Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Finnkax

Death-injury distance - Batleships broadside with full powder amount?

84 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

139
[PIZZA]
Members
878 posts
9,489 battles

I have read that some battleships muzzleblast can tear bolted thin hull/coverplates of right away and even from rear arcs of guns barrel. How much is hurting distance/blast zone of those guns? Problem is that even half atmosphere overpresure can kill if wavefront is sharp enough

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[BROOK]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,866 posts

You have videos of people standing on the weather deck of the Iowa firing full powder bag salvos in Desert Shield/Storm. Humans are tough things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,820
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
19,762 posts
10,986 battles
4 minutes ago, TornadoADV said:

You have videos of people standing on the weather deck of the Iowa firing full powder bag salvos in Desert Shield/Storm. Humans are tough things.

There are safe zones on any ship but there are also a lot of unsafe zones which is why the main guns would check fire while the secondary guns are being manned which would likely take a minute or two to get everyone in place.. Those secondary guns are probably safe zones once manned though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
213
[O_O]
Members
803 posts
5,277 battles
3 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Those secondary guns are probably safe zones once manned though.

Enclosed or casemate mounts, yes.  AA and open mounts would still be susceptible.  For the most part, flack jackets, helmets and hearing protection were considered to be sufficient protection, even though service members exhibited several physiological effects of pressure injuries in the years following.

-R

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
378
[JFSOC]
[JFSOC]
Members
1,217 posts
3,879 battles

I doubt these were photoshopped:

bb-62-dnsc8902127_jpg.jpg

6259115442_bf14f4c833_b.jpg

So, I'd say so long as you weren't in front of the muzzles, or close to them, you could be out on deck.  The problem would be if the guns were firing and you were in front of them when they did.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
47 posts
4,402 battles
53 minutes ago, Murotsu said:

I doubt these were photoshopped:

bb-62-dnsc8902127_jpg.jpg

6259115442_bf14f4c833_b.jpg

So, I'd say so long as you weren't in front of the muzzles, or close to them, you could be out on deck.  The problem would be if the guns were firing and you were in front of them when they did.

I think there might be a bit of forced perspective going on there, unless they built a camera platform on the bow of the BB then I don't think they are on the same ship.  I think the anchor chains are part of the foreground of the camera ship's shot, but aren't on the BB itself-check the deck line along the sheer in the second shot, it doesn't follow the sweep of the Iowa class's bow curve.  Awesome shot though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169
[BLHK]
Members
555 posts
3,685 battles
5 minutes ago, Call_of_the_Mastodon said:

I think there might be a bit of forced perspective going on there, unless they built a camera platform on the bow of the BB then I don't think they are on the same ship.  I think the anchor chains are part of the foreground of the camera ship's shot, but aren't on the BB itself-check the deck line along the sheer in the second shot, it doesn't follow the sweep of the Iowa class's bow curve.  Awesome shot though!

Also it is extremely probable if this is a non combat situation the ship is only firing half charges anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169
[BLHK]
Members
555 posts
3,685 battles
2 hours ago, Finnkax said:

I have read that some battleships muzzleblast can tear bolted thin hull/coverplates of right away and even from rear arcs of guns barrel. How much is hurting distance/blast zone of those guns? Problem is that even half atmosphere overpresure can kill if wavefront is sharp enough

.

I know that the Prince Of Wales during the Denmark Strait action tore up major chunks of her timber decking, and had a number of water tight doors jam due to the blasts coming from her own guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
551
[WOLF9]
Members
3,748 posts

  There's a great picture somewhere of one of our 16" BB's firing a full broadside- and actually displacing hemispheres of the ocean's surface underneath.

That told me all I need to know about the muzzle blast of these guns! lol.

  Considering the sheer force it takes to hurl a 2700lb projectile 20+ miles,  I can only imagine the blast when that pressure is suddenly released at the end of the barrel.   Man, those fireballs in the pics posted here are spectacular, aren't they?!

  I can only imagine what it would do to the crew- and ship- if someone were to sail too close in front of them when the main battery opened up.   It'd likely be as if a big HE bomb just exploded right next to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,883
[RKLES]
Members
8,965 posts
10,828 battles
27 minutes ago, MG1962 said:

I know that the Prince Of Wales during the Denmark Strait action tore up major chunks of her timber decking, and had a number of water tight doors jam due to the blasts coming from her own guns.

