The Gangut Dreadnought Class

THE GANGUT CLASS
First let me apologise. The writing of this piece has been a nightmare, and more than once I nearly walked away from it. Western and Russian records conflict and translating Russian has given me white hair. Plus the classes changing of names is confusing. There will be errors in this piece for many reasons, but the core of it is solid, I think. To quote 'Boney-M', "oh those Russians!".

There was amongst the worlds dreadnoughts, a class of four ships that were to be some of the longest serving battleships. They were to live through four wars and three revolutions, but they never fired their guns in angry at another of their type. In the First World War, they exchanged fire with their fellow Russians and with former allies. But not once at the Central Powers. The class only once sailed in one of the world's major oceans. They outlived all but one of their of their contemporaries and suffered 50% losses in the class, in the process. They were conceived in the days of HMS Dreadnought, and were to have be some of the most powerful dreadnoughts designed. But due too so many factors, they were years in the building, and by the time they were commissioned HMS Queen Elizabeth was under completion and the class was becoming obsolete.

The Gangut-class, or of you prefer, the 'Sevastopol' class, were the first of the two dreadnought classes begun for the Imperial Russian Navy. With Russia's humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese war their fleet faced a critical shortage of battleships, and the few that remained to them had become rapidly obsolete. Following the conclusion of the that War, the Imperial Russian Navy was in a state of confusion. Its leadership, its tactics and its ship designs had all been seen to fail through the repeated defeats by the Japanese at the Battle of Tsushima, the Battle off Ulsan and the Battle of the Yellow Sea. The Navy was to take some time to learn the lessons from the war, while the Imperial government worked to reform the Naval Ministry and forced many of its more conservative officers to finally retire.

Things grew more complex for the struggling Russian Admiralty in 1906 by events taking place in Portsmouth, England. With the unveiling of the new Dreadnought type, the Russian navy decided that it too would require four of these new big gun warships for their Baltic Fleet, in an effort to counter their rival in that two power sea, Germany. The Imperial Russian Navy developed a replacement programme that was to built between 1909 and 1930, and the Admiralty believed it  would see Russia returned once more to the front rank of the worlds navies, with a fleet of twenty dreadnoughts and four battle cruisers. But the tides of history would only see the Ganguts'' and Borodino be lifted off the designers board.

They planned for their new ships to achieve a speed of at least 21 knots, to be armed with twelve 12 inch guns, and have a further 16x4.7 inch guns mounted into casemates. But unfortunately the Russian Empire lacked the shipbuilding capacity or even the skills required to design and complete such complex and revolutionary ships.  With this is mind, they opened the design contest to foreign companies. In return they received  51 designs from 27 (or 13 depending on your choice of source) shipbuilding yards. But of the 27/13 shipyards only 6 were Russian.

The Russian requirements for their new class was in a state of flux though 1907, but the British company Vickers Ltd submitted a design for a 22,000-long-ton ship with twelve 12-inch (305 mm) guns mounted into triple, superimposed turrets, that met all the latest Russian requirements and was very nearly accepted by the Admiralty. But rumors of a contract with Vickers caused a public outcry, following problems with the armored cruiser Rurik then building in England. The Naval Ministry calmed the situation on the 30 December 1907 by announcing an international design contest in which the ship would be built in Russian ship yards,  no matter the nationality of the winning firm. In the final stages the leaders were the Italian company "Ansaldo" and the German company "Blohm und Voss."  On the closing date of the 12 March 1908 51 designs in total had been submitted by 13 different shipyards. But this date was to be extended by a month in order to allow the Baltic Works to complete its contract with the British firm of John Brown. The Italian firm of Cuniberti, (one of the first disciples of the 'All Big Gun Ship') was to soon to be declared the favorite, but their design was to be ultimately turned down, due to their insistence on the location of the secondary 4.7 inch guns into turrets and not casemates as the Russians demand. With the failure of the Cuniberti design, the German firm of Blohm & Voss stepped up to the fore and we're declared the winners. However Blohm & Voss refused to meet the condition of constructing the ship in a Russian yard. But in this tale of twist and turns the French Government now protested that they would not see any of the funds that they had loaned Russia to build up its defenses go into German pockets. As a result the Russians bought the Blohm & Voss design for 250,000 rubles and then simply shelved it in order to placate both sides.

This left the Russian Admiralty in a difficult position, of having to rework the design to their own specifications in their Baltic Yards.  But this major redesign was made easier with the help of the British shipbuilding firm of John Brown, who in addition incorporated features from the other rejected designs, worked on the hull form, the machinery, and offered to build it them in their own yard. The final design included much from other the entries, but in particular the Cuniberti project, which the end result would resembled.The result was a resemblance  to the first Italian dreadnought, the Dante Alighieri.  Since the firm which had designed the Dante had been one of the participants in that design process, it is only natural to see some Italian influence in this design. The term of commissioning was set at 20 months for each ship, but Russia having decided to build their dreadnoughts at home, with none of the industrial experience, the term was finally determined as 38 months on each ship

In the end of these twists and turns, the resulting design fell between that of a battlecruiser and a dreadnought, and became known as a 'Baltic Dreadnought'.  It was still a powerful design that could deliver a broadside greater than any of the contemporary British or German designs.  It was also to be some 2 to 3 knots faster than the other navies dreadnoughts.  This was only achieved by the use of the lighter Yarrow boilers rather than the heavier Belleville type found in some earlier ships.  The design also featured an ice breaking bow, an essential if it was to be able to operate year round in the Baltic Sea.  For its protection against the new threat of torpedoes and mines, the ship had a double hull that reached as far up as the ship's deck.  But ship had a Achilles heel in that it sacrificed armour over speed.  In most places the ship's armor was to be between one to three inches less than comparable ships.

Finally the four ships in the class were ordered in 1909, with two being named to celebrate the victorious battles of Peter the Great in the Great Northern War and the other two named after battles in the Crimean War. Three of the ships in the class also used names of pre-dreadnoughts from of the Petropavlovsk class lost during the Russo-Japanese War. Their construction was to be no less complicated than the design process. The project was delayed by financing problems until the 'Duma' formally authorized funds for the ships in 1911.

The navy had launched its design contest in 1906, but the Duma refused to authorize it, preferring instead to spend the money on rebuilding the Army. But Tsar Nicholas stepped in and overrode the objections of the Duma when in 1908 he ordered their construction to begin. Their construction was very slow as the Duma would not allocate the funds for these ships until May 1911. At first the funding was taken from other budget items or the Emperor's 'discretionary' fund, plus the shipyards had to use their own money just to keep the work moving forward. They were among the most expensive of their type, with their cost estimated at 29.4 million rubles each, including armament. The previous class of pre-dreadnoughts had only cost 11 million rubles each. Once the Duma finally provided the funding, the pace of work quickened and the ships were launched later that year, although further delays in the delivery of both the engines and turrets would hindered their completion. But the navies program continued to run into problems when the Duma expressed its strong opposition to the entire notion of Russian Dreadnoughts. The Duma considered that the money allocated had not been devoted to the objects originally intended, and that a large proportion of the monies had been employed for other purposes and on capital account. The attitude of the press could be understood by the fact that the 'Kotlin', (a newspaper funded by the Russian Admiralty), commented on the circumstances and remarked that the irregularities rendered exceedingly difficult the voting of money for shipbuilding by the Duma. The situation became further strained by statements circulated  as to the inferiority of the design,  and that it would be obsolete while still on the slipway. Plus it was claimed that for the cost of four Russian built dreadnought's, six of the same type could be built in England and five in other countries of the Continent.

The Durma become fractional over the matter,  but generally its attitude towards the Admiralty was unfriendly, and it was supported in this by a large section of the press. It was claimed that the sums allotted in 1908 and 1909 to the building of the four dreadnoughts of the Gangut class had been miss-spent, and the Admiralty explanations were not regarded as expectable. The total budget sum was for £2,050,000, of which £306,000 was allocated to the Obuchoff Works for the ordnance , £996,000 to the Admiralty yard; £320,000 to the Ishora yard; £202,500 to the Obuchoff Works (for shipbuilding), and £20,000 to Messrs. Blohm and Voss, of Hamburg, for the plans for a battleship.

