Polish Projects

[USSEssex]

I understand that the article dealing with the Benbow-battleship published in the Polish magazine originally was written in English. Can anybody supply a scan/pdf of the orginal?

The magazine was originally written in Polish because it is a Polish magazine, I wrote it in English here and I also included a link to the original here.
Some of the old issues are available online and you can read them.

 

[USSEssex]

In your opinion, looking at the overall design of the 1,690-ton destroyer, is it currently a modified Guepard (as it is generally said) or not entirely and closer to Mogador/Le Fantasque, or is it a combination of two projects, as in the case of the de Loire project?
Of course, looking at what it is based on and what it is closer to.
Because I may have inaccurate or outdated information.

 

[USSEssex]

In Przegląd Morski, 1930, No. 14 of the monthly navy magazine, 2nd Lt. Commander Jerzy Kłossowski, in the article "rozważania nad rozwojem naszej siły zbrojnej na morzu", discussed the geopolitical conditions of Poland and their impact on the expansion of the navy.
He claimed that the political situation affects the size of our fleet.
His proposed fleet consisted of destroyers, a battleship and an air force.
It was 1 battleship with a displacement of 18,000 tons (approximately), 6 large destroyers with a displacement of 3,000 tons and 12 destroyers with a displacement of 1,500 tons, the total tonnage of surface vessels was 54,000 tons.
the total displacement of the submarines was 11,000 tons, the total displacement of the auxiliary ships was 2,000 tons, and the total displacement of the training ship was 6,000 tons.
The total tonnage of the fleet was 73,000 tons.
According to Kłossowski, Polish ships should be built with strong weapons (this applies to all ships), high speed, of course in appropriate proportions, and should be heavily armored (this only applies to battleships), of course from a strategic and hydrographic point of view.
I will now turn to the discussion of the battleship and destroyers.
According to Kłossowski, a battleship was a ship that had a larger displacement than Panzerschiff A, therefore he assumed the displacement to be 18,000 tons, emphasizing in brackets that this was an approximate displacement, he considered the 280 mm battleship A's artillery to be of tactically positive caliber, and concluded that it was enough to add more main artillery of this caliber than Panzerschiff A, I will explain it briefly this way, it means that according to him, the Polish battleship should have armament of, for example, 4xII 280 mm, 3xIII 280 mm or 5xII 280 mm, it was simply supposed to have stronger armament than Panzerschiff.
The armor should be carefully considered and provide complete protection against 280 mm shells at average combat distances in average conditions.
The relationship between armor and artillery should be such that these two elements complement each other and do not interfere with each other.
Someone will ask what about speed.
Kłossowski wrote that at the expense of armor and artillery, the speed and radius of action should be reduced, if necessary, in relation to battleship A.
It was supposed to be a larger and stronger battleship than battleship A.
Large destroyers were to have strong main artillery and should be very fast, for example, Kłossowski wrote small cruisers for Guepard-class destroyers .
He believed that the ideal smaller destroyers would be the modernized Wicher-class destroyers with a displacement of 1,500 tons.
However, it should be remembered that these are the personal views of people associated with the Polish Navy and not the official fleet programs.
I have summarized myself here to the most important information and data.
You can read the entire issue, to which I will provide a link http://www.bibliotekacyfrowa.eu/dlibra/show-content/publication/60861/edition/55377/ .

 

[USSEssex]

