Royal Navy missile battleships

A variation with Regulus missiles stored in two hangars (two per each) at the side of rear funnel:

1733769881425.png 1733769907069.png 1733769927492.png


The missiles are essentially "Regumace" - they are Regulus-I missiles equipped with MGM-13 Mace-A ATRAN low-altitude navigation system (or its close British analogue). They are equipped with Orange Herald Small (30-inch version) boosted fusion 800-kiloton warheads
 
A suggestion only. 1950s RN ships still used lattice masts for their bedstead radars. Might give a period feel like the Battle class radar pickets.
 
uk 75 said:
A suggestion only. 1950s RN ships still used lattice masts for their bedstead radars. Might give a period feel like the Battle class radar pickets.
Click to expand...
Hm. You are right, I based the mast on Tiger's helicopter refit and didn't pay much attention to this detail (I assumed that it was merely a design choice) but after your words I checked the images. I'll try to redo the mast probably. Thank you for advice!
 
Dilandu said:
A variation with Regulus missiles stored in two hangars (two per each) at the side of rear funnel
Click to expand...
I'm not sure the elevating cradles for the missiles would be where you're showing them. At least on the US Regulus subs, the stowage cradle was also the launch cradle, so you'd just roll the missile out into the open, aim it more or less across the ship to avoid burning the paint off while the jet starts, and let fly.

It'd probably end up with a small piece of cooled and polished steel going from the inboard tracks to outboard. Well, maybe not polished, and probably stainless since any launches would burn the paint off, but still.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm not sure the elevating cradles for the missiles would be where you're showing them. At least on the US Regulus subs, the stowage cradle was also the launch cradle, so you'd just roll the missile out into the open, aim it more or less across the ship to avoid burning the paint off while the jet starts, and let fly.
Click to expand...
Hm. I oriented more on cruiser launchers, where missiles were placed on outboard platforms:

1733776875211.png

I assumed, that it was done to avoid deck damage by the boosters blast?
 
Dilandu said:
My mistake then( I sincerely thought that they were concerned about booster messing up with deck.

Thank you for the infromation! Seems I would need to remake this part ASAP.
Click to expand...
I mean, if that's where the original spotter plane catapults were located, then it's an easy reuse. Just like the cruisers.

But if the plane catapults were elsewhere, then I'd go with the submarine solution.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I mean, if that's where the original spotter plane catapults were located, then it's an easy reuse. Just like the cruisers.

But if the plane catapults were elsewhere, then I'd go with the submarine solution.
Click to expand...
The catapult (singular, but double-ended) on the KING GEORGE V class was in the depicted location at deck level, with the hangars forward and inboard of 5.25-inch mounts P2 and S2, rather than aft as shown in the proposed reconstruction.

1024px-Mus%C3%A9e_des_mod%C3%A8les_r%C3%A9duits_pic-017.JPG


The_Royal_Navy_during_the_Second_World_War_A3631.jpg


The_Royal_Navy_during_the_Second_World_War_A3868.jpg
 
Yellow Palace said:
The catapult (singular, but double-ended) on the KING GEORGE V class was in the depicted location at deck level, with the hangars forward and inboard of 5.25-inch mounts P2 and S2, rather than aft as shown in the proposed reconstruction.
Click to expand...
Okay, then I'd strongly suggest using the US submarine style launch/carry cradles, since that saves a step of needing to load the missile from the carry cradle onto the launch unit. Now you're just rolling the missile out of the hangar and into the launch position, Probably a 5-10min operation. IIRC the sub cradle also has a rotating section built into it so you don't even need a turntable in the deck.

remove the existing catapult rails but leave the exposed steel amidships, let that be the spot the exhaust hits on the deck.
 
Nelson class type ships are best---lots of standard missile boxes or something in the bow, maybe big fin Talos type missile rails in the stern for wider assets--no guns.
 
publiusr said:
Nelson class type ships are best---lots of standard missile boxes or something in the bow, maybe big fin Talos type missile rails in the stern for wider assets--no guns.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, but by missile era Nelson's were old and completely worn-out; one of them was basically unable to go to sea due to massive leaks, and the other one wasn't much better. Even if we assume that they got the major refit in late 1930s, it's very hard to think a scenario in which they would be chosen for any kind of missile refit in 1950s.
 
Okay, I redone the missile arrangement:

* Changed the craddle to recemble more the one on submarines (as far as I could understood it)
* Changed the rails into two-rail set per missile (and rotary circle for each pair)
* Moved the missile launch position inboard (probably would require some deck marking, but I'm frankly not sure)

1734026618182.png


I decided against re-making the rear mast into lattice one. I tried... and it just looked bad( Maybe I'll try another time.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom