Soviet Navy Series VI, XII, XV (1931-43), 141 boats, last active 1980s. MVI bis could be carried assembled on flatcars. The outer ones (2 bogies) could carry other
The Malyutka Series VI bis
The M-class or “Malyutka” class (Russian: Малютка “little one”) were the smallest coastal submarines in Service with the Soviet Russian Navy in ww2. They were either single or half-double hulled coastal submarines built in three series, VI (and VI bis), XII and VI before and during World War II for a grand total of 141, making it one of the most prolific submarine class in WW2, only comparable to the German Type VII and IX or the USN Gato class and British U-class. However in terms of general technical aspects, they mirrored the German Type II coastal submarines, built in sectionsto be build inland and transported by rail anywhere. Gorky Shipyard on the Volga was thus involved in that effort, sections being transported and assembled at Leningrad. They were also the first assembled by using welding. However they paid a heavy price to combat and accidents, with 88 lost overall. Exported postwar to Poland, China, Bulgaria and Egypt, they remained in service for decades in the cold war. Their immediate successors were the Zulu class (Project 611).
Given the scope of this article, the topic will be split into four parts, VI, VI bis, XII and XVI over the next months.
M1, the lead boat of the Malyutka series, in 1934.
Development
The M-class submarines, also known as “Malyutka” (“Little One”) were the smallest submarines designed and built in the Soviet Union during in the interwar. They were designed for the close-range defense of coastal areas, harbours and naval bases, proving also capable in WW2 of conducting successful patrols to enemy coasts and right to enemy harbors. A grand total of 153 M-class submarines spanning four different designs were built, 78 before the war, 22 during the war, 53 of the Series XV variant after the war. So they also played an important part of the coastal defence of USSR until the 1960s.
Map of the Volga (wiki CC)
The project went back to the early 1930s, when the Soviet government decided to reinforce the Pacific Fleet in a way that spared powerful surface ships. At the time, torpedo boats were considered obsolete and submersibles were a much better proposition for the same role. At the same time to free existing coastal shipyards it was decided to go with the Gorky shipyard in the Volga instead. Not only the boats will be able to be shipped directly south to the Black Sea fleet, but also in the north at Tver, south of St Perersburg to a base where they could be shipped by train to the Baltic or Arctic, and then also transported by rail via the transsiberian to the Pacific fleet. Due to the difficulties involved in transporting the Shchuka and Leninets classes in a disassembled state and reassembling them, decision was also made to design a class dedicated to rail transport, as the Germans did for the UB-I back in 1914. They were design to fit within standard railway loading gauges (1,520 mm vs Western 1,435 mm) when fully assembled, thereby allowing for easy rail transport. Legend has it that was to delay an enemy invasion rather than to stick with the Stephenson gauge, but wherever true or not, the First World War proved such hope to be futile as in 1914-1915, engineers of the German army advancing on Russian territory east of Warsaw just found that moving one rail nearer the other along the existing sleepers and fix them again was a quick way to deal with the issue, and it was again the case in WW2. They cut off the long end of the sleepers so that the broader gauge could not be restored without rebuilding the whole track…
Back to the submarine design, the project was led by A. N. Asafov, an engineer at Technical Bureau No. 4 who had previously worked on the Pravda-class submarines. The design was based on the Tsarist era “Minoga class” submarine, with a displacement of approximately 120 tons. Techniques for assembly were also inspired by the way the “Amerikansky Grolland” had been shipped from Canada in 1915-16 to Russia in knocked-down form as well. The new modules would be no more than to fit these railway cars, with a max width of 3,50 meters for the outer hull. They height also was to be moderated in order to fit below tunnels, albeit there were ways to circumvent the issue by just going south of the Ural Mountains. In any case, the coning tower was detached and transported separately, so only the full height of the hull from the keel to the deck was taken in account. And it was 2,58 meters. Periscopes as well as the engines and all equipments were carried separately in enclosed wagons or under tarpaulins. On March 20, 1932, the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR approved the design for the Series VI small submarine, designated “Malyutka”, as it was easy to remember their nature and characteristics for any fleet commander.
About Afasov and the Malyutkas
The name of A.N. Asafov is linked to another chapter in the history of domestic submarine shipbuilding—one directly related to strengthening the country’s Far Eastern frontiers.
The first formations of the Naval Forces of the Far East, established in 1932, were a minesweeper brigade (the 1st Naval Brigade) and a brigade of “Shchuka”-class submarines (the 2nd Naval Brigade, commanded by K.O. Osipov). Together with the surface ships, aircraft, and coastal artillery—which were limited in number at the time—these submarines laid the foundation for the Pacific Fleet.
Transporting “Shch”-class medium submarines and, later, “L”-class submarine minelayers—all built in the European part of the country—to the Far East by rail was possible only in sections. Their entry into service was delayed because assembling these sections at Far Eastern shipyards required a significant amount of time. Meanwhile, the international situation dictated a need to further strengthen the fledgling Pacific Fleet. Historical experience demonstrated that this task could be accomplished more quickly by delivering fully assembled surface ships and submarines to the Far East. Russia holds the distinction of being the first to transport submarines with a displacement exceeding 100 tons by rail over distances of approximately 10,000 km. During the Russo-Japanese War, the first four *Kasatka*-class submarines—each displacing 140 tons—arrived in Vladivostok from St. Petersburg in December 1904. By the summer of the following year, the total number of submarines delivered to the Pacific theater had reached 13.
The Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Soviet government decided to accelerate the design and construction of submarines with a displacement small enough to allow for their transport by rail in a fully assembled state, without requiring the suspension of oncoming train traffic. Given the vast distances separating the USSR’s various maritime theaters, this capability enabled the strategic maneuvering of submarine forces using both waterborne and overland transport networks.
Railways accepted only those loads that, once mounted on a flatcar, fit within the government-approved standard loading gauge. This ensured the safe passage of loaded rolling stock across the entire Soviet rail network without risking damage to station buildings, bridges, tunnels, or the cargo itself. By special order of the People’s Commissariat for Railways, “out-of-gauge” loads could also be accepted, though their transport entailed restrictions such as limiting oncoming traffic, reducing speed, or curtailing the list of permissible routes. In any case, however, the railway loading gauge imposed strict limits on the submarine’s cross-section at the midship section and on its overall length.
The timeframe for designing and building the required submarines—the preliminary designs for which were developed by the Naval Technical Committee (NTKM)—was extremely tight. A.N. Asafov, who was at the time the chief engineer of Technical Bureau No. 4, decided to base the design of a new small submarine on the *Minoga*—a vessel with a displacement of approximately 120 tons built by I.G. Bubnov between 1906 and 1909. During the Civil War, the *Minoga* had participated in an inter-theater submarine transfer from the Baltic to the Caspian Sea, carried out on the orders of V.I. Lenin. Four small submarines were transported from Petrograd to Saratov using special railway flatcars manufactured at the Izhora Plant in Petrograd.
The Malytka class, An evaluation. By Konstantin Sivkov, September 11, 2018
The main advantage of the “Malyutka” class was the ability to transport them by rail. The “Malyutkas” were the most numerous class of submarines in the Soviet Navy. They are credited with sinking 15 transport and combat vessels and damaging four others—figures based on reliable data confirmed by both sides.
Initially, the decision was made to build small submarines tailored to the specific conditions of the Baltic theater of operations. The initiative came from the Naval Directorate of the Red Army General Staff in May 1930. The plan called for a “small positional submarine” with a displacement of approximately 200 tons, equipped with four torpedo tubes and a loadout of four torpedoes. Specifications included seaworthiness up to Sea State 6, limited endurance (10 days), and an operational diving depth of 50 meters. A design was developed based on these parameters; all requirements were met, though the displacement slightly exceeded the target, reaching 250 tons. However, in 1932, the concept of redeploying submarines between theaters via the domestic railway network emerged. This required an even smaller submarine—one that could be transported on railway flatcars in a partially disassembled state. The idea was enthusiastically received by the Navy leadership, who faced the challenge of rebuilding the Pacific Fleet in a theater that lacked adequate shipbuilding facilities.
On January 9, 1932, new tactical-technical specifications were approved for a small submarine with a displacement of 130–140 tons. Thus, the famous “Malyutka” was born. Its initial production runs were the Series VI and Series VI-bis. Construction of the first of these series began in the autumn of 1932, and by 1935, the Soviet Navy had received 30 such ships (20 built by the A. Marti Shipyard and 10 by the 61 Communards Shipyard). As they were commissioned, the submarines were transported by rail to the Far East. In total, 28 Series VI submarines were inducted into the Pacific Fleet. However, they suffered from serious flaws that significantly reduced their combat value. Their maximum surface speed did not exceed 11 knots (compared to the 13 knots specified in the design requirements). When firing a torpedo salvo—and the boat carried only two 533mm torpedo tubes—the vessel would rise, exposing the upper part of the conning tower above the surface. The total time required to dive from cruising trim was two minutes—significantly longer than that of the larger submarines of the earlier *Dekabrist* class. It took up to 11 minutes to blow the main ballast tanks.
The *Malyutka* could carry nine tons of cargo, seven tons of fuel, or ten armed personnel. Yet even this mattered to a besieged city.
Consequently, the modernization of these boats began almost simultaneously with the start of the series’ construction. This led to the creation of the Series VI-bis, featuring improved hull lines, a new propeller, an additional quick-dive tank, and a number of other enhancements. These changes significantly boosted combat capabilities. However, given the limited displacement, it proved impossible to endow the boats with all the necessary qualities. Nevertheless, the Series VI-bis was produced in substantial numbers, with 20 units built. Of these, six were sent to the Pacific, two to the Black Sea, and 12 joined the Baltic Fleet. The Black Sea and Pacific *Malyutkas* of these series survived the war, whereas the Baltic units suffered heavy losses. Two were lost, and three were scuttled by their crews using explosives. By the end of the war, only two such “Malyutka” boats remained in the Baltic Fleet.
Five submarines of this series had been mothballed at the outbreak of hostilities and were subsequently scrapped. Throughout the war, not a single “Malyutka” of these series achieved any success. Of the entire group, only the Black Sea-based M-55 managed to employ its weapons—doing so twice, yet without result. In other words, the 50 submarines of the VI and VI-bis series failed to make any contribution to the defeat of the enemy. Clearly, their technical specifications were inadequate for successfully carrying out assigned missions under the conditions faced by the Soviet submarine fleet.
Let us consider some of the technical specifications. Surface displacement was 160–163 tons, while submerged displacement was 200–206 tons. Maximum surface speed was 10 knots (for the VI series) and 13 knots (for the VI-bis), with economical speeds of four and eight knots, respectively. Maximum submerged speed was five and seven knots, with economical speeds of two and three knots. Surface range at maximum speed was up to 600 miles, and up to 1,600 miles at economical speed; the corresponding submerged ranges were 7 and 55 miles. This meant the boat could operate submerged for less than 10 hours—hardly enough time to wage an effective campaign. Operational diving depth was 50 meters, with a maximum limit of 60 meters. Armament consisted of two loaded 533mm torpedo tubes in the bow, with no spare torpedoes carried. Artillery consisted of a single 45mm 21-K gun on the deck. The crew numbered 17, including four officers.
The obviously limited combat value of the early “Malyutka” series necessitated a fundamental redesign, including an increase in displacement. Increasing the latter by just 50 tons and the length by 4.5 meters made it possible to substantially improve the vessel and, consequently, radically enhance the combat capabilities of the new *Malyutka* series. They were laid down as the Type M, Series XII. They had a surface displacement of Displacement was 210–240 tons surfaced and 250–260 tons submerged. Diving depth remained unchanged. Maximum surface speed increased to 14 knots, and economical speed to eight knots; submerged speed remained the same. Surface range was 1,000 miles at maximum speed and up to 3,000 miles at economical speed. Submerged, the boat could travel 9 miles at maximum speed (meaning it could maintain that speed for only one hour) and up to 110 miles at economical speed. This was a significant capability—the *Malyutka* was able to conduct combat operations while submerged for over 24 hours. Primary armament remained unchanged: two 533mm torpedo tubes with two torpedoes (allowing for only one full salvo) and a deck-mounted 45mm 21-K gun. Diving time was drastically reduced: from cruising trim to 35–40 seconds (more than twice as fast as the *Dekabrist* class), and from position trim to 15 seconds. This contributed to a substantial increase in combat survivability. Early in the war, the periscope was the *Malyutka*’s primary means of detecting the enemy. However, starting in 1942, they were equipped with “Mars-8” passive sonar systems, which were state-of-the-art for the time.
