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 

...the basket mast...any info. on why?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
bargami



Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 75
Location: Richmond, Virginia

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:45 am    Post subject: ...the basket mast...any info. on why? Reply with quote

I'm putting this up to see whether any of the experts have some knowledge as to why American warships, both pre-dreadnoughts
and dreadnoughts, had these odd-looking basket masts, i.e.
what was their practical purpose? Our navy seems to have been
the only one to use them, and in dreadnoughts that went into
the interwar era they were replaced with tripods.

From an aesthetic point of view I think they made our dreads,
among the homeliest out there, kind of like floating transmitting
stations or power platforms, especially those that had two of
them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jefgte



Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 65
Location: France

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

US basket mast are higher than other BBs with tripod mast.
For the same high, tripod is certainly heavier.

They are also les vulnerable when hit than tripod mast.

In mechanical, a multi tubular structure is stronger than a structure made with a few biger tubes.

Personnaly, for the look, I prefer tripod rebuilt in the 25'-30'.



Jef
_________________
Current 1/700 WL Scratchbuilt:
1/700 WL models in progress
- HMS Lion
- SMS Friedrich dre Grosse
- USS Arkansas
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harley



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

PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Really, less vulnerable? Wasn't it Michigan which managed to have one of her cage masts keeled over by wind?

The tripod may have been heavier but it could also support the weight of equipment needed in the tops for decent fire control, a fact confirmed by the General Board of the US Navy even before war's end.

Harley
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address MSN Messenger
bargami



Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 75
Location: Richmond, Virginia

PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2008 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

After reading your reply I caught up with your information. Appears that
that "Michigan" incident you site helped lead to a report submitted to the
Navy Dept. comparing basket vs. tripod. Looks like the underlying
intent is to defend the existing arrangement, but even as they're trying
to do this they can't help but acknowledge the problems with the
American mast and the possible advantages of adopting tripod.
Clearly these advantages were decisive in the end.

Still not sure of the rationale for it to start with. The report implies some
things; maybe involving weight or balance?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Patia



Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 4
Location: Manchester England UK

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:00 pm    Post subject: Basket or Cage Masts in US Warships Reply with quote

Commander William Hovgaard of the Massechusetts School of Naval Architecture writes in the 1910 edition of Janes Fighting Ships (amongst many other things) his approval of the 'lattice' or cage masts of US Dreadnoughts which he stated serves its intended purpose of insulating fire control from the shock of heavy gunfire and the vibration of stressed machinery.
This latter point is most interesting as in his excellent book The Battlecruiser HMS Hood - An Illustrated Biography 1916 - 1941, Bruce Taylor records servicemen reporting that when running at speed - this much later designed and improved ship than the original US lattice mast dreadnoughts was still unbearable in the spotting tops atop her tripod mast due to the transmission of vibration from the engine rooms, and had to undergo several attempts to fit dampers of one form or another to address this problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bargami



Joined: 11 Dec 2007
Posts: 75
Location: Richmond, Virginia

PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sounds like you've dug out the rationale, and there had to be one for a
design departure. And the advantages are understandable, even if there
may have been disadvantages which appeared over time.

I think it's important here that the United States Navy, in developing
and designing its warships, is operating at a great distance from the
navies of Europe, even while responding to developments there (and
in Japan). While building their own dreadnoughts, in company with their
development in Europe, American designers might be more likely to
make a bold departure. Another example would be plunging ahead
with the super-firing turret, about which the Royal Navy was cautious
for a few years (not criticizing that: there were legitimate concerns).

I'm not saying that all of the bold departures were right; just typically
American..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Dreadnought Project Forum Index -> Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
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