User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 8:45:30 PM EDT
These things are about the ultimate in cool. The actual designation is 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun. The 50 caliber throws you off - but I think in this case they are saying the barrel length is 50 times the diameter of the bore. While most famous as being on battleships, they were sometimes mounted on shore defense batteries. These bad boys were in service until 1992 (
 ), and could launch 1,900 pound high explosive (or nuclear) projectile at 2700 fps, hitting targets 24 miles away.
I can only find a few websites or videos that talk about them, I'd love to see more if anyone has them. Here's what interesting, according to this drawing, the chamber was cut considerably larger than the rest of the barrel, and powder just lays in there in the bags. Obviously an expansion chamber when the powder starts burning, but it's interesting. I always assumed the bottleneck design of a .223, etc cartridge, was to allow a large powder charge in a shorter length round. Just more efficient. It never occurred to me that you'd cut a chamber shaped like this, if you could fit all the powder you wanted in there anyway, in a smaller diameter chamber. 
Another thing I wonder about, is the shell is a big old steel(?) cassed beast. Yet the rifling is cut in such a matter, that I just have a hard time seeing that completely fill up upon firing, in the same way a softer lead/copper round seals up the rifling in a regular small arm. I suspect that maybe they don't, and really it's the brass(?) base that fills that in, with the steel shell mostly just ridding on top. In any event, enjoy the cool pictures 
[edit to add] and here are some related video's. I'd embed them - but no can do. Navy training video This one is cool, because it shows the guy with the gauntlet using it to wipe down the breach upon opening. (I assume to eliminate any residual embers). I can't figure out the ram, are those wheels to help it roll along, or are they links for it to coil up back there behind the scenes? USS Missouri Gulf War Fan video with battleship pictures Good "home video" of the USS Missouri on deployment fireing her guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 8:53:03 PM EDT
[#1]
See the shiny area at the base of the shell? That's the rotator band, made from brass, engages the rifling in the bore.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:03:28 PM EDT
[#2]
I always wondered how much trouble/what kind of task was involved with unloading a shell from the barrel.
I mean, you're engaging a target, you load/reload several times, and finally are told to stand down. You've got to have several barrels loaded at that point that need to be made safe.... And then you've got the rotator band engaging the rifling, I know it's got to be snug.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:05:55 PM EDT
[#3]
If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing,
as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:06:58 PM EDT
[#4]
Coolest house ever.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:07:30 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: I always wondered how much trouble/what kind of task was involved with unloading a shell from the barrel. I mean, you're engaging a target, you load/reload several times, and finally are told to stand down. You've got to have several barrels loaded at that point that need to be made safe.... And then you've got the rotator band engaging the rifling, I know it's got to be snug. As I understand it, that never happened. Once the projectile is rammed in, they WILL fire. It's the only way to get the projectile out of the barrel, at least while at sea. There is no mechanism on the ship for withdrawing the projectile. It would not be reusable in any event due to the rifling imprinted on the driving bands. If it goes in, it will be fired. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:10:29 PM EDT
[#6]
We need to bring these back.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:11:56 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ The Yamato had a sister ship that was commissioned and saw combat, the Musashi. In fact, Musashi was the flagship for the Kaigun, the Imperial Japanese Combined Fleet. Specific change orders were sent down during fitting out and final construction to configure her for that role, since Yamato was too far along to make the necessary changes. You're probably thinking of Shinano. She was to be a third ship in the class, but her hull was converted to be a fleet support super-carrier, and she was sunk before being fully fitted out. Shinano remains the largest ship ever sunk by a submarine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:12:05 PM EDT
[#8]
Skip to the 26 second mark.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:12:25 PM EDT
[#9]
[edit political crap about Navy politics -changed my mind - let's talk about the guns!]
