This is my take on the many proposals to actually fully convert the converted Cleveland-class cruisers to double-ended, pure missile cruisers. It should be regard as a synchretic effort to blend the proposals into one, functioning design. Hence why I've settled to use the flagship configurated version, in this case the USS Oklahoma City as the testbed.
As can be seen, the Talos-system forward essentially duplicates the aft one: the same two-storied missile house, for instance. However, the bridge structure is now situated atop this missile 'house', and since the space removed from flag facilities, now how to be compensated, I've added additional superstructure. There's a pair of Mk 32 A/S triples beneath the bridge, since early proposal suggested the ships to be armed with torpedoes. I did reject the 21" ASuW twin mounting as being too heavy, so, again, this is a compromise.
For those who think this design is top heavy, I can only concur. That's, in fact, the one compelling reason why no double-ended conversions were carried out. Inclination tests with the Okie Boat in 1964, did, however, reveal that, although settling deeper in the bow than when in a gun-only config. there was still a reserve displacement available. Suggestions as to blistering the ships were rejected, also the removal of the six-inch gun turret. The ship would pitch quite vividly in anything but calm seas, but with her metacentric height lowered she probably would've turned out to be a fairly stable vessel, with a deep, long roll.
The prominent FAST-crane forward would not normally be shipped. As a matter of fact, though most plans and drawings show them in place, the FAST-cranes (or masts) were far from a permanent fixture on these ships, the Talos-armed ones. And they were heartidly detested for their tendency to always break down.
Anyway, this is how the USS Oklahoma City might have looked like with two Talos installations:
![[ img ]](http://i752.photobucket.com/albums/xx161/Bezobrazov/CLG5OklahomaCity-twin-end1963-76-1.png)
, few critics
