Shipbucket
http://67.205.157.234/forums/

Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945
http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3751
Page 1 of 3

Author:  Hood [ December 2nd, 2012, 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

A little pre-Christmas treat, a little-known Royal Navy never-were.

[ img ]
After the suspension of work on the Lion class, by February 1945 the DNC, Sir Charles Lillicrap, was estimating that a battleship meeting all the latest requirements would displace about 67,000 to 70,000 tons. Further designs brought this down to 59,100 tons standard, but this was still considered excessive. Lillicrap had another design prepared limiting the main battery to two triple 16in turrets and the belt armour to 9in. The resulting sketch, designated ‘X’, displaced 35,000 tons. The small battleship was severely criticised by the staff, which felt that the armament was inferior to that of existing foreign battleships. In April 1945 a Committee on the Size of Battleships was established, and after some further work was done, the new ship grew to about 45,000 tons.

The original sketch does not appear to have survived, but John Roberts drew an estimate of its based on known characteristics and general British practices of the time and was published in Warship, in the article, 'Diminishing Returns' which examines several small battleship designs from several nations and which has provided me with other drawing ideas. My artists impression builds on Roberts' basic sketch outline further. It is speculative but not wildly so.

Specification
37,200 tons normal, 44,500 tons full load (deep); 680 ft (720 wl) x 106 ftx ? ft; 2x3 16in, 6x2 4.5in Mk VI (although plan shows 8x2), 9x6 40mm; 125,000shp, 29kts; belt 9in, deck 6in.

EDIT: Added rigging and portholes in the hull to add a little more life!

Author:  BB1987 [ December 2nd, 2012, 4:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Very interesting Hood, i completely ignored the existence of such design, the ship looks quite nice, altough such a long empty bow leaves me with a strange feeling as it seems to break the balanced lines of the rest of the ship (muck like it was on the Corageous class) other than making her look underarmed.
The drawing itself is beautiful instead.

Author:  eswube [ December 2nd, 2012, 4:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Great work Hood!
Interesting concept indeed, although I guess that if it were to be turned into steel probably wouldn't work as planned (esp. regarding keeping in weight/size constraints).

Author:  Rowdy36 [ December 2nd, 2012, 5:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Nice work Hood!
It's an interesting looking design, almost cruiser-like in appearance. Handsome lines too, even if it does look underarmed.

Author:  emperor_andreas [ December 2nd, 2012, 6:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

A kind of small Lion and extra-large Vanguard in one...I like her!

Author:  Novice [ December 2nd, 2012, 9:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Interesting design, and a masterful display of pixel work.

Author:  denodon [ December 2nd, 2012, 10:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Excellent drawing of a ship I'd never heard of. I believe the excessively long bow was a deliberate choice to reduce water getting on the foredeck and flooding the guns. Unlike the uSN after all, the RN would operate primarily in the North Atlantic and North Sea, both very turbulent and rough seas compared to the usually sedate Pacific.

Author:  KHT [ December 2nd, 2012, 10:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

I like it. I think it's interesting that the superstructure looks slightly post-war-ish compared to earlier designs.

Author:  eltf177 [ December 3rd, 2012, 11:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

Assuming it was to be built, what might have been the laydown date?

Author:  klagldsf [ December 3rd, 2012, 6:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Royal Navy Battleship 'X' 1945

KHT wrote:
I like it. I think it's interesting that the superstructure looks slightly post-war-ish compared to earlier designs.
Considering that this ship likely would've been commissioned in the late 1940s if not into the 1950s....

The last revisions of the Lion, incidentally, also had only two main turrets but all concentrated forward.

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/