Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 1  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
BillKerman1234
Post subject: Timeline 34 - Late cold-war surface combatants (and more)Posted: September 3rd, 2021, 5:29 pm
Offline
Posts: 3
Joined: March 13th, 2021, 10:00 pm
Hi guys!

This thread is for all of the shipbucket-related work that I’m going to be doing related to my alternate history timeline, TL-34. I’ve already done quite a bit of experimentation and posted a ‘beta version’ of this TL to Spacebattles.com under the name Blue Waters, but I’m going to be completely redoing it, this time with the Eugenics Wars from Star Trek included! In fact, the number of changes means that this TL will, in all likelihood, look less like an edit to Blue Waters and more like an original one with some elements carried over.

With that out of the way, on to the ships!

Firstly, for now I’m going to do some work on the USN from the 1970s to 1994. The ships here will be similar to OTL, but there will be changes. US fleet doctrine calls for battle groups to be formed, with a capital ship providing offensive firepower surrounded by a number of AAW and ASW escort ships. As of the early 1970s the US had 9 carriers with a couple more on the way, for a projected average over the next few decades of 12, along with 5 guided missile battleships.

Standard US doctrine is to have all nuclear capital ships have at least one nuclear cruiser running escort, so that they can keep fighting even if the enemy surrounds them and cuts off their lines of supply. In addition, fleet plans projected a need for around 4 nuclear cruisers running independent action missions. This meant the US wanted a total of 15 modern CGNs.

As AEGIS started to mature in the early-to-mid 1970s plans were drawn up for the CSGN, or guided missile nuclear strike cruiser. The existing CGN Long Beach was converted into a prototype and eventually 8 of the final Helena-class CSGNs were built. Combined with the 4 Virginia and 2 California-class CGNs, that gave them the necessary 15 ships.

To fill out the rest of the escort slots left, Spruance-class destroyers were modified to carry AEGIS and used as fire directors, while regular Spruances given AAW refits were used as cheap missile batteries / ASW platforms. The AEGIS Spruances were christened Ticonderoga-class guided missile destroyer leaders.

As time went on and the early 1980s rolled around, it became apparent that a new DDG design was needed. Two designs were considered, both using a new hull shorter and wider than a Spruance, DDGX, which called for a 8000 ton ship equipped with AEGIS but no helicopters, and DDGY which had no AEGIS but did have helicopters and was both cheaper and 1000 tons lighter. Since at this point AEGIS cruisers and destroyer leaders were quite abundant, DDGY was chosen to be built, but not before a considerable amount of design work had already gone into DDGX.

Japan, interested in expanding its navy to counter the recent naval build up by China and lacking any AEGIS ships, signed a joint development contract with the US in 1983 for the DDGX, and would eventually commission them as the Kongō-class in 1988. Further development of the design, such as the addition of a helicopter hangar, led to the creation of the Ashigara and Musashi-class DDGs in the very early 1990s.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alright, on to the drawings!

Flight I Johnston-class DDG:
(the top-down view is WIP right now)

[ img ]


Kongou-class DDG:

[ img ]


Ashigara-class DDG:

[ img ]


Musashi-class CG:

[ img ]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here are some ever-so-slightly altered versions of already-drawn ships to update them and make them fit with the visual style of the ships I’ve been drawing:

Spruance-class DDG:

[ img ]


Hayler-class DDH:

[ img ]


Ticonderoga-class DLG:

[ img ]


Last edited by BillKerman1234 on September 4th, 2021, 9:38 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Timeline 34 - Late cold-war surface combatants (and more)Posted: September 4th, 2021, 9:00 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7354
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
Minor comment here: The name of the last artist always comes last. So on your initial 4 drawings here, the credits now say this was drawn by Vossiej based on original work from the others, while it was the other way around :P

I'm not sure if the hull shading you put on the spruance and tico hulls is accurate, but looking at the missile loadout these are very strictly in AU territory anyways so it isn't an real issue ;)

If you really want to bring the tico up to date, don't forget to update the satcoms, SPS-49, phalanx etc. as well.

_________________
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]
BillKerman1234
Post subject: Re: Timeline 34 - Late cold-war surface combatants (and more)Posted: September 4th, 2021, 9:42 am
Offline
Posts: 3
Joined: March 13th, 2021, 10:00 pm
acelanceloet wrote: *
Minor comment here: The name of the last artist always comes last. So on your initial 4 drawings here, the credits now say this was drawn by Vossiej based on original work from the others, while it was the other way around :P

I'm not sure if the hull shading you put on the spruance and tico hulls is accurate, but looking at the missile loadout these are very strictly in AU territory anyways so it isn't an real issue ;)

If you really want to bring the tico up to date, don't forget to update the satcoms, SPS-49, phalanx etc. as well.
I think I've fixed most of the problems you listed. The hull shading on the Spruances and Ticos I have no references on. As for munitions, I depict the ships in the states they were in as of commissioning or close to it, but (mainly due to time constraints) the missiles as the loadouts carried as of the 2010s or so. I might change that if I have time and try depicting the missiles from the same period as the ship.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
rifleman2
Post subject: Re: Timeline 34 - Late cold-war surface combatants (and more)Posted: September 5th, 2021, 1:15 pm
Offline
Posts: 450
Joined: February 22nd, 2015, 10:26 am
wasn't the Spruance AAW version called the Kidd class?
4 built originally for Iran and nicknamed the Ayotolla class


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Timeline 34 - Late cold-war surface combatants (and more)Posted: September 5th, 2021, 3:35 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3453
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
rifleman2 wrote: *
wasn't the Spruance AAW version called the Kidd class?
4 built originally for Iran and nicknamed the Ayotolla class
Yes. Ayatollah class (or Kouroush Class). Originally 6 ships ordered to reduced to 4, all named of ancient Persian kings and later names changed to great Ahatollahs. None received by Iran because of the 1979 Revolution. Instead, these ships commissioned into USN and sold to Taiwan in early 2000's.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 1  [ 5 posts ]  Return to “Alternate Universe Designs”

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


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


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