@@robertf3479Are there any of those left? I thought that Ryan has been everywhere on the battleship, from the radar platform at the masthead to the double bottom void space.
@@alexandermonro6768 I'm sure that in a ship as large as New Jersey with its warren of compartments there are at least a few that he hasn't been videoed or photographed in.
@@robertsmith4681 ooh yeah. I had not even thought about there being a file available to 3D print your very own 16" armour piercing shell! (or as you say, scale it to a more manageable size!) Now I know what I want for Christmas! Now I wonder if anyone ever made a standalone (scale) model of the 16" gun by itself...
@@williestyle35 The Teflon situation I remember reading about it but descriptions were quite vague, I assume details were still somewhat "Sensitive" in those days.
@@williestyle35 I've come aross a few cool ones but none that have the kind of details I want. Ideally I'd want something that shows the loading trays and and breech assembly and whatnot. All the 3d turrret models I've seen so far as very short on innards.
The cap also serves to act as ablative surface while minimizing deflection of the main penetrator when striking angled armor plate. Thats a super cool model.
Bravo Zulu to the maker of the shell. I could never realize the size of the components that make up the complete round, yes I have seen illustrations, but to see how its assembled together is another mater, complete with curator for scale. Great informational video.
Ryan - that is very cool! One minor nit to pick - Comp B is not a plastic explosive. It’s a meltable fill, primarily TNT (~40%) and RDX (~60%) with a little desensitizing wax.
I believe Ryan referred to it as Explosive D, or at least he should have. It isn't a plastic explosive. It is related to TNT, but is not a TNT and RDX compound. It is ammonium picrate and was used by the U.S. Navy in their large shells starting in the early 1900's.
@@tomscotttheolderone364 you’re absolutely correct. I responded to his comment about Comp B (at least that’s what I thought he said), and didn’t think about what they are properly filled with.
This definitely is a wonderful education tool for those of us who are visual learners. Cannot thank the professor enough for his passion and dedication.
Holy cow! What a great educational tool! As a navy man that deals with ordnance, this is awesome because explaining things to my son that plays with legos… this is all makes sense to him!
Wow, Ryan, this is perhaps the most interesting video of the all for me. I knew the theory of an armor piercing shell, and have seen drawings, but to actually see the pieces (even though they're not painted yet) really really made it all so clear to me. Totally fascinating. Thanks to the Professor and to you Ryan.
Great stuff, the cap is softer material usually in place to reduce the chances of the actual (hardened) shell body shattering when it impacts hard armor, it also helps with reducing the chance of the shell ricocheting off if the shell hits at a large angle by allowing the softer cap to bite into the armor plate. And yes the ballistic cap is just there for aerodynamics
This is wrong, AP caps post-WW1 are all "hard" caps, with a similar hardness to the shell body. American WW2-era caps had 550-600 BHN hardness, only the very base of it (where it connected to the shell) was softer. Some "super-hard" caps over 600 BHN were also experimented with. Soft caps prevent shatter at low obliquity, but that's pretty much all they do. They were ineffective at high obliquity as they just detached from the shell and, in every obliquity, did pretty much no damage to the armour. Hard caps "bite" into the armour even at high obliquity and help with penetration by breaking the hardened face. For reference, homogenous armour would have 200 to 250 BHN hardness, face-hardened armour 600-700 BHN at its hard face (down to 200-250 at the other side). Shell bodies were also hardened at the face (500+ BHN) to ~250 at the base.
What an informative and wonderful model to have on display. I would encourage you to obtain two other models with the assistance of this expert: a model of a practice round and a model of an HC round that also shows each of the sub-components of the fiberglass HC model that you have on display. Then discuss the differences between the three types of rounds. And, consider expanding the powder bag regime to show the "early" type (with the cordite "grains") as compared to the late 1980s powder "Swedish-enhanced" bags that are going to vaporize "teflon" to reduce friction and wear in the barrel.
What a wonderful gift for the museum. It makes everything easier to comprehend. Very special. Would it be possible to do a 3D model of the gear that the Damage Control crew would have used? (A representative sample) I went through DC training on Acadia which was a tender. I always wondered what life for a DC crew on something the size of a battleship was like. Must have been a backbreaking job.
Ryan, I am a big fan and contributor to the ship. That is such an amazing contribution. I bet the Naval Academy never had such a teaching tool. Dr. O… S…. Is owed such kudos. I don’t know if you’ve ever tried to 3-D print an item, but even the smallest one can take forever……
Ah that's awesome! Such an amazing demonstration aid! Mad kudos to Dr. Sepunkov (my best guess at spelling 😂) for that outstanding, thoughtful gift! A minor correction about the armor piercing cap: It actually didn't penetrate the armor itself, it was introduced in order to help reduce the chance that the hardened shell would shatter against hardened armor. It also incidentally helped reduce the chance of a ricochet when the shell struck an armor plate at an angle, but that was only a minor improvement and not the primary purpose for the addition. The cap, made of softer metal than the shell body, impacted the armor first and basically squished, which reduced the concentrated shock load on the shell tip at impact, instead spreading the force over a larger surface of the shell's nose and reducing the chance that the shell would split open and harmlessly shatter before punching a hole through the armor and being intact to detonate properly on the other side. Edit: Be sure to give an update once you get the parts painted up! I want to see that thing in all its glory!
Later versions of the Armor Piercing Cap also came with a face-hardened variety - the hardened front surface would fracture the hardened surface of the target armor plate, while the soft backing of the cap would protect the core shell's tip from fracturing as a regular soft AP cap would
This is a brilliant education tool, my only concern from experience with 3d printing is durability. Make sure to keep these away from direct sunlight as it will make the material brittle and away from heat as it will deform the material you could also create a mold around them and then from that mold create a resin version, especially as you can then also easily create more which will guarantee that such a brilliant object is preserved especially given the inherant weakness of PLA and if the public will be hands on with them then I give them a 6 month lifetime so may definitely be another argument for casting resin version (i do think versions for the public to handle would be brilliant)
Costs about 2x, but ASA would be a great material. As dimensionally stable as ABS (you have to print it at about the same temp), but more UV resistant. Painting them will also help.
In answer to your question about what to 3d print, I look at it the other way, 3d printers are only going to get better, so I would focus on getting as detailed 3d scan as you can of anything and everything. To the point of seeing about getting someone to donate a high resolution 3d scanner and just start working your way through the ship scanning literally every inch such a project may not be completed before the next dry-dock cycle, and scanners will also only get better and cheaper over time, so some things may need an additional pass later. but starting scanning now will let you scan things before they deteriorate more
What you need is an SG radar antenna. I bet you don't have one of those. Maybe one day an SK-1 or an SK-2. lol That shell is awesome, Ryan. I agree it deserved a video and thank you for bringing it. Don't forget to let us see it when you paint it. Thank you all so much.
If you could do 3D printed miniature replicas of spaces not on the tour route, I think that would be pretty cool, or maybe a replica of a full engine room, with cutaways to see inside the boiler, turbine, and maybe reduction gears, since you normally can't see the insides of those things. Also, if you guys would sell diecast, wood, or injection-molded miniatures of that shell that you can actually take apart, I would buy one in a heartbeat, especially if they were also keychains. They'd probably be kinda expensive, especially if you went diecast, but they'd be super cool regardless.
How about a 3D Admiral Halsey? Given his success with the weather, that gray would be about right. just kidding, and like everyone else has said, it's a great gift to the museum.
It's a shame Nathan Okun passed away earlier this year because he could give an even more detailed explanation of some of the issues and corrections. The biggest one is that it is not the armor piercing cap that makes it an armor piercing shell. The primary thing that makes it an armor piercing shell is that delay fuse, while the thickness of the wall and hardness of the steel in the shell body also play a big role. A high capacity shell, even with the AP cap and wind screen, would penetrate essentially no armor because it doesn't have a delay fuse, although the practical physical limits of fuse activation still imposes a delay of about 0.003 seconds. What the AP cap really does is absorb the shock from the impact on face-hardened armor plate such as Class A plate. Impact on face-hardened plate can send shock waves through the shell body that can shatter it under the right circumstances, or at least cause it to bounce off and be rejected under other circumstances. The cap, especially by WW2, is very hard and helps punch into the face-hardened plate, but its deformation absorbs and dissipates the shock of that impact, allowing the intact shell body to continue punching through the armor.
