Russian submarines

Discussions on all aspects of the USSR, from the Russian Civil War till the end of the Great Patriotic War and the war against Japan. Hosted by Art.
User avatar
de-gouden-ridder
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 15:50
Location: Vlaanderen

Russian submarines

Post by de-gouden-ridder » 22 Sep 2002 16:37

At this moment there is a movie named K-19 in the theatres. Now, I was wondering how big the Sovjet submarinefleet was during the war?
And did their submarines made the German work more difficult?

Anybody know something about that?

Thanks

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3901
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Victor » 22 Sep 2002 17:23

The ChF (black Sea Fleet) had 45 IIRC. I will have to check up this figure. They sunk several vessels, both by mines and torpedos. I can post a list of Sovit submarine sinkings if you are interested.

User avatar
Juha Hujanen
Financial supporter
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Mar 2002 11:32
Location: Suur-Savo,Finland

Post by Juha Hujanen » 22 Sep 2002 20:46

I've have something about Russian subs in Baltic.

Summer 41 Russians had 68(some statics say 51) subs in Baltic.During retreating to Leningrad Baltic Fleet lost c.30 subs.9 subs were buid and added to strenght.9.1.42 order was made in Leningrad,that main task of navy was to make subfleet ready for action and submariners and dockspecialist were freeed from front and returned to their original tasks.Spring 42 17 subs were ready for operational use.They were gathered to one Brigade and were led by Captein 1st class A.M Stetsenko.Later strengt was raised to 30 subs,from what c.10 subs were supposed be on sea at any given day during sailing season(baltic could freeze during winter makin sub operations imbossible).

Subbase was made in island of Lavansaari and 30 missions were launched in 42.Of them 23 were able to penetrate minefields and subnet set by Germans and Finns(Gulf of Finland was probably world most mined sea when Germans and Finns attemped to seal Soviet baltic fleet to Leningrad).Russian subs sink 18 ships(37789 tons) and lost 12 subs destroyed and 6 badly damaged in 42.Seven of ships sunk were Finnish merchmants,5 Germans,5 Swedish and 1 Dutch.

In 43 not a single Soviet sub managed penerate to Baltic thru minefields and subnet and guarding German and Finnish vessels.2 Soviet subs(S-9 andS-12) were sunk.

In the start of 44 Soviet Baltic Fleet had 18 subs operational but they remained in their bases to September after that they went to sea again.They sunk c.10 German ships.30.1.45 S-13 sinked Wilhelm Gustloff and 10.2.45 same sub sinked General Steuben.L-3 sinked Goya 17.4.45.Sub S-4 was lost.

At least 4 Russian submarine commanders were awarded with Hero of Soviet Union award:Lisin(S-7),Bogorad(Sts-3109,Kalinin(Sts-307)And Konovalov(L-3).Most succesfull of commanders was Marinesko(S-13).

That's all i got.

Regards Juha

User avatar
de-gouden-ridder
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 18 Aug 2002 15:50
Location: Vlaanderen

Post by de-gouden-ridder » 22 Sep 2002 20:59

Victor wrote: I can post a list of Sovit submarine sinkings if you are interested.


I would appreciate it, Victor. :)

Thanks Juha for the info. It is very usefull.

Koenraad/

Mark V
Financial supporter
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002 09:41
Location: Suomi Finland

Post by Mark V » 23 Sep 2002 06:12

Good summary Juha, but one correction:

There weren't submarine net across Gulf of Finland during 1942 open-sea season. That's why some Soviet subs managed to penetrate to Baltic, the minefields alone weren't enough.

From spring 1943 to autumn 1944 not a single one Soviet sub managed to penetrate Finn and German defence system.

User avatar
Juha Hujanen
Financial supporter
Posts: 2196
Joined: 20 Mar 2002 11:32
Location: Suur-Savo,Finland

Post by Juha Hujanen » 23 Sep 2002 16:09

Damm it,you are right Mark V.I checked my sources and found that planning of subnet started winter 42-43.marc 43 german netlanding unit arrived to Tallin and in May they had their part of net finished and Finns got their net in ready in April.

thanks for correction.The net must have been world longest net in sea.Probably over 50km long.

Chears Juha

Mark V
Financial supporter
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002 09:41
Location: Suomi Finland

Post by Mark V » 23 Sep 2002 20:20

Juha Hujanen wrote:thanks for correction.The net must have been world longest net in sea.Probably over 50km long.
Chears Juha


Long it was indeed. And very effective. Soviets just gived up even trying to penetrate it. First Soviet subs after 42 that got out to Baltic sea were escorted across minefields and subnet by Finnish navy after armistace between Finland and Soviet Union in autumn 1944, such inpenetrable Gulf of Finland was to Soviet navy. Too bad that we were forced to do that... the consequences were grave.

I don't have sources for exact lenght of the net now, but haven't heard longer submarine net elsewhere. At least not any other net that blocked whole strait of open sea. Other nets that i have heard defended harbours and some fjords.

The ability of Finnish, German and some part also Swedish navy to keep Baltic as sea of peace was key factor for survival of Finland, continued supply of raw materials from Sweden to Germany and maintaining only peacefull area (except western Allied mining in southern part of Baltic sea) for training of Kriegsmarine U-boats.

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3901
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Post by Victor » 24 Sep 2002 15:29

In 1941, the Soviets had in the Black Sea 47 submarines of three classes: Dekabrist (99 tons), Maliutka (200 tons) and Siutka (600 tons).
In 1943, there were 29 subs.

Here is the slinking list for the Black Sea:

1. Peles (ROM) on 15 Aug 1941, transport (5,708 tons)
2. Superga (ITA) on 29 Sep 1941, transport (6,154 tons)
3. Torcello (ITA) on 5 Nov 1941, transport (3,336 tons)
4. Sulina (ROM) on 29 May 1942, transport (3,495 tons)
5. Ankara (?) on 23 Aug 1942, tug
6. Salzburg (GER) on 1 Oct 1942, transport (1,742 tons)
7. Oltul (ROM) on 6 Oct 1942, transport
8. Carpati (ROM) on 10 Oct 1942, transport (4,336 tons)
9. Le Progres (GER) on 21 Oct 1942, 511 tons
10. Suceava (ROM) on 20 Apr 1943, transport (6,846 tons)
11. Varna (BUL) on 20 Aug 1943, transport (2,141 tons)
12. Thiesbe (GER) on 30 Aug 1943, transport (1,782 tons)
13. Santa Fe (GER) on 23 Nov 1943, transport (4,627 tons)
14. Volga-Don (GER) on 25 Nov 1943, transport (965 tons)
15. Theodorich (GER) on 12 Nov 1943, transport (3,409 tons)
16. MFP F580 (GER), on 10 Dec 1943, armed pontoon
17. MFP 592 (GER), on 15 Dec 1943, armed pontoon (it is not sure it was a sub)
18. Thyra 5 (GER), on 25 Dec 1943

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15095
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Post by Andy H » 24 Sep 2002 20:12

The Russian submarine fleet as of August 1939 was 150, whilst by June 10th 1940 that figure was 115, but by the time Russia entered the war some 218 boats either in operation or under construction.

Between August'41 to August'45 only 65 new boats entered service. The Russian navy was the only navy to end the war with less boats than it started with.

When war broke out some 35 boats were operating in the Baltic with a further 50 refitting or obselter and relegated to training. The main sub base was at Libau (1st Flotilla). By winter when effective op's finished some 27 Russian boats had been lost from 85.

:D Andy from the Shire

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 26 Sep 2002 00:09

"Goya " sinking was the most catastrophic marine disaster of all times.
About 7000 people perished,

User avatar
Sam H.
Member
Posts: 1975
Joined: 19 Sep 2002 21:21
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Post by Sam H. » 27 Sep 2002 01:06

http://www.feldgrau.com/wilhelmgustloff.html

Gustloff was the most traggic naval loss in history - check out the link above.

Overall, the Russian subs were largely ineffective in WWII. Then again, they did not have much to prey on either.

Karl da Kraut
Member
Posts: 341
Joined: 16 Sep 2002 12:00
Location: Germany

Post by Karl da Kraut » 17 Oct 2002 17:34

I read an interesting book about the Soviet navy in WWII written by the German Vice-Admiral F. Ruge. Ruge stated that the Soviet navy - especially her submarines - performed surprisingly poorly in WWII. Unfortunately this was some years ago, so I can't remember the title. :cry:

ISU-152
Member
Posts: 711
Joined: 14 Nov 2002 14:02
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine

Post by ISU-152 » 18 Nov 2002 14:48

Poor performance by russian subs? I highly doubt it. First of all Germany did not have a major fleet to fight with. And secondly Soviet Navy was the only unit which met the german invasion fully prepared for attack.

Lunin torpedoed the best German battleship "Tirpitz", after it has lost its speed it was finished by Allied Air force. And Marinesco sank the biggest transport Germany had killing over 7000 people most of them crews for future german submarines. He was declared by Hitler as No 2 enemy after Stalin. That speaks about something.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11486
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 18 Nov 2002 18:19

ISU-152,

Women, children and eldery people = future sub crew? 8O

Juha

Mark V
Financial supporter
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002 09:41
Location: Suomi Finland

Post by Mark V » 18 Nov 2002 20:23

ISU-152 wrote:Poor performance by russian subs? I highly doubt it.


Hi.

Soviet subs didn't even seriously hindered Baltic traffic routes during open water seasons 1941-42, in those years that they had possibility to sail in Baltic, in other words the years before German-Finnish submarine net across Gulf of Finland. Navies of Germany, Finland and Sweden did take care of that. This traffic across Baltic was essential to Germany. Critical supply of iron ore and copper from Sweden to Germany, supplies for German mountain troops in northern Finland and Norway, and the whole foreign trade of ally - Finland. So - there were targets and plenty of them. Did they accomplish anything worthwile ?? - NO. Did they had extremely valuable targets ?? - YES. I agree that after 1941 Soviet sub fleet had extremely difficult fighting enviroment and very limited possibilities for training and maintainance.

First of all Germany did not have a major fleet to fight with.


Well, Soviets didn't have major fleet either...

And secondly Soviet Navy was the only unit which met the german invasion fully prepared for attack.


Prepared to Barbarossa they were, i agree to that.

Lunin torpedoed the best German battleship "Tirpitz", after it has lost its speed it was finished by Allied Air force.


God. Do you still believe that old propaganda ??

>>>At 1700 the Russian submarine K.21 reported the Germans as steering 045° some 72 kilometer northwest of North Cape and claimed to have hit Tirpitz with two torpedoes. However no mention of a submarine attack is to be found in the battleship's war diary and she sustained no damage.

>>>5 July 1942 operations against the convoys PQ-17 and QP-13 are cancelled after the breakdown of several supporting units. During this operation, the Tirpitz was attacked by the Russian submarine K21. While the Russians claimed a hit on the battleship, the Germans did not noticed any attack. Tirpitz was redrawn to Bogenfjord were it arrived on 6 July 1942.


German's didn't even notice the attack. That says it all. Don't try to take the honour away from those brave British frogmen, submariners and flyers who sacrificed their lives in many attacks against Tirpitz.

source: http://www.bismarck-class.dk


And Marinesco sank the biggest transport Germany had killing over 7000 people most of them crews for future german submarines. He was declared by Hitler as No 2 enemy after Stalin. That speaks about something.



I don't even bother to answer this.

Return to “The Soviet Union at War 1917-1945”