"Ultimate battleship" designs

[awhalen61]

Not really.

1. That's a very small flight deck to work from, it looks even smaller than a Bogue's 440ft flight deck. So maybe you're carrying 24x aircraft.
2. The turret shape looks like 14" guns, not 16".
3. The flight deck amidships means that the armored citadel/raft is much bigger than the Iowa or maybe the Montana. Which means that it's very heavy, probably accounting for the extra beam.
4. It appears to be too wide to travel through the Panama Canal, which is a major operational limitation.
5. 6x shafts means rather immense fuel consumption.

Your conclusion is correct in that the ship was useless, but they were 16"/45s, and Gibbs designed the ship to try and sell it to the Soviets, so the Panama Canal limitation doesn't matter as much.

 

[Tzoli]

Not really.

1. That's a very small flight deck to work from, it looks even smaller than a Bogue's 440ft flight deck. So maybe you're carrying 24x aircraft.
2. The turret shape looks like 14" guns, not 16".
3. The flight deck amidships means that the armored citadel/raft is much bigger than the Iowa or maybe the Montana. Which means that it's very heavy, probably accounting for the extra beam.
4. It appears to be too wide to travel through the Panama Canal, which is a major operational limitation.
5. 6x shafts means rather immense fuel consumption.

I do not have the raw data at hand but will post later but:
1. It is not small, the entire hull is around 300m long
2. It is 16" turrets just maybe using the older guns Marks 1-3
3. Yes it IS heavy around 60-70.000tons standard displacememt but I don't see the issue here
4. It is true that it is an American design with American equipment but it is offered to the Soviets so the Panama Canal is irrelevant also do you remember the Montana class?
5. How would shaft number translate to fuel consumption? Shaft number correlates to engine power with a max value in this era of 40-50.000shp per shaft.

 

[Tzoli]

The BBCV version posted was the Gibbs & Cox Design B / Project 1058.1 from 1937
Dimensions: 298,7 (wl) x 306,32 (oa) 39,01 x 10,46 meters
Displacement: 61.840tons (standard), 74.000tons (full load)
Engines: 300.000shp Steam Turbines engines, 6 shafts
Speed: 63km/h (34knots)
Range: 53.700km (29.000nm)
Armour: 330mm Belt, 121mm Deck
Armaments:
4x3 16"/45 (406mm/45) Mark 6 Cannons (likely)
14x2 5"/38 (127mm/38) Mark 12 Guns,
8x4 28mm/75 Mark 1 AA Guns,
12x1 12,7mm/90 M2 Browning AA Guns
36x Aircrafts

There were 2 other BBCV designs offered/developed:
Gibbs & Cox Design A / Project 1058 from 1937
Dimensions: 297,18 (wl) x 304,8 (oa) 38,4 x 10,46 meters
Displacement: 56.000tons (standard), 69.000tons (full load)
Engines: 300.000shp Steam Turbines engines, 6 shafts
Speed: 63km/h (34knots)
Range: 53.700km (29.000nm)
Armour: 330mm Belt, 121mm Deck
Armaments:
4x2 18"/47 (457mm/47) Mark A Cannons (likely)
14x2 5"/38 (127mm/38) Mark 12 Guns,
6x4 28mm/75 Mark 1 AA Guns,
10x1 12,7mm/90 M2 Browning AA Guns
36x Aircrafts

Gibbs & Cox Design C / Project 1058.2 from 1937/38
Dimensions: 249,94 (wl) x 257,55 (oa) 35,96 x 10,16 meters
Displacement: 46.520tons (standard), 58.200tons (full load)
Engines: 200.000shp Steam Turbines engines, 4 shafts
Speed: 57km/h (31knots)
Range: 29.600km (14.400nm)
Armour: 330mm Belt, 121mm Deck
Armaments:
1x4,2x3 16"/45 (406mm/45) Mark 6 Cannons (likely)
10x2 5"/38 (127mm/38) Mark 12 Guns,
8x4 28mm/75 Mark 1 AA Guns,
12x1 12,7mm/90 M2 Browning AA Guns
24x Aircrafts

Note the full BB version the Gibbs & Cox Design D / Project 1058.3 from 1938/39
Dimensions: 249,97 (wl) x 257,55 (oa) 34,59 x 10,16 meters
Displacement: 45.000tons (standard), 53.680tons (full load)
Engines: 200.000shp Steam Turbines engines, 4 shafts
Speed: 57km/h (31knots)
Range: 29.600km (14.400nm)
Armour: 330mm Belt, 127mm Deck
Armaments:
1x4,2x3 16"/45 (406mm/45) Mark 6 Cannons (likely)
10x2 5"/38 (127mm/38) Mark 12 Guns,
4x4 28mm/75 Mark 1 AA Guns,
10x1 12,7mm/90 M2 Browning AA Guns
4x Aircrafts

 

[Scott Kenny]

The BBCV version posted was the Gibbs & Cox Design B / Project 1058.1 from 1937
Dimensions: 298,7 (wl) x 306,32 (oa) 39,01 x 10,46 meters
Displacement: 61.840tons (standard), 74.000tons (full load)
Engines: 300.000shp Steam Turbines engines, 6 shafts
Speed: 63km/h (34knots)
Range: 53.700km (29.000nm)
Armour: 330mm Belt, 121mm Deck
Armaments:
4x3 16"/45 (406mm/45) Mark 6 Cannons (likely)
14x2 5"/38 (127mm/38) Mark 12 Guns,
8x4 28mm/75 Mark 1 AA Guns,
12x1 12,7mm/90 M2 Browning AA Guns
36x Aircrafts

Which means it has a ~100m flight deck, even shorter than a Bogue. So I'd really like to see how they planned on stuffing 36x aircraft into that space. 12 on deck plus two hangars?

 

[Tzoli]

If I only take a rectangular shape for the hanger eg between the 5" twin turrets that means 83x25 meters (The flight deck triangular extensions are adding another 17m aft and 22m forward size for a total length of 122 meters for the flight deck)
The hanger area for one level should be 2.075m^2 plus the aft triangular section's area of around 212m^2
The Bogue had a flight deck of 133,1 x 24,4m and a hanger of 79.6 x 18.9 x 5.3m for an area of 1.504m^2

Even with one hanger level that would be enough for 36 aircrafts (Bogue carried 30)

 

[donnyjie]

Note the full BB version the Gibbs & Cox Design D / Project 1058.3 from 1938/39

Design D should be Project 10901

From Warship International 2021

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27200868

 

[Yellow Palace]

Design D should be Project 10901

Likely both. It would be normal for the design house to have a project number, and for the customer to have a project number. If the two are the same, it's a coincidence of the highest order.