Fire Control

[@stevensheldon9271]

It's impressive to see someone who works with a historical artifact who has the passion and knowledge to share the information with the public! Great video!

[@maxcaysey2844]

Ryan (and his team I assume) does an amazing job!

[@bobg25507892]

During 1969 was on the bridge of a british Shell Tanker saiiling out of Danang at night. I saw a very large target on the radar at 1 mile with NO lights showing. Whenshe was abeam the guns fired over our ship. We saw an orange light the flames and the horrendous noise of the 16 inch shell screaming through our hair. It was the New Jersey on station off Danang.

[@DoyleHargraves]

I bet you shit yourself. Was there any visible sign of the shells? Like a glowing tracer or anything? I've always wondered if the shells would be visible in flight, but I reckon daylight would be handy.

[@brianchapman3701]

So damn happy BB62 did not mistake your ship as an enemy vessel! Best wishes.

[@dingbell5498]

Hemisinus, or Helisoma?

[@bobg25507892]

@@dingbell5498 hemisinus

[@bobg25507892]

Yes i served on the Shell tanker Heldia 1967 tet offensive, Hanetia 1968, Hemisinus 1969 and Hemitrochus 1970 ALL vietnam run JP4 for American airforce.

[@shadow_entity9191]

The thing that still blows my mind is the fact that after 40 years the range finding computers are still up to date!

[@Electronzap]

It really is amazing how accurate they were in WW2. Moving gun hitting a moving target it can't even see with limited electronics.

[@scottb7539]

The old school engineers knew what the were doing. Imagine what they could have done now.

[@AgentOffice]

War creates so much science

[@KutWrite]

Similar is the complexity of the teletypes the Navy used. Very hard to maintain, though they didn't break often. Rumor was, the inventor went crazy shortly after completing the prototype.

[@ExarchGaming]

it's what made them the most lethal battleship (of ww2), they may not have had as big of guns or as much displacement as the much larger yamato or bismarck classes, but our fire control was second to none, we were much more accurate with slightly smaller guns and significantly less displacement. Due to the amazing fire control systems we used. (I say most lethal in WW2, because the kirov class nuclear powered battleships that Russian Federation fields are...fucking deadly. thank god they're expensive and hard to produce for the russian federation)

[@SOU6900]

I can only imagine how thick the training manuals must be for the plotters and the switch boards.

[@KutWrite]

Not only that, but the FTs (Fire-Control Technicians) maintain their own equipment, unlike the radio or radar Electronic Techs.

[@TAllyn-qr3io]

He said “guess”, so perhaps it is on a matchbook cover…as everyone smoked then…and had beards…lucky bastiches there 😁

[@bobroberts2371]

I found a film from 1953 that shows the fire control computer, there are probably other films in the series on that channel since this part 1. See the vid " U.S. NAVY BASIC MECHANISMS OF FIRE CONTROL COMPUTERS MECHANICAL COMPUTER INSTRUCTIONAL FILM 27794 " on the channel " PeriscopeFilm " This channel has lots of vintage films.

[@francisbusa1074]

State of the art in 1943. Still highly effective over many decades later!

[@KutWrite]

In 1960s NROTC classes we had to learn the basics of operating them and a 5" gun. They had working units in one classroom. The gun was outside.

[@realcygnus]

Museum Class marvels of mechanical(mostly) engineering !

[@A2Wx8]

I've never been anything but amazed by the Mark 8. What it could do all electromechanically before the days of cheap and ubiquitous electronics is incredible.

[@ericcorse]

Gives you a whole new appreciation for the guys with slide rules.

[@Thornbush434]

Yes and the unappreciated ability of the electromechanical is it is immune from EMP. It can operate in EMCON Delta ( ship board silence of electrical transmission or radiation to tack and kill a target while completely dark. Modern warships cannot do that.

[@henryostman5740]

what is even more amazing is the ones that preceded this, they were totally mechanical and had a clockwork mechanism, you had to wind them up before battle, I guess if the battle raged on you had to rewind at some point. Way back when, the US had some fine optical and watchmaking talent. The gun director was a British invention and given to the US during WWone.

[@henryostman5740]

I have visited both the NJ and the Missouri, on the latter I stood where McArthur stood during the surrender signing ceremony. It is great that we preserve these ships. The Brits, who also produced some great battleships and battlecruisers' sent all of theirs to the breakers. These are as much a part of history as are the battlefields such as Gettysburg and Normandy. i've been to both.

[@stevendaugherty7590]

Thank you very much for the detailed description! I recently toured the USS Iowa, BB-61, in San Pedro, CA, and your video answered many of the questions that I had regarding the equipment that I had seen in the plotting rooms. Awesome video!

