor
      organizing the supply of raiders with support vessels in transoceanic spaces!
      Join
    2. +3
      8 January 2025 09: 19
      Despite some successes, the British convoy system functioned properly. So, the raiders' actions did not bring any special results. On the Warspot website, there is a large article dedicated to the German system of supplying ships in the ocean.
      1. +3
        8 January 2025 14: 55
        Quote: TermNachTER
        So, the raiders' actions did not bring any particular results.
        The fact that the British have switched to a convoy system is already a good result.
        1. +3
          8 January 2025 15: 49
          Quote: bk0010
          The fact that the British have switched to a convoy system is already a good result.

          The British switched to the convoy system because of the threat of submarines, not surface raiders.
          A commercial raider won't attack a convoy, but for a combat ship as a raider on communications, a convoy is a tasty target.
          1. 0
            17 January 2025 15: 20
            Of course, I am not an expert on the Navy, I am more of a land-based technology specialist. But allow me to disagree with you. Germany had next to nothing in 1940. 4 battleships (Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau), 6 heavy cruisers, although 3 of them were pocket battleships (3 Deutschland-class and 3 Admiral Hipper-class) and 6 light cruisers (1 Emden-class, 3 K-class and 2 Leipzig-class) - that's all the Kriegsmarine had. There were simply very few forces and the exit of each ship could be tracked. That is, they are not such a big threat in principle and they are easy to track. But raiders are something, because you can convert any floating tub into them and you can do a lot and quickly and all this can be camouflaged and enter operational space. That's why convoys were introduced against them and submarines. Since the warships are mostly locked in their bases and rarely leave them. Of the raids of significant large ships, I only know the Bismarck's exit and the battle with Hood, the Schranhorst raid and Graf Spee and how the Tirpitz convoy was intercepted. And look how one raider made so much noise. And in total, the raiders sank about 950000 gross tons.
        2. 0
          8 January 2025 17: 31
          Considering the volume of tonnage of the allies, practically none.
  2. +5
    8 January 2025 06: 38
    Still, submarines were a more effective weapon for such work. And they were cheaper. I read the article with interest. Respect to the author!
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 07: 42
      Still, submarines were a more effective weapon for this kind of work.
      But they couldn't take any prizes.
      1. +2
        8 January 2025 08: 25
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        But they couldn't take any prizes
        Naval warfare is not about prizes. Prizes are for privateers. I think submarines had prizes in the early stages of the war, but that was rare.
        1. +1
          8 January 2025 09: 03
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Still, submarines were a more effective weapon for this kind of work.

          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Naval warfare is not fought for prizes. Prizes are for privateers.

          You contradict yourself, sir... the article is, to a large extent, about the privateer... hi
          1. +3
            8 January 2025 09: 08
            Quote: 2 level advisor
            the article is, to a large extent, about the privateer
            Privateers are still pirates. Pirates are either private or have received a license from a state. In the case of the ship described in this article, it is just a cruiser disguised as a civilian vessel (or rather, a vessel converted for the tasks of a cruiser) and sent to the ocean not for pure profit, as was the case with privateers, but to undermine the enemy's sea communications. The same as a submarine
            1. +1
              8 January 2025 09: 38
              Quote: Dutchman Michel
              Still, submarines were a more effective weapon for this kind of work.

              to check the efficiency, you need to count the number of sunken volumes by the number of built ones (submarines and "camouflaged raiders") - I think you didn't count, but according to my rough estimates, the efficiency of the raiders "from the article" is higher... in fact...
              Quote: Dutchman Michel
              And they were cheaper.

              example. such a ship cost approximately 2 million $ (I took the cost of the much larger Liberty for the calculation), the submarine type XII - 2,25 million $ I also don’t see cheaper..
              PS
              The PLs were better, but after 2 years... and in 1940, comparing them like the VSS and a shotgun is pointless...
              1. +2
                9 January 2025 13: 59
                Blockade and counter-blockade. The struggle on ocean-sea communications in the Second World War. Authors: V.A. Belli, V.P. Bogolepov, L.M. Eremeev, E.N. Lebedev, B.A. Pochikovskiy, A.P. Shergin. R Moscow: Izdatelstvo "Nauka", 1967
      2. +2
        8 January 2025 09: 20
        The prize was good, but the blockade of Britain was more important.
    2. +3
      8 January 2025 08: 31
      The Germans wanted to make a stir on the ocean lines. Submarines could not do this very effectively, at that time, the speed of movement under water and the fuel supply limited their autonomy.
      1. +2
        8 January 2025 08: 33
        Quote: tatarin1972
        Submarines would not have been able to do this very effectively, at that time, the speed of movement under water and the fuel supply limited their autonomy.
        "Wolf packs" and "cows" (transport submarines) easily solved this problem
        1. +5
          8 January 2025 08: 38
          You didn't understand, at that time the actions of wolf packs, it can be called cabotage. The actions of the Kriegsmarine in the southern latitudes of the Atlantic Ocean, in the Indian Ocean by wolf packs were not possible, the main problem is the great distance to the metropolis.
          1. -2
            8 January 2025 08: 43
            Quote: tatarin1972
            The actions of the Kriegsmarine in the southern latitudes of the Atlantic Ocean and in the Indian Ocean with wolf packs were not possible
            The main sea trade routes went through the Atlantic. Lend-Lease went through the Atlantic to England and the USSR, which automatically made it the main arena of the war. I agree with you on everything else
            1. +4
              8 January 2025 08: 49
              Lend-lease went in three directions, you forgot the trans-Iranian route and the Pacific route.
              1. +4
                8 January 2025 08: 51
                Quote: tatarin1972
                Lend-lease went in three directions
                This is for the USSR. For England only across the Atlantic. By the way, it was even bigger than for the USSR
                1. +3
                  8 January 2025 09: 00
                  That's where wolf packs operated, but the actions of ships like "Thor" would have been difficult, aerial reconnaissance would have found them. The tactics of raiding consisted of capturing single ships, this can be called privateering in another way, an auxiliary cruiser would not be able to pull a convoy of ships, since the convoys were accompanied by combat escorts.
          2. 0
            8 January 2025 09: 22
            The "tonnage theory" that Dönitz came up with turned out to be wrong because the Allies built more ships than the Germans sank.
            1. +5
              8 January 2025 09: 28
              You could say not the allies, but the USA. Liberty-type transports. Three ships a day were launched by the shipyards since 1943. The Germans reached one submarine a day.
              1. +1
                8 January 2025 09: 35
                Mostly Americans, but the British also built transports, so the theory was wrong from the start.
                1. 0
                  8 January 2025 09: 39
                  Let's just say Dönitz was wrong. request
                  1. +1
                    8 January 2025 09: 41
                    Everyone can make mistakes. Let's just say that Germany's naval war against the Anglo-Saxons was a surefire losing option.
                    1. 0
                      8 January 2025 09: 57
                      The potential of industry was initially unequal.
                      1. +3
                        8 January 2025 10: 49
                        Well, that's what intelligence and the General Staff are for. So that the military-political leadership has the initial data and an understanding that fighting is a sure-fire losing proposition, with an unpredictable outcome. It is generally accepted that Germany had very strong intelligence, and the German General Staff is generally considered a role model (Moltke, Clausewitz, and all that). But two lost world wars leave some misunderstandings)
                      2. +3
                        8 January 2025 10: 56
                        Intelligence, even very good ones, sometimes make mistakes. But usually it all depends on who is at the very top of the leadership. Hitler made many strategic mistakes.
                      3. 0
                        8 January 2025 13: 24
                        Hitler did not fall from the sky. There were people who brought him to power.
                      4. +1
                        8 January 2025 15: 16
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        It is generally accepted that Germany had very strong intelligence

                        A significant role in Germany's attack on the USSR was played by false information provided to Hitler by the head of the Abwehr, Admiral Canaris, who significantly underestimated our potential and created the image of the notorious giant with feet of clay. After Canaris's arrest in 1944, the Germans found documents on him that exposed his connections with the British, but after the fall of the Third Reich, this moment was carefully glossed over. They say it is not true, Hitler slandered a German patriot who fought against him, and if it is true, then Canaris was simply laying down straw for himself at the end of a lost war, etc.
                        In general, Canaris' collaboration with the British is known only from the verdict of the Nazi court; if there were any documents, they fell into the hands of the "allies", and they preferred to remain silent on this topic.
                      5. 0
                        14 January 2025 21: 14
                        Canaris's omissions and allegedly incorrect assessment of the USSR's potential have no significance in the inevitability of a drang nach Osten. A united Europe always goes to rob resource-rich Russia. Hitler and the military-political leadership of the Reich made strategic mistakes, relying on a pervetine blitzkrieg, but they could not in principle not get into the USSR.
                      6. +7
                        8 January 2025 15: 26
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Well, that's what intelligence and the General Staff are for.

                        Exactly half correct. In terms of intelligence
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        It is generally accepted that Germany had very strong intelligence,

                        An even more controversial statement, since there are many complaints about Canaris' department.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        But two lost world wars leave some misunderstandings)

                        What's not clear about that? :)) Anyone who knows a little bit of history will tell you that the General Staff does not determine the enemy, this is done by the political leadership. The fact that in both world wars Germany fought against an enemy that was obviously superior in resources is also a well-known fact. As is the fact that Hitler did not plan to fight against the alliance of England and the USA.
                        In general, the political leadership is to blame for the fact that Germany twice got into a fight against those who were too tough for it, and the fact that Germany managed to hold out for so long against such an enemy is the merit of their General Staff.
                      7. 0
                        8 January 2025 16: 23
                        The General Staff plans the war. If the Chief of the General Staff sees that nothing is working out, he is obliged to tell the leadership that it is impossible to win.
                      8. +2
                        8 January 2025 16: 32
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The General Staff is planning a war

                        With those countries that the political leadership indicates.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        If the head of the General Staff sees that nothing is working out

                        Hitler did not point out to the General Staff the alliance of England and the USA as an enemy.
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        He owes it to the leadership that it is impossible to win.

                        Even without this, the Chief of the General Staff of Germany resigned in 1938
                      9. +1
                        8 January 2025 16: 37
                        one left, another came in his place. And did everything as Hitler wanted, although he may have kept a fig in his pocket)))
                    2. +3
                      8 January 2025 12: 17
                      Hitler did not want a war with England. He mistakenly believed that an invasion of Poland would not lead to such a war.
                      1. 0
                        8 January 2025 13: 25
                        That's what intelligence and analysts are for, to calculate possible options. Whether he wanted it or not, the result - May 1945 - was hardly worth it.
                      2. +1
                        8 January 2025 13: 31
                        There are no absolute intelligence services and analysts. It is not known what he would have done if he had known for sure that England would enter the war for Poland.
                      3. 0
                        8 January 2025 13: 36
                        I agree. It doesn't happen. Therefore, the head of state, making decisions of such importance, must rely on his experience of state management and understanding of the situation. And Hitler is just a poker player. Many scold VVP for slowness, indecisiveness, etc. - you have to understand, because they do not understand the weight of responsibility.
                      4. 0
                        14 January 2025 21: 21
                        Completely different situations. An aggressive war of conquest and the preservation of the territorial integrity of the state, the protection of its population. Preservation of the nation. Indecisiveness here comes back to haunt you.
                      5. 0
                        14 January 2025 21: 44
                        Perhaps it is only haste in such things that is dangerous.
                      6. 0
                        14 January 2025 21: 50
                        Well, this has been going on for eleven years now.
                      7. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 46
                        Well, to be precise, almost three. From 2014 to early 2022, there were trades. There was a chance to avoid this war.
                      8. +1
                        14 January 2025 22: 56
                        Really? And it wasn't the Russian people who ended up there under the Banderites and Naglo-Saxons? The territories of the outskirts and the rest of Russia, as well as its people, are inseparable. Are you elevating the betrayal of an alcoholic to a legal fact? The wise and far-sighted president, who cares about the State, had only one way - to prevent the Banderite coup, because it was clear even to people far from politics that the outskirts were being torn away from Russia, divided and the Russian people were being set against each other in the Civil War.
                      9. 0
                        15 January 2025 00: 13
                        In 1991, VVP did not hold any significant posts. He began to raise Russia in 1999. You can try to present something to Boris, he doesn't care anymore.
                      10. 0
                        15 January 2025 00: 34
                        We are talking about 2014 firstly and participation in the collapse, betraying the oath to the KGB officer and the heir of the alcoholic secondly. For him, Ukraine is legitimate, even with Bandera's power. The towers of the elections, after the coup, were recognized. And they should have been burned with a hot iron. And there would have been no Civil War. Namely, that they behaved carefully, not to disturb the partners.
                      11. 0
                        17 January 2025 10: 27
                        In 2004, Russia was not yet ready for confrontation with the collective West, on many parameters at once.
                      12. 0
                        17 January 2025 16: 51
                        And there was no point in demolishing the mighty USSR to please those who wanted to speculate.
                        But we are not talking about 04, but about 14. The Masons did not even hope to pinch us like that back then. To prevent the Bandera from reaching the outskirts, there would have been enough special forces, as there were enough of them later in Kazakhstan and Belarus. All they had to do was shake the "legitimate" Yushchenko by the scruff of the neck and nip the nascent coup in the bud. The brazen ones showed how it was done in 22, having packed up the godfather and his generals. But the towers didn't need it at all. They exchanged raw materials for candy wrappers. Which were taken from them.
                      13. 0
                        10 January 2025 17: 21
                        It is not known what he would have done if he had known for sure that England would enter the war for Poland.

                        Let's assume it's the summer of 1939 and Hitler knows for sure that England will enter the war.
                        Option 1: another long and tedious negotiation that the Germans need a land corridor, and that's it! That's it, Germany will stop there. Definitely stop there. After the occupation of Czechoslovakia, they trusted Hitler less, but you never know - maybe it would have worked.
                        Perhaps there was no need to rush into occupying Czechoslovakia.
                        Option 2: offer the Poles Danzig in exchange for Lithuania or Kyiv (it's convenient to offer something that doesn't belong to you). Considering that it's 1939, the USSR is at war with Japan, the Poles, having the support of Germany, could risk fighting the USSR (but would the Germans be planning to fight the USSR at that time or would they have screwed the Poles)
                        Option 3. Provoke an attack by the Poles. The Polish army should cross the border and invade Germany, well, about 20-100 kilometers. Well, and after a week of defensive battles (and within the framework of the plan to retreat about 50 kilometers), go on the offensive.
                        Option 4, but here at least a couple of years of head start are needed. War with Poland in July 1939. Transfer of troops to the West (August). Defeat of the French and English armies in September-October. Quick defeat of the armies, without a six-month warm-up - Great Britain could go for peace.
                        Here, have a ready plan for the invasion of Great Britain in September-October 1939. I repeat - all this must begin at least in 1937, and know for sure that Poland and England must be finished off in one campaign.
                        Option 5. If Hitler was "raised" for war with the USSR, then state what Germany needs for war with the USSR (border, army, oil), and get permission for this.
                      14. 0
                        11 January 2025 00: 43
                        Here, we must have a ready plan for the invasion of Great Britain in September-October 1939.

                        Hitler had no intention or desire to fight with England, much less the United States.
                        If he had been sure that the war with Poland would lead to this, he would not have started it.
                      15. 0
                        8 January 2025 15: 27
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        That's what intelligence and analysts are for,

                        And the decision is made by the head of state, and the questions are addressed to him. The General Staff, by the way, warned...
                      16. +1
                        8 January 2025 14: 59
                        Quote from solar
                        He mistakenly believed that the invasion of Poland would not lead to such a war.

                        But it did not. To save face, war was declared, but it was the so-called "phony war". The British were impatiently waiting for the Fuhrer to fulfill his promises (the existence of negotiations with him at that time had to be carefully swept under the rug, right up to the murder of Hess, who was being released by Gorbachev, in prison) and attack the USSR. But the Fuhrer outplayed them at that time and himself began a real war a year later, having secured his rear by seizing France.
                      17. 0
                        11 January 2025 00: 51
                        The declaration of war by England and France put Germany in a suspended state regardless of the intensity of military actions. At that time, it had already reached an agreement with the USSR and was preparing to expand cooperation with it.
                        The impossibility of removing England from the war and the USSR's inflated demands in the alliance negotiations led it to attack the USSR and declare war on the USA - these were already forced decisions.
                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пакт_четырёх_держав
                      18. +1
                        14 January 2025 21: 28
                        Wow! The USSR provoked a war against itself with its inflated demands? What kind of crazy facts are not invented by anti-Sovietists. And even Wikipedia as an argument. fool am
                      19. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 01
                        If you are interfering in the conversation, read everything from the beginning, and don't take pieces out of context. I am writing the exact opposite.
                      20. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 11
                        Discussion is available to everyone. You express your thoughts personally, then in a personal message.
                        I read your sentences very carefully. Everything revolves around the possibility of a pact between the possessed and the USSR and the optionality of its attack, where is the opposite here? Nazism was initially set on aggression, this is an axiom. And you can dance from this stove. Everything was predetermined. The elimination of GB after the victory over the USSR. But the US factor, on the side of the USSR, was perhaps not taken into account.
                      21. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 54
                        I read your sentences very carefully.

                        You read it poorly or didn't understand the meaning of what you read. I'm just saying that Hitler was drawn to war against the USSR.
                      22. 0
                        14 January 2025 23: 00
                        And then they claimed that the IVS was also leaning towards the same thing. All that was left was to throw a bridge and say that Hitler had forestalled it? No?
                      23. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 41
                        right up to the murder of Hess in prison, who was being released by Gorbachev

                        The thread has grown, I saw your post only now. No Gorbachev freed Hess. Hess could have been pardoned for humanitarian reasons back in the 60s, when he was the only prisoner left - the others were released, and the maintenance of Hess alone cost a huge amount (about a million marks a year). But Hess himself categorically refused to be pardoned, as did his lawyer and his family. Hess demanded the cancellation of the Nuremberg Tribunal sentence, without the consent of the USSR this could not be done (unlike the pardon for humanitarian reasons), and the USSR did not give its consent, although it was repeatedly approached). Hess simply became an idol of the neo-Nazis of that time (and now too), a whole movement flared up for him to be released as innocent. A whole cult of Hess arose among neo-Nazis.
                        Pardon was consistently rejected not only by the prisoner himself, but also by his lawyer and family, who chose the maximalist strategy of delegitimizing the International Military Tribunal. Alfred Seidl filed the first petition for Hess's release on November 15, 1948, and remained true to his version of his client's innocence. Accepting Seidl's arguments would not only mean abandoning the foundations of post-war international law, but also rehabilitating the National Socialist regime as a whole along with Hess, which was, of course, unacceptable to the Allies... Wolf Rüdiger Hess responded to journalists' questions, stating in particular that his father had no grounds to plead guilty and, if he were pardoned, he would not accept the pardon and would voluntarily remain in prison[76]:212... According to V. A. Chernykh, who was the Soviet director of the Spandau Inter-Allied Prison in 1983-1988, between 1979 and 1986, Hess submitted five requests to the directors of Spandau asking for his release, and the Soviet Union responded to the first request with a decisive refusal, while the last three were completely ignored by the Soviet side[79].... All public efforts to secure Hess's release for purely humanitarian reasons failed due to the prisoner’s unwillingness to repent, to compromise his views that determined his life, and the lack of a reasonable critical position on this matter on the part of his lawyer and family, who preferred to engage in the politicization of the “Hess case”[9]:352....
                      24. 0
                        14 January 2025 23: 22
                        Quote from solar
                        No Gorbachev freed Hess

                        Didn't have time. I didn't study the details of the proposed release of Hess, because I learned about this story a long time ago, when mobile phones were still a curiosity the size of a brick and the Internet was more like a mail program. It was reported then that Gorbachev offered to release Hess. Considering the love of the President of the USSR for thoughtless beautiful gestures in the style of the house manager Bunshi on the throne of Ivan the Terrible, he could well have carried it out at the moment when the guard at Spandau prison was once again replaced by the Soviet one (it was carried by 4 countries in turn). Hess's murder has not been proven, although later a prison orderly wrote a book in which he claimed that Hess was killed by British agents dressed in American uniforms. There are reasonable suspicions that Hess's suicide note was falsified, and the claims that his injuries were inflicted in an attempt to save him seem dubious.
                      25. 0
                        14 January 2025 23: 30
                        Conspiracy theories that Hess was allegedly killed by the British because they did not want to release him do not take into account reality at all. They wanted to release Hess a long time ago, by pardoning him. No one wanted to keep him in prison for decades, Hess could have been released at any time, starting in the 60s. But Hess, his defense attorney and his family were categorically against pardoning, they demanded that the tribunal's verdict be overturned and he be released as innocent. Hess remained an adherent of Nazi views, and became an idol of neo-Nazis. It is clear that no one was going to overturn the tribunal's verdict for his sake.
                        Until the end of his life he remained loyal to Hitler and his ideas, and after his suicide he became an idol of neo-Nazis and right-wing radicals, who elevated him to the status of martyr.

                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Гесс,_Рудольф
                    3. +5
                      8 January 2025 12: 58
                      Quote: TermNachTER
                      Everyone can make mistakes. Let's just say that Germany's naval war against the Anglo-Saxons was a surefire losing option.

                      Nope. Theoretically, there was a winning option - but for that it was necessary to solve a small problem on the eastern borders within the timeframe specified in "Barbarossa". smile
                      Provided that there was no threat to the Reich on land from the east and that there was a raw materials rear area inaccessible to the enemy air force, the Reich could demobilize part of the ground forces and concentrate on the navy - the famous Plan Z.
                      1. +1
                        8 January 2025 13: 27
                        There was not even the slightest comparison of the industrial and demographic potential of the Allies and the Axis.
                      2. 0
                        8 January 2025 13: 46
                        Hitler wrote in Mein Kapf that a war on two fronts was a losing proposition for Germany. When he began the invasion of Poland, he did not expect England to enter the war. And then he lost the War for England in the air, his fleet was inferior to the English, and his land army was useless - he could not use it against England, and he could not disband it either, having England behind him, which refused to stop the war with Germany. The choice of where to use it was small, it was impossible to feed it just like that :((
                        Although just recently the Four Power Pact was being discussed in all seriousness.
                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пакт_четырёх_держав
                      3. +1
                        8 January 2025 13: 51
                        Whether he expected it or not - these are not the right formulations for the head of a large state and the Armed Forces.
                      4. 0
                        8 January 2025 13: 55
                        This is not an area in which one can always make clear predictions.
                      5. +1
                        8 January 2025 14: 30
                        Then it's better not to get into this area, but to paint watercolors in Vienna. They say it turned out pretty well.
                      6. 0
                        8 January 2025 14: 41
                        In this area, it is not only self-taught artists who cannot make unambiguous predictions.
                      7. +1
                        8 January 2025 13: 54
                        Quote from solar
                        And then he lost the War for England in the air

                        Here is an interesting question: he most likely did not win for various reasons, although there were opportunities.
                      8. 0
                        8 January 2025 14: 33
                        Most likely, he lost. The British already had an air defense system, which included radar, radio guidance for fighters, anti-aircraft artillery, and other types of weapons. And "Ultra" is good to play when you know everything.
                      9. 0
                        8 January 2025 14: 34
                        There are different opinions, from both sides... :)
                        But, as the classic said, the truth is somewhere nearby.
                      10. +3
                        8 January 2025 15: 30
                        Quote from solar
                        There was little choice where to apply it.

                        Hitler believed that England would not sit down at the negotiating table until there was a force on the continent capable of fighting the Germans. The USSR remained such a force. Therefore, Barbarossa can be safely considered an anti-English operation.
                      11. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 04
                        We can only guess what the drug addict - schizophrenic thought. Although, as a professor-psychiatrist I know says, even for him it can be very difficult)))
                      12. +2
                        8 January 2025 17: 17
                        You should know that at the time of the attack on the USSR, Hitler was not yet a drug addict.
                      13. +4
                        8 January 2025 17: 48
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        We can only guess what the drug addict - schizophrenic thought.

                        Why guess? There is a recording by Halder of a meeting with Hitler at the Berghof on July 31, 1940, where Adolf said in plain text that in order for England to capitulate, their last hope, the USSR, must be destroyed.
                        Russia is that factor on which England most of all puts. Something like that happened in London! The English were already completely down *, and now they rose again. From listening to conversations, it is clear that Russia is unpleasantly struck by the rapid development of events in Western Europe.
                        Russia only needs to tell England that it does not want Germany to be strengthened, and then the British will, like drowning people, hope that in 6-8 months things will turn out completely different.
                        But if Russia is broken, England’s last hope will fade. The lord of Europe and the Balkans will then be Germany.
                        Solution: in the course of this clash with Russia, it must be finished. In the spring of the 41st.
                        The sooner Russia is defeated, the better. The operation makes sense only if we smash this state with one blow. Merely capturing a certain area is not enough. Stopping in winter is fraught with danger. Therefore, it is better to wait, but to make a firm decision to deal with Russia. This is also necessary in view of the situation in the Baltic Sea. Two large states in the Baltic are not needed. So, May 1941, 5 months to carry out the operation. It would be best to do it this year. But it does not work out, since a single operation must be prepared.
                      14. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 56
                        This is what he said officially. But what was in his head is interesting.
                      15. +2
                        8 January 2025 18: 36
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        This is what he said officially. But what was in his head is interesting.

                        And that was it. He needed to solve the problem of England continuing to fight, which could not be solved directly - a landing on the island without a fleet was impossible, and the Reich had practically no fleet left after the Norwegian operation. So he stuck to the strategy of indirect actions, fortunately the Reich had everything for actions on land.
                        And Hitler, IMHO, did not take the USA into account as England’s hope because the USA’s problem (unlike the USSR) had no solution at all. smile
                      16. -1
                        11 January 2025 01: 00
                        There is also a recording by Halder of a meeting with Hitler at the Berghof on July 31, 1940, where Adolf said in plain text that in order for England to capitulate, their last hope, the USSR, had to be defeated.

                        Nevertheless, three months later, in November 1940, Hitler began serious negotiations with the USSR on deeper allied relations.
                        On November 12, 1940, Adolf Hitler proposed to Vyacheslav Molotov, who was visiting Berlin, that the USSR join the Axis countries as a full fourth participant[2]. The draft Treaty was developed by Joachim von Ribbentrop and was read to Molotov on November 13, 1940, in a bomb shelter[3], during the bombing of Berlin by the British Air Force[4].
                      17. -1
                        11 January 2025 00: 55
                        You can look at it from another angle. The German land army was out of action. It was not possible to agree on an alliance with the USSR due to the contradictory demands of the parties, the Four Power Pact fell apart.
                        You can't disband the army, it's too expensive to just feed it. It had to be used somewhere.
                      18. 0
                        11 January 2025 01: 13
                        Quote from solar
                        You can look at it from the other side.

                        It is possible. But the point is that history cannot be rewritten - you have already been given documents that reveal the goals that Hitler set for himself.
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        There is a recording of Halder's meeting with Hitler at the Berghof on July 31, 1940.

                        After this, there is no point in guessing.
                        Quote from solar
                        Nevertheless, three months later, in November 1940, Hitler began serious negotiations with the USSR on deeper allied relations.

                        That's right. Because there were two ways to make England lose its last potential ally on the continent, which was the USSR.
                        1 Destroy the USSR
                        2 Make the USSR an ally of Germany.
                        Hitler, for all his mein kaifs and drang osten, was not eager to fight on two fronts, so he first tried to solve the problem politically. When that didn't work, Barbarossa was launched
                      19. -1
                        11 January 2025 01: 37
                        It is possible. But the point is that history cannot be rewritten - you have already been given documents that reveal the goals that Hitler set for himself.

                        And then you contradict yourself.
                        There were two ways to ensure that England lost its last potential ally on the continent, which was the USSR.
                        1 Destroy the USSR
                        2 Make the USSR an ally of Germany.

                        Hitler did not have a fundamental goal to fight the USSR, as Halder says, he could have reached an agreement peacefully, the chances were quite good.
                        In reality, the decision to start a war with the USSR was made not in the summer of 1940, as Halder writes, but in the winter of 1940-1941, a month after the final failure of negotiations with the USSR. And before that, the war plan was only one of the possible options.
                      20. +1
                        11 January 2025 14: 35
                        Quote from solar
                        And then you contradict yourself.

                        Where is the contradiction here?
                        Quote from solar
                        Before this, the war plan was only one of the possible options.

                        That's right. Precisely because

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Hitler believed that England would not sit down at the negotiating table until there was a force on the continent capable of fighting the Germans. The USSR remained such a force. Therefore, Barbarossa can be safely considered an anti-English operation.
                      21. 0
                        11 January 2025 14: 42
                        The presence of an “extra army” is an objectively established situation that pushed Hitler to choose, first and foremost, forceful solutions to problems.
                        The problem with the USSR could have been solved differently, through negotiations and agreements; there were no fundamental obstacles to this. But Hitler chose the solution that required using the army, which was out of work.
                        Therefore, we can safely consider Barbarossa as an anti-English operation.

                        Quite. After the invasion of Poland, Hitler was forced to follow a situation in which one thing led to another, and eventually led to the declaration of war on the United States and war with the USSR.
                      22. +1
                        11 January 2025 14: 48
                        Quote from solar
                        The presence of an “extra army” is an objectively established situation that pushed Hitler to choose, first and foremost, forceful solutions to problems.

                        But now you are contradicting yourself - Hitler at first tried to resolve the issue through diplomacy, making the USSR an ally.
                        Quote from solar
                        But Hitler chose the solution that required using the army, which was out of work.

                        There was no "irrelevant army". Hitler could have declared demobilization at any moment, and that would have been all.
                      23. -1
                        11 January 2025 19: 08
                        But now you are contradicting yourself - Hitler at first tried to resolve the issue through diplomacy, making the USSR an ally.

                        What Halder describes happened in the summer of 1940. And the proposal to Molotov was in November 1940. That is, the first thing that came to Hitler's mind was still war. Although there was no reason for this. The USSR normally cooperated with Germany, spoke out against England and France, publicly calling them aggressors and demanding that they stop the war against Germany, there was no reason to believe that the USSR could become an ally of England. The British also never said that they would surrender if the USSR was taken out of the game (and why would they say this if they perceived the USSR as a country friendly to Germany. In addition, Hitler does not even mention the fact of the USA, no less important than the USSR, in his speech). Hitler himself in his Mein Kapf, a reference book for any German of that time, it was given to newlyweds for a wedding, writes that it is necessary to avoid a war on two fronts, in the West and in the East. And for some reason, Hitler suddenly puts forward this far-fetched "argument", it is unclear what it is based on, and talks specifically about war. And only then, having caught his breath, he proposes an alliance with the USSR, but abandons this idea at the first difficulty. Maybe he is some kind of maniac who wanted to fight at any cost? No, he clearly did not want a big war, and in general, up until 1943, Germany lived in peacetime (Hitler was afraid of a repeat of the First World War). The explanation is simple - he was under pressure from circumstances - an army that had nothing to do.
                        There was no "irrelevant army". Hitler could have declared demobilization at any moment, and that would have been all.

                        He could not. England's stubborn reluctance to make peace in the war weighed on him. He was not Trotsky, who
                        "Neither peace nor war: we will not sign peace, we will end the war, and we will demobilize the army"
                      24. +1
                        11 January 2025 22: 31
                        Quote from solar
                        What Halder describes happened in the summer of 1940. And the proposal to Molotov was in November 1940. That is, the first thing that came to Hitler’s mind was still war.

                        This is not true. Hitler simply knew that plans like Barbarossa required months of preparation (in reality, the latter took almost half a year) and gave the order to prepare a plan. That is, either he would resolve the issue with the USSR by political means, or, if that failed, he would have a ready-made war plan.
                        Quote from solar
                        Although there was no reason for this.

                        There were more than enough reasons for this.
                        Firstly, Hitler initially planned to expand to the East. That is, even if the USSR had sided with the Axis and Hitler had somehow managed to force England to make peace, he would still have attacked the USSR after that. He was stopped by a war on two fronts - he did not want to fight against the USSR and England at the same time.
                        Secondly, he considered an alliance with the USSR possible only with complete confidence in the loyalty of the USSR. Only the subordinate position of the USSR could give him such confidence, that is, Hitler considered the USSR only as a junior partner, but in no case as an equal. The main reason for the refusal of an alliance with the USSR was precisely that Stalin insisted on an equal alliance.
                        Thirdly, neither Hitler nor anyone in Germany understood what the USSR really was, its industrial power was underestimated many times over. As well as its military power.

                        Quote from solar
                        and why would they say this if they perceived the USSR as a country friendly to Germany

                        Didn't perceive it. Read Churchill.
                        Quote from solar
                        writes that it is necessary to avoid a war on two fronts, in the West and in the East. And for some reason Hitler suddenly

                        The whole point is that England at that moment had lost its army and could only conduct military operations by analogy with the strange war. And that was not too scary.
                        Quote from solar
                        The explanation is simple: he was under pressure from circumstances - an army that had nothing to do.

                        There was nothing simpler than to demobilize it partially. Even Germany's peacetime army would have been enough to counter any attempts by England.
                        At the same time, demobilization of the fleet and Luftwaffe was not required. That is, no army put pressure on Hitler and could not put pressure. All inactive and not engaged in the fight against England units could be demobilized and very quickly restored again, if there was a need for them.
                      25. -1
                        11 January 2025 23: 39
                        All units that were inactive and not engaged in the fight against England could be demobilized and very quickly restored again if there was a need for them.

                        Demobilization and the creation of a new multi-million army is not done at the snap of a finger. England preserved the army and was constantly engaged in strengthening it. Hitler could not go to games with demobilization - the re-creation of the army from newly called up, while the war was going on.
                        First, Hitler originally planned to expand to the East.

                        I planned it, but not through war with the USSR. It was under different conditions.
                        According to the ideas that were prevalent in the 20s (and Hitler shared them), the USSR would not last long and would collapse as a state. Under these conditions, he planned to expand to the east, which he wrote about in his Mein Kapf.
                        Quote from solar
                        and why would they say this if they perceived the USSR as a country friendly to Germany
                        Didn't perceive it. Read Churchill.

                        Churchill wrote a lot of things. For example, that England was not going to surrender.
                        "They can't defeat us. I will never give up. Never, never, never!"

                        But the plans to bomb Baku were quite real, although not implemented. Operation Pike.
                        Despite the formal neutrality of the USSR in the war that had broken out in Europe, the British and French came to the conclusion that the Soviet-German pact had made Moscow an accomplice of Hitler.[1] By destroying the oil fields of Baku and Grozny, the Allies hoped to weaken the Soviet oil industry and thus deprive Nazi Germany of Soviet oil.[2]

                        On March 8, 1940, the British Chiefs of Staff Committee prepared a memorandum, "Military Consequences of Military Operations against Russia in 1940." This document envisaged three main directions of operations against the USSR: northern (in the areas of Petsamo, Murmansk and Arkhangelsk), Far Eastern and southern. The report emphasized that "the most vulnerable targets in the Caucasus are the oil industrial areas of Baku, Grozny and Batumi," and noted that it would also be useful to involve naval forces in air strikes: "carrier raids in the Black Sea with the aim of bombing oil refineries, oil storage facilities or port facilities in Batumi and Tuapse would be a useful supplement to the main air raids on the Caucasus region and could lead to the temporary destruction of Russian defenses" [6] ... The minutes of the meetings of the coordinating groups of the French and British Air Force headquarters on April 4-5, 1940, indicated that air actions by Franco-British forces "will be directed against oil refineries and port facilities in the cities of Batumi, Poti, Grozny and Baku." The port of Odessa was also named as a possible target for attack. ...

