Go navy!

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Postby DeltaV » Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:21 am

There’s another advantage to developing a less-powerful laser first. The Navy’s surface ships don’t yet have the power generation necessary for spooling up a megawatt-class laser — or at least not if they don’t want to potentially be dead in the water. That’s one of the reasons the Senate Armed Services Committee is skeptical of the Free Electron Laser. It’s not clear that the ships can cope with diverting 100 kilowatts of power, either, but the Office of Naval Research thinks they can, and the laser geeks are “working closely” with the Naval Sea Systems Command to make sure the scientists are writing checks that the ship’s generators can cash.

Hmmmmmmm.....

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Wed Apr 04, 2012 12:19 am

This is doable.

Maybe not 10 at the same time in a multi-threat environment, but definately do-able.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Postby Diogenes » Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:40 pm

ladajo wrote:This is doable.

Maybe not 10 at the same time in a multi-threat environment, but definately do-able.


Decades ago, I had a dream that I was involved in a conflict taking place next to a shoreline in some contended part of the world, and I recall in my dream seeing a bright laser beam emanating from the deck of one of our ships (ala Johnny Quest, if you can remember that! :) ) and I marveled at the beauty of the sight, and I recall thinking (in my dream state) about how proud I was of our side for fielding such a weapon.

No other point to it, just thought I would mention it. :)

ImageImage
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:52 pm

GIThruster wrote: During the Lebanese conflict, the New Jersey was criticized for missing it's target at times up to 10,000'. .


Wasn't that tracked down to a variance in bagged powder & the charge ratings? IIRC many ol those shots fell short.

Because in WW2, those 16 inch guns were one salvo=one hit under 5-6 miles. USS Virginia, Battle of Sargasso Straights, at 4 am, tracked a IJN task force with radar from 11-12 miles out, and then dropped the hammer on them @ 5 miles range, scoring 5 consecutive hits before missing (bracketing) on the 6th salvo.

From everything I've read on the use of US 16 inch guns (after early 1943) in WW2, we hit anything within 5 miles range like money. A tube computer read a gyro, telling the director where the ship was, radar told the computer where the target was.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:58 pm

ladajo wrote: You can have a submunition ejector, that sprays sub 'splinters' of tungsten mini-rods over an area. Very lethal, very effective, very tested. No electronics neccessarily involved, a simple setback mechanical timer could do it..


In WW2 the US used a proximity fuse utilizing radar IIRC, very effective. (Maybe the 105mm Howitzer M-4 platform and naval 5 inch AA?) This replaced a timer system with adjustment rings IIRC.

But of course were talking about way more than a few thousands yards with these rail guns.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:02 pm

Roger wrote:
GIThruster wrote: During the Lebanese conflict, the New Jersey was criticized for missing it's target at times up to 10,000'. .


Wasn't that tracked down to a variance in bagged powder & the charge ratings? IIRC many ol those shots fell short. I do not recall this issue well, but will look it up for Lebanon.

Because in WW2, those 16 inch guns were one salvo=one hit under 5-6 miles. USS Virginia, Battle of Sargasso Straights, at 4 am, tracked a IJN task force with radar from 11-12 miles out, and then dropped the hammer on them @ 5 miles range, scoring 5 consecutive hits before missing (bracketing) on the 6th salvo.

From everything I've read on the use of US 16 inch guns (after early 1943) in WW2, we hit anything within 5 miles range like money. A tube computer read a gyro, telling the director where the ship was, radar told the computer where the target was.


10000' or ~ a little under 2nm is a huge spotting error, or as Roger said a bad load. Can you cite the incident? Something went not according to plan. Those old guns were purdy darn accurate. Surface fires were routinely made at 20nm or more.

At the Battle of Leyte Gulf, specifically Surigao Strait, after the intitial torpedo volleys, the initial big gun engagement ranges were on the order of 20K yds or more (> 10nm).

5nm would be considered point blank for Capital Ship engagement.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:07 pm

Roger wrote:
ladajo wrote: You can have a submunition ejector, that sprays sub 'splinters' of tungsten mini-rods over an area. Very lethal, very effective, very tested. No electronics neccessarily involved, a simple setback mechanical timer could do it..


In WW2 the US used a proximity fuse utilizing radar IIRC, very effective. (Maybe the 105mm Howitzer M-4 platform and naval 5 inch AA?) This replaced a timer system with adjustment rings IIRC.

But of course were talking about way more than a few thousands yards with these rail guns.


Yes, I am very familiar.

Interestingly enough, the Japanese though electronic fuses were impossible. They never considered that we could have done it and fielded them. It cost them a lot of aircraft. They did however try to come up with some rather interesting designs to try and solve the problem.

