Сейчас на борту: 
mangust-lis,
прибалт
   [Подробнее...]

Страниц: 1 2 3 … 17

#1 18.10.2013 21:01:26

ЗИС
Гость




Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Андрей Ярославович, нет ли у Вас аэроснимков м. Панагия периода Эльтигенской десантной операции?

Отредактированно ЗИС (18.10.2013 21:02:03)

#2 19.10.2013 00:19:05

Станислав Долгов
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

К выше заданному вопросу хотел бы узнать про аналогичные снимки, схемы и др. информацию от Бугазской косы и до м. Тузла. Как наши, так и немецкие, вплоть до освобождения Таманского полуострова. Есть возможность привязать их к местности и провести поиск на месте.

#3 19.10.2013 12:57:20

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

2

ЗИС написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #754562
аэроснимков м. Панагия периода Эльтигенской десантной операции?

Панагии нет, к сожалению

Станислав Долгов написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #754699
от Бугазской косы и до м. Тузла.

Есть Соленое озеро 22.10.43:
http://i57.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/1019/66/b78dac369b037948aedb879927e13066.jpeg

М.б. еще Гадючий Кут интересен (тоже 22.10.43):
http://i59.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/1019/c2/5010f8b4253520124873061a4d3697c2.jpeg

#4 19.10.2013 13:00:07

Станислав Долгов
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Спасибо. Уникальные снимки! Жаль по Солёному оз. привязок нет.

#5 19.10.2013 13:20:30

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

1

Станислав Долгов написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #754804
Жаль по Солёному оз. привязок нет

Вот здесь это
http://i57.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/1019/c3/0309d3943eb9f35e24fe93c0226146c3.jpeg

#6 19.10.2013 15:53:09

ЗИС
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Спасибо, Андрей Ярославович за фото! На Соленом был так называемый "Сольпром" так вот моя бабушка в компании подруги ходили пешком за солью из Темрюка с тачками. Три мешка набрали - и назад.

#7 29.11.2013 21:48:50

ЗИС
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Андрей Ярославович, нет ли данных об оснащении береговых батарей на таманском участке? Знамо только о корабельных орудиях на Панагии (743-я), но были же и другие батареи (4-е единицы если не ошибаюсь)

#8 30.11.2013 13:04:06

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

1

ЗИС написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #766159
береговых батарей на таманском участке?

Были 4 стационарных батареи, входили в 167 оад (отдельный арт.дивизион):
БС-640 = 2-100/56
БС-663 = 2-100/56
БС-723 = 2-130/50
БС-743 = 3-130/55

Кроме того, были 4 подвижных дивизиона (214, 251, 252, 253 опад) с "сухопутными" 122-мм и 152-мм орудиями

#9 30.11.2013 13:39:54

Станислав Долгов
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Андрей Ярославович, вопрос "в догонку": известно ли расположение немецких арт (зенитных) батарей на участке от Тузлы до оз. Солёное. Пока знаю про то, что на склоне у оз. Солёное была батарея которая препятствовала высадке нашего десанта.

#10 30.11.2013 13:54:34

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Посмотрю вечером. Но, насколько помню, с зенитными батареями в этом отношении совсем плохо.

#11 30.11.2013 13:56:02

Станислав Долгов
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

А. Кузнецов написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #766253
с зенитными батареями в этом отношении совсем плохо

Я с ходу не вспомню источник, но про батарею на Солёном упоминалось, как про "восемь восемь".

#12 01.12.2013 13:46:22

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Не нашел пока. Возьму на заметку этот вопрос, всё равно с кубанскими делами разбираюсь постепенно.

#13 12.01.2014 15:09:31

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 349




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Hello!  (sorry my english)
I'm the italian guy making some research for posts in the italian forum ^^
May i make a pair of questions regarding some other skirmish in black sea?  (i thank you again for the previous replies on Morozov page)

On 5 December 1943 we have a clash reported by MFPs  against soviet units. Igor confirmed me identity of TK-13, TK-53, TK-82 and TK-105, with TK-53 that launched torpedo and missed target.
German themselves admit in KTB to have suffered 2 badly wounded and 7 light wounded.
It's known to you identity of German MFPs involved? Especially the ones that took casualties.



