Military Review

Squadron battleship "Sisoy the Great". From birth to Tsushima

177



"Great Sisoy." Among Russian armadillos fleet this name is not used often. Meanwhile, the design and construction of the ship fell on the period when the main directions of the development of the domestic fleet were determined, and its service ended on one of the most tragic days - May 15, 1905, in the Tsushima battle.

Starting a story about this battleship is from August 1881, when a Special Meeting was held in St. Petersburg under the leadership of Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich, whose task was to determine the foundations of Russia's naval policy and develop a twenty-year shipbuilding program. The result of his activity was a program whereby for the Russian fleet in the Baltic the main task was to ensure superiority over the fleets of other coastal states. Separately stipulated the condition that the domestic fleet should at least not yield to the German, and it is desirable to have an advantage over it in the open sea. To achieve this goal, it was planned to build 16 battleships for the Baltic Sea. Taking into account the tactical and technical elements of their likely opponents, the displacement of the planned ships was limited to 8400 t, and the armament to a pair of 305-mm guns.

By the middle of 1888, these requirements changed in the direction of increasing combat power, and the fourth battleship of the program, Navarin, had already four 9476-mm guns deployed in two armor towers with a design displacement of 305 t. The Maritime Technical Committee (MTC) did not, however, agree on both the size of future ships, and their armament, the type of turret installations and booking. Therefore, the project of the fifth battleship was the development of "Emperor Alexander II", and not much stronger "Navarin." With a length between perpendiculars in 101 m, maximum width 20,42 m and draft 6,4 m, the displacement of the projected battleship was 8500 t. Two steam engines with a total power 7300 hp, according to calculations, should have provided the ship with a speed of at least 16 knots and 600 - ton of coal stock - cruising range economical course 3047 miles.

Squadron battleship "Sisoy the Great". From birth to Tsushima


The project assumed a sufficiently powerful booking: the board - 406 mm (to the nasal tip the thickness decreased to 356 mm, to the stern - to 305 mm), the beam - 216-241 mm, barbety - 305 mm, cover for barbet installations - 64 mm, casemates - 127 mm mm, karapasnaya deck - 51-64 mm, conning tower - 152 mm.

The armament of the new battleship was supposed to consist of three 305-mm guns placed in two barbet installations (two-gun on the nose, one-gun on the stern), four 152 mm caliber guns, four 120-mm guns on the upper deck and ten small-caliber Gochkis guns.

In early September, 1890, the ITC sent this project to a number of well-known admirals and received in response a variety of opinions. Vice-Admiral A.A. Peshchurov and Rear Admiral S.O. Makarov found it necessary to increase the main-caliber artillery by one 305-mm gun by installing it in a barbet aft installation. In turn, Vice-Admiral P. P. Pilkin, on the contrary, suggested reworking the project according to the type of ramming battleships and completely removing the stern barbet, while reinforcing the armament with a pair of 229-mm guns in the casemate. V.P. Verkhovsky, S.O. Makarov and P.P. Pilkin considered it necessary to increase the power of steam engines and the speed of the ship by reducing the weight of armor, and О.К. Kremer, on the contrary, considered booking a casemate insufficient. Vice-Admiral N. V. Kopytov proposed to completely abandon the construction of the battleship and build a cruiser. Vice Admirals N.I. Kaznakov, V.I. Popov, A.I. Kupreyanov, Rear Admirals PP Tyrtov and S.S. Valitsky agreed with the project, not considering it necessary to engage in any discussions.

Having received all these conflicting reviews, MTK reworked the project at the end of 1890. January 29 1891-second Marine Department Manager, Admiral N.M. Chikhachev as a whole approved it, after which they began to draw up the necessary drawings of the “battleship in 8880 tons”, which were completed by March 6 of the same year with the approval of the specification. The ship, initially referred to in the ITC documents as “Gangut” No. 2, had a steel hull with a maximum length of 106,98 m, width of 20,7 m, with 94 frames and a double bottom along the 20 to 76 frame. Along the entire length of the engine and boiler rooms, a longitudinal diametrical bulkhead was provided from the second bottom to the armored deck. The ship hull had continuous bottom stringers, zygomatic keels of length 35 m, forged akhter- and stem. The latter was strengthened for use as a ram.

The armor protection was made of ironclad plates. The side belt had a length of 69,2 m, and a width of 2,18 m (1,22 and below the waterline). The machine and boiler rooms of the battleship (length 42,7) were covered with slabs up to 406 mm thick, although the thickness decreased to the lower edge to 203 mm, then to the bow and stern of the ship to 305 mm (at the lower edge - 152 mm). The length of the casemate on the residential deck was 46,3 m. The width of the 127-mm armor plates covering it was 2,3 m, and in the casemate, on the battery deck with the same thickness, 1,92 and 2,24 m, respectively. The lining under the armor was made of larch bars 229 thick (under side armor) and 152 mm (for casemate armor). The 305-mm fore and aft barbettes were installed on the battery deck and exceeded the upper deck on the 0,69 m. The vertical larch bars of the barbet lining bar were 152 mm thick. On top of the main-caliber guns were covered with dome-shaped covers 63,5 mm thick. Nose traverse had a booking thickness of 229 mm, stern-203 mm, conning tower - 229 mm, decks - 64-76 mm.



The main power plant included 8 fire tube boilers (4 double-sided, 4 single-sided) with a total heating surface of 2202 square meters. m, providing the ferry two main machines with a total capacity of 8500 HP The highest speed was planned in 16 knots, and the estimated cruising range was 4440 miles with 10 knots. The drainage system consisted of a 4 steam centrifugal pump with a feed rate of 750 t / h, a steam piston pump (125 t / h); two ejectors and a fire pump.

The armament was planned from four 305-mm guns placed in pairs in barbet installations, six 152-mm casemate guns, twelve 47-mm single-barreled and four 37-mm multi-guns of Hotchkas. In addition, it was planned to install six surface torpedo tubes, two 64-mm Baranovsky paratroopers. In the mine cellars it was possible to take up to 50 spheroconical mines. On the battleship it was planned to install two masts 16,7 m high: one steel with two combat mars, the second wooden “for signals”. The crew was to consist of 500 lower ranks and an 32 officer.

Trying to accelerate the start of ship construction, the General Directorate of Shipbuilding and Supply (GUKiS), even before the development of the 7 drawings was completed in January of 1891, made an attempt to place an order for the manufacture of keel and bottom sheets at the Izhora state plant. The latter, loaded with urgent orders, refused flatly, and GUKiS had to send bids for the supply of 3200 tons of steel to six plants, of which only four (Putilovsky Zavod Society, Aleksandrovsky Steel Foundry, Bryansk Rail Rolling Plant and South Russian Dneprovsk Metallurgical Society) gave a positive response. As a result, the conditions of the Aleksandrovsky Plant were the most acceptable, however, GUKiS, transferring to it the order 4 of June, for some completely incomprehensible reason, slowed down the conclusion of the contract until mid-February 1892. In the future, this delay created many difficulties in relations with the plant (supply disruptions, of which there were many). The Board of the plant at any opportunity referred to the absence of the concluded contract and not set deadlines.

25 July The 1891 of the year in the wooden shed of the New Admiralty set about building a new battleship. And December 21, he was enrolled in the Russian fleet under the name "Sisoy the Great." The solemn laying of the battleship took place on May 7 next year, in the presence of the emperor and heir, Tsarevich Nicholas.



The builder of "Sisoi the Great" was appointed senior naval engineer V.V. Maximov. It is worth noting, however, that the general management of the ship’s construction was entrusted to the position of Rear Admiral V.P., commander of the St. Petersburg port, in force at that time. Verkhovsky, who immediately developed a stormy activity. However, his attempts to accelerate the construction of the battleship often rested on the irresponsibility of GUKiS. Being engaged in material provision of construction, GUKiS in some cases did not take care of the timely conclusion of the necessary contracts, for example, on the steering frame, for- and top-steers, propeller shaft brackets. An attempt to place an order for them abroad failed, and GUKiS had to turn to domestic factories: Putilovsky, who took over the manufacture of propeller shaft brackets, and again to Aleksandrovsky, who had already failed to make 12 t of steel by October 376. The timing of the new order, of course, was also disrupted, and Verkhovsky even raised the question of the need to change the contractor to the Putilov factory before GUKiS.

In the disruption of the planned construction timeframes, it is possible to blame the MTC, which continuously reworked the project, which naturally required a large number of additional works from the construction plant. In particular, the composition of armaments was changed several times. At the beginning of 1893, MTK ordered instead of barbet installations to install armor towers made of the Navarin type, with 305 mm wall thickness and 63,5 mm roof, and replace 35-caliber main caliber guns with new 40 caliber lengths. Instead of the previous 152-mm 35-caliber guns, the installation of new 152-mm Canet 45-caliber guns was planned, and at the end of the fall 1894 of the year finally determined the final composition of the weapon, adding a dozen Xnumx-mm Gochkas guns.

Since these changes caused an overload on more than 50 tons, in order to combat it, the chief ship engineer of the St. Petersburg port was asked to make a booking of a military cabin with a thickness of 152 mm instead of the planned 229 mm, but MTK did not agree to this proposal.

By April 1894 of the year, that is, actually three years after the start of construction, the building berths came to an end. From the 75 compartments for watertightness experienced 67; the remaining work took another six weeks and, finally, on May 16, the commission examined the body of the battleship. In the compiled statement it was noted that all the works were carried out according to approved drawings, and the ship’s launching mass is 4009 t.



20 May "Sisoy the Great" was launched. The pace of construction after the descent of the battleship, contrary to expectations, did not accelerate: the delay in the approval of the ship's design documentation by the MTK had an effect. 29 August GUKiS sent to the MTC a list of missing drawings: water drainage system, general ship ventilation, battle masts, side view, the placement of mine weapons and the location of lifeboats. In addition, the commander of Sisoi the Great, Captain I rank Sidensner, asked to arrange a steel commander's cabin at the stern and place a main compass in it, and Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich expressed a desire to have steel stengi and yards on the battleship. Solving these issues did not allow the battleship to pass in the 1895 year, so two steam engines already manufactured by the Baltic Shipyard for 4260 hp were already manufactured. had to disassemble for the winter.

Having received instructions from the Naval Ministry manager to complete work on the ship by 3 September 1896, GUKIS somewhat intensified its activities, having finished placing orders for the missing equipment in January-February. However, it was not possible to obtain and install it on time, and the list of unfinished work, which was made by the Chief Commander of the Kronstadt port, where the battleship moved for completion, included more than 90 points. Incomplete were one tower installation, drainage and ventilation systems, equipment supplying 37-mm cartridges to Mars, skylights, telephone and much more. In addition, it was found that the repair of the steering gear malfunction will take too much time, so GUKiS decided to mount a machine designed for one of the battleships of the Poltava type under construction on the Sisoy Velikiy.



September 23 1896 of the year on the dimensional Kronstadt mile held preliminary, and October 5 - official running tests. 15,66 knots, which were developed by Sisoy the Great, fully satisfied the MTC.

4 November 1896 The battleship arrived in Revel for the final preparation for the voyage abroad. The largest of the unfinished works was the installation of network barrier devices. December 2 battleship began its first sea crossing to Portland, and December 14 arrived in Algeria, where it was planned to stay 20 days, make the necessary corrections and make color. But the Maritime Ministry received instructions to join the squadron of the Mediterranean as soon as possible, so on December 20 “Sisoy the Great” left for Piraeus, where the team finally managed to produce the most necessary finishing works.

3 March 1897 of the year when performing shooting practice an explosion occurred in the breech of the left cannon of the stern tower. At the same time 16 people. died, 15 were seriously injured (6 was fatal), the tower itself was seriously damaged: the 15 armor plates moved, all the instruments and mechanisms were damaged, the armor weighing more than 7 t flew over the mainmast and chimney and fell on the bow bridge; at the same time, the force of the strike tore off the 37-mm cannon from the pedestal, damaged the bridge, the steam boat and other ship property.



The investigating commission established that during the shooting the hydraulic mechanism closing the gun's shutdown failed, and the servants used a manual drive. During the preparation of the left gun for the next shot, the gunner did not turn the lock piston all the way and left it open. The possible reason for this was considered the probability of displacement of the moving parts of the bolt, which caused the impression of putting it “on the stop”. The Commission indicated that “the present case is caused by ... the absence of safety devices that prevent ignition of the charge until the lock is completely closed”. As a result, the Maritime Ministry instructed MTC to develop appropriate measures to prevent the recurrence of such a case.

March 17 "Sisoy the Great" arrived in Toulon and stood up for repair at the Forge e 'Shantier' plant. Inspection of the ship revealed a huge number of deficiencies, of which the most dangerous for the service of the battleship were numerous hull leaks, poor-quality production of watertight bulkheads and armored hatches. Repairs lasted nine months, but the water flow of the bulkheads eight years later had a tragic effect on the fate of the ship.

12 December 1897, the battleship Sisoy the Great, re-entered service, and ten days later received an urgent order, together with Navarin, to follow the Far East. In mid-March, 1898, the ships anchored in Port Arthur, becoming a counterweight to the Japanese battleships Fuji and Yashima in case of a possible conflict.



Until the end of 1901, Sisoi the Great was part of the Pacific Squadron, taking part in May 1900 in suppressing the Ihetuani uprising (called “Boxing” by foreigners) and losing three sailors killed and 12 wounded from the landing party. 12 December 1901, the battleship Sisoi the Great, as part of a detachment consisting of ships, for the repair of which neither Vladivostok nor Port Arthur ports had any technical capabilities, went to the Baltic Sea. At the beginning of the summer of 1902, in Kronstadt, the battleship was put up for major repairs. It was supposed to install new boilers, repair the ventilation system, steering gear, tower installations, install a new steering gear, replace artillery. In addition, the General Directorate of Hydrographic Administration expressed the desire to manufacture new walls, decks and roofs of the cuttings from non-magnetic materials (brass, bronze or low-magnetic steel) to improve the operation of the compasses.

After the start of the Russian-Japanese war, in March 1904, the battleship was included in the squadron Z. P. Rozhestvensky. The course of work on it accelerated, and on it additionally installed new rangefinders and searchlights.

On the morning of August 29, the Sisoi the Great raised anchor and moved to Revel, where, after a month-long stay and an imperial review, the ships of the 2 of the Pacific Squadron began their transition to the Far East.

“Sisoy the Great”, following in the detachment of Rear Admiral D. Felkersam, passed separately from the main squadron through the Suez Canal. The meeting with the main squadron forces took place on December 26 in the harbor near the island of Nosibe, located near the island of Madagascar, where the squadron remained until March 3 1905, waiting for LF ships first. Dobrotvorsky, and then, deciding with St. Petersburg the question of the place of meeting with the detachment N.I. Nebogatov.



14 May 1905, the squadron ships entered the Korean Strait. On this day in 13 h 49 min shot of the flagship battleship "Prince Suvorov" announced the beginning of the Tsushima battle.

For about an hour, the Sisoy the Great was firing at the armored cruisers Nissin, Kasuga and Ivate without any damage. Reaching a 305-mm projectile in the Iwat, it caused a fire on the Japanese cruiser. In 14 h 40 mines, the nasal torpedo tube was damaged by an explosion of an enemy projectile, then, after defeat of the left side with shells from 305 to 152 mm, water began to flow into all the nasal compartments. In the subsequent 45 minutes, seven more large shells (one 305-mm, 3 - 203-mm and 3 - 152-mm) fell into the battleship, which knocked out the horizontal guidance system of the bow turret and caused multiple fires. By five o'clock in the evening the fires were extinguished, however, continuing to take water through the holes, the battleship received a one and a half meter trim on the nose and roll on the port side. Until the end of the battle, Sisoy the Great was hit by four more shells. Bulkheads, which were not corrected since 1897, continued to pass water, the trim and roll increased, the speed of travel decreased, and after nine o'clock in the evening the battleship fell behind the squadron.

In 22 hours 30 minutes, the Japanese destroyers conducted the first attack, after 45 minutes - the second, during which the torpedo that exploded under the head compartment, damaged the steering wheel and deprived the control ship. However, the main danger for the armadillo was water filling the bow. By May 3 15, the nasal tip rose above the water level only 0,3 meters. Commander of the “Sisoy the Great” M.V. Ozerov tried in reverse to bring him to Fr. Tsushima By 7 hours of the morning, when the coast could already be seen on the horizon, "Sisoy the Great" finally lost its turn. After 20 mines, three Japanese auxiliary cruisers and one destroyer approached it, which, after unsuccessful attempts to take the battleship in tow, removed people from the ship. In the 10 hours of 5 minutes, the battleship Sisoy the Great fell over and went to the bottom in 3 miles from Cape Kirasaki.



Sources:
Bogdanov M. "Great Sisoy" // Gangut. 1992. No.3. C.46-59.
Bogdanov M. Squadron battleship "Sisoy the Great". SPb .: Leko, 2004. C.3-46.
Balakin S. The victims of the Tsushima tragedy // Model-designer. 1993. No.2. C.12-16.
Gribovsky Yu. Russian Pacific Fleet. 1898-1905. History creation and death. M .: Military book, 2004. C.58-63, 111-118.
Author:
177 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 07: 27
    +7
    The fate of Sysoi is a typical result of the grossest mistakes of command that pursued both the army and the navy in the Russo-Japanese War.
    A ship with modern - of the same class as the "Borodinites" - main command artillery, and a speed comparable to that of the "Borodinites" undoubtedly had to be placed in the "Borodino" detachment, for example, the third or fourth.
    His guns GK there would be much more useful ...
    The same can be said about Oslyabyu, and about Navarin.
    And so it turned out a banal, classic rout in parts ...
    1. qwert
      qwert April 4 2016 08: 00
      +11
      Until they came under the influence of the French, normal ships were built. With straight sides and without any problems with stability. We would continue to continue our domestic shipbuilding school with an eye on England and Germany. But, here the uncles and cousins ​​of Nicholas II had too big interests associated with the French magnates and industrialists. The patriotism of the most august persons was the same as that of modern oligarchs. Those. he was not at all.
      1. 1440minutes
        1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 49
        0
        Quote: qwert
        We would continue to continue our domestic shipbuilding school with an eye on England and Germany

        There was a huge and insoluble problem; Russia did not have its own ship vehicles. Actually, no, they were. But such a level that it was extremely difficult to build good ships on them (see overexposures, goddesses, Stormbreaker). Therefore, at one time they bought cars, and then decided to buy a license for their production. So in the RIF appeared Bayan and Tsesarevich (their cars were the same). I don’t give an assessment to these ships, because bought them mainly because of a license for the production of machines.
    2. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 10: 06
      +3
      Detective sofa strategist: Sisoy stood after Oslyabya.
      And what?
    3. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 April 4 2016 16: 25
      +1
      Quote: Alex_623
      it was necessary to put in the detachment of "Borodino", for example, the third or fourth.

      There he would have ended and gave it with his reservation
  2. parusnik
    parusnik April 4 2016 07: 35
    +17
    At 7 a.m., three Japanese auxiliary cruisers and a destroyer approached the battleship. By this time the ship had completely lost its course. To save the team, the commander raised a signal, which was very unusual in a combat situation: “I’m drowning and asking for help.” For some time, Japanese sailors pondered what had happened, then asked the Russian battleship if he surrendered. After receiving an affirmative answer, they lowered the boat, which approached the "Sisoy the Great" at 20 a.m., raised the Japanese flag on the armadillo's gaffel, failing to lower the Russian from the flag. The Japanese, having made an unsuccessful attempt to take the ship in tow, lowered their flag and rescued people, and the bow trim was so large that the mooring boats clung to the trunks of the 8-mm guns of the bow tower. At 15 h 305 min “Sisoy Veliky” capsized and sank three miles from Cape Kirasaki. Fate took pity on him, and he sank under the flag of St. Andrew.
  3. Amurets
    Amurets April 4 2016 07: 43
    +10
    It amazes me that the construction of literally every ship was delayed by the fact that the MTK did not approve the blueprints, then demanded to redo it, as it was approved by another blueprint. I read about this bureaucratic chandelier in literally every book about the ships of the Russian Imperial Navy. About Rurik, Gangut , Varangian, Potemkin. It seems that this was done on purpose, and the MTK served the interests of other states.
    1. Alf
      Alf April 5 2016 21: 38
      +2
      Quote: Amurets
      . It seems that this was done on purpose, and the MTK served the interests of other states.

      It was no coincidence that the Russian sailors joked: the headquarters was at war with the Japanese, the technical committee was neutral, and shipbuilding and supplies were clearly hostile to us
  4. qwert
    qwert April 4 2016 07: 55
    +9
    Quote: Amurets
    It amazes me that the construction of literally every ship was delayed by the fact that the MTK did not approve the blueprints, then demanded to redo it, as it was approved by another blueprint. I read about this bureaucratic chandelier in literally every book about the ships of the Russian Imperial Navy. About Rurik, Gangut , Varangian, Potemkin. It seems that this was done on purpose, and the MTK served the interests of other states.

    Most likely ordinary capitalism. The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury. And the kickbacks in Tsarist Russia, especially under Nicholas II, were practically the same as now. So, I think MTK more supported the interests of private contractors.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 08: 56
      0
      Quote: qwert
      Quote: Amurets
      It amazes me that the construction of literally every ship was delayed by the fact that the MTK did not approve the blueprints, then demanded to redo it, as it was approved by another blueprint. I read about this bureaucratic chandelier in literally every book about the ships of the Russian Imperial Navy. About Rurik, Gangut , Varangian, Potemkin. It seems that this was done on purpose, and the MTK served the interests of other states.

      Most likely ordinary capitalism. The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury. And the kickbacks in Tsarist Russia, especially under Nicholas II, were practically the same as now. So, I think MTK more supported the interests of private contractors.

      Under ordinary capitalism, the construction of the dreadnought in England took a year, in Germany - 2.
      Empress Maria was built 6 years.
      This is not inherent in the social system, but in some relaxed mentality of the Russian person.
      However, the successes of Nikolaev Russia are undeniable. River bends were not involved there.
      For a very long time, almost until the 80s, we compared the economic growth of the USSR with 1913, the year of the highest rise of industrial production.
      For example, you can compare the standard of living in tsarist Russia in 1913 and in the USSR.

      http://maxpark.com/community/4765/content/2222813

       Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, during a visit to the United States, at a lunch in his honor, hosted on September 19, 1959 by the film studio "XX century-Fox", recalled:
        "I got married in 1914, twenty years old. Since I had a good profession - a locksmith - I was able to immediately rent an apartment. It had a living room, kitchen, bedroom, dining room. Years have passed since the revolution and it hurts me to think that I , a worker, lived under capitalism much better than workers live under Soviet power. So we overthrew the monarchy, the bourgeoisie, we won our freedom, and people live worse than before. As a locksmith in Donbass before the revolution, I earned 40-45 rubles a month Black bread cost 2 kopecks a pound (410 grams), and white bread - 5 kopecks. Salo was sold at 22 kopecks per pound, an egg - a penny apiece. Good boots cost 6, at most 7 rubles. And after the revolution, earnings dropped, and even very much, the prices have gone up a lot ... "
        He said it in 1959!
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate April 4 2016 09: 32
        +3
        The standard of living of the Russian countryside is also well known under the tsar - they practically did not cope with the state of hunger, and the wages of workers were much lower than the global ones. In addition, no one ever claimed that a person living in the city and having a demanded well-paid specialty lived poorly under the king, but under the king, the bulk of the population lived in villages with an appropriate level of income, literacy, medical support, mortality, etc. d.

        An article about an armadillo, but why did you begin to describe the "paradise life" under the tsar?)
        1. AK64
          AK64 April 4 2016 10: 20
          -3
          The standard of living of the Russian countryside is also well known under the tsar - they practically didn’t get out of the state of hunger,

          The province went to write ...
          And you compare the photo of the soldiers of the PMV and the photo of the soldiers of the Red Army - you will be very surprised.
          Compare growth. And why are these tsarist soldiers Taller, if they did not crawl out of hunger?

          Yes, and the wages of workers were much lower than worldwide.

          You will be surprised, but the standard of living, the real standard of living and not the "salary", of Russian workers was higher than that of British workers. The British, with significantly higher incomes, had an average life expectancy of 28 years. At least Dickens was respected, or something, before the ether was shaken.

          Under the tsar, the bulk of the population lived in villages with an appropriate level of income, literacy, medical support, mortality, etc.

          But the coming to power of the Bolsheviks for some reason was accompanied by the actual destruction of the systems of public health and public education. Ah, well, yes, well, yes, then, of course, they began to "develop" them again. Just when did you reach the pre-revolutionary level?

          An article about an armadillo, but why did you begin to describe the "paradise life" under the tsar?)

          In comparison with the Soviets, it was just heavenly.
          1. 97110
            97110 April 4 2016 15: 20
            0
            Quote: AK64
            You will be surprised, but the standard of living, the real standard of living and not the "salary" of Russian workers

            Yes, and salary ... Leaving for the season, a man could earn and bring more than 1000 rubles to the village, in the port of St. Petersburg, to earn money and bring it home. Accordingly, payment of an apartment, meals, travel to the house and other operating expenses are not included in this amount. If the worker had a qualification, does the salary increase? I refer again to the stories of my grandmother.
          2. barbiturate
            barbiturate April 4 2016 18: 27
            +2
            Quote: AK64
            The province went to write ...

            are you scribbling something from yourself?

            Quote: AK64
            And you compare the photo of the soldiers of the PMV and the photo of the soldiers of the Red Army - you will be very surprised.
            Compare growth. And why are these tsarist soldiers Taller, if they did not crawl out of hunger?