I have actually been kicking around the idea to do a paper on VT Fuses and Electronic Warfare's use and impact on the outcome of WWII. A very understudied and generally unknown area largely ignored by historians.

Most folks have no idea we were fully engaged in electronic warfare in those days, as well as using electronic radar proximity fuses (VT) for anti-air and ground campaigns.

We still use VT fuse variants today.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Postby Diogenes » Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:53 pm

ladajo wrote:
Roger wrote:
ladajo wrote: You can have a submunition ejector, that sprays sub 'splinters' of tungsten mini-rods over an area. Very lethal, very effective, very tested. No electronics neccessarily involved, a simple setback mechanical timer could do it..


In WW2 the US used a proximity fuse utilizing radar IIRC, very effective. (Maybe the 105mm Howitzer M-4 platform and naval 5 inch AA?) This replaced a timer system with adjustment rings IIRC.

But of course were talking about way more than a few thousands yards with these rail guns.


Yes, I am very familiar.

Interestingly enough, the Japanese though electronic fuses were impossible. They never considered that we could have done it and fielded them. It cost them a lot of aircraft. They did however try to come up with some rather interesting designs to try and solve the problem.

I have actually been kicking around the idea to do a paper on VT Fuses and Electronic Warfare's use and impact on the outcome of WWII. A very understudied and generally unknown area largely ignored by historians.

Most folks have no idea we were fully engaged in electronic warfare in those days, as well as using electronic radar proximity fuses (VT) for anti-air and ground campaigns.

We still use VT fuse variants today.



If you have not, you need to READ this book.

Image


It covers your topic of VT fuses in good detail. It is an excellent read.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:57 pm

Thanks. Haven't seen that one. I will pick it up.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Sat Apr 07, 2012 8:24 pm

ladajo wrote: Can you cite the incident? Something went not according to plan. Those old guns were purdy darn accurate. Surface fires were routinely made at 20nm or more.

At the Battle of Leyte Gulf, specifically Surigao Strait, after the intitial torpedo volleys, the initial big gun engagement ranges were on the order of 20K yds or more (> 10nm).

5nm would be considered point blank for Capital Ship engagement.


Wiki has it, not a lot of detail though

The inaccuracy is believed to have resulted because the ship's main gun powder had been remixed by the Navy, under the direction of Captain Joseph Dominick Miceli at the Naval Weapons Support Center, and rebagged. Powder lots (an individual production of powder) burn at different rates. Therefore, remixing the powder lots could cause the guns to fire inconsistently. The problem was apparently resolved after the Navy was able to locate additional powder supplies which had not been remixed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_New_Jersey_(BB-62)#Lebanese_Civil_War_.281983.E2.80.931984.29


My bad, it was the West Virginia that crossed the IJN "T" at Sargrasso. West Virginia was sunk at Pearl Harbor and refloated, she had older 16" guns, short tube, cramped turrets- that caused various issues that made continous firing problematic past about 10 salvoes. She was fitted with Mark 8 radar after being refloated, she spotted the IJN at 44k yards !

It should be noted she sunk the Yamashiro, whose beam was 100 ft. not a wide target at 22,800 yards (13 miles) at 1st salvo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_b ... _Yamashiro

West Virginia after action report

0304 - Enemy appeared on scopes of SG-1 RPPI -- 20 mile scale. The pip was visible at extreme edges of the tube on bearing 164° range 44,000 yards. Several groups of friendly pips appeared on the scopes as our DD's closed to attack from east and west. Two DD's patrolling to north of Dinagat and our cruisers a few thousand yards southwest were showing on the scopes. However, in the dark, and from CIC reports only it was difficult for the Captain to be certain just where our forces were.
0305 - Changed course to 090 by turn movement.
0307 - Destroyers report two large and one small enemy. Enemy is straddling them.
0310 - Main battery plot reported Spot 2's Mark 8 radar had the target. (It never lost it until after cease firing).
0311 - Saw gunfire to south.
0313 - Surface contacts 2 large 2 small were in strait heading north speed 20.
0314 - DD reported 5 targets 2 may be hit slowing down and dropping behind some.
0315 - CIC reported two groups about 39,000 yards, one of 3 small pips, the other of a large and medium pip preceded by several smaller pips.
0322 - DD report enemy 2 BB 2 cruisers and 1 DD.
0330 - CIC reports 1 group 174° 36,00 other group a little closer by about 4000 yards.
0331 - Notified all stations of fighting light code.
0332 - Received orders from Commander Battle Line to commence firing at 26,000 yards.
0332 - DD's report they have attacked.
0333 - 4000 yards to go. Gunnery officer reports range 30,000 and has solution with a large target.
0345 - Saw explosion in target area. Talked with gunnery officer to be sure our target was not among our own DD's. Fire control stated he had been on target for some time. CIC stated our DD's were clear.
0349 - Starshells in target area. Can't tell if our DD or enemy is firing them. Our range 24,000. Am hesitating to fire until certain target is enemy. ComBatDiv 4 directed open fire.
0351 - Our cruisers on our right flank opened fire. Our gunnery officer says he has had same big target for a long time and it is enemy. Commanding Officer ordered commence firing.
0352 - Notified Commander Battle Line we were opening fire.
0352-10 - First salvo 8 guns range 22,800 yards AP projectiles.
0353 - Could hear gunnery officer chuckle and announce hit first salvo. Watched the second salvo through glasses and saw explosions when it landed. [Note: target later identified as Yamashiro.]
0354 - Salvos very regular about 40 seconds interval. Other BB's opened after our second or third salvo.
0356 - See explosions in target.
0358 - Gunnery officer reports target is stopped and pip is getting small.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/shi ... rigao.html




