Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 5  [ 43 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 »
Author Message
TurretHead
Post subject: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 6:19 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
Here is some initial drawing work I've done towards an AU for an alternate South Africa.

This is the Zambezi class destroyer built in the mid 1970s as the first (mostly) South African designed surface ship.

[ img ]

Her hull and propulsion system was common with the Australian DDL program which was a joint venture between the two countries. The radar systems and primary missile system came from joint development with the UK and the Netherlands. The Dutch and South Africans utilised the American Mk 13 missile launcher design for the Sea Dart missile rather than the bulkier British missile launcher. Gunnery is an aft twin barrel 5” Mk 66 and port and starboard 3” Mk 75 guns for anti aircraft defence. Anti submarine warfare and anti ship warfare is provided by two Lynx helicopters. They are armed with AS 20 and AS 30 missiles for the anti ship strike role.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TurretHead
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 6:47 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
The concept for this AU is that in 1922 Southern Rhodesia votes yes in a plebiscite to join the Union of South Africa. This leads to changes in events that sees a new federal Union constitution that accommodates the then declining population of Africans in tribal nations alongside the white and coloured provinces. These changes see the UK transfer to the union several protectorates and the League of Nations replace the South African mandate over South West Africa to full sovereignty. These things were all considered in the real world in the 1900s to 1930s.

The result is a Union of South Africa by 1948 that includes the six advanced provinces (Cape of Good Hope, Natal, Orange Free State, Transvaal, Rhodesia, South West Africa) and around 30 African tribal nations. Which includes Bechuanaland, Lesotho, Swaziland and Northern Rhodesia. Each subject of the union is a citizen of a particular province or tribal nation and seats in the Union Parliament are decided upon based on each province or tribal nations financial contribution to the central union. Because of the very low tax base raised from the tribal nations (typically just a hut tax of £1 per family per annum) before the 1960s this means they generally only have the minimum representation.

[ img ]
Union of South Africa (WIP) 1960
Light green areas are the advanced provinces and dark green-grey areas the African tribal nations. The medium green-grey areas are federal land (parks and reserves).

Because of the incorporation of Rhodesia and the maintenance of the Cape Coloured as citizens of the Cape of Good Hope and the token representation of the tribal nations the Afrikaner Nationalist movement is never able to gain control over the South African government. Apartheid is never introduced and some of the more extreme elements of segregation law are repealed in the 1960s and 70s. The United Party remains the dominant force in South African politics well into the 1990s with the reintegration of the Afrikaner Nationalists in the 1970s.

Without the Nationalist government South Africa remains focused on wider Western defence needs in the 1950s and therefore invests heavily in building up the Navy after the Korean War. Like Australia and Canada the newly named Royal South African Navy acquires a carrier force in the late 1950s. Things go sour in the 1960s and 70s as the previously declining Black African population booms and newly development African nationalist political movements demand majority rule and the destruction of the settler society. While the African nationalists are able to garner huge political support in the Soviet bloc and developing world against South Africa the representative political nature of the Union makes it difficult to develop that opposition in western states. Especially as reform allows the tax revenue of tribal nation citizens living in the provinces to be used in their home land’s political representation calculation. While this still keep the black vote very much a minority until the 1990s the lack of overt racist legislation in the Union does not see the development of worldwide anti Apartheid movement. Many liberal governments in the west join in condemnation of South Africa from time to time, especially as military action against the African nationalists heats up in the 1970s and 80s but there is no UN arms embargo and significant ostracizing of South Africa.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TurretHead
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 6:58 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
I just have a general question about AUs. I have a lot of stuff on my Union of South Africa AU and would like to publish it online once I’ve illustrated it with Shipbucket and FD Scale drawings much like Colosseum’s North Point. Is there a website like WikiStates that lets you publish AUs based in the real world rather than a fictional geography?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 9:01 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3762
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
Google pages might work for you.

_________________
Please don't call me Tim. If you don't want to use Timothy, use TJ.
MATHNET - To Cogitate and to Solve


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Clonecommander6454
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 9:09 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 759
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm
That single arm Sea Dart launcher looks small, and i suggest moving the 76mm to the front/ rear


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 9:20 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3762
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
The Mk-13 will not fit a Sea Dart sized missile (The missile diameter is simply too large). A mount the size of the one you have might be able to take 16-14 Sea Darts at most. I'm really too tired to say much else.

_________________
Please don't call me Tim. If you don't want to use Timothy, use TJ.
MATHNET - To Cogitate and to Solve


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TurretHead
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 10:08 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
TimothyC wrote:
The Mk-13 will not fit a Sea Dart sized missile (The missile diameter is simply too large). A mount the size of the one you have might be able to take 16-14 Sea Darts at most. I'm really too tired to say much else.
The Sea Dart missile is within the footprint required to fit into an Mk 13 launcher in place of the SM-1. While the airframe is wider the wingspan is not. It is also a fair bit lighter. The Mk 13 launcher would have to be customized for the Sea Dart because of the wider body but that would just be changes in the nature of the holding arms. They won’t be cross-compatible but the same launcher design could be used. I wouldn’t have proposed it if I haven’t sized it.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TurretHead
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 10:17 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
Clonecommander6454 wrote:
That single arm Sea Dart launcher looks small, and i suggest moving the 76mm to the front/ rear
The single arm launcher is the exact size of a Mk 13 in ship bucket scale (2 pixels per foot) and the guns are right where I need them to be.

The primary reason for the Mk 13 launcher being at the bow is to manage weight. This ship is the same hull and machinery design as the Australian DDL. But it has a much heavier radar fit with the Broomhead 3D radar and two Type 909 illuminators. So the heavy Mk 13 launcher is moved down 10 feet to compensate for the heavy radar. The only place to fit the Mk 13 at this deck height on the ship was the bow. So it’s not being moved.

The 76mm guns (there are two) are located amidships on either side because this is the best location for them. Being at the centre of the ship’s length means they won’t pitch much up or down when the ship moves through waves. These guns are the ship’s close in air defence and being steady makes them far more accurate. Also being located at the deck edge they have excellent arcs of fire to both the front and rear. A gun mounted at the bow won’t be able to fire to the rear. The downside of their position is only one gun can fire to each side and you can’t really fire directly straight ahead or to the rear. But the ship lacks the length to fit in any further guns on the centerline and not being able to fire at 0° and 180° is not so bad as it only takes a small turn of the rudder to unmask these guns towards any target that is right of the bow or rear.

Of course the best reason for the big gun aft, the missile launcher forward and a 3” on each side amidships is I reckon it looks cool!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 10:55 am
Offline
Posts: 6617
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
It will be interesting to see how this DDG progresses.
Not sure the stern gun is a good idea, I'm not sure there would be enough room in the hull there for a decent magazine. I agree with the bow SAM position though.

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TurretHead
Post subject: Re: Royal South African NavyPosted: November 20th, 2011, 11:10 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 193
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:38 am
Location: End of a bad sci fi movie.
Hood wrote:
It will be interesting to see how this DDG progresses.
Not sure the stern gun is a good idea, I'm not sure there would be enough room in the hull there for a decent magazine. I agree with the bow SAM position though.
The red shade sections are for armaments and the entire aft lower deck is for 5" ammo around the shafts connected to the 5" gun room by a WWII style angled, powered chute. At least 1,000 if not 1,500 rounds could be squeezed in down there.

[ img ]

The gun is positioned aft because that's where I could fit it. But having the twin barrel gun aft gives it lots of space from the muzzle blast. As long as you don't have anything going on the flight deck (and you won't) you can bang away with the rapid fire 5" and not smash windows and radomes from the blast.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 5  [ 43 posts ]  Return to “Alternate Universe Designs” | Go to page 1 2 3 4 5 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests


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


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