Ummm......wazz this?

[Andrewbassg]

 

 

 

 

is on the upcoming Sverdlov......

[Type_93]

When your big Pew needs a little help.

[Verblonde]

Boring answer: probably ranging guns? Before people came up with cleverer systems, quite a lot of post-war tanks had them, if memory serves.

More manly answer: because you always need *moar* dakka!

[Admiral_Karasu]

Uhm... maybe it's an even more boring answer, something to do with bore sighting.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/Gun_Data_p3.php

[Verblonde]

2 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Uhm... maybe it's an even more boring answer, something to do with bore sighting.

http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/Gun_Data_p3.php

That makes more sense, although I'm sad that this precludes the possibility (for maximum manliness) of standing on the main guns in the heat of battle, presumably whilst shouting whatever Russian is for 'come at me bro!', whilst firing the smaller guns...

[invicta2012]

3 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

That makes more sense, although I'm sad that this precludes the possibility (for maximum manliness) of standing on the main guns in the heat of battle, presumably whilst shouting whatever Russian is for 'come at me bro!', whilst firing the smaller guns...

Reminds me of those poor sods who got the job of manning the AA guns on the top of BB main battery turrets. That must have been a nightmare - they'd have had to have been lying flat on the deck every time they fired the main guns, just to survive the blast.

[invicta2012]

Oh, and aren't they saluting guns?

[Admiral_Karasu]

9 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

That makes more sense, although I'm sad that this precludes the possibility (for maximum manliness) of standing on the main guns in the heat of battle, presumably whilst shouting whatever Russian is for 'come at me bro!', whilst firing the smaller guns...

... and waving a saber while doing the manly shouting, of course.

In any case, the Mihail Kutuzov doesn't appear to have them now (or in 2011, that is) in Novorossiysk.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/5pxnvi/soviet_sverdlovclass_cruiser_mikhail_kutuzov/

Strange, BTW, that the internet has pictures of the ship back in 1995 stating that it was slated for target practice back then. I also remember the Sverdlov class cruisers fondly from the 80s game Red Storm Rising, where the manual stated that by the 1980s they had become 'a mechanical nightmare to operate'.

 

3 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

Oh, and aren't they saluting guns?

Would be a slightly unusual spot for a saluting gun, I think.

[Andrewbassg]

12 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

Oh, and aren't they saluting guns?

Don't think so. Too many and in a strange place. Just think about reloading them....

[Andrewbassg]

30 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

probably ranging guns?

Hmm ....... Idk.... ranging guns were obsolete for naval use, especially in the '50's.

[invicta2012]

3 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Don't think so. Too many and in a strange place. Just think about reloading them....

Either that or starshell guns. As you say, they can't be reloaded easily , so that does imply some form of relatively static firing environment. 

[Asym]

44 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

Boring answer: probably ranging guns? Before people came up with cleverer systems, quite a lot of post-war tanks had them, if memory serves.

More manly answer: because you always need *moar* dakka!

That's one large sub-caliber device ! 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Asym

[CFagan_1987]

I vaguely remember this topic coming up on the official WOWS forum and I think they were training guns to familiarize crews with the basic principles ... alas I can't find the thread now as the forum has been shut down.

Ranging guns would also make sense but I think they were largely phased out by the time this cruiser class entered service

Edited November 8, 2023 by CFagan_1987

[Subtle_Octavian]

At a certain range the main guns and the training guns have a convergent point, so they can do training without putting wear on the barrels.

The lifespan of a 220mm barrel is perhaps 600 rounds or less depending on the wear, and under 300 rounds on a battleship.

[Andrewbassg]

49 minutes ago, CFagan_1987 said:

I vaguely remember this topic coming up on the official WOWS forum and I think they were training guns to familiarize crews with the basic principles ... alas I can't find the thread now as the forum has been shut down.

Ranging guns would also make sense but I think they were largely phased out by the time this cruiser class entered service

 

29 minutes ago, Subtle_Octavian said:

At a certain range the main guns and the training guns have a convergent point, so they can do training without putting wear on the barrels.

The lifespan of a 220mm barrel is perhaps 600 rounds or less depending on the wear, and under 300 rounds on a battleship.

Knowing Warsaw Pact military this kinda makes sense (also the "guns" don't seem to be having optics), tho  I still don't know how they solved the reloading....

Edit:

Seems that he made quite a number of training cruises. So yes, I think that's the most plausible answer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_cruiser_Dmitry_Pozharsky

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Andrewbassg

[Yedwy]

Looks like teaining guns, point was to use a smaller cheaper bullet that has identical drop on a given training range span to the bigger shell so crews can train accuracy without spending expensive ammo and gun barrels

[Wolfswetpaws]

15 hours ago, Andrewbassg said:

 

is on the upcoming Sverdlov......

The ladder and platforms are "clues", as I see the situation.  Crew could operate the small guns from the platforms.
So, my vote is for "training guns", to conserve the use of more expensive ammunition and reduce the "wear & tear" on the main-gun barrels.

I figure the rotation and elevation could be performed with the main-guns, and the small guns could be manually fired when the gunners communicate that they've aimed the main-guns and are ready for the smaller training ammunition to be fired.

I suspect that the ammunition is ballistically "close enough for government purposes" for a certain amount of distance.
 

[Asym]

16 hours ago, CFagan_1987 said:

I vaguely remember this topic coming up on the official WOWS forum and I think they were training guns to familiarize crews with the basic principles ... alas I can't find the thread now as the forum has been shut down.

Ranging guns would also make sense but I think they were largely phased out by the time this cruiser class entered service

It's called a sub-caliber device. Usually shoots a Tracer so the FDC can train on Burst on Target moving scenarios....  At the ranges where the Subcal device converges with the main gun.

