Claret
发表于 2015-4-12 00:11
猫失前爪 发表于 2015-4-11 22:59
双联装一分钟18发也不错了日本人的127双联装是一分钟8到14发,100双才一分钟19发···· ...
射速应该都是单管射速吧,和几联装没关系
猫失前爪
发表于 2015-4-12 03:43
Claret 发表于 2015-4-12 00:11
射速应该都是单管射速吧,和几联装没关系
有的是按双管一座炮的射速算的
Claret
发表于 2015-4-12 04:14
猫失前爪 发表于 2015-4-12 03:43
有的是按双管一座炮的射速算的
NW里Rate Of Fire的单位是rounds per minute,应该和几联装是没关系的
2237184455
发表于 2015-4-12 08:44
对海威力更大一些
板砖坠落之地
发表于 2015-4-12 09:35
猫失前爪 发表于 2015-4-11 16:33
数数英国人有多少高平炮,在二战,我知道102,,114,133,不知道120能不能高射····· ...
有120高炮,驱逐舰也上过120的高平炮不过仰角不理想
利塔耶夫
发表于 2015-4-16 21:29
按有些说法,英国人认为战列舰的副炮一定要比驱逐舰强,所以用了133.35这个口径。
kantukantu
发表于 2015-4-16 21:32
阿牛的口径换算成公制之后总是那么蛋疼,海陆都是各种疼
装甲巡洋舰鞍马
发表于 2015-4-16 21:37
oldcat 发表于 2015-4-8 18:35
6寸人力一样搬得动
不是搬不搬得动的问题
英国人研究的结果是认为36kg对于压榨装填手体能,或者说人力中继的弹药装填来说是一个最合适的弹重
更重的话搬得动但是带来的射速下降划不来
更轻的话搬得更快但是不能充分的挖掘投送量
也就是说英国人认为5.25”炮配这个弹重能够最大限度发挥投送量,就这样
STG44突击步枪
发表于 2015-4-17 02:04
本帖最后由 STG44突击步枪 于 2015-4-16 19:43 编辑
6寸炮是垃圾口径
5.4"/48 (13.7 cm) Mark 1
This weapon was part of a 1939 - 1940 study on possible replacements for the 5"/38 (12.7 cm) Mark 12.During this study, a variety of guns were investigated for arming a new generation of destroyers, cruisers and battleships.Requirements for the new weapon included the ability to achieve a slant range of 14,000 yards (12,800 m) and a maximum surface range of at least 18,000 yards (16,500 m).Projectile weight was to be no more than 75 lbs. (34 kg), muzzle velocity not less than 2,700 fps (823 mps) and a rate of fire of not less than 15 rounds per minute at any elevation.Besides the 5.4"/48 (13.7 cm), an up-rated 5"/38 (12.7 cm), a new 5"/54 (12.7 cm) and an improved 6"/47 (15.2 cm) were also considered.
Although the existing 5"/38 (12.7 cm) did not meet any of the above requirements, it did have a significantly lower mounting weight than any of the larger guns.This meant that more of them could be accommodated on the same size ship.For example, BuOrd calculated that a ship capable of carrying eight 5"/38 (12.7 cm) guns could only carry six 5"/54 (12.7 cm) guns and even fewer of the larger calibers.When the increased weight was taken into account, BuOrd could see no advantage to larger calibers and recommended that the planned new ships continue to use the existing 5"/38 (12.7 cm).BuOrd did recommend in January 1940 that development of the 5"/54 (12.7 cm) be pursued as its heavier shell would mean an improved anti-surface capability over the 5"/38 (12.7 cm).This resulted in the 5"/54 (12.7 cm) Mark 16 which was chosen to arm the Montana class (BB-67) battleships and the Midway class (CVB-41) carriers.
As for the 5.4"/48 (13.7 cm), it was temporarily revived as a possible armament for the proposed 8,000 ton cruisers when the new 6"/47 (15.2 cm) failed its preliminary tests, but this fell through when BuOrd reported that it would take at least 30 months just to get the design to the proofing stage.The 5"/54 (12.7 cm) could be produced three to four months quicker, as it could use some of the existing tooling used for the 5"/38 (12.7 cm).
STG44突击步枪
发表于 2015-4-17 02:41
本帖最后由 STG44突击步枪 于 2015-4-16 21:34 编辑
你需要这个
《佛爷教你打飞机》
http://www.amazon.com/Naval-Anti-Aircraft-Gunnery-Norman-Friedman/dp/1591146046/ref=la_B001JP9YFM_1_13?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1429209529&sr=1-13
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Naval-Anti-Aircraft-Gunnery-Norman-Friedman/dp/1848321775/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1429209584&sr=8-1&keywords=Naval+Anti-Aircraft+Guns+and+Gunnery
STG44突击步枪
发表于 2015-4-17 04:33
6寸炮垃圾,英国早看他不爽了
Nomenclature note:The 5.5"/42 (14 cm) BL Mark II was intended for DAMS of World War I, but this did not progress beyond the design stage, even though 1,100 guns were planned.Construction would have been A tube, taper wire and full length jacket.Weight without BM would have been 5.625 tons (5.72 mt).Later 5.5" (14 cm) BL guns were Army howitzers of the World War II period.
STG44突击步枪
发表于 2015-4-17 04:35
6寸炮垃圾,狄多就是换了133炮的林仙
IreneFan
发表于 2015-4-17 09:04
oldcat 发表于 2015-4-8 18:35
6寸人力一样搬得动
日本轻巡同样为了人力搬运而选择了14cm炮
xf-108
发表于 2015-4-18 00:07
IreneFan 发表于 2015-4-17 09:04
日本轻巡同样为了人力搬运而选择了14cm炮
不过日本人的搬运力远不如欧美白人吧?
IreneFan
发表于 2015-4-18 10:05
xf-108 发表于 2015-4-18 00:07
不过日本人的搬运力远不如欧美白人吧?
美国有黑蜀黍
IreneFan
发表于 2015-4-18 10:07
xf-108 发表于 2015-4-18 00:07
不过日本人的搬运力远不如欧美白人吧?
如果日本人认为自己的上限是14cm,那英国人用133基本可以肯定不是为了人力搬运的上限
装甲巡洋舰鞍马
发表于 2015-4-18 10:58
IreneFan 发表于 2015-4-18 10:07
如果日本人认为自己的上限是14cm,那英国人用133基本可以肯定不是为了人力搬运的上限 ...
看了下44推荐的玩意,按照那个说法,英国人用133是为了人力搬运的效率最大化,而不是搬运上限
STG44突击步枪
发表于 2015-4-18 14:52
IreneFan 发表于 2015-4-18 03:07
如果日本人认为自己的上限是14cm,那英国人用133基本可以肯定不是为了人力搬运的上限 ...
203炮也能做出47公斤的炮弹,相当于152炮
重点不是口径,在于弹重。
英米在间战都有类似的研究结果
a5mg4n
发表于 2015-4-18 15:32
IreneFan 发表于 2015-4-18 10:05
美国有黑蜀黍
當時還在種族隔離 能上戰位的通常只有白人
IreneFan
发表于 2015-4-19 00:06
STG44突击步枪 发表于 2015-4-18 14:52
203炮也能做出47公斤的炮弹,相当于152炮
重点不是口径,在于弹重。
噗,居然忘了这么重要的事。。。