forum.worldofwarships.eu
Actually Italian Navy's archives are open for public and completely free, you just have to take an appointment. The prospect of finding there private export proposals is quite slim but for official RM projects (like the discussed AA conversion proposals) it's where you want to go.
Ufficio Storico della Marina - Marina Militare
Sito ufficiale della Marina Militare Italianawww.marina.difesa.it
www.deviantart.com
I have GOT to start on this one. Too good not to make in 1/1200.I've drawn this cruiser design some time ago together with tow other hypothetical versions as requested, but the first darker coloured is the original based on the data Stefano provided to me.
Ansaldo Big Gun Cruiser Design for Russia by Tzoli on DeviantArt
Judging by stern, superstructure, funnel and AA guns disposition it seems a fictional design. In mid '30 between the first and the second Littorio's pair, Italian navy had a great interest in small battleships but the picture you posted is very different from any proposal I know. Here are some official Italian small BB designs for a comparison
(Note that it is easy to draw those many curved surfaced the Italians are so fond of.... )
Yep, this is my old alternate history design, made for an article on Russian alternate history forum. It's not real.
ceccherini
Can you post all your info on these pre Littorio designs? I had these drawings for many years though in smaller quality but I lack the actual data on them. And I've been considering drawing these for some time. I have too few Italian drawings in my disposal
I can only add to the excellent Phoenix_jz's post that also there were some studies for lightly protected but very fast Battlecruisers, one armed with 8 16" guns. The aim of these studies was mainly political, it was an effort to demonstrate that more Littorios were the most cost effective solution and that Littorio size was the very minimum to obtain balanced capabilities. Also the official report of these studies recommended not to built ships significantly larger than Littorio because, while the technical capabilities to built them were positively assessed, only an handful were in the realm of Italian economic possibilities. So Littorios were the perfect choice to hope to compete in the arms race. A very detailed article with many more photos is contained in the March 2012 issue of the magazine Storia Militare. If you are willing to try to understand Italian you can order a copy http://www.edizionistoriamilitare.it/html/2012.htmlceccherini
Can you post all your info on these pre Littorio designs? I had these drawings for many years though in smaller quality but I lack the actual data on them. And I've been considering drawing these for some time. I have too few Italian drawings in my disposal
Note, as ceccherini said, these aren't 'pre'-Littorio designs.
All barring the first attachment are from the 1935 Maricominav studies for 26,500-tonne battleship. I can give some background, though I don't have much in the way of detailed statistics;
In the run up to the London Conference (which resulted in the London Naval Treaty of 1936), initial proposals suggested displacement limits of 25-27,000 tons and 305mm to 330mm guns, which were either in agreement or not opposed between the British, French, and Italians. This ultimately failed, but while it existed as a potential option the Ship Design Committee (Comitato Progetti Navi/Maricominav) began exploring contingency options.
Starting in September 1935, these were feasibility for battleships of 26,500 tons standard displacement, with an armament of 305mm or 320mm guns. Presented to the Admiral's Committee in early 1936, the preference that resulted was for a ship of;
In a meeting on 6 February 1936, Maricominav determined that such a design would require a tonnage increase to 30,000 tons - just as the initially 35,000-ton Littorio had already expanded to 38,500 tons by this point. If the design was to remain within 27,000 tons, it would be necessary to either reduce the top speed to 28 knots, or adopt the same quadruple arrangement of the Dunkerque-class (and thus only eight guns).
- 27,000 tons standard
- Armor Protection as that of the Littorio-class
- Top speed of 30 knots
- Range of 4,000 nm at 20 knots, with potential room for growth in the context of oceanic deployment
- 9x320/44 (3x3)
- 12-16x 120-140mm guns in Triples or Quads (4x3, 3x4, 4x4)
- 12x 90mm guns + light AA calibers
Ultimately, though, these efforts were largely ended after March 1936. The Ship Design Committee's initial conclusion on the matter of the 27,000-ton (or 30,000-ton) battleship was that Italy should not willingly choose to adopt battleships of 'medium' displacement unless this was enforced by international treaties, and that the preferable solution would be to continue the construction of battleships like the Littorio-class. At the conclusion of the 2nd London Naval Treaty, no reduction in battleship displacement had been introduced, and as such the effort was ended.
I can only add to the excellent Phoenix_jz's post that also there were some studies for lightly protected but very fast Battlecruisers, one armed with 8 16" guns. The aim of these studies was mainly political, it was an effort to demonstrate that more Littorios were the most cost effective solution and that Littorio size was the very minimum to obtain balanced capabilities. Also the official report of these studies recommended not to built ships significantly larger than Littorio because, while the technical capabilities to built them were positively assessed, only an handful were in the realm of Italian economic possibilities. So Littorios were the perfect choice to hope to compete in the arms race. A very detailed article with many more photos is contained in the March 2012 issue of the magazine Storia Militare. If you are willing to try to understand Italian you can order a copy http://www.edizionistoriamilitare.it/html/2012.htmlceccherini
Can you post all your info on these pre Littorio designs? I had these drawings for many years though in smaller quality but I lack the actual data on them. And I've been considering drawing these for some time. I have too few Italian drawings in my disposal
Note, as ceccherini said, these aren't 'pre'-Littorio designs.
All barring the first attachment are from the 1935 Maricominav studies for 26,500-tonne battleship. I can give some background, though I don't have much in the way of detailed statistics;
In the run up to the London Conference (which resulted in the London Naval Treaty of 1936), initial proposals suggested displacement limits of 25-27,000 tons and 305mm to 330mm guns, which were either in agreement or not opposed between the British, French, and Italians. This ultimately failed, but while it existed as a potential option the Ship Design Committee (Comitato Progetti Navi/Maricominav) began exploring contingency options.
Starting in September 1935, these were feasibility for battleships of 26,500 tons standard displacement, with an armament of 305mm or 320mm guns. Presented to the Admiral's Committee in early 1936, the preference that resulted was for a ship of;
In a meeting on 6 February 1936, Maricominav determined that such a design would require a tonnage increase to 30,000 tons - just as the initially 35,000-ton Littorio had already expanded to 38,500 tons by this point. If the design was to remain within 27,000 tons, it would be necessary to either reduce the top speed to 28 knots, or adopt the same quadruple arrangement of the Dunkerque-class (and thus only eight guns).
- 27,000 tons standard
- Armor Protection as that of the Littorio-class
- Top speed of 30 knots
- Range of 4,000 nm at 20 knots, with potential room for growth in the context of oceanic deployment
- 9x320/44 (3x3)
- 12-16x 120-140mm guns in Triples or Quads (4x3, 3x4, 4x4)
- 12x 90mm guns + light AA calibers
Ultimately, though, these efforts were largely ended after March 1936. The Ship Design Committee's initial conclusion on the matter of the 27,000-ton (or 30,000-ton) battleship was that Italy should not willingly choose to adopt battleships of 'medium' displacement unless this was enforced by international treaties, and that the preferable solution would be to continue the construction of battleships like the Littorio-class. At the conclusion of the 2nd London Naval Treaty, no reduction in battleship displacement had been introduced, and as such the effort was ended.
I'm sorry but have only my own copy and no particular connection with the magazine. I can only suggest to order a copy at the link I posted.
Ok. Thanks, Sir.
stefsap.wordpress.com
Again, these designs exercised no influence on Littorio's design for the simple fact they came two full years after Littorio's finalization. We are talking about a generic concept study so there are few data because few data were required and produced during the study.Even stefano did not give more info on these except what influenced the Littorio, Design 4 proposed by General Isacco Umberto Pugliese: 3x3 320mm 4x4 or 4x3 140mm which I think would be changed to 135mm to remain constant with the Andrea Doria class and 12x1 90mm.
Admiral Vincenzo De Feo's proposal (Design 3) would be full diesel propelled
The 1935 Maricominav nine studies for a 26.500 t. battleship
After the Marine Nationale announced the Dunkerque, and in the context of the still going discussions on a possible international naval agreement, Regia Marina started a study on what was defined a…
Sure there are many unaccounted Italian projects, we have practically no known designs of large battleship except for those actually built and some export designs. But one must remember Italian navy was basically disbanded and rebuilt 4 different time in less than 3 years and Italy was the a land battlefront for almost two years. I really hope we will find something someday but actually it is really possible that the bulk of the documents was simply destroyed or lost.
I would not count just the few years of WW2 but rather the entire 20th century for warship projects.