The Imperial Naval General Staff believed that a speed of greater than the 21 knots of the German battle fleet would be decisive in battle, something that had been demonstrated at the Battle of Tsushima. However the heavy and bulky Belleville Water-tube boilers, as insisted upon by the Engineering Section of the Naval Technical Committee, would just not be able to exceed 21.25 knots.  However John Brown were able to demonstrate that the ship's turbines could deliver 45,000 shp (33,556 kW) if they were supplied with enough steam and the hull form was modified, they could reach 23 knots with the 45,000 horsepower. As a result of Brown's input, the Naval General Staff decided to that achieve the speed they sought they needed the use of small-tube boilers. At a meeting of the Naval Technical Committee called to discuss the issue, engineers from the fleet who were in favor of small-tube boilers and the Engineering Section were outvoted. The Yarrow small-tube boiler was significantly smaller and lighter than Belleville large-tube boiler, but on the downside  it would required more frequent cleaning and repair and their horsepower dropped off more rapidly with use.

The Russians were not believers in super firing turrets, feeling they offered no advantage as they voided the value of axial fire, and they thought that broadside fire was much more effective and also that super firing turrets could not fire while over the lower turret because of muzzle blast interfering with the open sighting hoods in the lower turret's roof. They therefore conceived a design of ships with a 'linear' arrangement (lineinoe raspolozhenie) of turrets shared over the length of the ship.They also believed that distributing the turrets, and their associated magazines, over the length of the ship improved the survivability of the hull. This arrangement did have a number of advantages, in that it reduced the stress on the ends of the ship since the turrets were not all concentrated at the bow and stern end of the hull. It also increased the stability because the lack of elevated turrets and their barbettes, improved the survivability of the ship, due to the magazines being separated from each other and it also offered a lower silhouette to the enemy. The disadvantages were that the magazines had to be situated in the middle of the machinery spaces, which then required steam pipes to be run through or around them and the lack of deck space free from blast. This also  complicated the location of the anti-torpedo boat guns which had to be mounted in the hull, far closer to the water than was really desirable.

The four Ganguts' were 180 meters (590 ft) in length at the waterline and their total length was 181.2 meters (594 ft 6 in). Their beam was 26.9 meters (88 ft) and they had a draft of 8.99 meters (29 ft 6 in), which was 49 centimeters (1 ft 7 in) more than had been designed for. They were overweight on completion and their displacement was 24,800 metric tons (24,400 long tons) at load, exceeding the design of 23,288 metric tons (22,920 long tons) by over 1,500 long tons (1,700 short tons). This obviously reduced their freeboard, by about 16 inches (41 cm) and gave them a slight bow trim which made for them being very wet ships.

High-tensile steel was used in the construction of the longitudinally framed hull with mild steel  only being used in the areas that did not contribute to structural strength. The use of H-T steel, plus changes in the design process, meant that the hull was 19% lighter than that of the preceding Andrei Pervozvanny class of pre-dreadnoughts. The hull was subdivided by 13 transverse watertight bulkheads and had a double bottom. The engine and condenser rooms were sub-divided by two longitudinal bulkheads. Their two electrically driven rudders sat on the centerline, with the main rudder abaft the smaller auxiliary rudder. Their designed metacentric height was 1.76 meters (5.8 ft). The navies determination to use of HT, a material usually associated with destroyers, was to see a three year delay in the ships construction.

The vessels were powered by ten Parsons-type steam turbines which in turn drove four propellers. The three engine rooms were situated between the third and fourth turret in three  compartments across the beam. The outer compartments each held a high-pressure ahead and reverse turbine for each of the wing propeller shafts. The central engine room held two low-pressure ahead and astern turbines as well as two cruising turbines which turned the two central shafts. The engines designed output in total was for 42,000 shaft horsepower (31,000 kW), but they exceeded that by over 23%,  producing 52,000 shp (39,000 kW) during Poltava's full-speed trials on 21 November 1915, which gave a top speed of 24.1 knots. Tweny-five Yarrow boilers provided the steam to the engines at a designed working pressure of 17.5 atm (1,773 kPa; 257 psi). Each of the boiler were equipped with Thornycroft oil sprayers to allow for a mixed oil/coal burning and the boilers were located in two groups. The forward group comprised of two boiler rooms in front of the second turret, the foremost of which held three boilers while the second one held six. The rear group was located between the second and third turrets and comprised two compartments, each holding eight boilers. The vessels bunkers at full load carried 1,847.5 long tons (1,877.1 t) of coal and 700 long tons (710 t) of fuel oil and that allowed for an endurance of 3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km) at a speed of 10 knots.

Their main armament comprised of a dozen 52-caliber Obukhovskii 12-inch (305 mm) Pattern 1907 guns mounted into four electrically powered triple-gun turrets. The guns could be depressed and elevated to a range of between −5° and 25°, where as most of their contemporaries only managed 12 to 15 degree elevation. Between 5°and +15° the barrels could be loaded  and their rate of fire was for one round every 30 to 40 seconds at up to 15° of elevation and one round per minute at 16°+.  The forward turret offered an arc of fire of 330°, the second turret 280°, the third turret 310° and the aft turret 300°. The turrets could elevate at 3 to 4° per second and traverse at a rate of 3.2° per second. Their magazines held 1200 rounds, which equated to 100 rounds per gun, and each shell weighted 470.9-kilogram (1,038 lb). The  projectiles were fired at a muzzle velocity of 762 m/s (2,500 ft/s) and this gave for a maximum range of 23,230 meters (25,400 yd).The ships had a number of advantages over contemporary vessels in that aa full broadside the Gangut class could train all twelve of her 12 inch guns on a target, compared to the eight guns of a comparable British or German battleship. Plus the 12 inch guns were the most powerful ones used in WWI with the heaviest shell of any 12" gun before American Alaska class in 1940s.

Pattern 1905 guns, were  mounted in casemates as the secondary battery was designed for defence  against torpedo boats. But because of the lack of freeboard and a bow-heavy trim the forward casemates were all to often flooded,  in even moderate seas. All the 4.7"weapons had a firing arc of between 125° and 30° and at least four could bear to any part on the horizon. Their maximum elevation was for +25°, to which they could at elevate 3.5° per second, and they could traverse at 6 to 8 degrees per second. The magazines were designed to hold 245 rounds per gun on completion but this was to be upgraded to 300 during construction. The design stated that the casements were to be 15 feet (4.6 m) above the waterline, but due to being overweight in service, this was reduced. The guns had a rate of fire of seven rounds per minute at a maximum range of around 16,800 yards (15,362 m) at 25° elevation with a 63.87-pound (28.97 kg) semi-armor-piercing Model 1911 shell at a muzzle velocity of 792.5 m/s (2,600 ft/s).  The positioning of the 4.7 inch casemate guns was not very efficient as many of them were placed directly below the main 12 inch guns and were difficult to use effectively when the ship was firing a full broadside.

On completion they were fitted with a single 30-caliber 3-inch (76 mm) Lender anti-airship (AA) gun mounted on the quarterdeck. This solo weapon had a maximum depression of -5° and a maximum elevation of +65°, and it fired a 14.33-pound (6.50 kg) shell at a muzzle velocity of 1,929 ft/s (588 m/s). Its rate of fire was of 10 to 12 rounds per minute and had a maximum ceiling of 19,000 ft (5,800 m). It's most likely additional anti-aircraft guns were added during the course of World War I, but the only source, Conway's, claims that four 75-millimeter (3.0 in) guns were added to the roofs of the end turrets during the war. The ships carried four 17.7-inch (450 mm) submerged torpedo tubes with three torpedoes carried for each tube.

The fire control was based around two Zeiss 5-meter (16 ft 5 in) rangefinders located on the conning towers roofs and there was also a 4.5-foot (1.4 m) Barr & Stroud instrument, possibly for precise station keeping on the master ship when concentrating fire. There were two Krylov stadimeters located in the lower level of the forward conning tower. These provided information for the central artillery post to calculate with its imported Pollen Argo Mark V Clock, a mechanical fire-control computer, and then transmit the results via the Geisler transmission system for the gun crews to follow. During the winter of 1915 and 1916 the Zeiss rangefinders were transferred to armored hoods on the rear of the fore and aft turrets and, at some point, 18-foot (5.5 m) Barr & Stroud rangefinders were added to the roofs of the middle turrets. In the spring of 1916 Gangut received a 9-foot (2.7 m) Pollen rangefinder. Sometime in 1944 Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiy was to receive a Lend-Lease British Type 279 air-warning radar. Parizhskaya,  Kommuna and Sevastopol had British Type 290 and 291 air-warning radars were fitted during the war.

The armour for the Gangut class ships was designed to offer protection from two different threats as perceived from the Russo-Japanese War.  The Japanese high explosive shells had damaged the unarmored portions of Russian ships and had even gone on to sink a number of ships with their heavy armor belts intact. The Russians concluded that the entire side of the ships would needed to be armored, even though this would limit the thickness of the main belt. They developed a system on which the outer armor would break up or slow the shells penetration down and then burst immediately behind the outer armor and an inboard armor bulkhead, which would stop any splinters and shell fragments reaching the ships vitals. This system would have most likely worked against the British armor-piercing shells that performed  badly at the Battle of Jutland, but it would not hold up against the improved shells introduced afterwards with their redesigned fuses. A weakness was that the turrets and conning towers had no inboard splinter bulkhead, even though they used armor thickness roughly equivalent to that of the main belt.

The Krupp cemented armor (KCA) waterline belt had a maximum thickness of 225 millimeters (8.9 in), but it tapered to around 150 mm (5.9 in) along its bottom edge. It was 117.2 meters (385 ft) in length and had a total height of 5 meters (16 ft), 3.26 meters (10 ft 8 in) of which was above the design waterline and 1.74 meters (5 ft 9 in) below. But with that overweight factor the ship's draft was almost 50 to 79 centimeters (20 to 31 in) deeper than intended, which meant that much less remained above the waterline. The remaining portion of the waterline was protected by 125-millimeter (4.9 in) plates. The upper belt which was to protect the casemates, was 125 mm of KCA over the citadel and 2.72 meters (8 ft 11 in) high. It dropped to a thickness of 75 millimeters forward of the citadel. The space aft of the citadel was the only unprotected section of the ships hull. 3.4 meters (11 ft) inboard of the side was a longitudinal splinter bulkhead made of Krupp non-cemented armor (KNC). It was 50 mm (2.0 in) thick at the level of the main belt, but then thinned to 37.55 mm (1.478 in) behind the upper belt. The main deck sloped from the bulkhead to the lower edge of the waterline belt and comprised of a 50-millimeter KNC plate on a 12 mm (0.47 in) mild steel plate. The space this created was used as a coal bunker, which added further protection when full. The main belt was closed off by 100 mm (3.9 in) transverse bulkheads fore and aft and the steering gear was protected by armor 100–125 mm thick.

The main gun turrets face and sides was of 203 mm (8.0 in) with a 100-mm roof, all of KCA. The guns had 3-inch gun shields to protect from splinters entering the embrasures and they were separated by splinter bulkheads. The barbettes were 150 mm (5.906in) thickness above the upper deck, but then it  reduced to 75 mm behind other the armor, except for the fore and aft barbettes which only thinned to 125 mm. The conning tower sides were 254 mm (10.0 in) in thickness with a 100-mm roof. The 4.7 inch guns (120-mm) guns had their own individual 3-inch gun shields. The funnel uptakes were protected by 22 mm (0.87 in) of armor. The upper deck was of 37.5 mm (1.48 in) nickel-chrome steel and the middle deck was 25 mm (0.98 in) of nickel-chrome steel between the longitudinal splinter bulkheads, but it thinned down to 19 mm (0.75 in) outside them. The lower deck was of 12 mm (0.47 in) mild steel.

Underwater protection was of a minimal level as there was only a single watertight bulkhead, possibly of high-tensile steel, behind the upwards extension of the double bottom. This was an extension of the splinter bulkhead and was 3.4 meters inboard. A more comprehensive system was contemplated early in the design stage but it was rejected due to it adding between 490–590 long tons (550–660 short tons).

The armor design for the Gangut-class ships had some major flaws. The rear transverse bulkhead was unprotected by any other armor, but was then the same thickness as the forward bulkhead which was defended by the upper belt armor. The thinness of the barbette armor was also a serious defect which could have easily proved fatal in combat. There was a lack of splinter bulkheads behind the armour of the turrets, barbettes and conning towers left all of those locations vulnerable to main calibre hits. But the biggest weakness was the lack of an anti-torpedo bulkhead, which made the ships highly susceptible to any mines or torpedoes strikes.

When finally completed the combat value of Russia's new dreadnoughts was to be disappointing and extremely low. The drives of the turrets and the iron sights were constantly out of order. In addition the ships had the trim down on the nose, and therefore coped poorly at low speeds. At the higher the speed the more the ships "dug in his nose", that is, they had a "wet fore deck",  a result of the missing forecastle.

The ships crew was to number 1,277 Officers and Sailors.

The class was to under go a number of name changes through their long careers, which is confusing to say the least. The following are the names and the years of the changes: 
Gangut (1911)                      Oktoberskaya Revolutsia (27 May 1925)

Petropavlovsk (1911)          Marat (31 May 1921)      Petropavlovsk (1943)           Volkov (late 40's)

Poltava (1911)                       Mikhail Frunze (7 Jan 1926)

Sevastopol (1911)         Parizskaya Kommuna (3 March 1921)

SHIPS CAREERS

On the 16th June 1909 all four ships were 'laid down', but this was to be just a ceremonial event as the actual work did not begin until between September and October. One of the more major complications was that the design for the turrets and their magazines had yet to be completed when their construction finally began, resulting in their weights and dimensions having to be estimated. In addition the design was so complicated that work had to be suspended when they started being constructed as it had yet to be decided where and how to put the guns within the hulls, which means there weren't any completed plans. The machinery for these ships was built at either the Baltic Works or the Franco-Russian Works, as the New Admiralty Shipyard lacked an engine shop of its own.  Work stopped again in 1910 due to doubts in regards to the strength of the ship's hull and poor workmanship.  It was to take a further two more years for work to be once more resume.  By this time the shipyards had been improved and the terrible Russian administrative system had also seen some improvements.  But the delay had witnessed foreign navies launching new battleships with 13.5 inch guns and that neutralized any advantage the Russians were expecting.

The deadline for the class was constantly pushed back due to the difficulties in funding and the administrative mess. The deadline was 'finally' set for the first half of 1914, but the construction period was to last for a further two years and the deadline was moved once more. As a result of the mess, Russia's new dreadnoughts were not available to the fleet when war was declared. Their 'tests' were accelerated by the end of December 1914, and finally the ships were put into commission after numberless failures and improvements at the end of 1914. All four of the ships completed their abbreviated trials by the end of 1914 and finally reached the fleet between December 1914  and January 1915.

The classes namesake, Gangut (Гангу т) was laid down at the Admiralty Shipyard in Saint Petersburg on the 16 June 1909, and she was sent down the slipway on the 20 October 1911. At the end of October 1914, she collided with her sister Poltava which was to delay her trials, scheduled for 9 November 1914, to late December 1914. Gangut undertook her gunnery trials in December and she was commissioned finally on the 11th January 1915.

The origin of her name origin derived from the battle of Gangut (also known as Hangö or Bengstörfjärd), a significant Russian naval victory during the Great Northern War, won by the Russian galley fleet. On the 26th July 1714 the vanguard of the Russian galley fleet passed by Wattrang's ships still lying off the coast and blocked Ehrenskold's unit in the skerries west of Gangut. The victory at the Battle of Gangut, fought June 27, 1714, allowed the Russian galley fleet to support the Russian army in Finland.

The second in the class was the Petropavlovsk (Петропавловск), and she was built at the Baltic Yard in Saint Petersburg. She was laid down on the 16 June 1909, launched on the 22 September 1911, she joined fleet on 4th December 1914 and commissioned on the 5 January 1915, (surprisingly straight forward the class). She was named after the Russian victory over the British and the French in the Siege of Petropavlovsk in 1854.

The next vessel, the  Sevastopol (Севастополь) was laid down at the Baltic Works, St Petersburg on the 16 June 1909. She launched on the 10 July 1911 and entered into service on 30 November 1914. She was named after the Crimea wars Siege of Sevastopol (1854–1855).

The fourth  vessel was the Poltava (Полтава) and she was built at the Admiralty Shipyard, St Petersburg, being laid down on the 16 June 1909. She was launched on the 23 July 1911, but at the end of October 1914, she had that collision with her sister Gangut which jammed her kedge anchor, damaged her hull and delayed her trials to late November 1914. She entered into service on the 30 December 1914. However, gunnery and torpedo trials had to be postponed until mid-1915 because of the thick winter ice. She was the only ship of the class to perform a full-power speed trial, which she did on the 21st in November 1915 achieving a top speed of 24.1 knots.  She was named after the Russian victory over Charles XII of Sweden in the Battle of Poltava in 1709.

Between December 1914 and January 1915 all four of the Ganguts' were to be assigned to the First Battleship Brigade within the Baltic Fleet as they arrived at Helsingfors post commissioning. Petropavlovsk assumed the position of the Brigades flagship.  But despite being deployed, their turrets and fire-control systems were still being adjusted and fine-tuned throughout the spring of 1915. The Brigades task was to defend the mouth of the Gulf of Finland and with it the capital against intrusion by the Germans, who were never tried to make any effort to oblige the Russians. So the new dreadnoughts daily life was comprised of   training interspersed with occasional sorties into the Baltic.  But the Admiralties mind set was crippled with the painful humiliating memories of their defeat at Tsushima. This left them afraid to commit the ships in major operations for the fear of losing them. By an order issued from the Stavka ( military high command) the new dreadnoughts were  not to be put at risk. This mindset severely limited the capability of the Gangut class and they were restricted to covering minelaying ships and defending the Slava during the attacks on Moon Sound. All secondary roles and not befitting Russia's powerful new dreadnoughts.

In the spring of 1915, the Baltic Fleet was re-organised into several tactical squadrons, known as 'manoeuvre  groups' , the composition of which varied during the course of the war. Each group was made up of two battleships, one cruiser, and escorting destroyers.  The composition of these groups in 1915, for example, was:
Group 1: Petropavlovsk, Gangut, Oleg.
Group 2: Sevastopol, Poltava, Rossiya,
Group 3: Andrei Pervozvanny, Imperator Paul I, Bogytar
Group 4: Slava, Tsessarevich but no cruiser in thus group.
Group 5: Rurik, Admiral Makarov, Bayan.
Group 6: Gromoboi, Aurora, Diana.

In July 1915 when the Slava ventured into the Gulf of Riga and became embroiled in the Battle of Riga Gulf,  the Petropavlovsk and Gangut were assigned to escort her,   but they were to take no part in the battle.In September of 1915 the commander of the Baltic Sea, Vice Admiral V.A. Kanin,  decided to launch a sortie with his dreadnoughts into the Baltic, but a mutiny over bad food aboard the Gangut was to it delay. The Gangut's were only to venture out of the gulf twice during the war. Petropavlovsk and Gangut covered minelaying operations near Gotland between October and November  1915. 

With the Russian high commands reluctance to put their dreadnoughts in peril, the crews became in active and not unsurprisingly this was to led to bored crews and their involvement in revolutionary activities.  There was a minor mutiny on board two of ships in 1-2 November  1915 and again in November 1915. Mikhail Aleksandrovich Kedrov was the captain  of command the Gangut and in February 1916 he was summoned to the Russian general headquarters to explain to the tsar in person, the causes of 'disturbances' in the Russian fleet. It incidents did not harm Kedrovs career as he was made commander of the destroyer division of the Baltic Fleet, and later was then promoted to Rear admiral in the Black Sea Fleet of the Imperial Russian Navy in the autumn of 1916.

Gangut and her sister Sevastopol provided distant cover for minelaying operations south of Liepāja on 27 August, this being the furthest that any Russian dreadnought ventured out of the Gulf of Finland during the war. On 11 November 1915  the Gangut and Petropavlovsk, would sail toward Gotland to provide distant cover of mine laying operations in the Gulf of Riga. They repeated the role once more on the  6 December 1915. But 1916 was to be a year of no offensive action for any,of the Ganhguts.Poltava did run aground in June 1916, but she suffered little damage. Sevastapol repeated the same feat on the 10 September but she was then under repair for two months.

A minor mutiny was to brake out on the 1st November 1916 on board Gangut when the Executive (First Officer) refused to issue his crew the traditional meal of meat and macaroni following coaling. Only the return of the Captain and his ordering an issue of a meal of tinned meat restored order on the ship. On the 17th October on board Sevastopol a half-charge of powder was dropped and it ignited on impacting the floor of the forward magazine. Only the flooding of the magazine prevented an explosion, but the resulting fire was to kill two men and burned a number of others. Sevastopol was to see no action of any kind during 1916, but twice she was to strike underwater rocks in that year, suffering minor damage each time.

The crews of all four of the Ganguts' were to join in the general mutiny of the Baltic Fleet on 16 March 1917, after the bored sailors had received word of the February Revolution in St Petersburg. The ships were to fall under Bolshevik control early in August 1917, and during that month three officers were executed by the 'Ships Committee' on board the Petropavlovsk. The Gangut's were demobilized six months later on 29 January 1918.  On 17 February 1918  Lenin ordered the ships of the Baltic Fleet to leave their bases at Tallinn and sail to Helsinki and all four Gangut class warships were moved to Kronstadt in April where they sat idle.  On 19 February, due to a new German offensive, the Baltic Fleet was ordered to once more transfer its ships ships located in Helsinki to Kronstadt, and on the same day ships started leaving Tallinn. A general evacuation was begin on the 22 February, with a group of four ships, led by the icebreaker Yermak, departing for Helsinki. They were followed on 24 February by a convoy of transport ships, accompanied by two submarines, three minesweepers and a minelayer.
By the time the German army entered Reval on 25 February, most of the Russian ships had already sailed, escorted by the icebreakers Yermak, Tarmo and Volynets. The operation, overseen by Alexey Schastny, succeeded in evacuating the majority of the Baltic Fleet to Helsinki, where all of the ships had arrived by 5 March, with the exception of the submarine Edinorog, which had been crushed by ice.With the conclusion of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the  Soviets had to evacuate their base in Helsinki in March 1918 or have their ships interned by a newly independent Finland. But March was to see the Gulf of Finland still frozen over from the winter months. Gangut and her three sisters led the first group of ships out to sea on the 12 March and they reached Kronstadt five days later in what was to became known as the 'Ice Voyage'. 
On the 12 to 13 April the German forces captured Helsinki and the Russians scuttled four submarines in Hanko harbour on 3 April, just before 10,000 troops of the German Baltic Sea Division landed in support of the White Guard. The German Army later returned all of the ships captured in Helsinki as demanded under the terms of the treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

All of the evacuated ships had were to reach Kronstadt or Petrograd by 22 April.The ships included in the transfer were:
Four dreadnoughts: Gangut, Petropavlovsk, Poltava, Sevastopol.
Three pre-dreadnought: Andrei Pervozvanny, Respublika, Grazhdanin
Five armoured cruisers: Rurik, Admiral Makarov, Bayan, Gromoboi, Rossia
Four cruisers: Bogatyr, Oleg, Aurora, Diana
59 destroyers
Three gunboats: Grosjaschy, Chrabry, Chivinets
12 submarines
Three mine layers
144 other ships

Two air force brigades and large amounts of military equipment was included in the transfer. The transferred ships were to go on to play an important role in the defence of Petrograd. But all four of the Gangut's were to be laid up on 9 November 1918 due to a lack of man power  and also their shells and stores being landed for use in the defence of Petrograd.

On 31 May 1919 Petropavlovsk was to give support to the Russian destroyer Azard and several minesweepers that had taken the bait laid by the Royal Navies  forces supporting the White Russians. HMS Walker, a British destroyer, appeared to be operating alone and the Soviets sortied out to attack theme 'lone' vessel. However a number of other British destroyers had been positioned in order to come in from behind the Soviet force. The Azard quickly  retreated at her full speed and Petropavlovsk engaged the Walker at about 14,000 yards (12,802 m). She was to hit the  Walker twice, but inflicted only minor damage and in addition wounded  two sailors. As the British destroyers drew too close to the Soviet coastal artillery and minefields, they broke off and retreated. A few days later Petropavlovsk in company with the pre-dreadnought battleship Andrei Pervozvanny was to shell Fort Krasnaya Gorka whose garrison had mutinied against the Bolsheviks. She fired 568 12-inch shells and the garrison surrendered on 17 June when Leon Trotsky promised them their lives. He lied, ordering them later to be machine-gunned.

During March 1918 Allied forces had been sent to Russia to retrieve the supplies that had been dispatched to the former ally,  and in addition they were to train the opposition, the Tsarist White Russian Army. Not unsurprisingly through these actions, the Allies came into conflict with the Russian revolutionaries. The conflict continued into 1919 and the Allied forces guarding the military equipment were now trapped by the Russian winter. The British raised the North Russia Relief Force to secure their forces evacuation and the new force arrived in Russia in June 1919.

C.M.B.s had been first introduced in April 1916, and were constructed of wood, 45 feet long, very fast and lightweight, built to skip over both the water and German minefields and then having delivered their torpedoes to  quickly escape. The boats weighed 4¼ tons, were later improved to travel at 40 knots and carried two torpedoes, mounted above the water line on either side of the hull. They were powered by twin petrol engines of 750 combined horse-power and carried light rapid firing guns to defend themselves. The crew of the  C.M.Bs  were minimal, with C.M.B 88 carrying two lieutenants, a sub-lieutenant,  two motor mechanics and a wireless operator.  The C.M.B.s had already seen action in the famous attack on Zeebrugge and Ostend on St. George’s Day in 1918.

Rear-Admiral Sir Walter Cowan, based at Björkö in the Gulf of Finland, commanded the British naval force in action against the Bolsheviks and his objective was to blockade the Bolshevik Northern Fleet. On the 17th June Lieutenant Augustine Agar VC launched an attack in a Coastal Motor Boat (C.M.B.) into  Kronstadt where the Russian cruiser Oleg was sunk. Agar’s success emboldened Cowan to undertake the more ambitious attack on Kronstadt Harbour which was the major Russian naval port  protecting Leningrad (the renamed St Petersburg). The attackers would have to overcome a series of defensive forts and a destroyer which protected the approach to the harbour. If they survived these they would then face the Russian harbour gun defences and those aboard the numerous ships in the harbour.

The raid was to be undertaken by a flotilla of 7/8 (sources vary) comprised of the C.M.Bs 31, 62, 72, 79, 86, 88. The flotilla was  commanded by a very experienced submarine captain, Commander C.C. Dobson, who was on board C.M.B. 31. commanded by Lieutenant R.H. Macbean. Another of the boats was captained by the successful Agar. C.M.B. 88 was in turn commanded by Lieutenant A. Dayrell- Reed, who had served in submarines and taken part, as a navigator, in the Zeebrugge raid. Lieutenant Steele was first and gunnery officer of the small craft.

An aerial reconnaissance carried out ahead of the attack had revealed that moored immediately to the left just inside the Harbour, was the Petropavlovsk. To her left, amongst other ships, was the pre-dreadnought Andrei Pervozvanni. Moored across from the Harbour entrance was the old (1860) armoured cruiser Pamiat Azona1890, (6,000t) submarine depot ship and to the right of the Harbour entrance, five other vessels were moored alongside each other including the 15,170 ton cruiser Rubric.

On the night of 17th/18th August 1919 at 22:00 the force of 7/8 C.M.Bs  sortied from their Finnish base of Bjorko Sound, only 30 miles from Russia's main naval port, Kronstadt Naval Base. The boats hugged the Finnish coast until at 23:45 they altered course for Kronstadt. Only four were able to increase speed and after about half an hour, Kronstadt Island came into view. Then a few miles on and the forts guarding Petrograd Bay were sighted. By 01:00 three of the boats, including C.M.B 88, were passing below  the forts. They stole into the inner harbour, where there was no defence boom in place, in the early morning of the 18th. Cdr Dobson took command of the boats C.M.B's  31, 79 and 88 while  Agar's boat, C.M.B 4 guarded the entrance to deal,with Gavriil guarding .

C.M.B 88 had been slowly taking on water since she had sailed,and this had to be pumped out at regular intervals, but she proceeded to lead the way in. Amazingly, neither the forts nor the guard boat, a Russian destroyer opened fire and, as the three leading boats approached the harbour, they formed up into single file with C.M.B 88 coming in third. The RAF at 01:30 now launched a diversionary air attack with 112Ib bombs, in order to provide cover for the C.M.B.s.

As the attacks developed the old (1860) armoured cruiser 'Pamiat Azona1890, (6,000t) which was serving as the submarine depot ship 'Dvina' was struck by C.M.B 79 torpedoes and sunk. In a fast moving action, C.M.B 79  was lost to the enemy. The commanding officer of C.M.B 88 Lieutenant Dayrell-Reed was killed by a shot to the head. As C.M.B 88 went of course, Lieutenant  Steele, second-in-command took the wheel and pressed on with the attack. Steele steered C.M.B 88 to a position suitable for launching a torpedo at the  pre-dreadnought Andrei Pervozvanni. He gave the order to fire at a range of one hundred yards, and the torpedo speed off to find its mark, exploding on the side of the ship. He now turned his attention to the  Petropavlovsk, which was now partly obscured by smoke issuing from the stricken Andrei Pervozvanni. Steele executed a very tight turn, still under enemy fire, and again from only about 100 yards gave the order to fire. Before he heard the second torpedo hit, Steele perform another turn within the minimum of space in order to allow his boat to escape from the harbour and then performed a third tight turn to escape the harbour entrance, still under heavy Russian gun fire from within the harbour. Steele's second torpedo found its mark. It was erroneously believed that then  Petropavlovsk was sunk in the shallow waters,  later to be salvaged, and in addition, pre-dreadnought Andrei Pervozvanny  was seriously damaged. The British boats did fail to hit the Russian guardship, the destroyer Gavriil  which manage to sink two more of the attackers (C.M.B 24 and C.M.B 62 or C.M.B 67, the accounts vary). Steele took his boat out of the harbour, under withering fire from the forts, and escaped out to sea. The force proceeded back to Björkö and, on the journey, they tended to Lieutenant Dayrell-Reed but he died later back at the base. Five boats had escaped and Cdr Claude Dobson DSO, RN and Lt Gordon Steele RN were to be awarded the Victoria Cross.

Steels medal citation reads as follows: Archibald Dayrell-Read The KING has been graciously pleased to approve of the award of the Victoria Cross to the undermentioned Officers: Lieutenant Gordon Charles Steele, R.N. For most. conspicuous gallantry, skill and devotion to duty on the occasion of the attack on Kronstadt Harbour on the 18th August, 1919. Lieutenant Steele was second-in-command of H.M. Coastal Motor Boat No. 88. After this boat had entered the harbour the Commanding Officer, Lieutenant Dayrell-Reed, was shot through the head and the boat thrown off her course. Lieutenant Steele took the wheel, steadied the boat, lifted Lieutenant Dayrell-Reed away from the steering and firing position and torpedoed the Bolshevik battleship Andrei Pervozanni at a hundred yards range. He had then a difficult manoeuvre to perform to get a clear view of the battleship Petropavlovsk, which was overlapped by the Andrei Pervozanni and obscured by smoke coming from that ship. The evolution, however, was skilfully carried out, and the Petropavlovsk torpedoed. This left Lieutenant. Steele with only just room to turn, in order to regain the entrance to the harbour, but he effected the movement with success and firing his machine guns along the wall on his way, passed under the line of forts through a heavy fire out of the harbour'.
There seems in the sources available to be me a consensus that the Petropavlovsk was struck by the C.M.B's torpedoes and was sunk in shallow water. She was then raised and returned to service in 1920. But the Russian websites and other sources make no mention of this happening. However the historian Gregory Bennett implies the dreadnought was sunk by the British torpedo, and he tends to be a reliable source.....  

In November 1918 Poltava was despatched to St Petersburg for a refit. But while at the yard on 24th November an oil fire broke out on board due to the inexperience of her crew. The fire was to burned for 15 hours, greatly damaging the ship. The forward boiler room, artillery control as well as electrical systems were either gutted or severely damaged. Repairs the damage was unsurprisingly slow. Then while under repair in 1923 she suffered a second fire. From that point, though she remained afloat, she was used as a barracks ship and a source of parts store for the other ships in the class. There were occasional moments when a refit was discussed,  but they were never to become reality. There were ambitious plans, along with the Borodino class battlecruiser Izmail, of a conversion to an aircraft carrier in 1924, for service in the Black Sea. But given the state of the Soviet economy shortly after the end of the Russian Civil War and the technical ability available this could only ever be some admirals pipe dream. A more modest goal was to restore her back to her original configuration and the Baltic Works was to begin work in 1925, but they exhausted the allotted funds by the 15 February 1926, which by time she was estimated to be 46.5% complete. There were further plans to focus on her reconstruction as a modern equivalent to her sisters or as a battlecruiser, but with one turret removed in order to save weight. However despite all these plans, on the 23rd January 1935 all work was stopped once and for all.

The Russian Civil War had by November 1920, ended in Western Russia with the defeat of General Wrangel and the White Russians in the Crimea. All across Russia popular protests were now erupting in the countyside, in the cities, towns and villages protesting against the Communist Party policy of grain requisition. In urban areas, a wave of spontaneous strikes took place and by late February 1921 a general strike broke out in Petrograd.
(I have established a Facebook page entitled 'The Gangut class' and within its photo albums are several hundred images of the four ships....) 
On February 26th 1921, in response to events in Petrograd, the crews of the Petropavlovsk and Sevastopol held an emergency meeting and it was agreed to send a 'fact-finding' delegation to Petrograd to investigate and report back on the strike movement taking place there. Two days later the delegation returned to the two dreadnoughts and the crews were told of the strikes (with which they had a full sympathy with) and the government action's to repress the strikes. The sailors  present at the meeting on the Petropavlovsk approved a resolution which raised 15 demands,  which included free elections to the soviets, freedom of speech, press, assembly and organization to workers, peasants, anarchists and left-socialists. Like the Petrograd strikers, the Kronstadt sailors demanded the equalisation of wages, the end of roadblock  and the removal of the detachments restricting travel as well as the stopping of workers to bring food into the city.

A meeting of fifteen to sixteen thousand people was held in Anchor Square on the 1st March and what was to become known as the Petropavlovsk resolution was passed after the "fact-finding delegation" had made its report. Just two Bolshevik officials voted against the resolution. The meeting decided to send a second delegation to Petrograd to explain to both the strikers and the city garrison of the demands of Kronstadt and to request that non-partisan delegates be sent by the Petrograd workers to Kronstadt to learn first-hand what was happening there. This second delegation of thirty sailors was arrested by the Bolshevik government.

On the 2nd March a meeting called a "Conference of Delegates" was held, and the meeting comprised of two delegates from the ship's crews, army units, the docks, workshops, trade unions and Soviet institutions. The 303 delegates endorsed the Petropavlovsk resolution and elected a five-person "Provisional Revolutionary Committee" (later enlarged to 15 members two days later). This committee was made responsible for the organizing of the defence of Kronstadt, something deemed necessary give the threats of the Bolshevik officials there and the in correct rumour that the Bolsheviks had ordered its troops to attack the meeting. Kronstadt had turned against the ‘Communist’ government and raised once more the slogan of the 1917 revolution "All Power to the Soviets", to which was added "and not to parties." The revolt was called the "Third Revolution" and it was  hoped they could complete the work of the first two Russian Revolutions in 1917 by instituting on freely elected, self-managed, soviets.

The Communist Government responded with an ultimatum on 2nd March claiming that the revolt had "undoubtedly been prepared by French counterintelligence". They also argued that the revolt had been organised by ex-Tsarist officers led by the ex-General Kozlovsky, who had been placed in the fortress as a military specialist by Trotsky himself. This was to remain the official line throughout the revolt's life.

During the revolt, Kronstadt was to re-organise itself from the bottom up. The trade union committees were re-elected and a council of trade unions formed. Rank and file Communists left the party in droves, expressing their support for the revolt and its aim of "all power to the soviets and not to parties." Around  300 Communists were arrested and treated surprisingly humanely in prison. In comparison, at least 780 Communists were to leave the party in protest over the actions the communists was taking against Kronstadt and its general role in the revolution. Rather significantly, up to one-third of the delegates elected to Kronstadt's rebel conference of 2nd March were Communists.

The Kronstadt revolt was a non-violent one, but from the start the government was not interested in negotiation but of delivering an ultimatum,  'either come to your senses or suffer the consequences'. The Bolsheviks issued a threat to shoot the rebels "like partridges" and even took the families of the sailors hostage in Petrograd. Towards the end of the revolt Trotsky authorised the use of chemical warfare against the rebels and if they had not been crushed, a gas attack would have all most certainly been carried out.

The Communist government started to attack Kronstadt on March 7th. The first assault was to be a failure. "After the Gulf had swallowed its first victims," Paul Avrich records, "some of the Red soldiers… began to defect to the insurgents. Others refused to advance, in spite of threats from the machine gunners at the rear who had orders to shoot any wavers. The commissar of the northern group reported that his troops wanted to send a delegation to Kronstadt to find out the insurgents' demands." After 10 days of constant attacks the Kronstadt revolt was finally crushed by the Red Army. On 17th March the final assault took place and once again, the Bolsheviks had to force their troops to fight. On the night of 16/17 March the Bolsheviks "arrested over 100 so-called instigators, 74 of whom he had publicly shot." Once the Bolshevik forces finally entered the city of Kronstadt "the attacking troops took revenge for their fallen comrades in an orgy of bloodletting." During the life of the revolt, both the Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk fired almost 700 12" rounds, plus the crews were to join in the Kronstadt Rebellion returning fire when the Bolshevik forces began to bombard Kronstadt Island and the ships were hit by three 12-inch shells that killed or wounded 102 sailors.   Probably the only gain but the the rebellion was Lenin's and the Communist Party's subsequent decision to loosen their control of the Russian economy by implementing the 'New Economic Policy'.

One effect of the rebellion was a renaming of the two participating dreadnoughts, Sevastopol and Petropavlovsk in May 1921. The ships were renamed Parizhskaya Kommuna    and Marat respectively following the rebellion having  being crushed, in order to commemorate the Paris Commune and to erase their 'betrayal' to the Communist Party. Gangut was also renamed as the Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya whilst she was being refitted in 1925 and  Poltava became the Mikhail Frunze in 1926.

The next few  years were to see the ships of the class mainly in reserve, but starting from between 1922 and 1924 they were slowly repaired and brought back to operational readiness. Following their reintroduction into the Red Navy, they were to see routine maneuvers as the navy slowly rebuilt itself. Between 20th and 27th July 1925, Marat lead a squadron of the Red Navy into the Baltic and the ships paid a visit to Kiel Bay. In 1925 Gangut/Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya went into dockyard hands for a refit, recommissioning on the 23 March 1926.

The Parizhskaya Kommuna   was refitted in 1928 to prepare her for being transfered to the Black Sea Fleet in 1929. The refit included the fitting of  an 'open topped' false bow in an effort to improve her sea-keeping qualities. She departed her Baltic base under the escort of the cruiser Profintern for the last time and sailed for the Black Sea (the only time the ships of this class to ever visited an ocean!).

But whilst on route through the Bay of Biscay, on the 22nd November, she was struck by a storm that was to cause damage to her new 'open topped' bow. She was forced to put into the French port of Brest for some repairs. Her new bow lacked the drainage required and had as a result trapped a large amount of sea water which subsequently badly damaged both the false bow and the supporting structure. The Soviet government, in an attempt to lessen the embarrassment of the incident ordered repairs to be made solely by the crew. Three days later Parizhskaya Kommuna    departed Brest and sailed straight into 35 foot waves. The condition in the ship was now worse than before and Parizhskaya Kommuna    turned back into Brest for further repairs. This time the Soviet government contracted  a French shipyard for the repairs. Now Parizhskaya Kommuna    had the bulwark that retained so much water removed. Both ships were to finally arrive at Sevastopol on 18 January 1930 and Parizhskaya Kommuna   became the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet.

Between 1928 and the 8th April 1931 the Marat was the first of her class to be reconstructed at Leningrad's Baltic Yard. Her superstructure was enlarged, her guns were replaced, her turrets refitted, the poor anti-aircraft armament improved and the fire-control equipment modernized. Her boilers were also converted to burn oil fuel alone and this now resulted in sufficient steam being raised that the forward three boilers could be removed, so the boiler room could be turned into anti-aircraft magazines and control spaces. The forward funnel was angled and extended backwards in order to try to keep their exhaust fumes out of the gunnery spaces and the bridge. She too was also given a false bow, but hers had a solid top that turned it into a forecastle.

Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya was the next of the class to be rebuilt and she gained by the experience gained through her sister's modernization, going into the yard on the 12th October 1931. Three year's under refit left the ship looking very different as the fleet had learnt lessons from the refit of the Marat.   Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya now had a larger bridge superstructure, two heavy cranes for the lowering and recovering of its three sea planes. The tubular tower-mast was replaced by a larger and sturdier structure with a KDP-6 fire control director, equipped with two 6-meter (20 ft) Zeiss rangefinders positioned on top. The aft superstructure was enlarged and an entire new structure was built just forward of it, with another KDP-6 director mounted on it, which required the repositioning of the mainmast 9 meters (30 ft) forward. These changes left insufficient room for a derrick, as was had been fitted on Marat, so two large boat cranes were mounted on each side of the mainmast. All twenty-five of her boilers were replaced by a dozen oil fired boilers that had originally been earmarked intended for the Borodino-class battlecruiser, Izmail. The space saved by this work was used to add another inboard longitudinal watertight bulkhead that greatly improved her underwater protection. Her funnel was curved to the rear rather than angled like Marat to better keep the bridge clear of exhaust gases  Each turret received Italian 8-meter (26 ft) rangefinders and their roof armor was increased to 6 inches (152-millimeter) in thickness. A new forecastle, similar to Marat's, was fitted to improve her Sea keeping qualities. Six 76.2-millimeter (3.00 in) 34-K anti-aircraft (AA) guns were added, three on the roofs of the fore and aft turrets.  Her Pollen Argo Clock mechanical fire-control computer was upgraded with a copy of a Vickers Ltd fire-control computer, designated AKUR by the Soviets, as well as a copy of a Sperry stable vertical gyroscope. This series of changes increased her displacement to 26,690 tonnes (26,270 long tons; 29,420 short tons) at full load and her overall length to 184.9 meters (607 ft). Her metacentric height decreased to 1.67 meters (5 ft 6 in) from her designed 1.76 meters (5 ft 9 in) as a result of her enlarged superstructures. She emerged from her make-over on the 4 August 1934.

Parizhskaya Kommuna was to begin her two-stage reconstruction in 1933. The major differences from her sisters reconstructions were that her guns and turrets were refitted to increase their rate of fire to about two rounds per minutes and to extend their effective range. She was the first ship in the class to receive light anti-aircraft guns and her forward funnel was given a more sinuous curve in order to direct its exhaust gases away from the forward superstructure. She completed the first stage of her reconstruction in January 1938 but found she had  stability issues derived from all of the additional top weight. The options to cure this were discussed at great length, until Marshal Voroshilov, the People's Commissar for Defense finally approved the addition of anti-torpedo bulges in 1939 which would increase the ship's underwater protection and hopefully cure her stability problem. The second part of her reconstruction was carried out between December 1939 and July 1940 and and a pair of bulges were fitted that extended from the forward magazine to the rear magazine that increased the ship's beam by 5.62 meters (18.4 ft). Their unusual shape was from an outer void compartment that was planned  to weaken the explosive force of the torpedo,  backed by a narrow section immediately next to the original hull that extended from above the waterline to the bottom of the bilge. This was then sub-divided into two compartments, the lower of which was kept full of either fuel oil or water in order to absorb splinters and fragments from the explosion. The upper compartment was filled with small watertight tubes designed to secure the ship's 'waterplane' area and minimize any flooding from shells striking on the waterline. The underwater torpedo tubes were not compatible with the new bulges and were to be removed. The bulges increased her standard displacement to 30,395 tonnes (29,915 long tons; 33,505 short tons), increased her metacentric height to 2.03 meters (6 ft 8 in) and in addition reduced her speed to 21.5 knots. The Soviets also took advantage of her new found  stability to reinforce her deck armour by completely replacing her middle deck armor with 76.2-millimeter (3.00 in) cemented armor plates originally intended for Admiral Nakhimov-class cruisers. These were not perfect as they were harder than desirable for deck plates, but they did have the attraction of being free! At some point, (the exact date is unknown), her 45-mm guns were removed and sixteen 37-millimeter (1.5 in) 70-K automatic AA guns were added, three each on the fore and aft turret tops and twelve in the superstructures.
On 7th August 1933 while Marat  was on a gunnery exercise, the gunnery personnel on duty in the foremast, heard the distinctive sound of burning, and saw the flames coming from the  second turret.  The magazines were immediately flooded and an explosion prevented. But the fire was to cost 68 crewmen their lives. The fire was caused by the premature opening of the gun breech after firing. By the 15th October Marat was returned to service.

Between 1st and 10th September 1934 the Marat and  Petroslav paid a visit to Gdynia (Poland). Three years later, in order to promote the growth and size of the revamped Soviet fleet in 19th May 1937  to the 5th June the Marat was sent as a representative of the Soviet Union to the Coronation Review of King George IV of England.  It was a proud moment for the Soviet navy. Marat returned to Russia via Memel, Libau and Tallinn, and on route was escorted by two oil tankers for her replenishment.

Marat and Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya participation in the Winter War was limited to a bombardment of Finnish 10-inch (254 mm) coast defense guns on 18 December 1939 at Saarenpää in the Beryozovye Islands, before the Gulf of Finland iced over for the winter. The two ship's  failed to inflict any permanent damage before they were driven off by a number of near misses. The two ships fired 400 12" during their participation in the war. On the 22nd June  Marat was anchored in Kronstadt following a voyage from Tallinn, and over the course of 14 hours she opened fire on the enemy and engaged Finnish reconnaissance aircraft. It was to become an almost daily activity for the ships anti-aircraft guns, and even several times a day. With the deteriorating situation on the ground and the growing threat to Leningrad,  on the 22nd August 22 Marat took up a  firing position in the Leningrad Naval channal. On 9th September she had already made use of her main battery, and six days later her 4.7 (120-mm guns) were in  action. She continued to fire on the advancing enemy troops almost daily and struck several targets. Her daily shell consumption of 12 inch 305-mm rounds was to reach 177. On 14th September the Marat came under Finnish 150mm shell fire and was struck nine times with no significant damage. Two days later, a  tenth shell struck in the nasal (Russian exact translation, sorry) and a machine-gun knocked out three guns AA70K. The lost AA were felt later that day when she was attacked by 27 dive bombers in two groups coming in off the bow and stern. Two 250 kg bombs struck home in the  'right waist area's (translation again)  in the wardroom, the same bomb exploded on the poop and the second damaged the barrel of 120-mm guns number 13, exploding to the side. Neither bomb  penetrated the armour and basically  destroyed the salon wardroom and some officers cabins.

Both  Marat and Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya  were to have  their anti-aircraft armament modernized and increased though the winter of 1939–40 and following the Soviets occupation of Estonia on 1st December 1940 they were transferred to Tallinn. Mikhail Frunze having been a parts source for two decades she was formally now discarded, after her scrapping had already begun at a slow pace.

Just before the German invasion in 1941, Parizhskaya Kommuna had landed four of her 4.7 inch (120-mm guns) in Kronstadt and her anti-aircraft armament was supplemented with two twin 76.2-mm 81K mounts mounted on her quarter deck. The magazines for these guns were probably located in the rearmost casemates on each beam, which lost their 4.7 inch (120-mm guns). In addition twelve automatic 37-millimeter (1.5 in) 70-K guns were added, three guns each on the middle turrets and the other six in the fore and aft superstructures. Four twin and four single 12.7-millimeter (0.50 in) DShK machine guns and two AA directors were fitted as well. Her large cranes had been replaced by smaller ones taken from the ex-German Lutzow  heavy cruiser Petropavlovsk in order to make room for the new anti-aircraft guns.

On 22 June 1941, the Germans launched operation Barbarrossa against the Soviet Union. The start of the the Great Patriotic War was to find the Marat in Kronstadt and Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya  in Tallinn. The latter was all to soon forced to fall back to join her sister in Kronstadt by the relentless German advance, but neither of the Baltic dreadnoughts were to engage the Germans until 8 September 1941 when they fired on troops of the German 18th Army from positions near Kronstadt and Leningrad.

In September 1941 both Marat and Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya were to be active in giving support to the defenders of Leningrad. Marat alone fired 1042 12" shells (86 per barrel) in the span of just eight days.  They were also to face some of the heaviest air strikes faced by any ships during war, each whilst sustaining damaged, remained in action. The cannibalized Mikhail Frunze, following the German invasion, was towed to Kronstadt and was beached there in late July 1941 near the Leningrad Sea Canal. During the Siege of Leningrad her hull was to used as a base for small ships.

Throughout the war the AA armament of the ships was continually increase and by the end of the war Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya carried twelve 76mm, twenty 37mm guns and sixteen 12.7mm machine guns.

Beginning in September 1941 the Luftwaffe launched strikes aimed at finally sinking the two ships. Marat was to be lightly damaged by German 15-centimeter (5.9 in) guns on 16 September. Then a week later on 23 September Marat was attacked by Ju-87B Stukas while she was in the harbour entrance. One bomb (claimed by Lieutenant Hans-Ulrich Rudel of III./StG 2) detonated in her forward magazine resulting in an explosion similar to that of the by USS Arizona about two and a half months later. The catastrophic explosion destroyed the bow area of the ship, disintegrated 'A' turret, destroyed the foremost funnel and threw the bridge superstructure through the air and down onto a nearby quay. The fatality amongst the crew was 326 killed. The morning of the 24th September was to find the Marat resting on the harbour bottom, which had only been 2 meters beneath her keel. The water level onboard reached approximately half the height of the space between the middle and lower decks, ie, mainly crew accommodation areas. Despite the fact that the Marat had virtually ceased to exist, it was tempting for the Russians to use what's left of her as a powerful floating battery. With that in mind from the 24th September work began to drain her from the stern of the ship and in the bow. As the water was  pumped from the hulls compartments, Marat gained positive buoyancy, gradually lifting off the bottom, finally emerging, with the trim on the bow  and list to starboard, depending tide level in the bay. Amazingly the aft turrets of the ship remained operational and on the 24 October were presented for a test shoot, and on 31st October they returned to  action. By the middle of 1942  'B' turret was also repaired and it to resumed it's bombardments. As the German Army drew closer to the city the  remaining three turrets continued to support Soviet ground operations.

The rear part of the ship was later refloated and she was to serve as a floating battery and she was to fire a total of 1,971 twelve-inch shells through the Siege of Leningrad. In December 1941 a number of granite slabs  1.6 to 2.4 in(40 to 60 millimeters)thick were removed from the nearby harbor walls, were laid on her decks to reinforce her deck protection. Another transverse bulkhead was built behind frame 57 and the space between them was filled with concrete to prevent her sinking if the original bulkhead became damaged.At this time the 4.7 inch guns were transfered ashore for the needs of the army, and by the end of 1942 Marat's armament consisted of three  12 inch (305-mm) turrets, three 4.7 inch (76-mm) one 34-K on the roof of the fourth main calibre turret, five 37-mm anti-aircraft automatic 70-K, two machine guns and three machine DC ANC.

Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya was to be  badly damaged in turn on 21 September 1941 by three bomb that hit her bow and which knocked out two of her turrets.  She was taken for the necessary  repairs to the Ordzhonikidze Yard on 23 October, but was to be hit once more by more bombs on two different occasions whilst under going repair. She  managed to avoid the majority of the dive bomber attacks.  But she was to be hit between three and six times.  Because of the constant attacks she was suffering, she was ordered the following month to undergo repairs at Leningrad.  As the repairs continued the Oktoberskaya Revolutsia  was again struck by four bombs during April 1942. She was hit by one heavy and three medium bombs dropped from a Heinkel He 111s of KG 4 during the night of 4/5 April, then once more by three bombs on 24 April. Her repairs were to be finally completed in November 1942, and a quadruple 37-mm 46-K gun mount had been added in September.

In the Black Sea four of Parizhskaya Kommuna's 4.7 inch (120 mm) guns were landed shortly before 22 June 1941 while she was in port at Sevastopol and the Germans drew closer. On the 26th June 1941 the Soviet Black Sea Fleet launched a raid on the Romanian port of Constanta, which was to the only encounter between major warships during the naval war in the Black Sea in the war. Parizhskaya Kommuna  she was held in reserve during the raid. Then on 30 October 1941 she was evacuated to Novorossiysk following the Germans breaking through the Soviet defensive lines near the Perekop Isthmus.
Parizhskaya Kommuna  was to fire her first shots of the war on 28 and 29 November 1941  when she bombarded German and Romanian troops south of Sevastopol with 146 12 inch and 299 4.7" (120mm) shells. The 29th December was to see Parizhskaya Kommuna make one evacuation run to Sevastopol, bombarding German troops on her arrival there.

A month later on the 29th December Parizhskaya Kommuna   steamed into Sevastopol's South Bay and fired 179 and 265 4.7" (120-mm) shells at German troops before embarking 1025 wounded Soviet troops and sailed escorted by the cruiser Molotov on the 31st.
Parizhskaya Kommuna bombarded German positions south of Feodosiya on the evening of 4/5 January 1942 and once more on the 12 January 1943. Parizhskaya Kommuna  went on to provided gunfire support during the Soviet landings behind German lines along the southern coast of the Crimea three days later. She once more  bombarded the German positions west and north of Feodosiya on the nights of 26/28 February in support of an offensive by the 44th Army.

Parizhskaya Kommuna having spent most of her time supporting troops during the Kerch Offensive between January and March 1942, fired her last shots of the war at targets near Feodosiya during the nights of 20/22 March 1942. Following that she returned to Poti Georgia to have her worn-out 12 inch guns relined. By the time this was completed the Soviets were unwilling to expose such an important asset to further German air attacks, which had already been the cause of the loss of a number of cruisers and destroyers.

On the 31st May 1943 Marat, (for a reason not recorded in my sources) reverted back to her original name. Special order from Moscow  By the end of 1943 both Parizhskaya Kommuna    and Marat had equally reverted back to their old names, while after the war what was left of the ex Marat now Petropavlovsk renamed Volkhov.

At one point in 1943 it was decided to use the bow of Mikhail Frunze  to replace the destroyed bow of Marat but it was decided that the result would not be worth the time or money involved. Both the Baltic ships were to remain active throughout the Blockade and Oktyabrskaya Revolyutsiya returned to her role of providing fire support during the Siege of Leningrad, the Leningrad–Novgorod Offensive in January 1944 and the Vyborg–Petrozavodsk Offensive in June 1944.  On the 9th June 1944 she was to be the last  Soviet battleship to fire shots in anger, during the latter offensive.  She obtained two direct hits on the concrete strong points at the distance of 30,000 meters. Parizhskaya Kommuna was to remained in Poti until late 1944 when she led the surviving major units of the Black Sea Fleet back to Sevastopol on 5 November 1944.On 22 July 1944, Gangut  was awarded the Order of the Red Banner while the Parizhskaya Kommune was awarded the Order of the Red Banner on 8 July 1945 . Mikhail Frunze  was to be finally raised on 31 May 1944, towed to Leningrad and her scrapping was begun in 1949.
It should be noted as we come to the end of the war, that none of the class were ever to engage ships of the German fleet in open battle.  The reason for this was simply because Stalin, like the admirals of the Great War before him, was afraid that they would be sunk and that the risk of loss would be too crippling to bear.

After 1945 there were a number of  plans (Project 27) to reconstruct Petropavlovsk, as she was now known, using the bow of Mikhail Frunze  and moving her third turret to the forward position, but the idea wasn't authorised and were formally cancelled on 29 June 1948. She was renamed Volkhov, after the nearby river, on 28 November 1950 and served as a stationary training ship until stricken on 4 September 1953 and broken up afterwards.She was renamed Volkhov in 1950 and served as a stationary training ship until stricken in 1953 and subsequently broken up. Mikhail Frunze was finally scrapped beginning in 1949.

Unlike her sisters, which were all scrapped over time, part of Mikhail Frunze continues to live on. The four triple 12-inch/52 (305mm) turrets were removed from the battleship in 1925. Two turrets were transported by the Trans-Siberian railroad in parts to the Soviet far east, where they were reassembled as coastal batteries on Russky Island in Novik Bay, guarding Vladivostok. The other two were kept in Leningrad until 1948, when they were sent to the Crimea to replace the Maxim Gorky Shore Battery #35, which had been destroyed during the war. Given modernized turrets in 1954, they guarded the Black Sea Fleet base at Sevastopol. Both the Vladavostok guns and the Sevastopol guns of Mikhail Frunze  remained in service with the Soviet Navy until 1997.

Written by Andy South c/o Facebook 'The Great War at sea'.