5 in Guns

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 23 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 1,1 тис.

  • @tater_relocater
    @tater_relocater 3 роки тому +460

    I thank his family for his service and the gesture of sponsorship in his memory.

  • @Redhand1949
    @Redhand1949 3 роки тому +428

    So, I was the gunnery officer on the Douglas H. Fox (DD-779) in the early 1970s. The ship had three 5"/38 dual gun mounts and one Mk. 37 GFCS director hitched to a Mark 1A computer down in "plot." My division was made up of both gunner's mates (GM's) and fire control technicians (FT's) The system was basically identical to what you describe, except the gun mounts weren't heavily armored, and only had light "splinter shields" as the mount exteriors.
    I disagree with only one system description that Ryan gave. That deals with the equipment in "plot" that compensated for the roll and pitch of the ship and its impact on the gunfire solutions generated by the Mk. 1A computer. The equipment was called that "stable element" and it had the ability to continuously sense the angles of the roll and pitch of the ship. The stable element DID NOT act as a gunfire cutout when the trigger was pulled so that the ship would only fire when it was on an "even keel." (An analogy is the interrupter gear in WWI and WWII fighter planes that prevented nose-mounted machine guns firing through the propeller arc from shooting the prop blades off.) It was far more ingenious than that. The metal shafts you see through the glass cover of the stable element connected directly into the Mk 1A computer and transmitted mechanical-analog inputs into the computer's firing solution to the gun mount barrels. (This worked when they were in "automatic" mode and train and elevation of the mounts were directly controlled by the computer.
    I know this is how it worked because the lead FT technician in my Division explained this to me when I first reported aboard. Also, I literally saw it in action when we were conducting gunfire exercises while underway, My "battle station" was in the open hatch of the director and this gave me a perfect view of Mounts 51 and 52 forward of the bridge. As the ship rolled to stbd and port I could see the guns compensating as the barrels moved up and down. So long as the computer was tracking a target and had a firing "solution" the guns would fire and be "on target."
    It was a remarkably sophisticated system for its time.

    • @gordonrichardson2972
      @gordonrichardson2972 3 роки тому +34

      Thanks for the clarification. In heavy seas a ship would never be on an even keel (in both the roll and pitch axes simultaneously).

    • @Riceball01
      @Riceball01 3 роки тому +27

      Sounds a lot like the gyro stbilizers in modern tanks. No matter haw much the the tank's hul pitches up and down/front to back, the gun always remains level pointing at wherever the gunner or TC is aiming it.

    • @d.b.cooper7290
      @d.b.cooper7290 3 роки тому +5

      Great information! -Thanks for the explanation.

    • @WBtimhawk
      @WBtimhawk 3 роки тому +8

      @@Riceball01 In fact it also sounds a lot like the gyro stabilizers on the sherman tank !

    • @redbovine
      @redbovine 3 роки тому +11

      That makes sense. If you were in evasive maneuvers heeling over due to a turn the guns wouldn’t never level out so the computer had to compensate to keep them firing.

  • @Mrcaffinebean
    @Mrcaffinebean 3 роки тому +334

    I have a distinct memory as a child of being near the USS Wisconsin when she was new to nauticus and asking my mother “do the guns ever fire“ she of course said no and that would be impossible and right as she finished her sentence one of the 5 inch guns fired on the Wisconsin. 😂

    • @anonnimoose7987
      @anonnimoose7987 3 роки тому +91

      The Wisconsin took that personally.

    • @barneyrice8502
      @barneyrice8502 3 роки тому +6

      Ha Ha Ha

    • @RaderizDorret
      @RaderizDorret 3 роки тому +54

      @@anonnimoose7987 To be fair, she was known for being a bit volatile in temperament. I'd suggest asking a certain North Korean shore battery, but it ceased to exist after it provoked Whiskey's Wrath.

    • @monkeyanimationandgaming
      @monkeyanimationandgaming 2 роки тому +11

      @@RaderizDorret it was wiped off the face of the earth , absolutely and totally deleted…

    • @Tomyironmane
      @Tomyironmane 2 роки тому +6

      ​@@anonnimoose7987 The Wisconson has a mean streak.

  • @martinwalker9386
    @martinwalker9386 3 роки тому +102

    The last time I was in a 5”/38 mount was December 27, 1972, location was Haiphong Harbor.
    I timed the shots for one minute at 24. During that deployment one gun crew fired 700 rounds in just over 3 hours. They emptied one magazine, shut that gun down and emptied the other magazine.
    Between July 9 and December 27 we fired 13,000 rounds. We replaced the barrels in August and in December, when we came home, they were due to be changed again.

    • @huskergator9479
      @huskergator9479 2 роки тому +5

      Holy cow! Wearing out barrels is a big deal when you consider it was 1972. Thank you & yours for your service, brother!

    • @cassidy109
      @cassidy109 2 роки тому +1

      What ship did you serve on?

    • @martinwalker9386
      @martinwalker9386 2 роки тому +14

      @@cassidy109 I checked on board USS Floyd B. Parks 3/1972, USS Gridley 5/1973, USS Samuel Gompers 4/1975, USS Acadia 9/1981, USS O’Brien 11/1984, USS Gary 7/1990 and USS Antietam 7/1992.

    • @mikebronicki8264
      @mikebronicki8264 2 роки тому +7

      Wow, that is amazing. A very underrated comment.

    • @52Ford
      @52Ford Рік тому +3

      @@martinwalker9386 Thank-you for your service.

  • @WhatAboutTheBee
    @WhatAboutTheBee 3 роки тому +237

    Thank you Stanley Smokowicz, for your service to our country.
    As a total side note, Stanley served on the Nevada. Special place in my heart for BB36.

    • @TheCementpond
      @TheCementpond 3 роки тому +2

      L

    • @Rutherford_Inchworm_III
      @Rutherford_Inchworm_III 3 роки тому +10

      With a last name like that, I'll eat my hat if nobody ever called the man "Smokey".

    • @WhatAboutTheBee
      @WhatAboutTheBee 3 роки тому +8

      @@Rutherford_Inchworm_III It would be a miracle if his shipmates didn't. Young men being what they are, in the spirit of fun and camaraderie!!

    • @Rutherford_Inchworm_III
      @Rutherford_Inchworm_III 3 роки тому +6

      @@WhatAboutTheBee My college roommate was "Booby" Bubanowitz. He didn't like it, but it was inevitable.

    • @TheStig_TG
      @TheStig_TG 3 роки тому +2

      @@TheCementpond ?

  • @conscript900
    @conscript900 3 роки тому +191

    I just learned how incredibly complicated some of our ww2 kit is even without modern computer technology. WHich i have to say is truely amazing. Im glad i stopped by to give this a listen and watch.

    • @jamesharding3459
      @jamesharding3459 3 роки тому +21

      A physical computer is actually more complicated than a digital one, since they need hardware to do the same things we use software for now.

    • @conscript900
      @conscript900 3 роки тому +10

      @@jamesharding3459 Which just makes it twice as awesome

    • @deadendfriends1975
      @deadendfriends1975 3 роки тому +18

      We went to the moon on a slide ruler.

    • @davidlockett5563
      @davidlockett5563 3 роки тому +5

      @@deadendfriends1975 The Apollo had a digital computer. Curiousmarc on UA-cam has a whole series on restoring an Apollo Guidance Computer ua-cam.com/video/2KSahAoOLdU/v-deo.html

    • @deadendfriends1975
      @deadendfriends1975 3 роки тому +1

      @@davidlockett5563 you know what I meant.

  • @sreetips
    @sreetips 3 роки тому +111

    My rack was right below the 5 inch 54 gun on a US Navy destroyer. Captain loved to shoot that gun when I was in my rack!