                        The German invasion of Norway and France disrupted the operation.
                        This is not true. Hitler simply knew that plans like Barbarossa required months of preparation (in reality, the latter took almost half a year) and gave the order to prepare a plan. That is, either he would resolve the issue with the USSR by political means, or, if that failed, he would have a ready-made war plan.

                        According to Halder, he speaks of military actions on July 31, 1940, and he approaches Molotov with an alliance proposal only on November 12 of the same year. In reality, the attack plan was developed after the decision to invade was made a month after the negotiations failed. Although, logically, Hitler should have approached the USSR immediately and he would have had a large reserve of time to agree on the details of the agreement.
                        The main reason for the rejection of the alliance with the USSR was precisely that Stalin insisted on an equal alliance.

                        The main reason for the refusal was the USSR's inflated demands, which conflicted with Germany's other allies. But in fact, they did not even try to coordinate them. And in other respects, the agreement with the USSR was not fundamentally different from the agreement with the other participants.
                        Thirdly, neither Hitler nor anyone in Germany understood what the USSR really was; its industrial power was underestimated many times over.

                        The stories about the "headless colossus with clay feet" are propaganda hype after the decision to attack had already been made. In addition, with the blitzkrieg tactics, this was of no fundamental importance. In addition, at the time of the attack on the USSR, the States had actually entered the war on the side of England, having adopted the Lend-Lease Act. Hitler understood that after the attack on the USSR, England and the USA would become allies of the USSR and would use their industrial potential for the war if the blitzkrieg failed (as it actually did).
                      26. +1
                        12 January 2025 20: 21
                        Quote from solar
                        Demobilization and the creation of a new multi-million army is not done at the snap of a finger. England preserved the army and was constantly engaged in strengthening it. Hitler could not go to games with demobilization - the re-creation of the army from newly called up, while the war was going on.

                        Sergey, you greatly exaggerate the difficulties of deploying an army based on trained reserve soldiers. If the divisions have already been deployed, the soldiers have undergone combat coordination (and this is how it was, many even managed to fight), then there is nothing difficult in demobilizing them - then, if necessary, calling them back. This will be easier than a mobilization plan in case of war.
                        Second - either the army is needed against England, but then it cannot be used to attack the USSR, or it is not needed, but then it can be partially demobilized. And you get that it can be sent against the USSR, but cannot be demobilized because it is needed against England
                        Quote from solar
                        I planned it, but not through war with the USSR. It was under different conditions.

                        That's all true. However, his key postulate was living space, so if the USSR did not collapse on its own, according to Hitler's logic, it needed help to do so.
                        Quote from solar
                        Churchill wrote a lot of things. For example, that England was not going to surrender.

                        She never intended to.
                        Quote from solar
                        But the plans to bomb Baku were quite real.

                        Just don't forget the deadlines for these plans.
                        Quote from solar
                        On 8 March 1940, the British Chiefs of Staff Committee prepared a memorandum, "Military Consequences of Military Operations against Russia in 1940".

                        That is, under the ardent Sovietophobe Chamberlain, before Churchill came to power. But we are discussing the situation that arose after the fall of France in 1941.
                        Quote from solar
                        According to Halder, he speaks of military actions on July 31, 1940, and he approaches Molotov with a proposal for an alliance only on November 12 of the same year.

                        Of course. First, Hitler draws up the Tripartite Pact, which, in fact, was signed only in September 1940, and immediately after that (in September) he approaches Stalin with a proposal to join the pact. November is already the time for negotiations.
                        Quote from solar
                        The main reason for the refusal was the USSR’s inflated demands, which conflicted with Germany’s other allies.

                        You can interpret it this way. It would be good to explain what exactly you consider to be overstated. In fact, the USSR was simply trying to ensure its own security and did not want Germany to strengthen on its borders.
                        Quote from solar
                        Stories about a "headless colossus with feet of clay" are propaganda hype that comes after the decision to attack has already been made.

                        Read Tippelskirch. He has a very good account of how and at what the military and industrial might of the USSR was estimated. And Tippelskirch, at that time, was, after all, engaged in intelligence.
                      27. -1
                        13 January 2025 00: 52
                        If the divisions have already been deployed, the soldiers have undergone combat training (and this is how it was, many of them even managed to fight), then there is nothing difficult in demobilizing them - and then, if necessary, calling them back.

                        Can you give examples of million-strong armies?
                        Second - either the army is needed against England, but then it cannot be used to attack the USSR

                        It is needed against England, but not immediately. Hitler did not plan to fight the USSR for a long time.
                        that is, under the ardent Sovietophobe Chamberlain, before Churchill came to power. But we are discussing the situation that arose after the fall of France in 1941.

                        The fall of France was in 1940. The cancellation of the plan was caused by this fact, as well as the fact that the Germans captured this plan in Paris and made it public for propaganda purposes - including discrediting England and France in front of the USSR.
                        And where did Churchill claim that with the fall of the USSR England would abandon the war with Germany? It's curious. In fact, he is known as an uncompromising supporter of the war with Germany.
                        Of course. First, Hitler draws up the Tripartite Pact, which, in fact, was signed only in September 1940, and immediately after that (in September) he approaches Stalin with a proposal to join the pact. November is already the time for negotiations.

                        Nobody interfered with the parallel negotiations. The USSR was informed about the preparation of the Tripartite Pact in advance, before it was signed, nobody interfered with the negotiations with the USSR since the summer, coordinating positions and looking for compromises. And the negotiations in November were extremely short - they asked, answered - and that's it. Although the issue was very serious. Much more time and effort was spent on concluding a new trade agreement between the USSR and Germany for 1941-42 than on this attempt.
                        In fact, the USSR was simply trying to ensure its own security and did not want Germany to strengthen its position on its borders.

                        It is difficult to understand how the plans for the straits, concessions on Sakhalin, the Balkans and the Middle East are connected with this. Perhaps Finland can be attributed to this. And the rest is not border protection, but expansion. Such inflated demands were typical of Stalin, by the way. Later, this led to the failure of the USSR to sign the San Francisco Peace Treaty and became one of the reasons for the beginning of the Cold War.
                        He has a very good description of how and at what the military and industrial power of the USSR was valued.

                        For Blikrieg, industrial was not of great importance. But in general, subordinates at all times knew how to guess the mood of the boss and give the corresponding reports. And this, I think, is true both for 1941 and for 2022 :((
                        By the way, Tippelskirch, History of the Second World War, after the defeat of France, chapter 4,
                        England's only ally on the mainland was defeated and lost confidence in it. Italy sided with Germany. England could not count on new allies: it had nothing to offer them.

                        As for underestimating the USSR, according to Tippelskirch, Hitler was rather dizzy from success.
                        The directive breathes optimism, which must be explained by the impression of victories over Poland and France. Therefore, it ascribes to the enemy the same passive role to which Germany had already become accustomed in the two previous wars. Once again, they hoped to circumvent Moltke's position that "no operational plan can remain unchanged after the first encounter with the enemy's main forces" by forcing a lightning war on the enemy.

                        Tippelskirch attributes the failure of the war with the USSR to the delay associated with the operation in Yugoslavia.
                        At the same time as the order for the strategic deployment of forces for the attack on Yugoslavia was given, the start of Operation Barbarossa was ordered to be postponed for at least four weeks. For the war against Russia, five invaluable weeks were lost, which had a decisive impact on its outcome.
                      28. 0
                        14 January 2025 21: 45
                        Only a blind person could fail to see the enormous industrial potential of the USSR by the end of the 30s. Especially since the Germans themselves participated in this. The possessed one believed that the USSR would collapse on its own. What nonsense.
                      29. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 05
                        More nonsense. Read the whole thread, and don't take bits out of context. "The demoniac believed" in this in the early 20s, when Mein Kapf wrote.
                      30. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 12
                        You present this as an argument confirming your fabrications.
                      31. 0
                        14 January 2025 22: 19
                        Read the entire thread, rather than picking out individual sentences.
                      32. 0
                        14 January 2025 23: 53
                        I'm not picking out anything. You constantly put the USSR and Nazi Germany on the same level. All "agreements" with Hitler had the sole purpose of delaying the war, for which the USSR was not ready. And perhaps even avoiding it altogether. Although the IVS hardly believed in such a prospect.
                      33. 0
                        15 January 2025 00: 32
                        I would like to quote from an article by one person who writes that the inflated demands of the USSR (and deliberately inflated, as he believes) led to Hitler finally becoming convinced of the need to fight the USSR.
                        Although the USSR itself, according to the author of the article, did not pose any threat to Germany and did not intend to fight with Germany.

                        On November 25, the Soviet leadership put an end to this: it officially put forward conditions to Berlin that were unacceptable to the Nazis, including the withdrawal of German troops from Finland, a mutual assistance treaty between the USSR and Bulgaria, and a number of others, thereby deliberately excluding any possibility of joining the Pact. This position finally strengthened the Fuhrer in his intention to unleash a war against the USSR. And already in December, throwing aside all the warnings of his strategists about the catastrophic danger of a war on two fronts, Hitler approved the "Barbarossa" plan.

                        The author is mistaken about the strategists, however - Hitler himself wrote about the catastrophic nature of a war on two fronts in his Mein Kapf. But let's forgive him this unprincipled mistake.
                        The USSR itself did not actually pose any threat to Germany and had no plans to start a war with the fascists, as the author claims.
                        I used many new, recently discovered, declassified materials in preparing this article. And in this regard, I can responsibly state that there are no archival documents that would confirm the version about the USSR's intention to start a preventive war against Germany.
                      34. 0
                        15 January 2025 00: 43
                        This is just one person's opinion. The USSR had only one demand - the security of our borders, but in fact, all these negotiations are just a delay of the inevitable. Hitler had no way not to fight the USSR, he was pushed to do so by world (or rather Anglo-American) capital, which the Third Reich gave birth to. Unexpectedly, though, he himself got into trouble. It is hard to imagine a more impossible alliance between the impudent and the USSR. Nevertheless, it is a fact.
                      35. 0
                        15 January 2025 10: 23
                        This is just one person's opinion.

                        This person has maximum free access to archives, even classified ones. He is not exactly "someone". "Someone" is more like you and me.
                      36. 0
                        15 January 2025 11: 46
                        Everyone, even the most informed, has political preferences and their own, and perhaps imposed, vision of the subject. There is a fact - Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union, got punched in the face and the World changed, to the profiteering coup of 91-93.
                      37. 0
                        15 January 2025 11: 49
                        There is a fact: Hitler's Germany attacked the Soviet Union and got punched in the face

                        Does anyone really argue with this fact?
                        The quotes above were from Putin's article, sorry for the intrigue.
                      38. 0
                        15 January 2025 11: 52
                        Then everything falls into place, like cartridges in a clip. I remember he also wrote or spoke about galoshes.
                      39. 0
                        15 January 2025 12: 05
                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пакт_четырёх_держав
                      40. 0
                        15 January 2025 12: 08
                        I read it a long time ago. Fictions, with a clear anti-Soviet bias. Not everything that has been preserved, even in the form of documents, is the truth.
                      41. +1
                        8 January 2025 15: 57
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        and concentrate on the fleet - the famous Plan Z.

                        So you are already rejecting the US entry into the war?
                        Because with such an "Arsenal of Democracy" in place, Plan Z is not worth the paper it is written on.
                      42. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 06
                        Actually, plan "Z" was calculated until 1946, the war started a little earlier)))
                      43. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 15
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Actually, the "Z" plan was calculated until 1946,

                        If we take the whole thing, then until the end of 48.
                        If we take only heavy ships (N-type battleships and P-type cruisers), then
                        Yes - they were supposed to be completed by January 1, 1946. In theory.
                      44. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 53
                        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
                        So you are already rejecting the US entry into the war?

