Battle Ship 16" Gun Bullet lube?

[lar45]

Hi all, has anyone ever heard of bullet lube being used in the battle ship 16" guns? to keep the black powder fouling under control?

Bob Williams was telling me they used to cut a slab or cake of wax/lube to stuff up between the projectile and powder charge. I know they burned Black powder, but have never heard of a lube or wax cake being used.

I tried to go to a navy chat forum, but got infected with a Trojan and some spyware right off.

Any thoughts?

[13Echo]

Take it from an old cannon cocker, we haven't used black powder for anything but the primer cartridge and the igniter pads at the base of the powder bag, since the Spanish American War. The powder grains for the big naval guns are huge tubes with multiple longitudinal perforations. Think 4831 magnified about 100 times. I don't know what the Navy does, maybe the really big guns did have some kind of lube or wax cake, but it certainly isn't used in Field Artillery. It is possible that was some kind of flash surpressor chemical. Maybe some old salt will expound on the Naval guns for us.
Jerry Liles

[Willbird]

One of the net gun writers did some tests with jacketed rifle bullets and liquid alox, and got higher velocity, and better accuracy with a little bit of it.

and them are Iowa class 16" rifles............and if I win the lotta I will have one. actually they are more of a pistol of you calculate out the bbl length in calibers.


Bill

[JohnH]

I've never loaded a 16" gun (but I did read a Guns and Ammo last night :) ) the various articles I've read all say the same thing....a 100 pound charge of black as the igniter for 600 pounds of smokeless. They say the primer looks like a 45-70 blank. None of the articles mentions any kind of lube, not to say there ain't none, just never read of it. I wonder if such a reverse duplex load would have a fouling problem, especially as the rifling is at least an inch deep and the driving band on the warhead fully engages the rifling, strikes me as being self cleaning that way. There is no case or shell, the warhead is rammed home, then the powder, in 100 pound bags, are loaded in, the breech closed, primed and fired. I imagine at least part of the damage to the Wisconson was a result of the powder being in bags, and if a mishap occured, the powder would catch clear back to the magazine.

[lar45]

A friend of mine had one of those 45-70 primers. He got it from a Gunners Mate friend of his. He only had one so I couldn't talk him out of it.

[andrew375]

There is no lube as such used. The powder is smokeless but is referred to in navy slang as "black powder" due to it's colour as it is heavily coated in graphite. There is some real black powder used as an initiating charge. BTW, the "blank" is properly known as a "vent tube".

The shell is made as a sliding fit in the barrel; gas sealing and rifling engagement is via copper driving bands shrunk on to the shell body. To control copper fouling in the barrel a piece of lead foil is placed on top of the top charge bag. The vaporised lead combines with the copper to form an intermetallic compound which, being brittle, is removed on the next shot.

Depth of rifling is around 3/16 inch at the most.

I served my apprenticeship at Royal Ordnance Nottingham and our principle product was big guns 75 m.m. upwards. We had a 17 inch as a gate guardian. At the battle of Dogger Bank <http://www.firstworldwar.com/battles/doggerbank.htm> in 1915 the Royal Navy engaged the enemy at roughly 21 miles and were registered on target at 19 ½ miles. This is shooting from a moving platform at a moving target! An 18 inch quadruple mount could put over six tons of projectile into the air at once.

[Slowpoke]

Its hard for me to comprehend a 2700 pound bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2300 FPS or a 1900 pound bullet at 2600 FPS.

So what US WW II battleship had the best battle record ?

[Bret4207]

I don't know much about the mechanics of the big guns, but I do know they were considered a Marines best friend when it came to softening up a landing area during an amphibious assualt. Some of the old timers used to tell us of calling in strikes along the coast line in VN from the Iowa class guns. Apparently it was very accurate fire and quite effective. Siad it sounded like a train going by overhead. And we thought the Ma Duece was a big gun.....

[BruceB]

Gents;

On the Shiloh Rifles Board, I found a VERY interesting discussion of the naval guns, including folks with the myth that the 16-inchers used blackpowder for the main charge. Some interestng and authoritative technical publications are quoted, and the thread is well worth a visit.

www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2016

Give it a look. Note that there are four pages of comments!

