8-inch Heavy cruiser Longest Gunfire Hit

[Bgile]

Why is everyone ignoring my post about the very long range battle of the Komandorski Islands?

[alecsandros]

Why is everyone ignoring my post about the very long range battle of the Komandorski Islands?

For my part, it's the first time I even hear of this battle :)

I looked it up on the net (don't have any books that cover the subject), adn found several sites. It appears that, late in the battle, Maya scored a (dud) hit on Salt Lake City at over 22000y (20km). And this may actualy be the longest cruiser gunfire hit.

Cheers

[dunmunro]

Why is everyone ignoring my post about the very long range battle of the Komandorski Islands?

OK, yes, I see. I'll have to check the ranges that hits occurred at Java Sea, but I think they were greater than 22k yds.

[dunmunro]

According to the map in Rising Sun in the Pacific, p344, by Morrison, Exeter was hit by Haguro at ~28k yds! The IJN also scored an 8" hit on De Ruyter a few minutes earlier at very long range, perhaps over 26k yds. The IJN had aerial spotting for this action but still only scored a few 8" hits while expending well over 1000 rds.

Edit: Here's the Official despatch regarding the Java Sea:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/L ... /38346.pdf

so, I'm certain that the IJN hits on De Ruyter, Houston and Exeter were at extreme range, over 26kyds and possibly were the longest ship to ship hits ever.

[Gerard Heimann]

The Hipper class did seem to have a good gunnery history. In addition to Hipper's successful shooting in more than one engagement, usually in difficult weather conditions, there was of course Prinz Eugen's hit on Hood early in the Denmark Strait battle. PG's shooting on land targets at the end of the war was commended on by various Army units, but hitting stationary targets is certainly not the same challenge.

Blucher was expended so quickly in the Norway Invasion so that boat had no chance to work up to real battle readiness. The Seydlitz was being converted to an Auxiliary Aircraft carrier and never used her guns as far as I know and lastly, the Lutzow was never completed.

Gerard

[RF]

Gerard, moving tanks out of visual range are hardly stationery or easy targets.

[Gerard Heimann]

Agreed. Thanks.

[RF]

The ''real Lutzow'' - if I can use that phrase Gerard, in view of the original ship designated with that name you refer to - is I believe credited with destruction of over 700 Soviet tanks.

[boredatwork]

Relative to a ship I would surmise - moving or not - tanks might actually be an easier target.

She wasn't targeting the tanks themselves but rather a tank unit, ie an area target. While individual tanks may move at speed and may do so randomly, in general tank units do not. Terrain and tactical considerations generally dictate either much slower movement of the unit as a whole, or predictable advance along a linear path (ie a road).

Therefore rather than aim at some hypothetical point of water where you estimate a ship will likely be you can instead aim at a fixed unmoving reference point of land, correct your fire based on forward observers watching the fall of the shot *relative to an actual reference point* then adjust the fire accordingly. I believe the Baltic is relatively calm compared to say the North Sea and, as you're firing at an enemy who can't retaliate, you can set you course and speed in such a fashion to minimize factors such as yaw to improve accurary.

Finally misses at sea have little effect - however against an area target on land even "misses" might do valuable work - damage sights and tracks with sharapnel, or crater roads, start fires, blind gunners with smoke, surpress or kill accompanying infantry, or cause individual tanks to panic and retreat, etc.

[Gerard Heimann]

As an addendum to my note about Blucher, Geirr H. Haarr, in his new book, The German Invasion of Norway, reported that Blucher, upon leaving Swinemunde on Apr. 7, fired its main guns in practice for the first and only time, shooting one round from each gun.

Gerard

[marcelo_malara]

Wonderful book, I am finishing it.

[Dave Saxton]

A lot of credit for the PG shore bombardment shooting must be given to Paul Schmalenbach. Schmalenbach conducted the shooting, and worked out the details of the systems (including FAC IIRC) used to put the shells on target. Still if the firecontrol systems and what not on PG wasn't up to the task, then it would have not been possible on such a consistent basis. At sea, the ballistics of the German 8" look to be well suited to shooting a good hit percentage out to 20,000 meters at least. At 18km the angle of fall is still less than 20*, and that's more than 50% of the max range.

I think the IJN cruiser shooting is really interesting Steve. I would like to learn more about it. Do you know more details?

[Bgile]

I think the IJN cruiser shooting is really interesting Steve. I would like to learn more about it. Do you know more details?

I'm sorry, I don't. I've read about it a number of times over the years and it can be googled for some descriptions of the battle, but I don't have any good written sources. Friedman devotes a paragraph to it in his book on US cruisers, but I know I've seen better accounts elsewhere. In summary, both sides took hits over about three and a half hours of long range shooting, but it wasn't decisive for either side. On the US side there were one CA and one old Omaha class CL, and the IJN had two CAs and I think a CL. There were destroyers on both sides.

[Dave Saxton]

L Brown cites a book titled:

The thousand Mile War: World War Two in Alaska and the Aleutians. Brian Garfield 1969, Doubleday Ny Ny.

Garfield is a prolific screen writer and fiction writer, but it seems he also wrote the most available on this battle history. Brown cites over 50 pages from Garfield on this battle. This is probably the best secondary source to start with. From there the primary sources may be revealed.

Brown only provides a few sentences. Basically he says that the battle started at 20km (21,870 yards) with the American FC radars providing early straddles, but after nearly four hours of exchanging long range salvoes the IJN came out much better. One American CA was dead in the water but protected by smoke screens. The IJN Adm wasn't aware of how bad the American situation and damages were, and failed to exploit his tactical victory. He withdrew both his warships and the convoy he was escorting.

[Bgile]

Salt Lake City was dead in the water for a time due to a mistake by her engineering department. She was definitely hit more often than the IJN cruisers, though. Most IJN shells fell within 200m iirc and she was lucky not be be hit more often. I don't think Richmond would have been terribly useful at that range (or any range, considering her obsolete weapon arrangement).