|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 15, 2017 16:35:42 GMT
I mentioned about HMS Warspite the other day and here is some info on her exploits during the Normandy landings.
HMS Warspite had the honour of being the first naval ship to open fire on D-Day, just before the whole fleet opened fire at 5:30 AM, apparently a German heavy gun battery showed signs of life so it had to be dealt with.
Later Warspite was fired upon by Torpedo’s unleashed by German E-Boats. The German navy sent out three torpedo boats from Le Havre after launching a smoke screen and these boats managed to fire off seventeen torpedoes.
Warspite opened fire on the boats and they turned tail back into their smoke screen and passed another three armed trawlers, these sailors serving on these trawlers must have been brave or stupid to try and stop the allied armada and one of these was sank by a direct hit from one of Warspite’s guns.
The seventeen torpedoes fired by the German boats managed to miss Warspite and HMS Ramillies, but hit a Norwegian destroyer named Svenner. Due to firing over 300 shells, HMS Warspite had to return to Portsmouth to stock up on ammo, but returned on 9th June to support the US forces on the Omaha section, apparently USS Arkansas and others were running out of shells too, and Warspite fired 96 rounds of 15in shells at positions in land and received praise from US Signallers for destroying German artillery positions.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 15, 2017 16:49:55 GMT
Warspite is a favorite among ship modelers who do a lot of RN stuff, second only to Hood.
Arkansas was the oldest of our BB's that served in WWII. She was actually ready for the junk yard about 1937 and North Carolina was her intended replacement. All those plans went out the window in 1939 when we found that we needed everything that could still float. She, the two Texas Class, the Nevadas and Pennsylvanias were all due for replacement by new construction, and the value of these ships was highly questionable throughout the war.
Ran across a great model of Repulse the other day while researching Massachusetts, by a guy named Chuck Bauer. It is done up in the camouflage measure that she was in when she was lost. Full hull and mounted on a beautiful wood base.
I am going to severely cut back on the number of model I do from now on. My eyes won't allow me to do justice to 1/1200 or 1/700 scale anymore, so I am limiting myself to 1/350 which presents the problem of space to display them.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 15, 2017 17:00:36 GMT
I would love to have a room maybe in a loft, were I could have all my stuff all laid out to hand. I would like to do a few AFVs in 1/35 scale, I used to make them back in the seventies, but the house we have now is too small and every room is taken up for other roles.
An attic room would ideal and would be well out of the way. I could even try my hand at painting again as I still have all my water colours and brushes.
My main wish is to have a Victorian detached house and I would let Sue do what she wants with the house as long as I could have the attic and turn one of the reception rooms into Sherlock Holmes study.
I can hear her scream now, Noooooo!
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 15, 2017 17:09:11 GMT
I would think that a picture of Chinese Gordon would not be hard to come by, but Persian slippers to keep your tobacco in may present some problems. Listen to Mrs. Hudson.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 15, 2017 17:17:39 GMT
I don't think I am asking too much, I have seen a lot of these types of Victorian houses and painted a few too, and they usually come with two main receptions rooms, dining and kitchen, so that means she would have a nice big lounge plus a dining room and kitchen, as these old houses had lovely big rooms with high ceilings all packed with Victorian features.
They all seem to have attic rooms too.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Feb 15, 2017 17:27:05 GMT
QC Perhaps you can explain to me the reasoning of the architects who designed the Baltimore class CA's for placing a dual 5" mount right behind the front 8" turrets as well as the aft 8" turret? Also the same question for the Cleveland class CL's? Then comes the difficult to understand the design of the Brooklyn class of CL's with their 3 6" turrets up front with the 3rd turret deck level behind the elevated 2nd turret. I would appreciate your assistance with these questions. Ian mentioned the role the 7 allied battleships played at Normandy on D Day for their bombardments of the German positions but I believe the Destroyers were more effective due to their ability to be closer to the defenses being pounded. I am unsure regarding the role played by the Heavy Cruisers but if the Cleveland and Brooklyn class Light Cruisers had been there I believe they could have been the fire support ships with their rates of fire. I found a site that deals with the Allied Battleships at D Day. Regards Dave padresteve.com/2012/06/06/the-battleships-of-d-day/
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 15, 2017 17:55:45 GMT
The reason for the five inch mounts placed where they were on the Baltimore, Cleveland, Fargo, Oregon City, and Des Moines Class Cruisers, was to provide for a three hundred sixty degree arc of fire for the five inch mounts, particularly in anticipation of and deployment of the 5 inch proximity fused round which was a devastating anti-air weapon.
