Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Commissar_Carl

360 degree turret rotation?

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
102 posts
3,777 battles

With the new dev blog it was revealed that the x turret of Jervis, along with all the turrets of the lightning, Jutland, and Daring will be able to rotate 360 degrees. As far as balance goes I think this is great.

But could these ships really do that? 

I know that in game the Haida (and I'd imagine Cossak) have 360 degree rotation on their B mounts, but Navweaps says that they have +160/-160 degrees of train. For that mount ( i think the mk XIX dual 120mm mount off the top of my head) was it able to rotate 360 but disabled fron firing in the deadzone, or could it just not rotate 360 degrees?

Just want to see if anyone has answers on this.

 

Edited by Commissar_Carl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
852
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
4,477 posts
14,425 battles

@Commissar_Carl I don't have a factual answer since I do not delve into ships real data any longer. If the WG devs make any ship have a particular operation ie 360 turret rotation even it they did not in reality they have a good reason for that! Now if their good reason doesn't suit you, I or any other player doesn't really matter, but if it really bothers one that it is not right then we can come here to the forum complaining until we get our way or get shut down. We can also PM devs directly and ask why and ask for a change if their why is not satisfactory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,117
[HYDRO]
Members
2,252 posts
4,211 battles

Based on info from Naweaps as well, the 120mm guns of L class were capable of -150/+150 degrees http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_47-50_mk11.php

The mount in that case was Mk XX. I haven't found any solid proof, but if I had to make an educated guess I would say that while the ships were capable of 360 degree traverse, they didn't have a system for disabling firing on the deadzone and were thus restricted to these angles. With a train rate of 10 degrees/sec I don't think this would negatively affect performance in combat conditions.

Regardless, this is just my opinion, I don't think I could find any relevant literature shedding a bit of light on this.

Edit, found this quote :

Quote

The 'X' mount gave an estimated arc of fire of 320 degrees at low elevations and 360 degrees at elevations above around 20 degrees.

No word on the B mount however.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
102 posts
3,777 battles
18 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Edit, found this quote :

No word on the B mount however.

This is great, shows that turrets for L and J classes could rotate 180 in theory. Wonder about Daring?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,143 posts
3,273 battles

Haven't done the full maths on it but the T10 RNDD turrets should be able to out-rotate her ability to turn (MBM2 + EM). Also depending on the gun angles and what's is blocked by superstructure, the ship's RoF might just be low enough to allow for Traverse + Turn to bypass the SuperStructure without losing DPM while "machine gunning"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,117
[HYDRO]
Members
2,252 posts
4,211 battles
13 minutes ago, Commissar_Carl said:

This is great, shows that turrets for L and J classes could rotate 180 in theory. Wonder about Daring?

 

 

Haven't been able to find anything, however the guns could reach 80 degrees elevation in the MkVII mount of the Darings. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_45-45_mk5.php

That is a good indicator that they must have been able to rotate the guns 360 degrees just by increasing the elevation as well.

Currently in game the T-22 is capable of that, having the weapons reach almost 90 degrees elevation to pass to the other side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
306
Members
1,140 posts

the CPXXII single mounts had 580 degrees of total train for the "X" position.

 

the early CPXIX twin X mounting on the "J" class had their mid-train position in the dead ahead position, then later in the war they were changed to have their mid-train position in the dead astern position.

 

the 4.5" QF Mk IV & V in the "X" position had >360 degrees of total train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
175
[FATE]
Members
332 posts
8,607 battles

Really do that?  No.  Any electrical, hydraulic, or pneumatic connections between the ship and turret would get twisted and broken.  You're asking from a realism standpoint, but the part that isn't real at all about what we are talking about is the turning speed of the ships.  A ship doesn't turn around in seconds, as it does in game.  It takes minutes.  Real ships were not in the back and forth juking shells fights that we have in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,753 posts
5,735 battles

There are hydraulic connectors which can make an object pivot 360 degrees on its axis but they are prone to leaks however as the connection utilizes ball bearings and o-rings to make the seal. 

The usual way is to use flexible lines and limit their rotation so they don't get over extended. Usual these designs are incorporated into booms on trucks, ships or stationary rig

Edited by dionkraft

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.

×