USN Fire Support Gun Proposals

[Scott Kenny]

Does anyone know how long this ammo stuck around? Did the Navy have 8" shells sitting in some depot until Des Moines and Salem were stricken in 1991? Or was it all transferred to the Army after Newport New decommissioned in 1975?

I'd suspect that the 335lb AP shells were kept in a depot until the ships were stricken. ~240lb HE shells probably went into general Army storage, because they are the same weight as Army shells.

 

[jsport]

Yes the 175mm was to use the same gun as found on the M107 SPG the Army was using in Nam.

Israeli later got a a shell that boosted the 175mm range out to 50km which they used to great effect shelling SAM sites, enough that they keep it in reserve to this day, and thats 12km more.

Neither use Basebleed or RAP to reach that range, that was all raw ballistics from the powder charge. So you can easily reach out to 60 70km using the Israeli shell with basebleed, tickle 100 with rap, which I recall them looking into that in the 90s.

One has to wonder whether these opportunities are not being discussed w/Ukraine's 175mms..however for future NATO considerations one would imagine 203mm lg rg would be preferred.

 

[TomS]

One has to wonder whether these opportunities are not being discussed w/Ukraine's 175mms..however for future NATO considerations one would imagine 203mm lg rg would be preferred.

What Ukrainian 175mm guns? To the best of my knowledge there aren't any.

 

[Scott Kenny]

One has to wonder whether these opportunities are not being discussed w/Ukraine's 175mms..however for future NATO considerations one would imagine 203mm lg rg would be preferred.

I don't believe that Ukraine had any? They were 122/152/203mm family.

 

[TomS]

I don't believe that Ukraine had any? They were 122/152/203mm family.

And have pretty solidly swing to 105/155mm now, because that's what the he West can provide.

The delivery of 175mm shells does feel very much like a backdoor disposal of potentially hazardous material by Greece.

 

[Grey Havoc]

The delivery of 175mm shells does feel very much like a backdoor disposal of potentially hazardous material by Greece.

Though it has to be said that the Ukrainians are increasingly suffering crippling munitions shortages.

 

[jsport]

The delivery of 175mm shells does feel very much like a backdoor disposal of potentially hazardous material by Greece.

again implausible/impractical.

 

[TomS]

again implausible/impractical.

Implausible that the Greeks dumped some barely usable military surplus material on Ukraine rather than paying for proper disposal? They would not be the first to do that, and probably not the last either.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Implausible that the Greeks dumped some barely usable military surplus material on Ukraine rather than paying for proper disposal? They would not be the first to do that, and probably not the last either.

True, but at least the ancient M113s and other items sent to them can usually be used in some way. 175mm shells without any actual 175mm caliber guns to fire them seem very useless. Maybe they could take the explosive out of them (probably past its shelf-life) and reuse it somehow, but I pity the guys getting that job. They shouldn't be that desperate for basic munitions at this point.

 

[Kat Tsun]

And have pretty solidly swing to 105/155mm now, because that's what the he West can provide.

The delivery of 175mm shells does feel very much like a backdoor disposal of potentially hazardous material by Greece.

Wondering if it could fired sabotted from an S-23 gun tho.

 

[TomS]

Wondering if it could fired sabotted from an S-23 gun tho.

Designing sabots is tricky work, and doubly so for a shell that wasn't originally designed for a sabot. Maybe some very simple base/cup sabot sort of deal, but it's doing to have all the accuracy of a thrown rock.

 

[Kat Tsun]

Designing sabots is tricky work, and doubly so for a shell that wasn't originally designed for a sabot. Maybe some very simple base/cup sabot sort of deal, but it's doing to have all the accuracy of a thrown rock.

Definitely not a wartime expedient but could be cool for a factory I guess. Sadly AFAIK the only active user of the S-23 was the Syrian Army.

 

[Scott Kenny]

And have pretty solidly swing to 105/155mm now, because that's what the he West can provide.

And 203mm still. The Soviet 203mm tubes are apparently compatible with US 203mm shells, based on photos of US-marked 203mm ammo but zero reports of M110s being delivered.

 

[Martes]

Looks like it may be the future development of triple 16-inch version mentioned above.

It seems there was a whole series of those studies:



BTW, does anybody know where the plans are from? I found them in an old and unsorted archive, and the only hint was that the file was named LFS.

 

[isayyo2]

BTW, does anybody know where the plans are from? I found them in an old and unsorted archive, and the only hint was that the file was named LFS.

It's all from Chapter 14 "Fire Support Revisited" of Norman Friedman's U.S. Amphibious Ships and Craft An Illustrated Design History.

 

[Martes]

Chapter 14 "Fire Support Revisited" of Norman Friedman's U.S. Amphibious Ships and Craft An Illustrated Design History.

Yes, I found the place, they are indeed there, except for the first variant, the one with missile launchers aft, apparently.

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

Yes, I found the place, they are indeed there, except for the first variant, the one with missile launchers aft, apparently.

I have a paper copy, the first one definitely from that chapter.

 

[Legnut]

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but it seemed more appropriate to ask my question in an existing topic rather than starting a new one.

Does anyone have additional details on the fire control system for the Mark 71 Major Caliber Lightweight Gun? Wikipedia says the following but I can't find a copy of the cited article online:

A specially modified Mark 155 ballistic computer provided 8"/55 ballistics for Hull's Mark 68 gun fire control system.[1]

The citation is here: Effron, Herbert M. (December 1975). "8"/55 Major Caliber Lightweight Gun: Big Punch for Small Ships". United States Naval Institute Proceedings: 91–93.

Is this the same Mark 155 ballistic computer used in the A6 Intruder? Or is this a different component? Was the Mark 155 then replacing the regular ballistic computer in the Mk 68, or was it somehow used in addition to the regular analog computer in the Mk 68 system?

Thanks, H

 

[JoeCalPo]

I will be modeling this to go along with my several BB-62s. Have several spare Iowa 16”/50 triples, some 8” barrels and a variety of 5”. Need to pick a year to decide if Phalanx or BPDMS - 1970s, 1980s, 1990s
No mount forward of the 16s though, it just seems an uncomfortable place.
Mast - see what’s in the spares.

I’ll happily take ideas to guide and focus the build.
Her name! Potential sources: state, territory, battle, or old monitors

I’ll shift this build and the ship to a separate thread, since it isn’t directly under the subject.

 

[TomS]

Is this the same Mark 155 ballistic computer used in the A6 Intruder?

No, it isn't. The Intruder used the AN/ASQ-155 computer, not a Mk 155. The AN/ASQ sequence is part of a totally different naming system.

Mk 68 GFCS wasn't digitized until at least 1975. I believe the Mk 155 was an analog ballistic computer that was the trajectory-computing part of the Mk 68. The modifications here would be different cogs or wiring to reflect the different ballistics of the 8-inch shell.