Diogenes, my Dad was an electronics tech, radar operator on a carrier in the PAcific during WW2, he told me that we used stamped metal inserts stacked up inside our tubes, we mass produced more and better tubes than Japan or Germany, our sonar, radios, Radar was better, as well as Huff Duff direction finders.

I've not read that the IJN had any radar early, Coral Sea and Midway, Fletcher got within 60 miles at Coral Sea and probably no more than 100 miles at Midway. In fact an account I've read in many different books says Yorktowns radar operator (@ Midway) detected a flight of aircraft approaching Yorktown, that were ascended, Yorktown was waiting for its first strike to return, those planes would have been descending to land, so it was deemed these planes were Japanese. Fletcher order his Wildcats up to CAP, vectored by this info.

Many people discount early sucsess like this, but I think Fletcher surrounded himself with an excellent staff and created an enviroment where the radar operator was not afriad to bring up a gut feeling.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Sun Apr 08, 2012 12:35 pm

The Japanese had radar. They even had aerial versions. (The Germans as well, and much better). It was more prevalent later in the war. But by that time they had no gas. We had cut the Japense off.

The Japanese used search radars, and played around with fire-control. They figured stuff out on their own, as well as got a little help from the Germans. This effort was augmented by the occasional capture of our stuff.

However, that said, they were true believers in optical gunnery, and arguably were the best in the world at it at the time.

The width of the target has not as much bearing on getting a hit as you think. The rounds are not dropping vertically. They are coming in on a slant (on purpose). You can do high angle, but it is harder to get hits. Most tactics called for adjusting charge and angle for a nice angled entry.
In naval gunnery, the left/right bit is the easy part. It is the up/down that gets you.
The Japanese went so far as to develop special fuses and tactics to hit in front of the Target, and then the rounds would "torpedo" their way into the ship underwater. The Japanese figured that it would increase chances of hits, as well as incident damage due to shock on non-penetrates/non-contacts. The other idea was to get the rounds under the torpedo belt armor to thinner skin. They definitely tried to use this, and interestingly enough at Leyte is casused them problems on two accounts. One was it used an AP round, that round would typically go right through a DD/DE without detonating on a hit. The other, was for DD/DE, when placed properly, and splashing in front of the target Destroyer/Escort, it would also pass under the hull because of the shallow draft. The Japanese suffered many wasted rounds over this.

In regard to Radar, with a little help from the Brits on the front end, we ran with it, and by the end of the war, one could argue we had fielded almost as many radars as we had mounted guns... :)

A side note, back in the day, I started out as an Electronics Tech and learned tube based surface search Radar. The SPS-10 specifically.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Postby Diogenes » Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:18 pm

Roger wrote:Diogenes, my Dad was an electronics tech, radar operator on a carrier in the PAcific during WW2, he told me that we used stamped metal inserts stacked up inside our tubes, we mass produced more and better tubes than Japan or Germany, our sonar, radios, Radar was better, as well as Huff Duff direction finders.


Some of our stuff was the best quality in the world, but not always. That book I mentioned above narrates one account of where an American Built Airborne radar system was sent to England for testing, and it compared favorably with the British version. However, the techs soon realized that the British Transmitter was superior to the American version, while the American Receiver was far more sensitive than was the British one. They combined the American Receiver with the British transmitter to produce a hybrid unit that exceeded the capabilities of either original system.

The Germans also made some fantastically good equipment.


Anyway, it is interesting to hear of your father's role in WWII. One of my Uncles was a Radar/Communications tech in the Navy during WWII as well. He went on to become an Engineer at Honeywell in the 60s.


Roger wrote:I've not read that the IJN had any radar early, Coral Sea and Midway, Fletcher got within 60 miles at Coral Sea and probably no more than 100 miles at Midway. In fact an account I've read in many different books says Yorktowns radar operator (@ Midway) detected a flight of aircraft approaching Yorktown, that were ascended, Yorktown was waiting for its first strike to return, those planes would have been descending to land, so it was deemed these planes were Japanese. Fletcher order his Wildcats up to CAP, vectored by this info.

Many people discount early sucsess like this, but I think Fletcher surrounded himself with an excellent staff and created an enviroment where the radar operator was not afriad to bring up a gut feeling.


That book above has a great number of interesting stories about how Radar was used during the war. One of my favorite was about the Anti-Aircraft fire direction radars. In this one case, they had 5 radar sets, and only 4 antiaircraft guns on which to install them. ( This was in the Pacific Theater) The tech asked the commander if he could install a spotlight on the remaining radar set, but the commander was concerned about giving away their position. The tech said he would configure it to turn on only after the other guns had started firing, where after the muzzle flashes would have given away the position anyway.

He configured the equipment in this manner, and later during the night they heard the guns open up on a target , and the searchlight clicked on just in time for them to see a Japanese Zero pinwheeling through the sky after having been shot up by the other four guns.

Radar fire control was deadly accurate.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:13 pm

ladajo wrote:However, that said, they were true believers in optical gunnery, and arguably were the best in the world at it at the time.

The width of the target has not as much bearing on getting a hit as you think. The Japanese figured that it would increase chances of hits, as well as incident damage due to shock on non-penetrates/non-contacts. The other idea was to get the rounds under the torpedo belt armor to thinner skin. .


Beam of ship, occasionally you might see bracketing and no hits from a salvo, that was my thinking. I have read about the IJN concern with near misses in the belt area, possibly over concern?

Optical night gunnery, the best hands down, yes sir.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:28 pm

ladajo wrote:The Japanese had radar..


According to my Dad..... (he told some stories, some that were a little "tall" if you get my drift)... the Japanese tubes were hand made, well the metal inserts that formed the interior contours.... From the experience gained at Coral Sea and Midway the USN was well on its way to utilizing the info gained from radar, although at Guada Canal the carrier CAP in the first major carrier attack by the IJN, was run fron Enterprise, the person in charge of the group CAP set all 55 Wildcats at 6k ft. the Zeros Betties and Vals approached at 20k ft.

After the war my Dad taught USN electonics at IIRC Pennsicola.

Since the Wildcats had a horrible climb rate they completely lost the advantage of USN radar spotting the Japanese flight dozens of miles out, Big "E" took 3 bomb hits, probably because of lax CAP protocal. Fletcher had spread his CAP out between different altitudes and had relative good fortune at vectoring his CAP at Coral Sea and Midway to Japanese attacks.

This may or may not be a relection of Spruances staff issues repeating its Midway failures..

One thing I think the US did very well was to try different stuff, get new ideas and get those into production, like the High Freq Direction finder was vital in the convoy Escort carrier anti sub efforts in the Atlantic.

Germanys sub CO made many assumptions, one was to oder his subs to be careful using radar, he thought the USN would track the radar, but we were tracking RF, via Huff Duff. And Vectored bombers from Carriers at attack U boats with some effacacy by late '42. By the time the radar equipped Wildcats saw service of off Escort carriers in the Atlantic, Allied convoys were fairly safe.

Diogenes, my Dad had some tall sories, an interesting one is working with some engineers on a V-2 rocket. They were to measure the distance between molecules of atmosphere at hi alt. Problem was theory said the distance was more than the width of the V-2. Circa summer of '47.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:18 pm

Roger wrote:
ladajo wrote:However, that said, they were true believers in optical gunnery, and arguably were the best in the world at it at the time.

The width of the target has not as much bearing on getting a hit as you think. The Japanese figured that it would increase chances of hits, as well as incident damage due to shock on non-penetrates/non-contacts. The other idea was to get the rounds under the torpedo belt armor to thinner skin. .


Beam of ship, occasionally you might see bracketing and no hits from a salvo, that was my thinking. I have read about the IJN concern with near misses in the belt area, possibly over concern?

Optical night gunnery, the best hands down, yes sir.


Superstructure and freeboard height actually plays along with beam. That, and visibility is one of the main reasons that the big gun ships were low profile.

It is like ASCM's, they generally have a horizontal(ish)/shallow and steep/vertical(ish) terminal maneuvers. If you are not sure about the hit, you pick the shallow approach. Much higher chance of tagging the target.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests