Talk:381mm/50 Triple Gun Mount/@comment-17105527-20150510164243/@comment-25399466-20160519195725

Historically, the dispersion was not so high as the post-war, and especially internet-era comments wanted them to be.

In WWII, a salvo dispersion of 1% of the range was considered good, and one of 2% at least decent (put in mind that, wit a dispersion of 1% of the range, with a 9 guns salvo, you have almost the certainty to hit a cruiser-sized target at 17000m).

In tests, the Littorios showed a dispersion of around 1% until 18000-20000m, and one of 2% from 23000-24000m (for comparison, the Nelson ad the Rodney, in 1939 tests, showed a "disappointing" dispersion of around 3% of the range at 17000m).

The images of the salvos of Vittorio Veneto at Gaudo, that are often taken to show the high dispersion of those guns, really show a maximum distance between the shots of 415m for a three gun salvo (vs Gloucester and Perth) and 500m for a nine gun salvo (vs Gloucester), that are consistent with the tests, considering that the Vittorio Veneto fired from 23000 to 25000m, and was at full speed.

That means that, all in all, the system was sound. Since, having the highest muzzle speed of them all, it should have had the worst dispersion. Instead it was comparable with that of the other modern treaty battleships. Especially considering that the Littorios were all very new. To correctly align the guns of a battleship infact was a complex work, that could take months, or even years, and was much more complex if done in wartime, when the occasion for firing tests were limited, since, out of the port, the ships were at costant risk to be torpedoed by submarines.