A total of 46 such submarines were laid down. Forty-five entered service: 28 before the war began and 17 during the conflict. Six submarines were sent to the Far East, 14 to the North, 16 to the Black Sea, and 9 to the Baltic. During the war, these submarines underwent significant redeployments between theaters of operation. In 1944, four Pacific-based *Malyutkas* were sent to the Black Sea; they arrived at their destination only after the war had ended. Four surviving submarines were also sent there by the Northern Fleet. During the war, 26 submarines of this type were lost—60 percent of the original number. Two *Malyutkas* were lost in the Pacific during combat operations against Japan; nine were lost in the North, seven in the Baltic, and eight in the Black Sea.
Unlike their predecessors, the Series XII submarines proved quite successful and competitive when compared to larger vessels. The Northern Fleet’s *Malyutkas* sank four enemy transport ships and three warships, and damaged another transport. Those in the Black Sea sank seven transports and damaged three more, along with one warship; additionally, one transport was sunk by a 45mm gun. In the Baltic, the *Malyutkas* failed to sink a single vessel; evidently, their technical specifications were insufficient to penetrate the enemy’s deeply echeloned anti-submarine defenses in that theater. In total, the Series XII *Malyutkas* are credited with sinking fifteen and damaging five transport ships and warships—figures confirmed by reliable data from both sides. Their performance record must be considered impressive, given the conditions under which they operated.
It is also worth noting that these vessels participated in transporting supplies to besieged Sevastopol. A *Malyutka* could carry only a limited load: nine tons of cargo, seven tons of fuel, or ten armed personnel. Yet, even this mattered to the besieged city. In total, the Black Sea Fleet’s *Malyutkas* carried out 12 supply missions to Sevastopol.
In addition to the Series XII *Malyutkas*, two Series XV *M* submarines also saw combat—both during the final stages of the war. These vessels represented a major modernization of the Series XII design. Their displacement was increased to 300 tons (surfaced) and 350 tons (submerged). This allowed for the installation of four torpedo tubes. Consequently, the torpedo load doubled. Other technical specifications changed only slightly. Both submarines saw combat in the North. Their operational record included the sinking of a single warship. This class of submarine is notable for an interesting fact: the *M-200*, which bore the name *Mest* (“Revenge”), was built using funds raised by the wives of submariners who had lost their lives. Credits: Konstantin Sivkov, Deputy President for Information Policy, Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences (RARAN); Doctor of Military Sciences
Published in Issue No. 35 (748) on September 11, 2018.
Deepstorm’s Take
In early 1932, at the initiative of designer A.N. Asafov, the Scientific and Technical Committee of the Naval Forces (NTKM) developed a preliminary design for a small submarine (Series VI); by March 15, the “general design”—as it was termed at the time—was ready, having been produced under Asafov’s supervision. Asafov believed that four months would suffice to draft the working blueprints and that construction could be completed within six months of the general design’s approval. His proposal was accepted. The general design specified a displacement of 154 tons; the weight distribution was tight, with a displacement margin of only two tons. Due to the rushed schedule, the design lacked sufficient detail, and certain structural issues remained unresolved. On March 20, 1932, following a report by V.M. Orlov, the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR approved the small submarine design, though several shortcomings were noted at the time. Despite the view held by some specialists that a submarine of this design would have limited tactical value, the decision to build it was entirely sound. Small submarines could effectively conduct combat operations in narrow waterways, skerries, near enemy bases, and along enemy coastal supply lines. Built in large numbers, they could make a significant contribution to the overall combat potential of the Navy.
Ships of this class were inexpensive, and their construction could be completed relatively quickly. The submarines’ dimensions allowed them to be transported fully assembled on railway flatcars, enabling movement via inland routes between geographically separated naval theaters. Furthermore, for the first time in the history of submarine construction, the hull was designed to be all-welded. It was the combination of these factors that led to the adoption and practical implementation of the **Series VI** submarine design—the first Soviet-built small submarine, destined to become the progenitor of several subsequent classes of similar vessels.
In May 1932, A.N. Asafov reported that he had implemented the following measures to address the shortcomings noted during the project’s approval:
– a single Rateau pump was installed to replace the three Maginot pumps, reducing the ballast pumping time to 11 minutes;
– a special 2 m³ anti-buoyancy tank was incorporated, featuring a pneumatically controlled Kingston valve, designed to counteract the submarine’s buoyancy during torpedo firing;
– the dimensions of the battery compartment were increased, thereby boosting the battery’s capacity; the resulting battery weight reached 14.5 tonnes;
– provision was made to install a 45mm gun weighing 0.5 tonnes in place of the 37mm semi-automatic gun.
Later, another significant modification was made: instead of a separate electric motor for economical submerged cruising, the main propulsion motor was used, supplied with half the battery voltage via a neutral wire connected to the battery’s midpoint. These changes resulted in a 3 m³ increase in the buoyant volume of the pressure hull, bringing the submarine’s displacement to 157 tonnes. The resulting metacentric height in the surfaced condition was approximately 0.1 m in fresh water, 0.115 m in the Black Sea, and 0.125 m in the Pacific Ocean.
The submarine was of single-hull construction, with an all-welded hull—except for the pressure conning tower and its fairing. The hull was fabricated from high-grade St.5 steel. The maximum diameter of the pressure hull was 3,110 mm, and the frame spacing was 500 mm. Pressure hull testing was conducted in a dock chamber using an external hydraulic pressure of 7.5 kgf/cm². Three transverse bulkheads divided the submarine into four compartments; these were lightweight bulkheads designed to withstand a pressure of 1 kgf/cm².
The submarine featured a single shaft. The main diesel engine (Model 38V8) delivered 685 hp at 600 rpm. The electric propulsion motor (Type PG60/34) was rated at 240 hp at 390 rpm. Diesel engine cooling was provided by an independent circulation pump.
Main ballast was distributed between two end tanks located outside the pressure hull and one side tank located inside the pressure hull. The tanks were fitted with manually operated Kingston valves of the outward-opening flap type. Deck tanks were provided, as well as a buoyancy tank in the bow section to prevent the submarine from diving bow-first while underway. The conning tower, constructed of low-magnetic steel, had a diameter of 1,000 mm and a height of 1,700 mm. The conning tower hatch cover was made of bronze. The conning tower fairing and bridge were constructed of duralumin. A cast-iron ballast with a total mass of 20 tonnes was also included.
A welded box-section keel served simultaneously as the ship’s water piping manifold; water drained into it from the main ballast tanks or submarine compartments, from where it was pumped overboard by a Rato pump. Two lifting eyes, each with a load capacity of 80 tonnes, were provided for hoisting the submarine.
An “ML” type battery, consisting of 56 cells, was located in the central control compartment. The battery pit was uninsulated and covered by removable wooden panels. Battery ventilation was of the general-pit type. Hydrogen-burning devices were installed. The operating voltage for the ship’s auxiliary machinery was 110 V. In addition to the Rato pump, there was also a reciprocating bilge pump. The bilge pump shared an electric motor with the high-pressure air compressor. Water was transferred between trim tanks manually using a Garda pump. The water piping system was constructed of steel pipes and steel fittings. Torpedo loading was performed using the “wet” method—meaning the torpedoes were drawn into the tube by the bilge pump while the tube’s front cover was open and the rear cover was closed.
Control of the vertical rudder and stern diving planes was effected from the control room via either electric drive or manual means. Control of the bow diving planes was manual only, operated from the control room.
The submarine carried a single 150 kg Hall-type anchor. The crew consisted of 15 personnel, including three officers.
The time required to dive from the cruising position to periscope depth—starting from a standstill with main ballast tank flood valves pre-opened—was two minutes. The time required to blow the main ballast tanks was 11 minutes.
No spare torpedoes were carried on board. Consequently, after an initial attack involving a salvo launch of two torpedoes, the submarine had to return to base to replenish its weapons.
From the very beginning of the project to build **Series VI** submarines, A. N. Asafov proposed assigning their construction to the A. Marti Shipyard (No. 198) in Nikolaev, given that the Baltic Shipyard was already overburdened with the construction of submarines of other designs. Soyuzverf accepted this proposal. On March 31, 1932, an expanded technical meeting took place at the A. Marti Shipyard, chaired by Soyuzverf manager I. I. Kondratyev and attended by the shipyard’s management and the project’s designer, A. N. Asafov; at this meeting, shipyard personnel were briefed on the submarine design and the tasks involved in ensuring their construction. Due to the extremely heavy workload at TsKBS-2 regarding other projects, it was decided at the meeting that the working drawings would be developed at the A. Marti Shipyard, with TsKBS-2—as the design originator—providing the necessary assistance to the shipyard by agreement. A bonus fund of 30,000 rubles was allocated to incentivize the design engineers. An 8-hour workday was established for designers and management staff, with the provision to extend it to 10 hours if necessary.
The working drawings for the **Series VI** submarines were developed in the shipyard’s Technical Shipbuilding Department (TS) (headed by P. S. Kuznetsov, with E. P. Egorov as his deputy). The hull design group was led by I. K. Maksimenko, and the mechanical design group by N. I. Savelyev. Engineer V. V. Perlovsky of TsKBS-2 was appointed as the designated TsKBS-2 representative and assistant to the TS head for the **Series VI** submarine project. In addition, during the development of the working drawings for the **Series VI** submarines, several other designers from TsKBS-2 worked at the Technical Bureau; these included engineer M.G. Aleksandrov (consulting on mechanical systems) and hull designers I.A. Shvaitser and A.M. Yakovlev, among others.
Some of the work was carried out at TsKBS-2, including all working drawings for the shaft line (including the propeller), the general layout of the engine room, working drawings for internal bulkheads, all calculations and schematic diagrams, procurement lists, and the design of a transporter for moving the completed submarines (developed by engineer I.T. Golubev). The working drawings for the transporter itself were produced by the shipyard’s Technical Bureau. When transporting a completed submarine, the following items were removed: the pressure conning tower and its fairing, armament, the battery, the anchor and cable, the periscope, all spare parts and supplies, some ballast, and other smaller loads. The weight of the load carried by the transporter was approximately 110 tonnes.
Due to the extremely tight space available for machinery inside the submarine, full-scale wooden mock-ups of the submarine’s compartments were built to verify equipment placement, access, and maintenance conditions. This was the first time such a measure had been used in domestic submarine shipbuilding, and it proved highly successful. The work was supervised by Technical Bureau designer I.M. Kostyushko.
The designers at the A. Marti Shipyard’s Technical Bureau successfully handled the assigned task, and by August 1932, all working drawings had been completed.
The primary challenge in constructing the **Series VI** submarines lay in mastering the welding of the pressure hull. At that time, all-welded submarine hulls were not being manufactured anywhere in the world. This represented a pioneering effort, not only for the domestic submarine shipbuilding industry but for global submarine construction as a whole. Although the A. Marti Shipyard was considered a leader in welding technology within the domestic shipbuilding industry, the task was exceptionally difficult for it, as the yard was not adequately prepared—there was a shortage of both welding equipment and qualified welding specialists. The situation was further complicated by the fact that the design documentation lacked detailed structural specifications for the welded joints, as the design bureau had no specialists in welded structures. Consequently, the shipyard’s design engineers had to develop the welded structures for the new submarine’s pressure hull on their own, working in close collaboration with the welders.
To verify the integrity of the welded joints, a full-scale welded section of the pressure hull was constructed. Initial tests revealed significant deformations and even structural failures in certain assemblies. The design would then be modified, and testing repeated. This cycle continued until satisfactory results were achieved. Seam leaks were generally remedied by caulking; if a leak could not be fixed this way, the design was altered again. Testing involved applying internal pressure first, followed by external pressure in a special chamber (also of welded construction) to assess the welded seams’ stability under operating conditions.