I'm surprised, Ryan. While I am no expert, I think you may have some facts wrong about the shell, if I'm remembering my ballistic shell metallurgy correctly. The shell itself should be hardened and be plenty armor-piercing on its own. The trouble is that uncapped shells tend to be ridiculously brittle and break apart, and they lose penetrating power rather quickly, especially at higher speeds. The blunt nose-cap should instead be solid, unhardened mild steel and is meant to deform on impact. This deformation applies pressure more evenly on the hardened shell nose and helps prevent it from breaking apart right away when the narrow nose first hits armor steel at high speeds, getting more penetration for the same shell with more consistency. The final piece is the ballistic cap, meant purely to assist external ballistic characteristics, and is hollow - I don't know if it would be mild or hardened, but it ultimately isn't meant to matter once the shell starts its terminal phase.
Slight correction (shell modeler here) - uncapped shells typically had their pointed tip hardened, to initiate a fracture in the armor, so that the tough remainder of the shell could push through the weakened fracture zone. The hardened tip was, however, brittle - and if the armor it hit was sufficiently face-hardened itself - the impact would fracture the tip of the shell, which would weaken the shell, and lead to either the shell itself fracturing, or at least deforming and severely reducing armor penetration. The original version of the armor piercing cap was indeed of much softer mild steel - and was intended to spread the energy of impact over a much wider surface area of the main shell - which protected the tip from fracturing, and thus maintained the shell's armor penetrating performance. Later versions of the armor piercing cap - however - like the one on the 16inch Mark 8 APCBC shell that I modeled - actually had a face-hardened cap as well. The face-hardened cap would actually also initiate a crack in the target armor plate, by pre-stressing the brittle face-hardened plate surface, and thus help the main body of the shell punch even deeper into armor.
Great video. I saw those shell components when I toured the drydock and wondered about them. So, the guy drove them over from Chicago? I can only imagine if he was stopped on the Pennsylvania Turnpike: State Trooper: "Sir, what's that in the back seat of your vehicle?" Guy: "Oh, that's my 16-inch battleship shell." Trooper: "Umm... Sir, would you please step out of the vehicle?"
Definitely gotta get the sections painted. I love that you have it for the ship now but painting the components to match the materials they would have been made out of will tell visitors a lot about the shell. They'll be able to see that the armor piercing cap is a much stronger material, just because of its color. The same goes for all the other components,. You could even go so far as to paint the package on the powder charge. I just wish I lived closer because I would offer to do it for you. I wouldn't be surprised if those who are closer make such an offer. If you were to invite volunteers it would be a certainty.
As a kid we had what looked like a 14inch nose-cap in our yard. It came from around Mare Island Naval Base. It was very heavy, concave at the base and hollow pointed.
Maybe try a 3D print of the turbines? Might be possible to drive such from an airbrush compressor, or even a bike powered compressor, to try help give visitors an idea of what say 100W power actually feels like. From that they should be better able to comprehend full scale power output.
Excellent, and thanks to the professor, as others have said. I would use Army Painter primer and color on 3D-printed items when you paint the parts. You will not get a perfect match, but you will likely find something close to the color. I don't find much value in sanding and filling as it stresses the 3-D layers and can delaminate them. Just color 'em and use 'em. If you want to show the details...you can fill the detail lines with a black wash and wipe off the excess. Please have a look at their website for painting figures, as it will help you think about this...Also, it is not plastic but something else, so it does not work like gluing a model together. Excellent again.
Creality CR-M4! 450 x 450 x 470 mm - with the 1 mm nozzle the entire shell took just 25 days (and 25 standard 1 kg spools) to print in 10 sections that screw together, and the powder bag took another 7 days (and 7 spools)
This video plus the video about when the last time the 16 inch guns were fired has me thinking: when was the last 16 inch armour piercing shell fired? For that matter, when was the last 5 inch armour piercing shell fired? Either on New Jersey or one of the other Iowas? I can’t imagine there were many armoured targets in the 60s and 80s but maybe the bunkers on land in the Gulf War?