That could be due to factors such as temperature or the fact she was not 100% ready to go into combat just yet since she actually went to sea with some workmen onboard finishing up on the way to battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,883
[RKLES]
Members
8,965 posts
10,828 battles
18 minutes ago, Fletcher7_1944 said:

  There's a great picture somewhere of one of our 16" BB's firing a full broadside- and actually displacing hemispheres of the ocean's surface underneath.

That told me all I need to know about the muzzle blast of these guns! lol.

  Considering the sheer force it takes to hurl a 2700lb projectile 20+ miles,  I can only imagine the blast when that pressure is suddenly released at the end of the barrel.   Man, those fireballs in the pics posted here are spectacular, aren't they?!

  I can only imagine what it would do to the crew- and ship- if someone were to sail too close in front of them when the main battery opened up.   It'd likely be as if a big HE bomb just exploded right next to them.

Just imagine what Yamato’s 18.1’ Guns firing was like...  :fish_boom:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[BROOK]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,866 posts
1 hour ago, Murotsu said:

I doubt these were photoshopped:

bb-62-dnsc8902127_jpg.jpg

6259115442_bf14f4c833_b.jpg

So, I'd say so long as you weren't in front of the muzzles, or close to them, you could be out on deck.  The problem would be if the guns were firing and you were in front of them when they did.

Thank you for finding some pics!

 

53 minutes ago, Call_of_the_Mastodon said:

I think there might be a bit of forced perspective going on there, unless they built a camera platform on the bow of the BB then I don't think they are on the same ship.  I think the anchor chains are part of the foreground of the camera ship's shot, but aren't on the BB itself-check the deck line along the sheer in the second shot, it doesn't follow the sweep of the Iowa class's bow curve.  Awesome shot though!

They are less then 100 feet away from the A turret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
540
[NATO]
Beta Testers
2,079 posts
6,215 battles

They are a little to pyrotechnical to be the typical flashless powder the US used in WW2. I couldnt imagine a rangfinder operator in the turret not being blinded by that flash! Also probably not the full charge needed for max range.

During the sinking of the Bismarck battle both Rodney and KGV blew the glass out of the bridge/compass platform windows on the first salvos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[-K-]
Members
1,133 posts
7,812 battles
11 minutes ago, hipcanuck said:

They are a little to pyrotechnical to be the typical flashless powder the US used in WW2. I couldnt imagine a rangfinder operator in the turret not being blinded by that flash! Also probably not the full charge needed for max range.

During the sinking of the Bismarck battle both Rodney and KGV blew the glass out of the bridge/compass platform windows on the first salvos

Well, flashless is relative.  Here's a shot of Washington during the night battle of Guadalcanal.  In the book Battleship at War it talks about the optical rangefinders being blinded by the 5" secondary fire.  It's a good thing they had radar fire control :cap_look:

gunnery.jpg

Also, during this battle, South Dakota ended up setting her aircraft on the stern on fire with salvos from her rear turret.  Subsequent salvos extinguished the fires when the planes were blown off the ship.

Edited by RightYouAreKen
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
378
[JFSOC]
[JFSOC]
Members
1,217 posts
3,879 battles

One photo was on Iowa, the second one was Missouri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
551
[WOLF9]
Members
3,748 posts
59 minutes ago, RightYouAreKen said:

Well, flashless is relative.  Here's a shot of Washington during the night battle of Guadalcanal.  In the book Battleship at War it talks about the optical rangefinders being blinded by the 5" secondary fire.  It's a good thing they had radar fire control :cap_look:

gunnery.jpg

Also, during this battle, South Dakota ended up setting her aircraft on the stern on fire with salvos from her rear turret.  Subsequent salvos extinguished the fires when the planes were blown off the ship.

  Lol- that just sounds SO Rube Goldberg, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[BROOK]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,866 posts
1 hour ago, hipcanuck said:

They are a little to pyrotechnical to be the typical flashless powder the US used in WW2. I couldnt imagine a rangfinder operator in the turret not being blinded by that flash! Also probably not the full charge needed for max range.

It's almost like that's the reason they have snap shutters on optical rangefinders! :cap_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
47 posts
4,402 battles
1 hour ago, RightYouAreKen said:

Well, flashless is relative.  Here's a shot of Washington during the night battle of Guadalcanal.  In the book Battleship at War it talks about the optical rangefinders being blinded by the 5" secondary fire.  It's a good thing they had radar fire control :cap_look:

gunnery.jpg

Also, during this battle, South Dakota ended up setting her aircraft on the stern on fire with salvos from her rear turret.  Subsequent salvos extinguished the fires when the planes were blown off the ship.

