Shipbucket

Long Beach herself launched in 1959. This was to be the follow-on generation.

You didn't think this was all, did you!
images gone due to the main site deletion, check the first post
Full description in the first post.

_________________
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

Very nice!

What was the intended DASH arrangement for these ships? It's impossible to think they were to be kept out on the weather deck.

Fantail hangar, in the CL/CA style?

I think the designers did not spend any time on where the DASH (or the manned helicopters on the still to draw CG) would be stored. I personally would have put an small hangar/maintenance shop between the 2 Mk 13 launchers, in the superstructure there. The DLG could have something similar, to the side of the Mk 10 GMLS, or could have had an fantail hangar of some sort.

_________________
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 USN really never had an eye of good looking ships did they?
A fantail solution for the DASH drones might have been feasible, certainly was a USN design trait.

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

In the eye of the beholder, I guess - I've always found most of the real-life DLG and DLGNs to be attractive ships (especially the later DLGNs), whereas Counties and T42s were beaten half to death with the ugly stick.

Can I ask the 4 advanced dish type radars on the DDG with two Mk 13 launchers are they placed side by side? Do you have any information on why and would it not limit substantially the arcs for using them all?

I don't see why when the DLG spreads them out more?

I placed the lower ones as far out as feasible, thus creating an firing arc that is near 360 degrees (larger then the actual arc of the Mk 13's)
The ship would need more director channels to be able to keep enough missiles in the air for the 2 Mk 13's to be worth it, and putting them all in line would give you horrible forward arcs and extremely good aft arcs. In the setup they are now, 2 can be pointed in any direction but straight forward, while in any other setup the forward blind spot would be bigger and only available for one director. Alternatively, some directors would have to be placed forward, which would complicate the arrangement for very little gain. (note that the forward directors on a modern tico are also side by side)

The DLG spreads them out more because I placed them how I thought best on the available space (as I had only numerical intel there) and to match the setup of the launchers as known.

_________________
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 latest drawings are certainly not attractive ships by any stretch of the word... rather lanky and a bit ridiculous looking to the modern eye, but as "schemes" they are interesting from a technical perspective.

The single black line for waterline doesn't look particularly good to me and I think these ships would look a lot better with a boot top shown. I understand that boot top is determined by light/full load draft, but I think that can be estimated especially by one of our only artists who is an actual engineer.

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

I do agree the 59s, in particular, are ugly as sin.

I hope you don't mean me re: engineering, because I am by no means qualified in this sense! I actually don't understand why boot topping is even a thing.