Interesting Battleship gun facts

[ar]

I have been led to believe that the British 15" naval gun was the best gun produced for the RN. It was a simple design and became the most reliable gun in the RN armoury and equal to any other 15" in any navy.

Equal is a dangerous word especially when the specific characteristics are so different. Equal in what specific way? By judiciously tweeking the weight one gives to each characteristic of a gun while keeping in mind the result one would like to see, one could make any weapon seem equal to or superior to any other weapon in the final tally.

In terms of power, The British 15" gun is considerably inferior to every other 15" naval gun that ever saw service, except for the WWI German 15" gun on the Baden class.

Can you explain please, re "terms of power".

[Guest]

Equal is a dangerous word especially when the specific characteristics are so different. Equal in what specific way? By judiciously tweeking the weight one gives to each characteristic of a gun while keeping in mind the result one would like to see, one could make any weapon seem equal to or superior to any other weapon in the final tally.

In terms of power, The British 15" gun is considerably inferior to every other 15" naval gun that ever saw service, except for the WWI German 15" gun on the Baden class.

Can you explain please, re "terms of power".

Power is an inaccurate word. Muzzle velocity squared times weight of shell. Effectively the energy which the gun impart onto the shell. This, when shell quality are equal, translates to either the ability to fire a heavier shell out to the same range, or to fire a equal weight shell to a greater distance, or to enable an equal weight shell to strike a target at the same distance with greater velocity and penetrative potential.

[Roger T]

In terms of power, The British 15" gun is considerably inferior to every other 15" naval gun that ever saw service, except for the WWI German 15" gun on the Baden class.

Well, seeing as it was designed in 1912, and every other 15" gun (except the comparable German example you quote) was designed at least 20 years later, that's hardly a criticism.

[Tiornu]

The Italian 381mm/40 had the lowest MV of any battleship gun in the Dreadnought period.

[ar]

Can you explain please, re "terms of power".

Power is an inaccurate word. Muzzle velocity squared times weight of shell. Effectively the energy which the gun impart onto the shell. This, when shell quality are equal, translates to either the ability to fire a heavier shell out to the same range, or to fire a equal weight shell to a greater distance, or to enable an equal weight shell to strike a target at the same distance with greater velocity and penetrative potential.

Could you then please give (in laymans terms) a set of comparative figures for the RN 15" of WW1 and the German 15" also of the same period? THank you.

[Guest]

The Italian 381mm/40 had the lowest MV of any battleship gun in the Dreadnought period.

But it never made it into high sea service.

[Guest]

Power is an inaccurate word. Muzzle velocity squared times weight of shell. Effectively the energy which the gun impart onto the shell. This, when shell quality are equal, translates to either the ability to fire a heavier shell out to the same range, or to fire a equal weight shell to a greater distance, or to enable an equal weight shell to strike a target at the same distance with greater velocity and penetrative potential.

Could you then please give (in laymans terms) a set of comparative figures for the RN 15" of WW1 and the German 15" also of the same period? THank you.

The British MK 1 15"/42 gun fires a 871 KG AP shell at 785 m/s. The German SLK L45 380mm gun fires a 750 KG AP shell at 800 m/s. The much greater weight of British shell more than makes up for slightly high muzzle velocity of the German gun. So the gun imparts 1.12 times as much kinetic energy to its shells as could the German gun.

[ar]

There are advantages that one gets with a low velocity heavy shell.
I will let others go over them for me, as I like to keep things brief.
Basically your argument I believe is flawed though, as you have negleted to compare the qualities of the GUN.

[Guest]

In terms of power, The British 15" gun is considerably inferior to every other 15" naval gun that ever saw service, except for the WWI German 15" gun on the Baden class.

Well, seeing as it was designed in 1912, and every other 15" gun (except the comparable German example you quote) was designed at least 20 years later, that's hardly a criticism.

Yes, but that's it's been in service for 20 more years doesn't make it equal to its younger counterpart.

[Guest]

There are advantages that one gets with a low velocity heavy shell.
I will let others go over them for me, as I like to keep things brief.
Basically your argument I believe is flawed though, as you have negleted to compare the qualities of the GUN.

You have to be more specific about what aspects makes up quality and how you would compare them.

[Guest]

Incidentally, the French and Italian 15" guns both fire heavier shells than the British 15" gun.

[ar]

There are advantages that one gets with a low velocity heavy shell.
I will let others go over them for me, as I like to keep things brief.
Basically your argument I believe is flawed though, as you have negleted to compare the qualities of the GUN.

You have to be more specific about what aspects makes up quality and how you would compare them.

You are the person that stated that the GUN was inferior. On that basis I feel that it is up to YOU to prove your case by giving a set of comparative figures, not I having to be specific.
The floor is yours.

[Mark Petersen]

All of this assumes that the projectile is hitting it's intended target. Without proper fire control systems all you are doing is raising latge splashes in sea water in a ship versus ship vs ship duel.

I fixed this, for some reason I had power fire conrtol systems

[Laurence Batchelor]

I would like to add that in actual combat is the best way to compare those 15" guns and mountings.
I still consider the RN 15" unequalled by any piece of naval artillery in any navy from 1912-1960.
Its combat record beats anything else even if a pure technical comparison doesn't, but those comparisons are mere paper talk!

[bengtsson]

I would like to add that in actual combat is the best way to compare those 15" guns and mountings.
I still consider the RN 15" unequalled by any piece of naval artillery in any navy from 1912-1960.
Its combat record beats anything else even if a pure technical comparison doesn't, but those comparisons are mere paper talk!

I tend to agree with you on that point Laurence. It is in combat that the weapons system must function and prove itself of value. The technical comparisons are interesting and show up some differences. But are these differences of such a vast scale that they would have a large effect in battle? Reliability with a reasonable weight of shell is what is wanted. The whole weapons system package is a different subject than just the technical characteristics of a gun. Shells, powder, fire control, loading and aiming speed etc. etc. so much goes into it all, the guns characteristics are simply one part.

Bob B.

[Foeth]

Well, Bismarck vs Hood is a direct comparision and the RN lost handsomely. So much for combat ratings. The German design is clearly superior.

[Werner]

Well, Bismarck vs Hood is a direct comparision and the RN lost handsomely. So much for combat ratings. The German design is clearly superior.

I think this engagement was a test of the entire system from gun to the supply department on shore and from armor to director computer. Don't forget to add a huge element of luck, which was not smiling on the British that day.

[1Big Rich]

Well, Bismarck vs Hood is a direct comparision[sic]

An engagement between a new battleship and an unmodernized battlecruiser 20 years her senior is hardly a direct comparison, no matter how close their other statistics may have been.

[Timmy C]

I get the feeling that Foeth was being sarcastic in his post.

[Laurence Batchelor]

Well, Bismarck vs Hood is a direct comparision and the RN lost handsomely. So much for combat ratings. The German design is clearly superior.

You make me chuckle sometimes!