In my reading about these monster artillery pieces over many years, I have NEVER found a single reference to any sort of wax or lube being used in the firing of the beasts. I questioned Mr. Williams about it at the time of our first meeting in Winnemucca, and frankly could not get much enlightenment from him about the use the Navy made of our beeswax. Whatever that use was, it certainly was a convenient circumstance for us CB shooters.

[Junior1942]

As part of my Navy Fire Control Technician "A" school way back in 1962 we spent some time on the fire control system for the 16" naval guns. Picture a washing machine size gray box with a glass lid illuminated from within the box. That was the plotter for the fire control computer. To operate it, you placed a map of the target area over the glass, then moved the plotter arm over the target area, then put an X on a lens on the arm over the target, then pushed a red "Fire" button.

When the 2000+ lb round impacted downrange maybe 20 miles, a spotter called in correction values. You entered those values into the fire control computer. If your target was a railroad track, for example, you could then walk those big bullets down the tracks.

By the way, I visited the USS Alabama at its tourist berth in Mobile (?) a few years ago. Its 16" guns and its fire control system look intact. Looks to me like a couple of old time FTs and GMs with a crew of flat-bellied boys to do the work could fire those big guns again.

[nighthunter]

The 16" guns have a barrel length of of 880 inches. So it is not a pistol barrel as one poster claimed. The correct name is 16''-50. You multiply the 2 numbers to get the barrel length. Same with a 3"-50 or a 5"-25 ( old submarine gun mount) or a 5"-38 ( WW2 destroyer class gun mount ) or a 5"-54 ( todays destroyer class gun mount ) or an 8"-55 ( old light cruiser weapons ) to the previously mentioned 16"-55. At one time the US Navy used 12 and 14 inch guns. The 8 inch and above weapons were classified as turrets as they were built into many layers of the decks of the ship.
There is no lube on the projectiles. Gas sealing is done with copper driving bands. Todays 5"-54 has an accuracy range of approximately 27 miles with an ordinary powder fired projectile. They also are playing with a rocket assisted projectile for the 5"-54 that extends the effective range to almost 70 miles. The 5"-54 can also fire nearly 60 rounds a minute giving it more fire power than the old 16 inch guns.
Oh by the way .... naval weapons are a real bit## to clean. 6' sections of wooden cleaning rods to screw together and 4 men to do the push and pull.

[BruceB]

I'v I imagine at least part of the damage to the Wisconson was a result of the powder being in bags, and if a mishap occured, the powder would catch clear back to the magazine.


John, I believe you're actually referring to that turret explosion on the USS Iowa.

I worked with a man here in the mine who was a damage controlman in USS Iowa, and who entered the turret after the explosion to see if anyone remained alive to be rescued. Interesting to talk to him about it, and it was a gory mess to deal with.

Nighthunter, how about a little description of the flashproof shutters and other such devices which were used to prevent a "train" explosion back to the magazines in warships? Many ships were victim to such catastrophes before the designers finally got it right.

[Willbird]

By golly you are right on the bbl length in calibers issue..would be roughly equiv to a 19.6" 357 bbl. Or a 17" 30 caliber bbl, 12.32 inch 22-250 bbl, mayabe I had 22-250AI on my mind when I ran the math a couple years ago.

the 25 and 38 caliber lengths would kind of pistolish, I have a friend that was a 5" gunner.

Bill

[nvbirdman]

I was just wondering, when you cast for this thing, do you use a ladle or a bottom pour pot?
OK guys, this one is easy.






You cast at night and use the big dipper.

[nighthunter]

The powder bags and projectiles are raised from below decks from thier individual magazines on hoists that are protected by being in individual cells that are protected from each other. Projectiles come up one hoist and powder comes up another. they each meet and are loaded seperately
into the firing chamber by a ram. A good gun crew could load and fire each barrel in just under a minute. Each gun room in the turret is protected from the other two in the turret. I hope I got this correct as its been 30+ years since my time on gun mounts and in the magazines.

[carpetman]

If it's true that those 16" guns don't need lube,I could get one for deer hunting and save the expense of beeswax,anhydrous lanolin and such. What meplat should I get for best results on deer? Maybe a Lee group buy? I'd prefer a 6 cavity,but would settle for a 2 cavity. Do they make gas checks in that size? If not,I think we should omit the gas check.

[Oldfeller]

Heck Ray, why not let's just get one of them new fangled rail guns offen a modern ship if we are going out on a midnight requisition mission anyway.

