This is the introductory video for a series that takes a detailed in depth look at the design and fabrication of the components that were part of the 14" guns used on Battleship Texas.
It is interesting that these were designed with pencil, paper and a slide rule, no computers. Also no high tech computers to aim or fire the guns either. I am so amazed by the ingenious mechanical designs back then.
What fascinates me the most were systems found on later ships where the turrets were directly controlled by the fire control computers using servo systems. While sensors, like search and fire control radars, were electronic, the computers and servos were purely electro-mechanical. They largely eliminated human error and could aim and hold on target faster and better. It was unfortunate that it wasn't feasible to adapt Texas to utilize them, but I'm glad they didn't try. It would have required heavy modifications that would have eliminated these early systems and the history that we can still see.
@@stevesmith9151 Guns as a main ships weapon are obsolete. There is a reason why they don't build them like that anymore. large Anti-ship missiles would still sink a Des Moines. Traditional naval guns maxed out at ranges of 21 miles modern Cruise missiles have ranges of a 1,000 miles. The primary role of Modern Warships is to defend Airspace and to hunt submarines. You cannot defend hundreds of miles of Airspace with Naval Artillery. With modern SM-6 missiles you can. As for LCS they were a shit show caused by corrupt politicians and flawed "threat" perceptions. However the Modern Burk and Tico ships have been doing their job for nearly 40 years without complaint.
@@tomscotttheolderone364 I think it really made sense to not upgrade Texas since she was not intended for surface actions but was being used as a shore bombardment platform. Along with New York and Arkansas and Nevada they were the oldest Battleships in the fleet. Whats great was that Texas against the odds was saved and preserved so we get a great time capsule. My personal dream would be when the Navy decommissions the USS San Jacinto (A Ticonderoga class Cruiser) it could be preserved in Texas along side USS Texas. It would be great since the two ships encompassed over 120 years of Naval History of the United States showing the evolution of Navy warships from 1912 to 2020. Both ships have a lot in common- Both ships had long service lifes (31 years for Texas, 35+ years for San Jacinto) both fielded new advanced capabilities but were followed by improved follow on classes (14inch guns on Texas, followed by Standard type Battleships) (Ageis Defense system on the San J, which was later used on the Burk class DDGs) Both had major refits to keep them relevant in the changing combat envoirments (Tripod masts radar and anti-Aircraft guns for Texas, Improved Firecontrol Systems for San J.)
@@stevesmith9151 Do you know what they found out about the Bikini Bomb Tests? that Nukes don't do that much damage to ships unless they were relatively close. Only one ship that was 1,000 meters from ground zero actually sank and that was a dry dock. Many Ships survived the bomb test including ships that were not war ships that had little in the way of Armor Several Destroyers survived much closer to the blasts and they do NOT have high survivability. The bomb test revealed that while nukes were deadly to ships up close ships were not nearly as heavily damaged at greater distances. However all ships would have been killed by Radiation since all the ships involved had Lethel levels of radiation. If you think a Hypersonic missile traveling at 5,000 Miles Per Hour is not going to dent Class B armor you are an idiot. just kinetic energy alone would be devastating to any ship. There Are anti-ship missiles intended to sink 100,000 Ton Fleet Carriers. Yamato and Musashi were sunk with concentrated air attack involving dumb bombs and unguided Torpedos. What the hell are you talking about "modern Sabot ammo" Are you talking about Tank Rounds? or Hypersonic projectiles- Hypersonic projectiles have been cancelled and either way would have inferior performance to Missiles. And no they were not even close to having "Sabot" rounds for the Iowas. "nothing Left on Earth that could go Toe to Toe with an Iowa and survive." Nonsense. Complete Utter Nonsense. It is in fact not that hard to sink a battleship if you have the right weapons avaible. IF you don't think that you can't build Missiles that can defeat Armor that was only rated against 2,000lb AP super heavy guns from specific angles (You probably don't even understand that Battleship Armor is built to take rounds at specific angles and distances. You can litterally build a missile with More Mass than a YAMATO shell with many times the velocity and target the ship from angles it was never intended to survive. That is the Reason why Armor is not a priority for the Navy anymore. You can always build your missile or Torpedo bigger and shoot from farther. No ship can be made invincible.
