Midway, FDR and Coral Sea were wonderful ships .............. There is a great model of the USS FDR at the Naval Aviation Museum at P-cola. I was there a couple of years ago and was lucky enough to run into an active duty Captain (naval aviation) that had flown a few tours off of the FDR. He used the model to show me all the goodies. For a 1940's class ship it was well advanced for its time. Of course the Midway and the Coral Sea were the same class.
5-Inch, 38-Caliber Naval Rifle
- Thread starter Jeff Thomas
- Start date
The three classification for artillery peices/cannon
Mortars, caliber lengths between 10-20
Howitzer, caliber lengths between 20-30
Guns caliber lengths between 30+
The point is now mute now, since all 155 mm in the US service have 39 caliber tubes and are still considered howitzers vice guns.
Mortars, caliber lengths between 10-20
Howitzer, caliber lengths between 20-30
Guns caliber lengths between 30+
The point is now mute now, since all 155 mm in the US service have 39 caliber tubes and are still considered howitzers vice guns.
Roy....I thought they backed off on the weight of topside armor after the 41 class. 6" laminated steel flight deck, 4" hangar deck and 4" first deck if I recall. That combined with knee breakers real close together made em top heavy rollin pigs in quartering seas. Made em drafty too, I think they drew bout 38" of water with air aboard and no way. Ceptin when we sank the Midway at Cubi, then she drew a bit more water.
I tempt on a few of the later ones and was under the impression they were built lighter and bigger, carried a lot more payload.
All relative I guess. I worked off of one CVE and quite a few Essex class farms..........then make back to back westpacs on 41...she seemed huge. Cept for all the kneebreakers.
Sam
I tempt on a few of the later ones and was under the impression they were built lighter and bigger, carried a lot more payload.
All relative I guess. I worked off of one CVE and quite a few Essex class farms..........then make back to back westpacs on 41...she seemed huge. Cept for all the kneebreakers.
Sam
Carlyle.....The 41 class bird farms didn't get commissioned till after WWII, they used casulty reports from all the damaged carriers in an attempt to build an unsinkable carrier. The heavy armored steel decks were for resistance to conventional bombs. Tiny compartments for increased watertight integrity. Tremendous fire fighting capability. Original design was to include an armored belt below the waterline for torpedo proofing. Four screws to give more torpedo resistance. Speed to get out of trouble and to give good wind over the deck without surface wind. I think top end is still classified but the Midway could do over 50 knots with a bent screw. Draft decreased by about 15-18 feet when scootin along. Sorta planing which is a good trick with a displacement hull.
Keepin all the topside armor and leaving out the below waterline belt made the class pretty top heavy, hence the reputation for bein wallowing rollers when not cranked on.
The wide angle deck and multiple elevators made it a joy to work from.
Midway launched at least one V1 rocket and launched P2V patrol plane amongst other fun things.
For years I had a fantasy of landing a 737 on her. I think it could be done with right people and weather conditions. John Blackburn as skipper, George Whistler as air boss and Dick Browning as LSO and I would try it. 737 close enough to A3 in size and weight, just no tail hook. Crew only, short fuel and it will fly controllably quite slow. And plenty of power for wave off or thrust reversing to stop it.
Of course the main battery was the air group. Then the 5 inchers for AA backed up by lots of 3", 40mm, 20mm. A formidable weapon indeed.
Sam..........sigh
Keepin all the topside armor and leaving out the below waterline belt made the class pretty top heavy, hence the reputation for bein wallowing rollers when not cranked on.
The wide angle deck and multiple elevators made it a joy to work from.
Midway launched at least one V1 rocket and launched P2V patrol plane amongst other fun things.
For years I had a fantasy of landing a 737 on her. I think it could be done with right people and weather conditions. John Blackburn as skipper, George Whistler as air boss and Dick Browning as LSO and I would try it. 737 close enough to A3 in size and weight, just no tail hook. Crew only, short fuel and it will fly controllably quite slow. And plenty of power for wave off or thrust reversing to stop it.
Of course the main battery was the air group. Then the 5 inchers for AA backed up by lots of 3", 40mm, 20mm. A formidable weapon indeed.
