|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 9, 2019 9:30:32 GMT -6
Some points about fire control systems based on radar. For a surface ship, you will need two different antennas and systems. One system using an orange peel laid on its side where the beam is wide in the vertical and narrow in the horizonal. The pulse width and PRF will determine its accuracy and minimum range.
The fire control system must perform three functions: Search, Acquisition and track. The search will be accomplished by the device mentioned above, the acquisition will require some method of storying the assigned target, verifying the target identity and then tracking the target in azimuth, range and altitude. This last function generally is performed by a parabolic antenna with a pencil style beam that is moved to maintain acquisition of the target. Its beam is designed to provide all three necessary variable to allow the firing systems to be pointed at the target.
On an aircraft, the search and track function are built into a parabolic antenna with a pencil beam that is scanned in three bars, high-middle- low. Once the target is discovered, the beam of the radar now stops scanning and goes into the track mode and the display now instead of scanning back and forth, simply becomes a targeting display. It is at this point that the weapons are sent the range, azimuth and altitude of the target before firing.
If you are trying to judge a fire control system, it must be based on these functions. To track multiple targets, the computer system must be capable of storing multiple targets. It doesn't matter whether it is surface or airborne. Radar frequency, pulse width, prf are important as is the scanning rate of the search set. To be effective, it must be automatic scanning, not manual scanning.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on May 9, 2019 10:41:15 GMT -6
I'm not sure if such precision was necessary for this kind of use. In fact, I'm pretty sure the British Type 283 radar for barrage fire with 6-in guns and whatnot was range only. The whole idea was to put a sort of rippling barrage in space and then either force the aircraft to fly through it or go the other way. Of course, this isn't BVR. I should point out that the Type 283 was an AA fire control radar type, not an air search radar type to which I was referring to in my previous post. Air search radar would have (at longer range) significantly greater range (and deflection) error rates than would FC radar at shorter ranges.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 9, 2019 15:24:58 GMT -6
One of the most important devices in fire control, in the interwar years and WW2, was the mechanical analog computers of Hannibal Ford and William Newell. US Navy gunnery was excellent due to the computers developed by these two men. Analogs_Ford_Newell.pdf (692.22 KB) I will tell you that analog computers were a nightmare for the maintenance personnel, and needed almost constant maintenance. They were shock-mounted to try to eliminate as much rocking and rolling as possible so as not to affect the alignment of the gears and cams. The ASN-48 INS system used an analog computer and it must have had a million gears on the top. It didn't but it always seemed like it.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 9, 2019 21:06:53 GMT -6
This discussion on AA gunnery is interesting, so here is a link to the United States Pacific Fleet Air Force Basic Gunnery Doctrine and Instructions for ships of Air Force, Pacific Fleet date 17 April 1944. I thought you might find it information and interesting. The first sentence, under General Consideration A. is really to the point. www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/BGD/index.html
|
|
|
Post by rob06waves2018 on May 10, 2019 16:32:36 GMT -6
Bit of a silly question here but can DDs/CLs carry scout planes, or is it only CAs and up?
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 10, 2019 16:46:26 GMT -6
Bit of a silly question here but can DDs/CLs carry scout planes, or is it only CAs and up? I can't speak for the game, but tin cans and light cruisers both could carry seaplanes. The tin cans were the Fletchers but no one can agree on how many were built with the modifications to actually carry the seaplanes. We know that three were completed, one had the mod removed in 1942. The catapult was a rotating device like the ones on cruisers and battleships.
|
|
|
Post by williammiller on May 10, 2019 21:46:47 GMT -6
A DD can be designed to carry, I believe, a single float-plane in RTW2...
After some checking I discovered that the recent play-tester DD that carried 4 (yes, FOUR) float-planes was a bug, not a planned feature, so it looks like DD and KEs (corvettes) will not carry float-planes in RTW2. Sorry folks.
|
|
|
Post by pirateradar on May 10, 2019 23:04:55 GMT -6
Bit of a silly question here but can DDs/CLs carry scout planes, or is it only CAs and up? I can't speak for the game, but tin cans and light cruisers both could carry seaplanes. The tin cans were the Fletchers but no one can agree on how many were built with the modifications to actually carry the seaplanes. We know that three were completed, one had the mod removed in 1942. The catapult was a rotating device like the ones on cruisers and battleships. Wasn't this experiment ultimately unsuccessful, though? I think they ultimately found that the Fletchers were too small to easily and reliably recover the planes.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 10, 2019 23:19:12 GMT -6
I can't speak for the game, but tin cans and light cruisers both could carry seaplanes. The tin cans were the Fletchers but no one can agree on how many were built with the modifications to actually carry the seaplanes. We know that three were completed, one had the mod removed in 1942. The catapult was a rotating device like the ones on cruisers and battleships. Wasn't this experiment ultimately unsuccessful, though? I think they ultimately found that the Fletchers were too small to easily and reliably recover the planes. Recovering seaplanes in the Pacific or the Atlantic was always difficult and fraught with danger. It did not matter if it was a tin can or a dreadnought battleship. The two ships; Halford and Stevens both conducted shakedown cruises in the Atlantic then sailed to San Diego. Both sailed then to Pearl Harbor. They participated in the Marcus Island raid in August of 1943. On the return voyage to Pearl, both launched and recovered their seaplanes. Essentially the idea was conceived in 1940 but by the time it was implemented, the construction of destroyers had accelerated and the need was no longer there. It did prove that aircraft could operate from smaller vessels leading to the use of helicopters. I don't consider it an unsuccessful experiment, it just needed the right aircraft and the OS2U Kingfisher was not the correct aircraft.
|
|