Re: Vanguard and Bismarck
Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:56 pm
Raven & Roberts says 23 1/2 feet Belt depth, with 8 1/2 feet below the design standard waterline.
Warships, naval battles, technology, weapons, navies of all eras, modeling, etc.
http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/
Right, but most of that was apparently above the waterline rather than below the waterline at operational displacements. Per R&R as Steve points out. If it extended too deeply below the waterline, intruding over the TDS area, it would consitute a major design flaw.alecsandros wrote:KGV had a 7.2 meters main belt, of which some 5 meters were 380mm thick , the rest tapering down to 140mm at the bottom ...
With the 170mm lower belt it was around 5.2 or 5.3 meters, IIRC.
Super charges were larger and hotter powder charges. They were conceived mainly to increase the muzzle velocity and therefore the range of the 15"/42 guns which did not have 30* elevation capabilities such as the Rs and some of the QE's. At 20* elevation the max range was only about 21km, so one of these old gals escorting a convoy could be out ranged by an enemy cruiser or battleship, making it helpless to protect the convoy. In the Med the main battery was out ranged by the Italian 6" gun. The use of supercharges could increase the range to 26.5km. The increase in muzzle velocity improved belt penetration but decreased the angle of fall against decks. It also greatly increased the wear and tear on the gunlining. I would suspect it altered the dispersion properties as well. They were only to be used in an emergency. In the event none of these battlewagons ever used them, and they were not issued prior to late 1941.paul.mercer wrote:Gentlemen,
In the post by Dave Saxton he states that 'supercharges could be used at a pinch', what were 'Supercharges', why would they only be used occasionally and how would they affect the performance of the gun as regards range and barrel wear?
That's 34-35km, not bad.dunmunro wrote:Maximum new gun range for the 15in/42 and supercharges (2638fps), using 6CRH ammo, was 37,830 yds. Naval Weapons of WW2.
I have no idea. I'm sure the info resides somewhere in the UK archives, and/or in test reports of supercharges used in coast defence guns.alecsandros wrote:That's 34-35km, not bad.dunmunro wrote:Maximum new gun range for the 15in/42 and supercharges (2638fps), using 6CRH ammo, was 37,830 yds. Naval Weapons of WW2.
Any info about the accuracy of fire with supercharges ? Were the salvos consistent and shots well grouped ?
KGV and Vanguard carried their main armoured deck one deck higher than on Bismarck, so their protected volume was greater than in Bismarck. I'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence, but Vanguard was an enlarged KGV design.spicmart wrote: Did Vanguard have more protected volume than Bismarck?
I always thought the Bismarck class were top in this respect.
And were the British following the German paradigm in that by designing Vanguard as they did?
I thought Bismarck had over 70 % of her length protected while KGV had only 55 %. I was wondering how much more Vanguard had.dunmunro wrote:KGV and Vanguard carried their main armoured deck one deck higher than on Bismarck, so their protected volume was greater than in Bismarck. I'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence, but Vanguard was an enlarged KGV design.spicmart wrote: Did Vanguard have more protected volume than Bismarck?
I always thought the Bismarck class were top in this respect.
And were the British following the German paradigm in that by designing Vanguard as they did?
Protected volume is not the same as protected length. Protected volume is the area protected by the armoured box (the citadel) formed by the main armoured deck and the main belt armour, and the fore and aft main armoured bulkheads. See this drawing for more info:spicmart wrote:I thought Bismarck had over 70 % of her length protected while KGV had only 55 %. I was wondering how much more Vanguard had.dunmunro wrote:KGV and Vanguard carried their main armoured deck one deck higher than on Bismarck, so their protected volume was greater than in Bismarck. I'm not sure what you mean by your last sentence, but Vanguard was an enlarged KGV design.spicmart wrote: Did Vanguard have more protected volume than Bismarck?
I always thought the Bismarck class were top in this respect.
And were the British following the German paradigm in that by designing Vanguard as they did?
And reading that Vanguard had more protected volume than every other BB made me assume that she should have at least as much length protected as Bismarck, this extended protection being a common feature in German BB philosophy.
Or did I just mistook protected volume with protected length?