Shipbucket

Indeed, the book "Vanguard to Trident" says about that fear.

Sverdlov 152mm gun (152/57 B-38) : http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNRussi ... _m1938.htm
British 6"/50 QF Mark N5 : http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_6-50_mkN5.htm

Perhaps the Blue Slug SSM would be an interim solution before Exocet (or Sea Martel as it was proposed). GW96 had larger magazine from Counties, so perhpas it would carry mix of Sea Slug/Blue Slug.

Blue Slug was mentioned for GW32 and I suppose would have featured in some of those earlier designs, especially for the double-ended designs lacking any 6in guns.
I don't think work on Blue Slug ever got very far. Armstrong Whitworth had their hands full developing the Sea Slug and then its Mk.2 version for the 1960s. The reference to nuclear warheads suggests to me that Mk.2 Sea Slug was to be employed on these ships and the standard missile would be used for anti-ship use to the limits of Type 901 horizon, so Blue Slug was not really needed (especially when the basic missile received a nuclear warhead).

One interesting snippet from a post at Secretprojects was that someone there mentioned having read somewhere that Type 901 production was the limiting factor for how many missile destroyers and cruisers could be built. Using six 901s between three GW96A would have surely delayed the Counties had they also been pursued at the same time.

The last interesting snippet, the first ship may have been named Duke of Edinburgh had she been laid down. Not sure how true that is, whether the GW96A ships ever got as far as the naming committee seems unlikely since no contracts were ever placed.

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

Actually I said 2 GW96, 6 Sea Slug Counties and 4 DDH Counties. So, totally 10 Type 901 radars would be built, two more than real life (4 for GW96 and 6 for Counties).

First batch of Counties built from March 1959 (laid down of first) until November 1963 (commissioning of last). Second batch from June 1962 up to March 1970.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County-class_destroyer).
Seven different shipyards shared the contract (only Swan Hunter built 2 ships). The building program of Counties perhaps give an idea for the possible building timeline of the GW96, concerning the radar construction problem. Cost for Counties varied from ~14m pounds to ~17m pounds.

No one however answered my question if the GW96 was connected to other earlier ships (e.g Tiger, Minotaur) of it was a stand alone design.

The GW96 surely shared some design practices with former cruisers, like the Tigers and the never built Minotaur. It was common practice to use well tried and tested hulls, expand them for a larger ship etc'. It saved time I believe. Hull lines were probably similar and the hull subdivision on similar lines.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

odysseus1980,
From the lengthy design histories I've given for this series it should be obvious that these are wholly different cruisers to anything designed before 1945. They are not traditional gun cruisers with heavy armour, they are volume-intensive ships with large spaces for electronics and missiles and used new unitised machinery layouts. Although the hullforms were probably based on earlier work, these were not direct descendants from the Colony class or the Minotaurs.

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

@Hood "Although the hull forms were probably based on earlier work, these were not direct descendants from the Colony class or the Minotaurs."
Minotaur 1947 was 645'wl x 75, while GW96 at 675 x 80 was slightly slimmer (Fineness ratios 8.6 and 8.44)
It was RN practice to start a design with a known hull form (one with much detailed work already done in the Haslar model tank.)
For example, the very first King George V design studies used the battlecruiser Lion hull form, but the desired internal arrangements could not be fitted in, and work went over to the Tiger hull form. Clearly the external form does not determine the internal arrangements (unless it is too small - remember length may be limited by docking requirements.)

Hopefully this may partially answer odysseus1980's questions about the Fijis. For this post we go back in time slightly.


Fiji Class Conversion October 1954

From the beginning of the search for a guided-missile cruiser, the Fiji class was considered as the basis for a conversion. The first proposed 48 Sea Slug missiles, Type 984 radar. Gun armament would be A turret and four twin Bofors 40mm L/70 mounts. This was unstable so the missiles were halved to 24 and the Type 984 replaced by the inferior (but lighter) Type 982/Type 983 combination.
In October 1954, alongside the early GW24-31 series, the final Fiji conversion was studied. Further attempts were made to lighten the ship, although a second Type 901 director was added. The radar fit matched that of the destroyer designs which became the County Class; Type 960 aerial search, Type 277Q height-finding, Type 992 TIR and Type 274 surface search. The gun armament remained at one triple 6in turret and the Bofors were now five twin 40mm Mk5 Bofors with STD directors (the mount aft of the mainmast is on the centreline). The rear superstructure held the 24 Sea Slugs, no armouring scheme is known, perhaps none given the topweight concerns. The design was still flawed, stability was acceptable but now trimmed 3ft 2in by the stern. Following this only new sheet designs were considered. Displacing 10,950 tons deep, the 80,000shp machinery would provide 30.5kts deep and clean. Endurance was 4,900nm at 20kts. Maximum complement was 790 (not at modern standards).
Drawing Note: This drawing is based on an official sketch drawing

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

I do not think the Colonies were a very good basis for conversion. The bigger Southampton Class, though 4-5 years older, had more mass to work with.

That conversion I did in the Fisherless RN was based more on a Southampton hull. (Page 26 of FRN) I'm not sure how to do one of those pointers to 'here'.

Very interesting as usual. And great drawing.

Yes, indeed answers my question. Probably she would be fitted with the 6"/50 QF Mark N5 also (if possible). On the other hand, Tiger Class was smaller than Towns (555 ft X 64 ft), so Sea Slug cruiser on this hull is impossible.

I have seen Krakatoa's Fisherless RN and remember that Sea Slug cruiser.