Tests were also conducted involving repeated cycling of external pressure between 0 and 3 kgf/cm² (250 cycles), after which the pressure was raised to the structural limit. These tests were carried out with the participation of representatives from Leningrad scientific organizations, led by Professor P.F. Papkovich, Yu.A. Shimansky, and V.P. Vologdin (a renowned electric welding specialist of the time), representatives from TsKBS-2, A.N. Asafov and his deputy V.F. Popov; and a special team from the Shipbuilding Research Institute (NISS), which carried out all measurements and observations.
The tests, conducted between May and August 1932, demonstrated that the all-welded pressure hull and all its components were fully functional. The creation of the world’s first all-welded submarine hull was a major achievement for the shipyard’s workforce—and, above all, for its designers and welders. Credit is also due to the project’s originator, A.N. Asafov, who first proposed building an all-welded submarine and persistently advocated for its realization. This project marked the beginning of the widespread use of welding in domestic submarine construction. From then on, all small submarines were built using all-welded construction; following the Great Patriotic War, riveting was eliminated from submarine construction entirely, and all submarines—regardless of size—were built using all-welded construction.
Thirty submarines of **Series VI** were built. These small submarines bore no names, only hull numbers (ranging from **”M-1″** to **”M-28″**, plus **”M-51″** and **”M-52″**). Their keel-laying plaques bore the same inscriptions as those of the **Series V, V-bis,** and **V-bis-2** submarines. Construction took place at both of the Mykolaiv shipyards: twenty boats were built at Shipyard No. 198, and ten at Shipyard No. 200. One boat remained in the Black Sea, one was transferred to the Baltic Fleet, and the remaining twenty-eight were sent to the Pacific Fleet.
E.P. Egorov served as the senior builder for the **Series VI** submarines, while K.I. Ruberovsky and G.K. Volik were the commissioning managers. Upon completion of the boats, K.I. Ruberovsky and E.P. Egorov traveled with them to the Far East (to the “Dalzavod” shipyard in Vladivostok). There, the boats were launched and fitted with the equipment that had been removed for transport; subsequently, sea trials were conducted, and the boats were handed over to the fleet. Among the shortcomings of the **Series VI** submarines noted by acceptance commissions,
the following should be mentioned:
– cramped layout of machinery and equipment, hindering access for maintenance;
– a significant range of prohibited diesel engine RPMs due to torsional vibrations in the shaft line;
– unsatisfactory performance of the combined drive for the high-pressure compressor and bilge pump, which operated off a shared electric motor;
– unsatisfactory battery compartment ventilation;
– difficulty in preventing the submarine from surfacing during torpedo salvos;
– flooding of the battery compartment through the conning tower hatch;
– poor habitability, etc.
The **Series VI-bis** represented the further development of this submarine class.
The creation of the **Series VI** and **Series VI-bis** submarines marked an important milestone in the history of domestic
submarine shipbuilding. These vessels provided valuable experience in the design, construction, and operation of small, single-shaft,
all-welded submarines. They served as the foundation for more advanced small submarines: initially single-shaft models
(**Series XII**), followed by twin-shaft models (**Series XV**).
The basic design was the same across series, albeit they were of course differences between series, in size, shape of the hull and conning tower, output, armament, ect.
This M-class basic design however started at 158 tonnes surfaced, which was less extreme than the German-designed Saukko made for Finland (For the lake Ladoga, 114 tonnes) of 1930. It is unknown how much the Soviets knew about it, as there was no collaboration between the Reischmarine and USSR at the time. But Saukko really tested the lower limit possible for a coastal submarine. The simple fact of lauching a torpedo was enoough to unbalance its fragile buyancy and sent it skyrocketing on the surface. The Soviet M-class had issues of their own. Starting for 157-158 tonnes for a first design gave a few more possibilities.
It reach just 198 tonnes submerged. Next series, the VI bis reached 161/200 tonnes, the wartime XII 206/256 tonnes, and the final coldwar XV series 281/351 tonnes, so more than double. The size also progressed: The Series VI, VI bis and XII all measured 37.50 m (123 ft) overall, whereas the XV went for 50 m (164 ft 1 in). In beam, the VI and VI bis were just 3.1 m (10 ft 2 in) but stability issues soon showed an extra bit was needed, if still compatible with the railroad frame, versus the XII series at 3.3 m (10 ft 10 in). The railroad transport requirement was practically abandoned for the XV series that went for 4.9 m (16 ft 1 in). The draft needed to be kept low as well, even if this impacted stability and buoyancy, to fit under tunnels if needed: So the VI and VI bis measured only 2.6 m (8 ft 6 in) tall to the deck, about double up to the periscope raised above the CT. The requirement was softened up for the XII bis which grew to 2.9 m (9 ft 6 in) and the cold war XV series went for 3.6 m (11 ft 10 in) of draft, no longer, or barely compatible with railway transport.
But the most important aspect was the construction method. At first in 1930 it was asked to assemble them by rivets, despite the suggestion of chief designer A. N. Asafov for welding instead. The idea was that riveting was mastered everywhere these boats could be assembled, versus welding that was barely mastered still in 1930, and in much fewer locations. Afanasov argued that rivets, if not perfectly flushed, would cause a lot of drag underwater and degrade performances. Sea trials of M1 proved him right. The lead boatwas laid down on August 29, 1932, with a riveted hull, as her initial sisters, and she demonstrated a speed lower than design specification of approximately 5 knots plus a longer dive time of around 80 seconds plus inadequate seaworthiness.
To improve performance, a special commission was established, inspected that lead boat and proposed several design changes, retaining notably the chief designer’s original proposal to use a electric welding for the next boats. This bold move made the “Malyutka” among the world’s first all-welded submarines. Modifications were also made to the ballast tank filling and emptying systems. Final boats in the VI series incorporated these recommendations, allowing speed to reach design specifications and improving dive time 1.5 times.
Powerplant
The first series VI were powered by one diesel engine, one electric motor on a single shaft. This was an inexpensive solution, which degraded agility somewhat, but caused less drag, as the single propeller was in line with the hull, and in anycase, two diesels could not fit within the confines of the pressure hull, which was about two meters wide. The advantage of having a diesel on the centerline, with walkways either sides enabled also easier maintenance and repair. There was however a massive drawback, no redundancy. Once the diesel broke down, apart the residual battery capacity, there was nothing for the boat to do but sent a distress message.
The series VI and VI bis had the same 38B8 diesel for surface running, coupled with a single PG60/34 electric motor for an output 685 hp surfaced and 240 tonnes submerged, for a top speed of 11.1 knots surfaced and 6.4 knots underwater. They had a fuel capacity limited to just 13 tonnes of diesel oil for a range or endurance, of 1000 nautical miles at 9.6 knots or 40 nautical miles at 2 knots sumbmerged. See below next time for the VI bis and XII.
The Series XV were developed separately with improved characteristics, including the main ballast in light hull and two shafts. These vessels were mainly used by the Black Sea Fleet and the Baltic Fleet.
Armament
Torpedoes
The Series VI and VI bis had just two bow 533mm (21 inches) torpedo tubes, and no reloads.
21-inches type 53-27
The story of the first 21-inches Soviet torpdoes started under Imperial Russia, as a model called the pattern 1917 designed to carry a warhead of 476 lbs. (216 kg) at 3,280 yards (3,000 m) and 45 knots or 10,940 yards (10,000 m) at 30 knots thanks to its Wet-heater. It never entered service due to the Revolution but formed the basis for the first Soviet torpedo, the “53-27” project. It is interesting to point out the simple type identifier, rather than “model and the year”, precising the caliber 53 cm and year (1927) was judged more compact, precise and efficient.
The first model adopted was the 533 mm 53-27 type. It was universal, designed to be used from large surface combatants down to MTBs and submarines. Design started likely in 1923 and was accepted in 1927, about the tilme the Dekabrist class were completed, so they were obtained probably in 1928-29 as production ramped up given their urgent need in the whole fleet.
They weighted 3,770 lbs. (1,710 kg) for a body that was 22.97 feet (7.0 m) long, carrying a 584.2 lbs. (265 kg) warthead, with simple percussion cap for the detonation mechanism, and thanks to their Wet-heater they reached 3,700 m at 45 knots. The dual setting mode was abandoned as too complicated. It was produced en masse until 1935 and really became widespread.
Deck Gun: 45mm/43 21K (1934)
Installed at completion on the Series III. This was a navy version of the Army 45 mm Pattern 1932 anti-tank gun. The navalized mount had a semi-automatic breech. Tested in 1934, accepted in 1935 after tests with the originally intended automatic breech mechanism failed. Standard AA mount until 1941-42, replaced by the 37 mm/67 but in production until 1947. Not efficient, semi-automatic, no time fuze. Total prod. 2,799 guns. It was largely used on submarines either as AA gun or main deck gun on small Schchuka types.
Specs
Gun Weight: 107 kg, length 2.3975 m, bore 2.0725 m, rifling 1.650 m
Rounds FRAG-Tracer OT-033 2 kg, HE O-240 2.89 kg, FRAG-Tracer OR-73A 2.32 kg
Muzzle velocity: FRAG-Tracer 880 mps and OR-73A 760 mps HE O-240 335 mps and F-73 760 mps.
Rate Of Fire: 25-30 rounds per minute
Single pivot Mount 21K 507 kg, -10 / +85° at 10-20°/sec. Recoil 27-30 cm.
Range (FRAG-tracer): 45°: 9,200 m, 85° 6,000 m. With HE at 45° 5,000 m.
Rounds provision c500, barrel life 4000 rds.
Sensors
Mars-16 Hydrophone
A locally produced version of the Atlas Werke model, which proved ineffective for speeds above 3 knots due to noise interference. It was less a problem for a submarine underwater, which could ran at 4 knots on more discreet electric engines. It replaced the Mars-A, DM and ShM models on all boats in 1940-41.
Type 129 Sonar
An excellent British sonar, obtained from the british for L-3, keel-fitted. 10 KhZ standard deployed also on the T Class, U Class, and V Class.
The Malyutka Series VI (1933)
The lead boat was created without A. N. Asafov’s advise to use electric welding and was slower to run underwater and with a long diving time so a “special commission” agreed to many design changes for the later boats in the series, notably, and a all-welded construction, but also revised ballast tank filling and emptying systems. Later Series VI boats were all improved. This was also applied later to the VI bis. A total of 30 Series VI were built, 28 (M-1 through M-28) assigned to the Pacific Fleet, transported to the Far East from December 1, 1933 to November 30, 1934 for assembly and the last ones to the Black Sea Fleet via the Volga, for submarine crew training. All were completed by Nikolaev, Shipyards No. 198 and No. 200 (formerly “Russud”). In the Pacific they were all completed and commissioned at Vladivostok, Shipyard No. 202 “Dalzavod”.
Submerged speed was also adversely affected by the poor design of the stern section, which ended in an abrupt step immediately aft of the muffler located behind the conning tower. It was decided to streamline the stern section by adding a special fairing. It was also discovered that, while underway, water rushing in through the limber holes struck the structural components of the bow superstructure with considerable force, creating additional drag. Deflector plates had to be installed inside the superstructure behind each limber hole. These modifications had some impact on the surface speed and an even greater effect on the submerged speed of the “Malyutka”-class submarines, bringing them to 13 knots and 7 knots, respectively.
To improve the seaworthiness of the Series VI submarines, the crew was advised against using the buoyancy tank. After hauling a “Malyutka” submarine onto the slipway, it was revealed that the main ballast tank flood valves (kingstons) lacked standard grates; instead, the outer hull plating simply featured drilled holes. The total cross-sectional area of these holes was smaller than the clear opening of the valve itself. Consequently, the resistance created by this arrangement significantly impeded water flow through the valve and drastically increased the time required to fill the tanks. The holes in the hull plating were enlarged to match the shape of the valve intake and covered with a coarse grate made of thick wire. As a result, the tank filling time was reduced by approximately one-third. It was also determined that, to prevent the submarine’s bow from rising during torpedo firing, it was sufficient to open the flood valve of the anti-buoyancy tank upon the preparatory command “Tube” (Apparat), without waiting for the executive command “Fire” (“Pli”).
The initial application of electric welding to the hulls of “M”-class submarines was highly imperfect: the shipyard simply replaced riveted seams with welded ones while retaining butt straps and lap joints. Under these conditions, no significant reduction in water resistance could be expected. Nevertheless, “M”-class submarines were the world’s first all-welded combat submarines.
