Some Interesting Military Data

[Condottiere]

At the moment, four to five inches is considered the upper range of dual purpose. Six inches has always been a stretch; might have been interesting if the British had invented water cooled six inchers in the Twenties, their light cruisers and capital ships might suddenly look really challenging.

Three inchers seems to be the compromise for lighter combatants, and two inchers too lightish, and probably dead duckish when the balloon goes up.

 

[aramis]

Keep in mind one nasty side effect of AA shells (Flak) - while the 155mm is considerably better than the 105mm in terms of burst radius (Shrapnel to roughly 150 vs 100m), Every bit of that shrapnel comes back down... and the worse case is it coming back down from 500-1000m onto the manned deck... Much above 6", and that risk gets pretty dangerous.

Note that pre-WWI, there was a 6" QF gun... 5-7 rounds a minute, up to 70° elevation...
some were converted to land AA guns (on rails, with higher angles of fire), by using time fused rounds... most were pulled from the fleet in WW I to replace them with 8" howitzers for shore bombardments... and most of the mounting vessels still in service after reverted to the newer, longer, higher velocity 5.5" QF DP guns when they pulled their howitzers...


The 6" QF as a DP surface combatant gun is in the realm of "It sure could have been done"... as it was in a very small number of shore guns. but it also had only 2/3 the rate of the 5.25" QF, lower muzzle velocity, and was an out of date weapon at the time.

And, thanks to the Washington Naval [Limits] Treaty, there was a rush to up-power the guns on BB & BC designs... leaving the smaller ships needing bigger mains (thus ruling out the 6" DP as a main) to threaten the uparmed and up-armored BB's and BC's...

 

[Condottiere]

The British were pushing for a light cruiser category, since they needed numbers to patrol the sealanes, defined by the six incher maximum.

The largest dual purpose gun is probably the Yamato class eighteen inchers, loaded with largish buckshot, though I don't know if they ever hit anything.

 

[JimMarn]

Yes, the CFAs were destroyers.

And their two 5"/54 Mk 42 mounts were dual-purpose mounts, which could be used in an anti-aircraft mode (85 degree max elevation vs 65 degrees for the Mk 45 mount used in later destroyer classes).

And they had Tartar missile systems, not Terrier (Tartar was also on some frigates). Tarter was the short-range missile intended to protect the launching ship and one or two more close to it, Terrier was the medium-range missile intended to protect the whole battle group, and Talos was the long-range missile intended to protect the whole task force.

In an integrated battle group/task force, they provided 3 concentric "rings of protection", one inside the other (with Sea Sparrow for individual ship last-ditch protection).


Tartar was replaced by Standard-MR (with the range of Terrier) fired from upgraded Tartar launchers, and Terrier & Talos were replaced by Standard-ER (with near Talos range) fired from modified Terrier launchers (and new launchers).

The biggest difference in the Standard missiles was that the ER had a booster section attached to the MR missile.

I found the Terrier claim on a web site, but I do now remember it was Tarter missles we had. I don't remember us using the deck guns for aerial drones, but we did fire missles at them.

Some of the guys got upset when they learned our ship was supposed to take the hits aimed at the aircraft carrier.

 

[kilemall]

I found the Terrier claim on a web site, but I do now remember it was Tarter missles we had. I don't remember us using the deck guns for aerial drones, but we did fire missles at them.

Some of the guys got upset when they learned our ship was supposed to take the hits aimed at the aircraft carrier.

Destroyers are the poor bloody infantry of the surface navy, and therein lies their glory and their ruin.

 

[aramis]

Destroyers are the poor bloody infantry of the surface navy, and therein lies their glory and their ruin.

the irony is that DD's originally were not main combat elements - their original role is reflected in their WW I name: Torpedo Boat Destroyer... they were more like modern Mech-Inf, with the Patrol Torpedo boat being the "poor Bloody Infantry"....

The roles have changed...

 

[Condottiere]

Size and role inflation, rather than creep.

The Japanese and the Americans appear to have the largest destroyers ever built.

 

[mike wightman]

Flight III Arleigh Burke is just under 10,000t while the Zumwalt is nearly half again as massive at 14,798t.

 

[JimMarn]

One year there was a DDER tied up on the other side of the pier from us.

A destroyer escort, with radar. It was placed out in the Atlantic Ocean as a radar picket ship. They had just come back in after being out for a month.

A tub boat when by in the channel near the end of the pier. Our ship barely moved. The DDER, about half our length maybe shorter, bounced all over the place. The gangway between it and the pier was banged up. Our gangway barely moved. They had a dual barrel 3 inch gun forward. I think they had a dual 3 inch aft. I remember what looked like twin 40mm Bofers guns, one set on each side of the ship back by the aft 3" gun turret. They had newer looking radar antennas, but otherwise the shop looked like it was made in the late 1940s.