                        FDR will have to try very hard for this. Because if the Reich wins the Eastern campaign, IMO, it will not be up to declaring war on the USA - they would rather digest the USSR.
                      45. +1
                        8 January 2025 20: 16
                        Quote: Alexey RA
                        Theoretically, it was a winning option

                        No! The US raised Hitler to destroy the British Empire, not to create a thousand-year Reich feel
                      46. +1
                        8 January 2025 22: 22
                        The fact that Hitler was brought to power by the Anglo-Saxons is, in general, no secret to anyone who can read)))
                      47. 0
                        9 January 2025 01: 13
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        The fact that Hitler was brought to power by the Anglo-Saxons

                        Reread my message above...
                        The United States is not run by Anglo-Saxons request
                      48. +1
                        9 January 2025 08: 50
                        Who rules the USA is a very complicated question. Anglo-Saxons is a common term for those on both sides of the Atlantic.
                      49. 0
                        9 January 2025 15: 17
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Who runs the United States is a very complex question.

                        of course, but finances are at the core...
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        This is common usage, about those on both sides of the Atlantic.

                        as usual, what is on the surface is a lie... request
                        Well, what's the point for the Anglo-Saxons in destroying their identity through migration?
                      50. +1
                        9 January 2025 16: 44
                        Finances are always at the core, Vladimir Ilyich said so.
                        Those who rule, they don't walk around Harlem (East End) or ride the subway. And they live in guarded areas.
                      51. +1
                        10 January 2025 12: 59
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Finances are always at the core, Vladimir Ilyich said so.

                        And before him, many, for example Marx...
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        And they live in protected areas.

                        Did this save IN2 and the Grand Dukes? I can't understand the logic of modern puppeteers, but many things indicate that they've gone too far... request
                      52. 0
                        10 January 2025 13: 09
                        Many in power were confident until the last moment that the situation was under control. And when they realized it, it was already too late.
                      53. 0
                        10 January 2025 13: 19
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        And when they realized it, it was already too late.

                        I agree and it ended badly...
                        But now there is a difference - part of the Western elite is pursuing strange not only geopolitics, but national and demographic ones... In essence, in developed countries, the indigenous population is dying out and being replaced by migrants, mainly Islamic ones... and the latter reproduce well, so there is no talk of controlling the Earth's population... and what remains?
                      54. 0
                        10 January 2025 13: 24
                        In this, I completely agree with you. I also do not understand this process and what they are trying to achieve? France is almost completely smoked, Germany is already approaching, England is also not far away. To say that the people making decisions in these countries are oligophrenics? I don’t think so. On TV they give the impression of being normal. But why this is really being done is not clear. However, in England, the mayor of London and other cities, and the main Tory are already smoked. In general, this is beyond my understanding and elementary logic.
            2. +2
              8 January 2025 12: 55
              Quote: TermNachTER
              The "tonnage theory" that Dönitz came up with turned out to be wrong because the Allies built more ships than the Germans sank.

              Not only that. Anti-submarine ships also turned out to be cheaper than submarines - at the VIF, Mr. Exeter claimed that the "seven" was equivalent in cost to three "flowers".
              1. 0
                8 January 2025 13: 28
                It is quite possible, since the Flower was based on the hull of a trawler, which could be built by any shipyard.
  3. +7
    8 January 2025 06: 39
    Thank you for a very readable article! I read it easily, I will tell you right away to the meticulous bores that I did not check the details and will not! History is history! Yes
  4. +7
    8 January 2025 06: 40
    Well, yeah. I don't read many such long articles, but I read THIS one in one breath!!!
    1. +3
      8 January 2025 09: 40
      If you are so interested, you can find on the Internet and read - Igor Bunich "Kaiser's Corsairs" and "Fuhrer's Pirates". Quite informative and easy to read. The late, unfortunately, Igor Lvovich, undoubtedly had a good literary gift, and as a translator he was not bad. And then, some translate so that the hair "stands on end", even my "hedgehog"))
      1. +2
        8 January 2025 12: 38
        Quote: TermNachTER
        If you are so interested, you can find it on the Internet and read - Igor Bunich "Kaiser's Corsairs" and "Fuhrer's Pirates".

        It's better to look for the source materials right away, because Bunich omitted something, and added his own ideas somewhere...

        Quote: TermNachTER
        and he's not bad as a translator either.

        When you don't know the language, probably yes... When I happened to come across the original of Kennedy's "The Chase", and decided that I was reading a slightly different book... Yes, also about "Bismarck", "Hood" and others, but everything was somehow different.
        1. 0
          8 January 2025 13: 31
          Well, many authors see and translate in their own way, the author of the article also has controversial points. I do not claim that Bunich is ideal, but he is quite readable. Regarding Ludwig Kennedy - of course it is better to read in the original. But personally, I have not come across other translations into Russian, "The Hunt for the Bismarck", except Bunich.
          1. +1
            8 January 2025 13: 39
            Quote: TermNachTER
            But I personally have not come across any other translations into Russian of "The Hunt for the Bismarck" other than Bunich.

            There are no others, because Bunich worked at a time when “noble piracy” flourished and there was no need to worry about prosecution.
            And now (especially now) there are many difficulties with the legal side of the issue.
            1. 0
              8 January 2025 13: 46
              And now what's stopping you? Any claims from the English will send you on an erotic walking journey. You can do it in electronic format and look for a translator until you get tired of it. Especially since even now in the West a lot of interesting books are published on the Navy of the Second World War. I read with pleasure.
              1. 0
                8 January 2025 13: 52
                Quote: TermNachTER
                Now what is stopping you?

                Perhaps the demand...
                Any work must pay for itself somehow.
                Well, and the presence of a qualified translator who knows the subject.
                1. 0
                  8 January 2025 13: 59
                  I think that for a simple amateur, Bunich is enough. Those who are interested in the issue more deeply, there is a lot of literature in English. But there are not many of them.
                  1. 0
                    8 January 2025 14: 09
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    For those who are interested in the issue more deeply, there is a lot of literature in English.

                    There is also literature of varying quality there.
                    I read the book about "Bismarck" by Dulin-Gartske, which was promoted on all foreign specialized resources as "ultimate edition". I didn't go crazy for it: I haven't seen so much trash and fun even in Taras and Shirokorad. :)
                    1. 0
                      8 January 2025 14: 37
                      Well, that's what they are experts for, to understand where fiction is and where serious authors are. I have already stopped reading modern interpreters. I prefer authors who were direct participants in the events, or contemporaries.
                      1. 0
                        8 January 2025 16: 06
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I have already stopped reading modern interpreters.

                        Still, they have one advantage: archival documents... The question is, how are they used?

                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        I prefer authors who were direct participants in the events, or contemporaries.

                        The former often lie as eyewitnesses, and the latter do not have a complete picture of what is happening, so it is a bad decision to limit ourselves to just them.
                      2. 0
                        8 January 2025 17: 45
                        Often - their archives - this is their understanding of the issue. Eyewitnesses also lie, but still they were there and saw with their own eyes. If there are two or three eyewitnesses, then sometimes the situation becomes clear. I don't read Taras and Shirokorad at all))) they are "interpreters - popularizers" of their book for wide circles of history lovers. Unfortunately, in Russia, seriously, few people write on this issue.
                      3. +1
                        8 January 2025 18: 19
                        Quote: TermNachTER
                        Eyewitnesses also lie, but they were there and saw it with their own eyes. If there are two or three eyewitnesses, then sometimes the situation becomes clear.

                        It's good when they exist, these same 2-3...
                        And when he is, at best, alone and contradicts himself every other line.
                      4. 0
                        8 January 2025 18: 55
                        Well, anything can happen. About three witnesses - this is Hara Tameichi, Anton Kroze and the third, American. They describe one fight, everyone has different memories)))
  5. +1
    8 January 2025 06: 45
    History itself tells us how to wage war at sea. Today, auxiliary cruisers could do a good job and do many amazing things for the Anglo-Saxons. But for this, you need to have a head on your shoulders and something steely below the belt, and we have a shortage of these.
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 11: 01
      Today, auxiliary cruisers could do a good job and do many amazing things for the Anglo-Saxons.
      - laughed... in modern conditions this is not realistic - satellites see everything
      1. +3
        8 January 2025 18: 27
        Quote: faiver
        - laughed... in modern conditions this is not realistic - satellites see everything

        Yeah... but there's also a shadow fleet of hundreds of tankers that no one sees. smile

        All this fun with Marinetraffic and real-time vessel tracking lasts exactly as long as the automatic identification system is turned on on the vessel. As soon as it is turned off, the vessel becomes "invisible" to civilian systems. A tanker was sailing in the Barents Sea - and it was gone. And a week later it appeared out of nowhere again, already with cargo. Or an empty tanker drifted in the Barents Sea for a week in proud solitude (there were no other AIS markers nearby) - and suddenly went to port with cargo. It must have been blown in by the wind.
        1. -1
          8 January 2025 18: 37
          All this fun with Marinetraffic and ship tracking
          - Do our troops also track NATO satellites in the North-Eastern Military District via transponders?
      2. 0
        9 January 2025 12: 01
        The first to laugh usually gets away with it. The Brits also laughed and lost their ships.
        1. 0
          9 January 2025 12: 09
          stay on line, your comment is very important to us bully
    2. +1
      8 January 2025 13: 52
      this is "obvious" - for non-specialists))) specialists see the full depth of depths and breadth of latitudes, the complexity (impossibility) of such a method of waging naval warfare)))
      1. 0
        9 January 2025 12: 02
        Well, yes, specialists still cannot fully protect the Black Sea Fleet's warships from BEKs.
        1. 0
          9 January 2025 13: 09
          Do you understand the difference between the Odessa Gulf and the world ocean?)))
          1. 0
            10 January 2025 12: 20
            Do you understand that it is much easier to hide in the world's oceans than in the Odessa Gulf?
            1. 0
              10 January 2025 13: 57
              Is it easier to hide?))) And are you familiar with such concepts as cruising range and seaworthiness?
              1. 0
                10 January 2025 18: 22
                I am already stunned by your arrogance and manner of arguing. So be healthy and enjoy the knowledge of what seaworthiness is
                1. 0
                  10 January 2025 18: 35
                  Where is the arrogance? I ask myself a perfectly correct question - do you know what seaworthiness is? Is the question unclear? I'll explain it in simple terms - the BEK is launched from the Odessa region, in good weather, in a couple of hours it reaches Tendra or Tarkhankut, where it is activated. Now let's take the ocean - distances of thousands of miles. Here it is calm, after 500 miles a storm - 8 points, the BEK safely sank. What is unclear?
                  1. 0
                    10 January 2025 18: 37
                    P.S. This is not to mention that the BEC simply won’t have enough fuel for 500 miles.
  6. +1
    8 January 2025 07: 12
    And the Germans fired a volley every 6 seconds and hit

    Maybe not a salvo but a shot?
    1. 0
      8 January 2025 14: 08
      I think this is a nautical terminology related to the history of sailing ships
      although there is one on this same site
      "In the absence of stabilization, gunners had to independently "select" the pitching correction. Doing this constantly, keeping the enemy in sight, at any given moment was very difficult. Therefore, on a warship of those years, the command to fire a salvo was more like permission to open fire, after which the guns fired when ready, "selecting" the pitching correction and firing."
  7. kig
    +3
    8 January 2025 07: 31
    barrier breaker "Sperrbrecher 26"
    - What kind of beast is this? It turns out that this is a requisitioned merchant vessel, designed to make a passage through minefields by simply "running over" a mine - well, that's if you're lucky, of course. It's been re-equipped in some way - or most likely, it's simply loaded with something floating, like empty barrels.
    1. +3
      8 January 2025 12: 43
      Quote: kig
      It turns out that this is a requisitioned merchant ship, designed to make a passage through minefields by simply "running over" a mine - well, that's if you're lucky, of course.

