Pics of the "big guns" firing...

[Foxy]

One (possibly stupid) question:

The web page says:
The term "caliber" refers to the ratio of the length of the barrel to the diameter of the bore. A 50 caliber gun with a 16 inch bore will have a barrel length of 800 inches or 66.6 feet. (16" x 50cal = 800 inches/12 inches per ft = 66.6')


Is this the universal definition of caliber, or does that only apply to large weapons and not to small arms?

 

[Coronach]

He sez the accuracy comes out to sub MOA at 18 miles.

Daaaaaaamn.

A friend of mine contends that the armor was so light on the Iowas that they should just be considered heavy cruisers, compared to Yamato class stuff.

Well, the armor was lighter. How much lighter, I have no idea (no books in front of me ATM). It is also worth noting that the Yamato class were monuments to inefficiency. The Japanese High Command decided pretty early on that the best thing the Yamato and Musashi could do for the war effort was to sit still...their fuel usage was ENORMOUS.

Check out the 16 inch hit on a Yamato turret glacis. They found a turret from the third Yamato in a Japanese navy yard and bought it back to the US for tests. Fired a 16" gun removed from the South Dakota (Damaged by bomb hit during the guadalcanal campaign) against the turret just to see if it would penetrate. Check out the results

Iowas were heavy criusers, my arse

The contention was that the Iowas were armored lightly compared to the japanese uberships. Likely they were. But we could afford to have our battleships move at fleet speeds for extended duration cruises, too. The japanese were forced to use them more like barracks ships for command staff. How many times did they sortie after fuel got scarce?

BTW, the turret you're referring to was removed from Shinano, I believe, after she was converted to a (very short lived) carrier.

 

[LoneStranger]

Foxy;

Referring back to my memory of the old encyclopedia, caliber is a term that is used for two different ideas.

One is the use with small bore weapons were it means bore diameter.

Second is the use with real guns, lanyard operated, primarily by Naval types where it indicates barrel length. Please note that USMC will come under Naval types. If you use it with Army types you will usually confuse them and Air Farce is totally clueless.



If you get into it you will find that the concept is valid in small arms and I vaguely remember that it had a lot to do with all of the older military rifles having such long barrels. The were trying to get everthing out of the round. I would not know if it is still considered an important design concept in this day with small arms.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Coronach,

The Pennsylvania took a torpoedo near the stern on August 12, 1945. She came close to sinking, but salvors managed to get the flooding under control.

I believe that the force of the blast badly bent one of the screw shafts.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Here you go, Tam...

The most beautiful battleship ever designed...

 

[STLRN]

The term caliber in reference to bore length is used by on all canons. Example the current US 155mm howitzers are 39 caliber weapon, while most of the world use 45 or 52 caliber tubes.

 

[Lord Grey Boots]

Link added below if Webshots won't show the pic.

BigBadbaddaboom

 

[Kirk Keller]

25 yards is fair accuracy indeed, when you consider the projectile traveled 22-23 miles before it got there.

 

[STLRN]

Just speaking as a professional artillerymen and someone who use to instruct at the school house. Being able to hit with 25 yards at 23 miles with the first round (predicted fire) is quite the exaggeration. Even assuming that the ship took into account the 4 of the 5 requirements for accurate predicted fire and none of the inherent errors took effect, the first requirement for accurate predicted fire is target location. Since observers would be giving location in 6 digit grids (100 m accuracy) it would be hard to have been with 25 yards.

Since naval guns are guns after all, they all suffer from high PEr, I don't have the TFTs anymore but I remember at extended range the PEr was in the hundreds of meters, making predicted were the round land on the GTL very problematic.

Also since the first round would normally take into account minimal amounts of the effects of MET, chances are that even the heavy round of the 16" would still get blown off course more than 25 yards at 23 miles.

 

[DonP]

Now you've done it!

You guys know the anti's monitor this board!

Now Sarah is going to call Rod Blagoyevitch here in Illinois and he'll be working on a new ban on ownership of 16 inch naval rifles. The next thing you know we'll all be hearing about gang bangers running around with these things doing drive-bys with one of those things from the back seat of some old Caddy.

We'll be back to answering the question; "Does anyone really need one of these to hunt deer with?" from Chuckie Schumer and his friends.

(I love the concussion pattern on the water from the muzzle blast. Very cool.)

Don P.

 

[ahenry]

STLRN,

Just speaking as a professional artillerymen and someone who use to instruct at the school house. Being able to hit with 25 yards at 23 miles with the first round (predicted fire) is quite the exaggeration. Even assuming that the ship took into account the 4 of the 5 requirements for accurate predicted fire and none of the inherent errors took effect, the first requirement for accurate predicted fire is target location. Since observers would be giving location in 6 digit grids (100 m accuracy) it would be hard to have been with 25 yards.

I believe you might be confusing accuracy and precision. That said, I know nothing about artillery so I couldn't begin to suggest you are incorrect in your final conclusion that 25 yard precision is well nigh impossible.

 

[STLRN]

Well no cannon out there has the capability, accuracy or precision wise to achieve those types of results. The units of measure, the Mil, only allow a 38 m precision at 23 mi's. Also The ships ability to fix its location, until the advent of GPS was only good to around 100 ms, so you are starting from a point of origin that would not allow that type of accuracy.

 

[Bog]

Gratuitously chucking in one of my efforts...

 

[Lord Grey Boots]

Hmm... lets design a modern battle ship.

First step is define its mission.
a) A pretty much invincible mobile weapons platform
b) Weaponry is the heaviest conventional weapons avail. 16" guns, high volume of cruise missiles, anti-sub rockets, anti-air missiles.
c) Capable of bringing heavy direct fire on anything within 30 mile radius (all dimensions), and indirect fire anything within 1500 miles.


Design concepts:
a) Submersible!
b) Stealth design
c) Modern armor capable of defeating any anti-ship missile.
d) Nuclear powered
e) <500 man crew
f)?

 

[Bog]

Let's break it down....

What we want is a vehicle for the delivery of cost-effective force in job lots with mobility.

Cannon are much more efficient than bombs, rockets or missiles once in place, cost-wise. Which means you can pound crap out of your target without the taxpayer whining, which nets to more pounds of Octol on target. Yay.

Yes, I belive in the battleship as a living concept, not a dead page from history. Nothing will make Generalissimo Dictatori rethink his strategy than half a million tons of pigiron off his cost with the ability to turn his hacienda into vapour without shrugging.

So.

I say de-mothball the Iowas, fit 'em up with the latest atmospheric interferometry, buff up their propellants and warheads, and go have fun.

 

[Tamara]

Also, as mentioned earlier, Silkworms and Exocets and their ilk are meant to deal with barely-armoured aluminum boxes. Against homogenous steel armour over a foot thick, those that get past the R2 units won't do much other than scratch the paint.

 

[Bog]

Remeber HMS Sheffield.

Selah.

 

[sinecure]

WOW!! What photos! Thanks, guys.

Anybody know what the maximum attained altitude of a 16-inch projectile, fired for maximum range, would be?

I recall reading warnings in the USAF for 40,000ft and below when [IIRC] the New Jersey was firing.

 

[LoneStranger]

STLRN,

All I know about the accuracy of the naval guns that I was involved with was that the Ballistic Computer, straight analog, had inputs for everything that could affect the fire of the gun.

I maintained and calibrated the equipment that supplied the inputs to the Fire Control Computer. How accurate was it? Like I said, IF your Fire Control is up to snuff and the computer has been compensated for tube wear and all other items yes they can be very accurate.

While out in the open ocean your actual position, as indicated by a map coordinate might be up for grabs once you start shooting you are using relative position to target. From an arbitrary start point you can come back to the same position.

When shooting shore bombardment accuracy shoud be even better. Pick two stationary points on land and you too can know where you are.

I didn't aim or fire them I just worked around them. Remember that the people shooting that kind of accuracy were usually in WWII/Korea and they had a humongous amount of practice

 

[Coronach]

Re: the Pennsylvania. Perhaps I have my ships mixed up, or perhaps my source understated the amount of damage. Either way, goes to show that BBs are very tough, but fragile if touched just so.

And Mike, Iron Duke is beautiful, but I think that honor must go to HMS Hood. She had a fatal flaw (she was a battlecruiser, after all, and not designed to face battleships), but certainly she was lovely.

And design the modern BB? OK. Take an Iowa and remove the rear turret. Replace it and the aft superstructure (most of which was designed to support the radar and rangefinding gear for the aft battery) with a VLS. Add in the latest version of phased-array radars and fire control systems to direct the air defenses. Nuclear power. A few 5" guns for light-duty junk bashing. CIWS for leakers. Helos and hangers for ASW. heck, include barracks space for special ops/forward observer/Selous Scout types inserted OTH by helo or Osprey (if it ever works). Keep most of the armor, just tweak it to deal with missiles instead of shells/torpedoes/bombs. LOTS of Bushmasters and small arms to repel boarders and strafe boghamars. Delete torpedo armor/bulges (most modern torps are designed to detonate under the keel, and there's no armor there, even on a BB). Revive the Deadeye projectile for 5" and 16" weapons. Not submersible- too costly in terms of money, space, complexity and workability...and it works against the mission, which is power projection, not the naval warfare equivalent of terrorism and assassination. Resist the urge to go stealthy- this brute wins the battle by owning the area in which it operates.

Most importantly, give it a cool historical name. If someone names it the USS Les Aspin I will personally go berserk in Annapolis.

Mike