Military Review

Choosing the best of the available, or Why Crump?

78



As part of the implementation of the shipbuilding program "For the needs of the Far East", adopted in early 1898, the Russian government in the person of the MTK announced an international competition for the construction of armadillos, cruisers and destroyers to strengthen the Pacific squadron. However, already in the spring of 1898, the Russian side urgently concluded a contract with the American entrepreneur C. Cramp (Charles Cramp) for the construction of an armored cruiser and a squadron battleship. Over the next decades, domestic sources have used the accusation of the chief as an explanation for the refusal of the Maritime Ministry fleet in corruption.

And if you try to look at the situation with an open mind? Both foreign companies that have responded to the invitation, the Italian “Gio. Ansaldo & C "and the German" Schiff- und Maschinenbau AG "Germania" ", there was no experience in building large warships according to their own designs. By the time of the events described, Ansaldo had handed over to the customer two armored cruisers, Garibaldi and Cristóbal Colón, built according to the design of the Italian politician, general and naval engineer E. Masdea (Edoardo Masdea). "Germania" is the armored cruiser "Kaiserin Augusta" and the battleship "Wörth", designed by the actual privy councilor A. Dietrich, head of the Konstruktionsdepartements of the Admiralty of the German Empire.

Schiff- und Maschinenbau AG "Germania", a shipyard with several hundred employees, was acquired by Friedrich Krupp AG in 1896 and expanded and modernized in the following years. The area of ​​the shipyard, which in 1902 changed its name to "Friedrich Krupp Germaniawerft", within six years was increased from six to twenty two and a half hectares, the number of personnel exceeded a thousand people. "Gio. Ansaldo & C "by 1898 in terms of the volume of completed orders was several times inferior to the leaders of the Italian shipbuilding industry. So, over the last two decades of the nineteenth century, the shipyard "Castellammare di Stabia" for the Italian navy built ships with a total displacement of 77 313 tons, "Venice" 49 696 tons, "Spezia" 47 775 tons. "Ansaldo" equaled 10 tons. The number of workers in the period from 477 to 1890 due to the lack of orders was reduced from 1893 to 600 people. With the beginning of the construction of armored cruisers of the "Garibaldi" type, the shipyard's personnel began to increase, reaching 380 in 1897. Comparing this shipbuilding company with others, it can be noted that about 1 workers worked at the Armstrong shipyard in 250, from 1897 to 16 the company built warships with a total displacement of 000 tons. In 1882, William Cramp & Sons "occupied an area of ​​1897 hectares with a total of 179 workers. From 685 to 1895, the company delivered combat and civil ships with a total displacement of 13 tons to customers. As these facts and figures show, both German and Italian the firms that submitted their applications for participation in the international competition, at the beginning of 6, were small shipbuilding companies with limited capabilities.

C. Crump arrived in Russia in March 1898. By that time, the shipbuilding company he headed had built two similar-type armored cruisers “Columbia” and “Minneapolis”, armored cruisers “New York” and “Brooklyn”, three squadron battleships “Indiana”. , Massachusetts and Iowa.







Following the meetings with Crump, Admiral-General Grand Duke Alexey Alexandrovich and the Chief of the Main Naval Staff F.C.Avelan approved the construction of a squadron battleship and an armored cruiser in America.

Another battleship, also on a non-competitive basis, was decided to be built in France, at the shipyard of the society “Forges et chantiers de la Méditerranée”. According to the designs of the chief designer and director of the company engineer A. Lagan (Amable Lagane), by the order of the French naval forces and foreign customers, the shipyard built armored cruisers Amiral Cécille, Itsukushima and Matsushima, as well as Armadillos Amiral Duperré, Marceau, Pelayo, Capitan Prat and Jauréguiberry.



The international competition for the creation of a battleship project did not take place, possibly also because of the poor experience of another international competition, to create an armored cruiser announced by ITC Circular No. 2 from 2 in March 1894. In October, 1894 summed up the first round of the competition on the nine projects submitted, and in June 1895, the final results of the competition. The competition lasted fifteen months, but none of the submitted projects could “be subject to immediate construction”. Obviously, under the conditions of a clearly perceived growing threat from the rapidly developing Japanese fleet, the leadership of the Marine Ministry found it unacceptable to delay the construction of two battleships abroad by holding useless contests, the results of which still needed to be refined and actually re-created the project.

It is impossible to either prove or deny the version of bribe-taking by officials, but what if you look at the situation from a different angle, wondering whether C. Crump made sense to give a bribe to get an order that did not promise a serious profit?

According to the contract, the cost of the squadron battleship Retvizan, with and without weapon reservation, was 4 358 000,00 dollars. For comparison, "Tsesarevich" with reservation and without armament cost under the contract 5 842 605,00 dollars (30 280 000 francs). The amount in which the Retvizan booking was supposed to do was unknown to us, however, the data at our disposal allows us to estimate the value of the Russian ship's reservation. In 1898-1899, for one ton of Harvey armor (Harvey armor), the US government paid 405 dollars to the main American steel companies (Bethlehem Iron Company and Carnegie Steel Company). Considering that the replacement, at the request of the ITC, which was supposed to be installed by C. Kramp Garveyevskaya armor to Kruppskaya (Krupp armour), poured into the treasury additional 310 000,00 dollars, the armor for Retvisan, the total weight of which was about 3300 tons. 1 dollars. Consequently, Retvisan without armor and weapons cost 646 500,00 2 dollars.

Now let us compare the obtained figure with the same for the battleship “Maine”, which had a displacement similar to the “Retvizan” and design and was being built at the shipyard of C. Crump simultaneously with the Russian battleship.



According to the contract, the cost of “Maine” without reservation and armament was 2 885 000,00 dollars, which is 173 500,00 dollars more than the cost of Retvizan without reservation and armament. The fact is all the more noteworthy because the voluntarily appointed 4 presidential act of March 1898, the price for building a series of three battleships of the type “Maine” was politically motivated and looked understated by American standards. Thus, the previously built armored cruiser "New York" without armor and weapons under the contract cost 2 985 000,00, which is one hundred thousand dollars more expensive than the cost of the battleship "Main". The Indiana and Massachusetts squadron battleships built by the same Charles Crump had a total value of six million dollars each. The third battleship of the “Oregon” type, built by Union Iron Works, cost even more, in 6 500 000,00 dollars.

The above figures give us reason to believe that Ch. Crump, trying to gain a foothold in the Russian market and push back competitors, went to price dumping. He offered a relatively low price for the battleship, obviously, coupled with the reputation of the company, which looked more advantageous against the background of “Gio. Ansaldo & C "and" Germania ", apparently, and persuaded the leadership of the Russian fleet to conclude a contract with Ch. Crump.
Author:
78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sakhalininsk
    Sakhalininsk 25 May 2016 06: 15
    +25
    If we talk without taking into account progressorship and bias, then the "Retvizan" built by Kramp was the best battleship of the Russian Imperial Navy at the beginning of the Russian-Japanese war. Unfortunately for the construction of a series of squadron battleships, the "Tsesarevich" was taken as a prototype, which was undoubtedly more progressive on the one hand, completely tower arrangement of art. systems of medium caliber, blockage of the sides and so on, but taking into account the technology of that time, the casemate guns of the SK were capable of a higher rate of fire, and the isolated casemates gave almost better survivability than the towers of the SK, which are prone to jamming as a result of minor damage to moving parts. In addition, a squadron battleship with the lines of Retvizan and a similar arrangement of artillery is much easier to build, which significantly reduces the construction time.
    In this case, unfortunately, the thirst for money won the mind and the brainchild of Lagan was taken as the basis for the future series of squadron battleships of the "Borodino" type.
    Thanks to the author for an interesting essay.
    1. overb
      overb 25 May 2016 09: 54
      +2
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      If we talk without taking into account the progressorship and bias, the "Retvizan" built by Kramp was the best battleship of the Russian Imperial Navy at the beginning of the Russian-Japanese war.

      Bravo, +, with both hands "for". Rarely do you come across such a correct opinion, usually everyone who is not particularly in the know nods at the Tsarevich. But this is far from the case. Retvizan was noticeably stronger than him. Even in the configuration in which it was in the RIF, the EBR-raider (increased coal supply, reduced booking). Why was this done, since Retvizan was not used for a single day as a raider? Apparently just because of saving money on armor.
      Unfortunately, for this reason, Retwisan, while remaining the strongest EDB of the RIF in the REV, could not compete on equal terms with the new Japanese (British) four of the EDB. Even with Asahi and Mikasa. And already to Sikishima and Hatsuse he was even further.
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      "Tsesarevich" was taken as a prototype, which was undoubtedly more progressive on the one hand

      A very controversial statement. In general, it is not clear how it could have been built for Russia, which already had a negative experience in building ships with solid armor (Nicholas I and Alexander II) and turret artillery of the SK (Petropavlovsk). Moreover, the project was redesigned from a class 2 EDR project, which can be seen in many details. As a result, the Tsarevich did not pull on a full-fledged class 1 EBR. He had "little things" there (anti-mine art without armor, scanty GP, etc.). The maximum is the very bottom of this segment. Overgrown hybrid.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 25 May 2016 10: 03
        +8
        Retwisan was not an EBR raider, and his coal supply was typical of American EDBs. The reservation was not reduced, it was simply extended, which, together with the other characteristics, made it the best EDB 1 TOE, it could compete with all 6 Japanese battleships, at least it was not inferior to them in anything, these were ships of equal classes with approximately equal characteristics.
        1. overb
          overb 25 May 2016 10: 37
          +1
          Quote: Nehist
          Retwisan was not an EBR raider, and his coal supply was typical of American EDBs.

          The ship was Russian. He was supposed to serve in Russia. The project was approved by MTK and GMSH. Therefore, the phrase "typical for American EBRs" is not appropriate here. In such a configuration, by European (and Russian) standards, it was an EBR with the capabilities of a raider. These capabilities could be curtailed by replacing some of the coal with armor. In this case, Retvizan, like the EBR, would be very strong, no weaker than the new Japanese (British) EBRs. But the armor cost money, so they didn't go for it. And as a raider he was not used for a single day.
          As for the increased reserves of Retvizan coal, it only indicates that this was the EBR of a typical American project. Those. Crump's project. And no "Peresvet project" along with the "Potemkin project" was lying around.
          Quote: Nehist
          The reservation was not reduced; it was just extended

          The relative booking above the GP was 72% of the level of Shikishima and Hatsuse. So, there was not enough armor (there was complete order on the overhead line). However, the Tsarevich had only 57% of the level of Sikishima and Hatsuse above the GP. And the "improved" Borodino residents have only 68%.
          Quote: Nehist
          He could compete with all 6 Japanese battleships, at least he was not inferior to them in anything

          He could even compete with the space Jedi cruiser. But it’s successful, only with Fuji and Yashima (old class 1 EDBs). In fact, this is a very good result for the RIF. Because Tsesarevich and Yasima / Fuji did not understand everything. And Borodinians were noticeably weaker than Cesarevich. With the new Japanese four, no one had any chance of success. Unless, with certain luck, Retvisan could have given Asahi, probably.
          Quote: Nehist
          These were ships of equal classes with approximately equal characteristics.

          The key word here is "approximately". I would say "very roughly". But one thing is beyond doubt, Retvizan was a full-fledged class 1 EBR. Unlike the same Tsarevich, who was a kind of EBR hybrid. Those. had some elements of class 2 EBR. There can be no question of Borodinians. Even Poltava in the RIF was an old class 1 EBR.
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 25 May 2016 10: 47
            +1
            Crump initially proposed his own type of Maine type EDB as a prototype, and he borrowed many of the solutions there. Poltava can add Sevastopol and Peter and Paul. RIF did not have more full-fledged EDB. A series of Black Sea residents are limited-theater ships and their transfer to the Far East would not have done
            1. overb
              overb 25 May 2016 11: 22
              -2
              Quote: Nehist
              As a prototype, his type of Maine-type EDB also borrowed many decisions from there.

              Of course. And once again I emphasize that he was not interested in any overexposures with the darks.
              Quote: Nehist
              Poltava can add Sevastopol and Peter and Paul.

              It is impossible. In Poltava, the armor was imported (American and modern). At Petropavlovsk, domestic (outdated). Sevastopol has an import budget (old, cheaper). From this, their security was completely different and Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk, therefore, their EDB class fell out.
              Also, all 3 were good, for the project of their time, walkers. Poltava and Petropavlovsk were thanks to a British car, and French cars of Russian assembly stood on Sevastopol (at first there were problems with them).
              Quote: Nehist
              RIF did not have more full-fledged EDB.

              Another was old from birth (no longer pulled out) EDB 2nd class Victory. The Japanese did not have ships of this class at all, but they were in other fleets.
              Here is what happened in 1 TOE:
              1. The EDB of the lower segment of the 1st class Retvisan.
              2. The EDB of the upper segment of the old 1st-class EDB Tsesarevich.
              3. EDB of the lower segment of old EDB class 1 Poltava.
              4. EDB lower segment of old EDB class 2 Victory.
              Here is what happened at the YAIF:
              1. EDB of the upper segment of class 1 - 4 pcs. (Asahi of them are weaker).
              2. The EDB of the middle segment of the old class 1 EDB - 2 pcs.
              It is clearly seen that there was nothing to catch 1 TOE. Even after the deaths of Yashima and Hatsuse (this was the strongest EBR YIF at that time). And 2 TOE, with its set of "disabled people of domestic construction", were generally sent for slaughter.
              1. Nehist
                Nehist 25 May 2016 11: 28
                +2
                With the assertion that I didn’t agree to catch 1 TOE, I didn’t agree that the battle in the yellow sea actually showed that the squadrons acted on an equal footing, and this with the superiority of the Japanese in medium artillery
                1. overb
                  overb 25 May 2016 11: 44
                  -2
                  Quote: Nehist
                  that actually the battle in the yellow sea showed that the squadrons acted on equal footing

                  Of course. Completely on an equal footing. Only now, as a result of the "battle of equals", ITOE was defeated and ceased to exist as a combat unit.
                  Quote: Nehist
                  and this with the superiority of the Japanese in medium artillery

                  Medium artillery WAS NOT PURPOSED for the linear battle of MODERN EDBs. She could work on some junk, maximum on the old EDB class 1 (armor above the GP was not enough). That is why the Japanese (except Fuji) she was up to the stars. And to Retvisan (+ to some extent, but to a lesser extent Tsesarevich), too. It had an effect on the rest of the Russian ships. Therefore, simply comparing the number of these trunks is wrong.
                  1. Nehist
                    Nehist 25 May 2016 11: 55
                    +2
                    And here you are mistaken !!! It was the numerous medium artillery that was assigned the role of destroying ships in linear combat, since the Japanese-Chinese and American-Spanish war fully confirmed this. But suddenly, when fighting in the yellow sea, it turned out that the medium caliber was useless against armored carobles, tsushima confirmed this, and dreadnoughts appeared. Where less accuracy and rate of fire GK decided to reimburse
                    1. overb
                      overb 25 May 2016 12: 14
                      +1
                      Quote: Nehist
                      as the Japanese-Chinese and American-Spanish war this was fully confirmed

                      And what does the technique of the Japanese-Chinese and American-Spanish war have to do with the MODERN technique of the Russian-Japanese war? I wrote to you, "She could affect some old stuff, maximum on old class 1 EBRs (there was little armor above GP)." This is the correct statement.
                      Quote: Nehist
                      But suddenly, when fighting in the yellow sea, it turned out that the medium caliber is useless against armored carobles, tsushima confirmed this,

                      Here you yourself in the second part of your phrase refute what was said in the first part of it.
                      1. Nehist
                        Nehist 25 May 2016 12: 24
                        0
                        1895 and 1898 well, and in 1904, how far did the technology go? These are peers wars! And it was precisely on their results that the tactics of the upcoming battles and TTX ships were built
                      2. overb
                        overb 25 May 2016 12: 35
                        +1
                        Quote: Nehist
                        1895 and 1898 well, and in 1904, how far did the technology go? These are peers wars!

                        No, the EDBs that entered service in the 20th century were very different in terms of booking above the GP from the 19th century ships. The concept has changed. Therefore, Hatsuse, Sikishima, Mikas, Asahi, Retvizan, Borodin residents and with reservations Tsesarevich, in this regard, this is one generation. And everyone else is different.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        And it was precisely on their results that the tactics of the upcoming battles and TTX ships were built

                        Well, the fact that generals are preparing for past battles is a known truth.
                      3. Nehist
                        Nehist 25 May 2016 12: 53
                        +1
                        The EDBs that entered service in the 20th century were precisely laid down at the end of the 19th century, it was the increase in the amount of medium artillery that led to an increase in displacement because it needed a lot, and the reservation area accordingly increased to cover all this machinery. Read the British documents of those times, no matter how they, with their two-power standard, were de facto leading experts in naval battle tactics. Trace the evolution of the EDB from Canupus to Agemnemon, where the increase and enlargement of medium-caliber guns is clearly expressed. Although ship designs with some large guns were proposed earlier by the same Italian Brin or our engineers. It is because of the low rate of fire that the role of the main weapon until the dreadnought appeared was of medium caliber
                      4. overb
                        overb 25 May 2016 13: 26
                        +1
                        Quote: Nehist
                        It is because of the low rate of fire that the role of the main weapon until the dreadnought appeared was of medium caliber

                        And I repeat to you, this was relevant for 19th century ships. with their small reservation above GP.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        it was the increase in the number of medium artillery that led to an increase in displacement because it needed a lot, and, accordingly, the reservation area increased to cover all this machinery.

                        Don't fantasize. For the EBR early 20th century. medium artillery was mainly "anti-cruise" (by analogy with "anti-mine") weapons. Before that, after all, its purpose was more universal. Let me remind you, even small cruisers of that time carried 3-5 TA, so theoretically, easily and simply could send an expensive EBR along with a rather large team to the bottom. At the same time, anti-mine artillery was like a grain of an elephant. And the main battery artillery had a low rate of fire. At the same time, 1-mm guns were intended against class 152 cruisers, and 2-mm guns against class 120 cruisers (smaller). 3-mm guns were placed against class 75 cruisers and mine cruisers.
                        Of course, 152-mm guns (and less) were also used in linear combat with EBRs. Especially in YaIF, tk. Russian "battleships" were mostly old and the action of the UK on them was effective.
                        Further, they were abandoned because the distance of the battle increased ("flight time"). And they came to the conclusion that the 203-mm cannons and main guns, albeit with a lower rate of fire, will cope with this danger for an increased period of time. In addition, cruisers also increased, and the largest of them, 152 mm, was already not enough.
                      5. Nehist
                        Nehist 25 May 2016 13: 55
                        +2
                        Dear you are fantasizing! Remind the effective range of torpedoes? A cruiser launching a torpedo attack at the time is a perverted and effective method of suicide. You are apparently new to the concept of squadron combat adopted at that time. And it consisted of small battle distances, and that is why medium-caliber guns decided the outcome of the battle. It was the probability of large hits that was put at the forefront. It was the total mass of shells fired per unit of time that determined the firepower and not the large calibers which, even when hit, did not guarantee penetration of the armor. Which by the way proved the same Tsushima
                      6. overb
                        overb 25 May 2016 15: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Nehist
                        Remind the effective range of torpedoes? A cruiser launching a torpedo attack at the time is a perverted and effective method of suicide.

                        Nevertheless, Suvorov was sunk by "suicidal torpedoes". Navarin rolled over and sank with the entire crew for this very reason. Sisoy received a torpedo and was sunk. Nakhimov. Monomakh. Few? Will you continue to insist that I fantasize?
                        Quote: Nehist
                        You are apparently new to the concept of squadron combat adopted at that time.

                        Oh weak. I can’t overpower her. This concept.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        And it consisted of small battle distances and that is why medium-caliber guns decided the outcome of the battle.

                        I repeat to you once again. This is a 19th century concept. Which adhered to just the RIF, because he was armed with mainly the old pelvis, armed with flappers (they were also armed with imported equipment). YaIF just did not adhere to such a concept. The British did not order, because The level of technology and weapons of the Jaonites was completely different. And the concept of doing lin. the battle from this was different.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        It was the probability of big hits that was put at the forefront. It is the total mass of fired shells per unit of time that determined the firepower

                        In 19 v. Against lightly defended ships. Better yet, armless or wooden.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        and not large calibers which even when hit did not guarantee penetration of the armor.

                        What do you mean, not guaranteed? And then why do you think such guns were put on ships? For beauty? You are mistaken.
                        However, as regards the guns of the Civil Code of Nicholas I, Navarin, Peresvet and Oslyaby (all of them were like the EDB), it is difficult to disagree with you here.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        Which by the way proved the same Tsushima

                        Tsushima proved that admirals in Russia, as there were not, are not. Some posers and throats. And she also proved that warships cannot be turned into coal transports, while also conducting combat operations. As a result of overloading, the RIF ships in Tsushima were only partially capable of shooting 9). And partially weakened (in terms of booking) to the level of armored cruisers, and if they were not Borodin or Nicholas I, then to the level of armored auxiliary cruisers.
                        This made it possible for the Japanese to effectively use guns with a caliber up to 203 mm inclusive against Borodinians. What would never happen if they were loaded normally.
                        This also made it possible to effectively use the same caliber guns up to 120 mm against the rest of the RIF ships at Tsushima (the citadel reservation scheme).
                        But Nicholas I was not overloaded. He did not let Nebogatov overload his ship. And he was not sunk. True, the next day he gave up, but he had no choice. Because there were no sea guns on it. But the guns with the ballistics of field howitzers on the sea can not be won.
                      7. Nehist
                        Nehist 25 May 2016 22: 41
                        +1
                        Well, yes, having decided all the artillery, Suvorov was indeed sunk by the cruisers, what would have happened to any Japanese Ebr if he had been in such a situation! But the rest of the ships sunk by torpedoes were by no means cruisers, and not in the daytime could there be enough erisi? And the fact that torpedo tubes are also on the Ebras, do they also need to go to torpedo attacks according to yours?
                      8. overb
                        overb 25 May 2016 23: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Nehist
                        what would happen to any Japanese Ebras if he were in such a situation!

                        The conversation was not about that. The nationality of the victim and the predator did not matter.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        But the rest of the ships sunk by torpedoes were by no means cruisers, and not in the daytime could there be enough erisi?

                        Didn’t the cruisers go at night? Only destroyers? It could easily be a cruiser. For the fight against them, they set up the SK quick-firing artillery.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        And the fact that torpedo tubes are also on the Ebras, do they also need to go to torpedo attacks according to yours?

                        Quite right. TA at EBR was taken quite seriously as a "last resort". Otherwise, why did you put them on?
                      9. Nehist
                        Nehist 26 May 2016 02: 23
                        0
                        Well, yes, as well as rams. And all because one idiot was lucky in the battle of Liss to drown another idiot with a ram blow. In general, it would be interesting to look at this picture: the EDB is launching a torpedo attack approaching a distance of 1,5-2 cable) According to Suvorov, they fired about 15 torpedoes in the complete absence of opposition and only 3 or 4 were hit, I don’t remember exactly. By the way, torpedo attack by destroyers in the afternoon is also a complete suicide. And cruisers, in view of their size, represent an excellent target even at night.
                      10. overb
                        overb 26 May 2016 09: 36
                        +1
                        Quote: Nehist
                        By the way, torpedo attack by destroyers in the afternoon is also a complete suicide.

                        Due to the presence of a large number of rapid-firing artillery. So that for the cruisers it would also be suicide, and not a walk, and put the SK caliber up to 152 mm.
                        Quote: Nehist
                        And cruisers, in view of their size, represent an excellent target even at night.

                        Do not tell. It can be very bad at night with lighting.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  • Comrade
    26 May 2016 03: 20
    0
    Quote: overb
    Medium artillery ... it had an effect on other Russian ships.

    Mostly psychological. As you know, 305 mm Japanese shells couldn’t even penetrate 75 mm armor, and here you intimidate with six-inch shells.
    1. overb
      overb 26 May 2016 10: 38
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      As you know, 305 mm Japanese shells could not penetrate even 75 mm armor, and here you are intimidating with six-inch shells.

