[Post Reply] [*]  Page 14 of 16  [ 152 posts ]  Go to page « 112 13 14 15 16 »
Author Message
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 19th, 2015, 4:47 pm
Offline
Posts: 2443
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Unless a source specifically states it, I'd be very surprised at within-hull SVTT on a ship with no helicopters. Without the organic helo, you aren't going to have a very big magazine at all, and so you won't want to devote such valuable full-beam space to them. I think external tubes are most likely, although something like the Knox installation is possible.

Of course, maybe I'm completely wrong and that was actually the plan.

I'd also like to see a RAS kingpost near the fueling station, like so:

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 19th, 2015, 6:15 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7046
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
erik_t wrote:
Unless a source specifically states it, I'd be very surprised at within-hull SVTT on a ship with no helicopters. Without the organic helo, you aren't going to have a very big magazine at all, and so you won't want to devote such valuable full-beam space to them. I think external tubes are most likely, although something like the Knox installation is possible.

Of course, maybe I'm completely wrong and that was actually the plan.

I'd also like to see a RAS kingpost near the fueling station, like so:

[ img ]
agreed on both points. should be fixed now.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 19th, 2015, 8:21 pm
Offline
Posts: 2443
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Thumbs up!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 20th, 2015, 12:21 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7046
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
[ img ]

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 20th, 2015, 8:26 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8149
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Contact: Website
Very interesting series!

_________________
My Worklist
My very neglected Deviantart page


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 20th, 2015, 9:59 am
Offline
Posts: 5568
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
Nice additions.
These ships have a very long and thin appearance. How beamy were they?

_________________
Hood's Worklist
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 20th, 2015, 11:59 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7046
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
here ya go, completed this miniseries, and added it to the first post. please comment if you see any errors ;)

DG/AEGIS
ASMS, the system that became the present AEGIS was first conceived in 1963, when it became clear that Typhon would not lead to results. Development started slow, but in 1969 it became Aegis. The cost concentrated in the advanced fire control computers and radars, as in Typhon, but even more so in the Aegis system because it used the standard missile instead of a new developed missile.
In 1969 the only missile ship under development was DXGN, as DXG was dropped. Because of that, ASMS was designed to be fitted on a nuclear destroyer or cruiser of 10000 tons displacement. When Admiral Zumwalt became CNO, he was determined to increase the amount of combatant ships by designing low-cost ships, which was enforced by unit-cost and unit-displacement limits. DXGN of course did not fit in this plan: nuclear vessels were just too expensive to build in the numbers required.
Zumwalt wanted a low-cost Aegis vessel, and the limits were set as $ 100 million and 5000 tons. Of the 139 computer runs of the first series, only one design was within these limits
[ img ]
This vessel had just an Mk 22 launcher, a helideck and Aegis on board. This was considered too austere even for Zumwalt, so new limits were set.

These limits were set at $ 125 million and 6000 tons, which proved to be more realistic. Within these limits, the design considered varied considerably. At first it was to have an austere sonar suite and provision for landing a helicopter, but no hangar. The SPS-49 search radar was deleted. The launcher would have been the Mk 26 Mod 1, which allowed the ship to fire ASROC and Harpoon as well, next to the SM-2MR
[ img ]

Critics argued that so valuable a ship should have at least 2 launchers. This resulted in a design with 2 Mk 13 launchers, which could not fire ASROC. LAMPS and SPS-49 were added, and this resulted in a vessel of 6161 tons and $ 136,1 million, both of which exceeded Zumwalts limits. This, and the lack of growth space in the Mk 13 launcher, made that this design was not satisfactory either, and a return to the Mk 26 was made, this time the Mod 2 with room for 64 missiles.
[ img ]
[ img ]
In the end, this resulted in the vessel shown underneath, the FY74 model, the only one about which exact dimensions are known.
[ img ]
Displacement: 5884,3 tons
Length WL: 148,74
Beam: 16,15
Draft: 4,94
Power: 70000shp
Top speed: 29,4 knots
The cost of this variant rose though, and was not at $ 200 million. This would only get worse over time, but it was clear this was the minimal platform that could support the fleet with effective Aegis air defence.
However, within the navy there were still plans for nuclear ships, and it was considered if it would not be better to have only one class of first line combatants. This, in effect, was a return to the original ASMS/DXGN plan. The nuclear ships were too expensive to build in numbers though, so it was proposed to have 8 nuclear strike cruisers and 16 conventional powered DDG-47 class ships, based on the Spruance hull. In retrospect, this was a fortunate turn of events, as we can see on the resulting Ticonderoga class; it would not have been easy to put a combat system designed for 10000 tons on a 6000 ton hull.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: December 21st, 2015, 8:11 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8149
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Contact: Website
Great series!

_________________
My Worklist
My very neglected Deviantart page


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Graham1973
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: April 22nd, 2016, 2:22 am
Offline
Posts: 87
Joined: September 18th, 2011, 2:20 pm
I just finished reading the OP and I would like to congratulate acelanceloet on creating a very informative set of posts. The research work shown is very impressive.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Project DXPosted: April 22nd, 2016, 5:19 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3038
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Remarkable thread, very informative under impressive research. Congratulations acelanceloet!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 14 of 16  [ 152 posts ]  Return to “Never-Built Designs” | Go to page « 112 13 14 15 16 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


Contact us | The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]