返回列表 回复 发帖
声望真正的命中距离如果是19000,那美国人就直接引进284算了,还自己研发什么?
19000码开火的结果是双方乱打一通,无一命中,最后停火。绝对不是什么15分钟后被弹.3 [6 b; J# H: }9 u
取得命中的是比较长的时间后的第二次接触,距离很近,说11000码并没有错。而此时沙舰雷达失灵,找不到对象,格舰与声望炮战,各自被对方命中2发。只是德国人运气差得多,一发切断了前设计指挥平台的线路,一发被打到炮塔后的测距仪卡死了一个炮塔。8 v  [' U% I" N! `1 U
鉴于战况不利,德军高速撤退,结果大浪还损毁了船体,其间沙舰A炮塔还进了水,轮机也坏了一个,总之是狼狈不堪。9 l% V5 A: S3 M
( W1 }0 U0 Y; r& {9 L1 F
这个出处也是英文的。如果英国人的284雷达+光学测距仪能在能见度极差且海况极为恶劣的情况下在凌晨4点(那时候太阳升起了没有也不知道)19000码取得命中,这表现也太大能了。. c2 D; o* P8 y0 z
: Q; U3 @! z" T7 e4 V
[ 本帖最后由 Surcouf 于 2008-10-9 08:33 编辑 ]
原帖由 oldcat 于 2008-10-8 17:33 发表 , E* Y& v( w/ `4 H1 j0 T
雷达?2 w0 E# Y  V* X+ n5 X
射击引导?2 [' }4 K1 Y1 Q$ T& g

& `0 X# ?' @7 Z6 L: h, M1 e7 A2 b8 D$ W; y6 i- a& S0 g. \
别梦了) o$ w. ?! r* n- q+ _' [
英国人那两次都是拿“光学仪器”指挥火炮打出来的
, T, m$ ~3 c) T9 @3 D5 \; I英国的火控方式是雷达+测距仪同时进行" ~; R3 x% S. O. ?. I
如果没雷达,声望连目标都找不到。19000码的第一次开火估计是雷达完全指引的,因为测距仪在这种情况下实在难以有效工作。
呵呵,我想你至少需要了解一点,284型是英国战列舰在战争前期通用的【火控雷达】- I. e3 b; \+ W# M* `  I) f
法国战列舰黎塞留号更是一直沿用此型雷达直到1951年。
6 l: s" M* ^4 l$ g! X) Z+ i1 f3 A$ H
5 k5 M1 a8 T! g" ]6 t7 ^# q* O) I根本就不可能提供火控级别的测量精度?
! ?& ^+ X3 v6 T# ~也许精度确实是差一点,可是你要说根本不能,这不是藐视皇家海军的智商么……$ D8 H( @2 y, \( t: T1 P$ p
5 b5 ~+ p& S. P0 o; I, k

& c" l7 f, {! g; E# W8 Z: r[ 本帖最后由 Surcouf 于 2008-10-8 20:29 编辑 ]
关于雷达的作用,你可以对比同一战斗中的沙恩霍斯特号。$ A$ C  p# a( K& U2 E. j8 n
沙舰的FuMo23一出故障,整个就瞎掉,目标都找不到。可见德舰也是要依仗雷达的。
别的我不想说  y  J$ F  T6 q! \/ j) L: L8 l; s
1. Type 284乃是Fire control radar,你不认它它也是火控雷达
2 p( m3 l) e8 o4 C7 f  ~2.北角海战的Duke of York用的也是284,你要说它是全靠光学仪器实现20000码左右命中的(就是打得沙舰减速那发,需要注意的是此战的海况和能见度比那次好,打了一票照明弹出去,光学与雷达配合指挥火控),那研发火控雷达也就没有必要了
% s4 r# k$ U# W7 o( k3.被命中的是格舰,沙的雷达是自己坏了,和光学仪器有关系?你真爱开玩笑! Z7 K1 t: ^, H' G4 ?3 s
4.英国的光学测距仪的基线长度可远不如德日法等国的新式战舰啊,按你说法这些家伙夜战得是相当能了,结果?雷达被各国研究者公认是夜战最重要的设备,您老人家一开口就全是测距仪的功劳了,雾岛比睿在那哭呢.  R/ R: B5 E0 s0 F5 |7 O

6 ?- x7 Y$ n+ Y0 H& k& b[ 本帖最后由 Surcouf 于 2008-10-9 08:46 编辑 ]
原来mk8只有有限的火控能力啊: D  `& w) U* a9 N
怎样解释苏里高一战中装备mk8的战舰都能发现目标并命中,而装备mk3的只有一个马里兰能有效射击?难道美国人也靠光学仪器?- i( U1 {5 p' O
这言论也忒能了3 M' h" y# w( ]9 v' i2 _8 F' {
1 l6 `' F5 m3 L& r# T
别人都当火控雷达使用并取得效果了,你硬要说什么不是,这是跟谁过不去啊?
在这里看了一圈,发现几个问题
  l/ v/ |( s" g1.某些同志有为反哈德而反德的情绪,在没有仔细查证的情况下就否定别人,动辄打成yy,这本质上与yy实在没什么分别5 f' z! M  S7 X
2.国内资料错误多不假,但在没有认真查证的情况下拿着一点只言片语的洋文来否定中文资料,实在不是什么好习惯8 P9 y. B3 J- o
3.什么是学术?难道我们查点外国二手资料看看就叫学术?把这东西当饭吃?写东西发到历史学术刊物上?退一万步说,你拿得到双方第一手档案?你能自己判断下结论吗?还是吃别人消化过的的二手货?至少我们大多数都是玩票的,还是老实点好
. v- \( m, e! [# S) a4 H3 d1 v+ s/ H5 o( G而举着"学术"的大棒来打压别人,哪怕是小白,也是很不合适的
; Z; ^, T/ Z( w. r! F. [9 x" f+ `' `8 s& L0 A3 v
除此外,微言大大的贴子等等还是很好的
我是个玩票的,不是什么搞"学术"的
* N* @" n8 U: \) j, r, k
; X+ o( R" Z* ?' [) F8 E我相信什么?笑,我是最不信中文资料的,所以会去看洋文% U7 [! y. N9 A5 t0 A3 R
那个什么地方我不知道,只是我手里的英文资料是这么说的
真是搞笑啊,现在你要做的事是举证284不是火控雷达或者在两次作战中284没起作用,是你所说的靠测距仪完成射控的。关于这一点,我可不需要你去翻哪本书,Google一下就可以了。
原帖由 oldcat 于 2008-10-9 12:03 发表 & z' e! y) U& ~6 X6 X
8 K  Z; ]& q% \; [: A8 c( `
' d: ~) Z# k+ y" F9 I& ]* a
请看清楚2 q$ o4 N, t; U  X. v
我说的是MK8和MK13
, f! t1 d! q3 i; d4 n% \
MK13具有完全射控能力,不错
5 K/ \  s: T2 h2 M, u. \5 }可是,这又如何说明MK8不具备完全射控能力?
6 i. T4 _9 K3 _' D7 b  ^/ L4 w我举的苏里高的例子可以作为MK8能够指挥射控的反例吗?
查证了一下,发现我说19000码第一次开火也是不对,11000码一说可算完全正确
$ l/ Y6 y1 u! a% [$ G7 [
* e! r4 ]! r6 ^+ Q1 i把全文贴一下
& G# V# M: p9 G  V3 K2 }% C( V
4 r' P3 K" P2 j8 E) mDuring the German invasion of Norway, the battlecruisers Gneisenau and Scharnhorst put to sea to patrol the area off Narvik, to cover the flank of the 10 destroyers sent to capture that Norwegian port. On April 9, 1940, the two were sailing in heavy weather near the Lofoten Islands. Gneisenau picked up a contact on her radar at 0430, and both ships went to battle stations. Around 0500 the navigator aboard Scharnhorst was attempting to take a navigational fix, when he reported that he had seen the flash of heavy gunfire in the mirror of his sextant. A minute later the scream of heavy incoming shells was heard on board Gneisenau: the radar contact was the battlecruiser HMS Renown and her nine escorting destroyers, also on patrol in the area. With her superior radar, she had taken the Gneisenau under fire from 11,800 yards, outside visual range in the low clouds and rainsqualls.
+ `9 S; F) T- ?# r' w
  D6 d' m* p" d* i' j/ oThe German twins returned fire three minutes later, and Renown shifted her fire to Scharnhorst at 0513. The three ships exchanged gunfire to no effect, exchanging salvoes sporadically until 0600, when the firing stopped. The weather was to rough for the destroyers to be effective. The German ships were under orders to avoid British warships, so they changed course frequently in an effort to disengage to the North. ) E5 H4 u# m% `( \3 Q. z8 e$ G2 W

2 S! I$ d$ ]3 DAt 0620, firing began again, with Renown once again targeting Gneisenau. Scharnhorst's radar malfunctioned, so her fire was completely ineffective, but within 5 minutes Gneisenau had scored two hits on Renown. One 11.1-inch shell passed through the main leg of Renown's foremast without exploding, while the second struck aft of 'Y' turret. This shell hit the starboard side hull plating between the upper and main decks, and passed through the ship above the steering gear and out the other side, also without exploding.
6 R) s# Z) ]( @3 t1 V0 H7 I: u4 Q$ H  ]' J: N+ `1 s& L
Renown answered almost immediately with two hits of her own. One of her 15-inch shells passed clean through Gneisenau's director tower without exploding, severing electrical and communication cables as it went. The debris caused by the passing shell killed one officer and five ratings, and destroyed the optical rangefinder for the forward 150mm turrets. Main battery fire control had to be shifted aft due to the loss of electrical power to the director tower. Renown's second shell struck Gneisenau's aft turret, knocking it out of action.
* |% K8 u3 P2 E: f+ w1 \
( i" }( o0 ^& Q$ k2 T. d# ?The Germans had had enough. Scharnhorst was blind, and Gneisenau had lost one third of her firepower. They ceased fire shortly after these hits, and the German twins raced northward at their best speed. It was feared that any further hits would slow one of the battlecruisers, leaving it open to torpedo attack from the British destroyers.
7 T' B! w" x! G9 N& X+ G: B
& j% s! N! |- y/ z0 ^- GAs the German ships raced north, they began to outpace the British battlecruiser. But the heavy seas took their toll: green water over the bows damaged both German ships. Water entered the forward turrets of both ships, rendering them useless due to short circuits. Scharnhorst suffered a powerplant problem, and the starboard shaft had to be shut down. The two dropped down to 25 knots, but by then they were out of radar range and Renown was unable to locate them. The German ships turned west, and after spending several days in the Arctic Ocean to throw off any British attempts to intercept them, the battlecruisers returned to Wilhelmshaven for repairs and overhaul.
这篇文章与LZ的到底那篇是正确?
  K4 v, P9 c  N( v3 c
1 h$ E- L; e& _+ e2 @" U请看第三方,沙恩霍斯特级的专题网站的记述:http://www.scharnhorst-class.dk/ ... harnweserubung.html4 T$ ]% J8 y+ U* }
$ {+ [' o5 t, F
At 0430 on 9 April the Gneisenau reported a radar contact, and both ships went to battle stations. About 0507 the enemy opened fire. At 0510 the main guns on the Scharnhorst responded the fire and at the same time the enemy was identified as a battlecruiser of the Renown Class.* A5 V+ U9 w. L8 e2 J# Y

$ f8 A* ^& o6 Q. ?' K0 Y/ Y8 xIn fact it was HMS Renown and she was accompanied by nine "H" class destroyers of the 2nd Destroyer Flotilla.
% m8 u0 K4 t/ H8 O# `+ e) m/ Q/ e/ ?! m, ~1 e% H1 @) y
In the engagement with the Renown, the Scharnhorst's radar malfunctioned, and she could not track the target. She came under fire from the HMS Renown, but repeated course changes allowed her to escape undamaged. By 0715 the German battlecruisers had outdistanced their pursuers. However, the Scharnhorst's turret Anton was put out of action by heavy seas that cascaded over the bows and into the turret through the cartridge ejection scuttles, rangefinder gear, and the gun bloomers. The ammunition hoist motor was short-circuited by seawater. When the Scharnhorst increased speed to the maximum possible, the starboard turbine had to be stopped, which slowed the two ships to 25 knots.4 T; k# T% ~$ ~* l+ `1 V

. n. d. w$ H" r* k2 l( \可见,除了部分时间上极小的差别,两者说法是基本吻合的。谁到底是正确的?谁是YY的?谁是YY反而将YY的帽子扣到别人头上的?4 [+ H2 |4 \  N% L% _

% P, q, `) G! ]( A请问了,这个叫学术?+ Q2 {" O. q; i8 {' X# O
% E1 H' P( D5 i: H. f
[ 本帖最后由 Surcouf 于 2008-10-9 12:30 编辑 ]
这是英意海军在二战的首次主力舰交战 ,虽然战列舰交火有限,但是结果却是一边倒的
- P& e4 x( p9 L" ~  S' B-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 ?5 i% r0 a( {0 i
就在同一次海战中,不妨看看这个
) k, w' o: Q! ~" W/ @4 b6 I" }  \' O3 G: u0 i3 b! q* _
Some debate is ongoing in Italy about the possibility of a hit by the Cesare on Warspite around the same time; this controversy, called "the blue smoke affair" is about a blue smoke seen rising from the Warspite by officers and lookouts aboard the Cesare. There was also an article by the Italian naval historian Enrico Cernuschi, who is considered a maverick in Italian naval and naval history circles, about the actual performance of Italian naval artillery. As of 2006 no definite conclusion on this is achieved.
不仔细还不知道,这材料真是漏洞百出
6 Q* f" z, M% c9 c
5 O& p+ P$ M' l, Y8 h/ o3 b7 L8 HAt 15:59 two shells from Giulio Cesare fell very close to Warspite. Almost immediately after one of Warspite's 381 mm rounds hit the rear deck of Giulio Cesare, setting off the stored ammunition for one of her 37mm anti-aircraft guns. The fumes from the burning ammunition were sucked down into the engine room, which had to evacuate and shut down half of the boilers. Giulio Cesare's speed quickly fell off to 18 knots and Conte di Cavour took over. Giulio Cesare and Warspite were well over 24,000 metres (26,000 yards) apart at the time of the hit, setting the record for naval gunnery against a moving target that stands to this day.
返回列表