Technology

Photo Tour Shows What Makes This ‘Devastating’ 5-Inch Weapon ‘Tick’ on the Destroyer USS Barry

Business Insider’s Robert Johnson got to take a tour on the USS Barry recently, and of all the amenities and gadgets, what fascinated him the most was the destroyers’ 5-inch, 127mm gun — and the process it took to fire it.

He got got a first hand look at just “what makes the 5-inch weapon tick”:

Loaded with an assortment of devastating rounds, the gun can pound out its 20-projectile magazine in about a minute while maintaining pinpoint accuracy via its computerized targeting.

[...]

All that happens to make this gun so devastating may surprise you.

Here is look at a few of his photos, but be sure to check them all out here.

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

5-inch light weight gun mount on the USS Barry. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

Powder that will shoot out a projectile is stored deep in the ship. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

A projectile like one of these gets loaded on top of the gun powder. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

The gun powder-projectile packages get loaded into this lift and brought to the firing room. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

These are the firing mechanisms. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

View on the ship after firing. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

Business Insiders Robert Johnson Takes a Look at the Destroyer USS Barrys 5 inch 127 mm Gun

Rounds detonating at sea. (Photo: Robert Johnson/Business Insider)

As a fun fact, Johnson found out the gunners on the ship have named the weapon Lucile.

Comments (94)

1 2
  • JustJP
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:51am

    “Lucile” Cool name.

    Report Post »  
  • sharkbait
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:47am

    I was the daily newspaper (The Guardian) editor on USS Independence, CV-62. I always enjoyed it when our Gunners’ Mates got a chance to practice with live fire. They were genuine artists with the 5-inch .38s.
    Dr. Dave Gowan
    wakullan@gmail.com

    Report Post » sharkbait  
    • The-Monk
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:36pm

      @sharkbait

      It’s not wise to post your e-mail address here. Too many trolls.

      You might want to report your post and have it deleted ASAP and then repost without it. : )

      Report Post » The-Monk  
    • Free_Thinker
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:41pm

      The 5 inch 38 is a good gun but the 5 inch 54 is even better!

      Report Post » Free_Thinker  
  • watashbuddyfriend
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:28am

    Just don’t need it, Nuke!

    Report Post »  
  • Tankertony
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:26am

    One of these could take out the entire Iranian navy.

    Report Post » Tankertony  
  • bane73
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:10am

    One part the article didn’t touch on (that they SHOULD have) was the men who spend 8-12 hours loading these munitions into the gun… the rounds and powder aren’t light (each discharge requires a powder AND a “bullet” and each of them weight around 30-60 pounds)… since the gun can fire 20 rounds/minute that means that the loading team (about 3 guys) are humping just under 100 pounds into the gun every 3 seconds. The 3 guys form a human chain and pass the rounds from one to another in order to get it from the magazine into the chamber. That means each guy humps about 2000 pounds per minute. Granted, they usually shoot in bursts so there is down time in that working-day… but they can sustain that rate of fire usually for at least 15min or longer at a given time. We routinely shot several thousand rounds in a day.

    Source: I served this auxiliary duty for about 6 months when I was a fresh sailor onboard the USS Valley Forge. It was very tiring work.

    Report Post »  
    • Evileye
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:29am

      Was in navy Korean war
      The gun then was called a 5″ /38
      Was a brass case. use to take the empty one down to machine shop and make ash trays out of them,

      Report Post »  
    • bane73
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:32am

      Haha, I’m not a smoker but that would be SWEET! :D

      Report Post »  
    • iteaparty.org
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 12:20pm

      You are exactly correct. We used four: One to pull the powders out of the canisters, one guy pulling and loading rounds, one guy loading the powders, and the senior guy was tracking inventory and watching for safety issues (usually pitched in on high volume shoots); he also set fuses if we were shooting Variable Timed rounds.

      It was grueling work but it was definitely worth it. Nothing sounds better than that beast roaring to life and putting some lead down range!

      Report Post »  
    • BBow
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 5:31pm

      They did make great re-enlistment memorabilia. As you saw on them the powder is 45lbs and a projectile is 75ish depending on type. Ammo on-load is a real “fun” day. As a slight side note to those who may have gender questions about such a task in the navy..When I was on a Male/Female ship (DDG-77) the women who went in the gun magazine on those on-loads often went as long and hard as any of the guys.

      Report Post »  
  • sbs21078
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:42am

    Look at the head on that!

    Report Post »  
    • muffythetuffy
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:49am

      A missal is more accurate and reliable. Guns should not even be on US war ships except for ceremonies. Why would a modern US Navy still us guns?

      Report Post »  
    • TreeTrimmerJim
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:11am

      Learn from the F4H Phantom of Viet Nam fame. It was a missiles only plane. Missiles are very expensive compared to ammo fired from a gun. Missile go far but not close. Missiles have envelopes of effectiveness which begins a short amount of time after they are launched. We ended up putting gun carrying pods on the Phantoms which increased the plane’s effectiveness and reduced the costs of achievement, a few dollars verses thousands of dollars per kill.

      Report Post » TreeTrimmerJim  
    • USMCEOD
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:34am

      The head on that round (which is a practice round) is just a cover. The HE projectiles are accurate but they lack the power of the 8 inch rounds or the 155mm Artillery rounds. Most of the 5 inchers the navy uses have a Prox Fuze which gives it a higher dud rate. I can’t tell you how many of these things I have stacked and blown on impact ranges. I will say with the computer controlled system it can sure put enough rounds on target quick enough to make up for it’s shortcomings.

      Report Post »  
    • LakeHartwellSailor
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:36am

      @muffythetuffy

      Oh Muffy….please you don’t have a clue. Sure missiles are accurate, but so are guns (please notice the spelling). Missiles are also very expensive per shot compared to guns. Believe me, guns are VERY accurate.

      Report Post » LakeHartwellSailor  
  • blnblu1
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:30am

    I was a Tiger on my son’s former Destroyer DDG 84, I was able to witness the 5″ – AMAZING and the distance was INCREDIBLE. Our Navy does more than visit a different port when they are out on their cruises. They are building schools, updating sanitary services, building roads plus more for not just “3rd world countries” but for any location that has a need. The Navy will raise their hand and get in line to help those who can’t always help themselves. Go NAVY! Go USA!

    Report Post »  
    • muffythetuffy
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:52am

      The Navy should not be building roads, schools, homes, or giving away free food. This is insane and further proves that the US is sliding into 4th World Military status. We will just become an over sized Sweden.

      Report Post »  
    • Shamrock241
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:52am

      Would that be on our broke TAX PAYERS dime.

      Report Post »  
    • bane73
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:04am

      I served onboard (not too long ago) the USS Milius and USS Valley Forge. The 2 that replied to your post don‘t understand what you were saying so thought I’d share info for them. When the Navy “builds schools, roads, etc” we aren’t doing it as our primary mission. When we make port-stops on cruise we make them typically for 2-4 days at a time. Traditionally we (sailors) tend to spend most of our time spending our money getting drunk (because when you spend 30-60 days at sea working, you tend to get depressed). Offering us the opportunity to help the local community is as much for them as it is for us and it costs the taxpayer almost nothing (we would be there anyways to give us some shore-time). Typically we don’t actually build a whole school, for example, we just help clean up a run down one. And it goes a long way towards showing our good-will and earning good-will in return. It’s a very cheap way of promoting US-diplomacy. Trust me, I’m an early Tea Party type guy, strong pro-states rights and all that. Having our sailors spend a few days fixing up an area of a local community when they make a port stop is at the very,very bottom of whatever concerns we might have. Any expense, by comparison, is so trivial as to be practically 0.

      Report Post »  
    • Lawrence7
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 12:55pm

      “Why would a modern US Navy still us guns?”

      Missiles are incredibly expensive with respect to a gun round and the ship can carry many more rounds of ammo/powder than missile. A gun also provides flexibility for dealing with small short range targets that do not require a heave expensive missile. One important aspect making guns better than missiles is the gun can fire a variety of different ammunitions for different effects on the target. The ammo decisions can be made quickly and changed quickly for firing from one target to another. In a combat situation, especially ground support along a coast line, a gun like this is a much better fire support weapon than a missile for a wide variety of reasons.

      Report Post »  
    • hawaiianninja
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 2:07pm

      @Muffy: LOL! “…sliding into 4th world military status”? With all the budget cuts the US military has suffered under this administration and the liberal (socialist? Marxist?) democrats, we’ll be lucky if we can defend ourselves at all should things turn for the worst. Normally, I don’t care to respond to the clueless (props to Dennis Miller), but your statement gave me a good laugh.

      Report Post » hawaiianninja  
    • BBow
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 5:38pm

      @iteaparty.org MK 160 batter than MK 86 (from a Destroyerman AEGIS FC)

      @Lawrence7 Don’t forget that a hard kill weapon for Air Defense is also a part of this beautiful guns capability.

      Report Post »  
    • misteryuck
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:19pm

      I worked on DDG84 at Ingolls shipyard in Mississippi back in the summer of 2000. Those are some kewl ships. USS Bullkely or something like that…

      Report Post » misteryuck  
    • snufy
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:54pm

      5″ guns are good for shooting small targets, but if you want something REALLY impressive, look at videos of 16″ guns. They can throw a 2,700 lb projectile accurately for 20 miles. Each salvo of 16″ moves the battleship sideways in the water 50 feet. When those strike a target, there is no target left. In WWII they used 16″ guns to slip mountainsides over Japanese enplacements. They use powder in 100 lb silk bags.

      Report Post » snufy  
  • schroeder123
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:13am

    Where is the Energy Beam ? Cut you in half……

    Report Post » schroeder123  
  • ChiefGeorge
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:53am

    Go Navy!

    Report Post » ChiefGeorge  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:08am

      I agree, and I am retired Army. Had good number of relatives who were WWII Navy vets though. But, why in the world did they name a tin can after Barry?

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • PPMStudios
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 12:06pm

      @ RJJINGADSDEN

      It’s named for Commodore John Barry (1745–1803).

      I’m retired Air Force and still managed to look that one up… GO U.S.A.!!

      Report Post » PPMStudios  
  • TheMajority
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:42am

    Something tells me, iran is building one right now. I am sure they learned a lot from the drone obama let them have also.

    Report Post »  
  • RinkyDink34
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:34am

    OMG I hope the Navy doesn’t mistakenly target the Oval office when the Liar and Chief is stinking it up :(

    Report Post » RinkyDink34  
  • keywest62
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:21am

    The Navy didn’t build that!!!!

    Report Post » keywest62  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:50pm

      @keywest62

      Um, so you actually think it was the Navy sailors themselves who built the ship?

      Report Post »  
  • KickinBack
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:30am

    Made in America.

    Report Post » KickinBack  
  • RamonPreston
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 6:37am

    Only MOOshell should care what it takes to make Barry’s 5″ gun work.

    Report Post » RamonPreston  
  • TinCanVet
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 6:05am

    As ITEAPARTY said, this is the M45. My first system was the M42, which had more legroom if you could hold on in Auto from Fire Control. For a decent video of the M42 in action, see this video-
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5lRYcT4Nd8
    Notice the drum magazine on THIS Puppy!
    I spent almost 2 of my 4 years as a Gunner on this thing before moving to the Big stuff, and have the tinitis to prove it :) Worth it too!

    Report Post » TinCanVet  
    • Bum thrower
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:28am

      Excellent! MOS 13A

      Report Post »  
    • DTR
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:40am

      I was a Mk 86 Tech guns! I was aboard USS Vicksburg from ‘06-’11. Quick funny story, my LPO was a Mk45 tech and when he went to 1st class leadership, he said his goal was to keep reenlisting until he got on the ship that sinks the USS O’Bannon…. Guess what Vick did in ‘08… Best…. Day…. EVER! (and contrary to the official reports, Vick’s 5″ was responsible for the sinking).

      Report Post » DTR  
    • TexasCommonSense
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:07pm

      It was quite the surprise to see this ship. I’m a Plank-Owner of this ship. I was part of it’s first crew as an FC2(SW) when it was commissioned in Pascagoula, MS in 1992. It‘s good to see she’s still fighting the good fight.

      Report Post » TexasCommonSense  
  • strewth_cobber
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 5:37am

    Those images remind me of Arj Barker’s joke at the Melbourne Comedy festival:

    1.00min mark>

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQk84Mpug58&feature=player_detailpage

    Report Post »  
  • JohnHW
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:54am

    I am a mount captain of an earlier model, a 5″/38.twin mount (on the USS John W. Weeks, DD701). We had a crew of 5 in the “upper handling room” which sent the shells/power up to the mount and 7 in the mount. Rate of fire depended on the loader, but usually was 8 per barrel (or 16). We had three mounts for a total of 6 barrels.

    Report Post » JohnHW  
    • TinCanVet
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 6:33am

      @JOHNHW, we worked with DD‘s that had the twin 38’s, but i never got to fire one. I was on a Knox Class DE/FF homeported out of Pearl in the early 70′s. I was a mount captain on some twin 3‘ 50’s(open & closed turret), and they were much more fun to fire! They sure have come a long way tech-wise since then, ey.

      Report Post » TinCanVet  
    • MMCMswRET
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:18am

      I was a mechanic on the USS Truxtun and our berthing compartment was right below the barrel of our 5″/54. Everytime they fired that thing it knocked all the lights out of the overhead (alot of dust too). But I loved watching that thing fire, I miss those days.

      Report Post »  
    • LakeHartwellSailor
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 11:11am

      @MMCMswRET

      Yo man! I was an OS on the Tommy T from 1980 to 1984!

      Report Post » LakeHartwellSailor  
    • seattleconservative
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 2:53pm

      Truxtun ‘90 to ’94. Fire control.

      Report Post »  
    • BBow
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 5:49pm

      Don’t let anyone here think that the current Navy has extra people around. Most work centers are half the size they where 10 years ago. I can’s say how much change before 2001 or after 2011.

      Report Post »  
  • ACACIA
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:43am

    sure are a lot nicer than the 5″ we had on coast guard cutters in the 1950 and 60s. i also agree that the entire mexican boarder should be line with these 5″ mounts shoot first and ask questions later.

    Report Post »  
    • Pink_Panther_Party
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:37am

      You don’t want to put anything that pretty, close to the border Acacia. It’d be stripped and sold for brass before you could fire the first shell!…lol

      Report Post » Pink_Panther_Party  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:56pm

      One guy implying that people crossing the border (including women and children) should be killed, and another implying that all Hispanics are thieves. Why does the lying liberal media claim that the Republican party is full of racists?

      Report Post »  
  • Talafofotom2
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:05am

    Edward’s wife was named Lucille-and although they got married in the west texas town near Burkette-lived through WW2 in Long Beach Ed was on an ammo ship finally decommed in the 50′s but was part of a good many re-possessions from the *** mil inWW2- when His Lucille went on a tear it was close to that one.

    Report Post » Talafofotom2  
  • iteaparty.org
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:50am

    As a former Gunner, I worked on this weapon system (on a Cruiser) for several years. This is the Mark 45 5″/54 gun mount. It has a rate of fire of 16-20 rounds per minute. The 70 lb 5 inch projectile is propelled up to the weaopons’ effective range of 13 miles by a 30 pound high explosive charge. It can be used against any target on land, in the air, or at sea. The versatility of the weapon is proven in the multitude of rounds that are designed for various purposes; variations can occur in fuse type or payload. The Blue rounds pictured here are BLNP, “Blind Loaded and Plugged.” They are big paper weights, no explosives or fuses inside, that are used for target practice (still A LOT of fun to shoot).

    The two levers shown in the fourth picture are pneumatic controls that allow the gun to elevate (move up or down) or train (move left to right) without engaging the electric motors used during operation. The gold netting in the same picture is a safety netting that covers the entrance of the gun housing to prevent entry during firing.

    The actual firing can be controlled from the Loader room or remotely from the radar station. When operated remotely, the computer provides all the calculations for training and elevating the gun and automatically adjusts for changes as the ship rocks and maneuvers.

    The entire gun system, from the magazine, to the loader room, to the gun itself, is three stories high.

