Naval Guns 147 



predecessor, the MARK 42, which weighed 150,000 pounds. We lost half the 

 firepower, but we know how to get that back now. We can build a 50,000- 

 pound, 5-inch mount now and not lose that firepower, so it was a tremendous 

 development, in my opinion. The mean rounds between failure went up 

 considerably, bringing the solid-state electronics into the control systems and 

 getting rid of some of the old switching. This, coupled with improving the 

 hydraulic systems, and so on, has led to considerable improvement in reliability. 

 We're still not anywhere close to where technology should allow us to be, and 

 that's why I think we should develop some new hghtweight guns. The light- 

 weight guns that we have now are based on the very late 1950's technology. For 

 example, the MARK 71 gun, which is the new 8-inch gun, has not even been 

 introduced on the first ship yet. It has been almost 15 years since that gun was 

 started. 



The Naval Gunnery Improvement Program, which you headed, represented a major 

 effort at Dahlgren in the 1970' s. How did this program originate and what was it all 

 about"? 



The Naval Gunnery Improvement Program was a collection of many indi- 

 vidual efforts which had been going on for some time, most of which date back 

 to the Naval Gunnery Conclave. The only thing that does not is the electro- 

 optical sensor system [EOSS] which was really, in my opinion, evolved due to 

 the early work of a young naval officer named Robin Battaglini. Another offi- 

 cer, Pete Orvis over at OPNAV, supported that effort, although he didn't 

 give us a lot of support in naval gunnery. Battaglini and Orvis kept the 

 electro-optical sensor work alive long enough to get it into the Naval Gunnery 

 Improvement Program, although both of them were gone by the time it 

 actually became known as the Naval Gunnery Improvement Program. In those 

 days, GIP, as it was called, included the electro-optical sensor system, the 

 development of the HIFRAG round, and the radar effort which was known as 

 Command Detonation. Pete Orvis was big on that. In fact, HIFRAG, Com- 

 mand Detonation, and EOSS were three of the things that Orvis was behind 

 very strongly. The velocimeter* became part of the program, although it has 

 been a "stepchild" all the way through. It never had a dollar appropriated for 

 it, but it was carried through the entire program. 



The first velocimeter effort that I know anything about began when I was in 

 Jim Kirschke's division in 1967. That was one of the first things we did. We 

 asked the University of Virginia to give us their opinion on whether the 

 velocimeter was worth considering, technically, and they decided that it was. 

 They actually did some of the early work. As far as I know, that's where the 

 velocimeter started. 



*An electronic device for measuring initial velocity of projectiles. 



