The Ship Model Forum

The Ship Modelers Source
It is currently Wed Nov 25, 2020 12:28 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 72 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 18, 2010 5:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
I was thinking about this today.

What if all these planned battleships in post-1930 were built?
It would be quite interesting but i want to hear ya'lls take on em all

US:
Montana class
Displacement: 65,000 long tons (66,040 t) (standard);[1]
70,965 long tons (72,104 t) (full load)[2][3][4]
Length: 920 ft 6 in (280.57 m)[2]
Beam: 121 ft 0 in (36.88 m)[2]
Draft: 36 ft 1 in (11.00 m)[2]
Propulsion: 8 × Babcock & Wilcox 2-drum express type boilers powering 4 sets of Westinghouse geared steam turbines 4 × 43,000 hp (32 MW)[2]
Speed: 28 kn (32 mph; 52 km/h) maximum[2][5]
Range: 15,000 nmi (17,000 mi; 28,000 km) at 15 kn (17 mph; 28 km/h)[1]
Complement: Standard: 2,355[2]
Flagship: 2,789[2]
Armament: 12 × 16-inch (406 mm)/50 cal Mark 7 guns[2]
20 × 5-inch (127 mm)/54 cal Mark 16 guns[2]
10–40 × Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft gun[2]
56 × Oerlikon 20 mm anti-aircraft cannons[2]
Armor: Side belt: 16.1 inches (409 mm) tapering to 10.2 inches (259 mm) on 1-inch (25 mm) STS plate inclined 19°
Lower side belt: 7.2 inches (183 mm) tapered to 1 inch (25 mm) inclined 10°[1]
Bulkheads: 18 inches (457 mm) forward, 15.25 inches (387 mm) aft[1]
Barbettes: 21.3 inches (541 mm), 18 inches (457 mm) (aft)[1]
Turrets: up to 22.5 inches (572 mm)
Decks: up to 6 inches (152 mm)
Aircraft carried: 3–4 × Vought OS2U Kingfisher/Curtiss SC Seahawk floatplanes
Aviation facilities: 2 × aft catapults for launch of seaplanes[3]


Germany:
H class
Displacement: 110,696 long tons design
131,088 long tons fully laden
Length: 345.1 m (1,132 ft 3 in) (waterline)
359 m (1,177 ft 10 in) (overall)
Beam: 51.5 m (169 ft 0 in)
Draft: 12.7 m (41 ft 8 in) design
13.5 m (44 ft 3 in) fully loaded
Propulsion: Inner shafts: 8 × 9-cylinder MAN diesel engines, 120,000 shp
Outer shafts: 2 × steam turbines driven by 6 oil-fired boilers, 150,000 shp
Combined power: 4 shafts, 270,000 shp
Speed: 30.1 knots (55.7 km/h) maximum
Range: 20,000 nautical miles (37,000 km) at 19 knots (35 km/h)
Complement: Unknown, but not less than 2,600
Sensors and
processing systems: Radar included, but not specified
Armament: 8 × 50.8 cm (20.0 in) guns in twin turrets
12 × 15 cm (5.9 in) guns in twin turrets
16 × 10.5 cm (4.1 in) in twin turrets
28 × 37 mm (1.5 in) in twin mounts
40 × 20 mm (0.79 in) in quadruple mounts
6 × 533 mm (21.0 in) underwater torpedo tubes
Armor: Belt: 380 mm (15 in)
Armoured decks:
60 mm (2.4 in) top deck
140 mm (5.5 in) upper AD
130 mm (5.1 in)–200 mm (7.9 in) lower AD
Torpedo bulkheads:
45 mm (1.8 in) outer
30 mm (1.2 in) inner (depth of 11 m (36 ft 1 in))
Aircraft carried: one catapult with nine aircraft, probably Arado 196 seaplanes