Author’s rendition from Mike1986Russia CC
⚙ Series VI specifications
Displacement
158 tons surfaced; 198 tons submerged
Dimensions
37.50 m (123 ft) x 3.1 m (10 ft 2 in) x 2.6 m (8 ft 6 in)
On October 3, 1932, her keel was laid down under the name “Special Vessel No. 237” based on its construction number. She was laid down at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and the modules assembled at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok on 10.1932, launched on April 9, 1933. She underwent trials under N. I. Vinogradov, her designer, in the Southern Bug River throughout the summer. In late October, she ran aground during testing but was freed with the assistance of the tugboat Sneg. Between December 1, 1933 and January 6, 1934, she was transported from Mykolaiv to Vladivostok at Plant No. 202 where she completed her assembly and final futting out. Still unnamed at the time, she entered service on April 26, 1934 and was completed on April 1934. She was assigned to the 4th Submarine Brigade under the designation “Submarine No. 1, M-class, Submarine Brigade” She was based in Maly Uliss Bay, Vladivostok. That summer she was in exercises and on August 16, officially incorporated into the Soviet Naval Forces of the Far East under command of V. S. Azarov.
By September 15, 1934, she was officially named M-1. From April 1936, M-1 was part of the 21st Division, 2nd Submarine Brigade. She was under command of A. A. Holmkvist in January–November 1938, A. P. Kopin from September 1, 1939 to November 21, 1940, and M. V. Leonov from November 21, 1940 to April 29, 1942. From February 11, 1941, she served in the 6th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade, still based at Maly Uliss. On May 1, 1942, she started a major overhaul at Plant No. 202 and returned to service on August 25, 1943. She had been under command of N. S. Leskovoy under December 7, 1942 and now her skipper was P. P. Nosenkov until the end of the war.
By August 1944, M-1 was transferred to a new base at Sovetskaya Gavan, part of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade. On July 28, 1945, she ran aground on rocks while conducting combat training. On August 9, she was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan. She had two combat patrols: One on August 14, 1945, providing cover for a minelaying operation. No enemy, she returned to base on August 17. On August 30, she departed Sovetskaya Gavan for Oodomari, carrying fuel and lubricants and arrived on the morning of 1st September. In October 1945, as part of her brigade, she was transferred to the Sakhalin Military Flotilla, while remaining based at Sovetskaya Gavan. From November 1945, she was reclassified as a training submarine. From 1947, she served in the USSR’s 7th Navy. On November 28, 1950 she was stricken. On January 8, 1951, her crew was disbanded, and she was sent for scrapping.
M2 (1933)
М-2 (hull number 243 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and assembled at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok, 8.1932, launched 8.4.1933, completed and in service 4.1934. Alexander Vladimirovich Buk was appointed as her first commander. She entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East on April 28, 1934.
On December 26, 1940, under command of Senior Lieutenant Boris Mikhailovich Mikhailov, and alongside submarines *M-19*, *M-20*, and *M-24*, the vessel undertook the world’s first group voyage under the ice. The operation was led by the division commander, Lieutenant Captain Lev Mikhailovich Sushkin, who was aboard the *M-24*.
On August 9, 1945, the submarine was serving under the command of Lieutenant Captain Nikolai Lukich Banit as part of the 6th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. It did not participate in combat operations.
On January 18, 1951, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and converted into a floating charging station designated *PZS-14*. It was stricken from the Navy’s vessel register on August 21, 1951, and subsequently decommissioned and scrapped on September 20, 1952.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-2/M-2.htm
M3 (1933)
Submarine “M-3”, Nikolaev, 1933
М-3 (hull number 236 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (11.1932/8.6.1933/5.1934).
Evgeniy Efimovich Poltavsky was appointed the first commander of the ship. On December 1, 1933, the submarine was sent by rail to Vladivostok, where it arrived on January 6, 1934. On June 8 (according to other sources, 16) June 1933, the submarine was again launched and on May 22, 1934 it became part of the Far East Naval Forces.
Submarine “M-3”.
On August 9, 1945, the M-3 met under the command of Senior Lieutenant Nikolai Vasilyevich Derbushev as part of the 6th division of the 2nd brigade of the Pacific Fleet submarine. On September 1, 1945, the submarine delivered fuel and oil for Soviet ships from Sovetskaya Gavan to Otomari (southern Sakhalin), and no longer took part in hostilities.
On January 18, 1951, the M-3 was withdrawn from service and reorganized into the floating charging station PZS-15, and on August 21, 1952, it was excluded from the lists of Navy vessels and on September 20, 1952 it was disbanded and scrapped.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-3/M-3.htm
M4 (1933)
М-4 (hull number 241 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (4.1933/16.6.1933/6.1934). On June 2, 1934, the submarine was commissioned into the Naval Forces of the Far East. Viktor Andreyevich Dolgov was appointed as the submarine’s first commander. As early as the winter of 1934–1935, the vessel began conducting training sorties from its base beneath the ice.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-4/M-4.htm
M5 (1933)
М-5 (hull number 245 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/29.10.1933/6.1934). On June 6, 1934, the vessel joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. Izmail Matigulovich Zaydulin was appointed as the first commander of the *M-5*. One of the submarines of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet (*M-1*, *M-5*, *M-8*, or *M-11*) returning to Sovetskaya Gavan, 1945. On August 9, 1945, the *M-5*—commanded by Senior Lieutenant Pyotr Pavlovich Pivovarov—was part of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. Following the outbreak of hostilities against Japan, the submarine put to sea to provide cover for mine-laying operations in the Strait of Tartary but did not encounter the enemy. After returning to base, on September 1, 1945, the submarine transported fuel and oil from Sovetskaya Gavan to Otomari (southern Sakhalin) for Soviet ships.
On November 28, 1950, the *M-5* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on January 18, 1951, the vessel was stricken from the Soviet Navy list and sent for scrapping.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-5/M-5.htm
M6 (1933)
М-6 (hull number 244 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1932/24.4.1933/6.1934). TS 11.1950, stricken 1.1951.
Vasily Alexandrovich Mazin was appointed the first commander. In December 1933, the submarine made the voyage from Sevastopol to Odesa amidst icy conditions, and subsequently traveled from Odesa to Mykolaiv following icebreakers. On January 25, 1934, the *M-6* was transported by rail to Vladivostok, arriving in April 1934; on June 13, 1934, it was commissioned into the Naval Forces of the Far East.
In 1934, while carrying out a training mission, the *M-6* ran aground. The accident caused damage to the submarine: dents formed in the bow section, and a crack appeared in the hull. Fortunately, after the submarine was pulled off the rocks, the dents were straightened out and the crack was welded shut. By the winter of 1934–1935, the *M-6* was already conducting training sorties from its base beneath the ice. On August 9, 1945, the submarine was under the command of Senior Lieutenant Yevgeny Georgievich Fedotov, serving in the 6th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. With the outbreak of hostilities against Japan, the *M-6* performed base patrol duties near Sovetskaya Gavan.
On November 28, 1950, the vessel was transferred to the Vladivostok branch of DOSFLOT (now ROSTO) for operational use. On January 18, 1951, the submarine was stricken from the Soviet Navy list, hauled ashore, and used as a combat training facility.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-6/M-6.htm
M7 (1933)
М-7 (hull number 242 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (4.1933/5.8.1933/7.1934) stricken 1.1951. She entered service on July 6, 1934, and joined the Naval Forces of the Far East on July 27, 1934. Ivan Alexandrovich Smirnov was appointed as the *M-7*’s first commanding officer.
On August 9, 1945, the submarine was part of the 2nd Independent Submarine Division of the Pacific Fleet, under the command of Lieutenant Commander Pyotr Grigoryevich Zinin. The submarine did not participate in combat operations.
On January 18, 1951 (some sources cite November 28, 1950), the *M-7* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on September 1, 1951, it was transferred to the Vladivostok branch of DOSFLOT for training purposes, and on September 19, 1951, it was stricken from the Navy list.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-7/M-7.htm
Note: Logs in research for all.
M8 (1933)
М-8 [M-8(hull number 238 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (10.1932/11.8.1933/7.1934). Stricken 9.1951.
She entered service on July 5, 1934, under the command of Mikhail Matveyevich Yevgenyev.
Around noon on September 21, 1934, during a training dive in Ussuri Bay, the *M-8* was practicing bottoming maneuvers with a submerged anchor deployment. Two commanders were on board: the regular commander, M.M. Yevgenyev, and a supervising officer, I.A. Smirnov (commander of the *M-7*). While taking on ballast, the outboard valve of the trim line failed. Consequently, water began flooding the second compartment through a 2.5 cm opening. The submarine surfaced; the crew managed to stop the inflow by creating counter-pressure, but fearing a battery explosion, the commander ordered the personnel to the deck. In the process, the watertight doors leading to the first and fourth compartments were left unsealed. The submarine headed for base, traveling partly under its own power and partly under tow by the minesweeper *Herkules*. About eight hours after the accident, while abeam of Cape Goldobin, the *M-8* developed a heavy bow-down trim and sank. Fortunately, there were no casualties among the crew. The *M-8* was raised on September 23, 1934, and soon returned to service.
Following the incident with the *M-8*, the Military Council of the Far East Naval Forces relieved M.M. [Yevgenyev] of his command. …relieved Yevgenyev of command of the ship and appointed him navigator of the *M-1*, while assigning the temporary duties of submarine commander to Leonid Andreyevich Yemelyanov, the navigator of the 3rd Division.
One of the Series VI submarines.
One of the submarines of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade, Pacific Fleet (the *M-1*, *M-5*, *M-8*, or *M-11*), returning to Sovetskaya Gavan, 1945.
On August 9, 1945, the *M-8* was part of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade, Pacific Fleet, under the command of Lieutenant Commander Spiridon Antonovich Chubanov. It did not participate in combat operations.
On November 28, 1950, the *M-8* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve, and on August 28, 1951, it was disarmed. On September 8, 1951, the submarine was stricken from the Navy list and sent for scrapping.
https://www.deepstorm.ru/DeepStorm.files/17-45/m%20VI/M-7/M-7.htm
M9 (1933)
М-9 [M-9(hull number 240 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1.1933/27.9.1933/7.1934). M.I. Gadzhiyev became the submarine’s first commander. On August 9, 1945, the *M-9* was serving under the command of Lieutenant Captain Viktor Petrovich Andashev as part of the 2nd Independent Submarine Division. With the outbreak of hostilities against Japan, the *M-9* deployed to its assigned area to conduct a base patrol; however, no enemy forces were encountered, and the submarine returned safely to base.
On November 28, 1950, the *M-9* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve. On January 19, 1951, the submarine was transferred to the Vladivostok branch of DOSFLOT for training purposes, but it was sent for scrapping on September 1, 1951.
M10 (1933)
М-10 [M-10(hull number 246 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/24.8.1933/7.1934).
The *M-10* entered service on July 5, 1934, and on July 27, 1934, under the command of L.G. Petrov, it joined the Naval Forces of the Far East.
On August 9, 1945, the submarine was serving under the command of Senior Lieutenant Oleg Georgievich Petrunin as part of the 2nd Independent Submarine Division. With the outbreak of hostilities against Japan, the *M-10* took up a designated patrol sector on the approaches to the Vladimiro-Olginskaya Naval Base but did not encounter any enemy forces.
On November 28, 1950, the submarine was withdrawn from the Navy’s active fleet and converted into a harbor service craft. On January 18, 1951, it was transferred to the fleet’s search-and-rescue service for diver training; on August 10, 1951, it was stricken from the Navy’s vessel register and scrapped.
M11 (1933)
М-11 (hull number 252 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (5.1933/29.11.1933/7.1934). On July 5, 1934, M-11 was under the command of Valentin Iosifovich Surabekov, and joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. She was assigned to the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade, Pacific Fleet with *M-1*, *M-5*, *M-8*, or *M-11* and returning to Sovetskaya Gavan, 1945. On August 9, 1945, *M-11* commanded by Lieutenant Captain Pyotr Konstantinovich Pokhvalsky, still part of the 10th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade, Pacific Fleet was present when the war with Japan started but did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, she was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on September 8, 1951, she was disarmed, stricken from the naval register, and handed over for scrapping.
