Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150299
Если в результате поломки в машине "Наварин" вбок потянет - не удержит ведь катер его.

Непонятно получается. С одной стороны, ЭБР - неповоротливая громада, даже подруливать которую катер не сможет.
А с другой, он совершенно лишен инерции и сразу после поломки машины мгновенно рванет в сторону так, что никто и моргнуть не успеет.

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150476
Занялись дифферентовкой уже в Порт-Саиде, а можно было начать и раньше.

А что, сутки, потерянные на дифферентовку в Суде как-то короче суток в Порт-Саиде? В чём экономия времени будет?

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150482
С одной стороны, ЭБР - неповоротливая громада, даже подруливать которую катер не сможет.
А с другой, он совершенно лишен инерции и сразу после поломки машины мгновенно рванет в сторону

Даже при "немгновенном повороте" радости мало. Или, скажем, не ЭБР "рванёт" в сторону, а берег "рванёт" к нему, то есть впереди - изгиб канала, а катер не может "ввести" ЭБР в поворот. Так чем-то лучше?

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
у оппонента речь о реальном практическом опыте.

Который далековат от реалий 1904 года, о чём я и говорю.

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
Выгрузка части снарядов - это мероприятие, следующее ПОСЛЕ выполнения мероприятий, предлагаемых коллегами выше.

То есть, вместо "непогрузки" части боезапаса на Балтике, нужно снимать его в пути??? Но ведь на это опять же нужно время, которое удлиняет поход, делая его отстающим от "небогатовских" темпов!

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
шкипер буксира знает и ждет этот поворот. И тем, что он уже сотни, если не тысячи кораблей разного тоннаже проводил через этот поворот.

... имея под ногами мощный буксир, а не "портовый катер"!

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
В том, что дифферентовку можно проводить на пути из Суды к Порт-Саиду.

А что, можно точно измерять осадку на ходу, корректируя её??? И перегрузка боезапаса на качке?

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
Наглядность примера в том, что проходил одновременно ЦЕЛЫЙ ЗНАЧИТЕЛЬНЫЙ ПО ЧИСЛЕННОСТИ ОТРЯД достаточно крупных кораблей. И организовать это несколько сложнее, чем прохождение четырех больших броненосцев.

Мне почему-то думается, что раздобывание семи буксирных пароходов несколько сложнее, чем двух. И почему Вы противопоставляете проход отряда Фелькерзама четырём "бородинцам"? Что, если пойдут "бородинцы", то кораблям отряда Фелькерзама проходить канал уже не придётся? Ещё как придётся! И "фелькерзамовцам", и четырём "бородинцам" и "Ослябе". И остальным кораблям, которые в реальности пошли вокруг Африки. Если всё "сплюсовать", то тем более не получаются "небогатовские" темпы перехода. А именно на них кое-кто "напирает"!

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150536
иначе можно смотреть на значимость примера Белого Флота.

Это уже упоминалось в теме, если Вы её читали. Не пример.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150547
у оппонента речь о реальном практическом опыте.
////
Который далековат от реалий 1904 года, о чём я и говорю.

Млин, так чем далековат то???
Есть буксир, на нем двигатель такой то мощности, с него на буксируемый обьект подан металический трос.
Вот парохед, вот канал - веди.
В чеи принципиальное отличие от реалий??? Металический трос "не той системы"?
Вы просто не понимаете о чем спорите.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150487
"Личный случай" длился 15 лет.
////
Для аналогии было бы полезнее 15 дней проводки по узкому каналу чего-нибудь огромного и неповоротливого. С помощью "портового катера" вместо буксира.

Вы видимо совсем не представляете себе реку, узость фарватера на ней, который кстати у нас так и называется - судоходный канал. Гарантированная ширина этого канала 60 метров.
И не представляете себе грузы, которые по этой реке буксируются.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150487
Для аналогии было бы полезнее 15 дней проводки по узкому каналу чего-нибудь огромного и неповоротливого. С помощью "портового катера" вместо буксира.

Шлюзование вверх (т.е. против течения) через шлюз Белоомутского гидроузла земснаряда "Московкий 704" со всем его караваном с помощью теплоходика проекта 1606 "Ласточка" (водоизмещение 20 тонн, двигатель 3Д6 150 сил) подойдет?

При этом ширина буксируемого состава 20 метров, совокупная длина (земснаряд, брандвахта, рефулеры)- около 200. Ширина шлюзовой камеры 24 метра. Состав надо сначала в эту камеру заправить, так что бы он ничем не зацепился, иначе оторвешь что зацепил, а затем вывести в верхнем бьефе так, чтобы всю эту здоровую хренотень не снесло на плотину.
Вот это была службушка. А самое забавное что не знаю кто больше нервничал - я за штурвалом "Ласточки", или командир земснаряда, который находился далеко позади и значительно выше, с лучшим обзором. В один момент ему даже показалось, что "Ласточка" не выгребает, и весь многотысячетонный состав на эту плотину и несет...

Слава богу, что такая службушка выпадал редко, остальное время просто водил по узким каналам всяческое огромное и неповоротливое...

Grosse написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150600
Вы видимо совсем не представляете себе реку, узость фарватера на ней, который кстати у нас так и называется - судоходный канал. Гарантированная ширина этого канала 60 метров.

Гарантированная ширина Суэцкого канала по дну даже в 1966 году составляла 45 метров (при глубине 12-13 метров), а уж в 1904 году, когда его глубина была в полтора раза меньше...

Grosse написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150600
подойдет?

А масса земснаряда свыше 10 000 тонн? Да и "Ласточка" Ваша крупновата для портового катера.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150688
Гарантированная ширина Суэцкого канала по дну даже в 1966 году составляла 45 метров (при глубине 12-13 метров)

Источник можно?

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150688
Да и "Ласточка" Ваша крупновата для портового катера.

А с чего Вы взяли, что портовый катер должен быть меньше 20 тонн? Это все таки не корабельный катер.
ИМХО портовый катер в Порт Саиде мог быть и потяжелее.

The New York Times, October 21, 1904:

The Baltic Fleet Voyage

  It is now definitely announced that the Baltic fleet will divide, en route to the East, one squadron going through the Suez Canal and the other around the Continent of Africa by the longer route. Taking Bornholm, Denmark, as the starting point, the distances to be traversed will be 11,220 sea miles for the squadron that passes through the canal and 15,000  sea miles for the  one that goes around the Cape of Good Hope, assuming that the theoretically shortest route be taken in each case. Of course, the distance actually traveled will be greater, for no navigator, even in time of peace,  can limit his run to the theoretically shortest distance.
    It is difficult to understand why the Russians should thus divide their fleet. At first glance it might be assumed that the route through the canal would consume less time and less coal than the one around the Cape; also that the opportunities for coaling ship at anchor would be more numerous and more convenient; but it must be remembered that somewhere before coming into touch with the Japanese the two squadrons must unite; consequently no time will be saved unless all the ships go by the canal route. Moreover, since no neutral port may be used for a rendezvous, the squadron that arrives first in the Indian Ocean will have to knock about at sea, until it is joined by the other; consequently little coal will be saved. It is even doubtful whether the opportunities for trans-shipping coal from the colliers to the warships will be better on the canal route than on the other.
    It is probable that, after leaving Denmark, the squadrons will steam together to some convenient spot on the Morocco coast outside the Mediterranean and there refill their bunkers from their accompanying colliers. In case no good opportunity for coaling again on the northern coast of Africa should present itself, that part of the fleet that goes through the Suez Canal will have a run of 2,010 miles from Gibraltar to Suez. Of course, there is no doubt the ships could cover that distance without recoaling if all the conditions were favorable; but stress of weather or difficulties with machinery might embarrass, if not endanger, some of the Russian ships.
    Navy experts in this country emphatically advise against a separation of the fleet, and many of them strongly prefer the route around the Cape. From the assumed first coaling place on the western coast of Morocco to the Cape of Good Hope the shortest distance would be about 4,900 miles, which would be increased to fully 6,000 miles by the stops along the west coast of Africa for coaling. Allowing for runs of 1,500 miles, there would be plenty of places where coaling stops could be made without interference by any Power. After passing the Cape—assuming that a full coaling had been had shortly before reaching British territory—there would be a rocky coast line for many a mile before the fleet could safely anchor again, and not until the coast of Mozambique was reached would the risk of interference by Great Britain be wholly avoided. Thence to the Straits of Sunda would be a stretch of more than 4,000 miles, but this could, be broken by touching at Madagascar.
    But, since the fleet cannot hope to make an average of more than 150 miles a day, the middle of February will hardly see the resumption of naval operations by the Russians.

Отредактированно vs18 (28.11.2009 17:12:11)

Движения различных отрядов в Средиземном море и районе Суэцкого канала в сообщениях газеты The New York Times. Отряд Вирениуса прямого отношения ко 2-й эскадре Тихого океана отношения не имеет, но сведения о нем представляют определенный интерес при обсуждении возможности использования Суэцкого канала кораблями 2-й эскадры.

December 19, 1903:

BIZERTA, Tunis, Dec. 18. — The Russian naval forces now anchored here, consisting of a battleship, (name not given;) the armored cruiser Dimitri Donskoi, of 5,882 tons' displacement; the turret ship Oslabya, of 12,675 tons' displacement; the cruiser Aurora, of 6,630 tons' displacement, and
five torpedo boats, commanded by Admiral Wirenius, will be reinforced in a few days by six torpedo boats and will proceed hence to the Far East.
The battleship Emperor Nicholas, having on board Admiral Mollas, commanding the Russian naval forces in the Mediterranean, will arrive at Piraeus, Greece, on
Dec. 23.

January 2, 1904:

PORT SAID. Jan. 1. - A Russian transport with 2,000 troops on board traversed the Suez Canal yesterday, bound for Port Arthur.

January 3, 1904:

BIZERTA, Tunis, Jan. 2. — The Russian squadron destined for the Far East will sail to-morrow for Alexandria.
A reception and banquet was given today aboard the battleship Oslabya. Admiral Wirenlus, in command of the squadron, toasted France and the alliance between
France and Russia. Gen. Pinchon, the French Resident General in Tunis, responded, expressing on behalf of the French people of Tunis an unalterable affection
for Russia and the Russians.
In a dispatch from Bizerta, Dec. 18, it was stated that the Russian naval force then anchored there consisted of an unearned battleship, ihe battleship Oslabya, the cruisers Dimltri Donskol and Aurora, and five torpedo boats. They were expected then to te reinforced in a few days by six more torpedo toats.

January 4, 1904:

BIZERTA. Tunis, Jan. 3. — The Russian cruiser Aurora sailed to-day for Alexandria.
In accordance with telegraphic instructions, the remainder of the squadron destined for service in the Far East has postponed its departure.

January 5, 1904:

BIZERTA, Tunis, Jan. 4. - The Russian Cruiser Aurora, which it was yesterday announced, had sailed for Alexandria, has gone for Piraeus to salute Queen Olga on her return to Greece from St. Petersburg.
It is thought that Admiral Wirenius and the entire Russian naval division under his cammand will sail for Suez at the and of this week.

January 6, 1904:

BIZERTA, Jan. 5. - The Russian cruiser Dimitri Donskoi, accompanied by two torpedo boats, left here to-day for Suda Bay.

January 14, 1904:

PORT SAID, Jan. 13. - The Russian Cruiser Aurora arrived here to-day, and later the Russian cruiser Dimitri Donsloi and seven Russian torpedo boat destroyers arrived.
The Dimitri Donskoi entered the Suez Canal, bound for Far East.
The torpedo boat destroyers will await the arrival here of the reminder of the Russian Mediterranean Squadron, which is expected shortly.
The Japanese armored cruiser Kasaga (formerly the Moreno, bought at Genoa from Argentina) arrived here to-day.

January 15, 1904:

SUEZ, Jan. 14. - Great interest is manifested here in the movements of the Russian warships in the canal. The Russian armored cruiser Dimitri Donskoi has arrived at Suez, and is coaling near the British armored cruiser King Alfred, which is also bound for the Far East.
The Japanese armored cruiser Kasaga left Port Said for Suez this morning, and was shortly afterward followed by her sister ship Niasin.
At about the same time the Russian battleship Oslabya arrived at Port Said.
It is stated by the officers of the Niasin tha the reports of an attempt to destroy their ship at Genoa are entirely false.

January 16, 1904:

SUEZ, Jan. 15. - The Japanese cruiser Kasaga to-day proceeded on her voyage.
Later the Niasin, after coaling here, also sailed for the East.

January, 17, 1904:

PORT SAID, Jan. 16. - The Russian battleship Oslabya has left this port for Suez.
The reminder of the Russian squadron is awaiting orders.

January 20, 1904:

ISLAND OF PERIM, Red Sea, Jan. 19. - The Japanese armored cruiser Niasin, formerly of the Argentine Navy, has arrived here from Suez. She reports all well on board.

January 23, 1904:

SUEZ, Jan. 22. - The Russian squadron, consisting of the battleship Dimitri Donsloi, the cruiser Aurora, and six torpedo boat destroyers, sailed to-day for the Far East.
One Russian destroyer, which is disabled, will remain here.

February 5, 1904:

SUEZ, Feb. 4. - The Russian battleship Oslabya, the transport Saratoff and three torpedo-boat destroyers sailed this morning for the Far East.

February 11, 1904:

PORT SAID. Feb. 10. - The Russian transport Azoff and two torpedo boats are here taking on board sufficient coal to take them to their nearest home port.
The commanders swore that the quantity of coal taken on board was the amount required.

February 12, 1904:

SUEZ, Egypt, Feb. 11. - The Russian volunteer fleet steamer Czaritza and a torpedo boat have arrived here.

February 13, 1904:

PORT SAID, Feb. 12. - The Austrian collier Java, charteded by Russia to preceed to Port Arthur with coal, hads been ordered by the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to leave here immediately.
The Java, Capt. Stefanovich, left Barry, Wales, on Jan. 23 for Port Arthur.

February 13, 1904:

ISLAND OF PERIM, Red Sea, Feb 12. - Mail advices received here from Jibuti, French Somaliland, say that the Russian squadron, which passed Perim on Jan. 27, has coaled at Jibuti and will wait there until Feb. 18 for the Russian warships due at Jibuti from Suez.

February 14, 1904:

SUEZ, Egypt, Feb. 13. - On reconsideration the Government has permitted the disabled Russian torpedo boat destroyer at Suez to go into dock for repairs. She will be towed to Port Said from here.
It was announced yesterday that the Russian Government had asked permission to dock a disabled torpedo boat destroyer at Suez, but this request was refused, as the authorities at Port Said had surveyed the destroyer and declared her fit to proceed.

February 15, 1904:

SUEZ, Feb. 14. - A steamship which has just arrived here reports that a Russian volunteer fleet cruiser, a battleship, and four torpedo boats anchored at the Island of Jebel Zukup, (in the Red Sea, about ninety miles from the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb,) on Feb. 10.
The steamer also reports that previously she passed the Russian transport Smolensk and one torpedo boat steaming slowly south.

February 17, 1904:

PARIS, Feb. 16. - A dispatch to the Figaro from St. Petersburg, timed 3:33 A. M. today, says:
"Admiral Rojdestwenski, Chief of the Marine Staff, is going on to assume the naval command at Port Arthur. The stoppin of the Russian squadron at Jibuti may lead to international complications, Jibuti being a neutral French port. It is understood that France is not likely to ask the squadron to leave."
It was announced from Port Said, Egypt, last night that the Russian battleship Oslabya, the Volunteer Fleet transport Saratoff, and four torpedo-boat destroyers were at the Island of Jebel Zugar, in the Red Sea, ninety miles from the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, and that the Russian Volunteer Fleet transport Smolensk and another torpedo-boat destroyer were at Daedalus Island, a shoal in the Red Sea, 350 miles south of Suez.

February 17, 1904:

ST. PETERSBURG, Feb. 16. — Admiral Wirenius has been instructed to hold the Russian squadron, consisting of the battleship Oslabya, the cruisers Aurora and Dmitri Donskoi, and a number of torpedo-boat destroyers, at Jibutil, French Somaliland, until further orders.

February 20, 1904:

PARIS, Feb. 20. - The St. Petersburg correspondent of the Figaro cables that the Russian squadron at Jibuti, French Somaliland, has been ordered to return to Kronstadt.
The Russian squadron at Jibuti consists, as far as is known, of the battleship Oslabya, the cruiser Aurora, the cruiser Dmitri Donskoi, and a number of torpedo destroyers.
It was reported from St. Petersburg Feb. 15 that this squadron had been instructed to remain at Jibuti until further orders.
It has been suggested that the stopping of these warships at Jibuti might lead to international representations, Jibuti being a neutral French port.
The volunteer transport Saratoff and four Russian torpedo boat destroyers were reported Feb. 15 at the Island of Jebel Zugur, in the Read Sea, ninety miles from the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, and on the same day the volunteer fleet transport Smolensk and another torpedo boat destroyer were at Daedalus Island, in the Red Sea, 350 miles south of Suez.
It has been understood that Japan had made arrangements to intercept the Russian squadron now ordered from Jibuti should it reach Far Eastern waters.

February 21, 1904:

PARIS, Feb. 20. - Exchanges of communications of a friendly character have occurred between France and Japan with respect to the stay of the Russian squadron at Jibuti, French Somaliland. France did not hesitate to make a complete explanation of her reasons for not ordering the Russian ships to depart, and it is said in a reliable quarter that this explanation was thoroughly satisfactory to the Japanese Government.
The frankness with which the Franch Government dealt with the question was gratifying to the Japanese diplomats, and it is asserted that there is no reason to believe that any friction will arise between the two countries regarding the incident.
It is now explained that France's neutrality instructions, while specifying the limit of stay as twenty-four hours, differ from the English neutrality laws in that this provision is hedged about by various conditions which enable an extension of the time during which a belligerent may remain in a French port.
France seeks, as she has told Japan and the other powers, to maintain an attitude of perfect neutrality, and has no intention of departing from this policy.
But, as to ordering the Russian ships to leave Jibuti, this has not been done, as to have done so would have aroused the French people, at first lukewarm, have become exceedingly keen.
The officials also say that France showed her fairness toward belligerents during the Spanish-American wa, when an American auxilliary cruiser tried to make repairs in the French West Indies. Spain then endeavered to have the cruiser complelled to leave forhtwith, but the French authorities did not require a rigid enforcement of the regulations, and the cruiser was permitted to remain until her repairs were completed. It is claimed that this American precedent justifies the stay of the Russians at Jibuti.
It is recognized in diplomatic circles that the Jibuti precedent may become a serious one for France, especially if a Japanese squadron attempts to come to the Atlantic to operate against the Russians in Baltic.

February 21, 1904:

ISLAND OF PERIM, Red Sea, Feb 20. - A squadron of warships passed here at midnight, bound to Suez. It is believed to be the Russian squadron recently at Jibuti, French Somaliland.

February 21, 1904:

ST. PETERSBURG, Feb. 20. - The Russian Mediterranean fleet has left Jibuti, French Somaliland, supposedly to return and join the Baltic fleet.

February 23, 1904:

SUEZ, Feb. 22. - The Russian transports Orel and Smolensk, which recently traversed the canal bound for the Far East, returned here to-day and entered the canal on their way to Port Said.

February 24, 1904:

ST. PETERSBURG, Feb. 23. — The Russian squadron under the command of Admiral Wirenius, (composed of the battleship Oslabya, the armored cruiser Dmitri Donskoi, the cruiser Aurora, and five torpedo boats.) which has been ordered to return north immediately from Jibuti, French Somaliland, will got to Libau, Courland, on the Baltic, and not to Cronstadt, as previously reported.

February 29, 1904:

SUEZ, Feb. 28. - The steamships laden with coal for Japan captured by Russian torpedo boat destroyers are reported to be the British steamer Frankby, (from Barry, Feb. 3, for Sabang, Straits Settlements,) the British steamer Franby, (from Barry, Feb. 3, for Hongkong,) and the Norwegian steamer Matilda, (from Penarth, Jan 30, for Sasebo.)

Движения различных отрядов в Средиземном море и районе Суэцкого канала в сообщениях газеты The New York Times. Отряд Фелькерзама.

