Shipbucket

The ship is larger than it needs to be. A battleship was never larger than it needed to be. The fact is even with bulky electronics and missile stowage a missle cruiser was far smaller than this with identical capabilties. Nothing larger than Long Beach is realistically needed. Maybe of you could provide double-ended Standard and Talos with two Terrier then maybe it might have more usefulness. Regulas II would be the better weapon for such a ship being supersonic and much more useful as a strike weapon.

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

Its size really is dictated by the need to carry Talos magazines for three launchers (those suckers are long). This is why the most ever shipped was just two launchers.

USS CBG-9?
I see you named the first 2 , 7-8. And the last one 10.
I assume a number 9 is in the making aswell?

Mitch

_________________
Fryssian AU with Lt.Maverick 114
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9802&p=193331#p193331

Embarked on: HNLMS Karel Doorman A833
To do list:
-Zeven Provincien class cruiser
-Joint support ship all sides
-F124 Sachsen class frigate
-F125 Baden-Württemberg class frigate
-Clemencau class aircraft carrier
-Zeven provincien class frigate
-Poolster class AOR
-Amsterdam class AOR
-Minas Gerais aircraft carrier

The problem is that your third GMLS is really not very functional. I would suggest that you go a different route with this. With a sufficiently deep hull, vertical-loading launchers would in fact be practical (if not sane), and these would be short enough in centerline length that all four (eight) missile guidance radars could be behind both GMLSs.

You didn't notice vertical-loading launchers on the first one?

I noticed that you changed the shape of the above-deck parts, and I noticed that you just dropped a completely different system onto the hull almost as if it had zero below-decks impact. Is that what you mean?

Uhhh...pretty much?