M12 (1933)
М-12 (hull number 253 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (5.1933/2.12.1933/7.1934). On July 27, 1934, *M-12*, under the command of Fyodor Fyodorovich Pavlov, entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, the submarine—commanded by Lieutenant Commander Alexander Ivanovich Reztsov and part of the Pacific Fleet’s 2nd Independent Submarine Division—was on active duty. During the Soviet-Japanese War, the submarine performed base patrol duties. On June 1, 1948, while conducting combat training exercises in Sovetskaya Gavan, *M-12* collided with *M-19*, causing the latter to sink. On November 28, 1950, *M-12* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on January 18, 1951, the submarine was disarmed and stricken from the Soviet Navy list. On August 28, 1951, *M-12* was handed over for scrapping.
M13 (1933)
М-13 (hull number 254 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (6.1933/21.12.1933/7.1934). On July 14, 1934, under the command of Andrey Trofimovich Chabanenko, the submarine entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, *M-13* was serving under the command of Senior Lieutenant Usman Gaynutdinovich Gaynutdinov as part of the 6th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. She did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, *M-13* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on January 18, 1951, she was disarmed and stricken from the naval register for scrapping.
M14 (1933)
М-14 (hull number 248 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/26.12.1933/7.1934). On July 10, 1934, *M-14* entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, the submarine, commanded by Captain-Lieutenant Semyon Stepanovich Matetsky and part of the 6th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet, was in active service but did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, the *M-14* was withdrawn from the combat roster and reclassified as a harbor service vessel; on January 18, 1951, it was transferred to the fleet’s search-and-rescue service to support diver training. On August 10, 1951, it was disarmed and stricken from the Navy’s vessel register for scrapping.
M15 (1933)
М-15 (hull number 247 was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/26.12.1933/7.1934). The submarine entered service on July 14, 1934, and on July 27—under the command of Aleksey Ivanovich Yevstrakhin—joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, the submarine was serving under the command of Captain 3rd Rank Aleksey Prokopyevich Blinnikov as part of the 6th Division, 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. It did not participate in combat operations.
On November 28, 1950, the *M-15* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on January 18, 1951, it was transferred to the 5th Department of the 5th Navy to support sonar operator training. On August 10, 1951, the submarine was disarmed and stricken from the Navy list for scrapping.
M16 (1933)
М-16 (hull number 260) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (8.1933/28.12.1933/7.1934). The submarine entered service on July 22, 1934, and—under the command of Ivan Ivanovich Baykov—joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. During the winter of 1935–1936, the *M-16*, still under Baykov’s command, undertook an autonomous group voyage alongside the submarines *M-17* and *M-18*. At the outbreak of the Soviet-Japanese War, the submarine was part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade, commanded by Lieutenant Captain Ivan Fedorovich Smirnov. It did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on August 10, 1951, it was disarmed and stricken from the Soviet Navy list for scrapping.
M17 (1933)
М-17 (hull number 257) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (7.1933/27.12.1933/7.1934). The submarine entered service on July 22, 1934, and—under the command of Ivan Ivanovich Baykov—joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. During the winter of 1935–1936, the *M-16*, still under Baykov’s command, undertook an autonomous group voyage alongside the submarines *M-17* and *M-18*. At the outbreak of the Soviet-Japanese War, the submarine was part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade, commanded by Lieutenant Captain Ivan Fedorovich Smirnov. It did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on August 10, 1951, it was disarmed and stricken from the Soviet Navy list for scrapping.
M18 (1933)
М-18 (hull number 259) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (7.1933/24.12.1933/7.1934). On July 21, 1934, under the command of Mikhail Ivanovich Kupriyanov, the submarine joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. During the winter of 1935–1936, the *M-17*—still under his command—carried out its first fully autonomous patrol and subsequently undertook a group autonomous voyage alongside the *M-16* and *M-18*. On August 9, 1945, the submarine was serving under the command of Lieutenant Captain Viktor Illarionovich Konshin as part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade. It did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, the *M-17* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve. On January 18, 1951, the submarine was transferred to a submarine training detachment in Vladivostok; however, on September 1, 1951, it was disarmed, stricken from the Navy list, and sent for scrapping.
M19 (1934)
М-19 (hull number 258) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (7.1933/14.5.1934/8.1934). On August 29, 1934, the submarine, commanded by Ilya Iosifovich Belyaev, joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On December 26, 1940, the *M-19*, commanded by Senior Lieutenant Vladimir Ivanovich Avdashev, participated—alongside submarines *M-2*, *M-20*, and *M-24*—in the submarine service’s first-ever group voyage under the ice. On August 23, 1943, the submarine ran aground in Razboynik Bay. With the assistance of the minelayer *Tomsk*, it was pulled off the rocks and soon returned to service. On August 9, 1945, the *M-19*—commanded by Captain-Lieutenant Nikolai Alexandrovich Starikov and part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade—was in active service but did not participate in combat operations. On June 1, 1948, while conducting combat training exercises in Sovetskaya Gavan, the *M-19* was rammed by the submarine *M-12*; however, it was raised the following day, subsequently repaired, and returned to service. On November 28, 1950, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and transferred to the 7th Navy’s rescue service to support diver training, but on January 18, 1951, it was stricken from the naval register and sent for scrapping.
M20 (1934)
М-20 (hull number 262) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (8.1933/17.3.1934/9.1934). On September 23, 1934, the submarine entered service and, under the command of Vasily Timofeyevich Nikulin, joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On December 26, 1940, under the command of Senior Lieutenant Yevgeny Nikolayevich Alekseyev, the *M-20*—along with the submarines *M-2*, *M-19*, and *M-24*—undertook the first-ever group submarine voyage under the ice. On August 9, 1945, the submarine was serving under the command of Captain-Lieutenant Vladimir Alekseyevich Borovoy as part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade. It did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, the *M-20* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on August 28, 1951, it was stricken from the Navy list and handed over to the Property Disposal Department for dismantling and sale. It was formally disbanded on September 8, 1951.
M21 (1934)
М-21 (hull number 263/566 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (9.1933/20.3.1934/9.1934). The submarine entered service on September 23, 1934, joining the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, the *M-21* was part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade, under the command of Captain-Lieutenant Mikhail Ivanovich Blazhin. It did not participate in combat patrols. On August 28, 1951, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on the same day, it was stricken from the Soviet Navy list and handed over for scrapping.
M22 (1934)
М-22 (hull number 264/567) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (10.1933/15.5.1934/10.1934). On October 10, 1934, under the command of Ivan Ivanovich Kurnosov, the submarine entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 9, 1945, *M-22* was serving under the command of Lieutenant Commander Anatoly Georgievich Sizintsev as part of the 7th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. It did not participate in combat operations. On November 28, 1950, *M-22* was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; on January 18, 1951, it was disarmed, stricken from the Navy list, and transferred to the fleet’s rescue service to support combat training operations.
M23 (1934)
М-23 (hull number 250) was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/16.5.1934/10.1934). M-23 entered service on October 10, 1934, and joined the Naval Forces of the Far East on November 9 (or, according to other sources, November 16), 1934. On October 6, 1944, *M-23* was transported by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on December 11, 1944. That same day, the submarine was assigned to the Black Sea Fleet. Her Pacific crew, led by Lieutenant Commander Moisey Lvovich Shlionsky, arrived along with the vessel. By this time, the war in the Black Sea had already ended; consequently, the submarine did not participate in combat operations. On May 31, 1946, *M-23* was disarmed and stricken from the Soviet Navy list. On June 26, 1946, following the removal of instruments and machinery, the vessel was decommissioned. The submarine’s hull was used for experimental purposes.
M24 (1934)
М-24 (hull number 265) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (10.1933/1.6.1934/10.1934). The submarine entered service on October 10, 1934, and on October 16, under the command of Valentin Borisovich Dokukin, it joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On December 26, 1940, *M-24*, commanded by Andrey Georgievich Yaylo, together with submarines *M-2*, *M-19*, and *M-20*, undertook the world’s first group voyage under the ice. Division Commander Lieutenant Captain Lev Mikhailovich Sushkin was on board the submarine. On October 6, 1944, *M-24* was shipped by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on December 11, 1944. That same day, the submarine was assigned to the 5th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet. The vessel arrived with its Pacific crew, led by Senior Lieutenant Ivan Dmitrievich Rezanov. As the war in the Black Sea had already ended by this time, the submarine did not participate in combat operations. On May 31, 1946, *M-24* was disarmed and stricken from the Navy list. After the removal of instruments and machinery, the submarine’s hull was used for experimental purposes and was finally dismantled at the Glavvtorchermet facility in Batumi in 1955.
M25 (1934)
М-25 (hull number 251) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/16.6.1934/11.1934). On November 18, 1934, under the command of Aleksey Alekseyevich Poskotinov, the *M-25* entered service with the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 30, 1944, the submarine was shipped by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on October 29, 1944. That same day, the *M-25* was assigned to the 5th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet. The vessel arrived with its Pacific crew, led by Lieutenant Commander Vladimir Sergeyevich Kamensky. Since the war in the Black Sea theater had already ended by this time, the submarine did not participate in combat operations.
On May 31, 1946, the *M-25* was disarmed and stricken from the Navy list. Following the removal of its instruments and machinery, the submarine’s hull was used for experimental purposes.
M26 (1934)
М-26 (hull number 249) was ordered at 200 Yd (61 Kommunar Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (1933/14.4.1934/11.1934). On November 18, 1934, *M-26*, under the command of Osip Andreyevich Grechko, joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 30, 1944, the submarine was sent by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on October 29, 1944. That same day, *M-26* was assigned to the 5th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet. The vessel arrived with its Pacific crew, led by Lieutenant Commander Savely Savelyevich Matsepuro. Since the war in the Black Sea had already ended by this time, the submarine did not participate in combat operations. Submarine *M-26* in Sevastopol, 1946–1949. Submarine *M-26* in Sevastopol, 1946–1949. Submarine *M-26* in Sevastopol, 1946–1949. On May 31, 1946, *M-26* was reclassified as a training submarine. On November 28, 1950, the submarine was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve; however, on January 18, 1951, it was disarmed and stricken from the Navy list, after which it was transferred to the fleet’s search-and-rescue service to support combat training.
M27 (1934)
М-27 (hull number 255) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (6.1933/23.7.1934/12.1934). On September 23, 1934, the vessel was transported by rail to Vladivostok, where she was finally completed at Shipyard No. 202 (Dalzavod). *M-27* entered service on December 31, 1934, and joined the Naval Forces of the Far East on January 7, 1935 (some sources cite January 3). On August 30, 1944, the submarine was shipped by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on October 29, 1944. That same day, *M-27* was assigned to the 5th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet. The vessel arrived with her Pacific crew, commanded by Captain-Lieutenant Alexander Ivanovich Belichenko. As the war in the Black Sea had already ended by this time, the submarine did not participate in combat operations. On May 31, 1946, *M-27* was stricken from the Navy list. On February 7, 1948, following the removal of her instruments and machinery, she was transferred to the fleet’s salvage and rescue service to support diver training.
M28 (1934)
М-28 (hull number 256 was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev and completed at 202 Yd (Dalzavod Yd), Vladivostok (7.1933/21.6.1934/7.1935). She entered service on July 16, 1934, and on July 22, 1934, under command of Daniil Abramovich Pavlutsky, joined the Naval Forces of the Far East. On August 30, 1944, *M-28* was transported by rail to the Black Sea, arriving in Poti on October 29, 1944. That same day, the vessel was assigned to the 5th Division of the 2nd Submarine Brigade of the Black Sea Fleet. Her Pacific crew, led by Lieutenant Commander Nikolai Nikolaevich Simonov, arrived along with the submarine. Since combat operations in the Black Sea had already concluded by that time, the submarine did not participate in them. On May 31, 1946, *M-28* was reclassified as a training submarine; on November 28, 1950, she was withdrawn from active service and placed in reserve (mothballed). On January 18, 1951, the submarine was decommissioned and stricken from the Navy list. Following the removal of its instruments and machinery, the hull was transferred to the fleet’s rescue service for use in diver combat training.
