Страниц: 1 … 52 53 54 55 56 … 118

#1326 27.06.2013 16:07:16

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Так ее обнаружение как-бы закрыло все тайны и догадки. Лодка обнаружена в пределах финского минного заграждения примерно там, где смотритель маяка Меркет днем 3 января 1940 г. визуально наблюдал лодку, а затем и взрыв на минном поле.
Разрушения характерны для подрыва на мине с последующей детонацией торпед в носовой части. Из-за этого носовая часть до дульного среза 100-мм орудия фактически отсутствует, точнее, превратилась в огромное поле обломков. Из восьми торпед в носовой части остался лишь хвост одной торпеды. Затем при сильном ударе оставшейся части корпуса о грунт  он переломился по переборке между 4 и 5-м отсеками. О силе удара говорит и то, что от корпуса при этом отваливались отдельные листы прочного корпуса.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1327 27.06.2013 16:15:00

Портартурец
Гость




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

А нет ли схемы расположения на дне останков С-2, если можно... ?

#1328 27.06.2013 18:19:49

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Есть вот такая сонограмма

http://i46.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0627/8b/36823586c145f6448083fb4ef076cc8b.jpeghttp://i48.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0627/96/31edfd3342cbd8cb30aa41983cd57596.jpeg


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1329 27.06.2013 18:27:44

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Thank you much for your info!

Yes, sadly i can use only that KTB that's avaible on english online...

Igor helps me lots but some things remain a bit unclear.

A pair of question about italian CB in Black Sea (that's much interest for them on italian forum).

19 June 1942
CB-2 and CB-3 that were severaly damaged by bomb splinters in Yalta.
Both moved on Costanza for full repairs.
(it' was an important loss because happened during the Sevastopol operations, after this there were only 3 CB operative until the end of the evacuation).

It's known exactly which group/ kind of aircrafts was responsable for this damage?


27 June 1942
CB-4 reported some light damage after depth charging in morning of 27 after attack on Soviet destroyer.
Location was south of Cape Sarich / 25 miles south of Cape Kikeneiz.
Torpedo attack against 2 DDs,  counter-attack was reported by 1 DD + 2 guardboats.

Igor said that depth charges heard were probably explosion of German air attack vs ships..
If the damage was caused by friendly fire German attack, who made it? He-111, Ju-88  etc...

About Italian CBs vs Sevastopol evacuation there were some other reports of depth charges attacks, but without damage reported on CB.
It's however interesting that Igor confirmed me that CB-3 really attacked cruiser Molotov on 12/13 June
Even if failure (with cruiser that did not noticed attack), it's an interesting addition to the description of the events.

#1330 27.06.2013 21:14:04

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711378
19 June 1942

I can't find in German docs the exact time of bombing. Do you know it?

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711378
If the damage was caused by friendly fire German attack, who made it? He-111, Ju-88  etc...

I haven't Luftwaffe docs.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711378
About Italian CBs vs Sevastopol evacuation there were some other reports of depth charges attacks, but without damage reported on CB.

The soviet submariners often thought that they were attacked too, but usually the facts of ASW-attacks didn't confirmed by axis forces.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1331 28.06.2013 03:54:30

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Sadly i found nothing of the air attack, only in that english-translated pages of the war diaries.
There it doesn't give hour or details of the attack.
The report that's wrote there is for day 19 June, so i SUPPOSE the attack could have been done during the night between 18 and 19 June.
The short description say just "by bombs splinters in Yalta".



I've at least one Italian book that deals shortly on CBs in Black Sea and reports (author Giorgerini) only "other occasions" of Soviet (aerial) raids on harbor with not-deadly damages that were repaired, but it doesn't add data or hour or details.
I think i should have another italian book that mentioned "a pair" of CBs (i think these two) damaged in air raid (again, i think this event), but without much other details.

However after talking with other italian users it's came out that even if war diaries after the 8 September were partially or entirely destroyed, the previous ones should have been saved in Rome, but to watch and read them it needs long time of official requests (and money).

I know for sure that exist an '50s years book focused only on Ladoga and Black Sea operations, i could try to find it this summer.


However i've found an interesting italian-wrote article about the CB operations after the 8 September 1943  (from Page 26)
http://www.marina.difesa.it/documentazi … aliani.pdf
Apart the mysterious event reguarding CB-1 on 15 September 1943 (the article seems very wrongly, it's claim a "submarine" or "freighter" sunk while CB-1 received damage, nothing close the supposed claim of attack against an "Infiltration craft": honestly, if there wasn't some claim of Soviet attacks that night, it seems to me just a self-detonation of torpedo and then a faked-incident with a supposed attack on enemy).
It however gives interesting data:
1) Despite Romanian claims, all CB remained under Italian control and the change of flag was mainly done by Italians and Romanians to prevent the German capture of the boats and the boats were kept in operation by Italians.
2) German Navy requested the Italian Social Republic (the Mussolini's northern government) to sent other 6 CB units, and the article say it's possible that one additional CB submarine could have be sent because Romanian said that 2 units were operative, while according the data of the text only one submarine (CB-3 and/or CB-6) could sail
3) The large soviet air attack on 20 August 1944 damaged two CBs, there was a killed too. (it's not said who were the submarines damaged)
4) CB-3 attempted attacks on soviet forces on 24 August and 25 August out of Costanza. Then CB-3 was self-sunk by crew 2 miles from coast and crew reached swimming the coast itself. Among notes has been wrote that maybe it was CB-6 that attempted these attacks and then was self-sunk.

#1332 28.06.2013 09:18:34

Портартурец
Гость




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Большое спасибо за ответ и сонограммы!
Правда по повреждениям вопрос не исчерпался, налицо два взрыва - в носовой части и в районе дизельного отсека, при ударе о грунт еще ни одна ПЛ пополам не ломалась, да еще так, чтобы две части корпуса оказались в 10 метрах друг от друга, а вот от взрыва - совсем другое дело. Где-то я читал что глубина на месте гибели С-2 очень мала - всего 23 метра...

#1333 28.06.2013 11:57:13

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711549
The report that's wrote there is for day 19 June, so i SUPPOSE the attack could have been done during the night between 18 and 19 June.
The short description say just "by bombs splinters in Yalta".

In the German docs the time of the attack was not given too, but in KTB Seekom Krim said that took place four air raid during the day, in KTB ASH the time of report of the damages of two CDs was given as 13.00 June 19th.
In the soviet dos I found the following data:
the 1st air raid took place at 14.45 and were made by 6 Pe-2 (40th BAP), which dropped 36 FAB-100 from 2000 m  heigh and saw two hits in the "anchor point of cutters' forces". I think that the very attack was succesful.
the 2nd air raid by 4 DB-3 (5th GMTAP) took place durind the evening. They dropped 2 FAB-250, 20 FAB-100 and about a hundred small splinter bombs from 3000 m.
the 3rd raid of 4 Pe-2 (the same crews, which bombed on 14.45) took place on 19.18. The planes dropped 32 FAB-100.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711549
However i've found an interesting italian-wrote article about the CB operations after the 8 September 1943  (from Page 26)
http://www.marina.difesa.it/documentazi … aliani.pdf

I saw nothing like this in the German docs.

Портартурец написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711585
Правда по повреждениям вопрос не исчерпался, налицо два взрыва - в носовой части и в районе дизельного отсека, при ударе о грунт еще ни одна ПЛ пополам не ломалась, да еще так, чтобы две части корпуса оказались в 10 метрах друг от друга, а вот от взрыва - совсем другое дело.

Вы вправе делать любые самостоятельные выводы, но хотел бы заметить две вещи.
Во-первых, я никогда не слышал об одновременном подрыве ПЛ на двух минах. Совершенно очевидно, что после взрыва с разрушением носовой части или после взрыва с отделением кормы ПЛ была обречена на гибель и второй раз подрваться уже не могла.
Во-вторых, съемки района разлома корпуса по переборке 4 и 5-го отсеков не показывают следов взрыва. Четкий словно скальпелем разрез поперек корпуса с абсолютно ровными краями.
http://i47.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0628/1c/dfbf31b2937568e0e5bc5d1a0bbba31c.jpeg

Портартурец написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711585
Где-то я читал что глубина на месте гибели С-2 очень мала - всего 23 метра...

Да, около 25 метров.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1334 28.06.2013 15:16:15

Портартурец
Гость




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Botik Petra Velikogo написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #711617
съемки района разлома корпуса по переборке 4 и 5-го отсеков не показывают следов взрыва. Четкий словно скальпелем разрез поперек корпуса с абсолютно ровными краями.

Прошу прощения, про этот факт не знал, вопросов больше нет.

