PDA

View Full Version : another NC、SD turrets RPC question



ssvcrtfi
24 Aug 09,, 02:58
NC and SDs turrets have RPC(Remote Power Control)?

Dreadnought
24 Aug 09,, 13:19
NC and SDs turrets have RPC(Remote Power Control)?

*Define what you are calling remote? Remote as in ?:confused:

Tiornu
24 Aug 09,, 15:55
None of these ships was completed with RPC, though apparently it was intended from the start. The action report for the Battle of Casablanca shows the gunnery officer's repeated plea for a complete RPC set-up; installation had begun but remained incomplete. It was not until 1943 that any ship got the complete system, and some did not get both elevation and training receiver-regulators until 1944.
I can't be certain, but I believe the Iowas were equipped from the get-go.

Dreadnought
24 Aug 09,, 16:08
Thanks for hinting the meaning of RPC. Havent heard that specific term used but yes the Iowas had that kind of control through the recievers on training and elevation orders from the get go. Your bottom two lights on the "Christmas Trees" mounted on the bulkheads light to indicate the turret is recieving those orders via gunplot through the directors.

It appears that the South Dakota class had it as well. Perhaps not South Dakota herself but her sisters did eventually.

There is a book that details this.

Naval Weapons of World War Two by John Campbell Pg. 107.

Dreadnought
24 Aug 09,, 16:44
An interesting article that gives a brief idea of who had what at the time and how much of an effect it had upon gun laying.

Fire Control Systems in WWII (http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-052.htm)

Further

http://www.combinedfleet.com/b_fire.htm

Tiornu
24 Aug 09,, 20:48
Sorry, what RPC does is feed instructions directly to the mounts while the older follow-the-pointer system requires humans to physically see and match the information relayed to them. Both the British at North Cape and the Americans at Casablanca commented on the human tendency for the mount trainer to "zone out" during prolonged engagements and let his equipment drift off target. The British thus concentrated on RPC for training. If you want to maximize the accuracy of your continuous aim, you want RPC for gun-laying as well. Perhaps strangely, the Germans used RPC only for elevation; I'd think, with their emphasis on quick-turning turrets, they'd have focused on training. The French were avant-garde in having RPC for elevation and training. However, the devil's in the details. The French and German systems were not considered successful. In the case of the French, I believe the problem was with the motors' burning out while trying to make constant, fine adjustments.
Note that I'm addressing only the main batteries of the modern battleships. I think the only old battleships to have RPC for their big guns were West Virginia, Tennessee, and California.

Dreadnought
24 Aug 09,, 20:54
Sorry, what RPC does is feed instructions directly to the mounts while the older follow-the-pointer system requires humans to physically see and match the information relayed to them. Both the British at North Cape and the Americans at Casablanca commented on the human tendency for the mount trainer to "zone out" during prolonged engagements and let his equipment drift off target. The British thus concentrated on RPC for training. If you want to maximize the accuracy of your continuous aim, you want RPC for gun-laying as well. Perhaps strangely, the Germans used RPC only for elevation; I'd think, with their emphasis on quick-turning turrets, they'd have focused on training. The French were avant-garde in having RPC for elevation and training. However, the devil's in the details. The French and German systems were not considered successful. In the case of the French, I believe the problem was with the motors' burning out while trying to make constant, fine adjustments.
Note that I'm addressing only the main batteries of the modern battleships. I think the only old battleships to have RPC for their big guns were West Virginia, Tennessee, and California.

*Sorry Tiornu, In my language it would be Auto, Semi-Auto and Local methods of Fire Control between gun plot, stable vertical, gyro, director and turret itself in certain modes acting as the director for the other turrets.

Dreadnought
24 Aug 09,, 21:08
* I stole this from an earlier post I made on one of Docs threads "Fire Mission" it might help relate to our languages.

1) Primary: Main battery directors (Spots 1 (Mainmast) Spot 2 (Aftmast) Spot 3 (Conning Tower or original FC spotting station) in association with Gun plot and the Mk. 41 Stable vertical contained in Main and Aft plot.

*Automatic- Gun Plot controls turret, sending info on trane and elevation through recievers in machinery pan and electric pan.

*Indicating- Gun position laid by turret crew in the "follow the pointer" mode with the Mk.41 Stable vertical as a guide.

2) Secondary: Turret acts as Fire Control director for all turrets with indicating by Mk. 41 Stable vertical in Main gun plot.

3) Local: Turret crew lays guns, utilizes sight control via telescoping range finder and Ford Mk 34 G.F.C.S. & Ford computer Mk.3