NationStates Jolt Archive


Abu Sufyan class cruiser

Ottoman Khaif
27-12-2004, 19:09
Abu Sufyan class cruiser


General information

Designed by Red Star Industries (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=355581) ship designers to satisfy a requirement laid down by the nation of Ottoman Khaif.


General statistics

Displacement: 8,500 tonnes standard, 12,470 tonnes laden
Length: 207.6m
Beam: 21.7m
Draught: 4.8m

Crew: 823 (61 officers, 740 OR) plus marines (2 officers, 32 OR)

Range: 4,500Km at 36 knots, 8,000Km at 16 knots.
Bunkerage: 1,400 tonnes oil in triple bottom.


Armament

Gunnery: Four DK-79A 8in (203mm) guns (2x2)
Eleven Goalkeeper 30mm CIWS units

Missiles: 186 Mk41 VLS cells, capable of accommodating:
BGM-109 Tomahawk (1),
ESSM SAM (4),
SM-2 SAM (2),
or RUR-5A ASROC (1).

Aircraft: One SH-60R Seahawk helicopter and two Predator UAVs.


Protection

Armour: Hull armoured with 60mm composite, 20mm cement, 40mm void space underwater belt and 50mm composite, 30mm cement belt from waterline to weather deck. Deck receives 45mm kevlar armour and 10mm cement layer.

Magazines and missile tubes provided with 50mm kevlar armour.

Other: Magazines and missile tubes surrounded by water jackets to minimise fire risk.

Shell hoists fitted with triple interlocking doors.

Missile hatches act as blowout panels.


Electronics

Radar: AN/SPS-49 Air Search
AN/SPS-55 Surface Search
AN/SPG-51D Missile control radar

Sonar: AN/SQS-56 MF bow-mounted sonar
AN/SQS-35 IVDS

EW: AN/SLY-2 IEWS


Miscellaneous

"Nixie" torpedo decoy and Prarie/Makser system fitted.


Propulsion

Boilers: Six high-pressure boilers.
Drive: Two sets direct-driver steam turbines.
Propellers: Two bronze variable-pitch.


Compartmentation

1) Sonar dome, accommodation, galleys, leisure areas, fuel tanks.
2) Forward VLS battery A.
3) Forward VLS battery B.
4) A turret and magazines.
5) Emergency control station, forward CIWS magazines.
6) Boiler room.
7) Turboalternators and main turbines.
8) Low-pressure turbines and batteries.
9) X turret and magazines.
10) After CIWS magazines.
11) After VLS battery 1.
12 After VLS battery 2.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v504/Ottoman01/takaoMod.jpg
The Freethinkers
27-12-2004, 20:39
Not a bad design, but has a significant number of problems.

1) Displacement is way too low. You do actually probably need to add another 2-3000 tons at least, especially when the limited armouring is taken into account.

2) 36 kts I take as the highest speed. Whilst not too bad compared to some, I do struggle to see how, with not the greatest hull shape, traditional shafts and oil(?) driven engines that anything above thirty would really be possible.

3) The missile positioning should be brought back closer to the super-structure, currently the length of the VLS would block entirely access to the bow and stern on several levels, and being so near to the sides also makes them very vulnurable to a side-impact from a missile.

4) Some more investment into anti-submarine armament and systems should be made.
Ottoman Khaif
27-12-2004, 20:45
Not a bad design, but has a significant number of problems.

1) Displacement is way too low. You do actually probably need to add another 2-3000 tons at least, especially when the limited armouring is taken into account.

2) 36 kts I take as the highest speed. Whilst not too bad compared to some, I do struggle to see how, with not the greatest hull shape, traditional shafts and oil(?) driven engines that anything above thirty would really be possible.

3) The missile positioning should be brought back closer to the super-structure, currently the length of the VLS would block entirely access to the bow and stern on several levels, and being so near to the sides also makes them very vulnurable to a side-impact from a missile.

4) Some more investment into anti-submarine armament and systems should be made.
Thanks for the help,I'll do the changes to the hull to impove the system.
DontPissUsOff
30-12-2004, 20:58
Not a bad design, but has a significant number of problems.

1) Displacement is way too low. You do actually probably need to add another 2-3000 tons at least, especially when the limited armouring is taken into account.

2) 36 kts I take as the highest speed. Whilst not too bad compared to some, I do struggle to see how, with not the greatest hull shape, traditional shafts and oil(?) driven engines that anything above thirty would really be possible.

3) The missile positioning should be brought back closer to the super-structure, currently the length of the VLS would block entirely access to the bow and stern on several levels, and being so near to the sides also makes them very vulnurable to a side-impact from a missile.

4) Some more investment into anti-submarine armament and systems should be made.

Fixed the displacement; was having to go off the original Takao as a rough guide, and didn't figure in just how much mass those missiles havem evidently.

Fixed the speed, which was a hangover from when I originally typed it and had nuclear propulsion or CONAS in mind.

Altered the missile positioning. The proximity of the cells to the sides is a problem, I agree, but I take (IC at least) the Soviet view that it's best to chuck as much firepower onto the hull as you can and hope you can hit them before they hit you.

Finally, ASW systems: OK specified no torpedo armament, and I'm not sure whether the USN has a system equivalent to the RBU-6000 (any info in this area very much appreciated).
The Freethinkers
31-12-2004, 02:04
Well, missiles, the VLS itself, the internal bracing, the armour, the support for that and the additional bulkheads all add up.

You would need a nuclear plant (or a very advanced gas turbine arrangement AND propulsor or water-jet based propulsion units, given the engines and shape displayed) to be hitting 36 knots. The revision is good though.

Yeah, but in NS having reasonable levels of survivability is a necessity rather than a luxury. That Soviet view will not see you last very long in the here and now.

I don't believe the USN ever deployed weapons of that sort much after WWII. There some European vessels that did carry ASW mortars though, I believe Bofors manufactured a six-barrel 375mm version, though I can;t be sure.
DontPissUsOff
31-12-2004, 02:13
I just realised I didn't actually show the new spec for it. Not a smart move. Here ye go:

New specs (with apologies to OK)

Pic: http://img159.exs.cx/img159/1783/takaomod19kf.jpg

General statistics

Displacement: 11,800 tonnes standard, 16,270 tonnes laden
Length: 207.6m
Beam: 21.7m
Draught: 4.8m

Crew: 823 (61 officers, 740 OR) plus marines (2 officers, 32 OR)

Top speed: 32 knots.
Best cruise speed: 15-16 knots.
Range: 4,500Km at 32 knots, 8,000Km at 16 knots.
Bunkerage: 1,400 tonnes oil in triple bottom.


Armament

Gunnery: Two DK-79A 8in (203mm) guns (2x2)
Eleven Goalkeeper 30mm CIWS units

Missiles: 192 Mk41 VLS cells

(Rest omitted due to irrelevance here)

Regarding the survivability thing, I know what you mean. I'm no Fisherite in RL - in fact I'm of the view he was one of the worst things that ever happend to the Royal Navy, with all that rot about "speed is armour" and "there is nothing that can be done by the battleship that cannot be done by a first-class armoured cruiser" - but IC a hefty Soviet influence over the plast 35 years in DPUO has resulted in a lot of Gorshkov's ideas entering the nation, alone with Soviet construction and design methods.