Naval History Forums

Steve Crandell wrote: ↑Sat Nov 27, 2021 6:05 pm
Do you think that was a serious and ongoing defect that was present in all US ships? ... Maybe teething problems.

I'd consider the construction departments as equally competent in discovering and cleaning up problems. It would be unwise to live with known weaknesses.

demonstrate that the Baron 'copied' ?

With regard to german Radar resp performance of Radar the Baron completely relied on british sources as far as i interprete his texts / footnotes on the theme.

I'm a bit late to this topic. Most of the above posts seem to concentrate on Tirpitz and late war German naval Radars. I have been looking more at Bismark and early second world war naval radars . the radars on board Bismarck were dedicated firecontrolradars. funkmess.jpg coarse firecontrol scheme ...

bigger is not always better the advantages on the US side are not as clear as it may appear let me explain. performance 16"/45 2700 lb AP projectile vs 38 cm/L52 800 kg PsGr in metrics 33,7 km vs 35,6 km max range 1250 kg vs 800 kg projectile weight 18,5 kg vs 18,8 kg bursting charge armor pene...

kevin32422 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:51 am 1942..United States produced better built ships, better radar better firecontrol

by what measurements

Once again Thorsten brings hugely valuable contemporary information, but I personally still struggle to envisage how one loader and one ammunition carrier (standard crew per gun) could possibly feed 55 shells individually into the breech in one minute, ie very nearly one per second, continuously. A...

no only 2 kHz difference between Fumo-Scharnhorst and Fumo-Gneisenau.

but this small difference does not rule out larger frequzency reception areas. depending on the receiver characteristics of the antenna and a tunable receiver

Early in development of the 38 cm gun/turret they had to choose between a L/56 Gun with 865 m/s initial Velocity and 35 degrees elevation and the known gun. Range 41 km. Extra weight per turret required: 128 t. Flight time for 820 m/s at maximum elevation 30 degrees was ~71 seconds. Its no more a ma...

My grandfather lived near a air warning Radar installation 7 km or so. When the set was in search mode you could see stripes on the tv screen when the beam sweeps over the house every 10 seconds or so and hear a noise from the speaker. But not on every TV-channel. I checked the february protocol fro...

With regard to Funkmess it must be said that any mention of the term or properties that allow conclusions to be drawn was strictly forbidden in open systems. Since even encrypted radio communication does not have to be regarded as secure communication in the sense of gkdos. The term DT 350 hm i woul...

According to the Funkmess protocol of the Scharnhorst/Gneisenau operation in February 1941 they used their Funkmess antenna as receiver for third party emissions. They could detect the use of other Radar equipment on nearby frequencies.

It's nice to know, for example, that m = 0.5 +Bx, but not very handy unless the user knows exactly what Bx is. Bill Jurens (sin a)^m m describes the obliquity term wich with to some o degree of accuracy described the general oblique performance of german L/ 4,4-4,6 APC projectiles with crh ~1,3 and...

Kartoffelkiste = potato box

from the name space to store potatos to eat

We have already discussed this before. Bismarck´s machinery was not efficient, her consumption was 325 grams/hp/hour, whereas for example Massachusetts´ was 305. The problem with all german naval powerplants was the high holiday load. Only steam on for readiness to drive and turbines making 0 revol...

Relative performance of KC aA(WW1) and KC (nA)(WW2)

At thickness 200 mm vs 15 cm Psgr L/3,7
Gg (Grenzschuss)at 0 degrees obliquity

KC(nA)approximately 740 m/s
KC(aA) approximately 680 m/s

The ballistic difference seems more marked at thicker plates.