Yes, in the new year with new combat (in the sense of literary) tasks. Let it be a month before it, but we, in accordance with the covenants, in advance.
Today we can say that the "Combat aircraft" cycle has taken place for itself, and it can fly and fly. But there is one more topic that I like well, no less (and maybe more) than the planes of the Second World War.
These are cruisers. Or a cruiser. As for the emphasis, both variations are considered correct.
And not without reason.
And who, excuse me, to admire? Aircraft carriers? Sorry, aircraft carrier and naval aesthetics - they didn't even float nearby. A floating warehouse with planes and an airfield - what is beautiful about it? In my opinion, nothing.
Approximately the same attitude towards battleships. Well, a big chest, well, huge guns. And in fact - a weak ship. Neither speed, nor maneuverability, defend against a submarine, defend against planes, lay a course for him so that there are no dangers, and then … If everything goes well, then the mister battleship will jump somewhere over the horizon.
And maybe it even gets there, then, of course, there are no words, there will be beauty. If it hits.
A cruiser is a cruiser. If you look at history, and we'll see now, it was originally a class not in terms of displacement or something else, but for its intended purpose.
And the main purpose of the cruiser was cruising. That is, independent actions and performance of tasks independently of the main fleet.
And here the list is not just big, it is also varied. Protection of the aforementioned big men, the fight against enemy destroyers (about harmful consumables of the seas!), Raiding, that is, the seizure and sinking of enemy supply ships, escorting convoys, setting minefields, supporting the landing forces and much more.
In general, a cruiser is completely independent, and therefore (from my point of view) even more versatile than a battleship or aircraft carrier. At the very least, the cruiser is able to get things done without involving a cover squadron. There are plenty of examples in history, but when the gentlemen of the battleships began to pose as lone heroes, everything ended very, very sadly. Foam on the waves. Proven by Bismarck and Yamato.
Are we going into history?
The term "cruiser" as such was born in the 17th century. "Cruiser" - this was more the purpose of the ship than its design.
Cruisers were usually fairly small and nimble ships. In those days, ships of the line were usually too large, clumsy and expensive to send them on long solo voyages, for example, to other continents. In addition, they were still strategically important units to risk on patrol or reconnaissance missions.
Therefore, in the 18th century, mainly frigates were appointed as cruisers. Medium size ships, fairly fast and maneuverable, equipped for long voyages, with medium armament on one or two gun decks.
If you read the stories about the pirates of the Caribbean of those years, it turns out that the frigate was the dream of every tough guy from Tortuga. Simply because it was the perfect cruiser to rob Spanish transports.
But the naval commander is not alive as a frigate either. And therefore sloops, corvettes, brigs were easily assigned to the role of cruisers, in general, the question was exclusively in the range.
In the middle of the 19th century, sail-steam propeller ships of various types began to perform cruising functions: frigates, corvettes, sloops, clippers.
And the Americans were the first to call the cruiser a cruiser. Yes, not simple ones, but from the Confederate States of America, during the Civil War in this country.
The CSA did not have such a fleet as the North, so the southerners relied on the raiders. For the first time, the Confederation began to officially use the term "cruiser", although it still united ships by purpose, and not by design. The cruiser Alabama drank blood from the US Navy for two years, capturing 69 prizes and sinking one warship until it was calm down off the coast of France.
And for another cruiser, "Shenandoah", which captured about 40 ships, chased up to hundreds of American warships, but never caught.
It was during the American Civil War that the cruiser emerged as a class of ships designed specifically for raiding.
If the term "cruiser" was settled by the Americans, then the first step towards the fact that the cruisers became the way we are used to seeing them were made in Russia.
In 1875, the frigate "General-Admiral" became part of the Russian Imperial Navy, which became the world's first armored cruiser. Unlike armored cruisers, these ships had not only an armored deck, but also armored sides in the waterline area - an armored belt.
Interestingly, besides us, only the British began to build armored cruisers. But then it came to the rest, and all the countries of the world rushed to develop and build faster assistants for their battleships.
Evolving, the cruisers approached the First World War as a completely independent class of ships, which existed and, moreover, arranged such cuttings in which it was hot and without battleships. The battles at Cape Coronel, at the Falkland Islands, in Heligoland Bay, at the Dogger Bank - all these episodes of the First World War are closely associated with cruisers.
Well, at the same time, two such remarkable classes as battle cruisers and heavy ones were singled out from the general family.
In general, I simply do not see any sense in retelling the history of cruisers, I think it is enough to designate the classes of these ships that will be considered.
1. Battle cruisers. A class undeservedly ruined by the Washington Treaty, which could have a very great future. But - they became battleships, and nothing can be done about it.
2. Heavy cruisers. A very interesting class, because every country was fucked up as best it could in terms of creating such ships.
3. Strange cruisers. I don’t know how to call them correctly, but these are those who didn’t get into the classes humanly. The same German "Deutschlands" and the Soviet "Project 26".
4. Light cruisers.
5. Auxiliary cruisers. Although not quite a cruiser, the crew of the same Jervis Bay did not have time to think about compliance. And they called it a cruiser - go to the "Admiral Scheer" … Although the Germans also wrote a bunch of pages in history.
6. Armored and armored cruisers.
7. Missile cruisers.
In general, the class has gone an interesting way, from small and maneuverable ships to the outright hulks of the Ripals, Von der Tann and Peter the Great.
Considering that the cruisers were built by everything, from recognized authorities to completely non-trivial South Americans, Swedes and Spaniards, there is where to roam and someone to compare with.
Especially interesting, in my opinion, are Italian and Japanese ships. There were many interesting solutions, but for some reason they did not pay much attention to them. So let's dare to try and talk about real warships, perhaps undeservedly ignored.
As an example, I can cite the actions of our cruiser Krasny Kavkaz. You can take and compare with his work any of our battleships. Or all three at once. Definitely the "Red Caucasus" will outweigh.
A cruiser without support is still a combat unit. Battleship…
Let's talk about cruisers …