I remember back when stationed on a tender at the submarine base in San Diego, we were told the New Jersey was coming into port at North Island. We found the highest spot to watch it come in. It reminded me of the Star Wars battle cruisers because of the triangular shape as it started to appear in the distance. Then we were amazed at just how big that ship was. Huge is an understatement!! The Star Wars thing is what I will never forget!!
My Pappy joined the Navy in 1937 and went through training on board the USS Texas. Always said it was his favorite ship. He got moved to the USS Lexington and his Navy career ended when he was badly wounded at the Battle of Coral Sea and the Lexington was sunk.
Sailed with an engineer Lester L Anderson on ocean tugs was @ coral sea on the Lex. Chief Bos’n Mate. So tough he ate hot sauce on his corn flakes. Not a sea story either
Outstanding video! Thank you! What caught my attention was the chamber pressure, 36k psi is incredible and while I understand the huge volume of the chamber takes a tremendous amount of gas to achieve those pressure ratings, I was comparing it to a 5.56mm rifle cartridge that produces around 58k psi chamber pressure, but in a really tiny chamber (in comparison). Thanks again!
Thanks! I knew the basics but always wondered how they ignited the main charges. I found it interesting that the max bore pressure when firing was 36,000 pounds per square inch. For comparison, a 30-06 cartridge has a bore pressure of about 46,000 PSI. But of course, we're talking about a HELL of a lot more volume in that 14" rifle!
The USS Constitution and WWII Battleships were my first love as a young 10 year old boy starting to build models around 1970. Every year my family took a two week vacation to Georgia (my mother's family is there) from Louisiana where my dad is from. He was a WWII, Korea and Vietnam vet of 24 years in the Army Air Corp and then the new USAF. Thing is on this trip was the USS Alabama in Mobile, and I recall I had to behave on that miserably long trip or we would not get to stop at the Alabama. When we got near I used to hunger for a view of it in the distance towering over the shoreline structures. it's not the Texas, I've seen her from a distance passing through Houston (and I understand she is undergoing an extensive restoration right now), but to get to crawl all over a true battleship was this ten year old's yearly joy for a few years. All mine and my dad's too I guess because we dragged along my 3 siblings and my mom. I even visited it again on my own honeymoon with my new (very indulgent) very beautiful wife in 1979. Battleships have a mystique that Aircraft carriers just don't have. Carriers are like floating hornets nests, they get the job done being full of bugs with stingers, cool in their own way. But NOTHING beats the brute force, pure pounding and national pride a battleship can dish out. I'm 63 now but, God! I STILL love battleships! They are wicked and intimidating looking. T.R. Roosevelt knew what he was doing when he sent the White Fleet around the world. Anyway, we won't build anymore so we should SAVE ALL that remain!! Thank you for this wonderful video. I have always wondered just exactly how firing worked. I knew the basic mechanics but the point to point illustrations were very informative. Many, many thanks, and I'll shut up now.
Took the full indepth tour of the USS Iowa now moored in San Pedro California. I was blown away by the technology, history and esprit de corps of the ships crew. I highly recommend a tour of this amazing piece of floating history.
Tom again an awsome video. always amazed by the knowledge you hold and the way you go into technical depth but also keeping it simple for everyone to understand. Thankyou captain T Scott for sharing you're knowledge with the world about battleship texas.👍
Very interesting ratio, 1500lb shell to 420 lb propellant or 150/42. A typical 308 Winchester rifle cartridge might have a 150 grain projectile and around 42 grains of propellant giving a muzzle velocity around 2800 ft/s. Ballistics is absolutely fascinating.
I was thinking the same thing, except it was 30-06 that I was thinking of. The 308 and 30-06 are only about 200 fps difference, so it hardly matters I suppose. I'm just glad there are still people with a like mind...
As this video was playing that very thought was tracing thru my curiosity, I was heading to the calculator, other web sites…thanks for the quick reference! I do think case pressures are higher on smaller ballistics bores? I came back and the .308 has 62k lbs of case pressure there is a ratio in there….,
Another superb video Tom, I really enjoy the concise and informative nature of your videos and your delivery style. Bring on the deep dives, the deeper the better! 😁
What really amazes me is just how similar the chamber pressure and muzzle velocity are to rifle calibers. Difference being a huge difference in mass ejected and weight of propellent expended. Velocity might kill but apparently mass obliterates.
@@ironcito1101 One of the ways that a hypothetical alien species might destroy the Earth would be to hit it with a 100 kg or so mass that they have accelerated to 99% the speed of light. This can be done without violating any laws of physics, and the kinetic energy would be like a rifle bullet going through an apple.
Kinetic energy goes up in a linear fashion with mass (2x the mass, 2x the energy. It increases by the square of velocity (2x the velocity 4x the energy).
Very nice presentation. FYI, The photo of USS Missouri firing a full broadside was upon our arrival at Sydney, Australia in 1986 for the celebration of the RAN's 75th anniversary. I'm on the open bridge next to an Aussie journalist as an escort. The blast created quite an impression and could have been one of those brown out moments. R. Lindel PH1(SW) ret.
Thanks for the photo i.d.! That had to be an incredible sensory experience! Btw, did you know Bob Lian? I believe he was a turret commander on Missouri around that time.
I'm one of those people that believes the Internet has done a lot of harm specially the social media part,keeps people indoors instead of being outside like it used to be and just a host of other maladies however RU-vid has to be one of the most amazing things ever invented and the concept is painfully simple,get people to upload videos of just about anything and everything, from sewing a button to catching a whale and everything in between, its amazing, thank you much for a great video,always wanted to know how this was done.
One thing on this class of ships that wasn't repeated was that the projectiles were brought up and were even stored nose down during loading. I really like the old girl hopefully they get her where she's not in danger if sinking sometime soon. Thanks for the video I live this stuff even at 65 years old it makes me feel like I'm 15 years old again!
The ship is currently scheduled to be towed to dry dock for hull repairs in late June or early July. The ship has been well prepared, the tow carefully planned and run through simulations, and it will be less than 50 miles in protected water.
@@georgedistel1203 Bringing the dry dock to where the ship is currently located was never considered for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is that tied to the state provided funding for repairs was that the ship could not stay in her present location. In any case, Galveston is a short and safe tow from where she is now, and it has all of the required logistical support and infrastructure already in place.
Thank you, that means a lot to me! You may already be aware of this, but Battleship Texas has very strong ties to Great Britain. She was not only attached to the British Grand Fleet during the last year of World War I, she took part in neutrality patrols, was a convoy escort to Britain, and spent time in British Shipyards and preparing for D-Day there.
Great job as always Tom. Very accurate and you are correct no real difference in the Iowa’s loading and design. The biggest change was the adding of circuit 1R the ready fire circuit which was a series of switches which prevented loading out of sequence. For example the gun captain had to hit a bore clear switch before the rammer could ram the projectile. And I never knew the names of the two ramps the shell moved through to get to the rifling. So I learned something new. Also our gas check pads were neoprene rubber (impregnated with asbestos I believe). I didn’t think Texas used the old mutton tallow pads in WW2, did it? Thanks!
Hi Bob! You saying that you learned something made my day! I would certainly prefer the safety of the 1R circuit; however, I would feel pretty safe in one of Texas' turrets. With the exception of the two powder men in the gun pit, the entire gun crew worked within literal spitting distance of one another, so there was no lack of communication. Ramming the shell into a "hot" chamber is no big deal, but powder is obviously a different beast. One absolute step in the 14", two-gun turret loading procedure said that the flash tight door between the side pocket and gun pit would not be opened and powder bags not pushed through until "bore clear" was called. Since that was done by one of the pit powder men who were less than 6 feet from and in full view of the gun captain, it effectively the same as a 1R circuit. I saw the check pad composition in an ordnance manual from the late 1920's. I have at least one newer one, so I'll check to see if there were any changes.
@@tomscotttheolderone364 how was “bore clear” determined? I assume it would be by visual check to see the sky through the barrel, however, how would it be done at night if that was the method?
