8"/55 caliber Mark 71 gun

From Self-sufficiency
Revision as of 06:21, 23 May 2010 by Luckas-bot (Talk) (robot Adding: ja:Mk 71 8インチ砲)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
8"/55 caliber Mark 71 gun
300px
The USS Hull test-firing a Mark 71 MCLWG prototype.
Type Naval gun
Place of origin Template:US
Service history
In service Never used
Used by United States Navy
Production history
Designer Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division
Designed 1975
Manufacturer FMC
Specifications
Weight 172,895 lbs. (78,425 kg) including ready ammunition
Barrel length 440 inches (11.176 m)
Crew 6

Caliber 8 in (203 mm)
Elevation +65 / -5 degrees
Rate: 20 degree/second
Traverse +160 / -160 degrees
30 degrees/second
Rate of fire 12 rounds per minute (rpm) automatic maximum
Guided projectiles: 6 rpm
Effective range 32,000 yards (29,260 m) at 41° elevation
Feed system 75 rounds on ready service loader

The U.S. Navy's Major Caliber Lightweight Gun (MCLWG) program was the 8"/55 caliber Mark 71 major caliber lightweight, single-barrel naval gun prototype (spoken "eight-inch-fifty-five-caliber") that was mounted aboard the USS Hull (DD-945) in 1975 to test the capability of destroyer-sized ships to provide shore bombardment support with the range previously available from decommissioned cruisers.[1] United States naval gun terminology indicates the gun fired a projectile 8 inches (20 cm) in diameter, and the barrel was 55 calibers long (barrel length is 8" x 55 = 440" or 11 meters.)[2]

Origin

Gunfire support from cruisers and battleships had become an established part of United States amphibious warfare doctrine during World War II. As the last of the wartime cruisers and battleships were decommissioned, the 5"/54 caliber gun became the largest available for such assignments. The 5"/54 could fire a 70-pound (32-kg) projectile approximately 15 miles (24 km) in comparison to a range of 17 miles (27 km) for 260 pound (118 kg) projectiles from the 8"/55 caliber guns of heavy cruisers.[3]

The impending loss of capability was anticipated by the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) in 1969. CNO established a requirement for a new gun capable of firing semi-active laser guided projectiles (SAL GP). Development took place through 1971 and 1972 at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division.[4]

Prototype

The 8"/55 Mark 71 gun was a single gun adaptation of the 8"/55 Mark 16 gun found in triple turrets on Des Moines class cruisers. The prototype gun mount weighed 86 tons and was approximately 20 percent heavier than the 5"/54 caliber Mark 42 gun it replaced. The prototype could fire ten to twelve rounds per minute from a 75-round automatic ready service magazine for semi-fixed ammunition when operated by one man. A specially modified Mark 155 ballistic computer provided 8"/55 ballistics for Hulls Mark 68 gun fire control system.[1]

Termination

At-sea technical evaluation occurred aboard Hull in 1975, and operational testing followed through 1976. The Operational Test and Evaluation Force determined inaccuracy made the gun operationally unsuitable, and concluded the lightweight 8"/55 was no more effective than the 5"/54 (with Rocket Assisted Projectiles). The report recommended against production or installation of the lightweight 8"/55, and program funding was terminated in 1978. SAL GP development continued.[4]

See also

Notes

Cite error: Invalid <references> tag; parameter "group" is allowed only.

Use <references />, or <references group="..." />

Suggested Reading

External links

ja:Mk 71 8インチ砲
  1. 1.0 1.1 Effron, Herbert M., CDR USN "8"/55 Major Caliber Lightweight Gun: Big Punch for Small Ships" United States Naval Institute Proceedings December 1975 pp.91-93
  2. Fairfield, A.P. Naval Ordnance Lord Baltimore Press (1921) p.156
  3. Campbell, John Naval Weapons of World War Two Naval Institute Press (1985) ISBN 0-87021-459-4 pp.131&143
  4. 4.0 4.1 Miller, John C., Col USMC & Peterson, H.W., Major USMC "Guns vs. Butter - Without the Guns?" United States Naval Institute Proceedings January 1982 pp.33-34