Jura The idiot
General
... OK the system was even fancier at the Yamatos: for example in the gunhouse there were separate loading gears for the shell and cartridges (and the handling of charges at two floors is ... surreal:
the vid:
The Viribus Unitis Battleship: 1:25 Model; Main Gun Turrets
- Thread starter Jura The idiot
- Start date
the vid:
Jura The idiot
General
finishing with Battleships Weekend 
Friday at 8:39 AM
the ammo was
"... in compartments III, IV, V, VI, VII, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII and XIX" which I have no way of knowing but since
"Such location shortened the distance between the magazines and ammo hoists."
I guess the shells were not encompassing the turret as on the Iowas, but were arranged something like this (it's obviously schematic and on a different ship, never built by the way):
??
Friday at 8:39 AM
... and as with the Yamatos above, I haven't found a top view for the Bismarcks either; what I read is... the arrangement AROUND the hoists, I mean the top views, for example on (newer) USN Battleships they would be like this:
...
I'm going to compare to other arrangements here ...
the ammo was
"... in compartments III, IV, V, VI, VII, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII and XIX" which I have no way of knowing
but since"Such location shortened the distance between the magazines and ammo hoists."
I guess the shells were not encompassing the turret as on the Iowas, but were arranged something like this (it's obviously schematic and on a different ship, never built by the way):
I think it is possible, however why would you want to use such large calibre shells?
If you want range and accruacy, you have missiles, if you want payload you have rockets tgat dont need the thick shell wall to withstand the propellant pressure, if you want penetration then there is heat.
I.e. big gus are currently obsolete.
Jura The idiot
General
was glad to see you two said pretty much the same too
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/th...del-main-gun-turrets.t7810/page-9#post-418806now with
Battleships era gone ... I'll try keep this thread going anyway
There are several possibilities.
Certainly using the rail gun is one.
But the arsenal ship idea could be added to that and they could easily do both.
With new builds they could add the all electric system and add the laser weapon system the US is already testing at sea on the USS Ponce.
So, imagine a 50,000 ton vessel with three 155mm Rail Guns, four larger Laser Weapon Systems, and 196 VLS cells using the PVLS configuration. and then all the sensors to go with it.
That would ne a massive and very powerful vessel...and a true modern battleship.
Keep in mind the reason why battleships were the way they were:
1. turrets with big bore guns weigh a lot. Yamato's 3 turrets weighed 9000 tons, as much as an arleigh Burke destroyer.
2. It is possible to stop The main perceived threats to battleships - big bore shells fired other battleships - with brut application of a lots of steel. Yamato's armor alone weighed more than a soviet Kirov class nuclear powered missile "battle Cruiser"
Neither of these are true with laser and rail guns. So there is no reason for future 50,000 ton battleships.
1. turrets with big bore guns weigh a lot. Yamato's 3 turrets weighed 9000 tons, as much as an arleigh Burke destroyer.
2. It is possible to stop The main perceived threats to battleships - big bore shells fired other battleships - with brut application of a lots of steel. Yamato's armor alone weighed more than a soviet Kirov class nuclear powered missile "battle Cruiser"
Neither of these are true with laser and rail guns. So there is no reason for future 50,000 ton battleships.
Jura The idiot
General
funny to see rail guns, lasers in the thread about warships which had been obsolete some 100 years ago (I established this thread to praise those ships so I can say that
to salvo-fire those contrivances), of course at high firing rates ... so a big ship would be needed, an electric power plant afloat ... but they don't mean to use that displacement for armor, do they?
where's Jeff anyway?
I'm no fun of lasers, rail guns, but just trying to be fair here: what their proponents would need is some ginormous power input if they wanted to shoot several at once (I think that's their dream
to salvo-fire those contrivances), of course at high firing rates ... so a big ship would be needed, an electric power plant afloat ... but they don't mean to use that displacement for armor, do they?where's Jeff anyway?
Jura The idiot
General
the battle ensign being raised:
