[Post Reply] [*]  Page 10 of 12  [ 118 posts ]  Go to page « 18 9 10 11 12 »
Author Message
eswube
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: May 16th, 2018, 6:15 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8884
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Contact: Website
Splendid! :)

_________________
My very neglected Deviantart page


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: June 2nd, 2018, 3:19 pm
Offline
Posts: 6164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
I have added the Surrey Class heavy cruisers to this AU.
I have re-uploaded full scale pictures but not updated the drawings to the original post here: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=6391&p=150738#p150738

I have added the Iron Duke Class battleships to this AU.
Link to the original post here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=8477&start=80#p180985

I have added the Admiral Class cruisers to this AU.
Link to the original post hereviewtopic.php?f=15&t=9451&start=30

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


Last edited by Hood on June 2nd, 2019, 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 23rd, 2018, 4:22 pm
Offline
Posts: 6164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
In 1952 with the demise of the Cruiser-Destroyer concept armed with three 5in/L70 guns the demand for a modern destroyer to replace some of the older types of prewar destroyers still in service remained. The Korean War rearmament programme was in full swing and the Admiralty decided to look into a modern destroyer. The design used several elements of the Cruiser-Destroyer concept, namely the 5in/L70 gun successfully co-developed with the USN, fixed torpedo tubes and the steam-gas turbine YARD Y.102 powerplant. By 1954 as the design was nearing design approval the guided-missile destroyer became the main focus and the number of hulls was curtailed at just four ships but the desire to have a modern design capable of anti-aircraft escort with good surface firepower to deal with Soviet cruisers and destroyers saw attempts to cancel the class rejected.

[ img ]
HMS Cutlass as completed, 1958

Four ships were laid down, HMS Cutlass and Claymore completed in the late 1950s to the planned design with three gun mounts. Given the problems with the Sea Slug programme which had delayed the following County Class destroyers the class offered a powerful and modern destroyer, offering the heaviest destroyer gun armament then afloat.

[ img ]
HMS Carronade at completion, 1960

The Admiralty decided to alter the second pair with the new 'Orange Nell' SAM. The missile was designed to intercept supersonic missiles. It had a max range of 5.7 miles and a minimum range of 1.1 miles. It could reach Mach 1.2 speed and had a 'warmed-up' reaction time of 10 seconds from detection to launch. The missile had four booster rockets. It was guided by an S-band volume scanning TIR and a Q-band illuminator. It could be looked on before launch or acquire after launch. The missile had a 100lb HE-frag or continuous rod warhead. The twin-rail launcher was fed by a magazine consisting of two concentric rings totalling 40 missiles. HMS Carronade and Culverin were converted on the stocks and completed after a 9 months delay owing to problems with the Orange Nell programme. Both ships commissioned in 1960.

[ img ]
HMS Claymore, 1966

HMS Cutlass and Claymore on return from the Far East following the Confrontation with Indonesia were refitted in the mid-1960s with Sea Cat and Type 965 radar to enhance their anti-aircraft capabilities. They maintained their escort role with the carrier fleet as close-in escorts. Increasingly however they seemed outdated with their heavy gun armament and heavy torpedo armament and plans were drawn up for their conversion into ASW escorts but funding problems continually delayed this work until 1968/69 when both were taken in hand to receive a hangar and helipad replacing X mount and Sea Cat 2 supersonic SAMs but their fire-control and sonar equipment was left largely unchanged.

[ img ]
HMS Claymore, 1979

HMS Cutlass was often seen abroad despite her lack of flag facilities but was decommissioned in 1979 during defence cutbacks. Placed up for sale, a transfer to Chile falling through in 1981 and she was broken up in 1983. HMS Claymore was mooted for retirement in 1981 but was brought back into commission for the Falklands War where her guns were put to good use for shore bombardment. On her return to Britain she was decommissioned and after a spell as a training ship was sold to the breakers in 1987.

[ img ]
HMS Carronade, 1977

During the 1960s and 1970s HMS Carronade and Culverin were kept updated with newer weapons, receiving modern anti-submarine torpedoes and supersonic Sea Cat 2 SAMs to bolster their aging Orange Nell system which was obsolescent by 1970. It proved impossible to consider fitting the new Sea Dart and so only minor refit work was carried out. At one point it was suggested to replace the system with another two Sea Cat 2 launchers as a poor mans guided-missile destroyer but this was never done. When the Type 80 frigates with Orange Nell were rearmed in 1976 the spares released kept the two destroyers going a little longer but missile stocks dwindled and in 1978 both were paid off. Both were broken up during the 1980s.

