Post by bcoopactual on Jun 8, 2019 9:23:34 GMT -6
This was well known by the time the first superfiring turrets were included in designs of the time. Superfiring turrets were arranged in a way such that the muzzle blast created by the turret's guns would happen past the inferior's turret roof, to avoid the worst of the effects impacting it. As a result we see, without exception, superfiring turrets which guns go over the preceding turret's roof, and which muzzles end roughly at the same point where the preceding turret's roof ends - that way when those guns fire the muzzle blast is produced almost entirely beyond the inferior turret's roof, avoiding "hammering the bell".
Such arrangement isn't there in either Juneau or Worcester. Both ships turrets are clearly arranged so the muzzle of the involved turrets are CLEARLY behind the roof of the next turret - end of firing at low angle will place that blast directly avobe the next turret's roof, with the shockwave hitting straight on said roof.
Even with properly spaced turrets the Royal Navy just didn't like the idea at all: HMS Neptune, the first RN battleship with superfiring arrangement, had phisical stops that prevented X turret to fire over Y turret. So did most of the RN capital ships of the era, though at this time the concern mostly involved the open sighting ports used in the turrets of the time, that might allow part of the blast inside of the turret itself.
British battleships in general avoided end-on firing from superfiring turrets, at least until HMS Hood, and even later it wasn't really liked: If memory serves me right, Oscar Parkes' work "British battleships" mentions (amongst many things about the blast properties of those guns in that ship) that in the Nelson class, firing from the superfiring turret directly over A was frowned upon because it would make the life of those in the latter turret quite unpleasant.
And Nelson's B turret guns' blast would happen well past the roof of A turret, not directly avobe it.
British battleships in general avoided end-on firing from superfiring turrets, at least until HMS Hood, and even later it wasn't really liked: If memory serves me right, Oscar Parkes' work "British battleships" mentions (amongst many things about the blast properties of those guns in that ship) that in the Nelson class, firing from the superfiring turret directly over A was frowned upon because it would make the life of those in the latter turret quite unpleasant.
And Nelson's B turret guns' blast would happen well past the roof of A turret, not directly avobe it.
Let's hear an Iowa's crewman's thoughts about it when Turrets One and Two were fired 15º off the side of the ship's bow at low angle in 1989:
"At this angle, one of Turret Two's guns was firing over Turret One... The concussion from Turret Two's guns shredded Turret One's gun bloomers (the canvas covers at the base of the main gun barrels) and damaged Turret One's electrical system. Dan Meyer said of the shoot that it was "the most frightening experience I have ever had in my life. The shock wave blew out the turret officer's switchboard and the leads. We had no power, no lights for a time. Men were screaming. There was panic."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion
Again, Iowa's turrets were properly spaced for end-on firing, but shooting 15º off the bow at very low angle, one of the guns actually had part of it's blast happening over Turret One's gunhouse's roof. Feel free to debate the thoughts of someone who was inside that turret about how pleasant getting partially hit by one (out of three) gun blasts from the turret behind was.
"At this angle, one of Turret Two's guns was firing over Turret One... The concussion from Turret Two's guns shredded Turret One's gun bloomers (the canvas covers at the base of the main gun barrels) and damaged Turret One's electrical system. Dan Meyer said of the shoot that it was "the most frightening experience I have ever had in my life. The shock wave blew out the turret officer's switchboard and the leads. We had no power, no lights for a time. Men were screaming. There was panic."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Iowa_turret_explosion
Again, Iowa's turrets were properly spaced for end-on firing, but shooting 15º off the bow at very low angle, one of the guns actually had part of it's blast happening over Turret One's gunhouse's roof. Feel free to debate the thoughts of someone who was inside that turret about how pleasant getting partially hit by one (out of three) gun blasts from the turret behind was.
More instances: During the fight in the Falklands against Von Spee's squadron, Invincible tried crossfiring with some non-surprising results:
In spite of the design, which limited cross deck fire from the amidships turret on the unengaged side, the 12-inch guns of P turret did fire across the ship at von Spee’s cruisers. Of course every time P turret fired, the marine crew of Q turret were dazed by the concussion
That quote comes from "Grand Fleet Battlecruisers" from Steve Backer. If you look at the deck plans of Invincible you'll see that in the angle for crossfire where P was to fire avobe Q, you'll note there's quite the distance. That blast wasn't hitting neither directly nor perpendicularly against Q turret's roof, yet the crew felt like they were hit with a sledgehammer on the head each time a projectile flew avobe them.
Yet Juneaus and Worcesters had their muzzles just behind the previous turret. Their blast on end on low-angle fire (low enough to just shoot past them) would've been put just above the next gunhouse. Yes, those were 5'' and 6'' guns obviously with quite weaker blast effects. But no, if you think that means the experience for the guys below would be pleasant, think again - the blast itself might have been smaller, but it'd have happened just avobe the gunhouse roof, and the blast concussion would've fully impacted those roofs, which being closed rigid structures, would've ringed like a bell. Not the most exciting thing to experience if you're a guy inside the "ringing bell".
In spite of the design, which limited cross deck fire from the amidships turret on the unengaged side, the 12-inch guns of P turret did fire across the ship at von Spee’s cruisers. Of course every time P turret fired, the marine crew of Q turret were dazed by the concussion
That quote comes from "Grand Fleet Battlecruisers" from Steve Backer. If you look at the deck plans of Invincible you'll see that in the angle for crossfire where P was to fire avobe Q, you'll note there's quite the distance. That blast wasn't hitting neither directly nor perpendicularly against Q turret's roof, yet the crew felt like they were hit with a sledgehammer on the head each time a projectile flew avobe them.
Yet Juneaus and Worcesters had their muzzles just behind the previous turret. Their blast on end on low-angle fire (low enough to just shoot past them) would've been put just above the next gunhouse. Yes, those were 5'' and 6'' guns obviously with quite weaker blast effects. But no, if you think that means the experience for the guys below would be pleasant, think again - the blast itself might have been smaller, but it'd have happened just avobe the gunhouse roof, and the blast concussion would've fully impacted those roofs, which being closed rigid structures, would've ringed like a bell. Not the most exciting thing to experience if you're a guy inside the "ringing bell".
"7b. Battle experience showed that British turrets in general were inadequately protected, especially on these early 12" (30.5 cm) models. Problems included the lack of gunport shields, which meant that splinters and blast could easily penetrate into the working areas. There were also large gaps between the base of the gunhouse and the top of the barbette, leaving an area of reduced protection. The sighting ports on top of the turrets were of an open design, which allowed both gunsmoke and sea spray to enter into the gunhouse as well as causing considerable discomfit to the crewmembers whose job it was to peer through these ports at the target. These sighting ports and the turret rangefinders also projected up above the turret roof, which unintentionally turned them into deadly shell traps. Finally, the sloping front roof of these turrets meant that the angle of incidence for incoming shells was less than that for a flat roof, which increased the chance of a penetrating hit."
American turrets were designed with superfiring in mind, British ones at the time were not.