|
Ron Saueracker -> RE: Coastal Defense Guns (2/20/2006 12:21:25 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: el cid again
quote:
I'm a gunner. I don't have to talk to a regular arty guy, I'll do. That's why I'm saying that even if the entire area were sited and zeroed indirect fire does not and should not be classed as dedicated CD guns and are nowhere near as effective as high velocity, directed, naval rifles. Apples and oranges and allowing them the same accuracy is simply in error.
On one point I am confused: why do you say "indirect fire"??? Land artillery can use either direct or indirect fire on a naval target. I am not understanding why you believe it must use indirect fire OR why indirect fire is somehow less effective than indirect fire from a naval gun is? On a ship we call direct fire "local control" in contrast to "director control." It is pretty rare for a ship to use local control except when the directors are out, but land coast defense guns, if undetected, may well prefer to allow the targets to close to point blank range before revealing their position.
Guns on land have inherant advantages over guns on ships. These ALWAYS include:
1) Guns on ships are moving with the ship's course and speed. Guns on land are at surveyed locations. This greatly reduces the fire control problem complexity, as you no doubt understand.
2) Guns on ships are moving with the sea itself. Not only do they pitch and yaw with waves and other motions of the ship in the sea, the sea water always has some (unknown) current - and this unknown generates an inherent error in the fire control solution. Modern ships attempt to compensate for rolling - but no ship can compensate for the current because its instantaneous value is not measurable.
3) Guns on land can be concealed. Guns on ships have no hills or trees to hide behind. There are no obstructions to observation unless the target is more distant than the visual horizon - in which case no gunnery is very accurate.
4) Guns on ships have more trouble measuring range than guns on shore do. Even the most primitive artillery unit can measure what we sailors call bearing from its OPs. The process of triangularization always yields an accurate range - more accurate than can be done by a ship - although it too can theoretically measure bearing from two different points - because the distance between those points is always less on a ship.
5) Guns on shore can use aiming stakes. It is primitive, but effective.
Actually, as you know, artillerymen often use prepositioned aiming stakes. It is just not common to put them in the water! But for a CD job, it is a good idea - and communist countries routinely train to do that. I can jam a radar. But I cannot jam an aiming stake! Properly used, it can yield range, bearing or both, depending on the situation. Ships never could use aiming stakes - since they are moving the relative position of the stakes constantly changes.
In addition to these advantages, guns on land may be proper high velocity rifles. Granted that sometimes mortars and howitzers are used - they are considered even MORE effective because of the angle they approach the target. They may not penetrate as much, but there is not as much to penetrate. But very often there is no inherant difference in a land gun and a naval gun. In our game, Japan should be credited with using 5.5 inch, 5 inch and 4.7 inch naval rifles (not to mention 6 inch, 8 inch and larger ones). These are actual naval guns - not land guns - even if mounted on land. Not much of a disadvantage vs guns mounted on ships in that. Only the advantages listed above.
Now, Mr. Gunner, please explain to me why your guns do not have an advantage over those guns on that ship over there?
I say indirect fire because we are seeing direct fire results from indirect fire specialist weapons. A howitzer is a poor direct fire weapon...period.
I'm NOT saying that land weapons necessarily be easily hit or what have you. My only beef is with the apparent volume and accuracy of non specialist guns. As I've posted before, indirect weapons in direct fire mode are at a disadvantage as the are not designed for this yet the model has them performing as well as those which are designed specifically for engaging naval/moving targets. I don't give a hoot about the dedicated CD guns, I just don't want every tube to have the effectiveness of shore based naval rifles.
But anyway, I don't want to get into a volume of fire issue with you as you obviously can swamp anyone...1) unless in local control the naval guns are director controlled; 2) same as 1; 3)ships can move, something not taken into consideration I don't think, unless only to complicate the ship's job in your arguement; 4) news to me, ever hear of dead ground?; 5) movement works for the ship as well.
|
|
|
|
