Differences between 10,5-cm (4.1") Krupp Naval guns S.K. L/40 and L/45?

[Tool1958]

Have you contacted the author at baryamakgun@hotmail.com? May be he has actually measured the guns.

Good idea; - Done, I'll get back to you with an answer.

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Have you contacted the author at baryamakgun@hotmail.com? May be he has actually measured the guns.

Good idea; - Done, I'll get back to you with an answer.

Regards Holger

Good! If you want me to participate in the exchange mail me to marcel_malara@yahoo.com.ar

Regards

[Tool1958]

Good! If you want me to participate in the exchange mail me to marcel_malara@yahoo.com.ar

Noted; - will set you in copy with the answer.


______________________________________________________________________________________

The following images do not show any further details, but background & text indicate the exact
type of two additional guns of the "SMS Breslau" / Midilie: 10.5 cm S.K. L/45 on M.P.L. C/1906


I_Transport of 10,5 cm L/45 from SMS Breslau-Midilli at Bosborus via Railway to Euphrates.

I_Transport of 10,5 cm L45 Guns from SMS Breslau-Midilli at Bosborus via Railway to Euphrates.png (167.65 KiB) Viewed 17893 times

Original Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/39631091@N03/9525330482
(Unfortunately the author is wrong. The "Torgut Reis" had only L/35 guns with different gun shields
and the two torpedo cruisers "Peyk-i-Shevket" and Berk i Satvet" had a total of only four L/40 guns.
All these guns were demonstrably installed at the Dardanelles. See Mitchel Report, p. 474 - 482)



II_Construction of two Artillery-Barges with 10.5-cm L/45 Guns at the Euphrates

II_Construction ot two Artillery -Barges with 10,5-cmL45 Guns at the Euphrates.jpg (78.88 KiB) Viewed 17893 times

Original Source: `Halbmond und Kaiseradler, Breslau und Goeben am Bisporus 1914-1918´, p. 127
https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm?method=s ... D95733690X



III_The use of 10,5-cm Q.F.Guns L/45 from "SMS Breslau" / Midilie on a Artillerie Barge

III_The use of 10,5-cm Q.F. Guns L45 from SMS Breslau-Mildilie on a Artilerie Barge.jpg (40.86 KiB) Viewed 17893 times

Original Source:
Türkei Militärmission / Feldpost Jilderim, Die Post der "Tigris-" und "Euphrat-Flußabteilung"
Ausgabe Nr. 67 im Mai 1977 (Seiten 1 - 14) https://kolonialmarken.de/wp-content/up ... EB_067.pdf
Ausgabe Nr. 68 im Oktober 1977 (Fortsetzung, Seiten 12 - 16) https://kolonialmarken.de/wp-content/up ... EB_068.pdf


Regards Holger

[Tool1958]

Coming back to the original topic:
Differences between 10,5-cm (4.1") Krupp Naval guns S.K. L/40 and L/45?


After further internal discussions with the, underrated author of the book:
“10.5 cm S.K.C./1932 . . . . . SAGA“
The development of the 10.5 cm naval gun in the German army and navy from 1890 to 1945"

. . . . . I received the following short and logical explanation from him:


“The barrel length of the 40-caliber cannon does not have a “reinforcement ring“.
Its pipe is cast in one piece in a sand mold and is called monobloc. Since it is
important that the cooling is done at the same time in order not to create gas
inclusions in the pipe that would lead to cracking or bursting, the back part is more
massive and also has the role of absorbing the inclusions. In this way the risk of
cracking is minimal, the percussion/explosion chamber being closed by the breech.“

On the 45-gauge gun, the barrel screws into the breech, which is machined from forged
steels and can be much thinner. Her appearance in the pictures is "without reinforcement Ring"


To get to the point; - The reasons for the different contours by L/40 and L/45 result
primarily from a metallurgical development in the product process of gun technology


L/40 barrels were cast and L/45 barrels were forged.


Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Coming back to the original topic:
Differences between 10,5-cm (4.1") Krupp Naval guns S.K. L/40 and L/45?


