Proof testing the German 30.5 cm (~12") naval rifle, 1908 AD

[230RN]

Newly manufactured.

Note breech closure.

Note slow process for the ignition device.

https://youtu.be/sZXb5uqUolM?t=345

................
Full video from scrap steel.  Kinda boring except for huge lathes and handling stuff toward the end:

https://youtu.be/sZXb5uqUolM

Terry, always a fan of huge naval rifles, 230RN

[MechAg94]

For a second there, I thought they might have those sailors stay there when it was fired.

I think there might have been a little unburned powder just after firing. 

[230RN]

Well, it was a max-max load for proofing, I suppose.

[K Frame]

That is some NEAT stuff. Nice find!

Not 100% sure, but I don't think the initial bit of that first video is of a German gun, I think it's English or American. The second bit of the gun being fired is German...

The first bit, showing the guy opening the breech, shows a gun with what appears to be an obturator pad breech. As far as I know, the Germans never developed a cannon system with an obturator pad breach seal -- they always used a brass case to effect the breech seal.

That was true of both naval and land artillery.

It tended to make their naval guns a bit slower firing (as you had to load three elements -- shell, bagged charge, brass case with additional charge) but it made the German ships a lot more resistant to the kind of catastrophic issues that resulted in the loss of 3 British battle cruisers at Jutland.

[WLJ]

For a second there, I thought they might have those sailors stay there when it was fired.

Not in 1908. In 1944.........

[WLJ]

It tended to make their naval guns a bit slower firing (as you had to load three elements -- shell, bagged charge, brass case with additional charge) but it made the German ships a lot more resistant to the kind of catastrophic issues that resulted in the loss of 3 British battle cruisers at Jutland.

Many believe that all three of those CCs probably wouldn't had gone boom if Beatty hadn't demanded such an unrealistic rate of fire in the 1st Battlecruiser Squadron that many of the anti flash safety systems had to be disregarded. Doing so gave flash an almost clear path from the turrets to the magazines.
Don't get me started on his FUBARed signaling at Jutland

[K Frame]

It wasn't just Beatty, that was relatively common practice across the fleet. It just really came to the forefront with the British battle cruisers because of the lesser levels of armor. They couldn't shrug off the hits that the battleships could.

 The British didn't concentrate on accurate gunnery as much as the Germans did, they tried to make up for through mass of fire. Part of that problem was with optics, the Germans had much better optics in the range finders.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[K Frame]

I believe it was the lion at Jutland that suffered a burned out Q turret because of a hit. The reason it wasn't lost is because the gunnery officer for that turret, who was killed, practiced proper handling of the charges.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[WLJ]

It wasn't just Beatty, that was relatively common practice across the fleet. It just really came to the forefront with the British battle cruisers because of the lesser levels of armor. They couldn't shrug off the hits that the battleships could.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

To some extend yes but everything I've read says Beatty took it to an extreme and the issues with the flash protection system was mostly a problem in the 1st Battlecruiser Squadron which was his command.

As far as CC not shrugging off hits that a BB could. CCs were never envisioned by Fisher to operation in the battle line, they were originally meant to chase down Protected Cruisers and the like and serve as scouts for the battle line and stay far away from BBs. But then they started to look at them and think, hey they got BB guns so lets give them their own battle line.  

Anyway, Beatty was suppose to lead the Germans in the waiting arms of the British Main Battle fleet and maintain communications on their whereabouts with Jellicoe and not start slugging it out with them. His ego wouldn't allow that. One thing to consider is that the German had a somewhat different idea of what a CC should be, their's were more BB like in armor and slightly smaller guns compared to their British counterparts.

I've also read that one issue with studying Jutland is that when Beatty became First Sea Lord he rewrote much of the official history and white washed his part. Many parts of the official version don't match up with many of the personal writings from what I've read.



 

[WLJ]

I believe it was the lion at Jutland that suffered a burned out Q turret because of a hit. The reason it wasn't lost is because the gunnery officer for that turret, who was killed, practiced proper handling of the charges.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

IIRC he died with his hands on the magazine flooding lever.
Lion was Beatty's flagship BTW

Edit: He ordered the magazine flooded and died. Won the VC for his actions.

[K Frame]

"s far as CC not shrugging off hits that a BB could. CCs were never envisioned by Fisher to operation in the battle line, they were originally meant to chase down Protected Cruisers and the like and serve as scouts for the battle line and stay far away from BBs. But then they started to look at them and think, hey they got BB guns so lets give them their own battle line."

Gee, where have we heard that before...

Oh, yeah, American tank destroyers.

Hey, you've got a turret, get out there with the Shermans and use it!

[K Frame]

"IIRC he died with his hands on the magazine flooding lever."

He was in the turret, and turrets didn't have flooding levers. He gave the order to the below-decks crews where the controls to flood the magazine were located.

[WLJ]

"IIRC he died with his hands on the magazine flooding lever."

He was in the turret, and turrets didn't have flooding levers. He gave the order to the below-decks crews where the controls to flood the magazine were located.

Yep, was going off fuzzy morning memory and I put a correction in my post.

[WLJ]

Crazy thing is Beatty was a half way (I said half way there's still the other half to deal with) decent First Sea Lord but a lousy, hated by many of his men, squadron commander.

[K Frame]

I'll be damned... I just watched the longer video, and yeah, that does appear to be the German gun. I don't understand that, because as I noted it shows a breech face that's very similar to the interrupted screw obturator pad design used on American and British guns with projectiles and bagged powder, no brass case to seal the chamber.

But, the Wiki article on the guns indicates that they were sliding block breeches (which did require a brass case to seal the chamber).

I wonder if that was an early design that wasn't adopted (the gun was designed in 1908, and that video was made in 1908)...

[K Frame]

Found a couple of pictures of Krupp sliding block breech mechanisms and they are nothing like what is shown in this video. I'm thinking that must have either been a design that was not adopted.