BCG-1 "Alaska"-class extra-long-range air-defense cruiser

[TurretHead]

of course we know that. not the exact numbers, but we know it is heavyweight. but the main problem here would be the structural integrety of the hull with the heavy weight fore and aft, that gives problems here. these systems might fit on the ship, but not in this arrangement.

Mate you have no evidence to back any of those statements. The weight of the turrets and their barbettes is huge. Solid thick steel for armour is much heavier than thin aluminium aerostructure and rocket fuels. As to the weight balance the weight of the SAGE system replacing the forward two turrets is far more than even a bunch of rockets.

This is what a SAGE building looks like:



It more than replaces the weight of two turrets compared to a rack of launchers and a big hangar to maintain Alaska class CG. Even without the weight of the computer's massive cooling system and the HMI the SAGE's FSQ-7 is the same as 40 BOMRAC missiles. Since each SAGE has two computers and one would assume around twice as much weight forward as aft to balance the turrets that is SAGE forward, 40 missiles aft. Real numbers not just pixel impressions.

[erik_t]

This is me shaking my head in frustration and sadness.

[TimothyC]

You might be able to do this on an Essex, but I have serious doubts about on an Alaska.

[acelanceloet]

turrethead: correct in the weight and all. but, look again at what I wrote.

where are the turrets: on strenghtened frames.
where is the computer in this arrangement: on the relatively weak bow.

and no evidence? do you have any that it WILL work? show me then, because the bits of knowledge and experience I have on ships in general say that it won't work like this.

[Colosseum]

:angryshipbucketforummer:

[Clonecommander6454]

Question: Who don't just ship Talos and use the remaining space for a Command Center. Surely there would be more than 40 Talos on a ship this size.

[Dilandu]

Question: Who don't just ship Talos and use the remaining space for a Command Center. Surely there would be more than 40 Talos on a ship this size.

Cause it won't be crazy enought...

Actually - cause the Talos will only have a range of 150 km, and "Bomarc" about 800!

[erik_t]

That much is true. However, Bomarc had a range from the launcher of 800km. It was still limited by what SAGE's radar web could detect. Here, where radar and launcher are collocated, the effective range of both systems will be about the same.

If you really want to go crazy, you basically need an organic AEW capability, which means building off of a carrier. But once you have the deck, fighters are much more efficient than huge SAMs (because they are basically a reusable first stage).

[Portsmouth Bill]

Um.....Bomarc? Wasn't this one of the reasons that the RCAF lost the CF-105? IIRC they sited them and then the Soviets decided they could simply knock them out with first strike ICBM's. So, a large hull at sea, with the same inefficient missile? Have we considered Soviet submarines shadowing them?

[klagldsf]

That much is true. However, Bomarc had a range from the launcher of 800km. It was still limited by what SAGE's radar web could detect. Here, where radar and launcher are collocated, the effective range of both systems will be about the same.

It seems like what would make the most sense is to just have one SAGE installation onboard ship (no actual launchers) so that it could extend the range of the detection web for ground-based launchers. I'm sure just the one installation will be quite a handful as has been discussed, but at least you won't have to worry about anything else.

Or you can do what they do for range instrumentation ships and use a converted merchant/auxiliary hull.