Bringing hope...

21 136 19
Bringing hope...

The Sea of ​​Azov is shallow, but its coasts are among the most enviable regions of Russia in terms of agriculture. How can this be interconnected? Well, at least this way: to export grain from the coasts of the Sea of ​​Azov, special ships are needed - with a shallow draft, capable of approaching an unequipped shore and accepting cargo "on the fly", without the help of port cranes. Of course, such ships appeared in Russia. And somehow it just so happened that exactly the same requirements are imposed on landing ships...


The landing before the landing ships appeared looked something like this...

Before the First World War, no one really bothered with creating specialized landing ships: during the Crimean War, the British used ferries made of tied barrels with a plank flooring to land horses and guns; in 1878, they built barges with a ramp, but without an engine. But most often, the infantry was loaded onto regular merchant ships (or warships, the infantry didn’t care), taken to where they needed to go, and landed using boats and launches. This is how the Japanese landed on the Liaodong Peninsula from May 5 to 12, 1904. But here it is immediately worth paying attention to the timing: the Japanese landed 50 thousand people with 216 guns and thousands of horses in eight days (and the cargo was unloaded in the captured port of Dalniy for several more weeks). No one could guarantee that Russia's adversaries in the next war would be as complacent as the commander of the 4th Division, Major General Alexander Fok, and Rear Admiral Wilhelm Vitgeft, who allowed the Japanese to carry out such an operation. And they would let the Russians the fleet more than a week for the landing! In general, for the landing on the Bosphorus (namely, the Black Sea straits were declared the target of Russia in the First World War) it was worth building something more suitable.




Elpidifor Paramonov, glory is somewhere nearby!

Fortunately, Russia had a great model for landing ships - the Azov steam barges of the merchant Elpidifor Paramonov. The engines were located in the stern of these ships, and the forward two-thirds of the hull was a hold with a pair of ramps. Placing the engines in the stern made the bow of the ship light, as a result of which the stern draft of this type of barges was one and a half to two meters, and the bow - less than a meter. Approaching the shore, the ship lowered the ramps, along one of which the loaders carried in sacks of grain, and along the other - they descended to the shore.


Grain-carrying barge of the "elpidifor" type

It is worth mentioning right away that the elpidifors did not appear immediately. Initially, the military, planning a landing on the Bosphorus, decided to use steamships of a more traditional design for it. The steamships Trevorian and Burdale were purchased and rebuilt as “base transports”. Each steamship carried 10 boats on davits and deck blocks, and 40 boats in the holds. Also, warehouses with ammunition and ammunition for the landing force were located on the transports. In general, these were the forerunners of the UDC, which had the ability to land 2 brigades of scouts and artillery division (on 22 transports). But, as practice showed, it took three hours to launch the standard floating craft, and during this time the stationary "base transports" and ships with landing forces were completely defenseless. And the enemy on the shore had time to prepare for the landing.


Bolinder

Fortunately, "bolinders" appeared - motor landing barges equipped with semi-diesel (glow) engines from the Swedish company "Bolinder". The first to design such barges (official name "landing lighter type X") were the British for landing in the Dardanelles. Each barge could accommodate 500 infantrymen or 40 horses, or 2-4 guns. At first, Russian engineers, without further ado, copied the English landing lighter, calling it a "bolinder". But the "Englishmen" turned out to be too small, seaworthiness and cruising range also let us down. And then our gaze fell on the grain barges of Elpidifor Paramonov, which, with a shallow draft, could reach St. Petersburg under their own power...


Landing at Rize: haven’t you seen the Turks?

The first time Paramonov's mobilized elpidifors were used was in 1916, in the landing at Rize. The Russian troops of General Yudenich, advancing along the Caucasian coast of the Black Sea, were hampered by the virtually impassable Pontic Taurus ridge: with one flank resting on the ridge and the other in the sea, the Turkish position at Boyuk-Dere was virtually impregnable. Therefore, it was decided to land a tactical landing force in the rear of the Turks: two infantry battalions, two guns and a machine gun crew. Two elpidifors and transport were assigned for the operation. On March 5, 1916, the ships approached the coast before dawn and began landing at 5:45 a.m. The Turks noticed the landing only when the landing was already ending, and, having discovered Russian battalions in their rear, they fled in panic. To prevent the Turks from strengthening their positions further along the coast, the landing was repeated at the next line, 20 miles from the captured position. The Turks tried to prevent the landing, but fire from the battleship Rostislav, which covered the landing operation, forced them to retreat. This success of the Elpidifors gave the naval command the idea of ​​building specialized landing ships in their likeness - more mobilized grain carriers.


Elpidiphorus in bloom

The full displacement of the first specialized landing ships was supposed to be 1050 tons. In reality, it turned out to be 1300 tons. The draft was 1,8 meters, but in the stern there were tanks, filling which allowed the ship's bow to be raised above the water and the landing party to be landed on the shore without getting their feet wet - along retractable gangways. The ships were equipped with a radio station, a 60 cm diameter searchlight was installed on the front mast. In case of loading seaplanes or high-speed boats on the deck, the fencing of the hatches was reinforced. It was planned to arm the landing ships with one or two 75 mm guns and two to four 37 mm or 47 mm guns. The Greek name "Elpidifor" (it was borne by one of Paramonov's barges, built, by the way, in Germany, in Kiel) was changed in the navy to the easier to pronounce "elpidifor". Unlike the semi-diesel Bolinders, the Elpidifors did not tinker with the engine and installed an old, proven triple-expansion steam engine. The power plant was planned to have a capacity of 750 horsepower, which would allow them to go at a speed of 10 knots. But the usual "economic" speed of these ships was planned to be no higher than 6 knots.


Construction of landing barges in Nikolaev, at the Russud plant

The Elpidifor project was developed by a team of engineers led by Colonel Lev Cromaldi of the Naval Engineer Corps. On September 1, 1916, the specification for the hull and mechanisms was approved, and on September 3, the Russud plant (today the Nikolaev Shipyard) was given a preliminary order for the construction of 30 landing ships.

Each ship had to be able to transport by sea and land on an unequipped coast 1000 infantrymen with rifle weapons, machine guns and ammunition. The elpidifors had a double bottom with ballast tanks designed to create a trim by the stern, facilitating exit to the shore, all rooms, including all four cargo holds, were electrified, holds 1 and 4 had crew quarters and conductors' cabins. The landing was carried out through opening hatches, along retractable gangways (the gangways were extended with the help of a reinforced bowsprit, on rollers), the width and strength of which made it possible to unload not only infantry, but also horses, field kitchens, teams and other equipment. The main power plant was represented by two triple-expansion steam engines with a total capacity of 676 horsepower, powered by two fire-tube boilers. A pair of fixed-pitch propellers was used as a mover. During the trials, the ships exceeded the planned maximum speed, giving 11,2 knots instead of 10 according to the design. At an economical speed of 6 knots, the elpidifor could travel 970 miles, at 10 knots - 650 miles.

The armament also turned out to be stronger than planned. Two 120-mm guns were installed on the bow of the ships on each side - Japanese, "Type 41" (licensed version of the British gun QF 4,7'/40 Mk. IV), and the anti-aircraft armament was represented by two 76-mm anti-aircraft guns Lander, located on each side at the stern, and two "Maxim" on the wings of the bridge. In addition to landing troops, elpidifors could also act as minelayers: in this case, 120 sea mines were placed in the holds. According to the specifications, the ship's crew should have been 25-27 people: 8 officers, 2 conductors and 17 sailors, but in reality it was increased to 60 people. Interestingly, there were no plans to keep elpidifors in the fleet after the war - they were to be sold to private companies for use as grain carriers.


Three Elpidiphori in the Sea

The ships began to be built in February 1917 — not the best time for shipbuilding. Therefore, instead of the planned 30 ships, only 20 were laid down. However, due to the revolution, only 3 were delivered, Elpidifors No. 410-412. When the Germans entered Nikolaev, on March 19, 1918, Elpidifor No. 410 had completed state trials, Elpidifor No. 411 and Elpidifor No. 412 were being completed and were at a high level of readiness. And then the chaos began: bend your fingers and tell us how many flags the Elpidifors sailed under! The ships were requisitioned and commissioned into the Kaiserliche Marine, under the numbers FD 20, FD 25 and FD 26. Why FD? Flachdampfer is German for "shallow-draft steamship." So, flag #1 is German. The Germans left and were replaced by the French, who in turn requisitioned the ships. Flag #2 is French. But the French handed over the elpidifors to the White Black Sea Fleet, so flag #3 is St. Andrew's.

As part of the White Fleet, the ships even had a chance to work in their specialty! In the summer of 1920, Lieutenant General Baron Pyotr Wrangel planned to break out of the Tauride Governorate to Kuban: White intelligence reported that the Soviet government was not popular there, and there was a high probability of an uprising. To implement the plan, it was decided to land a force under the command of Lieutenant General Sergei Ulagay, the so-called "Special Purpose Group", consisting of the cavalry divisions of N. G. Babiev, A. M. Shifner-Markevich and the infantry units of B. I. Kazanovich - 4,5 thousand bayonets and sabres, 12 guns, 130 machine guns, several armored cars and 8 airplanes (Soviet sources indicate different figures: 4 thousand bayonets, 4 thousand sabres, 17 guns and 243 machine guns). The landing force had good chances: on the entire coast from Yeisk to Novorossiysk, the Reds had a maximum of 10,5 thousand people (with white partisan detachments roaming around in the rear).

The operation was not a secret: the landing was openly talked about in the bazaars. So openly that the Reds considered all this chatter to be deliberate disinformation (they were expecting a landing on the Don)! Nevertheless, on August 12, 1920, the loading of the landing force onto the ships in Kerch was completed, and a detachment of 30 ships, including all three elpidifors, went to sea. On August 14, near the village of Vereshchaginsky, the first echelon of the White landing force came ashore along the gangways of the elpidifors. A description of the course of the operation itself is not the purpose of this material, but it is worth noting that both the task of landing the landing force (and during the battles for Northern Tavria there were several landings, in addition to the Ulagaev landing, there was the landing of General Slashchev near Kirillovka) and the task of evacuating it on September 7 were successfully accomplished by the new landing ships!


Evacuation of Wrangel's army from Crimea, Elpidifor participates...

The Elpidifors actively participated in the evacuation of Wrangel's army from Crimea to Gallipoli, after which... They planned to use them as commercial steamships after the war, didn't they? So they sold the ships to the Greeks (flag No. 4 is Greek!). No. 410 (named "Vera" by the Whites) was scrapped in 1924, No. 411 ("Nadezhda") was sunk on April 15, 1941 by the Luftwaffe in Porto Elli, No. 412 ("Love") was hit by an aerial bomb on April 22, 1941 and washed up on the rocks near Antikyra. It ended story Elpidiforov? No!


Elpidifor of Soviet completion (as a gunboat)...

After the final liberation of Nikolaev from the Whites, interventionists and other Makhnovists, the headquarters of the Naval Forces of the Republic decided to complete the construction of six elpidifors (Nos. 413-418) that were in a high state of readiness. The ships were not completed in the original version, but according to an improved design. First of all, the power of the power plant was increased: now two triple-expansion machines had a total capacity of 750 horsepower. The armament was also strengthened - first 2, then 3x130-mm naval guns of the 1913 model (B-7), with a barrel length of 55 calibers, were installed on the forecastle, in the middle and at the stern (the middle one was installed in 1928). The anti-aircraft weapons did not undergo any changes. The ship could carry 380 mines of the 1912 model, 180 mines of the 1926 model, 402 mine protectors, a Schultz sea trawl and a bottom trawl. The crew in wartime increased to 169-170 people (9 officers, 38 petty officers and 122-123 sailors). The displacement, accordingly, also increased to 1400 tons, and the average draft to 3,6 meters.

During repairs, minor changes were made to the design and armament of different elpidifors, so that they soon began to differ slightly from each other. But perhaps the most controversial change in the design was the welding of the lap ports and the absence of retractable gangways and a bowsprit for lifting them. For landing troops, it was supposed to use light wooden gangways lowered from the edge of the upper deck. Light guns could still be lowered onto the pier using the elpidifor's own cargo booms, but heavy ones - only by port cranes. Nevertheless, it was believed that the ships could carry 6 light tanks, 4 – 152-mm guns, 8 – 120-mm guns, 12 – 102-mm or 76-mm guns, 16 – 45-mm anti-tank guns, as well as on the upper deck – 8 ChTZ or 10 STZ tractors.

However, in the Red Navy the elpidifors were re-qualified as gunboats and received their own names: No. 413 - "Red Abkhazia", ​​No. 414 - "Red Adjaristan", No. 416 - "Red Crimea" (later renamed "Red Armenia"), No. 417 - "Red Georgia". But elpidifors No. 418-422 were less fortunate - they were completed as oil tankers.


Elpidifor #415 - no luck...

A separate issue is the fate of Elpidifor No. 415. It was completed, and in 1921... Anyway, on January 9, 1921, the ship was attacked by French warships near Anapa: the destroyers Sakalav and Senegalese and a minesweeper (sometimes called Dunkerque). The ship fought back desperately, but the forces were unequal, and the commander Grigory Butakov (the future hero of the defense of Sevastopol and holder of three Orders of the Red Banner and the Order of Lenin) decided to throw the ship ashore to save the crew and, with the possibility of removing the ship from the rocks, subsequently restore it. Which is what was done.

It is interesting in this situation that the Civil War was no longer being waged in the Black Sea at that time, so the actions of the French were outright piracy. Five sailors were killed, 5 were wounded, 27 were concussed and 3 were poisoned with asphyxiating gases. The Chief of Defense of the Black Sea coast, Boris Kondratyev, ordered all French ships, including merchant ships, to be sunk, but Moscow cancelled the order and preferred to get away with diplomatic notes of protest. It was not possible to restore the elpidifor #3: storms are common in winter along the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus, which quickly brought the ship to a state that did not allow for resuscitation. In 415, the elpidifor was dismantled for scrap metal (although some fragments of the hull can still be found on the bottom today).

During the war, the Black Sea Elpidifors actively fought. They laid mines, escorted ships and floating docks... But most importantly, they worked in their specialty! As early as August 13, 1941, they participated in the defense of Odessa, including providing fire support for the landing at Grigoryevka. On September 21, the Red Armenia was destroyed in a battle with Luftwaffe dive bombers; the ship sank with almost the entire crew. The Red Abkhazia, Red Adzharistan, and Red Georgia (and one more Bolinder!) participated in the Kerch-Feodosia landing operation, they acted as part of landing detachment B and on December 28-30, 1941, in difficult weather conditions, they landed troops in the area of ​​Mount Opuk. On January 14-16, 1942, the Red Adjaristan landed troops near Sudak.


"Red Abkhazia" at exercises before the War

But their main battle was the landing of troops in the Stanichka-Yuzhnaya Ozereyka area on February 4, 1943! In this operation, the Elpidifors not only worked for their intended purpose, but also acted in accordance with the practice developed before the War, during exercises: together with the Bolinders, which delivered tanks to the landing zone. The Red Abkhazia was damaged and was put in for repairs. The Red Georgia and the Red Adjaristan landed the main landing force near Stanichka. Then the main landing failed, but the diversionary force, led by Caesar Kunnikov, clung to a bridgehead near Tsemesskaya Bay, which was named Malaya Zemlya.

Supplying the beachhead also fell to the good old Elpidifors. The ships broke through the attacks aviation and torpedo boats. On the night of February 27-28, 1943, the Krasnaya Gruziya, which was being unloaded, was attacked by four torpedo boats; one of the torpedoes hit the stern from the left side, which caused the stern to be completely destroyed. The gunboat, which had run aground, was finished off by enemy artillery and aircraft. But the remaining two elpidifors continued their deadly dangerous voyages to Malaya Zemlya. Their work was duly appreciated: on July 22, 1944, the Krasnaya Abkhaziya was awarded the Order of the Red Banner.

After the war, the elpidifors were retired — in the era of jet aircraft and nuclear weapons, old steamships ceased to be of combat value. "Krasnaya Abkhaziya" became "Kursograf" — a hydrographic vessel of the Black Sea Fleet, then it was renamed "Ingul" and made a cable-laying vessel. "Krasny Adzharistan" first became a floating base, then a blockship. Both elpidifors were decommissioned on June 2, 1959 and scrapped. The time had come for new landing ships...
19 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    26 August 2025 06: 24
    Thank you. Very informative.
    1. +4
      26 August 2025 08: 56
      The ships have very successful designs, dear author, and from whom in Kiel did Paramonov order such a grain carrier? Who is the designer?
  2. +6
    26 August 2025 08: 07
    "equipped with semi-diesel (glow) engines" Reminded me - in the late forties, my first mentor at work sailed on a schooner with an American semi-diesel. The crew called it a "sharokal" - the glow head was a large copper sphere heated by blowtorches. At the same time, the collapsible exhaust pipe was led outboard - when started, the sharokal produced a cloud of black smoke halfway across the port.
  3. +3
    26 August 2025 10: 23
    By the beginning of the seventeenth century, one epilophorus was ready, two were being completed.
    , and the rest were at a much lower stage of readiness. How then was the Bosphorus operation planned for the seventeenth, for which these ships were actually built?
    1. +8
      26 August 2025 12: 39
      Kolchak said during interrogation that in the spring of 1917, something like April. It is possible that several elpidifors (at least three) would have been completed for the first wave of landing. The rest - from transports on bolinders (they were actively built). Bubnov wrote that the fleet was ready to carry it out in 1915-16, but the army was not ready to allocate troops...
      1. +1
        26 August 2025 12: 51
        You won't believe it, but Kira Bulycheva (yes, that same father of Alisa and my mellophone) in the novel The River Chronos has a description of the operation. The most truthful thing in it is that success was tied to chance... They wanted it, of course, but they missed their chance first in 1829 due to indecision and in 1878 due to the determination of the British. And in 17th it would have been necessary to quickly land the army, not to lose half the fleet to mines and Turkish ships plus Goeben and then supply. It's hard to believe, even if there had been no revolutions.
        1. +3
          26 August 2025 15: 39
          It's hard to say, there are too many "buts": let's say in reality the war lasted until November 1918, but this is taking into account Russia's withdrawal from it. And if it hadn't? They would have managed to set up the Elpidifors by November 18, but it's not a fact that the war would not have ended by then...
  4. +6
    26 August 2025 10: 56
    С
    Thank you, I would like to see more of your articles about ships.
  5. +6
    26 August 2025 11: 34
    To prevent the Turks from strengthening their positions further along the coast, the landing was repeated at the next line, 20 miles from the captured position. The Turks tried to prevent the landing, but fire from the battleship Rostislav, which was covering the landing operation, forced them to retreat.

