Shipbucket

Although it's a lot more ship for two larger guns, you have managed to make it an attractive ship, with PLENTY of room for growth. Heck, you can easily fit the Tomahawk ABL's on there. Just put them in the traditional place where they ended up on the Spruance class: On the foredeck, aimed forward, in front of the superstructure, besides the MK26. You've got PLENTY of room

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

yes, and if the Mk 26's are Mod 2 you can put them aft and aside of the Mk 26 itself, clearing the launcher. I think that would be the best place, the spruance proves you have the beam. the only drawback is some addition trouble with reloading the Mk 26 trough the strikedown hatch. (also, I really should finish my update to the spruances, I made just too many mistakes on the above one)

_________________
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

Thank you shipright, it is a lot of ship. Lots of room for expansion in the future (and not necessarily JUST the Flight II that's about to pop up). this hull could easily fit two MK-41 61 cells side buy side
Thanks for the comment erik t, and yes. It is a lot more hull than a Tico. I like to think that maybe it (after Flight IIA) might be nicknamed "Kirov Killer"
I would expect the ABL's will show up when these first hulls head in for their first SLEP...around 1985 or so. Thank you for the comments and compliments MihoshiK
Hi Ace, thanks again. I agree, and I'm betting the ABL's will make a reappearance with NTU

ok, Here is the Flight II Aegis/SPY-1 Ship



Lastly, does anybody know when the LM-6000 was first used in ships?

I don't see why anyone would do that. US post-war doctrine has always been to let aircraft carriers or submarines take care of major opposing naval units. And besides, there's nothing about this ship that would make it exceptional at taking on surface units of any kind.

_________________
“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.

Thank you for the comment Theil. I have to disagree about your statement of US post-war doctrine. When reading of the Iowa Class on Wiki, more specifically the section on the reactivation. the very first sentence says

"In the 1980s, as part of President Ronald Reagan's plan to rebuild the U.S. military and create a 600-ship Navy—which would counter the new Soviet Kirov-class battlecruisers"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa-class_battleship

There were Surface action groups built around the Iowa's specifically for that implicit reason.

The Iowas were reactivated because they were some of the few ships rusting in Suisun Bay that that had the room and generating capacity to fit a modern command centre onboard and because they had space to mount a lot of Tomahawks.
The guns were a nice bonus and had the modernization plan gone over budget they were the first things scheduled to be cut.

_________________
“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.

There's a big difference between the actual USN requirement and what a President thinks will sound good for a soundbite - and I hope I don't need to explain the difference between the former or even the latter and what someone thinks will sound good in a Wikipedia article. There's a reason why the [citation needed] tag exists.

The actual CGSN proposals had the best chance of being a one-for-one analog to Kirov, mounting several Tomahawk anti-ship missiles and only the ASM variant (not to mention being nuclear-powered) - it might not be a Shipwreck but the Tomahawk ASM still carried a big enough warhead to be a large ship-cracker (and that's ignoring that, at least according to what I read, the USN envisioned using the nuke variant against Soviet surface groups). That said, the primary weapon system of CGSN was still the SM-2/Mk-26/AEGIS combo.
And they were amongst the first things to be cut once the "peace dividend" era came.

I wish they left Missouri alone, it'd be nice to keep one in WWII config.

None of them were left in "WWII config".

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

thanks again guys, I figured by putting the "Kirov Killer" bit it there I might get an "oh no you didn't" type reaction please note thought that I did say the Flight IIA boats, which will have VLS and many more TASM's than the Iowa's carried. The whole concept fits into my back story about navy brass wanting more intimidating ships. The gas turbine variant of this hull may not have been a good choice to attach the fictional "Kirov Killer" name to, and I am planning to do a nuke version after I complete these ones. Ill have to add to my back story for it. Other than that, how is the SPY-1 layout? Practical? well placed panels?

I think it looks really nice, unfortunately my opinion does not count for much.

What are the white things on the railing for? I've always wondered this.

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