Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
What was the difference between the Bismarck's fire control system and that of the Iowa class ?
Now I know the Germans fielded by far the best optical equipment, but that is only useful for visual contact and cant be used to accurately assess where each salvo hits. So gun laying radar was used. But what was the difference between the system used on the Bismarck class and that on the Iowa class ?
Here is something I wrote on another forum:
My reasoning is this - it is 1939 and because the KM has cancelled the Scharnhorst and Gniesenau, we have six diesel carriers with three panzerschiffe accompanied by three tankers on the high seas. They have left port escorted by the destroyers available before the outbreak of war. 1000 nm out, the heavy ships refuel from the tankers - watched by the British, who are following from a not-so-discreet distance - and then the destroyers and tankers turn back towards port. The nine ships continue, followed by the British - until nightfall, when they break up into three hunting packs, one panzerschiffe and two carriers each, and do a night sprint at high speed in three different directions.
Near the South Atlantic the raiders spring their surprise. Acting in concert, about 60 nm apart, they systematically divebomb any merchantman showing a British flag within 80-120 miles radius of their carriers. Radio silence is preserved by the use of aircraft couriers, allowing the three raiding forces to operate with stealth.
Now, the three raiding forces combine in a prearranged rendezvous, and with 144 aircraft and three panzerschiffe mounting 18 28cm guns, sweep up concentrated to escape even as the hunting groups come down spread out to hunt. The advantage of the raider in escape is now apparent: he can afford to concentrate, whereas the hunter has to spread out to search. The raider's orders are: avoid combat with superior, equal, and near-equal opponents: overwhelm weaker opponents with dive bombing and gunfire: maintain air patrols at all times in daylight and good weather so that tactical surprise cannot be achieved: try to maintain patrols as conditions permit in night and bad weather: steer to your home ports on a course that goes through the U-boat pack mid atlantic.
And the results? Well, on the side of the raiders I like these odds in 1939.
depends on who is commanding them syscom
Battleship - Texas
Battlecruiser - Alaska
Carrier - Enterprise
Heavy Cruiser - Baltimore
Light Cruiser (under 9,000 tons standard) - Fiji
Destroyer - Allen N Summers
MTB - Fairmile D
Submarine - T Class
To answer this question one has to check the primary source material GUNNERY DOCTRINE and INSTRUCTIONS, BATTLESHIPS U.S. PACIFIC FLEET. Unfortunately, they don´t explain the rational behind the spotting procedures but I remember that Bill Jurens and Brad Fisher wrote a good analysis of this in an older warships international issue, worth reading.
The US Navy deployed four types of fire control radar in 1941: CXAS-1/FA/Mark 1, FB/Mark 2, FC/Mark 3, and FD/Mark 4.
The USS IOWA´s (as well as all US BB´s with Mark 8 FCS) FC/Mark 8 radar had a significantly better range and bearing discrimination than their 1941 predecessors. In fact and compared to US cruisers, The battleships main battery had better radar about 4 times the range discrimination of +/- 15yds + 0.1% of range.
In addition to the much improved range discrimination, the advent of Mk 8 FCR continuous radar ranges, allowed an experienced rangekeeper operator to track a target to with a margin of error of 2 degrees and 2kts. This must be considered as a critical advantage. Early radar sets such as BISMARCKS DeTeG had discrimination problems as well as limited performance and (not Bimsarck´s problem but typical for period sets) slow rate of data transmission- typically early radar operators passed ranges to plot/TS via voice circuits. This had two negative effects; one is that there is an obvious lag of several to tens of seconds in the reception of said ranges while the second is that there is a larger lag in waiting for the plotting of ranges and the extraction of the observed range rate.
This allowed IOWA to spot not only a target but also the individual fall of shots, easening any correction in firecontroll solutions. Bismarck´s FC system relied on stereoscopic rangefinder (as did the US) for observing the individual fall of shot, it´s radar could find ranges to targets but couldn´t spot the fall of shots.
I was pretty familiar with Texas and actually went aboard her at San Jacinto once. ......