Id. british gun

[Urmel]

I know nuffink about them coastal guns.

[Sturm78]

Hi all,

Any idea about this coastal gun?

Image from Ebay
Sturm78

[verdenpark]

This looks very much like the 4"/45 Mk.IX/X on the Nav Weapons website, but without the shield.

[Sturm78]

Thank you for your help, verdenpark.

Sturm78

[Sturm78]

Hi all,

How is possible to differenciate between 127mm 60pdr Mk.II and 114mm 4.5in Mk.I guns ????

Here, an image from Ebay: 60pdr or 4.5in gun?

Sturm78

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi all,

How is possible to differenciate between 127mm 60pdr Mk.II and 114mm 4.5in Mk.I guns ????

Here, an image from Ebay: 60pdr or 4.5in gun?

Sturm78

Hi Sturm

It is not possible to tell them apart from photos. The 4.5 inch MkI was a 60 pdr MkII with a new liner inserted in the barrel. They can be indentified if the unit markings on the towing vehicles can be seen as medium regiments in the BEF either had 60 pdrs or 4.5 inch guns not both in the same regiment.

Clive

[Paul_G_Baker]

Hi all,

Any idea about this coastal gun?


Sturm78

I think (from the diameter of, and the fact that it is a screw, breech) that this is either a 5.5in ex-naval, or a 6in gun. There is a wider version of what looks to be the same emplacement between pages 128 and 129 in Egbert Kieser's "Hitler on the Doorstep". In that one, the photographer was standing in a slightly different position, and at least one shell can be seen on the floor of the gunpit.

From the look of the emplacement, it seems to be one of the weapons installed in the 'Emergency Batteries' in 1940 as an anti-Sealion measure - all sorts of obsolete and obsolescent guns were pulled out of (mainly Royal Navy) Depots to be mounted in them!

[Clive Mortimore]

I think (from the diameter of, and the fact that it is a screw, breech) that this is either a 5.5in ex-naval, or a 6in gun. There is a wider version of what looks to be the same emplacement between pages 128 and 129 in Egbert Kieser's "Hitler on the Doorstep". In that one, the photographer was standing in a slightly different position, and at least one shell can be seen on the floor of the gunpit.

From the look of the emplacement, it seems to be one of the weapons installed in the 'Emergency Batteries' in 1940 as an anti-Sealion measure - all sorts of obsolete and obsolescent guns were pulled out of (mainly Royal Navy) Depots to be mounted in them!

Hi Paul

I think it looks more like a Naval 4 inch BL Mk IX, http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk9.htm.
The 5.5 inch guns had twin recoil cylinders above the barrel. The 6 inch guns had their recoil cylinders below the barrel. Some later marks of naval 6 inch had twin recoil cylinders above the gun but I am not sure they were used as coast defence.

[Paul_G_Baker]

Hi Paul

I think it looks more like a Naval 4 inch BL Mk IX, http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk9.htm.
The 5.5 inch guns had twin recoil cylinders above the barrel. The 6 inch guns had their recoil cylinders below the barrel. Some later marks of naval 6 inch had twin recoil cylinders above the gun but I am not sure they were used as coast defence.

Hi Clive

There is certainly a strong resemblance. I append a scan of the photo in Kieser's book for your comparison:



I've done what I could to clean it up via Photoshop.

Macksey's "Invasion" has a photo of a Langdon Battery 6in (taken from about 8 o'clock of the gunhouse) - which appears to show a single, top-mounted, recoil cylinder - although the lighting inside the gunhouse is poor, to say the least! Hogg also shows this arrangement in the Mk 24 mounting - although the piston-end connects just in front of the breech.

That said, I counted the bodies in the Kieser photo - isn't ten men a little excessive for a lowly 4in?

[Clive Mortimore]

Hi Paul

The text from the Hogg book states that the 6 inch Mk24 had a all-enveloping gun-house type shield. The two photos in the book show a gun at Dover in its shield and the other photo shows a gun without its shield in what looks like a factory photo. It has a massive mounting compared to that of the gun in the photos on this thread.

As for the ten man crew. I would discount the officer on the left of the photo as being a crew member. I am not certain if the sergent is a crew member or a gunnery instructor. The other NCO (number of cevrons not fully visable) looks like he is checking the aim of the gun layers so again is he a gunnery instructor? The other crew members are wearing 1908 webbing which suggest they may be Home Guardsmen and could well be on firing practice. The additional photos on the Naval Weapons site has a photo of a seven man crew on board HMS Sir John Moore http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk9_pics.htm. The shells and charge cases in both the photo you scanned and the one on the Naval Weapons site look the same.

Yours

Clive

[Paul_G_Baker]

OK, Clive! I stand corrected!

[Sturm78]

Thank you for your help, Clive and Paul.

4 inch BL Mk IX gun therefore

In the other hand, Can anyone help me with this gun?

Regards Sturm78

[jaguh]

Thanks for your replies,

Here a (random) reply in the thread "Id british gun":

"Cor Bliemy Mate, I think you are right, both are either a 4.5 inch Mk1 or a 60 pdr Mk1 or 2 on a MkIV carriage. Visually there was no difference between the 4.5 inch and the 60 pdr as a 4.5 was a relined 60 pdr. Both weapon types saw service with the BEF. "

It seems that both, the bore and the pdr, were used to name a gun. Why would one be a 60 pdr and the other a 4.5 inch?

Why not 60 pdr MkX and 60 pdr MkY (since it was only relined)?

Do they (the British) still do that or do they follow NATO and state the bore only? (metric!! no more 36" = 3' = 1 yd) :roll:

Jaguh

[jaguh]

Sorry,

the above reply was meant to be posted in the "British gun nomenclature" thread.

Jaguh

[Clive Mortimore]

Thank you for your help, Clive and Paul.

4 inch BL Mk IX gun therefore

In the other hand, Can anyone help me with this gun?

Regards Sturm78

Hi Sturm

BL 4 inch Mk VII

Clive