Just when toy thought you've seen it all..a dude comes up with a HAND CARRIED full size replica of a "training aid" of what the main guns yeets with glee to the target area,,,,absolutly amazing...THAT'S America!
3D printers might be good at making scale cutaway models of the various major pieces of machinery to show the different components inside, and place them next to the machines they model along the tour route. If the model maker is especially motivated, he could add hand cranks or electric motors to make the parts move to simulate the machine's operation, or add LEDs inside to make the internals easier to see. Or perhaps you could scale cutaways of the ship itself, with different cutaways slicing away different parts of the ship to show the ship structure & how different spaces are interconnected. 3D printers can also use transparent plastics, so "cutaway" could mean sections that still provide structural support but are see-through.
Fantastic video, and great thanks to the guy that printed this out. I didn’t realize the nose cone section was so lightweight or how the penetrator portion worked. I always thought the entire body was just cast steel, so thanks for teaching me, yet again, something new. What exactly was the penetrating portion made of? In light/medium arms these days, armour penetrating can often be depleted uranium, but that wasn’t exactly common in WW2. You said “dense and heavy”, I don’t feel like lead, while dense and heavy, would overcome armoured steel belts. Some sort of nickel-alloyed steel?
In the case of the 16in Mark 8 APCBC shell (represented in my 3D print) - it was all steel, but with several different levels of hardening. The core shell itself had a high-toughness primary body, but the tip was rapidly quenched during manufacturing, which made the tip itself exceptionally hard - and thus, good for initiating a fracture in a target armor plate. The hardened tip was, however, brittle - and if the armor it hit was sufficiently face-hardened itself - the impact would fracture the tip of the shell, which would weaken the shell, and lead to either the shell itself fracturing, or at least deforming and severely reducing armor penetration. The original version of the armor piercing cap was made of much softer mild steel - and was intended to spread the energy of impact over a much wider surface area of the main shell - which protected the tip from fracturing, and thus maintained the shell's armor penetrating performance. Later versions of the armor piercing cap - however - like the one on the 16inch Mark 8 APCBC shell - actually had a face-hardened cap as well. The face-hardened cap would itself also initiate a crack in the target armor plate, by pre-stressing the brittle face-hardened plate surface, and thus help the main body of the shell punch even deeper into armor.
@@OlegMilitaryHistory thanks for the detailed reply! Makes a lot of sense, and I understand it because I’m a machinist. But I’m a machinist in the 21st century, so these aren’t the techniques we’d use today. Sorry, not watching the video again right now, and I can’t remember who Ryan said made the models. Was it you?
@@OlegMilitaryHistory that’s awesome! The value of what your done for USS NJ can’t be overstated. Kids will be seeing that for years. And simply because of of that, I checked out your page. Long, detailed videos. Not many, but I’ve just saved your Lecture 1. I’ll take a look later, and if I like it I’ll subscribe and watch the rest. I love the technical stuff. So this steel they used, any idea what alloy? Maybe something like an 8620? Something that takes case hardening very well while but retains a tough core?
Would've been cool for Libby to cut in the scene from Step Brothers "Did we just become best friends?" illustrating the moment Ryan sees just how cool the 3D print was 😅
Might be unwieldy but how about prints of some of the weapons systems installed throughout her career? Like the 20mm Oerlikon and 40mm Quad Bofor and the systems in between those and the current Phalanx CWIS and their cartridges? And maybe some prints of the different missiles she had from what she had as her first missile to the eventual Tomahawk missiles all setup next to each other like a timeline or evolution of systems chart?
Have a 3D Printed AP shell is awesome. Now having a 3D Printed HE Shell would be awesome and 3D Printed other types of 16” and 5” shells that would be great. Also a 3D Printed ?working? Pioneer Drone that New Jersey used would be really cool.
That's cool. I use to have a shell that was like 12" diameter. It was solid except for the very top it had threads for a nose cone. I'm a family of machinists and my dad had made it at his work. Not sure what it went to, it was real and had the brass ring on it. It was pretty thick steel too and probably about 3 ft long.