@@jamesbeaman6337 I don't recall seeing anything in gunnery manuals that address the issue of visibility in the bore. My experience with looking down bores is that even a small amount of light, direct or reflected, provides decent visibility. There are two things that can be done to assure a safe bore if visibility is poor. The first is to simply ram a shell. It tightly fits against the barrels compression slope to seal the powder chamber from any remaining residue farther up the bore, isolating any hazard from the powder chamber. The other measure is to spray the chamber with water using a flexible metal water hose mounted on the overhead behind the breech. This will immediately extinguish any hot fragments and make it safe. Since the gunnery manuals specify that charges only be loaded if it is known that they will be immediately used, they aren't exposed to water long enough to have any affect upon their performance. In fact, I have read that this was part of the standard loading procedure for the British. So, if the gun captain has any doubt about the condition of the bore and powder chamber, he simply has a shell rammed, then hoses down the powder chamber. He can then safely call bore clear.
it always amazes me the engineering required as well as the forging to keep that barrel from detonating from one shot let alone years of such abuses makes me wonder if there is more work gone into the design of a single turret on that ship then It took for the whole ship
I discussed propellant in another video in which I describe how maximum chamber pressure during firing is 36,000 pounds per square inch, well within the strength parameters of the barrel. The reason is that propellant does not truly detonate, but burns extremely quickly. The individual pellets of propellant were designed in such a way to burn progressively faster so that they start fairly slowly and then speed up as the bore's volume increases as the shell moves through the barrel. This makes it build pressure in a controlled fashion without over pressuring. The guns and turret were the result of years of evolution from previous designs, much like the engines, boilers and even the ship's hull and structure.
@@tomscotttheolderone364 thank you for the clarification I had assumed it all went off at once but gradual would make it far easier for containment.....👍
That is a great video. I needed some moments but I think that the spin arrow caused by the rifling is pointing in the wrong direction. But nothing which impacts the outstanding educational quality.
Thanks! While I described what goes into firing a shot on the 14" guns, I didn't talk about how the turrets and guns were crewed. Go to the following video to see that. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-PC9g9WkDS-4.html
Seeing the design up close and how it's made in sections make me wonder what kind of tolerance the measurements on the parts were. I can only imagine it'd be very small as any small imperfections would likely result in a failure
You are correct. Even major parts may be machined as closely as .002-.003". More than that could not only cause failures, but could result in what was called lost motion. That is looseness that creates unwanted movements that can ruin accuracy. That could happen in a number of places in the gun and sighting assemblies.
In these days of computer aided design which allows quick work of most any type of mechanical problems or components it's easy to forget that there were a lot of very smart people who knew how to get the job done with slide rules and good old fashioned know how.
indeed naval guns were a marvel of technology even for a hundred years ago, pretty advanced for their time in history, the designers were definitely way too clever, i hope they benefited unlike some i can think of, Mr Dunlop who after a lifetime of redesigning the formula for rubber, having invested so much time and other peoples money died penniless, and yet into the future, Dunlop becomes a big name apparently, my grandfather left a design on the back of an office door for divers to be able escape a submersible and swim away, known today as the Davis and Tate escape capsule, pinched by Mr Davis and Mr Tate, thanks (i have absolutely no idea if any of that is true, just one of those family myths that one tells)
Great Video, Thanks, Also, the calculations and materials dealing with absorbing and controlling the massive recoil. The test was the durability of the system after thousands of firings with no major failures or causalities.
Unfortunately, there is nothing worthwhile to see in either. Not only were both completely stripped of their equipment by the Navy when the ship was decommissioned, they are no longer period correct inside. Both were in need of major structural repairs when the ship went to dry dock in 1988. Lack of adequate funding forced them to use materials and methods that were not part of the original construction. So, there isn't much to learn by visiting them. The good news is they were careful to make sure that outer appearances were correct.
This video explains the extra puff of white smoke from the guns after firing, as the remaining gases are ignited in the barrel. (BTW, the Iowa has a mechanical fire control computer that is so accurate, that it was not replaced with an electronics).