Read this article if you want to see the politics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:13:57 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
If it goes in, it will be fired. This has always been my policy, as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:14:05 PM EDT
[#11]
I used to drive past this one just about every day at A.P.G. I and my fellow gun bunnies always wished we could play with it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:14:16 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
These things are about the ultimate in cool. The actual designation is 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun. The 50 caliber throws you off - but I think in this case they are saying the barrel length is 50 times the diameter of the bore. While most famous as being on battleships, they were sometimes mounted on shore defense batteries. These bad boys were in service until 1992 ( ), and could launch 1,900 pound high explosive (or nuclear) projectile at 2700 fps, hitting targets 24 miles away.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg/470px-BB61_USS_Iowa_BB61_broadside_USN.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Iowa_16_inch_Gun-EN.svg I can only find a few websites or videos that talk about them, I'd love to see more if anyone has them. Here's what interesting, according to this drawing, the chamber was cut considerably larger than the rest of the barrel, and powder just lays in there in the bags. Obviously an expansion chamber when the powder starts burning, but it's interesting. I always assumed the bottleneck design of a .223, etc cartridge, was to allow a large powder charge in a shorter length round. Just more efficient. It never occurred to me that you'd cut a chamber shaped like this, if you could fit all the powder you wanted in there anyway, in a smaller diameter chamber. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/16inchload.jpg Another thing I wonder about, is the shell is a big old steel(?) cassed beast. Yet the rifling is cut in such a matter, that I just have a hard time seeing that completely fill up upon firing, in the same way a softer lead/copper round seals up the rifling in a regular small arm. I suspect that maybe they don't, and really it's the brass(?) base that fills that in, with the steel shell mostly just ridding on top. In any event, enjoy the cool pictures
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7_parbuckle_pic.jpg I believe that is about 215 million ft-lb of energy, not counting the explosion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:14:41 PM EDT
[#13]
I was on a destroyer stationed at Long Beach when the Jersey was undergoing retrofit and testing. We towed the target barge for her when she first tested her guns. Even with two miles of cable behind us it was still unnerving hearing the incoming shells.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:16:30 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
We need to bring these back. Hey lets do it ourselves those guns don't even require a tax stamp. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:19:37 PM EDT
[#15]
Those guns are fucking awesome. See the capstan they are using to move the fuckers! Didn't know BM's worked on the 16"sers!.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:22:58 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
I believe that is about 215 million ft-lb of energy, not counting the explosion. It is
That's projectile kinetic energy, so there's no reason to include the blast. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:23:48 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that were built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ As they should be, they were obsolete when they were built. IIRC, the Yamato and it's sister ship were sunk by aircraft from carriers. ETA, they are cool though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:33:50 PM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:43:09 PM EDT
[#19]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:48:51 PM EDT
[#20]
Here is a cool training video of the 16guns.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=0OmOQs0ziSU&NR=1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:50:32 PM EDT
[#21]
How can you insert HTML into posts? Like an iFrame?? Is it disabled?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 9:58:20 PM EDT
[#22]
That was the year and month I went to Basic in the Navy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:30:57 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o184/SWINGRRRR/2012-07-18125605.jpg http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o184/SWINGRRRR/2012-07-18131409.jpg I keep wanting to go see the Alabama in person. It's less than an hour away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:35:54 PM EDT
[#24]
I remember that incident when there was the explosion in one of those turrets (in the 80s I believe).
Initially they tried to blame it on one of the sailors (suicide attempt pehaps?) but later I think determined some of the gun powder bags exploded. Here is a Japanese video showing the explosion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:40:56 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: Keyboard, I need a new one. "Honey, I bought a new house".Coolest house ever. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Iowa_16_inch_Gun-EN.svg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:45:59 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: If it goes in, it will be fired. This has always been my policy, as well. That's pretty much SOP for clearing live ammo from Naval Guns. Of course, my experience is limited to the MK75 but if you don't do the downloading procedures 100% correct, you'll be firing the gun when you don't want it to go boom. There have been instances of Navy ships taking out smoke stacks and CWIS' while downloading the Mk75. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:47:14 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Those guns are fucking awesome. See the capstan they are using to move the fuckers! Didn't know BM's worked on the 16"sers!. GM's are just BM's with hunting licenses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:47:52 PM EDT
[#28]
It is crazy to think the sailors loading up those rounds/powder bags to shell Iraq were pretty much doing it the exact way that they did 50 years before in WW2.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:50:36 PM EDT
[#29]
My Grandfather served aboard the USS New Mexico BB-40 in WWII. He worked in the bottom of the turret in the powder handling room.
He was aboard both times that the New Mexico was hit by Kamikazes, once off Luzon and once off Okinawa. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 10:57:26 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: I remember that incident when there was the explosion in one of those turrets (in the 80s I believe). Initially they tried to blame it on one of the sailors (suicide attempt pehaps?) but later I think determined some of the gun powder bags exploded. Here is a Japanese video showing the explosion. The Navy F'd up with the cover up epic proportions that they cooked up with that. Blamed it on a Sailor and said it was a homosexual lovers quarrel. Washed everything out of the gun turret, threw pieces of the gun overboard amongst other items from the turret. The powder flats were flooded and the men down there died from gas poisoning and fire. It was quite the debacle. My Grandfather had NIS visit him at his home over the ordeal because he retired less than a year before it happened. He knew all of the men in the turret and it deeply upset him with what went on. He always said he knew from day one what happened and how. After it was all said and done, he was right. They had used powder that he knew wasn't any good. It had sat in a magazine that had no temp controls and became unstable over time in the heat. Reports said that some of the last things that were heard over the sound powered phones were, " Oh my God, the bags are glowing" and "Get out". I couldn't imagine. My paw paw on the far right. He wasn't very photogenic.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:06:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
It is crazy to think the sailors loading up those rounds/powder bags to shell Iraq were pretty much doing it the exact way that they did 50 years before in WW2. With powder bags manufactured for WW2 as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:12:33 PM EDT
[#32]
A little trivia: If you can find a picture of a full turret salvo from the top, or a video, you'll notice all 3 guns do not fire at once. I'm too lazy to dig one up.
