Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

The book Warship Losses of World War Two by David Brown lists the sinking in shallow waters off Leningrad at Kronstadt on 23 Sep 1941 of the Russian battleship Marat, but then goes on to state that the 12 inch guns remained in operation during the entire siege of Leningrad. This I assume is meant to be until January 1944. Does anyone know what the casualties were that were sustained when Rudel struck the ship? Also was the ship raised after the end of the siege or was it used for scrap?

Also the Gunther Just book on Rudel states that following the Marat mission, Rudel sank a destroyer and a cruiser. No dates are given. Could the destroyer be the Sovershenny which allegedly struck a mine and was beached until eventually destroyed by artillery fire in April 1942? Brown's book also states that on 21 Sep 1941 the destroyer Steregushchy was sunk (although eventually raised and repaired) and the torpedo boat Vikhr (also raised later). Could any of these have been the target of Rudel. For airmen a destroyer can easily be mistaken for a cruiser and a torpedo boat could be misidentified as a destroyer. Brown does not list any more naval losses for the rest of the year 1941 and he lists several destroyers lost in the Baltic but all to mines in 1942.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

Klaus, Soviet battleship Marat was already heavily damaged in a sorties on Sep 16, hit by a 500-kg bomber dropped by the commander of III/StG 2 Hauptmann Ernst-Sigfried Steen, because lack of material and time to repair the damage, it was decided Marat would be used as a floating battery inside Kronstadt, many of her sailor was re-deployed as infantry. Then in the Luftwaffe air raid on Sep 23, Marat was hit by 3 1000-Kg bomb, one was dropped by Oberleutnant Hans-Ulrich Rudel of III/Stg 2, the other was dropped by Oberleutnant Lothar Lau, the StG 2 technical officer, it was not certain who dropped the third bomb, and it looked like it was the bomber dropped by Oberleutnant Lau caused the most serious damage on the battleship's bow, however the battleship did not sink, the reason was simple, the water was too shallow to allow such a large warship to sink, only one of the turret of guns could resume fire after the damage, which resume fire support almost immediately, after repair, eventually all of Marat's guns were put back to action,and the warship itself could slowly moving in the navy base, however Marat was never sailed to ocean in the war time.
Rudel's destory and cruiser claimed could not be confirmed by Soviet loss records.

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

Hello marsyao
are you sure that also the bow or "A" turret in RN parlance, was reactivated? My understanding has been that the A-turret was smashed in the explosition and not repaired, otherwise I agree with your description, meaning that the mid-ship turrets (B and C) were later repaired, or was it that only B turret needed more extensive repairs, and the stern or D turret was able to resume fire almost immediately after the hits.
If the bow turret was repaired, have you info when it was able to fire again?

Regards
Juha

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

oops, Juha, you are correct,"A" turret did not come back to service

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

Maybe my reaction not-so-quick (14 years have passed), but what is the evidence that namely Lothar Lau most likely inflicted the fatal damage to "Marat"?

Best regards,
Andrey

Re: Hans-Ulrich Rudel and sinking of Marat
 

The answer is unknown to anyone?