You could cook & mince your deer simultanious with shooting it. Only problem would be the down range damage it would cause, I understand those rail guns are not subtle at all when they hit something. Brush fires would be the least of the damage.

Plus, the rail gun would require you to carry a VERY LARGE nuclear power plant along behind your four wheeler to power the thing.

However, it would be just the ticket for knocking down one of Bass's bionic deer !@!

Oldfeller

[lar45]

Gas checks could be made by cutting off the bottom of 5 gal metal buckets.

Did you guys ever see the online article about a guy hunting deer with his Mountain Howetzer?
He lined up on a path where deer normally go through. After the smoke cleared he scored something like 6 hits. I think he was shooting a few pounds worth of 12ga balls??

http://www.buckstix.com/howitzer.htm

Here's the link if you haven't seen it.

[Iron River Red]

Night hunter is correct in the configuration of the hoist or the elevator as it was called when I was aboard the Iowa.

I magazine is round and extends (I believe 6 decks below the gun mount) down into the ship. The level has shells that are of a different configuration to facilitate order and safety. If I remember correctly the H.E.'s were stored at the lowest level and the illumination rounds were at the top.

The entire magazine was round and the shells were lined up along the wall and were organised based on their weight and function. I believe this helped with load distribution and safety.

The rifling was indeed 3/16" deep and there is no lubrication added during the firing sequence.

The accident is the source for a number of theories. Some include sabotage, suicide, and the accidental ignition of the black powder portion of the charge.

Having been inside the mount, I can see how a misload could have happened and resulted in the discharge "if" the powder could be ignited by being crushed while the breech was being locked somehow...

Still this is also speculation and no one will ever truly know.

If you get a chance to tour one of the big guns, absolutely do so! I'm not sure if the Navy allows civilians in those areas, (I kind of doubt it) but they may on some of the museum ships.

You should note the thickness of the main deck and the hydraulic mechanism that closes the hatches. The main deck is close to 2 feet thick in places.

The modern battleship has the new fire control systems that are no longer located in the top of the superstructure. That area had been converted into a museum itself. The observation windows had glass almost a foot thick!

There are some incredible facts that are almost incomprehensible surrounding the BB's. A full broadside from the Iowa class would shift the entire ship almost 24ft sideways in the water!

Again, its a tour worth the price if you get the opportunity.

Red

[Bigscot]

I have been on the USS North Carolina, BB 55, many times. The last time I was on they had opened the fire control room and the magazine. You could go down through all the decks in the magazine. I found it amazing how they could accurately target something 20 some miles away. The turrets have been open for years. It is a great tour and I never tire of going on it. The ship is located in Wilmington, N.C.
BS

[Buckshot]

"...........There are some incredible facts that are almost incomprehensible surrounding the BB's. A full broadside from the Iowa class would shift the entire ship almost 24ft sideways in the water."

I will admit that they were some pretty amazing vessels and I imagine ole Jesse Oldendorf had a great time during the last half of World War 2 in the Pacific theater, racing around with his fast battleship division unleashing hell at any opportunity. The ship of the line's last hurrah.

However the idea that a 9 gun broadside would move the ship sideways is a sea story. I heard it and believed it also until I saw it explained as a scientific impossibility. It does seem plausible that hurling 9 armor piercing 2700 pound projectiles for a total throw weight of 12 tons at 2400 fps, should have SOME impact. Yet when you consider that the ship weighs in excess of 50,000 tons loaded, that 12 tons and added momentum fade a bit quickly.

It was figured, even the jet effect of the muzzle blasts and everything, that sideways movement would be bare millimeters.

While the idea of a modern full out conventional war involving ship vs ship gun duels was laugably remote, being on a Destroyer the topic did come up on occassion. If shot at by a capitol ship using AP, chances were excellent all you'd get if hit was a series of holes, as the shell whistled on through. That is, unless it hit something sturdy like the reduction gear, maybe a boiler or turbine. Other then that, a Destroyer would just be punctured. Of course if it was below the waterline, that would be a pisser. For armor on a can there was a 1" belt covering the 4 engineering spaces, and it fell short by about 5' of even reaching the main deck.

I believe it was the battle of Savo Island when ( I don't recall the name) a destroyer was approching a Jap battleship during the melee, and took several hits without severe damage. She eventually ran under the battleship's guns on a reverse course, peppering the larger ship with her 5 inchers to not much effect either. I suppose it may have pissed off some Jap sailers though.

.............Buckshot

[13Echo]

"I believe it was the battle of Savo Island when ( I don't recall the name) a destroyer was approching a Jap battleship during the melee, and took several hits without severe damage. She eventually ran under the battleship's guns on a reverse course, peppering the larger ship with her 5 inchers to not much effect either. I suppose it may have pissed off some Jap sailers though. "

That was the DD459 the first Destroyer Laffey. The Laffey had participated in, I believe, Coral Sea and other actions. At the battle of Savo Island she found herself under the guns of the battleship Hei and procedded to shoot its superstructure off with her 5" guns. The Hei was too close and could not depress the big guns to engage the little destroyer. The Laffey suffered multiple hits from the other Japanese battleship in the action, and, according to my father's good friend, "Dude" Barham (the ships exec, later promoted to Admiral) the shells just sailed through as if the ship were made of tinfoil. Even so they did manage to take out the ships engines and boilers and put enough holes through the waterline that the Laffey sunk. The Hei was shot to pieces and later sunk by the Guadalcanal Cactus Airforce. The first Japanese battleship to be lost in the war. Barham won the Silver Star for his lifesaving efforts after the Laffey sunk. One of the truely heroic stories of the war.

Jerry Liles

[StarMetal]

Let's get this story straight. First the name of the Japanese battleship was the Hiei. Second the Laffey did engage her and there was a hole in her bridge where a 14 inch shell passed through, but she was sunk from a torpedo from the Japanese destroyer Teruzuki. In 1992, Laffey’s wreck was discovered nearly a half-mile below the surface of Ironbottom Sound, off Guadalcanal. She is upright and largely intact from the bow to amidships, but her after third has disappeared. Both forward 5-inch guns are trained out to port, and her midships superstructure bears a hole where a Japanese 14-inch battleship projectile passed through her.

Here's pics of both ships:

http://www.hunt101.com/watermark.php?file=500/7385Japanese_training_ship_Hiei-med.jpg

http://www.hunt101.com/watermark.php?file=500/7385DD-459_Laffey2a1.jpg

Joe

[Iron River Red]

I would imagine the sailors of the venerable BB's may have exaggerated the facts somewhat when discussing the "facts and figures" of the ole girls.

When the question was asked about why the deck was covered with wood, the reply was so that it would deflect incoming rounds...

Somewhere in the conversation, I wondered at the validity of some of the "facts" myself.

Upon viewing the photo of the broadside it discloses the 9 guns as well as all the smaller guns. I didn't count them, but it was one hell of an impressive photo! I would imagine the ship would also be making some speed which would add to the debunking of the sideways shift in the water. The water was clearly disturbed, giving the appearance of sideways shift, but again that's hard to believe. Probably does increase the enlistment figures tho...
;-)

Red

[StarMetal]

Ford IslandWhy are the decks made of wood?

There are a few good reasons.
1. The powder bags used to propel the 16" rounds, in addition to having sensitive black powder ignition pads also evolved inflammable ether gas. These bags could be ignited by the smallest static discharge or metal-on-metal spark. For safety reasons, 16" powder bags always had to be handled with spark-less tools and on a spark-less deck. Wood is, of course, spark-less and a better choice than the alternatives available at the time, such as rubber, brass, lead, or rabbit fur.
2. Remember, that when the Missouri was built, ships were not air-conditioned, so the wood provided some insulation from the sun striking the steel deck.
3. Navy ships now use an epoxy based non-skid coating for decks. The wooden decks, without paint on them, are pretty slip resistant when wet.
4. Some say that the concussion from the 16" guns would flake paint off the decks if they did not have wood on them. If this was true then the ship's sides should also covered with wood.
5. The Navy is hot on tradition. Wooden decks remind sailors of the days when ships were made of wood and men were made of iron.
Battleship Missouri Why did they use teak?

Teak is very resistant to dry rot, sun, sea water, and termites. Almost any other type of wood would soon rot away. It is also a very hard wood which takes a lot of abuse, whereas another type of wood with similar weather and insect resistance, such as redwood, would not wear well under the feet of 2700 sailors.

Joe

[NVcurmudgeon]

In the Battle of Leyte Gulf, thin-hulled escort carriers were attacked by Japanese battleships. While retreating, one or more of the small carriers had Japanese BB projectiles pass through their hulls without exploding. "The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors" by James D. Hornfischer is an excelllent history of this part of the battle, in which American DDs and DEs, along with planes from the carriers, heroically drove off the Japanese battleships.

[13Echo]

Starmetal, as for "getting the story straight" on the Laffey, Dude was there, he was below decks when the superstructure was hit, and he recounts shells passing through the hull. He was also the ranking officer to survive. I forgot about the torpedo from the Japanese destroyer, that apparently was what sent her down. The Laffey fired her own torpedoes at the Hiei, but the range was too close and they never armed before hitting.

Jerry Liles

[StarMetal]

Well saying the shells took out the boilers and engine and then putting enough holes in the hull below the waterline that she later sunk, when she was sunk by torpedoes isn't exactly getting the story right .
Joe

[Buckshot]

..............Well regardless, the captain of the Laffey had a big set of brass ones, and he put them out on the line.

............Buckshot

[nighthunter]

I agree Buckshot. We owe what we have today to the many heroic servicemen and women that have served before us. From the time of the founding fathers of this country to the men and women put on the lines of today's wars we have a deep dept of gratitude to pay. I for one salute every veteran that has ever donned a uniform for our country.
God Bless The USA.
Nighthunter

[Slowpoke]

Google, BB 56 for an interesting read on what a well trained gun crew can do in regard to a Classic battleship against battleship duel at night. Good stuff IMO!

[35remington]

I've read several accounts of that chaotic sea battle, and what may have saved a number of the American ships, probably the heavy cruisers, was the fact that the Japanese were approaching Henderson field with the intention of bombarding it as they had done to good effect earlier. When the melee started, the Japanese 14 inch guns were loaded with bombardment type rounds (thin case) rather than armor piercers.

From Richard Frank's excellent book "Guadalcanal":

(A description of the munitions used in the earlier bombardment)
"Ready for Kongo's ammunition hoists stood 104 special Type 3 14 inch shells, originally designed for antiaircraft work but equally suited for bombardment of aircraft on the ground and fuel dumps. The casing of the Type 3 shell carried a modest bursting charge designed to scatter 470 individual incendiary sub-munitions over a wide swath."

The effect of these was extremely nasty against land targets on airfields, protected by nothing more than trenches for personnel, and nothing at all for anything else.

When the Savo brawl ensued with the two formations literally colliding with each other, Admiral Abe was en route to Henderson to bombard it. Captain Nishida, commander of Hiei, was in the midst of an argument with his gunnery officer over whether time remained to change the rounds on the Hiei's ammunition hoists and in ready status from bombardment type to armor piercers. There was not, and the close range (often MUCH less than a mile) battle was joined. This probably saved some of the cruisers. On the destroyers, it probably didn't matter. Frank also credits the torpedo for the ultimate demise of the Laffey, but noted that most of the gunfire damage to the Laffey came from the Japanese destroyers Asagumo, Murasame, and Samidare. He thinks Kirishima landed a large caliber salvo that disconnected the propulsion plants and steering. The torpedo removed her stern up to the after five inch gun. (Long Lances had one thousand pound warheads). That's why the wreck has no aft end.

The Laffey got in some 5 inch and cannon fire on Hiei, scoring hits that killed Abe's chief of staff. All the guns in the American formation were no larger than 8 inch and could not penetrate her main armor, but she collected over 85 hits which blinded her, jammed her rudder and caused flooding which could not be corrected before Henderson field's aviators caused more damage the following day. She could not be saved in such a situation, so she was scuttled.

Thanks, Mr. Frank. I was using quotes where applicable, paraphrasing some of the rest. A few observations of mine were included.

My comments-
In her antiaircraft defense the day after the sea battle, the Hiei used the Type 3 shells, so there was no doubt that these were loaded in lieu of armor piercers as the "bombardment rounds" when the battle was joined.

The crew of the cruiser San Francisco, particularly, were thankful for that. She copped a number of hits from the bombardment rounds.

FWIW, 16 inch armor piercers weigh 2700 lbs, high explosive around a ton. 14 inch shells are around 1500-1900 lbs depending upon type.

[Ricochet]

By the way, I visited the USS Alabama at its tourist berth in Mobile (?) a few years ago. Its 16" guns and its fire control system look intact. Looks to me like a couple of old time FTs and GMs with a crew of flat-bellied boys to do the work could fire those big guns again.
Same with the USS North Carolina at Wilmington.