That's a gutsy photographer-not only on deck during a main battery salvo, but during actual combat as well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
532
[BROOK]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,866 posts
26 minutes ago, Call_of_the_Mastodon said:

That's a gutsy photographer-not only on deck during a main battery salvo, but during actual combat as well!

Well, their job IS to chronicle the war, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
169
[BLHK]
Members
555 posts
3,685 battles
2 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

That could be due to factors such as temperature or the fact she was not 100% ready to go into combat just yet since she actually went to sea with some workmen onboard finishing up on the way to battle.

The article I read broke down the issues by mechanical such as the gun jams electrical issues they had because as you mentioned she was not technically complete when she sailed into action. And then the self inflicted damage from the firing of her main guns. And finally the damaged caused by the actual engagement.

As I mentioned in another thread, I had  a great chat with a battleship turret captain back in the 80s. Something he did tell me, battleships would never ever fire their main guns directly astern because the flex through the hull would destroy the propeller shafts plus mess with the gearing.

Who knew lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[-K-]
Members
1,133 posts
7,812 battles
19 minutes ago, MG1962 said:

The article I read broke down the issues by mechanical such as the gun jams electrical issues they had because as you mentioned she was not technically complete when she sailed into action. And then the self inflicted damage from the firing of her main guns. And finally the damaged caused by the actual engagement.

As I mentioned in another thread, I had  a great chat with a battleship turret captain back in the 80s. Something he did tell me, battleships would never ever fire their main guns directly astern because the flex through the hull would destroy the propeller shafts plus mess with the gearing.

Who knew lol

 

Add that to the list of "things I'm glad aren't modeled in WOWS"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
347
[REVY]
Members
1,261 posts
8,924 battles
16 hours ago, RightYouAreKen said:

Well, flashless is relative.  Here's a shot of Washington during the night battle of Guadalcanal.  In the book Battleship at War it talks about the optical rangefinders being blinded by the 5" secondary fire.  It's a good thing they had radar fire control :cap_look:

gunnery.jpg

 

 

Interesting side note do to this post:

 

You can see three of the ships 20mm mounts in the foreground of this shot. They appear to be covered and un-manned.

 

15 hours ago, Call_of_the_Mastodon said:

That's a gutsy photographer-not only on deck during a main battery salvo, but during actual combat as well!

 

Having never been on North Carolina, I wonder if there is a hatch or something in that bow area that the photographer can easily run into in case of emergency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
213
[O_O]
Members
803 posts
5,277 battles
15 hours ago, MG1962 said:

As I mentioned in another thread, I had  a great chat with a battleship turret captain back in the 80s. Something he did tell me, battleships would never ever fire their main guns directly astern because the flex through the hull would destroy the propeller shafts plus mess with the gearing.

 

That strikes me as a little fishy.  You'd be exerting force along the longest and strongest axis of the ship by doing that.  It's a bad idea for other reasons (there are gun crews and aircraft back there) but in combat I don't doubt for a second they'd fire over the stern if there was somebody shooting at them from back there.

@Belthorian, do you remember any of this?  Sounds kind of like the "BBs never fired full broadsides because they would roll the ship over" story to me.

-R

 

(PS, they didn't fire simultaneous 9-gun broadsides.  It wasn't for ship stability reasons though.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
47 posts
4,402 battles
1 hour ago, Lord_Slayer said:

 

Interesting side note do to this post:

 

You can see three of the ships 20mm mounts in the foreground of this shot. They appear to be covered and un-manned.

 

 

Having never been on North Carolina, I wonder if there is a hatch or something in that bow area that the photographer can easily run into in case of emergency.

True! Great attention to detail. Actually now that I think about it, the bow would probably be the point of the ship that's safest from concussion if the turrets are firing across the beam, the NC class has quite a long foredeck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
347
[REVY]
Members
1,261 posts
8,924 battles
2 hours ago, Mister_Rawr said:

(PS, they didn't fire simultaneous 9-gun broadsides.  It wasn't for ship stability reasons though.)

^ this

 

When firing a broadside, usually the center gun of each turret would fire after the outer guns had fired. The idea being that the center guns muzzle blast, or possibly even the shell itself, could send the outer shells off target.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×