Shipbucket

Thank you. I will add it to the poll with all the other entries.

USS Tennessee (BBGN-3)

Tennessee was one of four Washington class battleships authorised by President James Edward Day in the immediate aftermath of World War III. While America had won the nuclear exchange, it had not done so without bloodshed. The nation was vulnerable and its navy had suffered tremendously protecting lines of communication across the Atlantic. To make matters worse, there was no great surplus of ships as there had been after the last war. Peacetime construction was required to replace wartime loss. Washington (BBGN-2) and Tennessee (BBGN-3) were laid down at Newport News, one of the few surviving naval shipyards on the East Coast, in December 1963. Pennsylvania (BBGN-4) and North Carolina (BBGN-5) were laid down two years later when yard space was found on the West Coast.

Washington and her sisters represented a bridge between modern destroyer leaders and the old Iowa class fast battleships. Combat experience demonstrated that the latter could stand in the narrow confines of the North Sea and Mediterranean. They could sustain damage which would gut Long Beach and Leahy class vessels. The 16 inch guns of the Iowa class also proved valuable as Warsaw Pact forces overran Belgium and the Netherlands. However, the Iowa design was far from ideal. They were large ships with massive crews. At the same time, they had no meaningful anti-submarine or air defence system to speak of. The Washington class rectified both of these issues. Tennessee was smaller and less manpower intensive than an Iowa class vessel. For protection against submarines, it carried a sonar array and the ASROC system alongside deck-mounted torpedo tubes. Its layered air defence suite, meanwhile, was unparalleled. It carried the advanced AN/SPG-59 phased array radar and its companion missile systems, Typhon LR and Typhon MR. The short range Sea Mauler missile and the Vulcan gun system provided an additional layer of protection. Together, these weapons could halt attacks which overwhelmed the older Talos, Terrier, and Tartar systems. Tennessee was also fitted with eight Polaris launch tubes. Rebuilding the American nuclear arsenal was an additional priority.

Less than seven years after being laid down, Tennessee was commissioned in August 1970. Her career was difficult. Many of her air defence systems had been pressed into service ahead of schedule or originated from overly optimistic programmes that only survived due to wartime necessity. The AN/SPG-59 radar was particularly troublesome and its issues were never fully resolved. Failures were also experienced with Sea Mauler and the Vulcan gun system, though these were later fixed. Many of the ship's fittings also required early replacement. With many of its most trusted suppliers out of business, the United States Navy had been forced to rely on alternate manufacturers. Despite these issues, Tennessee served for thirty years. She acted as flagship of the Sixth Fleet for a number of years and spent a great deal of time in the Mediterranean. Members of her crew were helped suppress the Sicilian food riots of 1973 and her guns were fired in anger against Libyan coastal installations in 1986. Tennessee was decommissioned in 2001.

That's a really cool looking ship, she might be one of my new favourite guided missile battleship designs! However, I just want to point out you've currently listed two separate BBGN-3s with different names, Tennessee and Pennsylvania. Am I correct in assuming the latter should be BBGN-4, and North Carolina should be BBGN-5? Or perhaps should Washington and Tennessee be BBGN-1 and 2 respectively?

_________________
"Oh, absolutely not. Trinitite may be an eldritch being that breaks the laws of physics, but even she can't replicate the insanity that is German Engineering!" - PyrrhicSteel on whether Trinities' machine shops can make a new gasket for a crane
“Yes, strategy,” she replied to Evelyn’s withering look. “Because I am merely an amateur. I cannot talk logistics.” - Seven Shades of Sunlight, in a latter chapter of Katalepsis

Thanks for pointing out that error. Pennsylvania was supposed to be BBGN-4 and North Carolina BBGN-5.

Polls Now Open
No further entries will be accepted for the Modern Battleship Challenge.
Members of the Shipbucket community can now rate each entry here.

A separate poll with options for the next challenge is also open. The three options are:
1. X-Plane Challenge in FD Scale
2. Artillery Challenge in Soldierbucket Scale
3. Attack Helicopter in FD Scale

Both polls will run until the 20th of January, ending at 23:59 (UTC-12) (Countdown Timer).

Fun challenge with some nice work. My scoring sheet is below.

My apologies to TNGShM, as I see I screwed up the scoring for his entry. Ambition = 3 -> Scaled design quality = 7.

It's all good, better than I was expecting since this was my first challenge.

_________________
I don't know what I'm doing half the time so please cut me some slack.

CURRENT AND PLANNED PROJECTS (in order of first priority)
- Altesian battlecruisers
- Altesian destroyers
- Altesian cruisers
- Altesian ironclads
- History & maps of the Alteias Republic AU

Fine but not ambitious?
Uh can you explain why?
Its got to be the most beautiful warship design ever in real life trying to perform on a large scale?

_________________
Fryssian AU with Lt.Maverick 114
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9802&p=193331#p193331

Embarked on: HNLMS Karel Doorman A833
To do list:
-Zeven Provincien class cruiser
-Joint support ship all sides
-F124 Sachsen class frigate
-F125 Baden-Württemberg class frigate
-Clemencau class aircraft carrier
-Zeven provincien class frigate
-Poolster class AOR
-Amsterdam class AOR
-Minas Gerais aircraft carrier

Erik has touched on a fair bit so I’ll only really add points I observed. Just 2 cents but I feel a primary point of these challenges is to hone our skills and to be pushed from our comfort zones. A few here weren't posting what they usually would be a category they usually wouldn't touch on and that is commendable that they have entered!

