Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Krupp 240mm L/35


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
RE: Krupp 240mm L/35
Permalink   


Some personages with historical knowledge but nontechnical consider these mounts as a "battery in operation". But the pictures do not lie. There is also documentation that explains this

Once again, you ASSUME- (and remember what happens when you assume..  If by "personnages" you mean "characters" these include A Colonel of the Old Argentine Coast artillery Corps who handled these guns and two senior Argentine Navy officers which are prolific and well known published authors.. No, we are intended to accept your word/..

Come off it.. (or is you sneanky way on insulting somebody that is not a member of this forum???nono

The guns were indeed installed at Martin Garcia and fired during a presidential visit .c.18877 (will get the exact date

te as I do not have my notes with me) after the third shot.. That they were there on temporary duty, quite probably for I do not know when they were withdrawn from the island. I know they were at least as 1902..that does prove that

1) they were there

2) that there were operational

3) that they were at the island for over a decade..

Further details have none and if you do (other than mere suppositions..  let me know.. I heard from a Senior Officer in the Argentine Naval Aviation that these guns were withdrawn once the Navy had bombing planes to protect the Plata Basin-but nothing concrete

now...I will load a proper photo of the guns at Martín Garcia next time....



__________________


Major

Status: Offline
Posts: 100
Date:
Permalink   

Hi

 

 It is very strange that what you says, since the Colt 1895 were engraved as Colt DA.38 in ...... 1895 by the same Colt (see some of the many existing copies), and I do not think they have done it to bother you, this was Almost 120 years ago.

 

If I had wanted to lie, I would have invented a Nick instead of putting my real name

Search the records of the “Brigada de Infantería de Montaña VIII” of the year 1964

I remained in active reserve until November 1973.

 

Do not try to "kill the messenger", try to refute what you see in the photos (for example with other photos)

 

It seems that you does not understand that I do not feel myself the "owner of the truth" (I never said it) because I do not affirm things or data, I "show" them with photographs (or copies of texts). I do not say that the Krupp 130mm was "Argentine Model 1902", I show the photo of its breech block  engraved by the same Krupp. I do not say that the Colt was .38DA, I show the photo of one of them with that engraved mark ... ..

  

And the photo showing a supposed Krupp 240mm in Zarate, (from the book "Historia de la Escuela Naval Militar "  by Humberto F. Burzio  - tome I, page 521), is not a Krupp 240mm if not an Armstrong of 8 ".

In the topic BR 8 inches Armstrong BLR (203 mm) is explained "physically" (question of sizes) why can not be a Krupp

 

 

In Zarate they were provisionally mounted until their transfer, and only for didactic purposes, in the same way that they were mounted in Martín García Island, and not as Arsenal defense battery.

See Decree 2026

 

 

2026. — Reorganizando el Batallón de Artillería de Marina

 

DECRETO

Departamento de Marina.

 

Buenos Aires, Febrero 16 de 1887.

Considerando: Que es de indispensable necesidad reorganizar el Batallón de Artillería de Marina, á fin de atender con regularidad y economía para el Tesoro Público á los diversos servicios que determinaron su Institución, y particularmente al que se relaciona con el manejo del material moderno de Costa, que por su importancia requiere una instrucción especial, y usando de la autorización conferida al Poder Ejecutivo por la Ley de Presupuesto vigente del Departamento de Marina,

 

El Presidente de la República, Decreta:

Articulo 1.º — Precédase á reorganizar el Batallón de Artillería de Marina.

Art. 2.º — A los efectos del artículo anterior, refúndanse la Compañías que se hallan de Guarnición en la Isla de Martín García, en las actuales Baterías de Ametralladoras, donde se encuentra depositada la Bandera y el Archivo de aquel Batallón.

Art. 3.º — Por .el Arsenal de Guerra se procederá á cambiar una de las Baterías de Ametralladoras por otra de igual número de Cañones Krupp de 7,5 centímetros, constituyendo esta última y las Ametralladoras restantes, el armamento del Batallón de Artillería de Marina, mientras se establecen las Baterías de Costa que debe servir.

Art. 4.º — Encontrándose depositado en el Arsenal de Zarate el valioso material de Costa adquirido recientemente por el Gobierno en el extranjero, el precitado Batallón se establecerá en dicho punto, á objeto de que su personal adquiera la instrucción práctica indispensable para el manejo de estos Cañones, debiendo al efecto disponer dos de ellos convenientemente.

Art. 5.º — Atenderá igualmente al servicio Militar de Martin García por destacamentos que se relevarán cada dos meses.

Art. 6.º — Continuará como Jefe del Batallón de Artillería de Marina el Sargento Mayor de Artillería D. Carlos Domingo Sarmiento, actual Comandante de las Baterías de Ametralladoras.

Art. 7.º — El Jefe nombrado propondrá á la mayor brevedad al Estado Mayor de la

Armada la Oficialidad y demás personal que corresponde con arreglo á la Ley de Presupuesto.

 

Art. 8.º — Comuníquese, publíquese y dese al Registro Nacional.

 

Juarez Celman.

E. Racedo.

{Registro Nacional de la República Argentina).

 

…”Art. 4 - Being found deposited in the Arsenal of Zarate the valuable material of Coast acquired recently by the Government abroad, the mentioned Battalion will be established in this point, so that its personnel acquires the practical instruction indispensable for the handling of these canyons, having to the effect dispose two of them conveniently.”…….

Regards

 

Eduardo

 



__________________


Major

Status: Offline
Posts: 100
Date:
Permalink   

Hi

 

As you can see, in 1887 they were in Zarate, not in Martín García, and in 1903 they were no longer, (according to the photos of the forum user Tarkus 40 of Zonamilitar) and in those same photos, plus those of the Krupp 240mm of the Museum of the same Island Martin Garcia (of the  forum user Fepago ) can be seen that by their disposition (very together, without protection, inside the same barracks and without ammunition stores) and the lack of a solid base, they were only used as training material of the gunners.

 

Regards

 

Eduardo



__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

 

 

Let us take this by steps:

You seem to ignore  why those 8 inchers were removed from the protected cruiser ARA 25 de Mayo (lauched 1890) shorly after the ships arrived, the guns warped and became unserviceable, hence the Navy replaced them with two Krupp 210 mm L.35 cost artillery guns purchased in 1889 (see Gral Dick's book)  ( se Burzio's Historia del Torpedo y Sus Buques en La Armada, (DEHm Buenos Aires, 1968) pag.190 for some of these details

In Buenos Aires I came across some back issues of the Boletin del Centro Navl with the aricles I quted, which is also quoted by Captain (Capitan de Navio) Humbert F, Burzio, a prolific and methodic historian..

Now Colonel Pemme,:  Note the Army rank, (not Navy-as the Coast Artillery Corps was not given its own roster (escalafón) until much later.. He was one of the  first batch of officers transferred from the Army into the Coast Artillery Corps-l officers with the Krupp 240s..and not likely to confuse the useless Armstrong 203 L.40 with the Krupp 240 L.35...Now is he? Another thing, the 203 mm Armstrongs were never employed or deployed operationally,as they were warped, and nobody mounts cannon that are useless in fortiifications..they were placed in storage for many years, indeed they were still in storage in 1940 still in their original naval mounts  with limited elevation..

Here is a photo I took of one of these 203 mm L.40s at the 3rd. marine Infantry Batallion, a few years ago.. this is not the gun at Zarate in Burzio's book..different gun, different mount..

Do not try to "kill the messenger", try to refute what you see in the photos (for example with other photos) I do not do that! that's your job!.your habit,,not mineI

.

And the photo showing a supposed Krupp 240mm in Zarate, (from the book "Historia de la Escuela Naval Militar "  by Humberto F. Burzio  - tome I, page 521), is not a Krupp 240mm if not an Armstrong of 8 ".

 

You are quite wrong ! First of all, the guns were taken off the protected cruiser ARA 25 de Mayo (launched in 1890) shortly after it arrived in the country..And they removed them because they were warped..Armstrong rotested when they were replaced by two Krupp 210 mm L.35 acquired in 1889 (see Gral Dick's book)  See Burzio's  Historia del Torpedo y sus Buques en La Armada (Depto. de Estudios Historicos Navales, Buenos Aires, 1968) pag. 190.

Now Cnel. Pemme, whi handld these guns was hardly  a person to confuse a Krupp 240 mm L.35 with an An Armstrong 8-inch L.40

Now Colonel Pemme, Note the Army rank, (not Navy-as the Coast artillery Corps was not given its own roster (escalafón) until much later.. He was one of the original officers with the Krupp 240s..and not likely to confuse the useless Armstrong 203 L.40 with the Krupp 240 L.35...Now is he? Another thing, the 203 mm Armstrongs were never employed or deployed operationally, as they were warped, and nobody mounts cannon that are useless in fortiifications..they were placed in storage for many years, indeed they were still in storage in 1940 still in their original naval mounts  with limited elevation..

In  I am quite familiar with that Decree, yet the guns remained at Zarate as late as 1911 (only photographic evidence I have-don't know when they were removed but therey were not the useless 203mm L.40, compare this with the photo of the Krupp 240 and note the elevating gear on the latter, conspicuously absent in the 8 incher..



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Wednesday 1st of February 2017 06:02:45 AM



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Wednesday 1st of February 2017 10:54:51 PM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

My server is having technical problems, and the reply shot out before I could cored it. It might intesrest you to know that I had a Colt mod. 1895 cal. 38 (actually it employed the frame of a Colt 41 cal.) until I gave most of the guns in my collection to my older son..What I said was that the Argentine Army referred to it as a 10,66 mm, and you argued that this was another gun, the S&W Schofield mod. 1878 (built under license by DM&WF, Berlin) but that the model 1878 was in caliber .440 (or 11,176 mm)..and therefore a different gun

If the Krupps remained in Zarate until 1911 (as I maintain) and n Martin Garcia 9as you maintain, but no photographic proof to back it up past 1903-neither do I, but I do not assume anything.In fact the  Coast Artillery was re-organized several times during he period 1887-1898, due to budgetary restrictions, But the decree of 1887 which you quote reorganized the Coast (Artillery Service,and the company which garrisoned Martín Garcia was  reorganized with the machine gun batteries, and as you indicated it exchanged one of these batteries for an equal number of Krupp 75mm. 

 

The Decree further specified that since the Krupp 240s ordnance was at Zarate,the battalion was to take advantage of he opportunity to gain experience(with the Krupp 240ss),  without  still fulfilling its mission to guard the island of Martín Garcia.. Burzio, Historia de La Escuela Naval Militar op cit, Vol.1, pag 190 The authors further states that "Transformed into a  regiment and generically into The oast Artillery Corps, etc.etc it took charge of the Krupp batteries which defended the port of Bahia Blanca,, or Puerto Belgrano, as it was dubbed officially by a decree of 2 June 1923.. (Burzio, opt cit, pag 732) This more or less coincides with statements made by some senior Naval Aviators to me regarding the removal of the guns at both Zarate and Martin Garcia once the Naval Air Arm had acquired bombing planes to fulfill that role

 

As the photo you uploaded ( I will load a clearer version) seems to be the only one available in the Departamento de Estidos Históricos de la Armada, the Navy's Historical Research Department, and it does not indicate a date, nor are there any other photographs, I would not be so quick to make assumtions as you are: You have not seen any other photos-and (Neither have I..) I would not be so quick with your statements.. One photo o is not enough evidence
If they remained in place for over a decade, these guns could not properly be considered "in temporary emplacements" can they?
By the Way, the machine guns issued to the Coast Artillery Corps in argena were Maxim mod. 1884, one of the first recorded uses of that gun anywhere...
Cheers
Gunther

P.S.

 

On Friday or Saturday, I will upload a clearer photo of he guns in Martin Garcia and others..





-- Edited by Brunner88 on Wednesday 1st of February 2017 06:57:35 AM



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Wednesday 1st of February 2017 10:56:15 PM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

In the meantime, here are a couple of pics from the Krupp 240 mm L.35 at te then "Puerto Militar"

 



__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   


I was not able to locate my Krupp 240 L.35 files after all,( we just moved into a new and larger home)-I have yet a lot of unpacking to do.  so I asked a friend for a copy of this  photo in his collection.-Without a date or a caption from the original Naval Archives Files, it is impossible to tell what was done where and when. I have several photos of the earlier guns mounted here in this island, I refer to the Armstrong 177 mm (7 inch) model 1874s and 1877s that were emplaced here and still are. Some of them do not show any barbettes ,nor any shelter can be seen for the troops or powder magazines. This  does not indicate that there weren't any, but simply that they were not shown in some of the photographs, or that they did not yet exist when the photo was taken. and as this is the only photograph available even to the  Museum at Martin Garcia  beyond the fact that the guns WERE emplaced at Martin Garcia proves nothing at all...



__________________


Major

Status: Offline
Posts: 100
Date:
Permalink   

 Hi

 

….”Another thing, the 203 mm Armstrongs were never employed or deployed operationally, as they were warped, and nobody mounts cannon that are useless in fortiifications..they were placed in storage for many years”….

 

I totally agree that the  Armstrong 8 "  had come out serviced long before 1911 (probable date of the photo in question) and were considerate practically as scrap metal.

But what a coincidence....., that 8 “ was just ... on a scrap beach, and is not complete (it does not have its inferior mounting), nor in conditions to make fire, but “supported " on a wooden platform or rails (in the red circle at the bottom right is that platform) and surrounded by metallic scraps (in the red circle below to the left are seen wheels and gears), all on a dirt floor.

 

 

For that reason (the lack of protection and its aspect of abandonment) make that it is not possible that that cannon is a Krupp 240mm L35

 

If you look for images that have similarity to the 1911 photo (search engines on the Net), the 8 "Armstrong appears again (photo Hector Vera BIM 3 - Marine Corps Battalion 3)

It's not by chance…..

 

 

And if you take the job of superimposing both photos you will see that they are fully compatible (I already did).

Something that does not happen superimposing the photos of the Krupp 240mm with those of the book of Burzio.

I'm sure the Krupp 240mm were in Zárate, but I did not find any pictures of them.

 

Officially, the five batteries were inaugurated by President Julio A. Roca during the Great Naval Review held on May 17 and 18, 1901. These firing maneuvers were so successful that it led the president to reward the pointers weapons from his pocket. So, if the 20 Krupp 240mm guns purchased (see Gral Dick's list, the other four K240mm were from the river battleships) were in Puerto Belgrano in 1901, there could hardly have been any in Zarate in 1911

 

Again I am right, the Colt "Model Argentinean 1895" is Colt DA .38 caliber, the fact that it could have used part of the body of Colt DA.41 does not modify at all its "real caliber" (there was also Colt DA. 45 - Long Colt)

You said

 

…”Look, to use a simple example: the Argentine Army describes de model 1895 Colt revolver as "10,66 mm", when it is actually a 38  ( that is 9.652 mm)  In the U.S. the gun is a .38...end of story..

 

And our Army "never" described it "Officially" as 10.66mm.

 

And when I answered

 

…”The 10.84 mm (no10.66mm) caliber it was of the "Smith & Wesson Mod 3 Simple Action (1870/72) cal .44 Russian built by Ludwig Loeve (Berlin)"

End of story….

 

I was referring to the caliber closest to the 10.66 you mentioned, and that our Army used.

 

 

As for Armstrong Cal 170 mm. (7 ") Model 1874 of Martín García Island, they had their fortified front and also had their ammunition bunker in the same battery (see white arrow)

 

 

 

Finally, the time they may have spent armed in Zarate or Martín García Island, does not change their service at all, if installed as Gate Guardian and spend fifty years, is still Gate Guardian

 

Regards

 

Eduardo

 



__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

Barbanente wrote:

 

I totally agree that the  Armstrong 8 "  had come out serviced long before 1911 (probable date of the photo in question) and were considerate practically as scrap metal.

But what a coincidence....., that 8 “ was just ... on a scrap beach, and is not complete (it does not have its inferior mounting), nor in conditions to make fire, but “supported " on a wooden platform or rails (in the red circle at the bottom right is that platform) and surrounded by metallic scraps (in the red circle below to the left are seen wheels and gears), all on a dirt floor.

Something that does not happen superimposing the photos of the Krupp 240mm with those of the book of Burzio.

I find just the opposite-look at the elevating or traversing gears in the Krupp 240 mm I am attaching...

I'm sure the Krupp 240mm were in Zárate, but I did not find any pictures of them.

So, now you are sure, but before you doubted their existence as you attempted to negate the fact that they were mounted at Martin Garcia. As for other pictures of the 240s at Zarate,. GOOD! The Deparment of Historical Serices of the Navy does not have any. Captain Burzio was kind enough to give me a print of the one shown in his book,wgich unfortunately was ost in a fire that destroyed the library and museums of our club back in 1986.

 

Officially, the five batteries were inaugurated by President Julio A. Roca during the Great Naval Review held on May 17 and 18, 1901. These firing maneuvers were so successful that it led the president to reward the pointers weapons from his pocket. So, if the 20 Krupp 240mm guns purchased (see Gral Dick's list, the other four K240mm were from the river battleships) were in Puerto Belgrano in 1901, there could hardly have been any in Zarate in 1911

 

Again I am right, the Colt "Model Argentinean 1895" is Colt DA .38 caliber, the fact that it could have used part of the body of Colt DA.41 does not modify at all its "real caliber" (there was also Colt DA. 45 - Long Colt)

You said

 

…”Look, to use a simple example: the Argentine Army describes de model 1895 Colt revolver as "10,66 mm", when it is actually a 38  ( that is 9.652 mm)  In the U.S. the gun is a .38...end of story..

 

And our Army "never" described it "Officially" as 10.66mm.

 

And when I answered

 

…”The 10.84 mm (no10.66mm) caliber it was of the "Smith & Wesson Mod 3 Simple Action (1870/72) cal .44 Russian built by Ludwig Loeve (Berlin)"

End of story….

 

I was referring to the caliber closest to the 10.66 you mentioned, and that our Army used.

 

 

As for Armstrong Cal 170 mm. (7 ") Model 1874 of Martín García Island, they had their fortified front and also had their ammunition bunker in the same battery (see white arrow)

They did EVENTUALLY, not always and not at first as I will prove with photos of my own, they simply rested upon the rocky soil of the island. You need not bother oloading that photograph whch I sent in to Histamar along with hundresde of others, uncredited 

 

Finally, the time they may have spent armed in Zarate or Martín García Island, does not change their service at all, if installed as Gate Guardian and spend fifty years, is still Gate Guardian

 They were never deployed d operationally, as they were defective to start with, this is why they were replaced aboard that cruiser with two Krupp 210 mm L.35 mentioned in pag. 541 of General Dick's book., and being in reserve (as were a lot of older guns at Zarate!) and being gate guardians does not make them operational in my book nor anuboldy elses...

 

Here's a pic of a Krupp 240 mm L.35-Note the guear which is also shown in he pic in Burzio's book...


 



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Tuesday 7th of February 2017 07:38:29 AM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

Armored Turret which housed the range finders for the Krupp 240 mmL.35s

 

Another view of  the 240s preserved at Puerto Belgrano.

 



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Tuesday 7th of February 2017 07:46:26 AM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

The final point I wanted to make: Through a mutual friend, some years ago when I was a young Subaltern , I met Captain (Capitan de Navio) Humbero F, Buzio, a prolific author, a meticuoulous and vey and precise historian. A Member of the Argentine National History Academy and a well known Numismatic historian besides, The friends that introduced us was a numismatic himself, and though I found that part of the conversation somewhat boring, the wealth of dteailss that these two gentlemen demonstrated about coins amazed me...I showed him some photos  of Argentine warships I had obtained at the U.S. National Archives and he pointed  out innumerable details which escaped me at the time (but not since) including a pair Vickers Mountain howitzers aboard one of the Garibaldi cruisers of the Argentine Navy which he identified by the scanty available details of the mount .

