The Kometa anti-ship missile was VERY large, and the Krasny Kavkaz cruiser was small, worn out and, to put it mildly, not young.
The guards cruiser Krasny Kavkaz (formerly Admiral Lazarev) was laid down on October 18, 1913 and, having stood unfinished for 14 years, was commissioned already under Soviet rule.
During the Great Patriotic War, the cruiser made 64 military campaigns, gloriously beat the Nazis, but at the same time he himself received numerous damage from enemy aerial bombs, mortar mines and artillery shells. By 1946 it became clear that the "Red Caucasus" was no longer there and its restoration did not make sense.
On November 21, 1952, the guards cruiser was accidentally sunk during the tests of the first Soviet aviation anti-ship missile system KS-1 “Kometa”. This is how eyewitnesses describe this dramatic episode:
The experiment was built according to this plan. The rudders were laid and fixed on the ship so that it cruised in a circle. The cruising speed was developing. The entire team was removed from the "Red Caucasus" and on torpedo boats retreated to a safe distance … The radar operator of the carrier aircraft detected the target. At a distance of 130 to 70 km, the projectile detached, entered the carrier's radar beam and went to the target. As a rule, the shell hit the middle part of the ship and "pierced" the cruiser through and through. Three holes remained on the attacked side - one large, the size of the fuselage of the projectile, and two small ones, the diameter of the cargo at the ends of its wings. The wings of the projectile were clipped like a piece of paper with scissors … At the exit, a side with an area of more than 10 square meters broke out. However, the "Red Caucasus" remained afloat and continued to move in a circle.
After each such start the crew of the cruiser quickly returned to the ship and carried out urgent and urgent emergency work. The "Krasny Kavkaz" was repaired within a very short time and was again put out for testing at sea. Meanwhile, naval specialists, when asked whether the cruiser would sink if one shell with an accepted warhead hit it, replied that this was impossible. Well, if so, during the final experiment, they decided to launch a projectile with a warhead …
November 21, 1952 Krasny Kavkaz went to sea for the last time. After being hit by a shell, the cruiser broke in half and disappeared under water. The crew of the carrier aircraft did not utter a single word before landing at the airfield …
This episode is presented as an argument in the debate about modern missiles. Even if the old "Comet" sank the cruiser the first time, the modern "Harpoons" and "Granites" will not leave a dry place on the ship!
The cruiser is not the same for the cruiser - the size of the “Krasny Kavkaz” looked like a kid even against the background of the “Washingtonians”, whose standard displacement was artificially limited to 10 thousand tons. Being a light cruiser of the pre-revolutionary era (of the "Svetlana" type), it had some elements of armor protection in the form of two armor belts: the lower one along the waterline (75 mm thick) and a steel strip at the top of the side 25 mm thick. Other elements of local booking (armored decks, conning tower, barbets and main battery towers) were described with approximately similar numbers and are not of interest in the current conversation.
Booking scheme of the "Red Caucasus"
The Comet, on the other hand, was a miniature version of the MiG fighter with a Rolls-Royce Derwent turbojet engine. Transonic remote-controlled ammunition with a starting weight of 2760 kg. In addition to the absence of a pilot, the “Kometa” distinguished itself from the “MiG” by a smaller wing area (after all, unlike an aircraft, it did not have takeoff and landing modes; the higher the speed at the moment of “landing”, the worse for the enemy). In reality, the cruising speed of flight reached 1000 … 1200 km / h. And the combat load (warhead weight) was 600 kg, which corresponds to the starting weight of modern anti-ship missiles!
As a result, the super-rocket hit the Red Caucasus, which immediately collapsed. From dilapidation.
What did this experiment prove? Only that the tests of the missile guidance system were completed successfully. KS-1 is ready for service.
The case of the sinking of a light cruiser of the 1913 model of the year using a super-heavy anti-ship missile does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the high destructive effect or armor penetration of modern missiles. As follows from the testimony of eyewitnesses, before the final sinking, the target cruiser was repeatedly hollowed out with “Comets” with an inert warhead (which, of course, shattered and weakened the already dilapidated power set of the old ship). Even if the “Comet” fell into the upper armored belt, what was strange about the way a 2-ton transonic “blank” pierced the thin anti-fragmentation protection and, flying through the inner unarmored bulkheads, tore out a piece of the opposite side 3 by 3 meters in size?
Special attention should be paid to the description of how the rocket wings were “cut off like a piece of paper with scissors” when meeting even the most insignificant 25-mm obstacle (and, possibly, when hitting the unarmored part of the hull).
This is a bad sign for those hoping to penetrate armor, relying solely on the speed and mass of modern missiles. Under the indicated conditions, the kinetic energy of the body is of little importance against the background of its mechanical strength.
It is easy to be convinced of this by looking at the footage from the crash sites of aircraft. A blasphemous, but very revealing example: there are no foundation pits at the site of the crash of the huge liners. Upon encountering relatively “soft” soil, the plane crashes to smithereens, and the entire surrounding area is strewn with small debris.
Therefore, is it worth repeating that when hitting a sufficiently thick armor (equivalent in thickness to armor of heavy cruisers and battleships of the WWII era), the fuselage of ANY modern missile will remain outside. She will cut the wings “like paper with scissors”. Tearing off the "plastic skin", only the warhead will go forward. She is the very "penetrator" who, perhaps, will pierce the armor.
At the same time, the mass of warheads of even the heaviest anti-ship missiles is much inferior in weight and fur. strength of armor-piercing shells of large-caliber guns. The speed of the missiles is also slower. The situation will be aggravated by the ineffective form of the warhead and the layout of the missile itself (which is logical, because the missile was not designed to overcome armor).
This is not about replacing rockets with prehistoric cannons. Just a neutral statement of the fact that the armor penetration characteristics of modern anti-ship missiles should be lower than those of shells of past eras. And if those ammunition did not penetrate armor barriers equal in thickness to the caliber of the projectile, then why would the "soft" KSSH and "Comets" suddenly learned to leave in the side of the ship “a hole in the shape of an eight with an area of 55 sq. meters”?!
“At the beginning of November, tests of KSShch missiles were transferred to the Balaklava area, where the citadel (central part) of the unfinished heavy cruiser Stalingrad was used as a target. Before that, artillery and torpedo firing was conducted on the Stalingrad compartment, and the aviation was practicing all types of bombing. during the firing the team did not leave the target. It was believed that the armor of "Stalingrad" (side - 230-260 mm, deck - 140-170 mm) will reliably protect the crew. On December 27, 1957, the rocket, having flown 23, 75 km, hit the side of "Stalingrad "As a result, a figure-eight hole appeared in the board, with a total area of 55 m2."
Just a mockery of common sense, which directly contradicts the experience of the battles of world wars.
Compartment of the unfinished battle cruiser "Stalingrad"
If you read the inscription "buffalo" on an elephant's cage, do not believe your eyes
There is nothing strange in the fact that any scientific work is not the ultimate truth. In the monographs of the middle of the last century, especially those devoted to the description of damage to military equipment, there are a lot of inconsistencies and exaggerations. Vigilant experts have more than once “caught the hand” of masterful authors, pointing out their obvious mistakes. This was the case with the description of the consequences of the bomb attack on the Prince Eugen TKR during its repair in Brest. According to the monograph by I. M. Korotkina, referred to by the discussion participants on thematic sites, the bomb penetrated both armored decks and knocked out part of the side below the waterline, which led to the flooding of several compartments. At the same time, according to German documents and the testimony of all eyewitnesses, "Prince Eugen" was at that moment in dry dock. It was the same with the description of the "terrible damage" to ships during the nuclear tests at Bikini. At the same time, all statistics (5 sunk ships out of 77) and published photographic materials (experts walking in shorts on the upper deck 8 days after the explosion) indicate the absence of significant damage and any lethal radiation hazard.
In those days, there was no Internet. Researchers wrote many things from memory, without being able to quickly check and refine the data. Difficulties in translation, general secrecy of the topic and, perhaps, the desire to show the rocket as a kind of "superweapon" in accordance with the trend of the time. All this became the reason for the obvious falsification.
Returning to the main topic of our conversation, you can often hear another wonderful story. Shooting of the cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" with a KSShch missile in June 1961
In June 1961, the Nakhimov, being a floating target, was towed from the Sevastopol Bay 45-50 miles towards Odessa and anchored. From a distance of 72 km, the Prosorylivy rocket ship fired a KSShch rocket at Nakhimov, in inert equipment. The rocket hit the middle part of the cruiser on the surface of the side and made a hole in the form of a figure eight with an area of about 15 m2. The missile warhead pierced the cruiser through and made a round hole with an area of about 8 m2 in the opposite side of the ship. The bottom edge of the hole was 40 cm below the waterline. The rocket engine exploded in the cruiser hull, causing a fire on the ship. Many ships were involved in the struggle to save the cruiser. The fire was extinguished only 12 hours later.
Another dire consequences of a missile attack, aggravated by hours of fire. However, this time, the destructive power of the KSSC unexpectedly decreased by 4 times, leaving in the side a "hole in the form of an eight with an area of 15 m2." Moreover, the armor protection of the cruiser pr. 68-bis was incomparable with the protection of the mighty TKR "Stalingrad".
Fearfully?
Same-type cruiser "Mikhail Kutuzov" (pr. 68-bis), which has survived to this day
And here is a detailed description of the consequences of hitting the KSSh:
“The missile hit the junction of the ship and the side of the cruiser. A hole in the form of an inverted figure eight with a total area of about 15 m2 was formed. The hole in the spardeck belonged to the cruise engine, in the side - to the warhead in inert equipment. This hole alone was not enough. The missile "pierced" the cruiser from side to side and left the starboard side of the cruiser just under the foremast. The exit hole was an almost circular hole with an area of about 8 m2, while the bottom cut of the hole was 30-35 cm below the waterline, and by the time the emergency ships reached the cruiser, it managed to take in about 1600 tons of seawater. In addition, the remains of kerosene spilled over the cruiser, and this caused a fire that was extinguished for about 12 hours."
The warhead of the rocket (without the engine, which exploded in the hull) pierced through the target hull (at least 15 meters), pierced (otherwise it cannot be explained why the hole was below the overhead line) the flooring of the lower armored deck (50 mm), then pierced the armor belt (100 mm) and went out to sea.
The weight of the warhead of the KSShch was 620 kg, the cruising speed of the rocket was 270 m / s. Are there any examples in the world history of wars, how much heavier shells, at a much higher speed at the target, inflicted similar damage to the ship? So that a relatively light, “soft”, subsonic ammunition that penetrates the hull retains enough energy to pierce two more armor barriers at an angle?
There are no such examples.
But it is enough to look at the cross-section of the cruiser "Nakhimov" in the region of the 62nd frame ("just under the foremast") to understand how everything could really be.
The KSShch missile hit the cruiser in the area of the junction of the upper (unarmored) deck and the unarmored part of the side and immediately fell apart, due to its layout, into two parts (warhead and engine).
The warhead flew above the armor belt and pierced the cruiser through.
The engine flew into the area of the boiler air ducts. Having broken through the casing of the air duct, penetrating into the mine and finally losing energy, he fell on the grate and exploded. The explosion damaged the double bottom, which was no longer used for storing fuel oil.
Water poured into the resulting hole. Using the formula Q = 3600 * μ * f * [(2qH) ^ 0.5], you can easily calculate the flow of water through the hole into the hull. Taking the hydrostatic head from the calculation for a depth of 6 meters, the area of the hole for the minimum 0.01 m2, and the coefficient. permeability (mu) for 0.6, we get an impressive 237 tons of water per hour!
There was no crew on the cruiser, no one was fighting for survivability. By the time the rescuers reached the burning “Nakhimov”, while they assessed the situation and began active actions to rescue the sinking and burning ship, several hours could have passed. Hundreds of tons of water entering the partially disarmed target ship (standing without fuel, ammunition and dismantled mechanisms) inevitably caused a strong heel and trim, as a result, the lower edge of the hole left by the warhead gradually touched the water. This led to an even greater increase in the flow of water into the hull (the indicated 1600 tons correspond to a roll of ~ 10 degrees), as a result, when they started assessing the damage from the rocket, the lower edge of the outlet was 30 cm below the waterline!
But this does not mean at all that the rocket pierced the armor belt, which was a narrow strip in the waterline area. When the cruiser was examined by rescuers, its b / p had long since disappeared under water.
This is just one of the possible versions, with a minimum number of assumptions and the absence of any unlikely events. And, according to the author, it sounds much more realistic than the official version with the Nakhimov's decks and armor belts pierced through and through.
Epilogue
The purpose of the article was an attempt to analyze popular episodes of naval history with the subsequent conclusion that none of the three examples is an example of what they are trying to prove with its help.
The battle fiction about the damage to “Stalingrad” (a hole in the form of a “eight” with an area of 55 sq. M.) And no less strange story with a missile hitting the “Admiral Nakhimov” raises a lot of doubts, since the presented official versions in many respects (and in some places completely) contradict logic, maritime history and common sense.
The sinking of the Krasny Kavkaz guards cruiser with the help of a 2, 7-ton mega-rocket is worth separate. In the presented form (bang, and there is no cruiser), the experiment made no sense and could well qualify for the Shnobel Prize.
The Antinobel Prize in Physics was awarded to French researchers for studying the reasons why dry spaghetti in most cases breaks in more than two pieces.
- Science news for 2009