      Maybe under some conditions she could not. And so, a Japanese 305-mm armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 40 kbt. at an angle of attack of 15 degrees, a 237 mm type I group was pierced. A Russian projectile in the same conditions (do not forget, the Russian guns were 305/40 only according to the Russian measurement system, according to the British they were 300 / 38,3) pierced 228 mm of the same armor. But with the explosive charge in the Russian shells, everything was very bad. "Thank you" adm. Makarov.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 26 May 2016 11: 18
        0
        Well, Russian shells were originally designed for a different battle distance. But the fact that the Japanese armor-piercing shells (although they should be classified as semi-armor-piercing) did not really penetrate the armor, they were similar in effectiveness to Russian high-explosive shells, well, unfortunately you are right to thank S.O. Makarov, one of his concept of armored ships was worthless ... Although if the shells were used as intended, they would be very effective
      2. overb
        overb 26 May 2016 11: 53
        +1
        Quote: Nehist
        (although they should be classified as semi-armor-piercing)

        And why not non-armor-piercing? In fact, the Japanese used quite normal British armor-piercing shells. These Russian shells due to the small explosive charge in them should be called half-blanks.
        Quote: Nehist
        really didn’t penetrate the armor, they were similar in effectiveness to Russian high-explosive shells

        This is nonsense, do not read it. Pure and ordinary. Once again, I draw your attention, do not compare anything with Russian shells. Because of the caps of the unsuccessful design of Makarov, Russian naval shells (any) were made thick-walled. And from this, the explosive charge in them was small.
        The only exception was 254 mm shells (again, emphasizing that in Britain such shells would be 250 mm). They were from the land GAU, and Makarov’s influence did not extend there. Therefore, the caps there were of normal design. And the walls are of normal thickness. And a bursting charge of normal weight.
        Quote: Nehist
        Although if the shells were used as intended, they would be very effective

        Well yes. And the next step would be boarding. Unfortunately, the Russian admirals at the end of the 19th century were still mentally damn where. However, it is understandable, except for the experience of naval struggle with desert nomads (Turks), they had no other. And they were mostly not interested in foreigners.
      3. Nehist
        Nehist 26 May 2016 12: 04
        0
        But the British themselves were extremely unhappy with their shells! And where did you get the rubbish about the RIF's bad shells again? The Japanese, in their war at sea, write exactly the opposite just about 12 "and 10" shells! And yes, read Hayashi Katsuya in great detail describes the weapons of Japan and its opponents: In fact, the analysis of hits on Japanese ships shows that an abnormally low percentage of explosions was characteristic only of 75-mm Russian shells (which were equipped with completely non-wet pyroxylin and had other fuses). The rest exploded in about the same way as projectiles intended to penetrate behind a more or less solid barrier should. The real problem was that Russian ships only had such shells for medium-caliber cannons, and they needed good land mines. (C)
      4. overb
        overb 26 May 2016 13: 00
        +1
        Quote: Nehist
        But the British themselves were extremely unhappy with their shells!

        So no one called them ideal.
        Quote: Nehist
        And where did you get the rubbish about bad RIF shells again?

        From the Russian GMS. Screen I brought you.
        Quote: Nehist
        The Japanese, in their war at sea, write exactly the opposite just about 12 "and 10" shells!

        Paper will endure everything. Although no one argues with them about 10 "shells.
        Quote: Nehist
        And yes read Hayashi Katsuya

        And why should I believe Hayashi, I’m not afraid of the word, Katsuya, but should not believe other sources?
        Quote: Nehist
        which is an abnormally low percentage of gaps

        I did not write anything about the percentage of breaks. I wrote about the effectiveness of these gaps.
        In addition, it is very exciting to consider the 75-mm shell explosions, but it does not make practical sense.
  • Comrade
    27 May 2016 00: 44
    0
    Quote: overb
    Maybe in some conditions and could not

    Under no circumstances could she. The facts are that the Japanese "suitcases" during the entire Russo-Japanese War never pierced 75 mm armor. However, if you have the opposite information, I will gladly listen to you.
    Quote: overb
    Japanese 305-mm armor-piercing projectile at a range of 40 kbt. at an angle of attack of 15 degrees punched 237 mm Krupp type I.

    In theory, it can be, but in practice, not a single case of penetration of armor on Russian ships was recorded. Again, I will be happy to hear from you if you are aware of such cases from certain sources.
  • overb
    overb 27 May 2016 01: 17
    +1
    Quote: Comrade
    The facts are that the Japanese "suitcases" during the entire Russo-Japanese War never pierced 75 mm armor.

    You invented these "facts" or suggested by someone? And Alexander and Borodino were sunk by what? And Suvorov and Eagle, how were they made incapacitated?
    Quote: Comrade
    but in practice there was not a single case of penetration of armor on Russian ships.

    It’s rare who writes such nonsense. The story of Borodino and the 305 mm Fuji shell, it is generally very famous. Or do you think that powder cellars were not covered with armor? Or maybe there was some slobber smoked?
  • Nehist
    Nehist 27 May 2016 05: 27
    0
    According to the speculations of the same Japanese, the shell hit the roof of the tower and breaking through it ignited half charges, it was dropped on the elevator in a powder cellar and an explosion occurred. This is about Borodino. With regards to Alexander, the same Japanese recognized that he could drown while circulating by scooping up water with 75mm gun ports. Analysis of damage to the Eagle did not show penetration of the armor of the GP
  • verboo
    verboo 28 May 2016 00: 30
    0
    Quote: Nehist
    According to the speculations of the same Japanese, the shell hit the roof of the tower and breaking through it

    This is unlikely. Punching horizontal armor to Japanese cannons with their small elevation angle was completely unbelievable.
    Quote: Nehist
    With regards to Alexander, the same Japanese recognized that he could drown while circulating by scooping up water with 75mm gun ports.

    And this is unlikely. The crew are also not passengers on the tourliner. Must and could take action.
    Quote: Nehist
    Analysis of damage to the Eagle did not show penetration of the armor of the GP

    GP maybe. But the armor was not only on the GP.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Comrade
    26 May 2016 02: 07
    +1
    EBR Raider (coal reserves strengthened, reservations reduced). Why was this done, since Retvisan was not used for a single day as a raider? Apparently just because of saving money on armor.
    Since the weight of the armor on the Retvizan was 26% of the design displacement, which was the best indicator among the Russian battleships built before the Russian-Japanese war, it follows from your words that all Russian battleships were built as raiders. Hence the question. For "Mikasa" this figure was 28,5%, does this mean that this battleship was also a raider, or no longer, thanks to the superiority over "Retvizan" in two and a half percent?
    Unfortunately, for this reason, Retwisan, while remaining the strongest EDB of the RIF in the REV, could not compete on equal terms with the new Japanese (British) four of the EDB. Even with Asahi and Mikasa. And already to Sikishima and Hatsuse he was even further.
    And how many percent of the displacement of the last two armadillos was allocated to the armor, can you tell me? Yes, the type of reservation do not forget to indicate at the same time.
    1. overb
      overb 26 May 2016 10: 02
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      from your words it follows that all Russian battleships were built as raiders.

      There are 2 options. Or you have problems understanding what is written in Russian. Or you do not know what a raider is and what are its distinctive features. But tying the term "raider" to the percentage of armor is enchanting.
      Quote: Comrade
      And how many percent of the displacement of the last two armadillos was allocated to the armor, can you tell me? Yes, the type of reservation do not forget to indicate

      I'll tell you 32,3% (Retvisan has 25,6%). The vertical armor was Harvey-nickel (Retwisan's type I group, it is 11-12% more resistant than Harvey-nickel)). The horizontal armor was nickel and chromium-nickel (in Retvisan it was mainly chromium-nickel).
      The Sikishima’s citadel defense level for overhead lines was ~ 82% of the Retvisan level, and the Retvisan’s protection level above the GP was ~ 72% of the Sikishima level. Also, the level of aggregate power of the Retwisan artillery was ~ 90% of the level of Sikishima.
      1. Comrade
        27 May 2016 00: 54
        0
        Quote: overb
        to tie the term "raider" to the percentage of armor is enchanting.

        You yourself said that since the armor was reduced to Retvizan, it means that they were building a raider. So I asked how much the percentage of armor from the displacement should be, so that you would say: "Yes, this is no longer a raider, but an battleship."
        Quote: overb
        I'll tell you, 32,3%

        Do not consider it a work, please indicate which Japanese battleship do you mean? You don't mean to say that all Japanese battleships, with the exception of the Mikasa, had the same percentage of displacement armor?
        Quote: overb
        ~ 82% of the Retvisan level, ~ 72% of the Shikishima level. ~ 90%

        Until you explain where these coefficients came from, these will be just numbers.
        1. overb
          overb 27 May 2016 01: 23
          +1
          Quote: Comrade
          You yourself said that since the armor was reduced to Retvizan, it means that they were building a raider

          Do not attribute to me your fantasies. And read again what I wrote.
          Quote: Comrade
          Do not consider it work, please indicate which Japanese battleship you mean?

          In the same place you wrote "the last two". And the last two on the list were Shikishima and Hatsuse.
          Quote: Comrade
          Until you explain where these coefficients came from, these will be just numbers.

          These are not odds. This is the percentage of booking some ships relative to others. It says, if that.
          If you are unable to understand something the first time, you do not write questions, but read what is written again.
          1. Comrade
            27 May 2016 04: 57
            0
            Quote: overb
            the last two on the list were Sikishima and Hatsuse.

            Firstly, the percentage for the indicated battleships is indicated incorrectly, and secondly, there are no Asahi and Fuji.
            Quote: overb
            These are not odds. This is the percentage of booking some ships relative to others

            Where does it come from, let me curiosity?
            1. verboo
              verboo 28 May 2016 00: 01
              0
              Quote: Comrade
              Firstly, the percentage for the indicated battleships is indicated incorrectly, and secondly, there are no Asahi and Fuji.

              First of all, it's not up to you to judge this. Your "qualifications" are already clear.
              Secondly, there was no talk of Asahi and Fuji.
              Quote: Comrade
              Where does it come from, let me curiosity?

              PPC, not a question. At Nostradamus.
              1. Comrade
                28 May 2016 00: 14
                0
                Quote: verboo
                First, not for you to judge

                And who is "judging" here? You just typed the wrong number, relying on the Russian "maybe".
                Quote: verboo
                PPC, not a question. At Nostradamus.

                Rather, from the ceiling.
                1. verboo
                  verboo 28 May 2016 00: 25
                  0
                  Quote: Comrade
                  You just typed the wrong number, relying on the Russian "maybe".

                  So refute it sooner. If you can. And with this you will be very difficult.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Rather, from the ceiling.

                  Those. I understand, you don’t even understand all the absurdity of your question.
                  1. Comrade
                    28 May 2016 03: 16
                    0
                    Quote: verboo
                    so refute it sooner. If you can. And with this you will be very difficult.

                    Joking. We open the necessary book and see that the Shikishima had thirty-two percent of the armor, and the Asahi thirty point, four-tenths of a percent. There is no data on "Fuji", I thought you know, alas, I was wrong.
                    Quote: verboo
                    you don’t even understand all the absurdity of your question.

                    Just explain the origin of your interest.
                  2. verboo
                    verboo 28 May 2016 08: 28
                    0
                    Quote: Comrade
                    We open the necessary book

                    I’m embarrassed to ask, is that the same book with which I just need to go?
                    Quote: Comrade
                    and see

                    I try to use the ancient grandfather method. I specify the weight of the armor. as well as clarifying the normal displacement of the ship. and then on the sets I calculate%. So, it is more reliable.
                    Quote: Comrade
                    There is no data on "Fuji", I thought you know, alas, I was mistaken.

                    How is it not? Very much there. But I won’t tell you, because my data, in your opinion, is unreliable. Why do you need false data?
                    Moreover, this is a very insidious indicator. For example, in the RIF the highest percentage of booking among ships with modern 12 "artillery is at Petropavlovsk. But at the same time it is the weakest EBR of them. It's all about the old type of armor.
                    Quote: Comrade
                    Just explain the origin of your interest.

                    I repeat: These are the percentages of booking some ships relative to others. What is not clear?
                  3. The comment was deleted.
    2. Nehist
      Nehist 27 May 2016 05: 28
      0
      By the way, I’m also wondering why did you get that Retvisan was a raider? This is a classic EDB
      1. verboo
        verboo 28 May 2016 00: 11
        0
        Quote: Nehist
        By the way, I’m also wondering why did you get that Retvisan was a raider? This is a classic EDB

        I did not write that Retwiza was a raider. Retwisan was an 1st class EDB with raider capabilities. This directly stemmed from the range of its course (among the raiders of that time 7-8 thousand m. M.). Typical EBR1 of that time had a range of about 5-6 thousand m.m.
        Those. It was an EBR1 raider. Those. a ship that could be used in different ways.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Yarik
    Yarik 25 May 2016 06: 28
    +1
    The above figures give us reason to believe that Ch. Crump, seeking to gain a foothold in the Russian market and push aside competitors, went for price dumping.

    A naive American. It was just necessary to give the naval minister and the general-admiral, and "gain a foothold."
  • bionik
    bionik 25 May 2016 06: 43
    +2
    Battleship "Retvizan".
    1. qwert
      qwert 25 May 2016 07: 07
      +3
      В that Russia, as in the current one, was not the one who won dumped. Here the author is wrong. The one who shared with the Grand Dukes won. Now a similar situation. Sometimes a Turkish company wins a tender from the Germans and at the same time offers a price one and a half times higher than a German company. At the same time, neither the terms nor the quality of the Turks will definitely not be better. Under capitalism, when financing projects from the budget, there can be no honest tenders in principle. IMHO

      Also, the author is delusional that the main advantage of Crump was the price. The main thing that helped the interested parties to roll over his order was the timing. The French immediately stipulated the construction of the Tsarevich within 48 months !!!! And the fleet for the Far East "was needed yesterday."
      1. yehat
        yehat 25 May 2016 10: 28
        +1
        and why can’t you say that you have chosen according to the totality of conditions?
        1. Comrade
          29 May 2016 01: 16
          0
          Quote: yehat
          why can’t you say that you have chosen based on a combination of conditions?

          Because the contract for the construction of the "Retvizan" was signed on April 11, 1898. A letter from Lagan with a proposal to build an battleship for Russia by the chairman of the ITC was received on May 26, 1898, that is, a month and a half later. This fact is the delusion (or fundamental mistake) of my opponent, because the ITC could not compare the American and French construction speed, therefore, "time"couldn't help"interested parties lobby the order"at Crump. For they, these very persons, could not have known in March 1898 what speed of construction Lagan would suggest in May 1898.
      2. Comrade
        26 May 2016 02: 34
        0
        Quote: qwert
        In that Russia, as in the current one, it was not the one who dumped who won. Here the author is wrong. The one who shared with the Grand Dukes won.

        Do you insist that Crump did give a bribe?
        Quote: qwert
        the author is mistaken that the main advantage of Kramp was the price. The main thing that helped stakeholders to lobby for his order was the timing

        Higher, in comparison with "Ansaldo", for example, the build speed of Crump - this is the default. If your humble servant knows that "Ansaldo" was building the armored cruiser "Garibaldi", which had a displacement of 6 tons, thirty-nine months, then the interested parties one hundred and twenty years ago and even more so.
        Quote: qwert
        And the fleet for the Far East "was needed yesterday."

        Why, let me ask you? It is the beginning of 1897, which means that only "Fuji" and "Yashima" are in the ranks of the Japanese. "Asahi" and "Mikasa" are not even laid down yet.
  • Aleksandr72
    Aleksandr72 25 May 2016 06: 45
    +2
    In 1895, an analytical note "On the current state of the Russian fleet and its immediate tasks" was presented to Emperor Nicholas II. The author of the document was M.I. Kazi. The author, in his work, reasonably argued about the shift of the center of gravity of the fleet's actions from the western theater to the Far East. The king agreed with the Kazi's conclusions, and they significantly influenced the plans of the Naval Ministry.
    At that time, the shipbuilding program to strengthen the navy, adopted in 1895, was under way. But it clearly did not match the growth rate of the Japanese fleet. Therefore, in 1897, an additional program was developed "for the needs of the Far East." It, like the Japanese programs, was supposed to be completed in 1905.
    By this time, Russia planned to have in the Far East 10 squadron battleships, 4 armored cruisers, 8 armored deck cruisers of the 1st rank, 5 armored deck cruisers of the 2nd rank, 7 gunboats, 2 mine vehicles, 67 destroyers of various types, 2 mine and 2 auxiliary cruisers. Due to the workload of domestic plants in the Baltic and the Black Sea, in the complete absence of the shipbuilding industry in the Far East, a significant part of the ships was ordered abroad.
    Including an order for two ships of the shipbuilding program "for the needs of the Far East" - a squadron battleship and an armored cruiser (the future "Retvizan" and "Varyag" - was placed in the USA at the plant of "The William Cramp & Sons Ship and Engine Building Company" This company managed to bypass its competitors and, avoiding participation in the international competition announced by the Marine Technical Committee, signed a contract on April 11, 1898, which was "supremely" approved already on April 20. According to its terms, a cruiser with a displacement of 6000 tons (order No. 301) should was ready to be ready 20 months after the arrival of an observing commission from Russia to the plant.The cost of the ship (the future Varyag without weapons was estimated at 2 US dollars (138 rubles).
    1. bionik
      bionik 25 May 2016 07: 20
      +1
      Quote: Aleksandr72
      - the factory of The William Cramp & Sons Ship and Engine Building Company.
    2. overb
      overb 25 May 2016 10: 02
      +2
      Quote: Aleksandr72
      The cost of the ship (the future "Varyag" without weapons was estimated at 2 US dollars (138 rubles).

      The total cost with mechanisms, armor, artillery, mines and combat equipment, 5 922 967 rubles.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. andrew42
      andrew42 25 May 2016 13: 55
      0
      It is a pity that there is a saying "after a fight, they don't wave their fists." Russia should have applied a different naval doctrine for the Far East theater of operations: 2-3 coastal defense battleships with increased firing range from main battery guns, plus gunboats (and they were), and of course, armored cruisers, the newest, high-speed ones, for any money, pieces 8 in Arthur. It was the lack of a powerful high-speed cruising fleet that led to the fact that the transfer of the Japanese ground forces went almost unhindered. BBOs could keep Japanese battleships at a respectful distance from Russian bases, and armored cruisers could break Asama and Co. and completely control communications. Cheaper and easier. We can say that the battle of the Varyag with a detachment of cruisers Uriu has already shown who will become the master of the sea. After that, the gore of the EBR was essentially irrelevant. Well, suppose Rozhestvensky would lead the backbone of the squadron from the EBR to the north. Let's even assume that Port Arthur would not have fallen, purely hypothetical. But the Japanese armored cruisers were the real masters of the seas in that theater of operations. And you can't run after Japanese convoys on the EBR. In the end, such an advantage to go to bombard Japanese ports / bases / shipyards with EBR would still not work. It was necessary to win a cruising war: 1) speed 2) caliber 3) armor. Russia has invested in the wrong place. All the same, they lost to the Japanese-Brits in the EBR, and in the cruisers - in general, the seams. Unfortunately, the concept of British battle cruisers was still a long way off before the concept of British battle cruisers appeared, and ours did not manage to do this, the stretch of communications simply pushed for this. And therefore, the main drawback of the RIF: a catastrophically small number of armored cruisers with a decent speed. Yes on the edge, even 3-4 light "Novik", and then at the beginning of the war they would put japa on their ears. The root of all evil is cruisers, and high-speed cruisers.
      1. overb
        overb 25 May 2016 17: 08
        +1
        Quote: andrew42
        It was the lack of a powerful high-speed cruising fleet that led to

        Just the cruising fleet in the RIF was. And he was not bad. But they used it like a bull ... In Vladik, close scouts (Bayan, Novik and Askold), as well as a nearby Boyarin fighter, should have been based.
        Also in Vladik were to be based Tsesarevich with Victory, for raids on communications in the Sea of ​​Japan. Maybe there is a Relight with them. This is how the wok should really look like.
        In the PA, the distant reconnaissance hero Bogatyr and the distant fighter Varyag.
        Also in the PA were to be based on the EBR-Raider Retvisan and DBK-Raiders Russia and Gromoboy, for actions in the group.
        The location of the remaining ships was of no fundamental importance. In the Far East, they were not particularly needed.
        Quote: andrew42
        and armored cruisers could break Asama and Co.

        Actually, Asama and Co. were not initially interested in communications in the Sea of ​​Japan. Their area was Silent Window and the Russian Raiders. But since the wok was often rubbed in the Sea of ​​Japan, Kamimura was there too.
        Quote: andrew42
        catastrophically small number of armored cruisers with a decent speed.

        Apparently they do not mean the DBK-defenders, like the Japanese, but the DBK-raiders. But the DBK raiders would not have been able to "break Asama and Co.", the fight with the DBK defenders was not their task.
        If you mean DBK defenders, then where will their range come from? They will not be able to perform the functions of DBK-raiders.
        If we mean ships "which have a lot of everything," then this is from the realm of fantasy.
        In other words, everything is incomprehensible with the concept.
    5. yehat
      yehat 27 May 2016 12: 34
      0
      It was necessary not to produce a fleet, but to strengthen normally in the acquired territories.
      I believe that Tsushima, the capture of Port Arthur and a number of other troubles lie with the governor of eastern Siberia Sinelnikov and his entourage. Due to the activity of this ghoul, the position of the empire became precarious there. We lost the support of the Koreans and they even became hostile, we quarreled with others - with the Chinese, British, French and Germans.
      And with Japan, they generally openly disgustedly communicated, which is why they considered the Russian Empire their enemy.
      I’m sure that if diplomacy and settling controversial issues would have spent at least a third of the money spent on the manufacture of Rozhdestvensky’s squadron, and given due attention, the empire would have had no problems at all - there would have been no war with Japan, there would have been no confrontation with the Koreans, the Chinese would be much more friendly. And the Germans and their Qingdao wanted to be friends, but they were openly sent.
  • bionik
    bionik 25 May 2016 06: 49
    0
    The battleship "Tsesarevich".
  • Max repp
    Max repp 25 May 2016 07: 06
    +1
    It is a pity they did not agree to his proposal to build a shipyard in Vladivostok. Maybe it really was necessary to GIVE?
    1. yehat
      yehat 27 May 2016 15: 05
      0
      Utopia. where does the plant get specialists and resources from?
      in the east, all this was poorly developed, and with the Germans, who developed metallurgy well in Qingdao and not only, RI quarreled.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Fotoceva62
    Fotoceva62 25 May 2016 07: 43
    +1
    As you know, "you will not get wet you will not go." Crump smeared or not ... this is not known to modern science ... (K.F. Carnival night). But if you look with an "armed eye", you can see that the ship was designed and built according to the technical specifications of the customer (MTK) and under the supervision of RIF engineers, and even with the participation of the crew. The conditions are very harsh and unusual at the time. The most advanced EDB “Prince. Potemkin Tauride ", not American prototypes. Errors in choosing a boiler installation (Nikloss) were not fatal, the main disadvantage of poor-quality pipes and the difficulty in maintenance.
    The RIF received an excellent, standard EDB and the order of the Tsesarevich EDB is a mistake, in my opinion (the series was much more expensive and more difficult without improving combat qualities).
    The order of the Tsesarevich EDB is due more to political reasons and greater financial dependence on France.
    1. UVB
      UVB 25 May 2016 09: 09
      +2
      . The most advanced EDB “Prince. Potemkin Tauride ", not American prototypes.
      Let me disagree. At the request of the customer, the "Peresvet" was chosen as the prototype with the replacement of 10 "artillery by 12" and the replacement of a three-shaft installation with a two-shaft one. By the way, in your photo there is not "Potemkin", but the later "Evstafiy"
      1. Fotoceva62
        Fotoceva62 25 May 2016 15: 12
        +1
        I know that Eustace (improved Potemkin). But the ship turned out to be much closer to the Black Sea EDB, and most likely the basis was the contours and design characteristics of the propulsion system.
    2. Nehist
      Nehist 25 May 2016 09: 33
      +3
      With boilers on Retvizani, this is the merit of the chief warrior, who himself didn’t get out and drove the entire engine team to a bluish appearance, exactly the same Varyag boilers brought a lot of problems to the crew, as we see a different approach to the use of trustworthy equipment, sloppiness of the Varyag machine team and the exemplary approach of the Retwizany machine team
      1. overb
        overb 25 May 2016 10: 12
        +3
        Quote: Nehist
        as we see a different approach to the use of trusted technology, sloppiness of the Varyag machine team and the exemplary approach of the Retwizan machine team

        Quite right. As an example, we can recall the Victory and Oslyabya, which, due to the slovenliness of the machine team, made the "indestructible" boilers of Belleville already in the Mediterranean region unusable. Those. they were only enough for a "cruise" around Europe.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 May 2016 13: 55
          +1
          Quote: overb
          As an example, we can recall the Victory and Oslyabya, which, due to the slovenliness of the machine team, made Belleville's "indestructible" boilers unusable already in Mediterranean.

          Not just worthless. And in
          a marvelous part of a corrupted, rusted and objectionable state.

          But they saved by using old galoshes with fire tube boilers to train machine teams.
          ICHH, on the head "Peresvet" there were no problems with the CMU at the transition. But "Oslyabya" even blocked "Victory".
      2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Verdun
      Verdun 25 May 2016 11: 31
      +3
      Quote: Fotoceva62
      The RIF received an excellent, standard EDB and the order of the Tsesarevich EDB is a mistake, in my opinion (the series was much more expensive and more difficult without improving combat qualities).

      Many in their comments try to evaluate the fighting qualities of the battleships, based on the performance characteristics presented on paper. This is a vicious approach. The ship, especially such as an armadillo, contains many different mechanisms for various purposes. It often happens that the unsuccessful design of only one of these mechanisms is able to offset the advantages of the mechanisms of others. In all fleets, without exception, the high acceptance test results conducted in greenhouse conditions were very often not confirmed during operation. Despite the attractiveness of Retvisan's performance characteristics on paper, many of the structural elements were frankly of poor quality. It's not just about the notorious cauldrons of Nikloss. Winches and electric motors of the ventilation system, pumps and steam lines, elevators for supplying shells from the cellars - much in the design of Retvisan turned out to be frankly of poor quality. For this, Mr. Kramp, remember, even tried to be fined. Why not fined - that's the question! And the low price ... If you try to mold candy from waste products, its cost will not be high. It may even look beautiful. But here it tastes ... At the same time, I do not claim that Retvisan was a frankly bad ship. The approach used by Mr. Kramp during its construction was very common at that time in shipyards around the world.
      1. overb
        overb 25 May 2016 12: 03
        +2
        Quote: Verdun
        Despite the attractiveness of Retvisan's performance characteristics on paper, many of the structural elements were frankly of poor quality. It's not just about the notorious cauldrons of Nikloss. Winches and electric motors of the ventilation system, pumps and steam lines, elevators for supplying shells from the cellars - much in the design of Retvisan turned out to be frankly of poor quality. For this, Mr. Kramp, remember, even tried to be fined. Why not fined - that's the question! And the low price ... If you try to mold candy from waste products, its cost will not be high. It may even look beautiful. But it tastes ...

        “He who helps people is wasting his time. You cannot become famous for good deeds” - the wisest old woman Shapoklyak.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Fotoceva62
        Fotoceva62 25 May 2016 15: 24
        +2
        French ships of the same quality did not shine. The industry had such a technical level, but Kramp corrected his imperfections. In general, of all the ships built under this program, the best quality were ordered in Germany. Boilers, mechanisms, ships managed to become obsolete even on the slipway.
        1. Verdun
          Verdun 25 May 2016 16: 57
          +1
          Quote: Fotoceva62
          Boilers, mechanisms, ships managed to become obsolete even on the slipway.

          That, one hundred F. Engels wrote in "Anti-During" has not yet been canceled.
          ... at present, a military vessel is no longer fully meeting the requirements, becoming obsolete even before it was launched.
          But it probably will always be so. New technologies, new financial opportunities ... Only this can not serve as an excuse for an unbalanced project created with a violation of calculations and which uses even relatively high-quality, but poorly interacting, poorly suited components to perform the required tasks.
      4. yehat
        yehat 27 May 2016 12: 59
        0
        I wonder how the ship was taken if there were so many jambs?
  • baudolino
    baudolino 25 May 2016 07: 44
    0
    In those days, corruption was one of the components of the American economy. It makes no sense to emphasize this.
    1. Alf
      Alf 25 May 2016 08: 19
      +1
      Quote: baudolino
      In those days, corruption was one of the components of the American economy.

      Since then, nothing has changed.
  • Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 25 May 2016 08: 33
    +2
    Quote: qwert
    In that Russia, as in the current one, it was not the one who dumped who won. Here the author is wrong. The one who shared with the Grand Dukes won. Now a similar situation.
    Sometimes a Turkish company wins a tender from the Germans and at the same time offers a price one and a half times higher than a German company. At the same time, neither the terms nor the quality of the Turks will definitely not be better.
    Under capitalism, when financing projects from the budget, there can be no honest tenders in principle. IMHO


    the world is not perfect, it’s not a fan of the king and his relatives, but it is advisable to operate on facts. And you yourself gave a lot of bribes in modern Russia, did someone force you?
    Regarding the Turkish builders, you read the contract, and there may be nyances, such as service or something else, and then talk about bias and bribery.
    Have you participated in at least one tender?
    You read, so in the USSR under socialism there were no bribes! But what about the rumors about the Lada who the Italians shoved in a bribe.
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 25 May 2016 08: 45
    0
    The French constantly spoil us with their ships, and at that time also with artillery. And suspicions of corruption at the highest level, which "cannot be proved", constantly arise.
    1. Nehist
      Nehist 25 May 2016 09: 29
      +4
      Where did you get the idea that the French were spoiling us with artillery at that time? Kane's guns were some of the best at that time, and the problem with lifting arcs became clear later because no one then expected to shoot at long distances. Since the experience of the Japanese-Chinese and American-Spanish wars just proved the effectiveness of firing 6 "guns precisely at a medium-close distance where the angle of elevation of the gun is not so extreme
      1. pigkiller
        pigkiller 25 May 2016 09: 43
        +1
        Interestingly, in the town of Verden at the World War I memorial there are large-caliber guns manufactured at the Putivlovsk plant.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. overb
        overb 25 May 2016 10: 00
        0
        Quote: Nehist
        Kane’s guns were some of the best at the time.

        Yes? What is it?
        Quote: Nehist
        for no one then expected to shoot long distances

        If the lifting mechanism allows you to raise the trunk like that, then it should shoot without fail. Regardless of the assumptions. This is the basic principle of any normal technique.
        1. Nehist
          Nehist 25 May 2016 10: 10
          +4
          Bring the gun better than 6 "Kane? This was a feature of the Russian guns, because the circular of the naval department did not ambiguously indicate the maximum firing range. on the open pedestals, the installation of this problem was present
          1. overb
            overb 25 May 2016 11: 00
            +1
            Quote: Nehist
            Bring a better gun 6 "Kane?

            For example, the Armstrong EOS 152/40 was no worse. At least at medium and long distances. And the EOSs that stood on Nissin and Kassug (152/45) were definitely better.
            Quote: Nehist
            but on cruisers where the guns were mostly on the thumbs open installation this problem was present

            Why then did such sectors of the rise? The order to limit the lifting angle came out later, when it "suddenly turned out" that the lifting mechanism could not stand it. So they tested. Therefore, it was a clear design defect.
            1. Nehist
              Nehist 25 May 2016 11: 16
              +1
              It’s only that this defect was absent on Kene’s land guns and on those that were made in France, so there wasn’t a problem in the gun but on the aggregate of characteristics, the Kenes were about 20% higher than the British guns you quoted, This is the initial projectile speed and accuracy and trunk survivability
              1. overb
                overb 25 May 2016 11: 29
                0
                Quote: Nehist
                about the aggregate characteristics of Kane about 20% superior to the British guns you quoted

                Could it be more detailed here?
                Quote: Nehist
                This and the initial velocity of the projectile

                What is this "bonus" so wild? It has been abandoned for more than 100 years in Russia. Even by the time of WW1 in Russia.
                Quote: Nehist
                and accuracy

                With sinking hoists? Oh well. The post-war reference book of the State Medical School "The Russo-Japanese War" directly contradicts you.
                Quote: Nehist
                and trunk survivability

                The survivability of the barrel is directly dependent on the N / s projectile. The higher it is, the survivability of the trunk is usually less. So here, by.
                1. Nehist
                  Nehist 25 May 2016 11: 35
                  +1
                  What are the wives guide GMH contradicts? In his opinion, he only proves the disgusting preparation of the commandors. The survivability of the trunk mainly depends on the method of its production, in which the British wire trunks were much inferior
                  1. overb
                    overb 25 May 2016 12: 08
                    0
                    Quote: Nehist
                    What are the wives guide GMH contradicts?

                    In your assessment of Russians 6 ".
                    Quote: Nehist
                    The survivability of the trunk mainly depends on the method of its production, whereby the British wire trunks were much inferior

                    Yes, I knew this UG would come up. No, it did not affect 6 "quality. And even 12" quality up to a certain pressure level in the barrel was not affected. A far-fetched "advantage" during the RYAV.
            2. Pilat2009
              Pilat2009 25 May 2016 21: 35
              +1
              Quote: overb
              The order to limit the lifting angle came out later, when it "suddenly turned out" that the lifting mechanism could not withstand.

              I remember in the book "Port Arthur" Stepanova gallant artillerymen on the Golden Cliff cut down the limiters of the barrel rise
              1. overb
                overb 25 May 2016 21: 52
                0
                Quote: Pilat2009
                brave gunners on the Golden Cliff filed down the barrels

                Maybe for those last 5-10 long range shots, this particular gun was needed. And there may be hope for "maybe".
              2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 May 2016 14: 07
          +1
          Quote: overb
          If the lifting mechanism allows you to raise the trunk like that, then it should shoot without fail. Regardless of the assumptions. This is the basic principle of any normal technique.

          The lifting mechanism did allow for firing with large IOC. The problem is that the reinforcements for the guns were calculated based on the shooting experience that the designers had - that is, with low level of fire.
          And with any prolonged shooting with large UVN, problems began not only for 6 "kane", but for all guns. Remember what happened on the "Peresvet", when it was decided to shoot from tower 10 "with UVN 25-30 degrees ?
          But the kaneshkas who fired from the concrete foundations did not experience any problems.

          If during the process of firing with large air-guns, reinforcements are handed over under the guns, and loads not provided for by the project begin to influence the mechanisms - maybe this is not the case with machines and arcs? wink
          1. overb
            overb 25 May 2016 15: 26
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            The problem is that the reinforcements for the guns were calculated based on the shooting experience that the designers had - that is, with low level of fire.

            Experience is not needed here. Need engineering education. Calculate the force vectors and their power. Unfortunately, this has always been a big problem. And the level of RI, this would be a great level. Under the USSR, everything became much worse (2MV).
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And with any kind of prolonged shooting with large UVN, problems began not only for 6 "kane", but for all guns.

            Problems were seen on ONLY 6 "Kane with a single lift. No other guns had any complaints.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Remember what happened at Peresvet

            Peresvet had defective guns of the Civil Code. This is a well-known fact, so his guns (and Oslyaby just in case) shot a weakened charge. Already on Victory there were other, not defective GK guns.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            But the kaneshkas who fired from the concrete foundations did not experience any problems.

            This is a false statement. Now it's too lazy to look in the "History of the Russian-Japanese War" from the General Music School (there are several volumes) and do a scan. But it was not about the foundations, but about the mechanisms of the tools. There it is written in plain text. It's a document, whatever one may say.
            Quote: Alexey RA
            maybe not in machines and arcs?

            I don’t know, I didn’t do the tests. For what I bought (read), for that I sell (I write).
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 25 May 2016 16: 15
              +1
              Quote: overb
              Peresvet had defective guns of the Civil Code. This is a well-known fact, so his guns (and Oslyaby just in case) shot a weakened charge. Already on Victory there were other, not defective GK guns.

              And I'm not talking about guns. I'm talking about the installation. In which, even when firing with a weakened charge, it suddenly turned out that:
              At Peresvet, tower installations were also in a state close to critical. The strongest tremors of the case at elevation angles of 25-30 ° made us fear for the strength of the structures, and the electrical failure, which failed due to these tremors, could only be restored due to the excellent qualifications and dedicated work of the galvanizers, which quickly eliminated the numerous malfunctions.

              These are not some abnormal naval perversions. These are the results of the firing provided for by the design and construction of the IOC - and not even at maximum values.
              Quote: overb
              And the level of RI, this would be a great level. Under the USSR, everything became much worse (2MV).

              I would say that everything was "much worse" in the 20s - early 30s. The notorious leader of "Leningrad" is an example of this:
              Tests showed that the hull turned out to be too weak, and so much so that it was impossible to operate all the artillery at the same time. Dangerous stresses that occurred in the area where the forecastle and the hull docked created a risk of the ship breaking in half if these stresses dynamically increased, caused, for example, by a mine blast, a shell hit, or even a strong storm. The need for reinforcement of the corps was revealed. In addition, the stability of the ship was only slightly higher than critical, and the buoyancy margin was so small that any damage to the underwater part could lead to disaster.

              Then (with Italian help) the situation more or less improved. At least we could do without Tomozuru. smile
            2. Monarchist
              Monarchist 25 May 2016 22: 27
              +2
              Monarchist. Let me disagree with you: the Soviet artillery in the VM was of high quality. For example, 76 mm grabbin, I read somewhere that the Germans willingly used the Grabin guns, and the German engineering school is one of the best in the world
              1. overb
                overb 25 May 2016 23: 07
                +1
                Quote: Monarchist
                Soviet artillery in VM was of high quality

                Yes? In which place? And can you give examples?
                Quote: Monarchist
                For an example of a 76mm grabbin, I read somewhere that the Germans willingly used the grabin guns

                The Germans willingly used any captured weapons. Even Nagan revolvers and three-rulers. Even of the last century, they called them Gewehr 252 (Russian Mosin M-91 in 7.62). And those that were newer were called Gewehr 254 (Russian Mosin M-91/30 in 7.62). Since they were not preparing for a long war and did not have stockpiles of weapons.
                And worse than a three-inch cannon from the times of 2MB is difficult to find. In the world and up to 2MB, such guns almost did not. And already during the 2 MV and even more so. To be proud of it is the same as to be proud of a three-line rifle, a T-34/76 tank (it was armed with it) and a Nagan revolver.
                Is it possible to recall the German analogue, which was temporarily produced by them from 1942 to the beginning of 1943? in the anti-tank version (PaK97 / 38 arr. 1941, his Soviet rehash called ZIS-3 arr. 1942).
                And you can recall the American tank 75-mm M2. It was put on the M3 Lee tanks in 1941.
                Everything, more analogues to this miracle in the world, I do not remember.
                1. goose
                  goose 30 May 2016 16: 10
                  0
                  Quote: overb
                  to be proud of a three-line rifle, a T-34/76 tank (it was armed with it)

                  And what are the problems with the F-34? Everyone who saw her admired the design and efficiency. And the Germans, and the Americans, and the British, and the Czechs. For others, an unattainable masterpiece.
                  1. verboo
                    verboo 30 May 2016 16: 53
                    0
                    Quote: goose
                    And what are the problems with the F-34?

                    In the tank version:
                    1941 - a good tank gun.
                    1942 - not a bad tank gun.
                    1943 - bad tank gun.
                    1944 - a terrible tank gun.
                    In the anti-tank version (in the USSR it was pathetically called a "divisional gun"):
                    1941 - A good anti-tank gun (F-22USV).
                    1942 - A good anti-tank gun (ZIS-3).
                    1943 - bad anti-tank gun.
                    1944 - a terrible anti-tank gun.
                    Did you notice the dynamics?
                    Quote: goose
                    Everyone who saw her admired the design and efficiency. And the Germans, and the Americans, and the British, and the Czechs

                    Is that all right? laughing
                    Quote: goose
                    For others, an unattainable masterpiece.

                    Yes, well, what are you. The French Canon de 75 mle 1897 was "quail" in many countries. Even in the USA, the 75mm M2 tank gun is what it is.
                    As for the Russian three-inch gun of 1902, there is approximately the same system of "pre-production modernization" as with the Nagant rifle, carried out by Mosin (three-line). Only its author is not known. The advanced solutions were replaced by sloppy ones (too clever), the caliber was replaced with a more traditional one, after which the gun was put into service (through a three-inch model 1900). First of all, this concerns the replacement of the eccentric valve with a piston valve.
                    During the modernization of 1930. The piston bolt was replaced by a wedge one and the rate of fire of the gun finally caught up with the French gun mod. 1897 At the same time, the wedge gate was still simpler and better than the eccentric gate, in this the Soviet three-inch arr. 02 / 30g. French cannon arr. 97g. exceeded. In general, wedge-type gates were common in the armies of other states. Therefore, there was nothing "unattainable" and "masterpiece" in the three-inch model. Generally.
                    1. verboo
                      verboo 30 May 2016 22: 14
                      0
                      Quote: verboo
                      During the modernization of 1930. the piston shutter was replaced by a wedge and in terms of rate of fire the gun finally caught up with the French cannon arr. 1897 At the same time, the wedge shutter was still simpler and better than the eccentric shutter, in this the Soviet three-inch arr. 02 / 30g. french gun arr. 97g. excelled.

                      That’s all that I wrote about the shutter, it’s all about the three-inch arr. 1936 At the three-inch arr. 02/30, the shutter was still piston.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
      4. Monarchist
        Monarchist 25 May 2016 22: 10
        0
        Monarchist. Nehistu
        I agree with you: Kane's guns were among the best. Naturally, the most "hot" experience of the combat use of guns was taken into account.
  • overb
    overb 25 May 2016 09: 29
    0
    If we talk about prices for Russian EDB, then here they are.
    1. Comrade
      26 May 2016 02: 40
      0
      Quote: overb
      If we talk about prices for Russian EDB, then here they are.

      Maybe share information on the rest of the battleships, "John Chrysostom", for example, how much did it cost?
  • yehat
    yehat 25 May 2016 10: 32
    0
    how cool the ships of that time look! just shine ...
    I understand that everything is sad inside, but outside, it's something
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 07
    0
    Well, I will insert a few photos on the topic ...
    loads/images/2016/101/wpnx446.jpg016/743/rggu701.jpg
    Beauties !!!
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 09
    0
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/117/jxhn993.jpg
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 16
    0
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/655/ztfb280.jpeg
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 18
    +1
    ... in Qingdao after the July 28 fight ...
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/584/qsdb344.jpg
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 May 2016 14: 50
      0
      In Gangut there was a photograph of the foremast of the Tsarevich after the battle - 9/10 of the section was carried out by the shell. EBR was very lucky that the weather was more or less calm. In the excitement, no guy wires would have saved - the mast with its massive battle marsh would have fallen, destroying the bridge and ripping the board to its full height.
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 19
    0
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/400/dyga937.jpg
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 19
    +1
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/832/eqot286.jpg
  • Somad
    Somad 25 May 2016 12: 20
    0
    http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2016/919/phow689.jpg
  • The comment was deleted.
  • unknown
    unknown 25 May 2016 15: 11
    +1
    Quote: Verdun
    Quote: Fotoceva62
    The RIF received an excellent, standard EDB and the order of the Tsesarevich EDB is a mistake, in my opinion (the series was much more expensive and more difficult without improving combat qualities).

    Many in their comments try to evaluate the fighting qualities of the battleships, based on the performance characteristics presented on paper. This is a vicious approach. The ship, especially such as an armadillo, contains many different mechanisms for various purposes. It often happens that the unsuccessful design of only one of these mechanisms is able to offset the advantages of the mechanisms of others. In all fleets, without exception, the high acceptance test results conducted in greenhouse conditions were very often not confirmed during operation. Despite the attractiveness of Retvisan's performance characteristics on paper, many of the structural elements were frankly of poor quality. It's not just about the notorious cauldrons of Nikloss. Winches and electric motors of the ventilation system, pumps and steam lines, elevators for supplying shells from the cellars - much in the design of Retvisan turned out to be frankly of poor quality. For this, Mr. Kramp, remember, even tried to be fined. Why not fined - that's the question! And the low price ... If you try to mold candy from waste products, its cost will not be high. It may even look beautiful. But here it tastes ... At the same time, I do not claim that Retvisan was a frankly bad ship. The approach used by Mr. Kramp during its construction was very common at that time in shipyards around the world.

    The right approach. It is only necessary to get rid of one-sidedness. And then, everything that is in the arsenal of the Russian fleet in the REV is bad, but the Japanese have no flaws.

    1. Meanwhile, of the 12 armored ships of Togo, only "Mikasa", two "Italians" and the last four "Asams" carried Krupp armor.
    2. 6 "shell for a Japanese sailor of normal condition was too heavy. After WWII they switched to 140mm caliber. Plus, frankly unsuccessful cordite charges, which led to excessive burnout and premature rupture of shells in the barrels. In practice:" Askold "in the Yellow Sea with its fire performance successively suppressed two armored cruisers.
    3. The quality of the shells. Much has been written. I will add: they constantly refer to the absence of 3 "high-explosive shells, which made the Russian destroyers completely defenseless.
    The funny thing is that the Japanese (British) 3 "also did not have high-explosive shells. According to the views of that time, a blank was more suitable for destroying destroyers.
    4. The most interesting question: speed.
    Everyone loves to compare the real speed of Russian ships and the maximum Japanese, shown once during testing.
    In practice, by 1905:
    Fuji had an actual speed of 15 knots.
    "Garibaldians" - 17 knots.
    "Iwate", "Izumo", "Asama", "Tokiwa" -17 knots.
    Yakumo -16 knots.
    Azuma -15 knots.
    Partially, this factor manifested itself in the battle with the Vladivostok cruisers and in the Yellow Sea.
    In Tsushima it did not appear, since "quite by accident" Rozhestvensky took 9 knots.
    And then, "quite by accident" Nebogaty's detachment, staffed with experienced teams, with prize artillerymen, with normal, not spoiled shells, managed to lag behind at such a speed, at such a distance that it practically ruled out the shooting of his squad at Togo's battleships.
    1. overb
      overb 25 May 2016 16: 24
      +1
      Quote: ignoto
      only "Mikasa", two "Italians" and the last four "Asams" carried Krupp armor.

      The Italians Krupp stood at the GP. And above was Terni’s armor + nickel with chrome nickel. Terni, this is actually Garvey-Nickel armor in Italian fashion. Exactly the same armor was protected by Sikishima, Hatsuse and Asahi.
      In fact, the difference between the Krupp type 1 armor and the Harvey-Nickel armor is about 11-12%.
      Quote: ignoto
      6 "shell for a Japanese sailor of normal condition was heavy.

      This is not true. Rumors about the pettiness of ALL Japanese people are greatly exaggerated.
      Quote: ignoto
      After PMV, they switched to a caliber of 140mm.

      First, after RYAV, at 152/45 EOCs. Then, already before WW1 at 152/50 Mark. And only then, just before WW1 140/50 of its own design. And nothing, not overstrained. Apparently they had their own reasons for this. But not "deadness".
      Quote: ignoto
      "Askold" in the Yellow Sea successively suppressed two armored cruisers with its fire performance.

      Enchanting. Such a "revelation" is not even funny. The BRP scout suppressed 2 armored cruisers with his fart. It's just something.
      Now it is clear why there are amateurs "to analyze in detail the battle at Chemulpo." Since here the BRP reconnaissance allegedly suppressed 2 BRKs, then why the BRP fighter at Chemulpo could not destroy 1 BRK? This is nonsense, of course. In both cases.
      Quote: ignoto
      In practice, by 1905:
      Fuji had an actual speed of 15 knots.
      "Garibaldians" - 17 knots.
      "Iwate", "Izumo", "Asama", "Tokiwa" -17 knots.
      Yakumo -16 knots.
      Azuma -15 knots.

      Fuji - 15,8 knots (ship from Armstrong, by the way)
      Garibaldians - 20 knots (it is completely incomprehensible why completely new ships would suddenly cease to go)
      Iwate - 19,8 knots (ship from Armstrong, by the way)
      Izumo - 19,6 knots (ship from Armstrong, by the way)
      Asama - 19,4 knots (ship from Armstrong, by the way)
      Tokiva - 19,9 knots (ship from Armstrong, by the way)
      Yakumo - 19,9 knots (a ship from the Volcano, by the way)
      Azduma - 20,5 knots (not Armstrong and not Vulcan, of course, but St. Nazaire is also a brand, but a little thinner)
      Read less the "revelations" of the drunk Packinham.
      I also suggest that you think about how Izumo, Azuma, Iwate and Tokiva in the KP quickly caught up and overtook (covered their heads) the woks, if it is known that Rurik screwed them at a speed of 17,5 knots.
      1. overb
        overb 25 May 2016 16: 25
        +1
        Quote: ignoto
        staffed by experienced teams, with prize artillerymen

        Wow. The farther into the forest, the thicker the partisans. Already some prize experienced teams drew.
        Quote: ignoto
        with normal, not spoiled shells

        Yeah, already some kind of prize shell. It is interesting.
        Quote: ignoto
        which virtually eliminated the shooting of his squad at Togolese battleships.

        Milay. Nicholas I's main guns had the ballistics of field howitzers. Those. formally they were not even cannons. And the BrBO cannons were lightweight and fired with reduced charges. Because they were made to replace 9 "guns, and they were in caliber 10". "Nebogatov's detachment" could only courageously drown itself. There was nothing else for which he had the strength and resources.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 May 2016 17: 38
          0
          Quote: overb
          And the BrBO cannons were lightweight and fired with reduced charges. Because they were made to replace 9 "guns, and they were in caliber 10".

          Duc ... someone again missed the mark - as much as 7 tons. They wanted to get a light 10 "with good ballistics. But suddenly it turned out that the gun would be either light or with good ballistics. The coastal defense chose ballistics. The Navy - at first lightness, and then returned to ballistics anyway. smile
          1. overb
            overb 25 May 2016 19: 38
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Fleet - first lightness, and then still returned to ballistics

            Oh yes, the 10 "story is very exciting.
            Suffice it to say that in Russia, generally identical 10 "cannons had as many as 4 ballistics. And in general they were all quite good, since the base projectile was from GAU, and not from GIMA. That is, normal length and weight.
            1. There were guns of coastal defense. The projectile weighing 225,2 kg was accelerated in them to 777 m / s, providing DE 6937 tm. The coastal defense guns had one notable advantage, making them not save their weight.
            2. There were lightweight brbo guns. In them, the same projectile was accelerated to 693 m / s providing DE 5518 tm. The gun weighed 22,5 tons and used a charge of 52 kg of gunpowder. At an elevation angle of 15 degrees, this ensured a combat range of 63 kbt, and at an angle of 35 degrees (Apraksin), 91 kbt. For the little ones like Sinyavin, that was enough.
            3. In addition, GIMA decided to make normal, not lightweight 10 "cannons. But the first pancake came out lumpy. The Peresvet cannons were defective, they were repaired, strengthened, as a result, the Peresvet cannon weighed an average of 31 tons. Such a gun was fired with a charge weighing 56 kg, which provided him with a speed of 732 m / s and a DE of 6157 tm.With an elevation angle of 35 degrees, this gave a very decent range of 97 kbt.
            Oslyaby’s guns had exactly the same ballistics, but since they were not initially defective, they weighed 24 tons.
            I must say that the ballistics of the guns of the GK Peresvet and Oslyaby for the EDB guns (even 2 classes) was weak. And for the DBK guns, they were very powerful. So, it turned out neither 2 nor 1,5.
            4. There was still ballistics of the guns of Victory. These guns weighing 27 tons with a charge of 65,6 kg. dispersed the projectile to a speed of 792 m / s, providing DE 7207 tm. The firing range was 112kbt and these were the most long-range guns of the RIF. Their power corresponded to the power of class 2 EDB guns.
            The difference in weight between the lightweight BrBO and Pobeda guns was only 4,5 tons per barrel. It’s not entirely clear whether it was worth fencing a garden with lightweight guns at all. At the same time, in terms of armor penetration, the guns differed very much. In the sense, fundamentally.
            Probably, it would be necessary to bring the ballistics of the 10 "Kasuga cannon from Armstrong. This only 10" YaIF gun accelerated a 10 "projectile weighing 227 kg to a speed of 700 m / s providing DE 5675 tm. At an elevation angle of 35 degrees (initially it was 20), the firing range In principle, this is a normal figure for a DBK. A ship of this class does not need much more. Moreover, it was this single gun that was the YaIF's longest-range weapon.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 26 May 2016 09: 52
              0
              Quote: overb
              The difference in weight between the lightweight BrBO and Pobeda guns was only 4,5 tons per barrel. It’s not entirely clear whether it was worth fencing a garden with lightweight guns at all.

