Could the finnish cannons have pounded Leningrad?

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
Post Reply
User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4785
Joined: 15 Jun 2004, 16:19
Location: Finland

#1

Post by Topspeed » 16 Aug 2004, 20:35

Sami K,

Could the finnish cannons ( 152 mm ) have pounded Leningrad had we choosed to do so ?:?

Juke T

User avatar
KalaVelka
Member
Posts: 1087
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 17:12
Location: Suomi Finland Perkele

#2

Post by KalaVelka » 16 Aug 2004, 20:40

error post.
Last edited by KalaVelka on 16 Aug 2004, 20:56, edited 1 time in total.


Sami_K
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 10 Apr 2002, 08:46
Location: Finland

#3

Post by Sami_K » 16 Aug 2004, 20:47

Topspeed wrote:Sami K,

Could the finnish cannons ( 152 mm ) have pounded Leningrad had we choosed to do so ?:?

Juke T
No, the ranges of our coastal artillery near Leningrad is drawn on the map: http://www.winterwar.com/other/History/ ... emands.gif

Had there been a 305 mm battery in Ino, as there was during Tsarist Russia, it would've been a different matter. However, the Finns dismantled the battery as agreed in Dorpat 1920.

Our only mobile long range guns (a two-gun railroad battery "Akseli" with 152 mm Canet guns see: http://www.winterwar.com/forces/FinArmy ... tm#Railway), couldn't have reached Leningrad even if the guns would've taken firing positions on the border river.

Cheers,
Sami

User avatar
KalaVelka
Member
Posts: 1087
Joined: 26 Dec 2002, 17:12
Location: Suomi Finland Perkele

#4

Post by KalaVelka » 16 Aug 2004, 20:48

Topspeed wrote:Sami K,

Could the finnish cannons ( 152 mm ) have pounded Leningrad had we choosed to do so ?:?

Juke T
I dont know about the forts but I started to think that why didnt Ilmarinen and Väinämöinen shelled Leningrad with 254mm cannons (the range of the 254mm Bofors were 31km)? They surely would have had enough protection from the air by Luftwaffe and Ilmavoimat, atleast in the 1941-42.

The only reason that comes to my mind is the Mannerheims will that we should not attack against Leningrad. But in technicaly the bombard from the monitors would have been possible?

Kasper

Sami_K
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 10 Apr 2002, 08:46
Location: Finland

#5

Post by Sami_K » 16 Aug 2004, 21:03

KalaVelka wrote: I dont know about the forts but I started to think that why didnt Ilmarinen and Väinämöinen shelled Leningrad with 254mm cannons (the range of the 254mm Bofors were 31km)? They surely would have had enough protection from the air by Luftwaffe and Ilmavoimat, atleast in the 1941-42.

The only reason that comes to my mind is the Mannerheims will that we should not attack against Leningrad. But in technicaly the bombard from the monitors would have been possible?

Kasper

Too risky. Why risk those damn expensive (they were, in Finnish terms) boats, while you can deliver bigger 'bangs' with planes, and the Germans had even bigger guns firing at Leningrad from the land front.

Besides, between a firing position in range of Leningrad was Kronstadt + the batteries on the mainland, which meant that the approaches to Leningrad were extremely heavily armed with coastal guns.

Some information from "Fortress Europe - European Fortifications of World War II" by J. E. Kaufmann and R. M. Jurga.

"Kronstadt stood on Kotlin Island about 20 km west of Leningrad. It was the main naval base for the Soviet Baltic Fleet. A number of forts and batteries on the island, on the sea & on the mainland to the east & west encircled the base. Since 1893 the main forts were:
Fort Rif & Fort Shants (Schanz).
- Fort Rif (on the westend of the Kronstadt island) was armed w/2 armored turrets mounting 2x12-inch Model 52 guns each, a four gun battery of electrically loaded 10-inch Model 00 guns, two batteries w/ 2x6-inch Model Canet guns on each flank & a 75mm AA gun battery.
- Fort Shants mounted a total of 8 batteries to include two batteries of modern 120mm Vickers guns, 2 batteries of six obsolete Model 1877 9-inch guns & 16 obsolete 11-inch Model 77 and Model 88 mortars.
- The Demidov Battery (southwestern part of island) consisted of 6x9-inch Model 77 mortars & 6x6-inch Canet guns. Forts 1 thru 7 were, up till the 1930s, armed mostly old 3-inch gun batteries. However, Fort 4 had a two gun battery of 120mm Vickers. Many forts also had 150cm searchlights in addition to stockpiling many sea mines.
- Fort Pervomaiski (northeast of Kotlin Island and just off the mainland) was armed w/5x11-inch guns, 12x6-inch guns & 6x130mm guns. It also had two main gun turrets mounting Vickers 8-inch guns.
- Fort Krasnoarmeiski was similarly armed.