I was going to write about the would-be project 7U class destroyer ORP Sławny ex Slavnyj, but the matter is more complicated than I initially thought, so in this post I want to sort out the facts and collect all the evidence in this matter.
Okay, so let's start from the beginning.
1. We will start with the first document about the transfer of ships to Poland.
This document is called A Brief Outline of the Development of the Artillery Command and Artillery Supply Command of the Polish Army in 1944/1945.
We are interested in the report, I see the date on it is May 9, 1945, which was prepared by Maj. Gen. Czarniawski after talks with the People's Commissar of the Navy.
There are 2 specifics in this report
1) First of all, the Polish Navy could obtain the following ships from the USSR
1 destroyer
5 submarine chasers
6 torpedo boats
5 minesweepers.
these ships were to be crewed by Soviets until the officers were trained.
2) When Poland trained appropriate officer and non-commissioned staff, the USSR agreed (because they promised to do so) to provide Poland with further ships, and these were to be
5 destroyers
5-6 submarines.
This was partially confirmed by Józef Urbanowicz when he went with Bolesław Czarniawski with a delegation to Moscow in May, he mentioned in his memoirs about the transfer of 23 ships from the USSR to Poland, but only when the ships could be based in Gdynia and when we mobilized and trained the staff, he said that the Russians were They were very concerned and asked what we needed now, and their suggestions went much further and were beyond our capabilities.
He returned to Warsaw on May 8, and the letter I quoted above was prepared after this visit.
The only thing that is inconsistent here is that, according to him, the transfer of the ships was to be part of the reparations tonnage.
2. The next piece of evidence is a document dated August 27, 1945, it is a British report prepared by the British Embassy in Warsaw, this report, like the second one which I will quote later, describes the situation in the Polish Navy, the author of this report was probably Ambassador Victor Cavendish Bentinck.
The report reports on the transfer of 20 smaller Soviet ships from Leningrad and Tallinn to Poland.
The crews of these ships were to be mixed, i.e. Soviet and Polish.
3. The next evidence, although indirect, regarding the transfer of the ships to Poland is the document of August 28, 1945, prepared by Cmdr. Ivan Szylingowski, sometimes written as Szelągowski.
This document contains the dimensions of the ordered signs, and these were:
1) Flags
1x 240x120 cm
5x 150x75 cm
17x 100x50 cm
If there is no reserve order, it means that the acquisition of 1 large ship, most likely a destroyer, 5 medium-sized ships, probably minesweepers, and 17 smaller ships, most likely submarine chasers and torpedo boats, was expected.
This document is probably a draft of the original letter because it is unsigned.
Now we come to the history of ORP Sławny.
4. Another document mentioning the transfer of ships to Poland is the report of September 22, 1945, prepared by the British Embassy in Warsaw.
The author of the report, in a conversation with Klemens Kolasa, generally describes the topic of the failed takeover of 20 24 Soviet ships by Poland.
According to Kolasa's account, Admiral Aleksandr Vinogradov arrived in Poland on September 6 with an entire flotilla of ships, 8-12 ships arrived in Hel, another 2 arrived in Gdynia from Libawa.
There were 14 ships in total.
On September 7, a telegram was received from Warsaw that the ships would not be taken over due to technical reasons and the ships returned to Libawa.
And here we come to the heart of the matter with the ORP Sławny ex destroyer Slavnyj project 7U.
Russian Konstantyn Strielebickij in his article titled siódmy niszczyciel czyli „ORP Sławny”? published in Okręty Wojenne 2/2007 No. 82 quotes further documents from Russian archives, I will present them one by one below.
1) an important document is a document called the Diary of the destroyer Slavny from the Squadron awarded the Order of the Red Banner of the Baltic Fleet.
a) In chapter 3 called "Party and Political Work" there is an entry prepared in August 1945
under the title "Major Events" - "Work on preparing the crew to move to friendly Poland and hand over the ship to it."
b) In the part of the document in Chapter 4 called "Major Events" in the period from August 27 to September 1, 1945, there is the entry "Preparation of the ship for transfer to the Polish Navy".
According to this document, on September 4, the following entry was recorded
"Passage of the ship to the port of Hel for transfer to the Republic of Poland."
On September 9, we see the entry "Passage to Libawa".
End of the first part, finishing later and I don't have much left.

 

[Dilandu]

Very interesting!

 

[USSEssex]

Part 2
2. To what I wrote in the first point about the destroyer Slavnyj, it is also worth adding what the uncle of the author of the article said (reminder, the author of the article about the seventh destroyer was Konstanty Strielbickij).
His uncle, Captain 1st Rank Oleg Bordyukov, who participated in World War II, told him a story during one conversation.
Well, in the summer of 1945, he was a student of the F.E. Dzerzhinsky Higher School of Naval Warfare and did his internship on one of the ships of the Baltic fleet in the Gulf of Finland, and after leaving Leningrad, his training ship entered the main base of the fleet - Kronstadt on the island of Kotlin, at the quay of Morskogo Zavoda, his uncle he saw a destroyer which, as he says, was being prepared to be handed over to Poland.
What's more, he recalled that there was a Polish name on the ship's side, he recognized it because the inscription was in Latin letters and the Russians do not use Latin but Cyrillic, the destroyer also had a Polish flag, unfortunately he did not remember what name it was.
Probably this destroyer was the destroyer Slavnyj, and since the name in Polish and Russian is similar, the simplest, most sensible and at the same time logical name of this destroyer in Polish is ORP Sławny, and it probably had such a name, that is why there is nothing in the diary about renaming the destroyer because it's just that the name w in Russian and Polish reads the same and means the same, which is why the name of the destroyer had to be changed, because Sławny is the same name as Slavnyj but in Latin, and more specifically in Polish, if you know what I mean.
This conclusion was also reached by the author of the article, the seventh destroyer, Konstanty Streblickij.
Now you know why I write on Slavnyj ORP Sławny (this is also the name adopted in Poland when writing about this destroyer).
a) I will add another memory here, this time of Henryk Pietraszkiewicz.
When he was on WAK (the acronym means nothing to me now) in Leningrad in 1956, he met a captain of the 1st rank who claimed that he was preparing a destroyer to be handed over to Poland as part of the tonnage of ships and warships of defeated Germany.
Apparently there were supposed to be two, but he didn't know why they did it differently.
He wrote this in the Biuletyn Historyczny 21/2006 in his article "Na płytkich i głębokich wodach", page 169.
This is at least partially consistent with the above, as well as with what I wrote in point 1, regarding ORP Sławny in the previous post.
Perhaps Poland was actually supposed to receive more than one destroyer.
3. The next document is the "Diary of Combat Activities of the Naval Base in Libawa" in the period from May 3 to October 9, 1945.
a) On September 4, 1945, at 9:40 a.m. it was recorded that:
"the destroyers Slavny, Grozyashchi and Storozhevoy left Libawa.
On the same day, at 2.40 p.m., Libawa received a radiogram from the commander of the ship group, sent from the sea at 12.02 p.m.:
It is located at coordinates 56º 10' north latitude, 20° 45' east longitude.
On a course of 200° and a speed of 22 knots I am heading towards Cape Hel.”
In the "Notes" section of this document there is an entry: "At 5:30 p.m. the destroyers reached Hel."
b) the next entry in this document is from September 8 at 6:30 p.m. which says: "the destroyer Slavnyj arrived from Hel".
4. The last document that says anything about the case is the "Diary of combat activities of the Świnoujście naval base No. 11 (volume 2)" in the period from July 14 to December 31, 1945.
a) the first entry was made on September 7, 1945 at 20.35 "A radiogram was received from the deputy chief of staff of the Libawa naval base about the passage of the destroyer Storozhevoy from 22.00 on September 7 to 08.00 on September 8 on the Libawa l route."
b) On September 8 at 9.15 a radiogram was received in Świnoujście with the following content
"the chief of staff of the Libawa naval base reported that the notification about the passage of the Storozhevoy destroyer had been changed."
And so Slavnyj returned alone.
Well, that's it for this case, no more documents from 1945 were found in Poland, and there are more questions than answers, the destroyers were certainly part of a larger group of ships that arrived in Polish ports, and the takeover of the Slavny may be part of a larger puzzle, and more documents may be in Russian archives.
Below is a list of sources I relied on when writing both parts.
Biuletyn Historyczny 21/2006 Henryk Pietraszkiewicz article "Na płytkich i głębokich wodach"
Okręty wojenne 2/2007 nr.82 article siódmy niszczyciel czyli ORP Sławny? by Konstanty Strielbickij
Biuletyn Historyczny 23/2008 Zbigniew Wojciechowski article Przejęcie okrętów ze Związku Radzieckiego, Niemiec i Szwecji w 1945 r. w relacji generała Józefa Urbanowicza
Okręty Wojenne 4/2015 nr 132 article Przyczynek do historii ORP Sławny by Andrzej S. Bartelski
Morza i Okręty wydanie specjalne 5/2016 article Trudny rok 1945, czyli okręty, których nie było by Robert Rochowicz.

 

[USSEssex]

I have already written about the would-be project 7U destroyer, this post will mainly be about the attempt to introduce former German submarines into the service of the Polish Navy, although none of them managed to be introduced into service.
Would-be destroyer.

Before I move on to submarines, it is enough to mention the interesting case of the destroyer.
The whole matter takes place on October 24, 1946, because then the management of the shipyard in Elbląg (ex Schichau shipyard) proposed to the Polish Navy Command the finishing and launching of the hull of the T42 destroyer, it was a Flottentorpedoboot 1942 class destroyer, known as Flottentorpedoboot 1941.
One of the destroyers of this class was 58.5% completed, then blown up, and it was this hull of the T42 destroyer that was to be renovated on the slipway and launched again, all the remaining assembly and finishing works were to be performed by other shipyards subordinated to the Union of Polish Shipyards.
In addition, the shipyard also offered to complete the documentation of the unit that was preserved in the company archive.
Unfortunately, it was not possible to put it into service, I don't know why, but I suppose the reason could be the price.
However, if it entered service, it would probably not differ visually from the original, not counting the main and anti-aircraft guns or radars, and perhaps it would have 100 mm B 34U guns like ORP Burza after the war, at least I think so, but these are just my guesses as for weapons, but it is not impossible.
Of course, if the Polish archives contain data on the planned weapons, I don't know them, I don't know anything more about it apart from what I wrote here, but if I read something more about it in an article, I will add it.
Finally, regarding this destroyer, I will say that I did not know about this matter before, I found out about it when I read an article yesterday (an article that can be read in Morze Statki i Okręty 7-8/2019 on this topic) about an attempt to introduce seehund submarines to Poland navy (I will write more about it in a moment), which was also offered by the shipyard no. 16 in Elbląg, and it was with this offer of submarines that the finishing of this destroyer's hull was also proposed.
The destroyer itself in the offer was called Tyger 42.
I have a question, or rather two
1) What was the standard displacement of these destroyers? because the German Wikipedia gives 1,782 tons as the design displacement, and the English Wikipedia gives a displacement of 1,493 tons as the standard.
2) Does anyone have a good drawing of Flottentorpedoboot 1941 class destroyers?

German submarines for Poland 1945-1960.

1. Perhaps the first initiative to introduce a German submarine into the Polish Navy took place already in 1945.
This is what the post 35/13 of the MW Main Port Shipyard suggests, the post was changed by Order of the NDWP No. 0333 of November 30, 1945.
At point VII, the Diving Section had to include a submarine with a crew: the ship's commander-helmsman (boatswain), engine driver (mate) and deckhand (sailor).
I got this information from a post by user J.B from the fow.pl forum.
Link to the thread https://fow.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5800.
Unfortunately, it is not known what kind of submarine it is, because I do not have any more information about this submarine, perhaps it is the German submarine V 80.
2. Polish Seehund
The next submarines on this list are the XXVII B5 class submarine.
On October 24, 1946, shipyard no. 16 from Elbląg presented the Navy Command (DMW) with an offer to produce small XXVII class submarines for the Polish Navy.
The offer stated that these submarines were to have a 110 HP Bussing NAG diesel engine, an electric motor, a generator and a battery bank, but they were not to have navigation instruments.
Submarines were to be built from parts of damaged other, destroyed midget submarines or semi-finished products supplemented with new elements.
In total, there were 11 submarines, 1 model, i.e. trial submarine, and later, after building 10 more.
The total value of the contract for the delivery of 1 submarine was estimated by the shipyard at PLN 5 million.
The price calculated in 1947 was similar.
The Poles did not like this price because it was too high, almost as much as the submarine built in the Netherlands, and the shipyard did not want to go lower with this price.
And you have a reason why none of the submarines of this type entered the Polish Navy, and it is not known what happened later.
In general, the Polish Navy was interested in the offer, not only 1 trial unit but also 8 more submarines of this type, which is 2 less compared to the number from the shipyard's offer, but the problem was the price.
In addition to the above-mentioned submarines, the shipyard's offer included finishing and launching the hull of the T42 destroyer, which I wrote about earlier.
I think that this concludes the matter of these submarines that I wrote about, summarizing to the most important information that I provided above.
3. A small submarine with a displacement of approximately 250 tons.
At the end of 1948, it was possible to introduce a German submarine to the Polish Navy. It was to be a submarine with a displacement of about 250 tons, the ship was initially to be used for crew training and placed on land.
In December 1948, the submarine was recovered, this is the one I am writing about.
Unfortunately, nothing came of it and it was cut up for scrap.
This case was first written about by W. Radziszewski, Marynarka Wojenna w latach 1945-1949, Gdańsk 1976, chapter II on page 60.
I don't have this book, it's generally known.
I also used the information in this thread on fow.pl https://fow.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5800
It could have been U 2.
Generally, it's late now, and I will write the second part about attempts to introduce German submarines to the Polish Navy later, and there are 2 cases left.
So all the sources I use will be in part two, as usual, at the end.

 

[Dilandu]

If I recall correctly, many German submarines of 1945 build (especially Type XXI) were found to be poorly accembled, due to shortage of trained workforce, cutting too many edges, and interruption of accembly process by bombing. That's why very few Type XXI submarines were used for anything but training and experimental purposes; they could literally fell apart if subjected to too much stress. Its plausible that such considerations prevented Poland from aquiring German submarines.

 

[Airborne2001]

Poland asking for carriers is interesting. I hope one day we can discover info regarding the 1930 carrier plan. I gotta love the ambition to try and get the Hosho from Japan post-war lol.

 

[USSEssex]

From what I remember, this date is not exact, but from what I know there was a naval program, although it is not fully known to me, with a total tonnage of 200,000 tons, in which an aircraft carrier was included, plans of this type in which even battleships were included taken into account more or less seriously.
I would have to check other marine programs because maybe I have this marine program.
An example of such a naval program with an aircraft carrier that I know is Benedykt Krzywiec's plan from 1929, it included
2 battleships of 20,000 tons each
3 cruisers of 10,000 tons or 3 cruisers of 8,400 tons
1 aircraft carrier with a displacement of 5,500 tons
1 mine-laying cruiser with a displacement of 5,300 tons
destroyers
a) 4 Wicher-class destroyers
b) 3 Turbine-class destroyers
c) 3 Regele Ferdianand-class destroyers
submarines
a) 6 Maneli class submarines
b) 3 Redoutable-class submarines
c) 3 Wilk-class submarines
d) 3 Balilla-class submarines
The total displacement of the fleet is 113,285 tons, because 96,575 tons is the tonnage of the submarine fleet and 16,710 tons is the tonnage of the submarine fleet.
But this is not the official plan.
We never asked about aircraft carriers, although apparently the British were supposed to give us some aircraft carriers during the Battle of the Atlantic, as far as I remember, but this legend has not been confirmed.
I wrote about this case here.

As for the maritime program, Plan M.
It had been developed since 1943 and approved in 1944, and it was intended to be implemented after the war for 15 years, but only if Poland was a free and independent country.
First, we return to Poland with what we have, i.e. 1 cruiser, 6 destroyers, 6 submarines and an MTB.
Then we would get small ships like traulers etc
they wanted to get the rest of the ships from the USA and Great Britain, the ships after the division of the German fleet, plus maybe the Italian ones, i.e. some destroyers to replace the lost destroyers, a cruiser or two, etc., and what the Germans left us in Polish ports, e.g. Gneisenau could have been in such a fleet .
And the 3 battleships they wanted were to have a displacement of 35,000 tons, while the 6 aircraft carriers had a displacement of 8,000 tons.
And in this document for this sea plan there is North Carolina, and Hosho.
So I guess the Hosho idea relates to this maritime program.
Although the aircraft carriers were supposed to be from Great Britain, as I remember.
I will make a separate post about this maritime program and write about it in more detail.
However, in reality, this program could not actually be implemented, because Poland was supposed to be under the influence of the USSR, and consequently Poland was communist.

 

[RedLegion]

Not to mention the state the country was in after the war. The map shows what percentage of the city was destroyed.

 

[USSEssex]

Not to mention the state the country was in after the war. The map shows what percentage of the city was destroyed.View attachment 742307

The main point is that there is a difference between the way we look at it in 1943 and 1944 and what actually happened.
So, in order to actually implement this plan, after the war Poland would have to either be under the influence of the Allies or win the elections after the war, of course this did not happen because the elections were rigged by the communists, in addition, the communists located their structures, and the communists certainly would not have allowed it to be implemented this plan.
The shipyards would also have to be rebuilt.
Since 1945, new naval programs have been developed in Poland, and in the naval programs developed since 1945, the ally was mainly the USSR.
So Plan M was actually the last naval program developed by the Second Polish Republic, i.e. the government that was in London.

 

[USSEssex]

Part 2 to German submarines for Poland.
4. In the early 1950s, or more precisely in 1950, Poland could have had three former German submarines.
These were three specific submarines U4, U6 and U10 that were in Ustka.
In short
It started with the Szczecin Maritime Office building a cold storage facility, but its construction was hampered by submarine wrecks, and in the meantime, letters were sent, etc., so I won't go into detail about it.
The Polish Navy was interested in these submarines.
The protocol of July 20 say that the Wreck Commission has just decided to authorize the Szczecin Maritime Office, together with the Ministry of National Defense, to appoint a joint mixed commission to receive these submarines.
However, on August 8, 1950, the Ministry of National Defense withdrew from the declaration.
It is not entirely certain what happened to these submarines, they were probably scrapped in the 1950s, if not in 1951 then later.
5. The condition of the Project 96 submarines was deteriorating, so in 1956 there was an idea to introduce several German submarines to the service, at that time the Germans introduced 3 former German submarines into service that had been recovered, so we decided to do the same.
For this reason, in 1959 we were looking for German submarines, out of a dozen or so submarines we were interested in two specific ones, i.e. U 2342 and U 768.
The case with U 2342 is strange because this submarine had been recovered earlier, so they were looking for a submarine that was not there, but if the position of the wreck had not been mistaken, we might have found U 768.
None of the searched submarines were recovered and put into service, and the search was ended in 1959.
And this is where the whole thread about would-be German submarines ends, although there may be something new in the future, so the list may be longer.

Sources I used when writing both parts
Morze Statki i Okręty 7-8/2019 article Miniaturowe U-booty z Elbląga . Próba pozyskania OP typu Seehund dla PMW by Marcin Westphal, Okręty Wojenne 1/2013 article U-booty zamiast Whiskey by Witold Pasek, Okręty Wojenne 2/2013 article Tajemnice postomińskich wraków, czyli U-booty które pojawią się i znikają by Witold Pasek. Moreover, I drew information from this thread on the fow.pl forum https://www.fow.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=767 .

 

[USSEssex]

In this post I will write about the latest plans for cruisers of the Polish Navy, i.e. post-war ones.
So I'll start at the beginning.

In the fall of 1945, work on the future structure of the Polish Navy began at the Naval Command. These included proposals for positions for organizational units that were to be established in 1946. Several variants were prepared, below is one of the variants that was prepared.
One of such documents assumed the following, among other things:
destroyer squadron that was to be based in Gdynia (ORP Piorun, ORP Garland, ORP Burza, ORP Błyskawica and a fifth destroyer that has no name)
A corvette squadron was supposed to be based in Świnoujście, these are three Hunt II-class escort destroyers.
And here something needs to be explained.
At that time, the majority of the DMW were Russians, so Soviet ships from the Baltic fleet and those interned in Great Britain were also included.

In the next document that interests us more, dated October 29, 1945, positions were established for:
2 destroyers, i.e. ORP Błyskawica and ORP Burza
4 submarines, i.e. ORP Sęp, all 3 Wilk class submarines
9 trawlers with a displacement of 100 tons
12 submarine chasers
2 torpedo boats
I am not mentioning smaller ships.
It was an attempt to put together the ships promised by the USSR, those interned in Sweden, and those that were Polish property.
However, this was a minimal plan.
A month later, another document was developed at the Naval Main Staff.
It assumed, among other things, the takeover of ships that were Polish property, including those that were transferred to Poland on the basis of the Polish-British agreement signed in the first months of the war.
This fleet was then to consist of
1 cruiser,
5 destroyers (these are ORP Burza, ORP Błyskawica, in turn, the destroyers transferred under the Polish-British agreement were ORP Kujawiak, for sure, unfortunately sunk, those that survived the war were ORP Garland and ORP Piorun, the next destroyer under this agreement was ORP Orkan destroyer unfortunately sunk, my comment)
2 corvettes (probably ORP Krakowiak and ORP Ślązak, my comment)
6 submarines,
9 trawlers,
16 submarine chasers,
4 torpedo boats,
a training ship and a tanker.
The document itself is dated November 1945, so it was prepared shortly before the personnel changes in December.
The Polish-British agreement I am writing about included the takeover of ships that were in good technical condition, equipped and capable of entering service.
We asked for the transfer of the cruiser on the basis of the above Polish-British agreement, as was done with several destroyers and the ORP Dzik submarine, ORP Dragon did not meet the conditions of this agreement, we were interested in the Dido or Fiji class, we took over ORP Dragon to gain experience, and then when the situation would allow it, we could get a new cruiser, but I will write more about ORP Dragon another time, so it was proposed to replace ORP Dragon with, among others, HMS Royalist, HMS Diadem, Dido type or Arethusa type, but when we lost ORP Dragon, we were given a second cruiser class D, since we knew this ship, just to clarify.
Therefore, I have doubts whether the above cruiser is ORP Conrad (at the moment).
Another naval program with cruisers was presented on November 26, 1946 by Adam Mohuczy.
It was a fleet expansion program for the years 1947–1959.
It included, among others
5 light cruisers with a displacement of 4,215 tons
12 destroyers with a displacement of 2,000-2,200 tons
20 submarines with a displacement of 250-350 tons.
The tonnage of the entire fleet was 59,675 tons.
The presentation of this naval program accelerated the departure of Rear Admiral Mohuczy, and the plan was withdrawn by his successor, Włodzimierz Steyer.
Now I will try to solve the puzzle regarding this displacement, and what kind of cruisers these could be (potentially closest to what the Poles wanted back then) if this naval program was implemented.
So 2 things to start with
a) from what I know, these cruisers were to be delivered between 1953 and 1959 (remember, according to the naval program).
So this excludes existing ships such as the D-class or C-class.
The option of building such a cruiser in Polish shipyards according to your own design should also be ruled out because it is not possible.
b) displacement 4215 tons
In Poland in the 1940s there were editions of Jane FS and Weyers.
In Jane FS 44–45 the full displacement of 4,215 tons of the light cruiser Tromp was given.
And here I need to write something more about this ship.
Light cruiser Tromp was something intermediate between a large destroyer and a cruiser, or more specifically, a flotilla leader, but due to its armament it was called a light cruiser.

After the war, light cruisers of this displacement were no longer built, so the displacement of 4,215 tons is derived from the Tromp ship, with the understanding that a small, heavily armed ship just like Tromp can be built to achieve a displacement close to the full displacement of 4,215 tons, which is why the light cruiser Tromp was a cruiser here model, in other words, a starting point for what future Polish cruiser could be.
To sum it all up, we are talking about a flotilla leader/armored destroyer that could be called a light cruiser like Tromp, small light cruiser or a large destroyer of approximately the full displacement of 4,215 tons.
In such a situation, the only direction seems to be the USSR, because it would not be possible to build new ships in Great Britain or the USA, so it should be assumed that the project would be Soviet, because although there was a government of national unity at that time, the communists had the majority, Besides, Poland's main ally at that time was the USSR.
And this brings us to the question of what kind of ships they could be.

In fact, I know of two main ships that could have met the expectations of the Poles, which is what they were thinking about at the time.
I will provide here the data of the ships that I know, which are closest to what was thought about, not everyone may associate or know them.
1. Project 47
Project 47, as I would say, was supposed to be an armored destroyer/flotilla leader, after the war the concept of destroyer armor was returned, project 47 can be compared to ships such as the Dido class cruiser or the Tromp class, in general it is the project closest to the ship that was being thought about when creating naval program in 1946 (because I don't know what else to compare it to, especially when we take into account Soviet projects).
The closest to what was wanted is the project 47 designed by V.Ya.Shur in 1940, although it is larger than the Tromp.
Data for this project
Standard displacement 3,800 tons,
normal displacement 4000 tons
dimensions
length 150 m
width 13.6 m
armament: 4xII 130 mm B-2-U
4xII 37 mm 66 K
2x5 533 mm torpedo tubes
armor from 100 to 25 mm.
Speed 38 knots

2. Project 40 base version.
Project 40 was a large destroyer project developed in 1942–1945.
It was a large destroyer that had the following data (I am giving the data from the table on the Lesta wiki, there is data for all variants as well as a graphic of the variant in question)
standard displacement 3,300 tons, normal displacement 3,765 tons, and full displacement 4,230 tons.
dimensions
length 130 meters
width 13.4 m
draft 4.15 m
Armament: 3xII 130 mm B-2-U universal guns
10 37 mm guns
2xIII 533 mm torpedo tubes.
Although it is difficult to say today what specific ship could be built because it depends on many things, and I am not able to answer it, I could tell you why I did not consider projects with SM-2-1 turrets.
You see, the truth is that the USSR would not provide us with designs with such main turrets until they had such weapons.
For example, it was not possible for Poland to acquire Project 56 destroyers in the 1950s.
If anything, the Russians would be more willing to provide the project with the B 2 U or BL 109 turrets or a newer variant (because I'm not sure what else was available in the 130 mm caliber), and yes, hypothetically, Russia could provide Poland with the post-war project 47, but not with 130 mm SM-2-1 main turrets, if anything it would have to be a modified design with other 130 mm guns.

I think I have written quite a lot about what is behind these cruisers, and what it could be if the naval program was continued, so let this be a conclusion and summary.

If anyone knows more Russian designs with armor or others of this type that could be compared, you can write, see the tips I posted.
It was also the last naval program with cruisers (currently).

The last mention of a cruiser for Poland dates back to the late 1950s/early 1960s, at which time Russia was supposed to hand over one of the Baltic fleet cruisers to Poland.
There is more information in the Russian archives.

Below is a bibliography regarding the sources of fleet organization, naval program, displacement and data of potential ships.
Morze Statki i Okręty WS 1/2015 article Weteran w nowej szacie. ORP Burza w marynarce wojennej PRL by Robert Rochowicz, Morza i Okręty WS 5/2016 article Trudny rok 1945, czyli okręty, których nie było by Robert Rochowicz, https://fow.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5275&start=64 , for project 40 https://wiki.lesta.ru/ru/Navy:Эскад...D0.B5.D0.BA.D1.82.D1.8B_.D0.A6.D0.9A.D0.91-17 , for project 47 https://wiki.lesta.ru/ru/Navy:Лидер...2..D0.AF._.D0.A8.D1.83.D1.80.D0.B0_.281940.29 , and wikipedia for project 47 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лидер...екта_47#Разработка_нового_варианта_проекта_47 .

 

[USSEssex]

A short addition to the plan with the cruiser from 1945.
Well, I have an article by Robert Rochowicz (I didn't have it when I wrote the post) from 2019, it would generally indicate that this cruiser would be ORP Conrad, however (at this time), only the fifth destroyer is mysterious.
The entire fleet with one cruiser that I wrote was to be delivered by the end of 1946.
I should add an update to the earlier post soon.

I wonder what Soviet guns could be put on ORP Conrad if he returned to the country, replacing the old 152 mm guns.

 

[00-PureEvil-00]

I wonder what Soviet guns could be put on ORP Conrad if he returned to the country, replacing the old 152 mm guns.

Most likely she would be converted into an AA ship, which means 100mm dual-purposes. Most likely 100mm/56 B-34 singles. Or maybe B-54 twin mounts planned for Project 68 (Chapayev-class) cruisers as designed, although I'm not sure whether these mounts made it into production. Not sure if 100mm/70 SM-5 twins could be fitted without significant alterations to the hull — if USSR would give their brand-new guns to Poles in the first place.

If we're speaking bigger guns, pretty much the only candidate would be 130mm/50 B-13 in single or twin mounts (the same gun used on Soviet destroyers). Or maybe some obsolete 152mm Canets or 130mm/55 Patters 1911s from coastal batteries. Although this variant is rather unlikely, given that Conrad was, frankly, more or less worthless as a surface combatant by that time. On the other hand, she could receive such armament to work as a training ship...

 

[USSEssex]

If we're speaking bigger guns, pretty much the only candidate would be 130mm/50 B-13 in single or twin mounts (the same gun used on Soviet destroyers). Or maybe some obsolete 152mm Canets or 130mm/55 Patters 1911s from coastal batteries. Although this variant is rather unlikely, given that Conrad was, frankly, more or less worthless as a surface combatant by that time. On the other hand, she could receive such armament to work as a training ship...

As for the 130 mm guns, could the B 2 U turrets also be suitable, just like the BL109/BL 110?
if I remember, the first one was based on cruiser and destroyer designs, and the BL 109 was probably supposed to have the project 48K, and the last turrets were based on cruiser designs.
I don't know, I'm just sure if BL 109/110 wasn't later.
ORP Burza was also old, but they managed to give it a second life.
I guess the problem with ORP Conrad was not with the armament but more with the power plant.
So I suppose that even if it were possible to put it into service and modernize it, it would be similar to ORP Burza, i.e. it would be modern for a few years and then there would be problems.

 

[00-PureEvil-00]

As for the 130 mm guns, could the B 2 U turrets also be suitable, just like the BL109/BL 110?
if I remember, the first one was based on cruiser and destroyer designs, and the BL 109 was probably supposed to have the project 48K, and the last turrets were based on cruiser designs.
I don't know, I'm just sure if BL 109/110 wasn't later.

B-2-U was a pre-war design discontinued after 1941. And then-brand-new BL-109/110 probably wouldn't be cleared for export.
And even if it would, to mount full-fledged turrets on a cruiser designed to carry open shielded mounts would require a lot of hull redesign... most likely it would be considered too much effort for an obsolete and worn out ship.

ORP Burza was also old, but they managed to give it a second life.

IIRC, ORP Burza was converted into a guard ship with little to no alterations to her internals. Conrad would likely get the same treatment — which means shielded mounts (or enclosed gunhouses like B-2LM) and maybe some torpedo tubes, but definitely no turrets.

 

[USSEssex]

I can write about the situation with battleships for Poland that remained on paper.
So, no offers of battleship designs for Poland have been preserved in Polish archives, at least no one has found them so far.
However, this does not mean that such offers did not exist, if there were such projects, there is a chance that they are in Russian archives.
However, I don't know if there are any mentions of such projects.

 

[USSEssex]

IIRC, ORP Burza was converted into a guard ship with little to no alterations to her internals. Conrad would likely get the same treatment — which means shielded mounts (or enclosed gunhouses like B-2LM) and maybe some torpedo tubes, but definitely no turrets.

ORP Burza after modernization, specifically, it was an anti-aircraft defense ship.
Generally, two variants of the reconstruction of ORP Burza were considered
a) anti-submarine ship,
b) anti-aircraft defense ship
Ultimately, it was decided to choose the second option.

 

[USSEssex]

I added data for projects 606, 607, 608 and 609.
In the near future I plan to write about project 665 Tukan, it is an equivalent of the Soviet project 1241, so to speak briefly.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/polish-projects.38305/page-4#post-596739

 

[alexi]

Years ago @USSEssex posted a picture of a Polish QE (R-class?) battleship, i found a better version from the bunderachiv, there are two notes help to explains the ship parts and components and for the turrets in German.

 

[Tzoli]

As you seems to be very knowledgeable about Polish projects, what do you think about ship names? Would these be associated to these designs if built?
Cruiser names:
"ORP Dragon" "ORP Conrad" "ORP Baltyk" "ORP Król Wladyslaw IV" "ORP Lwów" "ORP Wilno" "ORP Poznan" "ORP Kraków" "ORP Wisla" "ORP Gdynia" "ORP Gdansk" "ORP Warszawa" "ORP Kraków" "ORP Zadwórze" "ORP Plowce" "ORP Odsiecz Wiedenska" "ORP Psków" "ORP Raszyn" "ORP Przemysl" "ORP Chocim" "ORP Kircholm" "ORP Fuengirola"

Battleship names:
"ORP Józef Pilsudski" "ORP Król Wladyslaw IV" "ORP Stefan Batory" "ORP Jan Sobieski" "ORP Kazimierz Wielki" "ORP Boleslaw Chrobry" "ORP Jan Kazimierz" "ORP Stanislaw Koniecpolski" "ORP Stanislaw Zólkiewski" "ORP Jan Zamoyski" "ORP Stanislaw Lanckoronski" "ORP Stefan Czarniecki" "ORP Jan Karol Chodkiewicz"

 

[USSEssex]

As for the names of battleships - that's a very good question, I don't know any official names for battleships, perhaps they could have had the names of historical lands and voivodeships, e.g. ORP Żytomierz, ORP Pomorze Gdańskie, ORP Śląsk, etc.
The question is open here.
As for the cruisers, I will say this - for ORP Conrad, the name ORP Wilno was proposed (as I remember), for ORP Dragon, the name ORP Lwów was proposed, ORP Bałtyk, in turn, was called ORP Władysław IV, but then they changed it to the neutral name ORP Bałtyk, for the Polish Trento, the name was planned ORP Józef Piłsudski.
Looking at the proposed cruiser names that I know of, they could have had the names of important Polish people/distinguished kings or princes, or cities. After the war, the cruiser could have had the name of a person important to the communists, e.g. Konstanty Rokossowski (they could have named the cruiser after him), but these are my guesses.
If the Poles received one of the Magdeburg or Graudenz-class cruisers, perhaps the name would be translated into Polish - e.g. Graudenz: ORP Grudziądz, or Breslau: ORP Wrocław.
Some Polish ships were named Arent Dickman, Polish cruisers could also have such a name.
In general, the issue of proposed names for Polish cruisers is not clear, mainly because the unbuilt cruisers have not yet been described and most of them we do not know what names they were supposed to have, the exception is the Polish Trento.
In general, this is also an interesting question about the names of Polish cruisers, as I write, the matter is open.