Mitchell Van Os-De Royter Battlecruiser
Whilst this is the first entry is it by no means a rushed one, detail is excellent without cramming the design, this may actually be one of the few 3 railing drawings I like atm on the bucket. It seems reasonably believable in this form and would serve well as a Dutch counter to Sverdlovs. My only two nitpicks and they are pretty much down to personal preference, having railings of the standard grey against a black painted surface seems a bit odd to me and the lattice masts especially aft seem a little off but again, two very small nitpicks on an impressive drawing

KHT-Tre Kronor
Another European ship based off never-weres, this one is indicative of the older styles and the fact we haven’t seen you for some years. I’m actually surprised there was no top-view from an artist who has one of the higher ratios of posting them. The actual design is balanced and very plausible but I feel the older style of art will hurt it in comparison to the other entries

Corp-California
This one grabs me like a lot of proposals from commercial yards who try to dip their toes into naval orders by offering a versatile ship based on an already proven hull that would be much cheaper per ton. The art style is excellent, no details for detail's sake, and the top view is appreciated to demonstrate the features hidden in the plan view. Only quibble is with the larger windows and how they are executed but that’s personal taste more than anything and the purist in me.
StealthJester-Oregon
Hull feels very 40’s bar the foremost 100ft, which seems out of place with the stated setting and I’ll wager is heavily influenced from the Long Beach. A couple of quibbles also spring to mind, from outdated Sea Sprites, the puce antifoul, directors pasted atop other fittings(aft), and portholes in places being too high to see out of if your crew is under 6’. The Falcion AShM is an interesting addition and adds a great deal of lethality before the Harpoon was about.

TNGShM-Revenge
As a newcomer, seeing an entry is always a good sign and this is a decent start, the only point that immediately sticks out is the shape of the stem, the absence of a Torpedo on the missile line for the aft launcher and the placement of life raft canisters which is a bit unlikely, the ones fore are likely to be lost in a serious blow.

RDFox-Inadvisable

This one rubs me weirdly, the proportions don’t seem right especially with the placement of the systems, inconsistent structure shapes which change from place to place despite sporting the same components, radars having very similar elevations and the machinery space looks to be as tight as the proverbial. Outboard skegs whilst explained and have advantages, make it look dam tubby aft whilst the bow is more akin to a cruiser and feels like an addition from another ship. Few stray lines left over from the top view aligning and wack deck levels don’t help the drawing to stand out. Some details seem missing in spots but the essentials are there.

Themax-Kanystal
Very modern take on the BB, I agree with what Erik has said about the hull and the weapon length, an extra deck may be the rectifying measure for the hull as I’m not sure about the clearance between the ER and the mission bay for the UUV’s as well. The drawing quality is pretty though I’m not sure about Helideck placement, I know it has been RL mooted a number of times recently but I would hate to be that pilot. The Launcher on the bridge wing may also be a source of consternation when launching fore but it does have a good arc of firing.

Heuhen-Lambda
Whew lad, this strikes me as very Kirovy, a hull which is a carriage device for as many weapons as can be shoehorned in. Whilst it’s a lot, I’m guessing of the projected cost, this is reasonable. The detail is excellent and everything is thought of that I can think of. Stepped-back, split bridges are a favorite of mine and the hull is quite the looker too.

Karle94-Vanguard
Whilst not the most ambitious, it is the most likely for a modern BB, surprised to not see a Seaslug somewhere on there, though or a top view considering the availability of source material but that’s just for those that pain themselves with that.

Acelanceloet-Montana
I had an inkling of what this would look like from snippets but the finished product is something to behold. The top view is excellent, the only two critiques I have are; why not Trimaran and duct the emergency exhausts under the deck and not full-width superstructure and essentially operate like an LHD. The whole thing puts me in mind of those cocaine Rolls Royce ideas around 20 years ago and I love it

Wolftheriot-Kenji
Topweight and topweight, I feel a top view may have helped here either to show otherwise. Few dings here including the three railing with two-tone which looks a little off. In addition to this, the shading for most faces aft are wrong, bow and stern are very weird shapes that won’t really be structurally easy and the panel lines suggest either tight and very arcane frame spacing or a shipbuilders nightmare. Needs to be cut down a deck or three and more hull fore.

Kiwi Imperialist-Tennessee
This is a pearl of a thing and I feel having the low hull and superstructure is reflective of the post-nuclear exchange world it is in, the top view may also be the best executed IMO for having well-defined shadows that match the SB light and it feels the part. I legitimately cannot fault anything except the bridge windows and this may be a niggle that’s more academic, would it be wise to have smaller windows in such a setting? Otherwise, I love it.

_________________
Work list(Current)
Miscellaneous|Victorian Colonial Navy|Murray Riverboats|Colony of Victoria AU|Project Sail-fixing SB's sail shortage
How to mentally pronounce my usernameRow-(as in a boat)Don-(as in the short form of Donald)Dough-(bread)
"Loitering on the High Seas" (Named after the good ship Rodondo)
There's no such thing as "nothing left to draw" If you can down 10 pints and draw, you're doing alright by my standards