On the mainland, in the Yhinmaki-Shepelevo area, stood several heavily armed forts.
- Fort Krasnoflotski had two turrets mounting 2x12-inch guns each, four single 12-inch gun turrets, a battery of old 10-inch Model 00 guns and 3x120mm Vickers guns.
- Fort Bukharin mounted 3x6-inch Canet guns & four 120mm guns.
- Fort Pulkovo had two turrets mounting 2x8-inch guns each.
- Fort Shepeleov had two turrets mounting massive 14-inch guns and four 120mm Vickers guns.
Coast Artillery: Range:
355.6mm (14-inch) - 31,000 meters
305mm (12-inch) - 24,600 to 42,000 m
234mm - 24,000 m
203mm (8-inch) - 33,500 m
152mm (6-inch) - 14,000 to 18,000 m
130mm (5-inch) - 19,600 to 25,400 m
105mm & 152mm (old) - 15,000 to 18,000 m
75mm (French Canet) - 8,000 meters"

Cheers,
Sami

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

#6

Post by Mark V » 16 Aug 2004, 21:06

Topspeed wrote:Sami K,

Could the finnish cannons ( 152 mm ) have pounded Leningrad had we choosed to do so ?:?

Juke T
All Canets were out of range and "pounded" is really strong word when considering an multimillion city like Leningrad.

Not that there would had been any desire to do anything like that - Finns always very carefully avoided to bring arms to bear to city area of Leningrad - equally during Winter war and Continuation war - i am mostly thinking about bombers...


Regards, Mark V

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4230
Joined: 24 Jun 2002, 12:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

#7

Post by Harri » 16 Aug 2004, 21:42

Topspeed wrote:Could the finnish cannons ( 152 mm ) have pounded Leningrad had we choosed to do so ?:?
:roll: What guns you are talking about? No way! The longest range 152 mm cannons in Finland were 152/45 CR Canet coastal guns which had a range of slightly more than 20 kms. Modernized "turned" guns had longer range because of greater elevation. 254/45 D Durlacher coastal guns had a range of 27.5 km (missed from Sami's list).

The only 152 mm field guns in Finland during Winter War (152 K/04, 152 H/15 and 152 H/17) had a maximum range of 11.2 km. The longest range field guns during Winter War were 107 K/10 and 107 K/13 (together 11 pcs): 13.6 km and Swedish 105 K/34: 16.3 km. There were four pieces during the Winter War.

Typical howitzers obtained later had a range of less than 17.2 km. Captured Soviet 122 K/31 cannons had exceptionally long range: 20 km. Movable Finnish coastal artillery had these guns. Also our 1st Railway Battery had 180/57 NRaut railway guns which had the range of 37.7 km. Not s single of our 305 mm guns (including three railway guns) were not in Karelian Isthmus.

Note that these are maximum ranges not necessary obtainable for all type of ammo.
Last edited by Harri on 16 Aug 2004, 21:51, edited 1 time in total.

Sami_K
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 10 Apr 2002, 08:46
Location: Finland

#8

Post by Sami_K » 16 Aug 2004, 21:49

Harri wrote:254/45 D Durlacher coastal guns had a range of 27.5 km (missed from Sami's list).
The list is about the Soviet guns near Leningrad & their ranges.

Cheers,
Sami

User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#9

Post by Christian W. » 18 Aug 2004, 13:57

Even if we could have done that, we wouldnt have needed to, the Germans had bigger guns, like the Railguns (Railway guns ). Though we also had Railway gun " Akseli " it was nothing compared to the German Railway guns.
Last edited by Christian W. on 18 Aug 2004, 15:53, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4785
Joined: 15 Jun 2004, 16:19
Location: Finland

#10

Post by Topspeed » 18 Aug 2004, 14:27

Christian W,


Not quite but 840 mm and 45 km !

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=39433


regards,

Juke T

Sami_K
Member
Posts: 200
Joined: 10 Apr 2002, 08:46
Location: Finland

#11

Post by Sami_K » 18 Aug 2004, 14:32

The German RR-guns in WW2 were:

- Name of the Gun
- Caliber (mm)
- Weight (kg)
- Projectile (kg)
- Range (km)
- Muzzle velocity (m/s)

K 12
- 210
- 302 000
- 107,5
- 115
- 1500

K aka "Schlanke Bertha"
- 280
- 218 000
- 136-255,5
- 62-151
- 1128-1524

"Lange Bruno"
- 280
- 123 000
- 284
- 36,1
- 875

"Theodor Bruno"
- 240
- 94 000
- 148,5
- 10
- 675

"Schwere Bruno"
- 280
- 118 000
- 284
- 35,7
- 860

"Bruno Neue K"
- 280
- 150 000
- 265
- 46,7
- 995

"Siegfried"
- 380
- 294 000
- 495
- 55,7
- 1050

"Gustav"
- 800
- 1 350 000
- 4 800
- 47
- 710
(IIRC, the last one was also known as "Schwere Gustav", but can't say for sure. Can't recall where I got these from, most probably from Jyri Paulaharju aeons ago). Gustav was, hands down, the most massive gun. I found this link, but I didn't have time to check if the figures match with the ones I posted here. http://www.e94114.de/Eisenbahngeschuetz ... etze01.htm )

Cheers,
Sami

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4785
Joined: 15 Jun 2004, 16:19
Location: Finland

#12

Post by Topspeed » 18 Aug 2004, 15:30


User avatar
Christian W.
Member
Posts: 2494
Joined: 10 Aug 2004, 19:26
Location: Vantaa, Finland

#13

Post by Christian W. » 18 Aug 2004, 15:33

I apologize. I read about Dora four years ago and mixed the range and name with Big Bertha. Again, i apologize.

Post Reply

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”