HMS Cutlass D98 June 1958
HMS Claymore D99 September 1958
HMS Carronade D100 March 1960
HMS Culverin D101 June 1960


Dimensions
Length: 486ft 6in (oa), 470ft (wl)
Beam: 50ft
Draught: 16ft

Displacement
5,250 tons (full load)

Powerplant
60,000shp YARD.102 COSAG
30kts on both
Endurance 3,500nm at 20kts

Armament (Cutlass and Claymore)
3x2 5in L70 (fire-control by 2x MRS-3)
2x1 40mm Bofors L/70 (fire-control by 2x CRBF) [replaced in 1964-66 by 2x4 Sea Cat SAM launchers (36 missiles) with GWS-21 fire-control, replaced by 1972 with Sea Cat 2 with GWS-22 fire-control)
[From 1972 2x1 20mm Oerlikon]
8x 21in torpedo tubes for Fancy anti-ship and Pentane anti-sub torpedoes (24x torps) [replaced by 2x3 12.75in torpedo tubes for 24x Mk.44 anti-sub torpedoes]
1x Mortar Mk.10 Limbo (30x depth-bombs)
2x Corvus flare-chaff launchers
[From 1972 1x Westland Wasp HAS.1 helicopter in a hangar aft]

Armament (Carronade and Culverin)
2x2 5in L70 (fire-control by 1x MRS-3)
1x2 Orange Nell SAM launcher (40x missiles) (fire-control by one Q-band illuminator)
[from 1969 2x4 Sea Cat 2 SAM launchers (24x missiles) with GWS-22 fire-control)
8x 21in torpedo tubes for Fancy anti-ship and Pentane anti-sub torpedoes (24x torps) [removed in 1969]
1x Mortar Mk.10 Limbo (30x depth-bombs)
2x Corvus flare-chaff launchers

Radars & Sonars
One Type 960 air search (by 1965 Type 965 by 1970 Type 965M), one Type 293Q TIR (by 1970 Type 992Q), one Type 277Q surface search/height-finder (by 1965 Type 978), one Type 978 navigation (by 1974 Type 1006) navigation, Type 170 and Type 174 sonars, Type 667/668 'Cooky' jammers.

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


Last edited by Hood on August 26th, 2018, 9:34 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 23rd, 2018, 5:03 pm
Offline
Posts: 2731
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Fantastic!!

I'd note the 5/70s I scaled as twin mounts, but of course your AU may proceed however it likes :D


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Gollevainen
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 23rd, 2018, 5:05 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4327
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:10 am
Location: Finland
Contact: Website
really nice set of ships. L/70 surely is on hell of a long barrel in 5inch caliber :D

_________________
Coming next: L/M Moskva, some research ships, pr.26bis, Pr.1144 remakes and Project 1143 complete redux.



Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
Submit your drawings to the archive here
Novgorod AU wiki


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 24th, 2018, 8:40 am
Offline
Posts: 6164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
erik,
Actually I scaled it down to the size of the single mount I drew off the drawings for the Cruiser-Destroyer in Friedman.
But I've changed like the wind and gone with twin mounts. To hell with the displacement, I want dakka!

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 24th, 2018, 9:00 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7186
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
The only thing not awesome about this ship is the visibility from the pilothouse, which I think might be awful instead :P

_________________
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]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 24th, 2018, 9:18 am
Offline
Posts: 6164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
True, but the RN preferred low superstructures in the early 50s so its in keeping with that. Don't forget the intention of the Type 15s that had the lookouts in glazed domes! It had crossed my mind but I don't think it would be too bad.

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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 24th, 2018, 9:29 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7186
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
Well, I know, but all RN ships had sight over the turrets, not just alongside them. I would suspect, even just for inshore work, there would be an (open) bridge level for conning which could see over the turrets, don't you think?

_________________
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]
Novice
Post subject: Re: Alternate Royal Navy #2Posted: August 24th, 2018, 9:26 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4018
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: Vrijstaat
acelanceloet wrote: *
Well, I know, but all RN ships had sight over the turrets, not just alongside them. I would suspect, even just for inshore work, there would be an (open) bridge level for conning which could see over the turrets, don't you think?
Or at least the glazed domes on both sides of the bridge like on the Type 15 frigates
These are awesome looking destroyers James

_________________
[ img ] 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"


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 10 of 12  [ 118 posts ]  Return to “Alternate Universe Designs” | Go to page « 18 9 10 11 12 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


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


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