After further internal discussions with the, underrated author of the book:
“10.5 cm S.K.C./1932 . . . . . SAGA“
The development of the 10.5 cm naval gun in the German army and navy from 1890 to 1945"

. . . . . I received the following short and logical explanation from him:


“The barrel length of the 40-caliber cannon does not have a “reinforcement ring“.
Its pipe is cast in one piece in a sand mold and is called monobloc. Since it is
important that the cooling is done at the same time in order not to create gas
inclusions in the pipe that would lead to cracking or bursting, the back part is more
massive and also has the role of absorbing the inclusions. In this way the risk of
cracking is minimal, the percussion/explosion chamber being closed by the breech.“

On the 45-gauge gun, the barrel screws into the breech, which is machined from forged
steels and can be much thinner. Her appearance in the pictures is "without reinforcement Ring"


To get to the point; - The reasons for the different contours by L/40 and L/45 result
primarily from a metallurgical development in the product process of gun technology


L/40 barrels were cast and L/45 barrels were forged.


Regards Holger

Hi Holger. The photos of the muzzle of the /40 disagrees with this, clearly they have an inner A sleeve with the rifling, so they are built up guns and not monoblocks.

Regards

[Tool1958]

Hello Marcello,


I think it's very good that you “stay on the ball' and continue to ask new questions again and again.
This is the only way to create, sometimes new aspects and answers.


But, as already mentioned, I just forwarded VladAlex's answer.
Of course, his explanation does not answer all the detailed questions we have about it.


For me, however, his explanation is for the first time an answer to this strange "Reinforcement Ring",
which is nothing other than a “thickened“ monobock casting. This means for me that PARTS of the
gun barrel and the gun breech were cast together. That would be the only logical answer; - or not?



(((By the way; - I have created also a new question about 10.5-cm Q.F., hoping to get eventually a answer.
Bagdad 1917 - “CAPTURED GUN ON DÉCAUVILLE RAILWAY” https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/308 ... %E2%80%9D/ )))



Back to your comment; -

The photos of the muzzle of the /40 disagrees with this, clearly they have an inner A sleeve with the rifling, so they are built up guns and not monoblocks.

Since we have discussed the topic of the thickening and the muzzle on the gun barrel, initially on the first and
second page in this thread, I also know which photos you mean; - clear answers we had not found; - but only guesses.


There may be an answer in your posted drawing; - but I don’t know.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... iagram.jpg

But I am sure that we will also find a clear statement on this.


Regards Holger

[Tool1958]

Here are two additional pictures on the topic of “barrel thickening” at the gun muzzle, also at the 10.5- cm S.K. L/45 in 10.5 cm M.P.L.C/1912


Thanks to the help of users in the AHF, excerpts of the three photos below can be posted here.


VladAlex also pointed out that the digitized negatives were mirrored. The opening of the gun
breech is on the left side, and not on the right side as in the link from the original online source.

01_10.5- cm S.K. L45 in 10.5 cm M.P.L.C1912.png (212.6 KiB) Viewed 11363 times

Original Source: https://digitaltmuseum.no/021015989530/ ... ia?slide=0

02_10.5- cm S.K. L45 in 10.5 cm M.P.L.C1912.png (243.5 KiB) Viewed 11363 times

Original Source: https://digitaltmuseum.no/021015928981/ ... ia?slide=0



Supposedly all three pictures are of the same gun?!?
However, this thickening of the barrel can be recognized differently at the gun muzzle.

05_10.5- cm S.K. L45 in 10.5 cm M.P.L.C1912.png (214.41 KiB) Viewed 11363 times

Original Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nilsmosbe ... otostream/




As you can see, the discussion about the 10.5 cm L/45 version continues in this thread.
The endless story of this topic is probably far from over.

Need help please for ID location of surviewed 10,5 S.K. L/45 on photo
https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 0&t=274529


Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hi Holger.

The only gun that we can be sure (because it was measured) to be a /45 is this one:



Then we have this one. It has no muzzle thickening, it is a monoblock gun, but it can be any other model, or even another calibre. I would like to see the markings in the barrel, it seems to be totally ignored bu the photographers.



Regards

[Tool1958]

The only gun that we can be sure (because it was measured) to be a /45 is this one:

Then we have this one. It has no muzzle thickening, it is a monoblock gun, but it can be any other model, or even another calibre. I would like to see the markings in the barrel, it seems to be totally ignored bu the photographers.

