This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Drogo Underburrow (talk | contribs) at 07:43, 26 March 2006 (Schwerer Gustav). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:43, 26 March 2006 by Drogo Underburrow (talk | contribs) (Schwerer Gustav)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Can someone explain how this was a strategic victory for the Russians? They lost Sevastopol and its garrison. They lost the relief force sent to relieve them (Kerch Peninsula). The fall of Sevastopol, then the strongest fortress in the world was a huge military and political blow to the Russians. --Pelladon 02:22, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
This is quite clear. For a long time this battle was distracting large number of German troops, while being of secondary value.
Sevastopol wasn't "fortress" from the land side. It was well-defended against naval assault, but not well protected from the land army actions. Defenses were largely improvised. Also it's loss, while being very bitter for Russians, wasn't any military or political blow. Holding for 250 days against enemy, while deep behind main front line was a thing to be proud of. It's considered an example of Soviet courage in modern Russia, not a humiliating defeat.
Schwerer Gustav
The main article on this gun contradicts the account given on this page. It claims that the gun was first used at Sevastopol on 5 June, 1942, not in November 1941 as stated in this article. -- Drogo Underburrow 07:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)