Naval History Forums

A good comparison of the fire control systems can be found at: http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-086.htm That article needs quite a revision but is mostly accurate concerning the Japanese Type 94 system. The Type 98 is basically identical except for more automation in the table and director i...

Hi Brad, I agree with your clarifications for the most part. Radar had the potential to change the whole ball game. Some navies had functional radars and some did not, and some navies were slow to realize what they had. In the USN, Adm Nimitz set up a special school at Pearl Harbor to better train ...

I think this thread is starting to spiral out of control on emotional content alone. Unfortunately I have not been able to articulate my points with enough clarity and it appears that Mr. Heidenreich has not understood them so I shall try again. Radar alone is no panacea, nor is it an instant ‘win b...

She did have radar for gunnery ranging in 1944. The Type 22 is a very poor FC radar; it had horrible range and bearing resolution and its accuracy wasn’t very good either (range accuracy was 2.5 times worse than the Mk 8 Mod 1 for instance). It didn’t have a plan view display either, but in any cas...

It should be noted that HiCap’s “observability” via radar wasn’t really a tactical consideration; I was just answering the question directly. Certainly AP is the preferred choice for USN battleships against BBs, CA/CLs, and CVs. HiCap produced very large splashes and the USN experimented with shorte...

Thanks Brad! Your input is always very valuable in these discussions because you obviously know a great deal about this topic. You figures you gave specified AP ammunition. Can you tell us what difference using HE would make, or is that not available? I can see arguments for both greater or lesser ...

There are a few misconceptions about FC radar and about its integration, particularly as the USN integrated it. If I may, I offer a few corrections based on current research: The max effective range of MK8 (FH) was 40,000 yards with the antenna mounted 120 feet high. This is just a theoretical max r...

How practical was continuous aim with a follow-the-pointer system? Very practical. This was how the USN (and others certainly) operated for most of the battleship era. Recall that Massachusetts’ AAR gives a good synopsis of the draw backs of manual gun laying and training, operator fatigue, particu...

What is the result of a ship's heel (as in a turn) or list or pitch on the firing of the guns? I've heard that they aren't fired unless the ship is on an even keel during rolls, but that can't be all there is to it because there must be allowance for turns and lists. I don't recall seeing a really ...

Brad, does this mean the 2 rounds per minute figure we see on sites like NAVWEAPS are not possible? I have a book on the Iowa class showing the firing cycle as being 30 seconds long. No those are accurate, but that’s the loading interval, not the salvo interval. The salvo interval includes other fa...

A total of 14 salvos were missed Good. That's the figure I've been working with. It came from the other discussion, so I wasn't certain about it. That's the number I used to calculate the 89% rate figure (actually 89.3129771). What got me wondering about the 1.3rpm figure was the disparity with the...

Washington's guns averaged 1.3 rounds per minute. This value doesn’t seem to add up. In the first phase they expended 42 rounds in approximately 3 minutes (precise time not available). That’s 14 rds/minute and that translates to 1.55 SPGPM. The second phase expended 75 rounds in 5 minutes 24 second...

Hi Duncan, I'm aware of the various methods of salvo fire. I was just illustrating the problem with your assumptions regarding missed salvoes. The USN tended to fire 9 gun salvoes, with each turret firing at a different range. You would then have a ladder consisting of 3 groups of 3 splashes each. ...

A few percentage points better, when your talking average probabilities of of around 10%, is not all that insignificant. It depends on the sample size. Fundamentally I would agree with you, if you were to fire a very large number of shots – say 100,000 – you could state quite correctly that a 2% ad...

Well, I feel the need to chime in and lend support to Thomas's views on danger space. By restricting the target area to above the waterline and and below the weather deck, danger space based on angle of fall appears to be relatively insignificant, but by what about target silhouettes, that include ...