Jump to content

Disappearing gun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
British64 pounder rifled muzzle-loading (RML) gunon a Moncrieff disappearing mount, at Scaur Hill Fort,Bermuda
TheBL 8 inchdisappearing gun of the South Battery, atNorth HeadinDevonport, New Zealand
A U.S. Coast Artillery battery with two guns on disappearing carriages
Annotated photograph of an M1901 Buffington–Crozier disappearing carriage for an M1900 12-inch gun
Inside a disappearing gun emplacement atHenry Head Battery
Splinter-damaged 6-inch (15-cm) United States Model 1905 disappearing gun atFort Wint,Philippines

Adisappearing gun,agunmounted on adisappearing carriage,is an obsolete type ofartillerywhich enabled a gun to hide from direct fire and observation. The overwhelming majority of carriage designs enabled the gun to rotate backwards and down behind a parapet, or into a pit protected by a wall, after it was fired; a small number were simplybarbettemounts on a retractable platform. Either way, retraction lowered the gun from view and direct fire by the enemy while it was being reloaded. It also made reloading easier, since it lowered the breech to a level just above the loading platform, and shells could be rolled right up to the open breech for loading and ramming. Other benefits over non-disappearing types were a higher rate of repetitive fire and less fatigue for the gun crew.[1]

Some disappearing carriages were complicated mechanisms, protection from aircraft observation and attack was difficult, and almost all restricted the elevation of the gun. With a few exceptions, construction of new disappearing gun installations ceased by 1918. The last new disappearing gun installation was a solo16-inch gun M1919atFort MichieonGreat Gull Island,New York,completed in 1923. In the U.S., due to lack of funding for sufficient replacements, the disappearing gun remained the most numerous type of coast defense weapon until replaced by improved weapons inWorld War II.[2][3]

Although some early designs were intended as field siege guns, over time the design became associated with fixed fortifications, most of which werecoastal artillery.A late exception was the use in mountain fortifications in Switzerland, where six 120 mm guns on rail-mountedSaint Chamonddisappearing carriages remained atFort de Daillyuntil replaced in 1940.

The disappearing gun was usually moved down behind the parapet or into its protective housing by the force of its own recoil, but some also used compressed air[4]while a few were built to be raised by steam.[5]

History

[edit]
Aiming a 14 "gun at theSandy Hook Proving Ground,New Jersey, US

Captain (later Colonel Sir) Alexander Moncrieff[6]improved on existing designs for a gun carriage capable of rising over aparapetbefore being reloaded from behind cover. His design, based on his observations in theCrimean Warwas the first widely adopted, used in many forts of the British Empire. The first experimental carriages of this type were wheeled.[7]His key innovation was a practical counterweight system that raised the gun as well as controlled therecoil.Moncrieff promoted his system as an inexpensive and quickly constructed alternative to a more traditional gun emplacement.[8]

The usefulness of such a system had been noted earlier, and experimental designs with raisable platforms or eccentric wheels, with built-in counterweights, were built or proposed. Some used paired guns, in which one cannon acted as the other's counterweight, or counterpoise. An unsuccessful attempt at a disappearing carriage was King's Depression Carriage, designed by William Rice King of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in the late 1860s. This used a counterweight to allow a 15-inch (381 mm)Rodman gunto be moved up and down a swiveling ramp, so the weapon could be reloaded, elevated, and traversed behind cover. The carriage was subjected to six trials in 1869–1873. It was not adopted; an 1881 letter to the Chief of Engineers by Lt. Col.Quincy A. Gillmorestated that it "still leaves a great deal of heavy work to the slow and uncertain process of manual labor".[9]Part of a test installation atFort Foote,Maryland remains.[10]King's design was better suited for breech-loaders; had the US not had a plethora of new muzzle-loaders just after the Civil War it may have seen wider use.[9]

BuffingtonandCrozierfurther refined the concept in the late 1880s by allowing the counterweight fulcrum to slide, giving the gun a more elliptical recoil path. The Buffington–Crozier Disappearing Carriage (1893) represented the zenith of disappearing gun carriages,[11]andgunsof up to16-inch sizewere eventually mounted on such carriages. Disappearing guns were highly popular for a while in the British Empire, the United States and other countries. In the United States, they were the primary armament of theEndicott- and Taft-erafortifications, constructed 1898–1917. Simpler carriages with a limited disappearing function were initially provided for smaller weapons, the balanced pillar for the5-inch gun M1897and theDriggs-Seaburymasking parapet for the manufacturer's3-inch gun M1898.However, these could only be retracted at a specific traverse angle (90° off the emplacement's axis), thus could not be used in action. Due to the mount's undesired flexibility when fired interfering with aiming, both types were disabled beginning in 1913 in the "up" position,[12]with installations circa 1903 and later having received pedestal mounts. Both carriage types and their associated guns were removed from service in the 1920s; in the 3-inch gun's case a tendency for the piston rod to break was a factor in their removal.[13]

Several mobile disappearing mounts appeared in France and Germany circa 1893. These included both road-mobile and rail-mobile designs. In France,SchneiderandSt. Chamondproduced road-mobile design and rail-mobile designs, in 120 mm (4.7 inch) and 155 mm weapons. The 0.6 meter railaffût-trucksystem was used tactically for 120mm and 155mm guns in WWI. Six 120 mm Modèle 1882 guns on St. Chamond mounts were deployed atFort de Daillyin Switzerland from 1894 to 1939.[14][15]Kruppproduced a rail-mobile 120 mm disappearing gun in 1900.[16]

Though effective against ships, the guns were vulnerable to aerial observation and attack. AfterWorld War Icoastal guns were usuallycasematedfor protection or covered withcamouflagefor concealment.[17]By 1912, disappearing guns were declared obsolete in the British Army, with only a few other countries, particularly the United States, still producing them up to World War I[4]and retaining them in service until replaced by casemated batteries inWorld War II.[3][11]

The only major campaign in which US disappearing guns played a part was theJapaneseinvasion of the Philippines,which began shortly after theattack on Pearl Harboron 7 December 1941 and ended with thesurrender of US forceson 6 May 1942. The disappearing guns were the least useful of the coast defense assets, as they were positioned to defend against warships enteringManila BayandSubic Bayand in most cases could not engage Japanese forces due to limited traverse. Despite attempts at camouflage, their emplacements were vulnerable to air and high-angle artillery attack.

Advantages

[edit]

The disappearing carriage had several principal advantages:

  • It afforded the gun crew protection from direct fire by raising the gun over the parapet (or wall in front of the gun) only when it was to be fired, otherwise leaving it at a lower level, where it was also able to be loaded easily.
  • With its guns in a retracted position (down behind the parapet), the battery was much harder to spot from the sea, making it a much harder target for attacking ships. Flat trajectory fire tended simply to fly over the battery, without damaging it.
  • Interposing of a moving fulcrum between the gun and its platform lessened the strain on the latter and allowed it to be of lighter construction while limiting recoil travel.
  • Simple, well protected earthen and masonry gun pits were much more economical to construct than the previous practice of constructing the standing heavy walls and fortifiedcasematesof a more traditional gun emplacement.
  • The entire battery could be hidden from view in place when not in use, unlike a traditional fort, enablingambuscadefire.
  • Higher rate of repetitive fire over non-disappearing types.[1]
  • Less fatigue for the gun crew.[1]

Disadvantages

[edit]

The disappearing gun had several drawbacks as well:

  • Some British carriage designs restricted maximum elevation to under 20 degrees and thus lacked the necessary range to match newer naval guns entering service during the early part of the 20th century.[11](Buffington-Crozier carriages, at their final development, could manage 30 degrees on a 16-inch gun.[18]) The additional elevation gained by mounting the same gun on a later non-disappearing carriage increased its range.[19]
  • The time taken for the gun to swing up and down and be reloaded slowed the rate of fire of some designs. Surviving records indicate a rate of fire of one round per one to two minutes for a British eight-inch (20 cm) gun, significantly slower than less complicated guns.[4](By contrast, the Buffington-Crozier 16-inch mount could manage one round per minute; the barbette mount was only 20 percent faster, and was slower at some elevations.)
  • The improvement in the speed of warships demanded an increased rate of firing. The disappearing gun was at a disadvantage compared with a gun that stayed in position as one could not aim or reposition a disappearing gun while it was in the lowered position. The gunner still had to climb atop the weapon via an elevated platform to sight and lay the weapon after it was returned to firing position,[11]or receive fire control information (range and bearing) transmitted from a remote location.
  • Their relative size and complexity also made them expensive compared with non-disappearing mounts,[4]In 1918, the 12 "DC gun cost $102,000, the barbette mounted gun $92,000.[20]This was more than made up, for some designs, by the reduced cost of protection. From the above reference, the cost of a 16 "DC emplacement was $605,000, while a turreted gun's proportional cost was $2,050,000.

Other applications

[edit]

Gun lift battery

[edit]

One very uncommon and even more complex type of disappearing gun wasBattery PotteratFort Hancockin theCoast Defenses of Sandy Hook,New Jersey.This and a number of 12-inch barbette emplacements were constructed due to the inability of the early versions of the Buffington-Crozier carriage to accommodate a12-inch gun.Built in 1892, the battery covered the approaches toNew York Harbor.Instead of using recoil from the gun to lower the weapon, two 12-inch barbette carriages were placed on individual hydraulic elevators that would raise the 110-ton carriage and gun 14 feet to enable it fire over aparapetwall. After firing, the gun was lowered for reloading using hydraulic ramrods and a shell hoist. While the operation of the battery was slow, taking 3 minutes per shot, its design allowed a 360° field of fire. Since its design was not further pursued, Battery Potter was disarmed in 1907.[21]

Battery Potter required much machinery to operate the gun lifts, including boilers, steam-powered hydraulic pumps, and two accumulators. Due to the inability to generate steam quickly, Battery Potter's boilers were run nonstop during its 14-year life, at significant cost. After the proving of the Buffington-Crozier carriage for 12-inch guns, theUnited States Armyabandoned plans to build several additional gun lift batteries.[citation needed]

[edit]

The concept was also attempted for conversion to a naval use.HMSTemerairewas completed in 1877 with two disappearing guns (11-inch (279 mm) muzzle-loading rifleson Moncrieff-type carriages) sinking down intobarbettestructures (basically circular metal protective walls over which the gun fired when elevated). This was to combine the ability of the earlypivot gunsto swivel with the protection of more classical fixed naval guns.[22]A similar design was later used in Russia for the first ship of theEkaterina II-class battleshipsand also used in the monitorVitse-admiral Popov.It has been suggested that both the harsh saltwater environment and the constant swaying and rolling of a ship at sea caused problems for the complex mechanism.[11]

If the mechanism seemed too temperamental for the open sea, it was not true for rivers and harbors.ArmstrongandMitchell's 1867HMSStaunch,a gunboat described as a "floating gun carriage", used a single9-inch (229 mm) Armstrong rifled muzzle loaderon a lowering platform with next to no armor. It was a resounding commercial success; there were 21 direct copies,[23]and another six near-sisters,[24]plus six near-copies (seeList of gunboat and gunvessel classes of the Royal Navy). Known as the "flatiron" gunboats, these vessels had a single large gun kept behind hinged shields, rather than a complex disappearing mount.[25]The simplified mounts were intended as much to lower the center of mass as to afford protection, and resembled a "lift battery." The gun was not normally lowered between shots.

[edit]
A US Army coast artillery 5-inch gun M1897 on a balanced pillar mount M1896

U.S. Endicott-era balanced pillar and masking parapet mounts were, in a sense, a hybrid of simple pedestal mounts and disappearing mounts: the guns were hidden from observation while out of action, but, once engaged, remained vulnerable to direct observation and direct fire. The emplacement designs only permitted retraction with the gun barrel at a specific traverse angle, usually 90° off the emplacement's axis. Since the barrels substantially overlapped the parapet of their installation, it was impossible to point the piece while concealed. The balanced pillar mount was used primarily with the5-inch gun M1897,while the masking parapet mount was aDriggs-Seaburypatent used primarily with the manufacturer's3-inch gun M1898."Masking parapet" was a proprietary term coined by Driggs-Seabury to distinguish their carriage from balanced pillar designs. Beginning in 1913 these carriages were disabled in the "up" position due to undesired flexibility interfering with aiming. The M1898 3-inch gun also developed a tendency for the piston rod to break when fired, and both types and their associated guns were removed from service in the 1920s.[12][13]

A Fahrpanzer road-mobile turret with 53 mm gun at theAthens War Museum
Retractable turret of theMaginot Line

In 1893 Germany'sHermann Grusondeveloped an armored turret for a 53 mm gun called a "Fahrpanzer"(mobile armor) that had both road- and rail-mobile versions. These were sold to several other countries prior to World War I, notably Switzerland, Romania, and Greece, were widely deployed in that war, and were present in most major Swiss fortifications at least through World War II, includingFort Airolo.[26][27]Surviving examples of the Fahrpanzer are at theAthens War Museumand theBrussels Army Museum.These mounts were intended for use in prepared trench-type positions that would shelter them from view when retracted; in the Swiss forts they were stored in covered bunkers until repositioned to fire.[14]While a few units used in fixed fortifications were sometimes mounted on sinking platforms or on short rail stubs intended for tactical concealment, the overwhelming majority were not, and acted in action as completely fixed guns, and are outside the subject of this article.

Retractable turretswere also conceptually similar, but almost never depended on recoil actuation, and, like the balanced pillar systems, often remained visible when actually in operation. Unlike balanced pillar designs, the pieces could generally be pointed and trained from cover, allowing complete surprise for the first shot. They were extensively developed for Continental European land defenses, but little used elsewhere.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^abc"Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers".54 part A.American Society of Civil Engineers.1905: 66.{{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal=(help)
  2. ^Complete list of US forts and batteries at CDSG website
  3. ^abBerhow, pp. 200-228
  4. ^abcdDisappearing GunsArchived2016-08-07 at theWayback Machine(from the Royal New Zealand Artillery Old Comrades Association)
  5. ^The Defenses of Sandy HookArchived2009-06-17 at theWayback Machine(from aSandy Hook,Gateway National Recreation Area,U.S. National Park Serviceinformation pamphlet. Accessed 2008-02-22.)
  6. ^Seton, George (1890).The House Of Moncrieff(PDF).Edinburgh. pp. 136–138.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  7. ^Hydro-pneumaticcarriagesat Victorian Forts and ArtilleryArchived2015-11-23 at theWayback Machine
  8. ^"Moncrieff's method of mounting guns with counterweights, of using them in gun-pits, and of laying them with reflecting sights: a paper read at the Royal United Service Institution (1866)"(from archive.org. Accessed 2009-06-25.)
  9. ^abSmith, Bolling W. (Winter 2020). "William Rice King and His Counterpoise Carriage".Coast Defense Journal.Vol. 34, no. 1. Mclean, Virginia: CDSG Press.
  10. ^King's Depression Carriage at the Historical Marker Database
  11. ^abcdeThe Disappearing Gun(from the 'navyandmarine.org' website, with further references. Accessed 2008-02-22.)
  12. ^abSmith, Bolling W. (Fall 2019). "The Driggs-Seabury 15-pounder (3-inch) Masking-Parapet Carriage".Coast Defense Journal.Vol. 33, no. 4. Mclean, Virginia: CDSG Press. pp. 12–18.
  13. ^abBerhow, pp. 70-71, 88-89
  14. ^ab"Fort de Dailly at ASMEM (Association St-Maurice d'Etudes Militaires) (in French)".Archived fromthe originalon 2015-11-17.Retrieved2015-10-09.
  15. ^La Mechanique a l'Exposition de 1900,Vol. 3, No. 15, p. 87 (in French)
  16. ^Dillard, Col. James B., "Railway Artillery",Mechanical Engineering,Vol. 41, Issue 1, January 1919, p. 44
  17. ^"Fort Winfield Scott: Battery Lowell Chamberlin".California State Military Museum.Retrieved2007-03-30.
  18. ^Hogg, Ian V., "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Artillery," Chartwell House, Secaucus, NJ, 1978 p74
  19. ^The Six Inch Shield GunArchived2008-05-11 at theWayback Machine(from a private website. Accessed 2009-02-28.)
  20. ^Fortifications Bill Congressional Hearings, 1916, p. 154
  21. ^Berhow, pp. 130-133
  22. ^Gibbons, Tony,The Complete Encyclopedia of Battleships,p. 89, New York: Crescent Books, 1983,ISBN0-517-378108
  23. ^Heald, Henrietta (2013-12-03).William Armstrong: Magician of the North(1 ed.). McNidder & Grace. p. 137.
  24. ^Morgan, Zachary (2014-11-12).Legacy of the Lash: Race and Corporal Punishment in the Brazilian Navy and.Indiana University Press. p. 172.
  25. ^HMSStaunchat Royal Museums Greenwich
  26. ^Fahrpanzer at Landships.info
  27. ^Kaufmann, J. E.; Jurga, Robert M. (1999).Fortress Europe: European Fortifications of World War II.Conshohocken, Pennsylvania: Combined Publishing. pp. 156–160.ISBN1-55750-260-9.
  • Berhow, Mark A., ed. (2004).American Seacoast Defenses, A Reference Guide(Second ed.). CDSG Press.ISBN0-9748167-0-1.
  • Hogg, I.V., "The Rise and Fall of the Disappearing Carriage",Fort(Fortress Study Group), (6), 1978
  • Hogg, Ian V., "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Artillery," Chartrwell, Secaucus, NJ, 1978
  • Lewis, Emanuel Raymond (1979).Seacoast Fortifications of the United States.Annapolis: Leeward Publications.ISBN978-0-929521-11-4.
[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related toDisappearing guns.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Disappearing_gun&oldid=1230077216"