The Brooklyn and Saint Louis Class were answers to the original configuration of the Mogami Class in the IJN. Both shared the 15 main gun configuration. About 1937-38 the Mogami Class converted from five 6" trip mounts to five 8" twins, and the trip mounts were fitted on Musashi and Yamato. The Brooklyn/Saint Louis were designed for surface combat and the 6"/47's they mounted were rapid fire guns. Their AA secondary mounts were weak. Saint Louis and Helena, were completed with 4 five inch twins, and Savanah was refitted during the war with them. The rest were planned to be converted in the same manner but it never took place.
The number 3 six inch mount on the Brooklyn/Saint Louis Class was so configured to cut down on the length of the ship, keeping it a little over six hundred feet. Had it been tiered above number 2, as you might expect, it would have effected the stability of the ship, and the only way to correct that was making a longer, and as a result heavier ship. Remember when these ships were designed there were still some tonnage and budgetary restrictions.
Dave, when you want to make a very big hole in the ground far away use a battleship. When you want precision fire use the five inch on a DD. You must also remember that you are firing in close proximity to friendlies on most call for fire missions. Precision is a must, and the guy calling for fire better damned well know what he is doing. BB guns were mainly used on targets for interdiction, preventing by their fire the reinforcement of the battle space. The only time they were ever used for direct fire on the beaches themselves were before the landings took place, and that holds true in the Pacific and Med as well.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Feb 15, 2017 21:39:32 GMT
Chuck thank you for explaining the design of the third forward mount being below the second. That has bothered me for years especially since the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano, the former USS Phoenix (CL 46) in 1982 was in my memory. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 15, 2017 23:25:24 GMT
Dave if you look at the Atlanta Class writ large the flaws in the design of the first two groups of four, the Atlanta Group, and the Oakland Group, they had 1-2-3 tiered as were 4-5-6, in the way you would expect both were pre-war designs, the four Atlantas hitting the streets in 42, and the Oaklands getting into commission in 43-44. The only real difference between the two groups beside cosmetics was that the Oaklands dropped the two waste five inch twin, slightly aft of amidships. The first four proved unstable, so that is why they dropped the waste guns in the Oaklands. It was fairly easy to do, just plate over the area externally, and internally convert the spaces to other use. They too proved to be unstable, even with the weight saving,
The third group, the Juneau(II) Group, of only three ships, were in the design process mid-war, and what they did with them to correct the stability issues was put 1 and 2, 5 and 6 on the main deck level, while 3 and 4 were both up a level. That is how they lowered the complete superstructure and corrected the stability issues. The last three did not commission until after the war. Only Juneau saw any extensive service lasting until 1955 in the active fleet. By 1960 and 61 all were on the scrap pile, except Spokane which they were going to convert for test purposes, but I forget what they intended to test. Anyway the test were canceled and Spokane was also scrapped.
They were nice looking ships, but obsolete for AA purposes with the conversion of Boston and Canberra.
We transferred all of the usable surviving Brooklyn/Saint Louis Class to South American navies around 1950-51, Two top Argentina, two to Brazil, and two to Chile. Honolulu and Savanah had been used up in service, they both took a beating, and both were retained until about 1960 for spare parts for the transferred units. That class was well thought of in South America and lasted longer that any of the Clevelands, except Little Rock ad Oklahoma City.
I think I am correct in saying that Phoenix/Belgrano was the last combatant survivor of Pearl Harbor still in service. There were a few other survivors around, but I am fairly sure she was the last surface combatant.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 16, 2017 12:07:38 GMT
Going back to ammunition, the German 352nd Infantry division, which manned the fortifications along Omaha beach had a full complement of field artillery and these were placed inland and sighted to support the beach defences, now the 352nd artillery regiment consisted of nine batteries of 105mm leFH 16 Howitzers (which were old guns dating from 1916) and two batteries of 150mm sFH 18 Howitzers (which were more modern).
Now each 105mm howitzer was supplied with 225 rounds and the 150mm howitzers 150 rounds, now I get that to 1.025 x 105mm and 1.200 x 150mm, which is a good amount of ammo.
What is also known is that these artillery positions were not mounted in any bunkers, but were simply positioned in fields and camouflaged to avoid detection from the air and because of this they never got hit by naval fire or bombed by the USAF, so they remained intact. They also fired off all their ammo so you can imagine the damage these weapons did on the beaches, what saved the Americans from further damage was that these position could not be re-supplied with shells, because the allied air force shot up everything on the ground that moved, so when their ammo dried up they had alternative but to cease fire.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Feb 16, 2017 15:42:49 GMT
QC In our discussion we mentioned how valuable the destroyers were in the pre landing bombardment and after the troops landing as they could get closer to shore. My question is did we use the CL's of the Cleveland and Brooklyn classes for inshore bombardment?
I read Humble Heroes: How the USS Nashville CL43 Fought WW II by Steven George Bustin and was intrigued by the incredible fore power of the Light Cruisers of the Brooklyn and Cleveland classes. The Nashville was tasked with destroying the Japanese Patrol Craft which discovered the USS Hornet and her escorts. If I remember correctly the Nashville fired over 600 rounds at the Japanese vessel. The accuracy was poor because of the sea conditions and a small vessel.
If we had a gun platform with a fairly shallow draft as a CL did we use them a lot? If not why? Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 16, 2017 16:03:10 GMT
Dave they had vessels that could get in close to land HE and they were known as LCT(R) which stands for Landing Craft Tank (Rocket), these were landing craft initially used for tanks, but were converted to fire rockets. linkYou also had LCT(SP) which carried the self-propelled guns, these were also given fire missions as they approached the beach. You need to read up on the way the allies used their LCTs, these two were used extensively not only in Normandy but in the Far East.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Feb 16, 2017 17:39:09 GMT
With a light cruiser Dave you get the equivalent of a DIVARTY, with regards to precision, and destructive power. The 6" gun is the rough equivalent to the 155mm howitzer in a division's general support battalion, while the 5" gun is a smidge more at 120mm than the 105mm which was the standard equipment of the division's direct support battalion.
Gunnery is applied mathematics. Shooting is not the issue, and never is. It is the calling for and adjusting of fires accurately, and the plotting and control of fires, that tells the tale.
The gunnery officer on Nashville should have been thrown overboard. I don't care what the sea conditions were, they should have been on that target in three, and it should have been sunk in four.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Feb 17, 2017 12:47:11 GMT
Didn’t the Nashville take part in the bombardment of the Japanese airfield at Munda on New Georgia? I know that they were not the only ship to engage this prime target as both the USS Helena and St Louis were part of it too. Apparently they really gave it a good pounding.
The 169th Infantry Regiment had a hard time of it on New Georgia, their third battalion dug in for the night before the attack on Barike, and their battalion commander never set up a perimeter defence line and neglected to string up any wires, plus they dug their fox holes too wide apart, which allowed the Japanese to infiltrate their positions during the night. This resulted in a night of hell for the soldiers. The next day they ran into a Japanese trail block and had to withdraw back to their positions to suffer another night of Japanese infiltrations.
These Japanese night attacks cause real disruption and many men panicked with the thought that Japs were among them, which resulted in blue on blue casualties.
The next day the 169th plus a company from 172nd Infantry Regiment tried to breech the trail block again, they succeeded but it was found to me manned by a single Japanese platoon which held up the advance for three days.
According to some sources, after this engagement the 169th Inf suffered from many cases of war neuroses, which accounted for one man in every four.
|
|