"Did WWI wing turrets actually fire across deck or not?" Topic

Friday a couple friends and I played an almost-refight of Dogger Bank, and I (re)discovered that FAI allows main guns in wing turrets to fire across the deck on the opposite beam, with the only penalty being a limited arc. The original GQ2 had the same approach.

However, I keep reading that the cross-deck firing of main battery guns on WWI BBs and BCs caused blast damage to superstructure, decking, deck fixtures, etc. Are there any WWI naval rules that disallow or penalize cross-deck firing? More importantly, did the combatants in WWI actually fire main guns across the deck? Which ships did or didn't? Were there any consequences? My reading has so far lead to no conclusions. Sources appreciated.

I noticed that FAI does disallow some superfiring turrets from firing directly across the lower turret:

British ships prior to HMS Hood had open turret sighting hoods, restricting them from using super-firing turrets within 15° of directly fore or aft. Align the Wing Turret AoF (see below) at the bow or stern to define this limit.

This implies that L.L. Gill is perfectly aware of the blast damage from firing main guns and so probably decided cross-deck firing wing turrets was a reality the FAI rules should allow.

- Ix

As far as I know it was discovered during trials that this was not a good idea and caused severe damage. There were many complications caused by wing main batteries also due to magazines and other lay out problems.

There's a very good reason why this layout experiment only lasted a brief time.

Turret blast effect is a complicated topic.

Cross-deck firing of en echelon turrets, it is my understanding, was not conducted during peacetime or in practice due to the damage that would be inflicted upon the weather deck and nearby light structure, but it was done in battle.

Blast effect upon nearby turret and gun positions was more complicated and actually represented an important consideration in the design of warships. The arcs of fire of super-firing turrets of early British dreadnoughts whose turret designs featured open rooftop sighting hoods were restricted to no closer than 30deg of the vessel's centerline when firing, as the blast effect would knock senseless the occupants of the sighting hoods of the adjacent inferior turret. However, similar effects would be produced by the firing of ADJACENT turrets located too near to another turret or gun position. It was, for example, found with respect to the Lord Nelson class pre-dreadnought that the aftermost 9.2in wing turret was impossible to fight when the aft centerline 12in turret was firing at 40deg or more before the beam.

I'm not certain that the solution to this problem had to await HMS Hood. HMS Queen Elizabeth had sighting hoods with blast shutters and it was reported that she did successfully fire her B turret directly over the roof of A turret during the Gallipoli operation.

On the other hand, blast effect problems in general persisted in other ways beyond the WW1 era. It was found early on in the careers of the Nelson and Rodney that the bridge was untenable when B turret was firing abaft the beam; the bridge ultimately had to be re-designed and reinforced to better protect its occupants from blast effect; for a time, no main battery fire by these ships was permitted abaft the beam.

B

Wow, that's a great post B. :-)

Yep, can't really add anything else, great summary Blutarski!

-Will

From my reading the Germans at least fired wing turrets on their battlecruisers cross-deck during combat operations. As for the concussion on those sighting hoods, I completely understand. Even on a (relatively) small gun like the 120 mm on the tank I was on (M1A1 AIMS variant), the concussive force from a tank firing near parallel (so that the angle from muzzle to adjacent crewmember was approximately 135 degrees at approximately 15-20 m distance, the force was not enough to injure, but it did feel like you were getting hit in the head by a heavy blunt physical object if you were standing the up in the adjacent tank's loader or commander's hatch. I can only imagine the force of having a 11-15 inch gun firing overhead. That said the force within a semi-closed driver's hatch, or if the crew was recessed (hatches open) in the turret was reduced to a negligible factor. Hope that gives some bit of perspective for those who have not been around live artillery pieces.

Happy to be of service.

B

Best wishes to all for the holidays and new year.

"Now the starboard side was engaged and the crew of Q turret were able to repay their brothers in P turret for their experiences of muzzle blast with their own cross deck firing. "I had ‘Q' turret firing across the deck,' wrote Smyth-Osborne in ‘P' turret. ‘They practically put my turret out of action, their blast deafening and dazing my gunlayers, spotters and trainers. In fact making all those in the gun house partly damned stupid. In the excitement the Marines in ‘Q' were firing on some dangerous bearings."

(Battlecruiser Invincible, The History of the First Battlecruiser 1909-16, by V.E. Tarrant, 1986, at pages 66-67)