Weight is just a bit under what's listed here but well over the 45 caliber version. USA 16"/50 (40.6 cm) Mark 7
A bit too heavy for me and actually I don't collect weapons , but I suppose it's a good opportunity for those who do and have space. Shipping would be a challenge.
Reminds me of when I was at Dahlgren. They had a shock tube that they had determined was excess to requirements and put out the word it was available. An air force installation thought they could use it so said they'd take it and asked some particulars about the what kind of truck they should send. The tube was big enough that some of my friends there skate boarded in it and it was either a half mile or a mile long.... The airforce decided that they weren't really able to make use of it ...
At one point there were a bunch of 16" barrels at Dahlgren. These were manufactured for the Monatanas or were spares. These may be those barrels. Or they may be barrels for coastal defence batteries as it was an army site. I suspect worn out 16" barrels would have been scrapped already. Although come to think of it I believe that gun had a liner which was replaced when wear got too bad and the weight corresponds to a complete barrel not just a liner or a barrel without a liner. Just remembered there were a couple of Iowas cancelled before completion as well.
Demillers dilemma here....how do you chop them up enough to meet government specs then transport to steel factory for feed stock. Think how many of today's autos can be made from a single segment of the barrel. These are the ultimate challenge to "forging your sword into plowshares."
Hawthorne Army Depot started life as 'Hawthorne Naval Ammunition Depot'. If you roll through the pictures there are several picturres of the various breaches that are Stamped 1944; one in particular has several date stamp where the gun had been re-arsenaled several times: These barrels were more than likely intended to arm the Illinois (BB-65) and Kentucky (BB-66) and were kept as spares should the need arise. The Montana program was scrapped in favor of carrier production early in the War : The question I have: How does this affect the re-activation of the Iowa's should it be deemed necessary? after all they are kept in a state of preserved readiness and can be reactivated.
Good spot. I agree although the other possibilities are still there. From what I recall the Montana's were cancelled about 3 months before construction was schedule to start on the first couple. So I'd consider it still a possiblity. Depends on how many tubes were made. Certainly the 18 for the next two Iowas would have been acquired before the Montana barrels would. I'm also not sure how many spares were made. SoDak had a couple of barrels damaged and need them replaced and I think Iowa lost one in the turret explosion so a few were needed over the years. Again my understanding is that the barrels are designed to accept new liners when they've had enough wear and the barrels are in pretty decent shape now I believe. Furthermre some of the new propellants have vastly increased the number of rounds that can be fired as has the fact that not many AP rounds were ever fired and HE rounds have a lower wear factor. I think the navweapons site goes into some of this and links off of it do.
The Mark VII 16"/50 would have been used on the Montana's had they been commissioned; but, these barrels are all stamped 1944 well after the cancellation of the Montana program in 1942. The idea of replacement barrels is that the barrels can be cycled through the system, and exchanged, allowing for the ship to remain in service. So it's possible that the barrel in the picture could have seen service on more than one of the Iowas in more than one conflict.
Where's that embarrassed emoteocon when you need it. I guess it's possible someone forgot to cancel them as well but that's pretty remote. I simply didn't catch the signifigance of the date. (technically the Montanas were cancelled in 43 but they construction was suspended in 42). My understanding is that it was easier to change the liners than it was to change the barrels. However when I tried to look up the references that I thought mentioned it I didn't find them and may have misread what I did find so this is an open question.
Hahaha, it wood be nice to see our customs trying to declare this! And it would be a challenge to find a shooters disciplin for that, otherwise it isn“t allowed to own. Maybe " Sporty Naval Gun"!
First, what a waste!?! Second, just where in heck do they think I can pick up a few Shells from? so why demill them? I may have a few good connections for militaria but??????? I guess if they can redily destroy thousands of harmless M-1 Garands, then why not destroy these gun barrels?
Want to keep those home and protect the Rio grande Carl, or are you planning the Independence of Texas ? They would be a bit big for a weapon rack in a pick-up truck, even for a Texan wouldn't they ?
The turrets are not particularly spacious and I would think anything bigger than a breach lock would pose a problem.
I would want one, except for the few million dollars in shipping that comes along with it. It is a pretty cool site, but why would anyone need minesweeping equipment?
LOL....Doesn't everyone have mine sweeping and degousing gear? That site is for public auction and is a part of The Defense Reutilization Maintenance and Disposal Branch of the Department of Defense. Very often items are sold for re-use, re sale or recycling. Everyone from local municipalities to surplus stores and recycling contractors buy the stuff. Most of the time there is required 'Demilitariztion' on items that are either weapons or technology. They auction everything from fork lifts to whip antennas.
LOL. Also did anyone notice nuclear reactors for sale category. Or space vehicles. Hopefully terrorists don't figure out about this site. They could outfit a whole army.