Montana Class Missile conversions

[BB1987]

i wanted to play around with some hypotetical missile conversion for the montana class:

I tried first with an austere late 50's refit of BB-70 New Hampshire in wich the aft main guns where landed to be replaced by a twin arm mk12 Talos missile launcher and an expanded magazine with the standard storage capacity of at least 104 missiles (or possibily even more)


Next, some 1964 fictional proposals including Terrier, Talos, single-end and double-end conversions for both BB-70 New Hampshire and BB-68 Ohio.




Then, a 1967 Albany-ish Terrier double end conversion for BB-71 Louisiana.


1976 RIM standard conversion for BB-68 Ohio.


1985 Iowa-ish refit for BB-67 Montana.


1994 VLS refit for BB-69 Maine.
(in planning stage)

[TimothyC]

For Talos you only need the SPG-49 and the SPW-2. The SPQ-5 was an early Terrier set and was superseded by the SPG-55. On the foremast I'd go for a larger 2D radar for longer range, but the combination you have (2D long range, 3D medium range, and a height finder) is a good one. I might also look at landing not one but two 5" mounts from each side, and installing a Mk 11 Tartar launcher on each beam. You would then have to find space for a pair of SPG-51 units to guide the shorter range Tartars, but that shouldn't be to difficult (I can give it a look later if you would like).

You've got a good start.

[erik_t]

This arrangement would probably work, although historically, every hull that could take the deeper Talos GMLS (Mk 12, I think?) did so. It would be very desirable to get the missiles under armor, and a truly monstrous magazine would be possible.

I would question the wisdom of such an austere conversion on a hull that would be <em>very</em> expensive to keep in service. Why not convert some surplus cruisers, if all you'll get is a single Talos?

[BB1987]

I might also look at landing not one but two 5" mounts from each side, and installing a Mk 11 Tartar launcher on each beam. You would then have to find space for a pair of SPG-51 units to guide the shorter range Tartars, but that shouldn't be to difficult (I can give it a look later if you would like).

i initially tought about putting a tartar on board, but i'm 2 to 4 years too early for them (my idea wa sa 1958 refit and the drawing shows the ship in 1960, tartars came in 1962)

This arrangement would probably work, although historically, every hull that could take the deeper Talos GMLS (Mk 12, I think?) did so. It would be very desirable to get the missiles under armor, and a truly monstrous magazine would be possible.

I would question the wisdom of such an austere conversion on a hull that would be <em>very</em> expensive to keep in service. Why not convert some surplus cruisers, if all you'll get is a single Talos?

according to the parts sheet that one should be already the mk12, altough is the horizontal loading one instead of the tilt loading (wich i think it's not around, i actually didn't even know of it's existence, i admit); and well, brng a Montana into cost-effectiveness i think would have ben quite hard, there is a way to make it look a bit less useless (like adding a second talos launcher aft, altough i don't know where?) without going double-end? (for that i'm doing something more ambitious with a terrier/tartar armed BB71)

[acelanceloet]

I was about to point you at belowdeck launchers for the talos, but then I remembered that is one of the very few GMLS's not present in the belowdeck parts thread.
anyways, you have a lot more beam available and of course a lot of space IN the hull, so the austere on-deck talos launcher should not be there, I suggest an (expanded?) Mk 12. you might best play a bit with the available magazines and numbers of launchers.
that said, the missile installation looks huge compared to the rest of the ship, and I think the magazine could be closer to the funnel.

[klagldsf]

This thread actually makes me want to dust off my "CBGs of the Early Cold War" designs (an attempt to put three Talos launchers on a single hull).

Anyway, I like it at least.

[BB1987]

I was about to point you at belowdeck launchers for the talos, but then I remembered that is one of the very few GMLS's not present in the belowdeck parts thread.
anyways, you have a lot more beam available and of course a lot of space IN the hull, so the austere on-deck talos launcher should not be there, I suggest an (expanded?) Mk 12. you might best play a bit with the available magazines and numbers of launchers.
that said, the missile installation looks huge compared to the rest of the ship, and I think the magazine could be closer to the funnel.

Thanks, i'll take a look at the Albany and Long Beach and guess a way to arrange the magazine better, if i can mange to put a second Talos launcher probably the refit would be more worth of it's name.

Anyway, probably i flew too low with BB-70, but for sure i'm going too high with Uss Louisiana


basically i'm going Montana meets Albany on steroids, a double-end full terrier warship; i armed her with four twin mk 10 lauchers, two horizontal and two diagonal loading ones, both with 80 missile magazine: diagonal mod 2 and a fictional mod 9 (i guess built especially for this conversion) based on the never built unknown mod done by Acelanceloet for the parts sheet; the rest of the armament features four twin mk11 Tartar launchers and four 5/38 mark12 twin gun mounts.
the idea behind this is that BB71 remained uncomplete after the war (much like BB66 kentucky) only to be completed on the albany lines by the mid 60s.
why? dunno, even the last two planned Albanys where even canceled because the high cost of the conversions, so it's unlikely that such conversion would have seen light... my reference was this:


the drawing is obviously a massive wip and most of the superstructure has to disappear, i hope Bezo will forgive me for using his missile cruisers as references, but i really love his Missoula class; moreover i posted it also because i want to be sure to have the Terrier launchers placed the right way, as there was some debate about bulkheads and correct spacing on previous threads, i've also placed them with the missile magazine beign rougly in the same spot where the 16-inch guns barbettes once stood.

[acelanceloet]

go on! that is the only comment I have on this last one. I can't wait to see how this ends up.
on a sidenote, I am a tiny bit doubted on the macks, clearly, on a ship this size, it should be possible to arrange mast, funnels and radars more spacious?

[erik_t]

according to the parts sheet that one should be already the mk12, altough is the horizontal loading one instead of the tilt loading (wich i think it's not around, i actually didn't even know of it's existence, i admit); and well, brng a Montana into cost-effectiveness i think would have ben quite hard, there is a way to make it look a bit less useless (like adding a second talos launcher aft, altough i don't know where?) without going double-end? (for that i'm doing something more ambitious with a terrier/tartar armed BB71)

This is not a tilt-rail versus horizontal-rail difference as with Mk 10, and you are not currently using Mk 12. You are using Mk 7.

This is GMLS Mk 12.



You can derive some scaling information from the CG-11 plans here (PDF warning).

[BB1987]

thanks Erik, this also proves my ignorance about missile systems.