I miss the tiny lead foil bag for reducing copper covering inside the barrel. On IOWA class ship it was placed by the gun captain during the loading process between 1st and 2nd powder bag.
As you said, these guys were really smart. They engineered all of this with slide rules, something that I’ll bet not 200 people world wide could do today. Most people couldn’t or wouldn’t leave their home without a computer screen @ the ready. Help me, what do I do! My phone wont work.
Great video! Amazing to think how the gun crews were so well trained they could go through this entire cycle in such a short time. What was the average reload time?
I didn't know the residual gas in the barrel was explosive but it makes perfect sense. You want the explosive mixture to be fuel rich, to prevent oxidization of the barrel by high-temperature oxygen that would remain if the mixture was lean. Everything with a combustion cycle, from car engines to rocket engines, is run rich for this same reason.
I believe the shortage of oxygen is simply the nature of the chemistry and not by design. While I am not a chemist, it seems unlikely to me that oxidation is a fairly minor consideration, especially considering that the Mk 12 barrels installed in 1944 had chrome lined bores By far, the major cause of erosion is microscopic cracks and flaking of the bore surfaces caused by extreme temperature "pulses" of at least 2,000 degrees.
@@tomscotttheolderone364 The ratio of fuel to oxidizer in the propellant is completely up to whoever manufactures it. Going with a fuel rich mixture wouldn't protect the barrel from all sources of wear for the reasons you mention, but it would solve the issue of high pressure, high temperature oxygen remaining in the barrel and going right to work on the metal.
The twist rate for the barrel is 1 in 25; however, it is not feet or inches. It is 1 in 25 calibers. To work that out, 25 X 14" = 350"/12" = 1 turn per 29.17'. While that doesn't sound like a lot, it is enough to spin the shell at more than 5,600 rpm as it leave the barrel. In terms of twist per barrel length, 52.5' bore / 21.17'= 1.8 turns.
I'm not sure what an obstruction would be since they kept the muzzle covered whenever the gun wasn't in use. The bore was visually inspected before the first and between all shots, and any visible debris would be cleared. It would be loose since the only thing that would fit tightly and jam in the bore was a projectile. That being the case, it would be easily pushed out.
I don't have a video that discusses that. It is mentioned at 4:04 in this video, but not in detail. The preferred way to fire the guns was remotely from main battery plotting room. Inside the room was a stable vertical, also called stable element, that used gyroscopes to detect when the ship was perfectly level. When the firing key was closed, the device would not fire the guns until the ship was perfectly level. The guns could also be fired remotely from the fire control towers where a gunnery crew member waited to close the firing key until he saw that the ship was level by watching the horizon through the gun director. If locally firing the gun from inside the turret, the pointer, a crew member who elevated the gun, watched the target through his telescopic sight. He watched the target move in his sight as his ship pitched and rolled. He would close the firing key and fire the gun "on the fall" as his sight moved down and crossed the target.
The answer is pretty complicated. It could be as few as 250 rounds or as many as 3,500 depending upon the type of shell and size of powder charge. You will find a detailed explanation in a video I created by clicking on this link. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dXLueUOnJN8.html
There are Freeze-Frame Still Shots From the Vietnam War Of The U.S.S. New Jersey Firing On Enemy Positions Where You Could See The 16-In. "Bullet" Coming Out Of The Gun With The Flash And Smoke That Offered A Better Example Of The Actions And Results You Described.
But, doesn't it take 10 minutes to turn the breech plug into the breech? No, it takes much less than ONE revolution. This critical detail is ignored by the speaker, it's called the "interrupted screw thread", in which the plug is inserted all the way, and THEN turned to lock it up. The threads in both the plug and breech are only partial, with an equal open space separating each threaded portion. If there are 6 thread sections and 6 open spaces, the plug only turns 30 degrees (1 /12th of a full rotation).
I am not sure how asking an absurd question, then answering it yourself accomplishes anything more than giving you the ability to discuss a nonissue. It was not a critical detail that I needed to address in this video because it wasn't pertinent to the topic and was covered in other others I have created for this channel. Since you brought it up, your description of interrupted thread design doesn't fit the Welin design used on Texas or any other 20th century U.S. battleship. It does not require "an equal open space separating each threaded portion." The major characteristic of the design incorporates threads that are both interrupted and radially stepped to eliminate the need for segments clear of threads between most thread segments. It also provides maximum plug strength while only requiring rotation of 30-36 degrees to lock or unlock the plug.
The "interrupted screw thread" was invented by Axel Welin who sold his patents to Vickers, Ltd., a British company. The US Navy tried to use the design without paying royalties to Vickers, and was successfully sued.
An excellent presentation. It boggles my mind how much brain power goes into developing novel ways to kill people ever more efficiently from great distances.
There was a very strict protocol followed in the event of a misfire or hang fire. The only time short cuts may be taken would be in combat when keeping a gun out of service for at least 30 minutes may present a greater danger than the gun accidentally discharging. The following is representative of what would have been done on Texas, New York and in the two gun turrets on the Nevada class ships. There are two very different procedures depending upon whether or not the primer fired, but the gun did not. The most likely problem would be a primer misfire. However, that cannot be determined without removing and inspecting it. There was danger in doing that, so several attempts would be made to fire it before removing it. First attempts would involve checking electrical connections, switching to battery power for the firing circuit and cleaning contact surfaces. If those don't work, they attached a lanyard to the firing lock and attempt to percussion fire it. If that didn't work, the firing lock would be opened and the primer removed and inspected. If it had not fired, a new one would be installed and the gun fired. If it had fired, then a whole new set of procedures would be followed. Things get really dangerous if primer fires, but the gun does not. It must be assumed that the gun may fire at any moment. There were two likely reasons for this happening. The bags were pushed too far in so that the rear bag is too far from the primer vent for the primer flame to reach it. The other is if the last bag is put in backwards so that its ignition patch is not against the breech face. The primer flame is not energetic enough to properly ignite the charge without the black powder in the patch, but it may start a smoldering fire in the fabric of the bag. Since they don't know what the problem would be, the turret was cleared of all crew except for a gunnery officer and a couple of crew to assist him. They wait at least 30 minutes before doing anything. This was to allow time for smoldering to travel up the length of a bag to the ignition patch and set off the charge. After 30 minutes, the firing lock is removed to fully expose the primer pocket in the breech. A sprayer wand with conical tip is inserted in the pocket and water sprayed into the powder chamber. After a few minutes, the breech plug is opened and water is sprayed into the chamber and on the powder bags as they are pulled out. The bags would then be placed in immersion tanks filled with distilled water to make sure they are totally safe. New bags can then be rammed, breech closed, primer inserted and firing lock closed.
An absolute maximum would be about 13 rounds in 10 minutes. However, loading was a very manual operation that varied according to crew skill and fitness. For those reasons, they would probably slow a little and end up with 11 to 12 rounds.
I haven't done much study of other nation's large naval gun systems, but I do know that while they shared general features, there could be large differences in design details. For instance, all large gun barrels were of "built up" construction, meaning that they were made up of several pieces. Some designs used sleeves and locking rings for strength while others relied upon wire winding, or a combination of both methods. Most nations used interrupted thread breech block and plugs, but the breech operating machinery greatly varied. There were also many differences between loading and ammunition handling systems. Aiming, pointing and training gear also varied a lot. The differences can largely be attributed to differences in design philosophies, along with differences in material and manufacturing capabilities.
The Yamato was the largest battleship ever built. Had 9 x 18 inch guns. Plus more smaller caliber. American air power sunk it and it's sister ship Musashi!!
It would be, except the propellant is designed to burn at an extremely fast rate instead of explode. You can see a full description of how it worked here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ywb2XoNY4C0.html
thats a pretty acugate display.i was on the 8 inch howitzer in texas in 1985.they discontinued it because it was too heavy and opted for the 15mm that could be air lifted.there were 2 fifferent charges.the green bag and the white bag.we shot the lesser green bag charge 99% of the time.when you shot the white bag i thought that 42 ton howitzer was gonna come off the ground
