Search found 3655 matches

by dunmunro
Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:11 pm
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: Damage Control Question
Replies: 2
Views: 114

Re: Damage Control Question

On p. 61 of The Littorio Class by Bagnasco and de Toro there appears: 'Each zone [of seven] was connected directly by telephone to the two damage control (or floatation centres): the main centre at frame 144 ... and the secondary centre located near the after propulsion spaces. The damage control c...
by dunmunro
Wed Feb 06, 2019 12:28 am
Forum: Naval Technology
Topic: The Structural role of Main Armour Decks
Replies: 7
Views: 3129

Re: The Structural role of Main Armour Decks

Gentlemen, Please forgive my ignorance in this question but exactly what does the statement'The RN methods were similar with King George V having an upper layer of 200 lb armour over the magazines and 160 lb armour over the machinery with a lower layer of 40 lb armour below'. actually mean when all...
by dunmunro
Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:46 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

Duke of York did not use any other radar type to direct fire at Scharnhorst after the 284 went down. Neither did it use 273 to assist in spotting after the 284 was unable to spot the fall of shot. Instead it asked any other British ship via voice radio that could spot the fall of shot to forward th...
by dunmunro
Fri Feb 01, 2019 4:37 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

You've proven that the IJN couldn't fight at night...and that the RN wasted all those interwar years training to use optical FC at night. This from the Baron: ... I could see through my director our shadowy attackers coming nearer and nearer, twisting to attack—each time, I thought, "Now the torpedo...
by dunmunro
Thu Jan 31, 2019 9:11 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

Hello everybody, "Type 281 was expressly designed for gunnery, both surface and air along with air warning capability. It had bearing accuracy of .5 degrees (30 arc minutes) which was sufficient to put the director's optics onto the target. " Sufficient to train optic, not to direct blind fire in t...
by dunmunro
Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:35 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

Thanks, therefore: 285 is a gunnery radar able to direct blind fire effectively, but we don't know up to which range it was usable. 281 and 273 are air and surface warning that can give the range (but not the bearing) that can be spotted from the flashes with witch "tolerance" ? 2 to 3 degrees I gu...
by dunmunro
Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:52 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

Hello everybody, and despite having missed such an important disclaimer, the "old" sentence still makes more sense: a surface warning radar is not designed in order to have a very high resolution in bearing. NO evidence whatsoever yet that Type 273 could have had a bearing precision and a fall of s...
by dunmunro
Thu Jan 31, 2019 2:30 am
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

"Of course DoY's type 273 also had a precision ranging panel and gave ~25 yd ranging accuracy but could not give high accuracy in bearing" who wrote this sentence here (http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=1724&hilit=FuMO26&start=45#p63765), confirming that Type 273 was not precise i...
by dunmunro
Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:05 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

I'm afraid the detection range performances means nothing here (despite having a weight tactically). Type 273 was a surface warning radar, not a specialized gunnery radar, as Type 284. FuMO26 was a multi-role radar. Type 273 performances might have been superior to FuMO26 (I would ask Dave to comme...
by dunmunro
Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:16 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

...of which, AFAIK, only the Type 284 was comparable to FuMO26 in terms of blind firing capabilities against surface targets.... and there was only one 284 aerial on board PoW, while Scharnhorst had two FuMO26 antennas. Possibly Dave Saxton can help here. Bye, Alberto Type 273 was a 10cm radar that...
by dunmunro
Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:09 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: If Bismarck had made it to France
Replies: 85
Views: 8808

Re: If Bismarck had made it to France

Hello everybody, Bill Jurens wrote: " I don't think it is fair to say that Antonio's proposal has been 'fully confirmed' at all. " Your respectable opinion, of course. I totally disagree. I'm afraid that not being able to propose ANY credible alternative, just demonstrates Antonio's reconstruction ...
by dunmunro
Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:05 pm
Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
Topic: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements
Replies: 37
Views: 5947

Re: Scharnhorst w/ 38cm's and other improvements

At Cape North, Scharnhorst would have been a very hard nut to crack for DoY even with 28 cm guns, had the two ships been alone (while the British were surrounding the German ship) and had Scharnhorst had her fore radar working, thus not being taken by surprise. Had Scharnhorst disabled the only Typ...
by dunmunro
Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:15 am
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Bismarck's armor against long range hits
Replies: 18
Views: 3242

Re: Bismarck's armor against long range hits

Of course, my mistake. Gneisenau was hit at 23:15 on February 26, 1941 and blew up at around 23:40, according to Whitley. My question still stands: did the bomb penetrate the main armor deck of the ship ? Bye, Alberto "... Gneisenau was hit at 23:15 on February 26, 194 2 ..." G&D state that the RAF...
by dunmunro
Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:35 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Bismarck's armor against long range hits
Replies: 18
Views: 3242

Re: Bismarck's armor against long range hits

Gneisenau's fatal bomb hit = 26-27 Feb 1942 . Koop states: On 13 February Gneisenau passed through the Kiel Canal and went immediately into drydock at the Deutsche Werke. Kriegsmarine standing orders prescribed that prior to a shipyard lay-up or entering drydock, a warship must discharge her stock o...
by dunmunro
Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:54 pm
Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
Topic: Admiralty War Diary, 22-28 May 1941
Replies: 8
Views: 1501

Re: Admiralty War Diary, 22-28 May 1941

As promised this is the relevant pages from the AWD for 22-23 May 1941:

http://www.sfu.ca/~dmunro/images/Bismarckops_22_23.pdf