    Report Post »  
    • Quest4Freedom
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:02pm

      This comment is a reply to all of our servicemen – past and present. THANK-YOU for your service in the protection of our great USA! It gives me hope in knowing that we have a plethora of patriots willing to stand in defense of our Constitution.

      Report Post »  
  • Temporal
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:43am

    In the WWII battlewagons of old, a 5-inch gun was considered merely “secondary” armament. The main batteries consisted of nine 16-inch guns which fired a 2000 lb shell. Now those were big guns!

    Report Post »  
    • BBow
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 6:08pm

      Google “US navy ships that had 16 inch guns” its about 6 Consider yourself in the Minority if you saw such a BIG gun. This gun is techy though so it does well. We should all also remember that LOOSE LIPS SINK SHIPS. Please watch what is said in such an open forum. I am sure anyone here can talk navy in person to a friend or even join the navy and get ESWS. Enjoy the Mysteries if not..lol

      Report Post »  
  • JACKTHETOAD
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:34am

    I want one mounted on the roof of my car. I hate traffic.

    Report Post » JACKTHETOAD  
  • Slowman101
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:10am

    We should put a couple of hundred along the Mexican border. LOCK AND LOAD.

    Report Post »  
    • Talafofotom2
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:06am

      Actually you load then lock.

      Report Post » Talafofotom2  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:54pm

      @Slowman101
      So you’re saying the punishments for illegal immigration should be death?

      Report Post »  
    • fish2mar
      Posted on August 30, 2012 at 8:03am

      Actually, the term, “Lock and Load” originated with the iconic M1 Garand. ‘Lock’ was the order given to recruits by their drill instructor on the firing line, and it meant to lock the operating rod in the rear position, and ‘load’ was the order given to insert an eight round enbloc clip into the weapon. I own a six digit Garand, and every part is correct for the weapon. It is ‘Dead-On’ accurate out to about six hundred yards !

      Report Post » fish2mar  
  • banjarmon
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:05am

    USS BARRY….I’m glad it is NOT the uss barack!!! The uss barack would have a water balloon launcher!!

    Report Post » banjarmon  
    • NeoMouser
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 2:20am

      no thats not correct it wont have any weapons
      it might have mighty fast engines for running away under a barrage of fire though
      or equipped with a white flag

      Report Post »  
    • scout n ambush
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 3:59am

      Oh no Barry Sotoreo no can‘t be there’s no white flags, wait a sec that sounds racist no green flags there that sounds better.

      Report Post » scout n ambush  
    • v15
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 4:38am

      The USS Barack would be fully equipped with teleprompters, fueled by murdered fetuses, the landing strip converted into a golf course, praying to his demon-slaying monkey-god to bless his raw dog meat, and would have traveled to all 57 continents throughout the world.

      Report Post » v15  
    • USNRET04
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 7:43am

      …and a USS Bill Clinton would not stay on an even keel!

      Report Post » USNRET04  
    • seattleconservative
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:31am

      The USS barack would be all bow and no stern.

      Report Post »  
    • RightThinking1
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 9:09am

      For sure, it would be a plug-in. Not much range at sea…

      Report Post »  
    • Sy Kosys
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 10:04am

      @USNRET04

      The USS Bill Clinton would be powered by the captain’s seamen

      Report Post » Sy Kosys  
    • Smokey_Bojangles
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 5:01pm

      The USS Obama would just run around in circles at $500 Trillion a second.

      Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
    • VanceUppercut
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 8:52pm

      @NeoMouser

      Yes, Obama is a coward…who managed to defeat Gaddafi with minimal expense and without the loss of a single American life, and who has killed more terrorists with drone strikes that Dubya ever dreamed of. Not to mention killing bin Laden, the guy who Dubya called “not that important” and eventually stopped looking for.

      Report Post »  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on August 29, 2012 at 12:32am

    Where can I get one for my apartments balcony? I know some progressives who would throw a fit over it there; so I wish for one desperately.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • Laus Deo
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:05am

      Throw a fit, or body parts?

      Report Post » Laus Deo  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on August 29, 2012 at 1:44am

      @Laus:

      To see them throw a fit; on the barrel I would fly the American flag with pride and have a sign beneath it that says “Proud American Son of an Army Father, and Grandson of a Marine”

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love