Japan:
Design A-150 (Super Yamato)
Displacement: Approximately 70,000 long tons (78,000 ST; 71,000 t)[1]
Length: 263.0 m (863 ft) (est.)
Beam: 38.9 m (128 ft) (est.)
Propulsion: Unknown
Armament: 6 × 510 mm (20.1 in)/45 caliber guns (2×3)[2]
"Many" 100 mm (3.9 in)/65 caliber guns[3]
Armor: Possibly a 460 mm (18 in) side belt; nothing more is given in sources

France:
Alsace class
Displacement: 45,000 long tons (45,700 tonnes)
Length: 251metres
Beam: 35.5 m
Draught: 9.22 m
Propulsion: 197,000 shp (147 MW) geared steam turbines
Speed: 30 knots (56 km/h)
Range: 5,000 nautical miles (9,000 km) at 18 knots (33 km/h)
Armament: three 380 mm turrets, triple mounts (9 guns) or quad mounts (12 guns) depending on project
9 152 mm guns in triple mounts
16 100 mm AA guns in twin mounts
32 37 mm AA guns


450 mm torpedoes
Armour: Side Belt: 320 mm with a 15.5 degree angle, 127 to 152 mm at the ends Deck: 170 mm upper deck over magazines, 150 mm upper deck over machinery Barbettes: 405 mm Torpedo Bulkhead: 30 to 100 mm

Turrets: 430 mm face, 270 mm sides, 195 mm roof

UK
Lion Class
Displacement: 42,500 tons standard
46,500 tons full load
Length: 785 ft (239 m) o/a
Beam: 104 ft (32 m)
Draught: 30 ft (9 m)
Propulsion: 8 × Admiralty 3-drum water tube boilers, Parsons geared steam turbines, 4 shafts, 130,000 shp
Speed: 30 kt (28 kt full)
Range: 3,720 tons oil, ?
Complement: 1,600 (+80 flag)
Armament: 9 × BL 16-inch (406 mm) Mark II L/45 in triple turrets Mk.II
8 × QF 5.25-inch (133 mm) Mark I L/50 in twin turrets Mk.I
48 × QF 2 pdr Mk.VIII L/39 (40 mm) in octuple mounts Mk.VIII

Armour: Belt
15 in (381 mm) tapering to 5.5 in (140 mm)
4-13 in (101-330 mm) closing bulkheads
Main deck
6 in max (152 mm)
Barbettes
12-15 in (305-381 mm)
Turrets
6-15 in (152-381 mm)
Conning tower
2-4.5 in (51-115 mm)

Aircraft carried: up to 3 × Supermarine Walrus

Russia
Sovetsky Soyuz Class
Displacement: 59,150 metric tons (58,220 long tons) (standard)
65,150 metric tons (64,120 long tons) (full load)
Length: 269.4 m (883 ft 10 in)
Beam: 38.9 m (127 ft 7 in)
Draft: 10.4 m (34 ft 1 in)
Installed power: 201,000 shp (149,886 kW)
Propulsion: 3 shafts, Brown Boveri steam turbines
6 triangle-type boilers
Speed: 28 knots (52 km/h; 32 mph)
Endurance: 7,680 nmi (8,840 mi; 14,220 km) at 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph)
Armament: 3 × 3 - 406-millimeter (16.0 in) B-37 guns
6 × 2 - 152-millimeter (6.0 in) B-38 guns
6 × 2 - 100-millimeter (3.9 in) B-34 DP guns


10 × 4 - 37-millimeter (1.5 in) 61-K AA guns
Armor: Waterline belt: 180–420 mm (7.1–17 in)
Deck: 25–155 mm (0.98–6.1 in)
Turrets: 230–495 mm (9.1–19.5 in)
Barbettes: 425 mm (16.7 in)
Bulkheads: 75–365 mm (3–14 in)
Conning tower: 425 mm (16.7 in)
Aircraft carried: 4 KOR-2 flying boats;
2 catapults


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 6:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:31 pm
Posts: 1091
Well, they would be decommissioned soon after they were completed, as there was really no use for them by the time they were designed.

