Japanese AA Weapon?

[Kenneth Williams]

Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?

A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.

I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!

Anyone know what this weapon was?

I can't find anything on it online and my friend can't remember the
name of it.

Kenneth Williams

[Keith Willshaw]

"Kenneth Williams" > wrote in message
...
> Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?
>
> A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
> battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.
>
> I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!
>
> Anyone know what this weapon was?

From
http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm

"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "

Keith

[av8r]

Hi

The Yamato had the following weapons dedicated for the anti-aircraft role

Six pairs of 5 inch guns

Twelve pairs of 25 mm guns

Four pairs of 13 mm guns

Cheers...Chris

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

"Keith Willshaw" > writes:

> From
> http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm
>
> "As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
> special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
> "Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed

Correction to the quoted part: `san shiki' is merely Japanese for Type
3, the short form of the name of the shell. I could't find out what
the nickname was in Japanese, but beehive is `mitsuhachi no su', not
very catchy. In the past, `beehive' was also known as `hankyujo'
(lit. 'hemisphere-shape'), which sounds a lot more likely. Anyone
else know for sure ?

--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

[WaltBJ]

I think I have identified the source of confusion here. The big guns
on the Yamato are referred to as 'the main battery'. This is a term
stemming from the old sailing ships. So when you hear someone casually
mention 'the main battery fired antiaircraft shells' one unfamiliar
with the term might assume a battery-activated antiaircraft gun. BTW
those San-Shiki shells were used but weren't effrective on aircraft.
They were also to be used to destroy merchant shipping should the case
arise. I suspect they also may have tumbled out of their racks and
detonated when the Yamato rolled onto her beam ends and blew the ship
in half. FWIW Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
coming in to sink her on that last mission - but to no avail. Wonder
what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
Walt BJ

[robert arndt]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "Kenneth Williams" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?
> >
> > A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
> > battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.
> >
> > I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!
> >
> > Anyone know what this weapon was?
>
> From
> http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm
>
> "As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
> special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
> "Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
> 2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
> rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
> desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
> projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
> oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
> bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
> tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
> degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "
>
> Keith

As noted in the link Keith provided the Musashi ruined one of her 18
inch guns the very first time she fired the Sankaiden ammo. The AA
rounds weren't bore safe and Musashi's detonated prematurely.
It should also be noted that Sankaiden ammo was not just for use by
the Japanese big battleships. The ammo was introduced in 1942 starting
with 8 inch guns and moving up to the big 18s of Yamato and Musashi.
They were, however, not effective in any caliber and most damaged the
ship's guns that fired them.

Rob

[Keith Willshaw]

"WaltBJ" > wrote in message
om...


> FWIW Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
> coming in to sink her on that last mission - but to no avail. Wonder
> what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
> Walt BJ

I think you meant Tirpitz there.

Keith

[Cub Driver]

Sounds a bit more sophisticated than putting up waterspouts!

As I recall, Yamato did sortie, so presumably it did fire some guns,
though that is hardly certain. It could have been a species of
proactive scuttling.

>
>"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
>special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
>"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
>2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
>rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
>desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
>projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
>oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
>bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
>tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
>degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "
>
>Keith
>

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
>coming in to sink her on that last mission

This actually was fairly common. There are many motion pictures
showing USN ships banging away in order to create waterspouts in front
of low-level kamikaze attacks. I should think that was often done
against torpedo bombers, who had to fly at low level.

(To be sure, that's different from firing AT the aircraft.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Cub Driver]

>> "Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
>
>Correction to the quoted part: `san shiki' is merely Japanese for Type
>3, the short form of the name of the shell.

Adopted in the year 2603 of the Japanese throne.

As a means of identifying military gear, year-adopted is one of the
most confusing, especially with the pace of adoption in the war years.

The most famous example of this system, and the only one that has made
it into English, is the A6M "Zero" -- adopted in, you got it, 2600.

This was actually considered to be the *long* system. (The full &
proper name is Type Zero Carrier Fighter.) A6M is the short system,
and was adopted from the U.S. Navy: purpose - sequence number -
manufacturer.

www.warbirdforum.com/zero.htm



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

[Keith Willshaw]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
> >coming in to sink her on that last mission
>
> This actually was fairly common. There are many motion pictures
> showing USN ships banging away in order to create waterspouts in front
> of low-level kamikaze attacks. I should think that was often done
> against torpedo bombers, who had to fly at low level.
>

In the case mention (Tirpitz not Bismarck) the aircraft were flying
at 12000 ft so the guns must have been aimed at the aircraft
presumably more in hope than expectation of actually doing any good.

Keith

[Greg Hennessy]

On 30 Oct 2003 21:24:43 -0800, (WaltBJ) wrote:

>Wonder
>what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
>Walt BJ

IIRC 3 of them hit the ship. Clean underwear time all round methinks.


greg



--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

[Keith Willshaw]

"Greg Hennessy" > wrote in message
...
> On 30 Oct 2003 21:24:43 -0800, (WaltBJ) wrote:
>
> >Wonder
> >what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
> >Walt BJ
>
> IIRC 3 of them hit the ship. Clean underwear time all round methinks.
>

There were 2 of these raids during which attacks were made.

On the first, which took place on 15 Sept 1940 the ship
was partly obscured by a smokescreen and only one bomb hit.

This hit about 50ft back from the bows and the bomb went
right through both deck and hull and exploded in the sea
bed below the ship. Much of the forward section of the hull
was flooded and a great deal of machnery damaged by shock.
The conclusion was reached that the ship was no longer fit for
sea and she was towed to Tromso to be used as a floating
fortress. This brought her within range of bombers from Scotland.

The second attack happened on 12th November and 2 hits were made
on the port side. The results were a massive explosion that blew
C turret right out of the ship which rolled over and sank very quickly.

Keith

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Cub Driver > writes:

> As I recall, Yamato did sortie, so presumably it did fire some guns,

Japanese accounts that I have read mention that the weather was so
poor, with low cloud, that the attacking aircraft could not be seen
until they were already far too close to be engaged by the main
battery. The overwhelming importance of radar for ships against
aircraft....

--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

[Alan Minyard]

On 30 Oct 2003 08:49:45 -0800, (Kenneth Williams) wrote:

>Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?
>
>A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
>battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.
>
>I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!
>
>Anyone know what this weapon was?
>
>I can't find anything on it online and my friend can't remember the
>name of it.
>
>Kenneth Williams

It was a shell for their 18 inch guns. Basically grape shot.

Al Minyard

[Errol Cavit]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
> >coming in to sink her on that last mission
>
> This actually was fairly common. There are many motion pictures
> showing USN ships banging away in order to create waterspouts in front
> of low-level kamikaze attacks. I should think that was often done
> against torpedo bombers, who had to fly at low level.
>


Also used by RN ships on (at least) the Malta convoys.

--
Errol Cavit |
I've heard a tape of collected kakapo noises, and it's almost impossible to
believe that it all just comes from a bird, or indeed any kind of animal.
Pink Floyd studio out-takes perhaps, but not a parrot.
Douglas Adams, _Last Chance to See_

[WaltBJ]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message >...
> "WaltBJ" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>
> > FWIW Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
> > coming in to sink her on that last mission - but to no avail. Wonder
> > what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
> > Walt BJ
> > I think you meant Tirpitz there.
> > Keith

OOPs - mea culpa - senior moment - trying to think of more than one
thing at once. Hell, I used to be able to do that. Tirpitz it was.
Walt BJ

[WaltBJ]

The book "A Glorious Way To Die" has the tale of Yamato's last sortie.
It was truly a one-way ride - the ship didn't have enough fuel to get
back home and the end game was to beach it at Okinawa and use it as an
artillery emplacement.
Walt BJ

[IBM]

(Kenneth Williams) wrote in
:

> Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?

Supposedly it did on its final sortie.
To no good wffwct IIRC.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>