#1335 08.07.2013 12:28:48

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Hello again! and thank you for your reply. I've searched more about the ultimate fate of the CB and i've found a good article of 1995 that despite the date has more correct data about the operations of the CB in Black Sea.
http://www.pietrocristini.com/storia-militare.htm
You've to scroll at number "75" to find "I CB nel Mar Nero"

Basically it's the only italian article to say things partially true:
that CB-5 was sunk by motor torpedo boat D-3
that CB-3 sinking S-32 and CB-2 sinking ShCh-213 are mythes.
It speaks correctly of sinking of ShCh-214 but doesn't relate it to the MAS action (as happened)
correctly reports that CB-4 didn't sunk ShCh-207, but sunk ShCh-203

But it's curious that say that "soviet sources" said that the S-32 was torpedoed by CB-2, but it say that's not clear if CB-2 was sailing the night of the sinking.


Then it confirms that Romania wanted get the CBs submarines in 1944, but the actual passage could have not be done and submarines remained "frozen" and still kept by italian crew of the RSI because italians kept delaying the passage and wanted themselves to use the boats.

Again it adds interesting data about the loss of the "fifth" CB, mentioning that it could have been the more probably the CB-3, self sunk by the Italian RSI commander Gabriele Battistini that was later awarded. It's also confirm that CB-3 was the only one operative, and CB-2 could have been partially cannibalized to make use of CB-3.

No details if the CB-3 was self-destroyed on sea after attempted attacks (as mentioned by the other article) or if it was in harbour.

There is no mention if one or some of the CBs was damaged by the last soviet air raid on Costance (when were hit 3 german uboats).

#1336 08.07.2013 12:47:04

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

I add another thing:
In that site at number "19" there is a page of the italian MAS in Black Sea
More mistakes, but it gives the exact hour of the italian MAS attacks against cruiser Molotov:
It's say at:
H.0120 of day 3 August: Mas-528 start attack move.
H.0127 of day 3 August: reports that 2 torpedoes hits the target. That's seen "sinking".
H.0138 of day 3 August: Mas-528 launch her depth charges claiming damage on the leader destroyer that is reported chasing the Mas.

I hopes it can help to make a clear valuation if the Mas was responsable or not for the damage on Molotov.



The article mention the author J.Meister claim that the soviets admitted that Kharkov too was damaged.
(if i understood well, Meister wasn't an exactly correct author).

Article adds that Mas-573 launched a torpedo without effect before the attack. of Mas-578

The articles ends with an interesting confirmation on damage on Mas-578: it's say
"Una volta in porto, verranno rilevati dei danni ad alcune paretie e i mozzi delle eliche, dopo essere stati smontati in cantiere a Gurzuf, risulteranno praticamente fusi".
Basically, it's seems these are small splinters hits (and/or light machine guns hits) and over-heating damages on propellers.

#1337 09.07.2013 12:06:43

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #714700
I've searched more about the ultimate fate of the CB and i've found a good article of 1995 that despite the date has more correct data about the operations of the CB in Black Sea.

I know this author, he is good Rohewr's friend. I have some doubts that he used German documents, which contain quite a lot info about CBs, include their conditions in 1944. This is not my subject, but I remember some curious places in different KTBs.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #714707
More mistakes, but it gives the exact hour of the italian MAS attacks against cruiser Molotov:

What kind of time mark was used by Italians on that time? German, local or Italian? Isee they used probably the local time.
And I did't see in the article the exact time of firing.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #714707
H.0120 of day 3 August: Mas-528 start attack move.

MAS-568?
As I understand not only MAS-568 fired their torpedoes, but MAS-573 too. When she did so?
Could you translate a short piece of KTB of MAS-568 from the article?

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #714707
Article adds that Mas-573 launched a torpedo without effect before the attack

By KTB ASM MAS-573 scored a hit, MAS-568 - two hits.
By KTB Seekom Krim - two hits from MAS-573.
Both commanders reported, that they attacked a cruiser with three tubes (Krasnij Krim).


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1338 09.07.2013 20:02:04

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Sorry ! Damn.. MAS-568 of course.
Ok, so, here it's the full text translated from the box  of MAS-568 action.

2 august 1942
h. 18.00  German convoy leave Fedosya and Ivan Baba to Mariupol
h. 19.00 From Fedosya leave the IV-MAS Flottilla, MAS-573 (Castagnacci), MAS-568 (Legnani), MAS-569 (Ferrari), to the assigned positions for the protection of the convoy.
h. 19.30 It's known that MAS-573 for issues at one engine is stopped 10 miles from coast (Gulf of Fedosya) and there it remains waiting
h. 21.00 MAS-568 reaches its point of waiting at 30 miles East of Fedosya, it starts hydrophonic listening. MAS-569 keeps on until the point at 10 miles further east.
h. 23.15 An almost full moon brights almost all the the horizoon to east

3 august 1942
h. 00.25 MAS-568 receive the message from Station R.T. from Fedosya, about the communication of MAS-573. "Enemy units are bombing the coast".
h. 00.30 message is decodified and its given to MAS-569, then - (sailing) at maximum speed compatibile with sea's conditions (force 3 from North-West) to intercept the the 
             enemy formation along the route of return.
h. 01.05 MAS-568 is framed by the enemy big guns and machine guns and move to the bow where the fire is origined without seeing the ships because its into the shadow zone. Moving at the maximum speed and widening on the left manage to defilade of enemy formation's bow  reaching the shadow zone  than the moonlight
h. 01.20 From the shadow zone, MAS-568 proceed to maximum speed for the attack manouvre and, reached 800 metres, launches torpedoes (two) against the cruiser that,
              sighting it, approaches to the left to offer only the stern and the maximum volume of fire.
h. 01.27 The torpedoes hits the target that's engulfed by a cloud of flames and smoke and it's glimpsed as sinking.
h. 01.38 The destroyer chase the MAS-568 that as defense launch 10 depht charges with the fuze marked to zero that are likely to damage the bow of the destroyer,
              making it stops the chasing. Keeps on strafing from escort fire.
h. 01.40 MAS-568 disengages and sail to return at maximum speed.
h. 04.30 MAS-568 reaches Yalta.

Additionals data:
The document make clears that only MAS-573 and MAS-568 were involved in the action.
In text is said that MAS-573 launched 1 torpedo first, but without effect.

It's interesting that this official record say that cruiser was "glimpsed" as sinking (not confirmed)
and the damage on destroyer with depth charges is said to be "likely", while the text then quote Meister as source for a "Soviet confirmation that Kharkov too was damaged"
(sadly i've not that Meister book, "The Soviet Navy" Volume 1 , year 1971)

Additional data is the further mention to light damages on MAS-568:
1) Fuses parts of engines (probably due overuse)
2) Small damages on hulls (probably due splinters/light fire. But it's unclear if caused by ships or aircrafts).
Alberto Rosselli on RegiaMarina http://www.regiamarina.net/detail_text. … &lid=2
Speak of "soviet fighters attracted by the battle". But the whole article of Rosselli seems filled with mistakes and a bit of propaganda (i've talked about this with other italians).
3) MAS-573 attempted to launch the second torpedo but it didn't came out properly. " e lanciò contro l’unità maggiore un solo siluro perché l’altro era partito erroneamente quando il Mas non era sull’angolo di mira giusto."


Another additional thing.
Legnani, before his death, give an interview and said these things:
1)They could not see the Kharkov and Molotov, and noticed only their gunfire until they managed to move in a different position to see them.
2) It's seems possible that the light damage was caused at the time by the gunfire of the soviet ships: these are the exact words of the Legnani that in an interview said that he was actually lightly wounded.
"Fummo sommersi da proiettili che scoppiettavano intorno a noi come nocciole e fui colpito da una scheggia alla guancia sinistra, della quale m’ accorsi soltanto quando uscimmo da quell’inferno."
"We were "swamped" by shells that exploded all around us as hazelnuts and i was hit a splinter at the left cheek, i've noticed it only when we came out from that hell".
Then it's adds that according him the Soviets believed to have mortally hit the MAS just a moment he started the attack manouvre.

Then there is another very interesting and a bit weird thing. He say this:
"Continuai a manovrare ed a fuggire e mi trovai ‘spiattellando’ sotto la prora del Karkov, che sparava ‘lungo’ con tutte le armi sopra le nostre teste. Eravamo a meno di 200 metri dalla sua prora, nell’angolo morto dei suoi tiri. L’ultima virata, a 50 nodi di velocità, ci consentì di scaricare di poppa le ultime armi a nostra disposizione: 10 BTG (bombe torpedine a getto), calibrate  a spoletta zero, a scoppio  quasi immediato e veramente con gran pericolo per il nostro stesso scafo. Due di questi ordigni colpirono il Karkov tranciandogli di netto la prora sino alla paratia di collisione, la cui tenuta li salvò da un rapido affondamento"
Basically from this interview, it seems that Legnani was just "under" the Kharkov (that fired over the MAS) and the depth charges attack "cut cleanly the bow"

Then again he say
"I cacciatorpediniere di scorta raccolsero i naufraghi del Molotov e presero a rimorchio il Karkov per la poppa. Gli aerei della Ricognizione Marittima sovietica c’inseguirono e ci mitragliarono durante  tutto il nostro rientro. Ma i loro colpi finirono tutti a 30 metri di poppa, ingannati, dall’alto, dalla  scia vistosa e  fosforescente lasciata dal nostro Mas."

Here it's say that the supposed "soviet fighters chasing the MAS" didn't hit the MAS-568, so the slight damage reported was almost surely caused by Molotov and/or Kharkov.
But also it say that while the Molotov "sunk" (not seen) the Kharkov was "towed".

It's POSSIBLE that actually the MAS-568 missed the first target (belived that it was a "cruiser", but could have been something else) and then launched the depth charges in front of the same Molotov believing it was the Kharkov?? The description of the damage (bow cut) and the towing, seems to coincide.
Legnani could have mixed the two ships due the confusion of the battle.

PS
All descriptions of the events doesn't mention German Air attacks, before, during or after the Italian MAS.


Legnani interview
http://www.marenostrumrapallo.it/index. … io-legnani

An italian map of the action:
http://www.marenostrumrapallo.it/images … arie/8.jpg

#1339 09.07.2013 21:45:27

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Another important addition.
It has just been emailed me this:
" riguardo al Molotov, è uscito tempo fa un articolo sulla Rivista Marittima
(E. Cernuschi, "Questione di metodo", n. 3, 2011), sollecitato dalle
polemiche sorte proprio a causa di alcune affermazioni apparse in rete, che
confrontava le varie fonti (tedesche incluse), evidenziando come l'attacco
tedesco sia avvenuto con circa 11 ore di differenza da quello italiano.
Ti ringrazio per l'interessamento per la mia richiesta, attendo quindi tue
notizie!  "

Basically it has been said me that in an article of a navy's stuff, this author (Cernuschi) said that according the German sources the air attack of He-111 was 11 hours of difference (don't know if after or later) then the Italian attack.
And this article has probably generated after commentary online on forum axisforum. (by igor, some time ago, replying at another italian user).

I've not managed to find this magazine's article, yet.

#1340 09.07.2013 23:34:37

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Very interesting. I examinated this ocassion and have some things about:
1. Probably the Soviet and the Italian sides both used the local time - the common thime of the engagement matched. Molotov got a hit at 01.26 what matched with the Italian observation.
2. Molotov didn't shelled the shore at all. At 00.53 she located a MAS for the first time and tried to evade her. At 01.05 Molotov opened fire agains a MAS, which plased at 20 degree a the the port side. Later Molotov shelled some more cutters (MAS-568 and MAS-573), but every time she located them on her port side. I haven't the soviet plan of the battle, but at 01.12 the operation was broken and soviet ships laid on the course 180 degree, despite the Italian plan. As I understand, no Italian cutters could cut Molotov's cours and attack her from the starboard. At 01.19 and 01.25 the cruiser twice defended against torpedo-bombers from starboard. In the second attack she got a hit from that said. So, from that point of view this was succes of the planes. Molotov saw a MAS for the last time at 02.30.
3. I didn't faind in the German sea documents any mentions about succesfull torpedo-bombers attack on that night, but in Molotov's documents the cruiser beat off seven air attacks.
So, I can't determinate the author of the succes.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1341 10.07.2013 01:32:08

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Ok, i deleted my first reply quickly because i read too much quickly your own and i've not noticed a pair of things.

"  At 00.53 she located a MAS for the first time and tried to evade her.   "
This could be one of the other two MAS.

