Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turrets

Guns, torpedoes, mines, bombs, missiles, ammunition, fire control, radars, and electronic warfare.
petsan
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:30 am

Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turrets

Postby petsan » Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:45 am

On 19 April 1989 inside one of the USS Iowa's 16" gun barrels, five 55 or 100 pound bags of D-846 powder blew up, a fireball 3,000°F with a pressure of 4,000 PSI blew out from the center gun's open breech, the explosion caved in the door between the center gun room and the turret officer's booth and buckled the bulkheads separating the center gun room from the left and right gun rooms, the fireball spread through all three gun rooms......

Image



Does anyone know the actual thickness of the STS longitudinal bulkheads between the individual gun chambers (in red) and or the transverse bulkhead forward of the turret officer's booth (in green)?

I read somewhere, maybe on another BB class that the Longitudinal blkhds. were 4" STS, but I cant find it anywhere in my BB library....No luck with main Battleship Books Dulin,Friedman etc.
Thanks All in advance

Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby Thorsten Wahl » Fri Aug 16, 2013 6:47 am

I think the cracks at the worldaffairsboard are better qualified to answer this question.

maybe ther is some information on
http://hnsa.org/doc/index.htm#guns

"Gun Mount And Turret Catalog, Ordnance Pamphlet 1112, 1945, is a Navy catalog of Gun Mounts and Turrets that includes almost all the U.S. Navy WW II equipment."
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!

Bill Jurens
Supporter
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby Bill Jurens » Fri Aug 16, 2013 5:04 pm

It's only my recollection to be sure, from looking at drawings some time ago, but for what it is worth...

The internal bulkheads in these turrets served both as structural supports to prevent downward deflection from projectile hits on the roof and to limit the spread of flash and flame if an internal explosion occurred. Each of these internal bulkheads is therefore really formed of two portions -- structural sections made up of deep girders and 'columns' of 40lb (or so) plate, and a collection of intermediate 'membranes' that were designed to confine internal explosions. These latter were, as I recall made of 20 lb plate. Around the deck lugs, the plates were thicker still, in order to support the guns. So, to answer your question of 'how thick?', one must first define exactly where you are looking.

The situation is complicated because some of the internal partitions were not ridgidly attached to the roof plates, this apparently in order to allow roof plates to be more easily removed in case internal repairs were required.

The diagram you presented by the way shows the explosion taking place much farther forward than it actually did.

Bill Jurens

petsan
Junior Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby petsan » Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:25 pm

Thanks Mr Jurens and everyone else

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3098
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby dunmunro » Sat Aug 17, 2013 9:36 pm

Bill Jurens wrote:It's only my recollection to be sure
Bill Jurens


Bill, hi. You might like to peruse this thread and share some thoughts:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=5843

Bill Jurens
Supporter
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby Bill Jurens » Sun Aug 18, 2013 4:37 am

Hello Mr. Munro:

I did take a quick glance at the thread you mentioned, but am not quite sure what is being argued about. Perhaps someone might clarify.

My only immediate comments would be:

a)There is really nothing new in the material being presented on Hood's testing, etc., as all of this has been in the public domain for years and years now.

b)I'd express my usual skepticism regarding the use of computer programs such asNAaB and FaceHard to obtain useful analytical data, especially when data is 'stacked', i.e. output data from one program is used as input data for a second one.

Bill Jurens

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3098
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby dunmunro » Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:24 pm

Bill Jurens wrote:Hello Mr. Munro:

I did take a quick glance at the thread you mentioned, but am not quite sure what is being argued about. Perhaps someone might clarify.

My only immediate comments would be:

a)There is really nothing new in the material being presented on Hood's testing, etc., as all of this has been in the public domain for years and years now.

b)I'd express my usual skepticism regarding the use of computer programs such asNAaB and FaceHard to obtain useful analytical data, especially when data is 'stacked', i.e. output data from one program is used as input data for a second one.

Bill Jurens


I may have seen this info earlier, but I was still surprised by the ability of the RN 15in to achieve such a degree of deck penetration. However I would suppose that a point of contention is that I see an analogue between Hood's armour scheme and Bismarck's/Scharnhorst's scheme.

sorry for bringing this threat OT.

sineatimorar
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:42 pm

Re: Question on longitudinal STS bulkheads inside Iowas turr

Postby sineatimorar » Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:12 pm

Talking about the explosion. Any comments on the lack flash-over protection in the ammo handling trunks? Most of the investigation reports lack in-depth cause and effect analysis.Reading the autopsy reports suggest while some personal were killed by what could be termed "blunt force trauma" from the shock wave generated by the blast front, a majority seemed to have been killed by effects of flash-over from the exploding powder charges in the handling room. By inference only as no actual mention of the blast path is actually ever mentioned, I can only come up with the ammo trunks been the transfer path from the gun room to the lower handling room. A case of simplicity over more complex interlock arrangements maybe.


Return to “Naval Weapons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest