Shipbucket

I think we can do better than so-called "random features".

It seems to me like a fairly safe bet that a 5/54 twin would reproduce the 5/38 crew arrangements in general, if not in exact detail. Thus a trainer on the mount's right hand side, a pointer and checker on the left, and a mount captain at rear center where he would be out of the way. And I wouldn't expect the exterior accoutrements to be different by more than a pixel or so in any respect.

Possibly the mount would be mirrored, but I can't imagine why. Stick with what works and minimize crew re-training and additional elements in the supply chain.

Colosseum is welcome to drop in with sources and completely invalidate everything I've said

I really have nothing to add... the dual 5"/54 mount is not something I've ever taken time to seriously consider as I haven't drawn anything using it.

I had sort of assumed the twin mount would look similar to the single mounts aboard Midway but as I understand it no sketches of the twin mount planned exist. BB1987's take on it seems fine to me - my only suggestion might be to move the mount captain's sight hood (and blast deflector) to the rear of the mount as on the 5"/38 twins.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

Norman Friedman's Naval Anti-Aircraft Guns and Gunnery has sketch of the twin Mk41 5"/54 mounting, but as intended for the early designs for the Mitschers, and as such has more in common with the later automatic Mk42 single mount rather than the twin 5"/38 mountings.

I'm unable to find any sketch of any 5"/54 Mark 41 twin mount (as intended for the Mitschers) in my copy. The only sketch I can find of the 5"/54 is on pg130 (of the Mark 39 single mount).

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

I swer I've seen at least one take on the double Montana mount... Damnit, now I have to break out the old HD.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

There are two, which I did when I drew the Montana some years ago. One is the enlarged 5/38 lookalike Dalamace used. The other one is based on the real 5/54 singles of the USS midway and its the one I've posted.

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation

Ah, right, missed your post on the previous page.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

The base ring on the 5/38 single mount was only slightly smaller than that of the twin (depending on exactly how you define the diameter, about 110" vs. 92"). Combined with the distance between gun axes on the twin, this meant that there was more room on either side of the single than there was to the left of the left gun and to the right of the right gun on the twin (60" from the center of the single gun to the edge of the gunhouse, compared to 48" on the twin). The single had enough space for the pointer and checker to be placed roughly side by side, looking through ports in the front of the gunhouse. The twin had to put them one behind the other, looking through telescopes built out of the side.

Expecting broadly the same geometry to hold on the 5/54 (you can't get away with a dramatically smaller base ring on the single) I think the enlarged 5/38 lookalike is much more appropriate than a 5/54 single lookalike.

I've got the Google books version. Of course the point of my earlier suggestion was moot since the caption explains that development for the mounting started in 1944.
http://imgur.com/a/o91CIqp

From what I gather, only S-511-66 seems to use the 5"/54 that BB1987 have posts, the one from what seems to be the Midway. Every other drawings for the Not-Atlanta use an enlarged 5/38 lookalike.

http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/ ... 511-23.jpg

http://www.shipscribe.com/styles/S-511/ ... 511-66.jpg