COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE COMMERCIAL X CONFIDENCE
(3) At the other end of the scale the larger calibre weapons ie
greater than 105 mm, appeared to be unacceptably heavy, complex and
expensive. The installed weights varied from 25 tons to 40 tons and
the costs lay between £1.5M to £2.0M.
(4) The 76 mm OTO MELARA mounting met most of the requirement and
was an established gun in service with many navies. However its high
rate of fire required a complex feed arrangement resulting in a system
in which ammunition types could not be changed without unloading the
whole of the ready use magazine ie 80 rounds. (One fact that emerged
from the study was confirmation of the low level of accuracy of the
76 mm system when the Italian designed and manufactured ammunition was
fired and a redesign is under consideration.) Mounting cost £820K.
(5) of the mountings that were readily available in a developed form
the Bofors 57 mm Automatic Gun L70 in Deck Mounting SAKL/70 appeared
a very good option. It had the same limitation as all the other
weapons systems examined in that it had been designed primarily for
general war use and was therefore more complex than it need be. It
was normally operated as a manned turret with 2 loaders and an einer
in the turret, but 40 rounds of one type of ammunition could be fired
from an unmanned gun. The mounting was equipped with a local fire
control system, but it was fairly rudimentary ie lead estimation with
fixed range (2000 metres firing). Mounting cost £533K. (NOTE This figure
$450K - £500K depending on exchange
has since been revised to between
rates).
(6) The only new mounting included in the Study was a proposal to
develop a naval version of the 105 mm tank gun using as many 'off the
shelf' well proven components as possible. A similar approach had
been adopted around 1950 in the development of the coastal Forces
System Mk 2 based on the 3.3 in gun, the forerunner of the present
C3
E-3
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE