Military Review

Hieroglyph "loyalty." Imperial Navy Heavy Cruisers

39
Hieroglyph "loyalty." Imperial Navy Heavy Cruisers



The sea is raging!
Far from Savo Island,
The Milky Way is spreading.


... On the night of August 9, 1942, a group of samurai circled Savo Island in an anti-clockwise direction, killing everyone who met them on the way. The cruisers Astoria, Canberra, Vincennes, Quincy became victims of the insane night battle, Chicago and two more destroyers received heavy injuries. The irretrievable losses of the Americans and their allies amounted to 1077 people, the Japanese had moderately damaged three cruisers and killed 58 sailors. After destroying the entire American compound, the samurai dissolved into the night mist.

Pogrom at the Savo Island entered the American historyas the “second Pearl Harbor” - so great was the weight of the losses and the disappointment of the actions of the sailors. So it remained unclear how the Yankees did not notice at a distance of 20 miles the roar and outbreaks of naval combat, the searchlights rushing around the sky and clusters of lighting bombs. Not! The watch on the cruisers of the Northern Union peacefully slumbered under the thunder of 203 mm guns - until the Japanese, having finally destroyed the Southern Union, did not move to the North and attacked the second group of American ships.



The impressive Japanese victory at Savo Island is the merit of the heavy cruisers Chokai, Aoba, Kako, Kunugasa and Furutaka. Imperial Cruising Force fleet became one of the main arguments in that war - many high-profile victories were recorded on the ships of this class: the night battle near the island of Savo, the defeat of the Allied squadron in the Java Sea, the battle in the Sunda Strait, raids in the Indian Ocean ... - these are the events that glorified the Japanese fleet.

Even when radars appeared on American ships, and the sea and the air were buzzing from US Navy equipment, the Japanese cruisers continued to fight, often achieving episodic victories. High security allowed them to operate relatively successfully in the conditions of the numerical superiority of the enemy and withstand numerous bombs, artillery and torpedo hits. weapons.



As practice has shown, the combat stability of these ships was extremely high. The only thing that could destroy the armored monsters - extensive damage to the underwater part of the hull. Only after this, tormented by American explosives, they lay down exhaustedly on the seabed.

There were 18 in total. Eighteen samurai, each with its own unique version of the birth, history of service and tragic death. No one lived to see the end of the war.



Constructors Championship

The Japanese heavy cruisers built during the interwar period were perhaps the most successful ships in their class — powerful offensive weapons, solid booking (the Japanese did everything possible under international restrictions), successful anti-torpedo defense and effective counter-drowning schemes, high speed and autonomy sufficient to operate in any area of ​​the Pacific.

The Long Lance’s business card was the 610 mm oxygen super-torpedoes, the most powerful underwater weapons in the world (for comparison, their main opponent, the US Navy cruisers were completely devoid of torpedo weapons). The downside was the great vulnerability of Japanese cruisers - hitting a stray projectile into a torpedo tube on the upper deck could be fatal for a ship. Detonation of several "Long Lance" completely disabled the ship.

Like all “Washington period” cruisers, the samurai suffered severely from overload. No bluff and forgery with the stated displacement could not rectify the situation - engineers had to dodge in the most surprising way so that, according to the figurative expression of the Americans, who also suffered from the conditions of the International Treaty on the Limitation of Sea Armaments, “pour a quart of liquid into a pint container”.



It was necessary to save on something: the main blow was dealt to the habitability of the ship and the conditions of accommodation of personnel (within 1,5 square meters per person). However, small Japanese quickly got used to the cramped - the main thing is that the ventilation should work well.

The desire to forcibly squeeze the cruiser into the coveted “10 thousand tons” gave unusual results. Uncontrollable fantasy of engineers, “masquerade” with the main caliber - according to secret calculations, some cruisers provided the ability to quickly replace 6-inch guns with powerful 8-inch barrels, as well as some traditional solutions of the Japanese shipbuilding school (for example, the shape of the nasal tip ) - all this led to the creation of amazing samples of naval weapons that brought many victories to the Land of the Rising Sun.



The Japanese cruisers were good in everything except one thing - there were too few of them: 18 desperate samurai could cope with pre-war American cruisers built, but for every lost ship the Americans immediately "pulled out of the sleeve" five new ones. Total US industry in the period from 1941 to 1945. built order 40 cruisers. Japan - 5 light cruisers, 0 heavy.

The effectiveness of the use of cruising forces was greatly affected by the scientific and technical backlog of Japan. Due to the presence of torpedoes and high-quality preparation for the conduct of night artillery duels, the Japanese cruisers had priority at the initial stage of the war, but with the advent of radar, their advantage came to naught.
In general, the whole story of the Japanese heavy cruisers - a cruel experiment on the topic: how long can an armored monster hold out under continuous attacks from the sea surface, from the air and from under the water. In conditions of many times superior forces of the enemy and the absence of at least some ghostly chance of salvation.

I suggest dear readers to get acquainted with some of these leviathans. What were their strengths and weaknesses? Could Japanese cruisers be able to meet the expectations of their creators? How did the brave ships die?

Heavy cruisers type "Furutak"

The number of units in the series - 2
Construction years - 1922 - 1926
Total Displacement - 11 300 tons
Crew - 630 people.
Armored belt thickness - mm 76
Main caliber - 6 x 203 mm




The first Japanese cruisers of the interwar period were designed before the entry into force of the Washington restrictions. In general, they turned out to be very close to the standards of the “Washington cruiser”, because originally planned as scout cruisers in the hull with the lowest possible displacement.

An interesting layout for placing main-caliber guns in six one-tower towers (later replaced by three two-guns). Typical for the Japanese wavy silhouette of the hull with a "snub" nasal tip and as low as possible in the stern. The low height of the chimneys, later recognized as a very unfortunate decision. Integrated into the design of the body armor belt. Bad conditions for the deployment of personnel - "Furutaka", in this sense, was the worst of the Japanese cruisers.

Due to the low altitude, it was forbidden to use portholes during sea crossings, which, coupled with inadequate ventilation, made service in the tropics an extremely exhausting exercise.

The story of the death:

“Furutak” - 11.10.1942, during the battle at Cape Esperance, the cruiser suffered severe damage from 152 and 203 mm projectiles of American cruisers. The following detonation of the torpedo ammunition, aggravated by the loss of travel, predetermined the fate of the cruiser: after 2 hours, the flaming Furutak sank.

"Kako" - the day after the pogrom near the island of Savo, the cruiser was torpedoed by the submarine S-44. Having received three torpedoes, "Kako" overturned and sank. The US Navy received its “consolation prize”.

Heavy cruisers like "Aoba"

The number of units in the series - 2
Construction years - 1924 - 1927
Total Displacement - 11 700 tons
Crew - 650 people.
Armored belt thickness - mm 76
Main caliber - 6 x 203 mm


They are a modification of earlier cruisers of the Furutak type. Unlike its predecessors, the Aoba initially received two-turrets. Subject to change superstructure and fire control systems. As a result of all the changes, Aoba turned out to be heavier than the original project on 900: the main disadvantage of the cruisers was the critically low stability.


Aoba, lying at the bottom of Kure harbor, 1945 year

The story of the death:

"Aoba" - a wounded cruiser was able to survive until the summer of 1945. Finally finished aviation US Navy during regular bombing of the Kure Naval Base in July 1945

"Kunugasa" - sunk by torpedo carriers from the aircraft carrier "Enterprise" during the battle for Guandalkanal, 14.11.1942

Heavy cruisers such as "Myoko" (sometimes found "Mёko")

The number of units in the series - 4
Construction years - 1924 - 1929
Total Displacement - 16 000 tons
Crew - 900 people.
Armored belt thickness - mm 102
Main caliber - 10 x 203 mm




The first "Washington cruisers" of the country of the Rising Sun, with all its advantages, disadvantages and original design solutions.

Five towers of the main caliber, three of which are placed in the bow of the ship according to the pyramid scheme - ten guns of the caliber 203 mm. The booking scheme is, in general, similar to that adopted on the Furutak cruiser, with the reinforcement of individual elements: the belt thickness was increased to 102 mm, the thickness of the armor deck above the engine rooms reached 70 ... 89 mm, the total weight of armor increased to 2052 tons. The thickness of the anti-torpedo protection was equal to 2,5 meters.

The sharp increase in displacement (standard - 11 thous. Tons, the full could exceed 15 thous. Tons) required a significant increase in the power of the power plant. Boilers cruisers "Myoko" was originally calculated for oil heating, power on the shafts of the propellers was 130 000 hp

The story of the death:

"Mioko" - in the course of a fierce battle near the island of Samar was damaged by a torpedo of a deck torpedo carrier. Despite the damage, was able to dock up to Singapore. During emergency repairs came under attack B-29. A month later, 13 December 1944 of the year, was again torpedoed by a submarine USS Bergall - this time it was not possible to restore the combat capability of the Myoko. The cruiser was scuttled in shallow water in the Singapore harbor and was later used as a stationary artillery battery. All that remained of Mikoko was captured by the British in August 1945.

“Nati” - in November 1944 of the year in Manila Bay was subjected to massive attacks of deck aircraft of the US Navy, received 10 torpedoes and 21 bombs, broke into three parts and sank.

"Jaguro" - sunk by British destroyers in the battle of Penang, 16 May 1945 of the year.

"Ashigara" - sunk by the British submarine HMS Trenchant in the Bangka Strait (Javan Sea), June 16 1945.

Heavy cruisers like "Takao"

The number of units in the series - 4
Construction years - 1927 - 1932
Total Displacement - 15200 - 15900 tons
Crew - 900-920 people.
Armored belt thickness - mm 102
Main caliber - 10 x 203 mm




They are a regular evolution of Mioko cruisers. Recognized as the most successful and balanced project among all Japanese heavy cruisers.

Externally, they were distinguished by a massive, armored superstructure, which gave the cruisers a similarity to battleships. The elevation angle of the main-caliber guns increased to 70 °, which made it possible to fire the main caliber at aerial targets. Motionless torpedo tubes were replaced with swivel ones - a volley from the 8 "Long Lance" on each side was able to finish off any enemy. The booking of cellars of ammunition has increased. The composition of aviation weapons was expanded to two catapults and three seaplanes. The hull steel of the Dukol brand and electric welding has found wide use in the hull construction.

The story of the death:

"Takao" - came under attack by the American submarine "Darter" on the way to Leyte Gulf. I barely made it to Singapore, where I was turned into a powerful floating battery. 31 July 1945, the cruiser was finally destroyed by the British dwarf submarine XE-3.

Atago - October 23 The 1944 of the year was sunk into the Sibuyan Sea by the American submarine Darter.

"Chokai" - mortally wounded in a battle near the island of Samar, as a result of a shell hit in a torpedo tube. A few minutes later, the cruiser’s flaming box was bombed by deck aircraft. In view of the complete loss of travel and combat capability, the crew was withdrawn, the cruiser was finished off by the destroyer of the escort.

“Maya” - October 23 The 1944 of the year was sunk into the Sibuyan Sea by the American submarine “Dayse”.

Heavy Mogami type cruisers

The number of units in the series - 4
Construction years - 1931 - 1937
Total displacement - about 15 000 tons
Crew - 900 people.
Armor belt thickness - 100 ... mm 140
Main caliber - 10 x 203 mm


After reviewing the acquired intelligence information about the new Japanese cruiser “Mogami”, the Chief Designer of the fleet of Her Majesty just whistled: “Are they building a ship of cardboard”?

Fifteen 155 mm guns in five GK towers, universal artillery caliber 127 mm, long lance, 2 catapult, 3 seaplane, armor belt thickness - up to 140 mm, massive armored superstructure, GEM with power 152 thousand hp ... and it all fits in the hull with a standard displacement of 8500 tons? The Japanese are lying!


"Mogami" with a torn off nose - the result of a collision with the cruiser "Mikuma"

In reality, everything turned out to be much worse - in addition to forgery from displacement (the standard in / and according to secret calculations reached 9500 tons, later it increased to 12 000 tons), the Japanese made a deft focus with artillery of the main caliber - with the start of hostilities "props" 155 mm the trunks were dismantled and in their place were ten formidable 203 mm guns. The Mogami turned into a real heavy cruiser.

At the same time, Mogami-type cruisers were monstrously overloaded, had poor seaworthiness and critically low stability, which, in turn, affected their stability and accuracy of artillery fire. Due to these shortcomings, the lead cruiser of the project is the Mogami in the period from 1942 to 1943. It was modernized and turned into an aircraft-carrying cruiser - instead of the fodder group of artillery, the ship received a hangar on 11 seaplanes.


Aircraft cruiser "Mogami"


The story of the death:

"Mogami" - damaged by artillery fire in the Surigao Strait on the night of October 25 1944, the next day was attacked by deck aircraft, collided with the cruiser "Nati" and sank.

"Mikuma" - the first cruiser of the Japanese fleet, lost in World War II. He was attacked by deck aircraft in a battle at Midway, 7 June 1942. Detonation of the torpedo ammunition left no chance for salvation: the wreckage left by the crew drifted for a day until it disappeared under water.


"Mikuma" after the detonation of their own torpedoes. Fragments of a downed American plane are visible on the roof of the fourth tower (like the exploit of Gastello)

“Suzuya” - sunk by deck aircraft in Leyte Gulf, October 25 1944. It is noteworthy that the cruiser was named after the river Susuya on about. Sakhalin.

"Kumano" - lost its nose in a clash with US destroyers in Leyte Gulf, the next day was damaged by deck aircraft. A week later, during the transition to repair in Japan, he was torpedoed by the Ray submarine, but still managed to get to Luzon. 26 November 1944 was finally finished off with deck aircraft in the harbor of Santa Cruz: 5 torpedoes completely destroyed the hull of the Kumano hit the cruiser. Oh, and the tenacious was the beast!

Heavy cruisers like "Tone"

The number of units in the series - 2
Construction years - 1934 - 1939
Total Displacement - 15 200 tons
Crew - 870 people.
Armored belt thickness - mm 76
Main caliber - 8 x 203 mm
A special feature of the "Tone" was a developed aviation armament - up to 8 seaplanes (in reality, no more than 4).



Tone on the way to Midway

Cruiser legend. Fantastic combat vehicle with four towers of the main caliber, concentrated in the nose of the hull.

The quaint appearance of the “Tone” was dictated by a serious calculation — such an arrangement of the towers of the Civil Code made it possible to reduce the length of the armor citadel, saving several hundred tons of displacement. Due to the unloading of the aft tip and the displacement of the scales to the mid-section, the hull strength was increased and the seaworthiness was improved, the spread of the GK volleys decreased, the behavior of the ship as an artillery platform improved. The liberated aft part of the cruiser became the base for the deployment of aircraft - now the seaplanes did not face the risk of exposure to powder gases, in addition, it allowed to increase the air group and simplify the operation of aircraft.

However, behind all the seeming genius of such a decision, the placement of all GK towers in the bow had an important drawback: a dead zone appeared on the stern corners - the problem was partially solved by turning a couple of GK towers back. In addition, a single hit threatened to disable the entire main caliber of the cruiser.



In general, despite a number of significant and minor deficiencies, the ships turned out to be worthy and patted a lot of nerves to their opponents.

The story of the death:

“Tonet” - the damaged cruiser was able to slip away from Leyte Gulf and get to its native shores. It was restored, but never again participated in the fighting at sea. 24 July 1945, the year was sunk by American aircraft during the raid on the Navy Kure. July 28 cruiser wreck was re-bombed by US Navy aircraft.

“Chikuma” (also found “Chikuma”) - sunk by deck aircraft in Leyte Gulf, October 25 on 1944.


Heavy cruiser "Tikuma"




I express my gratitude to all readers for having been able to read to the end of this entire list of fancy Japanese names!

Based on:
http://www.warfleet.ru/
http://www.wikipedia.org/
http://www.wunderwaffe.narod.ru/
http://hisofweapons.ucoz.ru/
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Su-9
    Su-9 24 September 2013 08: 32 New
    +9
    Oleg, thanks.
    A little off topic, but, reading about WWII, a lot of references to the victories of American submariners. And here they sank a bunch of cruisers. It would be necessary to illuminate them for educational purposes, otherwise many people think that some aircraft carriers fought laughing
    1. Vadivak
      Vadivak 24 September 2013 09: 45 New
      16
      Quote: Author Oleg Kaptsov

      "Asigara" - sunk by the British submarine HMS Trenchant
      "Kumano" during the transition to repair in Japan, was torpedoed by the submarine "Ray",
      Atago - October 23 The 1944 of the year was sunk into the Sibuyan Sea by the American submarine Darter.
      “Maya” - October 23 The 1944 of the year was sunk into the Sibuyan Sea by the American submarine “Dayse”.
      "Tacao" - came under attack from the American submarine "Darter" on the way to Leyte Gulf


      Japanese sailors were rather frivolous about the underwater threat. Suffice it to say that the super-aircraft carrier "Shinano" (was the largest aircraft carrier in the world, it was surpassed by the nuclear "Enterprise") with a displacement of 71 890 tons was attacked by USS Archerfish (SS / AGSS-311) with a displacement of 1,526 tons. As a result of the attack, the largest warship sunk by submarines was sunk.
      1. Sergl
        Sergl 24 September 2013 18: 12 New
        +3
        To the question of Shinano
        Here, IMHO, is not so much the valor of American submariners as the disgusting struggle for the survivability of an untrained Japanese crew.
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak 24 September 2013 19: 50 New
          +4
          Quote: SerGL
          To the question of Shinano
          Here, IMHO, is not so much the valor of American submariners as the disgusting struggle for the survivability of an untrained Japanese crew.


          Not only did the aircraft carrier have an anti-submarine warrant of three destroyers, but he himself went anti-submarine zigzag giving 20 knots, but the American did not fall behind ....,
          1. Bosk
            Bosk 24 September 2013 21: 14 New
            +1
            It was this zigzag that played a fatal role.
        2. Santa Fe
          24 September 2013 20: 10 New
          +7
          Quote: SerGL
          how much disgusting struggle for survivability of an untrained Japanese crew.

          as well as unsealed bulkheads - Shinano was unfinished
          on the other hand, it is known that one of the torpedoes damaged the fuel tank (empty at that time) - it would not be known how quickly Sinano would have died, had he been in combat-ready condition, with a full supply of aviation gasoline on board
          Quote: Vadivak
          The supercarrier "Shinano" (was the largest aircraft carrier in the world, surpassed by the nuclear "Enterprise") with a displacement of 71 890 tons was attacked by the USS Archerfish (SS / AGSS-311) with a displacement of 1,526 tons.

          The case is certainly curious.

          But in addition to Shinano, Amer boats crashed four more Japanese aircraft carriers: "Taiho", "Shokaku", "Dzunyo", "Unryu" - the heavy Taiho and Shokaku, 30 thousand tons each, are especially impressive!

          And here is another forgotten feat of the US Navy submarine:

          On September 2, 1944, the Finbek boat received an SOS signal from a plane crashing into the ocean. After 4 hours, the Finbek arrived in the disaster area and pulled a frightened lanky pilot out of the water. It turned out to be saved George Herbert Bush, future 41st President of the United States.

          And in his spare time on duty ...
      2. Bosk
        Bosk 24 September 2013 21: 12 New
        +1
        The main indicator of an aircraft carrier is the number of aircraft in its hangars, so for this indicator I would not call Shinano “super”, in terms of security it was probably one of the most protected, but otherwise ...
  2. Prometey
    Prometey 24 September 2013 10: 45 New
    +4
    By the way, yes, I would like more information about the actions of submarines in World War II in the Pacific Ocean. And sometimes, however, it seems that submarines fought only in Europe, and in the Atlantic.
    Thanks for the article, interesting to read.
    1. redwolf_13
      redwolf_13 24 September 2013 16: 15 New
      +1
      There is an excellent book by the commander of the US submarine flotilla in the Pacific, "The Devil's Bells." I advise it is written well and translated well published in 1995
      1. Prometey
        Prometey 24 September 2013 19: 07 New
        +1
        Quote: redwolf_13
        There is an excellent book by the commander of the US submarine flotilla in the Pacific, "The Devil's Bells

        Thank. But also some review article would not hurt.
      2. Eugeniy_369
        Eugeniy_369 24 September 2013 21: 26 New
        +2
        Quote: redwolf_13
        There is an excellent book by the commander of the US submarine flotilla in the Pacific, "The Devil's Bells." I advise it is written well and translated well published in 1995

        I read Roscoe's "US Submarine Operations in World War II". A good book, one might even say an analysis of submarine warfare. There is a lot of information and statistics, but only propaganda is slipping ... but this is my opinion.
  3. ben gun
    ben gun 24 September 2013 11: 22 New
    +7
    Oleg, a good article, but it seems a little lacking for a ballance - what did these Japanese engines sink? a brief history of the creation and death of these armchairs is good. But what they did to the Americans had no less curious.
    1. CARBON
      CARBON 24 September 2013 16: 33 New
      +6
      1 escort aircraft carrier Gambier Bay. 6 heavy cruisers Exeter, Houston, Quincy, Vincennes, Astoria, Canberra. 3 light cruisers "Perth", "De Reuters", "Java". One and a half dozen destroyers and destroyer escorts.
  4. barbiturate
    barbiturate 24 September 2013 11: 27 New
    +7
    It was very interesting, thanks to the author. Before that, I had to read about Japanese heavy cruisers and I also think that they fulfilled their duty and honestly died in the battle for their country in the conditions of rapidly growing superiority of the enemy, showing both the ability to fight and the ability to die.
  5. ka5280
    ka5280 24 September 2013 12: 11 New
    +2
    Thanks to the author for the article!
  6. Taoist
    Taoist 24 September 2013 13: 28 New
    +4
    Good article. The Japanese are generally very peculiar shipbuilders. I am always happy to study their technological and layout solutions.
    1. Kibalchish
      Kibalchish 24 September 2013 14: 04 New
      +4
      The benefit of the material is still enough
  7. tlauicol
    tlauicol 24 September 2013 15: 20 New
    0
    interesting and informative
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 24 September 2013 15: 40 New
      +1
      after reading some kind of jealousy arises for our fleet in WWII, which plainly did not sink any ships except the destroyer. So many costs in shipbuilding and such a minuscule as a result against the backdrop of their own losses.
      1. Djozz
        Djozz 24 September 2013 18: 01 New
        +3
        Ah, the sinking of "Gustlov", it was that the cat did not care!
  8. VI Kacheev
    VI Kacheev 24 September 2013 15: 25 New
    0
    For Taoist.
    Sorry that a few, as they say, "off topic. Your comment on my article was extreme, but, NOW, IT IS VERY INTERESTING MY!
    IF YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE DISCONTINUED, PASS, PLEASE, BY REFERENCE: http://www.nakanune.ru/news/2013/09/24/22324905
    If at all difficulties, then here's a copy for you:
    [b] The new Kalashnikov AK-12 was not admitted to state tests. [/ b]
    b]The Ministry of Defense did not allow the Izhmash concern's new Kalashnikov, the AK-12 assault rifle, developed as part of the creation of the new generation Ratnik combat equipment, before state testing, Izvestia writes with reference to the headquarters of the Ground Forces.[/B]
    "The AK-12 assault rifle and other products based on it did not pass preliminary tests and were not declared for [b] state tests at all. [/ B] Instead of them, for state tests, the machine gun of the Degtyarev plant was chosen as a combat equipment complex "Ratnik", - quotes the publication of his interlocutor. According to Vladimir Gromov, the chief designer of the Degtyarev plant, we are talking about a new small weapon based on an AEK-971 assault rifle, developed in the 1980s. A member of the test commission from the Ground Forces told the publication that the new Degtyarev assault rifle showed better accuracy and accuracy, including when firing bursts from unstable positions.
    [B]At the same time, the samples presented by Izhmash (now the Kalashnikov concern) did not suit the military either in terms of reliability, accuracy, or ergonomics.[/B]
    The High Command of the Ground Forces added that the Kalashnikov concern has about a month to eliminate the shortcomings identified during the preliminary tests. "If he shows the necessary characteristics, we will admit him to state tests, but this is unlikely. [B]Our demands were known to the Izhevsk people two years ago, and, nevertheless, they were unable to create a weapon that suits them. I doubt that they will be able to do it in a month, "the publication quotes the words of his interlocutor.[/B]
  9. SAM0SA
    SAM0SA 24 September 2013 16: 12 New
    0
    For the works RESPECT! hi
  10. CARBON
    CARBON 24 September 2013 16: 56 New
    +4
    Murderers of "Washington cruisers"!
    Beginning with the Mioko class, all pre-war British and American heavy cruisers were outnumbered.
    Firepower, speed, power reserve, survivability + pagoda superstructures and "Japanese" stems are beautiful, predatory, dangerous for the enemy. In addition, the training of the crews and the tactics of night combat worked out to the smallest detail, without radars, on searchlights and illuminating shells.
    About "Mogami" the author is not much wrong, it was rebuilt due to the death of 4 strike aircraft carriers at Midway, moreover, received heavy damage there from a collision with the same type "Mikuma" and 5 bombs from American carrier-based dive bombers. Until 43, it was being repaired in parallel and converted into a "heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser".
    The cruisers "Tone" and "Tikuma" are the best means of escort of the mid-30s for aircraft carrier formations.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 24 September 2013 18: 48 New
      +2
      Incidentally, I was delighted with an interesting article, but was even more disappointed in the legendary survivability and combat stability of heavy cruisers.
      What happens: one direct bomb hit on the TA and one close gap turns two cruisers into flaming ruins. The same could have happened to the "Mogami" if the Japanese had not thrown the torpedoes overboard after the collision (the bomb exploded in an empty cellar). Further more: one "eight-inch" TKr explodes under fire of six-inch guns. The other, the Chokai, with the support of battleships and other cruisers, is fighting American destroyers and escort aircraft carriers. Hitting a five-inch projectile? (The Yankees didn't have a larger one in that battle?) Into the TA - and it is already a burning wreck. Two more cruisers are losing the oncoming battle to destroyers (one loses its nose and speed, is finished off by aircraft, the other, the Haguro, immediately goes to the bottom). Conversations about radars will not fail here, since "Haguro" was the first to spot the Yankees and covered them with fire. In short, Not Ice :))
      "Nati" was hit by 10 torpedoes and 21 bombs, broke into three parts and sank. Impressive! Especially vulnerable readers. In fact, the TKr went out of order after the first torpedo hit and one bomb! Later, the Yankees swooped down on the defenseless and motionless ship like hyenas on a corpse and dropped several tens of tons of TNT - everyone wanted to excel! This is how legends are born, but heavy armor is no longer destined to be reborn! IMHO
      1. CARBON
        CARBON 24 September 2013 19: 22 New
        +2
        Ships limited by agreements could not be stable in combat, since all competitors tried to squeeze the maximum out of the minimum allowed. Imagine dear tlauikol what posts we would write if everyone built what they really needed. Maybe I'm wrong, but world military shipbuilding would have been much brighter both then and today.
        But still, the Japanese really built killer brothers, it is difficult to argue here.
        1. Djozz
          Djozz 24 September 2013 19: 30 New
          +2
          And the German "pocket" battleships are not the height of the engineering art squeezed into 10 thousand tons of waterism!
          1. Santa Fe
            24 September 2013 20: 53 New
            +1
            Quote: Djozz
            And the German "pocket" battleships are not the height of the engineering art squeezed into 10 thousand tons of waterism!

            you underestimated the full in / and Deutschland / Luttsov 1,5 times
            1. Eugeniy_369
              Eugeniy_369 24 September 2013 22: 23 New
              +1
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              you underestimated the full in / and Deutschland / Luttsov 1,5 times

              Germans cunning only on paper from "pickpockets" wrote 10 thousand tons. In real life, it is more.
              But Oleg (I don’t know my middle name sad ) these basics as our father knows good .
              1. Santa Fe
                24 September 2013 22: 46 New
                +1
                Quote: Eugeniy_369
                In real life, then more.

                standard ~ 10 thousand tons
                total ~ 14 thousand tons
                the only advantage - 6 drills of caliber 283 mm

                at the same time, in comparison with the Japanese cruiser "Myoko", the German pickpocket had a lower power plant and, accordingly, a lower speed (28 knots - 5 knots slower than Myoko)

                Japanese weapons - 10 203 mm in five towers. Not bad
                Reservations are generally similar. The cruising range is 2 times higher for the German (after all, economical diesel engines). The German has 8 six-inch cars, the Japanese has 8 station wagons + torpedoes - "long-leans"

                Deutschland is cool, of course. But the Japanese does not look like a weakling against its background, especially since it was built 5 years earlier.
                1. Eugeniy_369
                  Eugeniy_369 24 September 2013 23: 01 New
                  +1
                  Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
                  Deutschland is cool, of course. But the Japanese does not look like a weakling against its background, especially since it was built 5 years earlier.

                  I did not compare them fellow
                  You want to make a compliment repeat .
                  According to your articles, I conclude that the topic of the Navy is especially close to you?
      2. Santa Fe
        24 September 2013 19: 53 New
        +3
        Quote: Tlauicol
        Incidentally, I was delighted with an interesting article.

        Thank you
        Quote: Tlauicol
        he was even more disappointed in the legendary survivability and combat stability of heavy cruisers.

        In vain
        Quote: Tlauicol
        one direct hit of a bomb in a TA and one close gap turn two cruisers into flaming ruins

        Just an unforgivable miscalculation of designers.

        As WWII events showed, TA on the upper deck was a bad idea. Such explosive things must be hidden under the armor, inside the hull, make fixed devices - but just do not allow such a layout as on Japanese cruisers
        Almost unprotected torpedoes critically worsened combat stability.


        Shooting PLUR through the hatchways on board the cruiser "Moskva" - something like this should have been done by the Japanese, but ... Washington restrictions!

        Quote: Tlauicol
        Two more cruisers lose the oncoming battle with the destroyers (one loses its nose

        Torpedoes and not so capable
        underwater explosion hundreds of kg of explosives is able to kill any ship if the torpedo lays down successfully
        Quote: Tlauicol
        Further more: one "eight-inch" TKr explodes under fire of six-inch guns.

        A six-inch HE projectile is a funnel of 1,5 meters in depth, in which a machine-gun calculation of two numbers is placed

        An armor-piercing projectile of 152 mm caliber and a modern anti-ship missile system of the Exocet type are incomparable in terms of armor penetration, besides, the armor of the "Japanese" (like all Washingtonians) was frankly weak. The Washington Treaty disfigured the cruiser
        Quote: Tlauicol
        Thus legends are born, but heavy armor is no longer destined to be reborn!

        life goes in a spiral
        By the way, I wrote you the answer in the topic about "Albany"

        And the Japanese Type93 torpedoes were certainly good. Travel 40-50 knots. Range ... at least sufficient for any naval battle of those (ten miles or more). Warhead - 490 kg. Here is the cruiser "New Orleans", which got acquainted with the "Long Lance" - the explosion detonated the ammunition cellar of the first main battery turret, the bow was torn off to hell
        1. tlauicol
          tlauicol 25 September 2013 16: 06 New
          +1
          Good picture ! Only neither the torpedoes nor the Haguro cannons helped against the destroyers. Whether or not it was calculated is the result. But the Japanese bypassed the Washington agreements as they wanted, you yourself write about it in the article. You just can't book the whole ship, not the cruiser, not the battleship, not even the Yamato! The designers of the ships and anti-ship missiles understood long ago, and you persist. The same Chokai, before exploding, grabbed 5 "shells from the destroyers into the bow and limped, began to burrow.
          The Bismarck is limping in the sea - wait, it's damaged by a torpedo, the steering wheel is jammed, its fans will say! E-mine, 50000 tons of expensive steel can be simply disabled and even drowned in the first campaign with torpedoes? Or maybe fifty armored EMs to build?
          So Tirpitz's twin limps on the sea .. His brave gunners are five minutes away. drowned "Hood". So why are they smearing now? Yes, just an eight-inch (yes, not 16, not 15, not even 11, namely an eight-inch) Norfolk projectile hit the main rangefinder post. "Scheise" - the Germans shout: "We forgot to cover it with half-meter armor!" and the forward checkpoint should have been better defended, otherwise all the officers were killed in it. On our forum, some people think: "Nonsense, the main thing is that the ship maintains its speed and buoyancy" Boisage! Only now the British, having drunk their revenge, do not receive a single shell in return!
          Here is a blind "Scharnhorst" walking along the sea, wearing an armor belt thicker than that of "Tirpitz", according to the designers' plan, it must protect the ship from English 16 "shells at ranges over 11 km. It is surrounded by an English squadron .. And the fun begins!
          Wait, why blind? The fact is that the British cruiser destroyed his radar, and at the same time interrupted the servants. No, not a 16 ", but again with an eight-inch shell. The brave captain thought:" Mine Goth, you should have booked the radar or something? "And turned off the stern radar so that the British would not direct their ships and guns, bearing it.
          Water boils around Scharnhorst. Why are two of its towers silent, are they broken? Yes, it seems not, and the guns are intact. Is the armor belt pierced and the projectile flew into the cellar? No, just a stupid projectile did not hit the armor belt at all, but struck a little higher, breaking through the side and the barbet under the armored deck - these were the aiming mechanisms and were out of order. And the cellars had to be flooded, as red-hot fragments fell down there. Well, then the 15 "shell pierced the mastodon right through! It just hit the middle of the side, and went out through the double bottom, having turned the boiler room along the way .. Well, nothing, the main thing is the armor belt intact (sorry, could not resist joking).
          And such stories, when the armor does not seem to be put to shame by a shell, and armored ships are still drowning, exploding, failing, mass. Just stupid shells and anti-ship missiles do not understand that all of these thick armored belts, towers, and conning towers were created against them. And they’re not getting exactly where shipbuilders would like to. However, anti-ship missiles are no dumber than a shell, they can hit both the side and the superstructure, and if necessary, make a slide.
          Moral: cool ships wore armored belts, some even bulletproof vests, but never a single ship wore and will not wear an armored suit, armored overalls, or at least an armored jacket with a hood.
          1. Santa Fe
            25 September 2013 18: 10 New
            +1
            Quote: Tlauicol
            Only neither the torpedoes, nor the Haguro cannon helped against the destroyers.

            Firstly, this is a miscalculation of the Japanese in the conditions of the absolute superiority of the Allies on water and in the air - British destroyers coming from the South were mistaken for their Japanese, Haguro himself was previously detected from the air

            Secondly, there were many destroyers, and thanks to the mistake of the Japanese, they were able to approach the distance of the effective use of their torpedoes (specific and destructive ammunition)

            That's the whole story
            Quote: Tlauicol
            But the Japanese agreements bypassed the Japanese as they wanted,

            Borzels, but not as much as they would like
            To completely bypass the Washington restrictions, we needed the 17 cruiser of thousands of tons of full military (Baltimore) - this is the difference in a thousand tons - this was the armor
            Quote: Tlauicol
            You just can’t reserve the whole ship, neither the cruiser, nor the battleship, not even Yamato!

            Well, it depends on what. It is extremely difficult to defend against 203 mm shells (I don’t even say about larger calibres - it will take 30-40 or more cm of armor)

            from Exoset and the like - you can hide at once.
            Quote: Tlauicol
            The same Chokai, before exploding, grabbed 5 "shells from the destroyers into the bow and limped, began to burrow.

            "picked up")))
            Burke would have hoarded up right away
            Quote: Tlauicol
            Designers of ships and anti-ship missiles have long understood, but you persist.

            The Yankees removed their armor 10 years before the appearance of anti-ship missiles, in the late 1950s, when they created the first generation of post-war ships (Legi, Long Beach, etc.)
            The reason is the orientation towards a universal nuclear war, in which there will be no survivors
            Quote: Tlauicol
            And such stories, when the armor does not seem to be put to shame by a shell, and armored ships are still drowning, exploding, failing, mass.

            You just gave a list of failures, not paying attention to successful cases of "miraculous rescue" from under the enemy's hurricane fire:
            - Kurita squadron, battle near Fr. Samar (the squadron went 3 hours under the attack of the destroyers and 500 aircraft - it lost only 3 cruisers and was able to return to Japan). Among the 500 aircraft there were few torpedo bombers, and ordinary dive bombers and fighters could not do anything to armored monsters
            - Tirpitz (it took 700 sorties)
            - the incredible return of Seidlitz
            - Comparison of the results of Kamikaze attacks on protected and unprotected ships
            etc. etc.
            Quote: Tlauicol
            RCCs are not dumber than a shell, they can hit both the side and the superstructure

            Much depends on strategy
            in modern local wars with the Papuans, the breakdown of the radar does not mean the death of the ship - the cruiser will shoot the Tomahawks ammunition will go for repair (the main thing is that it’s not sunk, and there are no losses among the crew)

            Haguro is certainly handsome
            1. tlauicol
              tlauicol 25 September 2013 18: 33 New
              -1
              Conclusion ? In modern local wars with the Papuans, the battleship or TKr is NOT NECESSARY! NOT NEEDED !! In a nuclear war, too, is not bad !!!
              1. Santa Fe
                25 September 2013 18: 41 New
                0
                Quote: Tlauicol
                In modern local wars with the Papuans, the battleship or TKr is NOT NECESSARY!

                Just still needed))

                Why did they call New Jersey to the shores of Lebanon and Iraq?

                Why did the British shoot 10 thousand 144 mm shells at targets on the coast of the Falkland Islands?

                Why build Zamwolt with 155 mm guns?

                With regard to protection: "Stark", "Cole", "Sheffield", "Coventry", "Ardent", "Antilope", Israeli "Hanit", damage to fr. frigate by Libyan artillery (2011), mortar attacks on the parking areas of the US Navy - in all these cases, armor would be useful. Another thing is that "Hanit" is too small to install reservation ... but this does not negate the threat to larger ships off the coast of Lebanon

                Felling Stark after hitting Exzoset
                1. tlauicol
                  tlauicol 25 September 2013 19: 29 New
                  0
                  New Jersey was driven because the Tomahawks were tense in those years, and the old galosh could scare the Papuans. But nobody specifically began to build a battleship or TKr for battles with the Papuans. The English, you say yourself, managed without them. Yankees rockets and Hornets rive. And Zamvolt will be better protected by anti-missiles, rather than heavy armor.
                  You still remember that New Jersey destroyed 147 Vietnamese - you look, everyone will rush to build battleships. Papuans are many
                  1. Santa Fe
                    25 September 2013 20: 07 New
                    0
                    Quote: Tlauicol
                    But nobody specifically began to build a battleship or TKr for battles with the Papuans

                    The battleship is certainly not worth it, something like Batimore in 17 thousand tons ...
                    For comparison - Zwolvt 14 thousand
                    Quote: Tlauicol
                    The English, you say yourself, managed without them.

                    Losing 1,5 billion pounds - that is exactly how much the loss in ships (dead and damaged) cost
                    Quote: Tlauicol
                    Yankees rockets and Hornets rive.

                    I liked one of the comments from the forum - modern ships were created not for war, but for the comfortable passage of contract service in peacetime

                    The rocket is a powerful thing, but it will not replace artillery - the Zamvolt project appeared for a reason
                    Quote: Tlauicol
                    And Zamvolt will be better protected by anti-missiles, rather than heavy armor.

                    This has already been confirmed by Coventry, Stark and Cole)))

                    That is why, incidentally, peripheral armored aircrafts appeared on Zamvolta, replacing the ship’s armored belt
                    1. tlauicol
                      tlauicol 26 September 2013 06: 18 New
                      0
                      £ 1,5 billion? What a waste! and the resuscitation of 4 naphthalene battleships cost the US $ 500 million apiece! not counting the content! How much will you have to pay for a new one? and most importantly why, to kill one and a half hundred Papuans? really "cost / efficiency" as Kars says
                      1. Santa Fe
                        26 September 2013 07: 35 New
                        +1
                        LK reanimated with the expectation of long years of service and serious wars

                        But the Britons really fortanulo that the poor Argentos had only 5 anti-ship missiles
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        And how much will it cost to pay for a new one? and most importantly for what, to kill one and a half hundred Papuans?

                        And it says the adherent of Nimitsev and the Hornets))))

                        Iowa served for 50 years and fought in 5 wars. Nowadays such constructions are not needed, Baltimore is enough
              2. Kars
                Kars 25 September 2013 19: 46 New
                +1
                Quote: Tlauicol
                In modern local wars with the Papuans, the battleship or TKr is NOT NEEDED! NOT NEEDED !!

                Wow, how nervous. And what do you need? By the criterion of cost / effectiveness?
                And if so, for fun, accept the situation of building equipment from Scratch.
  11. Semurg
    Semurg 24 September 2013 20: 35 New
    0
    Respect to the author, although I am far from the marine theme I read with pleasure.
  12. Eugeniy_369
    Eugeniy_369 24 September 2013 21: 18 New
    +2
    Thanks to the author for the article, I read a lot about the Japanese fleet. Refreshed memory so to speak wink .
    Maybe about the lungs of Cherkanet? And there would be more pictures, pliz winked .
    Well, the article ... and the article ... by itself +++++++ bully
  13. slacker
    slacker 24 September 2013 22: 58 New
    0
    Impressive cars. Article plus.
  14. papik09
    papik09 25 September 2013 06: 03 New
    +1
    I put the article "+" without comment. Thanks to the author. hi
  15. mithridate
    mithridate 25 September 2013 15: 18 New
    0
    good informative article