Page 5 of 21 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 308

Thread: Big Battleship Doctrine

  1. #61
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    I need a lot of help with the tactics. We all need to figure out that best way for a modern BB to fight a war. We can change this design I've posted around. I'll make alterations if someone can convince me it's better.

    Sniper, maybe you can pitch in with design data on some of those cannon shells and what not you talked about in the other thread? Ram jet shells can be fired from a 16" gun. The engine doesn't go off until mid range in flight. As long as it has the needed speed. The best method if designing a new gun system based on AGS, is liquid propellant or perhaps C4 in the right quantities. Exploding at 26,000+ fps it would be an excellent choice. If the barrles weighed 105 tons...99 tons will suffice when using a titanium liner. The common steel barrels won't work. C4 is to destructive for it to work. A titanium liner on the other hand...it's a possibility.

    Or maybe heavier barrels are needed.
    Last edited by Defcon 6; 20 Sep 05, at 05:10.

  2. #62
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    "Are you still pro-BB?"

    I'm pro firepower and pro protection, that makes me pro-BB by default.

  3. #63
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    Sniper, how about you lay out the specs for your own modern redition of the advanced BB. I would like to see what you had in mind.

  4. #64
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    This was a question we played with quite a bit at Warships 1 a few years ago. I ended up pitching a design, and after much argument, we pretty much settled on what's listed below.

    I would design a Burke type 'wide' hull 30k ton displ. vessel with a crew of 500 and full flag facilities with four 6" twin AGS mounts, 2 ea. fore and aft(these i envision having an extremely capable anti-surface role as well as their obvious NGFS appeal), 196 APVLS cells, and four Phalanx Block1b/SeaRAM PMDS. Close surface defense would be handled by 2 35mm Millenium CIWS mounts, 1 ea port and starboard.

    Radar would be SPY-2 with Aegis Mk7 Baseline 7.0b/CEC, and i'd include a full sonar suite with extensive command and control features, extensive layered and spaced composite armor in mission critical areas, laminiated/spall lined steel walled compartments and bulkheads, nuclear powered(40kt sprint speed in calm seas), with am aft flight deck capable of operating 4 AV-8/B/F-35Bs(VTOL only), 4 V-22 Ospreys/MH-53s or eight LAMPS IIIs. 'Standard' compliment would be eight MH-60s(damned fine multi-role gunships with full ASW capabilities and powerful surface search radar), with hangar space for 6 of them(or four STOVLs/Ospreys/Pave Lows).

    I would include significant bunkerage so the vessel could support it's own escorts for extended operations, as well as adequate Berthing to embark and sustain a company sized element of SpecOps troops, and i would use it as the C4i centerpiece of a 3 ship task force consisting of it, and two Burke DDGs or LCS.

    I'd call it a heavy cruiser to avoid the political ramifications of 'battleship', and then i'd hire the best lobbying firm on the hill to make it happen.

    Every weapons and sensor system on the ship is derived from modern in service or high priority planned systems, thus avoiding the costs of developing or gaining support for all new systems. It makes accomodation for the 'all important' spec ops missions, and is a true triple threat 3d combatant, fully capable of self escort.

    Do we 'need' such a ship?

    No, not really.

    But if we had them, we'd find them to be extremely useful, i am quite sure.

    Unfortunately, the money just isn't there....and to be honest, at close to 20k tons displacement, CG-X is not too far from what i'm suggesting. It just lacks the guns and big flight deck.

  5. #65
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728

    Post

    Woohoooo do I hear a "Battleship Garage" as opposed to a "monster garage"...lol cant wait to see the "freeebies"...lmao Im in.

  6. #66
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    Exalibur, U.S Advanced Battlecruiser laid down 2005

    Displacement:
    25,594 t light; 26,695 t standard; 26,897 t normal; 27,059 t full load

    Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
    611.00 ft / 611.00 ft x 79.00 ft x 33.00 ft (normal load)
    186.23 m / 186.23 m x 24.08 m x 10.06 m

    Armament:
    3 - 16.00" / 406 mm guns in single mounts, 2,048.00lbs / 928.96kg shells, 1950 Model
    Breech loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turrets
    on centreline ends, majority forward
    4 - 6.10" / 155 mm guns in single mounts, 113.62lbs / 51.54kg shells, 1950 Model
    Breech loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turrets
    on side, all amidships
    10 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns in single mounts, 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1950 Model
    Machine guns in deck mounts
    on side, evenly spread
    Weight of broadside 6,655 lbs / 3,019 kg
    Shells per gun, main battery: 150
    3 - 533.0" / 13538.2 mm submerged torpedo tubes

    Peripheral Vertical Launch System-
    The solution consists of 20 four-cell PVLS situated round the perimeter of the deck, rather than the usual centrally located VLS. This would reduce the ship's vulnerability to a single hit.
    -Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (Raytheon RIM-162)
    -SM-3 Standard Missile
    -Tactical Tomahawk or Tomahawk TLAM
    -Harpoon ASM


    Armour:
    - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
    Main: 14.4" / 366 mm 397.15 ft / 121.05 m 10.66 ft / 3.25 m
    Ends: Unarmoured
    Upper: 11.3" / 288 mm 397.15 ft / 121.05 m 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length


    - Torpedo Bulkhead:
    11.8" / 300 mm 397.15 ft / 121.05 m 31.00 ft / 9.45 m

    - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
    Main: 11.8" / 300 mm 11.8" / 300 mm -
    2nd: 7.48" / 190 mm 7.48" / 190 mm -

    - Armour deck: 7.40" / 188 mm


    Machinery:
    Nuclear Powered
    Electric motors, 6 shafts, 400,507 shp / 298,778 Kw = 41.08 kts
    Range 200,000nm at 20.00 kts
    Bunker at max displacement = 364 tons


    Complement:
    77-92

    Cost:
    $396.857 million (Construction Costs)

    Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
    Armament: 832 tons, 3.1 %
    Armour: 13,282 tons, 49.4 %
    - Belts: 2,615 tons, 9.7 %
    - Torpedo bulkhead: 5,381 tons, 20.0 %
    - Armament: 291 tons, 1.1 %
    - Armour Deck: 4,995 tons, 18.6 %
    - Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
    Machinery: 683 tons, 2.5 %
    Hull, fittings & equipment: 10,797 tons, 40.1 %
    Fuel, ammunition & stores: 1,303 tons, 4.8 %
    Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

    Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
    Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
    17,066 lbs / 7,741 Kg = 8.3 x 16.0 " / 406 mm shells or 3.2 ADCAP torpedoes
    Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.59
    Metacentric height 7.6 ft / 2.3 m
    Roll period: 19.0 seconds
    Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 57 %
    - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.40
    Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.08

    Hull form characteristics: Tumblehome Hull
    Hull has a flush deck
    and transom stern
    Block coefficient: 0.591
    Length to Beam Ratio: 7.73 : 1
    'Natural speed' for length: 28.51 kts
    Power going to wave formation at top speed: 78 %
    Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 50
    Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
    Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
    - Stem: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    - Forecastle (20 %): 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    - Mid (50 %): 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    - Quarterdeck (15 %): 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    - Stern: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    - Average freeboard: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    Ship tends to be wet forward

    Ship space, strength and comments:
    Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 133.0 %
    - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 67.0 %
    Waterplane Area: 36,478 Square feet or 3,389 Square metres
    Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 126 %
    Structure weight / hull surface area: 244 lbs/sq ft or 1,189 Kg/sq metre
    Hull strength (Relative):
    - Cross-sectional: 2.17
    - Longitudinal: 0.90
    - Overall: 1.12
    Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is cramped
    Room for accommodation and workspaces is adequate

    The radar suite will consist of a dual band radar for horizon and volume search, an L-band volume search radar (VSR) integrated with the AN/SPY-3 multi-function radar already being developed by Raytheon for the US Navy. The two radars are to be integrated at waveform level for enhanced surveillance and tracking capability. The AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) is an X-band active phased-array radar designed to detect low-observable anti-ship cruise missiles and support fire-control illumination for the ESSM and Standard Missiles.

    Propulsion:
    I've equipped my vessel with MERMAID electrical pods, these give the vessel 360 degrees of movement without a rudder and can operate independantly. Direct hits can no longer disable a rudder or prop. shaft. Greatly increases survivability and fuel efficiency.

    6 Alstor MERMAID electrical pods @30MW each
    Cruise Speed: 31 kts
    Top Speed: 41 kts
    Last edited by Defcon 6; 21 Sep 05, at 19:52.

