Captured Soviet naval vessels in Finnish use?

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
Post Reply
User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4230
Joined: 24 Jun 2002, 12:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

#46

Post by Harri » 10 May 2007, 11:51

A few notes:

"Klamina" is either Hamina or Klamila [Finnish Navy HQ was there at some time] which both are at the very same area.

"Gogland" = Suursaari island.

"Jumu" should be "Jymy" = Distant Thunder.

Other classes:
"Taisto" = Battle (but also a male first name)
"Hurja" = Furious
"Nuoli" = Arrow

Actually the vessel names and the names of the vessel classes are very similar in all navies...:lol:

----

As far as I captured Soviet stuff which was given back was "in working condition" but not necessarily overhauled. Finns had made own modifications to many examples and Soviets perhaps altered them back to their current standards.

----

Finnish designation for Ilmarinen and Väinämöinen was "Rannikkopanssarilaiva" [Coastal Armour(ed) Vessel].

Janne
Member
Posts: 473
Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 12:53
Location: Helsinki

#47

Post by Janne » 10 May 2007, 13:43

In the Finnish version only the MTBs of the 1st flotilla (based in Kotka) attacked the German ships off the northern tip of Suursaari: Taisto-boats 3, 5 and 6 and Viima-boats 2 and 3 (the engine of 1 refused to start), but the 2nd flotilla (based in a fishing harbour in Klamila E of Hamina in Virolahti; no idea of its boats) was only dispatched in the Hapenensaari area.

The captains of the T-boats all thought they'd launched their torpedoes at German M-ships, but T-5 hit Pernau and the adjacent R-29, and the other T-boats couldn't see what their torpedoes actually hit behind the fog they had issued. Apparently only M-15 had suffered damage by a torpedo which had gone straight through it. (It would also seem to me that some of the destroyed German ships had been hit by several branches of arms of two countries.)


But the curious bits in BP's post are the ones about an alleged report by Finnish MTBs about the location of German ships and an alleged request for air support. Perhaps needless to say, the Finnish sources don't mention anything about these - on the contrary, they only tell about Soviet radio messages (in plain text Finnish) which were left unanswered, but for one short negative reply by local Finnish commander.

FWIW the Finns found the two Soviet aerial attacks (which took place between 10 and 12 in the morning IIRC) rather unhelpful, which wouldn't be surprising because no co-ordination whatsoever was possible.

Do the Soviet sources tell more about this? Who is said to have made the report and the request and via what channels?
Last edited by Janne on 11 May 2007, 08:14, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004, 23:51
Location: Central Europe

#48

Post by BIGpanzer » 10 May 2007, 15:15

Hi, Harri!
Harri wrote:
Finns had made own modifications to many examples and Soviets perhaps altered them back to their current standards.
I think so. What kind of modifications were made with G-5s in Finnish Navy [besides 20mm gun instead of MG]?
Harri wrote:
"Klamina" is either Hamina or Klamila [Finnish Navy HQ was there at some time] which both are at the very same area.
"Gogland" = Suursaari island.
"Jumu" should be "Jymy" = Distant Thunder.
Thanks for the corrections! Gogland and Suursaari were both in use, and Gogland (Hogland) is sometimes more common, sometimes less. As this is Russian territory it seems better to use Russian name [of Swedish-origin]. Hogland is more correct than Gogland according to my sea atlases, so sorry.
Harri wrote:
Actually the vessel names and the names of the vessel classes are very similar in all navies...
Very wise Harri compounds us :wink: ! Yes, especially the names of the vessel classes [among the navies of similar size and organization] as vessel names depends quite often on local epos or local heroic names or local political situation.

Best regards, BP
Last edited by BIGpanzer on 10 May 2007, 20:41, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004, 23:51
Location: Central Europe

#49

Post by BIGpanzer » 10 May 2007, 16:11

Janne wrote:
In the Finnish version only the MTBs of the 1st flotilla (based in Kotka) attacked the German ships off the northern tip of Suursaari: Taisto-boats 3, 5 and 6 and Viima-boats 2 and 3 (the engine of 1 refused to start), but the 2nd flotilla (based in a fishing harbour in Klamila E of Hamina in Virolahti; no idea of its boats) was only dispatched in the Hapenensaari area.
About 2nd flotilla I could find some info [see above] - is it 100% correct?
Yes, and I am sorry for incorrect translation of the complicated sentence. The same [seems to be] was mentioned in my source, direct translation - "Finns sent MTBs from the first flotilla from Kotka and from the second flotilla from Klamina (Hamina - thanks to Harri) to help the garrison of xxx, 5 MTBs attacked German ships....."
xxx on Russian is Âàíõàíêèëÿíìÿÿ. I have no good idea how to transliterate correctly this word into Finnish back, but as I know sounds of Finnish/Russian languages it could be the strange construction - Vanhankilänmää [may be ja instead of ä somewhere because of sound variations inside the word]. Harri will help me, I hope :wink:

As for communication between Finns and Soviets - I only read that Finns asked Red Banner Baltic Navy (KBF) HQ for air support, and the info from Finnish MTBs captains about enemy ships were transferred to the HQ of KBF aviation. No more info but I will try to find additional details in other sources.
I found a very detailed [day by day] research article [based on Russian and Finnish sources] about combat capture of Hogland by 161 Soviet infantrymen of colonel Barinov during WWII [02.01.1942], their service there [Finnish aviation tried to prevent the delivery of ammunition and additional men to colonel Barinov], Soviet counter-attack of recon Finnish group 17.03.1942 and hard combat with attacking Finns 26-28.03.1942 [237 Soviet soldiers were killed/wounded, 36 were captured, 191 reached Lavansaari; 161 Finnish soldiers were killed/wounded]. But there are no info about year 1944 in the article, only about 1942 :roll:

P.S. During 1 hour search in Runet I found only a few sources which mentioned some kind of Soviet-Finnish communications during the German operation "Tanne Ost" against Hogland/Suursaari. I think that the most correct and detailed info could be found in Russian special historical journals but I don't have them, of course. So what I could find online [I am posting only common info between sources about communications mainly, not the huge amount of info about the operation itself, this could be done using German sources also].
Janne wrote: FWIW the Finns found the two Soviet aerial attacks (which took place between 10 and 12 in the morning IIRC) rather unhelpful, which wouldn't be surprising because no co-ordination whatsoever was possible.
Many air attacks took place between 06:45 and 18:00, 481 sorties were made [see below].

"15.09.1944 the part of German ships moved towards south-west from the Island [Finns detected mine-sweeper, landing barge, 4 mine-sweeping motor-boats at 05:00, and ~ at 06:00 Finns detected 5 mine-sweepers and 5 landing barge in addition]. German landing unit captured area in the north-east coastline (4 x 1 km), but Germans could delivered only one 75mm gun and mortar platoon for support, and lost radiostation. The attack of two Ju88 against Finnish troops was unsuccessful and Finnish reserve (577 men) counterattacked Germans and encircled them in 3 areas. ~900 German soldiers and 2 field artillery batteries had no possibility for landing and stayed on their ships.
Finnish command had no possibility to help their counterattacked soldiers from the air so Finns asked HQ of Red Banner Baltic Sea Navy [KBF] for air support of Finnish units.
Soviet naval HQ quickly decided to attack German ships and landing troops using bombers and fighters, also several units of Soviet 6th separate regiment of marines received the order to prepare for landing operation to help Finnish allies.
06:45 36 Soviet aircraft attacked German ships, which already left island. 07:00 - 07:45: another group of 34 Soviet aircraft attacked the group of 12 German landing barges. Till 18:00 Soviet naval aviation performed 481 sorties [bombers sank 17 German ships (11 confirmed, unclear with other 6) and damaged 6 ships, fighters knocked down/damaged 15 enemy aircraft]. During air attacks Soviet aircraft groups tried to communicate with Finnish garrison of Hogland/Suursaari to understand which kind of air support and where exactly Finns needed, but radio communications were quite unsuccessful.....But it is mentioned that actions were coordinated before on high level - between Soviet and Finnish HQs.
In the evening two Soviet patrol motor-boats with marines on board came to Hogland/Suursaari and gave light signals to Finns: "Do you need any assistance?", but armistice took place at 21:00 already. German POWs [1231 including 175 wounded] were moved to Väksi (?), where they were interned in 3 days and were given to Soviets. Finnish garrison of Gogland/Suursaari was interned by Soviet troops in several days...."

About last days of Finnish garrison of Hogland/Suursaari - "according to the Peace Treaty HQ of KBF ordered to commander of Island naval base rear-admiral G. Zhukov to take the Hogland. Colonel Shramkov [commandant of Hogland] landed with artillery squadron, AA and MG units and 7th field hospital. The meetings between Finnish commandant lieutenant-colonel Miettinen and Soviet commandant colonel Shramkov were under strict control of NKVD officer. It was strictly prohibited for Soviet soldiers to meet, visit and talk with Finns, also walk along the island alone.
Two commandants agreed that Soviet officers would take the fortifications, equipment and armament of Hogland from South to the North, starting from 24.09.1944. Finns removed their soldires and their positions were taken by Soviet soldiers. Rear-admiral G. Zhukov asked colonel Shramkov to look for possible Finnish provocations and damages of leaving fortifications/equipment, but Shramkov replied that "Finnish officers are very correct and accurate, they left everything in good conditions". Soviet garrison received 36 houses of 2 Finnish villages, 12 warehouses, 43 another buildings, 6 trucks and 1 command car. Colonel Shramkov ordered to preserve everything in such good condition as Finns did, and that was done very carefully for some period of time, but later many things were damaged and stealed by Soviet recruit soldiers after WWII...."

These Russian sources cite the following literature mainly:
Naval historical research journal "Breeze" [on Russian], 1997, No.1
"War in east-european waters 1941-1945" by J. Meister, 1996
"Jatkosota kronikka". Jyvaskyla Helsinki, 1991
"Raising the blockade of Leningrad and liberation of Baltic states in 1944-1945" [reference-book, on Russian], 1991

Regards, BP

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#50

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 May 2007, 20:44

BIGpanzer wrote:
Juha wrote: One of the most correct Russian ones.
And one of the most correct al all as it was expected. Which designation is more correct than "armored ship of coastal defense"?
That is a reasonably good translation, but from not correct Finnish designation.
BP wrote:I am trying to translate [as you've mentioned it is always hard to translate 1:1].
The program was finally completed 22 December 1927 as "Act about principles of navy of coastal defense". According to it it was planned to built two armored ships of coastal defense [BrBO] with the displacement 3800 tons each and cost 100 milliones markkaa each.
My note: BrBO = Bronenosets Beregovoi Oborony = Armored ship of Coastal Defense.
Heh, I used babelfish and it gave the translation identical to the one you have been using
BP wrote: battleship of coastal defense "Väinämöinen
BP wrote:I never saw that Russian sources...mention Väinämöinen/Ilmarinen as battleships.
I wonder where you got the battleship designation you have used?
BP wrote:They are mentioned as BrBO of Finnish Navy always
Not so.
ББО "Вяйнемяйнен"
http://www.airwar.ru/history/av2ww/sovi ... ovfin.html
BP wrote:IIRC even Soviet documents of 1939-1940 also always mentioned those warships as BrBO
At least 1944 not so.
http://www.bellabs.ru/51/Photos/Niobe-V ... nen_1.html

Regards, Juha

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#51

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 May 2007, 20:57

Hi harri,
Harri wrote: Finnish designation for Ilmarinen and Väinämöinen was "Rannikkopanssarilaiva" [Coastal Armour(ed) Vessel].
I've seen both Panssarilaiva and Rannikkopanssarilaiva used.
What's your source for the Rannikkopanssarilaiva?

Regards, Juha

P.S. I would prefer ship over vessel at the translation

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#52

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 May 2007, 21:05

BIGpanzer wrote: What kind of modifications were made with G-5s in Finnish Navy [besides 20mm gun instead of MG]?
There were no 20mm guns at the captured Viima class MTB's.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004, 23:51
Location: Central Europe