    • @theDemocraticway
      @theDemocraticway 3 роки тому +2

      I was on a Knox class DE. We had a 5" 54. The Garcia class had 5" 38.

    • @johnnunn8688
      @johnnunn8688 3 роки тому

      😂🤣🤗

    • @michagrill9432
      @michagrill9432 3 роки тому +2

      That kinda reminds me of that viral video of a canadian in the army being woken up by artillery by his men 🤣

  • @JaredJanhsen
    @JaredJanhsen 3 роки тому +170

    I remember reading that in testing the radar proximity VT Fuse the Navy had to end their testing early. They had 3 target drones and it took just 4 rounds to destroy all 3. That fuse with a crew that can get these 5's shooting 22rpm would have been quite devastating to incoming aircraft. Definitely agree with Ryan that the 5" 38 was the most effective anti-air gun of WW2.

    • @naverilllang
      @naverilllang 3 роки тому +25

      Actual combat statistics line up. When the VT Fuze was introduced, japanese aircraft found approaching a ship equipped with them basically suicidal. Of course they didn't know _why_ American AA became so potent, but it's actually one of the main reasons why they resorted to kamikaze attacks. If the airplane is going to get shot down anyway, and the pilot has little chance to survive, you might as well throw the whole plane at the ship rather than hope it'll survive the trip home with enough parts still attached to fly again.
      The Luftwaffe also made the same bitter discovery when flying missions over water, which blunted the effectiveness of the already crippled air force even more.

    • @soultraveller5027
      @soultraveller5027 3 роки тому +10

      Didn't the British develop the concept of VT fuse or proximity fuse early On in the war ? Tizzard mission or something where the British handed over all there top secret hi-tech stuff and the cavity magnetron which they had managed miniaturise it which produce more powerful radar then anything available some other stuff got handed over jet engine captured German magnetic mine technology and important atomic data on developing the atomic bomb by British scientist in the manhatton project

    • @davidjakiela9553
      @davidjakiela9553 3 роки тому +26

      @@soultraveller5027 the British sent all of their secret weapons and the crown jewels to the us early in the war in case of German invasion. The prox fuse and the magnetron both proved critical for victory for the allies.

    • @leonedralev3776
      @leonedralev3776 3 роки тому +24

      @@soultraveller5027 yes. It was invented by the Brits and then developed to something that can be made in large numbers with high reliability rate in the US.

    • @soultraveller5027
      @soultraveller5027 3 роки тому +6

      @@leonedralev3776 yeah interesting how. War developed things faster then in peace time.

  • @markkrug4571
    @markkrug4571 3 роки тому +53

    Ryan! I’m having a drink in honor of Stanley Smokowicz now, Sir… May the memory of Smoke’em Smokowicz live with US Naval Gunnery forever!!! God Bless him and all his family!!!

    • @joeyoung4121
      @joeyoung4121 3 роки тому +5

      God bless men like Stanley, my father, father-in-law, that fought in the Great War WW2. Their bravery they fought over there so the war would not come here.

    • @tomwarren8892
      @tomwarren8892 3 роки тому +2

      Amen, brother!

    • @pgroove163
      @pgroove163 3 роки тому

      🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻......🥃

  • @patrickboos1919
    @patrickboos1919 3 роки тому +36

    My Father was gunners mate in the U. S Navy for 26 years . He serviced in WW II during Korea and during Vietnam . He worked on these mounts.

  • @whyjnot420
    @whyjnot420 3 роки тому +28

    Thumbs up just for the family sponsoring a video discussing the place an important member of their family had an important role.

  • @Cha-y412
    @Cha-y412 3 роки тому +42

    My Uncle was a gunners mate in a twin mount 5 inch on a light cruiser in WW2. Yeah they were Kamakazi killers. His ship downed 13.
    Shortly before his passing we visted the USS New Jersey and went into the port side twin 5 inch mount and 60 years after the war he was able to point out and explain to my Children and me every switch, dial, and lever in that mount as if it was 1944 again.
    Thank you NJ for the experiance.

    • @frankbodenschatz173
      @frankbodenschatz173 2 роки тому +1

      Had to be AWSOME! Wish my grandfather could have taken me into his flush deck destroyer from WW1 & 2 as you did.

    • @sheilaolfieway1885
      @sheilaolfieway1885 Рік тому

      RIP

  • @paytonrampy5857
    @paytonrampy5857 3 роки тому +158

    "when you don't need to drop 1ton of hate on your enemy" legend

    • @martinwalker9386
      @martinwalker9386 3 роки тому +3

      My ship, USS Floyd B Parks DD-884, could put over a ton on target in one minute with 2 mounts.

    • @anthonysacco5010
      @anthonysacco5010 3 роки тому +4

      Overkill is underrated

    • @dantreadwell7421
      @dantreadwell7421 3 роки тому

      @@anthonysacco5010 There is no Overkill. There is only Open Fire, and I need to reload.

    • @johnnunn8688
      @johnnunn8688 3 роки тому +1

      @@martinwalker9386, well done, for missing his point.

    • @Ganiscol
      @Ganiscol 2 роки тому +1

      @@johnnunn8688 he did not only miss the point, he also did not do the math: 1t x 9 = 9t per main battery salvo 😏

  • @BoneTime
    @BoneTime 3 роки тому +8

    I was a GMG 5"/38 gun mechanic. I trained in Newport RI gun school in July 1972. Served on USS Hawkins DD-873. We had two 5" twin mounts. Good presentation. Mostly correct. The projectileman always picked up pointy end forward. Sliding wedge breach block. The Hammer was reset when the gun fired and the breach block was automatically dropped after firing. There is also a gas compression system that pushes the gun back into firing position.

  • @notmenotme614
    @notmenotme614 3 роки тому +20

    This is the best Battleship New Jersey video yet. I loved how it took us through the entire process from start to finish.

  • @richiecuzzz1
    @richiecuzzz1 3 роки тому +11

    Rest In Peace sir, I appreciate your service. My grandfather was on the western front. He served in the U.S. Army 76th infantry division, 501st Combat Engineer Battalion. These men were truly the greatest generation.

  • @gmgg424
    @gmgg424 3 роки тому +32

    I worked on MT 53, MT 56 and the armory 1983-1987. Watching this video brought back some awesome memories. Wish I had recorded gun shoots in the gun mount. It is amazing to watch a crew that works well together pump out rounds. We always wanted to hear from fire control “rapid continuous load”.

    • @luciusvorenus9445
      @luciusvorenus9445 3 роки тому +5

      Thanks for your service, Guns. Fair Winds & Following Seas.

    • @dantreadwell7421
      @dantreadwell7421 3 роки тому +5

      Who doesn't want to pump out things that go boom at max rate?

    • @bluebarholdings950
      @bluebarholdings950 2 роки тому +1

      G2 Div 84-87, 87-89 G4 div. Gun Capt for 5"/35 middle mount on stb side, dont remember the number. But painted Rodger Rabbit's face on the view finder in 88 before arriving Australia. Then Armory. GMG2 Valor

    • @terryhooker
      @terryhooker 2 роки тому

      Hey I was in Mt. 53 on the New Jersey Dec 1981-Jan 1984. Please get back to me. GMC (SW) Terry Hooker-Ret

    • @gmgg424
      @gmgg424 2 роки тому +1

      @@terryhooker Hey Chief, This is Davis. I worked for you. You were GMG2 then. I was a GMGSA. I got onboard just before we went to shoot the Tomahawk to White Sands Missile Range that took 2 weeks because of weather. If I remember correctly you were the one that trained me for the shot line on that 2 week operation. We refueled an Oliver Hazard Perry Frigate.

  • @petersouthernboy6327
    @petersouthernboy6327 3 роки тому +13

    Thanks Smokowicz Family 😊. What an awesome way to commemorate your service 👏

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 3 роки тому +2

      what an awesome name too, perfect for a gunner 😜

  • @brendanukveteran2360
    @brendanukveteran2360 3 роки тому +6

    Respect and heartfelt thanks for shipmates who have passed, All who served are honoured.

  • @slotcarfan
    @slotcarfan Місяць тому +1

    My father served as a Navy officer at Dahlgren Navy weapons research during WW2. He told me about the development of the proximity fuze which greatly increased the kill rate of 5 inch AA during the last half of the war. He also had some intereresting stories about Navy gun testing that went well, and some that went wrong 😮.

  • @jrainey44
    @jrainey44 3 роки тому +15

    I remember a storm that hit us between Thailand and Hongkong that tore the crap out of our forward 5"/38. We spent an entire day dewatering mount 51 upper handling room due to sea water coming through the slide seal where the gun barrel elevates and depresses. We scooped up water with a dust pan and a bucket and then flushed the water down the toilet in the operations head. That was fun. After deployment we went into the yards to get a new mount 51 and fix several other issues on-board. The storm was bad enough that it ripped our pyrotechnic lockers off the deck which were up by the signal bridge level.

  • @johnminnott7334
    @johnminnott7334 3 роки тому +2

    Thank you Smokowicz Family. 57 years ago I was the 2nd Division officer in the USS Black (DD-666). My division was responsible tor the maintenance of all guns and gun fire control equipment. The Black had 4 5"38 single mounts (2 forward and 2 aft) and 3 twin 3"50 mounts (one amidship on each side and one behind and above mount 53). The 5" guns had a similar ammunition handling system to that you described but was somewhat abbreviated. The 3" guns were fed with one piece cartridges directly hand delivered in the open air from magazines on the main deck. By the time I served both the 5" and 3" mounts traversed and elevated too slowly to shoot down a jet aircraft even with VT ammunition. We mostly did plane guarding and fired H & I fire at Viet Cong supply trails.

  • @scottbruner9987
    @scottbruner9987 3 роки тому +53

    It's pretty amazing when you think about it....the optical directors, the analog computers, the guns themselves, all were designed without modern computers. All the engineers had were slide rules, and the Mark 1 Mod 0 design system.....also called the human 🧠.

    • @machintelligence
      @machintelligence 3 роки тому +9

      For higher precision, mechanical calculators were available. A computer was a job description of a person, usually female, who knew how to operate one.

    • @stevewhite3424
      @stevewhite3424 3 роки тому +14

      @@machintelligence my mom during the war in England was a high school math wizard. She was tapped on the shoulder to go work with the Navy artillery group I'm not sure what their name is to develop and calculate the gunners tables and books used to fire all kinds of big guns. I don't remember what they were but I remember her telling me there were about 10 different variables that went into the calculations for artillery rounds. Some of the ones I do remember were humidity, temperature, density altitude, etc. Smart girl who in the late sixties used to tutor me in calculus :-)

    • @machintelligence
      @machintelligence 3 роки тому +6

      @@stevewhite3424 Back in the early days of digital computers the men worked on the hardware (toys for boys) and women did the software programming (women's work) mostly in machine code or assembly language.

    • @xjack2312
      @xjack2312 3 роки тому +2

      @@stevewhite3424 Yeah, we were still using the info from those tables for manual gun firing solutions, if the main fire control system was knocked out. I left the RN in 87 and the gun direction platform (GDP) manual calculator was still in use then. We did a surface shoot on a Type 21 frigate in '86 and managed to put a manual solution together quicker than the stone age Ferranto computer! Might have been a fluke...

    • @xjack2312
      @xjack2312 3 роки тому +1

      Ferranti...

  • @everettnichols9062
    @everettnichols9062 3 роки тому +2

    Thank You For this Video and Thanks to The Smokowicz Family for Sponsoring!!!
    It sure brings back the memories doe me!!!
    Everett T. Nichols
    FTG2
    USN 1963-1967
    US Dixie AD-14

  • @KiithnarasAshaa
    @KiithnarasAshaa 3 роки тому +25

    Heck yeah! The 5"/38 is my favorite gun of the whole of the great war era, especially when coupled with the VT radar-proximity fuzes. Second Place goes to the 8"/55 Mk16 guns present on the Des Moines, as they also could field VT-fuzed rounds and had a blistering fire rate in comparison to earlier eight-inch guns and larger guns present on battleships.

    • @WBtimhawk
      @WBtimhawk 3 роки тому +2

      The Des Moines is such a beast. In case some people haven't seen them, there are a couple of great old school USN videos on it: ua-cam.com/video/ICifnf63lCs/v-deo.html&ab_channel=usssalemca139 and ua-cam.com/video/AXJIE50jxdw/v-deo.html&ab_channel=BobFreeman

  • @adamdubin1276
    @adamdubin1276 3 роки тому +37

    "One ton of hate"
    Good way to describe the compacted volvo fired from the main guns.

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 3 роки тому +4

      each shell IS the size of a Volvo, but I get what you mean 😂😂😂 in a perfect world battleships would fire off loads of candy and toys, but in our unfortunate world sometimes high explosives are the answer 😘

    • @adamdubin1276
      @adamdubin1276 3 роки тому +5

      @@RealJohnnyDingo Compacted was a better word now that I think about it.

    • @jimreilly917
      @jimreilly917 3 роки тому +2

      Not hate…that’s a ton of freedom.

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 3 роки тому +2

      @@jimreilly917 they hate our freedom, that's for sure 😂😂😂

    • @adamdubin1276
      @adamdubin1276 3 роки тому +4

      @@jimreilly917 I mean to fire a sixteen inch shell at someone you have to really dislike them...

  • @CharliMorganMusic
    @CharliMorganMusic 3 роки тому +65

    I've never seen a person standing next to those guns...I thought they were small, then I remember what a five inch gun on a tank would look like and I say, "Oh, dear. It's the size of a building."

    • @randomlyentertaining8287
      @randomlyentertaining8287 3 роки тому +10

      Most tanks nowdays are armed with a 120 or 125mm gun, which is five inches. Even those with a 100 or 105mm gun are still 4 inches. The guns are relatively small, what they're encased in tend not to be. Having visited the Jersey, I will say the 5 inch turrets are about the size of a couple compact cars.

    • @Riceball01
      @Riceball01 3 роки тому +9

      They're ven more impressive when firing. Yeas ago, I was lucky enough to visit the MO when she still was in service as part of a friend's and family. As part of the day ,they fired off everything they had, minus the 16 inchres since this was during moritorum on firing the 16 incidents after the tragedy aboard the Iowa. While I was somewhat disappointed that I didn't get to see the 16 inchers fire, the 5 inchers were still impressive in their own right.

    • @edwaggoner7403
      @edwaggoner7403 3 роки тому +7

      I worked for Naval Supply Weapons Systems Support when the four Iowa class BB's were being restored in late 80's.
      My job was to find sources for spare/repair partsto restore and outfit the ships. It was very difficult as technology had long ago bypassed the machinery on board. I found a stash of condemmed syncros and servos for the MK 1A computers that were marked beyond economical repair. We had them repaired as there was no source for new. It was a very interesting evolution.
      Also, some time later a US Army engineer contacted me to obtain a turret base ring assembly from a 16 inch gun. He wanted it to build a turn table to hold an Abram's tank. I suggested he only needed a 5 inch gun turret. He said it would not work as the Abrams was the biggest tank the Army had. Put him in contact with a Naval gun engineer who provided a 5 inch 38 caliber base ring turret that easily did the job.
      Naval 5 inch guns are big.

