maxim wrote:
Sorry, I cannot see much on the wreck photos (I see mainly animals growing on the turret) and I do not know the position of the barrels, their angle or if the angle is because of some damage etc.
With all due respect Maxim you simply need to look closer at the pics in last post this page;
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10618&start=420The b/w image show the deep turret barrel 'aperture' going 'back' into the turret roof further IMO than needed for just 50 degree elevation, and also the turret aperture does not have the squared off 'end' that Martin previously said differentiated the 50 degree turret (from the 70 degree turret), as the 'end' curves around. [
However, I am not at all sure now - after looking at more photos - if this point that Martin made re squared off (50 degree turret) as opposed to rounded (for 70 degree turret) is actually accurate.] The colour image simply shows the barrels (well the nearest barrel, as we can't quite see where other barrel enters turret) of Y turret at max elevation, that is basically hard up against the top of the turret aperture / roof.
maxim wrote:
My argument was only that it is very unlikely that she got the turrets as AA weapons. The idea to use the 8" guns as AA weapons was from the 1920s and it was shown that they turn and fire too slow to be effective.
I
never ever implied she got them
for use as AA weapons, you or some other party brought that reasoning into the discussion it seems.
I did say however the she used her 8" turrets as AA weapons - for want of a better term - effectively at max elevation during the Gasper Strait sortie 15 Feb 42.
maxim wrote:
Therefore, most heavy cruisers got in the 1930s more 4" guns and Exeter those turrets with only 50°.
I do not disagree that she was
built with the 50 degree turrets. But the forward two were wrecked by Graf Spee, and hence replaced.