            You will be very surprised, but there are a lot of photos, and if you compare the photos of Soviet soldiers from the encirclement with the photos of the imperial guard ... just what does this prove? By the way, there is a good photo of the preobrazhenitsa and an ordinary infantryman, they are standing nearby, inquisitive

            Quote: AK64
            You will be surprised, but the standard of living, the real standard of living and not the "salary", of Russian workers was higher than that of British workers. The British, with significantly higher incomes, had an average life expectancy of 28 years. At least Dickens was respected, or something, before the ether was shaken.


            Enough documentary books have been written on this subject, and Dickens’s books are fiction, can I read Shakespeare?) And I’m shocking the air out of laughter now - I advise Dickens to read it ... I prefer Mine Reed.

            Quote: AK64
            From only the coming to power of the Bolsheviks for some reason was accompanied by the actual destruction of the systems of public health care and public education. Ah, well, yes, well, yes, then, of course, they began to "develop" them again. Just when did you reach the pre-revolutionary level?


            This was not with the king, wake up. The Bolsheviks created everything from scratch.


            Quote: AK64
            In comparison with the Soviets, it was just heavenly.


            laughing And you are a storyteller
            1. AK64
              AK64 April 4 2016 20: 00
              +2
              This was not with the king, wake up. The Bolsheviks created everything from scratch.


              Well, yes, yes, before the Bolsheviks, after all, there was no life. Lenin crashed - and created life. First, the light created clearly - and then life.

              / and to the side /
              and why do kindergartens conduct internet? they can learn how to smoke
              1. veteran66
                veteran66 April 5 2016 20: 33
                -1
                Quote: veteran66
                The Bolsheviks created everything from scratch.

                yeah, they created .... I studied in a rural school, which was built by a landowner for peasant children and for 65 years in power, the Bolsheviks never bothered to build a new building. Recently I was in the places of my childhood, I saw an almost ready building of a new building, the liberals or whatever ... shit built.
                1. AK64
                  AK64 April 5 2016 20: 39
                  -1
                  I really like this picture.

                  I suggest that the participants in the conversation solve the problem on the board - only solve it verbally, as the children in the picture solve it
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. barbiturate
                  barbiturate April 6 2016 20: 04
                  +1
                  You want to say that the USSR did not build new schools in 65 years? Or why are you saying this? Apparently the landowner built it firmly, only under the shit had to build a new one laughing
                  1. veteran66
                    veteran66 April 6 2016 22: 23
                    0
                    Quote: barbiturate
                    USSR did not build new schools

                    built, I do not deny, but do not extol their efforts, while omitting the tsarist regime.
                  2. The comment was deleted.
            2. veteran66
              veteran66 April 5 2016 20: 30
              +1
              Quote: barbiturate
              This was not with the king

              but what about the Zemstvo hospitals and Zemstvo schools, which, incidentally, Lenin’s dad was very proud of, and the Bolsheviks praised him for this. They were not there either?
              1. barbiturate
                barbiturate April 6 2016 20: 24
                +2
                Zemsky schools and hospitals, of course, were there, did anyone argue with this? Since the main polemic about medicine has begun, let's talk about it, education is its own huge stratum. Here zemstvo hospitals, drive into the Internet. You will quickly be given links to ENCYCLOPEDIA (published under the tsar, for example), of which you can learn that by 1910 there were 3100 Zemstvo doctors to serve the rural population. Can you imagine the rural population of the Russian Empire in 1910? It is not difficult to find the number of peasants in 1910, then divide by the number of doctors (3100), a lot? laughing

                The same Veresaev, to which AK64 refers and whose point of view you apparently support, gives the figure of 22 thousand doctors for 129 million people in the empire (he cited data for 1901), and almost all doctors are in cities.

                This is also evidenced by Bulgakov in his Notes to the young doctor that the rural population did not really see the doctor, did not trust and was afraid because of their illiteracy, read if you do not believe
                1. veteran66
                  veteran66 April 6 2016 22: 20
                  -1
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  the rural population and the doctor did not really see

                  the main medical worker in the village was "fershal", well, and folk healers in much larger numbers. You can laugh, but they were just more useful, modern life shows, I do not mean modern charlatans for money.
              2. barbiturate
                barbiturate April 6 2016 20: 24
                0
                Zemsky schools and hospitals, of course, were there, did anyone argue with this? Since the main polemic about medicine has begun, let's talk about it, education is its own huge stratum. Here zemstvo hospitals, drive into the Internet. You will quickly be given links to ENCYCLOPEDIA (published under the tsar, for example), of which you can learn that by 1910 there were 3100 Zemstvo doctors to serve the rural population. Can you imagine the rural population of the Russian Empire in 1910? It is not difficult to find the number of peasants in 1910, then divide by the number of doctors (3100), a lot? laughing

                The same Veresaev, to which AK64 refers and whose point of view you apparently support, gives the figure of 22 thousand doctors for 129 million people in the empire (he cited data for 1901), and almost all doctors are in cities.

                This is also evidenced by Bulgakov in his Notes to the young doctor that the rural population did not really see the doctor, did not trust and was afraid because of their illiteracy, read if you do not believe
                1. veteran66
                  veteran66 April 6 2016 22: 27
                  0
                  Quote: barbiturate
                  Bulgakov testifies in his Notes to the young doctor,

                  I read, I agree, but unfortunately, the increase in the number of doctors did not outgrow the quality of Soviet medicine, about which praises sing here
                  1. barbiturate
                    barbiturate April 7 2016 15: 12
                    +1
                    The quality of Soviet medicine, a controversial and separate issue, probably smile But the fact that it was the Soviet government that brought medicine to the very bottom of the state is completely clear to me. Regarding the quantity and quality in that historical period, the well-respected forum member Andrei from Chelyabinsk wrote well and I completely agree with him in this matter, in my opinion Objectively written.

                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Usually, Bolsheviks are blamed for the collapse of education, because the quality of graduates of tsarist educational institutions is much higher than the early Soviet ones. This is true because:
                    1) Many teachers died, or fled to civilian, or something else happened to them.
                    2) The USSR began to actively promote education to the masses, teaching a large number to the detriment of quality.
                    But here's the funny thing - in the case of doctors, this approach was largely correct in many ways. Because under tsarism there were very good doctors - but there were LITTLE. Very few - large masses of the population of the Russian Empire simply did not have the opportunity to receive medical care. But a bad doctor is better than none. Therefore, the appearance of even low-skilled medical staff where there were no doctors before and gave a very big effect, including on child mortality.
                    And, I repeat, about the fact that scientists overestimated the results - you are VERY mistaken. For example, the failure of the first five-year plan is obvious by ... official statistics of the first five-year plan :))
          3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 22: 19
            +3
            Quote: AK64
            That's just the coming to power of the Bolsheviks for some reason was accompanied by the actual destruction of public health systems and public education

            You just look at the infant mortality rate in the early 20's compared to what it was in tsarist Russia. I believe you will be ashamed of your words.
            1. AK64
              AK64 April 4 2016 22: 40
              -5
              You just look at the infant mortality rate in the early 20's compared to what it was in tsarist Russia. I believe you will be ashamed of your words.


              Have you ever answered for the bazaar, huh?
              And give figures and facts.
              That is, at least one, at least one talker would have brought the numbers!

              Chatterbox, unlike you, I understand this professionally. I am not a historian, I am worse - I am an epidemiologist: I know what and how is considered.

              Chatterbox, there is NO number of "child mortality" in the early 20's. And in the 30s it is not there either.

              Chatterbox, in the 20s, the Bolsheviks’s infant mortality was not interesting at all, and they did not collect statistics. All numbers are nothing more than interpolation obtained in the 70s already. And honest interpolation indicates a higher mortality in Soviet times (which is hardly surprising).

              But for the tsarist time there are statistics. Because the "bloody tsarist regime" was interested in the situation of its subjects.

              And now the question is: Will you apologize to me?
              And the second question: will you be ashamed of a lie?
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 23: 29
                +4
                Quote: AK64
                That is, at least one, at least one talker would have brought the numbers!

                Well, bring on who's bothering? You essentially did NOT say ANYTHING. Where do you have arguments about the defeat of healthcare by the Bolsheviks? Where are the facts? Link to Dickens, or what?
                In general, before you demand something from others, do at least something yourself.
                Quote: AK64
                Chatterbox, in the 20's the infant mortality of the Bolsheviks was not interesting at all, and they did not collect statistics. All numbers are nothing more than interpolation obtained in 70 already.

                Wow :))) Take P.I. Kurkin "Fertility and mortality in the capitalist states of Europe", Moscow, 1938g.... And you read. Then you take Bravaia R.M. "Protection of mothers and babies in the West and in the USSR" Moscow, 1929g. And read. You are surprised to find that according to the indicated data, infant mortality in Moscow, for example, in 1911-1915 was 27,4 for 100 births, and in 1924 - 17,7, in 1925 - 13. That in the Tver province the mortality of children under one year was 1913 in 36,9, and 1923 in 14,8, etc.
                After that, sit in front of the mirror and try to explain to yourself (I don’t need to explain anything, everything is clear to me with you) how a book printed in 1929 can be an extrapolation made in 70's.
                Quote: AK64
                And now the question is: Will you apologize to me?

                Yeah. On the knees laughing
                1. AK64
                  AK64 April 4 2016 23: 43
                  -4
                  Well, bring on who's bothering? You essentially did NOT say ANYTHING. Where do you have arguments about the defeat of healthcare by the Bolsheviks? Where are the facts? Link to Dickens, or what?


                  funny yap, right?

                  No, seriously, but isn’t it funny?
                  It requires something, but is not able to produce anything.

                  And now, for reading for the ignorant, are offered
                  "Doctor's notes" Veresaev
                  и
                  "Notes of a young doctor" Bulgakov.

                  We read - and we are wildly surprised ...
                  Oh yes, the dates are the same ... As I forgot, you little children will not even be able to find the dates.
                  so Veresaev is 1990, the year of publication. Bulgakov also worked as a doctor only until 1917.

                  Draw conclusions.
                  1. barbiturate
                    barbiturate April 5 2016 06: 43
                    +1
                    Quote: AK64
                    And now, for reading for the ignorant, Veresaev's "Notes of a Doctor"

                    Quote: AK64
                    Oh yes, the dates are ... As I forgot, you little children will not even be able to find the dates. So Veresaev is 1990, the year of publication


                    Are you not so smart, eh? Do you consider yourself smarter than everyone else, perhaps that you are writing blatant nonsense? Even just type Veresaev's "Doctor's Notes" and what do we see?
                    "All-Russian fame came to Veresaev after the publication in 1901 in the magazine" Mir Bozhiy "" Notes of a Physician "- a biographical story about experiments on humans and a collision with their monstrous reality of a young doctor." A doctor - if he is a doctor, not a medical official - must first of all fight for the elimination of those conditions that make his activity senseless and fruitless, he must be a public figure in the broadest sense of the word. ”Then, in 1903-1927, there were 11 editions. In the work that condemned medical experiments on humans, it was manifested also the moral position of the writer, who opposed any experiments on humans, including against social experiments, whoever conducted them - bureaucrats or revolutionaries. The resonance was so strong that the emperor himself ordered to take action and stop medical experiments on humans. "

                    What is the 1990th year of publication? what great revelations did the Bolsheviks conceal from people in 1901, in 1903-27 it was 11 !!! editions. What great concern for people in it is it, oh, yap? We are talking about EXPERIMENTS ON PEOPLE, even the decision of Nicholas II on this occasion is! Love it, the rapper is cheap.

                    Bulgakov, too, made out the same thing, NOTHING about GOOD MEDICINE UNDER THE Tsar "Describes the life and customs of the villagers of that time - their illiteracy, superstition, a tendency to trust more local women-sorcerers than doctors"
                    You yap, and even cheap yap
                    1. AK64
                      AK64 April 5 2016 15: 25
                      -1
                      I think no one will mind if I bring the boor in the hour.

                      Veresaeva, of course, he did not read, limiting himself to an article on Wiki.
                  2. barbiturate
                    barbiturate April 5 2016 06: 43
                    +2
                    Quote: AK64
                    And now, for reading for the ignorant, Veresaev's "Notes of a Doctor"

                    Quote: AK64
                    Oh yes, the dates are ... As I forgot, you little children will not even be able to find the dates. So Veresaev is 1990, the year of publication


                    Are you not so smart, eh? Do you consider yourself smarter than everyone else, perhaps that you are writing blatant nonsense? Even just type Veresaev's "Doctor's Notes" and what do we see?
                    "All-Russian fame came to Veresaev after the publication in 1901 in the magazine" Mir Bozhiy "" Notes of a Physician "- a biographical story about experiments on humans and a collision with their monstrous reality of a young doctor." A doctor - if he is a doctor, not a medical official - must first of all fight for the elimination of those conditions that make his activity senseless and fruitless, he must be a public figure in the broadest sense of the word. ”Then, in 1903-1927, there were 11 editions. In the work that condemned medical experiments on humans, it was manifested also the moral position of the writer, who opposed any experiments on humans, including against social experiments, whoever conducted them - bureaucrats or revolutionaries. The resonance was so strong that the emperor himself ordered to take action and stop medical experiments on humans. "

                    What is the 1990th year of publication? what great revelations did the Bolsheviks conceal from people in 1901, in 1903-27 it was 11 !!! editions. What great concern for people in it is it, oh, yap? We are talking about EXPERIMENTS ON PEOPLE, even the decision of Nicholas II on this occasion is! Love it, the rapper is cheap.

                    Bulgakov, too, made out the same thing, NOTHING about GOOD MEDICINE UNDER THE Tsar "Describes the life and customs of the villagers of that time - their illiteracy, superstition, a tendency to trust more local women-sorcerers than doctors"
                    You yap, and even cheap yap
                    1. barbiturate
                      barbiturate April 6 2016 15: 16
                      +2
                      By the way, you can answer the talker AK64 about Veresaev "Doctor's Notes"
                      His work has long been disassembled by smart people, and I brought the AK64 trepuck excerpts from B. G. Yudin. A man in a medical experiment: re-reading VV Veresaeva. // Questions of the history of natural science and technology. No. 4, 2001

                      Yudin himself is a knowledgeable and respected person. Boris Yudin - Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Man of the Russian Academy of Sciences, editor-in-chief of the "Chelovek" magazine. But the talker AK64 clearly did not calm down and thinks that I have not read Veresaev. Well, let's re-read it (I read it a long time ago) and once again we WILL NOT FIND any revelations about EXCELLENT ROYAL MEDICINE, Veresaev talks about what Yudin is examining as a specialist. Veresaev also speaks directly about the moral and ethical aspects of medicine, attention for those who love the AK64 batter:
                      "People, even relatively educated people, often express the opinion that the reason for the plight of doctors is their gravitation to cities. These people say: we have about twenty thousand doctors, and the population of Russia is 128 million. What can be said about overproduction? Doctors are not they want to go into the wilderness, but they want to live in cultural centers; it is clear that there is an overproduction in these centers, but this overproduction is completely artificial: doctors in the centers are starving, and the VILLAGE DIES AND GENERATES WITHOUT KNOWING medical help. We have too few doctors, and not a lot, and you need to take care in every possible way to increase their number.
                      The village, indeed, perishes and degenerates, not knowing medical help. "I have allocated for the eyes of the battering AK64

                      And he testifies there! Veresaev "... for huge strata of the population, medical care is an inaccessible luxury."

                      Well, what about the AK64 trepak? I gave you quotes from Veresaev himself from his work to which you refer laughing What does Veresaev write about good and "heavenly" medical services for peasants?
                2. Cap.Morgan
                  Cap.Morgan April 5 2016 00: 36
                  -6
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

                  Wow :))) Take P.I. Kurkin "Fertility and mortality in the capitalist states of Europe", Moscow, 1938g.... And you read. Then you take Bravaia R.M. "Protection of mothers and babies in the West and in the USSR" Moscow, 1929g. And read. You are surprised to find that according to the indicated data, infant mortality in Moscow, for example, in 1911-1915 was 27,4 for 100 births, and in 1924 - 17,7, in 1925 - 13. That in the Tver province the mortality of children under one year was 1913 in 36,9, and 1923 in 14,8, etc.
                  After that, sit in front of the mirror and try to explain to yourself (I don’t need to explain anything, everything is clear to me with you) how a book printed in 1929 can be an extrapolation made in 70's.

                  Well, you're an adult.
                  If a fellow scientist in 1929 wrote the opposite, that is, the truth, he would have been judged by a trio as a notorious counter and would have left for 10 years without the right of correspondence.
                  1. AK64
                    AK64 April 5 2016 15: 34
                    -3
                    Well, you're an adult.
                    If a fellow scientist in 1929 wrote the opposite, that is, the truth, he would have been judged by a trio as a notorious counter and would have left for 10 years without the right of correspondence.


                    I (just in case) rushed once again to look for statistics on infant mortality in the USSR: in truth I tell a lie and does it still exist?

                    And here is what I found, look, do not be lazy:

                    http://vakhnenko.livejournal.com/40024.html

                    In a short article, we are talking about mortality from the 1950s, that is, for the BAPTIMAL one already.

                    Well, the fact that the mortality of the 50s was horrific, in comparison with developed countries, is understandable: in the 50s, mass public health was just beginning to be introduced - and as a result, sharp. Moreover, just the second half of the 50s is the only period in the USSR when population growth was approximately equal to the tsarist (!!!)

                    Dale, thanks to the introduction of affordable mass medicine (and let's call Khrushch a traitor again!) Mortality is still falling sharply. But it is still significantly, at times, higher than the "developed countries".

                    So, the article talks about METHODS for calculating mortality in the USSR, in the 1950s and 90s. About the methods.

                    How exactly and what was calculated, and what was NOT CALCULATED, trying to reduce the numbers.

                    Read, the article is short.

                    At the same time, I personally believe that in the 50s, after the death of you-know-whom, a literal feat was made in the sense of healthcare development: finally, even the tsarist level of 1914 was surpassed ..
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 16: 19
                      +3
                      Listen, epidemiologist, but don’t go around like a frying pan, everything is clear to you already.
                      At first, you argued that there are no statistics on child mortality at all, and that the available data is an extrapolation from the 70s. And he told me how smart and experienced you are. And that you know everything. And picturesquely knocking himself on the chest with his heel, he pulled me "for the bazaar to answer." And when I attached you with a face about the sources of the 29th year, you did not find anything more "smart" how to oppose them with your own.
                      If you say "answer for the bazaar," then answer for your bazaar:
                      1) You were not aware that sources of child mortality existed before the 70's and lifted your nose in vain
                      2) You are so illiterate that you are even unable to distinguish the year the book was published from the year it was written (so Veresaev became your 1990 year)
                      3) You are so unlucky that you oppose Fiction (even classic) to statistical research
                      In general, I'm sorry for the epidemiology. She has you.
                      1. AK64
                        AK64 April 5 2016 16: 25
                        -4
                        Sorry, but I will not speak with a boorish man who pokes at strangers.

                        After half an hour, proceed to the emergency.
                      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 17: 12
                        +3
                        Quote: AK64
                        Sorry, but I will not speak with a boorish man who pokes at strangers.

                        Naturally, you won't. First, you have nothing to answer me. Secondly, people like you do not know how to answer for their words, and will never learn. You dared to call me both "boorish" and "yap" only because you are wildly brave when you sit in the internet and understand that you will not receive a response in the face. In my face, you would not dare to blurt out this in your epidemiological life.
                    2. Ustinov 055 055
                      Ustinov 055 055 April 19 2016 11: 49
                      0
                      Gentlemen virtual Marshals and virtual colonels, believe the current captain of rank 2, HOW MUCH CAN go to the side of the HERE about the Bronenos, and you lived about. This somehow resembles the fate of our aircraft carrier fleet, one thing is necessary, but they all talked about and set up the aircraft carriers about the cruiser. Please essentially write comments
                3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 16: 30
                  +2
                  Quote: Cap.Morgan
                  Well, you’re an adult. If a scientist in the 1929 year wrote the opposite, that is, the truth

                  Those. the option that everything written AND THERE IS TRUTH do you not allow? :)))
                  But this is actually so. And I will explain why.
                  Usually, Bolsheviks are blamed for the collapse of education, because the quality of graduates of tsarist educational institutions is much higher than the early Soviet ones. This is true because:
                  1) Many teachers died, or fled to civilian, or something else happened to them.
                  2) The USSR began to actively promote education to the masses, teaching a large number to the detriment of quality.
                  But here's the funny thing - in the case of doctors, this approach was largely correct in many ways. Because under tsarism there were very good doctors - but there were LITTLE. Very few - large masses of the population of the Russian Empire simply did not have the opportunity to receive medical care. But a bad doctor is better than none. Therefore, the appearance of even low-skilled medical staff where there were no doctors before and gave a very big effect, including on child mortality.
                  And, I repeat, about the fact that scientists overestimated the results - you are VERY mistaken. For example, the failure of the first five-year plan is obvious by ... official statistics of the first five-year plan :))
                  1. barbiturate
                    barbiturate April 5 2016 16: 54
                    +1
                    You are right, dear Andrei, but the posts of the epidemiologist have gone somewhere laughing In the remainder, we have two fiction books cited by an epidemiologist who completely and refute his version of paradise before the revolution and good medical supply, and also Dickens laughing
                    By the way, the tsarist authorities didn’t hide the starvation of their own population, everyone knew about everything and very famous people wrote a lot about it in our time (Leo Tolstoy, V. Korolenko, and a bunch of people), but these events hit even in the encyclopedia published BEFORE the revolution, under the king!

                    “After the famine of 1891, covering a vast region of 29 provinces, the lower Volga region is constantly suffering from hunger: during the 8th century. Samara province went hungry 9 times, Saratov 1880. Over the past thirty years, the largest hunger strikes date back to 1885 (the Lower Volga region, part of the lakes and Novorossiysk provinces) and by 1891 (New Russia and some non-chernozem provinces from Kaluga to Pskov); then, following the famine of 1892, famine of 1897 occurred in the central and southeastern provinces, hunger strikes of 98 and 1901. approximately in the same area; in the XX century. the 17 famine in 1905 provinces of the center, south and east, the 22 hunger strike (1906 provinces, including four non-chernozem provinces, Pskov, Novgorod, Vitebsk, Kostroma), which opens up a number of hunger strikes: 1907, 1908, 1911 and XNUMX . (mostly eastern, central provinces, Novorossia) ”
                    New Encyclopedic Dictionary / Ed. ed. Acad. K.K. Arsenyev. T.14. St. Petersburg: F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron, 1913. St. 41.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 17: 32
                      +2
                      Quote: barbiturate
                      You are right, dear Andrei, but the posts of the epidemiologist have gone somewhere

                      Greetings, dear barbiturate! hi This is he who put us on the blacklist laughing We won’t see him again.
                      I will miss him, and with joy, chesslovo!
                    2. barbiturate
                      barbiturate April 5 2016 19: 00
                      +2
                      Ah, that’s why the epidemiologist disappeared laughing, and so he talked down, as if he knew a great secret, rushed right at people, but after two art books, supposedly the proofs that destroy his version of pre-revolutionary paradise were blown away like a Chinese ball laughing To miss such fruit with joy - well you put it, I join. yes
                    3. The comment was deleted.
                4. The comment was deleted.
        2. Cap.Morgan
          Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 23: 18
          +1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Quote: AK64
          That's just the coming to power of the Bolsheviks for some reason was accompanied by the actual destruction of public health systems and public education

          You just look at the infant mortality rate in the early 20's compared to what it was in tsarist Russia. I believe you will be ashamed of your words.

          In the early 20s there was a famine in the Volga region. And not only there. So the mortality there was very high.
          Where can I see objective data? Who can provide them?
          Economic Council? Do not tell my slippers.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 23: 34
            +5
            Quote: Cap.Morgan
            Economic Council? Do not tell my slippers.

            There are quite objective print data. And if you gave yourself the trouble to work a little with Soviet statistics, then you would know that it is not lying. He doesn’t conclude - yes, whether in any other way he distorts reality - that was. But lying directly - this is practically nonexistent.
            Example - take the statistical reference books of the economy of the USSR of the Brezhnev era. There the whole unsightly picture of the collapse of the socialist economy is evident.
            And finally, let’s say the economic council is lying. Where is your data from? From laughing slippers? :)
            1. Cap.Morgan
              Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 23: 51
              +2
              Well, think for yourself.
              Who counted the dead.
              Do you even imagine how this decline is considered?
              Those killed in the war, for example? This is an estimate. According to the census.
              Take one census, another, compare.
              But if you indicate in the census not the numbers that the authorities need, then you will go to cut the forest.
              Stalin indicated the death toll in the war - 7 000 000. And right up to the Khrushchev revelations, they all spoke with one voice - 7!
              Now it turns out 27.
              Here is the price of the statistics you are referring to.
              1. AK64
                AK64 April 5 2016 00: 06
                0
                Well, think for yourself.
                Who counted the dead.


                When the king believed. At least after the 1861 reforium, there are continuous statistics, by year and by province. Everything is available online. They kept statisticians in the bridging departments who sat and wrote. And there was no need for censuses: registry offices (churches) kept primary records, collect and summarize.

                Until 1861, it’s more verbose, but there is also data. Moreover, the data is DIRECT, and not ex post facto

                But there are no Soviet statistics, here you are right. Statistics are restored only in the 50s, after the death of Stalin. All that from 1917 to 1956 (approximately) is ESTIMATES. (And how they were received ...)
              2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 16: 42
                +3
                Once again I can only repeat to you - you did not work with statistics. And I worked a lot. And I am completely not convinced by general reasoning, which is already erroneous
                Quote: Cap.Morgan
                Stalin indicated the death toll in the war - 7 000 000. And right up to the Khrushchev revelations, they all spoke with one voice - 7!

                Well, what about the statistics? :))) Tell me a statistical guide that would declare the recommended 7 million? :))
            2. AK64
              AK64 April 5 2016 15: 45
              0
              There are quite objective print data.


              I repeat once again: there are no reliable statistics for the 20-30s.

              Conclusions about mortality in the 20-30s were made not on the basis of objective data collection, but on the basis of estimates from general demographic statistics.
              So from this general one: somewhere in 1922-25 (or even 27; just in the 26th there was a census) the population growth rate is approximately equal to the tsarist (slightly lower, but the difference does not increase the estimation error, so it can be neglected) . In the 30s, a direct scam was already beginning: the organizers of the 1937 census were shot as pests (and there is nothing to show unpleasant figures - everyone knows that life has become more fun, comrades!). However, even if we take as a basis the obviously falsified figures of the 1939 census, then the growth rates were much lower than the tsarist ones: any participant in the conversation can easily check this: subtract "it became-it", divide by the number of years and then by the population. (Why was it falsified in 1939? So if the predecessors were shot, then they will draw the right conclusions and what numbers they will receive!)

              The population growth rate reaches the level of 1914 only in 1955-59.
            3. veteran66
              veteran66 April 5 2016 19: 07
              +1
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Soviet statistics

              that's where the source of truth is !!!!
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. AK64
            AK64 April 4 2016 23: 36
            0
            In the early 20s there was a famine in the Volga region. And not only there. So the mortality there was very high. Where can I see objective data? Who can provide them? Economic Council? Do not tell my slippers.


            Well, you're right, of course. I have already mentioned this several times. (Soviet people, unfortunately, do not even know how to use Google, just a disaster)

            Mean about mortality:
            (1) the advice, as I said, on mortality, and demography in general, was of little interest. At least no one has yet found statistics (namely statistics and not estimates from the 70s) of mortality in the 20s or 30s. However, the 50s can not be found either, do not hope. Maybe it's a secret? But WHY - after all bloody royal regime won! It would seem - it is necessary to report victories! Scream and scream!

            A - it doesn’t work. There are no victories.

            But the "bloody and tsarist regime" kept statistics: the "bloody tsar" was interested in the situation of his subjects. And anyone who has mastered Google can easily find how infant and nursery mortality in the Russian Empire, both by years and (drums!) by provinces.

            The oversight came out of the Soviet people - published, s. They thought that they would drive a nail into the tsarist regime - but they would drive it into themselves (as usual for them, however, people try to.)

            Now notice to yourself: I said "infant" and "child" mortality. What is the difference? And the difference: infant is 0-5 years old, and "children's" 1-16 (in principle, until puberty).

            In general, take care of children, do not give them to pioneers. And do not give it to scouts: who knows?
            1. Cap.Morgan
              Cap.Morgan April 5 2016 00: 15
              +1
              Absolutely.
              Under Nicholas, objectively, the population grew by 50 million.
              Maybe there was some kind of infant mortality, but we see the result.

              In general, there is a phenomenon that I would call Soviet revanchism.
              The problems that took place in the USSR have been forgotten and the people, against the background of some of the current difficulties, begins to desperately dream of white and fluffy socialism, "when everyone had everything and the factories were working."
              There is common sclerosis.
              Since it is impossible to stop the aging process of revanchists objectively, sclerosis will smoothly flow into insanity.
              1. 1440minutes
                1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 33
                0
                Quote: Cap.Morgan
                There is common sclerosis.
                Since it is impossible to stop the aging process of revanchists objectively, sclerosis will smoothly flow into insanity.

                He said beautifully. It will be necessary to remember.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. AK64
                AK64 April 5 2016 00: 41
                -1
                That's right. Under Nicholas, objectively, the population grew by 50 million. Maybe there was some kind of infant mortality, but we see the result.


                You are wrong: under Nicholas, and even under Alexandra (two!) You see the exact figures of infant and child mortality. Frauds in the provinces. (sorry, I don’t know about Central Asia and the Caucasus - maybe they didn’t count there. But in Russia, count here and Little Russia, considered meticulously.)

                Infant mortality (0-5 years) is known: after 1861 and until 1914 it is approximately constant: 27-29%. It. certainly terrible. But guys, be realistic! She was a little less in rich Britain.

                And before the abolition of serfdom, that is, until 1861, infant mortality was about 41-44% - feel the difference! 41% is Cameroon.

                In general, for the Soviet people it may sound surprising, but the "bloody regime" took care of children and motherhood - the scoops howled at this level of care only in the 50s.

                I wanted to cram the picture, but something is difficult here ...

                Well, without a picture: guys, it's all right. It's always simple. And there is no need to look for "Jewish-Masons". It is just that, while maintaining the growth rate, Russia by 1950 became 280 million people without problems. Of which 90% are Russians (including Little Russians and Belarusians). These are Medeleev's estimates (yes, he invented vodka for you, stupid ones.). And this means Russia inevitably became the European hegemon (and hence the world).

                So they took measures against you, my stupid friends. and you are glad that the eggs were cut off: jumping-skok is easier without eggs.
                1. barbiturate
                  barbiturate April 5 2016 03: 39
                  +1
                  How many fairy tales have been written by supporters of the tsar’s father) They don’t believe in one thing at all, in other fiction. It will be possible to read your ARTISTS books by doctors, but I doubt that there is something written about the magnificent royal medicine, it simply was not there. I read artistic memoirs of P. Goncharenko. who was a paramedic in the regiment and came to his village, everyone in his memoirs recalls how he was treated and in what condition the Russian village was.
              4. veteran66
                veteran66 April 5 2016 19: 08
                0
                Quote: Cap.Morgan
                Since it is impossible to stop the aging process of revanchists objectively, sclerosis will smoothly flow into insanity

                + 100500 !!!!
      2. Nekarmadlen
        Nekarmadlen April 4 2016 22: 59
        0
        Russia we lost (((. Damned revolutionaries ((((
      3. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene April 5 2016 00: 00
        +1
        Stop whistling. Before the revolution, my mother, from a peasant family, had to beg for mercy in order to feed herself, and my father from a working-class family, when I asked him: "Was it really better in tsarist times?", Answered: "We did not starve, but we didn’t eat our fill either. ".
        1. Cap.Morgan
          Cap.Morgan April 5 2016 00: 04
          0
          Quote: Alexander Green
          Stop whistling. Before the revolution, my mother, from a peasant family, had to beg for mercy in order to feed herself, and my father from a working-class family, when I asked him: "Was it really better in tsarist times?", Answered: "We did not starve, but we didn’t eat our fill either. ".

          And my mother-in-law from the fertile Soviet Ukraine was starving in Soviet times quite recently. They ate a quinoa and she could not look at corn bread.
        2. AK64
          AK64 April 5 2016 00: 09
          +2
          Before the revolution, my mother from a peasant family was forced to ask for charity in order to feed herself,


          Out of curiosity: how old are you and how old is your mom?

          Please answer, do not run away.

          / And to the side /
          these are Ukrainians, sir; they Stalin personally for the Lviv famine of 1938 is to blame
    2. Amurets
      Amurets April 4 2016 12: 17
      +2
      Quote: barbiturate

      An article about an armadillo, but why did you begin to describe the "paradise life" under the tsar?)

      Then about the battleship. According to the recollections of the sailors of the Second Pacific Squadron, the Sisoi was not properly repaired, as well as the Navarino, and the ship went back to the Far East in a worse condition than it had come to St. Petersburg for repair. were objective: urgent completion of new ships, lack of materials and labor.
    3. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 13: 13
      -1
      [quote = barbiturate] The standard of living of the Russian countryside is also well known under the tsar — ​​they practically didn’t get out of the state of hunger, and the wages of workers were much lower than the global ones.

      An article about an armadillo, but why did you start describing the "paradise zhituha" under the tsar?) [/ Quote?
      The article is, of course, about the battleship, I just answered the statement about the "wretchedness" of Nikolaev's Russia.
      Of course, the full village did not live, but there were no famines, either under the Soviets. We still remember the famine in the Volga region and the famine, and there was also the famine of the 46th year.
      Yes, the great princes Matilda Kshesinskaya had, but how much was done in Russia!
      Through all Siberia, the road was led without any tractors and tunnel shields. In a few years.
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate April 4 2016 18: 48
        +3
        Russia practically did not get out of the state of permanent hunger under the tsar, it was also with the Bolsheviks, I do not argue, but since we are talking about tsarist time, if you please, Russia was constantly starving. Read, for example, the famous monarchist and Black Hundred Prince M.O. Menshikov - an article dated October 13, 1909, you will easily find. Do not miss Colonel General Staff Bagration, he will tell you (a witness to the events and a person directly involved in the recruitment process, if he is not a witness then who?) That 40 !!% of recruits tried meat first! once in a lifetime in the army, and the number of eligible for service is 1 out of 3!
        In general, a lot of material, easy to find. Tsar’s officials and ministers testify to how the nutrition of the population was
    4. 97110
      97110 April 4 2016 15: 12
      +1
      Quote: barbiturate
      but under the king, the bulk of the population lived in villages with an appropriate level of income, literacy, medical care, mortality, etc.

      My great-grandfather lived in a village near Kotlas of the Arkhangelsk lips. My grandmother was telling something about their life at that time. Qualification of the great-grandfather (on the issue of literacy) made it possible to earn up to 8 rubles on ship repair. in a day. This is when after 1917 the peasant could earn something similar? As for medical support and mortality ... My great-grandfather argued for a quarter and broke the oar at the carbas on the stroke. Another time, he carried an agreed distance of an anchor of 18 pounds. If there was a general practitioner nearby, using a tonometer would shorten the days of his fast-moving life. And so he survived the Revolution and the Civil, and the regional newspaper also mentioned his apple orchard (Kotlas district is in the south of the region. It’s a stone's throw to Veliky Ustyug). Do not believe? But it was ...
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate April 4 2016 18: 35
        +3
        Why do not I believe - I believe, only your great-grandfather was a qualified ship repairman, about which you yourself write - where is he a peasant? And 8 rubles a day - a lot of money at that time, the peasants a month and didn’t have nearly the same amount. For example, the salary of a platoon commander in the guard (infantry) was about 85 rubles a month. Compare with your great-grandfather's income per day!
        1. 97110
          97110 April 5 2016 10: 03
          0
          Quote: barbiturate
          Why do not I believe - I believe, only your great-grandfather was a qualified ship repairman, about which you yourself write - where is he a peasant?
          And on the ground he is a peasant. House 4 km. from Shipitsino I still found. There was no place there for a qualified ship repairman, and now there is no place. Neither Limenda nor Privodino was there then. He and his brother had a steamer on the farm - you can laugh. The steamer was left in Ustyug for winter storage. The price is 8 rubles. I represent nikolayevki. The worker at the sawmill then received 40 kopecks a day, children and women - 20 kopecks. He received these 8 rubles when he was hired to repair a "grubby" (a broken dredger).
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. yehat
    yehat April 4 2016 18: 55
    +2
    As for the pace of construction of the dreadnought, you did not indicate something:
    before its construction, the shipyards of England built several hundred ships in a few years,
    there was a powerful network of contractors and shipyards
    and Russia? built with a strain a couple of dozen ships.
    and what do you want? Industrial power for construction has been growing for decades!
    the Germans, in order to build a fleet for the battle of Skagerak, built their industry at a record pace for 20 years. and in the Russian Federation, as there were 5-6 plants, it remained.
    When, after school, Tsushima decided to build an excellent fleet of dreadnoughts, they found money and even upfront, but half the program was not completed because the industry was very weak.
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 20: 04
      -2
      When, after school, Tsushima decided to build an excellent fleet of dreadnoughts, they found money and even upfront, but half the program was not completed because the industry was very weak.


      Toli case under Stalin! Once Stalin decided to build 10 super links + 10 battle cruisers - and that ... in general, that ... Well, you understand, yes ...?

      But the industry was strong! Yes Yes! Well, in the textbook it is written that industry was strong under Stalin, but I read!
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 April 4 2016 21: 08
        0
        Quote: AK64
        Well, in the textbook it is written that industry was strong under Stalin, but I read!

        If it weren’t for the war, they would have built battleships. They were laid down (readiness from 7 to 20%). Just in time, they realized that the fighting was going on land.
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 4 2016 21: 26
          +1
          Quote: Pilat2009
          If not for the war, they would have built battleships. They were laid (readiness from 7 to 20%)

          They would build ships that look like battleships. And battleships would not be built. I will not dwell on the details now, but in the USSR before the war they could not build more than one normal destroyer. The Germans BF and Black Sea Fleet drove as they wanted. And drowned like kittens. And you swung at the battleships. Only extra victims would be.
          1. Cap.Morgan
            Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 23: 29
            +3
            Quote: 1440minutes
            Quote: Pilat2009
            If not for the war, they would have built battleships. They were laid (readiness from 7 to 20%)

            They would build ships that look like battleships. And battleships would not be built. I will not dwell on the details now, but in the USSR before the war they could not build more than one normal destroyer. The Germans BF and Black Sea Fleet drove as they wanted. And drowned like kittens. And you swung at the battleships. Only extra victims would be.

            The Germans traveled across the Black Sea on high-speed landing barges with a couple of anti-aircraft guns.
            Black Sea Fleet defended in the bases.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. AK64
          AK64 April 4 2016 21: 49
          +1
          If it weren’t for the war, they would have built battleships. They were laid down (readiness from 7 to 20%). Just in time, they realized that the fighting was going on land.


          Of course, of course, who would doubt: the first-born was laid on July 15, 1938. In three years they have done ... how much do you speak there? And, here, I see, I see --- azhnik 20%! Fantasy, right? 3 years - 20%. So, if there hadn’t been a war, by the year old, by 1953 (20% in three years, meaning 100% in 15 years), the first-born would have been completed. Industrial power. Against no arguing. Cheka!
      2. yehat
        yehat April 5 2016 16: 04
        +2
        What does Stalin have to do with ???? this is first
        and secondly, the battleships by the year 45 are morally obsolete and that is why they did not begin to build them.
        3. Finally, the USSR was in ruin after 5 years of war, and RI has not seriously fought for a long time.
        even the Russo-Japanese war cannot be considered a serious test.
        4. Under Stalin, after the war, dozens of other more needed ships were laid down, and were built, they in the 50s made up a very powerful fleet.

        and in general, enough praise without real arguments from the king. Do you think that the legendary submarine "crab" was built thanks to Nikolai-2? Or do you think he helped Witte and the Admiralty in the Duma to lobby for the cost of the fleet? Perhaps Nikolai-2 personally was a good person, but his character was soft and he did not have the moral right to remain so immersed in family life to the detriment of the state. It would be better to immediately renounce.
        Finally, I recall that the maintenance of the courtyard cost the state, if not a frail shipbuilding program. If one was so enlightened, one should have been more modest, like the Hohenzolern, for example.
        1. AK64
          AK64 April 5 2016 16: 15
          -1
          Y-yes ...

          Do you have a tantrum? Well, drink some water, and get off the Net.

          Perhaps Nikolai-2 personally was a good person, but his character was gentle and he did not have the moral right to remain so immersed in family life to the detriment of the state.


          That is, when, in August 1915, Nikolai Aleksandrovich took over the duties of the Commander-in-Chief, it seems that he "plunged into family life to the detriment of the state"?
          And by the way, unlike Stalin, he did not manage the army from Moscow, but from Stavka in Mogilev.

          This is simply the most striking example, which is enough to demonstrate to an intelligent person that this person does not know ANYTHING about the king.

          All that you know about the king was written about him by the conspirators and his murderers: the level of objectivity is quite consistent.

          As an example of the level of falsification of history: find all the group photos of Rasputin. (And it's better to find everything). Find and make sure that all the group photos of Rasputin ... rough photoshop (well, on the then methods).

          Think about it: who and why it was necessary to carry out such a massive fake!

          And finally understand that you do not know anything about the history of your country. All you "know" is ... photoshop. Sheer falsification. And pieces of truth can be pulled out only indirectly, from statistical figures.
        2. veteran66
          veteran66 April 5 2016 19: 13
          +1
          Quote: yehat
          I recall that the maintenance of the yard cost the state

          and the apparatus of the CPSU (b) - the CPSU how much did it cost?
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 22: 16
      +3
      Quote: yehat
      When, after school, Tsushima decided to build an excellent fleet of dreadnoughts, they found money and even upfront, but half the program was not completed because the industry was very weak.

      Quite the opposite. The first two years, the construction of the Baltic dreadnoughts was practically not financed (the situation changed with the advent of Grigorovich)
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 22: 43
        -3
        Quite the opposite. The first two years, the construction of the Baltic dreadnoughts was practically not financed (the situation changed with the advent of Grigorovich)


        Surprisingly: they built without financing. Apparently, they were building at subbotniks.

        All the same, the twists of the thoughts of Soviet people are SOMETHING ...
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 23: 39
          +2
          Quote: AK64
          All the same, the twists of the thoughts of Soviet people are SOMETHING ...

          Soviet people at least have thoughts :))) And some knowledge.
          Well, for example, you are our multi-character, would you consider it work and indicate how MUCH funds (as a percentage of the estimated cost of the Baltic dreadnoughts) were allocated in the first two years of their construction?
    3. The comment was deleted.
  7. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 22: 14
    +5
    Quote: Cap.Morgan
    Under ordinary capitalism, the construction of the dreadnought in England took a year, in Germany - 2.

    You haven't confused anything yet? Where is that dreadnought that was built in England for a year? (if you say - "Dreadnought" - I will laugh for a long time, since fairy tales about one year and one day have nothing to do with reality)
    Quote: Cap.Morgan
    Empress Maria was built 6 years.

    Explain how you managed to count the 6 years of the ship, which was started construction in July 1912 year, and went into operation in August 1915 year?
    Quote: Cap.Morgan
    This is not inherent in the social system, but in some relaxed mentality of the Russian person.

    I see. Even the sources look laziness.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan April 4 2016 23: 59
      0
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      Under ordinary capitalism, the construction of the dreadnought in England took a year, in Germany - 2.

      You haven't confused anything yet? Where is that dreadnought that was built in England for a year? (if you say - "Dreadnought" - I will laugh for a long time, since fairy tales about one year and one day have nothing to do with reality)
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      Empress Maria was built 6 years.

      Explain how you managed to count the 6 years of the ship, which was started construction in July 1912 year, and went into operation in August 1915 year?
      Quote: Cap.Morgan
      This is not inherent in the social system, but in some relaxed mentality of the Russian person.

      I see. Even the sources look laziness.

      Laziness, laziness.
      So look at the sources.
      Queen Elizabeth, battleship. Laid down in the 12th, launched in the 13th, Veliant, battleship, laid in the 13th, launched in the 14th. For any year it turns out. The British quickly built.
      About Empress Maria, I really made a mistake. (((Corrected.
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 April 5 2016 16: 53
        +1
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Laid down in the 12th, launched in the 13th,

        So after launching for another year or two completion, only the hull was lowered

        "Queen Elizabeth" Portsmouth 21.10.1912/16.10.1913/01.1915-launched XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX-entered XNUMX/XNUMX

        "Valiant" Fairfield 31.01.1913/04.11.1914/02.1916 - XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX - XNUMX/XNUMX
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 17: 42
        +1
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Queen Elizabeth, battleship. Pledged in 12, launched in 13, Velient, battleship, laid in 13, launched in 14. For any year it turns out.

        M-dya.
        Let me tell you how the ship is being built. Usually they begin to build it first. Then (often - a few months later, or even more after the start of construction), a solemn bookmark ceremony takes place. Those. usually by the time of laying the construction work is very well advanced. True, it sometimes happens and vice versa, as happened with the Empress Maria - it was laid much earlier than they started to build. Then the ship is launched. After the descent, the ship is completed afloat, undergoes tests and, finally, is included in the fleet (which, by the way, does not mean completion of the tests :)
        So it’s quite difficult to determine the real date when the construction of the ship began. Therefore, usually, the construction period is understood to mean the period from the bookmark to the commissioning of the ship, but certainly not before launching!
        With regard to launching, the Empress Maria, who began to build in July 1912 of the year, was launched on the 1 of November 1913 of the year, i.e., approximately a year and three months elapsed from the moment of construction to the launch, which (taking into account the fact that the British ships nevertheless began to be built BEFORE the official bookmark) almost one in one coincides with the best European practices.
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        About Empress Maria, I really made a mistake. ((

        I highly respect the ability to admit my mistakes. My regards! hi
      3. Alf
        Alf April 5 2016 21: 56
        0
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Queen Elizabeth, battleship. Laid down in the 12th, launched in the 13th,

        Launched: October 16, 1913
        Adopted: January 1915

        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Veliant, battleship, laid in the 13th, launched in the 14th. For any year it turns out.

        Construction started on January 31, 1913
        Launched on November 4, 1914
        Put into operation on February 19, 1916

        You understand the difference in "launched" and "put into operation"?
  8. 1440minutes
    1440minutes April 5 2016 01: 30
    0
    Quote: Cap.Morgan
    Under ordinary capitalism, the construction of the dreadnought in England took a year, in Germany - 2.
    Empress Maria was built 6 years.

    The battleship Oslyabya was built for 7 years and 7 months. They built a completely incompetent product (but still better than Sisoy), which quite naturally covered itself in the first battle. Not having served even 2 years.
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. Rzzz
    Rzzz 25 December 2018 20: 51
    0
    Do you know why it is compared with 1913?
    But because the harvest was very good, food prices were quite low, people could eat well, and merchants cut enough dough. This year, according to economic indicators, stood out well from the previous ones.
    In 1914 there was a severe drought, and everything became quite sour, and by the end of the year the war began too - the indicators were quite ugly.
  • AK64
    AK64 April 4 2016 10: 13
    -6
    Most likely ordinary capitalism.

    In the USSR it was the same

    The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury.

    But what about MTK?

    And the kickbacks in Tsarist Russia, especially under Nicholas II, were practically the same as now.

    This is a pretty serious charge against people. It would have been worth proving. Clearly, you can’t - crowed into the bushes.

    So, what would you know: it could not do without kickbacks and under Stalin. (yes, yes, and there is nothing to do with surprised eyes.) But just during the construction of the fleet, the rollbacks were insignificant.

    But on artillery, for example, Kshesinskaya was well welded up, lobbying for Schneider's interests. Kshesinskaya is the most striking example. But even she didn’t become a multimillionaire. (Though you will not name the poor.)

    But what to take with Kshesinskaya? She did not serve, she did not take the oath. But the apology to the generals and admirals is, in general, a meanness.

    So, I think MTK more supported the interests of private contractors.

    And the Soviet chbi interests "supported" when "strange ships" like Kiev were built?

    You are simply a Soviet person, and you cannot imagine the existence of HONOR.
  • Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 4 2016 10: 53
    +8
    Quote: qwert
    Most likely ordinary capitalism. The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury.

    What are the contractors?
    Before the REV, the vast majority of RIF ships were built at state-owned shipyards. St. Petersburg port, New Admiralty, Galerny islet, accepted into the treasury of the Baltic Plant, Sevastopol and Nikolaev Admiralty.

    And secondly, with exactly the same capitalism in Britain, the Vickers company in general and Basil Zakharov in particular, with all their limbs fought off any changes in the already approved drawings. Because any change is a delay in construction. And no amount for additional work covers the profit that could be obtained from the construction of a new ship in the same place - instead of the next changes already under construction and the next delay in freeing the slipway and the place at the outfitting wall.

    One should not blame the Russian bureaucracy on "capitalism". Bundle "MTK + original state-owned plant"managed to spend on the construction of the head EBR of the series" peresvetich "-" Oslyabyu "- the time that was enough for the recently accepted into the treasury of the Baltic plant for the construction and delivery to the fleet of 2 other EBRs of the series -" Peresvet "and" Pobeda ".
  • 1440minutes
    1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 42
    0
    Quote: qwert
    Most likely ordinary capitalism. The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury. And kickbacks in tsarist Russia

    Do you notice any contradiction? In tsarist Russia (i.e. under feudalism) there were feudal TDOs, not capitalist ones.
  • bionik
    bionik April 4 2016 08: 01
    +2
    The battleship "Great Sisoy".
  • bionik
    bionik April 4 2016 08: 09
    0
    Armadillo "Sisoy the Great", building.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 08: 25
    0
    Quote: qwert
    Until they came under the influence of the French, normal ships were built. With straight sides and without any problems with stability. We would continue to continue our domestic shipbuilding school with an eye on England and Germany. But, here the uncles and cousins ​​of Nicholas II had too big interests associated with the French magnates and industrialists. The patriotism of the most august persons was the same as that of modern oligarchs. Those. he was not at all.

    There were no stability issues with armadillos like Borodino!
    There were problems with critical overloads before each key fight - so what do the French have to do with it?
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 10: 22
      0
      There were problems with critical congestion before each key battle

      Why "everyone"?

      Borodino residents were carrying somewhere around 600 tons of constructive load ... But that was really Russian "technology" that was.

      In general, the French project is too much .... deliberate too. With candebobers. It should be simpler.
    2. Amurets
      Amurets April 4 2016 13: 58
      -1
      Quote: Alex_623
      There were no stability issues with armadillos like Borodino!
      There were problems with critical overloads before each key fight - so what do the French have to do with it?

      And you read Kostenko. V.P. On the "Eagle in Tsushima". This is the builder of the "Eagle", a ship engineer. I will not retell it and other authors. I will only note that in addition to the construction overload of ships, an overload of fuel supplies was added. dance, as the main armor belts of ALL SHIPS OF ALL PROJECTS WERE UNDER THE WATER.
      1. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 15: 58
        0
        And you read Kostenko. V.P. On the "Eagle in Tsushima". This is the builder of the "Eagle", a ship engineer. I will not retell it and other authors. I will only note that in addition to the construction overload of ships, an overload of fuel supplies was added. dance, as the main armor belts of ALL SHIPS OF ALL PROJECTS WERE UNDER THE WATER.


        You don't need to read Kostenko: he is tendentious. And he was not the "builder of the Eagle" - so, he took part. ("Ship builder" is quite a position meaning "in charge of the builder")

        But that the overload was fuel and the belts went under water - this is true. But this could not be avoided, otherwise they would not have reached Vladik.
        1. kig
          kig April 5 2016 02: 45
          0
          Kostenko was an assistant to the builder, although he took up his duties when the battleship was already brought from the factory to Kronstadt for completion and armament. As for "tendentiousness", this accusation can be brought against any author - a participant in a battle and a campaign, since they described what they saw and experienced personally, and therefore had a personal opinion. The same Novikov, who is Priboy, is quite tendentious to the same extent.
    3. 97110
      97110 April 4 2016 15: 51
      +3
      Quote: Alex_623
      stability issues for Borodino-type battleships!

      See how time flies! When I studied, there were problems with stability. And now tuta SUSTAINABILITY - like a kitchen stool.
      1. Ustinov 055 055
        Ustinov 055 055 April 19 2016 11: 52
        0
        Don’t be surprised, they poured me here that we have 10 ships leaving for exercises on 5 submarines simultaneously. Only for some reason, the author called them the courts and that they did not go but swam)
      2. Ustinov 055 055
        Ustinov 055 055 April 19 2016 11: 52
        0
        Don’t be surprised, they poured me here that we have 10 ships leaving for exercises on 5 submarines simultaneously. Only for some reason, the author called them the courts and that they did not go but swam)
  • tux
    tux April 4 2016 08: 42
    +1
    An interesting article closed the gaps in my knowledge about this ship. Thanks to the author! And who knows what the other 2 ships from this series were called, except for Sisa the Great and Navarin?
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 10: 24
      +1
      And this is not a series: Sisoy from Navariin was very different. There, each truck was built according to an individual project ... Thinkers, Th.
    2. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 40
      +1
      Quote: tux
      And who knows what the other 2 ships from this series were called, except for Sisa the Great and Navarin?

      I know. One was called the Silver Piano, and the second was Trafalgar. Both served in the British Navy.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 09: 04
    +6
    Quote: tux
    An interesting article closed the gaps in my knowledge about this ship. Thanks to the author! And who knows what the other 2 ships from this series were called, except for Sisa the Great and Navarin?

    This is not a series - the ships are completely different.
    Here is Peresvet-Pobeda-Oslyabya - a series.
    Borodino - a series.
    So there is nothing to answer your question.
    On the other hand, on the Black Sea there was a complete analogue of the Sysoi analogue - the Twelve Apostles;
    and the full analogue of Navarin - Three Saints.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 4 2016 10: 57
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      Here is Peresvet-Pobeda-Oslyabya - a series.

      Yeah .. series. It was distinguished by the forms of the hull, skin, armor and guns of the Civil Code. smile
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx April 4 2016 11: 37
        +1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Quote: Alex_623
        Here is Peresvet-Pobeda-Oslyabya - a series.

        Yeah .. series. It was distinguished by the forms of the hull, skin, armor and guns of the Civil Code. smile

        The appearance is the same, the main guns too. I don’t know about the rest, but I don’t want to lie)))
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 4 2016 13: 21
          +1
          Quote: Trapper7
          Appearance is the same

          This is yes.
          However, there were minor differences - it was on them that the ships are well recognized:
          "Peresvet" - both masts are "heavy", with combat mars.
          "Pobeda" is a light mainmast, without a battle mast.
          "Oslyabya" - the same; there is no aft conning tower; there is a bridge.
          Quote: Trapper7
          GK guns too

          By caliber, yes. But on the device - no. Pobeda received heavy 254-mm guns.
          1. 1440minutes
            1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 37
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            This is yes.

            And the Victory project was slightly modified.
            And also armor of a different type and from this in places of a different thickness and weight.
            And four-cylinder cars, not three-cylinder ones.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 4 2016 18: 11
              0
              Quote: 1440minutes
              And the Victory project was slightly modified.
              And also armor of a different type and from this in places of a different thickness and weight.
              And four-cylinder cars, not three-cylinder ones.

              I wrote about the difference between hulls and armor. And about other differences ... so you can get to the bottom of the "oslyabsky" machine gun. smile

              However, it is enough to remember that on three EBRs of one conditional series, the crew size differed by more than one and a half hundred people: Peresvet - 675, Pobeda - 769, Oslyabya - 846.
              1. 1440minutes
                1440minutes April 4 2016 20: 46
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA
                so you can get to the bottom of the "oslyabsky" machine gun.

                But the angle of elevation of the GK guns at Victory was greater.
              2. The comment was deleted.
        2. AK64
          AK64 April 4 2016 16: 02
          +1
          Appearance is the same

          The victory of the pipe is much lower
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • 24hours
    24hours April 4 2016 10: 22
    -2
    Quote: Technical Engineer
    the battleship "Sisoi the Great" re-entered service, and ten days later received an urgent order along with the "Navarin" to go to the Far East. In mid-March 1898, ships anchored in Port Arthur, becoming in the event of a possible conflict a counterweight to the Japanese battleships Fuji and Yashima

    Until that moment, everything was good. But to consider Sisoya and Navarin as a counterbalance to Fuji and Yashima, this is impossible in principle. Even Poltava could not serve as a counterweight to them, and not that these goners.
    However, everything is possible on the internet. The "community" is discussing "options for the battle between Asama and Varyag." And even often not so that a definite outcome is obtained. Why not even here fantasize about how the pug will kill the elephant.
    Quote: Technical Engineer
    in March 1904 the battleship was included in the squadron of Z. P. Rozhestvensky

    It should be noted that at the birth of Sisoy, like virtually all Russian-built ships, including the so-called. "Borodintsy" (only Poltava, Pobeda, Rurik for their time and, perhaps, with reservations, Russia can be discussed on this topic), were oppressed by their performance characteristics. Moreover, as a ship designed and built even worse than the average, on the whole disgusting, all-Russian level, it was absolutely not suitable for battle. Suffice it to say that its design total displacement was 9330 tons. In fact without coal its displacement was 9400 tons. Those. it was a complete kaput; it was impossible to bring it into a state of war even theoretically. Somewhere near the base he could still spin, but no more. Those. could fulfill the functions of an coastal defense battleship. Of course, for a squadron battle such a ship from birth was absolutely not suitable.
    Although, of course, this one was too clumsy. But the rest of the Russian-built ships left not far from it. Those "squadron battleships" were built in Russia.
    Quote: Technical Engineer
    the battleship received a one and a half meter trim on the nose and roll to the port side

    For this, a thick nail, and not a shell, was enough for him. Do not forget, Sisoy was a citadel armadillo. This means that the overload for his death was similar, because when overloaded, the Karapas ceases to fulfill its function. About the structural and construction overload, I already wrote above. But in the morning, on the day of the battle, there were 673 tons of coal on board. Those. its displacement was about 10070 tons. At the maximum possible for the battle full 9330 tons. Those. actual overload amounted to 740 tons. It means:
    1. His PSU plunged into the water somewhere about 55 cm from the optimal level (and 35 cm from the maximum). This is very bad, but the worst is written below.
    2. Its karapas plunged into the water about 35 cm below the level possible for combat. This means that it was enough to have a small projectile just below the overhead line to penetrate the unarmored side of the tip, after which water itself would have finished the flooded carp. And with them the ship. Which actually happened.
    1. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx April 4 2016 11: 48
      +3
      Quote: 24hours
      Until that moment, everything was good. But to consider Sisoya and Navarin as a counterbalance to Fuji and Yashima, this is impossible in principle. Even Poltava could not serve as a counterweight to them, and not that these goners.

      Why, then, Japan, having 2 such "perfect" battleships against two such "imperfect" Russians, did not get into a fight in 1898? Could have smashed our fleet, then there was no base in Port Arthur (they just fought for it).
      Or were our ships not so bad?
      And about the super quality of Japanese ships, you can tell the crew of Yashima, instantly killed by a donkey blown up on our mine, or the artillerymen of the GK Fuji, to whom our 12 "shell broke through thick 152 mm. Armor. Or artillerymen of medium caliber, not covered by armor. Power from these ships and rushing.
      1. 24hours
        24hours April 4 2016 12: 54
        -4
        Quote: Trapper7
        Why, then, Japan, having 2 such "perfect" battleships against two such "imperfect" Russians, did not get into a fight in 1898?

        Was a fight planned? No, it was not planned.
        Quote: Trapper7
        Or were our ships not so bad?

        Good ships in Russia did not build. In general, the level of development of the productive forces did not allow this. And the list of more or less tolerant I gave you above. Study. Just do not forget that Poltava would have nothing like that because of imported cars and imported armor. And without it, it was about the same slag as its sisterships.
        Quote: Trapper7
        And about the super quality of Japanese ships, you can tell the crew of Yashima, who instantly died in an mine bombing ass

        You confused Yasima with Petropavlovsk. It was Petropavlovsk that sank instantly. And Yasima was towed for a long time, he sank only after many hours, in the evening.
        Quote: Trapper7
        or to the gunners of GK Fuji, to whom our 12 "round broke through through the thick 152 mm. armor.

        You know. War is such a thing when they shoot. And when they shoot, it happens and fall. For this, there are special such devices, called shells. But when they hit, it sometimes pierces the armor. Well, otherwise it would not make sense to shoot at armadillos. Only some ships immediately sink, and some do not. Fuji did not drown. Because Armstrong, this is a company.
        Quote: Trapper7
        Or medium-caliber gunners not covered in armor.

        It was you who again confused him with the Cesarevich. And Fuji and Yashima were well, fully armored. At the same time, they are well designed and built with high quality. Because, again, Armstrong. Firm.
        By the way, Fuji sank Borodino.
        1. Trapperxnumx
          Trapperxnumx April 4 2016 13: 19
          +3
          Quote: 24hours
          You confused Yasima with Petropavlovsk. It was Petropavlovsk that sank instantly. And Yasima was towed for a long time, he sank only after many hours, in the evening.

          Yes, mixed up. With Hatsuse.
          Quote: 24hours
          It was you who again confused him with the Cesarevich. And Fuji and Yashima were well, fully armored.

          The 6 of the 10 medium-caliber fuji guns did not have armor protection. On Tsesarevich, all medium-caliber artillery was placed in armored towers.
          Quote: 24hours
          Was a fight planned? No, it was not planned.

          Where did the Russo-Japanese War come from then, if the fight was not planned? It’s just that with two-on-two forces, Japan did not dare to start a conflict, preferring to create an advantage in the Russian fleet. In 1905, after the advent of Borodin, the outbreak of war for Japan became almost impossible.
          1. 24hours
            24hours April 4 2016 15: 04
            -3
            Quote: Trapper7
            Yes, mixed up. With Hatsuse.

            After the blast, Hatsuse was towed, dragged, and only then he was blown up in the second mine and sank. Those. not like Petropavlovsk.
            Quote: Trapper7
            6 out of 10 guns of medium caliber fuji did not have armor protection.

            Had. Because were behind the armor plates. As well as mine artillery Tsesarevich.
            In general, are you attached to these medium and anti-mine guns? What did they matter in the squadron battle? They had a completely different purpose, it is only "on specialized forums" it is customary to take into account this 6 "trifle in squadron combat.
            Quote: Trapper7
            Where did the Russo-Japanese War come from then, if the fight was not planned?

            It was not planned at that time. Later, it happened. Not interconnected things.
            Quote: Trapper7
            It’s just that with two-on-two forces, Japan did not dare to start a conflict, preferring to create an advantage in the Russian fleet.

            1. There was no 2 on 2. It is absolutely impossible to consider Sisoy and Navarin as a counterweight to Fuzdi and Yasima.
            2. The Japanese never had a numerical superiority. But in many places they had a qualitative advantage. Here is what the Russian admirals did not understand at all, what and how can be used in the war with Japan says a lot. There were no naval commanders in Russia. Even Witgeft was not, although it was the most successful Russian admiral of that war.
            Quote: Trapper7
            In 1905, after the advent of Borodin, the outbreak of war for Japan became almost impossible.

            If you do not know the performance characteristics of Borodino, then maybe. But I think they knew them. Therefore, there was nothing terrible for them from these Borodinians.
            When they needed it, then they started.
            But the war that Russia could wage with Japan, she did not wage. In that war, part of the so-called EDB had to be sent from the Far East in general, so as not to interfere.
            Russia did not have the opportunity to conduct a squadron battle with the Japanese, there was no REAL EDB for this (Retvizan, Tsesarevich, Poltava, Pobeda, that’s the whole list; according to the TTX, the so-called Borodino EDB were not). Even if you assemble 1 squadron with 2 and 3, the result would be exactly the same as in real life. Only the Japanese would not have lost 2 EDB on mines at Port Arthur. That’s the whole difference.
            1. AK64
              AK64 April 4 2016 16: 17
              0
              Y-yes ...

              Another couch strateg ...

          2. 24hours
            24hours April 4 2016 15: 04
            0
            Quote: Trapper7
            Yes, mixed up. With Hatsuse.

            After the blast, Hatsuse was towed, dragged, and only then he was blown up in the second mine and sank. Those. not like Petropavlovsk.
            Quote: Trapper7
            6 out of 10 guns of medium caliber fuji did not have armor protection.

            Had. Because were behind the armor plates. As well as mine artillery Tsesarevich.
            In general, are you attached to these medium and anti-mine guns? What did they matter in the squadron battle? They had a completely different purpose, it is only "on specialized forums" it is customary to take into account this 6 "trifle in squadron combat.
            Quote: Trapper7
            Where did the Russo-Japanese War come from then, if the fight was not planned?

            It was not planned at that time. Later, it happened. Not interconnected things.
            Quote: Trapper7
            It’s just that with two-on-two forces, Japan did not dare to start a conflict, preferring to create an advantage in the Russian fleet.

            1. There was no 2 on 2. It is absolutely impossible to consider Sisoy and Navarin as a counterweight to Fuzdi and Yasima.
            2. The Japanese never had a numerical superiority. But in many places they had a qualitative advantage. Here is what the Russian admirals did not understand at all, what and how can be used in the war with Japan says a lot. There were no naval commanders in Russia. Even Witgeft was not, although it was the most successful Russian admiral of that war.
            Quote: Trapper7
            In 1905, after the advent of Borodin, the outbreak of war for Japan became almost impossible.

            If you do not know the performance characteristics of Borodino, then maybe. But I think they knew them. Therefore, there would be nothing terrible for them from these Borodinians. They were not the EDB, it did not work to build them like that. Wanted, but failed. In particular, due to the fact that the base, Cesarevich, was not a full-fledged first-class EDB, but was a second-class EDB, converted at the request of the customer (Russia) into a first-class EDB. And Tsesarevich in his time was also redone in Russia. The result is what happened. Only what they wanted, the EDB did not work.
            In general, the most powerful Russian EBR of that war in terms of the totality of qualities was Retvizan. And this is also taking into account the fact that in the RIF he was in the "EBR-Raider" variant (traditionally it was not used in this capacity for a single day). It was a wonderful project. Already at a meeting with him Fuzdi would have been exactly a cover (at a meeting with the Tsarevich there were varinates, the rest of the Russian ships were weaker). True, when meeting with Shikishima or Hatsuse (the strongest Japanese EBR of that war), Retvizan would most likely also have a cover.
            When they needed it, then they started.
            But the war that Russia could wage with Japan, she did not wage. In that war, part of the so-called EDB had to be sent from the Far East in general, so as not to interfere.
            Russia did not have the opportunity to conduct a squadron battle with the Japanese, there was no REAL EDB for this (Retvizan, Tsesarevich, Poltava, Pobeda, that’s the whole list; according to the TTX, the so-called Borodino EDB were not). Even if you assemble 1 squadron with 2 and 3, the result would be exactly the same as in real life. Only the Japanese would not have lost 2 EDB on mines at Port Arthur. That’s the whole difference.
            1. Trapperxnumx
              Trapperxnumx April 4 2016 17: 54
              +1
              Quote: 24hours
              Have had. Because were behind the armor. As well as the anti-mine artillery of the Tsarevich. But in general, are you attached to these cannons of medium and anti-mine caliber? What did they matter in the squadron battle? They had a completely different purpose, it is only "on specialized forums" it is customary to take into account this 6 "trifle in squadron combat.

              So Aurora also had armored artillery.
              They became a trifle just after this war, until 1904, this is already by its results and you and I know that they could not inflict decisive damage to enemy ships, and until that moment all 6 "-8" artillery was considered one of the main conditions of victory, the reason was its high rate of fire, which allowed throwing more metal than 12 "guns.

              Quote: 24hours
              Russia did not have the opportunity to conduct a squadron battle with the Japanese, there was no REAL EDB for this

              And there were and were. You contradict yourself by listing immediately those battleships that were in the 1 Pacific Fleet to this esc. These were just the ships, capable and able to maintain long fire contact with the Japanese fleet. Moreover, the Poltava were actually ships, fully equivalent to the same Fuji.
              And the reasons for the defeat in Tsushima on this site were already understood.
              1. 1440minutes
                1440minutes April 4 2016 21: 11
                +1
                Quote: Trapper7
                So Aurora also had armored artillery.

                Armored artillery has not yet been invented. But she had protected artillery. Flat shields, if not mistaken.
                Quote: Trapper7
                and until that moment, all 6 "-8" artillery was considered one of the main conditions for victory

                On the "specialized forums" this is the case to this day. It is still believed there who had more 6 "guns.
                6 "A cannon is a machine gun, if in a land-based way. When you compare tanks, you don't think which of them has more machine guns? Why do you think in the Navy?"
                The Japanese 6 "guns in the navy were very useful against the" Russian EBRs. "That is, ships that in fact were not EBRs, but gave a bunch of excellent command positions of rank 1. There were many such" Russian EBRs "in the RIF. does not mean that the Russian 6 "cannons should be counted against the Japanese EBRs. They were useless there.
                Quote: Trapper7
                allowing to throw more metal than 12 "guns.

                Exactly. About the "machine guns" and "Russian EBR" I wrote to you above.
                These high-quality battleships are not destroyed by machine-gun placers, but by a concentrated metal strike with high energy at one point.
                Quote: Trapper7
                that were in 1 Pacific Fleet to this esc. br.

                Well, what was there? Retvizan, Tsesarevich, Poltava and Victory? Yes they were. Who could they be set up against? Even after the demolition of Yashima and Hatsuse, there was no chance against the remaining Japanese linear forces.
                Quote: Trapper7
                Moreover, the Poltava were actually ships, fully equivalent to the same Fuji.

                For a start, there was no Poltava. There was Poltava. In a single copy. Fuji and Yashima, he was noticeably inferior. But he still had some chances of success in one-on-one combat. Why, read here. I have already written on this topic, I will not repeat myself.
                Quote: Trapper7
                And the reasons for the defeat in Tsushima on this site were already understood.

                They could even understand the homeless in the garbage. However, the main reason is one, buckets with nuts, and even with loud and beautiful names, are weak against the real technique. In addition, we do not forget about the level of professionalism from top to bottom.
              2. The comment was deleted.
              3. 24hours
                24hours April 6 2016 19: 37
                -1
                Quote: Trapper7
                So Aurora also had armored artillery.

                For armored shields. The state-owned cruiser was relying on flat shields.
                Quote: Trapper7
                and until that moment all 6 "-8" artillery was considered as one of the main victory conditions, the reason was its high rate of fire, which allowed throwing more metal than 12 "guns.

                This assessment was accepted at "specialized forums" and among historians of military-technical sciences. Among knowledgeable people, it is customary to consider the main guns. Although, of course, a medium-caliber trifle could have a very serious impact, even fatal, but only on "Russian battleships". The Japanese did not have such, so there is no special point in taking into account these Russian pukals.
                Quote: Trapper7
                the reason was its high rate of fire, allowing you to throw more metal

                A machine gun also throws out more metal than a VET gun. However, it is harmless to the tank.
                Quote: Trapper7
                richem of Poltava were actually ships

                "Poltava" was not there. There was Poltava. Singular. Petropavlovsk had outdated Russian armor. Sevastopol, with a budget import.
                Quote: Trapper7
                completely equivalent to the same Fuji.

                Poltava had some chances of success in the battle with Fuji. But there were fewer than Fuji. The other ships in the series had no chance at all against Fuji.
                Quote: Trapper7
                And the reasons for the defeat in Tsushima on this site were already understood.

                May be. But this does not mean that they were disassembled.
            2. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon April 4 2016 10: 45
    +1
    The drawings did not change because of conspiracies, but because of the constant appearance of certain innovations in technology and weapons during this period, the ship became obsolete in 5 years
    1. yehat
      yehat April 5 2016 16: 22
      0
      blueprints had to be changed because we had few good specialists in the technical part of the fleet, and our shipbuilding traditions were few, almost nonexistent, we used a lot according to foreign patents and foreign suppliers (mostly English) used this successfully to lobby for outdated stuff. And after a year or two of construction, the omission became so obvious that I had to take action.
      See which ships were the best in quality in the Navy - all built entirely abroad. The same thing about the engineering school: for the new battleships of the Izmail series for 7 years they could not come up with the sane design of the armored side. 3 times they redid the solutions and all 3 times it turned out badly - the armor diverged even from hits with no penetration. At the same time, the Kaiserreich had excellent technical solutions in this area, but they were never implemented. It was necessary to stupidly get down to business and do. After all, they were able to create for the Ismail and Gangut new, the best artillery of the Civil Code in the world before the start of the Second World War (then the Americans put them on all their modern battleships, assigning free documentation on orders).
      And the Americans, having built about 70 different heavily armored ships,
      As a result, having gained experience, we came to a certain qualitative growth in design and construction technology, which allowed us to make ships like Montana.
      Moreover, they used the Russian artillery technology of the Civil Code, the British technology in the manufacture of armor and radar, the German in the field of universal artillery and shipyard work, the design school, the Japanese in the mass conditioning of the ship’s premises, the Italian developments in the field of hydrodynamics and engine manufacturing.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 6 2016 20: 39
        0
        Quote: yehat
        See which ships were the best in quality in the Navy - all built entirely abroad

        "Peter the Great". "Catherine II". "Three Saints". "Bronetemkin Ponosets".
        That's it, well, that's all built abroad
        Quote: yehat
        The same thing about the engineering school: for the new battleships of the Izmail series for 7 years they could not come up with the sane design of the armored side.

        ??
        Quote: yehat
        3 times reworked decisions and all 3 times it turned out badly - the armor diverged even from hits with no penetration

        I won't ask why Ishmael suddenly became a battleship. I will not ask how you managed to count 7 years of development of his armor (Ishmael was founded in 1912, 7 years ago was 1905! When, other than Ishmael, dreadnoughts were not really thought about). I will not ask about what "3 times bad" you write here.
        But what, you don’t know that the divergence of armor (as well as its indentation) in the WWII happened to occur on ships of the German and British fleets?
        Quote: yehat
        After all, they were able to create for the Ismail and Gangut new, the best artillery of the Civil Code in the world before the start of the Second World War (then the Americans put them on all their modern battleships, assigning documents from orders for free).

        I don’t know who didn’t regret such noodles for you, only American and Russian guns have fundamental differences and cannot be suspected of any kind. And if the 356-mm (as well as the 305-mm) guns of Russian ships were indeed close to a masterpiece of artillery for their time, then American guns pulled at best strong middle peasants.
        Quote: yehat
        As a result, having gained experience, we came to a certain qualitative growth in design and construction technology, which allowed us to make ships like Montana.

        Unfinished
        Quote: yehat
        Moreover, they used the Russian artillery technologies of the Civil Code, the British technology in the manufacture of armor and radar, the German in the field of universal artillery and shipyard work, the design school, the Japanese in the mass conditioning of the ship’s premises, the Italian developments in the field of hydrodynamics and engine manufacturing

        Fantasy lashes over the edge. I especially liked about the German universal artillery (which did not exist in nature)
  • AK64
    AK64 April 4 2016 11: 05
    +2
    what is depressing is a well-organized group of comrades who even use the weather forecast to propagandize the scoop once again and spit on Russia.

    Well, then, the dwarf's prowess is to spit far.
    1. yehat
      yehat April 4 2016 19: 19
      -1
      I believe the opposite opinion is no less absurd.
      Better look, HOW MUCH had time to ... about Nikolay # 2.
      he received an empire, which included Finland, Korea, part of China, Poland, the Baltic states.
      There were colonies in Austria, America, Africa.
      Now it’s hard to imagine that it was all.
      1. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 20: 12
        +4
        I believe the opposite opinion is no less absurd.
        Better look, HOW MUCH had time to ... about Nikolay # 2.
        he received an empire, which included Finland, Korea, part of China, Poland, the Baltic states.
        There were colonies in Austria, America, Africa.
        Now it’s hard to imagine that it was all.


        This is a misconception.

        And in order to understand your mistake, you should start by stopping using the word "pro ..." in relation to anything. And in general, stop swearing: swearing leads to a stiff mind.

        Then you should carefully look at isria, and understand that everything that you know about Nikolai Alexandrovich - you know only from the words of his killers. It would be ridiculous to expect from them at least some justice.
        If you dig even deeper, then you will most likely be amazed at how much was done under Nikolai Alexandrovich — more than under Stalin, but without the Gulags and collectivizations.

        If it were not for the group of villains, already by the 20th in the world would be the situation of 1945, with two and only two great powers. And with the Straits, Iran and half of China.

        Somewhere like that.

        But the point is not in the "absurdity of the opinion", but in the actual existence of a small but clearly organized group of people who, in any topic, even if it is a weather forecast, begin to shit on Russian history and promote the scoop.

        Take a closer look, that's a fact. And the question is with whom you are: with a group of fraudsters or with normal people (who do not stray in flocks, and therefore look weaker)
        1. yehat
          yehat April 5 2016 12: 39
          +2
          Quote: AK64

          And in order to understand your mistake, you should start by stopping using the word "pro ..." in relation to anything. And in general, stop swearing: swearing leads to a stiff mind.

          Then you should carefully look at isria, and understand that everything that you know about Nikolai Alexandrovich - you know only from the words of his killers. It would be ridiculous to expect from them at least some justice.
          If you dig even deeper, then you will most likely be amazed at how much was done under Nikolai Alexandrovich

          1. You have no idea what I know, but trying to teach
          2. I have no idea what kind of killers you are talking about.
          3. I know about the personality of Nicholas-2 from very different sources - including from the Germans and the British, and even from the Japanese who spoke with him.
          4. I am convinced that I speak not from textbooks, but on the basis of the mass of events I studied and his actions. He too avoided managing the country, doing a lot of his personal affairs, essentially letting the development of the country take its course. And there is no forgiveness.
          Moreover, a number of key events happened negatively for RI because he simply did not keep his finger on the pulse of events, did not delve into, and turned over things to the devil.
          Finally, he cared little for the objective needs of state development and too much for personal connections. But at the beginning of the 1st World War, it became clear what these connections were worth.
          5. Some statistics: Nikolay # 2 adopted a state with a controlled population of about 135 million (and not all were taken into account) + about 15 million in territories with a gray status like Korea
          at the time when he renounced and WAS NOT KILLED, the empire has already lost more than 20% of its territories, at least 11 million of the population.
          The economic boom under Stolypin was in no way the merit of Nicholas II — he not only didn’t help, staying aside, but even interfered in a strange way, pitting him with other people in a government like Witte.
          Moreover, Nikolay-2 negatively affected the redistribution of natural ec. interests of the country from Germany towards France and England.
          Finally, what do you call a ruler who spent in the capital, from which he could really influence the empire, less than 40% of his time?
          You say that he did a lot, but with his resources he did ridiculously little.
  • unknown
    unknown April 4 2016 11: 08
    +3
    1. To consider "Sisoya" a counterweight to "Fuji" is impossible in principle?
    Yes, according to their characteristics, these are almost complete analogues.
    Booking scheme - the same, incomplete belt with bare ends.
    The main caliber - 4 * 12 "guns. Moreover, on the" Sisoy "in more advanced installations, with a higher rate of fire. Medium caliber: 6 versus 10 6" guns. The advantage of the Japanese is 2 guns in an onboard salvo. But it is not a fact that the total real rate of fire of 5 Japanese is significantly higher than 3 Russian.
    6 "shell for the Japanese was heavy, after WWII they switched to 140mm caliber.
    Charging cord caused a quick burnout of the barrel. These factors reduced rate of fire.
    Speed. Passport "Fuji" -18 knots. Real in 1904-1905 - 15 knots. And, therefore, this is the speed of the first armored detachment.
    The real speed of Sisoy in 1905 was 14-15 knots.
    "Sisoy" is a complete analogue of "Fuji".
    2. Comparison of the cruisers of the 6000-project and of the Asama type.

    Who was the first to write "Asams" into the best armored cruisers of their era, I do not know. Perhaps this happened under the influence of the general current of the RYE at sea, but it was done without critical analysis.
    There were no best "asams".
    The main caliber of 4 * 8 "in unsuccessful turrets with a lot of manual operations when loading, medium caliber with shells that are too heavy for a Japanese sailor of normal conditions, an unsuccessful location of the cellars of 6" guns, unsuccessful cordite of charges (the British, faced with a problem, switched to another composition ) significantly reduced the rate of fire. In terms of fire performance, the Asams were inferior to the Russian cruisers of 6000 projects. This was fully proved by "Askold" in the battle in the Yellow Sea, when successively broke through two cruisers of the "Asama" class. Moreover, during the battle, the "Askold" was missing two 6 "guns that remained on the ground front, which reduced its side salvo by one gun.
    In terms of speed "Asams" generally failed all the standards for cruisers.
    The last pair barely kept 17 knots for a long time, and this with boilers of a new type. But the "Frenchman" distinguished himself, which could go for a long time at a speed of 15 knots. And this is a cruiser considered modern.
    Not surprisingly, as soon as the Russians made the decision to leave the damaged Rurik, the Japanese abandoned their pursuit. There was simply not enough speed.
    "Asams" could not alone resist the battleships, only with a detachment.
    And modern cruisers could not catch up. These were strange ships: under-invaders, under-cruisers. Ideal only for one war - with Russia. The Russian admirals in this war showed complete misunderstanding and inability to use such a tactical element as speed.
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 11: 30
      +1
      These were strange ships: under-invaders, under-cruisers.

      These were not cruisers, they were "battleships for the poor."


      Ideal only for one war - with Russia.

      Not at all perfect: in real life there was very little sense from them. The Japanese would have spent their money much better if they bought 4-5 normal EBRs with the same money

      Russian admirals in this war showed complete misunderstanding and inability to use such a tactical element as speed

      Sofa strategists, th .... Everything around is fools, except for them ...
      What is the "misunderstanding"? If your cars are worn out --- how do you "use such an element as speed"? AS?
    2. Cartalon
      Cartalon April 4 2016 11: 52
      0
      It is difficult to use speed even if the squadron could not keep 13 knots, although even issuing an order to shoot at the nearest one, instead of firing at the head one, could greatly change the outcome.
      1. Amurets
        Amurets April 4 2016 13: 08
        0
        Quote: Cartalon
        It is difficult to use speed even if the squadron could not keep 13 knots, although even issuing an order to shoot at the nearest one, instead of firing at the head one, could greatly change the outcome.

        The squadron constantly lacked personnel, especially a qualified boiler-machine crew. The arrival to the Far East of the training transport "Ocean" under the command of ER Yegoriev, somehow managed to improve the situation with the personnel, but the arrival of this ship could not solve all the problems. R. Melnikov. The cruiser "Varyag". Head In combat color. For the fact that Yegoriev distinguished himself during the transition from St. Petersburg to Port Arthur, for 65 days and for the difference in service, he was appointed commander of the cruiser "Aurora".
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 4 2016 13: 54
          +2
          Quote: Amurets
          The squadron constantly lacked personnel, especially a qualified boiler-machine crew. The arrival to the Far East of the training transport "Ocean" under the command of E.R. Yegoriev, somehow managed to improve the situation with the personnel, but the arrival of this ship could not solve all the problems.

          With machine commands, 1 TOE was generally a full fifth point. The initial training of l / s was carried out on ancient training ships with fire tube boilers. And upon coming to the ship, I had to start training anew. Machine commands of the "first team", for example, when transferring "Victory" to TO:
          "Due to a complete misunderstanding of the control of fire, water, donkeys, automatic feeders, etc." the boilers at Pobeda were brought into a "marvelously partly corrupted, rusted and unusable condition."

          However, this transition served as a kind of school for almost all ships of the 1st TOE. And by 1903, machine teams were showing good results.
          But ... in 1903, the dismissals of those who had served their deadlines began. This caused catastrophic damage to the machine teams, whose officers had to actually start the process of training l / s (moreover, on a "live" ship and from a much lower initial level - the "old" teams at least had factory practice).
          ... due to the arrogant frivolity of the officials from the secondary school, by the time the ship began sailing, experienced and mastered specialists, in connection with the end of their service life, had to be replaced in droves by almost recruits from the plow. Preliminary training in sailor schools did not help much - young sailors practiced on fire tube boilers of long-obsolete coastal defense battleships. As a result, we learned to handle the latest boilers on the go at the cost of ongoing accidents.

          By the way, it is this "change" that is often attributed to the amazing results of "Varyag", which in a year from an excellent walker turned into a relative of "sleepy goddesses". smile
          1. Amurets
            Amurets April 4 2016 14: 22
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            By the way, it is this "changeover" that is often attributed to the amazing results of "Varyag", which in a year from an excellent walker turned into a relative of "sleepy goddesses"

            I would not say that. I believe that the excessive relief of the CMU led to such results. There were so-called circus performers in the western GCC; teams of CMU delivery units. How they worked is well described again by Melnikov, in the book "Cruiser Varyag". fuel and oil were used as described there. So the fuels and lubricants used at the delivery of the ship has nothing to do with the fuels and lubricants used in normal operation.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 4 2016 15: 02
              0
              Quote: Amurets
              I would not say so. I believe that the excessive relief of the CMU led to such results.

              The question, of course, is an interesting one ... besides the Varyag, 1 TOE was equipped with the Retvizan EDR with similar boilers. However, it did not have such a series of complaints about the boilers.
              1. Amurets
                Amurets April 4 2016 16: 14
                +1
                Quote: Alexey RA
                The question, of course, is an interesting one ... besides the Varyag, 1 TOE was equipped with the Retvizan EDR with similar boilers. However, it did not have such a series of complaints about the boilers.

                I would not blame Nikloss's boilers for all the troubles, although the Varyag had lightweight, and therefore less durable boilers than the Retvizan. Before the war, new pipes and collector boxes were ordered for them in St. Petersburg. ship mechanical engineering it is necessary to write a separate article. With once a link. The same Melnikov and the chapter "Varyag" and the problems of marine engineering. Here much has been written about these problems. The main ones I think are the lightweight foundations of steam engines, the disconnection of the foundation frames and cylinders into one rigid structure of the type modern ship machines. Filling of bearings with different alloys, which led to distortions in the bearings, such a case was on the leader "Tashkent" in 1941, when it was damaged near Odessa. True, the discrepancy of the alloys was revealed almost immediately, when boring the bearings. Link: M.N. .Surguchev. "The ships are returning to service." Scraping and attachment of all bearings and adjustment of oil clearances were not done correctly. Plus, the lightweight, not rigid foundation structures led to loosening of the connections of the boilers and a high accident rate. But this is my opinion about the reasons for the high accident rate of the KMU cruiser "Varyag". My conclusion is this: boilers hip-roof and machines on a rigid, monolithic foundation would give a greater increase in speed by reducing friction losses and reducing wear. Now we are all strong in hindsight.
            2. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 32
              +1
              Quote: Amurets
              Melnikov, in the book "Cruiser Varyag". What kind of fuel and oil was used is described in the same place. So the fuels and lubricants used in the delivery of the ship has nothing to do with the fuels and lubricants used in normal operation.

              Do not retell passions. In order to avoid such things, and as a rule they never had, ships were accepted by a commission of specialists. Which perfectly understood what was what. So Melnikov predicts tales, and you repeat after them.
              Of course, one cannot exclude the possibility of bribery of all members of the commission, to a single one. But this is a purely theoretical option. In fact, good coal was taken, but within the framework of the contract. Everything else, too. The rest is "passion from the historian of engineering".
      2. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 16: 27
        +2
        although even issuing an order to shoot at the nearest one, instead of firing at the head one, could greatly change the outcome.


        So they shot. Amam was knocked out of action at the very beginning of the battle, for example. He’s not the head one.
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon April 4 2016 19: 27
          0
          So they shot when Mikasa was not visible, and so honestly shot at him.
          1. AK64
            AK64 April 4 2016 20: 17
            +1
            So they shot when Mikasa was not visible, and so honestly shot at him.

            Strictly speaking, they did the right thing: if it is possible to concentrate fire, then it should be concentrated. But according to the situation, they also beat the end ones, and the two end ones beat pretty hard bits. (sorry not finished, of course)
      3. yehat
        yehat April 4 2016 19: 28
        0
        controversial moment. fire concentration is also an important thing
        1. Cartalon
          Cartalon April 4 2016 19: 38
          +1
          The Japanese, at the expense of speed, covered the head of the column and could normally shoot the head only other people's gaps interfere in such a situation, everything interfered with the Russians, gaps, smoke, distance.
    3. 24hours
      24hours April 4 2016 14: 39
      +1
      Quote: ignoto
      Main caliber - 4 * 12 "guns

      It would also be nice to take into account that 12 "are different. High quality, like the British (Japanese) and Russians. Moreover, this applies to all Russian naval guns with a caliber of 75 mm and more, except for 10". The latter have "legs growing" from the GAU, so GIMA couldn't screw up here.
      Real in 1904-1905 - 15 knots

      Well, actually about 16 knots. Sisoy ideally somewhere around 14,5 knots. 16 knots, he didn’t go for a period.
      Passport "Fuji" -18 knots

      At 4-hour tests, with normal traction, the average is 16,8 knots, and with forced traction 18,5 knots.
      6 "shell for the Japanese was heavy, after WWII they switched to 140mm caliber.

      It is a pity that the Japanese did not know about this.
      But not the fact that the total real rate of fire of 5 Japanese is much higher than 3 Russian.

      And what did it matter in squadron combat? Study the question of why medium speed shooters were installed on the EDB. And read less all sorts of "smart topic forums"
      This was fully proved by "Askold" in the battle in the Yellow Sea, when successively broke through two cruisers of the "Asama" class.

      I won’t even twist my finger near the temple.
      Elementary lacked speed.

      No, well, it's generally pearl perlovich. But how did they catch up with the wok? Because of Rurik? So the movement all the way was not braked by him, but Russia. Which Rurik went around on the right, and Stormbreaker on the left. Well, there is another story, why. It remains to add that the residual course is that of Russia, that of Thunderbolt in the summer of 1904. was 18,5 knots. And the most braking Japanese armored cruiser (Asama) walked 19,5 knots without a boost.
      "Sisoy" is a complete analogue of "Fuji".

      Gee-gee 3 times.
      Overhead line defense at Fuji 280 mm in the given group. Sisoy has 171 mm "for the same money".
      Above the overhead line, Fuzdi has approximately 813 tons of reduced group (security coefficient 11,4), and Sisoy approximately 591 tons (coefficient 8,5).
      Coef. Sisoya's armaments in comparison with Fuji are approximately 88,1%.
      I wrote about Sisoy's constructional and constructive superiority above. Shut up "analogs", nothing to do. Even half-imported Poltava did not reach Fuzdi.
      Quote: ignoto
      The last pair barely kept 17 knots for a long time, and this with boilers of a new type. But the "Frenchman" distinguished himself, which could go for a long time at a speed of 15 knots. And this is a cruiser considered modern.

      I read this UG everywhere among the "couch strategists". It couldn't be easier, just calculate the speed of Japanese cruisers in the Korea Strait. The speed of the FOC is known, the removal at which it was detected is also known. The time it took for the Japanese to catch up with the WOK, too. If you know basic math, you can do it. These supposedly goners were made under 20 knots. And the "lucrative Frenchman" was generally the most popular Japanese DBK. These "strategists" sit here, and retell passions to each other in a circle. Tired, in fact.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 24hours
        24hours April 4 2016 14: 40
        +1
        Quote: ignoto
        Yes, according to their characteristics, these are almost complete analogues.

        Right, oh.
        Comparison of cruisers of the 6000-project and the type "Asama"

        Actually, after this pearl, the discussion could be stopped. Due to your complete incompetence in this matter.
        Asama and company (except for Nissin and Kasuga, these are from another opera), these are the armored defenders of trade. And they were built to counteract the largest "trade fighters", armored cruisers (they were also called raiders, at the time of the RYV in the RIF it was only Russia, but with reservations). Such "wolfhounds" did not work against armored-deck trifles, they did not have enough speed for this. Long-range and short-range scouts acted against large armored "trade fighters" (in the RIF only Varyag) (then the meaning of the word was different). Armored (Bayan) and armored (Bogatyr and Askold). The "scouts" were not engaged in reconnaissance. Not with the squadron, not with the base.
        Approximately the same situation existed in relation to small "trade fighters" (Boyarin). And also ships built to counter them (Novik).
        Also, stationary cruisers were supposed to counteract the "trade fighters". These are in view of their profitability, in the form of escort ships. In RIF, these are goddesses incl. Svetlana, all sorts of other Don Monomakhs.
        Of course, if Asame (a fairly ancient wolfhound, he could have struggled with an unpredictable outcome with a ship of unknown purpose Thunderbolt) had caught some armored "trade fighter" that had lost its speed, he would have torn it, like Tuzik a heating pad, and at the moment. The situation was approximately the same under Chemulpo. Therefore, your "comparisons" are simply ridiculous.
        "Asams" could not alone resist the battleships, only with a detachment.

        Miracle, the Japanese DBKs were not squadron ships. And the Russians, too, were not. But in the RIF there were no normal DBKs (Rurik grew old, but could not build new ones). Therefore, they walked in a crowd (wok). In response, the Japanese walked in a crowd, because one wok was not defeated. But actually it was not right, so no one planned to use them.
        These were strange ships: under-armored non-cruiser

        The ships were right, the armored defenders of trade, albeit with flaws. The top of the lineup of “fighter ships”. Those. counteraction ships of enemy trade fighter cruisers. Japan is a nation state. Therefore, she was very afraid of such a war. Even two non-core budget armadillos (battleship for the poor) specially bought for this. Only here Russia, although it had a good cruising and raider fleet, did not wage such a war.
        Quote: ignoto
        The Russian admirals in this war showed complete misunderstanding and inability to use such a tactical element as speed.

        It was difficult for them to use it, they did not have it. But something happened. But in any case, nothing was used. More or less, Wittgeft used the mine component of warfare at sea. And the rest of the "naval commanders" even remember nothing.
    4. yehat
      yehat April 4 2016 19: 26
      0
      there was also an underestimation of the growth of the performance characteristics of the guns
      the calculation was for close combat with armor-piercing shells, and the Japanese used long-range firing heavy. That is why the shells were heavy for Japanese sailors, which is why the rate of fire was lower.
      but the main underestimation was the combination of poorly made bulkheads, heaviness and uneven booking, because of which the ships were sunk not medium caliber, but the main one.
      Ponder: ARMENIANS destroyed by medium caliber fire. MARASMUS!
      By the way, Russian armadillos used the main caliber better than the Japanese - more often they fell.
      1. 1440minutes
        1440minutes April 4 2016 21: 14
        0
        Quote: yehat
        By the way, Russian armadillos used the main caliber better than the Japanese - more often they fell.

        Yes? This is great news.
        1. yehat
          yehat April 5 2016 15: 41
          0
          see hit statistics. I saw her, and you?
          1. AK64
            AK64 April 5 2016 16: 01
            0
            see hit statistics. I saw her, and you?


            Give a link. Or provide these statistics here.

            The Japanese fired 446 12 "shells.
            In Orel 5 hits 12 ", in Nikolay 1 shell. In Borodino, Suvorov, Alexandra and Oslyabya - unknown. (Apparently, you know?)

            In general, the Japanese fell in 2-2.5 times thicket.

            If you have other data - please, If you have not given at least a link - you mean no data
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • Dimon-chik-79
    Dimon-chik-79 April 4 2016 13: 29
    0
    Quote: qwert
    Most likely ordinary capitalism. The more alterations, confusion, etc. the more contractors received money from the treasury. And the kickbacks in Tsarist Russia, especially under Nicholas II, were practically the same as now. So, I think MTK more supported the interests of private contractors.

    Nothing changes! Just as the bourgeoisie kept their pocket then, the same thing is happening now. And many are surprised how Russia could be defeated first in the Russo-Japanese, and then in the 1st World War, and for what reason in a country with such a wonderful ruler, a revolution happened. And there’s nothing to be surprised at when the state is placed at the service of the bourgeoisie, and not vice versa, and reigned irresponsibility prevails at all levels. By the way, the same thing happened with the USSR when it took up the greedy, mercantile and irresponsible.
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon April 4 2016 13: 34
      0
      But why is the USA where these bourgeoisie rule, or what didn’t happen? Capitalism is what people do if they are left alone, I don’t remember whose quote, but you won’t leave people alone, to paradise with bayonets this is your method.
  • VohaAhov
    VohaAhov April 4 2016 13: 52
    +4
    "Sisoy the Great" at different times:
    1. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx April 4 2016 14: 35
      +1
      And still a very beautiful ship!
      Very very!!!!
      1. 24hours
        24hours April 7 2016 09: 45
        0
        Quote: Trapper7
        And still a very beautiful ship!
        Very very!!!!

        I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in many non-retouched images this "very beautiful ship" has a very noticeable stern trim. And almost everywhere there is a submerged armor belt. There is no time for beauty here.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • qwert
    qwert April 4 2016 15: 50
    +1
    Quote: 24hours
    there was no REAL EDB for this (Retvizan, Tsesarevich, Poltava, Pobeda, that’s the whole list; according to TTX, the so-called Borodin EDBs were not).

    Is that so ?????? Tsesarevich, obsolete Poltava, and armed with 10 inches, Victory is squadron battleships, and Borodino, who are the direct heirs of Tsesarevich, isn’t ???? Why such a fright suddenly? What is wrong with them ????
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon April 4 2016 15: 53
      0
      Probably it means that booking is rather weak at Borodino
      1. Amurets
        Amurets April 4 2016 16: 25
        -1
        Quote: Cartalon
        Probably it means that booking is rather weak at Borodino

        I wrote above, I repeat: THE ARMOR BELTS OF ALL 2TOE SHIPS were drowned due to the overload of the squadron ships.
        1. AK64
          AK64 April 4 2016 16: 48
          0
          I wrote above, I repeat: THE ARMOR BELTS OF ALL 2TOE SHIPS were drowned due to the overload of the squadron ships.


          Tiny correction: MAIN armor belts went under water. MAIN.
          1. yehat
            yehat April 5 2016 12: 47
            0
            this is understandable, but what is it? Well, they drowned, the torpedoes did not decide the outcome of the battle, what kind of armor at the water level had almost no effect
            what would have changed in terms of armor if it had not been sunk?
            it would be the same sieve in poorly protected places.
            I suppose the problem was not in lowering the armored belt, but in lowering the ship itself.
            1. AK64
              AK64 April 5 2016 16: 05
              0
              this is understandable, but what is it? Well, they drowned, the torpedoes did not decide the outcome of the battle, what kind of armor at the water level had almost no effect
              what would have changed in terms of armor if it had not been sunk?
              it would be the same sieve in poorly protected places.
              I suppose the problem was not in lowering the armored belt, but in lowering the ship itself.


              As a result, thick GPs did not work. Shells hit much thinner upper belts.

              Oslyabya, with his narrow belt, which went under the water, became in fact an "armored battleship", his unarmored side was quickly smashed. And the result.
              1. 24hours
                24hours April 5 2016 17: 01
                0
                Quote: AK64
                Oslyabya, with his narrow belt, which went under the water, became in fact an "armored battleship", his unarmored side was quickly smashed.

                Not this way. GP Peresvetov of all the squadron ships of the RIF was the highest (2,35 m). This was due to the specifics of the ships (EDB class 2). Higher GP was only in the relatively new armored cruiser-raider RIF (Russia).
                Oslyaby still had a short and thin VP (91 mm of the reduced krupp, 57,3 m with a ship length of 130 m). If we distract from the existence of the GP (to sink it), then usually ships of this class in the world were called semi-armored (see actually the semi-armored cruiser Nakhimov). True, the semi-armored ships have normally located Karapas, while Oslyaby with the sunken GPs no longer had them. Therefore, something like a quarter-armored ship is obtained. Figuratively speaking.
                But not in Russia. First, the classes (ranks) of the escred ships were canceled here and all became like an EDB of class 1. Then, very wisely, the semi-armored ships were canceled. And all at once became armored. From these innovations RIF strengthened and matured right before our eyes. Rather, on paper.
                Everything is correct about the "unarmored board".
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 16: 50
        0
        Probably it means that booking is rather weak at Borodino


        It means that "normal ships are built only by the Americans and the British, and the stupid Russians have nothing to poke around in the seas." This is exactly what is meant.
    2. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 4 2016 17: 22
      +1
      Quote: qwert
      and Borodino, who are the direct heirs of the Tsesarevich, is not

      The pedigree is good in dogs. In cats, it is also good, if any. Even in humans, it occurs.
      It's more difficult with ships. Borodino residents were built "based on" the Tsarevich, and not according to his design. And this is an important clarification.
      As for belonging to the class, then everything is simple. There are tons of criteria. The ship satisfies them, so it belongs to this class. Do not satisfy, call.
      Borodin residents did not meet the criteria for EDB for 2 important parameters:
      1. Reservation of individual sections of the GP for overhead lines did not even correspond to the level of an EDB of class 2 (in Russia there was no division into classes, but in the world it was). Separate sections of the GP were armored even worse than that of the Japanese Garibaldians, and those armadillos were just right through the budget, even the armor was of the old type (thorns).
      2. The range of their operation with a normal and full supply of coal did not match the level of even an EDB of class 1. It may seem like bullshit, but it is not. Because an attempt to achieve a normal range of action will end with the sinking of the GP, the role of the GP will begin to play the VP, and this is a different level of protection and a different class of ship.
      And this is a continuous reservation scheme for ships. The citadel (and bezverzovny too) armadillos simply could not be overloaded under any pretext. But overloaded. With the already known result.
      3. The high-speed characteristics of Borodin residents allowed them to be ranked only as an obsolete class 1 EDB. But here everything is not so bad, although old, but 1 class.
      Quote: qwert
      and armed with a 10-inch victory is a squadron battleships

      Yes, victory with a bunch of reservations from the birth of an old class 2 EDB. At the same time, he, like Peresvet with Oslyaby, was built in such a way. Another thing is that it is almost built. Unlike his sisterships.
      Quote: qwert
      outdated Poltava

      However, it was a normal old class 1 EDB. The American GP armor and British cars did the trick. He had few chances to stick Fuji in, but at some meeting Borodino he would be able to fully lay down. If he hadn’t fled, Poltava’s move was not very good.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 4 2016 18: 33
        +1
        Quote: 1440minutes
        1. Reservation of individual sections of the GP for overhead lines did not even correspond to the level of an EDB class 2 (in Russia there was no division into classes, but in the world it was).

