• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

US double ended Missile Cruiser conversions

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,070

Attachments

Last edited:

Colonial-Marine

Fighting the UAV mafia.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
678
Reaction score
35
Looking at these conversions they always looked especially unstable with that very tall superstructure. Why was it felt necessary when the Talos fire control radar sets weren't even mounted on top of it?
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,024
Reaction score
995
Looking at these conversions they always looked especially unstable with that very tall superstructure. Why was it felt necessary when the Talos fire control radar sets weren't even mounted on top of it?
Missile fire control electronics were in there, along with, I believe, the flag plot and staff accommodation.
 

Tzoli

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,200
Reaction score
635
The superstructure might be tall but also narrow so less weight as one thought. The two other tall things are the macks (mast-stacks (funnels)) which again not that heavy weight. But indeed these conversions had topweight issues due to losing ammo deep in the hull yet the missiles are mostlyabove the waterline.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
709
Reaction score
332
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Amongst my favourite warships were the dramatic US Navy Albany class double ended missile ships.
Mine too) Their tall, square superstructures, massive antennas are essentially the embodiment of the dawn of missile & nuclear age.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
1,457
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incidentally...
 
Last edited:

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incdentally...
Then you yet to see the USN Zumwalt the RN Daring (Type 45) or the Swedish Visby classes
You just had to mention the Zumwalt didn't you? I was having a good day. We were all having a good day...
Long Beach?
At least Long Beach had a reason to look the way she did! The SCANFAR radar was a bitch to mount. There is literally no reason for Zumwalt to look the way she does. Yes, I know: stealth. They didn't need a damn tumblehome hull for stealth
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
1,457
At least Long Beach had a reason to look the way she did! The SCANFAR radar was a bitch to mount. There is literally no reason for Zumwalt to look the way she does. Yes, I know: stealth. They didn't need a damn tumblehome hull for stealth
The supreme, absolute shame is that tumblehome hull is reminiscent of the late 19th century French battleships... the horror, the horror.

Wait...

Cheaper, smaller combat warships ?

Seemingly build by drunken naval architects ?

With tumblehome hulls ?


OMG...

...it just dawned on me... is Zumwalt Jeune école applied to USN ? OMG... :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
 
  • Haha
Reactions: zen

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
At least Long Beach had a reason to look the way she did! The SCANFAR radar was a bitch to mount. There is literally no reason for Zumwalt to look the way she does. Yes, I know: stealth. They didn't need a damn tumblehome hull for stealth
The supreme, absolute shame is that tumblehome hull is reminiscent of the late 19th century French battleships... the horror, the horror.

Wait...

Cheaper, smaller combat warships ?

Seemingly build by drunken naval architects ?

With tumblehome hulls ?


OMG...

...it just dawned on me... is Zumwalt Jeune école applied to USN ? OMG... :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
No, that's the LCS. Zumwalt is many things. But cheaper and smaller ain't one of em.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
1,457
Ah dang. I mistook an horror for another horror.

so let me formulate it differently...

Is LCS the jeune école (catastrophic) dogma trying to doom USN ? :confused:
 

M. A. Rozon

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
81
Reaction score
10
The superstructure might be tall but also narrow so less weight as one thought. The two other tall things are the macks (mast-stacks (funnels)) which again not that heavy weight. But indeed these conversions had topweight issues due to losing ammo deep in the hull yet the missiles are mostlyabove the waterline.
With regards to topweight and Superstructure, much of the new superstructure was constructed from aluminum in order to save weight. In places, the metal was three inches thick. Areas of the structure that were to be subject to blast from rocket motors was constructed of steel. As for placement of the missiles, the Talos magazine was mostly buried in the Hull. This accounted for some of the expense of their conversion. The previous conversions (the CLGs) had their magazines on the weather deck.

Personally, I have always been fascinated by this generation of missile ships and all of the proposed conversions that never took place.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
1,457
Personally, I have always been fascinated by this generation of missile ships and all of the proposed conversions that never took place.
Me too. It was kind of "big gun ships" last chance to shine. Light cruisers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, treaty battleships, full-blown-battleships.
There were plenty of finished, unfinished and mothballed ships that never got a *second* chance - Worcesters, Baltimore, Oregon, Des Moines, Alaska, South Dakota, North Carolina, Iowas... imagine, if some kind of "silver bullet" had them all turned into guided missile ships and put back into service...

...and instead, capital ships shrunk to the tonnage of large destroyers. Try telling that to WWII USN, that destroyer / frigates would kill every single ship class larger than 10 000 tons. Except for aircraft carriers or amphibious, of course.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,024
Reaction score
995
At least Long Beach had a reason to look the way she did! The SCANFAR radar was a bitch to mount. There is literally no reason for Zumwalt to look the way she does. Yes, I know: stealth. They didn't need a damn tumblehome hull for stealth
Yes, they did. It's the only reason they adopted that shape.
 

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
Personally, I have always been fascinated by this generation of missile ships and all of the proposed conversions that never took place.
Me too. It was kind of "big gun ships" last chance to shine. Light cruisers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, treaty battleships, full-blown-battleships.
There were plenty of finished, unfinished and mothballed ships that never got a *second* chance - Worcesters, Baltimore, Oregon, Des Moines, Alaska, South Dakota, North Carolina, Iowas... imagine, if some kind of "silver bullet" had them all turned into guided missile ships and put back into service...

...and instead, capital ships shrunk to the tonnage of large destroyers. Try telling that to WWII USN, that destroyer / frigates would kill every single ship class larger than 10 000 tons. Except for aircraft carriers or amphibious, of course.
The problem with converting the big ships is that, given the fire control technology of the day, they couldn't guide any more missiles than the smaller cheaper cruisers. And given you could operate two Albany class with the same manpower as Kentucky, it makes more sense to guide twice as many missiles with two ships than convert a battleship.
 

Tzoli

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,200
Reaction score
635
Personally, I have always been fascinated by this generation of missile ships and all of the proposed conversions that never took place.
Me too. It was kind of "big gun ships" last chance to shine. Light cruisers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, treaty battleships, full-blown-battleships.
There were plenty of finished, unfinished and mothballed ships that never got a *second* chance - Worcesters, Baltimore, Oregon, Des Moines, Alaska, South Dakota, North Carolina, Iowas... imagine, if some kind of "silver bullet" had them all turned into guided missile ships and put back into service...

...and instead, capital ships shrunk to the tonnage of large destroyers. Try telling that to WWII USN, that destroyer / frigates would kill every single ship class larger than 10 000 tons. Except for aircraft carriers or amphibious, of course.
Yes.. though nowadays only a handful of ships armoured and those armour were only for vital spaces. Try to sink a Baltimore with standard SAM! I know Harpoons but Standard outrange them by many times!
That is why I prefer the soviet anti ship missiles, now THOSE have range!
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,865
Reaction score
1,457
Personally, I have always been fascinated by this generation of missile ships and all of the proposed conversions that never took place.
Me too. It was kind of "big gun ships" last chance to shine. Light cruisers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, treaty battleships, full-blown-battleships.
There were plenty of finished, unfinished and mothballed ships that never got a *second* chance - Worcesters, Baltimore, Oregon, Des Moines, Alaska, South Dakota, North Carolina, Iowas... imagine, if some kind of "silver bullet" had them all turned into guided missile ships and put back into service...

...and instead, capital ships shrunk to the tonnage of large destroyers. Try telling that to WWII USN, that destroyer / frigates would kill every single ship class larger than 10 000 tons. Except for aircraft carriers or amphibious, of course.
The problem with converting the big ships is that, given the fire control technology of the day, they couldn't guide any more missiles than the smaller cheaper cruisers. And given you could operate two Albany class with the same manpower as Kentucky, it makes more sense to guide twice as many missiles with two ships than convert a battleship.
That's why we needed a successfull "proto AEGIS" Typhoon system. Of course late 50's state-of-the-art would not allow it (just like the Arrow and Skylancer Sparrow II "proto AMRAAM".

Where is the "Moore law" when you need it ?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,254
Reaction score
1,279
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incdentally...
Then you yet to see the USN Zumwalt the RN Daring (Type 45) or the Swedish Visby classes
This reminds me of people who think the 5th gen aircraft are ugly because they don't look like F-104s or Mirages. I'll take "more effective" over "looks pretty" all day long.
 

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incdentally...
Then you yet to see the USN Zumwalt the RN Daring (Type 45) or the Swedish Visby classes
This reminds me of people who think the 5th gen aircraft are ugly because they don't look like F-104s or Mirages. I'll take "more effective" over "looks pretty" all day long.
Honestly, I think the F-22 looks damn good. Sexy even. The F-35 OTOH...
 

Tzoli

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,200
Reaction score
635
Yes, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-22 are all great looking ones, F-35 is like a one engined chubby F-22.
F-18 is so-so, good plane, effective but retired my favourite carrier plane the F-14.
Gripen, EF-2000, MiG-29, Su-27,35,37,47 PAK-FA are all great looking planes
 

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
I'd say that the Viggen is a pretty good looking plane too
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,070
As of USS Albany:
I think these ships just looked impressive and futuristic with their huge TALOS systems and the Macks and massive bridges. Elegant, no. Svelt, no. Pretty, no. The RN Countys (even with the Seaslug scaffold launcher) were elegant.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,254
Reaction score
1,279
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incdentally...
Then you yet to see the USN Zumwalt the RN Daring (Type 45) or the Swedish Visby classes
This reminds me of people who think the 5th gen aircraft are ugly because they don't look like F-104s or Mirages. I'll take "more effective" over "looks pretty" all day long.
Honestly, I think the F-22 looks damn good. Sexy even. The F-35 OTOH...
5TEHgqR.jpg
 

SSgtC

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jul 13, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
264
Also the embodiment of ugliness, incdentally...
Then you yet to see the USN Zumwalt the RN Daring (Type 45) or the Swedish Visby classes
This reminds me of people who think the 5th gen aircraft are ugly because they don't look like F-104s or Mirages. I'll take "more effective" over "looks pretty" all day long.
Honestly, I think the F-22 looks damn good. Sexy even. The F-35 OTOH...
View attachment 637893
Ok, the X-32 just looks happy to see me
 
Top