Differences between 10,5-cm (4.1") Krupp Naval guns S.K. L/40 and L/45?

[Thorsten Wahl]

even
if the original term QFG had no direct reference.

wrong it has "something" to do with the breech.

Screenshot 2023-12-11 121857.png (241.09 KiB) Viewed 30015 times

[marcelo_malara]

even
if the original term QFG had no direct reference.

wrong it has "something" to do with the breech.
Screenshot 2023-12-11 121857.png

Hi! My German is null . Can you write the relevant part?

Thanks!

[Tool1958]

even
if the original term QFG had no direct reference.

wrong it has "something" to do with the breech.
Screenshot 2023-12-11 121857.png

Hello Thorsten,

. . . not wrong; - maybe I expressed myself wrongly or you misunderstood.

Yes; - of course, wedge, transverse or push-crank locks generally had something
to do with the function and the term Quick-Loading-Gun / Schnell-Lade-Kanone

But the meaning of the my sentence referred to the fact that with the development of
the change from ring and casing barrels to cast and turned gun barrels, the
development of the quick-loading gun breech was also carried out. However, this
had no direct connection with each other, but happened in parallel.

Screenshot (2127).png (172.03 KiB) Viewed 29983 times

Regards Holger

[Thorsten Wahl]

1. The breechblocks of our modern cannons and quick-loading cannons.

The breechblocks of our ship's guns, which have been introduced since 1880, belong to the class of horizontal wedge breechches, except for the falling breech block of the 5.2 cm 8. K. L/35.

Since 1889 they have been introduced as quick-loading breeches for medium and light calibers.

For the larger calibers, the usual cannon breech with transport device had to be retained, especially because the industry was not yet able to produce cartridge cases that could withstand the stresses encountered in larger calibers.

The following breeches are available on our guns, which have been introduced since 1880:

A. Cannon breeches.
B. Quick-loading cannon breeches

->quick

[Tool1958]

Thorsten was faster then me. Here the German text (For copy and past translation also into Portuguese & Spain)

1. Die Verschlüsse unserer modernen Kanonen und Schnell-Lade-Kanonen.
Die Verschlüsse unserer seit 1889 eingeführten Schiffsgeschütze gehören zu den Quer- oder Keilverschlüssen, und zwar - bis auf den Fall-Block-Verschluss der 5,2 cm S.K. L/55 - zur Klasse der horizontalen Keilverschlüsse- Sie sind seit 1889 für mittlere und leichte Kaliber als Schnell-Lade-Verschlüsse ausgeführt. Bei den schweren Kalibern mußte man zunächst den gewöhnlichen Kanonenverschluß mit Transporteinrichtungen beibehalten, vor allem, weil es der Industrie noch nicht gelingen wollte, den in schweren Kalibern auftretenden Beanspruchungen gewachsene Patronenhülsen zu fertigen.
An Verschlüssen sind demzufolge bei unseren, seit 1889 eingeführten Geschützen vorhanden:
A. Kanonenverschlüsse.
B. Schnell-Lade-Kanonen-Verschlüsse

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

1. The breechblocks of our modern cannons and quick-loading cannons.

The breechblocks of our ship's guns, which have been introduced since 1880, belong to the class of horizontal wedge breechches, except for the falling breech block of the 5.2 cm 8. K. L/35.

Since 1889 they have been introduced as quick-loading breeches for medium and light calibers.

For the larger calibers, the usual cannon breech with transport device had to be retained, especially because the industry was not yet able to produce cartridge cases that could withstand the stresses encountered in larger calibers.

The following breeches are available on our guns, which have been introduced since 1880:

A. Cannon breeches.
B. Quick-loading cannon breeches

->quick

Thanks! Why do you say that the model evolution is related to the breech? Can not discern that in the text.

[Tool1958]

I would like to go back to my original question here. I'll try to ask this question
as precisely as possible. It's about the different versions of the 10.5 cm Krupp Guns:
10,5-cm S.K. L/40 on M.P.L C/1904 and 10,5-cm S.K. L/45 on M.P.L. C/1906

In particular the massiv `Reinforcement Ring´ around the chamber, after the
breech; - but only at the last L/40 Version. This was not present in the older
L/40 version, nor in the next, newer L/45 version.

(Wäre das ne Kochshow, könnte ich jetzt sagen: "Ich hab da schon mal eine Kleinigkeit vorbereitet")

001_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1897

001_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1897.png (133.78 KiB) Viewed 29910 times

002_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1904

002_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1904.png (146.48 KiB) Viewed 29910 times

003_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-45 on M.P.L C-1906

003_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-45 on M.P.L C-1906.png (145.91 KiB) Viewed 29910 times

Does anyone have an explanation for this?
Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

I would like to go back to my original question here. I'll try to ask this question
as precisely as possible. It's about the different versions of the 10.5 cm Krupp Guns:
10,5-cm S.K. L/40 on M.P.L C/1904 and 10,5-cm S.K. L/45 on M.P.L. C/1906

In particular the massiv `Reinforcement Ring´ around the chamber, after the
breech; - but only at the last L/40 Version. This was not present in the older
L/40 version, nor in the next, newer L/45 version.

(Wäre das ne Kochshow, könnte ich jetzt sagen: "Ich hab da schon mal eine Kleinigkeit vorbereitet")

001_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1897
001_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1897.png


002_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1904
002_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-40 on M.P.L C-1904.png


003_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-45 on M.P.L C-1906
003_Gun-Breech_10,5-cm S.K. L-45 on M.P.L C-1906.png


Does anyone have an explanation for this?
Regards Holger

This plans correspond to both versions of the the discussed guns? If so, the upper one is a hooped gun with a breech piece integral with the gun tube, while the lower one is a monoblock with an attached breech piece. I think that the monoblock is more modern gun. For me the chronological order would be:

-L 40 with ring
-L 40 monoblock
-L 45 monoblock

[Tool1958]

This plans correspond to both versions of the the discussed guns? If so, the upper one is a hooped gun with a breech piece integral with the gun tube, while the lower one is a monoblock with an attached breech piece. I think that the monoblock is more modern gun. For me the chronological order would be:

-L 40 with ring
-L 40 monoblock
-L 45 monoblock

Okay, I understand. Your explanation seem plausible.

I am not the specialist with the metallurgical knowledge who could explain the
exact development and production process of gun barrels. This is certainly a
science in itself.

The graphic with the two schematic representations of different production of
gun barrels does not apply to our case, but to the Krupp quick-loading-guns.
Both graphics still show an ignition hole or ignition channel, so older?
This should only be used as a supplement to explain Thorsten's explanation.

In very simple terms, the later Krupp-Gun-Barrels, which are the subject here,
were cast in one piece and subsequently drilled out, whereby Barrel and Breech
part formed one unit?!

Naval Ordnance and Gunnery Gun Barrel Construction
https://www.eugeneleeslover.com/USNAVY/ ... ION-1.html
https://dn790004.ca.archive.org/0/items ... OfGuns.pdf



Coming back to the chamber of the Gun-barrels of L/40 and L/45:

If we look at the pictures of the two L/40-Versions of C/1897 and C/1904, both use
the same ammunition. But the 1904 Version with this massive 'reinforcement ring'; -
Why? Here I have no functional or logical explanation for this.

10,5-cm Ammunition L-40 .png (128.25 KiB) Viewed 29841 times

Original Source: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-40_skc00.php


If we now assume only the somewhat meager information, so only the weight of the
HE ammunition, these data indicate the same shell size of the L/35, all L/40 and
L/45 versions. So why the difference: with and without this `Reinforcement Ring´?

10,5-cm Ammunition L-45.png (104.37 KiB) Viewed 29841 times

Original Source: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_41-45_skc06.php



FURTHER SOURCES:
Navy Department Office of Naval Intelligence
German Naval Guns, Mountings, Sights and Table of Ordnance, July 1917
Part I, Part IV. Section 2, Ammunition, pdf-Brochure on Page 27, centre:
https://ncisahistory.org/wp-content/upl ... ssed-1.pdf

Part II with additions:
https://ncisahistory.org/wp-content/upl ... ssed-1.pdf
(Unfortunately, most of the detailed tables & representations were not scanned)

General Staff (intelligence) Notes on German Shells, May 1918
10.5 cm Naval Guns: Page 298 - 299, Field Guns: Page 100 - 131 & 232 - 237
https://www.bulletpicker.com/pdf/Notes% ... 201918.pdf

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

If we look at the pictures of the two L/40-Versions of C/1897 and C/1904, both use
the same ammunition. But the 1904 Version with this massive 'reinforcement ring'; -
Why? Here I have no functional or logical explanation for this.



Regards Holger

Hi Holger. The denominations C/1897 and C/1904 relate to the mounting and not to the cannon itself. May be that the C/1904 mounting was in fact mounting a cannon of an earlier model than the C/1897 mounting. I am quiet convinced that the ringed cannon was older, more so after seeing the posted cutaways.

[Tool1958]

Hi Holger. The denominations C/1897 and C/1904 relate to the mounting and not to the cannon itself. May be that the C/1904 mounting was in fact mounting a cannon of an earlier model than the C/1897 mounting. I am quiet convinced that the ringed cannon was older, more so after seeing the posted cutaways.

Hallo Marcelo

Basically you are absolutely right!

Here we generally have to distinguish between the different stages of development
of the various weapon parts. But with this you push forward an almost 'intimate area'
of Krupp gun development that I actually wanted to avoid; - anyway.

We even have to distinguish between the gun barrel, the upper-gun-mount and the
lower-gun-mount. In most cases, however, the gun-barrel and upper-gun-mount was
assigned to a common development year; - in a few cases, all three elements were
even assigned to a year

As an example, here is one of the last and most modern 10.5 cm L/45 gun barrel
with upper-mount, on a much older M.P.L. Under-carriage.

10,5cm-Tbt.K. C1912-10,5cm-M.P.L.C1898-1.jpg (91.34 KiB) Viewed 29778 times

But I am sure that `our´ last L/40-version with the `reinforcement ring´ is authentic,
which is also confirmed by the photo below of the "SMS Emden"-Gun.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/147661871 ... 012891137/

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi! Looking at an enlarged image of Emdem´s gun another possibility comes to my mind, that the reinforcing ring is no actually so, but a part of the gun cradle. The cradle seems to be a circular sleeve that contains the trunnions and the tube, which recoils within the sleeve.

[Tool1958]

Hi! Looking at an enlarged image of Emdem´s gun another possibility comes to my mind, that the reinforcing ring is no actually so, but a part of the gun cradle. The cradle seems to be a circular sleeve that contains the trunnions and the tube, which recoils within the sleeve.

Good morning Marcelo

As can be seen in the photo with the "SMS Emden" gun, this massive 'reinforcement
ring' forms a solid bond with and above the chamber, between the gun barrel and the
breech. That means, In the event of recoil, he naturally defends himself with the
entire gun barrel.

004_Picture .png (143.75 KiB) Viewed 29711 times

Here is a graphic that I borrowed from the AHF and that illustrates the process.

Recoil Mechanism.JPG (68.51 KiB) Viewed 29711 times

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi! Looking at an enlarged image of Emdem´s gun another possibility comes to my mind, that the reinforcing ring is no actually so, but a part of the gun cradle. The cradle seems to be a circular sleeve that contains the trunnions and the tube, which recoils within the sleeve.

Good morning Marcelo

As can be seen in the photo with the "SMS Emden" gun, this massive 'reinforcement
ring' forms a solid bond with and above the chamber, between the gun barrel and the
breech. That means, In the event of recoil, he naturally defends himself with the
entire gun barrel.

004_Picture .png



Here is a graphic that I borrowed from the AHF and that illustrates the process.


Recoil Mechanism.JPG

Regards Holger

Hi! Yes, from this point of view the ring seems to be part of the barrel. Being this the case, one possibility would be that the breech is not cast with the barrel but screwed into it, the ring would contain the threading. Much like a Mauser rifle, in which the barrel ends in the chamber with threads around, and there is another piece screwed to it that contains the bolt. For sure this will simplify construction, and will even allow the changing of the breech in case of damage. Difficult to say conclusively without plans.

[Tool1958]

. . . Much like a Mauser rifle, in which the barrel ends in the chamber with threads around, and there is another piece screwed to it that contains the bolt. For sure this will simplify construction, and will even allow the changing of the breech in case of damage.

You see that very correctly. My own, very casual statement is probably too general, that gun barrel and closure form a unit.

Difficult to say conclusively without plans.

There are very clear and explanatory detailed drawings. However, I don't know whether these also apply to the Krupp developments?

PAGE_53_Figure_5B7_B.JPG (32.71 KiB) Viewed 29372 times

Original Source: https://www.eugeneleeslover.com/PAGE_53 ... _5B7_B.JPG

PAGE_86_FIGURE_6B4.JPG (55.16 KiB) Viewed 29372 times

Original Source: https://www.eugeneleeslover.com/PAGE_86_FIGURE_6B4.JPG

PAGE_87_FIGURE_6B6.JPG (57.27 KiB) Viewed 29372 times

Original Source: https://www.eugeneleeslover.com/PAGE_87_FIGURE_6B6.JPG


Maybe there is a friendly reader who knows verifiable details and sources? (- -)

Regards Holger