| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Tiornu |
Through Red-Colored Glasses |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 6994 ( 8-May-2008 21:48:21) Corn Boss |
At a 1928 Soviet meeting on military and naval affairs, the chief of the naval technical department rated the quality of the Soviet Union's battleships. Of
the fifty battleships in the world's navies--presumably a reference to the treaty powers--the Sevastopols were superior to thirty-five.
I believe there were seventeen battleships at that time with guns of 15in or larger. |
||
|
SMS12 |
|||
|
Posts: 689 ( 8-May-2008 21:58:07) |
Interesting.
So the 5 Rs, 5 QEs, 1 Hood, 2 Renowns, 3 Colorados and 2 Nagatos are better. O.K., I'll give him that. So he puts the Sevastopols ahead of the 9 14" Standard Type USN BBs. Hmmmm. 
|
||
|
Tiornu |
|||
|
Posts: 6995 ( 8-May-2008 22:18:50) Corn Boss |
I'm assuming Vlas'ev (the speaker in question) is manipulating the subject as much as possible and ignoring battlecruisers altogether. I can't say
for certain exactly which fifty ships he's referring to. What battleships were in service in 1928? The Nelsons were, but Vlas'ev may have conveniently
forgotten such newbies.
|
||
|
Gene Slover |
|||
|
Posts: 6283 ( 8-May-2008 22:42:43) |
The russians always built it first, found it first, designed it first and everything they had was always better than anyone elses.
If you don't believe that just ask a russian. |
||
|
Tiornu |
|||
|
Posts: 6996 ( 8-May-2008 22:48:52) Corn Boss |
During that time, nationalism was regarded as an arch-enemy of the revolution because it gave the enemy a tool for breaking the unity of workers and peasants. Of course, some folks will tell you the Americans always claim the first/best. |
||
|
Dolphinstriker |
|||
|
Posts: 1846 ( 8-May-2008 23:19:52) |
At a 1928 Soviet meeting on military and naval affairs, the chief of the naval technical department rated the quality of the Soviet Union's battleships. Of the fifty battleships in the world's navies--presumably a reference to the treaty powers--the Sevastopols were superior to thirty-five. Superior in what way? The claim is meaningless unless supported by factual data. Don't forget, 1928 was the year Stalin finished consolidating his power, and the heads of subordinate bureaus were falling all over themselves to prove they were on the ball and good communists. Candid truth had about as much chance as a snowball in Hell in that atmosphere. |
||
|
Tiornu |
|||
|
Posts: 6997 ( 9-May-2008 00:08:58) Corn Boss |
"Superior in what way?"
|
||
|
P3D |
|||
|
Posts: 817 ( 9-May-2008 22:49:20) |
Tiornu wrote: By having weaker armor and guns, with no speed superiority (compared to Ise, that is). Anyways, the Soviet ships in 1928 were in a sorry state. Only Sevastopok (Par. Kom.) and Gangut (Oct. Rev.) was usable. Petropavlovsk (Marat) was under
reconstruction. Poltava(Frunze) under repairs that were not finished.
|
||
|
seasick |
|||
|
Posts: 4648 ( 9-May-2008 23:58:11) |
The guy was probably saying what he said to keep in Stalin's good graces and not end up getting erased.
|
||
|
Tiornu |
|||
|
Posts: 6998 (10-May-2008 00:19:05) Corn Boss |
Vlas'ev certainly had politics on his mind, but I doubt he was trying to placate Stalin. First guess, he was probably trying to establish that the Red
Fleet was a credible force even in its weakened state and was therefore worthy of further investment. That is, they had a good foundation to build on.
ParKom and Profintern took the long way to the Black Sea and had a near-disastrous encounter with a storm in Bay of Biscay. |
||
