Shipbucket

Looks like the twin barrel Bofors ASW mortar.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Like this?

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File: ... uncher.jpg

Yup

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

Ok, let's now discuss something else.

As I redesign slowly my Navy, wondering if a better version of Lysander Class could be designed. Lysander Class supposed to come from the never built Italian Cruisers Zara and Incrociatore Polivalente. The Incrociatore Polivalente is about 6m shorter, this section is cut from the hangar section of the ship, helipad is shared between both ships. But I think if you have to accommodate large helicopters like SH-3D or AS332F the longer hangar is useful. Then, Zara design has the GMLS Mk26 mod2. My current Lysander was to had the Mk10, but perhaps this is impossible. When I asked for the Mk26 mod3 (with 84 missiles) I had in mind to use this GMLS in my Lysander Class with all necessary changes. GMLS Mk26 mod5 in RHN (AU) configuration would have 16 ASROC, 4-6 RGM-66 and 62-64 RIM-66, while the mod2 would have only 42-44 RIM-66. Another matter is SSM. If equip her with Adis I missiles, later designs like Isis and Chimera are integrated to already existing missile boxes, while if I use Adis II then extra boxes must be installed for Chimera/Isis. Dardo CIWS remains for now.

The other question for the original Italian designs is about that amidships crane. Is necessary or can be eliminated? The aft auxiliary boats seem to have a double davit, do we have a newer similar part?

Anyone?

Well as a beginner I would ask,
- If you could move stuff around on the smaller ship to keep a bigger helipad (IE torps to rear under the flight deck and missiles to the middle of the ship ? ) This will let you land big things even if you can't hanger them.
- Why not cut down on the number of guns ? (do you need 3 types on the smaller ship, what does the middle one give that the others cant ?).
- Should you move or raise up the CIWS to give full arcs ? its blocked by the missile launchers at the moment ?
- Why not use the same crane on both ships ?
Hope these questions are not to stupid,
JSB

-Both ships have exactly the same hangar.
-As all Italian ships of 1960's to 1980's they have 4 CIWS OTO Breda Dardo, (not only 2) plus twin triple purpose OTO Melara Combatto 76mm (surface and airborne targets, CIWS with proximity fuse projectiles). So they are very well protected against incoming missiles.Do not forget also that the middle gun not only increases supporting fire power but also covers a bit more rear arc of fire.
-The final ship will definitely has the Mk26 GMLS, because role of Lysander Class to RHN is Guided Missile Helicopter Cruiser (CGH). For other missiles seem more possible to use 8 SSM Adis I.
-The larger helicopter on board is the AS332F Super Puma, so drear deck space seem adequate.
-Indeed both ships could have the same crane, but the question is why this crane is there for.

BTW. In The bellow deck tread, there should be an Better Version og those 40mm, they have been There for a year!

All guns will be fixed. What about my text?

And some calculations about Mk 26 (from http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Weapons/US_GMLS.htm)

Mk 26 Mod 0 GMLS (Basic System)

Weights: 162,302 lbs empty, 193,022 lbs loaded
Capacity: 24 missiles
Missile Dimensions: 14.75” in diameter and 200” in length up to a weight of 2,200 lbs

Mk 26 Mod 1 GMLS

Weights: 208,577 lbs empty, 264,897 lbs loaded
Capacity: 44 missiles

Mk 26 Mod 2 GMLS

Weights: 255,111 lbs empty, 337,031 lbs loaded
Capacity: 64 missiles

Mod 2 is 72,134 lbs heavier than Mod 1, while Mod 1 is 71,875lbs heavier than Mod 0

An 84-capacity variant would probably weighs 409,165lbs. This is about the same as Mk7 and double of MK11. The old Mk4 GMLS weighs only 279,291 lbs!

In order to put an 84-missile Mk26 GMLS, what changes I need?

Since these seem not going any further, I consider designing my own cruiser with this specifications:

Ship lines influenced from US ships of 1950's/1960's (developed alongside with Miltiades Class, but from different team)
Length 175m-188m (my upper limit is the Elli Class)
Beam 17.5m-19m
Propulsion: COGAG, 4 gas turbines (~88,000hp to 100,000hp, depends from size)
Speed: >32kn

Armament:
-OTO Melara 127/54C (more possible) or recycle the twin 6" from Elli Class (less possible)
-Mk26 GMLS (64 or 84 missiles)*
-4 CIWS (Dardo first, ARIS VI later)
-Perhaps 2 side OTO Melara 76mm
-Adis I SSM (also take Isis/Chimera)
-Large hangar for accommodating two large helicopters in 10tn class (more possible is the "traditional" on deck hangar, but also consider "in hull" like Virginia or Vitorio Venetto).
*First designs shown Mk4 GMLS, recycled from Elli Class

One design which could work as base is this:



Of course no Harriers, but only helicopters. These two GMLS seem to be Mk11, perhaps also they are Mk26. No specification/information exists.

When I came across this, I thought using through deck hangar and twin Mk26 (44 missiles each) or even the single large Mk26 (84 missiles), reaching my upper limit in size. If she could have the capacity of Vittorio Venetto, then only two of these cruisers are needed and therefore I can reduce my complement needs. Superstructure will have a US touch, perhaps from Coontz/Kimon and a large amidships funnel (like Japanese Hatakaze Class) for its gas turbines. Masts will be of "cage" design, I have in my mind something like USS Truxtun. Also this can the traditional on deck hangar, built on the lines of Zara somewhat or even Miltiades. How this sound?

P.S I know Hatakaze is an 1980's design, but has exactly this feature that seem to fit in this cruiser.