Mk37 Director Question

Naval History and the Technology associated with it.

Moderators: Timmy C, Gernot, Olaf Held, JWintjes

Post Reply
User avatar
Sean Hert
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:17 pm
Location: Columbus, OH
Contact:

Mk37 Director Question

Post by Sean Hert »

Can anyone tell me what the difference between the earlier and later mk37's are? Is there a designator I am unaware of?

What I mean is, the later ones have the external observation bump for the slewing sight that isn't present on the early ones.
Mk37comp2.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
--
Sean Hert
User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:10 am
Location: (42.24,-87.81)

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Werner »

Although the quality of my intelligence has been called into question, I believe what you see (from Friedman) is replacement of the director officer's hatch and telescope position with a blister which contains an open slewing sight.

This was necessary because of the late war need to shift rapidly from one high-speed target to another.

(Friedman, 1985, p.83)
If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation at Risk" (1983)
User avatar
Sean Hert
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:17 pm
Location: Columbus, OH
Contact:

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Sean Hert »

Werner wrote:Although the quality of my intelligence has been called into question, I believe what you see (from Friedman) is replacement of the director officer's hatch and telescope position with a blister which contains an open slewing sight.

This was necessary because of the late war need to shift rapidly from one high-speed target to another.

(Friedman, 1985, p.83)
Great! Do you know if this had a different mod number or anything to tell one from the other?

I've never questioned the quality of your intelligence.
--
Sean Hert
User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:10 am
Location: (42.24,-87.81)

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Werner »

I have not been able to find the mod number right off-hand. I believe the telescope removed was Mk39. It possibly was a return to factory refit, because I don't see pictures of ships being modified with the director in place.

Ships like the Sumner DMs completed with them; DD-661 had one but 680 & 691 don't at VE Day. Seems like Iowa didn't get the change until the '80s, but some of the other BBs have them in the '50s. Many have a boat cover over the sight and manhole.
If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation at Risk" (1983)
User avatar
Sean Hert
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:17 pm
Location: Columbus, OH
Contact:

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Sean Hert »

Werner wrote:Ships like the Sumner DMs completed with them; DD-661 had one but 680 & 691 don't at VE Day.
Odd you should mention that, as that is what I am working on.... :big_grin:
--
Sean Hert
User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:10 am
Location: (42.24,-87.81)

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Werner »

When I said "boat awning", I meant a hemispherical covering of canvas with several transverse ribs that remind me of a boat awning.

These looked like you could fold them back like a knight's visor rather than the circumferential ribs of, for example, the mothball cocoon of an 40mm twin or quad.

It's a shame that they had to wait 40 years to make an anti-Kamikaze update to Iowa. It seems the USN has always been the exact opposite of Jackie Fisher's comment "The RN always travels first class".

Even today.
If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation at Risk" (1983)
User avatar
Werner
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:10 am
Location: (42.24,-87.81)

Re: Mk37 Director Question

Post by Werner »

I found out through a little more searching that the original mark was not liked because it relied on a conducting ring for the slewing sight to control the director, and the ring would burn out after a short period of heavy use. Replacement put the director out of operation for a significant number of hours. I get the impression it was a brush or roller which acted against a metallic ring which was nearly the inside diameter of the director. Therefore, many captains ordered it disconnected to save on maintenance.
If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation at Risk" (1983)
Post Reply

Return to “History & Technology”