PaperModelers.com

Go Back   PaperModelers.com > Card Models > Model Builds > Ships and watercraft

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-17-2012, 08:57 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Total Downloaded: 0
ORP Garland

Building the ORP GArland, but have no clue about what the small
"pipes" are on the pt and stb side of the deck besides the A and B
guns and also in front of the B gun.
Anyone any idea ?

Thanks in advance
Reply With Quote
Login to remove ads
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-17-2012, 09:11 AM
rickstef's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bear, Delaware
Posts: 4,622
Total Downloaded: 0
Send a message via AIM to rickstef Send a message via MSN to rickstef Send a message via Yahoo to rickstef
picture would help explain your question
__________________
"Rock is Dead, Long Live Paper and Scissors"
International Paper Model Convention Blog
http://paperdakar.blogspot.com/
http://picasaweb.google.com/rickstef
"The weak point of the modern car is the squidgy organic bit behind the wheel." Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear's Race to Oslo
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-17-2012, 10:46 AM
GreMir's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sunshine State
Posts: 2,407
Total Downloaded: 0
I believe somebody once told me (I'm an airplane guy...) that those supposed to be racks holding single shells. Of course I might be wrong
__________________
Constructive criticism of my builds is welcome - if I messed up and allowed others to see it, I certainly deserve it
Michael Krol
www.gremirmodels.com
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-18-2012, 08:08 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Total Downloaded: 0
Please find a picture which shows the objects on deck, in front of the B gun. These objects are also one deck lower along the railing port and
starboard. Hope this clearify my question.

Thanks in advance,
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-18-2012, 08:18 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Total Downloaded: 0
Forget the pickture......... sorry, here it is.......
Attached Thumbnails
ORP Garland-garland_06.jpg  
Reply With Quote
Login to remove ads
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-19-2012, 04:44 AM
strk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gdańsk, 3rd Republic of Poland
Posts: 629
Total Downloaded: 0
Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp

Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp

Zbiory NAC on-line - prototyp


I doubt if these elements are ammo racks. 120mm shells cant be exposed this way.

Maybe some smoke grenades or something?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-20-2012, 06:43 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Total Downloaded: 0
Thanks all for your suggestions,
I agree that ammo boxes is unlikley with a firing 12 cm overhead,
but from my own experience on WWII destroyers (buckley & flower class),
their smoke equipment was installed on the quarterdeck.........
Continuing searching........

Maxx
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-21-2012, 03:51 PM
NimitzFan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North of Houston
Posts: 236
Total Downloaded: 0
These are for holding ready-use shells - but a very specific kind that was safe to store this way.

The British 120mm from this period fired separate ammunition - a shell was entirely separate from the powder can. File:Australian naval gunners with 4.7 inch ammunition 1944 AWM 016472.jpeg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia These angle brackets held the shells used for ready-use and thereby simplified ammo supply by only requiring powder hoists.

But, nearly always the shells stored this was were for a kind of ammo called "Semi-Armor Piercing" which was developed after the end of WW1 and was a base-fused shell that was not armed until it was fired. Hence it was relatively safe to store this way. A picture of the round can be found at File:4.7 inch SAP Mk II A shell diagrams 1933.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have seen a number of pictures with the brackets filled with shells, but I can't put my fingers on any right now. Even in wartime, if in port, they were always empty so you can safely leave them that way on a display model. (Which really looks terrific by the way!)
__________________
Building - JSC - 1/250 SMS Emden
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2012, 02:45 AM
strk's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gdańsk, 3rd Republic of Poland
Posts: 629
Total Downloaded: 0
Thx for complete explanation.

I didnt expected "separate amunnition" relatively small caliber... and semi-AP?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-22-2012, 08:05 AM
NimitzFan's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North of Houston
Posts: 236
Total Downloaded: 0
Regarding SAP - Tests after WW1 persuaded the British that "Semi-Armour Piercing" was the best choice. It was designed to penetrate less than 1" of armor plate and then explode instead of exploding at first impact. Their tests convinced them that British destroyers would engage enemy destroyers which had stronger plating or very light armor over critical spaces, such as engineering or magazines. The intent was to enable British destroyers to more effectively stop their enemies.

However, in actual combat, the SAP shell did not perform as expected. The problem is that even in calm seas at short range it proved really hard to hit those specific points of an enemy unit. For example, at the first battle of Narvick, five British "H-class" destroyers engaged 10 German destroyers. The range was short, the sea was calm and the Germans thought that the British shells were defective because unless they hit something substantial, they would go right through the German and explode beyond the target. The problem was that the German ships were built as lightly as possible in order to obtain speed and so the SAP didn't have very much to hit. Captain Donald MacIntyre's 1962 book "Narvik" discusses the problem at some length.

On the other hand, SAP was the perfect round for engaging a surfaced submarine. The shell would penetrate and explode inside the pressure hull - something an HE round wouldn't do. One hit from an SAP that sub's war was over.

Regarding "Separate Ammunition" - the cutoff between fixed and semi-fixed or separate ammo seems to have normally happened at about 4" (102mm) for the Allied powers during WW2.

For example, the British 4" (102mm) antiaircraft gun fired exclusively fixed ammo. See Britain 4"/45 (10.2 cm) QF HA Marks XVI, XVII, XVIII and XXI However, they had anti-surface weapons of the same caliber that fired separate ammo. In fact, if you look at any Flower-class corvette, you see the same angle irons for holding shells. In fact, a picture showing them can be seen here -the last picture on the page. Britain 4"/45 (10.2 cm) BL Marks IX and X Pictures

But the ubiquitous American 105mm howitzer round was considered "semi-fixed" even though you almost always see it handled like a "fixed" or single round. That's because the powder case wasn't crimped onto the shell. The case was separate so that before loading the round, powder bags could be removed from it in order to manipulate the shell's trajectory and range. Sometimes you see a shot of the gunners removing bags before putting the shell on the case. The round was then handled and loaded as a single piece. M101 howitzer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In another example, except for submarine use, the widely used American 5" (127mm) was definitely "semi-fixed" in any version used since the powder case was totally separate from the shell - the rammer punched the shell and case in together. NOTE: The submarine 5"/25 lacked the rammer, and in any case was not intended to engage the enemy at any significant range. Accordingly a special fixed ammo was created for their use. But that's the exception.

I'm not an expert, but I think that cutoff for Axis power use was around 105mm, but the Germans in particular had larger caliber weapons that fired fixed ammo - a 128mm flak gun comes to mind.
__________________
Building - JSC - 1/250 SMS Emden
Reply With Quote
Login to remove ads
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2