When people design battleships of the Cold War, it's always following the refitted Iowa/Montana pattern - large guns, armored hulls etc. I've kinda wondered what a battleship would be like if it were actually following Cold War sensibilities - all-missile armament, etc. So I've decided to try to go ahead and o that. I'll be designing at least one class to represent each decade, or at least paradigm shift in ship design, starting with the 1950s. It's obviously a work in progress, and I'll have a B-side done too.
It is clear that any possible US postwar battleship or large missiles cruisers (since 1943 the U.S. canceled the Montana's and by 1945/1947 they stopped the last 2 Iowa/Alaska under construction) no longer carries any large guns (8" or 12" or 16")
And do not forget that the nuclear cruiser Long Beach, built in 1957/1961, use a hull similar to Salem CA ....
Briefly, the large 230/260 meters hull designs, are, for me, totally unrealistic (financially speaking)
Here are my ideas for designs of battleships/large missiles cruisers designs
1954/1958 period
Hull identical to salem
Conventional propulsion
Superstructure similar to the Salem's or upgraded Boston CA.
Two 127mm Mk 42 forward and 4 others 127 on the sides
8 or 10 twins 76mm on the sides
2 terrier (1 forward, behind the 127, and 1 aft) with their 1954/1958 sensor's
Stern with a early style helipad
= In resume, a conventionnal missile cruisers, +/- similar to the early missiles cruisers (Boston), but on the salem hull (more larger, more capable, with more weapons)
1959/1961 period
Hull identical to Salem/Long Beach
Nuclear propulsion
Superstructure similar to the Long Beach (forgets the too high Albany superstructures...)
Two 127mm Mk 42 forward
4 Twins 76mm on the sided
One Talos launcher aft
One Asroc launcher in the middle
Mk 32 TT
Two Terrier launchers (1 forward, 1 aft)
Two Tartars launchers (one on each side)
= In resume: a Long Beach hull with some Albany weapons disposition
= The reals fact howed that conversions of the cleveland cruisers (185 meters hull) was a failure (ships too cramped, internal volume too cramped for effectively accomodate 100+ missiles).
The 203 meters hull of Baltimore CA were more effective and no doubt that the 218+ meters hulls of the Salem's was even much better (more larger internal volume, able to receive without problems 100+ missiles)
In my opinion, without upgrade of some Baltimore CA during 1950's, the best way was to build 218+ meters hull +/- similar to the Salem's.
1962/1967 Period
Identical or slightly enlarged hull of Leahy/baimnbrige
superstructures of the Leahy/Baimbridge style
One 127mm Mk 42 forward
Two twins 76mm (one on each side)
Two Terriers launchers (1 forward, behinf the 127, one aft)
1 Asroc maunchers forward, behind the tartar
Mk 32
= In resume, a leahy/baimbridge +/- similar design, but with a very very slightly larger hull and better weapons disposition