File Name: naval firepower battleship guns and gunnery in the dreadnought era .zip
Norman Friedman , Ph. He has written over 30 books on naval matters, and appeared on television programs on PBS and the Discovery Networks.
- Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era
- Books on Naval Warfare
- Naval Firepower
- Norman Friedman
When live ammunition is iired from a gun toward a distant moving target, the gun must be so aimed that the axis of its barrel passes through a point which is both above and ahead of the target at the instant of firing. The heightwise displacement of the barrel axis of course compensates for the trajectory of the missile, and is the elevation used to offset the effect of gravity upon the missile during the course of its travel from the gun to the target. The horizontal displacement, which is sometime referred to las lead or aimingT allowance, compensates for motion of the target during the interval that the missile is traveling from the gun to the target.
Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era
A fire-control system sometimes called FCS is a number of components working together, usually a gun data computer , a director , and radar , which is designed to assist a ranged weapon system in targeting, tracking and hitting its target. It performs the same task as a human gunner firing a weapon, but attempts to do so faster and more accurately. The early history of naval fire control was dominated by the engagement of targets within visual range also referred to as direct fire.
Rapid technical improvements in the late 19th century greatly increased the range at which gunfire was possible. Rifled guns of much larger size firing explosive shells of lighter relative weight compared to all-metal balls so greatly increased the range of the guns that the main problem became aiming them while the ship was moving on the waves.
This problem was solved with the introduction of the gyroscope , which corrected this motion and provided sub-degree accuracies. Guns were now free to grow to any size, and quickly surpassed 10 inches calibre by the turn of the century. These guns were capable of such great range that the primary limitation was seeing the target, leading to the use of high masts on ships.
Another technical improvement was the introduction of the steam turbine which greatly increased the performance of the ships. Earlier screw-powered capital ships were capable of perhaps 16 knots, but the first large turbine ships were capable of over 20 knots. Combined with the long range of the guns, this meant that the ships moved a considerable distance, several ship lengths, between the time the shells were fired and landed.
One could no longer eyeball the aim with any hope of accuracy. Moreover, in naval engagements it is also necessary to control the firing of several guns at once.
Naval gun fire control potentially involves three levels of complexity. Local control originated with primitive gun installations aimed by the individual gun crews. Director control aims all guns on the ship at a single target. Coordinated gunfire from a formation of ships at a single target was a focus of battleship fleet operations.
Corrections are made for surface wind velocity, firing ship roll and pitch, powder magazine temperature, drift of rifled projectiles, individual gun bore diameter adjusted for shot-to-shot enlargement, and rate of change of range with additional modifications to the firing solution based upon the observation of preceding shots. The resulting directions, known as a firing solution , would then be fed back out to the turrets for laying.
If the rounds missed, an observer could work out how far they missed by and in which direction, and this information could be fed back into the computer along with any changes in the rest of the information and another shot attempted. At first, the guns were aimed using the technique of artillery spotting. It involved firing a gun at the target, observing the projectile's point of impact fall of shot , and correcting the aim based on where the shell was observed to land, which became more and more difficult as the range of the gun increased.
Between the American Civil War and , numerous small improvements, such as telescopic sights and optical rangefinders , were made in fire control. There were also procedural improvements, like the use of plotting boards to manually predict the position of a ship during an engagement. Then increasingly sophisticated mechanical calculators were employed for proper gun laying , typically with various spotters and distance measures being sent to a central plotting station deep within the ship.
There the fire direction teams fed in the location, speed and direction of the ship and its target, as well as various adjustments for Coriolis effect , weather effects on the air, and other adjustments.
Around , mechanical fire control aids began to become available, such as the Dreyer Table , Dumaresq which was also part of the Dreyer Table , and Argo Clock , but these devices took a number of years to become widely deployed. Arthur Pollen and Frederic Charles Dreyer independently developed the first such systems.
Pollen began working on the problem after noting the poor accuracy of naval artillery at a gunnery practice near Malta in Pollen aimed to produce a combined mechanical computer and automatic plot of ranges and rates for use in centralised fire control. To obtain accurate data of the target's position and relative motion, Pollen developed a plotting unit or plotter to capture this data. To this he added a gyroscope to allow for the yaw of the firing ship.
Like the plotter, the primitive gyroscope of the time required substantial development to provide continuous and reliable guidance. Pollen continued his work, with occasional tests carried out on Royal Navy warships.
Meanwhile, a group led by Dreyer designed a similar system. The addition of director control facilitated a full, practicable fire control system for World War I ships, and most RN capital ships were so fitted by mid The director was high up over the ship where operators had a superior view over any gunlayer in the turrets. It was also able to co-ordinate the fire of the turrets so that their combined fire worked together.
This improved aiming and larger optical rangefinders improved the estimate of the enemy's position at the time of firing. The system was eventually replaced by the improved " Admiralty Fire Control Table " for ships built after During their long service life, rangekeepers were updated often as technology advanced, and by World War II they were a critical part of an integrated fire control system. The incorporation of radar into the fire control system early in World War II provided ships the ability to conduct effective gunfire operations at long range in poor weather and at night.
Navy gun fire control systems, see ship gun fire-control systems. The use of director-controlled firing, together with the fire control computer, removed the control of the gun laying from the individual turrets to a central position; although individual gun mounts and multi-gun turrets would retain a local control option for use when battle damage limited director information transfer these would be simpler versions called "turret tables" in the Royal Navy.
Guns could then be fired in planned salvos, with each gun giving a slightly different trajectory. Dispersion of shot caused by differences in individual guns, individual projectiles, powder ignition sequences, and transient distortion of ship structure was undesirably large at typical naval engagement ranges. Directors high on the superstructure had a better view of the enemy than a turret mounted sight, and the crew operating them were distant from the sound and shock of the guns.
Gun directors were topmost, and the ends of their optical rangefinders protruded from their sides, giving them a distinctive appearance. Unmeasured and uncontrollable ballistic factors, like high altitude temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, wind direction and velocity, required final adjustment through observation of the fall of shot.
Visual range measurement of both target and shell splashes was difficult prior to availability of Radar. The British favoured coincident rangefinders while the Germans favored the stereoscopic type. The former were less able to range on an indistinct target but easier on the operator over a long period of use, the latter the reverse.
Submarines were also equipped with fire control computers for the same reasons, but their problem was even more pronounced; in a typical "shot", the torpedo would take one to two minutes to reach its target.
Calculating the proper "lead" given the relative motion of the two vessels was very difficult, and torpedo data computers were added to dramatically improve the speed of these calculations.
In a typical World War II British ship the fire control system connected the individual gun turrets to the director tower where the sighting instruments were located and the analogue computer in the heart of the ship.
In the director tower, operators trained their telescopes on the target; one telescope measured elevation and the other bearing. Rangefinder telescopes on a separate mounting measured the distance to the target. These measurements were converted by the Fire Control Table into the bearings and elevations for the guns to fire upon.
In the turrets, the gunlayers adjusted the elevation of their guns to match an indicator for the elevation transmitted from the Fire Control table—a turret layer did the same for bearing. When the guns were on target they were centrally fired. Even with as much mechanization of the process, it still required a large human element; the Transmitting Station the room that housed the Dreyer table for HMS Hood ' s main guns housed 27 crew. Directors were largely unprotected from enemy fire.
It was difficult to put much weight of armour so high up on the ship, and even if the armour did stop a shot, the impact alone would likely knock the instruments out of alignment. Sufficient armour to protect from smaller shells and fragments from hits to other parts of the ship was the limit. The performance of the analog computer was impressive.
Night naval engagements at long range became feasible when radar data could be input to the rangekeeper. Kirishima was set aflame, suffered a number of explosions, and was scuttled by her crew. By the s gun turrets were increasingly unmanned, with gun laying controlled remotely from the ship's control centre using inputs from radar and other sources. The last combat action for the analog rangekeepers, at least for the US Navy, was in the Persian Gulf War  when the rangekeepers on the Iowa -class battleships directed their last rounds in combat.
An early use of fire-control systems was in bomber aircraft , with the use of computing bombsights that accepted altitude and airspeed information to predict and display the impact point of a bomb released at that time. The best known United States device was the Norden bombsight. Simple systems, known as lead computing sights also made their appearance inside aircraft late in the war as gyro gunsights. These devices used a gyroscope to measure turn rates, and moved the gunsight's aim-point to take this into account, with the aim point presented through a reflector sight.
The only manual "input" to the sight was the target distance, which was typically handled by dialing in the size of the target's wing span at some known range. Small radar units were added in the post-war period to automate even this input, but it was some time before they were fast enough to make the pilots completely happy with them. The first implementation of a centralized fire control system in a production aircraft was on the B By the start of the Vietnam War, a new computerized bombing predictor, called the Low Altitude Bombing System LABS , began to be integrated into the systems of aircraft equipped to carry nuclear armaments.
This new bomb computer was revolutionary in that the release command for the bomb was given by the computer, not the pilot; the pilot designated the target using the radar or other targeting system , then "consented" to release the weapon, and the computer then did so at a calculated "release point" some seconds later.
This is very different from previous systems, which, though they had also become computerized, still calculated an "impact point" showing where the bomb would fall if the bomb were released at that moment. The key advantage is that the weapon can be released accurately even when the plane is maneuvering.
Most bombsights until this time required that the plane maintain a constant attitude usually level , though dive-bombing sights were also common. The LABS system was originally designed to facilitate a tactic called toss bombing , to allow the aircraft to remain out of range of a weapon's blast radius.
The principle of calculating the release point, however, was eventually integrated into the fire control computers of later bombers and strike aircraft, allowing level, dive and toss bombing. In addition, as the fire control computer became integrated with ordnance systems, the computer can take the flight characteristics of the weapon to be launched into account. By the start of World War II , aircraft altitude performance had increased so much that anti-aircraft guns had similar predictive problems, and were increasingly equipped with fire-control computers.
The main difference between these systems and the ones on ships was size and speed. The early versions of the High Angle Control System , or HACS, of Britain 's Royal Navy were examples of a system that predicted based upon the assumption that target speed, direction, and altitude would remain constant during the prediction cycle, which consisted of the time to fuze the shell and the time of flight of the shell to the target.
The USN Mk 37 system made similar assumptions except that it could predict assuming a constant rate of altitude change. The Kerrison Predictor is an example of a system that was built to solve laying in "real time", simply by pointing the director at the target and then aiming the gun at a pointer it directed.
It was also deliberately designed to be small and light, in order to allow it to be easily moved along with the guns it served. The MIT Radiation Lab's SCR was the first radar system with automatic following, Bell Laboratory 's M-9  was an electronic analog fire-control computer that replaced complicated and difficult-to-manufacture mechanical computers such as the Sperry M-7 or British Kerrison predictor.
In combination with the VT proximity fuze , this system accomplished the astonishing feat of shooting down V-1 cruise missiles with less than shells per plane thousands were typical in earlier AA systems. Although listed in Land based fire control section anti-aircraft fire control systems can also be found on naval and aircraft systems. Early systems made use of multiple observation or base end stations see Figure 1 to find and track targets attacking American harbors.
Data from these stations were then passed to plotting rooms , where analog mechanical devices, such as the plotting board , were used to estimate targets' positions and derive firing data for batteries of coastal guns assigned to interdict them. Coast Artillery forts  bristled with a variety of armament, ranging from inch coast defense mortars, through 3-inch and 6-inch mid-range artillery, to the larger guns, which included inch and inch barbette and disappearing carriage guns, inch railroad artillery, and inch cannon installed just prior to and up through World War II.
Fire control in the Coast Artillery became more and more sophisticated in terms of correcting firing data for such factors as weather conditions, the condition of powder used, or the Earth's rotation. Provisions were also made for adjusting firing data for the observed fall of shells.
As shown in Figure 2, all of these data were fed back to the plotting rooms on a finely tuned schedule controlled by a system of time interval bells that rang throughout each harbor defense system.
Books on Naval Warfare
Known as Panzerkreuzer, literally "armored cruiser," the eight ships of the class were to be involved in several early North Sea skirmishes before the great pitched battle of Jutland where they inflicted devastating damage on the Royal Navy's battlecruiser fleet. This book details their design and construction, and traces the full service history of each ship, recounting their actions, drawing largely from first-hand German sources and official documents, many previously unpublished in English. Containing many new photographs from the author's exhaustive collection this superb reference book presents the complete technical history of British capital ship design and construction during the dreadnought era. Beginning with Dreadnought, all of the fifty dreadnoughts, 'super-dreadnoughts' and battlecruisers that served the Royal Navy during this era are described and superbly illustrated with photographs and line drawings. Individual chapters cover the design and construction of each class, with full technical details, and there are extensive summaries of every ship's career.
A fire-control system sometimes called FCS is a number of components working together, usually a gun data computer , a director , and radar , which is designed to assist a ranged weapon system in targeting, tracking and hitting its target. It performs the same task as a human gunner firing a weapon, but attempts to do so faster and more accurately. The early history of naval fire control was dominated by the engagement of targets within visual range also referred to as direct fire. Rapid technical improvements in the late 19th century greatly increased the range at which gunfire was possible. Rifled guns of much larger size firing explosive shells of lighter relative weight compared to all-metal balls so greatly increased the range of the guns that the main problem became aiming them while the ship was moving on the waves.
Read Naval Firepower by Norman Friedman with a free trial. Read unlimited* books and Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnought Era. By Norman Friedman PDF ISBN:
Published November by Popular Culture Ink. Written in English. A feasibility study of a differentiated supervision and evaluation model for teachers. Naval Firepower is unusual in the way that it integrates analysis of the Naval Firepower book, its development, and the politics that surrounded it, with the tactical ideas that it was designed to serve, and which were changed by the features of the Naval Firepower book. This book gave enough data, specifications, doctrine, and specific results so as to form a good picture of naval gunfire capabilities during this era.
The most recent of more than twenty major books, is a very well received study of British destroyers and frigates. Du kanske gillar. Untamed Glennon Doyle Inbunden.
By Norman Friedman. A US Battle Squadron is shown during gunnery practice in The leading ship is Nevada or Oklahoma , distinguishable by her pattern of secondary gun mounts. Note the characteristic US cage masts, intended to insure that ships could keep firing at long range despite mast hits, and the bearing markings on No 2 turret. I have used predominantly Imperial units of measurement mainly yards and inches rather than metric, because they were standard in the two most powerful battleship-era navies, the US Navy and the Royal Navy.
Looks at the design, construction and crews of English and Spanish galleons, the differences between them and how they changed , their place in the naval world of the late sixteenth century, and three iconic clashes involving galleons on both sides.
Chalmers Using the performance of the Royal Navy as an illustration, this paper shows that systems of systems break apart at the perilous edge where human behavior meets engineered systems. These complex machines were in turn integrated into massive fleets.
Джабба принялся устанавливать на место новый чип. Через минуту его усилия увенчались успехом, а телефон все звонил и звонил. Христа ради, Мидж. Ну хватит. Телефон заливался еще секунд пятнадцать и наконец замолк. Джабба облегченно вздохнул.