Monitor "Zheleznyakov" - "River Cruiser" accepts battle...

45 398 66
Monitor "Zheleznyakov" - "River Cruiser" accepts battle...

The idea of ​​building a river monitor with an army artillery was born before the revolution. When designing gunboats for the Amur at the beginning of the 20th century, there were wishes to arm them not with naval but with field artillery: so that it would be possible to replenish ammunition from the warehouses of army units with which the ships interacted. The idea was put on the back burner: at that time, the army simply did not have worthy analogues of naval guns (field artillery before the Russo-Japanese War was limited to a three-inch caliber).


Polish river monitors after surrendering to the Red Army

In 1930-32, the monitor Udarny was built at the Leninskaya Kuznitsa plant in Kyiv, and the question of arming it with field guns was raised again and... postponed again for the same reason - the lack of decent guns. The ship was equipped with 130-mm naval guns, but the idea was implemented. By the Poles. The Polish Pinsk River Flotilla had six monitors armed with 75-mm field guns and 100-mm howitzers. This forced the Soviet leadership to create a counterweight to the Polish "river battleships".




Monitor of the SB-37 project

From 1934 to 1937, in Kyiv, at the same Leninskaya Kuznitsa, 6 monitors of the SB-37 project were built for the formed Dnieper Flotilla: Zheleznyakov, Zhemchuzhin, Levachev, Martynov, Rostovtsev and Flyagin. All were named in honor of sailors - heroes of the Civil War. The project was developed by the ship-mechanical design bureau of the Leninskaya Kuznitsa by Alexander Baibakov and Mikhail Boyko.

The requirements for the new ships were put forward based on the theater of military operations in which they were to operate: the upper reaches of the Pripyat River. The main ones were a small draft and length. As a result, ships with a displacement of 232/263 tons, a length of 51,2 meters, a width of 8,2 meters, but most importantly - a maximum draft of only 82 centimeters were born! To call the design of the ships simply original would be a clear exaggeration.

On the bare deck of the ship, only gun and machine gun turrets and a high superstructure rose up - all the living quarters of the monitor were in the hull. The hull was solidly riveted, with straight sides and a flat bottom. The height of the side (both the above-water and underwater parts are considered) from 2,1 meters from the stern to the 10th frame, from the 10th frame to the bow - 1,6 meters. Inside, the hull was divided into 13 compartments.


Monitor add-on "Zheleznyakov"

The most original part of the ship is undoubtedly the main superstructure. It consisted of a main caliber turret and a conning tower, and both the turret and the conning tower were strung on a 75-cm pipe like the disks of a children's pyramid. A ladder bracket was welded inside the pipe and manholes were made through which one could get into the hold, turret and conning tower. The conning tower was fixed to the pipe immovably, and the MK-2-4 main caliber turret located underneath it rotated.


MK-2-4 tower in the workshop

A monitor is an armored ship by definition. However, the armor of the SB-37 project ships can hardly be called excessive. The armor belt, 1,85 m high in the middle, 1,6 m in the bow and 0,95 m in the stern, was 16 mm thick in the middle and 4 mm at the ends. The deck was 4 mm thick. The area of ​​the main caliber magazines was reinforced with armor plates of 30 mm on the sides and 16 mm on the deck, the area of ​​the engine room was reinforced with 16 mm plates on the sides and 8 mm on the deck. The main caliber turret and the conning tower had 30 mm thick walls, 16 mm roofs, the 40-K and 41-K turrets had 20-25 mm thick walls and 10 mm roofs. As practice has shown, the main caliber turret and the conning tower could withstand hits from 37 mm shells.


102mm gun of the Obukhov Steel Foundry

The monitor was initially planned to be armed with 107-mm field guns of the 1910/30 model, but after much deliberation, the proven and reliable 102-mm B-18 guns (designated B-1931 until 2) were installed, which were obtained by cutting down from 60 to 45 calibers of the 102/60 mm gun of the Obukhov Steel Plant, created with the consultation of the Vickers company back in 1909 and which had proven itself well on the Novik-class destroyers. In addition to the main caliber, a 40-K turret with a 45-mm gun was initially installed in the bow and stern (the turrets were similar to those on the tanks T-28), but then Soviet engineers managed to insert another 45 mm barrel into the bow turret, resulting in the 41-K turret. If the main caliber turret crew was 16 people, then the 40-K had 3, and the 41-K had four. Defense The monitor was provided with two Maxim machine guns in machine gun turrets and one openly located one (later it was replaced by an M-4 machine gun mount of four Maxims) and two 37-mm anti-aircraft guns.

The most difficult question is about the engines of the SB-37 project ships. The project specifies two Soviet 2-SD-19/32 diesel engines with a capacity of 140 hp, but the probability that two such weak engines will accelerate an armored ship with a displacement of 263 tons to the standard 8 knots is zero. And in the wartime documents, two 4-SD-19 diesel engines with a capacity of 280 hp are indicated as engines, and this is much closer to the truth. But it is unclear when more powerful engines were installed on the ship...

The most honored and, undoubtedly, the luckiest of the monitors of this project was "Zheleznyakov". At the beginning of the war, the ship was part of the Danube military flotilla and entered the battle at 04:15 in the morning of June 22, 1941. That day, the monitor destroyed its first battery and shot down its first aircraft. And then there were battles on the Danube, the destruction of tanks, fire on concentrations of infantry, the suppression of artillery batteries. "Zheleznyakov" was lucky: its small size often forced the enemy to confuse it with small Romanian monitors. And masterful camouflage took place: the ship was disguised as an unmarked island or cape, organizing natural greenery on the deck and superstructures. Of the six monitors that were part of the Danube flotilla, only the crew of the Zheleznyakov, under the command of Captain-Lieutenant O. S. Marinushkin, saved their ship; the other five were blown up by their crews.

When the enemy had consolidated its position on the left bank of the Danube, the monitor received orders to break through to Odessa. And it did, arriving at the Pearl of the Sea on July 20, despite the fact that the flat-bottomed and low-sided ship was not designed for sailing in the Black Sea. During the battles in the Dnieper-Bug Estuary, the monitor was nicknamed "elusive": its shallow draft and short length allowed the Zheleznyakov to pass through channels that the enemy considered unnavigable. The ship would suddenly appear where it was not expected, launch a fire raid, and disappear in an unknown direction. But the Red Army was retreating, and soon the Dnieper-Bug Estuary became too dangerous a place for the monitor. And the Zheleznyakov left the estuary again, making the crossing to the Sea of ​​Azov, the Don, and the Kuban on October 25.


"Armored ship "Zheleznyakov"" (poster by Ivanov V.M.)

Included in the Azov Flotilla on November 21, it participated in the defense of Kerch, Rostov-on-Don, Azov, and the mouth of the Kuban. In the summer of 1942, it took part in battles to defend the Temryuk base and was the last to leave it, breaking through the German-controlled Kerch Strait to Poti. The monitor turned off the fairway and passed along the very coast of Crimea, through minefields, under fire from enemy batteries. The flat-bottomed "river cruiser" was poorly suited for sea passages, so a Black Sea storm threw the ship ashore. For three days, the crew patched up the holes and tried to get the monitor off the sandbank, and finally on October 3, Zheleznyakov arrived in Poti. Here, on October 14, it became part of the Black Sea fleetBut the ship, damaged in battle, had to be repaired until August 1943.


Monument to the sailors of the Danube Flotilla in Bratislava

And on August 30, 1944, the monitor, which had already become legendary, arrived in its native Izmail and again joined the Danube Flotilla. Ahead was the liberation of Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia... According to official data, during the war, Zheleznyakov covered 40 thousand kilometers in battles, destroying 13 artillery and mortar batteries, 4 infantry battalions, 2 ammunition depots and much more. In total, the Germans dropped 827 aerial bombs on the ship. Not a single one hit, and indeed, it was "Elusive"!

After the war, Zheleznyakov was again included in the Black Sea Fleet. In 1958, it was decommissioned from the Navy, transferred to the Danube Shipping Company, and used as a floating pier. In 1967, on the initiative of veterans and with the assistance of Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, the ship was installed in Kyiv on a concrete wave as a monument. There is no need to tell how monuments are maintained in the former Ukrainian SSR today. They say that you can even get inside the ship. But it is not worth it, homeless people have settled in it, so the smell inside is appropriate...
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 10
    1 March 2025 05: 17
    They say you can even get inside the ship. But it's not worth it, it's inhabited by homeless people

    There is a whole hunt for homeless people in Ukraine now, TCK is catching them in droves and sending them to the front. And TCK will still get around to the homeless people who have settled in "Zheleznyakov" :-)
    1. + 16
      1 March 2025 06: 22
      Quote: Comrade
      And they'll still get around to the homeless people who have settled in "Zheleznyakov" near the Shopping Center :-)
      It would be better if they settled in the Bandera family house-museum in the Lviv region. There, for a full understanding of who Bandera really was, apart from his personal belongings and letters, the persistent smell emanating from the homeless people is missing wink
      1. +2
        1 March 2025 23: 21
        This house-museum was apparently blown up at the beginning of the Second World War.
        1. +1
          2 March 2025 02: 40
          Quote: vindigo
          This house-museum was apparently blown up at the beginning of the SVO

          Maybe something else is meant?
          I combed the Ukrainian Internet, there is no such information there. And on their Wikipedia, on the page dedicated to "Zheleznyakov", there is not a word about the explosion either.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. 0
            10 March 2025 13: 09
            It seems like they write this

            https://news.ru/russia/vs-rossii-unichtozhili-muzej-bandery-novosti-svo-na-vecher-1-yanvarya/
    2. +2
      1 March 2025 21: 40
      And Vsevolozhsky "Elusive Monitor". And brave, to boot.
  2. + 11
    1 March 2025 05: 43
    The idea was put on the back burner: at that time, the army simply did not have worthy analogues of naval guns (field artillery before the Russo-Japanese War was limited to a three-inch caliber).

    Gerhard, good morning, have a nice day comrades!
    This reason is often found in descriptions of the river fleet of the end of the century before last and the beginning of the last century. In my opinion, it is more than far-fetched. Thus, coastal fortresses "subordinated to the army department" had their own small ships and supply vessels, including submarines and torpedo boats. Ferries, patrol boats (later launches) were assigned to land fortresses on rivers.
    The fleet had a good line of Kane (75, 120 and 152 mm) and Baranovsky (62 mm) guns. And the 76,2 mm field gun of the 1902 model and its "mountain" analogue would have looked good on the deck of any river gunboat. In fact, when such a need hung in the air in the Far East, it was solved by building the advanced gunboats Shkval (later reclassified as monitors).
    The Danube theatre of operations did not require such refinements, in the opinion of the tsarist admirals. The forces of the Black Sea Fleet were considered sufficient. In fact, this was the case. We were not going to fight Bulgaria and Romania, and the Austro-Hungarian monitors (incidentally armed with a hodgepodge of 120-152mm naval guns and 66mm-120mm howitzers below the Devil's Gate) were not planning either.
    After the First World War, the world map changed and the Soviet state began to build a river fleet, first on the Dnieper, and later on the Danube.
    Gerhard, thanks again for the article!
    P.S. Several photos of our Amur and Austro-Hungarian monitors. By the way, feel the difference!
    1. + 11
      1 March 2025 09: 15
      Field artillery was installed on Polish monitors, they later became part of the Soviet Pinsk military flotilla and fought well in the summer of 1941. But there will be a separate story about them)))
    2. +5
      1 March 2025 14: 15
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      And the 76,2mm field gun model 1902 and its “mountain” analogue would look good on the deck of any river gunboat.

      So the gunboats of the River Fleet of the Military Department during WWI were armed with a pair of 76,2-mm mountain guns, model 1904 (according to the original design, later - model 1909) on mounts from the Bryansk plant. And a pair of machine guns in turrets at the ends.

      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      After the First World War, the world map changed and the Soviet state began to build a river fleet, first on the Dnieper, and later on the Danube.

      Nope. The Military Department of the Empire began building a river fleet on the ETVD from special-project ships back in 1915. Gunboats, reconnaissance boats, patrol boats, armored boats, floating workshops... in total, the Military Department formed and was forming more than a dozen military flotillas on rivers and lakes. After the collapse of the Empire, the ships of the flotillas that did not have time to leave for Russia were captured by the Austro-Hungarians (and their fragments after the collapse), the Germans, Petliurites, and Poles. And those that did manage to leave took part in the Civil War, fought with the Finns and Poles, chased the Basmachi on the Amu Darya, served on the Amur.
  3. +4
    1 March 2025 05: 44
    Legendary ship, not legendary fate :-(it's a shame :-(
    1. +5
      1 March 2025 08: 39
      The ship has a good fate. It was left as a monument, but could have been scrapped :(
      1. 0
        1 March 2025 16: 34
        Quote: Not the fighter
        The ship has a good fate. It was left as a monument, but could have been scrapped :(

        Unfortunately, the Ukrainians will do this, if they haven't already. They recently tore down a monument to Peter I in Poltava, which was erected in 1915. For the Ukrainians, Charles XII was the same "liberator" as Hitler. That's why they hate those who defeated the Swedes and Germans.
  4. -7
    1 March 2025 06: 27
    Author! Please decide on the spelling:
    Monitor "Zheleznikov" — The River Cruiser accepts battle...

    or:
    "Armored ship "Zheleznyakov"" (poster by Ivanov V.M.)
    1. -4
      1 March 2025 08: 24
      Quote: yuriy55
      Author! Please decide on the spelling:

      Why are there only two??
      The Dnieper Flotilla built 6 monitors of the SB-37 project: Zheleznyakov, Zhemchuzhin, Levachev, Martynov, Rostovtsev and Flyagin. All are named after sailors who were heroes of the Civil War.

      In the steppe near Kherson there are tall grasses,
      There is a burial mound in the steppe near Kherson.
      Lies under a mound overgrown with weeds,
      Sailor Zheleznyak is a partisan.

      Did two "nonsense people" decide to show their ignorance or just "downvote" themselves in the course of life?
      Continue and you will have "happiness"...
      1. +4
        1 March 2025 10: 31
        There is a burial mound in the steppe near Kherson.
        Lies under a mound overgrown with weeds,
        Sailor Zheleznyak is a partisan.

        Anatoly Zheleznyakov was buried in Moscow at the Vagankovskoye Cemetery.
  5. Eug
    +1
    1 March 2025 07: 54
    ZheleznIkov or Zheleznyakov?
    1. +4
      1 March 2025 09: 16
      Zheleznyakov, there is a typo in the title...
      1. +1
        1 March 2025 10: 09
        There are typos throughout the text.
      2. +1
        1 March 2025 12: 35
        Quote: Flying_Dutchman
        Zheleznyakov, there is a typo in the title...

        Thank God, we figured it out... I don't want to work as an editor (proofreader) - I make mistakes myself, but when I see them in a headline... You understand - I can't pass by...
  6. +1
    1 March 2025 08: 15
    Legendary ship!!! I read about the exploits of this ship as a child. I didn't understand much of it then, but I remembered it. Then aviation became my hobby, and I "returned" to the history of this ship purely by chance in the late 90s when a friend brought me some encyclopedia about Soviet warships, which I read "for general development", by the way, the combat actions of this ship were described in more detail there.
  7. -4
    1 March 2025 08: 25
    now the Russian army apparently does not have such a class of ships, and probably does not need them, except perhaps somewhere with the border guards on the Amur, but if, for example, we consider the issue of creating river complexes of strategic troops, in addition to land complexes, we can not even design such a complex from the very beginning, but take the same Yars or Topol as a basis, and design a barge for it, the barge must have ramps for entry and exit, places for the crew, a large supply of fuel, and provisions for long-term duty, constructive protection is possible, at least bulletproof and self-defense against potential threats, what advantages will such a system give
    1- the river network of Russia is the longest in the world, we have huge river basins of the largest rivers that cover the entire country, that is, the duty station is the entire vast country, in addition, the rivers flow through such hard-to-reach places that you can only get to them by river or air, this makes such complexes invulnerable to sabotage groups
    2- a river vessel provides much greater autonomy than a ground complex, delivery and replenishment of fuel and food, as well as crew change can be organized either by air or also by rivers
    3 - invulnerability to potential enemy forces, the location is constantly changing like a ground complex, cannot be reached by submarines, cannot be tracked down by sabotage groups,
    There is a drawback in my opinion, and that is that our rivers freeze, and the ship will have to be made icebreaker, or somehow adapted to the ability to move on ice....
    1. +2
      1 March 2025 09: 19
      There are river armored boats, they seem to have even been spotted in the SVO at an early stage (or before the SVO? I don't remember exactly). And there really are no monitors. But with modern detection means, it will not be possible to ensure their stealth, and without it, destruction is a matter of time...
      1. 0
        1 March 2025 16: 15
        Quote: Flying_Dutchman
        There are river armored boats, they seem to have even been spotted in the SVO

        There are plenty of Grachats, Raptors, captured Ukrainian armored boats of the Gyurza-Akkerman and Vyshgorod types, which raised St. Andrew's flags and underwent repairs at the 1127th repair plant of missile and artillery weapons of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol. Instead of the Ukrainian combat modules BM-5M.01 "Katran-M" that somehow worked, the captured armored boats received a pair of 25-mm twin artillery mounts 2M-3M, albeit quite "aged", but aimed exactly where needed. There are also boats for the FSB, border guards, special forces ...
        1. 0
          1 March 2025 23: 14
          What is currently needed are river boats and air defense patrol boats capable of detecting and eliminating enemy drones.
          At least such as the Project 12130 boats.
          1. +1
            2 March 2025 10: 34
            Different ones are needed. Raptors are good boats. They can go on rivers and are seaworthy.
            1. +1
              2 March 2025 11: 06
              In my opinion, what is needed now is at least barges with Pantsir or Tor systems installed on them.
              1. +2
                2 March 2025 13: 38
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                In my opinion, what is needed now is at least barges with Pantsir or Tor systems installed on them.

                The armor is a cumbersome beast... It can't be installed on a nimble river boat. The Buk and Tor were installed on patrol ships like "Vasily Bykov". They won't work either. We need small, not cumbersome, not heavy in weight, air defense systems and anti-aircraft artillery, we can also put drone operators on it... with fighter drones... and don't forget about the BEKs...
                1. +2
                  2 March 2025 16: 13
                  That's right. Back on Snake Island it became clear that we don't have a landing ship capable of accepting the Pantsir for transportation.
                  As a temporary solution, self-propelled barges can be used on rivers.
              2. +1
                3 March 2025 17: 54
                Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich
                In my opinion, what is needed now is at least barges with Pantsir or Tor systems installed on them.

                One Tor complex has a too small ammo pack - it was intended for use as part of a unit, when vehicles reloading are covered by vehicles that have already reloaded.
                A single "Thor" is eight targets, and that's it, the guns are empty. And then it will be like in Karabakh.
                It was not for nothing that Kupol planned for the naval Thor to have 4 UVPs with 8 SAMs each.
                1. +1
                  3 March 2025 19: 51
                  It doesn't matter. According to rumors, drones were flying over the city center. There is no place to place air defense systems in the city, but there is a lot of space on the river and there is less risk, and boats can move. It makes sense to use the capabilities of flotillas and the navy for air defense purposes even on shallow rivers like the Don.
        2. +1
          3 March 2025 17: 52
          Quote: 30 vis
          There are a lot of Grachats, Raptors, captured Ukrainian armored boats

          The problem is that all this needs a clear sky to work. Otherwise, the UAV crews will compete for the right to sink such a fat target. And even without UAVs, there is still the problem of ATGMs.
          Oh yeah, the flotilla also needs a base outside the Chimera radius. Because there's no point in camouflaging the base - access roads and roaming tankers with trucks will quickly reveal the location.
          1. +1
            3 March 2025 21: 44
            Quote: Alexey RA
            There is no point in camouflaging the base - access roads and roaming tankers with trucks will very quickly reveal the location.

            Any naval base is vulnerable.
          2. 0
            8 March 2025 00: 32
            What kind of UAV will sink a target with a displacement of 265 tons? Throw grenades with fins from a 3D printer? Grenades from an RPG-7, wrapped in tape? Baba Yaga drop an 81 mm mine? Hovering at 50 m and aiming for a minute or more?
            1. 0
              10 March 2025 18: 25
              Quote: stankow
              What kind of UAV would sink a target with a displacement of 265 tons?

              Remember how "Lancets" beat the Ukrainian "Gyurza". The low power of the UAV warhead is compensated by the accuracy of the hit.
              Quote: stankow
              Throw grenades with 3D-printed feathers?

              It will fly into the cabin window. Or into the turret. Look how tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are hammered at full speed.
              1. 0
                11 March 2025 17: 32
                Well, it will disable the turret, the wheelhouse. But it is too far to sink, it will stay afloat and in combat. Penetrate the hull, destroy the frame, get to the engines.... Gyurza is only 34 tons, 8 times less. Hefty targets need hefty BP. Two orders of magnitude more than a drone carries. BEK - yes, it is a big danger. But a flying drone - hardly ever.
    2. +4
      1 March 2025 14: 25
      Quote: Max-1984
      In addition, the rivers flow through such hard-to-reach places that you can only get there by river or air, which makes such complexes invulnerable to sabotage groups.

      But it ties the complexes to the few navigable rivers.
      And yes, what are we going to do with the ice cover - our hard-to-reach rivers are in cold regions? Or do we not fight in winter? smile
      Quote: Max-1984
      a river vessel provides much greater autonomy than a ground complex, delivery and replenishment of fuel and food, as well as crew change can be organized either by air or also by rivers

      What prevents us from organizing air delivery of the same for the PGRK at the points?
      Quote: Max-1984
      invulnerability to potential enemy forces, the location is constantly changing like a ground complex, cannot be reached by submarines, cannot be tracked down by sabotage groups,

      Where will this complex go from the river? The saboteurs' task will be to find the area where the launcher is located - using the same UAVs, upstream or downstream, there are no other options. And then some "Spike" with a fiber-optic communication line will fly there.
      1. +3
        1 March 2025 17: 35
        The saboteurs' task will be to find the area where the launcher is located - using the same UAVs, upstream or downstream, there are no other options. And then some "Spike" with a fiber-optic communication line will fly there.
        Well, if we have saboteurs roaming along some Angara with drones and ATGMs and hunting for river launchers, then something has gone seriously wrong
        1. +4
          1 March 2025 17: 41
          Quote from alexoff
          Well, if we have saboteurs roaming along some Angara with drones and ATGMs and hunting for river launchers, then something has gone seriously wrong

          And since everything is going according to plan, then why do we need river launchers on shipping rivers, especially freezing ones - the PGRK is enough.
          And the river launchers won’t be very noticeable either, due to the navigability of the rivers.
          - And what kind of barge is that hanging around there with boats?
          - Shhh... it's a secret missile barge.
          - Super! I'll upload the photo to the network now!

          laughing
          1. +1
            1 March 2025 17: 47
            The PGRK is more obvious, you can't confuse it with anything. And there's a wagon and a small cart hanging out of the barges.
            By the way, it’s surprising that no one has yet decided to launch a SSBN directly into Lake Baikal, where no enemy submarine will sail.
            1. 0
              2 March 2025 19: 40
              Quote from alexoff
              By the way, it’s surprising that no one has yet decided to launch a SSBN directly into Lake Baikal, where no enemy submarine will sail.

              4-5 warheads in a square nested manner will sink this submarine with a guarantee. Baikal is not that big, and building a shipyard and assembling even a diesel submarine with ballistic missiles will cost more than building a normal submarine.
              But still, a limited series of missile monitors with ballistic missiles would make sense. The Caspian, the Sea of ​​Azov and the Volga with the Don, and their quite possible passage through the NSR to the Siberian rivers would greatly add to the enemy's concerns and would not cost much more than a regular PGRK with one missile.
              1. 0
                2 March 2025 19: 52
                Baikal is big and deep enough that to drown out all the submarines in it, the Americans would have to dump their entire nuclear arsenal there, which would still need to be taught to dive underwater. But in a safe place, submarines can be much simpler, no sonar or torpedoes are needed.
            2. +1
              3 March 2025 16: 18
              Quote from alexoff
              The PGRK is more obvious, you can't confuse it with anything. And there's a wagon and a small cart hanging out of the barges.

              Protected barges?
              There will be the same problem here as with the BZHRK - the necessary security measures for the carriers products destroy all the conspiracy.
              1. 0
                3 March 2025 16: 32
                Well, the guards can also be disguised as a barge with hidden weapons.
    3. +3
      1 March 2025 17: 40
      For this purpose, they riveted all sorts of vessels like the Buyan-M for launching calibers from rivers, so as not to formally violate any agreements.
  8. +3
    1 March 2025 08: 56
    Around 1976, I was in Izmail. I looked at the heirs of Zheleznyakov - "Shmel", I think.
  9. +3
    1 March 2025 09: 11
    In Soviet times, another river warship was called a river cruiser - the Chinese river gunboat "Jiangheng" (pictured is a similar vessel).
    1. +4
      1 March 2025 11: 25
      In principle, monitors as a class fall under this metaphor, and the same Ladoga gunboats were even called "lake battleships"...
      1. +2
        1 March 2025 12: 16
        It was called that because of its silhouette - the monitor in the article does not look like a cruiser.
        1. +5
          1 March 2025 13: 55
          Well, the main caliber is like that of a German small cruiser from the First World War)))
  10. -1
    1 March 2025 10: 06
    Again an article from the history section in the weapons section.
  11. +5
    1 March 2025 11: 44
    Oh, these "river cruisers"))) someone once blurted out some nonsense and it went sailing across the vastness of the Internet)))
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. +5
    1 March 2025 12: 26
    Of the six monitors that were part of the Danube Flotilla, only the crew of the Zheleznyakov, under the command of Captain-Lieutenant O. S. Marinushkin, retained their ship.

    ,,,the sadder his fate. sad

    The commander of the monitor "Zheleznyakov" Captain-Lieutenant Alexander Semenovich Marinushkin Born 25 in the village of Olkhi, Ukholovsky district, Ryazan province. In the Navy since 05.1910. In 1932 graduated from the Frunze Naval School in Leningrad. Member of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) since 1936. Excluded from membership in the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1931.
    In March 1938, from the position of commander of the MN "Zhemchuzhin", he was appointed to temporarily act as commander of the MN "Zheleznyakov" of the Far Eastern Fleet. From June 1938 - commander of the MN "Zheleznyakov". On 19.10.1940 he was assigned to the Far Eastern Fleet. On 17.12.1941 he was assigned to the Kerch Naval Base of the Black Sea Fleet. Assigned to the Azov Military Flotilla - date not specified (as in the document).
    On December 07.12.1942, 10, he was sentenced to 22.03.1943 years in a correctional labor camp and deprived of the military rank of captain-lieutenant. On March 44, 1944, he was dismissed from the Navy under Article 19740, paragraph "b". In January 1947, he went missing. Reason: TsAMO, report No. 21.09.1966s - 0633. On September 22.03.1943, 44, he was rehabilitated. Order of the People's Commissariat of the Navy No. 01687 of March 02.11.1966, 1936 on his dismissal under Article 04.03.1939, paragraph "b" was cancelled. By Order of the Ministry of Defense No. 06.11.1941 of November XNUMX, XNUMX, he was excluded from the lists of officers due to death. Military rank: lieutenant (since XNUMX), senior lieutenant (since XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX), captain-lieutenant (since XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX)
    He has no awards for military merit.
  14. +7
    1 March 2025 13: 28
    Pavlin Dmitry Vasilyevich 22.08.1911/12.06.1967/5 - XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX - participant of the Great Patriotic War, commander of the BC-XNUMX monitor "Zheleznyakov" of the Azov military flotilla.

    Order of the Patriotic War I degree
    Order of the Red Star
    Order of the Patriotic War II degree
    Medal "For Military Merit"
    Medal "For the Defense of Odessa"
    Medal "For the defense of the Caucasus"
    Medal "For the victory over Germany in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945."
    Medal "For the liberation of Belgrade"
    Medal "For the Capture of Budapest"
    Medal "For the capture of Vienna"
    Medal "For the defense of the Caucasus"
  15. +5
    1 March 2025 14: 06
    And how did he navigate the sea with such a high side, poor thing...
    1. +6
      1 March 2025 17: 09
      Iron men served. The Black Sea in winter, especially in the Novorossiysk area...
      1. +3
        2 March 2025 03: 22
        Quote: Flying_Dutchman
        Iron men served. The Black Sea in winter, especially in the Novorossiysk area...

        The lines came to mind:

        On those wooden shells,
        Iron people were swimming!
        1. +4
          2 March 2025 13: 45
          Quote: Comrade
          On those wooden shells,
          Iron people were swimming

          Let the waves reach the wheelhouse
          But they won't knock you off your feet
          On this oak shell
          Iron men live

          .


          The Sea Hawk is leaving the shore
          And the girl waves her hand


  16. +6
    1 March 2025 21: 46
    As a child I read a book called The Elusive Monitor... Thanks to the author for the article! Something about boats would be nice... MO-4, D-3 for example
  17. +5
    1 March 2025 23: 15
    Good article, thanks to the author.
  18. +3
    2 March 2025 14: 55
    Thanks to the author for the article! I watched the film, "Where is 042?" About the armored boat of the Danube flotilla, which fought behind enemy lines.
  19. +5
    2 March 2025 16: 03
    I remember, as a child, reading a book about river flotillas, it was called something like "Ships storm Berlin"! So there, Polish monitors and battles on the Dnieper were described! Now I read the article and immediately remembered!
  20. +4
    3 March 2025 01: 08
    Before "Zheleznyakov" there was a good project "Udarny" (around 1935). More promising.
  21. +2
    3 March 2025 08: 37
    Thanks to the author for the article. Monitors are essentially artillery cover batteries. Bridges on rivers, support for crossings and bridgeheads, etc.
  22. 0
    5 March 2025 13: 20
    I think I read a book about this monitor when I was a kid. Unfortunately, I forgot the author and the title, but I remembered the phrase "The last ship leaves the Don!"
    The monitor picked up our soldiers.
  23. +1
    8 March 2025 14: 19
    Thanks for the interesting article!
  24. 0
    11 March 2025 02: 35
    On the shelf in my library there is a small bluish book from the series "Military Adventures", on the cover of which the author's name I. E. Vsevolozhsky and the title "The Elusive Monitor" are emblazoned. Published in the early 60s, like the one I read at the same time, it made such an impression on me that I reread it again. Actually, my interest in the history of this warship was fully justified by the fact that the husband of my father's cousin fought on it as a sailor throughout the war, and after its end, my good Crimean friend (also a sailor) served on the monitor's crew for almost a year. In addition to the book, they told me a lot of interesting things, things that could be told in great detail. But fully aware that this will be in vain (at least because hardly anyone will read it due to the material no longer being new), I will refrain from the "Sisyphean labor" on this site. Having stood on a pedestal near the Leninskaya Kuznya plant (now Kuznitsa na Rybalskom) until the collapse of the USSR, it was moved to the territory of a park nearby. And it’s a good thing that the newly-minted nationalists, obsessed with de-Sovietization, did not send the hull of the heroic ship to be melted down.




    On the shelf in my library there is a small bluish book from the series "Military Adventures", and on its cover is the author's name I. E. Vsevolozhsky and the title "The Elusive Monitor". Published in the early 60s, like the one I read at the same time, it made such an impression on me that I reread it again. Actually, my interest in the history of this warship was fully justified by the fact that the husband of my father's cousin fought on it as a sailor throughout the war, and after its end, my good Crimean friend (also a sailor) served on the monitor's crew for almost a year. In addition to the book, they told me a lot of interesting things that could be told in great detail. But fully aware that this would be in vain (at least because hardly anyone would read it due to the material being no longer new), I will refrain from the "Sisyphean labor" on this site. Having stood on a pedestal near the Leninskaya Kuznya plant (now Kuznitsa na Rybalskom) until the collapse of the USSR, it was moved to the territory of a park nearby. And it’s a good thing that the newly-minted nationalists, obsessed with de-Sovietization, did not send the hull of the heroic ship to be melted down.

    On the shelf of my library bookcase there is a small bluish book from the series "Military Adventures", and on its cover is the author's name I. E. Vsevolozhsky and the title "The Elusive Monitor". Published in the early 60s, like the one I read at the same time, it made such an impression on me that I reread it again. Actually, my interest in the history of this warship was fully justified by the fact that the husband of my father's cousin fought on it as a sailor throughout the war, and after its end, my good Crimean friend (also a sailor) served on the monitor's crew for almost a year. In addition to the book, they told me a lot of interesting things that could be told in great detail. But fully aware that this will be in vain (at least because hardly anyone will read it due to the material no longer being new), I will refrain from the "Sisyphean labor" on this site. Having stood on a pedestal near the Leninskaya Kuznya plant (now Kuznitsa na Rybalskom) until the collapse of the USSR, it was moved to the territory of a park nearby. And it’s a good thing that the newly-minted nationalists, obsessed with de-Sovietization, did not send the hull of the heroic ship to be melted down.