Shipbucket

In 1939 the Turkish Navy looked to replace the aging Yavuz Sultan Selim with a new ship. An order was placed with SECN in Spain based on the designs of the little known Naval Architecht Heuhen Heuser (thanks to Heuhen for allowing me to use his PD for this). With aid from Germany in the design, a battlecruiser class vessel was ordered at the end of 1939. Due to the Second World War, construction was slow. The ship being finally completed postwar in 1946.



With Turkeys entry to NATO in 1952, assistance with defence packages for all arms of the military were badly needed. Part of the package was the refurbishment of the Torgud Reis with updated systems. Torgud Reis left for the Norfolk Navy yard in 1958. After a survey of the vessel it was felt that a conversion similar to the US heavy cruisers would provide a useful unit to guard the international waterway of the Bosphorus. The ship returned in 1964.

After chatting with TJ in IRC, an update will be coming on the 1960's version.




Updated with TJ's suggestions.

First, drawing wise that's good - except for those very bright bilge keels.

A few suggestions that I had posted in the chat.
At the top of the fore mast you have an SPS-8. That's a height-finder, and duplicated by the more advanced SPS-30 you have aft. As far as I know, the two radars were never shipped together (by the time a ship has the SPS-30 it lost any SPS-8s it had). I'd consider replacing it with an early (curved) Frescan unit such as an SPS-39 (pre-post correction: it looks like Boston did this, but Boston was a kludge). I'd also remove the 40mm mount of the B Turret for the refit drawing as I think it would certainly be gone by 1960. I'd also remove the aft most of the Mk 4 GMLSes as I don't think you have the centerline space to provide for four guidance units*. As for the guidance units themselves, right now you have the SPG-49 radar, which required the SPW-2 set and was deployed on Talos ships. I'd use either the SPQ-5 units found on the last 3 of the CLGs or the later standard SPG-55 set.

*The standard for US ships post-Boston/Canberra was to mount a single guidance channel for each missile rail.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

No need for those hanger windows, its just a maintenance nightmare and probably not optimal with that secondary right there.

You haven't updated your boats from 1946 through to the 60s, it might add a bit of "time warp" flare to show a change.

On the second 60s refit I can't see how you have room for that GMLS while retaining the hanger. I would go with the singe GMLS as TimothyC mentioned and reserve the stern for a hangerless flight deck.

I don't see any UNREP gear on her.

Cut the searchlights out of the 60s refit.

You have a missile magazine inside your hangar?

you might add smaller helo's because i think this flight deck is way to small for Seakings, beside that you still have mines or depth charges at your stern i would not feel safe to land on there as a pilot.

2 options for helo's:
- Smaller helicopters (UH-1 models or SH-2's) with hangar
- Seakings without hangar

Both options might keep the missile launcher in place.

_________________
Vi coactus
Door geweld gedwongen
Forced by violence
------
Caption signing treaty with England by Johan de Witt

[Working List]
None

At least for the original ship, the light AA suite seems almost stunningly sparse, and the exposed torpedo tubes seem like a dreadful idea. Meanwhile, she seems kind of... girthy... to be a battlecruiser. I don't even know if you can push enough power through two screws to reasonably get up past the 25 knot sort of range in that era.

3rd revision.
It has been an interesting learning tool as this is my first post-war vessel.



To answer the queries.
I do not think those are mines or depth charges on the stern, they would be tie off points for ropes I would say (need to ask Heuhen for a definitive answer)

Current AA fit on 1946 is the 16x130mm 10x37mm 12x20mm. If the ship had been completed for a combatant in WW2 I would certainly have doubled or even tripled the number of 20mm.

Current machinery output is 100,000shp for 30 knots on 25,500 tons.

Crap, forget the 20mm. 10x37mm compares unfavorably with prewar British and US ships. It's a complete sick joke in 1945.

that's a part of the mooring equipment. you do need something to attach the mooring to, or shall the ship be laying free in harbor, damaging any other ships...

when I designed the ship it was designed as a BC that traded some of it speed for better armor and artillery. it was more like an small and slow BB supposed in my AU be an ship that protected an island cluster of colony's, where the distance between every island could be reached inn 2 days sail from center of the cluster at 12 knots.

German inspired ships will always have a weaker looking AA fit than its UK/US opponents.
The Prinz Eugen from Wiki shows the following armament:
Armament:
8 × 20.3 cm (8.0 in) guns
12 × 10.5 cm (4.1 in) guns
12 × 3.7 cm (1.5 in) guns
20 × 2 cm (0.79 in) guns (20 × 1)

The Tirpitz in 1944 still had its 16x37mm but had 70 odd 20mm in quad, twin and single mounts