MY ideas for a FUTURISTIC BB

[fitz]

Originally Posted by maximusslade

LOL Sheesh, I can't win for losing!

Welcome to the exciting world of ship design.

[maximusslade]

*Grumble*

[maximusslade]

LOL At least admit it *looks* better. As for what looks like underutilized internal volume, I am trying to keep in mind that the ship will have guts in it, i.e. cold and dry storage, berthing, workshops, a reactor plant, officer country, goat locker, air conditioners, galley, mess, electrical switchboard rooms, parts lockers, yadda yadda yadda.

Perhaps if I narrowed the beam and shortened it up a little bit. LOL but this ship is starting to turn more into a heavy cruiser rather than the BB I started out with

[lastdingo]

The Constitution drawings (especially the first one) look really nice *jealous*.

The 70's 8" RF gun design is a good idea if someone wants to design a BC at all costs. Two turrets for redundancy is fine, but dual barrel is unnecessary.

I's add lots of 3" turrets - let's say four turrets each side plus two centerline, at up to 120 RPM you could saturate the air with so many shells that every non-ballistic missile should be intercepted in time (if the systems work fine and are active).

Since there's little need for many big guns I'd say that the rear should be utilized for helicopters and VTOL. A ship of that size could easily operate 14 medium ASW helicopters and 6 Harrier II+, even with a ramp for the Harriers (to enable them to take-off with lots of fuel).

I'd also utilize the space/deck area for some RC boats - to act as decoys for mines and missiles, emulating the signature of the main ship. These decoy boats could have one Phalanx or RAM each in addition to the magnetic/acoustic/radar emulation stuff and radar jammers.

The ultimate justification for such a big ship would likely be the ability to withstand hits and stay mission-capable. That and the usually cheap steel plus small increase of necessary power with increased displacement means that the ship could use lots of surplus displacement well. Imagine a ship that takes the punch of several torpedoes, lots of fragments and also some anti-ship missiles and remains at 70-90% of its original combat power and 95% of its original personnel strength.

Just for the good look; have a look at the Manchester class (stretched Sheffield class) - main guns well forward of the superstructure can look incredibly well.

[FOG3]

The Super Battleship IJN Yamato was taken out by "several torpedoes," and wasn't willing to just suck up a single torpedo hit when bracketed by a pair if them earlier by DD-532 USS Heermann effectively losing the Japanese the Battle of Samar despite their vastly out-tonnning and out-gunning their opposition in the process as Kurita didn't properly recognize the situation because of it. Incidentally proving Battleships being less then able to really bring their firepower to bear in the process as their opposition consisted solely of Sprague's 6 CVEs, 3 DDs,and 4 DDEs vs Kurita's Center Force of 4 Battleships (including Yamato), 8 Heavy Cruisers, 2 Light Cruisers and 13 Destroyers. Note the battle basically went on for hours.

There is no ship that can take "several torpedoes" or otherwise and not be sent to the bottom, and there never was. Let alone simply shrug them off as you imply. That's why the Biritish lived in mortal terror of subs to the point they wasted inordinate amounts of ammo pounding water when anyone thought they saw a periscope in WW1.

An ounce of prevention is worth is worth a pound of cure is an understatement. Enterprise and Hornet deserve a lot of credit, yet for some reason its always the BBs, despite the fact they couldn't even really take on 6 dinky 7,800 ton Casablanca-class Escort Carriers when having a downright unreal concentration of force to pit against them.

[fitz]

Originally Posted by maximusslade

LOL but this ship is starting to turn more into a heavy cruiser rather than the BB I started out with

Which simply means it is becoming more realistic.

[maximusslade]

Having read Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors I can appreciate Fog's point, BUUUUT for the record, we lost two CVEs, two DD's and a DE, the Japanese, for their part, thought that our DDs were CA's and that our DE was a CL. Further more, while the small US airstrikes against the Japanese were causing some damage, Kurita was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more concerened with Admiral Olendorf's task force that was closing in after just having finished off the Southern Force at the Battle of Surigao Strait.

So yes, it is unrealistic to try to design a ship that is immune to torpedos. Yes, BB's have limitations when operating without air cover. And OH YES our boys were able to pull off a heroic stand in the face of insurmountable odds. But do not say that the Japanese lost because BB's and CA's are impotent against DD's and carriers. The Japanese did not know what they were fighting and had an enemy force, vastly superior to his own, closing up on his rear, so he did what any prudent commander would do, he got the hell out of Dodge. By the time the Japanese withdrew from Samar, the escorts were burning or sunk and Taffy 3 was short carriers. If he had stayed he could have cleaned up Taffy 3 but would have had to deal with Maryland, West Virginia, Mississippi, Tennesse, California, and Pennsylvania plus all their escorts.

[lastdingo]

It is possible to prepare ships to survive multiple torpedoes.
It's all about
- reserve displacement (a matter of size),
- counter-flooding (easily done and again a matter of size),
- structural strength (already very different among nations of WW2),
- dense compartmentalization (easily done) and
- shock resistance (standard since I think 70's at the latest).

Such a torpedo-hardened ship has become feasible since vertical and horizontal armor and primary gun turrets of WW2 vintage wouldn't take so much displacement anymore. A 20,000 ton ship could easily take four modern heavyweight torpedo hits and cruise home if designed to do so.
The trickiest part is to disperse the propulsion and steering.

Nobody ever designed a ship specifically for torpedo survival (but no anti-shell protection) post-45, but it's possible to do it.

[fitz]

Originally Posted by lastdingo

Nobody ever designed a ship specifically for torpedo survival (but no anti-shell protection) post-45, but it's possible to do it.

Do you have even the slightest clue how a modern torpedo goes about its business? Given your thoughts on covering modern surface combattants with large numbers of anti-aircraft guns and apparent attraction to the dreaded hybrid warship I think the answer may be self evident.

Needless to say, everything you just described is nonsense.

Take for instance this sequence at the link below and keep in mind as you review the photographs that the torpedo which sank this vessel did not at any point come into contact with the ship!!!!

Mark-48 torpedo - attack

[maximusslade]

I have to say it, Fitz is right. Even the super massive Nimitz must kneel down before the awesome power of the ADCAP. BTW, I am intimately familiar with both the ADCAP and the Tomahawk, and by intimately familiar I mean that I spent two months at sea sleeping between an ADCAP AND A Tomahawk. LOL But in all seriousness, when a submarine like the one I was on (Seawolf class) can carry 50 of those things and sneak up close enough to a carrier that you can take nice clear pics of a guy taking a leak off the stern of a carrier then your carrier is SCREWED no matter how many compartments it has.

[maximusslade]

There it is, my CRUISER. It is a big cruiser but I think that would work.

[fitz]

Originally Posted by maximusslade

BTW, I am intimately familiar with both the ADCAP and the Tomahawk, and by intimately familiar I mean that I spent two months at sea sleeping between an ADCAP AND A Tomahawk. LOL

TMI

[FOG3]

Originally Posted by maximusslade

Having read Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors I can appreciate Fog's point, BUUUUT for the record, we lost two CVEs, two DD's and a DE, the Japanese, for their part, thought that our DDs were CA's and that our DE was a CL. Further more, while the small US airstrikes against the Japanese were causing some damage, Kurita was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more concerened with Admiral Olendorf's task force that was closing in after just having finished off the Southern Force at the Battle of Surigao Strait.

So yes, it is unrealistic to try to design a ship that is immune to torpedos. Yes, BB's have limitations when operating without air cover. And OH YES our boys were able to pull off a heroic stand in the face of insurmountable odds. But do not say that the Japanese lost because BB's and CA's are impotent against DD's and carriers. The Japanese did not know what they were fighting and had an enemy force, vastly superior to his own, closing up on his rear, so he did what any prudent commander would do, he got the hell out of Dodge. By the time the Japanese withdrew from Samar, the escorts were burning or sunk and Taffy 3 was short carriers. If he had stayed he could have cleaned up Taffy 3 but would have had to deal with Maryland, West Virginia, Mississippi, Tennesse, California, and Pennsylvania plus all their escorts.

True enough, but it would also be negligent to not mention they sunk 3 cruisers and put other IJN ships into repair dock for the rest of the war which is in effect a mission kill.

Casablanca-class Escort Carriers were not noted for being well armored or fast by any standard. Give those guys the credit they deserve, they certainly earned it. Especially when on fire didn't lead to going to the bottom.

By all rights that battle should have been a rout. Part of the reason I routinely bring it up is it emphasizes BBs don't exactly get an insured grant from God they can force others to play their game.

[maximusslade]

Very true Fog, I by no means wish to downplay what our boys did. It is things like what they did that make me so very proud to have been an American sailor.

[maximusslade]

No comments on my cruiser???