Walking back at 1942 (ever in Black Sea), there is another event that still has some lacking.
On 23 October 1942, Igor confirmed me  that soviet motor torpedo boats TK-73 and SM-3 made a failed attack against Anapa (Germans confirms that torpedoes found no target). However the German KTB reported that german MTBs were returning from (unsuccessful) mission and found the two MTBs moving away.
They've reported to have attempted chasing them but were strafed and forced to return. Soviets made no claim of clash against MTBs but talking with igor it's seems possible that soviet MTBs perceived the german motor torpedo boats fire as coastal MG fire and could have strafed back while retreating.
What you could adds about this event?
It's further interesting that the KTB reports how S-49 had the commander badly wounded (and another sailor more lightly) with widespread light damages on multiple MTBs.
It's known to you the identity of all the German MTBs and which ones  were (lightly) damaged?

#14 12.01.2014 16:03:08

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Hello,

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #781229
German themselves admit in KTB to have suffered 2 badly wounded and 7 light wounded. It's known to you identity of German MFPs involved? Especially the ones that took casualties.

There were 3 clashes during the night 4/5.12.43. German losses were in the 3rd clash.
Forces in the 3rd clash:
Soviet: riverine minesweepers RTSh-415 and RTSh-398 (ex-civil pinacces) with pontoon No.3 and landing boat DB-5 in tow, escort - PVO-21, -25, -28, -29, AKA-96.
German: F 342, 305, 578, 395, 401, 447

Losses:
Soviet: RTSh-398 with pontoon No.3 sunk, PVO-28 and RTSh-415 damaged
German: F342 damaged and broke the mission, 1 KIA, 8 WIA (one of them badly wounded). Among WIA was the detachment's commander.

1942 episode a bit later

#15 12.01.2014 19:19:24

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

At night 22/23.10.42 TKA-73 and SM-3 [non-serial MTB] made a raid against Dvuyakornaya bight (not Anapa, north of Iwan-Baba near Feodosia). No successes, German coastal batteries claimed 1 MTB sunk (untrue). During the attack Russian boats had divided and returned separately. Almost immediately after start of the return trip SM-3 was attacked by 4 German MTBs (S102, 49, 26, 28). After 45-minute fight (1 hour according to German report) Schnellboote turned back. Commander of S49 was badly wounded in the head, 1 man had a light wound, Schnellboote had some minor damages. SM-3 hadn't any damage or losses.

Отредактированно А. Кузнецов (12.01.2014 19:35:25)

#16 13.01.2014 13:56:32

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 349




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

I really thank you very much! You're ever so accurate, mixing the essential with the needed (sometimes it's hard to pick up the correct numbers and data from a long text, especially if wrote in russian).

May i ask you what's your section of naval warfare in which you specialize ? 
As i wrote i'm making an amateur work for a forum in my language: there is widespread interest for naval warfare in eastern front absolutely minimum knowledge about it.
(just extracts of extracts of old cold war western book that briefly talked about soviet navy in ww2).


If you don't mind, in the following weeks/months i would like to make some more questions especially reguarding naval clashesh and skirmish on which i found less details or contradictory elements.

I had made previously posted questions in Morozov Q&A topic, but there is already many people making questions there, and i don't want steal too much time and attentions (i could write there again, but maybe about more obscure events that needs multiple opinion)

#17 14.01.2014 20:11:32

ЗИС
Гость




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Андрей Ярославович есть такая информация:

самолеты ИЛ-2 вылет на задание 29.03.1943 г.
(пятерка Ил-2 47 шап ВМФ (МАГ НОР), ведущий - майор В.Х.Кунях, ведомые: ст. лейтенант А.В.Малышев (воздушный стрелок ст. краснофлотец Г.С.Мирошниченко), старшина П.Ф.Щербаченко (воздушный стрелок ст. сержант П.А.Скородумов), капитан И.Г.Коваленко, ст. лейтенант И.Н.Скорик должна была произвести бомбоштурмовой удар по плавсредствам и живой силе противника в портах Тамань и Гадючий Кут. Удар нанесен в порту Гадючий Кут.
С боевого задания вернулся только ведущий майор Кунях.
Четыре Ил-2 с задания не вернулись.
Источники информации:
1. Гиляревский В.П. Война: Морские летчики. О боевом пути 47-го штурмового авиаполка ВВС ВМФ. В 2-х томах. — 1992.

Данных о месте гибели звена нигде не нашел. Могу ошибаться, но на суше в местах гибели самолетов в Темрюкском районе везде стоят памятники. Насколько верно предположение, что 4 самолета лежат в Таманском заливе?
С уважением.

#18 14.01.2014 23:31:04

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

ЗИС написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #782120
Насколько верно предположение, что 4 самолета лежат в Таманском заливе?

Неизвестно, насколько верно это предположение. Ведь для нас самолеты просто пропали.
Я завтра в немецких документах посмотрю, что фашисты об этом пишут. Они-то должны были быть свидетелями.

#19 14.01.2014 23:33:09

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #781587
May i ask you what's your section of naval warfare in which you specialize ? 

Naval war during WW2 in East-European waters mainly.

#20 16.01.2014 00:42:35

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

При беглом просмотре 29.3.43, места падения флотских самолетов не обнаружились. В течение дня пропали 4 Ил-2 47 шап, 2 Ил-2 8 гшап + 1 Як-1 6 гиап при их сопровождении. У Гадючего Кута, по немецким данным, группа ША (вероятно, 8 гшап) атаковала неконтактные катера-тральщики без результата, те тоже никого не сбили. Немецкая ИА заявила сбитыми 4 Ил-2 в районе Чушки и вдоль побережья Азовского моря до Темрюка. По времени они 47-му шап не подходят. Возможно, они были из ВВС КА. Да и неизвестно, кого и сколько истребители сбили на самом деле.

#21 17.01.2014 15:37:23

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 349




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Hi again. There is an event that i think could be a bit important to be checked.
I've already wrote it here (last post http://tsushima.su/forums/viewtopic.php?id=1357&p=6   ) waiting for a reply from Morozov, but i remember you wrote an article about soviet ASW during the war.
Well... concering the loss of U-367 Morozov had removed it from the victories of L-21 because (igor told me) was found a communication of the submarine on day 15.3 that was already in Danzic Bay.

Well.. this group of polish divers actually inspected a submarine wreck classified by polish marittime authority in 2001, they dived in 2013 and took photos and videos and all seems to indicate that it was actually the U-367 and the location of the sinking should really match with the field of L-21
http://forum-nuras.com/printview.php?t= … 67fe2221a2
http://vimeo.com/78585591

An interesting element it's that according their inspection the wreck lie at shorter distance with T-5 then the distance between T-5 and T-3.

The diving was made in September 2013 so it's a very recent event.


What do you think about this event and these new elements?

#22 17.01.2014 20:27:43

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #783452
you wrote an article about soviet ASW during the war

Not about ASW but about the Axis submarine losses in the East-European water.

About U367. I read the Polish webpage in question. It is interesting. But I sceptical a bit about technical details for identification of U367. As far as I understood these details are proper for many other VIIC U-boats. And wreck in question is in too bad condition for more detailed identification.

More weighty argument is that no other lost U-boats can rest in that area. But that thesis should be proved. As far as I remember, some years ago I couldn't find any other candidate to that wreck but remained in some doubts.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #783452
An interesting element it's that according their inspection the wreck lie at shorter distance with T-5 then the distance between T-5 and T-3

The wreck is certainly close to the place of the barrage than one of the torpedo boats, but anyway in the some distance from the barrage. Of course, U367 could circulate some time after the explosion, but it is strange that the German observers posts said nothing about that event despite it was close to significant communications junction.

Other argument "contra" is the mysterious message signed by quasi-U3010 outside Danzig Bay. But it wasn't necessarily from U367.

In summary, I think the wreck in question very probably the U367 but it isn't fixed fact.

#23 18.01.2014 01:07:53

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 349




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

About wreck position i had read about uboat.net that even if seems to have a number mistakes or unclear things (especially reguarding allied boats), should have tracked back most of the U-boats lost in the different places (the known ones, of course).

http://uboat.net/maps/baltic_sea.htm
Apart U-367,  i've noticed only U-670 as sunk without a position disclosed (sunk on 20 August 1943, collision with ship Bolkoburg), but position it's given as well away from the peninsula of Hela.

Another detail i've got from some observation on Google earth it's that the wreck point even if it's  basically in front of the peninsula,  the peninsula itself make a smooth curve on north-west: if the submarine was following the route, it could have reported to be in "Danzic Bay" if it considered the passing of the extreme point of the peninsula.
If the submarine's commander used to consider the headland of the peninsula as point to evaluate the position as having reached the Bay, the reported position could make sense, considering himself already out in the bay.
Also submarine could have slowed its speed just because spotted mines. If i'm right the message seemed at first a report about mines, and not a call of immediate SOS.


It could help of course knowing the exact location of the wreck of the two torpedo boats according this modern polish evaluation.


EDIT: Morozov showed  the Ultra data about the issues of this events: http://www.tsushima.su/forums/viewtopic … 57&p=6
It's a pity that this mystery seems hard to be exposed (identity of sub, german messages, etc..)

Отредактированно lupodimare89 (18.01.2014 19:56:17)

#24 24.01.2014 15:45:25

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 349




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

Hello again!

I could have some events that are a bit lacking of clear data ^^

They're basically about soviet depth-charging operations: i've found a number of events in german sources that lists minor to moderate damages inflicted to Uboats (in Black Sea and especially on Baltic: Artic it's much more clear) without clear data about the identification of who caused such damage..

As i said almost all in Artic it's a bit clear, while there are "holes" for Baltic and something lacking still in Black Sea.


If you don't mind i could expose you a pair of the most obscure ones in Black Sea:


On 27 June 1942 there was what could be the ONLY direct damage with DC suffered by an italian midget submarine.
CB-4 reported in the morning that during the night attacked without hits "two destroyers" at 25 miles from Cape Kikeneiz. Then said to have been subjected to depth charges from 1 destroyer and 2 "patrol ships" with 58 charges reported and minor damages suffered.

Talking with Igor on axishistoryforum, has been found that target should have been the Tashkent leader destroyer: however no depth charging was made. Were also on sea minesweepers T-401 and T-407.  From the discussions, surfaced that POSSIBLY the submarine suffered light damages after close explosion by German aircrafts bombings (that were attacking the destroyer, and bombs could have been fall close enaugh).

However i've found more recently that on town.ural.ru has been wrote this:

    27 июня 1942 года субмарина безуспешно атаковала лидер «Ташкент», последний надводный корабль сумевший прорвать блокаду Севастополя, на борту которого было 2 100 раненных и часть панорамы Ф.Рубо «Оборона Севастополя 1854 - 1855 г.г.».


There are some other sources that could mention a depth charging attack made by Tashkent (or some other ship, maybe the minesweepers) during the night of 26/27 or early morning of 27 ?

It could be of high interest (especially on italian forum) due the fact that Tashkent was italian-built ...
Also could have been the only depth charge attack made by a soviet destroyer-size ship with some results.

#25 24.01.2014 21:01:04

А. Кузнецов
Участник форума
Сообщений: 2083




Re: Вопросы Кузнецову А.Я.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #787015
There are some other sources that could mention a depth charging attack made by Tashkent (or some other ship, maybe the minesweepers) during the night of 26/27 or early morning of 27 ?

Just check it and couldn't find any fitting attack. But I not saw the very Tashkent's documents.

Страниц: 1 2 3 … 17


Board footer