      They were not thrown directly onto the mines - minesweepers were there for that... "Sperrbrechers" were used as escorts for large and important ships and convoys sailing along known fairways (they were sent ahead), in case the minesweepers screwed up or the British threw in a "surprise".
  8. +3
    8 January 2025 08: 15
    In general, it was always surprising that German commanders, acting independently, were lucky, proactive, etc. But as soon as they put an admiral on top... that's it, hello. Everything went sluggishly, cautiously. They tried to run away from a single hit. And to take a risk was simply impossible.
    1. 0
      8 January 2025 09: 44
      Even when they put the captain on top, I mean the captain zur See, they also started to go wild))) read "Battle in the Bay of Biscay")))
  9. -1
    8 January 2025 08: 52
    Hmm. The fascists, waging war, in all cases tried to prevent the death of enemy crews and passengers, being true to the principle of rescue at sea. If it was technically possible, people were unfailingly rescued.
    The crew of our ship, when there was supposedly no war, was denied rescue and assistance. Conclusion? People of the West are much worse than fascists. I'm not sure they can be called people at all.
    1. +4
      8 January 2025 12: 03
      The crew of our ship, when there was supposedly no war, was denied rescue and assistance. Conclusion? People of the West are much worse than fascists. I'm not sure they can be called people at all.


      Conclusion: use critical analysis and get information from different sources. The crew of our vessel was provided with full assistance, and the media distorted the picture.
    2. +5
      8 January 2025 13: 09
      Quote: Mikhail3
      The crew of our ship, when there was supposedly no war, was denied rescue and assistance. Conclusion?

      All vessels that come to the aid of a ship in distress follow the orders of the coastal rescue coordination center. The Norwegian vessel had just assisted the Russian vessel. It placed a lifeboat from the sinking vessel along its side, protecting it from the waves. The weather was good, but nevertheless. They held on until the coastal rescue boat arrived. The order not to take Russian sailors on board the Norwegian vessel was received from the coastal rescue center "Cartagena".
      © representative of the company "Bulkship Management Kaliningrad"

      I remember that the captain of the ALED "50 Years of Victory" Dmitry Viktorovich Lobusov even apologized in his LJ to the Oslo Carrier 3 team for his first emotional post on the topic of rescuing the Ursa Major crew.
      Unfortunately, I also became a victim of the first emotions, for which I apologize to the sailors of this Norwegian ship.
    3. -1
      8 January 2025 13: 40
      You are a little wrong. The fact that the Norwegians acted like pigs does not make them criminals. There was no threat to the lives and health of the Russian sailors - they were in a boat, the sea was calm, the shore and rescuers were nearby. So, from the point of view of maritime law, there were no violations.
      1. +4
        8 January 2025 14: 28
        The photo shows that it was much safer to board the cutter from the lifeboat than to board the high side of the Norwegian vessel. The shore rescue center's order to wait for the cutter to arrive was logical and reasonable from this point of view. There was no threat to the lives of the people on the boat, and the Norwegians covered it with their side.
      2. -3
        8 January 2025 17: 42
        Yes. I am "a little wrong". People who refused to rescue those in distress at sea managed to cleverly hide behind paragraphs, instructions and other papers. Our captain was even forced to apologize. The ship's owners were probably threatened with a fine.
        It's nice to see how many defenders there are of these... sailors. Who, instead of just saving people, started leafing through paragraphs, looking for excuses. Guys, you're just great! Let them lay papers on you one day. They say it's very cozy to lie in a coffin surrounded by instructions. Ugh...
        1. +4
          8 January 2025 18: 14
          Quote: Mikhail3
          People who refused to save those in distress at sea managed to cleverly hide behind paragraphs, instructions and other papers.

          Once again and slowly: there was no refusal of rescue. The rescue operation was carried out in an organised manner from the very beginning – by the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre in Cartagena, which is responsible for such operations in the area. A specialised rescue boat was sent to evacuate the crew of the Ursa Major. Before its arrival, the Oslo Carrier 3 moored the boat from the Ursa Major and covered it with its side – despite the relatively calm sea.
          But you are, of course, much more professional than the captain of the ALED "50 Years of Victory", who recognized the actions of the Oslo Carrier 3 team as justified.

          Translating into urban realities, rescuers and an ambulance left for the accident site. And witnesses of the accident were asked not to try to provide assistance or evacuate the victims on their own.
          1. -3
            8 January 2025 18: 19
            Oh yeah. The captain, "first after God" on a vessel carrying out the most difficult voyages (tankers are pretty fragile, right? I don't know much about that, of course. But still, such a captain should be smart, professional and cool-headed, right?), wrote a post "under the influence of emotions." He had been doing all his work for many years under the influence of cool-headed skill and ability, and then suddenly "gave in to emotions." And then he talked to someone. Who, I wonder? Probably the owner of the vessel. Who else, except for relatives? And suddenly his post after the failure to save became emotions.
            Aren't you ashamed to pray, uncle? Or do they pay you too well? Ugh...
            1. +3
              8 January 2025 19: 06
              Quote: Mikhail3
              For many years I had been doing all my work under the influence of cold-blooded skill and ability, and then suddenly I "gave in to emotions." And then I talked to someone. Who, I wonder?

              And then I received information not only from domestic media, which pushed out unverified and incomplete information for the sake of monetizing the hype.
              In general, there was an excellent comment on the situation to the article on VO "Shipowner: Norwegians refused to rescue Russian sailors from the sunken dry cargo ship Ursa Major":
              Quote: kig
              How sensations are made.

              Surely, in the conversation between the crew and the ship owner, who is Oboronlogistics, something like "they approached the Oslo Carrier in a boat, moored, but did not lift us on board because they received instructions from the Spanish coordination center to wait for the Spanish boat" was heard. Oboronlogistics blurted out "refused to rescue" without understanding. Journalists happily picked up on it. Readers, not knowing the facts and circumstances of what happened, sitting on the couch in a warm apartment, have already passed judgment: the crew did not save the ship, jumped into the boat and was gone. The Norwegians refused to save them, which means they sank the ship. Two missing people planted explosives and were then picked up by a British nuclear submarine.

              And yes, I would like to see a person who is capable of putting pressure on the captain of the largest (before the new Arktikas are put into operation) nuclear icebreaker in the world - sovereign man. Moreover, to put pressure on him so that he would begin to express a point of view that contradicts the statement of the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation. smile
            2. 0
              8 January 2025 19: 44
              In purely human terms, they are Norgs, to put it mildly. From the Criminal Code's point of view, they are not guilty of anything.
              1. 0
                9 January 2025 10: 54
                Quote: TermNachTER
                In purely human terms, Norgs is putting it mildly.

                Norgis from Kaliningrad? wink You remember who recruited the crew for Oslo Carrier 3.

                The Norgi did everything possible to save the crew of the Ursa Major without violating the instructions of the rescue center: they moored the lifeboat, covered it with the hull, provided water, waited ambulance rescue boat, which arrived, if my memory serves me right, 2,5 hours later.
                1. 0
                  9 January 2025 10: 58
                  Well, they could have lifted people on board, via the storm ladder. Although I wrote that there was no immediate threat, so - the hysteria was blown out of proportion.
                  1. 0
                    9 January 2025 15: 20
                    Quote: TermNachTER
                    Well, they could have lifted people on board via the storm ladder.

                    And in a couple of hours, launch it down the same way. With such a performance, no crashes are needed - the storm ladder will suffice.
                    1. 0
                      9 January 2025 16: 40
                      I've used it more than once - it's still working.
          2. kig
            0
            11 January 2025 08: 00
            Quote: Alexey RA
            there was no refusal to rescue
            There may be another nuance here. I am not an expert in maritime law, but this could have happened: if our people had boarded the Oslo, this fact could have been considered a real rescue, if not of the vessel, then of its crew. And then the shipowner would have financial obligations. And now the saviors are Spanish rescuers, who are supposed to do this according to their duties.
        2. 0
          8 January 2025 18: 59
          As a former cop, I explain to you that human justice and the norms of the Criminal Code are completely different things.
  10. kig
    +5
    8 January 2025 09: 35
    this suggests that the strategy was chosen crookedly
    Who knows what would have happened if... Most likely, the success of auxiliary raider cruisers and the relative failure of raider warships largely stems from the fact that a warship is easier to track immediately upon leaving base.

    And the luckiest of the ten was obviously Penguin: 32 ships with a total tonnage of 156000 GRT were sunk, captured, blown up by mines laid by it, and sank.
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 09: 46
      The point of all the action, as in WWI, was to disrupt England's supply. In both cases, it turned out to be unachievable.
      1. +1
        8 January 2025 09: 47
        P.S. And the destruction of individual ships was beautiful and loud, but it had no fundamental significance.
  11. +3
    8 January 2025 11: 16
    informative article! thanks to the author
  12. +7
    8 January 2025 12: 30
    Who is to blame for the fact that the effectiveness of this pirate vessel turned out to be higher than that of
    multi-thousand-ton giants, encased in armor and armed with monstrous caliber guns? Who is to blame that two Kriegsmarine super battleships sank one ship with a displacement of 40 tons between them, and this misunderstanding sent ships with a displacement of 000 tons to the bottom?

    The author, in his characteristic manner, confuses the warm with the soft, trying to compare the effectiveness of the actions of auxiliary cruisers and heavy ships of the Kriegsmarine.
    To begin with, the goals and objectives of the operations were completely different.
    The actions of the auxiliary cruisers are "mosquito bites" to keep the British on their toes, showing that there may also be problems in the rear. If you look closely, it turns out that all the successes of the VKR are greatly stretched out in time. For example, the same first raid of the "Thor": 11 months - 11 ships on average with a tonnage of 9700 GRT. After the war, the British calculated that "per capita" of one VKR on average there were 14 ships with a tonnage of 84,7 thousand GRT.
    For comparison, the raid of the Admiral Scheer - 5 months - the VKR Jervis Bay and 17 vessels with a total tonnage of 113233 GRT, and this despite the fact that a CRT, as an object of hunting, arouses much greater interest than a commercial raider.
    The operations of the "big pots" ("Nordseetur", "Berlin", the well-known "Rheinübung" and the failed "Sommerreisse") were essentially touchstones in a large strategic operation to blockade Britain called "Wintereinsatz", scheduled for the autumn of 41, when the Germans planned to send all available heavy ships to sea at once: four battleships (later there were three left) and four heavy cruisers...
    However, the realities of war made their own adjustments and the operation did not take place.
    1. 0
      8 January 2025 19: 01
      Maxim, take Roman's work more calmly))) he is a broad-based author, writing about everything and everyone)))
      1. 0
        8 January 2025 19: 49
        Quote: TermNachTER
        Maxim, take Roman's work more calmly))) he is a broad-based author, writing about everything and everyone)))

        I know...
        But people can take all the arguments at face value.
        1. 0
          8 January 2025 19: 54
          Well, you and I are not people, we are professionals. And we are not responsible for everyone)
          1. 0
            8 January 2025 20: 03
            Quote: TermNachTER
            But we are not responsible for everyone)

            But we need to take care of them...
            1. 0
              8 January 2025 20: 09
              As a former cop, I say, you won't feel sorry for everyone.
  13. +1
    8 January 2025 12: 32
    A six-inch shell weighed 15 kg? The author must have gotten something wrong. Most likely he quoted the weight of a 105 mm shell.
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 12: 58
      Quote: Rakovor
      Most likely it was the weight of the 105 mm projectile.

      10,5 cm Sprgr. Patr. L/4,4 weighed exactly 15,1 kg.
      The problem was that it was part of a unitary unit weighing 27,4 kg.
    2. 0
      8 January 2025 15: 57
      Quote: Rakovor
      A six-inch shell weighed 15 kg? The author must have gotten something wrong. Most likely he quoted the weight of a 105 mm shell.

