Oversized Battleships Redux.

[BB1987]

probably some of you guys remember my sarting thread with it's insane 22-inch gun battleship, recently while trying to districate myself into the mess of the Sendai class refits and modifications i've put my hands on my old battlewagon in order to make it more up-to-date and detailed; my goal is not to make her more realistic or workable for modern naval warfare, or is should simply plunge her bow down into the mariana trench, but to put her more in line with my current drawing style.

six months ago:


now (but i'm still working on it):


i'll work sporadically on her between my real designs, then it will be time for her IJN counterpart too...

[Thiel]

Honestly, I'd stick with the historical stuff. You´re way way better at it.

[Colosseum]

Let the man draw what he wants.

[bezobrazov]

I agree with Colo here. However a few things on this otherwise rather nice drawing: The bow just doesn't cut it to be "American" Most established naval powers have over the time developed a kind of signature mark with regards to shipbuilding. They are traits easily identifiable with that nation's idiosyncretic character, so to speak, and with the 'Iowas' the USN perfected its bowform, a design that you've sort of diluted. Also I don't think there'd be two bow anchors, certainly not the way you've arranged them. Rather there'd be one secured to a big hawser 'cup' from the anchor deck. Again, I'd recommend you to look at the Iowas. Also, a bulbuous bow would be in order, even though you may not need a sonar.
As for the bridge: too much 'green house', also not designed with the customary USN bridge style (cf my modernizations of the Baltimore-class or the Californias to see what I'm referring to.)
I also believe a ship of this size would be nuclear powered, so stack is very archaic. The tower looks way, way too Japanese - probably because of your immense interest in the IJN. Now, it could be a Japanese super BB!
Lastly: while I get the main armament, I'm a tad puzzled at the 5/38s as secondaries?!? (Or tertiaries, which, honestly doesn't make much sense; are those four corner turrets meant to be 8" or 12"? It is sort of redundancy. - With 22" monster guns you've got a tremendeous littoral firepower. Alas, the likely range of these guns effectively neutralises the use of either of the smaller calibers, I'm afraid. I'd remove them altogether, unless you just want to keep them there for show. Also, I'd strongly suggest that you check the FCS, update them etc.
Hopefully my critique wasn't too devastating. I still think it's a magnificent ship you've created - magnificently crazy and weird! But an excellent draw!

[Colosseum]

I'd remove the "secondaries" and replace them with 5"/54s.

I also see a few Mk.51 directors - surely those would have been landed by 2012.

[BB1987]

thanks guys, i'll see what i can do to improve things a bit.
Bezo, you've probably got the right point about her strange look, i had concieved her as a USN battleships, but i still ended up with a massive tower because my inconditionate love for IJN battleships lines, beign fifteen when i first drawn her on paper surely did not help, also she is not nuclear powered as i actually made her beign built during the late 40's and early 50's.
this is the original drawing, one of the only two warships i've drawn back then to have survived to this day:

i had to obviously modify it a bit, as the main guns where too small for the 22-inch caliber i've planned to arm her with, so the superstructure was shrunked, i also removed the useless rangefinder placed between the stack and mainmast.

i also had two variants in the works back then, i halted working on them when i started to draw real life ships, the first without the 8-inch guns, and the second one with only 6x22-inch as main gun armament; both obviously are yet to be updated.

[bezobrazov]

Well, your sketch certainly is an impressive thing. And, trust me! I know everything about infatuation! Some ships and/or classes I've been obsessed with for thirty-some years now! You just cannot help it!

[acelanceloet]

I keep getting the feeling that your mast is not massive enough ..... if you want SPY-1 in it, that is

[emperor_andreas]

Looking good!

[BB1987]

@Ace: you mean that inside both the fore and aft fire control towers there is not enough space to allow the placement of the SPY-1 arrays? (they are placed in the same setup of the Uss Ticonderoga, fore and starboard on the front tower and aft and port on the aft one)


BB 79 and 81 with some of the changes made (and many others still to be done), the Uss Montana bow looks good on them






and i'm doing the same type of update on the IJN super-battleship too (i'll probably end up cannibalizing Erusia_Force's Yamato parts sheet once he'll post it on the IJN thread )

how she was:


how she looks now (WIP for her also):


i've switched all the 5-inch mounts into 3.9-inch ones, and i like it better this way