Battleship broadside question

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

If anyone knows this..

 

when firing 9 16” HE shells I don’t think you want them to all land in the same place. It would be much more devastating to have the hits spread out. Except for the famous “temper, temper Wisconsin” incident. Was there a a plan?

 

for comparison , a battery of 4 8” howitzers would be set in a pattern called a lazy W, 80 meters apart side to side and front to back, the idea being that the bursts Would be spread over an area 240 meters wide in a sort of staggered pattern.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

You’d want them all to hit in same place after the range and target have been zeroed in. If the target is another battleship or other capital ship, they can absorb a lot of big hits and still be a threat. Bismarck was hit over 400 times and still didn’t sink until the crew scuttled her. 
 

In Naval warfare of the battleship era, there’s a lot of water between targets, so spreading your shot is waste of ammo. The shooter tries to straddle the target to find the range and once established, obliterate the target with concentrated fire in order to move on to another target. 
 

 

[Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022]

Abilene Slim is on the hunt.  Battleship warfare concept was to be able to drop as many tons of explosive shells as possible on a moving target. Hitting other battleships, aircraft carriers, destroyers etc. was the desired attack.  I forget how many rounds a minute those 16" guns could fire, something like 2 which if you think about a 2110 pound shell with about 94000 foot tons of energy tossing that shell anywhere from 19 to 25 max range.....

 

When shelling land targets they concentrated rounds to tear up concrete fortifications or dug into sides of mountains.  

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

I was thinking g of shore bombarment as it was a common use in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq.

[twelve mile REB]

I believe the Iowa class Battleships guns could be aimed independently. 

[Pat Riot]

Yes, they could be aimed independently. 

[Pat Riot]

Here’s some interesting info. 

 

[Sgt. C.J. Sabre, SASS #46770]

2 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

For comparison , a battery of 4 8” howitzers would be set in a pattern called a lazy W, 80 meters apart side to side and front to back, the idea being that the bursts Would be spread over an area 240 meters wide in a sort of staggered pattern.

We used to do the same with 81mm Mortars. When we initially laid the guns, we would aim the guns to the same point, but once that was done, we would adjust the guns so that they FIRED in the lazy W. 

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

1 hour ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

I was thinking g of shore bombarment as it was a common use in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq.

It depends on the target. Those 16” shells are effective against hard targets like a harbor or airfield, but less so against a dug in enemy as was shown in WWII. For the number of shells expended in shore bombardment, the effectiveness wasn’t what was expected. Plus, many of the rounds didn’t detonate at all as they were meant for something harder than earth. 
 

That they were used in Korea, VN and Iraq had more to do with “we’ve got ‘em so let’s use ‘em” and “shock & awe”, rather than any real tactical advantage. At least the ammo was “free” since it had been around for decades. They also weren’t used much due to the expense and mothballed after relatively brief tours. The New Jersey was refurbished for Vietnam and put back into mothballs after about two years, as I recall. 
 

The Missouri was mostly a cruise missile platform for Desert Storm, although they fired the guns a couple of times for the hell of it. As I recall, the Mighty MO was costing $1 million a day to operate in the early 90s. That and the fact there weren’t enough skilled workers or materials to maintain & repair the rapidly aging equipment, which led to its final decommissioning. 

[Chantry]

11 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

If anyone knows this..

 

when firing 9 16” HE shells I don’t think you want them to all land in the same place. It would be much more devastating to have the hits spread out. Except for the famous “temper, temper Wisconsin” incident. Was there a a plan?

 

for comparison , a battery of 4 8” howitzers would be set in a pattern called a lazy W, 80 meters apart side to side and front to back, the idea being that the bursts Would be spread over an area 240 meters wide in a sort of staggered pattern.

 

For 1940's technology, the 16" 50 caliber guns were very accurate.  During an attack on Truk, the USS New Jersey chased Japanese destroyer IJN Nowaki (35 feet wide) and was straddling the destroyer at ranges of 34-39,000 yards with the last straddle recorded as being 38,720 yards.  Keep in mind the USS New Jersey would have been at near or maximum speed.

 

At the link is how accurate the  16" 50 caliber was when the battleships were recommissioned: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_16-50_mk7.php

[Subdeacon Joe]

Three gun turret v. triple-gun turret: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/triple-turrets-vs-three-gun-turrets-quick-read/

To put it simply, a turret is classified as a triple or a three-gun mount based on the guns it carries and how they elevate. A triple gun turret has all three gun barrels elevate and depress together as a single unit. In contrast, a three-gun turret has the barrels mounted individually. This allows each gun to elevate and depress on its own, independently of the others. This applies for other turret designs such as twin / two-gun turrets and quadruple / four-gun turrets.