do big guns have a modern role?

[eatthis]

27!?
Do you have a breakdown of what they all do?

tank turret  ----   battleship turret

where can i find that kit?

[kitnut617]

tank turret  ----   battleship turret

where can i find that kit?

No idea, you'd have to ask the treadheads.

Reading about it, it was an actual proposal that Krupp made to Hitler and that was a battleship turret with the center gun & equipment removed. 'Course, Hitler loved it and ordered into production, Speer though cancelled the order later.

JUst had a look on Hannants' website, they have them

[pyro-manic]

The turret is derived from that found on the "panzerschiff" heavy cruisers (also known as "pocket battleships"), featuring 28cm guns:

[Captain Canada]

I have always wanted to build a BBG or whatever, but for the CDN Navy. The problem is, so many years have gone by between wanting to and not building it, that now I don't believe that the big guns have a place in combat ! All that infrastructure etc. clogging up the ship.....leave that space for fuel and ords for the air component.

Mind you, I'd still like to build a giant tank like the ones above, only that would be late WWII stuff.

[Steel Penguin]

Eatthis,  not that kit but   http://www.forgedinbattle.com/index.php?cPath=22_38         its 15mm scale ( I think around 1:100  )  just be prepared for the cost 

[Gondor]

Eatthis,  not that kit but   http://www.forgedinbattle.com/index.php?cPath=22_38         its 15mm scale ( I think around 1:100  )  just be prepared for the cost 

That's pre built and die-cast. If it were a kit I would expect it to be cheaper.

Gondor

[Steel Penguin]

Gondor, im just glad it is resin and low part count, if it was cast in white metal I dread to think what it would weigh     Ive a 1:56 Chieftain  that's all white metal and that came in at round a Kilo, I had to put it on a plsati card base otherwise every time it was picked up the side skirts would have crunched.

My options on the modern Big gun, is that there useful to have to drop large things from a long way off, with a shell being very difficult to intercept currently,  the Gerald Bull "supergun" satellite launch idea was an interesting step up the Tech face, and seems to have vanished again,   But barrel erosion and the problem of manufacture and the low call for replacement makes it an industry that's not likely to re emerge.  Using a Gauss / rail gun / EM /Maglev system may well be a way forward but ( as far as I know) require massive power output and control to get a similar mass to target, which make using them on most mobile systems almost impractical,  you could use a nuke powered ship, but the problem of engineering it for the recoil forces from the start would mean a design from the ground up that would be different from most ( if not all) post cold war designs.
hmm which way to go? 

[DarrenP]

the size of rounds in big guns also gives space for guidance packages and range enhancement in form of motors or aerodynamic fixes

[NARSES2]

Would the electronics in a guidance package survive the blast ?

[PR19_Kit]

Would the electronics in a guidance package survive the blast ?

Not a problem with today's solid state electronics. We used to sell test machines that could generate over 50,000G for testing stuff like that.

[pyro-manic]

IIRC the US navy's next gen gun has had some issues with the guidance for the shells. They're so advanced they're basically guided missiles, but building them to cope with being fired from a gun has been challenging. Makes them very expensive...

[PR19_Kit]

IIRC the US navy's next gen gun has had some issues with the guidance for the shells. They're so advanced they're basically guided missiles, but building them to cope with being fired from a gun has been challenging. Makes them very expensive...

While the electronics could survive the firing the moving parts that steer the shell would be tough to design and build for sure.

[rickshaw]

Would the electronics in a guidance package survive the blast ?

What the (in)famous Dr. Bull did during the days of Project HARP was to fill the shell containing the electronics with fluid which would, after the shell had started accelerating, drain out, effectively making the interior solid, so the fragile (for the days - the early 1960s) electronics were cushioned against the shock.  Apparently it worked quite well.   He reported considerable success with this method and proposed big guns as viable alternatives to rockets for launching small satellites.   I'd assume optics could be protected in the same way, although how you'd clean them afterwards, I have no idea.   I am also unsure what fluid was used.  I'd assume some sort of oil, rather than water.

[PR19_Kit]

A silicone based fluid might work quite well. It has a very high damping factor and is used in dashpots etc. for that sort of purpose.

[Go4fun]

Let's try this for the battle wagons like the USS Missouri.
PSYCHOLOGICAL Having been between simple field artillery and their target range hearing a distant rumble of thunder then the distinctive scream of shells overhead followed by the sound and feeling of the ground shake was something. Even if you were not directly under the flight path it was impressive and now and then you could actually see the round flying over. My thought was "I'm sure glad those guys are on my side"!
I can only imagine what it would be like on the receiving end, to hear those giant shells, literally 1,000 lb bombs, screaming in and then the chaos when they hit. If you even heard the battle ships firing it just made you aware that there was more on the way and you couldn't out run it or hide under enough logs to save yourself.
Tell me how any missile or rocket could deliver half the terror at anywhere near the cost per round?