NationStates Jolt Archive

Here it is. Gimme your comments, perhaps I might sell you one.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-10/447411/NewShip.jpg

The Scala Class Battleship

Dimensions
Length(O/A) 1097.44 Ft (334.5m)
Length(W/L) N/A
Beam-hull 108' (32.91m)
Draft 36.7' (11m)

Displacement
Full Load 69,460 tons
Standard 48,540 tons

Propulsion
Boilers 8 Babcock & Wilcox 3 drum express "M" type
fitted with controllable superheat dual furnaces and double uptakes
Turbines 4 sets Manhiem and Briagn geared turbines
Horsepower 275,000 shp
Shafts 4
Endurance N/A
Max Speed 30-32 knts (extreme maximum 35knts)

Protection
Side Belt 14.2" (360.6mm)
Deck 4" (102mm)
Turrets 17" (431.8mm)
Conning Tower 17.5" (444.5mm)

Armament
Main Battery 9x 16.5"/50 cal (3x3)
Secondary 12x 5.1"/45 cal (6x2)
AAW 8x Kashtan CIWS, 2 RAM Launchers, 2 twin SA-N-12 Grizzly launchers [72]
Missles 40 SS-N-26 Yakhont Vertical launch tubes, 36 SS-N-25 Switchblade fired from main guns.

Radars
Air Search MR-800 Voshkod/Top Pair (Top Sail + Big Net), 3D Air
Search radar
Surface Search MR-700 Fregat/Top Steer 3D Air/Surface Search radar or MR-710 Fregat-MA/Top Plate 3D (Admiral Lobov and Varyag)
Navigation 3 Palm Frond Navigation
Fire control Argument/Front Door-C for SS-N-26 Fire Control
Volna/Top Dome for SA-N-12 Fire Control
Kite Screech for 16.5" Fire Control
3 Bass Tilt for Gatling Guns Fire Control
Punch Bowl SATCOM
Sonars MG-332 Tigan-2T/Bull Horn, hull mounted Sonar
Platina/Mare Tail, VDS Sonar

Complement 1700+

Suggested cost: 4.5 Billion a ship.

This ship was developed by Artitsan engineers for a more powerful battleship that can take hits from cruisemissles (if they get through some how) and dish it back out. The 16.5" guns can fire SS-N-25 Switchblade cruisemissles, these small anti-shipping missles are perfect for destroyers, frigates, or even cruisers. The larger and more powerful SS-N-26 Yakhont-4 missles would easily destroy larger surface ships, such as carriers. The Scala uses two different types of CIWS systems. The Kashtan CIWS, with 12 30mm barrels at 12,000 RPMs and accompanied by 8 SAM's, all in one system. The other CIWS would be the RAM launchers, or Rolling Airframe Missles. Both systems provide the best seen defence against anti-shipping cruisemissles and air attacks. Well worth the projected costs.

*shakes fist at whoever didn't go into detail*

One, please, if you're selling them now. *money wired upon confirm*

alright, have your one! *sends ship over after money is sent*

It's sad how people dont read the posts. -Glares at CoreWorlds-

I would remind you it says SUGGESTED retail price.

psst... Attican, do you think its lookin good?

Most ships can take multiple hits from modern anti-ship missiles before going down already. If this ship has armor equal to or greater than that of WWII-era battleships, modern antiship missiles would likely not even penetrate the armor, and thus it would really only be vulnerable to hits on the deck/bridge etc. The low profile is good. You really shouldn't be trying to launch missiles out of 16.5" guns... that's what VLS cells are for. Your big guns ought to launch shells, which are perfect for shore bombardment and close range (within ~ 40 miles) anti-ship combat. The CIWS systems are good, though you might want to specify what caliber the gun component of the CIWS is (commonly 20mm or 30mm).

For more info, go to Clan Smoke Jaguar's excellent thread on ship designs. I'll post a link in a moment. You really ought to read what he has to say.

Why are you using Boilers?

baleted.

EDIT - Whoops, looks like you've already checked the thread. Still, I'll leave the addy in case other aspiring ship builders need info.


This is CSJ's excellent thread I referenced earlier. Really full of info on ways to improve your ship designs. I would reccomend a thorough read to all ship manufacturers.

http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=94873&highlight=ships

Most ships can take multiple hits from modern anti-ship missiles before going down already. If this ship has armor equal to or greater than that of WWII-era battleships, modern antiship missiles would likely not even penetrate the armor, and thus it would really only be vulnerable to hits on the deck/bridge etc. The low profile is good. You really shouldn't be trying to launch missiles out of 16.5" guns... that's what VLS cells are for. Your big guns ought to launch shells, which are perfect for shore bombardment and close range (within ~ 40 miles) anti-ship combat. The CIWS systems are good, though you might want to specify what caliber the gun component of the CIWS is (commonly 20mm or 30mm).

For more info, go to Clan Smoke Jaguar's excellent thread on ship designs. I'll post a link in a moment. You really ought to read what he has to say.

The Kashtan CIWS, with 12 30mm barrels at 12,000 RPMs

There ya go.
Also, goto page three of that thread. See if you see anything familiar. Perhaps the stats to this ship and the corresponding responses :P.

Thanks ThirtyCaliber, your input was appriated. I wanted the cruisemissles from the guns because shells can only go so far, but perhaps I'll take your advice on it. The armour is actually greater than alot of the WWII class battleships. Everybody assumes Battleships are outdated due to their size and guns, but the fact not much can touch em, makes them gods in my book.

Why are you using Boilers?

;) export versions would not be sold with Nuclear reactors would they? Besides in the long run, non-nuclear means are more cost-efficiant, and are not as tempermental.

Well... you COULD sell two versions - nuclear and boiler. The nuclear one would not come with fuel, even if it did, it wouldn't be military grade, so no biggy.

Well... you COULD sell two versions - nuclear and boiler. The nuclear one would not come with fuel, even if it did, it wouldn't be military grade, so no biggy.
I suppose. But you should read the CSJ thread. It'll explain the disadvantages of nuclear propulsion, and the advantages of conventional.

Ok, who voted no.

It's sad how people dont read the posts. -Glares at CoreWorlds-

I would remind you it says SUGGESTED retail price.

I said IF he was selling them, and it seems he is selling them now! *money wired*

bump

Artitsa - all of his complaints against Nuclear Propulsion only are based in the real world. The cost of nuclear fuel in the real world is based on how much the producers are willing to sell. For instance, my nation has a mountain range that has Uranium that I can mine. Therefore, uranium is cheap. Expense depends on one's economic strength. Also, the turbines on nuclear powered craft in real life were not designed for their use. Most were designed for conventional craft, but the US navy was too cheap to design specialty ones

Perhaps, PERHAPS I shall make a nuclear export version

OOC: to make it real cool, only sell them realistically, like, limited production, and no storefront, only deals with other nations...

Also, the turbines on nuclear powered craft in real life were not designed for their use. Most were designed for conventional craft, but the US navy was too cheap to design specialty ones

You know, because the USN is too cheap to spend a could $1000 more to pay the engineers to design a nuclear worthy propeller on their $4 000 000 000 ship...

Oops, I voted for the wrong thing. Subract one yes.

never! Nianacio I'll never let you live it down.

Hey! For all you know, I meant to vote for the second yes!