Can anyone ID this naval gun?

[RICHARD1959]

[petwes]

That would hurt if you dropped it on your safety boots! 

[KizmeRD]

Could be a QF 12 Pounder, it certainly looks to me to be something around that calibre.

But I look forward to hearing what others may think.

MB

[wallace2]

This is copied from Dawlish Chronicles : The Mercantile Marine Memorial, Tower Hill, London

The Caption is WW1-vintage 4" gun on a WW2 DEMS.

Judging by the scale of men v Breech size it is a possibility.

I believe bare feet was a means of preserving foot grip on a wet and heaving deck. 

Edit.  The same photo also appears in an advert for a scale model kit of a 4 inch gun in the US Navy. 1/72 USN 4 inch 50 (10.2 cm) Sub Gun Deck.

This photo is different from the other pics in the advert as it has a recoil mech on top of the barrel.

Edited 15 September , 2022 by wallace2
Adding data

[KizmeRD]

Yes, could be a 4” naval gun, however, the image shown in the original post (a cigarette card?) shows a bare-footed sailor handling what appears to be fairly stubby shell (without an integrated brass propellent casing, making the round so much longer). Therefore I was thinking of something like a late-Victorian era 3” Elswick (12 pounder, 18 cwt) naval gun - which although it carried a QF designation, wasn’t truly quick firing, as it still had a separate cartridge case (for the propellent charge) that needed to be loaded along with the shell.

We really need the informed opinion of a proper gunnery expert (which I’m not).

MB

Edited 15 September , 2022 by KizmeRD

[wallace2]

7 minutes ago, KizmeRD said:

Yes, could be a 4” naval gun, however, the image shown in the original post (a cigarette card?) shows a bare-footed sailor handling what appears to be fairly stubby shell (without an integrated brass propellent casing, making the round so much longer). Therefore I was thinking of something like a Victorian era 3” Elswick (12 pounder, 18 cwt) naval gun - which although it carried a QF designation, wasn’t truly quick firing, as it still had a separate cartridge case (for the propellent charge) that needed to be loaded along with the shell.

We really need the informed opinion of a proper gunnery expert (which I’m not).

MB

Although a Logistics specialist l was the Gunnery Officer of an RNR minesweeper for the Fleet Review in 1977. Not that it made me a gunnery expert. We only fired breakup shot from the 40mm Bofors!🤣

[MikB]

 The shell diameter looks a bit large for 4.7" and a bit small for 6", and rather short for its diameter, whatever that might be. A 6" shell was and is around the 100 lb. mark in weight. The gun is definitely a bit small and low for 6". The breech screw has only been sketchily represented - plus it'd never fit in that chamber - and the armour on the gun shield looks way too thick; normally it was only for splinter protection, so well under 1".

So I think it's a rather impressionistic painting of a generic sort of gun on a destroyer, light cruiser or AMC, by someone who'd probably seen and sketched one but didn't have a detailed photo in front of him. Newspaper pictures were still often drawn at the time, and a skilled cohort of fast-sketching illustrators and followup colourisers existed. Cigarette cards and the like represented an alternative outlet for these people.

Edited 15 September , 2022 by MikB

[ernest james]

How about  the cruiser HMS Chester?

She had 5.5 in main armament and the gun shield appears to have  a big gap underneath. I understand this gap was responsible for significant gun crew casualties at Jutland .

The illustration could be linked to the story of Boy Cornwall  and his VC

best wishes

ernest james

[MikB]

45 minutes ago, ernest james said:

How about  the cruiser HMS Chester?

She had 5.5 in main armament and the gun shield appears to have  a big gap underneath. I understand this gap was responsible for significant gun crew casualties at Jutland .

The illustration could be linked to the story of Boy Cornwall  and his VC

best wishes

ernest james

Yes, It's not only possible but even likely that this might be a representation, or part of one, of some stage of that event - it had gained so much public consciousness that the story - or some version of it - was still appearing in boys' battle books even around 1960 when I first heard of it. I think other illustrations I've seen would put Cornwell as the crew member on the left behind the gun shield. But I believe the rest of the crew were dead or wounded when Cornwell won his VC for remaining at post with the gun.

It may alternatively be a generic representation of destroyer or light cruiser gun actions in any of the WW1 battles.

[KizmeRD]

5.5” naval gun as used in HMS CHESTER appears to me to be far more substantial than the image depicted in the OP.

MB

[MikB]

Whether it's intended to refer specifically to the Cornwell VC or generally to RN prowess, the gun in the painting is essentially what might be termed a propaganda icon, and its technical accuracy of representation is secondary to the subtext.

What's it say on t'other side of card, if known?

[ernest james]

I think this para by MikB sums it up for me.

Quote

So I think it's a rather impressionistic painting of a generic sort of gun on a destroyer, light cruiser or AMC, by someone who'd probably seen and sketched one but didn't have a detailed photo in front of him. Newspaper pictures were still often drawn at the time, and a skilled cohort of fast-sketching illustrators and followup colourisers existed. Cigarette cards and the like represented an alternative outlet for these people.

It  also brought  me the idea of HMS Chester