Bismarck with Triple Turrets...

[Legend]

The other day, an idea struck me. Bismarck, with four twin turrets, and a firing rate of three rounds per minute, has a broadside weight of 42,336 lbs. Theoretically, if they had inserted another barrel into each turret, the Germans could have potentially created a ship with a damage output double that of a KGV, superior to the Iowas and Yamatos, and high enough to contend with a Montana Class BB (Point taken: the armor would still be inferior).

1,764 (Shell Weight) x 12 (New # of Barrels) = 21,168 (New Broadside) x 3 (RoF) = 63,504 (Bismarck's New lbs Output per Minute)


Outputs (lbs) per minute:
Montana----64,800
Bismarck---63,504 (New)
Yamato-----57,942
Iowa--------48,600
Bismarck---42,336 (Old)
KGV---------31,800


Would it have been possible?

[Karl Heidenreich]

Legend,

If I´m not mistaken this same issue was addressed some years ago and you can find it in this very forum. Anyway, I do believe that some arguments for your proposition were not answered entirely.

One position, let me remember, was that Bismarck´s design didn´t allowed for triple turrets or changing the 15" for 16". And I object completely, at that moment, bringing forth the case of the North Car or South Dak that were concieved as 14" in accordance to the Treaties and then upgraded as 16". This is also an argument that has brought forth at the forum a guy called Lutscha which basic argument that Bismarck, having such a huge displacement, carry less gunnery than the US BBs prior to the Iowas, which I must admitt is a very good point now.

I invite you to look back at the older threads and see what you can find. I´m very lazy nowadays doing that. Sometimes I find a stupid post of mine and feel very bad.

Best regards,

[Legend]

Apologies.

[marcelo_malara]

As I understand it, the problem was that the Germans didn´t have a 16" gun, and waitng for it would have delayed the constuction.

[Bgile]

You don't just take a barbette designed for twin 15" guns and put triple 16" guns on it. There is a very large difference in size and weight. YOu can't put twin 16" guns in a twin 15" gun turret either. 16" guns of the same caliber are much heavier and take up more room. My gosh, why not put six 16" guns in 4 turrets, then you would have 4x6 = 24 guns.

The North Carolina class was to have three turrets with four 14" guns each, in line with treaty restrictions. The USN knew there was an escalator clause, so they designed a triple 16" turret that would fit the quat 14" barbette just in case. When the escalator clause was invoked, the design for the 16" turret was ready and it only took a few months to make the substitution in the unfinished ship (North Carolina).

[marcelo_malara]

My gosh, why not put six 16" guns in 4 turrets, then you would have 4x6 = 24 guns.

Good idea, I would put 3 facing forward and 3 aft, so she can fire over both sides at the same time!!!!

[als_pug]

at the time the bismark was built the 15 inch turrets were the only guns availabale . the next ship the h-39 was intended to have 16 inch guns . several of these were made and installed in norway as coastal defence batteries . 1 batterie is still in existence .

http://www.adolfkanonen.com/

impressive looking guns lol .

i still think it was interesting that the schanhorst and her sisiter were never converted to twin 15 . do you think it would have worked .

on another note re the calibre gun etc on a ship . an interesting case to look at is the single 18 inch gun mounted on the furious . it used the same turret as the twin 15 yet only just managed to fit the single 18 . also it was too powerfull for the ship . yet the twin 15 was not /.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Let me first clarify something: I said that two options have been examined in the forum:
1. 12 x 15" guns (four triple turrets or even 9 x 15")
2. 8 x 16"

In both cases arguments were raised about the design, which in order to do the mentioned modifications will need a such an incredible upgrade, that many called for more displacement.

Having said that I think that the mentioned upgrade, which I concur must take place, will not be that outstanding.

I think that Marcelo is right that the 15" were the available naval guns that Krupp could supply. BUt it was due to a Krupp policy that assured the navy that with them they were OK. It´s true that Krupp didn´t have production 16" available at the time.

And Legend, don´t apologyse because this about time to talk about this a little bit more becasue certainily will woudl talk design again which is something good, always.

Best regards

[Dave Saxton]

The Germans had gone to triples on both the panzerschiffs and the Scharnhorsts. They didn't like triples as good as twins for a variety of technical and philosophical reasons. In 1934 several new guns (all in twin turrets) were made available ranging from 33cm (13"), 35cm (13.8"), 38cm (15") and 40.6cm (16"). The 16" was available. It's clear in the archival record that the gun size selected was mainly based on politcal considerations and not based on technical or feasability limitations. Of course considering the power potential of high velocity 38cm guns it was a not a bad decision from the performance perspective either.

[lwd]

... . the next ship the h-39 was intended to have 16 inch guns . several of these were made and installed in norway as coastal defence batteries . 1 batterie is still in existence .

http://www.adolfkanonen.com/

impressive looking guns lol .
....

Not just looking from the stats I've seen. Indeed some on this board who are more knowledgeable than me consider these to be very impressive guns for their class.

[Legend]

Knowing the 16in gun was out of the question until about the time after WWII actually ended, I was only talking about putting 38cm onto this new turret. Four triple turrets with 38cm guns.

One of my other questions, which you guys went over, partially, was if these new turrets could fit in the existing barbettes? I was thinking that they wouldn't fit initially, but then I thought of the real ones, the barrels are far from the side of the barbette sides, and with enlargement of the turret top, they could potentially fit three barrels in. Albeit it would be cramped.

[Dave Saxton]

Why is the 16" gun out of the question until late war?

[Lutscha]

3 RPGPM are imo not a realistic figure for the German 38cm guns at any reasonable battle range.

[JtD]

The change from 35cm to 38cm increased the displacement by about 2000ts or 5%. I think it is reasonable to expect about the same again from an upgrade to 40.6cm.

[tommy303]

JtD has nailed it. The naval high command did not want any further increases in weight as Bismarck was already at the limit allowed for by the depth of the Kiel Canal. As it was, she could not transit the canal at full war load. Any further increase in weight was therefore unfeasible for her beam and length. The heavier H class ships would have compensated for the higher displacement by wider beams.