Reason is, they found out that with all 3 shells flying next to each other, there's enough air disruption that they ruin each other's accuracy, kind of like a Cessna trying to take off in the wake of a C-5. So they offset the firing of the guns by milliseconds...I believe the sequence is center, left, right, but I'm not sure. Hooyah Navy, beat Army! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:12:53 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Coolest house ever.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Iowa_16_inch_Gun-EN.svg I take it the powder room has AC now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:15:35 PM EDT
[#34]
http://www.nps.gov/goga/historyculture/new-gun.htm
New Gun for Battery Townsley A 16-inch gun barrel being moved through San Francisco, circa 1939. PARC, GGNRA It's huge, it's heavy, and it's historic! On October 1, 2012, a 16-inch naval gun was transported to Fort Cronkhite for display at Battery Townsley. The giant weapon, 68 feet long and weighing 120 tons, was once on the battleship USS Missouri and is identical in size and caliber to the ones that protected the bay during World War II. The gun is now displayed outside Battery Townsley, while plans are developed to fabricate a replica gun carriage inside the casemate (south gun room). The 16-inch gun barrel, designated U.S. Navy Mark VII #386, is a key interpretive feature of Fort Cronkhite, helping tell the stories of Battery Townsley and the men who served here and at the other harbor defense sites during World War II, as well as the military's role in preserving the future Golden Gate National Recreation Area. -----------------  16-inch gun #386 aboard USS MISSOURI during the Japanese surrender ceremonies in Tokyo Bay, 2 September 1945. The barrel was removed from the battleship turret during the Korean War and put into storage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:33:58 PM EDT
[#35]
My grandfather served on the Iowa 46-48 as an electronics tech. He received the WWII Victory Medal for his time on the Iowa.
He loved that ship and worked for 20 years to make it a museum, it broke my heart he wasn't able to see it become a reality. My favorite stories he told were of the full broadside all 9 guns, rocked the ship 30* he said 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:40:10 PM EDT
[#36]
I'd always heard that the "ship moving sideways when the big guns were fired" thing was a myth, but looking at your picture, the turbulence at the knife edge of the fo'castle looks like evidence that it is not.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:41:26 PM EDT
[#37]
Bad ass stuff.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2012 11:56:30 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ you're the guy who touts all kinds of erroneous facts about the f16 as well aren't you? There were 2 Yamato class, the Yamato and Musashi. The sinking of both were quite the feats and well documented and known about. Stay away from military stuff bro, you make it sound like everything you learned was from reading rainbow out takes or something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 12:12:46 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ    |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 12:15:45 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: We're gonna need more Oakum. Quoted: If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0271.jpg http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0272.jpg http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0273.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 1:29:47 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Quoted: We're gonna need more Oakum. Quoted: If I'm not mistaken, the shell fired most often for Naval uses was not explosive, it was simply armor piercing, as the kinetic energy of the projectile was so great that there would be no benefit to making the shell lighter in order to pack explosives into it. Explosive shells were used but they were generally reserved for shore bombardment. In a Naval battle, the most critical thing is to make big holes in the other ship, holes that cause it to sink. Holing the ship is of prime importance. Armor piercing rounds are best at holing heavy armor. The armor piercing shells fired by these guns were sufficient to penetrate ALL armor that was ever used on a ship, by any Navy, ever. The heaviest armor ever floated was the 24" turret face armor on the turrets of the Japanese Yamato class battleships, of which only the Yamato ever actually was launched. The 16" AP projectiles could defeat it, and did defeat it in tests performed by the US Navy on seized turret armor after the war. That turret armor was made for the incomplete Yamato sister ship. All four of the Iowa class battleships that wer built, retired undefeated and all four are now museums open to the public. CJ http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0271.jpg http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0272.jpg http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u29/hawken50/2007%20Vac/100_0273.jpg Ha! We used to make compressed air guns to fire the smaller plugs across the engine room. good times. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 1:35:46 AM EDT
[#42]
Bring back the Battleship!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 1:54:42 AM EDT
[#43]
it is interesting to compare the ratio of barrel lengths to calibers today.
