Gun research vs. Mount Research

[Kaiser Kirk]

Rocky brought up this topic in another thread.
I think it's worth discussion and probably merits a mod clarification after input.

I see Snip was on last 9/11, so I will send him an inquiry.

I've been assuming we need to research new guns, not just new mountings, so we might need to pin down expectations there.

Excellent question !

So far it hasn't come up.
I've been developing smaller guns for AA roles, so just tag them with AA in gun research as a tracking system.

I was presuming that
"Guns: Caliber - Shell diameter/barrel length" governed the type of things you researched new Guns for.
"type of gun" drop-down governed the type of things you researched new mounts for.
The obvious exception being going from muzzle loading to breech or quick fire...

The question is....IS that doable?
AND Is that how we want to handle it ??

First step..is it doable.
Looking at NavWeaps I was able to find several examples that indicate it is.

Looking at http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_3-50_mk10-22.php with it's 1910 date of development, I doubt it was designed as an AA gun at that time.
So the mounting came after.

This http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_3-40_mk1.php was designed in 1893, provided with HA mounts in WW1, and note 1b is they made a HA/LA mount for it.
"^Some PI mountings were modified to allow gunlayer firing, being redesignated as HA/LA IX* for Mark IA and IIA guns while HA/LA IX** were for Mark V and AV guns."

This http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk5.php
"The Mark V was first introduced as a low angle weapon on HMS Arethusa in 1914 and it was later chosen for use as an AAA gun near the end of World War I."
and looking at mountings, it was later provided in a twin HA/LA mount.
   Mark V Guns - Open Single Mounts
   Arethusa [1914] (6), Caroline (8), Calliope (8) and Cambrian (8): PX Mark I
   "V" (4) and "W" (4) Destroyers: LA CP Mark II
   Sloops and patrol boats of the 1920s: LA CP Mark II
   Hood (4), Emerald (3), Kent (4) and London (4): HA Mark III or Mark III* or Mark III** 4a
   Dorsetshire (4), York (4), Leander (4), Modified Leander (4), Arethusa [1935] (4): HA Mark IV 4a
   Destroyers "O" (5) and "P" (4 or 5): HA Mark III or HA Mark IV 4a
Mark XV Guns - Twin Mount 5a
   Resolution (1): HA/LA BD Mark XVII
   Repulse (2): HA/LA BD Mark XVIII

SO....is that how we want to do it ?

[quote ]
I'm coming around to visualizing this ship as an age-of-sail frigate with double hangers on top.
[/quote]

That's not it - my concept is the hangers are long smoothwalled areas, and the casements can be worked into the walls of the hangers.
So there's a clear area of hull below, which means the casements should be high and dry with lovely fields of fire.

[Kaiser Kirk]

I guess my frame of reference is that Springsharp lists DP along with BL, QF and AA guns rather than as a type of mounting like a deck mount.

I don't mind the faster, cheaper option of new mounts, I just need the certainty before 1/29 rolls around.

[Kaiser Kirk]

So to recap.

Springsharp has 3 categories
"Guns: Caliber - Shell diameter/barrel length" governed the type of things you researched new Guns for.

"type of gun" drop-down governed the type of things you researched new mounts for.  :
            This category is truely the problem as it mixes the breech type/ reload type, with function - AA/DP

"type of mount"... Mount, M&H, Casement, turret, etc.  : A mix of structural support, armor support and resupply means.

Mechanically, SS keeps the weight of the "gun" the same regardless of ""type of gun" and "type of mount"

Historically, as discussed above, it was possible to take a QF gun and place it in a Low Angle, High Angle or LA/HA mounting - presumably with varying ammo feeds.

Both "type of gun" and "type of mount" change the weight.

There is a functional reason - elevation means the breech must depress, which means the trunnion height must increase so the breech doesn't hammer a hole in the deck when it recoils.
I presume the intricacies of reloading at higher elevation work into this as well.

But ...practically, it's the same gun, just in a different mounting.

SO... I have been presuming
Gun Research : = Guns: Caliber
Here I differentiate between feed mechanisms, BL / QF / MG

Mount Research = way gun is mounted.
Here I have been mixing things, treating a 'Anti-surface' mount for my 90mm AA as a new mounting that allows it to shoot low.

I think Rocky's view is quite logical :
Gun Research :
"Guns: Caliber - Shell diameter/barrel length" governed the type of things you researched new Guns for.
"type of gun" drop-down governed the type of things you researched new mounts for.
Mount Research

But I think the historical and practical aspects of the same type of gun & breech being used in different mountings
means it's reasonable to evaluate Mount Research as meaning the purpose of the mounting with all the bits needed to function that way
....though an old muzzle loading 13.5" gun in an AA mount may not be the best choice.

Thoughts / Opinions ?

[The Rock Doctor]

Not the best choice, no, but possibly the most entertaining.

[TacCovert4]

I mean, they did make a 457mm AA gun.....they even used it, once that we know of.