Talk:British submarine flotilla in the Baltic
 | A fact from British submarine flotilla in the Baltic appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
.svg)
Anglo-German Naval Agreement
editThere seems to be significant consensus on the discussion page for Anglo-German Naval Agreement that Britain was not compelled to withdraw from the Baltic Sea by the bilateral treaty itself, but by the strategic geography of the straights around Denmark. To be consistent, shouldn't the suggestion implying such be removed? PJayC (talk) 13:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Photos?
edit-- Petri Krohn (talk) 19:52, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
E18 discovered!!!! - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8321516.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.74.18.151 (talk) 11:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
White Sea route
editI am very suspicious of the claim that the C-class submarines were brought by the White Sea, since the White Sea Canal was only built in the 1930s (and was a particulary notorious example of forced labour at that time). I have never seen mention that they were just enlarging an existing canal. PatGallacher (talk) 18:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I have removed this dubious information as I challenged it and there has been no response. I know one source makes this claim and even shows what purports to be a photo of this operation, but I am sceptical a photo would have been taken of a top secret military operation, I suspect this could be a Soviet propaganda photo from the 1930s of the White Sea Canal. It is possible that the submarines were transported from the White Sea to the Baltic Sea by rail, but this is speculation. PatGallacher (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, you can see the "Soviet propaganda" picture here: MaritimeQuest HMS C26 pages. I have restored a working link to one of the sources I used. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 00:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Submarines may have been moved by canal, but the link "canals in Russia" in article goes to White Sea Canal, built more than 10 years later. Therefore, the link can't be right, and the source, if right, means another canal. It could be a waterway now part of the White Sea canal, but it wasn't the White Sea Canal since it didn't exist.--Pere prlpz (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
- This issue still isn't resolved, the Martimequest picture doesn't prove anything. I'm inclined to agree with Pere prlpz that it means some other canals, but this needs establishing. Nthep (talk) 14:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- I found a source that establishes the route was via the Northern Dvina River and Sukhona River to Vologda then traversed the Northern Dvina Canal to Lake Onega and Lake Ladoga to Petrograd. So I have removed mention of the White Sea canal. --Nug (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks. Nthep (talk) 18:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
- I found a source that establishes the route was via the Northern Dvina River and Sukhona River to Vologda then traversed the Northern Dvina Canal to Lake Onega and Lake Ladoga to Petrograd. So I have removed mention of the White Sea canal. --Nug (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
- This issue still isn't resolved, the Martimequest picture doesn't prove anything. I'm inclined to agree with Pere prlpz that it means some other canals, but this needs establishing. Nthep (talk) 14:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- Submarines may have been moved by canal, but the link "canals in Russia" in article goes to White Sea Canal, built more than 10 years later. Therefore, the link can't be right, and the source, if right, means another canal. It could be a waterway now part of the White Sea canal, but it wasn't the White Sea Canal since it didn't exist.--Pere prlpz (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2014 (UTC)