Shipbucket

thanks guys.
heuhen: that is because I have read those 1000 pages for you, and liked to do it
erik: I will see what I can do, I have to estimate a bit too because I don't have her bulkhead plan, so don't expect it to be exact, but I can show what I had in mind. did you mean the refit or the redesign, or both, for the removal trunks?

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

The refit should be easy enough to figure from the real thing; I mostly meant the redesign. It will help me understand your thought processes and give more intelligent critique. It just looks so different that there's a little voice in the back of my head wondering what's wrong with it. One can make a comparison with, say, the steam DE/DEGs, with what seems like a need for only a single superstructure block right amidships.

well, hope this helps then. note that, when I started drawing this vessel, I thought the LWNP's to be held horizontal or diagonal when hoisted, but the gaps can be made much smaller when done like this, maybe not even THAT much bigger then the ones for the gas turbines (of which most of the module stays behind in the engine room) so it now looks like I made the structure even a tad too small :S oh well. I cannot be entirely certain of this setup either, as I don't have deck plans or anything of her (I wish I had) so I cannot even say for certain the engine rooms are exactly where I placed them, or that the aft engine room even has this size (I had estimated sizes of the forward one because of the LWNP document)

as you can see, the LWNP would have been hoisted by the reactor part (which is by far the heaviest, so I thought it best to directly connect to that) I don't really know if this would be the case IRL, so maybe they can indeed only hoist them horizontal and the superstructure is actually still too big

the refit would have it about the same as this, btw, with the difference that the aft one has to pass one deck less and the forward one..... well I think that one would have to pass the entire superstructure.

note that the ducts are just to the side of the centreline, so they do not penetrate any centerline bulkhead nor the watertight bulkheads. so, to remove the outher ones, I suppose you would have to remove the centerline ones first. if that is impossible, you need an duct that goes over half the ships width...... not something I would prefer.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Interesting indeed.

I'll have to ponder the electronics fit on such a small superstructure, especially ESM and comms interference problems as best I understand them. Potter's book isn't titled Electronic Greyhounds for nothing!

Maybe you just put WORLD'S MOST HILARIOUS DISCAGE ANTENNA on the forward superstructure, and coat the hangar shell with whips. That'll alleviate a lot of the problems, I suspect. Still, it feels like this Sprucan has less topweight than the one we know and love, and I wonder if the mast could get taller and bulkier, or perhaps split it back to two lattices as far forward and aft as you can get them. Or lengthen the superstructure a bit, perhaps with a lovely 45deg section (because those are always pretty).

Note with a full-beam hangar, you could likely fit two SH-3 if you'd like (rather than the one that as-designed Spruance could carry). That'd be a nice upgrade over SH-2.

nothing for you Erik, to bash this design into something along the lines of your AU sprucans?

anyways, I think you are right that the electronics in the mast are going to be a mess. hell, I haven't fitted flaglines because everything was already full xD. speaking of electronic greyhounds, I'd love to have that book! but it is just so hard to find an copy, all online stores I have seen it on are not that thrustworthy....... and don't even try to find it in a store in the netherlands.

I have not really looked at topweight, but mostly at superstructure volume. the hangar is beamier but might be shorter then the real life one, space limitations in such a short superstructure...... I will do some calculations on the effects of such modifications, but thinking now, if the superstructure would be lighter then the real one, it might correct the heavier weight of the engines and it might be possible to do an full DDGN-47 modification

anyways, there might be a lot possible, to the point of masts overhanging the forward structure. if that would really help, that is another matter. I think I will not modify these designs with them for now, maybe I will at the end of project DX, when all spruance variants are drawn, so I have all parts available. these as of now are just meant to test and show the concept of these ships

and I really should do an test for that SH-3 sized hangar, it might give these ships quite an upgrade

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

FAST DE
By 1964 the difference between Seahawk and the DE’s, and there was looked into an upgraded DE hull as alternative to the Seahawk. From this, a series of studies emerged.

The first one of these would have used an DDG-2 power plant in an enlarged DE-1052 hull. the SQS-26 would be supplemented by an new VDS, the SQS-35. There would be space reserved for the system that would end up to be BPDMS, but until that was ready an twin 3in/50 would be fitted. The result would have been close to Seahawk, and had with an price of 58 million for the first ship and 37 million for repeat ships, which was much more than that of DE 1052 class ships (20 million). This killed this design.

The displacement would have been 4247 tons light and 5578 tons full load.
L*B*T would have been 137,16 * 14,94 * 4,97 meters, resulting in an Cb of 0,55.
Range would have been 4500 at 20 knots, and the top speed would have been 30 knots. For that she required 70000 shp (52,2 MW)

The design is as close to real life as I could manage, but I have no reference for the radars or the topside arrangement. If she would have had macks, if the superstructure would have been laid out as shown and if the helipad would really have been that large, I don’t know. But this is, as normally with designs like these as close as can be done without drawings at hand.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Definitely a great thread to follow, both for the excellent drawings and infos given, keep it up!.

Just a question on the Fast DE, no rudder?

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation

she steers by altering her center of gravity so she heels over and her stabilisers serve as rudders
or in other words, I had forgotten to fit the rudder layer. sorry guys, now she can steer.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

A most interesting thread. Learning a lot here about USN designs, which aren't my strongpoint, and they make interesting comparisons with RN designs of the period.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

there were some additional DE's planned to be authorised in FY 68. suggestions were made to make these ships an modified design, closer to fleet speed and with the data handling systems of seahawk.
I have here included the designs of July and August 1966, which are described in US Destroyers. both would have had 40000 shp, and would have been armed with (quite interesting) 127/54 RF mounts, pointing at the heavy Mk 42 instead of the LW mount then in development. this was done for 360 degrees AA cover, as the aft mount would have been replaced by an point defence missile system when this became available.

the July proposal was considered too big, as it was pushed towards an heavy destroyer/light cruiser in size. it would have had 3 boilers and 2 shafts based on an pressure of 600 psi. this drove up the size to even larger then the earlier proposals, even while their top speed would have been faster.
when drawing this proposal out, I ended up taking more parts and ideas from the DX baseline proposals than of the earlier DE's, because these were more suitable. the ship thus seems to be an good step towards DX, although it is unrelated in all but role in reality, and was rejected.


one way out of this large size problem would have been to use an COGAG powerplant consisting of 2 FT4 gas turbines fitted to an single shaft. the coupling would be electrical to enable reverse.


the plan was to use an common hull and machinery for both an DE and DD (I would list the DD more as DEG but I will follow the way Friedman noted them) DASH, the VDS and the long TT in the stern were deleted and replaced by an austere tartar launcher (I supposed this could only mean Mk 22)

Friedman notes that this common hull idea must have influenced the DX/DXG project, which was just getting under way in the fall of 1966.

in the end, the FY 68 DEs were cancelled, and there is no evidence that they would have differed significantly from the FY64-67 DEs, but almost certainly these studies have influenced the weapons fit and possibly layout of the DX/DXG.

the next posted ships, if I keep to it chronologically, will be the first drawings of the actual DX studies.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin