Causes of the Tsushima disaster

102
Battle

23 May 1905 Squadron Rozhestvensky made the last loading of coal. The reserves were again exceeded; as a result, the battleships were overloaded, plunging deep into the sea. 25 May all the extra transports were sent to Shanghai. The squadron was put on full alert. Rozhdestvensky intelligence is not organized, so as not to detect the squadron.

However, the Japanese already guessed which way the Russian ships would go. The Japanese admiral of Togo has been waiting for Russian ships since January 1905. The Japanese command assumed that the Russians would try to break into Vladivostok or capture some harbor in the Formosa region (present-day Taiwan) and from there conduct operations against the Japanese Empire. At a meeting in Tokyo, it was decided to proceed from the defense, concentrate forces in the Strait of Korea and act on the situation. Waiting for Russian fleet the Japanese carried out a major overhaul of the ships, replaced all the faulty guns with new ones. Previous battles made the Japanese fleet a single combat unit. Therefore, by the time the Russian squadron appeared, the Japanese fleet was in the best condition, unified, with great combat experience, a formation that was encouraged by previous successes.

The main forces of the Japanese fleet were divided into 3 squadrons (each with several detachments). The 1 squadron was commanded by Admiral Togo, who held a flag on the battleship Mikaso. In the 1 combat detachment (armored core of the fleet) there were 4 squadrons of 1 class battleships, 2 1 class armored cruisers and a mine cruiser. The 1 squadron also included: 3 combat squadron (4 armored cruiser 2 and 3 grades), 1 squadron destroyers (5 destroyers), 2 th destroyer squad (4 units), 3 units, 4 destroyers. destroyers squadron (14 ship), 4-th detachment of destroyers (2 destroyer). The 2 squadron was under the flag of Vice Admiral H. Kamimura. It consisted of: 6-th combat squad (1 class 4 armored cruisers and advices), 4-th combat squad (4 armored cruisers), 5-I and 4-th destroyer squads (on 9 ship, X-ray armored cruisers, 19-I and 3-th destroyers (for 3 ship), 5-th and 3 squadrons (for 2 ship), 6-th combat crews th and 4-th units destroyer. 3-I squadron under the flag of Vice Admiral S. Kataoka. The 7 squadron consisted of: 3 combat squadron (obsolete battleship, 4 cruiser 1 class, advice notes), 5 battle squadron (10 X-class armored cruisers), 11 battle squadron, 15 battle squadron of 17 class cruisers , 18 class cruiser, 20 gunboats), 4, 16, 2, XNUMX, XNUMX, XNUMX, XNUMX and XNUMX of the destroyers (XNUMX units), XNUMX-th detachment of destroyers (XNUMX destroyer), a detachment of special purpose ships (it included auxiliary cruisers).

Causes of the Tsushima disaster

Japanese fleet goes to meet the 2 th Pacific squadron

The balance of power was in favor of the Japanese. For linear armored ships was approximate equality: 12: 12. For large-caliber guns in mm 300 (254 — 305 mm), the advantage was on the side of the Russian squadron - 41: 17; on the other guns, the Japanese had the advantage: mm 200 - 6: 30, mm mm 150 - 52: 80. The Japanese had a great advantage in such important indicators as the number of shots per minute, weight in kg of metal and explosives. On the 300-, 250- and 200 mm guns, the Russian squadron fired 14 rounds per minute, the Japanese 60; metal weight was in Russian guns 3680, the Japanese - 9500 kg; the weight of the explosive in Russians, in Japanese - 1330 kg. The Russian ships were also inferior in the segment of 150 and 120 caliber guns. By the number of shots per minute: Russian ships - 120, Japanese - 300; the weight of the metal in kg for Russian guns is 4500, for the Japanese it is 12350; Russian explosives have 108, Japanese have 1670. The Russian squadron was also inferior in terms of armor: 40% versus 60% and speed: 12-14 nodes versus 12-18 nodes.

Thus, the Russian squadron was inferior in speed of fire in 2-3 times; by the amount of metal ejected per minute, Japanese ships were superior to Russians in 2 1 / 2 times; The stock of explosives in Japanese shells was more in 5-6 times than in Russian. Russian thick-walled armor-piercing shells with extremely low bursting charge pierced Japanese armor and did not explode. Japanese shells produced severe damage and fires, literally destroying all non-metallic parts of the ship (there was an excess of wood on the Russian ships).

In addition, the Japanese fleet had a significant advantage in light cruising forces. In a direct cruising battle, the Russian ships were threatened with complete defeat. They were inferior in the number of ships and guns, and were also connected by the protection of transports. The Japanese had a huge superiority in the carrying forces: the 9 Russian 350-ton destroyers against the 21 destroyer and the 44 destroyer of the Japanese fleet.

After the appearance of the Russian ships in the Strait of Malacca, the Japanese command received accurate information about the movement of the 2 Pacific Squadron. In the middle of May, the cruisers of the Vladivostok detachment went out to sea, indicating that the Russian squadron was approaching. The Japanese fleet prepared to meet the enemy. The 1 and 2 squadrons (armored fleet core of 4 squadron battleships of the 1 class and 8 armored cruisers of the 1 class, almost equal in power to the battleships) are located on the western coast of the Korean Strait, in Mozampo; 3-I squadron - near the island of Tsushima. Auxiliary cruisers from the merchant steamships made up an 100 miles guard chain spread out 120 miles south of the main forces. Behind the watchdog, light cruisers and patrol ships of the main forces were stationed. All forces were connected by wireless and guarded the entrance to the Korean Gulf.


Japanese Admiral Togo Kheyhatiro

Squadron battleship Mikasa, July 1904 of the year

Squadron battleship "Mikasa", aft tower repair. Reid Elliot, 12-16 August 1904 of the year

Sikishima squadron battleship, July 6 1906

Squadron battleship "Asahi"

On the morning of May 25, the squadron of Rozhestvensky headed for the Tsushima Strait. The ships went in two columns with vehicles in the middle. On the night of May 27, the Russian squadron passed the Japanese watchdog chain. The ships went without lights and were not seen by the Japanese. But, following the squadron 2 hospital ship were lit. In 2 hour. 25 min. they were noticed by the Japanese cruiser, having remained undetected. At dawn, the Russian squadron first came out alone and then several enemy cruisers, who followed at a distance and at times disappeared in the morning mist. Around 10, the squadron of Rozhestvensky was reorganized into a single wake column. Transports and auxiliary ships under cover of 3 cruisers moved behind.

In 11 hour. 10 min. Japanese cruisers appeared from behind the fog, some Russian ships opened fire on them. Rozhestvensky ordered to stop firing. At noon, the squadron headed north-east 23 ° - to Vladivostok. Then the Russian admiral tried to rebuild the right column of the squadron in front of the system, but, again seeing the enemy, refused this idea. As a result, the armadillos were in two columns.

Togo, having received a report in the morning about the appearance of the Russian fleet, immediately moved from Mozampo to the eastern side of the Korea Strait (Okinoshima Island). From the intelligence reports, the Japanese admiral knew perfectly well the deployment of the Russian squadron. When at about noon the distance between the fleets was reduced to 30 miles, Togo moved towards the Russians with the main armored forces (12 squadron battleships and armored cruisers) plus 4 light cruisers and 12 destroyers. The main forces of the Japanese fleet were to attack the head of the Russian column, and the cruising forces of Togo sent around the Russian rear to capture the transports.



In 13 hour. 30 min. the right column of the Russian battleships increased the course to 11 nodes and began to dodge to the left in order to reach the head of the left column and form a common column. Cruisers and transports were instructed to depart to the right. At that moment, the ships of Togo appeared from the northeast. The Japanese ships, having a course in 15 nodes, went across the path of the Russian squadron and, being ahead and somewhat to the left of our ships, began sequentially (one after the other at one point) to turn in the opposite direction - the so-called “Togo loop”. Thus, Togo took a position ahead of the Russian squadron.

The turning point was very risky for the Japanese. Rozhestvensky got a good chance to turn the tide in his favor. Having accelerated the move of the 1 squad to Maxim, having come close to the 15 cable distance, which was usual for Russian commanders, and concentrating fire on the turning point of the squadron of Togo, the Russian squadron battleships could shoot the enemy. According to a number of military researchers, such a maneuver could cause serious damage to the armored core of the Japanese fleet and allow the 2 Pacific squadron, if not to win this battle, then at least accomplish the task of breaking through the main forces to Vladivostok. In addition, the newest Russian battleships of the Borodino type could try to "squeeze" Japanese ships to a column of older Russian battleships, slow, but with powerful tools. However, Rozhestvensky either did not notice this, or did not dare to take such a step, not believing in the capabilities of his squadron. And he had very little time to make such a decision.

At the time of turning the Japanese squadron into 13 hour. 49 min. Russian ships opened fire from a distance of about 8 km (45 cable). At the same time, only the head battleships could effectively hit the enemy, for the rest the distance was too great, and the ships in front hampered. The Japanese responded immediately, concentrating the fire on two flagships, Prince Suvorov and Oslyab. The Russian commander turned the squadron to the right to take a position parallel to the course of the Japanese fleet, but the enemy, using greater speed, continued to cover the head of the Russian squadron, blocking the way to Vladivostok.

Approximately in 10 minutes the Japanese commanders were adjusted and their powerful high-explosive shells began to produce great damage on the Russian ships, causing severe fires. In addition, fire and strong smoke made it difficult for the Russians to shoot and disrupt control of the ships. Oslyabya was badly damaged and about an hour. 14 min. buried his nose right up to the gates, rolled out of order to the right, after about 30 minutes the battleship overturned and sank. The commander of the 10 rank captain Vladimir Baer was wounded at the beginning of the battle and refused to leave the ship; more than 1 people were killed along with him. Destroyers and tug lifted out of the water 500 people. At about the same time, Suvorov was severely damaged. Fragments of the projectile fell into the wheelhouse, interrupting and wounding almost everyone who was there. Rozhestvensky was injured. Having lost control, the battleship rolled to the right, and then dangled between squadrons, trying to regain control. In the course of further battle, the battleship was fired several times, attacked with torpedoes. At the start of the 376 hour. the destroyer "Violent" removed from the ship part of the headquarters headed by seriously wounded Rozhestvensky. Soon the Japanese cruisers and destroyers finished off the crippled flagship. The whole crew died. When the battleship Suvorov was killed, Admiral Nebogatov took command, holding a flag on the squadron battleship Emperor Nicholas I.


I.A. Vladimirov. The heroic death of the battleship "Prince Suvorov" in the Tsushima battle

I.V. Slavinsky. The last hour of the battleship "Prince Suvorov" in the Tsushima battle

The squadron was headed by the next battleship - "Emperor Alexander III". But soon he received severe injuries and moved to the center of the squadron, giving Borodino a leading position. Finished battleship "Alexander" in 18 hour 50 min. concentrated fire armored cruisers "Nissin" and "Kassuga." None of the crew (857 people) survived.

Russian squadron continued to move in a relative order, trying to escape from the Japanese ticks. But the Japanese ships, without serious damage, still blocked the way. About 15 hour. Japanese cruisers went to the rear of the Russian squadron, captured two hospital ships, started a battle with the cruisers, knocking down cruisers and transports in one pile.

After 15 an hour. the sea suddenly closed the fog. Under his protection, the Russian ships turned to the south-east and separated from the enemy. The battle was interrupted, and the Russian squadron again fell on the course of the north-east 23 °, in the direction of Vladivostok. However, the enemy cruisers discovered the Russian squadron and the battle continued. An hour later, when the fog reappeared, the Russian squadron turned south and drove the Japanese cruisers away. In the 17 hour, obeying the instructions of Rear Admiral Nebogatov, Borodino again led the convoy to the northeast, towards Vladivostok. Then the main forces of Togo approached again, after a short skirmish, the fog divided the main forces. About 18 hour. Togo again caught up with the main Russian forces, concentrating fire on Borodino and Orel. Borodino suffered severe injuries and burned. At the start of the 19 hour. "Borodino" received the last critical damage, was all on fire. Battleship capsized and sank with the whole crew. Saved only one sailor (Semen Yushchyn). “Alexander III” died a little earlier.

With the sunset, the Japanese commander took the ships out of battle. By the morning of May 28 all the detachments were to gather north of the Dagelet Island (in the northern part of the Korea Strait). The miners received the task of continuing the battle, encircling the Russian squadron and completing the rout by night attacks.

Thus, 27 in May 1905, the Russian squadron suffered a heavy defeat. 2-I Pacific squadron lost 4 best squadron battleship of 5-ti. The newest battleship Eagle, which remained afloat, was badly damaged. Other ships of the squadron were also heavily damaged. Many Japanese ships received several holes, but retained their combat capability.

The passivity of the Russian command, which did not even attempt to defeat the enemy, went into battle without any hope of success, surrendering to fate, led to the tragedy. The squadron only tried to break into the direction of Vladivostok, and did not lead a decisive and furious battle. If the captains were resolutely fighting, maneuvering, trying to get close to the enemy for effective shooting, the Japanese would have suffered much more serious losses. However, the passivity of the leadership paralyzed almost all commanders, the squadron, like a herd of bulls, stupidly and stubbornly, rushed towards Vladivostok, not trying to crush the Japanese ship.


Squadron battleship "Prince Suvorov"

The squadron battleship "Oslyabya" in the campaign to the Far East as part of the 2 Pacific Squadron

Oslabya ​​squadron battleship in front of the Korean Strait, May 1905

Ships 2-th squadron during one of the stops. From left to right: squadron battleships Navarin, Emperor Alexander III and Borodino

Squadron battleship "Emperor Alexander III"

Completion of the pogrom

At night, numerous Japanese destroyers surrounded the Russian fleet from the north, east, and south. Nebogatov on his flagship overtook the squadron, became in my head and moved to Vladivostok. Cruisers and destroyers, as well as the surviving transports, not having received the task, headed in different directions. The 4 battleships remaining at Nebogatov (“Nikolai”, “Eagle”, “Admiral Senyavin”, “General-Admiral Apraksin”) in the morning were surrounded by superior enemy forces and capitulated. Crews were ready to take the last battle and die with honor, but they fulfilled the order of the admiral.

Only the Izumrud cruiser, which was the only cruiser remaining in the squadron after the battle and guarding the remnants of the 2 Pacific Squadron from the destroyers' attacks at night, did not obey the order to surrender to the Japanese. "Emerald" at full speed broke through the encirclement and went to Vladivostok. The captain of the ship, 2 rank captain Vasily Ferzen, who performed well during this tragic battle and breaking through the ring of encirclement, made a number of serious mistakes on his way to Vladivostok. Apparently, the impact of psychological stress of the battle. When entering the Gulf of Vladimir, the ship sat on the stones and was blown up by the crew, fearing the appearance of the enemy. Although at high tide it was possible to remove the ship from the shoals.

The battleship Navarin did not suffer much damage during the day battle, the losses were small. But the night he gave himself the light of searchlights, and the attack of the Japanese destroyers led to the death of the ship. Of the crew member 681, only three managed to escape. The battleship Sisoy the Great suffered heavy damage during the day battle. At night, she was attacked by destroyers and received fatal damage. In the morning, the battleship reached the island of Tsushima, where it collided with Japanese cruisers and a destroyer. The commander of the ship M. V. Ozerov, seeing the hopelessness of the situation, agreed to surrender. The Japanese evacuated the crew, and the ship sank. The armored cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" was seriously damaged during the day, was torpedoed at night and in the morning it was flooded in order not to surrender to the enemy. The battleship "Admiral Ushakov" was seriously damaged in a day battle. The speed of the ship fell, and he fell behind the main forces. On May 28, the ship refused to capitulate and took an unequal battle with the Japanese armored cruisers Iwate and Yakumo. Having received severe damage, the ship was flooded by the crew. The heavily damaged cruiser “Vladimir Monomakh” was flooded by the crew in a hopeless situation. Of all the ships of the 1 rank, the cruiser Dmitry Donskoy was the closest to Vladivostok. The cruiser overtook the Japanese. "Donskoy" took the fight with the superior forces of the Japanese. The cruiser died without lowering the flag.


V.S. Ermyshev Battleship "Admiral Ushakov"

"Dmitry Donskoy"

Only a second-class cruiser Almaz, the destroyers Bravy and Grozny, could leave for Vladivostok. In addition, the transport "Anadyr" went to Madagascar, and then to the Baltic. Three cruisers (“Pearls”, “Oleg” and “Aurora”) went to Manila in the Philippines and were interned there. The destroyer "Bedovy", carrying the wounded Rozhestvensky, was overtaken by Japanese destroyers and surrendered.


Captured Russian sailors on board the Japanese battleship Asahi

The main causes of the disaster

From the outset, the campaign 2-th Pacific Squadron wore an adventurous nature. Ships had to be sent to the Pacific before the war. Finally, the meaning of the campaign was lost after the fall of Port Arthur and the death of the 1 th Pacific Squadron. From Madagascar squadron had to be returned back. However, due to political ambitions, the desire to somehow raise the prestige of Russia, the fleet was sent to death.

The march from Libava to Tsushima became an unprecedented feat for the Russian sailors to overcome the enormous difficulties, but the battle at Tsushima showed the rottenness of the Romanov Empire. The battle showed the backwardness of the shipbuilding and armament of the Russian fleet in comparison with the advanced powers (the Japanese fleet was created by the efforts of the leading world powers, especially England). Russian naval power in the Far East was crushed. Tsushima was the decisive prerequisite for concluding peace with Japan, although in a military-strategic sense, the outcome of the war was decided on land.

Tsushima has become a kind of scary landmark event for the Russian Empire, showing the need for fundamental changes in the country, the destruction of the war for Russia in its current state. Unfortunately, they did not understand him, and the Russian Empire died as the 2-I Pacific Squadron - bloody and terrible.

One of the main reasons for the death of the squadron was the lack of initiative, the indecision of the Russian command (the scourge of the Russian army and navy during the Russian-Japanese war). Rozhestvensky did not dare to firmly raise the question of sending the squadron back after the fall of Port Arthur. The admiral led the squadron without hope of success and kept passively, giving the initiative to the enemy. There was no specific battle plan. They did not organize further reconnaissance; it was an opportunity to defeat the Japanese cruisers, who had been separated from the main forces for a considerable time and did not use. At the beginning of the battle did not use the chance to deliver a strong blow to the main forces of the enemy. The squadron did not finish combat formation and fought on unfavorable conditions, only lead ships could conduct normal fire. The unsuccessful construction of the squadron allowed the Japanese to focus fire on the best battleships of the Russian squadron and quickly disable them, after which the outcome of the battle was decided. During the battle, when the main battleships failed, the squadron actually fought without command. Nebogatov took command only in the evening and in the morning handed over the ships to the Japanese.

Among the technical reasons, we can single out the "fatigue" of ships after a long march, when they were separated from the normal repair base for a long time. The ships were overloaded with coal and other cargoes, which reduced their seaworthiness. Russian ships were inferior to Japanese ships in the total number of guns, reservation area, speed, speed of fire, weight and explosive power of a squadron shot. A strong backlog was in cruising and bearing forces. The squadron’s ships were varied in armament, protection and maneuverability, which affected its combat capability. New battleships, as the battle showed, had weak reservations and low stability.

The Russian squadron, unlike the Japanese fleet, was not a single combat organism. The personnel, both commanding and private, differed in heterogeneity. Personnel commanders only enough to fill the main positions of responsibility. The incomplete commanding staff was reimbursed due to the early release of the naval corps, the call from the “old men” (who had no experience of walking on armored ships) and the transfer from the merchant fleet (warrant officers). As a result, there was a strong gap between young people who did not have the necessary experience and sufficient knowledge, “old men” who needed to update their knowledge and “civilians” who did not have normal military training. There were also not enough sailors for military service, so about a third of the crews consisted of storekeepers and recruits. There were many “penalty boxers”, whom the commanders “banished” on a long voyage, which did not improve discipline on ships. The situation with the non-commissioned officers was no better. Most of the personnel were assigned to new ships only in the summer of 1904, and could not study the ships well. Due to the fact that it was necessary to finish, repair and prepare ships in an emergency order, the squadron did not go together in the summer of 1904, did not study. Only in August was the 10-day voyage. During the campaign, due to a number of reasons, the crews could not learn to maneuver the ships and shoot well.

Thus, the 2-I Pacific Squadron was poorly prepared, in fact, did not receive combat training. It is clear that Russian sailors and commanders entered the battle courageously, bravely fought, but their heroism could not rectify the situation.


V.S. Ermyshev. Battleship Oslyabya

A.Tron The death of the squadron battleship "Emperor Alexander III"

Alexey Novikov, a sailor on the Orel (the future Soviet marine painter), described the situation well. He was arrested in 1903 for revolutionary propaganda and was transferred to the 2 Pacific Squadron as an “unreliable” one. Novikov wrote: “Many sailors were called up from the reserve. These elderly people, who had obviously become disaccustomed to the naval service, lived with memories of their homeland, were sick of separation from their home, with their children, with their wife. The war fell on them unexpectedly, as a terrible disaster, and they, preparing for an unprecedented march, did the work with a gloomy air of strangers. The team consisted of a lot of recruits. 3 are pitiful and miserable, they looked at everything with frozen horror in their eyes. Their scarecrow was the sea, for which they had fallen for the first time, and even more - an unknown future. Even among the personnel sailors who graduated from various special schools, there was no ordinary fun. Only fines, as opposed to the rest, were more or less cheerful. The coastal authorities, in order to get rid of them as a harmful element, came up with the easiest way: to write them off to ships going to war. Thus, to the dismay of the senior officer, we have accumulated up to seven percent. ”

Another good image, explaining the death of the squadron, was given by Novikov (under the pseudonym "sailor A. Zatery"). Here is what he saw: “We were extremely amazed that this ship did not suffer from our artillery at all. He looked as if he had been taken out of the repair right now. Even the paint on the guns did not burn. Our sailors, having examined “Asahi”, were ready to swear that on May 14 we fought not with the Japanese, but ... well, with the British. Inside the battleship we were amazed at the cleanliness, tidiness, practicality and expediency of the device. In our new battleships of the Borodino type, for some thirty officers, a full half of the ship was assigned; it was cluttered with cabins, and they only increased fires during the battle; and in the other half of the ship, we had not only wedged seamen into 900, but also artillery and lifts. And our enemy on the ship, everything was used mainly for guns. Then we were struck by the absence between the officers and the sailors of the discord that you meet with us at every turn; in the same place, on the contrary, some kind of solidarity, kindred spirit and common interests were felt between them. It was only for the first time that we really learned who we were dealing with in battle and what the Japanese are. ”
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    28 May 2015 06: 22
    Thanks to the author! This must never be forgotten!
    1. Sniper 74
      +2
      28 May 2015 14: 23
      I advise you to read Novikov-Surf about this tragedy. The book left a strong impression. Especially the second part, where the battles, Christmas tactics and destruction were described in detail.
      1. +8
        28 May 2015 15: 10
        Quote: Sniper 74
        I advise you to read Novikov-Priboy about this tragedy

        I advise you to hand over the book of Novikov-Priboy to waste paper, where it belongs to. Just burn beforehand so that no one reads by accident.
        No, well, as a child, I also re-read it 500 times, of course. And only much later, after I read a bunch of all kinds of literature on the topic of REE, I realized how false this book is.
        If you prefer memoirs - take the Semenov trilogy
        1. +1
          28 May 2015 16: 17
          I don’t think that I need to hand over the book to waste paper. The author describes the events as a witness. Admiral Rozhdestvensky’s mistakes were unforgivable.
          1. +14
            28 May 2015 17: 10
            Quote: THE_SEAL
            The author describes the events as a witness.

            The author, unfortunately, describes these events not as a witness, but as a writer fulfilling a political order.
            How many people according to Novikov got to the shooting lists by order of Rozhestvensky? When you read, the feeling is that not one dozen. The correct answer is none. Description of the teachings that Rozhdestvensky arranged? Dismiss, not Novikov’s. The fact that Rozhdestvensky shortly before the battle received a stroke, but remained to fulfill his duties? Have mercy, what are the strokes of the satrap. A head wound, after which the Japanese doctors TWO MONTHS did not dare to remove the fragments of the skull that went deep between the bone and the brain? What nonsense, scratch, the admiral was in full consciousness! And in general, there was no insinuation in the head of the admiral’s brain, well, what kind of a servant of a rotten tsarism can have a brain?
            Novikov constantly writes about things that he has never witnessed, and could not have been - for example, the behavior of Rozhdestvensky. Well, how does a battalion from "Eagle" know what is happening on "Suvorov"?
            And such questions, inaccuracies, defaults - a wagon, and a small cart.
            I say again - if you want a more or less impartial description - read Semenov's trilogy. By the way, Novikov also doused him with slops, declaring him a court shaker, while this officer, having asked for leave from Admiral Makarov (he had not yet left for the Far East), voluntarily went to Arthur, fought there, was interned on "Diana", fled , got to Russia and got a job on the 2nd Pacific to fight the Japanese further. Only here you will not find any of this at Novikov's.
            1. +9
              28 May 2015 17: 24
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              read the trilogy of Semenov.

              Andrey, every anniversary of the Tsushima battle there is another article stigmatizing the sneaky tsarist system and the site begins another debrief. Novikov’s apologists are indignant and give advice. It’s not interesting already
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              How many people according to Novikov got to the shooting lists by order of Rozhestvensky?

              I remember when asked to shoot a couple, another troublemaker, Rozhdestvensky replied: "We are going to our death, before the battle all prisoners will be released from the punishment cells so that they can wash away the shameful stain with their blood ...."

              And referring to this article: "Such a low weight of the explosive was due to the fact that for fear of ignition in hot climates, it was greatly reduced."
              I apologize, but the author did not mess up anything? Maybe it was a question of HUMIDITY OF EXPLOSIVES?
              In general, take away the binoculars from the admiral, let them steer the battalion!
              1. +7
                28 May 2015 17: 37
                Quote: Pilat2009
                And referring to this article: "Such a low weight of the explosive was due to the fact that for fear of ignition in hot climates, it was greatly reduced."
                I apologize, but the author did not mess up anything? Maybe it was a question of HUMIDITY OF EXPLOSIVES?

                The author has beguiled everything that is possible. The generally accepted version is that our wise men, fearing the possible detonation of pyroxylin in the tropical heat (this is interesting, how?) Brought its moisture content to 30%, of which it exploded little and badly in Tsushima.
                IMHO the problem is that there are 2 types of pyroxylin - dry and wet. At the same time, dry (humidity 3-5%) is easily ignited by an open flame or by touching a hot metal, drilling, friction, or impact of a rifle bullet. Those. dry pyroxylin is EXTREMELY dangerous. That is why not dry but wet pyroxylin (humidity 10-30%) is used as a blasting explosive. It was with such pyroxylin that Russian shells were equipped and no tropics, tsushima and the far east had anything to do with it.
                And the problem was that it was extremely difficult to maintain the moisture value of pyroxylin. The shell is leaking. As a result of long walks in tropical humidity, pyroxylin in domestic shells of the 2nd Pacific Ocean became banally damp, which did not explode.
                Quote: Pilat2009
                In general, take away the binoculars from the admiral, let them steer the battalion!

                Well, if every cook can manage the state ... (by the way, this quote is also a lie, the original talked about the fact that every cook should try to learn how to control the state, such a program is a maximum of education and a hint that in the USSR, with due the level of skill of the kuharkino will not interfere with the career :))) ... why not the fleet? laughing
            2. -1
              28 May 2015 20: 47
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Quote: THE_SEAL
              The author describes the events as a witness.

              The author, unfortunately, describes these events not as a witness, but as a writer fulfilling a political order.
              How many people according to Novikov got to the shooting lists by order of Rozhestvensky? When you read, the feeling is that not one dozen. The correct answer is none. Description of the teachings that Rozhdestvensky arranged? Dismiss, not Novikov’s. The fact that Rozhdestvensky shortly before the battle received a stroke, but remained to fulfill his duties? Have mercy, what are the strokes of the satrap. A head wound, after which the Japanese doctors TWO MONTHS did not dare to remove the fragments of the skull that went deep between the bone and the brain? What nonsense, scratch, the admiral was in full consciousness! And in general, there was no insinuation in the head of the admiral’s brain, well, what kind of a servant of a rotten tsarism can have a brain?
              Novikov constantly writes about things that he has never witnessed, and could not have been - for example, the behavior of Rozhdestvensky. Well, how does a battalion from "Eagle" know what is happening on "Suvorov"?
              And such questions, inaccuracies, defaults - a wagon, and a small cart.
              I say again - if you want a more or less impartial description - read Semenov's trilogy. By the way, Novikov also doused him with slops, declaring him a court shaker, while this officer, having asked for leave from Admiral Makarov (he had not yet left for the Far East), voluntarily went to Arthur, fought there, was interned on "Diana", fled , got to Russia and got a job on the 2nd Pacific to fight the Japanese further. Only here you will not find any of this at Novikov's.

              ====

              indeed, how could a participant in the battle, a battalion of the "eagle", know something, and even more so, write something about the battle
              1. +1
                29 May 2015 00: 36
                Of course, how did the battalion Novikov know about the battle? Everything is correct. You can even continue the row according to your logic. Why did Tolstoy suddenly begin to describe the war with Napoleon, he is just a pitiful lieutenant. And Simonov, who wrote "The Living and the Dead"? A journalist of some sort, but also climbs wherever it is necessary. So?
                1. +2
                  29 May 2015 07: 52
                  Quote: Rastas
                  You can even continue the row according to your logic. Why did Tolstoy suddenly begin to describe the war with Napoleon, he is just a pitiful lieutenant. And Simonov, who wrote "The Living and the Dead"? A journalist of some sort, but also climbs wherever it is necessary. So?

                  Is it possible without cheap footsteps? The problem is not that Novikov is a bailer and cannot write by the baseness of his rank, I have not said such a thing anywhere. The problem is that Novikov is a liar.
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. +2
                  29 May 2015 19: 43
                  Quote: Rastas
                  Of course, how did Novikov know about the battle? All is correct.

                  Everyone imagines himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the side ....
                  After 10 years, after analyzing everything that is possible and picking up other people's thoughts, we are claiming the truth in the first instance? But what about the analyzes at the Tsushima forums, where up to the minute they were dismantled and recognized as unpromising?
            3. +3
              29 May 2015 12: 34
              In Tsushima, the organizational abilities of Rozhdestvensky were just noted, since he led such a squadron across 3 oceans. On this his abilities ended. All historians admit it.
            4. 0
              29 May 2015 12: 34
              In Tsushima, the organizational abilities of Rozhdestvensky were just noted, since he led such a squadron across 3 oceans. On this his abilities ended. All historians admit it.
              1. 0
                29 May 2015 19: 50
                Quote: THE_SEAL
                On this his abilities ended

                Oh how. As Wilson said: "There are no examples in history where the weakest fleet defeated the strongest."
                You do not want to take the place of Christmas and win?
        2. +1
          28 May 2015 18: 10
          Novikov-Surf very much slandered the entire command, starting from boatswain. At one time, sailors-participants demanded that he stop writing nasty things about Tsushima. He introduced the sailors who performed the duty wretched and stupid. Ask what ship it was and who it was.
          1. +1
            29 May 2015 00: 37
            By the way, I have never read this before, that sailors demanded that Novikov stop writing something.
        3. -5
          29 May 2015 00: 25
          I can assume that you didn’t even open Novikov-Priboy, since you are urging you to turn him in for waste paper. Although for lovers of crunch French rolls, there is nothing surprising.
          1. +2
            29 May 2015 07: 58
            Quote: Rastas
            I can assume that you didn’t even open Novikov-Priboy, since you are urging you to turn him in for waste paper

            I can’t suppose, but I know for sure that you EXCEPT Novikov-Priboy did not discover anything. If you had given yourself the trouble to read at least the memoirs of the same Semenov, and the materials of the Investigative Commission, you would not have written such a thing.
            Quote: Rastas
            Although for lovers of crunch French rolls, there is nothing surprising.

            Killer argumentation. laughing Wouldn't the genie be kind enough to tell you what I wrote wrong in my comment, where I listed Novikov-Priboy's "delusions"? (not a complete list, by the way)
            1. 0
              29 May 2015 14: 46
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              The squadron only tried to break through in the direction of Vladivostok, and did not conduct a decisive and furious battle. If the captains resolutely fought, maneuvered, tried to get closer to the enemy for effective shooting, the Japanese would have suffered much more serious losses. However, the passivity of the leadership paralyzed almost all the commanders, the squadron, like a herd of bulls, stupidly and stubbornly, broke through to Vladivostok, not trying to crush the Japanese ships.


              Is this an excerpt from a 1935 history textbook?
              the author of a couple of paragraphs above himself says that:
              a) the Japanese had an advantage in speed - try to get closer to an opponent who is faster than you!
              b) Togo cut the path to Vladik - then a breakthrough towards Vladik is the rapprochement with the enemy and an attempt to crush the Japanese system

              in short, the article is 50 years old ...
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. 0
          29 May 2015 12: 47
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          I advise you to hand over the book of Novikov-Priboy to waste paper, where it belongs to. Just burn beforehand so that no one reads by accident.


          I agree with you, having read first Novikov, and then other materials, I was unpleasantly struck by his lies and political bias.
    2. +3
      28 May 2015 15: 38
      The key point of the article characterizing the causes of the defeat:

      In our new battleships of the Borodino type, for some thirty officers, an entire half of the ship was assigned; it was cluttered with cabins, and during the battle they only increased fires; and not only up to 900 sailors were squeezed into the other half of the ship, but also artillery and lifts. And in our enemy on the ship everything was used mainly for guns. Then we were struck by the absence between the officers and sailors of the discord that we see at every step; in the same place, on the contrary, they felt some kind of unity, a kindred spirit and common interests.

      The unity of the soldiers under the leadership of the commander, the belief in him that he will not sell, will not be scared, he will do everything right, take care and achieve victory. So it was under Hannibal, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Suvorov and other generals. Who endured all the hardships and hardships along with the soldiers, on an equal footing.
      1. +2
        28 May 2015 17: 12
        Quote: Max_Bauder
        the absence between the officers and sailors of the discord that we see at every step;

        Well, even if you take Novikov-Priboi, you can see that there were good officers, and the difference is because people did not need this war. Yes, in battle people showed heroism, did their duty, but they were not eager to march. Rozhdestvensky's "petty tyranny" was largely explained by the fact that not everything turned out as we would like.
      2. +3
        29 May 2015 06: 46
        Quote: Max_Bauder
        So it was under Hannibal, Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Suvorov and other generals. Who endured all the hardships and hardships along with the soldiers, on an equal footing.

        laughing Do you think Rozhdestvensky had an armored capsule with a motor ??? If you visit any Soviet-built ship, then to your surprise you will notice that the command staff lives much better than ordinary Soviet sailors! The BCH-5 cockpit alone on the Project 30-bis destroyer is worth something !! Well, the best life on a ship is with a battalion !!!! On the BOD "Komsomolets Ukrainy" pr.61 at the head of the product, only two buttons were fastened on the uniform jacket ... top and bottom, and a solid "fender" peeped out in the center.
        1. 0
          29 May 2015 18: 28
          I don’t know, sorry, really Mikhalkov was right when he showed the US Citadel in the film, before the storming of the fortress, the generals and colonels of the Soviet Army are shown as complete scumbags, with a solid "fender" each, they were drinking and eating when the soldiers and sergeants were hungry, only lacked " upskirt "invite.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. +1
      28 May 2015 16: 44
      How many do not shout halvah, but the combat readiness of the army and navy is checked in combat with the enemy. Let's not forget that Japan was already a sea empire and captured thousands of islands all the way to Australia. And the majority of Russian officers treated the soldiers like cattle. And how did Serdyukov or Vasiliev and others like them differ from them? But we must pay tribute to the Japanese, who appreciated the feat of the Russian sailors.
      1. +3
        28 May 2015 17: 27
        Quote: siberalt
        Let's not forget that Japan was already a maritime empire and captured thousands of islands all the way to Australia

        Hmm, what can I say, another admiral
        1. +1
          28 May 2015 19: 58
          Quote: Pilat2009
          Hmm, what can I say, another admiral

          Admiral, tell me which islands Japan captured by 1904?
  2. +17
    28 May 2015 06: 42
    It was passivity, inertia of thinking and hope for chance that led to the death of our squadrons. During a long campaign, a talented and intelligent commander could train mottled crews, torture them with firing and exercises for interaction, and knock a squadron into a heavy armor-piercing fist. But none of this was done. Nothing.
    Tsushima is a terrible lesson in how to fight and it is necessary to study it in detail not only in higher military institutions but also in schools in history classes, and in our country, Russian-Japanese is just a set of dates. Like there was such a war and we lost. I think this is a gross mistake. The Russo-Japanese War is a key moment in understanding the causes of the death of the Romanov dynasty and the Russian Empire as a whole (IMHO of course)
    1. +7
      28 May 2015 08: 52
      Quote: D-Master
      The Russo-Japanese War is a key point in understanding the causes of the death of the Romanov dynasty and the Russian Empire as a whole (IMHO of course)

      And a serious lesson in today's Russia.
      1. +3
        28 May 2015 16: 32
        The post-Tsushima fleet revival and the pre-war period are well written in Leonid Sobolev's book "Overhaul".
        1. 0
          2 June 2015 09: 44
          well written in the book by Leonid Sobolev "Overhaul".
          This should be the naval officer’s handbook!
          1. +1
            2 June 2015 10: 11
            Quote: Monge
            This should be the naval officer’s handbook!

            The book is actually absolutely magnificent :))) I still re-read it periodically with pleasure, although well, I’ve never been a naval officer :)
          2. The comment was deleted.
    2. 0
      28 May 2015 11: 44
      Tsushima is a terrible lesson in how to fight and it is necessary to study it in detail not only in higher military institutions but also in schools in history classes, and in our country, Russian-Japanese is just a set of dates.
      We really need to study in schools, but at universities, let's study in more detail more recent events like the Falklands or Georgian events, of course.
    3. +6
      28 May 2015 13: 29
      Tsushima is a terrible lesson in how to fight and it is necessary to study it in detail not only in higher military institutions but also in schools in history classes, and in our country, Russian-Japanese is just a set of dates.
      Tsushima in many respects predetermined the passivity in 1mv of the main forces of the Russian fleet in the Baltic and Black Seas, as a result of idleness tens of thousands of sailors disciplined and took an active part in the extermination of naval and non-naval officers and the October coup in 1917. And the loss of continuity of officer personnel and the Great Domestic - only the Northern Fleet provided systematic, substantial substantial support to the troops thanks in many respects to the leadership of the Commander Fleet Golovko. The BF (remnants) turned out to be locked up, and Tributs, imitating activity, with the stubbornness of a maniac, drove submariners to death in the nets and mines that blocked the exit from the Gulf of Finland. Former chef Ivanov, who became Oktyabrsky, actively participated in the discharge of Sevastopol in 1942. He did not organize the evacuation of defenders (unlike the Germans, who took significant forces out of the strike in 1944), and after the loss of three destroyers in one day in October 1943, he did not allow surface ships take an active part in bd !!! It pains me a Sevastopol man that the transports with the Germans left the Crimea almost unhindered and our fallen remained unrevenged
      1. +6
        28 May 2015 16: 24
        Unfortunately this is a fact. The Northern Fleet was underestimated before the Second World War. But it was he who turned out to be the most effective and efficient. It is significant that the Germans in the Black Sea had practically no fleet. Nevertheless, they managed to inflict significant damage to the Black Sea Fleet. The shortsightedness and often criminal negligence of Oktyabrsky and Tributs led to tragedies during the evacuation from Sevastopol and from Tallinn. This must not be forgotten. One needs to learn from these mistakes. They repeated the path of Admiral Rozhdestvensky.
    4. +3
      28 May 2015 15: 11
      Quote: D-Master
      It was passivity, inertia of thinking and hope for chance that led to the death of our squadrons. During a long campaign, a talented and intelligent commander could train mottled crews, torture them with firing and exercises for interaction, and knock a squadron into a heavy armor-piercing fist. But none of this was done.

      Horror. I understand you, of course, about 20 years ago, I was thinking the same as you ....
    5. +3
      28 May 2015 17: 30
      Quote: D-Master
      torture shooting and interaction exercises

      Shoot guns? Wear cars? And shells, and coal?
  3. +9
    28 May 2015 06: 49
    Yes, I read the novel "Tsushima" as a child, I still remember it. Russian sailors died a terrible and heroic death 110 years ago, fulfilling their duty. There is no forgiveness for both Japan, which has always been an enemy of Russia, and the tsarist regime, which they suddenly undertook to rehabilitate. And we need to close this shop about the return of the Kuril Islands to Japan. Eternal glory to Russian sailors!
  4. +2
    28 May 2015 07: 02
    The article is a big plus. The only remark: A.S. Novikov (who is the author of "Tsushima") and A. Zaterty are one person.
  5. +13
    28 May 2015 07: 51
    I read a lot about that period of our history. True for a very long time. What surprised me, along with the rejection of shimoza, if not a humane weapon, the dizziness of decision-makers and heated moods of hat-making, well, just like now.
    1. +5
      28 May 2015 09: 29
      Quote: fomkin
      I read a lot about that period of our history. True for a very long time. What surprised me, along with the rejection of shimoza, if not a humane weapon, the dizziness of decision-makers and heated moods of hat-making, well, just like now.

      True as it is now. And this is not surprising, the political and economic model is the same now and then. Only the level of technical development is different. And it seems that everything is going according to one scenario. This is also not surprising, but natural, since the authorities want to resurrect the Russian Empire again on the old economic basis and again the fatal conflict begins between the level of technical development and the economic model. Only at a new level.
      We can safely wait for a repetition of "Tsushima", and then the well-known sequence of political events.
  6. -1
    28 May 2015 07: 57
    The author plus and many thanks, do not forget our story, even such an ugly one-people fulfilled their duty with honor
  7. +1
    28 May 2015 08: 17
    Yes, this is our heroic story, whatever it may be!
  8. Gewissenheit
    +5
    28 May 2015 08: 29
    Thanks to the author, right now, right now, the story repeats, self-praise abundantly, the truth is that the uterus closes its eyes.
  9. +8
    28 May 2015 09: 27
    The article is generally good. Tsushima is a sad page in the history of our fleet, it must be remembered in order to avoid similar in the future. The only drawback of the article seemed to me a reference to the novel by Novikov-Priboy (it was published under this pseudonym). Literary critics noted that the description of the imperial fleet in Tsushima differs somewhat from the facts set forth in historical documents, and from that written by the author himself in 1906-1907. Plus, in his biography there is an arrest in 1903 for revolutionary propaganda in the navy and living on Capri near Gorky in 1912-1913, which, in my opinion, somewhat lowers the level of trust in the author.
  10. +1
    28 May 2015 09: 45
    Near the capital of Japan, in the city of Yokosuka, a surviving after the Russian-Japanese war of 1904-1905 is installed. the flagship of the commander of the Japanese fleet, Admiral Heihachiro Togo - the battleship Mikasa.
    1. 0
      28 May 2015 09: 58
      Front view.
      1. 0
        28 May 2015 10: 01
        Back view..
    2. +5
      28 May 2015 11: 14
      by the way, this battleship sank On the night of September 11-12, 1905 as a result of an internal explosion. in completely peaceful conditions. the shimosa detonated without assistance.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  11. +24
    28 May 2015 09: 52
    As I read "Such a low weight of the explosive was due to the fact that, fearing ignition in a hot climate, it was greatly lowered" so I immediately realized that the author was not in the subject. And the rest was no longer interesting to read, absolutely.
    The weight of the explosive cannot be changed for a specific climate, this is the design of the shell. Pyroxylin was waterlogged, but not reduced in weight. Waterlogging is also laid in production, since the projectile itself is made relatively tight.
    The shells did not explode (badly and not always) because such a design was a fuse of General Brink’s system.
    By the destructive (blasting) effect and incendiary effect, pyroxylin was one and a half times inferior to shimose.
    I would like to have a more truthful presentation of such articles, since the similar story is distorted sad
    Not rated in any way hi
    1. +8
      28 May 2015 10: 36
      Plus for you. There really was a problem with tight fuses. If it worked, then low humidity didn’t play a special role. And in the article the comparison of shells is somehow strange indicated. Comparing armor-piercing projectile and HE shell is somehow not logical. But that is why they were not on the squadron, a question. It was somehow not beautiful either to charge the squadron’s leadership about not conducting exercises and firing. There couldn’t be any training shells on it - since everything was loaded with combat weapons and it was not possible to replenish their capabilities. Maneuvering was a deterioration of vehicles, and they didn’t differ in a special stock and where to take repair parts ?!
      As they say - you need to prepare for war in peacetime, and not in a military campaign and in battle. And in many ways, the fault of 1 TE, than destroying ships in the harbor from the siege artillery, could have exchanged at least 1-2, then Togo would simply have nothing to meet 2 TE.And the sailors and admirals who have fulfilled their duty ETERNAL MEMORY.
      1. +7
        28 May 2015 12: 22
        Quote: Predator
        One must prepare for war in peacetime, and not in a military campaign or in battle.

        On August 11, 1904, at a meeting of the Naval Ministry chaired by Nicholas II in Peterhof, a proposal was made to delay the exit of the 2nd Pacific squadron for serious combat training. But the assistant minister F.K. Avelan and Admiral Z.P. Rozhdestvensky categorically opposed this, citing an economic justification for the large losses expected by the treasury from the termination of agreements already concluded on the supply of the squadron with food and fuel on the way. This sweet couple considered it more justified to send the squadron immediately, to make a stop in Madagascar, where, in anticipation of the "exotic cruisers", to engage in combat training.
        Quote: Predator
        And in many ways the wines of 1 TE, than destroying ships in the harbor from the siege artillery, could even be exchanged for at least 1-2, then Togo would simply have nothing to meet 2 TE.

        Recently I read a story from Oles Buzina "An unexpected miracle", here is a short excerpt ... "Sometimes the fate of history is decided by only one shell, which hit the right time and in the right place. On July 28, 1904, the Russian and Japanese fleets met in a general battle. Squadron Rear Admiral Vitgeft brilliantly led the battle. With graceful maneuvers he did not allow the faster Japanese fleet to cover the head of the Russian squadron. The flagship battleship of the Japanese "Mikasa" received shell after shell. One of its turrets stopped firing. She was jammed from Russian hits. And then it happened. A Russian shell hit the bridge of the Mikasa, where Admiral Togo was openly standing. But, having injured almost everyone around the Japanese flagship, it did not harm him. Following this, the Japanese shell hit the bridge of the battleship Tsesarevich, where it was also openly with the headquarters there was Admiral Witgeft. Almost all died. From Witgeft there was only a piece of meat. Control of the squadron was upset. Without losing a single ship, she returnedto Port Arthur. " In essence, Oles is right, the events taking place around us are made up of previous decisions, accidents and fatal mistakes. We can, of course, fantasize in hindsight, but our fantasies will remain only fantasies and nothing more.
        1. +2
          28 May 2015 16: 07
          It all started earlier, that there would be a war, they knew and even wanted it. (Everyone knows the reasons - a small victorious war is needed like air). But the preparations were very strange. The troops in the Far East and China were not brought into combat readiness, they did not make supplies. The ships scattered , were not sent additionally (if not battleships, then destroyers and cruisers had to be sent, especially light and armored ones). And then there were so many accidents, no words - the death of the "Petropavlovsk" mine with Makarov, Vitgeft in the midst of a breakthrough, etc. Particularly influenced by the death of Makarov.
  12. +10
    28 May 2015 09: 57
    Well, yes, Novikov, who was on the campaign (albeit in the selfish position of a battalion) and took part in the battle, and then communicated with his comrades in misfortune being in Japanese captivity, is no longer an "authoritative" source, just because you see, he had "Bolshevik" views. And the current liberal types of "historians", who have already added to the fact that the cause of the Tsushima catastrophe is: "sabotage", "Bolshevik" sabotage, an earthly anomaly, UFOs, etc., are truths in the first instance - well, they are free from "Bolshevik" prejudices. By the way, the same Kostenko in his book "On the" Eagle "in Tsushima" confirms the same conclusions of Novikov about the defeat of the Russian fleet in the ill-fated battle. And he probably "can not be trusted", he, too, then went over to the side of the "Bolsheviks".
    1. 0
      28 May 2015 11: 00
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      By the way, the same Kostenko in his book "On the Eagle" in Tsushima "confirms the same conclusions of Novikov about the defeat of the Russian fleet in the ill-fated battle.

      Russian shells pierced armor but did not explode. Japanese shells exploded but did not pierce armor. hence the question, if the Japanese shells are so terrible, why were they not so effective against the Vladivostok detachment of cruisers and the same "Varyag". Whether someone likes it or not, the reason for the defeat is the extremely low combat training of the crews. especially the gunners. ships were sent into battle with artisans on board who were finishing work "on the go." as it turned out that drill was not able to replace live fire. and this applied to both new and old ships. in the first world comparable ships such as "Slava" or "Eustathius" showed completely different results.
      1. +3
        28 May 2015 12: 34
        Quote: kashtak
        if the Japanese shells are so terrible, why were they not so effective against the Vladivostok detachment of cruisers and the same "Varyag".



        Somewhere I came across information that the Japanese shimoza was first used precisely during the Tsushima battle. Before that, they used armor-piercing ones, like ours.
        1. +1
          28 May 2015 12: 54
          "On January 26, 1893 TNF - trinitrophenol (aka shimosa, liddite) was adopted by the Japanese Imperial Navy as a filler for" general "(increased explosive power) and armor-piercing shells" shimosa was used by the Japanese throughout the war.
          1. +3
            28 May 2015 18: 47
            shimoza could not be used for armor-piercing shells because of sensitivity to shock, leading to a premature explosion, before breaking through the armor
            1. Elk
              Elk
              +2
              30 May 2015 15: 33
              shimoza could not be used for armor-piercing shells because of sensitivity to shock, leading to a premature explosion, before breaking through the armor

              Oddly enough, picric acid has a fairly moderate sensitivity to shock. More sensitive than tol, but not more sensitive than RDX. Another conversation is that it is an acid, and when it comes into contact with the metal, salts — picrates — are formed, but they have the sensitivity of initiating explosives. To isolate the charge of shimoza, the Japanese used wax paper and tin foil (tin is resistant to picric acid), in which the pieces were wrapped in several layers before being placed in the charging chamber of the shell. Thus, both high-explosive and armor-piercing shells were equipped.
              The choice of the Japanese as the main high-explosive shell was justified by tactics. Namely, the alleged range of fire. The Japanese intended to open fire from maximum distances of 40-50 cable, on which armor-piercing shells could no longer properly penetrate the armor of the main armor belt, but high-explosive projectiles were even slightly more effective than when shooting short.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. +2
        28 May 2015 14: 02
        Quote: kashtak
        Russian shells pierced armor but did not explode. Japanese shells exploded but did not pierce armor. hence the question, if the Japanese shells are so terrible, why were they not so effective against the Vladivostok detachment of cruisers and the same "Varyag".

        Ineffective?
        “Russia” in this last phase of the battle could respond from the starboard side only from the commissioned one of the stern 203 mm and one 152 mm guns, the other two 152 mm could shoot only occasionally. All five mine vehicles needed during the rapprochement were broken, in one of them a torpedo prepared in combat exploded. On "Russia", on the orders of the commander of Captain 1st Rank A.N. Andreev, the senior mine officer once again checked subversive cartridges that were carried around the ship (in case it was destroyed under threat of capture).
        Continuing to follow the trail, the Stormbreaker at this stage of the battle assumed the brunt of the fire of Japanese ships. Thanks to the casemates, the Thunderbolt artillery did not suffer as much as it did on Russia. Here, too, applying a lot of estimates and professionalism, they were able to commission some of the previously damaged guns; The 152-mm guns Nos. 4 and 11 were corrected under fire by the junior artillery officer, Lieutenant N. N. Gobyato. The right nasal 203-mm gun resumed fire, the broken bolt of which, using parts removed from the idle gun, was restored by the midshipman D.P. Rudensky.

        You remember the fate of "Rurik".
        Quote: kashtak
        in the first world comparable ships such as "Slava" or "Eustathius" showed completely different results.

        "Glory" is possible. But about the shooting "Eustathius" ... the data of our reports and the data of the Germans on losses differ by an order of magnitude.
        It would be better then to remember "Pateleimon" - with its hit in "Goeben" with 100 kbt.
        1. 0
          28 May 2015 14: 43
          I remember about the fate of Rurik. I remember that he withstood the battle with a superior enemy to whom he was inferior in all respects. and was flooded by its crew. the Japanese could not sink it. "Russia" and "Thunderbolt" are gone. a small number of guns in the last phase of the battle, so there could not be more of them at such heading angles. you remember the location of the artillery. so my question remains. [quote = Alexey RA] [quote = chestnut]
          [quote = kashtak] in the first world comparable ships such as "Glory" or "Eustathius" showed completely different results. [/ quote]
          "Glory" is possible. But about the shooting "Eustathius" ... the data of our reports and the data of the Germans on losses differ by an order of magnitude.
          It is better then to remember "Patelemon" - with its hit in "Geben" from 100 kbt. [/ Quote]
          Panteleimon is also a good example. in the Tsushima battle, the distance was half that. at this level of preparation of calculations and mat. parts of the result would be completely different. with respect
          1. +1
            28 May 2015 15: 10
            Quote: kashtak
            I remember the fate of Rurik. I remember that he withstood the battle with a superior opponent who was inferior in all respects. and was flooded by his crew. the Japanese could not sink it.

            At the time of the sinking, "Rurik" did not have operational guns and mine vehicles. So the Japanese shells were very effective. I'm not talking about the problems with the steering of the "Rurik" caused by those same Japanese shells.
            Quote: kashtak
            "Russia" and "Thunderbolt" are gone. a small number of guns in the last phase of the battle, so at such heading angles there could not be more of them. you remember the location of the artillery. so my question remains.

            It's not about KU:
            The minute of the fatal decision was drawing near: new and new guns went out of order on ships, only two 152 mm from the starboard side and three from the left side could shoot at Rossiya.

            And also on the effectiveness of Japanese shells:
            At Gromoboy, at 6 minutes, when he was making a turn with his detachment, about 10 sailors and the commander of the battery, Lieutenant N. N. Brachet, died, as already mentioned, from a shell bursting in utah.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. +2
        28 May 2015 17: 43
        Quote: kashtak
        hence the question if the Japanese shells are so terrible, why were they not so effective against the Vladivostok squadron of cruisers and the same "Varyag".

        And you read Semenov, he asks the same questions:
        "It was not at all like in the Yellow Sea, I was standing with a stopwatch to record hits .." - something like that.
        Perhaps the ammunition was different, the last time the Japanese did not think of
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 0
      1 June 2015 23: 19
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      confirms Novikov’s same conclusions

      There are no "conclusions of Novikov" but there are conclusions of qualified specialists, the same Kostenko, Klado, squadron officers and conclusions of the commission. Novikov only voiced them, but if in terms of materiel it is still possible to agree with Kostenko, then with his tactical ideas like "throw five high-speed battleships the convergence at the moment of turning "can be argued, to put it mildly
      Speaking of Bolshevik sabotage, the same Novikov wrote that metal shavings were found in the car of one of the battleships, and there were numerous facts of damage to the materiel during the campaign.
      In short, the system is to blame and not some specific performer
  13. +2
    28 May 2015 10: 19
    Such a low weight of the explosive was due to the fact that for fear of ignition in a hot climate, it was greatly reduced. As a result, some armor-piercing shells, penetrating enemy ships, did not explode.
    What kind of nonsense? In the Russian Imperial Navy, the concept of a light projectile with a reduced number of explosives was proposed by Makarov (a light projectile with a high initial speed), they often pierced through the Japanese, but fuses failed. And the absence of high-explosive shells affected not in the best way, because most of the ships died from fires caused by high-explosives (with shimoza).
  14. -2
    28 May 2015 10: 25
    Causes of the Tsushima disaster

    The main one is the lack of sane command of the Russian squadron and the lack of a plan for a military company. Rozhdestvensky’s plan for a breakthrough into Vladivostok does not withstand any criticism, so breakouts do not organize:
    Stocks again took in excess of the norm, as a result, the battleships were overloaded, plunging deep into the sea.

    Ships went in two columns with vehicles in the middle.

    But, following the squadron, 2 hospital ships were lit. At 2 o’clock. 25 minutes they were spotted by a Japanese cruiser, itself undetected.

    Where is the logic? hi
    1. +3
      28 May 2015 12: 45
      Quote: Gomunkul
      The main one is the lack of sane command of the Russian squadron and the lack of a plan for a military company. Rozhdestvensky’s plan for a breakthrough in Vladivostok does not withstand any criticism, so breakouts do not organize

      Oh dear captain Nemo, there were many reasons and each could be called the main !!!!
      This is the inertia and swagger of the MTK led by Admiral Dikov.
      This is the bureaucratic relationship between the GUKiSom and the MTK.
      This is swagger with the arrogance of Admiral General Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich.
      And a lot of reasons, and all of them are basic.
      1. +4
        28 May 2015 16: 12
        Oh dear captain Nemo, there were many reasons and each could be called the main !!!!
        I agree with you, but the main reason is the efforts of "our" future allies in the Entente to prevent Russia from penetrating into Asia, plus the fifth column inside the country, whose loss in the war with Japan played into the hands of destabilizing the situation inside the country and further changing power. By the way, the first Russian revolution of 1905-1907 was a consequence of this defeat. It is a pity that then the country's leadership did not draw the correct conclusion from this and dragged Russia into the First World War, to the delight of "our allies." hi
      2. The comment was deleted.
  15. 0
    28 May 2015 10: 45
    Additional material on the technical condition of the Russian exadré - see Levashov "Russia in crooked mirrors"
  16. +6
    28 May 2015 10: 53
    In 1954, the surviving sailors were awarded medals "For Courage"
  17. abvgde
    +4
    28 May 2015 13: 23
    There are many reasons for defeat. But in my opinion the main reason, as mentioned above, is the socio-political structure of the system in which the Russian state functioned then.
    Corruption, the greed of the elites, pushing them into overt treason, disrespect for the common man and many other vices of capitalism. Everything is exactly the same as we have today.
    The Bolsheviks took all this into account. And as a result, the victory in the Second World War and the Japanese in three weeks were erased.
  18. +5
    28 May 2015 13: 44
    Due to my profession, I had to conduct it myself, and even more to get acquainted with the results of other people's accident checks. So I got this opinion - never a single violation or a one-time failure to fulfill obligations leads to tragedy - it’s always a vicious circle of racket, negligence and systematic disregard for rules and instructions.
    The squadron died from the whole complex listed by you, dear friends.
    Rozhdestvensky lacked the will and determination, sailors of training, ships of speed and maneuver.
    The result is obvious!
    The solution is always to rebuild and "bring to normal combat" all of the above and identified.
    An example is the actions of the Navy the day before the Second World War - NOT a single damaged ship in the first day of the war, despite the attacks and attacks.
  19. 0
    28 May 2015 13: 50
    Hero sailors - eternal memory ...
    But the oceans are not Russian elements. We are strong on earth, especially on our own.
    The empire perished because the conquests and colonialism contradict the Russian Spirit. The essence of the Kingdom was distorted by the one who, in addition to the Tsar (protector), also wanted to be the Emperor (invader). The last "official" Russian sorcerer, Rasputin, tried to convey something to Nicholas II, but the strength of the materialistic worldview no longer allowed the latter to HEAR the voice of Mother Russia from the lips of a "simple" peasant. I suppose the coming Tsar already knows all the mistakes of his predecessors;)
  20. +2
    28 May 2015 13: 55
    Very surprised by the description of the calibers of the guns, neither in inches nor in mm is strange. Incomprehensible 300 200 mm and so on.
  21. +1
    28 May 2015 14: 25
    The turning moment was very risky for the Japanese. Rozhdestvensky got a good chance to turn the tide in his favor. Having accelerated the course of the 1st detachment to the maxim, drawing closer to the 15 cable distance familiar to the Russian commandos and focusing fire on the turning point of Togo's squadron, Russian squadron battleships could shoot the enemy.

    SW Kofman parsed this sentence almost 25 years ago:
    It is often indicated that at this moment Togo was almost in a hopeless position, since his ships, turning "sequentially", passed the same turning point, but which was easy to target. This is a gross mistake, since there was no central guidance system at that time, even within the same ship. According to the data of the rangefinders, they received an approximate distance, and then almost every gun or turret was fired individually, watching the fall of their shells relative to the fired ship. To shoot at the "imaginary" turning point in the open sea was more difficult than at a real target. The only "flawed" position of the Togo ships at that moment was that only those of them who had already turned and lay on a stable course could shoot accurately enough.

    http://tsushima.su/RU/libru/i/Page_7/page_18/page_19/Page_32/kofman-analiz/
  22. 0
    28 May 2015 14: 30
    As a kid I read "Tsushima" .... Rozhdestvensky had a chance, really good ...
  23. 0
    28 May 2015 15: 33
    Experience is the son of difficult mistakes. I perceive this defeat as an experience. The main thing is not to forget him
  24. 0
    28 May 2015 15: 33
    In my opinion, everything was decided by the fusion of the Japanese squadron and the preparation of Japanese commandants, coupled with new shells. A word to an eyewitness - Captain 2nd rank V.I. Semenov was one of the Russian officers involved in both of the largest naval battles of that war: July 28, 1904 (attempts to break through the Arthur squadron in Vladivostok) and May 14, 1905, the Tsushima battle.
    (During the Tsushima battle, Semenov was on the Suvorov, our flagship, was wounded several times, was evacuated with the destroyer along with Rozhestvensky and miraculously survived).

    In his experience, he could COMPARE the shooting quality of Japanese commandos in both battles. We omit his description of the battle on July 28, 1904, but here are his impressions (by V.I. Semenov) about the Tsushima battle:

    “On July 28, in a few hours of battle, the“ Tsesarevich ”received only 19 large shells, and I was seriously planning to record moments and places of individual hits, as well as their destruction, in the upcoming battle. But where was there to write down the details, when it was impossible to count the hits! Such a shooting, I not only never saw, but also did not imagine. Shells poured continuously, one after another ...
    It began with flights. Some of the long Japanese shells at this distance overturned and, clearly visible with the naked eye, spinning like a stick thrown while playing in the towns, flew over our heads not with a terrible roar, as the projectile relies, but with some absurd mutter.
    - This is the "suitcases"
    (The “Suitcases” in Arthur were Japanese long-caliber large-caliber shells. Indeed: the shell is a foot in diameter and more than 4 feet long, is this not a suitcase with explosives?)? - asked, laughing, Rare ...
    However, it immediately struck me that the "suitcases", absurdly tumbling in the air and falling as it fell into the water, still exploded. This has not happened before ...
    After the flights, shortages went. Closer and closer ... The fragments rustled in the air, clanging about the side, about the superstructure ... Here, not far, against the front pipe, a giant column of water, smoke and flame rose ... They ran to the front bridge with a stretcher.

    (Japanese officers said that after the surrender of Port Arthur, in anticipation of the second squadron, they were so prepared for her meeting: each commander fired five live sets of shells from his gun when firing at the target. Then the worn guns were all replaced with new ones).

    For 6 months on the Arthur squadron I nevertheless looked at what - both shimoza and melinite were, to a certain extent, old acquaintances, but there was something completely new! .. It seemed that not shells hit the side and fell to the deck , and whole mines ... They were torn from the first touch of something, from the slightest delay in their flight. The grab rail, the back of the pipe, the top of the sloop beam - this was enough for an all-destructive explosion ... Steel sheets of the side and superstructures on the upper deck were torn to shreds and knocked people out with their scraps; iron ladders rolled into rings; intact guns were torn off the machines ... "

    The difference was evident in the accuracy of the shooting, and the psychological impact of the explosions of new Japanese shells on Russian sailors.
    If the “Tsesarevich”, in a few hours of battle near Shantung, in the summer of 1904, received only 19 hits, was able to reach neutral Qingdao under its own power and disarm there, then on May 14, 1905, the Japanese fire was simply murderous.
    The newest Russian battleships: Suvorov, Borodino, Alexander III, Oslyabya, died after several hours of battle, and the only surviving new battleship Orel received about 100 (!!!) hits from Japanese shells ...
    1. +1
      28 May 2015 16: 26
      Quote: barbiturate
      The newest Russian battleships: Suvorov, Borodino, Alexander III, Oslyabya, died after several hours of battle, and the only surviving new battleship Orel received about 100 (!!!) hits from Japanese shells ...

      This is according to Kostenko. Koffman reasonably doubts them.
      ... according to the data of V.P. Kostenko, which became widespread in Russian historiography, only "Oryol" was hit by 150 shells, of which 42 were 12-inch shells. But Kostenko, who was a young ship engineer during Tsushima's time, had neither the experience nor the time to accurately investigate all the damage to the ship in those few hours of the morning on May 28 before the ship was handed over. Much was recorded by him already in captivity from the words of the sailors. The Japanese and the British had much more time and experience. The "Eagle" was examined by them "in nature", immediately after the battle, and from numerous photographs. A special album was even released, dedicated to the damage to the Russian battleship. The data of foreign experts differ somewhat, but even the number of hits given in the Japanese official history of the war at sea is much less than that of Kostenko.

      Packingham gave 76 hits. The history of the war at sea ("Meiji") - about 60. And 12 "- only 8-10.
      1. +1
        28 May 2015 17: 01
        well, these are details, here you can believe one or the other, but you still need to believe the facts, and they are stubborn) 4 armadillos were actually destroyed by art fire and it doesn’t matter how the red-hot helpless skeletons of the former ships were finished, the 5th armadillo Orel also managed to grab it hits and all in the same battle, which indicates the great accuracy of the Japanese artillery fire and the strong impact of their shells on the target. The flagship was a qualified observer who REALLY saw the shooting of the Japanese in the BOTH unsuccessful naval battles for us of the first and second squadrons and noted a HUGE difference in the number and quality of hits, so 100 or 60, what is the difference now? smile
        1. +1
          28 May 2015 17: 17
          Quote: barbiturate
          The flagship was a qualified observer who REALLY saw the shooting of the Japanese in BOTH unsuccessful sea battles for the first and second squadrons and noted a HUGE difference in the number and quality of hits

          Yep ...
          "the first Russian volleys saved the Japanese from pleasant illusions. There was not even a hint of random firing in them, on the contrary, for a distance of 9 thousand yards, it was unusually accurate shooting, and in the first few minutes Mikaza and Shikishima received a number of hits six-inch shells ... ".

          Quote: Alexey RA
          Packingham gave 76 hits. The history of the war at sea ("Meiji") - about 60. And 12 "- only 8-10.

          According to campbell
          Careful analysis of the reports of the British and German naval attachés and the study of numerous photographs make it possible to say with a high degree of probability that the "Eagle" most likely received 5 12 ", 2 10 ", 9 8", 39 6 "and 21 small bore or shrapnel hits

          But according to Meiji, I'm afraid to lie, but like three feel
          1. +1
            28 May 2015 18: 13
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            But according to Meiji, I'm afraid to lie, but like three

            Like twelve. Three 12 "hits are for Ferran.

            As for the hits and the intensity of fire from the point of view of an observer on a fired ship, it is not for nothing that the phrase "The Packinham Effect" appeared after the RJA: in battle it always seems that the enemy shoots better, faster and more accurately than you. smile
            1. 0
              29 May 2015 19: 35
              Quote: Alexey RA
              it is not for nothing that after the RJAV the phrase "Packinham Effect" appeared: in battle it always seems that the enemy shoots better, faster and more accurately than you. smile

              According to Makarov, about the same, but he was before)))
          2. 0
            28 May 2015 19: 19
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Uh-huh ... "the first Russian volleys saved the Japanese from pleasant illusions. There was not even a hint of random firing in them, on the contrary, for a distance of 9 thousand yards, it was unusually accurate shooting, and in the first few minutes" Mikaza "and" Shikishima "got a series of hits with six-inch shells ...".


            This phrase refers to the beginning of the battle and the concentration of fire did give several hits, but this was not enough. For example, Edwin Falk, biographer and admirer of Admiral Togo's talent: "The percentage of hits from the Russians was low, but their shells lay so tightly around the Japanese flagship that he suffered hit after hit." And this happened in a relatively short period of time, during the so-discussed Togo maneuver, here is Packinham you quoted:
            ... "and in the very first few minutes" Mikaza "and" Sikishima "received a number of hits with six-inch shells. Then, having given the command, he could no longer cancel the maneuver, and therefore felt an unpleasant anxiety."

            But this is the very beginning of the battle, and its outcome was simply devastating by the mildest definition and it happened in an artillery battle !! It is a fact!! And here ONLY ONE !! the explanation is poor shooting or bad shells or all together, everything else is secondary, even the role of the commander is minimized when fighting in wake columns.

            But the witness and eyewitness (Semenov) in the midst of the battle, when the Russian flagship is already badly beaten.
            "Coming to the upper deck, I went to the left side between the 12-inch and 6-inch towers to look at the Japanese squadron ... It was still the same! .. No fires, no bank, no knocked out bridges ... As if not in battle, but on practice shooting! As if our guns, which had been rattling incessantly for half an hour, were not firing shells, but ... God knows what! .. With a feeling close to despair, I lowered the binoculars ... "
            1. +3
              28 May 2015 19: 27
              Quote: barbiturate
              But the witness and eyewitness (Semenov) in the midst of the battle, when the Russian flagship is already badly beaten.
              "Coming to the upper deck, I went to the left side between the 12-inch and 6-inch towers to look at the Japanese squadron ... It was still the same! .. No fires, no bank, no knocked out bridges ... As if not in battle, but on practice shooting! As if our guns, which had been rattling incessantly for half an hour, were not firing shells, but ... God knows what! .. With a feeling close to despair, I lowered the binoculars ... "

              Uh-huh ... while the Mikasa EDR got 10 x 12 "and 22 x 6" hits.
              Peckingham effect In his best.
              1. +2
                28 May 2015 20: 04
                Quote: Alexey RA
                Uh-huh ... while the Mikasa EDR got 10 x 12 "and 22 x 6" hits. The Packinham effect in all its glory.

                Quote: Alexey RA
                "Packinham Effect": in battle it always seems that the enemy shoots better, faster and more accurately than you.


                no, I see a little dumb))
                You write about the total number of hits of large and medium caliber for ALL !! battle on the FLAGMAN !!! of the Japanese fleet, when the 4 latest Russian armadillos are already at the bottom due to art fire, and the 5th Eagle has from 60 to 150 !! (according to various estimates) hits and you talk about the Peckingham effect ??)) Mol Semenov seemed to think that according to Russian ships get more))
                You give data on Mikasa, if you give data on the rest of the Japanese battleships, it’s generally ridiculous in the number of hits, I’ll continue from the same source as YOU:
                "Shikishima": 1 - 12 ", 1 - 10", 3 - 6 ", 4 - 75-mm and several unknown caliber;" Fuji ": 2 - 12", 3 - 6 ", 2 - 75-mm and 5 of unknown caliber; "Asahi": 10 hits, of which 2 - 6 "

                Yes, anyone here understands that the Japanese themselves suffered little or medium damage from the fire of the Russian squadron, as Semenov’s cautorang testifies to, which was there and his words are fully confirmed by the very fact of the destruction of Russian battleships and the defeat of the squadron !! And you still speak in response to the CERTIFICATE !! Semenova

                Quote: barbiturate
                "Coming to the upper deck, I went to the left side between the 12-inch and 6-inch towers to look at the Japanese squadron ... It was still the same! .. No fires, no bank, no knocked out bridges ... As if not in battle, but on practice shooting! As if our guns, which had been rattling incessantly for half an hour, were not firing shells, but ... God knows what! .. With a feeling close to despair, I lowered the binoculars ... "


                about the Peckingham effect)) Well then I’m Papa Roman and the Japanese ballerina at the same time))
                1. 0
                  29 May 2015 12: 35
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  You write about the total number of hits of large and medium caliber for ALL !! battle on the FLAGMAN !!! of the Japanese fleet, when 4 of the latest Russian armadillos are already at the bottom due to art fire, and the 5th Eagle has from 60 to 150 !! (according to various estimates) hits and you are talking about the Peckingham effect ??))

                  Hmm ... about 60 - this common the number of hits in the "Eagle". If we take the same "History of the War at Sea", then the "Eagle" got 12 - 12 ", 7 - 8" -10 "and 20 - 6". Total - 39 hits of shells of large and medium caliber.
                  1. 0
                    29 May 2015 15: 12
                    There are many estimates, but if you take something average in number, for example, Campbell, who talks about 76 hits in Oryol: Of these, 5 - 305 mm shells, 2 - 254 mm shells, 9 - 203 mm shells, 39 - 152 -mm shells and 21 - smaller shells, and Kostenko says about 140ka hits from them 12 -305mm.
                    Of course, many of Kostenko’s data are famously dismissed as just a young talented ENGINEER with a gold medal for graduating from college, a direct PARTICIPANT and WITNESS of events, what can he understand and know? laughing
                    In any case, the Japanese simply shot Russian ships in all respects, which quickly turned into a victory
                    1. 0
                      29 May 2015 16: 01
                      Quote: barbiturate
                      Of course, many of Kostenko’s data are famously dismissed as just a young talented ENGINEER with a gold medal for graduating from college, a direct PARTICIPANT and WITNESS of events, what can he understand and know?

                      You see, what a problem - Mr. Kostenko is a little inaccurate in tsifiri. For example, while testifying about the overload of Orel before the battle, he reported 400 tons of coal and 80 tons of ammunition (not counting other weights), but in the memoirs, coal almost dropped to 370 tons, but the mass of ammunition grew to 91 tons.
                      Quote: barbiturate
                      just a young talented ENGINEER with a gold medal for graduating from college

                      But why then such difficulties with the score? And coal would be okay - 10% plus or minus - who counts them for you? But for some reason, after the battle, Kostenko counted 56-mm shells in Orel. And the Japanese who unloaded the Eagle - 305.
                      Quote: barbiturate
                      DIRECT PARTICIPANT AND EVENT WITNESS

                      Therefore, among military historians, the proverb is widespread: "He lies like an eyewitness."
                      1. 0
                        29 May 2015 20: 05
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        And the Japanese who unloaded the Eagle - 188.

                        And Novikov said that in some tower there are generally two ....
                      2. +1
                        29 May 2015 21: 02
                        Not quite so - 2 shells of armor-piercing and high-explosive, in my opinion :)))
                      3. 0
                        1 June 2015 19: 22
                        Sorry, the opportunity to write has just appeared, although the topic has already been covered, so in a nutshell smile I’ll answer that Kostenko may be mistaken in something, but why should I believe the Japanese? This is a nation extremely interesting in terms of various postscripts and exaggeration of their victories and belittling the enemy, they could easily have their own interest in counting the shells of the surrendered armadillo, can you find it?

                        Well, about "He's lying as an eyewitness" it seems to me that you do not interpret the proverb correctly at all. I mean a person who tells so reliably and with so many details, as if he himself saw, but guaranteed to be caught, that he was not an eyewitness to the event. Kostenko, on the other hand, REINFORCED CONCRETE)) was exactly the OWNER and PARTICIPANT of the events described by him
                      4. +1
                        2 June 2015 03: 36
                        Quote: barbiturate
                        I’ll answer that Kostenko may be mistaken in something, but why should I believe the Japanese? This is a nation extremely interesting in terms of various postscripts and exaggeration of their victories and belittling the enemy, they could easily have their own interest in counting the shells of the surrendered armadillo, can you find it?

                        Unfortunately, I do not find it. The fact is that the Japanese issued an order to give the most accurate data for their "Soviet Secret War at Sea" and this order was most likely carried out. You see, it’s one thing if it was about open sources, then yes, the Japanese will lie cheaply. But the Soviet Secret War was an extremely closed source, it was strictly for official use and was used in the training of Japanese naval officers.
                        And Kostenko had no time to count either shells or holes from shells. There, after all, everything is not easy, it is also necessary to do measurements and study everything thoughtfully.
                        Quote: barbiturate
                        Well, about "Lying like an eyewitness" it seems to me that you are not at all correctly interpreting the proverb

                        I interpret it correctly :))) For example - a textbook example, by the way - during the operation "Cotopult" British pilots reported 7 torpedo hits in "Dunkirk". In fact, there were none. But there were no lies either - the pilots mistook for hitting the ship hitting the pier, next to which this ship was standing, somehow :))
                        Well, someone in my opinion thought - judging by the memoirs of Russian soldiers, about 2,5-3 thousand "Ferdinands" were destroyed in total. This despite the fact that a total of 90 of them were produced. Apparently, for many of our soldiers "Ferdinand" was any large self-propelled gun, just something to do.
                      5. The comment was deleted.
                      6. The comment was deleted.
                    2. 0
                      29 May 2015 20: 01
                      Quote: barbiturate
                      Of course, many of Kostenko’s data are famously dismissed as just a young talented ENGINEER with a gold medal for graduating from college, a direct PARTICIPANT and WITNESS of events, what can he understand and know?

                      And where did the young one fight along Novikov? In the infirmary. That is, there’s no talk of any live hits
              2. The comment was deleted.
            2. +1
              29 May 2015 21: 01
              Quote: barbiturate
              This phrase refers to the beginning of the battle and the concentration of fire really gave several hits.

              Sorry, but you are wrong a little more than completely. In 15 minutes - 25 hits! Sorry, but the 1st Pacific in 4 hours - 32 or 33 hits.
              Quote: barbiturate
              But this is the very beginning of the battle, and its outcome was simply devastating by the mildest definition and this happened in an artillery battle !! It is a fact!! And here ONLY ONE !! the explanation is bad shooting or bad shells

              You are not quite right. But I’ll wait a bit with the answer - the article in Samosonov’s refutation is practically written :)
              1. 0
                1 June 2015 19: 39
                I don’t understand at all how, from the point of view of logic (25 hits in 15 minutes and then another 7 !! for the rest of the battle !!) and facts (defeat and drowning of several newest battleships) you can explain this with something other than a good situation for us at the beginning of the battle, because then the commandos abruptly forgot how to shoot?
                Maybe you don’t have to look for difficulties, where everything is simple? The start of the battle turned out to be successful, the effect of concentration of fire temporarily turned out, but unsuccessful shells did not allow it to be used TO a MUCH degree, then the battle came down to battle in wake columns dictated by the Japanese and quickly led to defeat, since the Japanese were much better at shooting the best, in this situation shells, but they fired much better because they trained their gunners very well and fused very well as a squadron, as evidenced by both our European and Japanese officers.
                Everything is very simple, if you want to win - train and follow the changes in the tactics of others, so as not to get a blow that you can neither avoid nor block, that's all.
                1. +1
                  2 June 2015 03: 41
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  I don’t understand at all how, in terms of logic

                  Logic is the enemy of the historian
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  25 hits in 15 minutes and then another 7 turns out !! for the rest of the battle !!

                  You did not understand. 25 hits in a quarter of an hour and then another order (or even more) 200 hits - this is our result in Tsushima. And 33 hits for the whole battle - this is in the battle on July 28 at Shantung where the 1st Pacific fought :)
                  In general, wait a bit, I’m adding a series of articles-refutation of Samsonov, a little bit left :)
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  Maybe you don’t have to look for difficulties, where everything is simple?

                  Unfortunately, nothing is easy there.
                  1. 0
                    2 June 2015 17: 27
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Unfortunately, nothing is easy there.


                    We’ll wait for your work, maybe you’ll have to change your mind), although I just don’t understand what can be argued about and where it can be difficult in this matter, where a bunch of facts and evidence of the highest level before the fight plays what happened - a complete defeat .
                2. The comment was deleted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
          3. The comment was deleted.
  25. +1
    28 May 2015 16: 07
    Remember. To the grinding of teeth hurts ....
    We also remember how in the 45th they put two unbeaten for the beaten, drove the narrow-eyed to the islets, for 70 years now they are only small bastards, no more.
    Do not forget the lesson ....
  26. -1
    28 May 2015 20: 15
    interesting thanks !!!!
  27. +1
    28 May 2015 20: 32
    In Liepaja (formerly Libava), an Orthodox naval cathedral rises in a military town, a monument to sailors and officers of the 2nd maintenance squadron is erected on its territory. Here was their last prayer service before going on a campaign !!!
  28. 0
    28 May 2015 22: 53
    1st squadron - partially flooded, partially recessed. 2nd and 3rd squadron - partially surrendered, partially drowned. The new fleet, which spent a breakthrough of money on the eve of World War I (less for artillery), sat at the berths in the Baltic, was almost ready to deal with two German cruisers in the Black Sea, but did not have time and disappeared into the abyss (literally) of the waters . The effectiveness of Soviet-made submarines (built with national money) is the lowest of all participants in World War II. The Black Sea Fleet allowed the Germans to evacuate from the Crimea, and before that from Taman through the Kerch Strait. They left their people in Sevastopol. The Baltic Fleet, having lost 1% at the Tallinn crossing, spent the whole war in Kronstadt and could not even force the Germans to go on convoys when transporting the Swedish ore to Germany. The list of victories is somehow not impressive. And the sailors were used as infantry - perfect infantry, but not like sailors ....... After the war they built a new fleet, then they cut it, under Brezhnev they created an ocean fleet - they cut it again. What's next? In a word, I cut the cover for a more appropriate one - is it simple ....
  29. den-protector
    -2
    28 May 2015 22: 58
    And in our country, more and more less significant media and bureaucrats are vying with each other to praise the tsarist regime, what a good and Orthodox it was and how good life was in Russia under the tsars-priests. And how bloody maniacs the Bolsheviks destroyed Russia. Everyone is trying to "equate" Russia's participation in World War I with the war of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War. As comrade Winnie the Pooh used to say: "It's not without reason ...".
  30. -2
    28 May 2015 23: 20
    Russian battleships built according to French designs were overturned, instead of drowning having exhausted buoyancy. From such losses.
    In Orel, during the campaign, they were able to improve the protection of vital components, pipelines from auxiliary materials, spare chains, and thereby increase its survivability in battle. He received so many hits stayed afloat.
  31. 0
    29 May 2015 12: 34
    Shells did not explode !!! In 1906 firing was carried out by shells left over from prepared for the campaign and they did not explode !! What the hell skill and accuracy of shooting! Or treason or sloppiness, which is one and the same! It turned out that the humidity of the explosives was not even 30%, but all 80% !!!
  32. 0
    30 May 2015 16: 11
    Christmas surrendered, others had it ??????? someday?
  33. 0
    31 May 2015 16: 05
    In the sailing era. It was considered the norm.

    There are a number of persistent misconceptions in the naval part of the Russo-Japanese War

    1. Shimoza stronger than pyroxylin. In fact, the pyroxylin explosiveness is forty percent higher. By the way, the British, in part, returned to black powder, and used such shells even in the Battle of Jutland. The explosiveness of black powder is four times lower than that of pyroxylin.

    2.Russian shells, based on Makarov's vicious idea, were unnecessarily lightweight. The shells, indeed, were lighter than the Japanese, but within the normal range. In general, shells of the same caliber, but of different fleets, usually had different weights. For example, the Germans mainly used light shells. That "Bismarck" did not stop at all.
    By the way, part of the shells on the Second Squadron was of German production. In addition to Russia, only Germany launched shells with pyroxylin.

    3. Russian shells had a smaller mass of explosives. Within the standard norms of that time. Japanese shells had an excessive mass of explosives, which in the explosion gave a mass of small fragments.

    4. Russian ships, with the exception of the First Squad, were obsolete, and all Japanese were the most modern.
    The Japanese have only four battleships in Tsushima.
    The most modern is only one: the flagship Mikasa. The Fuso is an outdated project, the extremities are not covered, the main caliber artillery has a low rate of fire, the average is practically all open, the real speed is not higher than 15 knots. This means that the speed of the entire squadron is not higher than 15 knots. "Asahi" and "Shikishima" with Harvey armor. Or, is it only for "Oslyabi" and "Bayan" that Harvey armor is bad, but is it good for the Japanese?
    The rest are armored cruisers.
    Straight, the crown of creation, epoch-making ships, the ancestors of battlecruisers.
    Unsuccessful project. Not cruisers, the maximum speed of the best, real-18 knots. Yakumo -17 knots, Azuma -16-15 knots. "Italians" also did not go more than 18 knots. Re-lightweight machines.
    And not battleships: weak artillery. After all, only 8 ". Not for nothing, the Japanese immediately switched to 12" in Tsukuba.
    That is, the cruisers were just lucky. Tactically. And "Scharnhost" and "Gneisenau" - no.

    5. The newest Russian battleships were heavily overloaded. There was a construction overload. For example, on "Orel" there are about 684 tons. And "Mikasa" has about 900 tons. This means that his belt has gone deeper.
    By the way, it was possible to get rid of part of the construction overload on a hike, since its significant part is additional shields in cabins, to facilitate the crew staying indoors when swimming in the tropics. The remaining overload is operational. The Japanese were also overloaded with fuel and ammunition.

    6. The rate of fire of the Japanese squadron was higher. In fact, the rate of fire of the heavy guns was about the same. For example, the surrendered flagship of Nebogatov fired more shells from two guns of the outdated system of an outdated installation than the Shikishim of four.
    The rate of fire of medium-caliber artillery is higher among the Russians. Not for nothing, the Japanese later switched from 6 "to 140mm. To a lighter shell.

    The reasons for the defeat in Tsushima are tactical. Human factor.
  34. 0
    3 June 2015 20: 00
    I did not like the article.
    The reason for "Tsushima" is the mediocrity of the state system of Ingushetia.
    As for the fleet itself, the very fact of the arrival of the squadron at the theater of operations is already a feat. Indeed, unlike in peacetime, ships could not be in neutral ports for more than 24 hours - repairs, bunkering were underway. The resources of SU at that time were very limited, and most ships had a significant service life. Therefore, the ships were in poor technical condition. Large-caliber guns at that time had a small resource, therefore, for the training of personnel used stem firing of 37 mm inserts. There was virtually no centralized guidance system; rangefinders had a large error. Therefore, experience was important, and on the second squadron there were almost no participants in the battles.
    Rozhdestvensky’s main mistake was poor preparation for the inevitable fleet. The ships went into battle with overloaded coal, and the combustible finish was not dismantled.
    The result is logical, although the Japanese are sometimes very lucky.
  35. 0
    6 June 2015 19: 12
    The lack of command and disorder put the Russian fleet and army in a catastrophic defeat.
    1. 0
      April 5 2019 17: 23
      Oh sorry, the good topic is dead. Again, the anniversary on the nose)))) What is the reason for the defeat in Tsushima?
      The main culprit is Witte (Chubais of our days). From it there is a reserve and the thickness of the walls of the fortress and the port of Dalniy (the killer of Port Arthur). If TOE2 hadn’t wandered for 4 months, hell knows somewhere according to Rozhdestvensky’s directives it could have been able to go to Vladivostok in March when the Japanese armadillos rearm
    2. 0
      April 6 2019 11: 39
      "The mediocrity of the command and carelessness put the Russian fleet and army in a catastrophic defeat."
      The mediocrity of the brains of the writer of this verse says that little we study the history of our country.
  36. 0
    April 5 2019 17: 27
    Friends if there are patriots. (poke your nose). Even the day began
    l imperceptibly
  37. 0
    April 5 2019 17: 29
    Oh wildly sorry. NOT RYAV and YARV, i.e., the Japanese-Russian war for the adversaries attacked