Sam..........sigh
Sam, I know that some of our flattops during the war started out as cruiser hulls.....was this the Princeton class (was it only USS Princeton or were there others?), and were any built that begin as battleship hulls? If so I would guess that the armor belt was left off. Of course I know that once the Essex class came along that became kinda like the benchmark, until the Midway class. Speaking of putting a 737 down on one.......It could be quite possible. The navy did some expirments after the war using B-25's. Jimmy Doolittle proved they could get them off a carrier, and after the war the navy proved you could LAND one too. It was done several times. Back to the 737 and the Midway class.........if the ship can do say 50 kts. and there is a 20 kt. wind there is 70 kts right there. Figure a 737 in a dirty configuration at 120 kts or maybe less if its plumb stripped, and minimal fuel. That would be 60 kts or less( I added 10 kts for mama) relative landing speed............quick toes on the brakes, and co-pilot on the ball with the thrust reversers.........hell yes it could be done, you just couldn't prang it down too hard, approach would have to be a lil flat. OK, OK, I am gonna stop thinking out loud .
.More squids here than I thought. Interesting thread.
bruels, et al -- Yeah, I knew about allowing for the lag time between the shell hoist and gun but thought I was heading for too much detail. Didn't think about allowing for the predicted flight path though -- that should have been a no-brainer. Thanks. Very impressive for WWII.
We had an analog computer in the conning tower to compute firing solutions for torpedo attack. Speed, angle on the bow, etc. Just before we fired, we'd take one ping on the target to confirm range. That TDC was always within 200 yards of what sonar said. Pretty impressive for gears and wheels.
I didn't fully explain my BP barrel length statement. I shifted gears mentally and was thinking of the long-barrel rationale being applied to rifles (as in Kentucky). I remember reading about the short cannon barrel length restrictions because of BP's burning characteristics. You could see that in the pear-shaped Rodmans and the belted-breech Parrotts in the Civil War.
4V50 Gary - Serendipity at work here. I just finished reading "Left to Die - the Tragedy of the USS Juneau", so it's easy to say the Rogers boys - Joseph, James, Louis and Patrick.
The Juneau was supposed to be a supporting anti-aircraft cruiser and had only 3" armor and those 5"x38s. We got shot up pretty bad off Savo island (1942 Guadalcanal campaign), losing three heavy cruisers, so they had to send her in for ship-to-ship combat. She was heavily damaged, but survived, only to be torpedoed by mistake (the Jap was aiming for the San Francisco). It hit the magazine and the Juneau disappeared so fast the rest of the fleet thought everyone was killed. And that started a tragic chain of events.
If you think the sinking of the Indianapolis in 1945 was a FUBAR, read this book. It will make you want to punch holes in the wall. Out of almost 700 men, about 125 survived the torpedoing only to float for SEVEN FREAKING DAYS. US aircraft flew over them daily and reported it, but rescue never heard about it until days later. Sharks and thirst got all but ten (count them). Joseph and James Rogers survived only because they were transferred from the ship before the sinking.
The Navy changed their all-brothers-on-one-ship policy after that.
bruels, et al -- Yeah, I knew about allowing for the lag time between the shell hoist and gun but thought I was heading for too much detail. Didn't think about allowing for the predicted flight path though -- that should have been a no-brainer. Thanks. Very impressive for WWII.
We had an analog computer in the conning tower to compute firing solutions for torpedo attack. Speed, angle on the bow, etc. Just before we fired, we'd take one ping on the target to confirm range. That TDC was always within 200 yards of what sonar said. Pretty impressive for gears and wheels.
I didn't fully explain my BP barrel length statement. I shifted gears mentally and was thinking of the long-barrel rationale being applied to rifles (as in Kentucky). I remember reading about the short cannon barrel length restrictions because of BP's burning characteristics. You could see that in the pear-shaped Rodmans and the belted-breech Parrotts in the Civil War.
4V50 Gary - Serendipity at work here. I just finished reading "Left to Die - the Tragedy of the USS Juneau", so it's easy to say the Rogers boys - Joseph, James, Louis and Patrick.
The Juneau was supposed to be a supporting anti-aircraft cruiser and had only 3" armor and those 5"x38s. We got shot up pretty bad off Savo island (1942 Guadalcanal campaign), losing three heavy cruisers, so they had to send her in for ship-to-ship combat. She was heavily damaged, but survived, only to be torpedoed by mistake (the Jap was aiming for the San Francisco). It hit the magazine and the Juneau disappeared so fast the rest of the fleet thought everyone was killed. And that started a tragic chain of events.
If you think the sinking of the Indianapolis in 1945 was a FUBAR, read this book. It will make you want to punch holes in the wall. Out of almost 700 men, about 125 survived the torpedoing only to float for SEVEN FREAKING DAYS. US aircraft flew over them daily and reported it, but rescue never heard about it until days later. Sharks and thirst got all but ten (count them). Joseph and James Rogers survived only because they were transferred from the ship before the sinking.
The Navy changed their all-brothers-on-one-ship policy after that.
Johnny Guest
Moderator in Memoriam
What an unusual topic!
I really have nothing to offer, except:
This thread has been most interesting. Again, there's a wealth of knowledge amongst TFL members.
And---Thanks to all who served at sea, whenever, and in whatever capacity.
Best,
Johnny
I really have nothing to offer, except:
This thread has been most interesting. Again, there's a wealth of knowledge amongst TFL members.
And---Thanks to all who served at sea, whenever, and in whatever capacity.
Best,
Johnny
Oatka - I've read that book. Naval history remains one of my favorite topics and one of the reasons why I belong to the Naval Institute Press (member discount). Right now I'm going to start a classic, Sailor of King George. I've skimmed it and found a real interesting passage on Trafalgar. It tells the story of how the French used musket armed sailors (or marines) to sweep the poop deck clear. Lesson: Unlike soldiers who were taught to load fast and volley fire - never mind aiming, sailors & marines made a deliberate effor to place their shots since the density of targets aboard ships was much less.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Sam,
You're mixing your ship specifications.
The Midway class was capable of no more than 33 to 35 knots, rated design speed was 32 knots, same roughly as the Essex Class, at a rated 212,000 shaft horse power. They were the last carriers designed with speed rated for being escorted by the fast battleships.
The Enterprise, however, the first nuke powered carrier, can SUPPOSEDLY do 50 knots at full tilt & boogie, but most people say that given the hull form and the rated shaft horsepower (about 290,000), max 40 to 42 knots is more likely.
With the exception of Wasp and Ranger, all US fleet carriers (and to call Ranger a fleet carrier is something of a stretch, really), have had 4 shafts.
Carlyle,
The 10 "Light" Fleet Carriers of WW II, all built on Cleveland-class cruiser hulls, were the Independence (class leader), Lafayette, Princeton, Beleau Wood, Cowpens, Monterey, Langley, Cabot, Battan, and San Jacinto.
Of those CVLs, only the Cabot is still left, and I think she's headed to the breakers after attempts to preserve her as a museum failed.
You're mixing your ship specifications.
The Midway class was capable of no more than 33 to 35 knots, rated design speed was 32 knots, same roughly as the Essex Class, at a rated 212,000 shaft horse power. They were the last carriers designed with speed rated for being escorted by the fast battleships.
The Enterprise, however, the first nuke powered carrier, can SUPPOSEDLY do 50 knots at full tilt & boogie, but most people say that given the hull form and the rated shaft horsepower (about 290,000), max 40 to 42 knots is more likely.
With the exception of Wasp and Ranger, all US fleet carriers (and to call Ranger a fleet carrier is something of a stretch, really), have had 4 shafts.
Carlyle,
The 10 "Light" Fleet Carriers of WW II, all built on Cleveland-class cruiser hulls, were the Independence (class leader), Lafayette, Princeton, Beleau Wood, Cowpens, Monterey, Langley, Cabot, Battan, and San Jacinto.
Of those CVLs, only the Cabot is still left, and I think she's headed to the breakers after attempts to preserve her as a museum failed.
Sam,
A couple of follow-on notes for our CVA "pass down the line" thread:
1) In addition to the P-2V, the Midway Class (specifically Coral Sea) was the only F-111B carrier suitability test deck. Roy Buehler (of Strike at Pax) was the project's carrier suit aviator. With the early TF-30's lack of thrust and the F-111B's extended variable geometry wingspan, launch was demanding. Recovery was even worse, due to high Vpa, stability/control/handling issues, wingspan/island clearance, and long momentum-driven engine "spool" times.
2) The Nimitz Class, I believe, has returned to heavily armored flight decks. The 1980 Prowler conflagration on CVN-68 certainly demonstrates real survivability and robust design.
