More on KGV Class main armament problems

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

More on KGV Class main armament problems

Post by Byron Angel » Sun May 12, 2019 6:01 pm

Following excerpted from D K Brown's "Nelson to Vanguard" (p.31) -

"The reason for the selection of 14in guns and the reduction to ten guns has been explained and seems inevitable in the circumstances. <snip> The problem lay in the mounting which was unreliable. Problems in the Prince of Wales against Bismarck could be excused since she was barely complete but King George V only got off 339 rounds against Bismarck compared with 380 from Rodney with a slower-firing gun. Even at the end of 1943 Duke of York only got off 68 percent of possible rounds at North Cape.
Part of the problem lay in the requirement to pass ammunition into the turret at any angle of training. This involved a transfer ring, moving independently between ship (magazine) and turret. The designer of the ring did not allow enough for the flexibility of a ship and its bending due to heating of the upper deck in sunshine and the action of waves. Either could bend the ship several inches."


B

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3846
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: More on KGV Class main armament problems

Post by dunmunro » Sun May 12, 2019 6:51 pm

Byron Angel wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 6:01 pm
Following excerpted from D K Brown's "Nelson to Vanguard" (p.31) -

"The reason for the selection of 14in guns and the reduction to ten guns has been explained and seems inevitable in the circumstances. <snip> The problem lay in the mounting which was unreliable. Problems in the Prince of Wales against Bismarck could be excused since she was barely complete but King George V only got off 339 rounds against Bismarck compared with 380 from Rodney with a slower-firing gun. Even at the end of 1943 Duke of York only got off 68 percent of possible rounds at North Cape.
Part of the problem lay in the requirement to pass ammunition into the turret at any angle of training. This involved a transfer ring, moving independently between ship (magazine) and turret. The designer of the ring did not allow enough for the flexibility of a ship and its bending due to heating of the upper deck in sunshine and the action of waves. Either could bend the ship several inches."


B
DoY didn't have any problems with the transfer ring jamming and in the main, the problems were caused by relatively minor issues related to the safety interlocks:
14 inch Breakdowns.

12. - Loss of 14 inch output due to gun mounting failures is attributable
to three causes :-

(a) Failure of bridge tube flash doors in working chamber to close
completely.

(b) Collapse of shell arresters in the central ammunition hoist.

(c) Two small mishaps - (1) a pin falling out of control shafting,
(2) a split washer in pipeline from recoil
cylinder tanks

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: More on KGV Class main armament problems

Post by Byron Angel » Sun May 12, 2019 7:36 pm

Hi dunmunro,
Can you say with confidence that causes (a) and (b) were unrelated to transfer ring issues? Just asking.

B

dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 3846
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: More on KGV Class main armament problems

Post by dunmunro » Sun May 12, 2019 9:22 pm

Byron Angel wrote:
Sun May 12, 2019 7:36 pm
Hi dunmunro,
Can you say with confidence that causes (a) and (b) were unrelated to transfer ring issues? Just asking.

B
The report goes into more detail about the lost output and the shell transfer ring clearance wasn't an issue. There was an issue with 14in shells surging while being rammed from Y turret shell ring, due to movement of the ship, but that was really a shell arrester issue and none of the turret rings jammed.

Post Reply