        You mean the armored belt thinned to 194 mm, which also did not reach the full thickness of the BShGK barbets (in barbets the armor belt was only 145 mm thick)?
        The side belt of Krupp armor along the waterline with a thickness of 194 mm (against 250 on the "Tsesarevich") in the middle of the hull and 145 mm (against 160 on the "Tsesarevich") in the extremities consisted of plates 2 m high, the upper belt - of plates 152 mm thick and 102 mm high 1,67 m.

        So this is the payment for the third armor belt - the secondary battery casemates in the middle part, which were not on the "Tsesarevich".
        In addition, some with The EDB generally had a 152 mm main armored belt. smile
        Quote: 1440minutes
        3. The high-speed characteristics of Borodin residents allowed them to be ranked only as an obsolete class 1 EDB. But here everything is not so bad, although old, but 1 class.

        17,5 - 17,8 knots It is on the level.
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 4 2016 20: 43
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          You mean the armored belt thinned to 194 mm, which also did not reach the full thickness of the BShGK barbets (in barbets the thickness of the armored belt was only 145 mm)

          These are the plots at the barbets I mean. The fact is that they are often mistakenly not taken into account, believing that their booking was even excessive. But in vain. This is due to the fact that the Borodino people are approached with the standards of citadel battleships. But the fact of the matter is that they were built according to a different scheme. According to the continuous booking scheme. And they did not have an armored traverse and carapaces. And the watertight partition was further to the extremities. Therefore, this section of the GP for such ships was no less important than the rest of the central ones. But its thickness was made 145 mm to save from overload. It’s not even funny. The ancient Nicholas I and Alexander II (the same booking scheme) have a 305 mm compound (i.e. approximately 171 mm krupp). The Tsarevich (who is like the father) has a 229 mm group (and another 63 mm of chromium-nickel bevel, i.e. a total of 274 mm of the reduced group). And among Borodinians, the "cardboard" is 145 mm group and only 43 mm of chromium-nickel bevel (in total, about 176 mm of the given group, that is, almost like in the ancient Nicholas I and Alexander II). Moreover, 2 times from each side and over a decent length.
          176 mm kruppa in the 20th century, this is the figure of the DBK, not the EDB. Moreover, inferior DBK. The same circle of budget Garibaldians at GP had min 187 mm of the reduced krupp. And the expensive and serious DBK non-budget buildings, such as Azuma or Yakumo, 215 mm reduced krupp. And Iwate / Izumo 224 mm reduced krupp, i.e. as much as real 2nd class EDBs.
          By the way, the latest Japanese EDBs (4 pcs) for overhead lines were booked according to the 2nd class EDB scheme (only Victory in the RIF), but they were elegantly booked above the overhead lines. According to the EDB scheme of class 1 overhead lines, only Fuji and Yashima were booked at the YAIF. And in the RIF Retvisan, Tsesarevich and Poltava.
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So this is the payment for the third armored belt - the PMK casemates in the middle

          The board could and should have been done wisely. But not how it goes.
          Quote: Alexey RA
          In addition, some EDBs generally had a 152 mm main armor belt

          For example?
          Quote: Alexey RA
          17,5 - 17,8 knots It is on the level.

          Less than 18 knots in 20 did not go to the EDB. Usually something around 18,5 knots was the norm.
          1. yehat
            yehat April 5 2016 15: 48
            0
            formally, the speeds were yes, but steam engines
            Significantly the characteristics varied from service.
            and in reality, rarely which ship could go stably 18 knots
        2. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 4 2016 20: 43
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          You mean the armored belt thinned to 194 mm, which also did not reach the full thickness of the BShGK barbets (in barbets the thickness of the armored belt was only 145 mm)

          These are the plots at the barbets I mean. The fact is that they are often mistakenly not taken into account, believing that their booking was even excessive. But in vain. This is due to the fact that the Borodino people are approached with the standards of citadel battleships. But the fact of the matter is that they were built according to a different scheme. According to the continuous booking scheme. And they did not have an armored traverse and carapaces. And the watertight partition was further to the extremities. Therefore, this section of the GP for such ships was no less important than the rest of the central ones. But its thickness was made 145 mm to save from overload. It’s not even funny. The ancient Nicholas I and Alexander II (the same booking scheme) have a 305 mm compound (i.e. approximately 171 mm krupp). The Tsarevich (who is like the father) has a 229 mm group (and another 63 mm of chromium-nickel bevel, i.e. a total of 274 mm of the reduced group). And among Borodinians, the "cardboard" is 145 mm group and only 43 mm of chromium-nickel bevel (in total, about 176 mm of the given group, that is, almost like in the ancient Nicholas I and Alexander II). Moreover, 2 times from each side and over a decent length.
          176 mm kruppa in the 20th century, this is the figure of the DBK, not the EDB. Moreover, inferior DBK. The same circle of budget Garibaldians at GP had min 187 mm of the reduced krupp. And the expensive and serious DBK non-budget buildings, such as Azuma or Yakumo, 215 mm reduced krupp. And Iwate / Izumo 224 mm reduced krupp, i.e. as much as real 2nd class EDBs.
          By the way, the latest Japanese EDBs (4 pcs) for overhead lines were booked according to the 2nd class EDB scheme (only Victory in the RIF), but they were elegantly booked above the overhead lines. According to the EDB scheme of class 1 overhead lines, only Fuji and Yashima were booked at the YAIF. And in the RIF Retvisan, Tsesarevich and Poltava.
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So this is the payment for the third armored belt - the PMK casemates in the middle

          The board could and should have been done wisely. But not how it goes.
          Quote: Alexey RA
          In addition, some EDBs generally had a 152 mm main armor belt

          For example?
          Quote: Alexey RA
          17,5 - 17,8 knots It is on the level.

          Less than 18 knots in 20 did not go to the EDB. Usually something around 18,5 knots was the norm for a class 1 EDB. Class 2 EDB walked faster.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Trapperxnumx
            Trapperxnumx April 5 2016 09: 04
            0
            Quote: 1440minutes
            But its thickness to save overload made 145 mm.

            British battleship Canopus - The main belt of 6 "(152 mm) thick Krupp cemented armor was 196 feet (60 m) long and protected the ship's citadel between the main turrets. At the extremities, there was a thin belt of 2" ( 51 mm), which protected the waterline from being hit by shells from rapid-fire guns.

            Postscript: I really, really don’t think that Borodin residents were well booked. On the contrary, I consider their armor insufficient. But the British also built similar ships with similar displacement and armor.
            1. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 09: 32
              +3
              Quote: Trapper7
              British battleship Canopus - 6 "(152 mm) thick Krupp cemented armor main belt

              Yes, the British in the late 19th century built such a series of weakly protected ships. Such a reservation was considered unsuccessful. Before and after the Canopus (Majestics and Formedible), the armor of the GP was 229 mm.
              Quote: Trapper7
              But the British also built similar ships with similar displacement and armor.

              The British built a lot. Therefore, 6 poorly booked Canopuses did not play a big role for them. They were something like lightweight class 2 EBRs, but with 12 "cannons. The ships were strange. The last Majestic with 229 mm GP armor were built in 1898. In parallel with the Canopuses, the first Formedibles were also built (in 1901, 2 entered service) with 229 mm of armor, so they had the opportunity to choose what and where to use.
              Due to the small volume of construction, MTK should have approached this matter more responsibly.
              1. yehat
                yehat April 5 2016 15: 53
                +1
                rightly said. when the Russian Federation builds 4 weakly armored battleships - this is one
                and when England builds 4 of the same, but besides them there are still other pieces 20, albeit even more dull troughs, this is not so annoying.
              2. Trapperxnumx
                Trapperxnumx April 5 2016 16: 51
                0
                Quote: 1440minutes
                The British built a lot. Therefore, 6 poorly booked Canopuses did not play a big role for them. They were something like lightweight class 2 EBRs, but with 12 "cannons. The ships were strange. The last Majestic with 229 mm GP armor were built in 1898. In parallel with the Canopuses, the first Formedibles were also built (in 1901, 2 entered service) with 229 mm armor. Therefore, they had the opportunity to choose what and where to use. MTK, due to the small volume of construction, would have to approach this matter more responsibly

                I absolutely agree.
              3. The comment was deleted.
    3. yehat
      yehat April 5 2016 12: 43
      0
      snout, i.e. nose did not come out)))
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon April 4 2016 19: 00
    +2
    Borodino was not a masterpiece of shipbuilding, but Cisima was clearly not due to the flaws of the project, the allegation that they were not in the same class with the enemy was far-fetched.
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 4 2016 20: 07
      0
      Quote: Cartalon
      claims that they are not in the same class with the enemy far-fetched.

      So pull it back.
      Over the ears.
      It is only desirable reasoned.
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon April 4 2016 22: 23
        0
        Mikasa alone would sink Suvorov? If so, how?
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 21
          0
          Quote: Cartalon
          Mikasa alone would sink Suvorov? If so, how?

          A decisive ram blow to the lower jaw.
          But seriously, even Fuji had very good one-on-one chances against the same Suvorov. Why is there Fuji, even Poltava. Therefore, Mikas should not be dragged here.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 19: 47
    -2
    Quote: AK64
    Detective sofa strategist: Sisoy stood after Oslyabya.
    And what?

    You know how to count yourself - or help?
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 20: 21
      +1
      I would advise you to turn to strangers on you.

      / and to the side /
      However, the Ukrainians ...
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 19: 53
    -1
    Quote: Pilat2009
    Quote: Alex_623
    it was necessary to put in the detachment of "Borodino", for example, the third or fourth.

    There he would have ended and gave it with his reservation

    The fourth was the Eagle - it began to be seriously fired only on the side of the day when the three ships in front were killed.
    And being isolated from the Borodino detachment, Sysoi in the battle with the main forces did not accept!
    Just like Navarin ...
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 20: 12
    0
    Quote: 24hours
    It would also be nice to take into account that 12 "are different. High quality, like the British (Japanese) and Russian. Moreover, this applies to all Russian naval guns

    "Quality British guns" ???
    Finally, the wire structure showed its weakness in the REV!
    The wire structure could not withstand intense firing, especially over long distances.
    As a result, the trunks were bursting!
    In the same Tsushima battle, the barrel of the gun in the bow base of Mikasa was torn apart, the fragments completely disabled the second gun - the tower is completely disabled!

    On Russian ships, the most problematic were the 152-mm guns, due to the weakness of the elevator gears - there were no complaints about the reliability of the GK armadillos!
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 4 2016 21: 30
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      Finally, the wire structure showed its weakness in the REV!

      Really? Why didn’t anyone notice this?
      Quote: Alex_623
      As a result, the trunks were bursting!

      Here is the news, so the news. Can you give an example?
      Quote: Alex_623
      In the same Tsushima battle, the gun barrel in Mikasa’s bow base was torn apart

      In fact, this is not due to British guns, but to the explosives of Japanese shells.
      Quote: Alex_623
      there were no complaints about the reliability of the Civil Code of the battleships

      But there were complaints about their performance characteristics. These were dead guns. They were immediately replaced by others after the REV.
      1. AK64
        AK64 April 4 2016 22: 00
        +1
        But there were complaints about their performance characteristics. These were dead guns. They were immediately replaced by others after the REV.


        "Dead" were shells (lightweight, based on a distance of up to 30 cab.). And it was the shells that were replaced.
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 28
          0
          Quote: AK64
          "Dead" were shells (lightweight, based on a distance of up to 30 cab.). And it was the shells that were replaced.

          Cannon-shell, this is a single complex. There are no dead shells in powerful cannons and vice versa. And the fact that in 1907. thick-walled shells (named after adm. Makarov) were replaced by thin-walled shells, which of course was not bad. But it was a half measure. In 1911 anyway, I had to adopt a new gun-shell complex.
          1. AK64
            AK64 April 5 2016 00: 50
            0
            Cannon-shell, this is a single complex. There are no dead shells in powerful cannons and vice versa.


            neighing ..
            Brother Kolya, is that you? Not serious? It hurts too much for a friend ... Well, people of their own ... It is clear that there are young people around, but we are ... Gray-haired ... Wounds again, well ... And?

            The cannon was calmly used until the ships were completely sunk. But the shell was changed to 5.5 caliber long. (Whether it was 3.3 or 3.5 in the REV, I am too lazy to check the details for sure.)



            And the fact that in 1907. thick-walled shells (named after adm. Makarov) were replaced by thin-walled shells, which of course was not bad. But it was a half measure. In 1911 anyway, I had to adopt a new gun-shell complex.


            Yes, stop fantasizing: nothing Russian 40 cal long gun from Amstrong 40 cal long was not different, Nothing.
            The one that was adopted later - it’s mushrooms after all according to the English model 52 cal guns are long. The British switched to 52 cal --- well, and the Russians too: Chi are we the worst of all? And so, that on Mikas there were 40 cal trunks - that in Russians, starting with Sisoy, the same 40 cal trunks.

            The "problem" (and even that dubious one) was that, assuming close (up to 30 kab) combat, they used a "light" (3.3 cal long) projectile: it gave better armor penetration up to 30 kab.
            But only
            1. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 01: 15
              -1
              Quote: AK64
              neighing ..

              You can also chew hay. To have everything in the complex.
              Quote: AK64
              But the shell was changed to 5.5 caliber long. (Whether it was 3.3 or 3.5 in the REV, I am too lazy to check the details for sure.)

              High explosive, but not armor-piercing. The high explosive (the weight of the projectile itself remained the same) the hitch was less, they shot close, because the size of the chamber did not change.
              And the length of the armor-piercing projectile has not changed. And the weight has not changed. And the hitch did not change. Only the wall thickness has changed, as well as the weight and composition of the charge.
              Quote: AK64
              Russian nothing 40 cal long gun from Amstrong 40 cal long not different

              Well, let's start with the fact that the Russian cannon in the Western measurement system was not 40 caliber, like Armstrong's gun, but 38,3 caliber. In addition, if, again, measured "in their own way", then it was not 12 "(304,8 mm), but 300 mm. That is, serious differences are already evident.
              In addition, due to the significantly heavier projectile (385,6 kg versus 331,7 kg), the Japanese guns were decently heavier. After all, they had a noticeably greater return impulse and working pressure.
              Although, of course, Armstrong’s guns did not reach full-fledged British guns.
              Quote: AK64
              he gave up to 30 cabs the best armor piercing.

              Up to 20 cab.
              1. AK64
                AK64 April 5 2016 01: 40
                0
                Quote: AK64
                he gave up to 30 cabs the best armor piercing.


                Up to 20 cab.


                There is an opinion that up to 27 cabs, and naturally the "Russian light" and "Russian heavy" were compared.
                I wrote "30" just rounded to the close, well, since I'm too lazy to check the numbers.

                Since there are no concrete arguments on the remaining issues (regarding the fact that the Japanese used long and heavy 5.5-explosive shells at Tsushima), I have no objection to anything.

                Accordingly, it is chipped.

                However, to help young people and adolescents (well, we all support young people, right?), I’ll note: there someone went through Borodintsev’s armor - so the Japanese fired high-explosive shots, and even 100mm of armor would hardly penetrate whether they could: there are no examples of breaking through. So what can of course Borodin and absolutely poor but about landmines japov this little sway.
                Look for other reasons.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. 1440minutes
                  1440minutes April 5 2016 02: 11
                  -2
                  Quote: AK64
                  It is believed that up to 27 cab

                  There is an opinion, but there are calculations. They show 19 cab.
                  Quote: AK64
                  I am noticing: there was someone about Borodin’s armor going through - and so the Japanese fired high-explosive, and they could hardly have penetrated 100mm of armor: there are no examples of penetration. So, of course, Borodin residents can be absolutely poor, but that’s not enough for relatively high explosive japs.

                  Tales about "scary fugasks" are very popular. And Oslyabya and Sisoi can be easily attributed to them. But Alexander and Borodino cannot be written off as fugasks. They were sunk by armor-piercing. And the rest were mostly armor-piercing. Although they shot mines too.
                  But cotton has simple "arguments". We didn't have normal land mines. And the Japanese did. Here is the answer why the rout happened. Unscientific primitivism.
                  By the way, we didn’t have normal landmines by the will of Mr. Makarov. Which pushed his tips. And they could only be mounted on thick-walled shells. I can even prove it, I have a book with such a beautiful monogram. There it is all written. Black and white.
                  1. AK64
                    AK64 April 5 2016 16: 23
                    0
                    But cotton wool "arguments" are simple.


                    After that, this "cotton wool", it is clear what to talk with the creature and nothing about.

                    And about Kolya, I, of course, also guessed.
                3. The comment was deleted.
                4. yehat
                  yehat April 5 2016 16: 51
                  0
                  the Japanese also had high-explosive armor-piercing shells
                  don't take simplified memes from other articles.
              2. yehat
                yehat April 5 2016 16: 49
                0
                Quote: 1440minutes

                Although, of course, Armstrong’s guns did not reach full-fledged British guns.

                ok this is understandable when compare photos of these guns
                Armstrong's gun is one and a half times heavier
                it has a thicker barrel wall and it allows not only to throw heavier shells, but also to strengthen the charge of the shot to fly further.
                1. 24hours
                  24hours April 5 2016 17: 33
                  0
                  Quote: yehat
                  Armstrong's gun is one and a half times heavier

                  We look at the weight of the British 12 "/ 40 (30.5 cm) Mark IX cannons - 50 tons.
                  We look at the weight of British guns for abrigines 12 "/ 40 (30.5 cm) EOC (Armstrongs) - 49 tons.
                  We look DE Mark IX - 11653 tm
                  DE 12 "/ 40 (30.5 cm) EOC - 10542 tm.
                  What is the advantage of Armstrong?
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. yehat
          yehat April 5 2016 16: 30
          +1
          No, the main problem was precisely in cannons made according to outdated requirements.
          at the same time, similar guns of the latest models by the British and Germans were much better. The main problem was that they could not withstand a powerful charge and therefore did not shoot far, and the weight of the shells was limited.
          The "light" shells became bad because of the tactics - they were designed for intense firefight at medium range, and not for hinged fire at maximum.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 24hours
      24hours April 6 2016 20: 03
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      In the same Tsushima battle, the barrel of the gun in the bow base of Mikasa was torn apart, the fragments completely disabled the second gun - the tower is completely disabled!

      This is a shimosa. She is liddit or melinite. This has nothing to do with the quality of the guns. Half the world used Armstrong's cannons, and nothing was pleased.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Finally, the wire structure showed its weakness in the REV!

      Finally in 1907. experimentally it was proved that up to a barrel length of 45 calibres, the British system of fastening by continuous winding of high-strength (150 kg / mm) wire is optimal. This is so, as an easy and free educational program for uneducated users.
      Quote: Alex_623
      and Russian ships the most problematic were 152 mm guns, due to the weakness of the elevator gears - there were no complaints about the reliability of the GK armadillos!

      On Russian ships, ALL guns were problematic. In one part or another, in one degree or another. Except 10 "Victory cannons (4 barrels). And 10" BrBO cannons (11 barrels). The 120 mm cannon was also relatively good.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 21: 51
    -2
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Here is the news, so the news. Can you give an example?

    Is this news for you ???
    And to read books for yourself, to look at pictures in Google - is it weak?
    The picture shows the stern tower of the armored cruiser Nissin after the Tsushima battle.
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 16
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      And to read books for yourself, to look at pictures in Google - is it weak?

      I’ll definitely look. But only after you study the question of what is shimosa. And what did she lead to.
      About the Italian guns produced by Pozuoli on the Garibaldians, I already wrote to you.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 21: 55
    -2
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Here is the news, so the news. Can you give an example?

    The bow tower of the armored cruiser Nissin after the Tsushima battle.
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 14
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      The bow tower of the armored cruiser Nissin after the Tsushima battle.

      A terrible sight. Just a nightmare.
      Nevertheless, there is no need for guns, that’s all she, shimoza.
      In addition, I want to upset you, on the Nissin and Kasuga there were Italian guns. Pozuoli production.
      1. Alex_623
        Alex_623 April 5 2016 11: 12
        0
        I don’t want to upset you either - but if in RI French guns of the Cane system were produced and put on ships, then in Italy English guns were made and put on ships under the license.
        Secondly, in all likelihood the Spaniards knew something - that’s why the “Cristobal Colon” ​​bought from the Italians unarmed and armed it themselves with non-English type guns!

        As for the shimoza, this dregs were thrown by the British when it turned out that in Britain, on British ships, gun barrels are just as torn as the Japanese!
        If the general public knew about this — in fact, that the entire British fleet is armed with substandard guns — then this would be an international scandal, and their heads would fly not only in the Admiralty, but also in the cabinet!
        Therefore, the scandal was successfully hushed up by moving the arrows to the "wrong" Japanese shimosa ...

        In general, the Japanese, in general, stupidly classified everything related to the RYA, and except for the "Official History of the War at Sea Meiji" - which is actually not a military-historical analysis of the war at sea, but a heroic poem about the wisdom of the divine Mikado, heroism and courage of the Great One - no sane at all there was no literature on RJAV!

        So the "wrong" Japanese shimosa in this whole story is far-fetched!

        Ruptures of gun barrels took place in the battle in the Yellow Sea.
        A year has passed between the battle in the Yellow Sea and Tsushima - if you talk round!
        What - for a year, the "cross-eyed macaques" have not been able to figure out what the problem is, and have not been able to develop countermeasures?
        Re-equipping shells is not the same as developing new models of guns and re-equipping the entire fleet with them!
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 5 2016 11: 33
          -1
          Quote: Alex_623
          but if in RI French guns of the Cane system were produced and put on ships under license, then in Italy English guns were produced and put on ships under license.

          It was not worth writing platitudes.
          Quote: Alex_623
          the Spaniards knew something - that’s why the “Cristobal Colon” ​​bought from the Italians unarmed and armed it themselves with non-English type guns!

          And the Russians "knew something." Therefore, they bought unarmed ships, equipping them with their own weapons. In fact, it's all about weapon compatibility.
          Quote: Alex_623
          then this dregs were thrown by the British

          Do not want to be interested in schimosa, take an interest in melinitis or ice ice. This is about the same. No one except the Japanese used this explosive because of its instability.
          Quote: Alex_623
          in fact that the entire British fleet is armed with substandard guns

          I want to upset, but the Japanese ships were armed with Armstrong's EOCs. British Navy ships NEVER armed with EOCs, only MARKs. So here you have a prolapse. True, "artistically designed".
          Quote: Alex_623
          So the "wrong" Japanese shimosa in this whole story is far-fetched!

          Do you like Top Secret? Anything about aliens?
          Quote: Alex_623
          What - for a year, the "cross-eyed macaques" have not been able to figure out what the problem is, and have not been able to develop countermeasures?

          I'll tell you even more, there is a version that Mikasa also quacked at the time due to shimoza. Nevertheless, they considered this a small fee for the other qualities of this explosive. Finally, they refused shimoza only after Mikasy.
          1. AK64
            AK64 April 5 2016 16: 46
            0
            No one except the Japanese used this explosive because of its instability.


            Liar ...

            However, as usual: Kolya cannot but lie.
            1. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 18: 44
              0
              Quote: AK64
              However, as usual: Kolya cannot but lie.

              And what, Kolya, is this some kind of offensive name? Are you constantly calling me Kolya?
              1. AK64
                AK64 April 5 2016 18: 47
                0
                Kolya is your name.
                After all, your name is Kolya, right? Oh yes, I understand, not Kolya, but Nicholas.
                (Just do not turn the language to Nicholas after cotton wool)

                I can also name.
                1. 1440minutes
                  1440minutes April 5 2016 19: 16
                  0
                  Quote: AK64
                  I can also name.

                  But it even became interesting to me. It would be interesting to know your last name. Especially after the very unusual name of Kolya.
            2. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 18: 44
              0
              Quote: AK64
              However, as usual: Kolya cannot but lie.

              And what, Kolya, is this some kind of offensive name? Are you constantly calling me Kolya?
      2. Alex_623
        Alex_623 April 5 2016 12: 11
        0
        I don’t want to upset you either - but if in RI French guns of the Cane system were produced and put on ships, then in Italy English guns were made and put on ships under the license.
        Secondly, in all likelihood the Spaniards knew something - that’s why the “Cristobal Colon” ​​bought from the Italians unarmed and armed it themselves with non-English type guns!

        As for the shimoza, this dregs were thrown by the British when it turned out that in Britain, on British ships, gun barrels are just as torn as the Japanese!
        If the general public knew about this — in fact, that the entire British fleet is armed with substandard guns — then this would be an international scandal, and their heads would fly not only in the Admiralty, but also in the cabinet!
        Therefore, the scandal was successfully hushed up by moving the arrows to the "wrong" Japanese shimosa ...

        In general, the Japanese, in general, stupidly classified everything related to the RYA, and except for the "Official History of the War at Sea Meiji" - which is actually not a military-historical analysis of the war at sea, but a heroic poem about the wisdom of the divine Mikado, heroism and courage of the Great One - no sane at all there was no literature on RJAV!

        So the "wrong" Japanese shimosa in this whole story is far-fetched!

        Ruptures of gun barrels took place in the battle in the Yellow Sea.
        A year has passed between the battle in the Yellow Sea and Tsushima - if you talk round!
        What - for a year, the "cross-eyed macaques" have not been able to figure out what the problem is, and have not been able to develop countermeasures?
        Re-equipping shells is not the same as developing new models of guns and re-equipping the entire fleet with them!
  • Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 4 2016 22: 33
    +3
    Greetings to the respected author!
    The article makes the most wonderful impression, thanks. The description of design and construction is a balm for the soul - excellent mastery of the material multiplied by good writing style. It seems that I know, but still laughed heartily at the reviews of our admirals about the project - "swan cancer and pike" just nervously smoke on the sidelines. "Add armor! No, remove armor! Yes, that's all nonsense, let's better build a cruiser!" I will say a banality, of course, but such articles are terribly lacking for the topvar, and actually, not only for the topvar.
    A couple ... no, not comments, but rationalizations that could give an excellent article the value of a small monograph. It would be very interesting to read the comparison of "Sisoy" with imported battleships. And ... no matter how unpleasant it may be, you cannot throw out the words from the song - the ship surrendered to the enemy.
    1. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 April 5 2016 17: 07
      +1
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      the ship surrendered to the enemy.

      Eagle officers who surrendered the ship in a much better situation were eventually acquitted
      Well, then Sisoy still did not get to the enemy. Maybe seeing that the ship will inevitably sink, the commander decided to save the team and not the iron
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 22: 40
    0
    Quote: AK64
    In fact, this is not due to British guns, but to the explosives of Japanese shells.

    And what - all these three guns are torn apart due to the wrong Japanese explosives ???
    And all in one place ???

    In fact, back in the 19th century, Britain developed an original gun barrel production system:
    A few kilometers were wound onto the hot liner (several tens of kilometers! By heavy sea guns!) Of steel wire, while cooling the wire, it fastened the liner perfectly.
    The technology turned out to be very cheap and technologically advanced, and before the REV it suited everyone ...
    But in the RNV, the firing ranges unexpectedly sharply increased - and with och heavy Japanese shells and with prolonged intense firing at maximum distances, this wire structure was insufficient, the barrels did not withstand and burst!
    They also burst during the battle in the Yellow Sea;
    they also burst in the battle of the Vladivostok cruisers with a detachment of Kamimura;
    they were also torn in the battle of Tsushima;
    they also burst during the large exercises of the Grand Fleet EMNIP in 1908 - when the British carried out large-scale firing of the fleet with live shells at long distances!
    Then the systemic marriage of British guns was revealed ...

    So my friend, this is "news" only for you.
    After the REV, the British fleet had to urgently re-equip the Grand Fleet with reinforced guns and also urgently adopt a flaky shell - according to the Russian model.


    As for the Russian guns, they showed themselves excellently in all the battles of the RPE - with the exception of insufficiently strong gears for the elevators of the 152 mm guns.

    And no one changed the Russian guns after the REV to new ones - they modified the towers and modified the lifting mechanisms, bringing the elevation angle of the guns to 35 °.
    And the next generation of guns had completely different parameters ...
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 4 2016 22: 48
      +2
      I protest against the fact that my nickname is in the quote: I did not write this.

      I apologize
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 00: 08
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      And what - all these three guns are torn apart due to the wrong Japanese explosives ???

      Exactly. I recommend that you study the features of Japanese shimosa. All your "assumptions" will disappear at once.
      Quote: Alex_623
      the trunks could not stand and burst!

      And you are a big dreamer. Just huge.
      Quote: Alex_623
      they also burst during the large exercises of the Grand Fleet EMNIP in 1908 - when the British carried out large-scale firing of the fleet with live shells at long distances!
      Then the systemic marriage of British guns was revealed ...

      But this is a direct lie. Not a fantasy.
      Quote: Alex_623
      So my friend, this is "news" only for you.

      Of course. Besides such revelations, this is NOT news for you only. It is a pity that the guys do not know about this.
      Quote: Alex_623
      After the REV, the British fleet had to urgently re-equip the Grand Fleet with reinforced guns and also urgently adopt a flaky shell - according to the Russian model.

      Enchanting nonsense. For the first time I come across this.
      Quote: Alex_623
      As for the Russian guns, they showed themselves excellently in all the battles of the RPE - with the exception of insufficiently strong gears for the elevators of the 152 mm guns.

      It is a pity that you are completely out of the subject of artillery. Only 10 "guns showed themselves well. And even then, because they were from the GAU, and not from the GIMA.
      Quote: Alex_623
      And no one changed the Russian guns after the REV to new ones - they modified the towers and modified the lifting mechanisms, bringing the elevation angle of the guns to 35 °.

      And what was their change? They basically all turned out to be the Japanese. Well proven, and the Japanese were. Paradox.
      By the way, they did not fix them, but exchanged them for their own, "defective" ones.
      Quote: Alex_623
      And the next generation of guns had completely different parameters ...

      Shooting backwards? Oddly enough, you are right about the parameters. Can you explain what these "other parameters" were?
      1. Nehist
        Nehist April 5 2016 03: 08
        +1
        It is strange that this is news for you !!! But the British guns were indeed less tenacious than the Russian
        1. 1440minutes
          1440minutes April 5 2016 09: 19
          0
          Quote: Nehist
          But the British guns were indeed less tenacious than the Russian

          You should not scoop up information "on specialized forums". They will not write to you there yet. So Alex_623 gave a couple of photos to confirm his version ... of Italian cannons. At the same time, Italian cannons are also unacceptable, it's all about the experimental and unstable shimose.
          1. Nehist
            Nehist April 5 2016 09: 36
            0
            The fact that I do not argue about the unstable shimoza, she at times increased the chance of the stem breaking off. I meant that when firing normal shells, the wear resistance of Russian guns was higher
            1. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 10: 14
              0
              Quote: Nehist
              I meant that when firing normal shells, the wear resistance of Russian guns was higher

              I came across such data. If you have them, it would be interesting to take a look.
            2. The comment was deleted.
            3. AK64
              AK64 April 5 2016 17: 04
              0
              The fact that I do not argue about the unstable shimoza, she at times increased the chance of the stem breaking off. I meant that when firing normal shells, the wear resistance of Russian guns was higher


              And do not argue in vain (although it is not just something to argue with with this - you should not speak with him).

              Arguments:
              (1) Trinitrophenol (assuming that shimosis is precisely trinitrophenol) was used very widely in PMV, and even in WWII. Under Jutland, the British fired precisely trinitrophenol. However, massive detachments of the trunks were observed only among the Japanese in the REV.
              (2) it’s a very characteristic photo --- not a gap, namely a gap. Shimoza has a very high brisant (crushing) effect, and in case of a shell explosion in the barrel, I would expect another
              (3) The fact that Armstrong’s technology was no longer used is also hinting.

              So IMHO Alex_623 is absolutely right. (He would still be politely told to learn so the price he would not have)
          2. Nehist
            Nehist April 5 2016 09: 50
            0
            And by the way, the Italians were the same British Armstrong guns
            1. 1440minutes
              1440minutes April 5 2016 10: 16
              0
              Quote: Nehist
              the Italians were the same British guns Armstrong

              Armstrong designs, manufactured by Pozuoli.
              The "British guns" of the Japanese were not always British either. Only at first. And then their production was perfectly mastered in the arsenal of Kure. For example, in Poltava (as part of the YaIF) there were curious hybrids produced by this arsenal, the rear shrouds and machine tools were Russian, and the front shrouds, barrel pipes and shells for the guns were "British". And inside there was an adapter in the form of fastening rings of its own design.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 16: 52
      0
      And what - all these three guns are torn apart due to the wrong Japanese explosives ???
      And all in one place ???


      Thinking, I agreed with the argument: trinitrophenol was used quite widely in WWI and even WWII, but no one except the Japanese, moreover, exactly at 12 ", did not report barrel torn off. (Moreover, the cuts are characteristic)
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 4 2016 22: 59
    0
    Quote: AK64
    I would advise you to turn to strangers on you.

    / and to the side /
    However, the Ukrainians ...

    "Sofa strategist detective" - ​​is this "on you"?

    (Yawning): By what you go, you will find ...
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 19: 46
      0
      Well, tell us how you would defeat Togu by placing Sisa third or fourth (that is, in the heart of the Borodino squad!)

      If this is not a sofa strategy, then what is it?

      Well, wait for the story
  • Sarma
    Sarma April 5 2016 05: 17
    -2
    A typical example of corruption and the adoption of the essentially defective ship by the thieving officials of the stupid Tsar Nikolashka the Second.
  • unknown
    unknown April 5 2016 11: 09
    +1
    How little is needed for such a heated discussion to flare up.

    Apparently it will have to be repeated. As they say in my favorite anecdote "... for the military."

    1. According to their characteristics (weapons, booking scheme, speed) "Sisoy" and "Fuji" are equal. K RYAV "Fuji" is an obsolete battleship, like ships of the "Poltava" type.
    2. The Japanese knew that the 6 "shell is heavy for them. Still, a Japanese sailor of normal condition was lighter than a European one by an average of 20 kg.
    But there was nothing to choose from either. The British have less than 6 "caliber is 120 mm. It will not be enough. Caliber 140mm, or rather a ready-made gun of this caliber appeared later, for light cruisers intended for Greece. A ready-made gun of this caliber, more precisely 138,6mm, was from the French. artillery for Japan at that time - Great Britain. Therefore, for a while they reconciled.
    3. "Asams" were not any advocates of trade. They were originally designed for squadron combat. All specialists write that they were sorely lacking in speed. S.A. Balakin wrote about this in his work on cruisers of this type. And the reason is known: limited displacement, armor for a squadron battle ..., I had to save on cars. Re-lightened machines were installed on the ships, as a result, in real service, a sharp shortage of speed. And the "most popular Frenchman" turned out to be the slowest, for a long time 15 knots. The story is similar to the fate of the Italian WWII cruisers. Similarly, the "Italians", built on the same principle, barely held 17 knots, which was noted by the British who were on the Togo squadron.
    4. On the comparison of cruisers with a displacement of 6000 tons and the "Asama" type.
    Probably, the T-34-76 and "Tiger" also cannot be compared, but in battle they had to fight.
    When, in a battle in the Yellow Sea, "Askold" going for a breakthrough was blocked by "Yakumo", and then "Tokiwa", probably due to the impossibility of comparing them, was it necessary to reduce the speed, raise the white flag and surrender at the mercy of the winner?
    The admiral made a different decision. This episode proved that the fire performance of the 6000 cruisers is higher than that of the Asam. By the way, in this battle, "Yakumo" acted independently, due to the impossibility of being in service with armored cruisers. The reason is the same: insufficient speed.
    The Japanese quickly realized the shortcomings of the Aesam. On the home series, they dramatically increased the main caliber, displacement, speed and received the "ideal cruiser RYAV" which entered service after its completion.
    Not for nothing, many experts consider the construction of "aces" a mistake. With this money, it was possible to build 2-3 normal battleships, which would bring more benefits.
    On the contrary, the Japanese praised the characteristics of the cruisers of the 6000 projects. During the formation of the post-war (after WWII) program, their characteristics (primarily displacement) were taken as a basis for scout cruisers.
    1. 24hours
      24hours April 5 2016 16: 11
      0
      Quote: ignoto
      Sisoi and Fuji are equal

      An adorable way to prove your case, you just need to repeat the above 33 times.
      Quote: ignoto
      Still, the Japanese sailor of normal condition

      You would only know what Japanese people are. Therefore, to pick up with a hundred loaders for the fleet was no problem. Couch is gossip.
      Quote: ignoto
      The fact that they were sorely lacking in speed was written by all experts.

      And it happens on the fences they write. Damn what. But this does not mean that it is true. Good quality British (from Armstrong, by the way), German (from Vulcan, by the way) and French (Saint-Nazaire, it’s not just that) technique went well. Those. not just foreign equipment, but equipment from the world's best manufacturers.
      And you are right now driving me over my ears on the topic "Rolls-Royce (not even a Mercedes) shit, it doesn't drive more than 10 thousand km."
      And if you are bad with geometry and arithmetic, then say so.
      Quote: ignoto
      as noted by the British on the squadron of Togo.

      Exactly. All these fables, sooner or later, rest against Pekingham's reports. Which was a big dreamer. Or just hawala Japanese disu.
      And there are no other sources. Moreover, all these fables are easily refuted by the data on the battle in the Korea Strait. When you start talking about it, the "cool specialists from the sofas" pose as ostriches. Here, I see. But here, I don't see.
      Quote: ignoto
      Probably, the T-34-76 and "Tiger" also cannot be compared, but in battle they had to fight.

      Count how much the T-34 needed to destroy one Tiger. There were not so many Varangians in the RIF.
      Quote: ignoto
      "Askold" going to the breakthrough was blocked by "Yakumo", and then "Tokiwa"

      I'll tell you one thing. Askold did not "go for a breakthrough." Askold fled from the battlefield, contrary to the order of the admiral (Ukhtomsky in particular). Actually, like all 1TOE ships. The only difference was that they fled to different places, i.e. actually scattered in different directions, like cockroaches. And already after them to Port Arthur Ukhtomsky trudged on Peresvet, holding the signal "follow me".
      At the same time, nobody asked Askold the road. Because it was worth blocking her Yakumo or Asama, and Krant to that Askold. The tiger will tear the kitten in any way. And the balance of power there was about the same.
      Quote: ignoto
      This episode proved that the fire performance of 6000 cruisers is higher than that of Asam.

      What nonsense. Just enchanting. Not only do you compare armadillo with armored deck. So you still manage to compare the scout with the defender. Your verses look about the same as if you found a lot of advantages over the Tiger in the T-34.
      Besides, who are these mysterious 6000 thousandths? Let us know, be so kind.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. 24hours
        24hours April 5 2016 16: 14
        0
        Quote: ignoto
        By the way, in this battle, "Yakumo" acted independently, due to the impossibility of being in service with armored cruisers.

        Which system? How and why could an armadillo be in the same ranks with some armored decks there? What was he to do with them?
        Quote: ignoto
        The Japanese quickly realized the shortcomings of the Aesam.

        Asam did not exist in nature. There were 2 asams. Iwate / Izumo can be attributed here with a stretch, although these were ships of the next generation. In addition, Yakumo and Azduma were relatively similar to each other. And also 2 Garibaldians, who were not "defenders", but budget battleships. Those. generally ships of a different class (and design).
        Quote: ignoto
        With this money, it was possible to build 2-3 normal battleships that would bring more benefit.

        What good? The Japanese had an excess of EDB. And the fact that the RIF was not engaged in cruising, so the Japanese could not know in advance.
        As for the shortcomings, they had only one; it was the wrongly chosen GC. It was, they had no other shortcomings.
        Quote: ignoto
        in contrast, the Japanese praised the characteristics of the 6000-project cruisers.

        Again enchanting nonsense. There were no "cruisers 6000" in the RIF. All ships were for different purposes, and Askold was built in general erroneously and beyond the program.
        Quote: ignoto
        During the formation of the post-war (after WWII) program, their characteristics (primarily displacement) were taken as a basis for scout cruisers.

        Again, some new category, cruisers-scouts. What is "our money"? Are the scouts cruisers? So the Japanese had such things during the RYA, nothing new.
        By the way, there were already one "scout-scout 6000" in the RIF during the REV; He was called Bogatyr and did not participate in hostilities. How the Japanese were able to appreciate it and copy it after the REV, a big secret.
    3. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 17: 13
      0
      1. According to their characteristics (weapons, booking scheme, speed) "Sisoy" and "Fuji" are equal.


      How can 12Ktons be equivalent to 9Ktons?
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 14: 22
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Quote: Alex_623
    And to read books for yourself, to look at pictures in Google - is it weak?

    I’ll definitely look. But only after you study the question of what is shimosa ...

    Actually, I’m a former pyrotechnician, and unlike you, I didn’t read about shimosa in books, but I myself worked with it!

    So you can proceed to viewing the pictures right now ...
    1. 24hours
      24hours April 5 2016 14: 54
      +1
      Quote: Alex_623
      Actually, I’m a former pyrotechnician, and unlike you, I didn’t read about shimosa in books, but I myself worked with it!

      And I am a former astronaut. From the Martian expedition. Judging by your knowledge of explosives.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 14: 58
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Quote: Cartalon
    Mikasa alone would sink Suvorov? If so, how?

    A decisive ram blow to the lower jaw.
    But seriously, even Fuji had very good one-on-one chances against the same Suvorov. Why is there Fuji, even Poltava. Therefore, Mikas should not be dragged here.

    I completely disagree!

    1) Suvorov has two armor belts from bow to stern, Krupp armor;
    Mikasa had the main armor belt from bow to stern, the second belt reached only barbets (armor is also Krupp), and since the towers on Mikas were far from the bow and stern (unlike the Borodintsy, whose towers are close to the bow and stern) - Mikasy och most of the sides in the bow and stern are much worse armored than Borodintsy.
    in Fuji, the main armor belt reached only to barbets - with the same significantly greater distance of the towers from the bow and stern - therefore, in Fuji Pts, a large space in the bow and stern is not reserved at all. So Fuji is really not an armored ship - but a semi-armored one, like Poltava!

    2) on all, without exception, Russian turret RPE ships, reloading of turret guns could be carried out at any turn of the turret.
    Fuji and the dead man on mines near Port Arthur Yashima are the only two EBRs of both fleets in which to reload the guns they had to be deployed in a diametrical plane, and after reloading, return to the rear!
    At the same time, firstly, Fuji was significantly inferior to all Russian EDBs in combat rate of fire, and secondly, at this rate of fire it was almost impossible to follow the target, guided by the breaks - while Fuji was turning towers back and forth, the situation completely changed.
    That is, every new volley of Fuji - compared with a volley of Russian armadillos - went at random, at random!

    3) The ending of the battle always took place at shorter distances than the beginning of the battle. Consequently, the opponents came close to medium-small distances and brought into action the medium caliber ...
    At the same time, Russian 152mm guns have a length of 45 calibers, and Japanese (English!) - 40 calibers!
    Therefore, in the ending of the hypothetical one-on-one ending of the duel, Suvorov has a slight advantage over Mikasa, overwhelming over Fuji!
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 19: 14
      0
      Mikasa Pts most of the sides in the bow and stern armored significantly worse than Borodin.

      Mikase was neither warm nor hot because of this. it was a citadel battleship. Unlike Borodino.
      with the same significantly greater distance of the towers from the bow and stern - therefore, in Fuji Pts, a large space in the bow and stern is not reserved at all.

      You at least cut off these extremities with Fuji with a knife. He will be great at fighting and shooting further. This is a characteristic feature of the citadel armadillos. The main thing is not to overload them. And the extremities were completely irrelevant to them. Nothing of value was stored there.
      So Fuji is really not an armored ship - but a semi-armored one, like Poltava!

      You are confusing the armadillos of a full reservation, the citadel armadillos and semi-armored ships. But there were also traverse armadillos. In other words, learn materiel and do not write nonsense.
      while Fuji was turning towers back and forth the situation was completely changing.

      The paths of the Internet tales are inscrutable.
      That is, every new volley of Fuji - compared with a volley of Russian armadillos - went at random, at random!

      Nevertheless, somehow Borodino managed to send to the bottom. Apparently by accident, aiming at Mikasu.
      The ending of the battle always took place at shorter distances than the beginning of the battle.

      Where does this "new data" come from?
      Russian 152mm guns have a length of 45 calibers, and Japanese (English!) - 40 calibers!

      Damn, do you finally study what member of the middle-caliber quick-shooters stood on the EDB.
      Therefore, in the ending of the hypothetical one-on-one ending of the duel, Suvorov has a slight advantage over Mikasa, overwhelming over Fuji!

      In fact, there are special estimation factors. There are many factors, this is armor in different places, and guns, and ... Well, a lot of things, in short.
      So, Mikasa has 9282 points. Sikishima has 9333 points. Fuji has 7921 points. Poltava has 7663 points. At Suvorov. As it actually was - 7433 points (with reservations). If we replace the areas with 145 mm armor of the GP with 194 mm (it is not clear only due to what, because this is overweight), then there would be 8016 points.
      8016 points for the Russian military shipbuilding, this is just a masterpiece result. It’s never been better to build anything in Russia.
      There was only one "sadness". In terms of performance characteristics, Borodino was not an EBR. Due to the preponderance, the range of their action was very limited (the coal supply was reduced, in short) and in terms of performance characteristics they were BrBO. Those. coastal defense battleships.
      Well, they could not cost the EDB in Russia, they did not know how. In fact, only Victory was built on Russian components, i.e. from the birth of an old EDB class 2. This was the technological crown of the Russian defense industry in the early 20th century.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 15: 04
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Quote: Cartalon
    Mikasa alone would sink Suvorov? If so, how?

    A decisive ram blow to the lower jaw.
    But seriously, even Fuji had very good one-on-one chances against the same Suvorov. Why is there Fuji, even Poltava. Therefore, Mikas should not be dragged here.

    4) As for the Poltava, they are no different in armament from the Borodins.
    Booking at Poltava is significantly inferior to Borodins and Mikasa-Asahi-Sikishima, but Poltava is significantly superior in booking Fuji-Yashima - in view of the same design features of ships:
    On Russian ships, the towers are closer to the bow and stern than on Japanese (English) ships.
    Consequently, Poltava armored better than Fuji Yashima!
    So Poltava also has very good chances in a one-on-one duel with Fuji!

    Reasoning about the thickness of the armor has no relation to Tsushima! The Japanese in Tsushima fired mostly high-explosive shells!
    And for a high-explosive projectile, that the armor is 100mm, that 200mm, that 300mm - everything is one, it will not penetrate either one or the other, much less a third!
    Hence the conclusion:
    Borodins, all things being equal (!!!), had a noticeable advantage in booking and a slight armament over Mikasa-Asahi-Sikishima and an overwhelming unconditional advantage over Fuji!
    And since in Tsushima the main act of the whole performance was the battle of the First Armored Detachment of Togo with four Borodinians, we can safely say that the iron (!!!) and other things being equal (!!!) Borodinians were slightly superior to the First Armored Detachment or, in any case, not inferior to him. The only thing that spoils the ratio - the only 254mm Kassugi gun - everything else in the battle of the first-class EDBs (as the battle in the Yellow Sea showed) is not significant.

    So the reasons for the defeat in Tsushima should not be sought in the "iron" and not in its comparison - but in a completely different place ...
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 19: 56
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      Booking at Poltava is significantly inferior to Borodins and Mikas-Asahi-Sikishima, but Poltava is significantly superior in booking Fuji-Yashima

      We look at booking GP for overhead lines.
      Fuji 280 mm reduced krupp. Poltava 254 mm reduced krupp. Mikasa 233 mm led krupp (EDB level 2 class), Borodinians 176 mm led krupp (battleship level for poor or budget armadillos). Everything, as you wrote, is just the opposite.
      See booking above GP.
      Based on the type of reservation in the coefficient. Mikasa 26,0, Borodino 19,7, Poltava 13,8, Fuji 11,4. Well, finally here you hit the target. Security trends above the GP of those years are clearly evident.
      By the way, I’ll pay attention to the American armor of Poltava, at Petropavlovsk with adequate armor coefficient. only 10,6.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Consequently, Poltava armored better than Fuji Yashima!
      So Poltava also has very good chances in a one-on-one duel with Fuji!

      For starters, this is a moot point. Booking on VL is critical, and here Fuji's performance is better. In addition, do not forget about the Fuji guns. They are clearly better than those that stood in Poltava. Therefore, the total Fuji score is greater than that of Poltava.
      Quote: Alex_623
      The Japanese in Tsushima fired mostly high-explosive shells!

      And you can write that they didn’t shoot but spat through the straw. Paper can stand it. Only Borodino and Alexander were sunk by armor piercing.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Borodins, all things being equal (!!!), had a noticeable advantage in booking and a slight armament over Mikasa-Asahi-Sikishima and an overwhelming unconditional advantage over Fuji!

      The fact that thin armor is much better than thick, I already understood. But what, and less powerful guns are better than more powerful ones? I didn’t know that. It will be necessary to record, otherwise I will forget.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Borodinians were slightly superior to the First Armored Detachment, or in any case not inferior to it.

      Bravo. They are understandable, the victory of the Russian fleet under Tsushima was stunning and unconditional.
      Quote: Alex_623
      The only thing that spoils the ratio is the only 254mm Kassugi gun

      Ah, that’s what it is, that’s who made it all wrong. But I still could not understand. Now I know, thank you, opened my eyes.
      Quote: Alex_623
      So the reasons for the defeat in Tsushima should not be sought in the "iron" and not in its comparison - but in a completely different place ...

      What, and not in the Kassugi gun? And in what place? Hopefully not in the back?
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 15: 14
    +1
    Quote: 24hours
    Quote: Alex_623
    Actually, I’m a former pyrotechnician, and unlike you, I didn’t read about shimosa in books, but I myself worked with it!

    And I am a former astronaut. From the Martian expedition. Judging by your knowledge of explosives.

    Well, then do not enter into discussions with the "cosmonauts"
    There is a very simple and well-known method:

    Do not like someone else's post - write your own!

    And the flanging to catch up with everything!
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 15: 42
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes

    And the Russians "knew something." Therefore, they bought unarmed ships, equipping them with their own weapons.

    Is it true ??? - Wow! ??
    I’m terribly shy - but still I’ll venture to ask:
    and the Canet system weapons are the very "own weapons" with which the Russians armed their ships? ..

    And I’m very embarrassed to ask (already blushed!) - but my dear colleague knows that at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, the controlling stake in the Putilovskiye Zavody, for example, belonged to the French company Schneider? ..
    Therefore, the Russian 76mm field gun (colonel!) - This is really the development of Schneider launched into production in Russia!
    And that the shell for her - as well as for the ZiS-3, F-22, USV, F-34 and many other Russian (Soviet) guns - is this a French shell of the EMNIP model of 1898?

    And my dear colleague is aware that:
    Is the "Russian" three-line rifle a Nagant rifle?
    "Russian" TT - is it Browning?
    "Russian" PM - is it Walter?
    "Russian" PPD, PPSh, PPS - is this Bergman (aka Schmeiser)?
    "Russian" DP is Lewis?

    Perhaps the Russians really knew something ...

    Karoch, instead of entering into discussions with all sorts of different dilettantes - it’s better to go read the che-thread about shimoza!
    And then, as I take a look, you are completely not in the subject of artillery ...
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 20: 08
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      and the Canet system weapons are the very "own weapons" with which the Russians armed their ships? ..

      It. These guns and Obukhov were on Russian ships. There were still small hotchkisses. Everything was made in Russia.
      Quote: Alex_623
      controlling stake for example of the same joint-stock company Putilovskie factories belonged to the French company Schneider?

      And what, from this the plant ceased to be Russian?
      Quote: Alex_623
      Is this a French shell of the EMNIP sample of 1898?

      Nah, it's not like that. It’s enough that these shells were of different calibers.
      Quote: Alex_623
      And that the shell for her - as well as for the ZiS-3, F-22, USV, F-34 and many other Russian (Soviet) guns

      Maybe somewhere deep in the base. But in 1930. A new range of ammunition was adopted. In addition, before the Second World War, she changed a couple of times.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Is the "Russian" three-line rifle a Nagant rifle?

      At the heart of the three-ruler was the Nagant rifle. But the three-ruler was not for her.
      Quote: Alex_623
      "Russian" TT - is it Browning?

      In general, like Colt Browning.
      Quote: Alex_623
      "Russian" PM - is it Walter?

      Not really. But at the core was Walter PP.
      Quote: Alex_623
      "Russian" PPD, PPSh, PPS - is this Bergman (aka Schmeiser)?

      And here it’s even wrong here.
      Quote: Alex_623
      "Russian" DP is Lewis?

      Personally, I don't know. On the one hand, he looks like Lewis. On the other hand at Browning. Most likely a "combination of features".
      Quote: Alex_623
      And then, as I take a look, you are completely not in the subject of artillery ...

      No where to me. I only live by the fact that on the forum someone will tell me something. Even if I laugh at the next "pro", and that day was not in vain.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 17: 44
    0
    Quote: ignoto

    Not for nothing, many experts consider the construction of "aces" a mistake. With this money, it was possible to build 2-3 normal battleships, which would bring more benefits.
    On the contrary, the Japanese praised the characteristics of the cruisers of the 6000 projects. During the formation of the post-war (after WWII) program, their characteristics (primarily displacement) were taken as a basis for scout cruisers.

    This "many specialists" assessment is because they only look at Tsushima!
    If we evaluate only Tsushima, then really two opponents of Pts lacked a couple of Formidebls ...

    But let's roll back to 1904, and even earlier:
    1) Sysoy and Navarin are sent to Russia from the Far East ...
    2) even earlier, the towers intended for Oslyaby pass to the Black Sea - Rostislav. Oslyabya is waiting for the towers for himself, and by the time the war begins, he is in the Indian Ocean with Oleg and Aurora ...
    3) the heavy ocean raiders Peresvet and Pobeda, the cruisers Askold and Novik, and the armored Bayan find themselves locked up in Arthur and partly die there without any benefit and partly intern and drop out of the game until the end of the war ...
    4) all specialists claimed that Arthur had weak coastal defense - wasn’t it logical to send Senyavin-Apraksin-Ushakov there?

    Now imagine this situation:
    In Arthur, Peropavlovsk, Poltava, Sevastopol, Sysoy, Navarin, Ushakov, Senyavin, Apraksin.

    In Vladivostok, Retvizan, Tsesarevich;
    Relight, Victory, Oslyabya;
    armored cruisers Stormbreaker, Russia, Rurik, Bayan;
    high-speed cruisers Askold, Oleg, Bogatyr, Novik, Boyarin.
    And three "Goddesses" - Aurora, Diana, Pallas.

    And Togo has six of his EDBs + two more hypothetical Formibidels - eight in total.

    How much is needed to guarantee the blocking of the Arthur armadillos? - Five against eight - not enough ...
    Then six?

    And in Vladivostok there are five EDBs - only two remain to block-neutralize!

    Togo will have to be torn between Arthur and Vladivostok, since Togo's main task is to ensure the supply of supplies and troops from Japan to the theater of operations!
    If he comes to Arthur with superior forces and tries to lure the squadron into a general battle - communications in the Sea of ​​Japan will have to be laid bare!
    The Japanese have no cruisers that could counteract Askold, Oleg, Bogatyr, Novik, Boyarin!
    And they also do not have Asmoids to counteract Rurik, Russia with the Thunderbolt, Bayan - Formidebles were built instead!
    But the Arthurian squad does not want to go out to battle - it stands under the cover of coastal batteries!

    So ordering Formideblov instead of Asmoids is only good when you know how it all ended ...

    And the British and Japanese from the experience of using Asmoids made completely opposite conclusions:
    the conclusion of the Japanese - Kurama;
    the conclusion of the British - Invisible.
    1. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 20: 32
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      heavy ocean raiders Relight and Victory

      Wah! Peresvet, it turns out to be "heavy ocean raiders". Impressed by the breadth of thought. 1. And nothing that the "heavy ocean raider" Peresvet has a range on the project was 6200 (10) miles. Those. randomly coincided with the range of the class 2 EBR. And real "heavy ocean raiders" have never been less than 7500-8000 (10) miles.
      2. But nothing that Peresvet real range in combat condition was 2600 (10) miles? Well, a little failed. And in fact another BrBO (coastal defense battleship) was built.
      Quote: Alex_623
      the cruisers Askold and Novik, and the armored Bayan are locked in Arthur and partly die there without any use

      I’m embarrassed to ask, what is it all of a sudden? Askold and Novik with their move could well have gone to Vladik. And the Bayan with some reservations, too. But how they really left, we know. There was no one who wanted to fight for faith, the king and the Fatherland.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Wasn’t it logical to send Senyavin-Apraksin-Ushakov there?

      What's the point? The coastal defense was the point to strengthen the Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk. But not the Ushakovs.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 19: 06
    0
    Quote: 24hours

    I'll tell you one thing. Askold did not "go for a breakthrough." Askold fled from the battlefield, contrary to the order of the admiral (Ukhtomsky in particular). Actually, like all 1TOE ships. The only difference was that they fled to different places, i.e. actually scattered in different directions, like cockroaches. And already after them to Port Arthur Ukhtomsky trudged on Peresvet, holding the signal "follow me".

    Actually, the order of Witgeft before the battle is a breakthrough to Vladivostok without any reservations.
    And this order was not from Witgeft - this order was imperial!

    So really Cesarevich, Askold, Diana and Novik are the only large ships who even tried to act in accordance with the order after the battle.
    But all of the listed ships were damaged,
    the most significant ones are with Cesarevich,
    Diana has an underwater hole
    Askold has a maximum move of 13,5 knots and half artillery is knocked out,
    Novik’s refrigerators were broken, pipes and cars were damaged on their last legs.

    So after assessing the damage, the commanders of Tsesarevich, Askold, Diana came to the conclusion that it was impossible to break into Vladivostok and interned in neutral ports.

    The fidelity of their decision is fully illustrated by the fate of Novik ...
    1. 24hours
      24hours April 6 2016 19: 10
      +1
      Actually, the order of Witgeft before the battle is a breakthrough to Vladivostok without any reservations.

      Unfortunately, Vitgeft died. And the new squadron commander raised the signal (an order from such a naval) "follow me." You can, of course, nod at anything. But the military people know that with the death of the old commander, all his functions are transferred to the new one. And if the new commander ordered to follow him, it was necessary to follow him. And not scatter in different directions, like cockroaches from dichlorvos.
      In a good way, apparently, all admirals, commanders, and starpoms of ships participating in the battle in the ZhM, except Peresvet and Victory (and maybe a couple of cruisers), should have been hanged after the battle (and inaccessible after the war). For edification as follows. But Nicholas II was a gentle man. From this he ended badly.
      And this order was not from Witgeft - this order was imperial!

      There are no "imperial orders". There is an order from a senior commander / superior that must be followed. Ukhtomsky's order was fulfilled only by the commander of Victory.
      So really Cesarevich, Askold, Diana and Novik are the only large ships who even tried to act in accordance with the order after the battle.

      Those. surrender to a third party, is this an order? I have not heard something about such an order. The only one who more or less plausibly pretended to carry out the initial order (or maybe actually tried to carry it out, but stupidly) is the commander of Novik. But at the same time, he a priori could not get to Vladik, coal would obviously not be enough for him. It is not clear why it was necessary to make such a "wind" at all, because Novik was small and NEARBY scout.
      Cesarevich and Askold, if they had ignored Ukhtomsky’s order, had to go to Vladik, nothing disturbed them. Diana was supposed to go to Saigon and further east, this trough had no chance of breaking into Vladik.
      But all of the listed ships were damaged

      Describe more passions. All ships were in motion and operational. But they preferred to surrender to a third party (for this, apparently, and "went for a breakthrough"). A very "courageous" act.
      Novik’s refrigerators were broken, pipes and cars were damaged on their last legs.

      Darling. Novik, this, of course, is not a Volcano. This is just Shihau. Therefore, this is not Maybach, but a Mercedes. Moreover, Mercedes is three years old. Therefore, your pearls regarding "machines on their last legs" are at least inappropriate.
      After assessing the damage, the commanders of Tsesarevich, Askold, Diana came to the conclusion that it was impossible to break into Vladivostok and interned in neutral ports.

      By the way, Port Arthur was closer, there was no need to go to foreigners. And if they REALLY wanted to break into Vladivostok, then with their speed they could do it easily and simply a little later, having patched up their "terrible damage" in Port Arthur. Diana is not concerned.
      The fidelity of their decision is fully illustrated by the fate of Novik ...

      If you want to scratch your ear, then you need to do this with your hand, not with your foot. If you want to do the “wind”, then you can do it with your foot. So much for Novik’s fate.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 20: 08
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    and on TTX it was BrBO. Those. battleships of coastal defense.

    1) can you confirm this with a quote from any guide to the armored fleets?
    If not, then this is your personal, personal opinion.
    I leave it on your conscience ...
    2) and what does the fact that in Russia they knew how or did not know how to build an EDB have something to do with the move-outcome of the RNE?
    In Japan, in general, all the large ships of foreign construction - and then what?
    Borodins, Tsesarevich, Retvizan, Peresvet, Poltava - all of them are quite ships at the level of tasks in terms of both armament and armor!
    The battle in the Yellow Sea is an excellent confirmation of this:
    Poltava was the end ...
    fell behind and turned out to be alone against four Japanese EDBs + Nissin-Kassuga ...
    That is - it turned out to be a vodka against the whole detachment of Togo ...
    Half an hour of shelling by the entire Togo detachment, and only an hour under Japanese fire - and the Japanese failed to reduce its speed, nor to disable the artillery, according to the senior artillery officer of Poltava, "only the tops were beaten, nothing of the systems important for the battle and campaign was damaged." ...
    Even both flagships - Tsesarevich and Peresvet - suffered more than Poltava.
    Moreover, both Tsesarevich and Peresvet completely preserved artillery - only at Peresvet horizontal aiming was difficult.

    At the same time, at the end of the battle on Mikas, both GK towers were silent and turned away in the opposite direction from Russian ships, one gun was fired in the casemate, and the second one from time to time.
    But by the end of the battle, Mikasa had completely lost his combat readiness - he had turned into a heavy, armored-citadel squadron barge with a load of broken guns aimed at re-melting!
    One tower on Asahi and one tower on Sikishima was silent, both towers of the Civil Code were preserved only by the third and least fired Fuji - we read the memoirs of Lutonin and Cherkassov and enjoy ...

    But Togo’s battleships in the Yellow Sea lost half of their GK guns — that is, in GK they became two Mikasas!

    3) and the coefficients of different authors are different - I hope this is not the first you hear from me?
    Odds for example of the same Parks do not lead?
    He has an EMNIP for Mikasa, Sikishima, Fuji and Borodintsev - eight, for Fuji, Sysoi, Navarina - seven, for Oslyaby - six, for Nikolai - five!

    So your opinion is your opinion,
    my opinion is my opinion ...
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 20: 29
      0
      So your opinion is your opinion,
      my opinion is my opinion ...


      If you may ...

      I don’t read your opponent’s remarks (disgusting), but you won’t close your eyes, and the eye sometimes clings.

      A comparison of the thicknesses of the Makas armored belts and the Borodinians is such a wonderful nonsense, such .... Given that Mikasa is an English (citadel) reservation scheme, and the Borodin French has a reservation for the entire side, so what's the point of comparing the round with the red?

      This is the dumbest and most arrogant juggling.

      but you didn’t notice ...

      You would not sit down with a crook to play cards. But if you have sat down, watch carefully, carefully. Applications like "nobody except the Japanese used pictinic acid" this is a miracle what is
      1. 1440minutes
        1440minutes April 5 2016 20: 44
        0
        Quote: AK64
        I don’t read your opponent’s remarks (disgusting)

        Do not worry, I brought you to the emergency. So you are not so upset.
        Quote: AK64
        A comparison of the thicknesses of the Makas armored belts and the Borodinians is such a wonderful nonsense, such .... Given that Mikasa is an English (citadel) reservation scheme, and the Borodin French has a reservation for the entire side, so what's the point of comparing the round with the red?

        I want to surprise you, but the shell doesn’t care what the booking scheme is. He is more interested in the thickness of the GP.
        And what kind of traverses there, split and spread, or classic, it does not matter to him. It doesn’t matter to him what is happening with the Karapas. And in addition to the shape and location of the traverses and the shape and location of the carapace no difference there is no reservation between the solid scheme (you call it French, although Alexander II and Nicholas I were also armored the same way) and the citadel (you call it English).
        Learn materiel, my quarrelsome, but little-knowing friend.
        Quote: AK64
        This is the dumbest and most arrogant juggling.

        Dudes. They offended the AK64 boy with something. So he is spiteful.
        Quote: AK64
        but you didn’t notice ...

        But AK64, I noticed everything at once. Immediately brought to clean water. I repeat once again, learn the AK64 materiel. And then you will see a lot of interesting things.
        Quote: AK64
        You would not sit down with a crook to play cards. But if you have sat down, watch carefully, carefully. Applications like "nobody except the Japanese used pictinic acid" this is a miracle what is

        Pictin is such a bonding polysaccharide. But picric acid, this is already a component of explosives. So, you need to be more careful, crook.
        And yet did not apply. Massively, at least.
    2. 24hours
      24hours April 7 2016 00: 06
      0
      Quote: Alex_623
      1) can you confirm this with a quote from any guide to the armored fleets?
      If not, then this is your personal, personal opinion.
      I leave it on your conscience ...

      May I?
      1. Directories do not classify ships. As they are listed in the fleets of their countries, so do they give reference books.
      2. There are already three of us, because V. Gribovsky, the author of the book "EDR of the Borodino type", has joined us. A scan about the range of Borodino and Alexander III is attached.
      3. Gribovsky has no data on Eagle, so we will count him "on our fingers".
      Design normal displacement - 13516 tons.
      The actual normal displacement is 14151 tons.
      Design underweight and construction overweight - 635 tons.
      The projected normal supply of coal (the ship is in optimal combat form) is 787 tons.
      The actual normal supply of coal (a ship in optimal combat form) is 152 tons.
      The projected full supply of coal (further the combat effectiveness was quickly lost) - 1235 tons.
      The actual total supply of coal (further the fighting efficiency was quickly lost) is 600 tons. On Tsushima day in the morning, 1095 tons of coal were aboard the Eagle.
      The design range in operational state is 5020 miles at a speed of 10 knots.
      Actual range in combat-ready condition - 2440 miles at a speed of 10 knots.
      4. The range of the first class EDB at the time of Borodino, from 1 to 4500 miles.
      From 6000 to 7500 miles walked a class 2 EDB,
      Raiders (armored fighter cruisers) usually walked more than 7500 miles,
      3000 to 4500 miles walked the old class 1 EDB. The Victory class 4250 EDB also got here with its 2 miles - the best ship built on the Russian element base. Of course, he did not reach the real 2nd class EDB, but he almost pulled on the old one.
      Less than 3000 miles were coastal defense battleships (BrBOs). Not only Borodinians, but also Peresvet, with its range of action in a combat-ready state of 2600 miles, actually fell into this category.
      Less than 1500 miles were armored floating batteries. Oslyabya got here, with his range in the combat-ready state of 880 (!!!) miles.
      About Sisoy I wrote a little higher; it was impossible even theoretically to bring him into a fully operational state.
      If Zhvanetsky said, “this was a joke in Odessa,” then here you can only say, “this is how they built in Russia.”
      1. 24hours
        24hours April 7 2016 00: 32
        0
        Oslaby's actual total coal supply was 324 tons. On Tsushima's day in the morning, there were 1415 tons of coal on board.
        And on board Sisoy 673 tons of coal. Although even without coal, the advantage was 70 tons.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 20: 42
    0
    Quote: AK64
    Applications like "nobody except the Japanese used pictinic acid" this is a miracle what is

    The quote where I wrote that no one except the Japanese used picric acid - in the studio, pliz!
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 20: 46
      0
      The quote where I wrote that no one except the Japanese used picric acid - in the studio, pliz!


      You do not know how to read: I wrote in Russian that your opponent claims this.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 20: 54
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    Wah! Peresvet, it turns out to be "heavy ocean raiders". Impressed by the breadth of thought. 1. And nothing that the "heavy ocean raider" Peresvet had a range of 6200 (10) miles. Those. randomly coincided with the range of the class 2 EBR.

    Wa-ah-ahhh !!! - Hey, yes ???
    And it’s nothing that Peresvet was created as a continuation-development of the Rurik-Russia-Stormbreaker line - namely, heavy ocean cruisers, in other words, raiders!
    Another thing is that at Peresvet there really were boilers without economizers - well so it happened!
    And for four guns of the battleship caliber, I had to pay with range - in the opposite case, the main gun was no more than 203 mm!

    So you can expand the breadth of your thought as much as you like and call Borodintsev BrBO and Peresvetov battleships of the second class - from this, a heavy armored cruiser (or as it was called in the Russian General Intelligence Service - "battleship-cruiser") will not turn into something else at the behest of a pike ..
    1. AK64
      AK64 April 5 2016 21: 01
      +1
      So you can expand the breadth of your thought as much as you like and call Borodintsev BrBO and Peresvetov battleships of the second class - from this, a heavy armored cruiser (or as it was called in the Russian General Intelligence Service - "battleship-cruiser") will not turn into something else at the behest of a pike ..


      I agree: a heavy armored cruiser. And the range (6200 miles) is exactly the raider
      Purely for comparison: 4500 miles from Mikas and Asam, and 6700 from Rurik. What is this if not a raider?
    2. Cartalon
      Cartalon April 5 2016 21: 05
      0
      I did not get into the discussion, you are much more competent in technology, but the lightweight tracing-iron battleships from the British series and the BC line do not belong in any way, Stormbreaker is generally built later if I'm not mistaken.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk April 5 2016 22: 12
        +1
        Quote: Cartalon
        but lightweight armadillos tracing paper from the british series

        A bit wrong. When designing "Oslyabey", there really was a look back and the battleships of the second rank Centurion and Rinaun, but no tracing came out - from 4 projects (one was called "battleship of the Renaun type", the second - improved Petropavlovsk and 2 more MTK projects) eventually chose one from MTK projects. Well, the final ship - three-propeller, with a high forecastle, more advanced armor, with towers instead of barbets was very different from the British.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. 1440minutes
      1440minutes April 5 2016 21: 27
      +1
      Quote: Alex_623
      And it’s nothing that Peresvet was created as a continuation-development of the Rurik-Russia-Stormbreaker line - namely, heavy ocean cruisers, in other words, raiders!

      Did you come up with this yourself? And how long? I will not even refute this shnyaga. So there everything is obvious.
      By the way, about Thunderbolt. This is one of my favorite RIF ships. It’s hard to say why it can be adapted. It is bad for everything, it suits bad for everything. What to do? So it is conceived, designed and built.
      The remaining ships, at least in idea, had a very clear functional purpose.
      Quote: Alex_623
      Another thing is that at Peresvet there really were boilers without economizers - well so it happened!

      Horror is terrible. A nightmare is a nightmare. The catastrophes are catastrophic.
      So what? At Gromoboy, both cars were four-cylinder, not three-cylinder. But even this did not help him.
      In addition, do not fantasize about economizers. I see you are a huge visionary.
      Quote: Alex_623
      And for four guns of the battleship caliber, I had to pay with range - in the opposite case, the main gun was no more than 203 mm!

      This deep and congenial thought, I did not understand something.
      Quote: Alex_623
      and call Borodino BrBO

      You see, young man. There are project numbers. In first-class shipyards, the actual numbers usually corresponded to them. In Russian shipyards, this was not so. First, projects were calculated one more clumsily than the other. There were no specialists. Secondly, a deck was built through the stump. Well, it was bad in Russia with the working classes. Here the proletariat was like dogs uncut, and there were few workers.
      Therefore, the final products in Russia sometimes had nothing in common with the idea. Believe me, BrBo instead of EDB, this is a great option. For example, Oslyabya in fact by TTX was a self-propelled armored artillery battery. The range of its operation in an economical move of 10 knots in combat condition was only 883 (eight hundred eighty three) miles. And about Sisoy it is written above, he was no one at all, because to bring him into a combat position was impossible even theoretically.
      So do not talk about pikes. So designed and built. And there is nothing to be surprised at.
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 21: 04
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    In general, like Colt Browning.

    Actually, it’s Browning!
    Colt Browning was for some time called the modern American Army Colt.
    At the beginning of the last century, the US Army turned to the Browning firm on the subject of developing a powerful army pistol.
    Such a pistol was created and in the original it was called Browning High Power (to translate - or guess it yourself?)
    The production of this pistol was launched at the factories near Colt, initially it was called simply Browning, then the name Browning-Colt appeared, then Colt-Browning - and finally just Colt!

    So study - while I am alive!

    And if there is a desire to find out why the PPD is Bergman (aka Schmeiser), and the DP is Lewis, do not hesitate, ask!

    I will definitely tell you!
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 21: 42
    +1
    Quote: 1440minutes
    You see, young man.

    Boy, I asked you for a reference to the Old from any guide to the armored fleets on the subject of identifying Borodin residents as BrBO!

    There is no such reference? .. - Who would doubt it ...
  • Alex_623
    Alex_623 April 5 2016 21: 45
    0
    Quote: 1440minutes
    This deep and congenial thought, I did not understand something.

    Well so what can you say? .. - Can you try reading books?
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon April 5 2016 21: 55
    +1
    Truth was born in the argument, listened and left
  • Serg koma
    Serg koma April 7 2016 08: 00
    0
    Quote: AK64
    I really like this picture.
    .... only decide verbally, as the children in the picture decide it

    They decide where to get clothes and shoes - so they scratch their "turnips" laughing
  • Maxim Burmistrov
    Maxim Burmistrov 18 May 2017 18: 06
    0
    One of the main reasons for the defeat in the war was the lack of a repair base in Port Arthur and Vladivostok. It was absurd to lead ships for repair to the Baltic. After all, ships can be damaged in battle, then they also drive to the Baltic? Or a ship that can be repaired, if there is a repair base, can be put in reserve for a month before the end of the war? Thus, because of this stupidity, an entire squadron was withdrawn, which was mainly part of the 4nd Pacific Squadron, with the exception of Alexander II, Kornilov, and Pamyat Azov, which were not ready to leave with the II squadron. The bases should be such that it was possible to carry out major repairs and rearmament. There was no BRBO in the Pacific. We can say that only fairly old ships were hijacked ... but when operating off their coast and undergoing repair and modernization, they could well be a serious opponent of any Japanese ship, with the exception of the 12 latest EDBs. This statement applies to battleships, of course. And this: "Sisoy", "Navarin", "Nikolai" and "Alexander" ... 12 XNUMX inch guns ... Clearly limited fighting capacity against Sikishim, but far from helpless.
    Another immeasurable stupidity was the lack of proper quality control of ammunition and explosives in them, the results of the impact of their shells on the armor.
    It would be better if there were no 2 armadillos in Russia, but the rest were of high quality built and armed.
    An additional stupid thing was that, in addition to the above, all the Baltic Fleet's combat-ready ships were not in Port Arthur. And this is Oslyabya and Aurora and about a dozen fighters, not counting destroyers ... But cruising operations had to be entrusted not to armored cruisers, but auxiliary ones ... 2 and so it was, and several more could be "found".
    Unfortunately it turned out, how it happened ... and it was the stage of the collapse of the Russian Empire