  7. #67
    Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 05
    Location
    Oak Hill, VA
    Posts
    577
    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon 6
    Complement:
    77-92

    Cost:
    $396.857 million (Construction Costs)

    I think you're missing one (or more) zeros on the construction cost. The LCS with one mission module'll probably be in the $300mil range. (or does $396.857 million mean $396 billion? if so, then you're way over paying )

    Also, I seriously doubt you could get the complement down that far. I mean DD(X) probably will have 100-150, and it's far smaller, with a lot less machinery & systems.
    Last edited by B.Smitty; 21 Sep 05, at 15:48.

  8. #68
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    The crew and price are waaaaaaaaaaaaay low.

    The ship you're describing would cost about 5-6 billion each(An Arliegh burke costs 1.1bn, and the DD-X is projected to cost 3bn each).

  9. #69
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    The Arsenal ship was able to be designed for 69+ crew. It's a question of automated systems. My figure is dead on accurate.

    Actually it wouldn't. That 396 million dollars is construction costs. Constrution costs refers to just the ship, armor ect. It does not include the E-Warfare systems and weapons. With weapons I gave this estimate $986.756 Million.

    This is because my ship is conventional. It isn't a DD(X) spin-off. It is simply designed to use weapons and e-warfare systems, everything else is conventional. Automation systems aren't counted against ship price because they eliminate sailors who receive paychecks. Theres a very specific way of figuring costs here.

    Plus it's made to be cheap. Scrap metal anyone?

    As I said before, the Queen Mary 2 is a 150,000 ton cruise liner and it costs $852 million.

    Using the same specs as my light battleship (the other exalibur BB(X) ) I can maintain both a Battleship BB(X) and a BC(X) for reasonable levels of cash.

  10. #70
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Your prices are beyond fantasy.

  11. #71
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    The Queen Mary 2 is $852 million.

    With a missile loadout similar to the DD(X) weapons are by far the most expensive portion of the ship. Another thing with DD(X) is that it jumped 400 million dollars in a span of 6 months when nothing new had been added. The U.S steel and ship yard industry is out of control. Thats why I don't calculate current market trend into my price.




    Whatever. The size of the ship makes little impact. Regardless, the QM2 is 852 million in price.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mary_II

    Tonnage: 150,000 gross tons
    Displacement: 150,000 tonnes (approx)
    Length: 345 m (1,132 ft)
    Beam: 41 m (135 ft) waterline, 45 m (147.5 ft) extreme (bridge wings)
    Draft: 10 m (32 ft 10 in)
    Height: 72 m (236.2 ft) keel to funnel (includes 17 passenger decks)
    Power: 157,000 horsepower (117 MW) GE LM2500+ gas turbine/diesel electric plant
    Propulsion: Four 21.5 MW pods: 2 fixed and 2 azimuthing
    Speed: approximately 30 knots (56 km/h)
    Complement: 2,620 passengers, 1,253 officers and crew
    Cost: UKŁ550 million (US$800 million)

  12. #72
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    BB(X2)
    Illinois Class, U.S Advanced Battleship laid down 2005 (Engine 2005)

    Displacement:
    74,727 t light; 77,948 t standard; 78,656 t normal; 79,222 t full load

    Dimensions: Length overall / water x beam x draught
    922.00 ft / 922.00 ft x 120.00 ft x 33.00 ft (normal load)
    281.03 m / 281.03 m x 36.58 m x 10.06 m

    Armament:
    AGS Gun System's:
    9 - 16.00" .70/ 406 mm guns (3x3 guns), 2,071.00lbs / 939.39kg shells, 2005 Model with extended titanium lined barrels
    Breech loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turrets
    on centreline ends, majority forward
    10 - 6.10" / 155 mm guns in single mounts, 113.65lbs / 51.55kg shells, 2005 Model
    Breech loading guns in Coles/Ericsson turrets
    on side, all amidships
    16 - 2.24" / 57.0 mm guns (8 mounts), 5.65lbs / 2.56kg shells, 1950 Model
    Machine guns in deck mounts
    on side, evenly spread
    *BAE Land and Armaments 57mm CIWS

    Weight of broadside 19,605 lbs / 8,893 kg
    Shells per gun, main battery: 150
    6 - 21.0" / 650 mm submerged torpedo tubes

    Peripheral Vertical Launch System-
    The solution consists of 80 four-cell PVLS situated round the perimeter of the deck, rather than the usual centrally located VLS. This would reduce the ship's vulnerability to a single hit.
    -Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (Raytheon RIM-162)
    -SM-3 Standard Missile
    -Tactical Tomahawk or Tomahawk TLAM
    -Harpoon ASM

    x2 MRLS 12 cell box units on retracting mounts

    Posseses Theater Missile Defense.

    The Hangars are actually streamlined into the hull-
    The hangars do not hold the helo's, they simply ride ontop
    The helo and UAV launch decks are flat with no patterns painted

    Hangar and docking capacity:
    UAV's are stored in the hangar (which is small_ any manned craft are simply stored on deck waiting launch.
    Rear Landing deck-
    x4 AH-1 Super Cobra Attack Helicopters
    UAV support with x28 Warrior UAV systems
    CH-66 Chinook landing capacity. Negates AH-1's, or they have to be in flight so there is room for landing operations.

    Bow deck (smaller):
    x3 AH-1 Super Cobra's, or x2 Blackhawk helicopters.

    Compact sleeping quarters that can house 100 infantry for landing operations. (Since there are no opposing naval landings now, most likely special ops)



    Armour:
    - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg)
    Main: 17.8" / 452 mm 562.90 ft / 171.57 m 12.47 ft / 3.80 m
    Ends: 9.20" / 234 mm 303.08 ft / 92.38 m 12.47 ft / 3.80 m
    56.02 ft / 17.07 m Unarmoured ends
    Upper: 15.8" / 401 mm 562.90 ft / 171.57 m 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    Main Belt covers 94 % of normal length
    Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces

    - Torpedo Bulkhead:
    17.9" / 455 mm 562.90 ft / 171.57 m 32.29 ft / 9.84 m

    - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max)
    Main: 10.0" / 254 mm 10.0" / 254 mm -
    2nd: 8.00" / 203 mm 8.00" / 203 mm -
    3rd: 8.00" / 203 mm 8.00" / 203 mm -

    - Armour deck: 7.00" / 178 mm

    Machinery:
    Battery powered
    Electric motors, 6 shafts, 229,527 shp / 171,227 Kw = 41.05 kts
    Range 200nm at 28.00 kts
    Bunker at max displacement = 1,274 tons

    Complement:
    288-333

    Cost:
    $6.898 billion *if (DD(X) 4.2 billion)

    Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
    Armament: 7 tons, 0.0 %
    Armour: 32,043 tons, 40.7 %
    - Belts: 6,747 tons, 8.6 %
    - Torpedo bulkhead: 12,038 tons, 15.3 %
    - Armament: 672 tons, 0.9 %
    - Armour Deck: 12,587 tons, 16.0 %
    - Conning Tower: 0 tons, 0.0 %
    Machinery: 5,491 tons, 7.0 %
    Hull, fittings & equipment: 37,185 tons, 47.3 %
    Fuel, ammunition & stores: 3,929 tons, 5.0 %
    Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 %

    Overall survivability and seakeeping ability:
    Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
    82,740 lbs / 37,530 Kg = 40.4 x 16.0 " / 406 mm shells or 14.7 torpedoes
    Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.22
    Metacentric height 9.4 ft / 2.9 m
    Roll period: 16.4 seconds
    Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 76 %
    - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.31
    Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 0.88

    Hull form characteristics: Tumble-Home design
    Hull has a flush deck
    and transom stern
    Block coefficient: 0.754
    Length to Beam Ratio: 7.68 : 1
    'Natural speed' for length: 34.53 kts
    Power going to wave formation at top speed: 53 %
    Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 86
    Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 0.00 degrees
    Stern overhang: 0.00 ft / 0.00 m
    Freeboard (% = measuring location as a percentage of overall length):
    - Stem: 17.66 ft / 5.38 m
    - Forecastle (20 %): 20.60 ft / 6.28 m
    - Mid (50 %): 20.60 ft / 6.28 m
    - Quarterdeck (15 %): 20.60 ft / 6.28 m
    - Stern: 20.60 ft / 6.28 m
    - Average freeboard: 20.36 ft / 6.21 m
    Ship tends to be wet forward

    Ship space, strength and comments:
    Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 108.6 %
    - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 162.5 %
    Waterplane Area: 97,194 Square feet or 9,030 Square metres
    Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 183 %
    Structure weight / hull surface area: 309 lbs/sq ft or 1,507 Kg/sq metre
    Hull strength (Relative):
    - Cross-sectional: 1.81
    - Longitudinal: 1.26
    - Overall: 1.38
    Hull space for machinery, storage, compartmentation is adequate
    Room for accommodation and workspaces is excellent
    Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform


    The radar suite will consist of a dual band radar for horizon and volume search, an L-band volume search radar (VSR) integrated with the AN/SPY-3 multi-function radar already being developed by Raytheon for the US Navy. The two radars are to be integrated at waveform level for enhanced surveillance and tracking capability. The AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) is an X-band active phased-array radar designed to detect low-observable anti-ship cruise missiles and support fire-control illumination for the ESSM and Standard Missiles.

    Propulsion:
    I've equipped my vessel with MERMAID electrical pods, these give the vessel 360 degrees of movement without a rudder and can operate independantly. Direct hits can no longer disable a rudder or prop. shaft. Greatly increases survivability and fuel efficiency.

    8 Alstor MERMAID electrical pods @30MW each
    Cruise Speed: 31 kts
    Top Speed: 41.05 kts

  13. #73
    Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 05
    Location
    Oak Hill, VA
    Posts
    577
    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon 6
    The Arsenal ship was able to be designed for 69+ crew. It's a question of automated systems. My figure is dead on accurate.
    The Arsenal ship could get by with a small crew because it was basically a floating VLS freighter. It had minimal sensors and no guns. It took all of its queueing and fire control from other vessels. Therefore, it only needed enough crew to drive & maintain the boat.

    If I read it right, your ship still uses significant DD(X) compoents (MFR and associated combat systems).

    It has a rough superset of the armament, sensors and combat systems of DD(X), and will have a larger, nuclear propulsion system.

    Plus the 1950s-era guns & turret systems are far more manpower-intensive than modern turrets. A triple 16" Iowa turret had a minimum crew of, what, 77 sailors?

    Optimistically, a single mount might require a third of them, and you have three turrets, so figure 70-odd sailors just for the 16" gun turrets.


    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon 6
    Actually it wouldn't. That 396 million dollars is construction costs. Constrution costs refers to just the ship, armor ect. It does not include the E-Warfare systems and weapons. With weapons I gave this estimate $986.756 Million.

    This is because my ship is conventional. It isn't a DD(X) spin-off. It is simply designed to use weapons and e-warfare systems, everything else is conventional. Automation systems aren't counted against ship price because they eliminate sailors who receive paychecks. Theres a very specific way of figuring costs here.

    Plus it's made to be cheap. Scrap metal anyone?
    $986 billion is still less than a Burke, which has been in full-rate production (amortized development costs) for years now, is far smaller, with a smaller weapons suite.

    Also, even at full-rate, DD(X)s are still supposed to cost in the $3 billion range.

    IMHO, scrap metal won't help drive down the price much. Most of the cost is tied up in amortized development, the weapons systems and C4ISR.

    Plus, it's also nuclear.



    Quote Originally Posted by Defcon 6
    As I said before, the Queen Mary 2 is a 150,000 ton cruise liner and it costs $852 million.
    Yes, but the Queen Mary 2 doesn't have 16" guns, SPY-3/MFR, PVLS, or armor.

    Oh, and it isn't nuclear-powered.
    Last edited by B.Smitty; 21 Sep 05, at 20:12.

  14. #74
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Sep 05
    Location
    Illinois, U.S
    Posts
    659
    by the way, the DD(X) is at least 600 ft long from naval-technology and globalsecurity's specs.

  15. #75
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    The Queen mary is a freakin luxury cruiser.

    You're not including R&D costs, Sys integration costs, and even your per unit cost is crazy low.

    5 billion MINIMUM for one of these ships.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 125
    Last Post: 21 Jun 08,, 04:33
  2. Battleship History Article
    By rickusn in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 17 Jan 07,, 16:16
  3. Big Battleship Doctrine 2
    By Defcon 6 in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 581
    Last Post: 16 Jun 06,, 21:37

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •