Nihon Kaigun 1946

Post drawings from any Alternate Universe scenario here.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
eswube
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#281 Post by eswube »

Sad, very sad. :(
emperor_andreas
Posts: 3908
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 8:03 am
Location: Corinth, MS USA
Contact:

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#282 Post by emperor_andreas »

Well, this isn't exactly IJN, but it's part of the AU I'm doing with all the IJN drawings, so I figured I'd post it here. (And it's a rarity for me...my first USN ship! :) )

By 1941, it was blatantly obvious the IJN was building more battle cruisers, and the USN - while building battleships out the wazoo in an effort to catch up - wanted some more 'cruiser killers' to combat both these new enemy battle cruisers plus the twelve 10-inch-gunned large cruisers that the IJN already had. As such, the United States ordered an upgraded 'cruiser killer' class to go along with the seven Alaskas that were currently under (or about to start) construction. The second class of large cruiser not only had an increase in 5-inch turrets (ten twin mounts versus six on the Alaskas at the expense of any aircraft handling facilities), but also an upgrade in main armament to nine fourteen-inch guns. The large gap in their superstructures affectionately earned them the nickname of the "Bucktooth-class". Even so, most considered them handsome vessels.

Image

By the end of the war, the list of U.S. large cruisers looked like this:
Alaska-class
U.S.S. Alaska (CB-1) - commissioned 17 December 1943
U.S.S. Guam (CB-2) - commissioned 17 March 1944
U.S.S. Hawaii (CB-3) - commissioned 17 June 1944
U.S.S. Philippines (CB-4) - commissioned 17 September 1944
U.S.S. Puerto Rico (CB-5) - commissioned 17 December 1944
U.S.S. Samoa (CB-6) - commissioned 17 March 1945
U.S.S. Aleutians (CB-7) - commissioned 17 June 1945

Constitution-class
U.S.S. Constitution (CB-8) - commissioned 6 February 1945
U.S.S. Constellation (CB-9) - commissioned 6 May 1945
U.S.S. United States (CB-10) - commissioned 6 August 1945
U.S.S. America (CB-11) - commissioned 6 November 1945
U.S.S. Shiloh (CB-12) - commissioned 6 February 1946
U.S.S. Gettysburg (CB-13) - commissioned 6 May 1946
U.S.S. Appomattox (CB-14) - commissioned 6 August 1946
Image
MS State Guard - 08 March 2014 - 28 January 2023

The Official IJN Ships & Planes List

#FJB
Colosseum
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#283 Post by Colosseum »

Wow... haven't even had it on the forum for a day and there's a kitbashed version out there. ;)

You should give it the updated Mk.37 and SK radars available on the new Alaska. Also, by this time they would be built with SK-2 air search sets with two SG surface search sets. You'd also see Mk.13 radars on the main battery directors. Also you have two versions of the 5"/38 mount in use...
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#284 Post by TimothyC »

The Slipways to build that many large cruisers don't exist unless you cut into carrier production. The changes needed for the second batch also are going to eat up the limited drafting-room capacity of the time to the point that you'd lose the Midways as far back as 1943.
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
eswube
Posts: 10696
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#285 Post by eswube »

Very impressive!

@TimothyC
That's in the real world - and here we have an AU, where - I suppose - there could be slightly larger production capacity (in the sense that it's not physically impossible as long as we - or rather Author - are keeping it within certain reasonable limits).
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#286 Post by Thiel »

If they have the production capacity why not use it to build more Essex's or Midway's?? The Alaska took 21 months to build, the Constitution class would take about the same. That means construction will have to start in May or June 1943 and they'll need a slipway each since construction overlaps. At that point the USN was screaming for carriers and escorts. Those seven slipways and the material needed could instead be used to build 7 Essex class carriers and 8 Gearing class destroyers. Or 117 LSTs for that matter.
The first option would provide a whole lot more cruiser killing than any 7 cruisers, but the second option might be better if the Pacific war drags on.
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.
User avatar
Demon Lord Razgriz
Posts: 446
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 1:18 am
Location: Eastern North Carolina

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#287 Post by Demon Lord Razgriz »

Nice, but it has one massive flaw, it can not be named USS Constitution, as the first one is still In Commission. :P
95% of my drawings are destined for NS, 4.9% for fun, & .1% serious.
Worklist:
Space Shuttle
Atlas V
Delta II/III
Project Constellation
Soyuz series
emperor_andreas
Posts: 3908
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 8:03 am
Location: Corinth, MS USA
Contact:

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#288 Post by emperor_andreas »

Actually, the first U.S.S. Constitution was planned to have been renamed U.S.S. Old Constitution when the USN had the name slated for a Lexington-class battle cruiser...no reason to expect the same renaming could not have happened in this case as well.
Image
MS State Guard - 08 March 2014 - 28 January 2023

The Official IJN Ships & Planes List

#FJB
User avatar
KHT
Posts: 1396
Joined: November 19th, 2011, 12:49 pm

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#289 Post by KHT »

Impressive!

I'm no mod, but since we left out reality and politics out of the KM '46 thread(with some aid from the mods), why not do the same here? The '46 AUs are for awesome, over-the-top ships, not well-evolved background stories.
Colosseum
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact:

Re: Nihon Kaigun 1946

#290 Post by Colosseum »

I agree, sometimes it's fun to just design silly things without realism constraints. ;)
Post Reply