October 30, 1904:

TANGIER, Oct. 29. — The Russian battleships Oslabya, Sissoi Veliky, and Navarin, the armored cruiser Admiral Nakhimoff, and seven torpedo boats, besides colliers, arrived here this morning. The Russian flagship exchanged salutes with the French cruiser Kleber and the British cruiser Diana.
The Russian officers say they will remain here about a week. It is rumored that they will stay at Tangier until the inquiry into the North Sea incident is ended.

October 31, 1904:

TANGIER, Oct. 30. — Five Russian torpedo-boat destroyers have put to sea.
The remainder of the fleet has been coaling and provisioning all day.

November 2, 1904:

TANGIER. Nov. 1. — The officers of the Russian war vessels now here are awaiting the company of Vice Admiral Rojestvensky.

November 4, 1904:

TANGER, Marocco, Nov. 3. - Vice Admiral Rojestvesky's squadron arrived here during the day. All the vessels composing the Russian squadron are now anchored in the bay. British cruisers escorted them here from Vigo. The Russian said they would remain here two or three days, but to-night the battleships Sissoi Veliki, Oslabya, Admiral Nakhimoff, and Dmitri Donskoy, commanded by Admiral Voelkersam, have sailed for Suda Bay.

November 11, 1904:

CANEA, Nov. 10. - The battleship Sissoi Veliki, with Vice Admiral Voelkersam aboard, and the battleship Navarin, the cruisers Izumrud and Almaz, a number of torpedo boats, the transports, and the Volunteer steamer Yaroslav of the Russian Baltic squadron have arrived in Suda Bay.

November 12, 1904:

SUEZ, Nov. 11. - It is stated here that owing to rumors that attempts may be made to wreck vessels of the Russian Pacific squadron while passing through the canal the canal company is taking stringes precautions against blocking.
A strict surveillance on both sides of the canal will be exercised during the transit of the Russian squadron.
The Russian Consul General recently arrived at Port Said.

November 13, 1904:

PORT SAID, Nov. 12. - The vessels of the Russian second Pacific Squadron will only be allowed to take on board sufficient coal and provisions to reach the next port.
Arrangements are being made to pass them through the canal as quickly as possible.

November 24, 1904:

PORT SAID, Nov. 24. - The Russian Second Pacific Squadron was sighted at 6 o'clock this morning.

November 25, 1904:

PORT SAID, Nov. 24. - A division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron has arrived here.
The division consists of the battleships Sissoy, Veliky, and Navarin, the cruisers Jemtchug, Almaz, and Svietlana, the destroyers Bodri, Blestiaschy, Bezumprechni, Bystri, Bravi, Bedovi, and Buiny, and the transports Gortschakoff, Voronej, Kitai, Tamboff, Kieff, Jupiter, Merkur, and Vladimiroff.
Thought the larger warships were not ordered to coal here, the destroyers are coaling from transports. They will enter the canal at dawn to-morrow, and the rest of the division an hour later.
Rear Admiral Voelkersam, in command of the division, indignantly denies that Russian officers or sailors created disturbances at Canea, Crete. He says a few drunken sailors were carried on board, but no one was killed or wounded, and there were no deserters, as reported by an English newspaper.

November 26, 1904:

PORT SAID, Nov. 25. - The division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron which arrived yesterday entered the Suez Canal to-day.
Local representatives of Russia are accompanying the squadron on board the flagship. The iron-clads are being towed through the canal.

December 3, 1904:

ISLAND OF PERIM, Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb, Dec. 2. — Four Russian warships passed Perim at 2 o'clock this morning, going southward.
At 5 o'clock this afternoon twenty more Russian warships passed Perim, in the following order: Two cruisers, a battleship, five volunteer transports, seven torpedo-boat destroyers, four colliers, and a battleship. A French steamer brought up the rear.
The Russian division stopped an hour off the African coast, and then proceeded toward Aden.

December 6, 1904:

GENOA, Italy, Dec. 5. — The German collier Irmgard Horn, which was chartered by the Russians and accompanied Admiral Voelkersam's division of the Russian second Pacific Squadron through the Suez Canal and was going to the Island of Perlm, Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb. suddenly received counter orders and has arrived here.
The cause of her return is not known.

January 4, 1905:

TAMATAVE, Island of Madagascar, Jan. 3. — The division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron commanded by Rear-Admiral Voelkersam, which after passing through the Suez Canal sailed from Jibuti, French Somaliland, Dec. 10, for the Island of Madagascar, anchored to-day in Passandava Bay, in the Northwestern part of this island.
The squadron commanded by Admiral Rojestvensky is at Antongil Bay, on the east coast.
It is believed that the whole squadron later will rendezvous at Diego Suarez Bay, on the northeast coast of the island.

Движения различных отрядов в Средиземном море и районе Суэцкого канала в сообщениях газеты The New York Times. Отряд Небогатова.

March 22, 1905:

CANEA, Crete, March 21. - The Russian Third Paific Squadron, under Admiral Nebogatoff, has left Suda Bay for Port Said.

March 25, 1905:

PORT SAID, March 24. - Admiral Nebogatoff's division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron, consisting of a battleship, four cruisers, and four transports, arrived here to-day. The vessels are not coaling and are only taking moderate supplies on board. The transports are heavily laden with stores. The division, which is said to be bound for Jibuti, French Somaliland, on its way to join Rojestvensky's ships, will probably proceed today.

March 26, 1905:

PORT SAID, March 25. - The division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron, commanded by Admiral Nebogatoff, which arrived here from Suda Bay, Crete, yesterday, entered the canal this morning.

March 27, 1905:

SUEZ, March 26. - The whole Vice Admiral Nebogatoff's squadron has sailed southward.

April 2, 1905:

PERIM, Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb. April 1. — Five Russian warships and a tug passed here at sunset, bound for Jibuti. Three steamers are following them.
The Russian hospital ship Kostroma, bound for Jibuti, arrived here this afternoon, and is obtaining 130 tons of coal and 65 tons of water.
The vessels referred to in the foregoing probably compose the division of the Russian-Second Pacific Squadron, commanded by Admiral Nebogatoff, which left Suez, going south, March 26.

April 8, 1904:

JIBUTIL, Gulf of Aden, April 7. - Vice Admiral Nebogatoff's division of the Russian Second Pacific Squadron sailed this morning.

Grosse написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150726
С реальной осадкой без мер по разгрузке бородинцы не могли пройти канал - разумеется.
В Порт-Саиде их разгрузить скорее всего не получилось бы - естественно.

Присоединяюсь. Все эти меры надо было продумать и реализовать заранее.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150547
А что, можно точно измерять осадку на ходу, корректируя её??? И перегрузка боезапаса на качке?

Осадку можно расчитывать, учитывая расход переменных грузов. Боезапаса 12дм нет с Либавы. В результате получим некоторый запас в осадке. Корректировка дифферента (а при запасе в осадке может быть не столь строгой)достигается перепусканием оставленной части котельной воды. И дополнительно (если это понадобится) забором нескольких десятков тонн забортной воды.

Пересвет написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150749
Как раз минный катер (устаревший) впоследствии и мог быть переведён в портовые катера. И портовому катеру не нужна высокая скорость, а размеры - чем меньше, тем лучше, особенно на тесном рейде.

Мог. Но с не меньшей вероятностью для этих целей мог быть использован катер специальной постройки. Как Ваше, так и мое утверждение не имеют прямых доказательств. Т.е. 50/50. Поэтому решительно утверждать, что портовой катер в Суэце тождественен минному катеру с ЭБРа, представляется, нет оснований.

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150859
А вот почему эти мероприятия не были проведены своевременно?

А своевременно - это, извините, когда?

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150859
Здесь с их опытом я вполне согласен и отношусь с уважением.

Вот это "здесь" и обесценивает апелляции к опыту. Если здесь согласен, а там не согласен - всё, получается, что к опыту (чьему-либо) апеллировать бессмысленно, и стоит использовать иные аргументы.

Вик написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #150856
Боезапаса 12дм нет с Либавы.

Хорошая идея - привязать успех операции к ж.д. и одесскому порту в период, когда Россию накрывала волна забастовок. Да и опыт Иртыша безусловно свидетельствует в пользу идеи похода броненосцев без 12" снарядов. Да и идея компенсировать строительную перегрузку (которая во многом была "наверху")  отказом от грузов, расположенных ниже ВЛ, тоже красивая.
Ну да ладно.