Difference between revisions of "Torpedo Control Plotting Instrument"

From The Dreadnought Project
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with ''''Torpedo Control Plotting Instrument''' is a very generic name for a series of specific British torpedo control instruments. They were manufactured by [[El…')
 
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
==Mark I==
 
==Mark I==
−
The Mark I instrument was equipped with its own periscope by which the target bearing would be observed.  This periscope was regarded as optically inadequate, but there was no consensus on a magnification or field of view that would be ideal, but a majority felt that binoculars with a power of 6 would be an improvement.
+
The Mark I instrument was equipped with its own periscope by which the target bearing would be observed.  This periscope was regarded as optically inadequate, but there was no consensus on a magnification or field of view that would be ideal, but a majority felt that binoculars with a power of 6 would be an improvement.{{CN}}
 +
 
 +
By mid 1919, the magnification of this periscope was judged to be too weak and it was recommended that a new lens might resolve the issue.  One periscope was converted to a power of 5 and field of view of 6.5 degrees.  Other ships received Pattern 343 binoculars witha  power of 6.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918'', p 166.</ref>
  
 
==Mark II==
 
==Mark II==
 +
 
==Mark III==
 
==Mark III==
  
−
==Efficiency in Service==
+
==Performance==
 
[[File:ARTS1917Plate56.jpg|thumb|300px|''Alteration proposed in 1917'''<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', Plate 56.</ref><br>This was to be performed for trail on a Mark I instrument taken from ''Agincourt''.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', p 195. (A.L.G. 5422/17)</ref> ]]
 
[[File:ARTS1917Plate56.jpg|thumb|300px|''Alteration proposed in 1917'''<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', Plate 56.</ref><br>This was to be performed for trail on a Mark I instrument taken from ''Agincourt''.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', p 195. (A.L.G. 5422/17)</ref> ]]
  
Line 27: Line 30:
  
 
When the observation instruments cannot be placed on the centre line, port and starboard pairs for each would be used with a C.O.S. to select which to use.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', p. 196.</ref>
 
When the observation instruments cannot be placed on the centre line, port and starboard pairs for each would be used with a C.O.S. to select which to use.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917'', p. 196.</ref>
 +
 +
This device was trialled with the dual plotter similar to that in ''Ramillies'' located in the TS, plotting bearings taken from the forward control position and the torpedo control tower.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918'', p. 166.</ref>
 +
 +
===Abolished?===
 +
In mid 1919, a meeting of the [[Fleet Torpedo Committee]] decreed that "deflection plotters" should be abolished, as their results, if accurate, were stale.  It is not obvious to me whether this refers to the T.C.P.s.<ref>''Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918'', p. 167.</ref>
  
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==
Line 38: Line 46:
 
*{{BibUKHandbookOfTorpedoControl1916}}
 
*{{BibUKHandbookOfTorpedoControl1916}}
 
*{{BibUKARTS1917}}
 
*{{BibUKARTS1917}}
 +
*{{BibUKARTS1918}}
 
{{refend}}
 
{{refend}}
  

Revision as of 17:42, 9 March 2011

Torpedo Control Plotting Instrument is a very generic name for a series of specific British torpedo control instruments. They were manufactured by Elliott Brothers and positioned in the Torpedo Control Towers of capital ships.

Mark I

The Mark I instrument was equipped with its own periscope by which the target bearing would be observed. This periscope was regarded as optically inadequate, but there was no consensus on a magnification or field of view that would be ideal, but a majority felt that binoculars with a power of 6 would be an improvement.[Citation needed]

By mid 1919, the magnification of this periscope was judged to be too weak and it was recommended that a new lens might resolve the issue. One periscope was converted to a power of 5 and field of view of 6.5 degrees. Other ships received Pattern 343 binoculars witha power of 6.[1]

Mark II

Mark III

Performance

Alteration proposed in 1917'[2]
This was to be performed for trail on a Mark I instrument taken from Agincourt.[3]

Late in 1916, people were questioning the efficiency of the devices, and in January 1917, the ships fitted with TCPs were asked to report on several questions:[4]

  • should the device be in the forward TS, with bearings being sent down electrically?
  • should the bearings be taken through a periscope, telescope, or binoculars?
  • should those bearings be taken from the Fire Control Top or other such position (rather than in the TCT)?
  • how can the periscope of the Mark I be improved in terms of power and field of view?

There was no agreement on the specific points of inquiry, and some ships flatly questioned the device's utility:

  • it did not seem accurate enough for the E.R. speed setting for torpedos which emerged after the devices were designed
  • the receiver should remain where it is — perhaps a second plot recorder could receive transmitted data?
  • the means of taking bearings from the rangefinder trainer's periscope on the Mark II and II devices would be better replaced by binoculars transmitting bearings electrically.
  • the Mark I periscope would be better replaced by binoculars with power 6

The proposed alterations were to be prototyped and trialled using equipment from Agincourt. A pair of binocular-based observing instruments would be capable of fast and slow training to acquire and track a target and transmit its relative bearing over step-by-step circuits. The slow, tracking mode was to have 2 arc minute granularity — better even than the tardily-improved bearing steps used by the Dreyer tables which went from 15 minute to 4 minute some time after Jutland.[Citation needed] The gyro compass receiver which would rectify the relative bearings to true bearings would also be in a fine 2 minute granularity.[5]

Each observer would have a key he could press when he was on the target. The key could cause marks on a 6.5 inch wide clockwork-driven bearing plot featuring an improved speed regulator. The paper for the plot would be divided into two separate plotting areas for the two transmitters, and a bearing grid could be used to judge the rate on either transmitter's data. Each observer would also have a bearing indicator showing him where the other observer was training, to permit discrepancies to be detected.

When the observation instruments cannot be placed on the centre line, port and starboard pairs for each would be used with a C.O.S. to select which to use.[6]

This device was trialled with the dual plotter similar to that in Ramillies located in the TS, plotting bearings taken from the forward control position and the torpedo control tower.[7]

Abolished?

In mid 1919, a meeting of the Fleet Torpedo Committee decreed that "deflection plotters" should be abolished, as their results, if accurate, were stale. It is not obvious to me whether this refers to the T.C.P.s.[8]

See Also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918, p 166.
  2. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917, Plate 56.
  3. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917, p 195. (A.L.G. 5422/17)
  4. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917, p. 195. (C.I.O. 83 of 1917; G. 18610/16, 9.1.17)
  5. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917, Plate 56.
  6. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917, p. 196.
  7. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918, p. 166.
  8. ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1918, p. 167.

Bibliography

Retrieved from "http://216.92.248.253/tfs/index.php?title=Torpedo_Control_Plotting_Instrument&oldid=21368"