Talk:Battle of Chemulpo Bay

Inaccuracies and omissions?

Some points which are present in Russian sources (notably in the account published in 1907 by Rudneff himself), but for which I need to find more references:

• The Japanese squadron also included 8 torpedo boats.
• Russian fire inflicted considerable damage, sinking one of the torpedo boats and damaging the Asama (killing her captain in the process). Around 30 dead Japanese were landed by the squadron after the battle.
• The Varyag was scuttled after the battle; the Korietz was destoyed by explosives.
• The Russian casualties included ~30 killed and ~100 wounded. They were taken aboard the neutral vessels (along with the Russian mission in the city) and returned to Russia via Saigon.

Kirill Lokshin 19:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Russian fire did not damage the Asama, nor was her captain injured or killed. Perhaps you are confusing this with the Battle of Tsushima, when the Asama took a direct hit in her captain's quarters, which damaged the Asama's steering mechanism, causing her to drift out of the line of battle. Also, the Japanese forces at the Battle of Chemulpo Bay included 16, and not eight torpedo boats. --MChew 12:56, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

8 torpedo boats and only 3 was near in the battle time (14 squadron except Kasasagi). As Varayag and Korietz logbooks state Asama was hit in the aft bridge and also back 8inch gun was probably damaged. Different sources contain very different information about damage did to japanese, from "none was damaged at all" to "1 torpedo boat sunk, 1 cruiser sunk from battle damage going home, about 30 killed and 70 wounded, 3 cruisers damaged total" AFAIR.

Capt. Rudnev is listed as a casualty, which is true, he was wounded in the head, but he did not die at Chemulpo. I've removed the line that lists him as a casualty therefore, in case people think he died there.

205.250.208.203

http://cruiserx.narod.ru --- lots of historical sources in russian language, maps of chemulpo bay, logbooks and so on

Now looks better, but article need some more attention.

The picture is innacurate, as it shows Koreets ablaze, while in reality the gunboat was not hit by japanese (or, according to some sources, hit once in the bow without significant damage) - it was blown up by it's crew. Varyag was also meant to be blown up, but supposedly the neutral captains issued a protest, fearing damage (?), and as a result Varyag was scuttled (sunk). There are pictures of the aftermath of the battle (too bad I don't own a scanner) wich show that prior to sinking the fires have been extinguished. With respect, Ko Soi IX 17:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

http://www.varyag.metropol.ru/cruiser/history/chemulpo/index.wbp?page_num=1 --- All photos must be public domain now.

Message from Dorf:

Changed a few things, like the Varyag officers 'pleading' with the neutrals to escort them out, and Varyag's crew setting fire to the ship before scuttling it - nonsense. Nor did Varyag staff 'advise' Rudnev to surrender - whoever wrote this seems to have no knowledge of the Russian navy. Connaughton's book is a bit rubbish in this sense, he must have dreamt about the glories of the Empire when writing it. Why doesn't anyone use Russian sources?

From NMD-kroq: All right, there is a perfect source for this, it's in Russian, though. It's called Desantnaya Operaciya v Inchone, the author is Andrei Polutov -- he has studied Japanese for over 30 years and has access to the Confidential History of RJW. Connaughton's book is a bunch of horse-shit, he has everything wrong re. morning of the 8th. Although the Koreetz was blown up, it remained largely intact, the Japanese recovered 3 useful guns (including one 8-inch and one 6-inch, and a bunch of ammunition). The Japanese also raised the Sungari, she served in IJN until 1929. Finally -- whoever thought of renaming Sir Julian S. Corbett? Stafford was his middle name. NMD-kroq (talk) 22:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)