Repulse/prince Of Wales Sinking

[Dawes]

So there's probably no way to ascertain (with any accuracy) the true number of South Dakota's kills?

[DougRichards]

 

Let's not forget the training level of the Japanese pilots at the start of the war, they were arguably the best in the world. How many other air forces could hit maneuvering warships from level bombers? Also, the state of damage control (the ships and the men) early in the war was pretty bad.

All air forces.

 

The issue is investment return, how many hits vs flights mode+bombs dropped.

 

 

Well B-17s could only hit ships if they were careless enough to leave pickle barrels on their decks

[Ken Estes]

IJN Mutsuki's skipper was a noteworthy victim of overconfidence vs USAAF B-17s, taking no evasive action:

 

Mutsuki was sunk in an attack by USAAF B-17 Flying Fortress bombers while assisting the damaged transport Kinryu Maru, 40 miles (64 km) northeast of Santa Isabel island. 7°47′S 160°13′ECoordinates: 7°47′S 160°13′E. Mutsuki took a direct bomb hit in her engineering section, killing 41 crewmen and injuring 11 more. Yayoi took on the survivors, which included her captain, Lt. Cdr. Kenji Hatano

 

 

HMS Repulse was very maneuverable compared to HMS PoW, as well as to IJN Settsu, the former BB converted to a target ship for the Nell and Betty bombers to practice against prior to WWII. In the attack on Force Z, Repulse was well handled, receiving only on bomb hit [detonated on her deck armor, setting fire to the seaplane, later jettisoned], but PoW took an unfortunate torpedo hit on a propeller shaft, which was distorted and literally beat the hull up, alone sufficient to knock her out of action. Left alone and still maneuvering, Repulse fell victim to no fewer than 17 Betties in a scissors attack, and five torpedos hit, dooming the ship.

 

PoW was designed to resist torpedos of approx 450 lb, as I recall from the relevant David Brown volume,but the IJN aerial torpedos had larger warheads.

[Ken Estes]

 

 

 

The 3/50 continued in Service with the RCN till the late 80's

 

...and the 3"/70 continued in RCN through 1992: see HMCS Mackenzie at SanDiego after RIMPAC 92. [ETA] Oops, she also retains her 3"/50 aft.

 

 

 

USS Norfolk was last in the USN, decomm'd 1970.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ken Estes

[DougRichards]

It makes me wonder about cooperation between various service, whether that be USN and Army or RN and the British army. I understand that some interwar French cruisers were armed with 155mm guns, basically of the same type used by the French Army.

 

The US 155mm guns used a semi armour piecing shell for coastal defence purposes. The same shell was used by the GMC M12 and the M1 155mm gun, and therefore the later M40 GMC. In the land role it was to deal with concrete and other bunkers, which it did very well. It also available to shoot at ships.

 

I can see no good reason why the USN and the Army would not use the same shells, except for the usual inter service rivalry. I would be pleased to hear that the Army 155guns and the USN 6" guns (well, they were basically the same bore and purpose) but I fear that this was not the case.

 

Having said that, the same was probably the case in Britain, with the army's 4.5in gun (firing the same shell as the US 4.5 in) being completely overlooked by the RN for its guns, except for the mid war adoption of the RN 4.5in and 5.25in guns for coastal defence and AA purposes.

 

Didn't anyone talk to each other?

[Markus Becker]

The US Army got their 155s from the French. 6" is 152mm and it was the maximum the naval treaties allowed for light cruisers afaik.

[Ken Estes]

The use of army 155mm guns in the 1930s French light cruisers of the La Galissonnière class was dictated by parliament as an economy measure, however what was actually fitted were the naval 152mm/55 caliber Model 1930, same in the later Richelieu class BBs as secondary armament. I don't know the details of how the wrangling ensued.

 

Naval guns can be much heavier in design than land arty pieces and one advantage would be to mate with semi-automatic loading equipment. For instance, the USN 6"/47 light cruiser guns of the modern light cruisers from Brooklyn onwards used brass casings for the propellant charges, enabling them to use continuous belt hoists and ram projo and propellant case in a single stroke. Thus, the rate of fire was a very respectable 9-10 rpm, or 150 rpm from a single Brooklyn class cruiser. The 6"/47 also could use a superheavy AP projo having twice the penetration of the 6"/53 of the earlier Omaha class. These capabilities would hardly be supportable in an army weapon where larger numbers at reasonable cost are basic requirements. The use of brass propellant canisters alone would be nightmarish.

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ken Estes

[Ken Estes]

The IJN introduced their 155mm 6.1"/60 with the Mogami class CLs, later distributed to the CL Oyodo and the Yamato class BB when replaced by 8" in the Mogami class. They were unrelated to army weapons of 155mm caliber.

 

Curiously, the later Agano class CLs reverted to the 1912 vintage naval 152/50 guns as they were available from the reconstructed Kongo and Fuso class BBs and reserve guns. Talk about world class navy run as a rummage sale!

[JasonJ]

IJA caliber of that class were actually not 155mm. While they were named as Type so-and-so 15cm cannon, they were 149.1mm.

[DougRichards]

The IJN introduced their 155mm 6.1"/60 with the Mogami class CLs, later distributed to the CL Oyodo and the Yamato class BB when replaced by 8" in the Mogami class. They were unrelated to army weapons of 155mm caliber.

 

Curiously, the later Agano class CLs reverted to the 1912 vintage naval 152/50 guns as they were available from the reconstructed Kongo and Fuso class BBs and reserve guns. Talk about world class navy run as a rummage sale!

 

Well the HMS Vanguard did get its main guns from what was available from 40 years before

[Ken Estes]

IJA caliber of that class were actually not 155mm. While they were named as Type so-and-so 15cm cannon, they were 149.1mm.

 

So no mixing with IJN weapons was possible. That matches their usual relationship!

Edited December 27, 2018 by Ken Estes

[Markus Becker]

 

Curiously, the later Agano class CLs reverted to the 1912 vintage naval 152/50 guns as they were available from the reconstructed Kongo and Fuso class BBs and reserve guns. Talk about world class navy run as a rummage sale!

I see your Anago class and raise you HMS Vanguard.

 

The first French post war CL had army guns because nothing else was available at the time but the guns weren't all that good. I can get detail when I'm home in a few hours.

[JasonJ]

 

IJA caliber of that class were actually not 155mm. While they were named as Type so-and-so 15cm cannon, they were 149.1mm.

 

So no mixing with IJN weapons was possible. That matches their usual relationship!

It matches but in this case, maybe not one of the symptoms. IJA used 149.1mm since before WW1 while the cruiser 155mm gun looks like a new gun. A difference of 5.9mm might not be worthwhile but with all navy parties being under same treaty terms, maybe there was a desire to use absolute maximum allowed caliber and go 155mm. Don't know that much though、 just wonder.

[glenn239]

So there's probably no way to ascertain (with any accuracy) the true number of South Dakota's kills?

 

There was a marked lethality spike in USN defenses at Santa Cruz in comparison to the previous carrier battles. SoDak and 40mm.

[Markus Becker]

Lundstrom mentiones the reports and notes that the "26 kills" claim for SoDak wasn't made by SoDak but ascribed to her. And that she had six 40mm quad mounts plus the smaller stuff.

[shep854]

RE: Santa Cruz and later battles, with so many guns on different ships blazing away at the same target, ascribing the kill is rather problematic, like kills of attacking fighters through a bomber formation. Maybe BB gets the kills because it's the biggest ship?

[Ken Estes]

Lundstrom was one of the sources I would have gone to.

 

This is odd; we will need more:

 

South Dakota was credited with downing 26 Japanese planes, firing 890 rounds of 5 inch, 4,000 rounds of 40mm, 3,000 rounds of 1.1 inch and 52,000 rounds of 20mm ammunition during the action. Captain Gatch made the following assessment of the relative effectiveness of each weapon type in bringing down enemy aircraft during the action: 5 inch: 5%, 40mm and 1.1 inch: 30% and 20mm: 65%.^[6]

 

^{fn 6:} AntiAircraft Action Summary, July 1942 to Dec 1942. United States Navy. p. 111. Information Bulletin No. 22.

[Ken Estes]

RE: Santa Cruz and later battles, with so many guns on different ships blazing away at the same target, ascribing the kill is rather problematic, like kills of attacking fighters through a bomber formation. Maybe BB gets the kills because it's the biggest ship?

+1

[Ken Estes]

 

 

IJA caliber of that class were actually not 155mm. While they were named as Type so-and-so 15cm cannon, they were 149.1mm.

So no mixing with IJN weapons was possible. That matches their usual relationship!

It matches but in this case, maybe not one of the symptoms. IJA used 149.1mm since before WW1 while the cruiser 155mm gun looks like a new gun. A difference of 5.9mm might not be worthwhile but with all navy parties being under same treaty terms, maybe there was a desire to use absolute maximum allowed caliber and go 155mm. Don't know that much though、 just wonder.

 

 

 

I usually trust NavWeps because of their sources.

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_61-60_3ns.php

[shep854]

Lundstrom was one of the sources I would have gone to.

 

This is odd; we will need more:

 

South Dakota was credited with downing 26 Japanese planes, firing 890 rounds of 5 inch, 4,000 rounds of 40mm, 3,000 rounds of 1.1 inch and 52,000 rounds of 20mm ammunition during the action. Captain Gatch made the following assessment of the relative effectiveness of each weapon type in bringing down enemy aircraft during the action: 5 inch: 5%, 40mm and 1.1 inch: 30% and 20mm: 65%.^[6]

 

^{fn 6:} AntiAircraft Action Summary, July 1942 to Dec 1942. United States Navy. p. 111. Information Bulletin No. 22.

Whew! Those 20mm loaders had to have been exhausted--that came to 2,600 drums, assuming 20rd per drum.

[JasonJ]

 

 

 

IJA caliber of that class were actually not 155mm. While they were named as Type so-and-so 15cm cannon, they were 149.1mm.

So no mixing with IJN weapons was possible. That matches their usual relationship!

It matches but in this case, maybe not one of the symptoms. IJA used 149.1mm since before WW1 while the cruiser 155mm gun looks like a new gun. A difference of 5.9mm might not be worthwhile but with all navy parties being under same treaty terms, maybe there was a desire to use absolute maximum allowed caliber and go 155mm. Don't know that much though、 just wonder.

 

 

 

I usually trust NavWeps because of their sources.

 

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNJAP_61-60_3ns.php

 

 

Thank you for the link Ken. I still wonder about the origin of this 155mm gun barrel design though. The breech design seems to be coming from 1914 but the barrel and its caliber itself might be new from 1930s. The Japanese wiki just says that the gun was developed in the first half of the 1930s without touching on its name (3rd year type) and the breech noted your your link. I got books for Army stuff. But not for Navy stuff, I'm no better than the internet.

 

In any case, it looks like the Navy was using 152mm before this 155mm cannon while the Army was going with its 149.1mm Maybe only saving grace for the Navy to be going 152mm while the Army was going 149.1 was that the Navy gun was originally Vickers, thus an origin of difference out of just technical differences and not necessarily out of the Army-Navy feud although maybe that feud made the conditions for a failure to unify to the same caliber later.

[Markus Becker]

RE: Santa Cruz and later battles, with so many guns on different ships blazing away at the same target, ascribing the kill is rather problematic, like kills of attacking fighters through a bomber formation. Maybe BB gets the kills because it's the biggest ship?

Who else was having 40's, particularly quad mounts?

[Markus Becker]

Deleted

Edited December 27, 2018 by Markus Becker

[Markus Becker]

Also deleted

Edited December 27, 2018 by Markus Becker

[Josh]

 

RE: Santa Cruz and later battles, with so many guns on different ships blazing away at the same target, ascribing the kill is rather problematic, like kills of attacking fighters through a bomber formation. Maybe BB gets the kills because it's the biggest ship?

Who else was having 40's, particularly quad mounts?

 

By that point in the war, everyone. Every can probably had 4-10 barrels. On the Fletchers I think they replaced one of the quint torp launchers with a quad mount late war.