M51 (1933)
М-51 (hull number 239) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev (11.1932/22.5.1933/9.1934). commissioned into the Black Sea Naval Forces on September 9, 1934, as the *M-51*. Its first commander was M.S. Boyko, who led the vessel until December 1934. Like the other Series VI submarines, the *M-51* was not sent to the Far East; instead, it and its sister ship, the *M-52*, remained in the Black Sea to serve as training vessels for submarine crews.
On June 22, 1941, the submarine—commanded by Senior Lieutenant (later Captain-Lieutenant) Vladimir Matveyevich Prokofyev and assigned to the Black Sea Fleet’s Separate Submarine Training Division—was undergoing repairs in Sevastopol. Upon completion of repairs on July 1, 1941, the *M-51* departed for its permanent base in Novorossiysk.
By July 8, the submarine had deployed to a patrol zone on the approaches to Novorossiysk (Position No. 10). On the morning of July 14, near Cape Utrish, the *M-51* was mistaken for an enemy submarine and narrowly avoided being rammed by the transport ship *Krasnaya Kuban*. Subsequently, due to an error by the submarine’s radio operator, contact with the base was lost; this forced the division commander, Captain 1st Rank L.G. Petrov, to put to sea aboard the destroyer *Smyshleny* to search for the vessel. Subsequent patrols near Novorossiysk and the Kerch Strait also yielded no results.
On October 27, 1941, the *M-51* relocated to Kerch. The submarine was intended for reconnaissance and the destruction of enemy vessels in the western Sea of Azov; however, following its first sortie, it was recalled to Novorossiysk on November 9 due to the evacuation of the Kerch Naval Base.
V.M. Molotov, Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR, on the bridge of the newly commissioned submarine *M-61* (later redesignated *M-51*); the *M-51* (a Series XII “Malyutka”-class submarine) alongside a submarine tender.
V.M. Molotov, Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR, on the bridge of the newly commissioned submarine *M-61* (later redesignated *M-51*). Autumn 1934.
The *M-51* (a Series XII “Malyutka”-class submarine) alongside a submarine tender.
During the second half of November, the *M-51* conducted patrols in the Feodosia area. From December 6 to 11, it transported the chief of the Black Sea Fleet headquarters’ operations department to Sevastopol, after which it was tasked with providing navigational support for ships involved in the Kerch-Feodosia amphibious operation. The submarine’s mission was to determine and report weather conditions near Feodosia and subsequently serve as a navigational reference point for ships and transports approaching the port. Hydrographer Lieutenant A.G. Vitchenko was on board. On December 28, the submarine submerged 3.5 miles east of Cape Ilya (near Feodosia) and, during the nights of December 29 and 30, acted as a lighted navigational beacon. Guided by the submarine’s searchlight beam, the landing force—comprising the cruisers *Krasny Krym* and *Krasny Kavkaz*, the destroyers *Zheleznyakov*, *Shaumyan*, and *Nezamozhnik*, and the transport ship *Kuban*—aligned itself with the entrance channel leading to the gates of the port of Feodosia. On January 11, 1942, the *M-51* put to sea with the mission of providing navigational support for a landing operation at Sudak, but was recalled to base after the operation was postponed. During the first week of April, she conducted reconnaissance in the Feodosia–Dalniye Kamyshi area before arriving in Gelendzhik to await repairs (having suffered a vertical rudder failure during her last patrol). On May 31, the submarine transferred to Poti, where a major overhaul began.
On December 29, 1942, Lieutenant Commander Mikhail Mikhailovich Golubev was appointed commander of the *M-51*. The submarine returned to active service on April 8, 1943.
On the evening of June 30, the *M-51* deployed to the area between Cape Opuk and Cape Kiik-Atlama (designated as reserve patrol zone No. 86). The mission was overseen by Captain 2nd Rank N.F. Klynin, commander of the 4th Submarine Division. The Soviet submarine made contact with German submarines twice (on the evening of July 1, likely *U-23*, and during the day on July 7, possibly *U-19*) but was unable to launch an attack. In mid-August, the *M-51* patrolled the Yalta–Cape Meganom area (patrol zone No. 84). On the morning of August 16, while attempting to attack a convoy, the submarine was detected and pursued. One of the landing barges dropped eight depth charges on the submarine; the resulting explosions damaged the *M-51*’s electrical measuring instruments and the linkages for the vertical and aft horizontal rudders, while the stern tube gland began to leak. After the crew carried out necessary repairs, the submarine left its patrol area and arrived in Ochemchiri on the morning of August 20.
On the evening of September 22, following navigational repairs, the *M-51* was conducting trials on the measured mile near Ochemchiri. While transitioning from cruising trim to diving trim—and still moving under diesel power—an error in calculating the intake of water into the compensating and trim tanks caused the submarine to take on ballast and submerge with its conning tower hatch open. Eight men, including the submarine’s commander, died in the accident. Six crew members, led by Petty Officer 1st Class N.I. Skripchenko, escaped to the surface through the aft hatch, while another five exited through the bow torpedo tubes. The survivors swam to shore on their own. On September 25, 1943, the submarine was raised from a depth of 12 meters by the fleet’s salvage service and the submarine tender *Elbrus*. Following restoration, the *M-51* returned to service in late 1944 under the command of Lieutenant Captain Vasily Mitrofanovich Aleksandrov, who commanded the vessel until March 1947.
On December 30, 1944, the *M-51* was withdrawn from the fleet’s active combat roster and transferred to the Black Sea Fleet’s Hydrographic Directorate; from October 12, 1946, it was used for training purposes.
The submarine was disarmed on November 28, 1950, and decommissioned on December 8. After the removal of its instruments and machinery, the hull was transferred to the Black Sea Fleet’s salvage service to support personnel combat training.
M52 (1933)
М-52 (hull number 261) was ordered at 198 Yd (Marti Yd), Nikolayev (8.1933/13.12.1933/9.1934). Commissioned on September 9, 1934, and assigned to the Black Sea Naval Forces on September 13, 1934. On June 22, 1941, the submarine was stationed in Novorossiysk as part of the Black Sea Fleet’s Independent Submarine Training Division, under the command of Lieutenant Commander (later Captain 3rd Rank) Grigory Nikolayevich Tsebrovsky. Shortly before the outbreak of the war, the submarine had completed repairs and was in the post-repair work-up period.
M-52 departed for its first combat patrol on July 6, 1941, tasked with maintaining a watch southwest of Novorossiysk (Position No. 10). No enemy forces were encountered; however, on July 8, the submarine was attacked by a friendly MBR-2 seaplane. Fortunately, there were no serious consequences, and the submarine returned to Novorossiysk on the morning of July 9.
Until October 1941, she conducted patrols southwest of Novorossiysk and south of the Kerch Strait (Position No. 9); in October and December, it twice sortied for reconnaissance missions in the Feodosia area. On November 5, 1941, during an enemy air raid on Novorossiysk, the *M-52* sustained minor damage from near-misses: its 45mm gun jammed, and two crew members were wounded. From December 12 to 14, the submarine conducted an unsuccessful search for a seaplane crew in the area between Cape Chauda and Cape Opuk.
In January 1942, the *M-52* was assigned to operations supporting the Kerch-Feodosia amphibious landing. On January 10, the submarine deployed to the Sudak area for reconnaissance; it was also tasked with acting as a floating beacon. The operation was postponed, and the submarine returned to Novorossiysk by the evening of January 12.
In February, M-52 was under repairs in Poti. On July 14, 1942, Lieutenant Commander Yefim Pavlovich Obolentsev was appointed as commanding officer. In October 1942, she was designated for transfer to the Northern Fleet (though other sources indicate it was originally intended for use as a training vessel in the Caspian Sea). She was loaded onto a transport barge and shipped from Poti to Baku on December 3 (or December 10, according to other sources), arriving safely six days later. On December 24, 1942, she was launched at the Zakfederatsiya Shipyard in Baku, and on January 13, 1943, recommissioned into the Caspian Military Flotilla. On January 21, 1943, M-52 was reclassified as a training submarine. On July 17, she was transferred to the training detachment for naval educational institutions. In October 1943, M-52 was sent back to the Black Sea and on June 20, 1945, disarmed, on July 28, 1945, stricken from the Navy list and sent for scrapping.
The Malyutka Series VI bis (1935)
On August 13, 1933, decision was made to build twenty more Malyutka-class, but based on an improved design. They featured an additional quick-dive tank, electric controls for the bow hydroplanes, and improved propeller. The latter by the way and encased in a conical stub and just could not fell off. But externally, the design was spectacularly different as seen in the comparison below. Nothing almost was left unchanged: The bow which was straight and took a camber there, but the aft deck, instead of being stepped was now straight and flush, with a duck tail instead of the former more boat-like tail.
The shape of the rudder was changed, as the ventral fin from which protruded the propeller dhaft. The torpedo tube doors had a new shape, and if the water scoop design remained the same, the beefier aft section now had additional scoop cuts. The stern section reshaped was calculated for better seaworthiness overall. Of course the biggest change was about the conning tower, which was completely was redesigned, instead ofthe classic “italian style” large CT with a forward helmsman’s post, the shapes of the fairings were now completely new and simplified. Instead of windows, there were portholes, and the forward, slanted and narrow forward edge ended in a wider top. Still, there was a signal projector on top.
The periscope was now in a new fairing integrating the portico. The door was eliminated and replaced by a simple access to the top bridge was steps cut in the fairing. Overall, this new CT had a much smaller size and better hydrodynamic efficiency, it was more “fin than CT” and had additional scoops at its base. It contributed to its better top speed thanks to all these refinements, increased to 13.2 knots surfaced and 7.16 knots underwater, with an endurance reaching ten days and they dived faster between the new bow planes and extra ballasts. So, albeit the internals and arrangements, lower hull and diving planes remains the same, they ended at very different and easy to distinguish. The new Malyutka Type VI bis looked more refines and streamlines, and with the same output, they were just more efficient overall, especially underwater.
Poster, Series VI bis, based on the work of mike1979russia, 2011, CC. and its detail. The original is 300 dpi, 32cm
The way the MVI bis could be carried assembled on flatcars. The outer ones (2 bogies) could carry other elements like the diesels, periscopes, pumps, electric engines, etc. as much as buffering the ends against any collision with other railcars. No fuel, no ammunition of course. Special supports were installed at the center on the 4-bogie flatcars. This scheme was only suitable for railways having no tunnel underway of course. From deepstorm. Original legend: “M77 and M79 transport scheme to Lake Ladoga.” Note that the Finns also had a submarine on lake Ladoga, the German-built microscopic
⚙ Series VI bis specifications
Displacement
161 tons surfaced; 202 tons submerged
Dimensions
37.50 m (123 ft) x 3.1 m (10 ft 2 in) x 2.6 m (8 ft 6 in)
comparison between the Series VI and VI bis
Once approved, construction started at the Sudomekh shipyard, Leningrad (5 boats), and Nikolayev, at Shipyard No. 198, formerly Russud (12 boats) as well as Shipyard No. 200 (61 Communards), for three 3 boats. Logistics used the small size and modular construction still, with the submarines transported by sections and by rail from Nikolayev to Leningrad to be completed at Shipyard No. 190. This enabled well inland yards to build these submersibles. All Series VI-bis submarines entered service by the end of 1936, three years after the design was approved. Twelve joined the Baltic Fleet, six joined the Pacific Fleet (making a total of four Pacific brigades), and two in the Black Sea Fleet. Many of them would be transferred to China instead of being scrapped.
M-43 (1935)
M-43 was ordered from “Sudomekh” and laid down as hull 58 on February 2, 1934, launched on 6 June 1935, tansferred, assembled November 1935 for completion, but named M-82 until 1939 (M-61, M-71, M-82).
Laid down at Shipyard No. 196 (or Shipyard No. 194, according to other sources) in Leningrad on February 2, 1934, as *M-82* (construction number 58). The submarine was launched on June 10, 1935, commissioned on November 6, 1935, and—under the command of Mikhail Fyodorovich Khomyakov—joined the Red Banner Baltic Fleet on December 8, 1935. On August 31, 1939, *M-82* was transported by rail to Vladivostok, where it joined the Pacific Fleet as *M-43* on October 27, 1939.
On August 9, 1945, the submarine was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan under the command of Lieutenant Commander Vasily Nikiforovich Sheloputov, as part of the 10th Division of the Pacific Fleet’s 3rd Submarine Brigade. She did not participate in combat operations.
No career more logs, in research.
Stricken 28 November 1950. Transferred to China in 1954 as 205.
M-44 (1935)
M-44 was launched on 27 November 1935 and named M-84 until 1939. Laid down on March 10, 1934, at Shipyard No. 196 (or Shipyard No. 194, according to other sources) in Leningrad under slipway number 60 as *M-84*. The submarine was launched on July 15, 1935, commissioned on November 27, 1935, and—under the command of Aleksey Alexandrovich Batyrev—joined the Red Banner Baltic Fleet on November 29 (or November 6, according to other sources), 1935. On August 31, 1939, *M-84* was transported by rail to Vladivostok, where it joined the Pacific Fleet as *M-44* on October 27, 1939.
At the outbreak of the Soviet-Japanese War, the vessel was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan under the command of Lieutenant Captain Sergey Sergeyevich Sazonov, as part of the 10th Division of the Pacific Fleet’s 3rd Submarine Brigade. The submarine did not participate in combat operations. No more career logs, in research.
Stricken 28 November 1950. Transferred to China in 1954 as 200.
M-45 (1935)
Crew of the submarine M-85/45. src sovboat.ru
M-45 was launched on 4 November 1935. Named M-85 until 1939. Laid down on the slipway at Shipyard No. 198 in Nikolaev on May 29, 1934, under construction number 294 as “M-77.” On April 29, 1935 (or July 15, according to other sources), the submarine was launched under the designation “M-85.” The submarine entered service on November 4, 1935, after which it was loaded onto a railway transporter and delivered to Leningrad. On June 26, 1936, “M-85” joined the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. On August 19, 1939, the submarine was shipped by rail to Vladivostok, where it joined the Pacific Fleet as “M-45” on October 27, 1939.
On August 9, 1945, she was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan under the command of Lieutenant Captain Ivan Grigoryevich Gubanov, as part of the 10th Division of the 3rd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet. She did not participate in combat operations. No more career logs, in research.
Stricken 28 November 1950. Transferred to China in 1954 as 201.
M-46 (1935)
M-46 was launched on 4 November 1935, named M-86 until 1939. Laid down on August 29, 1934, at Shipyard No. 198 in Nikolayev (construction number 301) as *M-78*, the submarine was launched on July 15, 1935 (some sources cite May 25) under the designation *M-86*. Commissioned on November 4, 1935, the submarine was subsequently loaded onto a rail transporter and delivered to Leningrad. On June 26, 1936, *M-86* joined the Red Banner Baltic Fleet. On August 19, 1939, the submarine was shipped by rail to Vladivostok, where, on October 27, 1939, it joined the Pacific Fleet under the designation *M-46*, commanded by Alexander Georgievich Gusarov. On August 9, 1945, the submarine was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan under the command of Lieutenant Captain Alexander Pavlovich Smetanin, as part of the 10th Division of the Pacific Fleet’s 3rd Submarine Brigade. *M-46* did not took part in any combat operations. No more career logs, in research.
Stricken 28 November 1950. Transferred to China in 1954 as 202.
M-47 (1935)
M-47 was launched on 10 June 1935, named M-53 until 1939. Laid down on February 10, 1934, at Shipyard No. 198 in Nikolaev as *M-53* (construction number 287). The submarine was launched on December 23, 1934 (some sources cite October 18), commissioned on May 5, 1935 (some sources cite June 11), and joined the Black Sea Fleet on June 15, 1935, under the command of Andrey Vasilyevich Krestovsky.
In 1939, she was transported by rail to Vladivostok, where it joined the Pacific Fleet as *M-47* on October 27, 1939. On August 9, 1945, the submarine—commanded by Senior Lieutenant Andrey Nikolayevich Khimich and part of the 10th Division of the 3rd Submarine Brigade of the Pacific Fleet—was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan. She did not take part in combat operations. No more career logs, in research.
Transferred to China in 1954 as 203.
M-48 (1935)
M-48 was launched 19 October 1936 (named M-56 until 1939). Laid down on March 25, 1935, at Shipyard No. 200 (named after the 61 Communards) in Mykolaiv under the designation “M-56” and yard number 1047. The submarine was launched on November 20, 1935, commissioned on October 19 (or October 21, according to other sources) of 1936, and—under the command of Georgy Alekseyevich Grevtsev—joined the Black Sea Fleet. In 1939, “M-56” was transported by rail to Vladivostok, where, on October 27, 1939, it joined the Pacific Fleet as “M-48.” On August 9, 1945, the submarine—commanded by Lieutenant Captain Fyodor Yakovlevich Fomin and part of the 10th Division of the Pacific Fleet’s 3rd Submarine Brigade—was stationed at Sovetskaya Gavan. On the day the USSR declared war on Japan, “M-48” deployed to its patrol station; however, while en route to the assigned area, the submarine collided with the patrol boat “BO-314.” The accident caused a crack in the plating of main ballast tank No. 3 and bent the shafting of the aft diving planes. “M-48” was forced to return to base, but two days later, following repairs, the submarine proceeded to the assigned area, where no enemy forces were encountered. No more career logs, in research.
Transferred to China in 1954 as 204.
M-54 (1935)
M-54 was completed on 14 October 1936. In short: She ran aground on 10 December 1941; later salvaged and repaired. Laid down on December 20, 1934, in Mykolaiv at Shipyard No. 200 (named after the 61 Communards). The submarine was launched on September 15, 1935, and commissioned into the Black Sea Fleet on October 14, 1936. At the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War, the *M-54* was under the command of Lieutenant Commander Eduard Borisovich Brodsky and assigned to the Separate Submarine Training Division. The *Malyutka*-class boat was undergoing a mid-life refit at Shipyard No. 532 in Kherson. In the first half of August, the *M-54* was towed to Sevastopol, where repairs were completed at Shipyard No. 200; on October 1, the submarine arrived at its permanent base in Novorossiysk. On October 27, 1941, the *M-54* relocated to Kerch. The following day, it deployed to the northwestern Sea of Azov to conduct patrols and reconnaissance and to destroy enemy vessels; however, after completing only one patrol in the area, the submarine returned to Novorossiysk on November 10.
On December 3, the *M-54* was dispatched to the area between Cape Chauda and Cape Opuk for reconnaissance. While navigating a severe storm near Cape Utrishonok, the submarine suffered a heavy list—reaching 60 degrees—which caused electrolyte to spill from the batteries and the gyrocompass to fail, forcing the vessel to return to Novorossiysk. An attempt to repeat the reconnaissance mission on the evening of December 10 ended disastrously; while en route to the designated area, the submarine’s gyrocompass failed once again. She lost her position and, five and a half hours after departing Novorossiysk during a Force 7 gale, was driven bodily onto the rocks near the village of Dzhemete (7 miles north of Anapa). It was not until June 30, 1942, that the *M-54* was refloated; on July 5, she was towed by the salvage vessel *Mercury* to Poti for emergency repairs. On October 23, 1942, Lieutenant Commander Nikolai Danilovich Ivanov was appointed commander of the *M-54*, and on July 15, 1943, the ship received a new commander: Lieutenant Commander Alexander Alekseyevich Nikolaev.
M-54 returned to service on July 1, 1943, and from September onwards, she was once again deployed to patrol stations. Between then and May 1944, the submarine undertook eight combat patrols off the southern coast of Crimea. Throughout this period, the submarine made contact with the enemy on only three occasions. On October 2, 1943, 130 miles south of the Kerch Peninsula, M-54 was attacked by a German seaplane. four depth charges dropped by the aircraft disabled a number of the submarine’s electrical measuring instruments. On the morning of November 15, off the southern coast of Crimea, a convoy of self-propelled pontoons was not attacked due to an unfavorable firing angle, and on January 31, 1944, she evaded a surface attack by U-18 by diving. Black Sea Fleet Series VI-bis submarines in parade formation, 1947. On July 2, 1944, the submarine was placed at the disposal of the Novorossiysk Naval Base commander to support sonar operator training for patrol boats. During the transit from Poti, the submarine participated in exercises involving the search for and detection of a submarine by an aircraft equipped with radar. Finally, on October 18, 1944, the *M-54* was withdrawn from active service, disarmed, and transferred to the Black Sea Fleet’s hydrometeorological service. Decommissioned 18 October 1944. Stricken December 19, 1944, sent for BU February 1, 1945.
M-55 (1935)
M-55 was laid down under construction number 1046 at Shipyard No. 200 (61 Communards), Nykolaiev, March 25, 1935, launched on November 20, commissioned into the Black Sea Fleet on October 17, 1936. She was under refit at Sevastopol, part of the Separate Submarine Training Division in 1941, under command of Sr. Lieutenant Sergey Ivanovich Yefanov. Work was suspended and on November 3, M-55 moved to her base at Novorossiysk. On January 14, 1942 she made her first patrol, a reconnaissance for an amphibious landing near Sudak. This was done in the night of January 16-17, 13.9 km offshore, used as a floating beacon. Guided by her light, destroyers Soobrazitelny and Bodry supported by the gunfire of Parizhskaya Kommuna, Krasny Krym and other destroyers landed the 226th Mountain Rifle Regiment in Novy Svet Bay. M-55 then returned to Novorossiysk.
On January 21, she was ordered to the Crimean coast with the same mission in the night of January 25 for another landing at Sudak. But on the evening of January 21, she came under shore-based artillery fire and her gyrocompass failed, her aft diving planes were damaged. On January she was recalled back and the the landing ships unaware of this struggled to find their spot through storm and fog, landing the men 4 miles west of Sudak. Fortunately they spotted Shch-201 there for navigation and they landed the 554th Mountain Rifle Regiment (138th Rifle Division) as planned.
From February to April 1942, M-55 remained in Gelendzhik before being dry docked in May in Novorossiysk, and back in service by July. She did not patrol before October, near Yalta and Anapa. No spot.
On October 28, Lieutenant Captain Eduard Borisovich Brodsky took command and while on patrol on January 28, 1943, from Tuapse she was to land scouts near Cape Kikineiz and Cape Meganom. On January 30 while off Cape Meganom, she was spotted from the shore, fired upon. There was an emergency dive, but it was done with the upper conning tower hatch still open. The commander managed to secure the lower hatch in time and she remained in the seabed with her conning tower flooded. Upon surfacing she was fire upon again but managed to flee. Later it was found she had 30 bullet holes in her CT fairing which lost all electrical equipment, inc. controls for the diving planes and gyrocompass repeater. Her stern diving plane stock was also bent so she return to Tuapse.
She made another sortie after repairs off the Crimean coast in late February and early March notably off Cape Kiik-Atlama after repairs in Tuapse and patrolled the Yalta–Feodosia area in late August and early September. In the next combat patrol on October 4, off the southern coast of Crimea she spotted a convoy of Marinefahprahm (German landing barges) but the target angle was wrong and she aborted the attack.
In her November patrol off the southern coast of Crimea she had another torpedo attack on November 2, but aborted it to avoid collision with a convoy escort. Newt day she launched and missed against the barge F-472. She was depth-charged but escaped. By late November, she made no contact. She had another patrol in December, still the southern coast of Crimea, and on the 27th she spotted two minesweepers moored in Dvuyakornaya Bay. She launched, claimed them hit (they observed a thick smoke through the periscope). It was the 1st Schnellboot “Ivan-Baba” unit with S-26, S-28, S-42, S-45, S-47, S-49, S-51, S-52, and S-72 but the submarine missed, the torpedoes detonated on the shore. The S-Boat departed and hunted her down for half an hour, her skipper counted 13 depth charges dropped.
M-55 then deployed two more times in early 1944 and by late January/early February she sailed off the southern coast of Crimea by early April, and southwest of Cape Sarych, making a spot on April 22 but never was in position to fire. This summer she had a mainteance until mid-September 1944. On November 9 Lieutenant Commander Nikolai Alexandrovich Parfenov took command but due her poor condition she was disarmed and stricken. On February 1, 1945 she was sent for scrapping. She was actually the only one in her sector that performed torpedo attacks in anger as none of her sisters including the Black Sea Series VI, had such an opportunity. Hence why her career is detailed there.