              And the 10 "was not at all lucky with the weight savings. smile Remember the dancing around the weapons of "General Admiral Apraksin". To reduce the overload, BrBO developed a fundamentally new turret - and at the cost of reducing the main battery guns by a quarter, they saved as much as 41 tons.
              1. overb
                overb 26 May 2016 10: 15
                +1
                Quote: Alexey RA
                To reduce the overload, the Brbo developed a fundamentally new turret - and at the cost of reducing the main guns by a quarter, they saved as much as 41 tons.

                Yes, it was terrible nonsense. Apraksin somehow did not work out at all. They put even more modern armor on his GP (by the way, 99 tons were saved), but all is not enough. But to reduce the power of the GK by 1/4, it was something. Enchanting dullness event.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. yehat
        yehat 25 May 2016 19: 55
        0
        and yet the majority of the Japanese were smaller, which affected the simple power capabilities and reload speed. In addition, due to the nutritional characteristics, they had less animal proteins, which affected endurance.
      4. Comrade
        26 May 2016 02: 57
        0
        Quote: overb
        The Italians Krupp stood at the GP. And above was Terni’s armor + nickel with chrome nickel. Terni, this is actually Garvey-Nickel armor in Italian fashion.

        Could you clarify what "Terni armor + nickel with chromium-nickel" means?
        1. overb
          overb 26 May 2016 10: 17
          +1
          Quote: Comrade
          Could you clarify what "Terni armor + nickel with chromium-nickel" means?

          Vertical Terni armor, horizontal nickel and chrome nickel.
          1. Comrade
            27 May 2016 01: 00
            0
            Quote: overb
            Vertical Armor Terni

            If we are now talking about "Kassuga" and "Nissin", then the Krupp armor went to the armor belt.
            1. overb
              overb 27 May 2016 01: 12
              0
              Quote: Comrade
              If we are now talking about "Kassuga" and "Nissin", then the Krupp armor went to the armor belt.

              Those. today you decided to tell me the same thing that I told you on May 25, 2016 at 16:24. This is an interesting move.
              1. Comrade
                27 May 2016 02: 41
                0
                Quote: overb
                today you decided to tell me the same thing that I told you on 25 on May 2016 in 16: 24. This is an interesting move.

                Even more interesting is that the Krupp armor on the Kassuga and Nissin was made by Terni. And you speak in such a way as if Krupp's armor and Terni's armor are different types of armor. Here is Krupp, and here is Harvey. In fact, all the armor of the Japanese "Garibaldians" was fashioned by Terney.
                1. overb
                  overb 27 May 2016 02: 49
                  0
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Even more interesting is that the Krupp armor on the Kassuga and Nissin was made by Terni.

                  Who would have thought?
                  Quote: Comrade
                  And you speak in such a way, as if Krupp's armor and Terni's armor are different types of armor.

                  Exactly. Various. Terni's Krupp armor was called KC. And the Terni armor is an analogue of the Harvey-nickel armor. Quite often, the reservation of the Japanese Garibaldians is indicated correctly, the armor of the Krupp-Terni. Those. 2 different types of vertical armor. Krupp was at the GP.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  In fact, all the armor of the Japanese "Garibaldians" was fashioned by Terney.

                  And again, who would have thought?
                2. yehat
                  yehat 27 May 2016 13: 01
                  0
                  it's not a fox skin to make it laughing
                  1. Comrade
                    28 May 2016 03: 34
                    0
                    Quote: yehat
                    it's not a fox skin to make it

                    This is an old term, one hundred and twenty years ago, this is exactly what they said about the process of making armor - "dressing of armor".
      5. Comrade
        26 May 2016 03: 28
        0
        Quote: overb
        Garibaldians - 20 knots (it is completely incomprehensible why completely new ships would suddenly cease to go)

        Could you be so kind as to indicate the source where it says that "Kassuga" and "Nissin" in 1905 went to twenty nodes. If this is not true, you can simply remain silent.
        1. overb
          overb 26 May 2016 10: 25
          0
          Quote: Comrade
          Could you be so kind as to indicate the source where it says that "Kassuga" and "Nissin" in 1905 went to twenty nodes.

          Could you be so kind as to indicate the source where it says that "Kassuga" and "Nissin" in 1905 went less. If this is not true, you can simply remain silent.
          PS. Why ships, which in 1904. quite officially went 20,05 and 20,15 knots in 1905 will not go 20 knots? There are norms for reducing the course for a year of operation. Here they must be adhered to. Or do you suppose that the Varyag drivers were launched on them? I don’t know anything about this. And you?
          1. Comrade
            27 May 2016 01: 32
            0
            Thus, we state that you cannot prove your words that the Japanese "Garibaldians" in 1905 "walked at 20 knots.
            Quote: overb
            Why ships that are in 1904. quite officially went 20,05 and 20,15 nodes in 1905 will not go 20 nodes?

            Elementary. The speed indicated by you was developed during sea trials. “Kassuga” managed to develop a course of 20,05 knots for an hour and a half, and “Nissin” - 20,15 knots. The highlight is that this move was achieved in greenhouse conditions. The sea was calm, the wind was weak, the coal was a perfect cardif, and the displacement during the sea trials was ... How much, can you tell me? If you have any difficulty, please ask.
            But when the same cruisers under the same conditions "ran" not for an hour and a half, but for six, the results were much more modest. Now fast forward to 1905. Can you say that during the Battle of Tsushima, "Kassuga" and "Nissin" had the same displacement as during the record one and a half hour run? How about the weather? If I am mistaken, then you correct me. During the Tsushima battle, the wave was serious, and the Japanese did not have the same coal.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. overb
              overb 27 May 2016 02: 12
              0
              Quote: Comrade
              Thus, we state that you cannot prove your words that the Japanese "Garibaldians" in 1905 "walked at 20 knots.

              Should I? However, see their tests in 1904. But you just can not refute anything. And if you can, refute it. I’m not going to prove anything to you, because is not obliged to.
              Quote: Comrade
              “Kassuga” managed to develop a course of 20,05 knots for an hour and a half, and “Nissin” - 20,15 knots.

              This is apparently your favorite move, to write to me what I wrote to you about before?
              Quote: Comrade
              The highlight is that such a move was achieved in greenhouse conditions. The sea was calm, the wind was weak, coal was a perfect cardiff

              I'll tell you a secret, these test conditions are standard. And the "selected cardiff" is actually normal coal, which was used to load ships in ports.
              Quote: Comrade
              How exactly do not tell? If you have any difficulty, ask.

              Not even going to. I also had enough statements about the non-penetration of 305 mm shells of any armor. Contrary to the obvious penetration of Borodino's 305 mm Fuji shell.
              Quote: Comrade
              But when the same cruisers under the same conditions "ran" not for an hour and a half, but for six, the results were much more modest.

              They ran for 6 hours. And for 1,5 hours, there are no such tests. These are the next "facts" invented by you.
              Quote: Comrade
              Can you argue that during the battle of Tsushima, "Kassuga" and "Nissin" had the same displacement as during the record one and a half hour run?

              I can not. Because there was no "record 1,5 hour run", these are your ideas. And it was not about the "Tsushima battle", but about the speed of Nissin and Kasuga in general.
              Quote: Comrade
              Yes, and the yoke of the Japanese was not the same.

              What is it? Have you drunk? Or have you lost cards?
              By God, people like you surprise me. And very much. It seems that they are arguing for the sake of argument. They invent something, somehow they play it. So the waves dragged in, the wind. Although the waves on all ships act, like the wind.
              In short - there will be facts that Nissin and Kasuga in 1905. less than 20 knots went, please contact. Will not, leave me alone. Otherwise, I’ll just bring it to the emergency.
              And, advice. Check the dimensions, offset and power of Nissin and Kasugi, and use Sharpe. You will be immensely surprised, probably. Everything converges, the speed should have been the same as it was written (20,05 and 20,15 knots). Therefore, further your fantasies on this topic are simply not appropriate.
              1. Comrade
                27 May 2016 02: 56
                0
                Quote: overb
                Should I?

                No one owes nothing to nobody.
                Quote: overb
                I’ll tell you a secret, such test conditions are standard

                Where in Italy? May be. But even more secretly, I will tell you that "Asahi", for example, passed sea trials in a strong headwind and a serious wave. Nothing, the results were impressive. Because he was building an English factory, not an Italian "factory", as ZP Rozhestvensky put it.
                Quote: overb
                Not even going to.

                Naturally, because such cases were not recorded by the participants in the battles.
                Quote: overb
                1,5 hours, such tests do not happen. These are the next "facts" invented by you.

                Are you ready to publicly apologize to me and other members of the forum for misleading and take your words back if I post a screenshot from an English technical magazine describing the sea trials of the Kassugi and Nissina? "Yes or no" ?
                Quote: overb
                leave me alone. Otherwise, I’ll just bring it to the emergency.

                You were quickly blown away. This is called "went for wool - came back trimmed."
                1. The comment was deleted.
                2. verboo
                  verboo 28 May 2016 00: 23
                  0
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Where in Italy?

                  In the world.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  that "Asahi", for example, was undergoing sea trials in a strong headwind and a serious wave.

                  And what are you saying? Are you demonstrating your erudition?
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Because he was building an English factory, not an Italian "factory", as ZP Rozhestvensky put it.

                  Well, D. Brown in Klaibank, this is not the height of perfection either. And I would argue actively who is cooler, Ansaldo or he. Those. I would argue very much. Those. Based on the available data, I can safely say that Nissin and Kasuga were built much better than Asahi (Asahi had a rather significant advantage). Moreover, his project was rather mediocre. The result was a very unimportant boat. Very, very unimportant boat. With disgusting ones for British-built ships, TTX. But with all this, he was noticeably stronger than any RIF ship.
                  Mikasa from Vickers to the level of Sikishima and Hatsuse (both Armstrong) also did not reach. And if the last 2 ships were quite masterpiece, then Mikasa was an ordinary gray mouse. So, nothing special.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Naturally, because such cases were not recorded by the participants in the battles.

                  You would at least follow the thread of the conversation, or something. And then write out of place. That's why it is problematic to understand what.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  Are you ready to publicly apologize to me and other members of the forum for misleading and take your words back if I post a screenshot from an English technical magazine describing the sea trials of the Kassugi and Nissina? "Yes or no" ?

                  Spread it out. And I'll see what kind of murder you found.
                  Especially for people like you. The European methodology suggested 2 types of tests. 6 hours with natural draft and 2 hours with supercharging. No such 1,5 hour tests existed.
                  Quote: Comrade
                  You were quickly blown away. This is called "went for wool - came back trimmed."

                  I'm just tired of you. And your fantasies got me. Want to fantasize, fantasize. But without me.
                  1. Comrade
                    28 May 2016 03: 30
                    -1
                    Quote: verboo
                    In the world.

                    In an alternative, presumably.
                    Quote: verboo
                    And what are you saying? Are you demonstrating your erudition?

                    Go to the person?
                    Quote: verboo
                    I would argue actively who is cooler, Ansaldo or he. Those. I would argue very much.

                    Well, let's bet. Only, chur, to operate with facts and figures. and not exclamation marks, slogans, and speech.
                    Quote: verboo
                    You would at least follow the thread of the conversation

                    Again. The direct participants in the hostilities at sea did not leave us documented facts of Japanese armor breaking through. You insist otherwise. Hence the request. Give a source where this is said. Perhaps he just didn’t catch my eye, and you are more lucky.
                    Quote: verboo
                    Spread it out. And I'll see what kind of murder you found.

                    Will not work. You've been offered a deal, apologies for attempting to mislead, against a screenshot from a respected tech magazine hot on the heels of the Kassugi and Nissin trials. Write that you are ready to apologize to me and the members of the forum, and get a screenshot. Do not write - you will not learn anything about sea trials.
                    And continue to habitually draw information from V. Kofman's "murzilka".
                    Quote: verboo
                    I'm just tired of you. And your fantasies got me. Want to fantasize, fantasize. But without me

                    "Draining" is counted.
                    1. verboo
                      verboo 28 May 2016 08: 47
                      0
                      Quote: Comrade
                      Well, let's bet. Only, chur, to operate with facts and figures. and not exclamation marks, slogans, and speech.

                      So let's look at your numbers. And then only threats "to present something sensational". But no specifics.
                      Quote: Comrade
                      Again. The direct participants in the hostilities at sea did not leave us documented facts of Japanese armor breaking through

                      Once again, they were not up to it. Because they, along with the evidence, were mostly killed.
                      Quote: Comrade
                      You insist otherwise. Hence the request. Give a source where this is said.

                      You already really got me. How much can I transfer from empty to empty? By God, it's time for you with your tediousness in the emergency.
                      Quote: Comrade
                      Will not work. You are offered a deal

                      Also some kind of deal? Everyone, goodbye. Go to an emergency, you are our dealmaker. I do not intend to read your comments further and answer them. The next move you will explicitly ask to transfer $ 5 to your account. And then post a funny murzilka "in a reliable foreign language." The level of your "knowledge" and "sources" is generally clear to me. And not interesting.
                    2. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. yehat
          yehat 27 May 2016 13: 02
          0
          down the Amur or Neva downstream - easily)))
      6. Nehist
        Nehist 27 May 2016 05: 44
        0
        Three and a half hours caught up with it quickly? And the reason, incidentally, was not in Rurik! Felts at Gromoboy felts at Russia I just don’t remember the problem with the cars happened because of which the squad slowed down which allowed the Japanese to approach the distance of the shot! Well, since you say that Rurik went 17,5 knots and the Japanese could not catch him for more than three hours, where is their vaunted speed of almost 20 knots? And the Japans would not have caught up with them ...
        1. yehat
          yehat 27 May 2016 13: 04
          0
          17.5 knots - a very decent speed for an armadillo
          if the Japanese would have accelerated to 19 knots, then they were catching up with a speed of about 1 knot.
          therefore for a long time.
        2. verboo
          verboo 27 May 2016 23: 37
          0
          Quote: Nehist
          Roofing felts at Gromoboya roofing felts in Russia I just don’t remember the problems with the cars happened

          Oh ho ho. Sloppiness happened there. In Russia. The device was Russian, five-machine (!!!) and three-shaft. Therefore, to use it effectively, there were instructions. Labor intensive. And who loves her, this laboriousness? So the clumsy thing happened.
          But, by the way, this non-folding box did not change anything in Russia, the Japanese would still catch up with the WOK, only a little later. But the fact that Rurik died is a direct "initiative" of Jessen. It was Rurik who, for some reason, decided to cover himself, his beloved.
          And Rurik was reclassified into "armored cruisers" shortly before that, when semi-armored ships were canceled in the RIF. And before that, he was quite rightly a semi-armored cruiser. If Jessen had covered himself with an armored Thunderbolt, nothing would have happened, all the ships would have returned to the base. But he decided to hide behind a half-armored Rurik. From this and such a result.
          Quote: Nehist
          Well, since you say that Rurik went 17,5 knots and the Japanese could not catch him for more than three hours, where is their vaunted speed of almost 20 knots?

          Now for sure I won’t say the initial distance. And also the chase time. But you need to take into account the difference in speeds.
  • geologist
    geologist 25 May 2016 22: 21
    0
    What about sumo wrestlers?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Comrade
    26 May 2016 01: 53
    0
    Quote: Sakhalininets
    a squadron battleship with Retvisan contours and a similar artillery arrangement is much simpler to build, which significantly reduces construction time.

    In theory, yes, but in practice it's not that simple. "Retvizan" took forty-five months to build, and "Slava" thirty-six. "Tsarevich" was built in fifty-two months, and "Prince Suvorov" was built in thirty-eight months.

    Quote: Sakhalininets
    In this case, unfortunately, the thirst for money won the mind and the brainchild of Lagan was taken as the basis for the future series of squadron battleships of the "Borodino" type.

    Most likely, such a decision was made at the highest level of the empire, and this is hardly a matter of banal bribes. Recall that just at the time of the events described in France, local and Russian banking institutions were distributing bonds of the "Russian 3% gold loan of 1896" for a total amount of one hundred million rubles in gold, intended to pay off part of the interest-free debt on the issue of banknotes of the State Treasury to the State Bank and to replace 5% of the gold rent in 1884. History knows several cases when France, by lending, influenced the image actions of the leaderships of countries that borrowed money from the French.
    In practice, it looked like this. I (France) will lend money to you (the borrowing country), but for this you will meet me halfway in some matters. For example, for a part of the borrowed money, you will order warships at the shipyard to which I will show you. And then it turns out that prominent French politicians, including the country's foreign minister, are in the leadership of this shipyard. Let us also recall that one of the main beneficiaries of the shipyard that built the "Tsesarevich" was the French navy, and in its shipyard there were prominent admirals. This explanation may sound unusual, but if you are interested, I can tell you in detail about a similar scheme, only this time the French turned it over with the Poles, who wanted to build destroyers for French money.
    Quote: Sakhalininets
    Thanks to the author for an interesting essay.

    Glad I liked it.
  • Comrade
    26 May 2016 02: 37
    0
    Quote: overb
    Sisoy got a torpedo and was flooded

    "Sisoy the Great" was not flooded, it is said about this in any "murzilka".
    1. overb
      overb 26 May 2016 09: 34
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      "Sisoy the Great" was not flooded, it is said about this in any "murzilka".

      Different sources say differently. Suliga, for example, said it was flooded. In some places, he drowned himself. This does not change the essence, he died from a torpedo.
      1. Comrade
        27 May 2016 01: 42
        0
        Quote: overb
        Suliga, for example, says it’s flooded

        Let's look at Russian officialdom together, what about the flooding of the ship?
        1. overb
          overb 27 May 2016 02: 05
          0
          Quote: Comrade
          Let's take a look at Russian officialdom together

          What is this? You are a very big dreamer. And the inventor.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Nehist
    Nehist 26 May 2016 12: 27
    0
    Quote: overb
    And why not non-armor-piercing? In fact, the Japanese used quite normal British armor-piercing shells. These Russian shells due to the small explosive charge in them should be called half-blanks.

    Japanese armor-piercing shells differed from HE shells only in a smaller amount of explosives. They also started with picric acid and were equipped with an ultra-sensitive bottom fuse without a moderator. As armor-piercing such shells acted only in those rare cases when the "Izuina fuse" did not work.
    1. overb
      overb 26 May 2016 12: 53
      -1
      Quote: Nehist
      Japanese armor-piercing shells differed from HE shells only in a smaller amount of explosives.

      And a lot of metal. smile Actually, any armor-piercing projectile differs from a HE projectile with the same. Including
      Quote: Nehist
      equipped with an ultra-sensitive bottom fuse without moderator

      I don’t agree.
      Quote: Nehist
      As armor-piercing such shells acted only in those rare cases when the "Izuina fuse" did not work.

      This is nonsense, excuse me for frankness. Alexander and Borodino under Tsushima were sunk by Japanese armor-piercing shells. Suvorov and Oryol are disabled by them. Did the fuses fail?
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 26 May 2016 17: 36
        0
        Quote: overb
        Alexander and Borodino under Tsushima were sunk by Japanese armor-piercing shells

        Armor-piercing? Tumbling in flight?
        1. overb
          overb 26 May 2016 17: 40
          +1
          Quote: Pilat2009
          Armor-piercing?

          Armor-piercing.
          Quote: Pilat2009
          Tumbling in flight?

          And where else have you read it? laughing
        2. The comment was deleted.
  • Pilat2009
    Pilat2009 26 May 2016 19: 53
    0
    Yes, right now, I don’t remember. Like Semenov
    1. Comrade
      27 May 2016 01: 45
      0
      Quote: Pilat2009
      Like Semenov

      Or at Lutonin, a senior officer at Poltava.
  • Comrade
    27 May 2016 03: 01
    +1
    Quote: overb
    Who would have thought?

    Live and learn. Here is a link for you
    http://www.locandavecchiomaglio.it/
    if you want to deal with Terni’s armor, you’ll figure out how I figured it out. When I wrote this article, I turned a large amount of information, a lot did not go into the article, but personally enriched me.
    1. verboo
      verboo 27 May 2016 23: 22
      +1
      Quote: Comrade
      want to deal with Terni’s armor - you’ll figure out how I figured out

      I figured it out a long time ago. And even enlightened you.
      1. Comrade
        28 May 2016 00: 40
        +1
        Quote: verboo
        I figured it out a long time ago. And even enlightened you

        Well, since you are such an "educator", so tell us, when did Terney acquire a patent from Krupp for the production of Krupp armor? You don't have to name the date of signing the contract, but if you please be so kind as to the year. And don't forget the source for now!
        By the way, Nikolai, why do you always change your flag? You are from Moscow, if my memory serves me, so why this euro-circus with flags?
        1. verboo
          verboo 28 May 2016 01: 59
          +1
          Quote: Comrade
          so tell me when Terni acquired a patent from Krupp to issue Krupp armor? You can not name the date of signing the contract, but please be kind to the year. And do not forget the source!

          Those. you read something completely uninteresting somewhere, and now you want me to read it? Do I need it? Why should I be interested in these details?
          Quote: Comrade
          Nicholas,

          As soon as they didn’t call me on the Internet. I don’t even remember all the names. Once, even with a Dog (or something like that, I could be wrong). So go on, I'm already used to it.
          1. Comrade
            28 May 2016 03: 40
            0
            Quote: verboo
            You read something completely uninteresting somewhere, and now you want me to read it?

            I came across information that the Terni plant acquired a license to process armor plates using the Krupp method. And "Kassuga" with "Nissin" had Krupp armor produced by the Terni plant. You are saying something different, which is why I gave you a link to an Italian site so that you could eliminate your illiteracy in this narrow issue.
            Quote: verboo
            As soon as they didn’t call me on the Internet. I don’t even remember all the names

            Well, I think that you haven't forgotten "Passer-by" with "Hotel" yet.
            So what's with the flags, why change? Or is it you who are moving from country to country, rotating the desktop globe?
        2. The comment was deleted.
  • murriou
    murriou 26 September 2016 10: 59
    0
    Quote: Comrade
    Why, let me curiosity?

    If you look no further than your own nose, then you are right, there is no need.

    In other cases, the result is different. lol
    The inevitability of the aggravation of relations with Japan became apparent after the Trinity intervention of 1895.
    The military shipbuilding program was adopted in Japan in 1896. Not only was it advertised on every corner, but unknown to competent persons, it was not already at the stage of its discussion.

    Here is what V.P. Kostenko writes about this:
    By the end of 1895, the Russian government's view of the state of affairs in the waters of the Far East had changed. Having accepted the conditions of the Shimonosek peace, Japan immediately decided to triple the fleet and double the army. A strong current arose in Russian sea circles, insisting on an urgent and significant strengthening of the Pacific Fleet, since Japan, which had launched an aggressive program in Asia, could become a likely and dangerous opponent of Russia. This opinion was approved by the government, and Nicholas II instructed the head of the Ministry of the Sea to “reconsider the view on Russia's martial law in the Pacific Ocean.” Formed by order of the tsar, the Special Conference concluded that “Compared to 5, a significant change in the situation has taken place in the Far East, and this is far from in our favor. Japan’s course of action has revealed the most powerful conquest


    Quote: Comrade
    It is the beginning of 1897, which means that only "Fuji" and "Yashima" are in the ranks of the Japanese. "Asahi" and "Mikasa" haven't even been laid yet

    However, the Japanese program of 1896 was not at all exhausted by Fuji and Yashima, and Russia also understood this.
  • murriou
    murriou 12 October 2016 10: 32
    0
    Quote: Nehist
    the total mass of projectiles fired per unit of time determined firepower

    This is an indicator for a howitzer battery.
    And for warships, no mass of volley matters, if the shells making up this mass are unable to inflict a substantial defeat on the enemy.
  • The comment was deleted.