I don’t really know anything about guns so maybe my two questions don’t make much sense:
WWI British guns seem a bit heavier than anybody else’s (I exclude Italian and Japanese designs that seem to me derived from the British ones)
As per Navweaps website:
Why is that? Are they somehow overworked guns? Does anything to do with their technology?
My second question came about comparing the performance of the British 14/45” in KGV and the French 13”/50 in Dunkerque. The French guns seems far superior. Is that data correct? It looks to me that not only the French 13” gun was a superb modern gun; also that the British gun somehow looks not a great advance in performance over their own WWI designs.
Dunkerque at 23,000m: 13.46”
KGV at 22,860m: 9.5”
WWI British 15”/42 at 22,860m: 10.2”
Even modernised US WWI 14”/45 seem to have better penetration than the “new” British design: 10” at 25,880m
Has the British naval gun industry underperformed in the 1930s? Particularly if comparing with their many great guns up to WWI. Maybe lack of orders/funds in the interwar years stopped them investing in research? Although the same would apply to everybody else, I suppose.
WWI British guns seem a bit heavier than anybody else’s (I exclude Italian and Japanese designs that seem to me derived from the British ones)
As per Navweaps website:
| 12"/50 | |
| UK | 68,000 Kg |
| US | 56,310 Kg |
| GER | 51,850 Kg |
| RUS | 50,700 Kg |
| 12"/45 | |
| UK | 58,626 Kg |
| US | 54,000 Kg |
| FR | 54,700 Kg |
| AUST | 54,250 Kg |
| 13.8" to 14" guns | |
| UK 14"/45 | 86,110 Kg |
| US 14"/50 | 81,473 Kg |
| US 14"/45 | 64, 633 Kg |
| GER 13.8"/45 | 73,500 Kg |
| AUST 13.8"/45 | 74,000 Kg |
| 13.4" to 13.5" guns | |
| UK 13.5"/45 | 77,829 Kg |
| FR 13.4" | 66,950 Kg |
Why is that? Are they somehow overworked guns? Does anything to do with their technology?
My second question came about comparing the performance of the British 14/45” in KGV and the French 13”/50 in Dunkerque. The French guns seems far superior. Is that data correct? It looks to me that not only the French 13” gun was a superb modern gun; also that the British gun somehow looks not a great advance in performance over their own WWI designs.
Dunkerque at 23,000m: 13.46”
KGV at 22,860m: 9.5”
WWI British 15”/42 at 22,860m: 10.2”
Even modernised US WWI 14”/45 seem to have better penetration than the “new” British design: 10” at 25,880m
Has the British naval gun industry underperformed in the 1930s? Particularly if comparing with their many great guns up to WWI. Maybe lack of orders/funds in the interwar years stopped them investing in research? Although the same would apply to everybody else, I suppose.
statistics: Posted by Nautilus — 50 minutes ago — Replies 1 — Views 32