United States Strike Cruiser

[MC Spoilt B'stard]

Acelanceloet drew the never build CSGN mk2, i got the idea to make a replacement programme for the Iowa Battle Ships. Her she is ''Montana Class Cruiser''.



The ships would have been a combination of 5 inch guns in dual mounts, 3 inch guns in single mounts and mk41 Vertical Launch Systems.
She would serve as a ASuW ship with limited AAW and ASW capabilities.The AEGIS combat system was to be installed.

Armament
Guns
- 8x 5 Inch Dual Purpose gun in twin turrets
- 4x 3 Inch Dual Purpose gun
- 4x 20 mm Phalanx CIWS block 0

Missiles
- 151 mk41 Vertical Launch System Cells
* 68 x Tommahawk Cruise Missile
* 53 x Standard Missile 2 SAM
* 30 x VL-ASROC ASW missile
- 8 Quadruple harpoon Anti-ship missile's
- 2 mk29 NATO Sea Sparrow Missile's

Torpedoes
4x mk 32 SVTT for mk46 torpedo with 36 torpedoes in storage

Aviation
The ship would carrie 2 AV-8B Harrier II VTOL strike aircraft in the hangar making the ship capable of striking surface and land targets at long range. Harriers could also be used for Air to Air combat or ASW role.

Want to thank Acelanceloet for his help with the design and comments!

[Karle94]

Do you know that the Harrier can`t take off verticaly with weapons and fuel? No plane ever built has been able to do that, not even the F-35.

[Colosseum]

Easy, give the Harriers seaplane floats and launch them off catapults.

Like real men would do.

[Rhade]

Real men are launch without floats!

[acelanceloet]

then it's called skyhook xD

[TimothyC]

It's called the Grumman G-698. It is not at all plausible that an"ASW centric design of this size would not embark helicopters in number. In general, this design needs a fair amount of work. More to come when I don't have a Sword of Damocles over my head.

[klagldsf]

I don't want to steal away from Tim's thunder (he gives some of the best advice on this board) but....

* you have waaay too many guns. With Mk 65 full-automatic twin mounts, yeah you get a theoretical very high volume of fire but unless you're trying to put up as big of a flak barrier as you can you're running into some serious diminishing returns for the weight and firepower. Two would be about as many as you'd need.

* you also don't need the Mk 75s at all. They're superfluous with the Mk 65s. I know the Italians love them as CIWS weapons but since this is a US Ship, and US Ships only ship Mk 75s if they don't need a Mk 45 (i.e., not going to do NGFS) you simply don't need them.

* While you're at if if you front-load all of your armaments up front you can use the whole stern and quarterdeck for larger air operations. Hell you can even rearrange things for a whole through-deck - which gets you back to the CGSN Mk. II.

[Dilandu]

Do you know that the Harrier can`t take off verticaly with weapons and fuel? No plane ever built has been able to do that, not even the F-35.

Well, it can. But after that, he could fly... about 15 minutes, as i presume.

P.S. Also, we could always start it with JATO from the inclined ramp.

My IMHO:

- This cruiser just have got a ridiculously big arsenal of artillery. And not-so-good artillery for this amount.

- Your ship have only a four AN/SPG-62 radar - you have place for at least eight of them!

- The 64 "Harpoons" is too many for their capabilites. Better to use long-range BGM-109B TASM (anti-ship missile, "Tomahawk"-based)

P.P.S.

Aviation
The ship would carrie 2 AV-8B Harrier II VTOL strike aircraft in the hangar making the ship capable of striking surface and land targets at long range. Harriers could also be used for Air to Air combat or ASW role.

You have an impressive arsenal of BGM-109 and SM-2 plus "Sea Sparrow" for that functions. Only two "Harriers"... they doesn't justify a place that is occupied.

[gordo8000]

Ho, ho, Holy S***! Impressive start!

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

I'll leave the technical details to Tim & others, but your front view does not match up with the top & side views.