I was on watch on the quarter deck. I asked the officer on watch and he said to go ahead, I hollered over and asked them if they were okay.

They laughed and said that happens to them all the time.

I'm glad I never got stationed on one of those tiny things. But then again, someone I knew who was stationed on an aircraft carrier expressed shock I didn't mind being on the DDG I was stationed on.

 

[JimMarn]

Flight III Arleigh Burke is just under 10,000t while the Zumwalt is nearly half again as massive at 14,798t.

Something that size seems more like light cruisers, CLs, to me.

 

[Condottiere]

The British were thinking about eight and a half kilotonnes, but the light cruiser is defined by the six incher, and cap out by about ten kilotonnes.

The Zumwalts tend to resemble predreadnoughts.

 

[BlackBat242]

One year there was a DDER tied up on the other side of the pier from us.

A destroyer escort, with radar. It was placed out in the Atlantic Ocean as a radar picket ship. They had just come back in after being out for a month.

They had a dual barrel 3 inch gun forward. I think they had a dual 3 inch aft. I remember what looked like twin 40mm Bofers guns, one set on each side of the ship back by the aft 3" gun turret. They had newer looking radar antennas, but otherwise the shop looked like it was made in the late 1940s.

Try 1943-45.

In the 1950s thirty-four WW2-built EDSALL class DEs and two JOHN C. BUTLER class DEs were pulled out of the reserve fleet and converted to Destroyer Escort Radar Picket ships (DERs), with more radar equipment. These ships were then placed on patrol in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as part of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line. Some remained in service into the 1970s.

Destroyer Escort Radar Picket Ships Index

 

[kilemall]

Well now the USN calls em destroyers, but really those Burkes are CLs at least.

 

[aramis]

Well now the USN calls em destroyers, but really those Burkes are CLs at least.

In the current range of cruiser tonnages, they're right in the middle... Medium Cruiser. They should be a CGA (Curiser, Guided, Aegis)...

But that's a well documented issue. Congress limited the number of Cruisers, so the Naval Planning Board labeled the (then) medium cruiser as a destroyer to get it past the appropriations committee.

The US has not, at least since WW II, had decently matched definitions for anything shy of Battleships and CVAs...

 

[JimMarn]

Try 1943-45.

In the 1950s thirty-four WW2-built EDSALL class DEs and two JOHN C. BUTLER class DEs were pulled out of the reserve fleet and converted to Destroyer Escort Radar Picket ships (DERs), with more radar equipment. These ships were then placed on patrol in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans as part of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line. Some remained in service into the 1970s.

Destroyer Escort Radar Picket Ships Index

I looked at a few of the photos. I don't remember that ship's name or hull number. But they were smaller than our ship. Our ship was about 450 feet long and they were shorter than us by about half.

We couldn't figure out how they could see or track anything on radar as they bounced around so much. Well, there are days in the Atlantic when the surface is smooth. But I don't remember that as something that happened often.

 

[Enoki]

At the moment, four to five inches is considered the upper range of dual purpose. Six inches has always been a stretch; might have been interesting if the British had invented water cooled six inchers in the Twenties, their light cruisers and capital ships might suddenly look really challenging.

Three inchers seems to be the compromise for lighter combatants, and two inchers too lightish, and probably dead duckish when the balloon goes up.

The RN in the late 20's - early 30's tried an 8" with AA capacity on the County class of cruisers. The 8"/50 Mk VIII could elevate to 70 degrees and was intended to have a ROF of as much as 6 to 8 RPM with an original design spec for 12 RPM.
The technology was really not up to the demands and the system was never actually used that way. The ROF was more like half the design rate and never got close to the original spec. The gun turrets suffered protracted problems with reliability, some of which were never fully fixed.

By post WW 2 it was obvious that the heavy AA gun was pretty much useless. Even a water cooled, massive one like Green Mace was really incapable of dealing with high subsonic speed jets flying at 35,000 feet or higher and could barely engage aircraft like that at 40 or 50,000 feet. Hence, the move to missiles.
AA guns fell back to being useful against low flying aircraft and anything bigger than a 3" or 4" was pretty much worthless. Navies retained a 5" or 6" gun primarily for surface fire and amphibious fire support.

 

[JimMarn]

I remember reading several books on RN campaigns like Narvik. Survivors complained that their AAs guns couldn't go up to a high enough elevation. I think they mentioned 70 degrees max elev, but it wasn't an 8" gun.

