Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
GeneralVeers

Mine Action Guns

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
642 posts

Hello, I was looking at the the new Royal Navy Battleship stat pages and I noticed on the upper tier ships they have a category called mine action guns. What exactly are those? I suspect they're secondary guns since in the lower tier pics it has secondary guns in the same slot as mine action guns. Which is all and well, but why would Wargaming use different wording for them in their same batch of pic releases? Anyone that has info on this, it would be greatly appreciated if you shared it with me.:)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

poorly translated Russian for "secondary guns"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,596
[-KIA-]
Banned
9,382 posts
28,311 battles

I believe the more accurate translation is something like "anti-torpedo boat" guns.

Edited by TenguBlade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,732
[SPTR]
Members
28,224 posts
21,213 battles

I was hoping that these "mine action guns" would automatically start shooting at incoming torpedoes until it was found out to be poor translation from the russian source. Still they look to be very strong secondaries or better than those on the USN at least.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
642 posts

Ok, I just wanted to make sure it wasn't some new type of armament that we were getting that was exclusive to British Battleships. That would have been cool, but it makes sense it's just a bad TL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

I believe the more accurate translation is something like "anti-torpedo boat" guns.

 

Well from what I've seen of the Russian interpretation of "torpedo boats" a more accurate term would be "Anti-experimental citadeless rocket ship guns".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,039 posts
14,276 battles

poorly translated Russian for "secondary guns"

 

they got "secondary guns" right on the other 100 or so ships but now they mistranslated it?  I don't buy it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,424 posts
3,448 battles

 

they got "secondary guns" right on the other 100 or so ships but now they mistranslated it?  I don't buy it.  

Somebody linked to a dev post where they stated it was a mistranslation. I don't have the link though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
312 posts
2,789 battles

USN

 

British BBs shown have 4 Minotaur cannons on each side. Depending on the stats of the mounts themselves and whether they get 7km base or 6km base, and if they fire HE or AP (lol), they may not be necessarily better than the USN BBs...
Edited by admiral_noone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,053
[SYN]
Members
16,027 posts
12,803 battles

 

British BBs shown have 4 Minotaur cannons on each side. Depending on the stats of the mounts themselves and whether they get 7km base or 6km base, and if they fire HE or AP (lol), they may not be necessarily better than the USN BBs...

 

those are not minotaur's guns

They are the same as Dido's 5.25in guns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

 

British BBs shown have 4 Minotaur cannons on each side. Depending on the stats of the mounts themselves and whether they get 7km base or 6km base, and if they fire HE or AP (lol), they may not be necessarily better than the USN BBs...

 

A mistake I made too, they are very visually similar.

 

It looks like Conqueror gets the 5.25in of Dido but in the Mk. II housing as seen on HMS Vanguard.

 

 

I don't think it's going to be a good secondary battery for AA or surface work. Half the ROF of the USN 5in/54 on the Montana, worse MV, heavier shells, only 8 instead of 10. Going with Minotaur turrets would have been a little interesting at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

those are not minotaur's guns

They are the same as Dido's 5.25in guns

 

Same guns diffrent mounts, (AFAIK non of the Didos had the MKII mounts). They're the MkII from Vanguard:

 

Image for comparison of Vanguards mounts:

 

uBT2ThP.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
5,072 posts
1,514 battles

 

A mistake I made too, they are very visually similar.

 

It looks like Conqueror gets the 5.25in of Dido but in the Mk. II housing as seen on HMS Vanguard.

 

 

I don't think it's going to be a good secondary battery for AA or surface work. Half the ROF of the USN 5in/54 on the Montana, worse MV, heavier shells, only 8 instead of 10. Going with Minotaur turrets would have been a little interesting at least.

 

Again RoF is unknown. Don't take navweps at face value, the number it quotes for the MKII mounting is worse than the actual in service one for the MKI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
642 posts
782 battles

I seem to remember something about the earliest Russian battleships had mines as an on board weapon system. Thought it was a curious fact at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,662
[CALM]
Beta Testers
6,838 posts
6,088 battles

It's a mistranslation.  Torpedoes were also referred to as mines by Russians, IIRC and the term "mine" was more of a catchall designation that encompassed all water-based explosives, and for a time also had torpedo boats referred to as mine boats.  Thus, the smaller guns were anti-mine boats, or anti-torpedo boats; basically secondary guns for dealing with smaller, faster targets.

 

Or so I recall from the last thread where "mine action guns" was also a mistranslation of the original Russian wording.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,168
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,312 posts
18,902 battles

 

Again RoF is unknown. Don't take navweps at face value, the number it quotes for the MKII mounting is worse than the actual in service one for the MKI.

 

Not unprecedented to drop. They can go off the planned '10-12' range if they want, still lackluster.

 

Either way, it shouldn't be approaching the AA or ASuW firepower of the 6in autoloader, which would have been super cool. Ship looks like it needs something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×