Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask An Expert- Battleships

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

  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
    I just fixed that for you. Happy Birthday!
    Can't wait to get the book.
    Thank you very much. But I really wasn't to push anybody on this board. However, if I can finish my back up plan, well, let's just wait and see. Your previous posting put me to work. I could not find the photo I had in mind (but I haven't gone through all of my books). But I did find a photo in Newell & Smith's book on the USS Missouri on page 123 and a follow up photo in Paul Stillwell's book on the Battleship Missouri on page 181 that will answer your question on pre-detonation.

    Hopefully I can scan those pages tomorrow and provide you some uploads. Maybe not uploads. I don't know your email address and haven't figured out how to post pictures on this forum yet (they USED to be EASY). Just remember, artillery projectiles of any caliber were made by the hundreds of thousands. Mostly all by women (a cousin of mine was a male supervisor in one of the munitions factories just northeast of the San Fernando Valley). Women were the best to use as they have a natural sense of detail perfection OR imperfection.

    But then there is Murphy's first law. "If ANYTHING could POSSIBLY go WRONG. IT WILL."

    Leave a comment:


  • Pacfanweb
    replied
    Originally posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    I have a four foot tall bookcase full of ship related books. Which shelf has that book would take me some time to find. I really shouldn't be on line right now because my wife is under the weather and I promised to empty the dish washer, take her car to get washed and zap a few more Miller Moths invading our kitchen.

    THEN I will head out to VFW Post 8615 for my daily double Vodka. After that, I will look for the book (if I haven't put it away someplace else).

    I'm also running low on happiness because not a single copy of my book has been sold this month. Hope just one sells before next Tuesday and I can count it as a birthday present for my 80th year on this planet. But if one doesn't sell, well, I have a back up plan.
    I just fixed that for you. Happy Birthday!
    Can't wait to get the book.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
    So you actually have a picture of the detonation happening? That'd be fascinating to see sometime.
    I know, add it to your list, lol.

    Thanks for your knowledge.
    I have a four foot tall bookcase full of ship related books. Which shelf has that book would take me some time to find. I really shouldn't be on line right now because my wife is under the weather and I promised to empty the dish washer, take her car to get washed and zap a few more Miller Moths invading our kitchen.

    THEN I will head out to VFW Post 8615 for my daily double Vodka. After that, I will look for the book (if I haven't put it away someplace else).

    I'm also running low on happiness because not a single copy of my book has been sold this month. Hope just one sells before next Tuesday and I can count it as a birthday present for my 80th year on this planet. But if one doesn't sell, well, I have a back up plan.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pacfanweb
    replied
    So you actually have a picture of the detonation happening? That'd be fascinating to see sometime.
    I know, add it to your list, lol.

    Thanks for your knowledge.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by Pacfanweb View Post
    Regarding the firing delay or "ripple" firing of the main rifles:

    If I'm understanding the reasons for this, they are, in no particular order:

    Because the blast won't interfere with the shell next door and throw its trajectory off a bit

    Because it's easier on the ship itself



    Any other reason? Could the blast ever detonate a shell coming out of the barrel next to it?
    You are somewhat correct on both counts. After conducting stress readings on the roller paths and turret foundation (1 1/2" thick Special Treated Steel shaped (more or less) like a truncated cone), we finally decided that a 1/2 second delay between each gun firing during a salvo fire, gives time for the entire supporting structure to return from compression. The fact that the delay time improved projectile accuracy was a secondary benefit.

    But we still limited full elevation to only 42 degrees, though the guns are designed to elevate 45 degrees for maximum range, in order to take excessive pressure off the roller in the roller path. If I recall, in WW II, the USS Texas had a problem with her rollers flattening out when the guns were at too high of an elevation.

    But I've also been told that, during the Korean War, one of our Iowa class Battleships was able to get her gun barrels raised to 45 degrees relative to the tangent of the Earth's curvature. This was done by deliberately positioning the ship alongside an underwater sand bar and ballasting down onto the sand bar listing the ship at least 4 degrees. But I haven't seen any official report on that though it is perfectly logical.

    And for the last part of your question, ummm, it might be possible for the muzzle blast of an adjoining barrel to activate the base fuse of a shell just a fraction of a second ahead of it. I don't recall which book I have that shows a photo of one of our Iowa's firing a full salvo but you could see the shaving brush fan out of black smoke from a warhead detonating in the air.

    Hard to say which is better. The shell going off after it's well away from you or having the problem the "Mamie" had during the battle of Casablanca where many of the fuses screwed themselves out half way to the target.
    Last edited by RustyBattleship; 21 Jul 16,, 04:10.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pacfanweb
    replied
    Regarding the firing delay or "ripple" firing of the main rifles:

    If I'm understanding the reasons for this, they are, in no particular order:

    Because the blast won't interfere with the shell next door and throw its trajectory off a bit

    Because it's easier on the ship itself



    Any other reason? Could the blast ever detonate a shell coming out of the barrel next to it?

    Leave a comment:


  • bigjimslade
    replied
    It sounds like the ships themselves have stashes of information. Somehow I've got to take a look. Anyone at the NJ I should contact?

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by RustyBattleship View Post
    I may have some photos in hiding somewhere on this PC. However, I know the Wisconsin has a Windlass manual. They had two but when I couldn't find one on the Iowa (while up in Benicia) a contact of mine on the New Jersey got the Wisconsin to give us one of their manuals. That manual is now aboard ship but we have so much more work to do, I would not ask anyone to make a copy of it. But it is possible to get one from the New Jersey because before sending it to me (I think) they made a copy of the Wisconsin's copy.
    I remember sitting on the deck looking through manuals looking for that. Found several WWII era manuals though on different things like the .45 and grenades.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by bigjimslade View Post
    Thanks,

    I have read they are 120 lbs each (I could find that). Would you know of any pictures of the wildcat without chain? I am trying to figure out how the links fit from the plans.
    I may have some photos in hiding somewhere on this PC. However, I know the Wisconsin has a Windlass manual. They had two but when I couldn't find one on the Iowa (while up in Benicia) a contact of mine on the New Jersey got the Wisconsin to give us one of their manuals. That manual is now aboard ship but we have so much more work to do, I would not ask anyone to make a copy of it. But it is possible to get one from the New Jersey because before sending it to me (I think) they made a copy of the Wisconsin's copy.

    Leave a comment:


  • 85 gt kid
    replied
    I was going through something online the other day (can't remember where) that said the Missouri had a prop shaft removed, they went on to say that means she couldn't be reactivated (stupid). Anyways I've never read that in all my readings and with the high restrictions on the Iowas it seems unlikely but figured id ask.

    I do know that the Massachusetts had her outer shafts REMOVED because she couldn't fit in the drydock in the late 80s and the museum wanted to CUT the shafts, the Navy said no.

    Leave a comment:


  • bigjimslade
    replied
    Thanks,

    I have read they are 120 lbs each (I could find that). Would you know of any pictures of the wildcat without chain? I am trying to figure out how the links fit from the plans.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by bigjimslade View Post
    Does anyone know the dimensions of chain links on the Iowas? Diameter? Length? Width?
    The best I can tell you as that Iowa class Battleship anchor chains are 3-3/8" diameter studded links. That's the thickness of the link. They are actually oval shaped about 20" long and 14" or 15" wide. I was just trying to scale off a drawing I made of the towing bridle I had to design when the New Jersey was decommissioned. Then I had to draw it all over again in CAD for the towing bridles for the Missouri and Iowa. So the quickie print out I made is sort of 3/4"=1'-0" to scale.

    You would have to look up their weights on the Internet. But, they are HEAVY. But not the heaviest towing bridle I ever had to design which was for the Ranger when she was towed up to Bremerton from Long Beach. DANG! Those were BIG chain links.

    Leave a comment:


  • bigjimslade
    replied
    Does anyone know the dimensions of chain links on the Iowas? Diameter? Length? Width?

    Leave a comment:


  • ArmorPiercing88
    replied
    Do the other 3 ships use saltwater, or do they just not run as much AC?

    I guess I meant if that lunatic Trump gets elected and tries to reactivate some battleships (which is not beyond reason...not relighting that whole debate but Trump is nuts enough to try), what is the "ranking" of the ships in terms of current material condition, and why? Hasn't Iowa been subject to more restrictions than Missouri over the years? I know her donation contract has the usual language about national emergencies blah blah blah, but she was the only ship NOT put back into Cat B reserve after they were all decomm-ed in the early 90's.

    Leave a comment:


  • RustyBattleship
    replied
    Originally posted by ArmorPiercing88 View Post
    So the Missour is in the best material condition of the 4 because of air conditioning? I was thinking more about the (remote) possibility of needing to be returned to service. They obviously wouldn't be able to bring back all 4. Aren't Wisconsin and Missouri in substantially better shape than Iowa and New Jersey, which would likely become parts bins?
    Yes. Having its own air conditioning machinery, using only FRESH water from shore supply, you do not have to cut open the seachests to provide SALT water to go through the existing York plants. Tube change outs are a b*tch and I had to add in bolted plate accesses through transverse bulkheads for the change outs. This ensures that the main machinery spaces and living quarters below 2nd deck can keep a low humidity. Plus having the main units up on 03 level allows room to access the plants (Carrier) and all the piping is PVC making easy and light weight for an valve maintenance or any repairs needed.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X