M-71 (1935)
M-71 was launched on 24 August 1935. She was laid down on March 10, 1934, at Shipyard No. 198 (Marti Plant) in Nikolaev under slipway number 289. She was then transported in sections by rail to Shipyard No. 190 (Zhdanov Plant) in Leningrad, and commissioned on August 24, 1935. On September 13, 1935, she was accepted in the Baltic Fleet and took part in the Winter War under command of Sr. Lieutenant Lev Nikolayevich Kostylev, 24th Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade. She was sent off Bengtskär Island to provide cover for amphibious landings on Seiskari, Lavansaari, Bolshoy Tyuters, and Gogland. In the evening she withdrew to the southern Gulf of Finland to reload batterie and did it in a Force 8 gale. She was driven by the storm towards Turku and eventually ran aground on the night of December 4. The crew believed she was on the Estonian coast near the Muhu Strait, managed to free herself from the rocks and remained at anchor off until morning. She proceeded to Tahkuna lighthouse, revealing her navigational error by 50 miles and she arrived in Paldiski. Given hull damage she was back to Kronstadt for repairs. The winter war was over for her.
In 1941 she was in a major overhaul at Tosmare shipyard, Libau, recommissioned as part of the 4th Division, 1st Submarine Brigade under Lieutenant Commander Lev Nikolayevich Kostylev. But he took command instead M-79 for her first patrol. On the evening of June 23, 1941, still not able to flee the city, M71 was scuttled by her crew to avoid capture. The crew joined local defense units and were killed in Libau.
M-72 (1935)
M-72 was laid down on March 10, 1934, at Shipyard No. 198 (Marti Plant) in Mykolaiv under yard number 288, transported in sections by rail to Shipyard No. 190 in Leningrad for final assembly, launched on December 23, 1934, commissioned on September 13, 1935. Under command of Senior Lieutenant Nikolai Nikolaevich Kulygin she joined the 23rd Division, 3rd Submarine Brigade Baltoc Sea, Oranienbaum, and was part of the Soviet-Finnish War. On December 5, 1939 she moved to Paldiski (Baltiysky) and three days later, made a first patrol near Kalbådagrund. As her batteries were charged that night the diesel engine’s exhaust manifold burned through. She departed for Paldiski for repairs. On December 9, she returned to Kalbådagrund. On December 15 there was a fire in the main electric motor. A day later she was back to base for emergency repairs. She made a 3rd patrol to the same area by late December. A storm broke out while on station and the stern diving planes were damaged by high waves and jammed while diving. She took seek shelter in Hara Bay and was back to base on December 30. On January 12, 1940, M-72 deployed again between the islands of Jussarö and Bengtskär but in the evening of January 15, she battled Force 5–6 gales, with high Waves washing over the conning tower hatch and flooding the CP. The gyrocompass failed as the magnetic compass and she returned to base, meeting heavy broken ice underay and needed an Icebreaker to enter Paldiski. M-72 had her hull and CT dented by ice and her TTs were no longer watertight, the stem was twisted. Repairs dragged on due to a lack of facilities until she proceeded to Kronstadt. There, she became part of the 9th Division, Training Brigade as per June 1941 but repairs were ongoing, work halted in August and she was placed in reserve (mothballed), crew reassigned to naval infantry units. On December 2, 1944, she was decommissioned, stricken and sent for scrapping.
M-73 (1935)
M-73 was launched on 24 August 1935. Career logs. To Be Updated Decommissioned to reserve in August 1941. Stricken 2 December 1944.
M-74 (1935)
M-74 was launched on 24 August 1935. Career logs. To Be Updated. Bombed and sunk by German aircraft at Kronstadt on 23 September 1941.
Raised in 1942, but deemed not worth repairing. Stricken 2 December 1944.
M-75 (1935)
M-75 was launched on 24 August 1935. Career logs. To Be Updated Decommissioned to reserve in August 1941. Stricken 2 December 1944.
M-76 (1935)
M-76 was launched on 24 August 1935. Career logs. To Be Updated. Decommissioned to reserve in 1941. Stricken 2 December 1944.
M-77 (1935)
M-77 was Ordered as Sudomekh (Судомех) under hull 61, but was originally laid down under the designation M-85. Laid down on March 10, 1934 (other sources cites October 1934) at Shipyard No. 196 in Leningrad under construction number 61/294 she was first designated indeed M-85. She was launched on March 21, 1936, commissioned into the Red Banner Baltic Fleet on June 19, 1936. Or laid down at Shipyard No. 198 (Marti Yard) in Nikolaev and in 1935, transported by rail to Shipyard No. 194 (Sudomekh) in Leningrad for assembly, launch and completion. Integrated to the 24 DNPL (24th division, 2nd sub brigade, Baltic fleet).
In June 1936, she was redesignated M-77. During the Soviet-Finnish War, she undertook several combat patrols and was spotted and strafed by a Finnish aircraft. She dove and escaped damaged.
In the summer 1939 she was transferred to Oranienbaum base a,d then Paldiski in December. Until February 1940 she made four patrols.
On 9-12 December she had an issue with the accidental drop of her solid ballast and managed to reach Yussaee and short of food and fuel she returned to Paldiski on 12 December.
On 17-19 she went in ambush to Kalbadargrund, but withstood a storm for 2 days and had an electrolysis issue and on the 19th returned to base for repairs. 24-29 saw another short sorties, recalled due to the bad weather worsening. On 7-8 January she returned to Kalbadargrund, and was attacked as stated above, by a Finnish Blackburn Ripon that her spotter at first identified as a harmless Bristol Bulldog fighter. M77 was stuck in ice and could not manoeuver when it happened on the 7th. The Rpon strafed her and dropped a bomb that exploded at 100-120m away. She could defend herself as her DsHk and 45 mm gun were stuck, frozen solid. This went on for 22 minutes, the crew frantically trying to warm the gun by urinating on it, with the Ripon making several passes, but having no more bomb to drop. Only when the gun was operational they could repel it. The next day, M77 was recalled due to ice making navigation near impossible. On 8 February while winterized, she drifted after a strong gust of wind on the anchorage net of “9 january” yard, damaging her forward dive plane, repaired over 3 days.
From 7 July 1940 to January 1941 she underwent maintenance and repairs at Tallin NyD.
She spent the spring at Hanko. On 11 Feb. 1941 she was reassigned to the 4th Division of the 1st. BrPl (Sub Brigade), Baltic fleet at Libau (HQ). She is transferred there on May 14. On 22 June she was relegated to second line operations.
In the 1941-43 campaign she carried out 14 patrols, for 61 days at sea (see the M77 reference on deepstorm for more). She made no spot, launch no torpedo and was frequently used to land reconnaissance and sabotage teams and to support amphibious landing operations at the rear of the German lines. During the Siege of Leningrad (1943–1944) she conducted reconnaissance, monitored approaches to enemy bases, shipping lanes, coasts, and islands, and carried out various operations as part of the Ladoga Military Flotilla, on Lake Ladoga. She was decommissioned in 1946, in reserve, stricken 22 February 1949 and BU.
M-78 (1935)
M-78 was launched on 19 June 1936. Career logs. To Be Updated. Sunk by U-144 west of Widawa (now Ventspils) on 23 June 1941.
M-79 (1935)
M-79 was launched on 5 July 1936. Career logs. To Be Updated. Served on Lake Ladoga in 1943. Stricken 22 February 1949.
M-80 (1935)
M-80 was launched on 15 July 1936. Career logs. To Be Updated. Scuttled at Libau on 24 June 1941 to prevent capture.
M-81 (1935)
M-81 was launched on 15 July 1936. Career logs. To Be Updated. Sunk by mine off Vormsi, Estonia on 1 July 1941.
M-83 (1935)
M-83 was launched on 8 November 1935. Career logs. To Be Updated. Scuttled off Libau on 27 June 1941 while returning to port.
Read More/Src
Books
Bagnasco, Erminio (1977). Submarines of World War II, Cassell & Co, London
Bertke, Donald A. (2012). World War II Sea War, Vol 4: Germany Sends Russia to the Allies: Day-to-Day Naval Actions June 1941 through December 1941. Dayton Ohio: Bertke Publications.
Mombeek, Eric (2001). Eismeerjäger—Zur Geschichte des Jagdgeschwaders 5—Band 1—Zerstörrerstaffel und Jabostaffel [Fighters in the Arctic Sea—The History of the 5th Fighter Wing—Volume 1—Destroyer Squadron and Fighter Bomber Squadron]. Linkebeek, Belgium: ASBL, La Porte d’Hoves.
Whitley, M. J. (2000). Destroyers of World War Two: An International Encyclopedia. London: Cassell & Co.
Breemer, Jan S. (1989). Soviet Submarines: Design, Development and Tactics. Coulsdon, Surrey: Jane’s Information Group. ISBN 0710605269.
Gardiner, Robert; Chesneau, Roger, eds. (1980). Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1922–1946. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-85177-146-7.
Meister, Jürg (1977). Soviet Warships of the Second World War. London: Macdonald & Jane’s.
Burov V.N. “Domestic Military Shipbuilding”.
Shirokorad A.B. “Ships and Boats of the USSR Navy, 1939–1945”, Harvest, Minsk, 2002.
Berezhnoy S.S. “Ships and Vessels of the USSR Navy, 1928–1945”, Military Publishing House, Moscow, 1988.
Platonov A.V. “Soviet Warships, 1941–1945”, Part 3, Tsitadel, St. Petersburg, 1996.
Morozov M.E. “Submarines of the USSR Navy in the Great Patriotic War, 1941–1945”, Part 2, Strategiya KM, Moscow, 2003.
Gusev A.N. “Soviet Submarines, 1922–1945”, Part 2, Galeya Print, St. Petersburg, 2004.
Golosovsky P.Z. “Submarine Design and Construction”, Vol. 2, LPMB “Rubin”, 1979.
Dmitriev V.I. “Soviet Submarine Shipbuilding”, Military Publishing House, Moscow, 1990.
Drawing by S. Balakin.
Soviet Navy Series VI, XII, XV (1931-43), 141 boats, last active 1980s. MVI bis could be carried assembled on flatcars. The outer ones (2 bogies) could carry other
Back to the submarine design, the project was led by A. N. Asafov, an engineer at Technical Bureau No. 4 who had previously worked on the Pravda-class submarines. The design was based on the Tsarist era “Minoga class” submarine, with a displacement of approximately 120 tons. Techniques for assembly were also inspired by the way the “Amerikansky Grolland” had been shipped from Canada in 1915-16 to Russia in knocked-down form as well. The new modules would be no more than to fit these railway cars, with a max width of 3,50 meters for the outer hull. They height also was to be moderated in order to fit below tunnels, albeit there were ways to circumvent the issue by just going south of the Ural Mountains. In any case, the coning tower was detached and transported separately, so only the full height of the hull from the keel to the deck was taken in account. And it was 2,58 meters. Periscopes as well as the engines and all equipments were carried separately in enclosed wagons or under tarpaulins. On March 20, 1932, the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR approved the design for the Series VI small submarine, designated “Malyutka”, as it was easy to remember their nature and characteristics for any fleet commander.
Installed at completion on the Series III. This was a navy version of the Army 45 mm Pattern 1932 anti-tank gun. The navalized mount had a semi-automatic breech. Tested in 1934, accepted in 1935 after tests with the originally intended automatic breech mechanism failed. Standard AA mount until 1941-42, replaced by the 37 mm/67 but in production until 1947. Not efficient, semi-automatic, no time fuze. Total prod. 2,799 guns. It was largely used on submarines either as AA gun or main deck gun on small Schchuka types.
M1 (1933)
On August 13, 1933, decision was made to build twenty more Malyutka-class, but based on an improved design. They featured an additional quick-dive tank, electric controls for the bow hydroplanes, and improved propeller. The latter by the way and encased in a conical stub and just could not fell off. But externally, the design was spectacularly different as seen in the comparison below. Nothing almost was left unchanged: The bow which was straight and took a camber there, but the aft deck, instead of being stepped was now straight and flush, with a duck tail instead of the former more boat-like tail. 
