Search found 274 matches
- Mon Dec 29, 2014 11:57 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
- Replies: 56
- Views: 31238
Re: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
42/43 stats RPB 42/43 RPM Birds per minute 5” 42352/96 441 19 .043 5”VT 9128/61 150 19 .127 40mm 120465/ 1451 120 .083 1.1” 67,858 1616 100 .062 20mm 853,558/ 4225 285 .067 .50 cal 447,995/47 9531 450 .047 .30 cal 77461/2 38731 450 .012 Above is a table I made using the report listed here- http://ww...
- Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:17 am
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Spruance's Decision-Right or Wrong
- Replies: 12
- Views: 5937
Re: Spruance's Decision-Right or Wrong
Lee often expressed that he would never again expose his battleships to such risks as he had to run at Guadalcanal in 1942, and that USN battleships were not designed for, and the crews poorly trained for, night battle So much for the superiority of US Battleships at night with their radar fire con...
- Sat Dec 20, 2014 5:27 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
- Replies: 56
- Views: 31238
Re: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
Was that your own words or a copy paste Aurora? I thought it was a copy paste, my error if it was not. My only point is the Oerlikon is much maligned due to it's performance against kamikazes, but that was a very unusual situation and it's effectiveness against conventional attack is often overlooke...
- Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:32 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
- Replies: 56
- Views: 31238
Re: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
The Oerlikon was an effective short-range weapon, and suitable for mounting on light and coastal vessels such as air-sea rescue launches corvettes,sloops and submarines – in fact the weight of the basic gun compared favourably with that of the .50in Browning machine gun. It could fire up to 500 rou...
- Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:18 am
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Fletcher v Fubuki Class Destroyer Battle
- Replies: 13
- Views: 7736
Re: Fletcher v Fubuki Class Destroyer Battle
From Navweaps: with a mid-1943 analysis of 105 torpedoes dropped at speeds in excess of 150 knots found that 36 percent ran cold (did not start), 20 percent sank, 20 percent had poor deflection performance, 18 percent gave unsatisfactory depth performance, 2 percent ran on the surface and only 31 pe...
- Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:52 pm
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
- Replies: 56
- Views: 31238
Re: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
The British 5.25" Dual Purpose gun Not a bad weapon, but hardly the mainstay of the British dual purpose AA park. They had a lot of dual purpose weapons, kind of a mixed bag like the Japanese had, including a 4" weapon or two, a few 4.5" weapons, and the 5.25" weapon you mention...
- Fri Dec 19, 2014 10:04 pm
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Fletcher v Fubuki Class Destroyer Battle
- Replies: 13
- Views: 7736
Re: Fletcher v Fubuki Class Destroyer Battle
I didn't know our DDs fired torpedoes which were the same type as those trouble-plagued submarine fish... I think our aerial torpedoes were OK, but the Sub and DD ones were the terrible ones. Our aerial torpedoes could not be launched from as fast of a moving plane or from the same altitude as Japa...
- Fri Dec 19, 2014 7:35 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Refitting of ships - Armor?
- Replies: 21
- Views: 14277
Re: Refitting of ships - Armor?
That makes a lot of sense Tommy. I just was not sure what procedures there generally where when modernizing a vessel.
- Fri Dec 19, 2014 12:26 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Refitting of ships - Armor?
- Replies: 21
- Views: 14277
Re: Refitting of ships - Armor?
So no for the US BB's at Pearl, and the Japanese Kong class either?
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 9:45 pm
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: Refitting of ships - Armor?
- Replies: 21
- Views: 14277
Re: Refitting of ships - Armor?
I guess there was one question I had - Is anyone aware of battleship reconstruction where they replaced as opposed to added on to existing armor?
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 7:46 pm
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Spruance's Decision-Right or Wrong
- Replies: 12
- Views: 5937
Re: Spruance's Decision-Right or Wrong
The right call was made by Spruance IMO. So many Japanese planes were lost in the battle, and carriers without planes are useless. This was the last battle that the Japanese Naval Aviation did anything using conventional tactics.. One might say the Japanese carriers with poorly trained pilots and fl...
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:12 am
- Forum: Naval Technology
- Topic: De-Capping Layer
- Replies: 24
- Views: 16749
Re: De-Capping Layer
"Special common" had about a 2 lb bursting charge. AA common had more like 7 or 8 lb. So a common is about 13% Explosive by weight, the Special Common about 4% by weight. Compares to about 1.5% in the 16"/50 AP shell, or 8.1% For the 16"/50 HC round. I fond the rounds for the US...
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:03 am
- Forum: Naval History (1922-1945)
- Topic: Why was USN cruiser shooting so poor?
- Replies: 93
- Views: 35871
Re: Why was USN cruiser shooting so poor?
Good news only if you are not JapaneseHowever the good news was that USN destroyers got the improved torpedoes too.
Good point. I don't think the timing of both is purely circumstantial.until late 42 early 43-which will almost match with the IJN introduction of Convoy Escorts
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:00 am
- Forum: Military History and Technology
- Topic: World best soldiers ever
- Replies: 120
- Views: 86781
Re: World best soldiers ever
I agree, they were just not technologically able to compete with Euorpeans, but that does not undermine their discipline, morale, or courage.but that did not detract from the fact that they were great warriors-which was my point RF
For that matter, perhaps the Nez Perce should be included?
- Thu Dec 18, 2014 12:50 am
- Forum: Naval Weapons
- Topic: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
- Replies: 56
- Views: 31238
Re: Japanese vs US AA capabilities
That 3" was a pretty mean weapon. I think it had a rate of fire of 50 rpm's or so,combine with a proximity fuse. I don't think it was operational until 1948, but had the invasion of Japan came about it may well have been pressed into service sooner. with the advent of the Kamikaze even the 40mm...