But, if they were to last longer, then we would see the Montanas, and A-250 based in the Pacific, and the Lion, H-class and Alsace class in Europe. At least post-war anyway, when they would actually see service. These would be part of the whole Cold War issue, blocking off the Sovetsky Soyuz class from leaving Soviet waters.

Though, there would be some controversy with the H-class, which side of Germany will it be on?

_________________
Current builds:
Hobby Boss 1/700 Type VIIC U-Boat for my AH

Planned builds:
3 more 1/700 AH submarines


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 2:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
Japan would have built the A-250 regaurdless. They still saw the battleship as center peice to their navy. Yet, she would have still faced the same fate as the Yamato and Musashi later in the war.

The Montana class would have been quickly decommisioned after the end of the war, for it was to slow to keep up with the Essex class carriers. Unless they changed the entire power plant so where her top speed would be higher. Thats where the last two Iowa class come in (the Illinios and Kentucky).

your right Sr. Gopher, The Lion and Alsace class would keep the Sovetsky Soyez class from entering European waters with the U.S on the other side. With that i would see the cold war escalating more than it did. The whole cat and mouse game with the subs would have been the same with the battleships.

But concerning the H class, it would all depend on where the Germans decided to build the ships, that is, if they survived through out the war, and what country obtained them at the end of the war. If you look at what the U.S did to all the captured ships from Japan and Germany (the nuclear bomb test on all the ships) I don't think it really would matter what side of Germany it would belong to! :mad_2:

But that is just what I think xD


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 3125
Location: Hawaii
One thing to remember about the H-Class BBs is that the first two were actually laid down and construction was well underway BEFORE the war even started. If they stayed on schedule they would have been completed around the time Bismarck left on her fateful journey. Imagine the fight THAT would have been! But, they were instead scrapped on the ways and the other 4-6 of the class canceled to make way for more U-Boats. Wonder if they could of actually made a difference or not, at least in the early years of the war.

_________________
Drawing Board:
1/700 Whiff USS Leyte and escorts 1984
1/700 Whiff USN Modernized CAs 1984
1/700 Whiff ASW Showdown - FFs vs SSGN 1984

Slipway:
1/700 Whiff USN ASW Hunter Killer Group Dio 1984


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
That would have been one heck of a battle! If the Bismark did all that damage, just imagine what just ONE of the H class ships would have done... poor england.... But yeah i didn't know Germany started to build them. But still, it would have had the same fate as the Bismark and Tirpitz did. England and the allies would have made that the first priority to sink over the Bismark annd Schornhorst class.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 1:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:29 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Just for kicks, heres something for you all to look at, one of the USN's proposed designs for the Montana class "Battleship Study Scheme-8" *This is a large picture*

The camouflage and armament are just speculation by me, but I think they look good.

Here is another design I found and I resized and redrew it to match my drawing style:

Montana Class Design

_________________
-Abram


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 10:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 3125
Location: Hawaii
WOW!!! I really like the first drawing there Arizona. I've seen the second before around the net but that first one is new and different. Great job! :thumbs_up_1: Did you ever/plan on doing a top down view?

_________________
Drawing Board:
1/700 Whiff USS Leyte and escorts 1984
1/700 Whiff USN Modernized CAs 1984
1/700 Whiff ASW Showdown - FFs vs SSGN 1984

Slipway:
1/700 Whiff USN ASW Hunter Killer Group Dio 1984


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 7:29 pm
Posts: 1270
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Cliffy B wrote:
WOW!!! I really like the first drawing there Arizona. I've seen the second before around the net but that first one is new and different. Great job! :thumbs_up_1: Did you ever/plan on doing a top down view?



A top view is always on the plan, sometimes it just never happens :whistle: :doh_1: Perhaps at some point Ill get around to it.

On that note here is another drawing of a Montana Class Design I made of my own:

USS Montana BB-76 1946

Being finished in 1945 the ship didn't receive as many guns as if it had been finished earlier, hence some empty gun tubs and big empty spaces on the superstructure where gun tubs could have been. Also on the top view you can notice around the dual 20mm guns lots of gray disks, that's where 20mm mounts would have been as well. From the comparison below you can see the sheer size of this design. Its probably in no way plausible, but it was fun to draw as I came up with it on my own.

Smaller uncolored version as a comparison to the Iowa class:

Montana - Iowa Comparison

_________________
-Abram


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 3125
Location: Hawaii
Ahhhhhhhhh, so I see you sprang for the 1000 footer with the extra SHP to get her up to 33 knots. Me likey! :cool_2:

_________________
Drawing Board:
1/700 Whiff USS Leyte and escorts 1984
1/700 Whiff USN Modernized CAs 1984
1/700 Whiff ASW Showdown - FFs vs SSGN 1984

Slipway:
1/700 Whiff USN ASW Hunter Killer Group Dio 1984


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 2:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:31 pm
Posts: 1091
I bet taxpayers would want to kill the person who decides to build that for the navy...ESPECIALLY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

_________________
Current builds:
Hobby Boss 1/700 Type VIIC U-Boat for my AH

Planned builds:
3 more 1/700 AH submarines


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
Very nice! If i heard that was planning to be built right now, I would be one of the first to start a fund raiser to have her built! I know it would be hella cheaper to build a battleship than it would our 8 billion dollar aircraft carriers and destroyers!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 4:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 2:31 pm
Posts: 1091
USN_Matt wrote:
Very nice! If i heard that was planning to be built right now, I would be one of the first to start a fund raiser to have her built! I know it would be hella cheaper to build a battleship than it would our 8 billion dollar aircraft carriers and destroyers!


It's really that reason why I wish carrier technology stopped advancing in WWII, and why jets and nukes were never designed...Oh well, that is the reality in my little world anyway.

_________________
Current builds:
Hobby Boss 1/700 Type VIIC U-Boat for my AH

Planned builds:
3 more 1/700 AH submarines


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2010 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
Yeah i know how you feel! Born in the age of supercarriers, jets, and nuclear weapons.... Nothing beats the sight of a 16", 1000kg projectile being launched at 820m/s with a distance of 39,000m! :destroyer: sorry bout that! had to rant about the old navy days. still, nothing beats seeing a battleship in action, just to bad I was born to late...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2010 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:58 pm
Posts: 1549
Location: Houston, Texas
1. The Montana class would have served in Korean war and would have been retired afterwards. The Iowa class would still be retained in reserve.
2. The Lion class would have been kept in reserve in the 1950s with Vanguard, while the remaining King George V would be scrapped. All scrapped between 1955 and 1960.
3. H class vessels would not have survived the war. All units destroyed by the RAF at port in Danzig or were a total loss in Copenhagen May 1945.
4. Super-Yamato vessels destroyed April-June 1945. None ever entering service.
5. Alsace class: Completed 1955, deleted 1960-1965
6. Sovetsky Soyuz, 2 hulls finished in 1950, in service 1951. Decomissioned within 10 days of Stalin's death. Kruchev orders them to be converted to CV. Both converted to CV 1958-1962 serve as anti-submarine command cruisers. 24 ASW helecoptors, 8 fixed wing ASW turbo-prop aircraft, 12 fighters, the

_________________
╔═════╗
Seasick
╚═════╝


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 12:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
Seasick wrote:
1. The Montana class would have served in Korean war and would have been retired afterwards. The Iowa class would still be retained in reserve.


Thats true, but soon after the korean war the class would have been decomissioned do to the lack of speed. If i remember some where it was said the minimum speed was around 30knts or so, where the Montana could only do a maximum of 28. UNLESS, during construction the propulsion was up graded to something more powerful rather than the same power plant as the Iowa class. If this was the case she would have served alongside the Iowa class, if not replaced the Iowa class as the last class in service.

