Go fer ya gun partner

[TorpX]

I remember the accident and the "sabotage theory". I never thought it was very credable. Most of what I read involved ill-considered ballistics experiments and the possibility of over-ramming. I also remember stuff in the papers about how "old" and "crude" the guns were, but they seemed to function very well in WWII.

Yes they can. The guns in the turrets are automatically timed to fire a fraction of a second apart to prevent the shells from interfering with each other. Standard practice in most navies was to fire one barrel from each turret simultaneously, as this made it easier for the gunnery officer to see exactly where they were hitting.

I saw news video when they were used in Lebanon against the Syrians. It showed them being fired one at a time. That puzzled me as it is usually desirable to obtain a TOT effect. In a fleet action, wouldn't they have to fire them in volley, to avoid any pitching or rolling problems (in rough seas)?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by TorpX

I saw news video when they were used in Lebanon against the Syrians. It showed them being fired one at a time. That puzzled me as it is usually desirable to obtain a TOT effect. In a fleet action, wouldn't they have to fire them in volley, to avoid any pitching or rolling problems (in rough seas)?

In naval combat you want to fire salvos, or even full broadsides, not because of rolling problems but because the Fire Control Officer needs to see whether his aim is long or short, and you can't do that if one shell is coming down every two seconds. On the other hand, during shore bombardment you fire one and get a report from a land-based spotter, and adjust on his mark. The 5"/38s our destroyer carried were capable of firing a full broadside every five or six seconds, but in actual practice we normally fired one or a pair every fifteen seconds or so. Much easier that way, except for one time we were firing at night and my bunk was almost under the aft turret.

[Sledgehammer427]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Much easier that way, except for one time we were firing at night and my bunk was almost under the aft turret.

Good Morning!

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Much easier that way, except for one time we were firing at night and my bunk was almost under the aft turret.

Assuming this was combat and not practice, I imagine whoever was out there in the distant darkness on the receiving end of those five inch shells was probably wishing he could trade bunks with you.

One of the great effects of the broadside was crossing the T, bringing all major guns to bare on the enemy coming towards you, or moving away. The Royal Navy managed to complete this manouver twice at Jutland in WW1.

I was surprised to learn recently that when the Hood attacked Bismarck she was steaming head on and only able to fire two turrets, the complete opposite of the tactic used in WW1. Surely you are an easier target when presenting the ships bow, opposed to presenting a side on attack, ie a broadside.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by sidslotm

I was surprised to learn recently that when the Hood attacked Bismarck she was steaming head on and only able to fire two turrets, the complete opposite of the tactic used in WW1. Surely you are an easier target when presenting the ships bow, opposed to presenting a side on attack, ie a broadside.

Admiral Holland aboard the Hood, was aware of the danger posed by Hood's outdated horizontal protection. Therefore, he wanted to reduce the range to Bismarck as quickly as possible and considered the risk acceptable. Bad roll of the dice.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by sidslotm

One of the great effects of the broadside was crossing the T, bringing all major guns to bare on the enemy coming towards you, or moving away. The Royal Navy managed to complete this manouver twice at Jutland in WW1.

I was surprised to learn recently that when the Hood attacked Bismarck she was steaming head on and only able to fire two turrets, the complete opposite of the tactic used in WW1. Surely you are an easier target when presenting the ships bow, opposed to presenting a side on attack, ie a broadside.

The Hood was about to make its turn bradside to unmask its aft gun(s) when she took that fatal hit IIRC.

[Raptor1]

As far as I recall, the Hood executed two turns during the engagement, the first one right before the Germans opened fire had actually opened her rear guns' firing arcs enough to allow them to open fire. It was during the execution of the second turn a few minutes later that she was hit and exploded.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Assuming this was combat and not practice, I imagine whoever was out there in the distant darkness on the receiving end of those five inch shells was probably wishing he could trade bunks with you.

You're probably right. Not ten minutes after the first shot jarred me awake I was long gone and unaware.

As for all the "I recall"s about Hood, You're pretty close to home. Here's a good article from the International Naval Research Organization's old magazine Warship International:
http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO_Hood_p1.htm