Now, Colonel Peme served with the Coast Artillery unit at Zarate And at Martín Garcia, and it is highly unlikely that HE would mistake the non-operational Armstrong 203 mm with the Krupp 240s we knew  so well, and A Priori, it is just as unlikely that Captain Buzrio would confuse these guns.. Only you seem to believe this, I do not, nor for a single minute.



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Tuesday 7th of February 2017 09:18:17 AM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   


As promised, some of photos of Armsrong 7 inch gun at Martín Garcia that were no sent to HISTARMAR.. Notice the lack of any fortifications at all in the first and the earthen papapets in the second. The barbettes would cme in later due to budgetary restrictions..
o




__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

Some additional photos of the Armstrong 177 mm (7 inch) guns at Martn Garcia Island, the first was one of the photos I spurchased at the Naval historical Department, like the previous ones.









-- Edited by Brunner88 on Wednesday 8th of February 2017 12:15:29 AM

__________________


Major

Status: Offline
Posts: 100
Date:
Permalink   

Hi

 

Re-reading the book of H. Burzio, cannot be found nowhere   that this cannon is a Krupp 240mm.

Even with many words written in several notes. you can not explain  why that cannon (which you suppose a Krupp 240mm) was abandoned in 1911 on a scrap beach

Something that looking at the photo cannot be denied.

In addition, it is seen that you has very little sensation of proportions, of sizes and volumes, and does not relate the size of the cannon with the people who are in front of weapon.

 

 

Taking an average height of people and equalize scales so that in the photos said height is the same, it is VERY clear that a Krupp 240mm CAN NOT be hidden behind the cadets. If you cannot see this ......

 

 

 

  With respect to the element seen in the photo of Burzio with the nº 1, and compared with that of the Krupp 240mm, it is seen that there is nothing in that position (nº1  in the picture below)

If the profile of the barrel of the Krupp 240mm is superimposed with the profile of the barrel of the picture of Burzio, it is noted that in that photo should see the whole breech block behind the cadets (marked with nº 2)

Neither do you see the lower mounting (marked with nº 3), nor the turn support and its "galapago" bar (marked with nº 4)

 

I just said that the Krupp 240mm were not installed as a "Batería de Defensa de..." either in Zárate or in the Martín García Island, and that's true, they were only assembled for didactic purposes to prepare gunners (and  it says so the "Decreto ley 2026"  that I  posted)

 

The previous photos of Armstrong's 170mm battery, show a work under construction (these photos can be seen in the “Museo Histórico Isla Martín García”)

Since at that time it was known that it was essential to protect the cannons, because the probable enemies had the capacity to destroy slopes so little prepared, and in fact so they did

In the last photo, you see on the left an ammunition bunker

In any case these batteries they were fortified throughout their operational life, and even today can be seen such fortifications.

 

 

 

On the other hand, in the photos of Martín García Island in 1903, it was shown that there was nothing left (only a mark on the grass).

 

 

Regards

 

Eduardo



__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

..
 

Let us go very slowly that you may undrerstand :

 Re-reading the book of H. Burzio, cannot be found nowhere that this cannon is a Krupp 240mm.

2) Wrong. On page 730 he states : "The Corps was transferred to Zarate in 1887, (where) it had an opportunity  tp install in the canyons (Barrrancas) of the Paranáa River, near the Navy Arsenal, one of the heavy Krupp 240 mm guns that was stored, along with other armaments since they were purchased. After the erection  of a platform it was mounted and fired succesfully in the presence of the president of the Republic, Dr. Miguel Juarez Cellman "


Even with many words written in several notes. you can not explain why that cannon (which you suppose a Krupp 240mm) was abandoned in 1911 on a scrap beach

2) Wrong again, what makes you think it was a scrap heap? Twenty  240 mm guns were acquired and by the 1920s 20 guns were installed at Puerto Militar?and why would the Navy scrap such a gun in 1911?  T


In addition, it is seen that you has very little sensation of proportions, of sizes and volumes, and does not relate the size of the cannon with the people who are in front of weapon

3) Wrong again: there you go assuming! the Armstrong 203 .40 was actually 8,12 meters long, the Krupp 240 L.35 8,40 meters. BUT: Apparently  you overlooked or misunderstood the term "Warped", which means deformed:  which is the very reason the guns were taken off a brand new warship in the first place shortly after its arrival. EVen today the guns maintain the original naval mount, for the  only mount of that type and size available to the Navy was that of tehe Krupp 240 mm.. Perspective can be deceiving,  there is a photo I took of some friends in Vietnam which makes one of them, barely 5 ' 6 " seem like he was over 6 feet tall.


If the profile of the barrel of the Krupp 240mm is superimposed with the profile of the barrel of the picture of Burzio, it is noted that in that photo should see the whole breech block behind the cadets (marked with nº 2 /Neither do you see the lower mounting (marked with nº 3), nor the turn support and its "galapago" bar (marked with nº 4)


4) Wrong again, I called it a davit (or pescante) in other words a hoist, a winch

I just said that the Krupp 240mm were not installed as a "Batería de Defensa de..." either in Zárate or in the Martín García Island, and that's true, they were only assembled for didactic purposes to prepare gunners (and it says so the "Decreto ley 2026" that I posted)

5) Yes, and Burzio explains the various reorganizations sustained by the Coast Artillery Corps. And now I ask' If the 240 mm was fired in front of the president, ( 1887) and used for trainng (or didacting purposes)  means that the guns remained in place at Zarate at least until 1911 and what operational unit does not engage in training exercise?


The previous photos of Armstrong's 170mm battery, show a work under construction (these photos can be seen in the “Museo Histórico Isla Martín García”)
 6 0The photos shows that the fortifications, apparently for budgetary reasons were built much later than when the Armstrongs were installed. By the way, the earlier photo shows Army ( not Navy troops, as the Island of Martin Garcia was garrisoned at the time by the Army)
Since at that time it was known that it was essential to protect the cannons, because the probable enemies had the capacity to destroy slopes so little prepared, and in fact so they did

I

In any case these batteries they were fortified throughout their operational life, and even today can be seen such fortifications.





On the other hand, in the photos of Martín García Island in 1903, it was shown that there was nothing left (only a mark on the grass).


snad:




-- Edited by Brunner88 on Friday 10th of February 2017 12:29:25 AM



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Friday 10th of February 2017 12:30:37 AM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   



In any case these batteries they were fortified throughout their operational life, and even today can be seen such fortifications.

On the other hand, in the photos of Martín García Island in 1903, it was shown that there was nothing left (only a mark on the grass

7) Even if we are to ASSUME that they were transferred to Puerto Militar (as Puerto Belgrano was then termed) we have two sources (Peme and Burzio) which state that the guns were installed at Martin Garcia in 1888..until (at least) 1903..(source?) and that hardly constitutes a "temporary" assignment. as you once described it....

My  most pleasant assignment with the U.S military (England) lasted  two years  I only wish that particular assignment  had been as  "temporary"...as that of the 240s at Martin Garcia.

awwawwaww....



-- Edited by Brunner88 on Friday 10th of February 2017 12:32:18 AM

__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   


As I was saying, look at thie photo of those same Krupp 240s...They were 8,40 meters (25 feet,2 )in length, yet in this photo the guns looks deceptively smaller...



__________________


Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 208
Date:
Permalink   

An interesting photo taken by a friend back in 1997 of an Armstrong 7 inch which bears the following inscription near the breech : Caóón de 177 Amstrong mod. 1877". This photo was taken at the Muséo Naval de la Nación, on the Lujan River, an area known as "El Tigre".



__________________
«First  <  1 2 | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us