#53

Post by BIGpanzer » 10 May 2007, 21:20

Hi, Juha!
Here you are incorrect because of translation problems and I can explain this for you with great pleasure to help you.
Juha wrote:
That is a reasonably good translation, but from not correct Finnish designation.
The majority of world's naval historians used identical classification for all world's ships of identical(similar)-type, they very seldom pay attention to local small differences in classifications. Classical destroyers are described as destroyers in reference-books [if they are not about only one navy of specific country], doesn't matter that some navies describe them as large torpedo boats or even small cruisers, for example [but good sources try to mention the local classification also, if possible, at least in the text].
Juha wrote:
Heh, I used babelfish and it gave the translation identical to the one you have been using
battleship of coastal defense "Väinämöinen"
The problem is that there are two terms in Russian language - ëèíåéíûé êîðàáëü [battleship] and áðîíåíîñåö [armored ship or armour-carrier]. Russian sources mention, for example, the old large steam warships of XIX c. or begXX c. [Tsushima-period] as áðîíåíîñåö/armored ship always [ëèíåéíûé êîðàáëü = battleship, large warship of post-dreadnought period WWI-WWII or large sailing warship of XVIII c.], the same is used for armored coastal defense ships - áðîíåíîñåö áåðåãîâîé îáîðîíû [armored ship of coastal defense, never battleship].
But many vocabulars don't feel such differences at all and translate áðîíåíîñåö and ëèíåéíûé êîðàáëü as battleship easily, which is wrong as we know [when I don't have time I use BabelFish, so battleship appeared one time here; when I have time for my own translations - I check the correctnesses of terms and use only correct ones]. Why should we mistake also as vocabulars?!
But your never find the term ëèíåéíûé êîðàáëü in good Russian sources about Finnish "Väinämöinen" [but only this term you will find in the articles about Japanese "Yamato", or Soviet "Marat" or British "Nelson", for example], "Väinämöinen" is always mentioned as áðîíåíîñåö áåðåãîâîé îáîðîíû [armored ship of coastal defense] never as ëèíåéíûé êîðàáëü áåðåãîâîé îáîðîíû [battleship of coastal defense] - very impossible/strange word-group for Russian naval literature at all :lol: . Translators/vocabulars can make such mistake [and very often], but not original sources.

Do you understand this time?
Juha wrote:
BP wrote:
They are mentioned as BrBO of Finnish Navy always
Juha wrote:
Not so.
You make assumptions, not confirmations. "Not so".
Abbreviations BrBO and BBO mean fully identical terms - Bronenosets beregovoi oborony and Bronenosets beregovoi oborony. Armored ship of coastal defense.

Do you understand this time?

Regards, BP
P.S. Juha wrote:
There were no 20mm guns at the captured Viima class MTB's.
This is interesting. Soviet G-5 were armed with 2x12,7mm mainly. But several sources mention that Finns installed 1x20mm on captured MTBs of that type.
Most probably, you are right - look at the photo [only 12.7mm MG of "Vihuri" is visible]:
http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/mtb/pic/vihuri.jpg

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#54

Post by Juha Tompuri » 10 May 2007, 21:37

BIGpanzer wrote:"Väinämöinen" is always mentioned as... [armored ship of coastal defense] never as ...[battleship of coastal defense] - very impossible/strange word-group for Russian naval literature at all :lol: . Translators/vocabulars can make such mistake [and very often], but not original sources.
Why do you self then use the:
BP wrote:battleship of coastal defense "Väinämöinen
...and from what source???



BP wrote:Abbreviations BrBO and BBO mean fully identical terms -
Might mean, but you wrote
BP wrote:They are mentioned as BrBO of Finnish Navy always
Two different things.

BP wrote:This is interesting. Soviet G-5 were armed with 2x12,7mm mainly. But several sources mention that Finns installed 1x20mm on captured MTBs of that type.
Be careful with those sources.

Regards, Juha

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004, 23:51
Location: Central Europe

#55

Post by BIGpanzer » 11 May 2007, 00:01

Names of the ships of the Finnish navy - http://users.tkk.fi/~jaromaa/Navygaller ... pnames.htm

Hi, Juha!
Have I already mentioned that you are the most outstanding AHF sad apple? IIRC - yes :wink: Do you check every letter in every post from more than 20000 AHF members [23998 at, lets see time of course to be correct, 00:15]? Hard work :roll:
Juha wrote:
Why do you self then use the:
BP wrote:
battleship of coastal defense "Väinämöinen"
...and from what source???
I use armored ship of coastal defense in 99% cases and in that [IIRC first] case I used BabelFish [the same source of term "battleship" as in your case]. The more detailed explanation, please, see in my previous post [3rd paragraph from above, lines 7-10, for example :wink: ]. Careless wonk moderator [but extremelly friendly, thanks for the last PM answer] - the most horrible thing is possible to imagine :lol:
Juha wrote:
BP wrote:
Abbreviations BrBO and BBO mean fully identical terms -
Juha wrote:
Might mean, but you wrote
They are mentioned as BrBO of Finnish Navy always
Two different things.
Ah, sorry :wink: Just have no wish/time to "overtranslate" the abbreviation BrBO again
Juha wrote:
BP wrote:
This is interesting. Soviet G-5 were armed with 2x12,7mm mainly. But several sources mention that Finns installed 1x20mm on captured MTBs of that type.
Juha wrote:
Be careful with those sources.
Jawohl, mon général! Olen samaa mieltä.
But the sources [naval reference-books] is really good [checked many times] and I don't think that this is just mistake or annoying incorrectness in this case [of course, even the best sources make mistakes]. Probably, should be the reason for such info. Did Finns plan to install 20mm guns on captured MTBs?
The another possibility I guess [hmm...mistake then] - "Vasama" [ex-TK-52] of D-3 type was armed with 20mm ShVAK gun initially [probably, as quite many D-3 had only 2x12.7mm], and the same armament was mentioned for G-5 in Finnish navy.
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasama_%28 ... 2C_1942%29 [was "Vasama" rearmed with 20mm/40mm Madsen by Finns?]

Regards, BP

P.S. Have you know this site about motor-boats - http://www.pt-boats.net
I saw the good international forum inside several times before but only now I realize [when I open the main page] that this is the site devoted to new Russian game project.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#56

Post by Juha Tompuri » 11 May 2007, 01:11

BIGpanzer wrote:Names of the ships of the Finnish navy - http://users.tkk.fi/~jaromaa/Navygaller ... pnames.htm
Pretty good list and translations



BP wrote:I use armored ship of coastal defense in 99% cases and in that [IIRC first] case I used BabelFish [the same source of term "battleship" as in your case].
At recently I would say the ratio being more close to 50:50


BP wrote:Jawohl, mon général! Olen samaa mieltä.
But the sources [naval reference-books] is really good [checked many times] and I don't think that this is just mistake or annoying incorrectness in this case [of course, even the best sources make mistakes]. Probably, should be the reason for such info. Did Finns plan to install 20mm guns on captured MTBs?
The another possibility I guess [hmm...mistake then] - "Vasama" [ex-TK-52] of D-3 type was armed with 20mm ShVAK gun initially [probably, as quite many D-3 had only 2x12.7mm], and the same armament was mentioned for G-5 in Finnish navy.
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasama_%28 ... 2C_1942%29 [was "Vasama" rearmed with 20mm/40mm Madsen by Finns?]
Thanks for the promotion.
IIRC the Vasama had 20mm Madsen and later 40mm Bofors added when changed from MTB to Patrol boat (Finnish designation VMV) role. (as it is mentioned at the link you posted)
Also IIRC the Viima class had only one 12,7mm mg

Regards, Juha

P.S. the pt-boat site is new to me.
Have to check.

User avatar
jdoe
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: 02 Jul 2005, 23:33
Location: Oulu, Finland

#57

Post by jdoe » 11 May 2007, 01:34

BIGpanzer wrote:As this is Russian territory it seems better to use Russian name [of Swedish-origin]. Hogland is more correct than Gogland according to my sea atlases, so sorry.
You probably understand, why Finns prefer to use Finnish names for the places lost after the last wars? ;) Especially when most of us laymen know that island only by the name "Suursaari", if at all.

But this is a case of heart over brains and that is something at least I am not good at.

And BTW, "jymy" would be more like the SOUND of a distant thunder. Notice this is very close to "jyly" which basically means the same thing, but is also used to describe artillery barrages far away. At least I've seen it used more often than "jymy"

User avatar
BIGpanzer
Member
Posts: 2812
Joined: 12 Dec 2004, 23:51
Location: Central Europe

#58

Post by BIGpanzer » 11 May 2007, 01:52

Juha wrote:
At recently I would say the ratio being more close to 50:50
Very disagree - I counted terms [I don't take into consideration my explanations of terms, if possible] in all my post through the whole thread [I am also a great wonk, sometimes....] :wink:
battleship of coastal defense - 1 + 1
armored ship of coastal defense - 15
Far away from 50:50 Your pardon for slander :?

Or you prefer quoting for count - no problems, but make this in correct and honest way, please - only corresponding to subject full sentences. Lets continue our nonsense absurdity instead of posting necessary detailed info [as I am trying to do].
Juha wrote:
IIRC the Vasama had 20mm Madsen and later 40mm Bofors added when changed from MTB to Patrol boat (Finnish designation VMV) role. (as it is mentioned at the link you posted)
Also IIRC the Viima class had only one 12,7mm mg
Thanks for the info!
jdoe wrote:
You probably understand, why Finns prefer to use Finnish names for the places lost after the last wars? Especially when most of us laymen know that island only by the name "Suursaari", if at all.
I understand completelly and even more. But lets use modern "international" names [as in atlases - Hogland is much more common] if possible, or both names [Finnish/Russian or Russian/Finnish] in such cases as lost/captured/acquired Russian/Finnish territories during WWII for better understanding by forummembers and most correctness. After Harri's post I started to write Hogland/Suursaari
If some Russians prefer to use [heart over brain] names for the lost places as "the Great Finnish Principality of Russian Empire" I'll explain also that it will be more correct to use the "Republic of Finland" at the moment :lol:

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11563
Joined: 11 Sep 2002, 21:02
Location: Mylsä

#59

Post by Juha Tompuri » 11 May 2007, 07:39

BIGpanzer wrote:
Juha wrote:
At recently I would say the ratio being more close to 50:50
Very disagree - I counted terms [I don't take into consideration my explanations of terms, if possible] in all my post through the whole thread [I am also a great wonk, sometimes....] :wink:
battleship of coastal defense - 1 + 1
armored ship of coastal defense - 15
JT wrote: At recently
includes also http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=117516

A friendly remark, drop the personal issues.

Regards, Juha

Janne
Member
Posts: 473
Joined: 15 Feb 2006, 12:53
Location: Helsinki

#60

Post by Janne » 11 May 2007, 08:56

To BP: The 2nd MTB flotilla was based in Klamila. Klamila is not in Hamina. (Repeat as many times as necessary...)

It is recognized that the Soviet AF performed several missions, starting from 06.45 (Finnish time), against German ships that were returning to Tallinn. However, the two missions that could've said to have been "air support" to the Finnish defenders took place around 10.40 and about one hour later. The target of one was, roughly, the German positions in the NE part of the island, but the bulk of it hit the no man's land between the fighting parties (and managed to get in the way of a Finnish counter-attack which had to be aborted). The target of the other were the ships etc in Suurkylä harbour, but they had already been damaged/destroyed by Finnish artillery fire and left unmanned by the Germans.

I cannot deny too vehemently that the Finns did not request any assistance at some higher level, but it would appear that if they did they failed to tell the local commander about it. FWIW it could be that the Soviets were eager to interpret a Finnish communication as an plea for assistance or that it was seen politically fitting to try to establish a case of co-operation against Germany. OTOH it could be that the Finns did ask for help, but true to their nature they refuse to admit it afterwards and prefer to claim they fought alone. Or whatever. (In the absence of evidence we'll have to judge these things on a gut feeling, and ours may differ...)


On the general subject of place-names, I would find it absurd to use any other than the Finnish names for Finnish places - including those that were turned Soviet in 1940 or 1944. On the particular subject of Suursaari, I find it entirely natural for all participants - Finnish, Soviet, German - to use their own language also in an English text, if the reader can be expected to have the relevant information about the many names (including Swedish) of the island.

Last and maybe least, the mysterious Russian translitteration hides the small island of Vanhankylänmaa about 30km off the coast of Kotka near Haapasaari. A small coastal artillery battery was located on the island. However, since it wasn't under attack, it is probably a mistranslation to write that the 2nd flotilla was dispatched to "help the garrison" there.

Post Reply

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”