Russian destroyers are a little different, but different!

16 184 35
Russian destroyers are a little different, but different!

I must say that story The history of the sea-going destroyer Vzryv is rather dark. No, destroyers are one of the few classes of ships whose appearance was preceded by theoretical research. The appearance of self-propelled mines required a theory of their use. The theory that emerged set requirements for the ship. The construction was ordered from the Byrd plant, and then...


The destroyer "Vzryv" resembles a yacht in its contours...

Some features of the ship's architecture make a number of researchers think that the plant used the hull of the yacht "Mab" under construction or already built for the torpedo boat: the torpedo boat's contours and armament were too unusual for a warship. The copper plating alone is worth something! The torpedo boat was launched on August 13, 1877, and was commissioned by the end of the year. In general, the first pancake, fully justifying the proverb, came out lumpy.



The displacement of the new ship was 134,23 tons, but the armament was only one fixed torpedo tube. And the speed was a letdown: the 800-horsepower engine was cramped in the yacht's hull, so instead of the planned 17 knots, the "Vzryv" never gave more than 14,5. Since the frankly wretched armament did not suit the destroyer's commander, Captain 2nd Rank N. V. Tchaikovsky, he insisted on installing 1886x4-mm Hotchkiss guns on the ship in 37: without them, the crew could only respond to the enemy with rifles. All three!

However, the first breakthrough ships are rarely successful, so you can forgive the "Explosion" its shortcomings, after all, it staked out for Russia the rights to invent a new class of ships! The world's first torpedo boat served until 1907, in its last years - as a training ship of the training mine squadron. Although it had no continuation.


Alfred Yarrow

But in the world after the successes of the Russian torpedo weapons During the Russo-Turkish War, a torpedo boat boom began! Several torpedo boat building centers gradually emerged: the English firms Thornycroft and Yarrow, the German Schichau, and the French Norman. But what about the Russians? Oddly enough, torpedo boats turned out to be too complex ships for Russian shipbuilders!

It turned out that building a high-tech small ship was as much more difficult than building an armored cruiser as making a pocket watch was more difficult than making a tower chime. When building torpedo boats, "weight discipline" was important - exceeding the planned weight (a common problem for domestic shipbuilders) was unacceptable, and compact machines and mechanisms required increased precision processing, careful assembly and competent operation. In general, the first "real" torpedo boat had to be ordered from the Englishman Alfred Yarrow.


"Batum", Russian destroyer, from Yarrow

By that time, the Yarrow company had already built a couple dozen torpedo boats for the Royal Navy, so there was no need to wait for a prototype: ships with a displacement of 40 tons, giving a speed of 18-20 knots, were chosen. The Batum ordered by the Russian Navy Department received a displacement of 48 tons and could give a speed of up to 22 knots. Interestingly, the torpedo boat was built with money that was planned to be spent in 1878 on the purchase of a pair of new torpedo boats in England.


"Batum" could also sail...

Initially, the word "torpedo boat" was not used. "Batum" was considered a "seaworthy torpedo boat". And the British called it "a torpedo boat of the "Batum" type", recognizing a new... if not a class, then a type of ships. Meanwhile, "Batum" had all the features of future torpedo boats: a hull with a length to width ratio of 8,4; a ram stem; a rise in the bow of the deck from the stem to the conning tower. The steam engines were of the vertical type, and the cylinder heads rose above the deck by 0,457 meters, as a result of which the deck was strongly sloping. There was one shaft, with a propeller located behind and below the rudder. There were three masts with gaff oblique sails. A pair of fixed torpedo tubes was located in the bow of the ship: considerations of stability did not allow installing rotating torpedo tubes - the torpedo boat's hull was too narrow. The nose had "drop rudders" that allowed the aircraft to reduce the turning radius for a quicker exit from an attack.

"Batum" was launched on May 31, 1880, after which it was sent to Fiume to install torpedo tubes and receive torpedoes (the ship had 4 torpedoes). In September, the ship arrived in Nikolaev. The destroyer attracted everyone's attention: in comparison with foreign ships, it was large and fast, as a result of which Yarrow, who began to actively advertise his products, even called it a "mine cruiser". The advertising campaign was successful, orders for the English industrialist began to pour in like water from a horn of plenty: Argentina, Austria, Italy, Holland and Greece decided to immediately acquire similar ships.

The sailors had mixed feelings about the ship. The fact is that in order to achieve high speed, the Batum was significantly over-lightened, and the crews, accustomed to the solid deck of cruisers or battleships, did not respect the sides vibrating under the blows of the waves and the deck bending under the sailors' burns. In addition, on the measured mile, the destroyer really did show a phenomenal speed of 22,16 knots, but it barely had enough coal to return to the plant: the English engineer did not provide for coal pits, and the coal was kept in sacks right in the engine room, which during movement resembled a branch of hell - 69 degrees Celsius (Yarrow also saved on normal ventilation)!

Other shortcomings include the less than thorough riveting of the hull: 20-30 buckets of water were pumped out of the hold per day. And this is only in the stern. The pipe in Fiume had to be extended - water would get into it at full speed (so the torpedo boat's seaworthiness was quite relative). In addition, the careless installation of the torpedo tubes led to both torpedoes in them being dented by the time they arrived in Nikolaev. There were also problems with firing: the ship would bury its bow deep in the waves at speed and the torpedo tube covers would end up under water. In general, the ship had to be thoroughly redesigned in Russia! One of the promising changes was the transfer of the torpedo boat's boilers to crude oil in 1882/83, which greatly facilitated the stokers' work. In general, the ship should be recognized, like many "firstborns", as experimental.


John Isaac Thornycroft

After reviewing the Yarrow destroyer, the Naval Ministry decided to order destroyers from other foreign manufacturers: to select the best model for serial production at domestic shipyards. The Sukhum was ordered from Yarrow's competitor, John Thornycroft. It was supposed to be an improved version of the Batum. But with the other orders, things are not so clear. The Shikhau company did not receive any orders, but three orders were placed with French shipyards: Norman in Le Havre, Forges and Chantiers in Toulon, and Claparède near Paris. All this was called a "fan order." Perhaps I am being unfair to the Naval Minister, Vice-Admiral Ivan Shestakov, but it seems that the French "gave him a hard time," because it is difficult to explain the absence of Germans in the competition otherwise.


"Sukhum" - destroyer from "Thornycroft"

Thornycroft's Sukhum had a displacement of 65 tons, a length-to-width ratio of over 9, a bow draft of 0,61 meters, a stern draft of 1,91 meters (with a propeller), the propeller was the only one, but it was protected by a rudder. The thickness of the deckhouse and deck plates above the torpedo tubes was 6,4 mm, twice as much as on the rest of the hull. The ship had luxurious interiors, using teak and mahogany, but the speed was disappointing, amounting to 17,95 knots. How did it show 18,9 knots during trials? Most likely, the cunning British did not load it enough...


Destroyer "Gagra"

Three "Frenchmen" were also named after cities on the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus: "Gelendzhik", "Poti" and "Gagra". In general, not differing fundamentally from "Batum" (which had already become a kind of standard), they carried several useful innovations: external keels to protect the hull, regulators to prevent misfires of the propellers, indicators of the number of revolutions of the engines, desalination plants... It is interesting that the experience of observing the construction of torpedo boats at French shipyards stimulated the creation of an "experimental pool" in Russia for research into hydrodynamics, without which the creation of high-speed ships was impossible.


Destroyer "Poti"

The first of the "Frenchmen" to arrive in Russia was the "Poti". The ship with a displacement of 63 tons developed a speed of 18,5 knots on the measured mile. The torpedo boat arrived in Sevastopol in the summer of 1883. And the other two "Frenchmen" were stuck in their historical homeland until March 1884 - shipbuilders frantically eliminated the deficiencies in the machines. "Gelendzhik" with a displacement of 74,7 tons was able to give 17,8 knots on the measured mile. It is worth noting right away that, being an undoubted step forward in comparison with torpedo boats, torpedo boats were quite conditionally seaworthy. There was no talk yet of joint actions with cruisers and battleships. It was on this type of ships that the "weapon complex" first appeared, which became the standard for a long time: two fixed torpedo tubes in the bow and two 37-mm guns.

Meanwhile, despite all the shortcomings of the destroyers, the admirals highly valued the promising weapon. The very possibility of a joint attack by several small, nimble, but most importantly, cheap ships to disable a handsome battleship was fascinating! True, the tactical methods proposed for this, from a modern point of view... original. Thus, it was supposed to sneak up on the battleship at low speed, launch torpedoes and leave at full speed... in reverse! But they calculated the number of destroyers necessary for such an attack: according to the head of the mine squadron, Rear Admiral I. M. Dikiy, 8 pieces.


The propeller-rudder group of the destroyer "Kotlin"

"Batumi", "Gagra", "Gelendzhik" and "Poti" became "guinea pigs": they were probably tested more than combat exercises. The sailors experimented with the boilers, trying to get rid of the boiling of water that got into the cylinders of the machines, detected during operation, and eliminated leaks in the smoke tubes. Probably, the construction of the first domestic torpedo boat of the "Batumi" type at the Baltic Shipyard, named "Kotlin", can also be considered an experiment. On it, they experimented with the number of propellers, machines, and hull shape. And most importantly - with the installation of machines from decommissioned torpedo boats on the torpedo boat, "Kotlin" got machines from "Drozd" and "Kanareyka" - a saving, however! But the first domestic series of torpedo boats were ships of the "Izmail" type.


"Izmail"

Izmail was built in Nikolaev, and its three sister ships were built in St. Petersburg, in the New Admiralty. The ships were a continuation of Poti, which was recognized as the best of those ordered abroad. The inspector of shipbuilding works of the Nikolaev port, Major General of the Corps of Naval Engineers Nestor Korshikov, who presented the project, drew attention to the "better speed, maneuverability and best sea qualities" of the new destroyers. In particular, the rotation frequency of the propeller shaft was reduced - from 100 to 60 revolutions per minute, which promised greater reliability and durability of the machine. Much attention was also paid to preventing overload and increasing the stability of the destroyer.

In the Black Sea, construction of the Izmail began in July 1884, and the ship was commissioned on July 12, 1886. The price of the ship turned out to be... high. Over 100 thousand rubles for a torpedo boat with a displacement of 73 tons and a by no means fantastic speed of 17,6 knots - not cheap at all! This is explained by the high share of imports in the ship's engine room: in Le Havre, Norman ordered an engine regulator, tachometer, injector, Claparede steam donk and 5 ejectors. This also included the cost of plant equipment: several lathes and screw-cutting lathes and a hydraulic pump for testing boilers were purchased. All subsequent ships of the series were somewhat cheaper.

The ships were built well. One of the first commanders particularly emphasized that the installation of an external keel allowed "jumping over booms and rocks without much damage" - very relevant for the Baltic! This conclusion was subsequently confirmed by the repeated landings of these destroyers on rocks, which did not lead to serious damage to the hulls.

The service of the Izmail-class destroyers was long and intense. Even when they were withdrawn from the first line (destroyers in those years were becoming obsolete not quickly, but rapidly!), these inexpensive ships were "driven hard by their superiors". They not only practiced torpedo attacks, but also acted as reconnaissance ships for squadrons, messenger ships, shield tugs during firing, sailors and officers were trained on them, many were transferred to the border guard, some were used as minesweepers. Izmail itself was scrapped only in 1, having completely exhausted its resource.


Destroyer "Vyborg"

The next torpedo boat, the 125-ton Vyborg, was ordered from England. It was not possible to come to an agreement with Yarrow (relations with Britain had once again worsened), and the order went to the James and George Thomson company, which offered to build the ship cheaper. The project seemed interesting to the Russian Navy: the company offered several innovations, such as installing an electric searchlight. But the company, which had no experience, did not complete the order in the best possible way, so Vyborg was not continued. Then came another series of two ships: Revel and Sveaborg. Here, a not very good trend in the technical policy of the MTC is already beginning to be seen. If it is logical to build the first ships as experimental ones, then further... It becomes clear that the Russian Navy Ministry does not pay due attention to torpedo boats. Especially against the background of their cunning neighbors...


German destroyer S-42 of the Schichau company

The Schichau company began its activities by building torpedo boats for the Russian Baltic fleet. But, having gained experience with this order, the Germans received an order from their own government, which, compared to ours, can be called colossal. In 1883, the company began building a grand series of 65 torpedo boats for Kaiserlich Marine! These were copies of the 65-ton torpedo boat of the Yarrow company, which had a speed of 22 knots. By 1889, the construction was completed, and the Russian sailors had dangerous competitors in the Baltic.

