The rotating cylindrical part is usually referred to as the gunshield. The unit as a whole (that is to say the gunshield and the 'box' housing it) is identical in principle to a warship's casemate, but is never really, or at least rarely, referred to as such on a tank.
I would not refer to it as a barbette as it is very different in principle. A barbette is a stationary cylindrical armoured tower which contains a turntable and associated machinery for a gun or guns and is, as Ironsides notes, a term applied to that type of mounting in fortifications or on warships. Place an armoured shield on top to protect the breeches of the guns and you have what is generally referred to as a turret. It does not apply to a tank. Even less does it apply to that particular type of mounting.
You can see a battleship casemate here:
They were usually recessed, as in this case, but sometimes the housing was sponsoned out to achieve better fields of fire, much like the tank's guns. In fact, now I consider it more I'd probably refer to the mountings on rhomboid tanks as sponsons.
-- Edited by Roger Todd on Thursday 29th of November 2012 12:32:23 AM
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Gunshield, Barbettes usually apply to main gun positions of a particular type on warships, casemate or casement can apply to fortifications or ships but may also apply in this case for the armoured position...
The Defition of Casemate/Casement changed over time, by the late 19th - early 20th century a "casemate, casement" in regard to warships is an enclosed armored box generally intended to prevent destruction of more then one weapon by a single hit or to protect a single gun postion from any direction even through the hull of the vessel( in otherwords from the rear, im not going to discuss defintions of rear), you could argue the sponson in this case has no rear armour so is not a "Casemate casement" as any shell entering the Landship would likely knock out both guns, since they dont have individual all round protection...
A closer definition of a Early Landship(British) maybe a self propelled box battery with the guns in sponsons but one that includes the propulsion and conning position without any seperate compartment or protection, a recipe for disaster for a warship...
But I think what matters here is what term was used at the time in regard to the Landships...
Cheers
Sorry Roger this was not in reply to you it just took a long time to post
-- Edited by Ironsides on Thursday 29th of November 2012 02:57:50 PM
As Roger ses Sponson or armoured sponson would be the way I would refer to them , I was thinking you could you use "casemate sponson" but probarbly "armoured sponson" would be more correct.
"casemate" allways implies armor, though I think "sponson" implies a certain amount of armour its not allways the case sponsons at least on warships had any..
from contemporary books:
"The tanks moved down to the temporary tankdrome which had been decided upon near the rail- way, and the sponson trucks were towed there. The night was spent in fitting on the sponsons to the sides of the machines. "
""They're bombing us, sir! " cried one of the gunners. McKnutt signalled to him, and he opened fire from his sponson. They plunged along, amid a hail of bullets, while bombs exploded all around them." from Life in a Tank 1918
"She," curiously enough, is a male, carrying six-pounder as well as machine-guns, and is therefore easy of access. The door is in the rear of the projecting"sponson," or gun-turret"
"Finally came the order to push in sponsons." This is the immediate and inevitable preliminary to a railway journey, and consists in pushing in the projecting gun-turrets along guide-ways until they are level with the side of the Tank. The operation is not a difficult one, but calls for co-operation between Tank and Tank. All bolts having been withdrawn, one Tank noses up to the sponson of her mate and gently but irresistibly pushes it in" from Men and Tanks
"instructions, which I forwarded to Mr. Tritton on October 5th, giving the size of the opening of the " sponsons," which would carry one gun on each side of the proposed ship, and the weight of the gun-carriage, of the base-plate, and of the holding-down ring and shield. These two sponsons, which carried two guns and shields, were to weigh in all about three tons."
" A sponson is a structure projecting beyond the side of a Tank or Ship in which a gun is placed. This projection is necessary to enable the gun to be fired clear of the side, directly ahead or astern." from "Tanks, 1914-1918; the log-book of a pioneer (1919)"
Many thanks, Citizens. The bit I'm interested in is the curved shield thing, which a singularly annoying gent insists is a casemate. I believed that not to be the case, and, thanks to these very kind exp[lanations, the shield shall hereinafter be referred to as "the shield".
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Come on, Charlie - I've got enough on my plate. Have toyed with the idea of Scutum: the Latin word for "shield", although it has in modern times come to be specifically associated with the rectangular, semi-cylindrical body shield carried by Roman legionaries.
But I think this fits the bill; caption to photo in D. Fletcher's New Vanguard book on the Mk IV:
A male sponson . . . The short six-pounder gun in its rotating shield . . .
That will be sufficient to quieten this egregious person, especially since he is very fond of quoting DF, often in vain.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
Many thanks, Citizens. The bit I'm interested in is the curved shield thing, which a singularly annoying gent insists is a casemate. I believed that not to be the case, and, thanks to these very kind exp[lanations, the shield shall hereinafter be referred to as "the shield".
I'd go for that. If you're referring to who I suspect you are, I would say to him that the whole unit, that is to say the boxy structure including the curved shield, could be referred to as a casemate or, if you wanted to cover all bases, a 'sponsoned casemate'. But the curved shield on its own is not a casemate.
Shouldn't the curved shield be a mantlet. Before everyone leaps in and says that a mantlet is an external shield there have been
a number of tanks with internal mantlets. The function of a mantlet is to protect the working part of a gun.
I agree that casemate is not correct - that seems to refer to a type of mounting.
Funnily enough, I deleted a reference to mantlets from my previous post as I feared confusing matters, but yes, certainly in naval practise some heavy guns had a curved shield behind the turret face, to prevent splinters entering the turret through the gunport, rather than the external mantlet common to tanks.
Hm, good point about the lack of an internal armoured division. Having said that, any shell entering and exploding from any direction would have knocked out an early tank - they simply weren't shellproof, hence the Flying Elephant project.
Ironsides wrote:Sorry Roger this was not in reply to you it just took a long to post
No worries!
It emphasises that there are no easy answers. Or, rather, that it's easy to say what it isn't - the gunshield on its own isn't a casemate. But is the unit as a whole?
On the whole, I'd stick to sponsons to describe the whole thing and gunshield for the part James enquired about.
Ironsides wrote:Sorry Roger this was not in reply to you it just took a long to post
No worries!
It emphasises that there are no easy answers. Or, rather, that it's easy to say what it isn't - the gunshield on its own isn't a casemate. But is the unit as a whole?
On the whole, I'd stick to sponsons to describe the whole thing and gunshield for the part James enquired about.
Casemates are for ships; everyone knows the sponson of a rhomboid tank as a "sponson", so let's stick with that - after all, a sponson is a projection from the side.
As for mantlets, I've just checked a dictionary (Chambers) which describes them as 'moveable shields'. The term is therefore perfectly suitable for the part in question - although I myself would tend to use it for later vehicles with cast mantlets; to me the word suggests something more grandiose than the simple metal plate used on the rhomboids. Whilst there's nothing wrong with saying 'mantlet', I would call it a gun-shield.
After I suggested it as a possible descriptive term, I noticed Casemate has been adopted to describe a certain type of gun position in an AFV, Janes WW2 Tanks uses it in some cases.. I had'nt previously been aware of this, is this a new development in AFV terminology?
I am deeply content that in the Osprey Mark V Tank by D. Fletcher and Henry Morshead, the sponson is described as a sponson and the part that started the argument as "the rotating gunshield." That gives me enough ammunition to shut my opponent up, so I shall quit while I'm ahead.
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.