Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 3 of 5  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 4 5 »
Author Message
Colosseum
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 5:03 pm
Offline
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact: Website
The Kingfisher has more elan.

Even more elan could be acquired by mounting an even older floatplane, but we don't want to overdo it.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Wolfman
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 5:07 pm
Offline
Posts: 254
Joined: July 26th, 2011, 6:48 pm
The floatplane, catapult, and handling crane all kinda ruin the image of the Arleigh Burke for me, Colosseum. The paint scheme's cool, but please, leave the floatplane and associated equipment off in favor of the helicopters the design actually uses (or SH-34s, if you care to go old school).


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Raven
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 5:35 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 107
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 6:30 am
Location: San Diego, Ca.
Contact: Website, Yahoo Messenger
That would be the anti-kamikaze machine from hell... until it ran out of missiles. Take quite a while to tool up a new batch of standards...

_________________
In Hoc Signo Vinces

By This Sign You Will Conquer


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Colosseum
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 6:03 pm
Offline
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact: Website
Floatplanes are more efficient for shipboard use than helicopters, especially for this ship's purpose. Long-range spotting for missile attacks can be accomplished better with a Kingfisher than with a helicopter.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Wolfman
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 6:10 pm
Offline
Posts: 254
Joined: July 26th, 2011, 6:48 pm
I would think that mounting a catapult on a ship of this class would be difficult, to put it mildly, Colosseum.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Colosseum
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 6:57 pm
Offline
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Austin, TX
Contact: Website
[ img ]

Now with 99% more defensive elan; note the removal of the missiles and all guidance radars bar the AEGIS system, which is of course used to control the 40mm Bofors gunfire. An advanced SK air search sits at the top of the foremast, augmented by an SP height-finding radar (essential for fighter direction) on the mainmast. Above the SK is an SG surface search set. Mk.37 gun directors control the main battery of 5"/38 dual purpose guns. Also, an advanced mine hunting vehicle designed along the lines of the Japanese Ko-Hyoteki minisub sits on the starboard rail.

Structural modifications include the addition of an armored conning tower right forward of the bridge and the addition of the mainmast. Future units will have their uptakes trunked into one funnel to clear sky arcs for the AA guns.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
erik_t
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 8:06 pm
Offline
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US
Wolfman wrote:
erik_t wrote:
Truly, the floatplane ought to be the A2D.
A Skyshark? IIRC, there was never any consideration of creating a floatplane version of either the Skyshark or the older Skyraider.
Oh, there wasn't... but how awesome would that be? :)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Wolfman
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 8:57 pm
Offline
Posts: 254
Joined: July 26th, 2011, 6:48 pm
Colo, just replace both of those air search radars with an SX and it'll look better. Erik_t, I'm pretty sure it would have been very interesting.

On another note, am I the only sane person on this thread?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rainmaker
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 9:06 pm
Offline
Posts: 244
Joined: August 2nd, 2010, 6:12 pm
Location: Montreal, QC
Wolfman wrote:
Colo, just replace both of those air search radars with an SX and it'll look better. Erik_t, I'm pretty sure it would have been very interesting.

On another note, am I the only sane person on this thread?
I think you might be missing the joke, friend. ;)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Wolfman
Post subject: Re: DDG-51 - how it should have been builtPosted: February 17th, 2012, 9:09 pm
Offline
Posts: 254
Joined: July 26th, 2011, 6:48 pm
I have a very dry sense of humor.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 3 of 5  [ 49 posts ]  Return to “Alternate Universe Designs” | Go to page « 1 2 3 4 5 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 10 guests


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


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