3) One of the CVN-77/CVNX's design primary objectives is the reduction of island/topside weight, through the integration of systems and sensors (as contrasted to today's stand-alone "stovepipe" systems). This is intended to provide margin for further topside/flight deck survivability features. The use of Kevlar-type materials (strong, fire proof and far lighter) is also projected.
Warmest regards -- Roy
PS: Mike, IMHO there is no way CVN-65 could approach 50 knots! Forty knots would be VERY difficult, although perhaps theoretically possible. In my two years in Enterprise, I never saw speeds like 40 knots.
A couple of follow-on notes for our CVA "pass down the line" thread:
1) In addition to the P-2V, the Midway Class (specifically Coral Sea) was the only F-111B carrier suitability test deck. Roy Buehler (of Strike at Pax) was the project's carrier suit aviator. With the early TF-30's lack of thrust and the F-111B's extended variable geometry wingspan, launch was demanding. Recovery was even worse, due to high Vpa, stability/control/handling issues, wingspan/island clearance, and long momentum-driven engine "spool" times.
2) The Nimitz Class, I believe, has returned to heavily armored flight decks. The 1980 Prowler conflagration on CVN-68 certainly demonstrates real survivability and robust design.
3) One of the CVN-77/CVNX's design primary objectives is the reduction of island/topside weight, through the integration of systems and sensors (as contrasted to today's stand-alone "stovepipe" systems). This is intended to provide margin for further topside/flight deck survivability features. The use of Kevlar-type materials (strong, fire proof and far lighter) is also projected.
Warmest regards -- Roy
PS: Mike, IMHO there is no way CVN-65 could approach 50 knots! Forty knots would be VERY difficult, although perhaps theoretically possible. In my two years in Enterprise, I never saw speeds like 40 knots.
I was in New Oreans a few years ago. They had (what was described to me as) one of the last WW2 light aircraft carriers awaiting scrapping. It was going to be towed to India(!) for scrapping 'cause environmental concerns make it cost prohibitive in this country. I'll have to get out the old pictures I took and see if I can discern any identification on it.
Now, back to the original post discussion
I've got a book on the Iowa Class next to me as I write this, and they discribe the muzzle blast of the 5/38s as being more fierce than the main 16/50s. That the 5/38 was a sharp crack compared to the longer period boom of the 16". Kinda like comparing a .223 out of a contender barrel to a black powder 50cal in a long rifle.
Other BB or CB hulls converted to carriers:
HMS Eagle - former Chile BB (never completed) Admirante Cochrane;
HMS Furious, Courageous, Glorious - former light battlecruiser
IJNS Kaga (former Kaga class BB);
IJNS Akagi (former Amagi class CB);
IJNS Ise & Hyuaga (hybrids w/14" BB guns fore & amidships & flight deck aft);
IJNS Shinano (Yamato class BB - sunk by Joe Enright & Archerfish)
Bearn (former Normandie class BB)
Only the Furious & Bearn survived the war. Of the early conversions from BB/CB hulls, the Kaga, Akagi & Saratoga & Lexington all carried 8" guns for defense against cruisers or raiders. Whereas the Japanese mounted their guns in casemates (in the hull), the USN approach was to place them in dual gun turrets on the flight deck. Of course, while the Sara & Lady Lex guns were drier, the disadvantage was that they couldn't (or shouldn't) fire across their flight decks for fear of blast damage. Both Sara & Lady Lex shipped their guns sometime early in WW II in favor of heavier AA.
Per Breyer, Sara & Lex had 178mm thick armored bulkheads & 152 mm thick side armor
HMS Eagle - former Chile BB (never completed) Admirante Cochrane;
HMS Furious, Courageous, Glorious - former light battlecruiser
IJNS Kaga (former Kaga class BB);
IJNS Akagi (former Amagi class CB);
IJNS Ise & Hyuaga (hybrids w/14" BB guns fore & amidships & flight deck aft);
IJNS Shinano (Yamato class BB - sunk by Joe Enright & Archerfish)
Bearn (former Normandie class BB)
Only the Furious & Bearn survived the war. Of the early conversions from BB/CB hulls, the Kaga, Akagi & Saratoga & Lexington all carried 8" guns for defense against cruisers or raiders. Whereas the Japanese mounted their guns in casemates (in the hull), the USN approach was to place them in dual gun turrets on the flight deck. Of course, while the Sara & Lady Lex guns were drier, the disadvantage was that they couldn't (or shouldn't) fire across their flight decks for fear of blast damage. Both Sara & Lady Lex shipped their guns sometime early in WW II in favor of heavier AA.
Per Breyer, Sara & Lex had 178mm thick armored bulkheads & 152 mm thick side armor
Mike Irwin
Staff
Cougar,
I don't know if Cabot had ever been in New Orleans, but by the time you were there she was the only Independence-class CVL left.
The Cabot, given her cruiser base hull, is pretty recognizable. This is how she looked in 1997 at Brownsville, Texas.
And another view...
I don't know if Cabot had ever been in New Orleans, but by the time you were there she was the only Independence-class CVL left.
The Cabot, given her cruiser base hull, is pretty recognizable. This is how she looked in 1997 at Brownsville, Texas.
And another view...
Mike Irwin
Staff
USS Saratoga survived WW II, as well, only to go down at Bikini.
Saratoga's armor belt was upwards of 6" thick. It was a holdover from the BC days.
As originally constructed, both Sara and Lex had 8 8"/55 cruiser guns in 4 turrets, 2 fore and 2 aft of the island.
Theory was that with her armor and guns she could do a fair job of protecting herself in a sea battle against other cruisers.
Lexington was sunk before those guns could be removed; they were removed from Saratoga in 1942, which were replaced with 5"/38 mounts.
As far as other cruiser-based carriers:
HMS Vindictive started out life intended to be the cruiser Cavendish. She never, as far as I know, saw combat, but like Hermes and Langley, provided much valuable information about the nature of an aircraft carrier.
Saratoga's armor belt was upwards of 6" thick. It was a holdover from the BC days.
As originally constructed, both Sara and Lex had 8 8"/55 cruiser guns in 4 turrets, 2 fore and 2 aft of the island.
Theory was that with her armor and guns she could do a fair job of protecting herself in a sea battle against other cruisers.
Lexington was sunk before those guns could be removed; they were removed from Saratoga in 1942, which were replaced with 5"/38 mounts.
As far as other cruiser-based carriers:
HMS Vindictive started out life intended to be the cruiser Cavendish. She never, as far as I know, saw combat, but like Hermes and Langley, provided much valuable information about the nature of an aircraft carrier.
5" 54
"The five inch 54 caliber gun may justly be called "Midway Guns", for they were designed and built expressly for the Midway class carrier, and she was the first ship in the navy to carry them." Midway cruise book, 58/59
3" 50
"In case of attack, it would take only sixty seconds for the three-inch battery to hurl over eight hundred projectiles into the air to knock down any plane attempting to penetrate Midway's fire power umbrella.--Each rapid firing twin 3"/50 mount is capable of one hundred rounds of accurate fire per minute." Midway cruise book, 58/59
Mike........during the unpleasantness in Formosa Straits in 58/59 it was nearly routine to conduct flight operations in the 40knot area. Launch with extreme loads, and recover with extreme loads cause the button never got pushed to "light em Up."
Sucks when the boat has to make all the wind over the deck, cause then the wind is straight down the hull line and gives a crosswind for landing on the angle. Plus the approach is through the turbulance caused by the Island structure.
I think the 50+ was logged in Sept 58.
Carlyle.....final at 105 in 737-300 not unusual with light pax load and at least an hour's fuel on board. It will take a 3° landing.
Roy, I forgot about the 111 fiasco. Even worse than the bucks wasted on the Cutlass.
I bounced on the Monterrey....seemed like a postage stamp.
Sam............jeez I feel old.
"The five inch 54 caliber gun may justly be called "Midway Guns", for they were designed and built expressly for the Midway class carrier, and she was the first ship in the navy to carry them." Midway cruise book, 58/59
3" 50
"In case of attack, it would take only sixty seconds for the three-inch battery to hurl over eight hundred projectiles into the air to knock down any plane attempting to penetrate Midway's fire power umbrella.--Each rapid firing twin 3"/50 mount is capable of one hundred rounds of accurate fire per minute." Midway cruise book, 58/59
Mike........during the unpleasantness in Formosa Straits in 58/59 it was nearly routine to conduct flight operations in the 40knot area. Launch with extreme loads, and recover with extreme loads cause the button never got pushed to "light em Up."
Sucks when the boat has to make all the wind over the deck, cause then the wind is straight down the hull line and gives a crosswind for landing on the angle. Plus the approach is through the turbulance caused by the Island structure.
I think the 50+ was logged in Sept 58.
Carlyle.....final at 105 in 737-300 not unusual with light pax load and at least an hour's fuel on board. It will take a 3° landing.
Roy, I forgot about the 111 fiasco. Even worse than the bucks wasted on the Cutlass.
I bounced on the Monterrey....seemed like a postage stamp.
Sam............jeez I feel old.
Mike Irwin
Staff
Sam,
Sorry, dude, but as far as I know the absolute FASTEST any of the Midways was ever recorded as going was 34.&change knots.
With the hull form and shaft horse power, I don't think they were capable of doing that. Given the hull form, to do 50 kts, they would have needed a SHP of somewhere around 350,000 to 400,000. Not doable with the machinery of the day.
And, no offense to Midway's cruise book, the 5"/54 was NOT designed specifically for the Midway class, they were designed for the Montanas, long before the Midway class was even conceived.
Original design specifications were laid out in 1938/39, initial design/construction/testing took place in 1939/40, concurrently with finalization of plans for the Montanas.
The Midway class was the next logical step in carrier design, and given the nature of BB vs CL in the pre-war years, and the fact that the final design work wasn't done on the Essex ships, and the Essex laid down, until April 1941, the Midway class likely wouldn't have started specific design until mid-1940 to early 1941.
By that time the first 5"/54 mounts and guns had been constructed and, with the cancellation of the Montanas in favor of more Essex-class carriers, had been put into storage.
Sorry, dude, but as far as I know the absolute FASTEST any of the Midways was ever recorded as going was 34.&change knots.
With the hull form and shaft horse power, I don't think they were capable of doing that. Given the hull form, to do 50 kts, they would have needed a SHP of somewhere around 350,000 to 400,000. Not doable with the machinery of the day.
And, no offense to Midway's cruise book, the 5"/54 was NOT designed specifically for the Midway class, they were designed for the Montanas, long before the Midway class was even conceived.
Original design specifications were laid out in 1938/39, initial design/construction/testing took place in 1939/40, concurrently with finalization of plans for the Montanas.
The Midway class was the next logical step in carrier design, and given the nature of BB vs CL in the pre-war years, and the fact that the final design work wasn't done on the Essex ships, and the Essex laid down, until April 1941, the Midway class likely wouldn't have started specific design until mid-1940 to early 1941.
By that time the first 5"/54 mounts and guns had been constructed and, with the cancellation of the Montanas in favor of more Essex-class carriers, had been put into storage.
Sam, I swear this is my last post to this thread . . .
Quote
3" 50: "In case of attack, it would take only sixty seconds for the three-inch battery to hurl over eight hundred projectiles into the air to knock down any plane attempting to penetrate Midway's fire power umbrella.--Each rapid firing twin 3"/50 mount is capable of one hundred rounds of accurate fire per minute."
Midway cruise book, 58/59
Unquote
Always found the 3/50 to be a waste of weight, people, ammunition, money and so forth. The last of the "eyeball" shooters, my experience is the probability of hitting anything airborne with the darn things approached zero -- plus range was so limited the enemy's weapons were likely "on the way" by the time the 3/50 could engage.
All this said, you "gotta love" cruise book writers; everything on the ship is always superb.
Best regards -- Roy
Quote
3" 50: "In case of attack, it would take only sixty seconds for the three-inch battery to hurl over eight hundred projectiles into the air to knock down any plane attempting to penetrate Midway's fire power umbrella.--Each rapid firing twin 3"/50 mount is capable of one hundred rounds of accurate fire per minute."
Midway cruise book, 58/59
Unquote
Always found the 3/50 to be a waste of weight, people, ammunition, money and so forth. The last of the "eyeball" shooters, my experience is the probability of hitting anything airborne with the darn things approached zero -- plus range was so limited the enemy's weapons were likely "on the way" by the time the 3/50 could engage.
All this said, you "gotta love" cruise book writers; everything on the ship is always superb.
Best regards -- Roy