Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Animated gun turret.gif

Animated Gun Turret

An animated naval gun turret, based on a British 15 inch turret Mark 1. Ordnance is loaded into a hoist at the shell room, then powder magazines are added from the powder room. The hoist then transfers this load to the top of the turret, where the shell and gunpowder are loaded into the gun barrel and discharged. The cycle then repeats.

Reason: Eye catching and large
Articles this image appears in: Breech-loading weapon, Gun turret BL 15 inch /42 naval gun
Creator: Emoscopes

Support as nominator — TomStar81 (Talk) 03:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Enc OK (maybe - shouldn't there be people moving the stuff from storage to elevator?), but no "wow", nor graphically appealing... --Janke | Talk 05:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support new version. Still not 100%, but much better. --Janke | Talk 06:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Very weak oppose~~ I really like it, but it needs polishing. Not sure where... maybe show people, not necessarily animating them loading, but just having them there to 1) show scale, and 2) place them where human interaction is needed, like loading the magazine into the lift. As for scale, I understand the whole thing might not be to scale (but if it is, awesome), but it is specifically based on a 15 inch turret, so it would be nice to have a human scale for that. But honestly, I like it a lot. --Golbez 06:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support edited version. --Golbez 21:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ - I agree it needs polishing. The animation should be smoother and maybe a little slower. Suggest that the shooting moment is emphasized. Alvesgaspar 11:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support edited version - Very good now - Alvesgaspar 13:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ~~Weakest oppose~~. If you can make the motion smoother, I'll support. — BRIAN0918 • 2007-04-06 13:09Z
Very weak oppose In addition to the above (slow it down!), I'd like a little bit of whitespace at the top of the animation so the gray doesn't extend all the way to the top. Also, can we get some kind of blast from the end of the barrel?--HereToHelp 14:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Support Looks great now. This version is by far superior.--Here T oHelp 21:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Steptrip/Votes ~Step trip 17:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Excellent animation that aids understanding. Always liked Emoscopes' clear animations, so support - with a few of the above tidyups, strong support. M0RHI | Talk to me 22:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As per above, the shooting moment should be included. Also the magazine section is not smooth compared to the rest of the animation. Witty lama 23:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support edited version. Witty lama 02:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question How do the bits in the magazine move into the lift thing in trunk? In an animation, drawing arrows for movement are unneeded shorthand. (it'd probably help if the bits and the lift thing were labeled too.) —Pengo 23:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They would be passed by hand. Emoscopes ^Talk 14:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ludicrously weak oppose It is an extremely good picture, reasonably high resolution, and very informative, but the part where the explosive charges are loaded from the magazine into the lift could be made clearer (i.e. how the charges are carried from the magazine to the lift). Otherwise, this is a very good picture. BeefRendang 04:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Ludicrously strong support The edited version is wonderful. Very informative, definitely worthy of FP status. BeefRendang 03:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it would seem that TomStar81 has notified Emoscopes about everyone suggestions, so you should seem some improvements soon. Its a very good find on his part, and a great addition on Emscopes part. Well Done! 70.254.22.164 06:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I am a fan. Comment, great image... I agree with some of the opposes and I only don't vote support in hopes that it will encourage someone to make a few fixes with the image. gren グレン 18:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, from the creator so I shan't vote. I have incorporated the above suggestions, and there is a labelled and unlabelled version now, with numbers only, to make it more multi-language friendly. Emoscopes ^Talk 12:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This is a great bit of work; Emoscopes is to be commended for responding to the requests for changes so quickly. If I might make one further small suggestion, I'm not sure whether the gun returning to zero elevation for each loading is accurate - surely that would greatly reduce the firing rate? I'll ~~conditionally support~~ based on someone correcting either me or the animation :-) --YFB ¿ 17:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Large guns of this era either loaded at a fixed elevation (when the rammer was fixed in the gun house), or at a limited range of elevations (like this gun, where the rammer is carried on the cradle). You have to bear in mind that a shell and cordite for each gun weighs well over a ton, and it is mechanically simpler, and the cycle is actually quicker, to have the gun load at a low or fixed elevation, and then rise to the required elevation to fire, before returning to load. This particular gun could be loaded between -5 and +20 degrees, (hence the "S" shaped upper hoist track) but I really wanted to emphasise the loading limitations in the drawing. These guns could elevate through a 35 degree arc and with a rate of elevation of 5 degrees per second, when the whole loading cycle takes around a minute, you really aren't slowing things down. Later weapons, such as the BL 16 inch /45 naval gun returned to a fixed loading elevation due to the enormous weight of ammunition. Hope that clarifies things! Emoscopes ^Talk 22:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your detailed and interesting reply. I agree with your reasoning and Support. --YFB ¿ 09:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice ^8thstar 19:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A great animation, well worthy of FP status. — BillC^talk 23:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support I previously withheld from voting because the original version seemed to only marginally meet FP standards. The edited version is much better and takes all the critiques into consideration (constructive criticism does work!). Very encyclopedic and lovely animated pic. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 10:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
support nicely done. Debivort 13:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Parts of the red line, labeled "main deck" but seemingly part of the turret, have different thickness. Is that on purpose? It looks implausible. ~ trialsanderrors 19:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's on purpose, I forgot to clarify in there annotation that this represents the armoured portion of the ship. The barbette is clindrical, so the section is cut through it, hence the difference in line thicknesses (imagine looking at it from the front). Emoscopes ^Talk 06:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Blieusong 20:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent technical diagram. The only nitpick I have is the green shell in the gun barrel - it seems to change sizes. {Slash -|-Talk} 05:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see what you mean, it jumps to the left by 1 pixel, that shouldn't be too hard to remedy. Emoscopes ^Talk 06:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support- A quality animation --Penubag 08:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)penubag[reply]
Support- A beautifully accurate diagram, everything from the blast doors on the lifts and the cordite magazine in a simple, aesthetic and easy to follow illustration. I'd love to see this on the main page, my only negative point is that I didn't think of this first! well done. WikipedianProlific ^(Talk) 22:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Animated gun turret.gif --Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 21:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]