Shipbucket

I take it this is as she apeared in the 1980's?

Great work again novice!

_________________
When Britain first, at Heaven's command
Arose from out the azure main;
This was the charter of the land,
And guardian angels sang this strain:

"Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
"Britons never will be slaves."

No. This is as built. The Restigouche and some sisters were rebuilt with ASROC, and losing the 3"/50 gun mounting aft along with one Limbo ASW mortar.
Two of these served in the first Gulf war 1991 and lost their ASROC for two quadraple Harpoon launchers and Phalanx.
The most noticeable part of the conversion (apart from ASROC, that is) was a new mast much like the one the new DDH like HMCS Athabaskan .

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

Duely noted. Will we be seeing these versions? (Pleeeeease!)

If not, I would be willing to modify it.

_________________
When Britain first, at Heaven's command
Arose from out the azure main;
This was the charter of the land,
And guardian angels sang this strain:

"Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:
"Britons never will be slaves."

So that you were protected by the 3"/50 while the 3"/70 was undergoing protracted maintenance

The British (Canadian) 3"/70 mount was apparently somewhat more successful than the rather internally-insane US 3"/70, but it could not really be considered successful.

Excellent subject matter, and brilliantly executed. It seems curlish to carp; but re the 'turtle back'; I'm thinking it might look better to emphasise the effect via darker shade lines, even (and I might get shot for this) running a very dark line (in place of black) under the weather/gun shield, as you could argue that it isn't a leading edge.

It seems the British mounting was designed to be less sophisticated then the US one, and it shows. The British mounting weighing at around 38 tons whereas the US was tipping the scale at aroun 58t.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

That is interesting. I wonder why the R.N. accepted the U.S. mount for the Victorious reconstruction; instead of saving a lot of top weight?

That's the (in an entirely different weight class) 3"/50, Bill. Totally different weapon.

That's my understanding too, Novice, noting that the US mount was nominally rather more capable than the British (as you'd expect to get with additional sophistication).

The US 3"/50 came about as replacement for the quadruple 40mm gun mount (same weight nominally -at least when designed). Shortly after the war Britain needed some more advanced weapons, especially radars. The US was approached regarding the SPS-17 radar and SPG-354 (Mk. 56 GFC),and after some negotiations the transfer of systems approved along with the gun mounting most suited to the GFC the 3"/50 gun and so HMS Victorious got the gun mountigs (the SPS-17 radar was also earmarked for her, but AFIK the radar transmitter was coupled to a British designed antenae Type 965 was resulted). The Mk.56 GFC was Anglicised as the MRS.3 with Type 903. BTW the US SPS-17 was aborted in favour of SPS-28/SPS-29.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"

As requested



The HMCS Gatineau was called IRE (Improved REstigouche), after those modifications, which included modifiying the stern for VDS, anew mast and the armament changes.
Strangely enough, the 3"/70 Vickers mounting was not replaced with the more reliable 3"/50 mounting.

_________________
Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"