[@brianchapman3701]

Ryan, I've watched a number of your videos so far. Outstanding, because they are highly informative, but I enjoy the humor when it pops up, too (crawling thru the 16-inch barrel, for example). I am a patron of the USS Iowa museum and a plank owner of the planned Naval Surface Museum of which Iowa is the centerpiece. I regret to say I'm retired and have limits on what I can send you, but I am contributing the dollars I can to you and our sister ship. I am a civilian, but I love me the Iowas, all of them. Best wishes for a strong recovery from the Covid crisis. Brian Chapman / Cedar Rapids, Iowa

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Thanks for your support of the fleet, happy new year!

[@nonamesplease6288]

This is great content. I took my boys on the firepower tour. The look of "wow, cool!" in their eyes at the awesome amount of power on this ship was amazing. Everyone should go to see the old lady. So sorry that circumstances have caused you to close. You guys are victims of circumstances beyond your control and I wish you the best.

[@ammoalamo6485]

Around 1999 I took a few photos of battleship Alabama, including inside the #2 turret local control space. It was crowded - from standing on the deck, I had to crawl through a tiny hatch almost straight up into the turret at the back. There was barely enough room for me to turn around, and the space seemed to be walled off from the rest of the turret. The optics of the rangefinder were either disconnected or defunct somehow because I could turn the focus wheel, and the image tried to change focus, but it never did come into focus as I knew a rangefinder should from my use of rangefinder cameras. The whole space appeared to be for only one person, and that's it. I imagine the noise of a salvo would have been tremendous in that small space so close to the guns.

[@Rick-nq3mz]

My dad was a fire control tech P/O 2nd on the USS Paul Revere in Vietnam 64. He told me how range finders work and the guns work together and lining everything up. This is cool info brings back memories on what he said. Thanks

[@KennethStone]

I've visited some of the base end stations here in the Bay Area, both north and south of the Golden Gate Bridge, and they controlled the firing of the guns to prevent any enemies sailing in from the pacific. It was the same basic concept- two target spotters a set distance apart fed distance, angle, and speed data to the fire control plotters who plotted a firing solution for the gun batteries. It is absolutely amazing to see the size and scope in person. I'm just SO happy that American mainland was never attacked.

[@KutWrite]

Hi Ryan. Thanks for the tour. I remember a couple of things differently: 1. The optical rangefinder solves range too. It has a known base of the triangle, the length between the "eyes" at the end, and knows the angle of the mirrors at both ends when the operator superimposes both images into one. So, angle-side-angle solves for the common base of the two right-triangles thus created. 2. The stable element continuously compensates for the ship's angle to the horizon. So, it doesn't have to wait to come back to "zero" before firing. If you watch a film of the guns while they're slaved to a director, they continually "wave" to keep the barrels at the right angle to fire at any time. I always thought the FTs (Fire-Control Technicians) were the most impressive rating. They maintain their own equipment, unlike the radio or radar Electronic Techs. The latter two maintain and repair the gear in their respective specialty, but Radiomen or Radarmen operated them. I think both ratings were later incorporated into something else, as so many have been over the years (e.g. DC (Damage Control) men are now within the HT (Hull Technician) rating... though that may've changed from my last active duty post.

[@mikeh.8912]

Yeah, I was wondering about #2. There's a video of Missouri firing from within the gun room, and while they are waiting for their turn to fire, the gun is just moving up and down as if fixed onto a target. That movement would make sense if it is locked target-wise while the ship rocks a bit.

[@ironhorse3497]

WOW.... Crazy brilliant folks designed this system !! God Bless America and FJB!

[@shoominati23]

Redundancy would play a big part I should imagine. There would be nothing like having the ship becoming a multi-billion dollar paperweight because the enemy's last salvo landed close and splinter damage took out a $15 sensor.

[@alzinn8231]

I was stationed at the Gunfire Support Trainer, Naval Amphibious School in Little Creek in 1972-73. All east coast gunships came thru our facility for training. We had Mark 1A's for 5"38 and Mark 47's for 5" 54 destroyers and Mark 8 Rangekeepers/Mark 48's for the few operational crusiers - which used the same system as the battleships. We also operated the live gunfire range at Bloodsworth Island. Mostly DD's and the occasional CL. Unfortunately, all the BB's were parked at that time, so I never got to see a live 16", but I remember the Lowry DD-770, had a stable element malfunction and exploded a 5" round right over our spotting tower at Bloodsworth, and I can tell you that even puny 5" rounds get loud up close!

[@KutWrite]

Were you an FT? IF so, ever open up one of those Mk Ia's?

[@alzinn8231]

@@KutWrite I did - bringing the "A" test inline

[@Hustler9g]

The redundancy on redundancy on redundancy is insane.

[@LegitAjit]

I am not going to lie, I learned about this channel from a world of Warships live stream. Great content, I hope everything goes well for y'all.

[@bigtom1948]

Not every fire control system worked as well as it should have. I worked with the Mk 56 system paired with a Mk 1A computer on a Garcia Class DDE (Frigate). Something was terribly wrong with the system at least on that ship, it was always unstable and often inaccurate. We spent many, many hours just trying to meet minimal readiness standards, forget about excelling. The Fire Control Techs had a awful time of it and a couple of them were well seasoned and highly skilled in electronics. I wasn't that skilled as I was a new E-3 while on that ship but assisting and tool carrying helps too. Even the yard dog techs tried to help but they couldn't find the stability issues either. Nothing worse than chasing intermittent, unrelated electronic failures. So frustrating, several times during exercises the ship was forced to rely on local gun fire control from the gunners mates! Thank goodness we never went into actual battle with that ship and system.

[@3mtech]

did this system use 400 hz MG

[@barrywilkinson3420]

Tom, I was an FT2 on a Fletcher class destroyer and the MK 56 system was a bear. We had one FT who spent his entire tour trying to get the thing to work right.

[@dreweisenhofer5985]

I really want to thank you and all of your crew for jobs well done! Every time we visit, there are more areas open, and your staff is very helpful and knowledgeable! Can't wait to visit in the spring!

[@rumanda36]

Really enjoy your channel and how thoroughly you cover this topic. We get to see things we probably wouldn’t get an opportunity to normally view, your delivery is pure genuine. Just a pleasure, thank you.

[@stevengrant4651]

I served as an FTG on a LSD from 1969 to 1972. We had a hand held optical range finder. We also had the Mk 56 Gun Fire Control system. Much smaller versions of the mechanical computers here. Radar tracked automatically. Gyro stabilization on the director. Auto inputs from wind speed and direction, ships speed and heading. You had to manually input shell speed. Rumor was that the Mk 1able computer for the Mk 37 Gun Fire Control system was Designed by one man. After he finished he went insane. He was put in a hospital. The Navy found out that the computer needed a star shell computer. So they brought the original designer out the the hospital to design the star shell computer. When he finished the star shell computer they sent him back to the hospital.

[@frankmount8407]

I think that guy's name was Bill LaMay !! I was on the aircraft carrier USS Randolph from '64 to '69 as an FT ! I worked with a 56 system the whole time I was in !! Most of the system was in metal drawers much like filing cabinets, and in order to maintain this stuff the drawers were opened and closed quite often ! Bundles of wires were just as often breaking !! Sometimes, when we ourselves couldn’t solve these problems, this guy from the hospital was brought in !! As I remember, he was quite docile, even pleasant, and knew every wire and connection !! He had this habit of making these strange grunting/whining noises randomly that often surprised us and got us trying to control our laughter (I was eighteen at the time!) !! When he left, we admitted how glad we were to have him but we felt so bad for him ! Yikes !! Memories from so long ago !!

[@cherlonmathias1646]

My dad was in Spot 1 when he was on the New Jersey in '68

[@theloneranger8725]

The Mark 8 computer is basically a hyped up, more complex slide rule, which I was still using when I began college in 1968. The slide rule was the analog math personal computer before the digital PC was introduced to the public. It was a little cumbersome to use, but like the Mark 8, if you lined up the correct numbers, you got the correct answer. The big advantage of it, and the Mark 8 on battleships, is that you didn't have to worry about a software error (a bug) messing up the result. I was in information technology for 47 years, and take it from me, that's the best reason for not replacing the Mark 8 with a digital computer on the ships. The trade off is that the operators have to be intelligent enough to use it correctly.

[@yourdiytechlife]

Those analog computers are fascinating. Good video👍

[@muskiedave6463]

My father served as a CPO in R Division from Dec 43 - Nov 44. Saw a lot of action in WWII.

[@Slarti]

Interesting, your description of visual range finding might help with an explanation of parallax. Easy for me to say I know.

[@gowanfenley]

Fantastic detail on the fire control systems. Thank you for this!

[@robertadamcik9179]

I was Gunnery Officer on a DD in the early '90s, and I can say that the digital Mk 152 fire control computer I had for my 5/54 guns was way less reliable than the Mk 8 computer. It wasn't until we had the UYK-7 computers that reliability increased.

[@smhedge]

I was an FC back then. The first fire control computer I worked on was the MK 152 (but it was on the Terrier Missile System). Even though I never saw a Mk 8, I can believe that you are right. After the Mk 152, I worked on the UYK-43 and UYK-44 which pretty much replaced the UYK-7 and UYK-20 respectively. Those systems were orders of magnitude more reliable than the Mk 152.

[@ionstorm66]

MK1 and MK8 are still considered effective enough to export controlled.

[@ritaloy8338]

The DD I was on was a Gearing Class and we had the Mk 1A. The problem that the 5" - 38 cal had in Vietnam was that they were still in range of shore batteries. That was taken care of with the Rocket Assisted Projectile.

[@marcr.6191]

This was a very interesting video

[@06colkurtz]

The M48/60 series tank use the coincidence range finder which operates in a similar manner. One mirror is fixed, the other is moved by the ranging wheel. The TC observes the target, then rotates the ranging wheel until he sees a single image. When the fixed mirror image is coincident with the movable image the range is known

[@SomeRandomHuman717]

And the joke was, if you somehow got the correct range, it was merely a coincidence LOL. The keys to this system were (1) maintenance (your turret mechanics better be purging the rangefinder with nitrogen every quarterly) and (2) proper boresighting which included a boresight target set up at a known range, so that the rangefinder could be benchmarked against the known range.

[@curtiscains8533]

I realize this was a difficult video to make. I appreciate all your effort Ryan Thank You

[@sparty94]

very cool. those analog computers are really interesting pieces of history. all that switch gear and redundancy, the navy brains really think these things through.

[@8MoonsOfJupiter]

That was amazing - so interesting to see these incredible pieces of machinery and your detailed explanation of how they operate; thank you!

[@rowdybme4584]

How the heck, as a Texan, I am addicted to New Jersey Battleship vids, I will never know.

[@KutWrite]

Well, the Texian Navy didn't stick around long. It's all one now. I think you have a couple of nice museum ships in your state, though.

[@tobyw9573]

As I recall reading, there has been a nuclear round designed for an 8" artillery piece that would theoretically have a very great range in a 16" sabot round. Once a projectile gets up where the air is really thin, they will carry very long distances (q.v Saddam's 100-mile artillery project).This could fit well into the F-35 battlespace integrated control environment currently being perfected. If Iowas can shoot 2x 16" rounds/minute, that would equal 18 rounds/minute from 9 guns. Sounds like it would be competitive with missiles using guided rounds.

[@Shinzon23]

Two things; 1. Please get a lapel microphone so we get better audio. 2. I wish that the turrets still turned when commanded to from the fire control room; be awesome to hear the iconic ominous hum and see 16 inch rifles smoothly following the commands from the fire control room.

[@philbell7952]

You’re lucky to have this!

[@Shinzon23]

@@philbell7952 ????

[@rudimustermann953]

spooky, the wheel in the middle was turning by itself in the beginning of the video :)

[@patnd5c68]

I've really enjoyed your videos and find them pretty interesting. Good luck with your re-opening tomorrow!

[@scottbruner9987]

They have backups for their backup's backups. Amazing.

[@billcat1840]

Amazing how much you know! Capital ships have always interested me but until I found you, I had no idea how they really worked... Being able to hit something 23 miles away just fascinates me. Thanks 😊

[@NathanOkun]

A couple of technical points about the Mark 38 (and 5"/38 secondary/AA Mark 37) fire-control systems: (1) The optical cross-director range-finders were all STEREO type. This means they tried to make your head as large as they were with your eyes as wide apart as the two mirrors at the end of the cross-arms. This allowed the user to move the mirrors with a hand-crank until the target looked like it was directly between (in distance) several marks cut into the eyepiece lenses you were focusing your eyes through. This gave extremely good ranges (the Germans used it too), but unfortunately, many people could not use this technique due to severe eye strain after a few minutes. It is like looking at your finger nearly touching your nose by crossing your eyes, in effect. The British used a different system, the COINCIDENCE rangefinder, with one mirror showing the upper part of the scene and the other showing the lower part, so you merely cranked until you could line up the two at some sharp point that overlapped both to get the range. This worked in good visibility, but if any obscuration at all (weather, smoke, heat shimmer, etc.) occurred that blurred the alignment, the range could be rather bad. However, anybody could use this method with rather less eye strain, so, with lots of experience, you could get reasonable ranges, on the average, though it might take longer than with a stereo design. Some countries, like Italy, had BOTH types in their main high-position directors. (2) (a) Once you have the range and bearing info, you have to get it accurately to a very small error to the range-keeper/ballistic calculator for conversion to a gun aiming solution, and then get the firing orders just as accurately to the weapons being aimed. Due to the high precision needed, especially in bearing and elevation angles if you are not to completely miss the target "by a mile" (no joke at long range!), this was a big problem. Talking over a voice-pipe or sound-powered phone headset was not adequate, especially when firing at high-speed aircraft or fast-maneuvering ships -- modern radar systems transmit this target information at many times PER SECOND to get it right. Various methods of electrical transmission were attempted over the years, with the first one being the "step-by-step" system that could be used in the DC powered ships of the early 20th Century. This had the wiring with many closely-spaced contacts in a ring, each one meaning a specific value of whatever data was being transmitted (in some minimal-value fixed steps). You sensor in the director (target bearing. elevation, and range) would be connected to this ring with a rotating contact that would move a fixed amount on the ring as the data being transmitted got larger or smaller, with the effect being tiny steps from minimum (zero point) to maximum (almost back to the zero point after going entirely round the ring). The receiver had a similar ring and would go round until it hit the circuit that was live with the data value. This unfortunately had a problem in that shock could bump the rotating arm or the ring and you were now giving bad information AND NOT KNOWING IT! Also, as finer steps were needed with faster aircraft, for example, the design had to be rebuilt from scratch to allow this. Also, if you had to make the system go to more pieces of equipment, you needed to boost the DC power without changing its relative strength even slightly, since this would shift the live contact point which was giving the value needed at the receiver, scrambling your data. (b) The US came up with a better concept, though it needed AC power to use it. It had the effect of two magnetic compass needles free to rotate in a ring on a plane, one at the sender's equipment and a matching one at the receiver's equipment. Around the edge of this ring in an equilateral triangle (60-degree corners) was at each corner a separate coil of wire with the two ends connecting the transmitter with the receiver, matching them exactly. By powering up the system with AC to cause each of the coils to be independently charged, the coils would now act like small electro-magnets, forcing the transmitter needle to a fixed angle, using circuitry connected to whatever the sensor/weapon orders data needed to be transmitted, converted to an angle value between zero and 360 degrees (usually, though this varied with the design), the connection of the receiver coils to the transmitter coils made the former match exactly, within tolerances, to each other, sending the desired data. For most applications, the precision needed was greater, so a second set of paired needles paralleled the first, though this time with a 36-to-1 gear ration in their movement, an electric circuit (later a very simple digital computer program algorithm) would merge the results to tweak the final value to the one desired. Also, by using the same kind of amplifiers used in regular AM radios, the strengths of the signals could be increased to allow multiple receivers to get equally accurate data. In fact, eventually this became the basis for no-person-in-the-loop fully automatic control of weapons and radars -- "Remote Power Control" (RPC)..

[@rays7437]

Wow!

[@steelpanther88]

great video. the analog computer and the fire control was the most interesting aspect of the ship to me :)

[@TheFlatlander440]

Typically, how many crew would be manning that fire control center during battle stations?

[@theoldbigmoose]

Ryan you are an incredible historian and curator! Do you do this all from memory? Incredible presentation. We wish you all the best during your stand down. May things open up in spring with a vigor!

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

He goes by memory and the occasional post-it when we need numbers on things like other ships commissioning dates and weights of obscure things.

[@Omnihil777]

You should know that there was a real famous TV police inspector in the 80s here in germany who was called "Schimanski" Just another spelling of your name, Ryan. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst_Schimanski Loved the TV movies, he was a roughed up Columbo you could say. Love your videos about that awesome ship.

[@forebill]

I was a 5" FC on New Jersey in Sky 2. A rangefinder determines range by adjusting the angle on one of the mirrors while the other side stays fixed. When the target comes into focus as the operator adjusts the moving mirror he can then read the range from a calibrated dial.

[@grathian]

Good description of the Mk4 radar rangefinder with its A-scope display, obsolete before the New Jersey commissioned. You should know New Jersey had Mk8s, a phased array scanning a 30 degree sector around the target using a B-scope display, technology that was a decade beyond everybody but the Royal Navy. The redundant radar you mentioned atop the Mk 40 director was a Mk 4.

[@greghelms4458]

You gotta be overworked and underpaid. Kudos to you sir for passing on your passion.

[@TAllyn-qr3io]

The US NAVY has no shortage of bright work! I polished more bright work in basic, in San Diego, waiting for my Drill Company to form…maybe 10 recruits a day = deck guns, torpedoes, etc., needed polishing 😀

[@ВасяПупкин-з3ж2е]

Is there some video about those elevated rangefinder on a mast? Want to watch it...

[@craig4811]

Thank you for the tour and explanation.

[@davejohnson1819]

just for your information the radar range finder display is an 'A" scan, the same as used in early radars like the 1 at Peal Harbor on Dec 7, 1941

[@georgefranklin3222]

Thank you for a very interesting video. Something to see how complex and massive this weapon platform is. Can't begin to imagine how many sheets of plans it takes to design and build this ship. Your knowledge about this ship is very impressive.

[@fburger9953]

Hey Ryan - enjoy your videos very much and hope you are getting the support you need to keep things going! Question... Understanding there are a lot of variables, but what's the expected accuracy of the 16 inch guns overall? Say at a distance of 20 miles, how close to target could you expect your first shells to be?

[@John_Doe657]

Great tour. Fascinating how complexed these old systems where and the analog technology behind it. Kinda gives an Idea of a contributing factor that helped the US win the pacific war. Thx for the insight. Cheers from 🇸🇪

[@WhiskyCardinalWes]

It took a couple of viewings, but it finally hit me, there are CIWS still on board! I thought they would have been one of the first things the Navy pulled off of a museum ship!

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Its more of a shell of a CIWS at this point. Can't be activated or anything.

[@WhiskyCardinalWes]

@@BattleshipNewJersey Are the CIWS control rooms and workshops stripped out?

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Check this out kzbin.info/www/bejne/hKDQgnusop2FeKc

[@WhiskyCardinalWes]

@@BattleshipNewJersey LOL I should have did a little digging into the back videos!

[@billwieworka7250]

On the subject fire control when New Jersey was off Lebanon 🇱🇧 in the 84 there was incident where the 16 inch guns were used against Syrian 🇸🇾 Artillery positions. I have heard four explanations 1. was there was a coordinate error 2. There was a datum issue 3. It was intervening terrain 4. There was a firing solution issue Was there a final conclusion any information or comments would be appreciated! Thanks

[@mrz80]

I have a great time on New Jersey when I was up there a few years ago. I'd love to get back up that way.

[@cannon440]

Boy looking at the internals of this ship enforces the adage "They don't make um like they used too!"! Is it true all wiring was pure silver?

[@MoritzvonSchweinitz]

This channel is awesome. I wish there was a similar channel about other Navy's WW2 ships. Also please get a lapel mic!

[@doctordoom1337]

So much I'd like to see / hear, not sure if all of it is there. I'd like a hypothetical video on Halsey's decision and what if the fleet did make it back to the Leyte landings. In a time not too long ago, I received my history degree in naval studies. I work at a different museum in NJ/NY (spoiler for which one it is) now (also furloughed), but my college thesis was actually on the lives of sailors during WWII on the Enterprise, New Jersey, and Vicksburg (a great uncle served on that ship).

[@thorerik678]

I was an Electronics Technician Chief during the 70-90's. I would like to see radio and associated spaces that supported communications. I am interested in the type of crypto coding units such as KWR-37, KW-7, KG-14, KY-8, etc. All this equipment should have been replaced during the gulf war period so it may not be on board. You might have examples of KG-36 and 40 crypto units. "KG" is short for Key Generator. What kind of High Frequency transmitters were aboard (T-2's?)? This ship should have also had satellite comms such as the WSC-3 radio set used for UHF line of sight ship to ship coms and satellite link for over the horizon comms. General HF comms were supported by R-1051 radio sets. Associated equipment to recover Keying broadcast messages were URA-17 comparator/converter sets. They took the high/low audio tones recovered by the radio and converted them to open and close a keying loop of DC current which was then sent through the crypto equipment to be decoded and then sent to a teletype printer. At the end of my career communications had advanced to such an extent message traffic was sent to an individual's computer directly much like email we have today. Didn't need Radiomen to sort all the traffic much like mailmen sorting letters to specific addresses.

[@stevecooper2873]

I recall, years ago, being in a gun turret with my young son, who of course was being introduced to 'modern' solid state computers of the day [90s] and him looking at a panel taller and wider than us both labeled "fire control computer". He scanned over it a bit, and turned and asked "but, where is the computer?" I don't think he believed my explanation of gear driven computers that computed just fine before the digital age. [Battleship Massachusetts]

[@KanalFrump]

Just how many miles of signal wiring is used to connect all the different parts of the weapon systems on the ship?

[@leggomyeggo2073]

So much complexity and all the engineering and fabrication was done with a lot of brain, pencil, paper and experience power. Once built, one can only imagine the resources needed for commissioning and it's shakedown so that everything works in harmony as it is supposed to. No email, CAD/CAM, even faxes, just old fashioned snail mail, memo's, phone calls and onsite communication. It tires me just thinking about it.

[@josephstevens9888]

Don't forget slide rulers!

[@ritaloy8338]

Sorry to break the news to you but the Fax Machine has been around before WWI

[@stevecooper2873]

@@ritaloy8338 Twas very crude tho.

[@johnwilkinson7370]

could you show radio room, and the secure radio in the New Jersey. I was a radioman on the USS Ozark MCS-2.