 

[BlackBat242]

The RN messed up in the 1930s - they built several different sizes of heavy AA/DP guns, and many ships had too few adequate AA guns - for example, destroyers had either 4" DP guns or 4.7" guns, and cruisers had 4 single 4" guns - although most were refitted with 4 twin 4" mounts later.

The 4" could elevate to (depending on which mark of mount) between 60 and 80 degrees max.

The 4.7" could elevate to (depending on which mark of mount) between 40 and 60 degrees max (most were 55 degrees).

Only late in the war did destroyers start to get the 4.5" DP gun (80 degrees in the twin mount, 55 degrees in the single mount) that had been settled upon as the standard DP gun for battleships and carriers in the late 1930s.

Then in 1938 battleships and the newly-designed AA cruisers got the 5.25 twin DP mount (70 degrees).



By contrast, starting in the 1920s the USN settled on one size of heavy AA/DP gun - the 5"/25 calibre AA gun in the 1930s, and the 5"/38 calibre DP gun in the late 1930s.

Both of these had a max elevation of 85 degrees (except for a small number of low-angle (40 degree) mounts on a handful of destroyers or secondary ships).

 

[Condottiere]

Army reorganization of the July 28, 1866 Act of Congress per the 1866 Army Register (p. 150-d).

A "Troop of Cavalry" consisted of:

01-Captain
01-First Lieutenant
01-Second Lieutenant
01-First Sergeant
01-Company Quartermaster Sergeant
05-Sergeants
08-Corporals
02-Trumpeters
02-Farriers and Blacksmiths
01-Saddlers
01-Wagoners
78-Privates

Total maximum aggregate strength is 102 men.

Note, this is for the ten cavalry regiment organization. The six calvary organization is slightly different-but since they went with ten, we will use this. The only difference at the troop/company-level is that with the six regiment structure, a Company Commissary Sergeant was included.

Also note that the Register calls them "troops" instead of "companies," yet uses the term Company Quartermaster Sergeant!

Each regiment of cavalry consisted of:

01-Colonel
01-Lt. Colonel
03-Majors
01-Adjutant
01-Regimental Quartermaster
01-Regimental Commissary
12-Captains
12-First Lieutenants
12-Second Lieutenants
01-Chaplain (only in the black regiments, i.e., 9th & 10th Cav.)
01-Veternarian Surgeon (only allowed to the 7-10 regiments)
01-Sergeant Major
01-Quartermaster Sergeant
01-Comissary Sergeant
01-Saddler Sergeant
01-Chief Trumpeter
01-Regimental Hospital Steward
12-First Sergeants
12-Company Quartermaster Sergeants
60-Sergeants
96-Corporals
24-Trumpeters
24-Farriers and Blacksmiths
12-Saddlers
12-Wagoners
936-Privates

The maximum authorized aggregate regimental strength is 1,240.

GAC, at the time this was printed was a Captain in the 5th Cav. On the lineal rank of Captains in the cavalry, he was 55th in seniority, junior to Eugene Baker, Wesley Merritt, John Baker, Theo. Rodenbough, Ira Chaffin and many others.

His pay at that time was $70. per month with the following Subsistence, Servant and Fodder allowance:

4 rations per day-Monthly aggregate at .30 per ration=$36.00
1 servant paid at the rate of a private soldier.
2 forage rations for horses.

Total monthly pay was $137.50.

As a Lt. Colonel his pay was $95.00 per month with the following:

5 rations per day-Monthly aggregate at .30 per ration=$45.00
2 servants paid at the rate of a private soldier.
2 forage rations for horses.

Total monthly pay $203.00.



Organizational structure for a Cavalry regiment as of January, 1875.

Source: The Army Register, January 1875

[Note: A cavalry regiment consists of twelve troops.]

01-Colonel
01-Lt. Colonel
03-Majors
01-Adjutant (Extra Lieutenant)
01-Regimental Quartermaster (Extra Lieutenant)
12-Captains
12-First Lieutenants
12-Second Lieutenants
01-Regimental Sergeant Major
01-Quartermaster Sergeant
01-Chief Musician
01-Saddler Sergeant
01-Chief Trumpeter
12-First Sergeants
60-Sergeants
48-Corporals
24-Trumpeters
24-Farriers & Blacksmiths
12-Saddlers
12-Wagoners
648-Privates

Organizational structure for a Cavalry troop as of January, 1875.

Source: The Army Register, January 1875

01-Captains
01-First Lieutenants
01-Second Lieutenants
01-First Sergeants
05-Sergeants
04-Corporals
02-Trumpeters
02-Farriers & Blacksmiths
01-Saddlers
01-Wagoners
54-Privates

 

[JimMarn]

I have noticed a few times over the years that folks think Custer was a General when he was in the cavalry fighting the Native Americans. I think its confusion over the breveted ranks used in the 1800s.