"At 01.05 Molotov opened fire agains a MAS, which plased at 20 degree a the the port side. "

This is very much interesting, because means that probably it was the Molotov to be responsable for the slight damages on the MAS and the light wound on commander Legnani.Also it confirm the first step of the engagement of the MAS

"Later Molotov shelled some more cutters (MAS-568 and MAS-573), but every time she located them on her port side. "
Also this could match, because Legnani said that the ship "stopped firing" against him, Legnani maybe was thinking that Molotov believed to have sunk him, but it seems that being probably closer to the dark side, Molotov could not see it clearly again

" I haven't the soviet plan of the battle, but at 01.12 the operation was broken and soviet ships laid on the course 180 degree, despite the Italian plan. As I understand, no Italian cutters could cut Molotov's cours and attack her from the starboard. "
Well.. but it's said that in more points the MAS sailed at maximum speed, even if it's not given other data as the distance or degrees, the MAS reported to be on the darker side of the sea. Um... this is a bit unclear.


"  At 01.19 and 01.25 the cruiser twice defended against torpedo-bombers from starboard. In the second attack she got a hit from that said. So, from that point of view this was succes of the planes. Molotov saw a MAS for the last time at 02.30.   "

Ok, now this is a matter a bit complicated. According Legnani he should have been into a non-visible position by Molotov and claimed the hit almost exactly at the same minute reported by the Molotov. And at that time there is no mention about allied German bombers on air, neither about plans to operate together German aircrafts...
It's possible that the Molotov had a number of false-sightings?

And what about Kharkov during this night? Kharkov sighted and/or attacked the MAS as it has been reported by Legnani?

Finally, it remains the question mark about the supposed soviet aircrafts that fired against the retreating MAS.

#1342 10.07.2013 02:27:26

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

One last thing.
And this is important.

It has just be emailed me the pdf file of this article. And it's a very "bad" one. The one that wrote this article made a very harsh criticism to the use of internet about searching on naval warfare and history and the mistakes made on it. I'm sorry to say but it's directly point the finger on old posts on the site warsailors.com
I don't know/remember who made the comments, maybe igor?
However... basically it's say that the version of german air attack is false because it's a "report from an old british site that messed up 2 attacks" the MAS attacks on the night, and the Germain air attacks the day only after in morning and midday. German themselves claimed the sinking of a cruiser the day after.


I... don't know what to say more, apart that this article is not nice, and seems to attack directly the whole internet community that seems to "put in doubt" the honour etc..
pretty much nationalistic..

#1343 10.07.2013 03:01:51

Serg
Старшiй лейтенантъ
st-let
Сообщений: 2632




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Thanks for great info!
All Soviet sources which i read says that it was german aircraft. According to Bagnasco ('M.A.S' p356-357) Nella notte tra il 2 e il 3 agosto 1942 al comando del sottotenente di vascello Legnani, attaccò una formazione navale sovietica composta da un incrociatore e da un cacciatorpediniere che avevano bombardato la base di Iwan Baba  nel golfo di Feodosia. Il MAS 568 lanciò due siluri contro l'unità maggiore Delle due armi, lanciate a breve distanza sotto l'intenso fuoco delle unità avversarie, probabilmente una sola colpì l'incrociatore Molotov (10 380 t) asportandogli l'estrema poppa con eliche e timone. L'unità sovietica, nonostante i gravi danni subiti, poté essere rimorchiata in porto, ma rientrò in servizio solo dopo due anni di lavori.
It seems that contradiction resolved, Molotov was hit by one of Italian MTB's (in absence of confirmation by german side).

#1344 10.07.2013 21:03:22

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715359
It's possible that the Molotov had a number of false-sightings?

I don't think so - see the doc below.

I think we need the original combat reports of MAS commanders. Without this we can't answer on some vital questions, for example: Did MAS crew saw any German aircrafts above battlefield during the action? On what position against the cruiser was MAS-568 and MAS-573 when they did their "succes" salvoes? How many seconds passed between torpedo firing and torpedo hits? and e.t.c.
Could we state, that no German planes took part in action only based on some journal articles? I think, no. For example, I'm very good know the data difference between the German articles and books and German KTBs.

Here is the extract from Molotov war diary.

http://i48.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0710/b6/fda98ccdd159b9266d4cc3b976fc48b6.jpeghttp://i46.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0710/c7/b61c7c5b4f511dc00eda5fdd1e468dc7.jpeghttp://i46.fastpic.ru/thumb/2013/0710/4c/2c49909b1c96caeb7c0691c4fdf20e4c.jpeg

I wounder to see the same Italian document.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715359
And what about Kharkov during this night? Kharkov sighted and/or attacked the MAS as it has been reported by Legnani?

Kharkov was in close defence order of Molotov. She fired 59 shell against shore between 00.59 and 01.04 and from 01.07 shifted her fire agaist cutters. She got the order to lay on course 180 degree from 01.12 and from 01.14 got an order to raise her speed to 28 kn. At 01.24 she warned the cruiser about air attack. At 01.28 (after the hit) Kharkov got the order to guard the damaged ship. At 01.53 Kharkov got the order to began towing the cruiser, which couldn't manage her direction of movement by the engins and e.t.c.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715359
Finally, it remains the question mark about the supposed soviet aircrafts that fired against the retreating MAS.

Likewise no confirmaton about this in the soviet docs. Some planes bombed that night Ivan-Baba and Feodosia, but they didn't see any cutters on sea and haven't any attack on them. The soviet fighters from Caucasus base took off to made CAP above Molotov only at 04.53 and didn't see any cutters too.

Serg написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715365
Nella notte tra il 2 e il 3 agosto 1942 al comando del sottotenente di vascello Legnani, attaccò una formazione navale sovietica composta da un incrociatore e da un cacciatorpediniere che avevano bombardato la base di Iwan Baba  nel golfo di Feodosia. Il MAS 568 lanciò due siluri contro l'unità maggiore Delle due armi, lanciate a breve distanza sotto l'intenso fuoco delle unità avversarie, probabilmente una sola colpì l'incrociatore Molotov (10 380 t) asportandogli l'estrema poppa con eliche e timone. L'unità sovietica, nonostante i gravi danni subiti, poté essere rimorchiata in porto, ma rientrò in servizio solo dopo due anni di lavori.

Уважаемый Serg, правилами форума рабочим установлен русский литературный язык. По необходимости в интересах установления истины приходится иногда прибегать к утвердившемуся в качестве языка международного общения английскому. Я лично не понимаю по итальянски и не вижу ни возможности, ни необходимости использовать его в моей персональной ветке.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1345 10.07.2013 23:10:45

lupodimare89
Участник форума
Сообщений: 352




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

I know, sadly i've already talked with other interested italians online, in the forum of submarines i'm part of...
To have more clear descriptions of what happened in all the engagements that involved italian units in Black Sea and Ladoga
The problem it's that the documents are not of public domain, it's possible to consult them but this require:
1) Long and complex bureaucratic requirements
2) give valid reasons why you request to see them  (and being an amatour interest in Navy and ships doesn't count much)
3) it has been implied to me that's better having a wallet with money (expecially to not wait months and months).

Honestly it seems that all the italian literature that have (short) chapters about the naval operations on eastern front, just reported extracts provided by the same Navy and repeated in the years.

I have a relative (far relative) that's into the Navy and he knows about my interest in Navy, he should work in Rome now and i COULD ask him about this, but should attempt to contact our common relatives before.

" Likewise no confirmaton about this in the soviet docs. Some planes bombed that night Ivan-Baba and Feodosia, but they didn't see any cutters on sea and haven't any attack on them. The soviet fighters from Caucasus base took off to made CAP above Molotov only at 04.53 and didn't see any cutters too. "

This could increase the possibility of presence of German aircrafts actually.
All the reports, etc.. speak clearly of presence of aircrafts making an attack.
It could have happened expecially if the MAS/aircrafts attack was not coordinated, and this COULD explain why MAS didn't reported of German attacks (while it speak about "escort fighters" in some point) and if i'm right the two soviet ships had no aircraft escort.

#1346 10.07.2013 23:22:09

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

I understan your reasons and I can wait patiently. The acsess to archives in Russia is very bureaucratic  too, but as you can see I solved some that problems :)

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715587
This could increase the possibility of presence of German aircrafts actually.

I think so. The German aircrafts attacked Italian cutters at least one time (June 3rd, 1942, MAS with Gen Manstain), so, I think they could repeated this twice.

lupodimare89 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715587
if i'm right the two soviet ships had no aircraft escort.

There were no escorts before 05.00.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

#1347 12.07.2013 10:18:50

maslopoop
Капитанъ I ранга
k1r
Откуда: Россия, Калининград
подводная лодка Щ-407
Сообщений: 3996




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Мирослав Эдуардович! На ветке про Щ-216 у Вас прошли атаки "щуки" 10, 16 и 17 февраля.. а про 16 число нельзя подробности? Заранее спасибо, с уважением..


Я из того поколения, когда подарок не надо было упаковывать в красивый пакет, так как сам красивый пакет был нехилым подарком

#1348 12.07.2013 14:31:17

pavel123
Мичманъ
michman
Сообщений: 446




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Мирослав Эдуардович!
Подскажите, пожалуйста - одерживали ли победы наши подводники торпедами 53-27 и 45-36?


Не так страшен танк,как его не обученный экипаж...

#1349 12.07.2013 14:56:40

han-solo
Гость




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

Мирослав Эдуардович!Возник вопрос по Чёрному морю:
  После потопления немецкой авиацией лидера и двух эсминцев крупные корабли в боевых действиях не участвовали.Был ли на это приказ "сверху" или решение командующего флотом?Или всё дело в техническом состоянии кораблей и банальной нехватке эсминцев?А то версий и кривотолков более чем нужно.

maslopoop написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715986
а про 16 число нельзя подробности? Заранее спасибо, с уважением..

Присоединяюсь.

Отредактированно han-solo (12.07.2013 14:57:42)

#1350 12.07.2013 19:18:59

Botik Petra Velikogo
Адмиралъ
admiral
anna3 stas3b
Сообщений: 10313




Re: Вопросы Морозову М.Э.

1

maslopoop написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #715986
а про 16 число нельзя подробности? Заранее спасибо, с уважением..

Честно накопанные данные растекаются по интернету и становятся достоянием людей ни разу не бывших в архивах.
Давайте, Вы напишите свои вопросы мне в личку.


pavel123 написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #716040
Подскажите, пожалуйста - одерживали ли победы наши подводники торпедами 53-27 и 45-36?

Конечно, ведь одерживал же победы "Лембит" и "агешки".

han-solo написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #716045
Был ли на это приказ "сверху" или решение командующего флотом?Или всё дело в техническом состоянии кораблей и банальной нехватке эсминцев?А то версий и кривотолков более чем нужно.

Эти документы были уже миллион лет назад введены в научный оборот. В частности:

ДИРЕКТИВА СТАВКИ ВГК № 220074 НАРОДНОМУ КОМИССАРУ
ВОЕННО-МОРСКОГО ФЛОТА, КОМАНДУЮЩЕМУ ЧЕРНОМОРСКИМ
ФЛОТОМ О ЗАДАЧАХ ФЛОТА НА 1944 ГОД
Копии:   командующим войсками 3-го и 4-го Украинских фронтов и Отдельной   Приморской армией, представителю Ставки^
11 апреля 1944 г. 02 ч 15 мин
Ставка Верховного Главнокомандования Черноморскому флоту на 1944 г. ставит задачи:
1.  Систематически нарушать коммуникации противника в Черном море, а в ближайший период нарушение коммуникации с Крымом считать главной задачей. Для действия на коммуникациях использовать подводные лодки, бомбардировочную и минно-торпедную авиацию, а на ближних коммуникациях — бомбардировочно-штурмовую авиацию и торпедные катера.
2.  Быть готовым к высадке в тыл противника тактических десантов силой батальон-стрелковый полк.
3.  Охранять побережье и приморские фланги армий, содействовать фланговым частям армий при их продвижении огнем береговой и корабельной артиллерии мелких кораблей.
4.  Повседневно расширять и закреплять операционную зону флота в Черном море путем уничтожения минных полей, открытия и поддержания своих фарватеров и маневренных районов безопасными от мин.
5.  Обеспечивать свои коммуникации от воздействия противника, в частности, организовав надежную противолодочную оборону.
6.  Путем систематического траления в первую очередь создать возможность плавания по фарватерам с дальнейшим переходом к сплошному тралению загражденных минами районов.
7.  Крупные надводные корабли тщательно готовить к морским операциям, которые будут при изменении обстановки указаны Ставкой.
8.  Быть готовым к перебазированию флота в Севастополь и к организации обороны Крыма.
9.  Быть готовым к формированию и перебазированию Дунайской военной флотилии.
Ставка Верховного Главнокомандования
И. СТАЛИН А. АНТОНОВ
ЦАМО. Ф. 148а. Оп. 3763. Д. 165. Л. 16, 17. Подлинник.


"Вранье и ложь в пропаганде, агитации и печати дискредитируют партийно-политическую работу, флотскую печать и наносят исключительный вред делу большевистского воспитания масс".

Из директивы заместителя Наркома ВМФ СССР и Начальника Главного политического управления ВМФ армейского комиссара 2 ранга И.В. Рогова.

Страниц: 1 … 52 53 54 55 56 … 118


Board footer