Battleship Texas, Fuel For 10 Giant Chemical Engines

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 65

  • @stevenbade7438
    @stevenbade7438 2 роки тому +31

    I am a long time subscriber and professionally trained in many of the topics you cover. I am impressed with your explanations of highly complex issues in an easy to understand format. This is the very essence of true teaching, and anyone that has had the experience of a true teacher will understand this. Thank you for creating a great historical legacy for everyone to enjoy!

    • @robertlian2009
      @robertlian2009 2 роки тому +2

      That’s because Tom is more than a teacher, he is a docent on the battleship Texas. And I am proud to have learned a lot from him as a fellow docent. Docents do more than teach, we interpret. And it is rewarding and fun to be a volunteer. I presently docent for the National Museum of the Pacific War in Fredericksburg, TX.

    • @Reversibleband
      @Reversibleband 2 роки тому +1

      You should see him on the Hard Hat Tours aboard the ship! It was an honor working with him on those. 👍🏼

  • @donaldmesserschmidt3890
    @donaldmesserschmidt3890 Рік тому +1

    Another great video with easy to understand explanations of the science behind the gunnery and the required chemistry and engineering to make that heavy shell leave the barrel!

  • @MrTexasDan
    @MrTexasDan 2 роки тому +5

    Excellent info Tom!
    I learned quite a few new points, such as the perforations making more propellant gas as it burned. It all makes sense to me now.

  • @triarii_00
    @triarii_00 2 роки тому +4

    very interesting video. no idea just how complex the design of large gun powder was.,

  • @bartk07
    @bartk07 2 роки тому +3

    This knowledge you have is a pure gold.

  • @Pamudder
    @Pamudder 2 роки тому +4

    Another marvelous explanation of an important but obscure topic.

  • @robertlian2009
    @robertlian2009 2 роки тому +2

    Great job as always! BZ! Lots of info I didn’t know. The picture at about 7:26 those are the 16 inch reduced charges, real not dummies. The one time I can remember firing the guns over the bow we ended up with lots of powder on deck. Broken pieces like your drawing. A triangle with 3 concave sides. Thanks again!

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +2

      Wow, Bob, it's really interesting that you mentioned that! I recently read a manual that stated that unburned powder slivers were very common with reduced charges due to low bore pressure combined with sudden decompression that extinguished them. It's nice to hear first hand confirmation of these issues! I would like to talk to you sometime about magazine inspections. There is a 1923 manual called, "Ammunition Instructions For The Naval Service" that apparently was the bible for gunnery officers. It went into extreme detail on all aspects of ammunition storage and inspection, including surveillance ovens kept on board. The book can be downloaded on Google Books. I am curious about how procedures on ships had evolved by the 1980's.

  • @briceasterling
    @briceasterling 2 роки тому +4

    Woo hoo, thanks once again Tom!

  • @seatedliberty
    @seatedliberty 2 роки тому +4

    For the Iowa class piwder bags, there was a trim layer of loose grains of powder lying on their sides that was used to bring each bag up to the exact correct weight. It is believed that an overram led to the trim layer grains being crushed and the heat and friction of that led to the open breech detonation (technically a deflagration) on board the Iowa.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +3

      Yeah, I read the report. It's interesting that I have never seen a reference to a trim layer in any ordnance manuals in their descriptions of powder bags. It makes me wonder if perhaps it didn't come into use after WWII.

    • @seatedliberty
      @seatedliberty 2 роки тому +3

      @@tomscotttheolderone364 I believe it started in the 1980s when they remixed old powder lots to make new bags for the Iowas.

  • @oregonwprrmodeler
    @oregonwprrmodeler 2 роки тому +4

    You sure make very interesting and informative videos. I stumbled across your channel sometime back and continue to watch. Well done…again.

  • @BeagleFanatic1
    @BeagleFanatic1 2 роки тому

    Excellent description and explanation of the old "smokeless" powder used in large bore naval guns.

  • @GoodGnewsGary
    @GoodGnewsGary 2 роки тому

    Outstanding video! I never knew that so much engineering went into the powder alone. Absolutely fascinating.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому

      Frankly, this only hit the non-technical high points. Even 100 year old textbooks and manuals on the subject are deep dives into chemistry and physics that are hundreds of pages long!

  • @nomore9203
    @nomore9203 2 роки тому +2

    WOW I did not know this. Thank you.

  • @patg6557
    @patg6557 2 роки тому +1

    Another great and very educational video, thank you!

  • @nufy08
    @nufy08 2 роки тому +1

    Thank you for sharing all the info on the old girl. Please keep it up. What are you going to do while she is in drydock? Will yall still be able to work on her?

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +6

      I seriously doubt that I or any other volunteers, will have any access to the ship while she is in dry dock since we offer no skill or value to the repair process. I performed some work at a couple of shipyards back in the early '90's and know that yards are very restrictive about people being on a ship or even on the dock, so it certainly doesn't hurt my feelings. It's a safety and insurance thing. My understanding is that Battleship Texas Foundation will have some staff presence on board presence as the "owner's representative". In the meantime, I will continue to post videos of subjects regarding battleship systems, particularly those specific to Texas, that interest me.

  • @pharphrobrien401
    @pharphrobrien401 2 роки тому +3

    Terrific job, as always. Very interesting. Keep it up!

  • @patchmack4469
    @patchmack4469 Рік тому

    very cool video Tom, nicely explained

  • @nukacolared
    @nukacolared 2 роки тому +1

    Awesome video. I love watching these. Really teaches a lot while being very enjoyable to watch.

  • @bassettraceengines
    @bassettraceengines 2 роки тому

    Great job of explaining. thanks

  • @anselmdanker9519
    @anselmdanker9519 Рік тому

    Thank you for a very interesting article 😃.
    I have not had this information presented before.

  • @duanem.1567
    @duanem.1567 Рік тому

    Very interesting and informative discussion.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  Рік тому

      Thanks! Come back in 2-3 days. I'll be dropping the second half of the tour that takes us one deck down to the bottom of the ship. There's much more to see down there!

  • @applied.precision
    @applied.precision 2 роки тому +2

    Just found this channel. One video in and I'm subscribed and hooked. Excellent presentation, lots of data, GREAT illustrations, no BS. Can't believe never came across this channel before.

    • @jamesbeaman6337
      @jamesbeaman6337 2 роки тому

      You have some catching up to do!

    • @nogoodnameleft
      @nogoodnameleft Рік тому +1

      ​@@jamesbeaman6337 This is seriously one of the coolest historical military UA-cam channels

  • @USS-Texas3214
    @USS-Texas3214 Рік тому +1

    Ah to be young and deleting the enemy again...

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  Рік тому

      😄 Yeah, and neutralizing targets! It's all so clean and sterile when holding the clean end of the stick!

  • @pvtimberfaller
    @pvtimberfaller 2 роки тому

    Can you explain the designation “12”45 caliber” etc.?

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +1

      Sure. The term "caliber" is not used in the normal sense. It is used to describe the bore length of a gun barrel, which is the rifled portion not including powder chamber. This is commonly used to describe naval guns. To answer your question directly, the bore of the gun is 12" in diameter and 45 calibers long, or 12X45= 540"= 45 feet. Texas has 14"/45 cal., so the bore length of her barrels are 14X45= 630= 52' 6". The Iowa class have 16/50 cal. guns, so they have a bore length of 800" = 66' 8". This is very helpful when distinguishing between different guns of the same caliber. The best example that comes to mind are the different U.S. Navy 5" guns with standouts being the 5"/51 that were single purpose high velocity cannon heavily used in the early 20th century. Battleship Texas started life with 21 of those as close protection against destroyers, torpedo boats, etc. and ended her career with 6 of them. The 5"/25 cal. was a compact gun that worked well as a really heavy submarine gun mount. The best of them all was the 5"/ 38 cal. dual purpose that was extensively used during WWII for both surface targets and as a superb anti-aircraft gun.

  • @ryanstuckey8677
    @ryanstuckey8677 2 роки тому +1

    imagine what the 16 inch 50 gun could do if designed to use the tripple base powder we have today

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +5

      I suppose it would likely give some overall performance improvement, but I'm not sure how much. Maybe the big improvements would be reduction of charge size and perhaps barrel life would be extended. It would still have to operate within the barrel's design constraints, so I don't know that you would see much increase in projectile velocity. I would be more interested in what could be done with sub caliber, self guided munitions.

  • @jamesdavis5096
    @jamesdavis5096 Рік тому +1

    Why don’t you do a video on how they aim these guns? From the rangefinders to the mechanical computer systems I think that would make an interesting video parts of the rangefinder computer is actually programmed in mechanically to the main computer

  • @rek-tekconsultingllc8827
    @rek-tekconsultingllc8827 2 роки тому

    Outstanding video as always, Tom!
    I'm curious as to know how high the external gun barrel temperatures of the 14"/45 reached during a prolonged engagement? The photos of the burnt paint on the British gun barrels that engaged Graf Spee come to mind.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +1

      I don't have exact numbers, but I am sure that the 14" guns didn't heat nearly as badly. The British 6" guns used on Ajax and Achilles had a rate of fire of 8 per minute as opposed to 1.33 for Texas. They would have certainly been approaching a rof of 8 when going against Graf Spee which would result in much higher barrel temperatures.

  • @Andy-ql9wh
    @Andy-ql9wh 2 роки тому +1

    Very interesting. Thank you

  • @tyr8338
    @tyr8338 2 роки тому

    Awesome video, keep them coming!

  • @olegadodasguerras3795
    @olegadodasguerras3795 2 роки тому +1

    Super vídeo

  • @thisoldgoat3927
    @thisoldgoat3927 2 роки тому

    Why do you use a New Mexico-class battleship for the thumbnail when this is about the Texas, a New York-class battleship?

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому +2

      Even though it is the wrong class and a 14"/50cal. main battery, it's the best color photo I found of 14" gunfire and is similar to Texas gun fire.

    • @thisoldgoat3927
      @thisoldgoat3927 2 роки тому

      @@tomscotttheolderone364 I understand.

  • @eekedout
    @eekedout 2 роки тому

    Amazing video!

  • @d.b.cooper7290
    @d.b.cooper7290 2 роки тому +1

    Wow - fascinating!

  • @frankbodenschatz173
    @frankbodenschatz173 Рік тому

    Fantastic!

  • @kiereluurs1243
    @kiereluurs1243 Рік тому

    Ehm, is the title incorrect, or just misleading?
    Interesting story, though I expected a different one.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  Рік тому +1

      I will readily admit that I used it as a hook, but it is correct. How likely would the casual visitor look if I called it "A brief description of the design and importance of nitrocellulose propellants to the interior ballistics of 14" guns". It is correct because a chemical compound burns to provide pressure that accelerates a projectile through a gun bore, much the same way gasoline burns and expands to push a piston in its cylinder. Of course, the piston is attached to a crankshaft that converts linear propulsive force into rotational force. The gun's projectile is obviously not attached to anything, so the engine is used to accelerate it to a desired velocity so that it will fly on a predictable path once it leaves the gun.

  • @markefm
    @markefm 2 роки тому

    When will the battleship move to Galveston?

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  2 роки тому

      Go to the Battleship Texas Foundation website or Facebook group to get their latest updates.

    • @markefm
      @markefm 2 роки тому

      Thanks

  • @nogoodnameleft
    @nogoodnameleft Рік тому

    It is shocking how only fifteen 14" guns survive that are on display. 10 of them are on Texas. The rest were scrapped, sunk as targets with their battleships and are in the Pacific, or are in some trash pile at military bases, rotting and wasting away. 14" guns were the mainstay of American battleships until the Colorado class. Most of the Pearl Harbor battleships had 14" guns like Texas. I think there are zero surviving 12" guns. Texas needs to be saved and constantly drydocked frequently to keep her forever as a memorial to the pre-1941 battleships worldwide.

  • @stretch3281
    @stretch3281 2 роки тому

    Fascinating 👍

  • @briangulley6027
    @briangulley6027 2 роки тому

    I can safely say we would never have evolved past living in caves and throwing rocks if I was the one who had to come up with new technology.

  • @HM2SGT
    @HM2SGT Рік тому

    Thinking of the ammunition being provided to Ukraine these days; I wonder if artillery still uses the same principles/process? Quite a effort to make that ammunition! Now I have a better appreciation for how many ammunition plants there were during the second world war.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  Рік тому

      Propellant is made using much the same technology, but newer and better. It is exceptionally unlikely they use bag powder charges. They will use either fixed ammo that has projectile, powder and primer fixed in a brass shell, or semi fixed. That is the same, except the projectile is separate. To load that, you ram the projectile, then the separate brass shell containing powder and primer. Semi fixed is much easier to handle and load on really big caliber guns.

  • @scotcoon1186
    @scotcoon1186 Рік тому

    Good thing the bean counters didn't screw up the powder charge like they did with the early m16 in Vietnam.

    • @tomscotttheolderone364
      @tomscotttheolderone364  Рік тому

      Fortunately, bean counters had nothing to do with propellant and bag design and construction for these guns. They were the result of extensive and methodical testing by ordnance experts and proving grounds.