Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Battleships

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

  • With all due respect, Sumrall isn't to be taken lightly.
    While I respect Robt. Sumrall and all he has done for US Naval history, etc. there were NO dual 20mm mounts on MISSOURI or any of the other 3 IOWAs that I can find from well over 100 photos of these ships. I think the operative clause in his complete statement is this: "It is uncertain if this installation was carried out in any of the class."

    Comment


    • Originally posted by bigjimslade View Post
      To finish my computer model, I am looking for measured drawings of the following Iowa class details:

      Nixie Bolsters
      Armored Box Launchers
      Life Raft Holders
      Phalanx Guns
      SATCOM Antenna
      SQL-32 Antenna
      Bow Roller Chock
      16" Range Finder Hoods
      MK 37 Director
      MK 38 Director
      AN/SPS-6 Antenna
      AN/SPS-10 Antenna
      New Jersey/Iowa Bow Bulwark
      Funnel Caps
      I need to add to this list, the same for the boat cranes.

      Comment


      • Have a question regarding battleship propulsion


        for U.S.S. Massachusetts (BB 59) form BRIEF DESCRIPTION - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
        "Each Boiler can change 16,500 gallons of water into steam at 600 lbs. per sq. in. pressure and 850 degrees F. Temperature in an hour. In order to do this it burns about 1400 gallons of fuel oil per hour."

        BBs 61 to 64 used improved Babcock Wilcox Boilers. What was the designed steam output and fuel flow?

        And btw is there somebody knowing the specific calorific value of the used fuel oil during WW2 [BTU/gal]
        Thank you.

        Comment


        • Here's a question. Did battleships get set on fire by small calibre gun fire?

          I ask this because in this game I play, World of Warships, when I play a BB, a lot of CA, CL and DD try to gun fight me by peppering me with HE shells and setting me on fire. The fire does 10 times more damage to me than the explosions themselves. That's got to be wrong, no?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by hboGYT View Post
            Here's a question. Did battleships get set on fire by small calibre gun fire?

            I ask this because in this game I play, World of Warships, when I play a BB, a lot of CA, CL and DD try to gun fight me by peppering me with HE shells and setting me on fire. The fire does 10 times more damage to me than the explosions themselves. That's got to be wrong, no?
            Yes, it's wrong. But also yes, smaller caliber fire could and did certainly start fires on Battleships. Just ask South Dakota at Guadalcanal.

            But as for a topside fire gradually sinking the ship like it does in the game....nope. That's totally unrealistic. As is the whole "don't show your broadside" business in the game. In real Battleships, the broadside is where your armor is. The game is fun, but don't treat it like a simulation...it's not.
            Does have some darn nice graphics and ship modeling, though.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
              Yes, it's wrong. But also yes, smaller caliber fire could and did certainly start fires on Battleships. Just ask South Dakota at Guadalcanal.

              But as for a topside fire gradually sinking the ship like it does in the game....nope. That's totally unrealistic. As is the whole "don't show your broadside" business in the game. In real Battleships, the broadside is where your armor is. The game is fun, but don't treat it like a simulation...it's not.
              Does have some darn nice graphics and ship modeling, though.
              What about citadel shots?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by hboGYT View Post
                What about citadel shots?
                just something made up for the game.

                There is such thing as an armored citadel on a bBattleship, but there's no such term as a "citadel shot".

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
                  just something made up for the game.

                  There is such thing as an armored citadel on a bBattleship, but there's no such term as a "citadel shot".
                  What about over-penetration?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by hboGYT View Post
                    What about over-penetration?
                    That happened. AP shells would go all the way through un-armored or lightly-armored targets and either not explode or explode harmlessly in the sea.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Thoddy View Post
                      Have a question regarding battleship propulsion


                      for U.S.S. Massachusetts (BB 59) form BRIEF DESCRIPTION - ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
                      "Each Boiler can change 16,500 gallons of water into steam at 600 lbs. per sq. in. pressure and 850 degrees F. Temperature in an hour. In order to do this it burns about 1400 gallons of fuel oil per hour."

                      BBs 61 to 64 used improved Babcock Wilcox Boilers. What was the designed steam output and fuel flow?

                      And btw is there somebody knowing the specific calorific value of the used fuel oil during WW2 [BTU/gal]
                      Thank you.
                      Not much help here but the Midway class carriers with similar/identical turbines (53,000 HP each) and probably the same boilers produced about a max of 153,000 pounds of steam an hour. Fuel usage was about 1,475 gallons/hour at full load. The NSFO fuel used when these ships were built had about 5% more energy than the clean burning NATO F-76 fuels (also called DFM) used starting about 1970ish.

                      Send a note to B&W they are still around? They produced over 50% of the boilers in WWII.
                      Last edited by FlankDestroyer; 01 Oct 18,, 04:07.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
                        Yes, it's wrong. But also yes, smaller caliber fire could and did certainly start fires on Battleships. Just ask South Dakota at Guadalcanal.

                        But as for a topside fire gradually sinking the ship like it does in the game....nope. That's totally unrealistic.
                        I'd have to disagree with the bit about the fires. While I don't know if uncontrolled fires materially contributed to the sinking of any battleships in WW2, they could be a significant and/or contributing factor. Probably the wildest close-range fight between battleships and smaller cruisers and destroyers (and probably most similar to what you might see in WoW) was the naval battle on the night of 12-13 November between IJN battleships Hiei, Kirishima and their support warships against a USN task force led by Adm Callaghan (followed by a second fight the night after.) The Combined Fleet website has a good account of the Hiei's loss, deriving the information from both US and Japanese sources. Fires were not the primary source of the Hiei's loss, however uncontrolled fires did sink many other ships and Lexington comes immediately to mind. Fire is acknowledged as one of the greater threats to ships and is reflected in how much damage control training is fire related. Warships tend to have lots of stuff that likes to explode when exposed to fire.

                        Comment


                        • I know its a game but maybe someone could tell me. Why does the Iowa only have a torpedo damage reduction of 27% compared to the IJN amagi's 42%. I thought Iowa had a pretty decent torpedo protection system

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by ADHD Chief View Post
                            I know its a game but maybe someone could tell me. Why does the Iowa only have a torpedo damage reduction of 27% compared to the IJN amagi's 42%. I thought Iowa had a pretty decent torpedo protection system
                            You answer was in the first sentence. "It's a game".

                            I suspect that the designers have a bit of bias against US ships. The US Battleships in-game should be much more accurate than they are, and their secondaries should have a lot longer range. But again, it's a game not a simulation, so they had to try and make each ship have strengths and weaknesses for balance.
                            It doesn't at all represent how things were in real life....other than the modeling. That is fantastic.

                            Comment


                            • This is a good read about Battleship designs from some naval historians. Not sure if it has been posted before?

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

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by hboGYT View Post
                                Here's a question. Did battleships get set on fire by small calibre gun fire?

                                I ask this because in this game I play, World of Warships, when I play a BB, a lot of CA, CL and DD try to gun fight me by peppering me with HE shells and setting me on fire. The fire does 10 times more damage to me than the explosions themselves. That's got to be wrong, no?
                                The Germans made a comprehensive test with the target ship Hessen in 1937
                                3 destroyers were set as attackers at very short and favourable distances of 2,5 km - 2,7 km they achieved about 200 hits of 12,7 cm in very short time against the target ship.

                                Its fighting capabilities had been strongly reduced by splinterdamage and direkt hits against sensors, firecontrol facitlities, Flaks, machineweapons, ready ammunition, personellel, not armored parts of the ship, funnels and so on.

                                But anything befind usual captitalship armor was unharrassed.
                                Fire was absolutely no problem.

                                Conclusion the target ships was never in danger, loosing ist seekeeping capabilities speed and maneuverability but should have had problems with ist fighting capabilities.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X