a 16" / 50 cal barrel has a length of 800". Using the same ratio here are the lengths of some common calibers today .223 / 11.15" .264 / 13.2" .308 / 15.4" .338 / 16.9" I guess there is validity to short / stiff barrels being accurate at least on a naval gun with fire comntrol |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 2:05:38 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember that incident when there was the explosion in one of those turrets (in the 80s I believe). Initially they tried to blame it on one of the sailors (suicide attempt pehaps?) but later I think determined some of the gun powder bags exploded. Here is a Japanese video showing the explosion. The Navy F'd up with the cover up epic proportions that they cooked up with that. Blamed it on a Sailor and said it was a homosexual lovers quarrel. Washed everything out of the gun turret, threw pieces of the gun overboard amongst other items from the turret. The powder flats were flooded and the men down there died from gas poisoning and fire. It was quite the debacle. My Grandfather had NIS visit him at his home over the ordeal because he retired less than a year before it happened. He knew all of the men in the turret and it deeply upset him with what went on. He always said he knew from day one what happened and how. After it was all said and done, he was right. They had used powder that he knew wasn't any good. It had sat in a magazine that had no temp controls and became unstable over time in the heat. Reports said that some of the last things that were heard over the sound powered phones were, " Oh my God, the bags are glowing" and "Get out". I couldn't imagine.
My paw paw on the far right. He wasn't very photogenic.
http://i1242.photobucket.com/albums/gg538/joecoastie99/pawpaw.jpeg Ether gas smell is a sign of powder deterioration even for the reloading powders that we used today. Wikipedia - USS Iowa (BB-61) Powder from the same lot as the one under investigation was tested at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division. Spontaneous combustion was achieved with the powder, which had been originally milled in the 1930s and improperly stored in a barge at the Navy's Yorktown, Virginia Naval Weapons Station during a 1988 dry-docking of Iowa.[37][38][39][42] As it degrades, gunpowder gives off ether gas, which is highly flammable and could be ignited by a spark. This revelation resulted in a shift in the Navy's position on the incident, and Admiral Frank Kelso, the Chief of Naval Operations at the time, publicly apologized to the Hartwig family, concluding that there was no real evidence to support the claim that he had intentionally killed the other sailors.[37][39][42][47] Iowa captain Fred Moosally was severely criticized for his handling of the matter, and as a result of the incident the Navy changed the powder-handling procedures for its battleships.[44] The incident remains the surface Navy's worst loss of life during peacetime operations, surpassing the loss of life incurred from the attack of an Iraqi Air Force jet on the Oliver Hazard Perry-class guided missile frigate USS Stark.[48]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 2:21:03 AM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: See the shiny area at the base of the shell? That's the rotator band, made from brass, engages the rifling in the bore. Driving band. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 2:41:10 AM EDT
[#46]
Cool vid of the USS Wisconsin:
 Size of the breech blocks:  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 3:14:36 AM EDT
[#47]
I had the pleasure of touring the North Carolina when I was in Wilmington.I got to go inside a turret.Holy fuck is it cramped!I can't even imagine being in there
during firing.Claustrophobic as hell. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 3:17:15 AM EDT
[#48]
always wondered what the chamber pressure in PSI is when one of those things go off, anyone know?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 3:47:14 AM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
We need to bring these back. You're on my naughty list! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2012 3:50:54 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I remember that incident when there was the explosion in one of those turrets (in the 80s I believe). Initially they tried to blame it on one of the sailors (suicide attempt pehaps?) but later I think determined some of the gun powder bags exploded. Here is a Japanese video showing the explosion. The Navy F'd up with the cover up epic proportions that they cooked up with that. Blamed it on a Sailor and said it was a homosexual lovers quarrel. Washed everything out of the gun turret, threw pieces of the gun overboard amongst other items from the turret. The powder flats were flooded and the men down there died from gas poisoning and fire. It was quite the debacle. My Grandfather had NIS visit him at his home over the ordeal because he retired less than a year before it happened. He knew all of the men in the turret and it deeply upset him with what went on. He always said he knew from day one what happened and how. After it was all said and done, he was right. They had used powder that he knew wasn't any good. It had sat in a magazine that had no temp controls and became unstable over time in the heat. Reports said that some of the last things that were heard over the sound powered phones were, " Oh my God, the bags are glowing" and "Get out". I couldn't imagine.
My paw paw on the far right. He wasn't very photogenic.
http://i1242.photobucket.com/albums/gg538/joecoastie99/pawpaw.jpeg That's exactly how a GMC should look. Reminds me of my LCPO from USS Firstship, who was also a GMC. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
