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

[Tool1958]

Hi Holger. What about the barrel proper? Do they have any markings?

Hi Marcello,

Regarding your question, here are sample from the back of the gun-breech. This is from the 10.5-cm S.K. L/40
on-board guns of the "SMS Königsberg", which were equipped with the same gun-type like the "SMS Emden".

Breach block of 10,5-cm L40 SMS Königberg Gun .jpg (79.69 KiB) Viewed 87849 times

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi Holger. What about the barrel proper? Do they have any markings?

Hi Marcello,

Regarding your question, here are sample from the back of the gun-breech. This is from the 10.5-cm S.K. L/40
on-board guns of the "SMS Königsberg", which were equipped with the same gun-type like the "SMS Emden".


Breach block of 10,5-cm L40 SMS Königberg Gun .jpg


Regards Holger

Hi Holger! Ok, that´s definitive, the gun is 1905?

[Tool1958]

Hi Holger! Ok, that´s definitive, the gun is 1905?

Hi Marcello; - I would says yes.

The Gun-Barrel was manufactured in 1905. The Upper-Carriage is model year 1904,
but of course it could have been produced a year or two later until the new model 1906 came out.

I'm no longer sure about the undercarriage. Maybe Model C/1888?!

The Australians describe it exactly the other way around?!?

"Description: 10.5 cm Schnellade Kanonen C/88 [Naval Gun]. The gun is mounted on an MPL C/1904 mount.
Breech markings: The gun is numbered 'Nr. 404.L / FRIED. KRUPP' at the rear of the breech, but there is no date.
At the top of the breech are the numbers 'K4373 / Nr.1320'. Neither of the hand recuperator/buffer cylinders
are numbered. The right of the mount is numbered '21684'."
Source: https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C240449

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi Holger! Ok, that´s definitive, the gun is 1905?

Hi Marcello; - I would says yes.

The Gun-Barrel was manufactured in 1905. The Upper-Carriage is model year 1904,
but of course it could have been produced a year or two later until the new model 1906 came out.

I'm no longer sure about the undercarriage. Maybe Model C/1888?!

The Australians describe it exactly the other way around?!?

"Description: 10.5 cm Schnellade Kanonen C/88 [Naval Gun]. The gun is mounted on an MPL C/1904 mount.
Breech markings: The gun is numbered 'Nr. 404.L / FRIED. KRUPP' at the rear of the breech, but there is no date.
At the top of the breech are the numbers 'K4373 / Nr.1320'. Neither of the hand recuperator/buffer cylinders
are numbered. The right of the mount is numbered '21684'."
Source: https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C240449

Regards Holger

Well, C/88 would make sense if that corresponds to the year 1888, the hooped construction would be correct for that year.

[marcelo_malara]

I spoke with author Kent Crawford (https://www.academia.edu/75272309/Artic ... eur_Part_2) about this thread. He is very knowledgeable about cannons, specially of this perior.

About the ring he said:

"That ring is specific to the boundary between the breech mechanism and the rear of the chamber and bottom of the cartridge. Logically, that area would need maximum support to prevent the breech from blowing.

The construction of the sliding wedge breech is that the surface bordering was held in place by a screw function. The cartridge main charge was contained in a metal cylinder, the bottom of which was close, but not in contact, with the wedge. When the charge is ignited, gas expansion would pressure in all directions, and the pressure would build until relieved by the projectile moving up the bore. But during those seconds, a great deal of pressure would push against the wedge and the and that junction with the 'A' tube. I would bet that particular ring, shrunk on with considerable pressure, was intended to support that particular joint against the initial pressure surge."

[Tool1958]

Well, C/88 would make sense if that corresponds to the year 1888, the hooped construction would be correct for that year.

It would look like this. (Krupp probably didn't just confuse not only the opponents with his model names at that time.)

10,5-cm S.K. L40- C1904 on M.P.L. C1888 .jpg (95.17 KiB) Viewed 87819 times

Regards Holger

[Tool1958]

I spoke with author Kent Crawford (https://www.academia.edu/75272309/Artic ... eur_Part_2) about this thread. He is very knowledgeable about cannons, specially of this perior.

About the ring he said:

"That ring is specific to the boundary between the breech mechanism and the rear of the chamber and bottom of the cartridge. Logically, that area would need maximum support to prevent the breech from blowing.

The construction of the sliding wedge breech is that the surface bordering was held in place by a screw function. The cartridge main charge was contained in a metal cylinder, the bottom of which was close, but not in contact, with the wedge. When the charge is ignited, gas expansion would pressure in all directions, and the pressure would build until relieved by the projectile moving up the bore. But during those seconds, a great deal of pressure would push against the wedge and the and that junction with the 'A' tube. I would bet that particular ring, shrunk on with considerable pressure, was intended to support that particular joint against the initial pressure surge."

Hi Marcelo

Thanks for the addition. This explanation sounds absolutely plausible.

The Model C/1904 had this 'reinforcement ring' to absorb the high energy of the cartridge explosion.

BUT: The same kinetic energy (all models had identical ammunition) also occurred in the models C/1897 and C/1906; - without this 'reinforcement ring'?


Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi Holger.

I think that the models are:

10.5cm L/40, hooped construction, with ring. One possibility is that the ring function is to attach the dumper, and that it has no barrel reinforcement function, and so this and the next would be the same.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_4 ... en_pic.jpg

10.5cm L/40, hooped construction, no ring

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_4 ... er_pic.jpg


10.5cm L/45, monoblock barrel, no ring.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10.5_cm_SK_L/45_naval_gun


So, to differentiate them you need just to look at the muzzle or at the stepped reinforcement sleeve.

Happy new year!

[Tool1958]

HAPPY NEW YEAR (- -)

Dear Marcelo

Yes; - many things are possible. But I'm also looking for verifiable evidence for the various constriction features.

Unfortunately, to this day there is no extant example of a 10.5-cm Krupp Q.F Gun L/45
on M.P.L. C/1906, that I know of. But I am sure there will be more results in the future.

10.5cm L/45, monoblock barrel, no ring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10.5_cm_SK_L/45_naval_gun

This we have to exclude from our search, because its a Erhardt- and not a Krupp Construction
on a Submarine mount. Also not all listed ships are not correct, whuch used this Navy mount.

Regards Holger

[Tool1958]

THE 10,5-cm L/45 - M.P.L. C/1906 COMPLETE VERSION

The photo below shows, according to a very credible source, a 10.5-cm Krupp S.K.
L/45 on M.P.L. C/1906. However, the location is no longer known and cannot be traced.

Could it possibly be a museum? - In Europe? - Holland? -England? - Germany?

Can someone help me find the location.

Regards Holger

Here is an update regarding the search for the location of this gun.

This gun was originally part of the coastal defense in Hoek van Holland, and later
became an exhibition object in Fort Maasmond. The photo in the link below (scroll down)
is older. It is not known exactly where the gun is today.
http://www.zuidfront-holland1940.nl/ind ... an-holland

The exact type of gun is also not known. If it would be really a 12-cm Gun, it should
be a Swedish 12-cm Bofors S.K. M 24 gun, 37 pieces were built under license.
Source: https://www.netherlandsnavy.nl/index.html

It is very likely not a 10.5-cm Krupp Q.F. Navy Gun on M.P.L. C/1906, but a 15-cm Krupp Q.F.
Navy Gun on M.P.L. which were used in Hoek van Holland for Costal defense, as in the photos below.

20220102192603-db185ac2-me.jpg (108.55 KiB) Viewed 87768 times

20220102192607-75bca236.jpg (48.85 KiB) Viewed 87768 times

Original Sources:
http://www.grondgebondenluchtverdedigin ... e/start-15



But the caliber 10.5-cm Krupp Q.F. on Navy-Central-Mount certainly existed in the Dutch Navy.
The three small coastal gunboats "Friso", "Gruno" and "Brinio" (1912-1913) were each armed
with four of these Krupp guns. However, the caliber length differs in the different sources
between L/45, L/47 and L/50. Therefore, I assumed that the guns were later used for coastal
protection. However, there is no evidence for this.
https://www.netherlandsnavy.nl/Photo_pantserboten.htm & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brinio-class_gunboat


Four 10,5-cm Q.F. Krupp Gun on Dutch coastal gunboat "Gruno" 1915

Four 10,5-cm Q.F. Krupp Gun on Dutch coastal gunboat Gruno 1915.jpg (89.57 KiB) Viewed 87768 times

Original Source: https://www.netherlandsnavy.nl/Sloops/Gruno_quay.jpg


Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Unfortunately, to this day there is no extant example of a 10.5-cm Krupp Q.F Gun L/45
on M.P.L. C/1906, that I know of. But I am sure there will be more results in the future.

Hi! So, this two, there is no certainty about them?

http://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/resiml ... i/1214.jpg

[Tool1958]

Hi! So, this two, there is no certainty about them?
http://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/resiml ... i/1214.jpg

Hello Marcelo,

As mentioned previously, the Turkish author of the post claims that this is a 10.5cm L/45 gun
barrel. The author has done extensive research into the different guns and their locations in
the Dardanelles fortifications. So for me it's very credible and serious articel.

To be clear again; - I am only repeating statements or text passages here and also identifying
these with the source. Turkish Original Source: http://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/789_ca ... akgun.html

So it can only be checked on site by taking measurements to see whether it really is this type of gun.
It may only be a 10.5 cm L/45 gun barrel and not a complete gun with upper- and lower mounts and protective shield.

Regards Holger

[Tool1958]

As mentioned previously, the Turkish author of the post claims that this is a 10.5cm L/45 gun
barrel. The author has done extensive research into the different guns and their locations in
the Dardanelles fortifications. So for me it's very credible and serious articel.

To be clear again; - I am only repeating statements or text passages here and also identifying
these with the source. Turkish Original Source: http://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/789_ca ... akgun.html

So it can only be checked on site by taking measurements to see whether it really is this type of gun.
It may only be a 10.5 cm L/45 gun barrel and not a complete gun with upper- and lower mounts and protective shield.

To return again to the use and presence of 10.5-cm Q.F. L/45 guns on the Turkish theater of
war; - As already mentioned, this type of gun was used only on the "SMS Breslau" / Midilie.

After the conversion from twelve 10.5-cm to eight 15-cm S.K., at least five of the 10.5-cm
were demonstrably integrated into the coastal defence on their original Navy Central Mount.

10,5-cm Battery No.7 & No.17.png (130.83 KiB) Viewed 87728 times

List of Coastal Batteries at Dardanelles.jpg (78.86 KiB) Viewed 87728 times

Original Source: CONFIDENTIAL Report of the committee appointed to investigate the attacks
delivered on and the enemy defences of the Dardanelles straits, in 1919, Admiralty Naval Staff
Gunnery Disvision April 1921 (so called: "Mitchell Report")

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

As mentioned previously, the Turkish author of the post claims that this is a 10.5cm L/45 gun
barrel. The author has done extensive research into the different guns and their locations in
the Dardanelles fortifications. So for me it's very credible and serious articel.

To be clear again; - I am only repeating statements or text passages here and also identifying
these with the source. Turkish Original Source: http://www.geliboluyuanlamak.com/789_ca ... akgun.html

So it can only be checked on site by taking measurements to see whether it really is this type of gun.
It may only be a 10.5 cm L/45 gun barrel and not a complete gun with upper- and lower mounts and protective shield.

To return again to the use and presence of 10.5-cm Q.F. L/45 guns on the Turkish theater of
war; - As already mentioned, this type of gun was used only on the "SMS Breslau" / Midilie.

After the conversion from twelve 10.5-cm to eight 15-cm S.K., at least five of the 10.5-cm
were demonstrably integrated into the coastal defence on their original Navy Central Mount.


10,5-cm Battery No.7 & No.17.png



List of Coastal Batteries at Dardanelles.jpg


Original Source: CONFIDENTIAL Report of the committee appointed to investigate the attacks
delivered on and the enemy defences of the Dardanelles straits, in 1919, Admiralty Naval Staff
Gunnery Disvision April 1921 (so called: "Mitchell Report")

Regards Holger

Hi! And of those five guns the only survivor is that barrel? Or have you seen another one?

[marcelo_malara]

Have you contacted the author at baryamakgun@hotmail.com? May be he has actually measured the guns.