This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I'm pretty sure that these guns were simply K L/40, not SK L/40s. And it might be worth mentioning that they were disarmed when converted to barracks ships and their guns. at least the L/40s, were used as railroad guns. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
The description of compound armor is correct - it's taken directly from Herwig. But compound armor is essentially a plate with hard steel on the face with softer wrought iron behind. Wood backing was optional, but all four ships of the class retained it (even the two that got nickel-steel armor). And Herwig states this: "Wörth and Brandenburg were protected by so-called "compound" plates, introduced in 1877 and formed of steel-clad wrought-iron plates alternating with layers of wood and an inner skin of two layers of sheet iron." Presumably the sheet iron is simply the outer skin of the hull. Regardless, that matches with the description at compound armour. Parsecboy (talk) 14:52, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure about the description of Weissenburg (later Turgut Reis). I have seen two preserved turrets of the ship last week (Turkish coastal battery Turgut Reis at Dardanelles). They are made of three steel plates, 4 cm each, connected by large bolts (totall thickness 12 cm). This schema is visible at the whole turret - gun ports, door openings and the bottom edge of the whole tower. Is not it the so-called compound armour, rather than nickel steel "Krupp armour"? Ondřej Filip (talk) 12:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
No, compound armor included layers of wood and wrought iron, the layers of steel you saw were the result of Krupp's early rolling machines, which could not roll steel thick enough for a single plate.
I wasn't aware that turrets from the ship had been preserved - do you know anything about when they were installed? If you have any pictures you would like to upload, they would certainly be used. Parsecboy (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. Do you think they have also made the armour belt at this manner (many thin plates to have a 40 cm thickness)? I think the text is wrong when it descibes "300 mm thick sides and a 30 mm thick roof" of the turrets.
It might well be the case that entirely new mounts were built for the guns - they would have been a few decades old by then. Which would explain the discrepancy between the article and what you saw. Parsecboy (talk) 12:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually, after looking at your photos, it does look like the original turret. Curious. Parsecboy (talk) 14:07, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
I do not see any differences between the archive photos of the ships and existing turrets. Inner mechanisms are typical 19th century work, not pre-WWII work. All the parts of the turret (including bolts of the armour parts) are signed with typical numbers, stamped to the steel. Ondřej Filip (talk) 20:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)