Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Battleships

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Ken_NJ View Post
    USS New Jersey at 887 ft 7 in?
    Well, for that particular ship, you're a couple of inches over. However, the question was in plural context rather than singular. In other words, the Iowa CLASS Battleships were the longest ever built.

    Darn. Our troops sure would have liked those Butter Cookies. In truth, I won a tin of Butter Cookies for having a large layout of Miwaukee Road trains in HO scale. However, I had them sent to the daughter of a good friend of mine who was serving in Iraq at the time. She was rather confused as to who sent them to her and why, but her unit enjoyed them tremendously. It wasn't until she returned from Iraq while she, her father and I were sipping drinks at the VFW post that she found out it was me who had them sent.
    Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

    Comment


    • #62
      Isn't the Wisconsin the ship that was supposed to be longer then the rest? I think it was because of the bow being replaced on it...
      "If a man does his best, what else is there?"
      -General George Patton Jr.

      Comment


      • #63
        I looked up each of the Iowa's on Wikipedia, they had the NJ as the longest. That was the quickest place to find the information, not very accurate. I would trust Rusty more over any web site.

        Comment


        • #64
          I think what Mr L. means is the longest at launch which would have been the New Jersey. Four inches longer then her sisters. Many seem to speculate that this added few inches comes in the form of her flanges welded on the stern for her Nixie Towed Sonar Array mounting. Would be interesting to remeasure all four to see what they all measure now after their 1980's refit.
          Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Michigan_Guy View Post
            Isn't the Wisconsin the ship that was supposed to be longer then the rest? I think it was because of the bow being replaced on it...
            I've read this in a number of books too, that the Wisconsin is longer due to the bow replacement. But the upper bow was not replaced, just removed and reattached after the collision with the destroyer USS Eaton in 1954 (the lower bow was what was replaced, with the structure taken from the USS Kentucky). We have discussed this in the past here, and our resident expert, Rusty Battleship, who actually designed the 1980's Iowa class refits, assures me that the Wisconsin is not measurably longer due to this work. Still, the all of the Iowa class are the longest battleships regardless of any modifications. Too bad, I'd like nothing better than for the Wisconsin to be the longest one.
            sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
            If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
              I think what Mr L. means is the longest at launch which would have been the New Jersey. Four inches longer then her sisters. Many seem to speculate that this added few inches comes in the form of her flanges welded on the stern for her Nixie Towed Sonar Array mounting. Would be interesting to remeasure all four to see what they all measure now after their 1980's refit.
              You're pretty close on this. When all four Battleships were built they all had the same bow configuration that included 20 mm gun tubs port and stbd of the bullnose. Before modernization in the 1980's, both New Jersey and Missouri had the gun tubs removed. But before that, on the outside of the upper edge of the tubs was a wind diverter, actually a venturi scoop to to push oncoming air up and over the gun crews. Though today the Iowa and Wisconsin retained their gun tubs at the bow, the wind diverter was removed.

              The Wisconsin did not attain a longer hull length when receiving Kentucky's bow. Only the lower one-third was replaced leaving the upper part of the bow above water to still extend forward in her origninal as-built condition.

              However, I have seen many ships of many classes where there are differences in their dimensions. One reason is that one class of ship may have been built in several shipyards and differences in construction procedures resulted in a longer or shorter ship.

              This can also occur in only a single shipyard. A private shipyard built all of the Spruance class Destroyers. Later one of their compartments in the superstructure was to be converted into a new electronics suite. The design section that had to lay out an installation arrangement of the consoles needed an accurate drawing of the size of the compartment and the sizes and locations of Tee-bar bulkhead stiffeners.

              So, I went out and measured up the compartments on four ships.

              You guessed it. There were all different in overall size and some stiffener locations.

              Somewhere along the line somebody forgot the meaning of QA (Quality Assurance).
              Last edited by RustyBattleship; 20 Jan 11,, 18:44.
              Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

              Comment


              • #67
                Agreed with the above Mr. L. Interesting how the four ships differ slightly in measurement and appearance. Thinking "Kilroy" wasn't there all the time.;)

                Am going to send you message about your inquiry. Mr. L. You now have a new "notification" in your box.;)
                Last edited by Dreadnought; 20 Jan 11,, 19:04.
                Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Too bad, I'd like nothing better than for the Wisconsin to be the longest one.

                  Just keep in mind she still belongs to Philadelphia. Along with the New Jersey.;)
                  Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I am sure she is in good hands :), I visit her regularly on facebook.
                    Jay Amundson | Facebook

                    If I could have anything at all in this world, I'd build a nice deep and wide canal right up to my house and park her in my yard so I could personally watch over her, holystone her decks and polish her brass, and perhaps even live in the Milwaukee Suite and rent out my house.

                    I did covertly try to take posession of her in 1991, by writing my name in a secret location aboard her with my trusty pencil - but I doubt that any court will uphold my claim. ;)
                    sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Another topic I just though of while looking at the USS Kearsarge (ex BB-5). Looks like they removed most of the shell of the turret on some of the battleships about 1/2 to 3/4 the way down the page for re-gunning. How difficult was it to replace the barrels on an Iowa class? Did they need to take all of the armour and plating off to replace the barrels?

                      Battleship Photo Index BB-5 USS KEARSARGE

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Dreadnought View Post
                        Too bad, I'd like nothing better than for the Wisconsin to be the longest one.

                        Just keep in mind she still belongs to Philadelphia. Along with the New Jersey.;)
                        She is just a day trip away. Luckily, I live between the two sisters on Delmarva.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Ken_NJ View Post
                          Another topic I just though of while looking at the USS Kearsarge (ex BB-5). Looks like they removed most of the shell of the turret on some of the battleships about 1/2 to 3/4 the way down the page for re-gunning. How difficult was it to replace the barrels on an Iowa class? Did they need to take all of the armour and plating off to replace the barrels?

                          Battleship Photo Index BB-5 USS KEARSARGE

                          It looks like they were able to change the Kearsarge's barrels through her oversized gun port. On the Iowa's they had to take the armor off the top of the turret above the gun to change barrels. It was a big job and usually done stateside in a ship yard, the guns weighed ~110 tons. I beleive one of our Iowa class experts can illuminate the process in better detail.

                          http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/bat...tml#post755861
                          Attached Files
                          Last edited by USSWisconsin; 26 Jan 11,, 06:49.
                          sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                          If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                            [ATTACH]23759[/ATTACH]
                            It looks like they were able to change the Kearsarge's barrels through her oversized gun port. On the Iowa's they had to take the armor off the top of the turret above the gun to change barrels. It was a big job and usually done stateside in a ship yard, the guns weighed ~110 tons. I beleive one of our Iowa class experts can illuminate the process in better detail.
                            I'm afraid I have to disagree at some point. Only the center panel of the turret roof would need to be removed to get at some of the big items. Generally speaking the gun yoke was secured to the turret roof forward of the center panel. The barrel could then be changed out on its own.

                            We had to change out the center barrel of turret II of the New Jersey back in the 80's. Preparing for the changeout was longer than the barrel changeout itself. Most of the special rigging items were in storage up in Hawthorne, Nevada (along with the new barrel) but some were missing and we had to make new ones.

                            That wasn't easy as the plan copies we had were very faded and it took a few near-sighted techs and engineers (like me) to read what the dimensions would be and we drew new plans that could be read by a normal person.

                            The turret had to be trained to port a few degrees. Then a "staging" had to be built up underneath it, strong enough to support the weight of a gun barrel weighing 118 standard tons. The stanchions to the main deck were pretty hefty but since the main deck in that area was "ONLY" 1 1/2" thick, extra stanchions were added below to the 2nd deck that is 6" thick.

                            I have a full set of photographs of the Missouri's barrel changeout in Norfolk, plus the changeout procedures. But it's too late at night right now to dig them out, scan them, reduce them to copy size and post them.

                            But in a nutshell, only one panel roof had to be taken out. But not always. If there were no other large items to be replaced (such as the Yoke, Slide, vent fans, etc.) it remained in place.

                            In other words, the "Fast Class" Battleships, including the Iowas, were designed for a more rapid changeout of barrels than the older classes of ships. The designs were very precise, excellent and workable. And this was when the word "computer" in the dictionary meant a "person who computes figures such as costs and sales prices."
                            Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Thanks Rusty, I didn't understand the the process very well, its amazing to get the details from the person who did it.

                              I found this picture of Iowa getting a new gun, among other things, Ingalls - Sept 1982
                              Attached Files
                              sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
                              If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by USSWisconsin View Post
                                Thanks Rusty, I didn't understand the the process very well, its amazing to get the details from the person who did it.

                                I found this picture of Iowa getting a new gun, among other things, Ingalls - Sept 1982
                                [ATTACH]23761[/ATTACH]
                                I know it looks like the left barrel of Turret II is missing. It's was there but was out of the picture. The white patch is a sheet of galvanized steel installed during her last inactivation to keep the turret compartment sealed against dampness.

                                The crane is installing the new tripod mast and the photo was taken at the Avendale dry dock.
                                Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X