[@envitech02]

Ryan is not perfect but then so are we all. But when it comes to PASSION for his favourite subject, I'd rate him a 15 out of 10. I'd love to meet him someday and chat and argue all day long about battleships and WWII stuff. A six pack of beer would come in handy, plus plenty of hotdogs and snacks or KFC. That's because we'd forget about lunch and dinner.

[@Sigmagnat650]

This is incredible. My perception is that the average layperson thinks "WW2 was just WW1 with tanks and faster planes". When you consider that this sort of technology was floating around in the 40's... dang.

[@MrDaddydid]

I would love to see a video on the 'Crows Nets'. I have never even see a photo of the insides of any.

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Check this out: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hXO2dodootCCf7c

[@laurawerner]

Nice video! If you haven't done so already, it would be great to see a video that focuses (ha!) on how those optical rangefinders work. Extra bonus points if you can get any video of what the rangefinder operator would see when looking into the eyepieces! (I have no idea if that is practical, but it would be extremely cool to see.)

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Check this out: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qavbf32vmaqkhdU The lenses are currently covered by armored covers that are basically impossible to pull off so not much we can do about seeing out of them

[@laurawerner]

@@BattleshipNewJersey Thanks!

[@dirkbroegger7303]

Thank's a lot, great and interesting documentation.

[@plutonium87]

Very interesting video and nice presentation

[@dfe3]

Excellent video!!

[@stevensheldon9271]

This video makes me want to come see the New Jersey just so I can hear you talk about it! :)

[@pizzafrenzyman]

Fascinating topic. By far the most interesting jobs onboard. I remember reading somewhere that the fire control computers would also account for the coriolis effect of the earth's rotation. Who is deciding which target(s) to engage and which fire control system is going to be used for each target? Do those orders come from the CIC?

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Generally, yes.

[@edgarlatulip4820]

those old "range only" type radar displays usually were set up to give 2 peaks..........the 1st is the transmit pulse, the 2nd is the distance.

[@tonydeleo3642]

Would be great to go into the machine shop, the kingdom of the machinist mate

[@allaboutboats]

No, a machine shop is the home of Machinery Repairmen not Machinists Mates. Confusing Names admittedly, but the Machinists Mate is stationed down in the engine room operating the Steam Powered equipment like pumps, turbine generators and oil purifiers and main engines. I was a MMC(SW) so this is my specialty.

[@kriskelley5216]

actually the Machinery Repairman (MR) is the rate

[@ColoradoStreaming]

Nice Bausch and Lomb ad at 5:05.

[@treaty92]

Show us what it looks like, looking through the optical range finder

[@jonleonard538]

Length of base line and angles associated allows range finding.

[@nikolasbbq]

MINDBLOWING - love this stuff!

[@stradplayer90]

The USS Mass is standing at the top of the conning tower and gives me the impression that is their primary spot.

[@barrykery1175]

That's was pretty neat. I would love to have seen the mechanical analog computer being built and calibrated. That is simply amazing. I always thought the ship's gyro would keep the gun barrels trained on the target as the ship rolled? Just a guess, I guess I guess wrong? Is there only one gyro on the ship or one per mount? What about a gyro for the 5" 38's? Out destroyer had one pretty big gyro in CIC. By the way, I worked at the Bethlehem Steel where the 16" gun barrels were made. The last time I was on the NJ, the guy that gave us the tour, who actually could have been you(?), said there were no spare barrels for the ship. He was correct. There is a gun barrel on display in what was the plant but is now the casino. That barrel is in fact a 14" gun barrel. I am enjoying every one of your videos I saw so far. I find new ones everyday. Suggestion, have whoever is working the camera attach a wired mic to you. There are times I am struggling to hear you. Barry G. Kery

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

We do have a few gyros, but not one for each individual gun.

[@RF590KG84]

Did the turrets have their own stable element for local control? I'm taking it there was no active stabilization of the big guns from your description, they fired when the ship rolled back. But what about pitching motion? That would have had the same effect surely? I'm assuming the 5 inch turrets were fully actively stabilized with reference to roll and pitch, as AA fire was all about rate of fire, you couldn't wait for the ship to roll back. Very interesting, analogue computation is amazing. The C-130 E4 autopilot dated back to the same era as the Mark 8, and wasn't replaced until the mid 90s. It was more electrical than electro-mechanical, but again was analogue and so good that it worked fine and could be hooked up to modern navigation equipment such as INS. Very special people probably worked on these computers in back rooms with no windows, and all they'd talk about at parties would be the difficulty of aligning cam A234 on shaft X53. Yikes.

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

The turrets do not have their own stable vertical but by the time that you're using just the in-turret systems you're in knife fighting range and it doesn't really matter anymore. The stable vertical does do both pitching and rolling, usually you're only doing one at a time, and remember even wet battleships like the Iowas don't move all that much.

[@RF590KG84]

@@BattleshipNewJersey I was under the impression that gun alignment was critical. For example I read somewhere that it's not carried out in dry dock on some ships because the hull may flex differently than when floating, introducing a mis-alignment between the guns and directors when refloated, although that was for smaller more modern ships of lighter construction. The Iowa class could definitely pitch and roll a bit however, and as the video correctly explains, even a slight change in angle at the time of firing translates into major inaccuracy over many miles. I'm surprised there isn't active stabilization of the big guns, but there you go. Certainly analogue computation was capable of calculating for roll rates and anticipating the right time to fire.

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

The stable vertical is definitely helpful on board, but you only use the systems in the turret as opposed to the complete system in Plot when all else has failed. At that point you can only fire at shorter ranges because you have to be able to see your target and being much closer requires less precision.

[@RF590KG84]

@@BattleshipNewJersey According to Navpers 16116, the Stable Element could control surface gun fire in two modes: Continuous fire, in which the guns themselves were stabilized continuously from stable element signals, as were the Director sights, and the guns fired immediately the breach was closed and the gun elevated, since they were always laid on target regardless of ship roll and pitch. This would presumably be the preferred mode in action against other battleships, in order to hit them as much as possible before they hit you. Rate of fire would therefore be limited only by the ability of the turret gun crews to reload. I note in the film of Bismarck firing against Hood and POW that the guns definitely weren't firing in perfect salvo unison, but presumably as soon as each individual gun was loaded and the breach was closed, and the gun elevated into firing position. The other mode was Selected level, where the Stable Element would only complete the trigger circuit when the ship reached the level position. You may be right that local control was entirely point and shoot from the turret, with a best guess as to when the guns were level. There was probably repeaters from the Stable Element to assist in this, as Selected Level triggered at the Stable Element could apparently be either automatic or manually by someone watching the indications and "timing" when to squeeze the trigger. This would presumably result in simultaneous salvo firing, and might have been preferred even under Director firing when visually ranging / bracketing the target. Almost certainly the 5 inch in AA mode would have to be fully stabilized throughout, there being very little hope of hitting a maneuvering aircraft except by stabilized radar / computer / Director control.

[@vgbondarev]

Ryan's face at 1:03 is the look of "Who the fuck, and why the fuck" personified LOL

[@cyberp0et]

So many things to discover...

[@Bluelagoonstudios]

I'm not sure you did a video on the ships radars? It would be very interesting subject. Thanks.

[@barriewright2857]

7:30 Bit of a sound problem due to the wind but it's still good thank you 👍. Amazing to see the analogy computer, that can't be hacked or be infected by a virus. Could that analogy computer be comparable to a modern computer and which one that's old or newish.

[@Lagniappe.]

What are the large white tanks behind you around 9:37 ? A lot of what you show looks similar to what's in the Alabama, but that is different.

[@pizzafrenzyman]

I'm going to make a complete wild-a$$-guess and say the tank on the left is related to damage control and fire suppression, and the tank on the right is a compressor for air filtration.

[@envitech02]

Wow, what complicated optics and mechanical computers!

[@bobroberts2371]

I found a film from 1953 that shows the fire control computer, there are probably other films in the series on that channel since this part 1. See the vid " U.S. NAVY BASIC MECHANISMS OF FIRE CONTROL COMPUTERS MECHANICAL COMPUTER INSTRUCTIONAL FILM 27794 " on the channel " PeriscopeFilm " This channel has lots of vintage films.

[@BrianSheppard]

Why did we have one of these on an aircraft carrier in 2004?

[@rogerlibby14613]

FIRE FIRE MIKE 103! We all know what you meant in the title .... I just couldn't resist.

[@Svilans]

If the ship takes on a list due to battle damage and is not able to reach a stable vertical, is there some kind of compensation or override for that?

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

At that point, you're not firing at far enough away targets for that to matter

[@bashkillszombies]

That Mk VIII is similar to what German U-boats were using at the end of WWI. Scary how behind we allies were.

[@rays7437]

Axis

[@johnknox5692]

i donated thk for explanation on all of this equipment how it used, im sure you have done alot of reading

[@phil20_20]

Good Stuff!

[@EtzEchad]

I remember seeing a room like that many years ago. I'm pretty sure it was on a battle ship but I can't remember which one. It was before my dad died, so it probably was in the early 90s. Do you have any idea which ship it might've been? It wouldn't have been the New Jersey if that became a museum ship in 99.