Dwenadzat Apostolov

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dwenadzat Apostolov
Dvenadtsat'Apostolov1892.jpg
Ship data
flag Russian EmpireRussian Empire (naval war flag) Russian Empire
Ship type Ironclad
Shipyard Nikolaev Admiralty Shipyard
Keel laying February 1888
Launch September 13, 1890
Commissioning June 17, 1893
Decommissioning 1911
Whereabouts Wrecked in 1931
Ship dimensions and crew
length
104 m ( Lüa )
102.26 m ( KWL )
width 18 m
Draft Max. 8.38 m
displacement 8850  t
 
crew 599 men
Machine system
machine 8 × cylinder boiler
2 × 3-cylinder compound machine
indicated
performance
Template: Infobox ship / maintenance / service format
8,500 hp (6,252 kW)
Top
speed
15 kn (28 km / h)
propeller 2
Armament
Armor
  • Belt: 305-356 mm
  • Barbetten main caliber: 254–305 mm
  • Armored domes: 64 mm
  • Deck: 51-76 mm
  • Command tower 203 mm
  • Bulkheads: 229-305 mm

The Dwenadzat Apostolow (Russian: Двенадцать Апостолов, German: Twelve Apostles ) was a battleship of the Imperial Russian Navy . Laid down in 1888 and launched in 1890, it served in the fleet until 1911 and was demolished in 1931. In Russian literature, the Dwenadzat Apostolow is referred to as an "armored barbed ship" (барбетный броненосец) and as a "squadron armored ship" (эскадренный броненосец).

construction

Side elevation and deck plan showing the armor
The Dwenadzat Apostolow before the modernization with open-topped barbeds
The Dwenadzat Apostolow after the modernization with armored domes over the barbeds

The Dwenadzat Apostolow was originally part of a planned series of two ships. The company intended to build the sister ship, however, ran into economic difficulties and was unable to complete the ship.

General characteristics

The Russian naval command required a smaller, inexpensive, but nevertheless powerful battleship for use in the Black Sea. The ship was laid in February 1888 in the Admiralty Shipyard in Nikolajew . As a barbed ship it was a completely new type for the Imperial Russian Navy. A total of eight 23.0 cm cannons were to be used as armament, two of them in towers fore and aft, the rest in a casemate amidships. The construction of the towers and the machinery had not yet been finalized when construction of the hull began. Overall, the Dwenadzat Apostolow turned out to be a successful design. With a displacement of just over 8000 t, the ship's hull could not be fully armored. The armor was therefore concentrated on a citadel amidships, which protected the most important facilities of the ship. In September 1888, the armor design was specified. The thickness of the belt armor was to be increased from 330 mm to 360 mm at the level of the waterline, the increase in displacement by 76 t was accepted - however, the waterline armor was limited to a narrow belt and corresponded to the French building philosophy of the time. The front tower was moved 2.34 m aft, because it was feared that the ship could otherwise become too top-heavy. At the same time, the planned armament was redesigned. The main armament was reduced to four guns of 30.0 cm caliber, which were to be set up in twin barbeds, the secondary armament should consist of four 15.2 cm cannons in the central battery. Despite the reduction in number and caliber, this led to an increase in weight of 100 tons. There is no high freeboard. This restricted the seaworthiness of the ship and made fire fighting difficult in rough seas, as the ship easily took over water. During the planning and construction - as with almost all Russian ships of the time - the weight increased considerably, the Dwenadzat Apostolow was too heavy for its dimensions, which further restricted the seaworthiness. Nevertheless, it was considered the better design compared to the battleships Alexander II and Nikolai I built for the Baltic Sea . The ship was not measured exactly, the displacement was estimated at around 8850 t. That was around 600 t above the projected displacement of 8206 t. The hull of the Dwenadzat Apostolow was similar to that of Alexander II , but the ram was 1.2 m longer. In the waterline the ship was 102.26 m long, 104 m over everything. The width was 18 m, the draft 8.32 m. The ship had eleven transverse bulkheads and longitudinal bulkhead and a double bottom over its entire length. Opposite the ships of the older Ekaterina-II. -Class, she had better seaworthiness, as was shown during a storm in 1894, although she rolled heavily in rough seas and took over a lot of water via hatches .

drive

Two three-cylinder, triple composite steam engines manufactured by the Baltic Works were used as the drive . The design output was a total of 8500 PSi. The steam was supplied by a total of eight cylinder boilers. The ship was propelled by two propellers with a diameter of 5.26 m. During the test, an output of 8758 PSi and a speed of 15.15 knots were achieved. After the test, the chimneys were raised by 3.81 m to improve the draft and to keep the superstructures free of smoke. The ship was able to bunker 720 t of coal, which gave a range of 1900 nautical miles at a speed of 10 kn. The electrical system was fed by six Siemens generators, which delivered a total of 540 kW.

Armament

The main armament finally realized consisted of two pairs of the 30.5 cm cannon model 1877 with a barrel length of 30 calibers. The weapons were developed and manufactured by the Obukhov works in Saint Petersburg . They were arranged in two twin barbeds fore and aft. The maximum tube elevation was 15 °, the minimum −5 ° and the lateral straightening area 270 °. 66 rounds of ammunition were carried for each cannon. The cannons fired grenades with a projectile weight of 331.7 kg at a muzzle velocity of 570 m / s. With a pipe elevation of 6 °, the range was 5090 m. The rate of fire was one shot every five minutes, but the loading machines could only be used when the heel was less than 5 °.

The secondary artillery consisted of four 15.2 cm cannons model 1877 , which were set up on pivot mounts in the central casemate. The sides of the casemate were exposed opposite the hull to allow the secondary artillery to fire in the direction of the longitudinal axis. Each of the guns had a lateral directional range of 130 °. The maximum pipe elevation was 8.5 °, the minimum −8 °. 130 rounds of ammunition were carried for each cannon. The cannons fired grenades with a projectile weight of 54 to 56 kg at a muzzle velocity of 578 m / s and light grenades with a projectile weight of 41.5 kg and a muzzle velocity of 710 m / s. With a tube elevation of 12 °, the theoretical range with the light shell was 7470 m. However, the placement of the guns did not allow this increase in the barrel. The rate of fire was one shot per minute.

The ten 4.7 cm hotchkiss cannons were mounted in notches in the hull or in the superstructure. They fired grenades weighing 1.5 kg at a muzzle velocity of 450 m / s. The rate of fire was 20 rounds per minute and the range was 1850 m. Two 3-inch Hotchkiss revolver cannons stood on the front end of the superstructure, and two more on a platform by the second chimney. They fired a 0.5 kg shell at a muzzle velocity of 440 m / s. The rate of fire was 32 rounds per minute and the range was 2778 m. Six more cannons of this caliber, albeit with a single barrel, were on the fore marshes, two more in notches at the rear end of the superstructure. The cadence of these weapons was 20 rounds per minute. The location of two further 3.7 cm cannons is no longer traceable.

The Dwenadzat Apostolow had a total of six surface torpedo tubes . One tube was located in the fore and stern post, the others in pairs amidships on each side.

Armor

The composite armor was supplied by Cammell, Laird & Company of Sheffield . It included most of the trunk. At the level of the machinery, the armor thickness was 356 mm, decreased to 305 mm at the level of the storage rooms and was only 178–203 mm thick at the ends. The belt armor was a total of 70 m long at a height of 1.68 m, while 1.3 m was below the waterline because of the excess weight. At the lower edge, the armor was only 203 mm thick. The transverse bulkheads were 229-305 mm thick armored to ensure the ship's buoyancy after hits in individual departments. The casemate was armored in the lower part over a length of 65 m 305 mm, in the upper part, where the 15.2 cm cannons were positioned, 127 mm. The barbeds had armor with a thickness of 254 to 305 mm. Initially the barbeds were open at the top. In 1893 the barbeds were provided with a 64 mm thick armored dome. The command tower had steel armor with a thickness of 203 mm.

commitment

Block ship no.8

After the launch, the ship was transferred to Sevastopol on May 11, 1892 for equipment from Nikolayev . Officially commissioned on June 17, 1893, the equipment work was not completed until 1894.

After commissioning in 1892, the ship was used in the Black Sea and remained there for fifteen years. During this time, the Dwenadzat Apostolow did not take part in a single battle. In 1895 the ship was used to test a new mine laying system developed by Lieutenant AP Yugrumow. In further experiments, the most suitable dimensions for torpedo nets should be determined. During these tests, torpedoes were fired at the ship with the nets laid out. In 1903 a gun exploded, killing one man and wounding two others.

In 1905 the Dwenadzat Apostolow took part in the pursuit of the mutinous battleship Knjas Potjomkin Tavritscheski .

In 1907, the Marine Technical Commission proposed that the ship be re-equipped with Belville boilers . However, the plan was discarded in favor of refitting the battleship Tschesma (Russian: Чесма). At the same time the Russian admiral staff was considering rearming the ship. 25.4 cm guns were to be used in twin towers and a number of new 15.2 cm guns in a newly constructed casemate. The cost was estimated at 1,275,000  rubles , the weight of the ship would have increased by only 15 t. However, the proposals were rejected by the Naval Technical Commission, which viewed modernizing the outdated design as a waste of money. In 1909, the Admiral's staff again suggested rearmament. This time, lighter guns should be used in order to be able to use the Dwenadzat Apostolow as a guard ship in the port of Sevastopol. This proposal was initially accepted by the Russian Naval Minister Admiral Ivan Grigorowitsch, but the decision was later revised.

On April 1, 1911, the ship was taken out of active service, removed from the fleet list and handed over to the port authorities of Sevastopol. The armament was removed and the ship intended for use as a Hulk for submarines. The name of the ship changed to block ship no. 8 (Блокшив № 8). The ship was used for various purposes in the port. The ship was incapacitated and was seized by German troops in the port of Sevastopol in May 1918 and handed over to the Allied intervention forces after their withdrawal in December 1918. During the Russian Civil War, it was alternately taken possession of by both sides. The White Army forces abandoned the ship when they were driven from the Crimea . The machinery was removed in 1921. It was used as a backdrop for the filming of the film " Battleship Potemkin ", as the Knjas Potjomkin Tavritscheski had already been canceled in 1922. It was then used as a warehouse for sea mines until it was finally sold for scrapping on January 28, 1931.

literature

  • Vladimir V. Arbuzov: The Battleship Dvenadstadt Apostolov . In: International Naval Research Organization (Ed.): Warship International . 30, No. 2, Toledo, OH, 1992, ISSN  0043-0374 , pp. 368-388.
  • Gardiner, Robert (Ed.): Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1860-1905 . Mayflower Books, New York 1979, ISBN 0-8317-0302-4 .
  • Stephen McLaughlin: Russian & Soviet Battleships . Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, MD 2003, ISBN 1-55750-481-4 .

Web links

Commons : Dwenadzat Apostolow  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Footnotes

  1. McLaughlin, pp. 47f.
  2. Gardiner, p. 179.
  3. a b McLaughlin, p. 46ff.
  4. a b c d McLaughlin, p. 48.
  5. McLaughlin, p. 46.
  6. a b c Arbazov, p. 388.
  7. McLaughlin, pp. 49ff.
  8. a b McLaughlin, p. 49.
  9. McLaughlin, pp. 46, 52.
  10. Arbuzov, pp. 381, 387.
  11. a b c d McLaughlin, p. 52.
  12. Arbuzov, p. 387.