Recoilless rifles use a 7.62 insert.   The M68A1 (105mm) had a shell insert where the loader put in a 50 cal tracer.  et cetra....... 

2 hours ago, Yedwy said:

Looks like teaining guns, point was to use a smaller cheaper bullet that has identical drop on a given training range span to the bigger shell so crews can train accuracy without spending expensive ammo and gun barrels

Yep.  Been around for a very long time.  Many Naval Main Guns on ships are "lined" - IOW's, they insert a rifled "liner" into the barrel to save the cost of removing the entire gun that takes considerable time and expense...  The "liners" had a "service life of "xxx" rounds and, they had to be "trimmed" at the muzzle when the liners moved forward, slowly after use.   Wear is always an issue in accuracy and most FC computers either had manual inputs of rounds, by type expended or actually measure the pressures....

And yes, the FDC's could "see" that tracer and where the relationship to the reticle was.

And yes, even Battleships guns have to be zero'd and converged:

Here's a 120mm zero'ing (bore sighting) device.  You can use a binocular, white string and some tape and do the same thing.  Most muzzles have indexing notches at 0-90-180-270....  BB's and Naval guns simply could use any object and do the same thing with simple, although much larger, tools.....  Naval guns also have "patterning relationships" if there was more than one barrel....  those were set the same way and the individual barrels had an engineered "offset' applied to the trunnions/mounts.   You see this in a lot of WW2 aircraft sighting in photo's at night where the fighter was lifted on a "Tillering" pedestal and all of the weapons were fired and then adjusted to where, at a certain range they were supposed to hit creating an effective covergence pattern...  Ships are the same way, without the pedestal... 

Hope this helps.....

Edited November 9, 2023 by Asym

[Verblonde]

1 hour ago, Asym said:

It's called a sub-caliber device. Usually shoots a Tracer so the FDC can train on Burst on Target moving scenarios....  At the ranges where the Subcal device converges with the main gun.

Recoilless rifles use a 7.62 insert.   The M68A1 (105mm) had a shell insert where the loader put in a 50 cal tracer.  et cetra....... 

Yep.  Been around for a very long time.  Many Naval Main Guns on ships are "lined" - IOW's, they insert a rifled "liner" into the barrel to save the cost of removing the entire gun that takes considerable time and expense...  The "liners" had a "service life of "xxx" rounds and, they had to be "trimmed" at the muzzle when the liners moved forward, slowly after use.   Wear is always an issue in accuracy and most FC computers either had manual inputs of rounds, by type expended or actually measure the pressures....

And yes, the FDC's could "see" that tracer and where the relationship to the reticle was.

And yes, even Battleships guns have to be zero'd and converged:

Here's a 120mm zero'ing (bore sighting) device.  You can use a binocular, white string and some tape and do the same thing.  Most muzzles have indexing notches at 0-90-180-270....  BB's and Naval guns simply could use any object and do the same thing with simple, although much larger, tools.....  Naval guns also have "patterning relationships" if there was more than one barrel....  those were set the same way and the individual barrels had an engineered "offset' applied to the trunnions/mounts.   You see this in a lot of WW2 aircraft sighting in photo's at night where the fighter was lifted on a "Tillering" pedestal and all of the weapons were fired and then adjusted to where, at a certain range they were supposed to hit creating an effective covergence pattern...  Ships are the same way, without the pedestal... 

Hope this helps.....

Great post - most interesting! Thank you.

[Admiral_Karasu]

@Asym This following article by Commander Blake D. Mills, Jr, USN, mentions lightweight sub-caliber sabot projectiles in another connection. Do you mean that similar projectiles were used in gunnery training?

Some Basic Aspects of High Performance Naval Guns

 

[Asym]

2 hours ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

@Asym This following article by Commander Blake D. Mills, Jr, USN, mentions lightweight sub-caliber sabot projectiles in another connection. Do you mean that similar projectiles were used in gunnery training?

Some Basic Aspects of High Performance Naval Guns

For the M68A1 105mm gun, rounds that were dedicated training munitions, weren't nearly a War Shot...  Our sub caliber devices were in-bore 50 caliber tracers.  Remember, we had SIMNET and UCOFT's to practice on all day, everyday the training schedules allowed time.  Under President Regan, we completely shot all of the entire US stocks of Combat and Training munitions.  We even imported stock from Europe and shot that completely.  Then, the Germans gave us all of their training rounds and we shot that too.......  Till, the US started to produce what we needed.....  

And, the War Shot rounds would rock the tank up to the second road wheel......

Edited November 9, 2023 by Asym

[Lord_Slayer]

On 11/8/2023 at 4:18 PM, invicta2012 said:

Reminds me of those poor sods who got the job of manning the AA guns on the top of BB main battery turrets. That must have been a nightmare - they'd have had to have been lying flat on the deck every time they fired the main guns, just to survive the blast.

pretty sure if the main guns were going to be used, none of the exposed AA positions would be manned.

[Wolfswetpaws]

The AT-4 anti-tank weapon has a training version that uses ballistically matched 9mm ammunition.

Quote

The M287 subcaliber tracer trainer (Figure B-10) uses the 9-mm M939 training practice-tracer (TP-T) cartridge. When loaded, this trainer simulates the M136 AT4 in weight, balance, and operation. The velocity and trajectory of its ammunition match that of the M136 AT4's HEAT cartridge, but the M287 produces less noise, backblast, and overpressure. The M287 subcaliber tracer trainer is used in place of the M136 AT4 in training.

For additional information and a picture, please visit this link.
https://www.bevfitchett.us/shoulder-launched-munitions/m-at-subcaliber-tracer-trainer.html