      Second blooper: six-inch guns from old DESTROYERS (???)...
      It seems that the author somehow confused 105 and 150.
      1. +2
        8 January 2025 18: 20
        Quote: Captain Pushkin
        Second blooper: six-inch guns from old DESTROYERS (???)...

        Hmm... where is that in the article?
        It says that after the first campaign, the old 15 cm/45 SK L/45 model 1906 guns, which had seen WWI, were replaced with new 15 cm/48 Tbts KC/36. These latter were the "destroyer" ones - like on the "Narviks".
        For the second voyage, the worn-out old guns were replaced with rapid-fire Tbk C/36 L/48 guns on a C/36 torpedo mount with a barrel length of 48 calibers, as on the Project 1936A destroyers.

        By the way, the same replacement of the old 15 cm/45 with the new 15 cm/48 was carried out in 1942 on the Emden cruiser.
  14. 0
    8 January 2025 12: 57
    The legendary tanker Altmark, after all, found its last adventures in Japan. At the beginning of the war, the British boarded it in Bergen, Norway.
    1. +3
      8 January 2025 13: 12
      Quote: tralflot1832
      At the beginning of the war, the British boarded him in Bergen, Norway.

      What special forces?
      The Kossak brazenly entered the Jössingfjord, ignoring all warnings from the Norwegians, approached the Altmark, and a boarding party under the command of Lieutenant Turner captured the transport.
      1. 0
        8 January 2025 13: 25
        You are right, but Altmark outlived Kossak (the destroyer received a torpedo in the side and sank in October 1941 somewhere in the Mediterranean in the area near Gibroaltar)
        1. +3
          8 January 2025 13: 43
          Quote: tralflot1832
          You are right, but Altmark outlived Kossak.

          Each person is destined for something, as they say...

          Quote: tralflot1832
          The destroyer was hit by a torpedo and sank in October 1941 somewhere in the Mediterranean in the area near Gibroaltar

          No, much further west of Gibraltar, in the Atlantic - 35° 56'N, 10° 04'W
  15. +2
    8 January 2025 13: 20
    Shame on TirpimallA",


    Then there are both DöniTC and NemeTC. smile

    However, all the authors previously wrote Tirpitz, Dönitz and German.
    1. +2
      8 January 2025 13: 50
      Quote: Comrade Beria
      Then both DöniTC and NemeTC. smile
      However, all the authors previously wrote Tirpitz, Dönitz and German.

      And they wrote it correctly: "tz" at the end of a word is transmitted as "ц".
      If "tz" is in the middle of a word and between vowels, then it is "тц", for example Richard Beitzen - Рихард Бейцен
  16. 0
    8 January 2025 13: 39
    I read the article carefully, but did not find the most important thing there - the raider's displacement :( Correct me if I'm wrong.
    True, it later became known that during the fire, 12 people from the crew (4 Dutch and 8 Malays) were able to launch a boat and escape. After 30 days, they were able to reach Madagascar, but only 3 Dutch and one Malay survived.

    Yes, the percentage of Malays who died gives one an idea of ​​the morals of that time.
    And I read about raiding large ships, and based on the results I got the impression that raiding for them is cutting circles around the "Altmark". Having refueled from it, the Germans were already starting to think about the next refueling.
    1. +2
      8 January 2025 13: 52
      Quote: Not the fighter
      but I didn't find the most important thing there - the raider's displacement

      As well as the performance characteristics in general
      Displacement 9300 t
      3863 GRT
      Xnumx length m
      16,7 width m
      17 nodes travel speed
      Cruising range 40 nautical miles
      349 crew
    2. +2
      8 January 2025 14: 06
      Quote: Not the fighter
      I read the article carefully, but did not find the most important thing there - the raider's displacement :( Correct me if I'm wrong.

      Total length - 122 m. overhead line - 116.
      Displacement - 9200 tons, cargo capacity - 3862 GRT.

      Quote: Not the fighter
      And I read about raiding large ships, and based on the results I got the impression that raiding for them is cutting circles around the "Altmark". Having refueled from it, the Germans were already starting to think about the next refueling.

      Your question was answered by Meisel (commander of the Admiral Hipper) in the cruiser's JBD (I can't find the exact quote quickly, but the gist of it is something like this): "A ship should always have the maximum possible fuel supply in case of an encounter with the enemy, so that during a long chase it would be possible to exhaust its fuel reserves and escape pursuit." Kranke did something similar when the Scheer was breaking away from the British in the Indian Ocean (though the "pickpocket" had it easier in terms of fuel).
  17. 0
    8 January 2025 13: 40
    To be fair, the typo should be corrected:
    The shells also differed in the amount of explosives, with the same weight of 15,3 kg.
    The actual weight of the shells was 45,3 kg. Well, on topic. Germany's raiders in the world wars convincingly proved the creativity of the idea - who is the author?
    1. +2
      8 January 2025 14: 15
      Quote: Scharnhorst
      Well, on topic. Germany's raiders in the world wars convincingly proved the creativity of the idea - who is the author?

      It seems like the Southerners during the US Civil War, if we're talking about converting civilian ships into commercial raiders...
  18. +4
    8 January 2025 13: 46
    Roman called Thor small several times, but in fact it is a colossus 120 meters long and with a displacement of 9300 tons.
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 18: 42
      Well, that's probably in comparison with other raiders. The same "Penguin", in my opinion, was about 17000 tons.
      1. +1
        8 January 2025 19: 54
        Quote: Rakovor
        The same "Penguin", in my opinion, was about 17000 tons.

        Of those in operation, the largest was the Kormoran - 19900 tons, the smallest was the Komet - 7500 tons.
        "Thor" was second from bottom after "Comet".
  19. 0
    8 January 2025 15: 30
    Excellent presentation of the material. The author is great.
  20. 0
    8 January 2025 16: 43
    I think the Germans made a mistake with the submarine fleet. They should have built battleships and finished off the aircraft carriers. The Germans could not have won the naval war without destroying the navy.
    1. +3
      8 January 2025 17: 09
      Quote: ss29
      It was necessary to build battleships and finish aircraft carriers.

      OK, let's say so. Let's leave out the resources needed for this.
      Battleships H and J were laid down in July and September 39. Their readiness (according to plan) is August and October 43.
      The remaining four were laid down in 40 and will be ready in May-December 44, again according to plan.
      And taking into account the wartime, the deadlines creep further to the right...
      In general, in my opinion, submarines were the best option for the fleet. :)
      1. 0
        8 January 2025 19: 12
        Well, that's great, the UG needed two battleships, six cruisers and destroyers to drive the British away from the Danish straits and attacks on convoy escort ships. Moreover, the Germans got the shipyards of Denmark, Norway, France, Holland and they could build ships there.
        1. 0
          8 January 2025 19: 58
          Quote: ss29
          UG two battleships, six cruisers and destroyers

          Not science fiction. :)

          Quote: ss29
          Moreover, the Germans got the shipyards of Denmark, Norway, France, Holland and there

          Under constant British raids?

          By the way, have the British completely run out of navy?
          1. 0
            8 January 2025 20: 12
            Before the US entered the war, the constant night raids of the British Air Force did not bother anyone and did not cause damage. Britain's navy dominated and kept the Germans in a constant blockade, by the end of the war this affected the quality of steel, the production of weapons and those same shells for ships.
            1. 0
              8 January 2025 20: 17
              You are stating self-evident things...
              Then what?
              If, according to your idea, we stop building submarines and focus on large combat ships, what will this change in relation to the current reality?
              Well, besides the increased costs of scarce resources.
              1. 0
                8 January 2025 20: 22
                Why stop producing submarines? If the Germans had a striking fist, the British would have to maintain a counter fist, which would make the submarines' tasks easier. If you don't maintain a fist, then the striking fist could destroy the convoy along with its escort or escort its convoy, say, from the Bay of Biscay.
                1. +1
                  8 January 2025 21: 37
                  Quote: ss29
                  Why stop producing PL?

                  Where will you get resources from?

                  Quote: ss29
                  If the Germans had a striking fist, the British would have had to maintain a counter-fist, which would have made the task easier for the pl.

                  Well, the Germans kept their fists up: first in Brest, then in the Arctic.
                  How did this affect the actions of German submarines against the Home Fleet?

                  Quote: ss29
                  If the fist was not held, then the striking fist could destroy the convoy together with the guards or lead its convoy, for example, from the Bay of Biscay.

                  It's a bit difficult to get to the Atlantic from Germany, don't you think?
      2. 0
        10 January 2025 17: 33
        "Zeppelin" and "aircraft carrier B" could have been completed
        the same confusion with the "Seydlitz" (built as a cruiser, then decided to make it an aircraft carrier), and with the "Lützev" (became the Soviet "Tallinn"/"Petropavlovsk").
        i.e. during normal operation:
        "Zeppelin" and "Seydlitz" 1940.
        "Aircraft carrier B" and "Lützev" 1941/42.
        1. 0
          10 January 2025 18: 44
          Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
          i.e. during normal operation:

          According to the memorandum of July 39:
          "Zeppelin" - commissioned in mid-40, combat readiness spring-summer 41;
          "Trager B" - December 41 and autumn 42;
          "Seydlitz" and "Lutzow" - December 41 and autumn 42;

          Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
          leapfrog with "Seydlitz" and "Lutzew"

          What kind of chaos is there?
          "Seydlitz" was being completed somewhat behind schedule (approximately 6-8 months), when in May 42 the OKM decided to rebuild it into an aircraft carrier using the "Weser-1" project. The project was developed over the summer, and work began in the fall.
          "Lützow", which was in lesser readiness, was simply sold to the USSR.
          Our people wanted to buy "Eugen" and "Seydlitz", but the artist forbade it.
          1. 0
            10 January 2025 19: 05
            But at first he was closer to reality, but no, he decided that the Germans would cope sooner.
            I meant that the mess with "Zedlitz" was the conversion of the cruiser into an aircraft carrier. The Germans had time to complete the ship as a cruiser. Or, they could have converted it into aircraft carriers earlier - then (with luck) they could have gotten 4 aircraft carriers (if "Lützev" is not sold)
            1. 0
              10 January 2025 19: 29
              Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
              The Germans had time to complete the ship as a cruiser.

              They practically completed it as a CRT, in fact, only “cosmetics” remained there.

              Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
              Or, to convert them into aircraft carriers earlier - then (with luck) we could get 4 aircraft carriers (if the "Lutzes" are not sold)

              In 39, the Germans did not really need aircraft carriers. Even two corps under Plan Z (C and D) were shifted far to the right, with the surrender in 46-47.
              1. 0
                11 January 2025 10: 19
                In 39, the Germans did not really need aircraft carriers. Even two corps under Plan Z (C and D) were shifted far to the right, with the surrender in 46-47.

                As an alternative. The Germans realized that the two cruisers "Seydlitz" and "Lützev" were becoming expensive, and they reworked the project into an aircraft carrier. Yes, they were not needed in 1939, but in 40 they would have come in handy.
                But, this is more of an afterthought, and with afterthought, many things would be different.
                1. 0
                  11 January 2025 11: 02
                  Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
                  The Germans realized that the two cruisers, Seydlitz and Lutzev, were becoming too expensive, and they redesigned the project for an aircraft carrier.

                  Why did the Germans sell Lutzow with such a light heart?
                  Because at the end of 39 they hoped that the "misunderstanding", later called World War II, would quickly end and it would be possible to calmly continue work on Plan Z, which the "hippers" did not really fit into.
                  If we look further, the work on improving the battleship N project continued until 42. It was precisely the improvement taking into account combat experience, and not the invention of monsters from the N-41 and on... Even the project of the postponed Cruiser R continued to be adjusted.
              2. 0
                16 January 2025 16: 08
                They practically completed it as a CRT, in fact, only “cosmetics” remained there.

                That's what I'm talking about - the cruiser is practically finished, no, let's convert it into an aircraft carrier. As a result, neither a cruiser nor an aircraft carrier
    2. 0
      8 January 2025 18: 42
      Quote: ss29
      It was necessary to build battleships and finish them aircraft carriers.

      Land-based airfields are enough for operations in European waters. And America still has more in the ocean. The same applies to battleships request
      In general, there is an opinion that the resources spent on battleships should have been used to create another or even a couple of tank armies.
      1. 0
        8 January 2025 19: 10
        If you destroy the USSR, yes. But if not, then there is nowhere to get tungsten, rubber, nickel, chrome, etc. And without surface ships, convoys cannot be protected.
        1. 0
          8 January 2025 19: 59
          Quote: ss29
          And without surface ships, convoys cannot be protected.

          What convoys? request
          1. 0
            8 January 2025 20: 16
            Blockade breakers, just as the Germans operated on the Allies' communications, so the Allies searched for the Germans on the sea routes, only the German had to reach a certain place alone where he was given an escort.
            1. +1
              8 January 2025 20: 20
              Quote: ss29
              Blockade breakers

              As I understand it, you are proposing to escort ONE blockade runner with an entire squadron?
              1. 0
                8 January 2025 20: 38
                Why did they gather about ten of them and scatter in the ocean, perhaps someone would swim to it.
                1. +1
                  8 January 2025 21: 38
                  Quote: ss29
                  Why did they gather about ten of them and scatter in the ocean, perhaps someone would swim to it.

                  So they walked alone: ​​turn to real history, not your own fantasies.
                2. 0
                  9 January 2025 11: 41
                  Quote: ss29
                  Why did they gather about ten of them and scatter in the ocean, perhaps someone would swim to it.

                  And how will battleships help here?
                  1. 0
                    9 January 2025 11: 50
                    Good question. The surface fleet will help here. And battleships should go in pairs, two go, two rest. They distract His Majesty's fleet.
                    1. 0
                      9 January 2025 12: 06
                      Quote: ss29
                      And battleships should go in pairs, two go, two rest. They distract His Majesty's fleet.

                      In His Majesty's Navy in 1940: 1 King George (and 4 under construction); 5 Queen Elizabeths; 5 Revengeances; 2 Nelsons and 3 battlecruisers.
                      here it's more likely, we need to try do not attract excessive attention to oneself request
                      Of course, a significant part of the forces is diverted to other theaters, but the British can at least theoretically gather them into a fist (especially since they did this in WWI), but the Japanese will definitely not send their squadrons to the North Sea
  21. +1
    8 January 2025 19: 22
    Why didn't the Germans take a couple of snellboats on board in the hold or on the deck? 100 tons is quite within the power of an onboard crane, and a 40-45 knot torpedo boat will catch up with a merchant steamer faster and force it to surrender without a long chase and risk to the base ship.
    1. +1
      8 January 2025 20: 01
      Quote: clou
      Why didn't the Germans take a couple of snellboats on board in the hold or on the deck?

      Actually, they did.
      TKAs were on the Comet, Cormoran and Michel.
      But the weather needs to be appropriate to use them.
      1. 0
        9 January 2025 22: 52
        Quote: Macsen_Wledig
        But the weather needs to be appropriate to use them.

        if a seaplane was used, then a boat could also
        1. 0
          10 January 2025 18: 59
          Quote: clou
          if a seaplane was used, then a boat could also

          This requires certain weather conditions...
    2. +3
      8 January 2025 20: 11
      Quote: clou
      Why didn't the Germans take a couple of snellboats on board in the hold or on the deck?

      Because this idea is only good in theory, but in practice it is no good.
      Quote: clou
      and a 40-45 knot torpedo boat will catch up with the merchant ship faster and force it to surrender

      Not even close. The TKA will be immediately identified as a military ship, even from afar, and will immediately begin to radio about the raider. At the same time, it will be very difficult for the TKA to effectively attack with torpedoes - it will need to get closer to the ship under fire from its artillery, and on the ocean wave there will be no speed of 40 knots. In general, the game is not worth the candle.
      1. 0
        9 January 2025 23: 02
        Not even close. The TKA will be immediately identified as a military ship, even from afar, and they will immediately start radioing about the raider.

        a multi-hour chase in the wake of one merchant vessel after another with gunfire identifies the raider much more strongly. In addition, the things are smokeless and have a low silhouette and can be seen even in clear weather at a relatively short distance. And how many rapid-fire guns are there on a merchant ship? 1-2 openly standing machine guns or an ancient 102 mm. That's the typical armament of the auxiliary cruisers 8-152 and 2-76
        on an ocean wave there won't be a speed of 40 knots. In short, the game is not worth the candle

        all the same, keelboats on a relatively flat wave will be three times faster than any merchant ship
        In general, it was a strange choice for a raider, there were cargo-passenger ships with greater speed and capacity for crew and prisoners. And the ability to "make a pass" for a British auxiliary cruiser
        1. +2
          10 January 2025 02: 06
          Quote: clou
          a multi-hour chase in the wake of one merchant vessel after another with shooting

          Very often it didn't happen, because the trophy either surrendered or was quickly suppressed by artillery. That's the joke, that the victims didn't realize until the last moment that they were facing a raider.
          Quote: clou
          In general, it was a strange choice for a raider, there were cargo-passenger ships with greater speed and capacity for crew and prisoners.

          But the appearance of the liner where it shouldn’t have been immediately raised questions.
  22. +1
    8 January 2025 19: 31
    which in Germany were called auxiliary cruisers, and the rest of the world called raiders.

    Sigh. Auxiliary cruiser is a class of ship. Raider is a tactical mission.
  23. 0
    9 January 2025 12: 41
    Who is to blame that two Kriegsmarine super battleships between them sank one ship with a displacement of 40 tons, and this misunderstanding sent ships with a displacement of 000 tons to the bottom?


    So the author is not familiar with the tactics (or rather strategic principle) of "Fleet In Degin"?
    Who was sunk by the Iowa, Missouri, Yamato and Dunkirk?
  24. 0
    9 January 2025 14: 06
    For those interested in the topic, I recommend:
    Victor Galinya. "Hitler's Reders". Moscow, 2009. "Yauza", "Collection", "Eksmo".
    And so, I feel sorry for the owl, they’re dragging it onto the globe again, its paws are cracking!
  25. +2
    9 January 2025 14: 16
    Quote: Macsen_Wledig
    The operations of the "big pots" ("Nordseetur", "Berlin", the well-known "Rheinübung" and the failed "Sommerreisse") were essentially touchstones in a large strategic operation to blockade Britain called "Wintereinsatz", scheduled for the autumn of 41, when the Germans planned to send all available heavy ships to sea at once: four battleships (later there were three left) and four heavy cruisers...
    However, the realities of war made their own adjustments and the operation did not take place.

    And we must not forget that the blockade was generally successful. After the sinking of the Hood, insurance rates jumped to 25% of the cost of the goods being transported, which, according to the customs of the time, was effectively a cessation of transportation.
    After Bismarck's death, rates suddenly fell to the normal wartime 10%.
    Unlike the VSPKr, whose actions can be stopped by a couple of destroyers in the right place at the right time or one light cruiser from the WWI era, heavy ships are capable of COMPLETELY stopping shipping in the required area and to counter them, at least equally powerful heavy ships are needed. And, grandma, there are many different ways of saying it.
    1. +2
      9 January 2025 18: 06
      Quote: Grossvater
      heavy ships are capable of COMPLETELY stopping shipping in the required area and to counter them, at least equally powerful heavy ships are needed.

      Exactly.
      From a theoretical point of view, it would be interesting to see the implementation of "Wintereinsats"... But, unfortunately or fortunately, we will never know/see this.
      1. 0
        10 January 2025 17: 38
        Dear colleague, can you tell me more about this?
        Winteraysatsa

        ?
        I type it into the search - your comment is the only one that finds it
        1. 0
          10 January 2025 18: 58
          Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
          ?
          I type it into the search - your comment is the only one that finds it

          RM 35-II/286 Operationen "Wintereinsatz"
          Not only everyone knows about her. :)
          I only found out about it when NARA made the OKM documents publicly available.
          There is no mention of it in foreign works either: perhaps the authors also thought that after the death of the Bismarck, the Germans decided to curtail such operations.
          1. 0
            10 January 2025 19: 00
            RM 35-II/286 Operationen "Wintereinsatz"

            Thank you!
  26. 0
    11 January 2025 11: 09
    Thank you, very interesting material.
    Pair of add-ons
    Gumprich renamed "Nankin" to "Leuthen"

    Not quite. Gumprich named the captured steamship "Nanking" "Mjolnir" - Thor's hammer. It became "Leuthen" later, after arriving in Japan, when it was officially accepted into the Kriegsmarine as a dispatch ship.

    with the help of English ship mechanics

    The Germans write that the Nanjing machine crew consisted of Indians, and the kitchen staff of Chinese. Neither of them had any sympathy for England, so good, working relations were established with the Germans.
    Mjölnir, under the command of Oberleutnant Vogel, had its own long and interesting odyssey.
    There were some absolutely ridiculous cases.
    While transferring some of the cargo from the Mjolnir to the supply ship Regensburg, they were caught by a British auxiliary cruiser. It was more heavily armed than the Germans and began to approach them. But then it turned away and disappeared over the horizon. The Germans intercepted its radiogram, in which the British reported that they had encountered a heavy cruiser. Presumably, they mistook the silhouettes of two transports merged together for a heavy cruiser.
    Another time, "Mjolnir" met a British destroyer in the Indian Ocean. It began to catch up with them. The Germans were already prepared to die heroically, and the destroyer... simply passed by and disappeared from sight. What it was - none of the Germans understood.
    "Mjolnir", now "Luyten", also perished in the explosion in Yokohama, along with "Thor" and "Uckermark".
  27. +1
    15 January 2025 12: 20
    Yes, it was a steam turbine ship...

    The term "motor ship" actually implies the use of a diesel engine, namely an engine, and not oil-fired boilers. So it is a "turbo ship", or more precisely, a "steam-turbo ship".
  28. 0
    15 January 2025 14: 57
    The story is certainly interesting, there are many facts that few people know. But the title is in the same spirit, clickable and nullifying objectivity, serious attitude to the material, like a kindergarten. What exactly is the shame of 2 most powerful battleships, which did not even need to fight directly, by their very existence paralyzed the will of the Admiralty and the entire fighting spirit of the Royal Navy. They acted exactly as they were ordered, they did not flee from the battlefield, did not seek to be interned, Bismarck, even before its death and "made a stir", thinning the ranks of the British, so what is the shame of a warship that did not lower the flag? Somehow frivolous, it seems the site is not for schoolchildren, it seems the Unified State Education is starting to bear fruit, sadly.
  29. 0
    15 January 2025 18: 00
    Yeah, right, Tirpitz, with its stand in the Norwegian fjord, caused more damage to the Allies than all the raiders put together. Let's remember the northern convoys and cruiser escorts that the British had to chase away. The destruction of the convoy pi kkkkyu 17 was only possible with Tirpitz in Norway.
  30. 0
    17 January 2025 12: 27
    Both in WWI and in WWII, the Germans were two heads above the Anglo-Saxons in crew training. Although the Germans were our enemies, it is very pleasant to read how the Anglo-Saxons vomited blood.
  31. 0
    17 January 2025 12: 43
    IMHO, as coastal patrol aircraft became saturated with Liberators and Halifaxes, the probability of success for such raiders would begin to tend to zero.
    The German auxiliary cruisers were very lucky that they were pirating during the years when the Anglo-Saxons had little more than nothing in the air.
    Even if we theoretically imagine that a couple of auxiliary cruisers had turned into Japan, then in the second half of 1942 - early 1943 they would have tried to get through the Indian Ocean to the southern part of the Atlantic, they would have been met with a completely different reception there. Most likely, they would have been discovered by the Anglo-Saxon air reconnaissance in the first week or ten days. And all the raider's luck would have ended there.