Quote:
2. The Lion class would have been kept in reserve in the 1950s with Vanguard, while the remaining King George V would be scrapped. All scrapped between 1955 and 1960


Would the Lion class be scrapped as well in that time frame?

Quote:
3. H class vessels would not have survived the war. All units destroyed by the RAF at port in Danzig or were a total loss in Copenhagen May 1945.
4. Super-Yamato vessels destroyed April-June 1945. None ever entering service.
5. Alsace class: Completed 1955, deleted 1960-1965


Depending on when this class was completed, It wouldn't have survived. If it was completed by the begining of the war it would have gone the way you described, but later in the war it would have been destroyed while under cunstruction.

I agree with you on the Super-Yamato. would have never even left the shipyard.

Would the French even have enough resources at that time to build the Alsace class? Wouldn't the Germans comendiered the ships while under cunstruction? if so, i don't think they would have been completed, and the materials used for other things.

Quote:
6. Sovetsky Soyuz, 2 hulls finished in 1950, in service 1951. Decomissioned within 10 days of Stalin's death. Kruchev orders them to be converted to CV. Both converted to CV 1958-1962 serve as anti-submarine command cruisers. 24 ASW helecoptors, 8 fixed wing ASW turbo-prop aircraft, 12 fighters, the


Thats really interesting, I would have never have thought that would have happened. I would have seen them completed but than refited as a missile battleships around the 1958-1962 time period. With what you said, is that what happened to alot of post-WWII ships? If not, what made you conclude that would happen? Sorry, you caught my curiosity on that matter!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:58 pm
Posts: 1549
Location: Houston, Texas
USN_Matt:
I doubt that the Montana class could have been made to cruise at 30+ knots. Their maximum sustained velocity would have been 29 knots. Both the Iowas and Montanas were intended by pre-ww2 planning to remain in service for 40 years. I might be wrong but the Montanas if built would have not entered service until very late in the war, like 1945. Its hard to speculate since there is no way in the world that they would have been built.

The Sovetsky Soyuz would be decommissioned when Stalin dies. Turning them into a CVS of sorts is not unreasonable though unlikely.

_________________
╔═════╗
Seasick
╚═════╝


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 3125
Location: Hawaii
There were multiple designs for the Montanas varying from 28 -33 knots. The upper ends had a ship anywhere from 980'-1050' with 313 SHP. They would have been MASSIVE but would have been possible to build them as "fast BBs" if they had wanted to do so.

_________________
Drawing Board:
1/700 Whiff USS Leyte and escorts 1984
1/700 Whiff USN Modernized CAs 1984
1/700 Whiff ASW Showdown - FFs vs SSGN 1984

Slipway:
1/700 Whiff USN ASW Hunter Killer Group Dio 1984


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
seasick

With the normal powerplant they would have received during construction, the Montana wouldn't be able to break 30knts at all as you said, but like Cliffy B said, there were many designs of the Montana at the time. It is sad that samller, and slower design. If anything they should have gone with the 313 SHP design.

I see what you saying about the Sovetsky Soyez, though, we will never know what would have become of that class...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 11:41 am
Posts: 1227
Location: turning into a power-hungry Yamato-models-munching monster... buahahahaha...
Just a footnote - the H class (more properly the H-43 and H-44) as described in the first post was never meant to be built, as opposed to, say, the Montanas or the Lions. It was a design study aiming at gathering information about how hull size, hull protection and ship speed relate to each other. The H-class that were started were ~50.000 ton ships armed with 8 406mm guns and suffering from some of the same design defects the Bismarcks did.

H-43 and H-44 may also have been aimed at keeping design teams together which otherwise may have found their way to the front...

Jorit

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 9:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:31 am
Posts: 79
there were actually three designs in the H class, the H-39, H-43, and the H-44. The H-39 was the one that actually started cunstruction but was cancelled.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 72 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group