The Dreadnought Project Forum Index The Dreadnought Project
Naval History in the years 1890-1920
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Reg1sterReg1ster 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

USN fire Control
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These bots are now making it past the image verification step. How base.

I'll prune the users and messages and see if there are further steps I can take to secure the site.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Harley



Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 131
Location: Great Britain

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the link, sonofdavros. Sure it will be an interesting read.

And bots can sign up, verify and post now?? Damn that...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems I was wrong -- some of the forums allowed unregistered posters. I locked those down and hope that people aren't put off by having to register.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
sonofdavros



Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 6
Location: Dorset, UK.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Tone. I'm sure it won't put people off.

Harley, whereabouts in the UK are you? I'm in Bournemouth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harley



Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 131
Location: Great Britain

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm at the University of Leeds at the moment, but I live in West Cumbria. Need to do some research into my whole Pre-Dreadnought affection, see if it would genuinely stand the test of time (which is why I hope this simulator of Tone's comes to fruition).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
Adrian Dobb



Joined: 13 Nov 2005
Posts: 41
Location: Devon, UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've invested in the John Brooks book and my initial impressions are as Tone suggested that it is very good. What I've found very useful and interesting so far is the examination of all the many different elements in the gunnery system and how they came to be included in the whole. I had previously thought in simple terms of either having or not having a long range gunnery system (hence how did other navies do it?). But from what I've read so far it all seems much more incremental, i.e its possible to achieve a reasonable degree of success without having all the elements. This to my mind starts to makes sense of how other naval forces were expecting to tackle the problem.

For instance Brooks refers to the Russian navy purchasing Cooke-Pollen rangefinders (of perhaps 12ft base) which had proven superior to the Barr and Stroud in comparative tests, although at triple the price. As estimation of enemy course and speed in decent visibility was at least as good as the various early plotting methods, (and much quicker) even a very basic manual system might do ok. As discussed above poor visibility would equally affect the data collected for a plotted solution.

Any way that's just an impression so far, but it leads me to think that from the various scattered references to the kit and theory of gunnery in fleets other than the RN and Imperial German Navy it should be possible to at least infer the basics of their systems using Brooks' outline of the essentials as a guide. As per Harley's post I don't know of any comparative master tome on this topic so unless anyone does (Tone?) this is the best I can think of.

Incidentally had a quick look at the the Hood sites pdf document, seems again quite interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harley



Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 131
Location: Great Britain

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

:whistles:. Found a site which answered my U.S. gunnery question. In fact, this site is so full of information I'm still reading through it half an hour later. www.navweaps.com. I came across it whilst looking for a picture of 40mm Bofors to work from. By the look of things the Webmaster has pretty much everything covered...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Navweaps is a very nice site for quick answers. Detailed study eventually demands that one explore the sources that informed its creators, however. They give many of their references on the pages in question, which is the mark of a good website.

I'd say the Brooks book is the best single book out there, but it is not a general work focused on the systems and how they performed. Because Brooks is an academic historian, and because he was preceded by only a single other writer in this field whose outspoken conclusions he disagrees with, he was probably obliged by his own interpretation of history, his publisher's sense of what sort of book is worth printing, and the world's love of a no-holds-barred grudge match to largely dedicate itself to arguing against prevalent thinking in this field advanced by the only other person who has written in detail on the matter, and that the points of distinction involve a lot of heat and a lot of "he said, she said" (not all of which occurred in the past!)

I'd love to try writing a book that takes a less historical approach and a more technical one, focusing on bringing more people into the small circle of those who know anything about this field and this era. It's a chore and a taxing moral position to wade into an area of heated debate when the true fun should be to educate more people to join that discussion.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Beatty



Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tone wrote:

Argo

+ Superior construction of both plotting table and clock

+ Clock is internally well-integrated and therefore compact

+ Clock was amenable to further outward options of what plotting equipment to use

+ reliable variable speed drive for generating a continuous range reading

- Plotting was "true course plotting" which was costly to achieve with mechanical reliability and not close enough to the ballistic solution.

- Amenable only to a single rangefinder as input.

- In addition, I believe this required the rangefinder to simultaneously take bearing cuts. I'm sure this received special attention, but the criticality of ensuring the greatest number of range cuts possible with the minimum of distraction

- Both Clock and Argo rangefinder were not truly helm-free; they could tolerate yaw from a perfect course, but when significant maneuver was occurring, operators had to disengage gyros.

snip

tone


IMO these two points are major drawbacks of Argo's system. Using single optical range sources -- particuarly with short baselength instruments -- is very inadvisable. This is because even though one can obtain good ranges, even in good ranging conditions the spread from take to take can be substantial. For instance in the 1980s on USS Iowa it was found that even a very well trained range taker on the 46' baselength Mk 53 in Turrets 2 and 3 had a large spread over the course of a ranging series.

Brad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harley



Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 131
Location: Great Britain

PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seeing as this is the USN Fire Control thread, and I'm curious, is there reading materiel on the Fire Control system as refitted/incorporated on the Iowas in the 1980s? Was it essentially the same as that as fitted in the 1940s or had digital computer gadgetry worked its way in there to great effect?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
tone
Site Admin


Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 479
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand that they never really altered it much. It was hard to improve upon, and still worked. I think the only misgiving was the difficulty of ensuring spares could be made when needed.

tone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Beatty



Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 21

PostPosted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes they did very little to the basic system, however the system had been altered with numerous subtle OrdAlts post war. The big improvement was the addition of the velocimiter radars (can't recall the Mark designation right now), rebagging and reblending of propellent and carefull attention to propellent temperature and storage in the magazines. Overall however the system is basically the same as it was in the 1940s and indeed there are instances in the 1940s where the shooting was equally as good, and the average was still fairly close to the 1980s. As Tone mentions they had trouble with spares and in fact the three museum ships were 'raided' for spares when necessary.

Brad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lacroix



Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 1
Location: Peterborough, Ontario, CANADA

PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In terms of the technology and to a lesser extend their doctrine or use you might want to take a look at;

US NAVAL WEAPONS(ISBN 0-87021-735-6) bu Norman Friedman

This may shed some light on the subject
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group