"a425couple" wrote in message news:BdyKJ.37$f2a5.2@fx48.iad...
Maryellen Reilly
Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2?
Originally Answered: What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in
World War 2?
-------------------------------
One of the worst antiaircraft guns was the main battery of Japanese battleships:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Shiki_(anti-aircraft_shell)
"a425couple" wrote in message news:BdyKJ.37$f2a5.2@fx48.iad...
Maryellen Reilly
Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2?
Originally Answered: What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in
World War 2?
-------------------------------
One of the worst antiaircraft guns was the main battery of Japanese battleships:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Shiki_(anti-aircraft_shell)
"a425couple" wrote in message news:5CHKJ.908$H_t...@fx40.iad...
On 2/2/2022 2:14 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"a425couple" wrote in message news:BdyKJ.37$f2a...@fx48.iad...
Maryellen Reilly
Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2?
Originally Answered: What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in
World War 2?
-------------------------------
One of the worst antiaircraft guns was the main battery of Japanese battleships:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Shiki_(anti-aircraft_shell)
One of the worst for AA against the planes thatHiei and Kirishima did not bombard Henderson. Instead it was their sisters, Kongo and Haruna who laid down the devastating bombardment the night before.
normally tore up the IJN fleet,
- OK, sounds true enough. The USN planes were
quite evasive and unpredictable for 14", 15", 16"
or 18" guns to follow.
But for ground attack, seems they did OK
"The Sanshiki anti-aircraft shells were used for shore bombardment
during the Battle for Henderson Field. On 13 October 1942,
----- Over the next 83 minutes, they fired 973 14 in (360 mm) shells
into the Lunga perimeter, most of them falling in and around the 2,200
m² area of the airfield. The bombardment heavily damaged the airfield's
two runways, burned almost all of the available aviation fuel, destroyed
48 of the CAF's ("Cactus Air Force") 90 aircraft, and killed 41 men, including six CAF aircrew."
However, it still seems to me, that that idea would have
had a fair chance of working from the Tirpitz,
the Lancasters coming in to drop the huge Tall Boy
bombs were flying straight at the Tirpitz, and going
straight and level and high. Seems that the shotgun / bee hive
rounds would have been pretty ideal for that.
------------------------
Hiei was sunk and only Kirishima returned for the second bombardment, however she unexpectedly encountered US battleships Washington and South Dakota first, with her shell hoists filled for shore bombardment instead of a naval battle. In the resulting battle South Dakota suffered an electrical failure and along with US destroyers absorbed all the damage, while Washington, concealed behind the glare of burning ships, pounded Kirishima to death.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_lundgren/kirishimaDamageAnalysis.php
20 hits from 75 main gun rounds is incredible, the usual average is around 3%. Bismarck scored zero at a not much greater range.
Free Surface Effect is water shifting to the low side like loose cargo. GM is stability against capsizing.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_lundgren/South_Dakota_Damage_Analysis.php Lundgren claims that hit 13 was a san shiki.
jsw
Maryellen Reilly Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2? Originally Answered:
What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in World War 2?
The allies spent 2 billion dollars on the Manhattan project to
develop the atomic bomb. This was a huge amount of money for the
time.
The allies spent over 1 billion dollars to develop the proximity fuze
to enable shells launched from a naval/artillery tube to explode
within the proximity of the intended target.
This target could be an airplane or be a ground target. Imagine
shooting a shotgun into the air and when it gets close to an airplane
it fires multiple projectiles in all directions.
The physics of this theory is unimaginable especially in 1943.
You must combine Radar ,a fire control computer and a VT fuze.
All of this before transistors or solid state electronics. The
collaboration of the top scientists from the British
Telecommunication Research Establishment and multiple US scientific
research groups including John's Hopkins University applied physics
lab and Western electric.
The unbelievable process of developing all of the components of this
proximity fuze was completed. The remaining hurdle was allowing this
fragile fuze and bomb to be launched from a artillery/naval gun and
be able to survive 20,000 Gs and 30,000 rpm.
Eventually they developed a wax and oil suspender which allowed this
delicate mechanism to survive the explosive expulsion from a gun.
This one improvement created a 50 fold increase in success in
destruction of attacking aircraft for the allied navy's.
The VT fused shells in 5″ Naval anti-aircraft shells were initially
sent to the US Navy in the Pacific.
Airburst VT shells were introduced in Europe first against the V1
rockets attacking England , then during the battle of the bulge as
airburst antipersonnel artillery.
The USN tested the new AA shells against drones over the chesapeake
bay and the were able to destroy 1 in 4 shots. They shut down testing
and went immediately to production.
The Germans were only successful in 1 in 2500 antiarcraft shots.
143.5K views1.4K upvotes14 shares151 comments 18.4K viewsView 161
upvotes 8 comments from Steve Coleman and more
Steve Coleman · December 25 John's Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory developed the VT Fuse.
I spent 20 years walking past a display case every day holding one of
the early prototypes. It never failed to amaze me that they could
fit all that in that small fuse and have it survive the massive G
forces of being shot out of an AA gun.
Paul Wahler · December 19 I recently read a fascinating book about
the development of the proximity fuse. The title of the book is “12
Seconds of Silence” - a reference to the time from when the V-1
“buzz” motor shut off and when the unguided missle hit the ground. A terrifying 12 seconds to contemplate if you were going to die. I
highly recommend this book.
Neal Sollan · December 20 Have heard the author talk. For those who
may wonder about the title … It comes from what the author considers
the greatest achievement (event) in the WW2 history of the proximity
fuze. The British moved by PF equipped AAA to in effect from a
defensive line across the normal routes used by V-1s and took out
the vast majority of them long before they got to densely populated
areas. The victory however was short lived and had a notable example
of poor timing.
In an a.m. BBC broadcast there was an announcement that the V-1
threat to Britain had effectively ceased. In the p.m. the first V-2
landed (somewhere in Greater London as I remember). AAA and hence the
PF was useless against this type of missile
Paul Wahler · December 21 I love these ‘little’ pieces of WWII
history which have only been explored fully after the secrecy acts of
various countries have passed. I was even more surprised about the
proximity fuse use in artillery shells.
I got this book from the niece of Merle Tuve, the person Section T
was named for. I can see her family resemblance in the photo of
Tuve.
Edward Adamchek · January 26 Maryellen: Check out the U.S. Naval Institute’s video on Willis Lee. If you haven’t seen it, you must - it’s about 30 minutes (more or less) and describes some of his stunts
as well as the fact that he forced the BuOrd to release the 5”
proximity shell to be shipped to the PTO when it was 1:5 effect…
(more) Profile photo for Geren Nichols Geren Nichols · December 27
Vacuum tubes!!! Can you even shoot your current iPhone out a 5″ gun
with 2,600′ fps muzzle velocity and expect it to work?
The VT amazingly tough (only had to work once for a few seconds).
Profile photo for Ted Kennedy Ted Kennedy · December 25 I love the
story of R V Jones, the British electronic warfare expert. On being
sent to the US with radar secrets and I think the PF details he was accompanied by an armed officer. R V J protested that he didn’t need
a body guard only to be told the guy wasn’t there to protect him but
to shoot and kill him if R V J was in danger of capture.
Graham Figg · December 31 The “Oslo Letter” was authenticated by the inclusion of a prototype German proximity fuse.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Report
On 2/2/2022 2:14 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"a425couple" wrote in message news:BdyKJ.37$f2a5.2@fx48.iad...
Maryellen Reilly
Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2?
Originally Answered: What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in
World War 2?
-------------------------------
One of the worst antiaircraft guns was the main battery of Japanese
battleships:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Shiki_(anti-aircraft_shell)
One of the worst for AA against the planes that
normally tore up the IJN fleet,
- OK, sounds true enough. The USN planes were
quite evasive and unpredictable for 14", 15", 16"
or 18" guns to follow.
But for ground attack, seems they did OK
"The Sanshiki anti-aircraft shells were used for shore bombardment
during the Battle for Henderson Field. On 13 October 1942,
----- Over the next 83 minutes, they fired 973 14 in (360 mm) shells
into the Lunga perimeter, most of them falling in and around the 2,200
m² area of the airfield. The bombardment heavily damaged the airfield's
two runways, burned almost all of the available aviation fuel, destroyed
48 of the CAF's ("Cactus Air Force") 90 aircraft, and killed 41 men, including six CAF aircrew."
However, it still seems to me, that that idea would have
had a fair chance of working from the Tirpitz,
the Lancasters coming in to drop the huge Tall Boy
bombs were flying straight at the Tirpitz, and going
straight and level and high. Seems that the shotgun / bee hive
rounds would have been pretty ideal for that.
"a425couple" wrote in message news:5CHKJ.908$H_t7.35@fx40.iad...
However, it still seems to me, that that idea would have
had a fair chance of working from the Tirpitz,
the Lancasters coming in to drop the huge Tall Boy
bombs were flying straight at the Tirpitz, and going
straight and level and high. Seems that the shotgun / bee hive
rounds would have been pretty ideal for that.
-------------------------
Maximum elevation of the Tirpitz' main battery was 30 degrees.
On 04/02/2022 12:18, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:sthqcd$ngv$1@dont-email.me...
Thw British 3.7" (94 mm) AA gun was just as effective as the US 90 and
with the proximity fuse which arrived in just time for use against the
V1 was very useful. My mum , who is still with us at the age of 97
served on an AA gun crew at RAF West Kirby in 1944/45 and was rather
disappointed they never got to fire a shot in anger. As with the German
88 they got pressed into the AT role in North Africa but by 1944 the 17
pounder proved to be better in the AT role as it had a lower profile ,
fired APDS shells and was lighter with a low profile. It could kill a
Tiger II at 2000 yards.
------------------------
The US 90mm AA gun's advantage was its tracker.
https://dbpedia.org/page/GL_Mk._III_radar
"Several improved versions of the Mk. III(B) were experimented with,
but none were widely produced due to the 1944 introduction of the
SCR-584 from the US, which provided both scanning and tracking in a
single semi-trailer unit. Mk. III units found themselves relegated to
secondary roles, as diverse as artillery spotting, coastal
surveillance and weather balloon observation."
Indeed and the first examples arrived in the UK in early 1944
Let me quote a fuller version of that article. note that the core
technical advance was the cavity magnetron developed in the UK and
produced in the USA. Unlike the Axis powers UK and US sharing of
development went both ways.
<Start>
Radar, Gun Laying, Mark III, or GL Mk. III for short, was a radar system
used by the British Army to directly guide, or lay, anti-aircraft
artillery (AA). The GL Mk. III was not a single radar, but a family of related designs that saw constant improvement during and after World War
II. These were renamed shortly after their introduction in late 1942, becoming the Radar, AA, No. 3, and often paired with an early warning
radar, the AA No. 4, which was also produced in several models. The Mk.
III began development shortly after the introduction of the cavity
magnetron in early 1940. The magnetron allowed radar systems to operate
at microwave frequencies, which greatly reduced the size of their
antennas and made them much more mobile and accurate. Having originally started work on the magnetron as part of the AI Mk. VIII air-to-air
radar, the team was told to drop everything and develop a radar for AA
use as quickly as possible. This turned into a fiasco; by the end of the
year very little progress had been made and the team returned to working
on airborne radars.
The magnetron has also been demonstrated to the Canadians and US as part
of the Tizard Mission in the fall of 1940. Immediately following the
visit, the National Research Council of Canada began development of a GL radar based on the UK design. The first examples of these GL Mk. III(C)
(for Canadian) arrived in the UK in November 1942. British units of
slightly more advanced design, GL Mk. III(B) (for British) arrived in December. 667 of the Canadian models were produced, with about 250 of
these seeing service in the UK while most of the others were sent to the continent or remained in Canada. 876 of the British models were produced
and saw more widespread service.
Fifty Mk. IIIs were supplied to the Soviet Union. Several improved
versions of the Mk. III(B) were experimented with, but none were widely produced due to the 1944 introduction of the SCR-584 from the US
<End>
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:sthqcd$ngv$1@dont-email.me...
Thw British 3.7" (94 mm) AA gun was just as effective as the US 90 and
with the proximity fuse which arrived in just time for use against the
V1 was very useful. My mum , who is still with us at the age of 97
served on an AA gun crew at RAF West Kirby in 1944/45 and was rather disappointed they never got to fire a shot in anger. As with the German
88 they got pressed into the AT role in North Africa but by 1944 the 17 pounder proved to be better in the AT role as it had a lower profile ,
fired APDS shells and was lighter with a low profile. It could kill a
Tiger II at 2000 yards.
------------------------
The US 90mm AA gun's advantage was its tracker.
https://dbpedia.org/page/GL_Mk._III_radar
"Several improved versions of the Mk. III(B) were experimented with, but
none were widely produced due to the 1944 introduction of the SCR-584
from the US, which provided both scanning and tracking in a single semi-trailer unit. Mk. III units found themselves relegated to secondary roles, as diverse as artillery spotting, coastal surveillance and
weather balloon observation."
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message news:stn4hf$t8s$1@dont-email.me...
The magnetron has also been demonstrated to the Canadians and US as part
of the Tizard Mission in the fall of 1940.
----------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tizard_Mission
If necessary I can quote from hard copies of R. V. Jones' "The Wizard War" >and William Stephenson's "A Man Called Intrepid", which give further
details.
The conditions that permit or encourage scientific advancement is one of my >historical research interests, though I haven't found a complete answer. >Clever minds with private or government funding appear to be essential.
On 2/2/2022 2:14 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"a425couple" wrote in message news:BdyKJ.37$f2a5.2@fx48.iad...
Maryellen Reilly Pharmacist1y
What was the best anti-aircraft gun during WW2?
Originally Answered: What was the best Anti-Aircraft gun defense in
World War 2?
-------------------------------One of the worst for AA against the planes that normally tore up the IJN fleet,
One of the worst antiaircraft guns was the main battery of Japanese
battleships:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Shiki_(anti-aircraft_shell)
- OK, sounds true enough. The USN planes were
quite evasive and unpredictable for 14", 15", 16"
or 18" guns to follow.
But for ground attack, seems they did OKNope - they didn't have the train/elevation rates to make that work, no effective fire control systems, and a low rate of fire. They relied on
"The Sanshiki anti-aircraft shells were used for shore bombardment
during the Battle for Henderson Field. On 13 October 1942,
----- Over the next 83 minutes, they fired 973 14 in (360 mm) shells
into the Lunga perimeter, most of them falling in and around the 2,200
m² area of the airfield. The bombardment heavily damaged the airfield's
two runways, burned almost all of the available aviation fuel, destroyed
48 of the CAF's ("Cactus Air Force") 90 aircraft, and killed 41 men, including six CAF aircrew."
However, it still seems to me, that that idea would have had a fair
chance of working from the Tirpitz,
the Lancasters coming in to drop the huge Tall Boy bombs were flying
straight at the Tirpitz, and going straight and level and high. Seems
that the shotgun / bee hive rounds would have been pretty ideal for
that.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 96:00:53 |
| Calls: | 6,659 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,206 |
| Messages: | 5,334,480 |