Hello Marcelo,

Basically, I am already convinced that both photos you posted represent a 10.5-cm Q.F. L/45 Gun-Barrel.
Both photographers, Bayram Akgün and Nils Mosberg, have been dealing with this topic not since yesterday
and are actually very credible when they make such a statement.

In my opinion, both gun barrels and breech blocks also have the same appearance. At least I can hardly
tell any differences based on the photos. Both photos also show a similar gun breech in detail.

10,5-cm L45 Gun-breech in Turkey.png (146.57 KiB) Viewed 11161 times

Original Photo was vertical mirrored

10,5-cm L45 Gun-breech in Norway.png (221.18 KiB) Viewed 11161 times

Original Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nilsmosbe ... otostream/


But of course there are differences. However, these may result from the fact that the gun in Turkey is a 10.5-cm
L/45 C/1906, and in Norway is 10.5-cm L/45 C/1912 gun; - even if the pure barrel length is identical to 4.725 mm.


Back to your question; - Why late L/40, as well as L/45 gun-barrel-variants in some photos have a thickening
at the muzzle, and on some not, is not known to me; - But I will forward this question and update here.

Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

Hello Marcelo,

Basically, I am already convinced that both photos you posted represent a 10.5-cm Q.F. L/45 Gun-Barrel.
Both photographers, Bayram Akgün and Nils Mosberg, have been dealing with this topic not since yesterday
and are actually very credible when they make such a statement.

In my opinion, both gun barrels and breech blocks also have the same appearance. At least I can hardly
tell any differences based on the photos. Both photos also show a similar gun breech in detail.


10,5-cm L45 Gun-breech in Turkey.png
Original Photo was vertical mirrored



10,5-cm L45 Gun-breech in Norway.png
Original Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nilsmosbe ... otostream/


But of course there are differences. However, these may result from the fact that the gun in Turkey is a 10.5-cm
L/45 C/1906, and in Norway is 10.5-cm L/45 C/1912 gun; - even if the pure barrel length is identical to 4.725 mm.


Back to your question; - Why late L/40, as well as L/45 gun-barrel-variants in some photos have a thickening
at the muzzle, and on some not, is not known to me; - But I will forward this question and update here.

Regards Holger

Hi Holger. The thickening of the muzzle is a leftover from the muzzle loading era. It was used to fasten the cannon in bad weather, look in this photo to the gun to the right. Really it has no use in a modern gun.



The gun in Norway has no muzzle thickening but also a second bumper on top. So it would be a different /45?

Regards

[Tool1958]

Hi Holger. The thickening of the muzzle is a leftover from the muzzle loading era. It was used to fasten the cannon in bad weather, look in this photo to the gun to the right. Really it has no use in a modern gun.

MARCELO - !!!

Please; - are you serious or are you kidding me?
( . . . or you have had one bottle “Lequi Liquor“ to much? - - - )

The gun in Norway has no muzzle thickening but also a second bumper on top.

The thickening at the muzzle had nothing to do with the recoil brake.

So it would be a different /45?

Yes; - as I already mentioned: The gun in Turkey is a 10.5-cm L/45 C/1906, and in Norway is 10.5-cm L/45 C/1912 gun


Regards Holger

[marcelo_malara]

MARCELO - !!!

Please; - are you serious or are you kidding me?
( . . . or you have had one bottle “Lequi Liquor“ to much? - - - )

The gun in Norway has no muzzle thickening but also a second bumper on top.

The thickening at the muzzle had nothing to do with the recoil brake.

So it would be a different /45?

Yes; - as I already mentioned: The gun in Turkey is a 10.5-cm L/45 C/1906, and in Norway is 10.5-cm L/45 C/1912 gun


Regards Holger

Hi! No, no kidding intended, many people do not know this. True that many guns after the sailing era had the muzzle thickening, it served no purpose then (in my knowledge).

For the second, I meant that the Norway gun has an upper and lower dumper, besides the lack of muzzle thickening. The Turkish gun has only a lower dumper and muzzle thickening.

Regards

[Tool1958]

Hi! No, no kidding intended, many people do not know this. True that many guns after the sailing era had the muzzle thickening, it served no purpose then (in my knowledge).

For the second, I meant that the Norway gun has an upper and lower dumper, besides the lack of muzzle thickening. The Turkish gun has only a lower dumper and muzzle thickening.

Regards

Hi Marcelo,

Regarding the different muzzle shapes of the two guns, we both agree.

Regardingh your fourther comments; - Let's hear what VladAlex mentioned about it:

"So to recap, the spring cylinders return the pipe to its original position and the piston cylinder
has the main role of DAMPING the recoil movement and avoiding shock braking of the barrel.

Thus, it linearizes the recoil speed and absorbs shocks similar to shock absorbers from the suspension
of a car or from the bogies of a passenger car. This protects the optical sighting mechanism in particular.

To compensate for hydraulic oil losses, the damping cylinder is usually equipped with oil filling valves in several parts."


Good explained; - Sounds logic; - or not?

Reagrds Holger

[marcelo_malara]

For the second, I meant that the Norway gun has an upper and lower dumper, besides the lack of muzzle thickening. The Turkish gun has only a lower dumper and muzzle thickening.

Regards

Hi Marcelo,

Regarding the different muzzle shapes of the two guns, we both agree.

Regardingh your fourther comments; - Let's hear what VladAlex mentioned about it:

"So to recap, the spring cylinders return the pipe to its original position and the piston cylinder
has the main role of DAMPING the recoil movement and avoiding shock braking of the barrel.

Thus, it linearizes the recoil speed and absorbs shocks similar to shock absorbers from the suspension
of a car or from the bogies of a passenger car. This protects the optical sighting mechanism in particular.

To compensate for hydraulic oil losses, the damping cylinder is usually equipped with oil filling valves in several parts."


Good explained; - Sounds logic; - or not?

Reagrds Holger

Hi Holger. Yes, I know that. The conclusion would be that there are two different /45, the differences being the lack of muzzle thickening and two dumpers in lieu of one in the newer 1912 model.

Regards

[Tool1958]

. . . The conclusion would be that there are two different /45, the differences being the lack of muzzle thickening and two dumpers in lieu of one in the newer 1912 model . . .

Hi Marcello,

There are several answers or additions to your comment:


1. Regarding: “. . . there are two different /45 . . . „

Yes; - very different; - Attached vertical & horizontal sections from L/45 C/1906 and L/45 C/1912

1906.jpg (65.3 KiB) Viewed 11044 times

Source: Courtesy of VladAlex

1912.jpg (74.37 KiB) Viewed 11044 times

Source: Courtesy of VladAlex



2. Regarding: “. . . the lack of muzzle thickening . . .“ Here answers from VladAlex:

“The thickness of the barrel of the same type of cannon can have several causes:

I. Redesign in order to increase the durability of the gun barrel

II. The use of an improved manufacturing technology
• Monobloc barrel cast and subsequently mechanically processed
• Monobloc barrel cast, mechanically processed and reinforced with a metal jacket,
• Forged monobloc barrel - i.e. superior quality material, barrel made of 2 screwed pieces or barrel made of 3 pieces screwed.

So the same cannon of the same caliber and length of the barrel and the same dimensions can be modernized by changing the barrel and reusing almost the entire "old" structure.

III. Standardization of ammunition of the same caliber for its use in all existing guns. This automatically led to the appearance of the 10.5cm SKL/45n.R barrels.

In general, almost all the barrels used in the Atlantic Wall cannons were re-worked to become n.R. and could be used with modern standardized ammunition.“




3. Regarding: “. . . two dumpers in lieu of one in the newer 1912 model.“

I would agree with your comment, even Nils Mosberg mentioned to his picture:
“ . . . Note that some important parts are missing.“
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nilsmosbe ... otostream/
However, I don't know exactly what he meant by that.


Regarding the construction and function of the Barrel brakes and pre-haulers by springs
and piston cylinders of the 10.5 cm guns can be seen here on page 10.

Waffen-Arsenal, Sonderband S-15, Deutsche schwere Flak 10,5 cm . . . . . pdf.
http://amicale.3emedragons.free.fr/Docs ... 0Flak+.pdf


Regards Holger