In fact, it was the large government order that prompted the leadership of the Russian Imperial Navy to order nine steel torpedo boats from Schichau (the same type that the company built for the Kaiser, slightly improved) - three for the Baltic and six for the Black Sea fleet: Abo, Vindava, Libava, Yalta, Novorossiysk, Chardak, Kodor, Kiliya and Reni. Compared to 65 for the German fleet - a pittance, but considering that in Russia, to date, no series of more than four torpedo boats had been built...


Destroyer "Abo" - the first German under the St. Andrew's flag

The Abo type (as the German-built destroyers were called) still resembled English and French ships; the German shipbuilding school had not yet acquired its own face, but they had already abandoned the ram bow (the Russian officers rated the lines of these destroyers very highly) and installed more economical triple-expansion engines.

The quality of construction was not up to par: the engine was frankly good, but the hull work was so-so, requiring reinforcement of the platform for the Hotchkiss guns, and on the stern, according to the commander of the destroyer "Chardak" Lieutenant Alexander von Niedermiller, it was possible to additionally install a rotating torpedo tube. The maximum speed of the destroyers was 20,6 knots, in good weather it could be increased to 21 knots, but in real service conditions the ships did not go more than 19 knots. The "Abo" type was very good for inland seas, but was absolutely not suitable for the ocean - 70-80 tons of displacement could not provide good habitability, service on them was, according to memoirs, "tiring".


Destroyer Suchena in the Far East

In addition to the ships mentioned, two more destroyers of the Abo type were built: Yanchikhe and Suchena. These ships deserve special mention because they were disassemblable. They were divided into 6 fully finished sections, which were sent by steamships to the Far East and assembled and launched in Vladivostok by May 1889.


Destroyer "Ussuri", formerly "Nargen"

Growing demands on torpedo boats led to an increase in the displacement of ships. The "25-knot" torpedo boats "Nargen" and "Gogland" ordered from Creighton of Abo had a displacement of 152,54 tons. During trials in 1890, they showed speeds of 20,15 and 20,38 knots, which became a significant achievement of domestic shipbuilders. The cruising range under steam was 2400 miles, but these torpedo boats could use sails as an auxiliary propulsion device. In addition to the fixed bow torpedo tube, they carried two rotating ones on the deck, and artillery was represented by three five-barrel 37-mm Hotchkiss revolver guns. Good seaworthiness allowed these ships to reach the Far East under their own power, accompanied by the port vessel "Silach". In Vladivostok, the destroyers were renamed "Ussuri" and "Sungari", the ships participated in the suppression of the "Boxer Rebellion" and the Russo-Japanese War (they were part of the Vladivostok cruiser detachment).

The experience of operating the first torpedo boats was the basis for the project of Lieutenant Mikhail Beklemishev (later the commander of the first Russian submarine, the Dolphin), who taught at the Mine School in parallel with his service as a mine officer on the ships of the Baltic Fleet. The draft design was presented in 1888, the drawings in 1889. In general, Beklemishev's torpedo boat resembled the ships of the Schichau company: 85 tons of displacement, oil-fired boilers, a speed of 22-23 knots... But there were also differences: firstly, the twin rudders covered the propeller disk, which should have given the torpedo boat high maneuverability, but without the use of bow rudders, which were common at that time; secondly, in order to avoid such a common problem on destroyers of those years as the bow burying itself in the water at high speed, Beklemishev proposed abandoning the placement of two fixed torpedo tubes in the bow, and instead placing a pair of semi-rotating ones behind the wheelhouse.


Destroyer "Rochensalm"

MTK slightly revised the project: having refused to install a rotating torpedo tube and instead of the proposed locomotive boiler to install a proven Belleville water-tube boiler, it was nevertheless decided to order two destroyers with oil heating and four with coal. Two for the Black Sea Fleet, four for the Baltic. The orders were received by the Creighton company, the Putilov Plant and the Bellino-Fenderich Plant in Odessa. Having received orders for the Borgo and Ekenes destroyers, Creighton reworked the project, increasing the power of the machines to 1200 horsepower (instead of 1100 horsepower according to the project). In fact, only they achieved speeds close to the projected ones: 19,56 and 20 knots, which did not affect the cost of the order (212,5 thousand rubles). The remaining enterprises transferred ships of the same (even slightly higher) cost to the fleet, but they were unable to squeeze speeds above 17,2 knots out of the machines.

The Putilov torpedo boats were named "Biorke" and "Rochensalm", the Odessa torpedo boats - "Anapa" and "Aytodor". In 1890, the Putilov plant received an order for two more torpedo boats of this type - "Gapsal" and "Moonsund". During construction, it was decided to abandon the oil heating of the boilers, and all the launched ships were coal-fired, except for "Rochensalm", whose boiler had mixed oil and coal heating. Beklemishev's double rudders also did not justify themselves. In general, the ships turned out to be far from as advanced as planned...


Destroyer Adler - German fast ship

However, two more destroyers were ordered from Schichau - "Adler" and "Anakria", as can be understood from the names - for the Black Sea Fleet (Adler developed a record speed of 26,5 knots during trials!). The ships were no different from the previous destroyers built by this company, but the head of the Naval Ministry, Admiral Ivan Shestakov, was quite impressed by the reliability of the German machines and, during a visit to the German Elbing (modern-day Polish Elbląg) in 1888, ordered two destroyers and a torpedo cruiser from the company. Shestakov did not have time to order any more torpedo boats, since he died in Sevastopol on November 21, 1888. His activities in terms of torpedo boat procurement can be called...

Ambiguous. With the light hand of Ivan Alekseevich, the Russian Imperial Navy acquired a hodgepodge of different types of destroyers, built in tiny series, but we should not forget that under him, Russian shipbuilders first began to build ships of this class at a completely world-class level. And it was he who insisted on the sale of Alaska - "we will not forget, we will not forgive"!


Admiral Ivan Alekseevich Shestakov

The construction of a series of domestic torpedo boats of the Anakria type can be considered Shestakov's legacy - firstly, the Tosna type practically repeated the German project, secondly... Again, a small series, which only increased the diversity of torpedo boats of the domestic fleet! "Asp", "Tranzund", "Gogland", "Norgen", "Domesnes", "Tosna" and No. 131, No. 132 (since April 20, 1895, the torpedo boats were deprived of names, leaving only numbers). However, there was a third reason: the prototype of the series was not the record-breaking "Adler", but the "Anakria", which did not grab the stars from the sky.


Dago-class destroyer

A series of four 100-ton Dago-class torpedo boats was also a step in the same direction. Four ships, three for the Baltic, one for the Black Sea, not exactly record-breaking performance — an improved Sveaborg. Locomotive boilers, two torpedo tubes — one fixed in the bow and one rotating on the deck. The conning tower was enlarged, a triple expansion machine was installed... Dago and Kotka were built in Abo, and Kronshlot and Seskar at the Izhora Plant. The torpedo boats' performance was not record-breaking: Dago's speed on a measured mile was 4 knots, while Kotka's was 18,37 knots. The Kolpino torpedo boats showed even worse speed — the Izhora Plant had no place to test them. However, the rotating torpedo tube gave them a noticeable tactical advantage; the new destroyers could fire not only with their bows...


Destroyer No. 267, which was slandered...

But in the next series, we can say that the "Shestakov" approach to the matter began to end. Gradually, little by little, but it was ending. The series of Pernov-class destroyers was ordered quite solid - 25 units. But that's another story. For now, we can recall one of the poorly illuminated moments in the history of the first Russian destroyers. Namely, the "participation" of destroyer No. 267 in the mutiny on the battleship Potemkin. Quotation marks in this case are quite appropriate. The fact is that, despite the assurances of Soviet historiography that the destroyer's crew supported the mutiny on the Potemkin, this is not quite true, or rather - not at all true! The destroyer was captured by the rebellious crew of the battleship.

When the rebellion began, bullets began to hit the ship's superstructure, and on the former Izmail (namely, it was deprived of its name in April 1895 and received No. 267) this was perceived as evidence of the suppression of the rebellion. But soon sailors who had fled from the Potemkin, who did not want to take part in this event, and the inspector A. N. Makarov began to board the destroyer.

Seeing that things were going badly, the destroyer's commander, Lieutenant Baron P. M. Klodt von Jurgensburg, tried to weigh anchor, but was unable to do so — the capstan had broken. He then decided to completely release the anchor chain, for which he reversed, but in his excitement he forgot that a boat was moored to the stern, the bow of which got tangled up in the propeller, and the ship lost its speed. The wind began to blow it toward the battleship, where, seeing the destroyer's maneuvers, they decided that it was going to torpedo them, and signaled the ship to immediately moor to the Potemkin with its stern, and to confirm the seriousness of their intentions, they fired three warning shots from a 47-mm cannon.

Klodt von Jurgensburg obeyed, and a team of armed Potemkin sailors boarded the destroyer. The ship's commander was arrested and escorted to the battleship, and the former Izmail (with an armed "boarding party" of battleship sailors on board) followed the mutinous Potemkin to Constanta, where the crew refused to be interned, and returned to Sevastopol under its own power - the sailors from the destroyer found no guilt in themselves. After returning, the entire crew was put in the "Bombory" (I guess that there was a garrison guardhouse there, but I have no idea where it could have been stuck, maybe nearby, in the Lazarevsky barracks? G.f.C.), but later the court acquitted all the sailors...
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. BAI
    +2
    15 August 2025 06: 18
    It is interesting that the experience of observing the construction of destroyers at French shipyards stimulated the creation in Russia of an “experimental pool” for research into hydrodynamics, without which the creation of high-speed ships would have been impossible.

    But doesn’t the Russian N.A. Krylov (a scientist-engineer, not a fabulist) have priority in this matter?
    1. +4
      15 August 2025 13: 01
      But doesn’t the Russian N.A. Krylov (a scientist-engineer, not a fabulist) have priority in this matter?
      The Englishman Froude had priority (hydrodynamic similarity criterion - Froude number), who made the experimental tank earlier.
  2. +4
    15 August 2025 06: 53
    For 10 years, the RIF destroyers have not been able to confidently show 20 knots during daily service and standard loading. Shestakov somehow didn't overdo it with the technical specifications and the placement of orders.
  3. 0
    15 August 2025 07: 39
    Interesting review, thanks.
    Meanwhile, despite all the shortcomings of the destroyers, the admirals highly valued the promising weapon. The very possibility of a joint attack by several small, nimble, but most importantly, cheap ships to disable a handsome battleship was fascinating! True, the tactical methods proposed for this were, from a modern point of view, original...

    At that time, tactical views on the use of torpedo boats depended on the views of admirals from different countries. In England, it was believed that if a torpedo boat was at a distance of 1,5 meters from the ships being attacked for 450 minutes, it would be disabled by rapid-fire guns. In France, this distance was increased to 900 meters, but it was necessary to take into account the number of small-caliber rapid-fire guns installed on the ship.
  4. +9
    15 August 2025 08: 13
    Perhaps I am being unfair to the Minister of the Navy, Vice-Admiral Ivan Shestakov, but one gets the impression that the French “gave him a hard time,” because it is otherwise difficult to explain the absence of the Germans in the competition.

    Ivan Alekseevich can be accused of many things, but not of corruption.
    And the absence of the Germans is explained very simply. In the early 80s, they were still nobody in the world military shipbuilding. This is especially true for destroyers.
    The first more or less decent "Schütze" type ships were laid down in 1882 and in almost all performance characteristics were inferior to the "Batum" which entered service in 1880 (even taking into account its actual characteristics)
    Moreover, the Germans themselves were not at all under any illusions about them and used them for training purposes.
    1. +4
      15 August 2025 08: 55
      Well, the Germans took their first steps in shipbuilding with a big eye on French shipbuilding, so it was not worth expecting any masterpieces from them.
      1. +5
        15 August 2025 09: 14
        Quote: TermNachTER
        Well, the Germans took their first steps in shipbuilding with a big eye on French shipbuilding, therefore, one shouldn’t expect any masterpieces from them.

        in the part of the destroyers into English)
        And if the Germans make copies, the question inevitably arises: why turn to those who make copies if you can work with the original?
        1. 0
          15 August 2025 10: 46
          Learning a little from everyone is also not bad. The Japanese ordered "Asams" from three countries at once. The result was not very good, though.
          1. +3
            15 August 2025 11: 45
            Quote: TermNachTER
            The Japanese ordered "Asams" from three countries at once.

            If you mean "Yakumo", then the Germans had caught up by that time.
            1. 0
              15 August 2025 11: 53
              No, I don't think it's a sin to adopt someone else's positive experience. The Japanese wanted to, too, but they set very strict conditions. Although the shipbuilding schools were different, the ships turned out to be almost identical, with the exception of the most unsuccessful one - "Azuma". Yes, by that time, German shipbuilding was already at the level of world standards. "Bogatyr" and "Askold" turned out to be very successful, if you compare them with "Dianas".
    2. +1
      15 August 2025 13: 03
      This is all understandable, but there is one "but" - the Germans had already ordered destroyers before, and the fact that they are nobody and have no name would allow the price to be reduced: there is a serious markup for the company's reputation, and the Germans did not have one yet...
  5. +1
    15 August 2025 08: 53
    I think that most likely the French "brought it" to the Grand Duke, General-Admiral Konstantin Nikolaevich, since he made the final decisions.
    1. +4
      15 August 2025 09: 17
      And is it okay that VK Konstantin was already retired by that time?
      1. 0
        15 August 2025 10: 54
        So they brought it to Alexey Alexandrovich. Especially since he liked to relax in Paris, he didn't have to carry it far)
        1. +5
          15 August 2025 11: 51
          You know, I got the impression that the "six-pood" VK had already turned around during the reign of his nephew. Perhaps Alexander III kept his august brothers, if not in check, then on a fairly short leash. Well, the then managers Shestakov and Chikhachev were much more independent figures than Tyrtov and Avelan.
          1. 0
            15 August 2025 11: 58
            So serious (expensive) orders abroad began in the late 80s. Before that, there were small things.
  6. +1
    15 August 2025 10: 02
    original. So, it was supposed to sneak up on the battleship at low speed, launch torpedoes and leave at full speed... in reverse!
    Tactics based on the ship's design - at high speed, the bow and the torpedo tube are underwater, and a stationary torpedo tube can only be hit at a right angle and, accordingly, can only be left in reverse
    1. +1
      15 August 2025 13: 06
      It’s still hard to understand: they were clearly not sneaking up at high speed, and having heated it up to full, they could have turned around, however, most likely there were reasons then, which are not entirely clear today...
  7. +1
    15 August 2025 10: 59
    Quote: BAI
    It is interesting that the experience of observing the construction of destroyers at French shipyards stimulated the creation in Russia of an “experimental pool” for research into hydrodynamics, without which the creation of high-speed ships would have been impossible.

    But doesn’t the Russian N.A. Krylov (a scientist-engineer, not a fabulist) have priority in this matter?


    The first in Russia.
    The world's first experimental tank was built (irony on) by a certain William Froude. (irony off)
    1. +3
      15 August 2025 13: 04
      The world's first experimental tank was built (irony included) by a certain William Froude.
      He is not "someone". He is a hydrodynamic scientist. His similarity criterion - the Froude number - is still used today.
      1. +2
        15 August 2025 15: 38
        Quote: Aviator_
        He is not "someone". He is a hydrodynamic scientist. His similarity criterion - the Froude number - is still used today.

        Well, it's not for nothing that the tags are set: wink
        Quote: deddem
        The world's first experimental pool was built (irony included) one William Froude. (irony off)
        1. +1
          15 August 2025 15: 43
          I was surprised by "someone" about Froude. So you can write "someone" Mach, Grashof, Reynolds, Stanton, Prandtl, Peclet and others, whose criteria are fundamental in hydro and gas dynamics.
  8. 0
    15 August 2025 14: 14
    In fact, the architecture of such destroyers (a wedge burying itself in the water) is worthy of a separate discussion. One "Englishman" made it - and everyone began to stupidly copy it. Although it became clear almost immediately that the shape of the bow was VERY UNSUCCESSFUL. The disgusting view from the wheelhouse and its cramped conditions forced the ship to be commanded OUTSIDE it and climbing HIGHER, exposing oneself to danger in battle. A bonus was the bow getting flooded in fresh weather right up to the embrasures. WHY for a very long time no one tried to make a more seaworthy BOW with a high wheelhouse - the question is probably rhetorical. The FASHION for the English "style" was very strong.
    1. 0
      15 August 2025 20: 36
      By the way, the fashion is back now. They are building ships with an "inverse" (i.e. reverse with the stem inclined to the stern) bow again. Just look at the USS Zumwalt.
      1. 0
        15 August 2025 22: 19
        Zumwalt has a high side and the slope is not critical. But for such shells as the first destroyers - this is a problem from birth.
        1. 0
          15 August 2025 23: 28
          There are discussions in the literature about some advantages that such a design solution provides, but I will not judge their relevance. As for the sizes of ships, such solutions are being tried starting with small-sized fleets - BEKs, yachts, boats. Apparently, some of the applications are dictated by fashion and a futuristic look, and some are somehow justified.
  9. +2
    15 August 2025 15: 52
    I enjoyed reading this interesting and technically competent article, which has become a great rarity lately. Thank you!
  10. +4
    15 August 2025 18: 06
    1. The photo "Ussuri" is excellent, masterfully made.
    2. but it seems that the French "gave it to him"
    Perhaps the financing conditions were more favorable. Not directly from the budget (it was still necessary to wait for it), but loans under government guarantees. In review articles on economic relations between Russia and France, there are references that in order to finance military purchases, Russia entered into loans with French banks and government agencies. These loans allowed Russia to cover the costs of building, for example, ships at French shipyards.
  11. +1
    15 August 2025 18: 57
    Chief of the mine detachment Rear Admiral I. M. Dikiy


    Ivan Mikhailovich sometimes evoked the habits of a wild man with his statements, but his last name was still Dikov.
  12. +1
    15 August 2025 20: 27
    Quote: Aviator_
    I was surprised by "someone" about Froude. So you can write "someone" Mach, Grashof, Reynolds, Stanton, Prandtl, Peclet and others, whose criteria are fundamental in hydro and gas dynamics.


    You overestimate the knowledge of the majority of the Internet audience.
    If you're hoping that if you say "Reynolds" they'll immediately remember his numbers, you're deeply mistaken, because they'll remember, first of all, Hollywood clown Reynolds.
  13. +1
    15 August 2025 22: 36
    The article is interesting, thanks to the author! I was intrigued by the photo of the S-42, which became, as far as I remember, the prototype for the famous series of destroyers of the Dobrovolets type. Do I understand correctly that this came here from the next article?
  14. +1
    16 August 2025 12: 42
    But with the other orders, everything is not so clear. The Schichau firm did not receive any orders, but three orders were placed with French shipyards: Norman in Le Havre, Forges and Chantiers in Toulon, and Claparède near Paris. All this was called a "fan order." Perhaps I am being unfair to the Minister of the Navy, Vice-Admiral Ivan Shestakov, but it seems that the French "gave him a hard time," because it is difficult to explain the absence of Germans in the competition otherwise.

    Judging by the letter of Vice-Admiral Likhachev, the initiator of the MM order in France was VK Konstantin Nikolaevich.
    The initiative to order from France (from Normand or Clapared) did not belong to me, but to the Grand Duke General-Admiral
    © from a letter from I.F. Likhachev to Captain-Lieutenant Zatsarenny (former commander of the "Batum") dated 5/17.12.1881.
    Quoted from R.V. Kondratenko. On the order of sea-going destroyers for the Black Sea Fleet // Gangut. Issue 48. 2008.

    Moreover, at first the above-mentioned pair of French factories were a priority. Discussion of the terms of the MM order with the Thornycroft factory began after the French received the MM specifications for RIF and began developing the projects. Well, the order for the fourth MM was given to Forge et Chantier on Likhachev's recommendation - a month after the order for the first three ships.
  15. 0
    17 August 2025 20: 34
    "Batum", a torpedo boat - 48 tons. This is more than the D-3 boat, less than the J. Kennedy boat - 56 tons. I won't even mention the 100-ton Schnellboats. Evolution, however.
  16. 0
    18 August 2025 10: 28
    After returning, the entire crew was put in the "Bombory" (I guess that there was a garrison guardhouse there, but I have no idea where it could have been placed, maybe nearby, in the Lazarevsky barracks? G.f.Ts.), but later all the sailors were acquitted by the court...

    "Bombory" is a blockship, a former sail-and-screw schooner of the Black Sea Fleet, built by the British. In the fleet - from 1857 to 1903, then decommissioned and converted into a blockship, serving as such until 1911.
    During the events in Sevastopol, the blockship was used as a floating prison.
    On the morning of June 21, the fleet command and judicial authorities came to the Prut again. They began to take the sailors off the ship. On the shore, one of them killed the traitor P. Kalashnikov with a brick. The entire crew was placed in a floating prison, blockading the Bombora. At night, having broken through the side, several people escaped. Then the Prut men were transferred to the fortress.
    © Gavrilov B. I. In the fight for freedom: Uprising on the battleship Potemkin.
  17. 0
    16 November 2025 23: 16
    I read it with pleasure good