It's my mistake, submarine was lost in october 1942. Russian sources said about last contact with submarine at 01.10.42. The exact date ShCh-320 was lost is not known.Do the Soviet sources really date the ShCh -320 lost in 1941?
Regards
If you mean my literature sources [for Rodan I don't know] - they are as much anti-Soviet as you can imagine I would say [IIRC I've mentioned thir date as 2005 and USSR collapsed in 1991, have you heard about this fact ] "Anti-Soviet" concerning the effectiveness of Soviet submarines.....The author call Soviet submarines as "Reds" with strong negative meaning quite often. Obviously he didn't like Soviet times a lot [but the losses analyzed and described in the most possible correct way, nevertheless, without any overestimations in advantage to Germans and other Axis nations]. Submarine losses are the most well documented subject in my opinion.Juha wrote:
Do the Soviet sources really date the ShCh -320 lost in 1941?
As I've already mentioned quite many sources from the Soviet time period mention that Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso" sank either ShCh-320 or ShCh-308 during battery charging 27.10.1942 indeed.[ShCh-320 sank transport 05.07.1942, another transport could be sank 26.9.1941 [not confirmed]. ShCh-320 was lost 03.-07.1942 probably because of mine explosion to the north-west from Is. Vaindlo. 23.10.1942 it was awarded with Red Banner Order].
What Finns wrote [the most detailed info I could find in Finnish sources]:On the sums of raid victories of "ShCh-320" there was sinking the three transports of enemy (two of 6.000 brt and one of 8.000 brt - [one not confirmed]). The whole crew of submarine was awarded by orders and medals. Commander "ShCh-320" I.M.Vishnevskiy is awarded with the Order of Lenin. On 23 October, 1942, by the Decree of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR submarine "ShCh-320" was awarded with the Order of the Red Banner. About the fact that their ship became Red banner neither commander nor crew of submarine so they did not learn. On 1 October, 1942, "ShCh-320" it left to the position into the region to the West from Island Bornholm. [position number 1]. During the raid "ShCh-320" didn't communicate with radio and its further fate was unknown. Supposedly, submarine perished 3-10 October of 1942 on the mine. Some sources indicate that "ShCh-320" it blew up on the floating mine in the region of battery charging to northwest from Vaindlo island on 3 October, 1942. It is possible that submarine heated the German antisubmarine warfare ships in the evening on 3 October on Gogland island (left simultaneously with "ShCh-320" submarine "ShCh-303" it heard in this direction the explosions of depth charges).. It is sometimes indicated that the submarine became the victim of the torpedo of Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso" in Ute region on 27 October, 1942, that it does not correspond to reality. To "ShCh-320" perished 37 people.
The detailed history of ShCh-320 [use Babel Fish, sources from 1990 to 2002]It was dark and visiblity poor due to drizzle. At 19.40 Iku-Turso turned east to enter the seaway, when suddenly a large enemy submarine was seen closing fast only 100 m away. The enemy boat passed Iku-Turso at 30 m distance and Iku-Turso opened fire with 20 mm Madsen gun. About 50 shots were fired. Some hits were seen in enemy tower, but it disappeared into darkness and drizzle. Iku-Turso got again hydrophone contact and followed it easily. Rain had gone and in moonlight visibility was 4-5 miles. At 23.51 a submarine tower was seen in direction given by hydrophone. The enemy boat surfaced and sailed to east with high speed. At 23.58 Iku-Turso shot two torpedoes against the enemy submarine and the victim, Shtsh 320, sank 00.01 at 20 miles west from Marhällan. The distance had again been estimated too short (this time it was actually 4 200 meters instead the estimated 2 000 meters) and five gunshots were fired before one torpedo hit
Rodan wrote:
As for ShCh-320. The last contact with submarine was at night 01.10.41 so it can't be sunk 27.09.41.
Juha wrote:
Regards, Þõà
Laurence wrote:
Could someone tell me what type and capabilities did the Red Banner Fleet have on the Pacific coast in regards to submarines in the 1930-1945 era?
Here a journey of ShCh-303 May-June 1943 from Stalinin Kiusa - Himmlerin Täi (tease of Stalin - lice of Himmler) by Ohto ManninenBIGpanzer wrote:submarines of "ShCh"-type [X series] had independence in food supplies and fuel only for 20 days usually [see specifications in every book about submarines]! This is the significant proof here in my opinion![/color]
Pacific Fleet was awarded with Red Banner order only in 1965. It was called as Sea Forces of Far East [MSDV] till 11.01.1935, and then as Pacific Fleet [TOF].Laurence Strong wrote:
Could someone tell me what type and capabilities did the Red Banner Fleet have on the Pacific coast in regards to submarines in the 1930-1945 era?
Do Russians have a long tradition in transliteration this name [as me seems not among the most popular in Russia]?Rodan wrote:
Phonetically both variants are correct. AFAIK, traditionly translation Þõà is used.
Beer is preferableLaurence wrote:
BP
If I could reach across the ocean I would kiss you......well maybe not , but I would buy you all the beer you want.
-23.09.1942 [21.10] - check point Norchepingsk bay [position No. 11], escorted by 5 mine-sweepers [No. 210, 211, 215, 217, 218] and 3 patrol boats till East Gogland broad.
-24.09.1942 [05.29] - check point [diving point] at East Gogland broad.
-27.09.1942 [00.08] - finished crossing the Gulf of Finland, [22.30] - check point (position) near lighthouse Õóâóäøåð [exact name?].
-28.09.1942 - patrol in the area near lighthouse Landsort, didn't attack convoy because of shallow depth.
-30.09.1942 - Swedish submarine was detected in the morning.
-01.10.1942 - night, received the order from the base to go to the position in Aland sea [position No. 6]
-02.10.1942 [02.31] - reported about arrival to the area of island Arnholm. [14.14] - underwater torpedo attack against convoy [3 transports, 1 mine-sweeper] (15000 t and 7000 t, 2 torpedos, distance - 15 cables, 2 explosions in 2 min) - Finnish transport "Vanda" and mine-layer "Ruotsinsalmi" were attacked unsuccessfully. [14.25-14.52] anti-submarine ships dropped 11 depth charges without any success.
-03.10.1942 - detected single mine-sweeper and convoy, but torpedo attacks were canceled because of large off-bow angle.
-07.10.1942 - detected convoy, torpedo attack was cancelled.
-08.10.1942 - detected two convoys, torpedo attacks were cancelled.
-09.10.1942 - detected Finnish submarine during the daytime, began torpedo attack, but Finnish submarine dived.
-10.10.1942 - detected convoy, torpedo attack was cancelled because of anti-submarine vessels barrier.
-11.10.1942 - detected convoy (3 transports, 3 mine-sweepers, 4 patrol boats), [12.26] began underwater torpedo attack in the point 59.58/19.39 - [transport 7000 t, 2 torpedos, distance - 15 cables, 1 explosion] - Finnish transport "Orient" and German transport "Hiddensee" were attacked unsuccessfully. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 7 depth charges without any success.
-12.10.1942 - detected convoy, daytime, attack was cancelled because of long distance.
-13.10.1942 - detected convoy and single mine-sweeper, attacks were cancelled because of reaction of anti-submarine vessels.
-16.10.1942 - detected two convoys, attacks were cancelled because of long distances and bad off-bow angle.
-21.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [15.36] against convoy (6 transports, 2 patrol ships, 2 mine-sweepers, 2 patrol boats) - (tanker 10.000 t, 2 torpedos, distance 7-12 cables, torpedos missed because of tanker manoeuvre), Shch-307 broke surface after torpedo salvo; enemy patrol ships didn't attack.
-23-24.10.1942 - moved to the south area of the position.
-26.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [12.07] against convoy (5 transports, 4 patrol ships) - [transport - 10000 t, distance 6 cabels, 2 torpedos, strong explosion after 55 sec]. Finnish transport "Betty H." (2478 brt, pyrites on board, 12 men were lost) was sank in the point 59.54/19.36. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 10 depth charges without any success. [15.50] Two Finnish submarines were detected ["Vetehinen" and "Iku-Turso"], but commander of Shch-307 decided not to attack them - believed that were Swedish submarines. [20.44] crossed with "Iku-Turso" on counter-courses, distance 20 m; Finns made near 50 shots from 20mm gun without any damages.
-27.10.1942 - [01.00] Shch-307 was detected and unsuccessfully attacked by "Iku-Turso", artillery fire from Finnish submarine, 2 Finnish torpedos missed. Shch-307 crash dived, received the order to return back to base
-28.10.1942 - [04.10.] began to cross Gulf of Finland.
-31.10.1942 - daytime, two times touched mine anchor lines south-west from island Small Tuters.
-01.11.1942 - [10.05] met with Soviet patrol boats. [12.46] arrived to Norre-Kappellaht (exact name?) bay.
-06.11.1942 [17.00] - 07.11.1942 [00.55] moved to Kronshtadt, escort - 5 mine-sweepers [No. 207, 210, 211, 217, 218], 2 patrol boats.
From http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/typ_sch.htm [the database of all Soviet warships of WWII, not so detailed about careers, nevertheless].
27.10.1942 was attacked by Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso", but, despite the report of Finnish captain, remained undamaged.....
Victories of Shch-307 during 4 navigations of WWII period:
German submarine U-144 [09.08.1941]
Finnish transport "Betty H" [2478 brt, 26.10.1942]
German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945]
Doubt victories:
German transport "Skrunda" [2141 brt, 03.11.1944]
German transport "Marie Ferdinand" [1757 brt, 09.01.1945]
- seems to be that Finnish captain became a fairy tale writer after the warFrom my post above:
The most detailed info I could find in Finnish sources:
It was dark and visiblity poor due to drizzle. At 19.40 Iku-Turso turned east to enter the seaway, when suddenly a large enemy submarine was seen closing fast only 100 m away. The enemy boat passed Iku-Turso at 30 m distance and Iku-Turso opened fire with 20 mm Madsen gun. About 50 shots were fired. Some hits were seen in enemy tower, but it disappeared into darkness and drizzle. Iku-Turso got again hydrophone contact and followed it easily. Rain had gone and in moonlight visibility was 4-5 miles. At 23.51 a submarine tower was seen in direction given by hydrophone. The enemy boat surfaced and sailed to east with high speed. At 23.58 Iku-Turso shot two torpedoes against the enemy submarine and the victim, Shtsh 320, sank 00.01 at 20 miles west from Marhällan. The distance had again been estimated too short (this time it was actually 4 200 meters instead the estimated 2 000 meters) and five gunshots were fired before one torpedo hit
I am not a translator so I can't answer that question. I interested in history of Winter War, Continuation War and civil war in Karelia so finnish names in russian transcriotion are not unknown to me. Due to that facts my answer is you can find litarature in russian with finnish names if you want.Do Russians have a long tradition in transliteration this name [as me seems not among the most popular in Russia]?
...which has piqued my interest. At a glance, the tonnage of supplies delivered and the number of civilians evacuated seem impressive. Do you know where to verify and flesh out these numbers?Rolf Erikson wrote:...In all, thirty submarines successfully completed seventy-five missions and aborted seven due to damage or Axis opposition, with the loss of two vessels: Shch-214, lost to the Italian MTB MAS-571 on 19 June; and S-32, to German aircraft a week later. Although the transport of gasoline in ballast tanks caused at least four explosions and fires, the submarines transported 4,000 tons of material to the besieged city and evacuated about 1,400 wounded women and children to Caucasus ports...
Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at? What "new" info there has been "found" at Russian era that has changed the older info?BP about ShCh-320 sinking by Iku-Turso wrote:Modern Russian sources don't support this [interesting, that old Soviets did -
Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.BIGpanzer wrote:PS to Juha.
Here is the info from the very detailed site about careers of all Soviet submarines. This is about Shch-307 "Treska"/""Codfish"[/color] [with list of references]: http://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files ... Sh-307.htm
What are you thinking about this info [one of the raids of Shch-307 in Baltic]? ...
...-26.10.1942 - underwater torpedo attack [12.07] against convoy (5 transports, 4 patrol ships) - [transport - 10000 t, distance 6 cabels, 2 torpedos, strong explosion after 55 sec]. Finnish transport "Betty H." (2478 brt, pyrites on board, 12 men were lost) was sank in the point 59.54/19.36. Aircraft and patrol ships dropped 10 depth charges without any success. [15.50] Two Finnish submarines were detected ["Vetehinen" and "Iku-Turso"], but commander of Shch-307 decided not to attack them - believed that were Swedish submarines. [20.44] crossed with "Iku-Turso" on counter-courses, distance 20 m; Finns made near 50 shots from 20mm gun without any damages.
-27.10.1942 - [01.00] Shch-307 was detected and unsuccessfully attacked by "Iku-Turso", artillery fire from Finnish submarine, 2 Finnish torpedos missed. Shch-307 crash dived, received the order to return back to base
AFAIK the two first victories are real, do you have truthful info about the 1944-1945 claims?BP wrote:From http://sovnavy-ww2.by.ru/submarines/typ_sch.htm [the database of all Soviet warships of WWII, not so detailed about careers, nevertheless].
27.10.1942 was attacked by Finnish submarine "Iku-Turso", but, despite the report of Finnish captain, remained undamaged.....
Victories of Shch-307 during 4 navigations of WWII period:
German submarine U-144 [09.08.1941]
Finnish transport "Betty H" [2478 brt, 26.10.1942]
German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945]
Doubt victories:
German transport "Skrunda" [2141 brt, 03.11.1944]
German transport "Marie Ferdinand" [1757 brt, 09.01.1945]
I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.BP wrote:- seems to be that Finnish captain became a fairy tale writer after the war
What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?BP wrote: Shch-301 in surface exploded on mine 27.08.1941 near cape Juminda, 13 men were resqued.
Many sources mentioned that it was exploded on submarine mine, but according to the most detailed sources that could be mine from F.18 field [mine-layers "Ruotsin-salmi" and "Riilahti"] or D.22 field [German mine-sweepers from 5th flotilla] only
The literature sources about Soviet submarines [on Russian]:To Jon.G
Anyhow, I've tried referencing the data which Erikson gives in his summary tables. They correspond well with yours but are less detailed.
From the first point of view seems not wrong. I will try to translate the corresponding info for you, but next week-end, OK?Rolf Erikson íàïèñà:
...In all, thirty submarines successfully completed seventy-five missions and aborted seven due to damage or Axis opposition, with the loss of two vessels: Shch-214, lost to the Italian MTB MAS-571 on 19 June; and S-32, to German aircraft a week later. Although the transport of gasoline in ballast tanks caused at least four explosions and fires, the submarines transported 4,000 tons of material to the besieged city and evacuated about 1,400 wounded women and children to Caucasus ports...
...which has piqued my interest. At a glance, the tonnage of supplies delivered and the number of civilians evacuated seem impressive. Do you know where to verify and flesh out these numbers?
This is very well discussed in the online source above [sorry, on Russian]. Shch-307 detected "Iku-Turso" 5 hours before attack but Soviet captain thought that was Finnish submarine [see my post above].Janne wrote:
BP, according to the Per-Olof Ekman who wrote (in 1983, i.e. with access to the published Soviet literature up to 1981) what has been considered the classic of submarine warfare in the Baltic, the first enemy sub sighted and engaged by "Iku-Turso" was indeed "SC 307" and the second sub, sighted and engaged 3-4 hours later was "SC 320". Unfortunately, Ekman doesn't tell his readers how and when the subs were identified.
Shch-306 - no, last radio message from 11.11.1942 [21.55] - "began to cross Gulf of Finland". After that unsuccesfully attacked Finnish mine-layer "Ruotsinsalmi" [17.45, 19.50 - 12.11; 02.27, 04.45 - 13.11]. Reason of loss - 13.11. exploded on mine [mine fields "Nashorn"] or around 13.11. exploded on mine [mine fields "Uminda" or "Seeigel"]. 38 men were lost.Janne wrote:
(BTW "SC 308" is described as missing in early October, probably due to a mine, as are "SC 304" and "SC 306".)
I don't know. I can assume that on Finnish info.Juha wrote:
Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at?
At first [IIRC in 1957 even] it was mentioned that Shch-308 was attacked/sank, in 1980s - that Shch-320 was attacked/sank. In 2000s - the info that both submarines were exploded on mine fields and unsuccessful attack of "Iku-Turso" against Shch-307.Juha wrote:
I wonder when it was for the first time mentioned in USSR/Russia that Iku-Turso attacked (/and sank)
ShCh-320 ?
ShCh-308 ?
ShCh-307 ?
Most probably date of loss - 03.10.1942 - 06.10.1942 on mine field.Juha wrote:
Also to where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?
I assume from Finnish/German also, most probably - from submarine logbooks if they returned back to base.Juha wrote:
Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.
100% truthful info - eye-witness only [from both sides better!]. We can only discuss the correctnesses of info to some degree. German transport "Henriette Schulte" or "Steinburg" [1923 brt/1319 brt; 16.01.1945] - third loss is in doubt between two ships in convoy in reality. About "Skrunda" - in doubt as I've mentioned [several versions exist, sorry, no time as they are too long to describe], about "Marie Ferdinand" - in doubt as I've mentioned. Many German sources mention V317/Wega as the sank target:Juha wrote:
AFAIK the two first victories are real, do you have truthful info about the 1944-1945 claims?
I strongly believe that general procedure is common for all navies. Submarine commanders mistaked more often than pilots in my opinionJuha wrote:
I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.
The most detailed [without ""] general source about the fates of all Soviet submarines - http://www.deepstorm.ru/Juha wrote:
What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?
IIRC no.BIGpanzer wrote:I don't know. I can assume that on Finnish info.Juha wrote: Where were the "old Soviet" sources based at?
Thanks for the infoBP wrote:At first [IIRC in 1957 even] it was mentioned that Shch-308 was attacked/sank, in 1980s - that Shch-320 was attacked/sank. In 2000s - the info that both submarines were exploded on mine fields and unsuccessful attack of "Iku-Turso" against Shch-307.Juha wrote: I wonder when it was for the first time mentioned in USSR/Russia that Iku-Turso attacked (/and sank)
ShCh-320 ?
ShCh-308 ?
ShCh-307 ?
AFAIK there were no other candidates [but I didn't check all "Shch-info
Actally that wasn't an answer to my question.BP wrote:Most probably date of loss - 03.10.1942 - 06.10.1942 on mine field.Juha wrote: Also to where the back line of 10th October 1942 at the Russian estimations about the sinking date of the ShCh-320 is based at?
IIRC from the Finnish radio intelligence sources, Galkin and Lishin interrogations and from the post war Soviet sources.BP wrote:Why Finns thought about Shch-320 as the target for "Iku-Turso"?
I wonder what info the Germans had?BP wrote:I assume from Finnish/German also, most probably - from submarine logbooks if they returned back to base.Juha wrote: Seems to be info from Finnish sources, added some extra (sources?), and sub name changed.
Sources - above [main]. Sub name - just differ
So wasn't the submarine logbooks also availlable to the soviet era researchers? Or where the "new" detailled info about the sub (ShCh-307) actions?BP wrote:I strongly believe that general procedure is common for all navies.Juha wrote: I don't know about the procedure at other navies, but here the reports ( to which the Finnish info is based at) were written during the war.
In some countries it was about the same.BP wrote:Submarine commanders mistaked more often than pilots in my opinion
The most detailed or the most detailed general source?BP wrote:The most detailed [without ""] general source about the fates of all Soviet submarines - http://www.deepstorm.ru/Juha wrote: What might the "most detailed sources" be and to what they are based at?
FinnishBP wrote:Swedish/Finnish actress Irina Björklund
The basic info source of yours also sheds some light to the perhaps lesser known part of the actions of the Soviet subs: trying to sink own ships in order to make that look like an enemy (Polish) sub had done that.BIGpanzer wrote:http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/an ... 5-oasa.htm [basic info].
http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/an ... 12-asa.htm ( actually, why a Soviet ship was listed as an allied ship [that time, 1939] there?)# METALLIST und PIONER wurden angeblich von dem poln U-Boot ORZEL versenkt resp. verfehlt.
In Wirklichkeit wurde METALLIST vom eigenen SC-303 angegriffen und von dem T-Boot TUCHA versenkt,
PIONER wahrscheinlich ebenfalls von einem sowj. U-Boot angegriffen und verfehlt.