akagizuo 发表于 2013-1-22 04:22 static/image/common/back.gif
感觉对马海战里面，蝗国舰队速度优势也就3节左右，怎么在态势上有那么大优势？？？ ...
当时的炮战距离太近了。
akagizuo 发表于 2013-1-22 04:21 static/image/common/back.gif
BSM想奸了POW不太难吧，双方都打到15000码左右距离了，双方速度差距又不大，BSM存心追，POW半天都拉不开 ...
如果POW一心想跑，距离是一定会越拉越大的。因为俾斯麦不可能仅用前方4门炮追击，而POW无心与俾斯麦对射，那就势必是俾斯麦以一个角度斜对着POW的逃遁航线，直线速度对比在这种情形下也是没意义的。
另外，丹麦海峡之战的POW尽管炮塔出了大问题，但实际射击命中率是高过俾斯麦的。恐怕在这阶段对射毫不吃亏。
但是这根射孔技术的发展相违背啊
ssvcrtfi79 发表于 2013-1-22 14:06 static/image/common/back.gif
但是这根射孔技术的发展相违背啊
这方面不太懂，以我的理解说说：
说违背倒也不违背吧，直线交火情况下的火控解算基本也就是一战那种模式。间战的发展只是优化测量手段和解算流程，尤其是测量手段的优化，使得火控有效距离增大了。但基本模式并没有改变。对方一避弹机动，再怎么准确的测量解算也很难在远距离上打准。
LeSoleil 发表于 2013-1-22 04:09 static/image/common/back.gif
胡德是没有装甲盒结构的，水平防护很脆弱。而且处在观测不利的位置上，与俾斯麦对射很吃亏。 ...
胡德的垂直防禦更讓人不放心
既然如此 那還不如保持交戰距離在25km以上 這樣至少兩邊都是生雞蛋
而不是本位面中生雞蛋跟皮蛋對掐
本帖最后由 LeSoleil 于 2013-1-22 15:05 编辑
a5mg4n 发表于 2013-1-22 14:46 static/image/common/back.gif
胡德的垂直防禦更讓人不放心
既然如此 那還不如保持交戰距離在25km以上 這樣至少兩邊都是生雞蛋
而不是本 ...
保持交战距离25千米以上，火控在当时环境下基本无力，而其作战任务是拦截摧毁俾斯麦号，打两炮脱离了，这还怎么玩？再拉近一点，20千米炮击，德舰完全可以击破胡德的甲板，胡德打不穿俾斯麦。还是劣势。而且这个距离上英军船多炮多的优势势必不能发挥，两艘英舰在这种糟糕的火控环境下射击同一个目标的校正问题是需要注意到的，如果射快了就没法分辨哪一轮炮是哪一条船打的，难以进行下一步校正。
霍兰摆角度以加强防御，理想状态是接近敌人的过程中甲板因距离接近而不被击穿，侧舷装甲因与来袭炮弹存在角度而不被击穿，冲锋到相互击穿且对火控观测有利的较近距离，然后发扬英军的炮火数量优势，是完全合理的。
LeSoleil 发表于 2013-1-22 15:03 static/image/common/back.gif
保持交战距离25千米以上，火控在当时环境下基本无力，而其作战任务是拦截摧毁俾斯麦号，打两炮脱离了，这 ...
火控硬件水平與當時RN無異(甚至略差)的IJN都能在30km上3輪內跨射了
本帖最后由 克虏伯火炮 于 2013-1-22 15:20 编辑
a5mg4n 发表于 2013-1-22 15:08 static/image/common/back.gif
火控硬件水平與當時RN無異(甚至略差)的IJN都能在30km上3輪內跨射了
跨射不等于命中。25公里以上对运动目标的命中率势必极低，这不是英国舰队所希望的。对于英国舰队来说，歼灭对手是唯一目的，最不致也要重创它让它无法进入大西洋破交。
如果让它没吃上几颗炮弹就溜进了“鸡舍”，那就是彻头彻尾的失败。
克虏伯火炮 发表于 2013-1-22 15:17 static/image/common/back.gif
跨射不等于命中。25公里以上对运动目标的命中率势必极低，这不是英国舰队所希望的。对于英国舰队来说，歼 ...
远距离射击必须得对方配合，对方不想陪你打、不走直线的话就只能是浪费炮弹。中近距离至少可以用级梯射击法倾泻炮弹。
在对方做大角度避弹机动或为高速目标的情况下，应使用二/三段法试射（本来远距离射击的试射就是多段法），修正量取极限主义，这样命中的概率高一些。
本帖牵涉到炮弹距离落角，射向与目标艏艉向交角，以及被弹部位等和装甲破坏免疫相关问题。手上刚好翻到加拿大海军兵器史大老Bill Jurens在1976年做的分析，现在把资料贴出来供参考：
Tables and Charts of Projected Target Areas With Variations in the Angle on the Bow and Angle of Fall For a Standard Warship Design
W. J. Jurens
October, 1976 (revised and updated, June 2001)
The following tables and charts should be useful to those interested in determining the approximate changes in relative projected areas of warship internals with variations in angle on the bow and angle of fall. Such determinations are useful, for example, in the statistical simulation of naval gunfire actions where the probable effect of individual hits is to be taken into account by a "Monte-Carlo" type random event generator.
The geometry of the vessel used in this study has been specifically selected to be representative of as many typical vessels as possible. The overall dimensions and proportions of the hull -- and to a certain extent of the superstructure as well -- were selected by averaging the actual measurements of approximately forty battleship and battlecruiser designs produced from c. 1920-1945. These dimensions were used to produce a transparent scale model at a scale of 1:1000, which was then photographed with a 35mm camera while the angle on the bow and the angle fall were varied in a consistent manner and at equal increments of 30 degrees horizontally and 20 degrees vertically, with one additional photo being taken from directly overhead. The resulting frames of film were then enlarged and transferred to transparent acetate sheets, which were in turn analysed with the planimetric capabilities of an Apple II+ computer with an attached graphics tablet. The resulting output was subsequently divided into a number of categories and printed out with additional routines used to compute relative percentages of areas from the raw area figures obtained planometrically. The resulting output, allowing for systematic and accidental errors in measurement and computation, is considered to be accurate to within 1-3 percent.
A few cautions and explanations of the methods used in coding the data and its interpretation are probably in order. The areas listed under "Turret(s)" include all projected turret surfaces and associated barbettes. The areas listed are for the entire projected area of the space involved both above and below the waterline, and thus no allowance has been made for the protective effects of the ocean surrounding the hull. In practical terms, especially at low angles of fall, much of the area of the sides of the magazines and engineering spaces would, in fact, be practically inaccessible to shell fire because they are well below the waterline. In addition, the projected areas here obtained take no account of the possible screening or shielding effects of unarmored portions of the ship located in the superstructure or elsewhere. This can sometimes lead to some misleading results. For example, although a small portion of the deck area of the forward magazines is still visible and projected at an angle on the bow of 180 degrees and an angle of fall of 20 degrees, the chances of a projectile actually penetrating almost the entire length of the target's superstructure in order to reach this area are abysmally small. Of course the masking effects of superimposed armored target areas are taken into account in all cases. The rather large proportion of target represented as "miscellaneous" covers projected target area through which an inbound projectile would intercept essentially no armored areas (or vital) at all.
It will be noted from the above that the effects of changes in angle on the bow are at a maximum when the angle of fall is small, decreasing rather rapidly thereafter as the angle of fall increases, and eventually becoming zero when the angle of fall is 90 degrees. Generally speaking, in the model used in this study the effects of screening are essentially absent beyond angles of fall of 45 degrees. The tabulated values for "Total Area" are raw areas and for the vessel in question may be converted to square meters by multiplying by the constant 6.916. The tabulated "Total Area Ratio" is the ratio of the total area at any given angle on the bow and angle of fall combination to that of the entire target at an angle on the bow of 90 degrees and an angle of fall of 0 degrees. Drawing C1569 gives the total projected area of the target at any given angle on the bow and angle of fall combination to that of the rectangular "footprint" of the water plane.
补上文的算式：
LeSoleil 发表于 2013-1-22 12:59 static/image/common/back.gif
如果POW一心想跑，距离是一定会越拉越大的。因为俾斯麦不可能仅用前方4门炮追击，而POW无心与俾斯麦对射 ...
为什么不能直线追
同样是4门炮追4门炮，15寸对14寸还有优势；射控上如果直线逃逸，POW的舰桥上的主要指挥仪的视线还受阻，更何况POW舰桥已经被BSM重创了
akagizuo 发表于 2013-1-22 17:55 static/image/common/back.gif
为什么不能直线追
同样是4门炮追4门炮，15寸对14寸还有优势；射控上如果直线逃逸，POW的舰桥上的主要指挥 ...
正前方射击，炮数少，受上浪和船体摇摆影响大，观测受水雾影响，校正因炮数少而效率低。
mathewwu 发表于 2013-1-22 16:20 static/image/common/back.gif
本帖牵涉到炮弹距离落角，射向与目标艏艉向交角，以及被弹部位等和装甲破坏免疫相关问题。手上刚好翻到加拿 ...
没太看明白。
被弹比例为何会在射向与首尾交角60-120度时最大，而0度或180度时最小呢。
射弹散布面不是一个纵向于射向的长椭圆吗？那就应该是射向与首尾交角0度时，战舰投影与散布面重合最大呀……
还是我理解错了？
LeSoleil 发表于 2013-1-22 18:25 static/image/common/back.gif
没太看明白。
被弹比例为何会在射向与首尾交角60-120度时最大，而0度或180度时最小呢。
AREA RATIO各部位被弹（面积）比率要算上舷侧，上甲板，以及上层建筑的表面积。舰艏艉没有上层建筑。
本帖最后由 STG44突击步枪 于 2013-1-22 12:36 编辑
“我爱超重蛋”协会成立{:17:}，诚招1.8-1.9系数胖子加盟
本帖最后由 STG44突击步枪 于 2014-5-29 06:45 编辑
500毫米45倍径炮（弹头重2375公斤，初速700米每秒，射速1~1.5发每分钟）;
450毫米45倍径炮（弹头重1731公斤，初速700米每秒，射速1.5发每分钟）;
400毫米45倍径炮（弹头重1216公斤，初速700米每秒，射速1.5~2发每分钟）;
350毫米45倍径炮（弹头重814公斤，初速700米每秒，射速1.5~2发每分钟）;
305毫米45倍径炮（弹头重539公斤，初速700米每秒，射速2~3发每分钟）;
203毫米50倍径炮（弹头重159公斤，初速700米每秒，射速4~5发每分钟）;
克虏伯火炮 发表于 2013-1-22 15:17 static/image/common/back.gif
跨射不等于命中。25公里以上对运动目标的命中率势必极低，这不是英国舰队所希望的。对于英国舰队来说，歼 ...
要讓首相無法破交 連續追個兩天讓其沒油就好 反正KGV和反擊也在路上了
STG44突击步枪 发表于 2013-1-22 19:44 static/image/common/back.gif
500毫米40倍径炮（弹头重2375公斤，初速700米每秒，射速1.5~2发每分钟）
450毫米40倍径炮（弹头重1731公 ...
203mm/12不是更好?