    Well, the Turkish troops had no chance here - "Rostislav" was distinguished by rare daring in that campaign, working along the shore with practically direct fire (in one of the operations the BR approached the shore at 2 cable lengths). And if the Turks could still withstand the shelling from 6", then after 10" they began to retreat.
  6. +2
    26 August 2025 14: 40
    Quote: Civil
    The ships have very successful designs, dear author, and from whom in Kiel did Paramonov order such a grain carrier? Who is the designer?


    Since they were built in Austria-Hungary, at the STT shipyard, it is logical to assume that the developer was its partner, the company "Schihau".
  7. -1
    26 August 2025 14: 54
    The author has already prepared for the perception of his title.
    Elpidiphoros - from the Greek elpis (genitive elpidos) - hope and phero - to carry. (academic.ru)
    I would still like to reproach: FIRST the term "elpidifor" is introduced, THEN, after a few paragraphs, it is explained where it comes from and why.
    1. +3
      26 August 2025 15: 43
      Absolutely right, because under the title there is a "lead", that is, the initial paragraph, where the topic of the article is explained. It's just that this paragraph is not reflected in the main text, but only under the picture and the title, before opening this text))) Another thing is that the lead is not reflected completely, so it probably makes sense to duplicate it in the main text...
      1. 0
        26 August 2025 16: 35
        It must be assumed that the lead is visible not only to everyone...
        The essence of the claim. Here is the text about Elpidifor:
        The first time Paramonov's mobilized Elpidifors were used was in 1916, during the landing at Rize.

        And only after the picture in the next paragraph is an explanation given:
        The Greek name "Elpidifor" (one of Paramonov's barges, built, by the way, in Germany, in Kiel, bore this name) was changed in the navy to the easier to pronounce "elpidifor".
  8. +3
    26 August 2025 14: 58
    Elpidifors No. 418-422 were less fortunate - they were completed as oil tankers.

    Why?
    Elpedifor No. 418 was delivered as the tanker "Vasily Fomin", then was rebuilt into the ore carrier "Valery Chkalov". During the war, it was mobilized, fought as a minesweeper under the number "T-512". Armament: 1x 76-mm 34K, 5x45-mm 21K; two twin Colt-Browning machine guns (12,7-mm) and two single DShK machine guns, mine-sweeping armament. After being damaged in 1942, it was rebuilt as a cable-layer. It was written off for scrap in 1960.
    419 bore the name "Alexander Yeshmaev", "Stakhanovets". Fought as a military tanker. From 1947 - a bunkerer. Scrapped in 1960.
    Etc.
  9. +3
    26 August 2025 19: 22
    Thanks author. As usual, a good, informative article. I am familiar with "Elpidifors", but it was still interesting to read.
    1. +2
      27 August 2025 13: 23
      Cool article, very interesting, it became clear where the name Elpidifor came from. The author, as a specialist in the Navy, has a question why the fleet needed BT-7 tanks and V-2 engines before the war. I read this in the Russian State Archive of Ethnography, from memory of 1939.
      1. +1
        28 August 2025 22: 11
        I don't know, but I'll try to find it. A purely unfounded assumption: maybe for armored boats? Turrets and engines? I don't know...
  10. +1
    3 September 2025 11: 45
    Great article! Thank you very much!
    I became convinced that a landing operation in 1917 was possible and the probability was high.
    It's still a pity that it didn't work out.
    1. 0
      29 September 2025 09: 56
      We recall the details of the course and, most importantly, the end of the Greco-Turkish War of 1920-22 (unless, of course, I'm not confusing the dates) and quietly rejoice that the dreams of the straits remained just wet dreams.
      If Russia had managed to seize the straits, it would have turned into such a protracted and bloody massacre that the Civil War would have seemed like a children's matinee.