    • @realulli
      @realulli 3 роки тому +5

      @@edwaggoner7403 I'd suspect that engineer secretly wanted to turn his whole block with 16" ring...
      ;-)

    • @edwaggoner7403
      @edwaggoner7403 3 роки тому +1

      @@realulli
      One 16" barrel is about gun (barrel) weighed 239 000 lb without the breech x three per mount.
      The 5" 38 caliber twin mount has two guns weighing just under 4000 lbs each plus breech, loaders and the housing so could easily handle the tank. .

  • @alexlohan2988
    @alexlohan2988 3 роки тому +2

    “Iowa-Class Battleships are not symmetric… nobody is” Truly wise and humble words, Ryan. Haha thanks for the amazing and informational content! This is my favorite channel on UA-cam!

  • @colinboynton192
    @colinboynton192 3 роки тому +67

    Drach: “However…”
    Ryan: “Wellllllll…”
    Can’t wait for you two to collaborate, probably won’t be until next year sadly.

  • @stephenhood2948
    @stephenhood2948 2 роки тому

    All that tech and it was still completely useless without the brave men who gave so much for our freedom. Thank you Stanley Smokowicz, and all the many others, for your service!! What a great video series!! Absolutely amazing seeing how the many systems on one of these great ships all worked together, as a unit with one common goal, to overwhelm the enemy with exploding steel.

  • @RickLowrance
    @RickLowrance 3 роки тому +12

    Two great subjects in a row. I love learning about the guns.

  • @thejerseyj5479
    @thejerseyj5479 Рік тому +1

    Almost impossible to describe the sense of awe one has when this 5 inch system is shown and explained. Simply amazing and your efforts at taking us through it all was superlative. Perhaps the best video yet.

  • @kingofcastlechaos
    @kingofcastlechaos 3 роки тому +5

    This is incredible technology. I would love to see more information about the engineers and technicians who developed it. I really enjoyed the snippet of the men testing the AA guns in the factory and would like to see more. Keep up the good work.

  • @marksides9757
    @marksides9757 3 роки тому +3

    I so seriously want to meet this gent. He puts so much energy and passion into the videos. I'm guessing he's an awesome person to be around.

  • @phillipbouchard4197
    @phillipbouchard4197 3 роки тому +18

    One feature that most of our W.W. 2 fleet had in common was our 5" 38 caliber guns. Could be found on Battleship's, Aircraft carrier's, Cruiser's and Destroyer's.

    • @billbrockman779
      @billbrockman779 3 роки тому +4

      Even tenders and some other support ships, along with some invasion small ships for fire support.

    • @timberwolf1575
      @timberwolf1575 3 роки тому +6

      And pretty much anything that didn't have a 5"/38 had a 5"/25 if it was older dual use or a 5"/54 if it was only for surface engagements. Most of the ammo was the same for all of the US 5" guns. Even today you'll find 5"/54 guns on the Arleigh Burke Destroyers with improved mounts to allow the 5"/54 to be used for AA.

    • @dantreadwell7421
      @dantreadwell7421 3 роки тому

      Hey, if the basic gun system works, no need to change it up.

  • @djohnson542
    @djohnson542 3 роки тому +5

    Thanks for the video! My dad was a mount captain on a 5”/38 gun on a destroyer at Okinawa. I’ve always wanted to see what the inside of one of those mounts looked like.

  • @dont-want-no-wrench
    @dont-want-no-wrench 3 роки тому +13

    the scale of the national effort during ww2 always amazes me whenever i see anything like this

  • @Idahoguy10157
    @Idahoguy10157 3 роки тому +24

    When I joined the navy in 1975 there were still some 5”/38 caliber guns in active service. Took a tour around a Gearing class destroyer in 1976. It was a navy reserve destroyer at the sub base in Connecticut.

    • @wallyjohns7312
      @wallyjohns7312 3 роки тому +3

      Which ship was that? I was stationed on the Gearing which was a reserve training ship, homeported at New London. This was 1971-1972. Gearing was scrapped in 1973. I didn't know they replaced it with another Gearing class DD. I was an FT and worked on the MK 1A computer and MK 37 director.

    • @Idahoguy10157
      @Idahoguy10157 3 роки тому +1

      @@wallyjohns7312 …. I can’t remember. I was a submarine FT. Had A and C schools there at the sub base. Someone put together a field trip for us to see an actual gun fire control.

    • @pitsnipe5559
      @pitsnipe5559 3 роки тому +2

      That would be the USS Charles P. Cecil DD835. I was in the Forward Fireroom from 1(973 to 1974.

  • @mrdecider
    @mrdecider 3 роки тому +3

    Great video, it answered a bunch of questions. Out of Great Lakes A school, in 1969 I was assigned to the New Jersey. As an FTG-3 I was the lowest rank FTG. Assigned to 5" mount 52. The ship was sent to mothballs in Bremerton shortly afterwards, I spent a lot of time chipping paint on the 011 deck. Recall getting paint by going to Stores on (below decks) level 6, had to have a chit for cardboard box and brush, then to paint locker in bow where they'd pass up paint, Then back to 011 - time for lunch!!

  • @rossbunnell7992
    @rossbunnell7992 11 місяців тому

    Great job explaining the 5 inch, 38 caliber gun and the Mark 37 Gun Director! My dad was a fire controlman on the USS Cummings, DD-365, which operated using this system. This is the best illustration I've ever seen of the whole gun system. When people think of WWII technology, they tend to think of the Norden bombsight or the P-51 mustang. However, the Mark 37 Gun Director and the fire control systems for these 5 inch guns were truly a technological marvel.

  • @jaym6564
    @jaym6564 3 роки тому +358

    USS Samuel B Roberts disagrees: Star Shells are anti-shipping weapons!

    • @tucker1012
      @tucker1012 3 роки тому +85

      Yamato : I fear no ship ,
      but that THING
      *it scares me*

    • @aceofthesky1247
      @aceofthesky1247 3 роки тому +122

      "They fired all their Arnor Piercing, then swapped to High Explosive, they rapidly ran out of High Explosive, they then swapped to Anti Air Craft shells. After expending all of her Anti Aircraft Shells, the Roberts, as a last resort she loaded and fired Star Shells, which had the unintended effect of setting off high temperature Phosphorus fires." - Dracfinel (Idr how to spell the dudes name, hes on yt tho)

    • @idahorodgersusmc
      @idahorodgersusmc 3 роки тому +7

      @@tucker1012 best comment ever

    • @MHTfueler
      @MHTfueler 3 роки тому +7

      @@aceofthesky1247 Which video of his? I'd like to catch it!

    • @exharkhun5605
      @exharkhun5605 3 роки тому +29

      @@MHTfueler He hints at it in the short "USS Samuel B. Roberts - Guide 208". For the full battle and probably the quote above the 45 minute long : "The Battle of Samar - Odds? What are those?"

  • @joehayward2631
    @joehayward2631 2 роки тому

    I was part of USS MISSOURI Marine Det during end of the 80s. Our 5 inch gun was mount 51 with EAGLE GLOBE & ANCHOR between gun barrels. We were beside surrender deck. For a time I was 1 of 3 marine 5 in fuse setter. Our XO was artillery LT. he ran our guns. Watches, rings anything that might cause a spark was not allowed in gun or magazine. I love watching your videos. Brings back great memories.

  • @sailcat662
    @sailcat662 3 роки тому +7

    Honestly, your channel gets me through the day. I wasn't a pollywog myself but I did a few tours in the 'gan with some amazing US sailor technicians. Thank you kindly for your videos.

  • @maxM38383
    @maxM38383 3 роки тому

    I just visited the battleship USS Massachusetts and it was the very first battleship I have visited and these videos truly don’t dont do it justice. If I wasn’t on a tight schedule I would have spent the whole day exploring as much of the ship as possible

  • @dannyisaacs7552
    @dannyisaacs7552 3 роки тому +5

    As you said, the 5 in. mounts were manual load. We could train and elevate the mount by hand, set the fuze, and fire the guns because we had a bank of batteries in the mount to produce the elect. charge to set off the elect primer. So if the ship loss total electrical power, we could still operate the mounts and shoot at our targets. This was a long video, but you did a great job.

  • @Robert-ff9wf
    @Robert-ff9wf 3 роки тому +2

    My thanks goes out to Stanley and his family!!! What a unique skill he had!! STANLEY!!! Thank you for your service!!

  • @johnslaughter5475
    @johnslaughter5475 3 роки тому +3

    Don't knock Subic Bay. I was there several times during 1968, '69, & '70. This was probably the best liberty port we had. Combined with Cubi Point, Subic was huge. There was a skeet range, golf course, horse riding trails, a huge Exchange complex, clubs for all paygrades. Then, there was Grande Island. This afforded swimming, skin diving, areas for the ships to host ship's parties every day in port, a couple more clubs and a hotel. The hotel was fantastic. 6" thick mattresses with freshly laundered sheets, standard bunks like you'd find at home, AND it was free. You just had to make a reservation and show your overnight pass. Grande had some nice trails where you could see Japanese bunkers and artillery emplacements from WWII, which had ended only 23 years before I got there the first time. This was all while wearing dungarees.
    Then, there were tours to be taken to see the route of the Bataan Death March. I took one, with my father, up to Corregidor. They were working on Malinta tunnel at the time and we couldn't go in. Manila was also on a tour.
    Our 5" 54's were loaded putting a projectile in the top of the hoist and the powder canister into the lower part. They then went up to the guns 8 decks above us. How the rest worked, I have no idea.
    I remember reading how the guys below decks knew how close the planes were. The 5" started firing first. Then, as the planes got closer, they'd hear the 40's open up and then the 20's. That told them the planes were pretty close as the 20's had a range of a little over 2-1/2 miles. A plane doing 120mph would cover that distance in about 75 seconds.

  • @jackwhitetron
    @jackwhitetron 3 роки тому +1

    Best 5inch gun documentary ever. Thanks

  • @R.J._Lewis
    @R.J._Lewis 3 роки тому +79

    I'd be interested to know how the gun barrels on this and the 16 inch guns were cleaned and maintained. The bore brushes must have been huge! And the amount of grease to get them properly oiled must have been bucket loads!

    • @robp7652
      @robp7652 3 роки тому +13

      He has shown some tools for them. But yes yes yes . Procedure for 16 inch as well as 5 inch rifle cleaning

    • @scottbruner9987
      @scottbruner9987 3 роки тому +26

      They have shown in other videos. It's a brass slightly-sub-caliber plug. Has a fitting on the end for a cable to attach to, and vents through it's length to pass air. The cleaning part is several patches of short stiff wire, that spiral along the long axis of the plug. It's drawn through the barrel one way, and then put back in, and pulled back. I don't know how many passes they make. Or if they have some sort of industrial version of Hoppes #9.
      Hope this helps you.

    • @alexam694
      @alexam694 3 роки тому +2

      Does anybody know the name of the video?

    • @scottbruner9987
      @scottbruner9987 3 роки тому +11

      @@alexam694 I checked my history from yesterday. The title you're looking for is:
      "Tools of the 16" guns"

    • @dalesql2969
      @dalesql2969 3 роки тому +8

      There is a reason that barrel cleaning solvents come in gallon jugs, and cleaning rags are issued by the bale. For the 5 inch guns there was a long wooden pole that was used for swabbing the barrel.

  • @jerrydonquixote5927
    @jerrydonquixote5927 8 місяців тому

    28:48 thank you for reminding me of all these memories. We saved our brass like fire nozzles, or anything and we gave them to the Chinese ladies in Hong Kong, along with I think $2,000.00, and they painted our ship. they were old too! and they painted it with bamboo poles and rag on the end and they did a hell of a job! The only thing they could say was "you boatanmate", I would say yes ma'am, and she would point where she wanted the 5 gal bucket, and I would move it. That was a really cool memory!

  • @KATBIRD1026
    @KATBIRD1026 3 роки тому +5

    Dad was a port side pointer on a 5 inch, BB-48 West Virginia, he joined the ship during it's refit in Bremerton, WA, after it was was re-floated in Pearl Harbor....

  • @joeottsoulbikes415
    @joeottsoulbikes415 3 роки тому +2

    WOW!!!!! Thank you for making this one! It was hard for me to visualize in my head how big the round was and how it moved from down in the ship up to the gun. Now I have seen it all. You did a really great job of explaining it all and showing us the process. Actually seeing the round beside a person and seeing you move that round really explains a lot. It is huge compared to what I imagined in my head. I know the whole thing does not fly out of the barrel but now I have seen the part that does. Imagining being a pilot in a plane and having this thing the size of a basketball slam into and explode my engine, rudder or wing just anialates it. Having one of those hit the side if a destroyer or picket ship would be crazy! I see now after having also watched the video about loading the 16 inch guns why the Battleship was so feared by smaller ships. I definatly would not want to keep my smaller ship broadside to those guns. I would be turning away and running or facing nose toward you to launch torpedoes to make the narrowest smallest moving target I could be. I think it was the Battle of Late Golf that Nimitz and his carriers had been lured away north where the smaller ships fell into a trap and had to defend against Japanese Battleships?? The commander of that small ship fleet that charged headlong toward Battleship Musashi firing torpedoes did what I would have thought of. Make yourself narrow, small and fast. Fire everything you have facing forward to crack that battleship in half if you can. Good thing Musashi was not as well side armored for torpedos as New Jersey, Iowa and Wisconsin were. I wish Kentucky had been finished. Having lived there and knowing how prideful and patriotic the residence of that state are they would have loved that ship. It would have been anchored in or just off the Ohio river in Louisville today had she sailed and been retired. It is too bad the USS Ohio (SSGN-726) can not be turned into a museum ship due to being nuclear. In an alternate future history where there was a USS Battleship Kentucky on the south bank of the ohio and a Submarine USS Ohio anchored on the north bank as museums would have been cool.

    • @TotallyDapper
      @TotallyDapper 3 роки тому

      I believe the battle you're thinking is the Battle of Samar, during the Battle of Leyte Gulf. An escort carrier task group came under attack by a huge Japanese force, and three Fletchers and four destroyer escorts fought off four battleships, the Yamato, Nagato, Kongo, and Haruna, six heavy cruisers, two light cruisers, and 11 destroyers. The Musashi was part of the Japanese force, but was sunk by US aircraft on the way to the battle. The USS Johnston did indeed charge the Japanese force, launch torpedoes at Yamato, and start firing at the enemy cruisers and destroyers, quickly joined by USS Hoel, USS Heermann, and the destroyer escort Samuel B. Roberts. They fought off the entire Japanese force and bought time for four of the six escort carriers they were escorting to get away. There's a very good video on the Battle of Samar done by Drachinifel.
      Those men are legends.
      And the 5'38 is a legendary gun.

  • @steffenb.jrgensen2014
    @steffenb.jrgensen2014 3 роки тому +7

    The 5"/38 indeed was a superb gun. First by moderation with "only" 38 calibers of length (and a moderate muzzle velocity) - that made the gun "handy" compared to similar guns with more omph - but the 5"/38 had enough. Next it was relatively simple by not trying to use an autoloader - by WWII autoloaders usually ended up in extreme complication and cost but limited reliability. And finally the 5"/38 was supported by probably the best fire control systems of WWII and on top of that VT fuses. If the Axis had had similar AAA systems air power wouldn't have been as dominating by end of WWII.

  • @markbyrum4743
    @markbyrum4743 3 роки тому

    I was the Gunnery Officer on the USCGC Dallas (WHEC-716) for a period back in the 1970's when we had a single mount 5"/38. We experienced a recoil failure where all recoil arrestors failed and the final barrel arrestor (the 2" thick "L" shaped plate) stopped the barrel from ejecting out the back of the mount distorting and partially tearing in the process. Along with my Chief Gunner's Mate, we went to an old boneyard and salvaged a replacement plate from a deactivated gun (which was no longer available through stock supplies). Good vid. Keep at it!

    • @chash7335
      @chash7335 3 роки тому

      My shop built some parts for the Dallas. A set of demister screens and turbine inlet screens.

  • @jayh1947
    @jayh1947 3 роки тому +7

    Thank you Stanley Smokowicz, we all owe you for your service.........Jay

  • @billwilliams9527
    @billwilliams9527 3 роки тому +1

    Served on the USS DE Haven DD727 for 4 years during the Korean War, my General Quarters and condition 3 watch station was the dual 5"38 gun mount 52. I can tell you from experience that was one versatile and wicked weapon. Thanks for the video, brought back some good memories. And yes as we anchored off Hong Kong all kinds of stuff, mostly food that could no be used, could be traded and 'junk' boat dwellers would wash and detail the entire hull of the ship.,

  • @mcsmith7606
    @mcsmith7606 3 роки тому +14

    My father's first assignment after leaving the US Naval Academy was with the Nevada as its was refloated at Pearl Harbor. He eventually made it to England with Nevada. He said that they had numerous gunnery practice drills and spent all day training on on towed targets. The English were suppose to train with them but delayed leaving port. After the Nevada retired for the day and headed to port a British ship sortie out. It trained on the towed target, fired a salvo sinking the target an His first dd returned to port in the Nevada's wake. The British didn't think much of the American Navy. He left the Nevada to become a double plank owner on the USS Wisconsin. He said that he was first Officer of the Deck but I believe this was before the ship was commissioned. I believe his battle station was the forward port 5" gun director.

    • @drizler
      @drizler 3 роки тому +2

      My neighbor was on a tanker in 1945 T age 16 then destroyers in Korea. He said the Brits were known for phenomenal gunnery even then. His DD had been banging away at a factory of some sort for a while with limited success. So,e Limeys sailed up in a similar destroyer and asked if they minded if they had a crack at it. My. Neighbor was a chief radio was a radioman so he heard it all himself. The Limeys just wailed on it for a few minutes then sailed off thanking them for the target practice. They totally destroyed that factory. They were just that good with their gunnery back then.

    • @Superuser009
      @Superuser009 3 роки тому

      I could be remembering it wrong, but I think most of the time you weren't supposed to sink the target. You'd enter an offset into the FC system, bang away and observe the results. If you sail out and sink the target in one go, how much training did your crew just get? Or the crews of any other ships scheduled for range time that day?

  • @jwilliamson196
    @jwilliamson196 3 роки тому

    A great video. I served in two WWII cutters in the 60s and 70s and your video taught me more about the whole gun mount operations in 35 minutes than 4 years on the cutters. I was a QM and just had to listen to the mounts when they barked. Great job.

  • @seafodder6129
    @seafodder6129 3 роки тому +151

    "Great for when you don't want to drop 1 ton of hate on the enemy"... It's not a ton of hate, Ryan... It's 1 ton of frEEEEEEEEEEEEdom! ;)

    • @barneyrice8502
      @barneyrice8502 3 роки тому

      For Sure

    • @Qardo
      @Qardo 3 роки тому +3

      Freedom through firepower!

    • @jamessharp4842
      @jamessharp4842 3 роки тому

      Seafodder..That's what they told me before Vietnam...Just like Afghanistan today...See how they both worked out...

  • @klepper00
    @klepper00 3 роки тому +1

    Thank you Smokowicz family ! I really enjoyed the video .

  • @bartk07
    @bartk07 3 роки тому +110

    "Iowa class battleships are not symmetrical. Nobody is. " - Ryan Szimanski, 2021 :-)

  • @glenkelley6048
    @glenkelley6048 3 роки тому

    Bless You Sir for an excellent presentation on what has been a mystery to me til now.
    Thank You Stanley for your service, YOU SAVED THE WORLD! Rest in Peace SIR!
    Somewhere in the vast labrynth of New Jersey is a locker with a bit of working gear in it. I was a volunteer onboard in the very early days of her berthing in Camden but had to move away soon afterward and did not return for my stuff.

  • @luthiervandros
    @luthiervandros 3 роки тому +3

    I read the title as uss New Jersey lol. Since I’ve gone off half cocked, I’ll add that it was my grandfather’s battleship! When I was still dating the woman who would become my wife, i saw the plaque for this same battleship on my future father-in-law’s wall. He served on it before it was decommissioned.

  • @jake4194
    @jake4194 3 роки тому +2

    All this analog technology is amazing, so complex and advanced for its day!

  • @placeholdername6310
    @placeholdername6310 3 роки тому +24

    Touring the Battleship and firing the 5” gun would make for an awesome (and clean) bachelor party. You guys should email the suggestion to local wedding planners so they can pass it along to their clients.

    • @tamaslapsanszki8744
      @tamaslapsanszki8744 3 роки тому +3

      Thanks for the suggestion, I'm interested in this. All that's left is to find a woman, propose to her, then get my friends to organize the party on BB-62. I seem to be stuck at step 1, finding true love :)))))

    • @SkinnerBeeMan
      @SkinnerBeeMan 3 роки тому +5

      @@tamaslapsanszki8744 there's a Filipina mail order bride for everyone. Lol

    • @placeholdername6310
      @placeholdername6310 3 роки тому +3

      @@tamaslapsanszki8744 I can’t think of a better place to find a good wife than at a warship museum. The pickup lines practically write themselves.

    • @Valorius
      @Valorius 3 роки тому +1

      @@SkinnerBeeMan Just double check to make sure it's a girl.

    • @SkinnerBeeMan
      @SkinnerBeeMan 3 роки тому

      @@Valorius if you drunk or desperate or woke enough will it matter. Haha. Woke. Jk.

  • @jwcinc12
    @jwcinc12 3 роки тому +2

    What a great way for his family to contribute to the Ship's HIstory

  • @MusicBent
    @MusicBent 3 роки тому +48

    I love that the powder canisters just fall down into whatever room is below them, like an office, then need to be cleaned up later 😂

    • @oceanhome2023
      @oceanhome2023 3 роки тому +9

      Many of these empty shell casings became outdoor ashtrays !

    • @ut000bs
      @ut000bs 3 роки тому +4

      @@oceanhome2023 I have one. It's one for the desk.
      Edit: it is made from a shell fired by the USS McCaffery DD-860.

  • @drubradley8821
    @drubradley8821 3 роки тому +1

    The title of that video showing it in real time action of the loading process is :((( 5" 38 Gun Operation on 13 September 1951 during the Siege of Wonsan; Korean War USS Floyd B. Parks)))) Really neat to be able to see all that you explained, in real life practice from back in the day. I will understand if you do not allow this to be shown, but, really did help me understand each motion for the loading process that you did explain exceptionally well and I think you for that time and effort. But the video in the link below shows that the ship is running on its own power and all feature are working, vs having to imagine it. I am really enjoying the learning about these amazing machines, Thank you

  • @adamdavis7663
    @adamdavis7663 3 роки тому +3

    Excellent episode! I really enjoyed seeing how it all works!! I'm a millwright by trade, so I would live too see an indepth look at the propulsion systems. Especially the steam turbines and generators!

  • @everettnichols9062
    @everettnichols9062 3 роки тому +1

    I'm the 'Subic Bay Grandfather' you're talking about here! In fact, Great Grandfather of 3 and Grandfather of 5!!! I made Subic 3 times during the Vietnam war aboard the USS Dixie, AD-14. We did a lot of re-gunning of Destroyers there during the shore bombardment phase of the war. We were out on Yankee Station on one Deployment, trying to tend destroyers at sea!!! (Admiral's Idea that did not work!!!)
    My GQ Station was 'Pointer' in the only Gun Fire-Control Director On Board Dixie at that time.
    Everett Nichols USN FTG2
    1963-1967
    USS Dixie R-5 Division

  • @msaa1125
    @msaa1125 3 роки тому +3

    I remember taking a tour on this! Very exciting!

  • @CT2CA
    @CT2CA 3 роки тому +1

    Thanks much! My Dad served in the Pacific from 1942 to 1945 in 5" guns on cruisers and battleships (including Massachusettes). I still have a small diary he kept during the war.

  • @tgthorson51
    @tgthorson51 3 роки тому +4

    I never knew of the complexity of these fire control systems. Amazing! It would be interesting to know of the different systems on foreign battleships like Bismark, Hood and Yamato.

  • @MrJento
    @MrJento 3 роки тому +2

    The fire control “computers” are fascinating, but not unique. Younger viewers should remember that prior to the 1960’s every thing was analog, not digital. That Battle ship was designed by engineers using slide rules and log tables. Built by tradesmen who had no laser levels or digital callipers. Navigated by men who used mechanical sextant, a book of sight reduction tables and a fine clock work chronometer.
    The existence of the Antikythera mechanism suggests that this situation has been so for 2500 years.
    Such devises then were common. The watch on a sailors wrist. The fire control director on a ship. The Norden bomb sight. The calculator in the ships office used to balance the books, even the German enigma code machine....all fascinating examples of functional and accurate analog computers.
    Nicely done, Ryan.

  • @ghost307
    @ghost307 3 роки тому +13

    Wow!!
    The production values are growing by leaps and bounds.
    This is good enough quality to be on the History Channel...or should be on instead of ghost shows, pawn shops and the other drivel.

  • @markkeyser
    @markkeyser 3 роки тому +1

    Dad was the Gunnery Officer on the USS Eberle (DD430). He talked about the guns but I had no real idea of their complexity. Also, I didn't know that the turrets covering the 5" guns on the destroyer were simply in place to keep the weather out. Thanks for the explanation of the system!

  • @EnigmaticPenguin
    @EnigmaticPenguin 3 роки тому +3

    I learned a ton, thank you for producing these

  • @edpolk1262
    @edpolk1262 2 роки тому +1

    Always thought it was so cool about the rapid fire, and the shells ejecting out the back of the turret.

  • @darvinclement3250
    @darvinclement3250 3 роки тому +24

    Retrofitting the ships to use missiles must have been a huge undertaking. That's a lot of metal that needs to be removed! Shooting those guns was sure labor intensive.

    • @dannyisaacs7552
      @dannyisaacs7552 3 роки тому +4

      5 in. mounts were made to be lifted off the ships and replaced in one piece. Not the handleing room just the mount.

  • @n.b.barnett5444
    @n.b.barnett5444 2 роки тому

    Great program - I'm building a model of a Cleveland class cruiser with six twin-fifty turrets, this made it "come alive" for me. Really like your videos.
    Ned in Nevada

  • @P_Nut8421
    @P_Nut8421 3 роки тому +6

    21:24
    Ah, the product of mine and Jack's hard work painting all those ammo cans. I know that is after we finished painting them because the open cans are at the top left of the powder rack.

  • @jimmacaulay844
    @jimmacaulay844 Рік тому

    Brings back memories! USS Stoddard DD-566, 1968 in the Tonkin Gulf. Fired something like 5000 rounds from our single 5"38s. I was at the trainer's station. At "Surface action starboard" (or port) I would engage manual control, slew the mount around till the needle matched the director's needle and slam it back into automatic control. I hope I'm remembering it accurately! Then for the duration of the mission I was just along for the ride while the director controlled point and train. Fun times!
    Your video taught me many things I never had a need to know back then. Very interesting, thanks!

    • @mikerobb5154
      @mikerobb5154 3 місяці тому

      I was the lead FT on the Stoddard from 1966 to 1967. I was only E5 but I was transferred to the Stoddard to replace the Chief FT who had been busted back to E3. It was my second goround in Vietnam. I was there on the Cowell DD547 during the Tonkin Gulf incident. Mike Robb

  • @richardmoore609
    @richardmoore609 3 роки тому +27

    It may not have the destructive power of the 16in but I still wouldn't want 127mm of high explosive pointing anywhere near my direction.

    • @barneyrice8502
      @barneyrice8502 3 роки тому

      Ha Ha Ha, Right ON

    • @dantreadwell7421
      @dantreadwell7421 3 роки тому +1

      Considering the main gun on most MBTs is 120mm, and most field artillery tends to max at 155mm, there is a reason naval fire support is friggin SCARY. And for a good bit of reach, well, sometimes all you got is that 1 ton of hate and indiscriminate justice.

  • @bobmckenna5511
    @bobmckenna5511 3 роки тому +1

    A really nice episode. I enjoyed how you got into the workspaces and described them.

  • @GeistView
    @GeistView 3 роки тому +8

    Was there a 5" mount on the NJ that was the Marines mount? On the Iowa there is a 5" mount that was crewed by the Marines.

    • @dannyisaacs7552
      @dannyisaacs7552 3 роки тому +2

      yes the Marines had there own mount. except during Vietnam. No Marines were on board then

    • @GeistView
      @GeistView 3 роки тому

      @@dannyisaacs7552 Ty

    • @charlesharman7690
      @charlesharman7690 3 роки тому +2

      USS Long Beach CGN-9 had two single 5" mounts amidships crewed by our MARDET.

  • @georgeburns7251
    @georgeburns7251 3 роки тому +1

    Great subject and also learned a lot from the comments. You have a smart, and respectful subscriber base.

  • @MrJento
    @MrJento 3 роки тому +7

    The “small naval rifles” the 5,4 and 3 inch guns are larger than most army arterially. For example the first major engagement of US Army personnel at Kaserine pass. The Germans destroyed most US armour and field guns and would have wiped out the trapped infantry had no a field observer with a radio called in accurate 5 inch naval gun fire which destroyed enough panzers to cause Rommel to pull back. Main battery fire from the older battleships involved in operation torch would have destroyed both German and allied troops in that pass. Destroyers with their “little” guns had a “big” effect that day.

    • @randomlyentertaining8287
      @randomlyentertaining8287 3 роки тому +2

      Actually, 3 inch (76mm) guns are about as small as land based artillery goes and they're uncommon nowadays. In US military terms, the smallest caliber land based field gun is a 105mm howitizer, which is about 4 inches. Then comes the 155mm howitzer, which is the most common caliber of field artillery in the US military with 518 M777 guns and 998 M109 Paladins in current service with another 500 Paladins in storage. In fact, none of the Big Five (US, China, France, Britain, Russia) use any field gun under 100mm. The 155mm (6 inches) tends to be the most common.

    • @MrJento
      @MrJento 3 роки тому

      @@randomlyentertaining8287 Exactly the point. In WW2 land based guns were on a par with the smaller naval ordinance. In 1942 the 155 and even 105’s while in service were uncommon. The 75 and 37mm cannon as found on the Mark 2 tank were the norm. As was the 50 and 75mm pack howitzer. On smaller naval ships like the flush deck destroyers the 3 and 4 inch guns were common.
      Things changed so quickly. The 5in-38 became common at sea and the 105 howitzer ashore. Yes they had 155 guns but proportionally few until after WW2.
      So my point was to show the dichotomy of “small” naval guns filling the role of “large” army ordinance in breaking a concerted tank attack on our foot soldiers. And done so at a time when coordinated “close support” and shore to ship radio communication had not been developed to the extent it would be by 1944-45, much less as it is today.

    • @Lawman212
      @Lawman212 3 роки тому

      Do you have any histories that describe the naval gun strike? I guess the strike didn't come from a ship because the ocean is 140 miles from the pass. Were naval guns used on land somehow?

    • @MrJento
      @MrJento 3 роки тому +1

      @@Lawman212 ok. This can get long. There are tactical studies of this. Use Google. I got my background at the war college 50 years ago. From memory:
      The Pass is about 150 miles from the coast. The major battle occurred on the north coastal side. The army suffered 1000 casualties and lost all major equipment. A retreat due north....I’m sorry...advance to the rear....was performed. There followed a series of running engagements on a line due north to a small coastal city called Bone. The idea was to evacuate the survivors off the beaches to the east of Bone a’ la Dunkirk. They never made it. They were overtaken to the west of Be’ja, about five miles from the sea. This is where naval gunfire from the destroyers sent to recover the troops were able to stop the 5th army tank attack. These destroyers were of the “flush deck” or four stack type typical of WW1 service. They were obsolete at that time and had been selected for operation torch because they could operate in shallow water and naval losses were expected to be high. They were considered expendable.
      The ships typically carried the 4 inch 50 and 5 inch 25 guns. The 4 inch gun was capable of greater range and had an explosive capacity somewhere between that of the 105 and 155 army howitzer. Very effective on the German mark IV at that time. Especially with shore spotters calling corrections. This stopped the German advance and a British tank regiment came in from the east to save the day. The survivors of II Corps rejoined US elements to the west and so the beach evacuation never came to be. This was an embarrassing situation for the army. Reports were conflicting and purposely vague. The British, German and American recollections seldom agreed. In total II Corps lost 3300 killed or wounded and about 4000 captured, plus all their armour and heavy guns. As I recall a Corps then was about 16,000 men. Do the math.
      There is considerable confusion about naval rifles vs army artillery. The difference is far beyond the inch-to- metric bore conversion. Naval guns were often encased as coastal artillery. But never mounted for use as mobile artillery.
      Field artillery tend to fire a large projectile relative to the propellent charge. As howitzers they fire in high trajectory to drop shell into an enemy position. Much like a mortar might. For example the 105mm which was the most common “heavy artillery” round used in WW2. A regiment had three batteries of 105, but only one battery of 155. The most common 75mm pack howitzer out numbered the heavies ten to one.
      So. Look at the encased 105. The projectile appears quite long and is in a rather stubby looking case not quite as long as the projectile.
      Naval rifles are designed for direct fire, though the larger ones actually fire on a trajectory at range. The smaller naval guns had an AA role. As such the tube tends to be longer and velocity much higher as you would expect of an AA piece. If you examine a 4 inch naval shell you see an encased projectile slightly larger in diameter than the 105 round with a projectile slightly shorter, but a case at least twice the length of the projectile.
      So. Roughly speaking the naval rifle round is longer and throws about the same projectile with 2-21/2 times the charge out of a barrel substantially longer than an artillery piece. The naval rifle is attached to and supported by a ship.
      Army artillery must be towed. The 105 by a two and a half ton truck. The 155 by a treaded tractor. Ammo must be moved from truck to gun, and loaded by hand at the breach on artillery. Not hoisted up the barbet and mechanically loaded as with most naval rifles.
      Thus the navy typically has much larger guns. Except for coastal batteries which mount obsolete naval guns for potting at ships offshore.
      I hope that helps. Study. History is made up from the broad brush strokes. But there is detail that ads depth to every story.

    • @Lawman212
      @Lawman212 3 роки тому

      @@MrJento Thanks a lot for that explanation. I hadn't considered that the battle was a continuous affair over many miles.

  • @jimlongley9531
    @jimlongley9531 3 роки тому +1

    I was a 5/38 gunner on the USS Zellars DD-777. Thanks for the memories.

  • @MakeMeThinkAgain
    @MakeMeThinkAgain 3 роки тому +4

    There's a wonderful USN video showing how those computers actually work.

  • @michaeldea6599
    @michaeldea6599 3 роки тому +1

    would love to see a video with 14 people in that gun room. Can't believe the choreography and teamwork that would've been required. Great vid!

    • @yes_head
      @yes_head 3 роки тому

      Or the smell. 14 guys in a hot enclosed space, working hard... I'm guessing they kept as many of the small hatches open as possible!

  • @stevemolina8801
    @stevemolina8801 3 роки тому +3

    RIP Stan I too was a Gunner on 5" Guns but a newer versions.

  • @DinoNucci
    @DinoNucci 3 роки тому +2

    That switch room is bonkers!

    • @wst8340
      @wst8340 3 роки тому +1

      Be a good set for a movie

  • @erikgranqvist3680
    @erikgranqvist3680 3 роки тому +6

    Kind of interesting that the 5"38 looks so tiny on a Battleship when the gun on a modern tank in Nato generally looks like they have a really big gun. The Leopard 2 and the Abrams has 4" and a bit (120mm). Surroundings make a lot.

    • @johnbradley4644
      @johnbradley4644 3 роки тому

      There is a huge difference in these guns. The weight of the round in a tank gun is about the weight of the projectile in a 5 inch 38.

  • @rjpx947
    @rjpx947 3 роки тому +1

    Thanks so very much for this continuing series. It gives wonderful insights into what it must have been like for the crews that lived and served on these ships. I've toured naval ships in the past, but would certainly love to see a BB up close, especially an Iowa class.

  • @michaelathens953
    @michaelathens953 3 роки тому +8

    Oh man no way could you let me in that plotting room; I'd have to play with every switch on that wall.

  • @bobrunge7594
    @bobrunge7594 3 роки тому +1

    I was a First Class Fire Control Technician 1967-73. Got out after 6 years, 48 years ago today. I went to over a 1 year school on the MK37 Gun Fire Control System he is talking about. Was lucky enough to have 13 months left when I needed 12 to sew on E6. Made it in 4 years and 11 months. The radar was good out to 100,000 yards...50 miles. A radar mile is 2000 yards. The director was a hot house in Cuba during training with the sun beating down on its steel. When I finally made it out of the director, I was assigned to "Plot", where the computer was, which was air conditioned. We used to call it the "coffee grinder". All mechanical/electrical components. Made by Ford Motor Company. Rack type component solvers etc, which gave you and immediate solution to the ballistic problem....surfce or air target. We had a Radar Signal Processing Equipment (RSPE) in the director. Advent of transistors. Have many stories to tell of my time shooting those 5" 38's. I have a million of them. I now wear hearing aids because of them.

  • @pepperman2385
    @pepperman2385 3 роки тому +3

    To the family of Mr. Smokowitcz: my deepest condolences. To Stanley: sailor, rest your oar.

  • @moebanshee
    @moebanshee 3 роки тому +1

    My husband Theodore Kubik was the marine bugler under captain Melson during the Korean war He served on the battleship New Jersey and he loved it.

  • @davebaldschun3869
    @davebaldschun3869 Рік тому +3

    I was a gun crew member with the Port Aft 5”-54 caliber gun on the USS Franklin D Roosevelt CVA-42 and, …. What was that you said?

    • @angelachristine13
      @angelachristine13 4 місяці тому

      My father served on the the USS Franklin D Roosevelt in 70-71

  • @jtw77388
    @jtw77388 3 роки тому +1

    I manned a 5 X 38 on a WWII vintage destroyer during the Vietnam War. Started in the ammo handling room and worked my way up to Trainer. We lobbed a lot of shells ashore and never knew what we were shooting at. We were about a half mile offshore so we could effectively hit something seven miles inland. On automatic, the Trainer had a pretty cushy job except for having the barrel about a foot from your head. Want to know how to recreate the noise inside a 5" mount? Climb inside a large industrial trash receptacle and have someone hit it with a sledgehammer.