HOME | DD

BlastWaves — Defiance-class Heavy Battleship by-nc-nd

#1950s #1952 #battleship #bb #blastwaves #class #crosssection #cutaway #defiance #fictional #fictitious #internal #internals #montana #ship #ships #steampowered #vehicle #vessel #warship #worldwar2 #worldwartwo #ww2 #battle_ship #internalview #cross_section #inside_view #shipcutaway #montanaclassbattleship #montana_class #battleship_cutaway #warship_cutaway #crosssections
Published: 2019-10-13 15:11:13 +0000 UTC; Views: 94413; Favourites: 1042; Downloads: 497
Redirect to original
Description A fictional design for an extremely large and heavily armored battleship, based primarily upon the unbuilt American Montana class of battleships.

This drawing depicts such a ship around 1953, with its anti-aircraft cannons still intact and its aircraft catapults removed for helicopter operations, much like that of the Iowa class battleships used during the Korean War.
---
Defiance-class Heavy Battleship
As the war between the Ostellan Republic and the Esternan Federation between the Atellan ocean intensified, it became apparent that the then currently fielded battleships of the Ostellan Navy (Archer-class, Typhoon-class, and Daring-class battleships) were obsolete by modern warship standards. This was due in part to being strictly limited in their construction by arms control treaties signed after the end of the First World War, despite costly modernization and refit programs to combat these effects. As a result, a program to develop a more modern and capable warship no longer limited by international treaties was quickly put in place. While initially many designers and shipbuilding companies approached the Ostellan government to design the next-generation warship, the Ostellan government and Navy ultimately chose to establish a new, specialized division dubbed the Ostellan Naval Committee of Battleship Research (ONCBR) to both design and build what would become known as the Defiance-class of battleships. By May of 1940 the first design was presented to the Centralized Committee of Ostellan Naval Warfare Research (CCONWR), featuring three triple-mount 15-inch gun turrets, 16 anti-aircraft guns, and four dual-purpose 5-inch cannons. This design would later be modified to have four 15-inch turrets and 18 anti-aircraft guns, and a few weeks later further changed to have 20 anti-aircraft guns and eight dual-purpose 5-inch guns. After a year later and nearly two dozen design iterations later, on June of 1941 a finalized design was presented and approved by the CCONWR for production at the North Superna naval yard, with two vessels being dubbed BB-52 Defiance and BB-53 Triumphant to be constructed. However, materials to actually build the two ships would not become available until December of 1942, as the majority of the steel and manufacturing force was being used in the construction of aircraft-carriers and smaller sized warships. 

Between July 1941 to January 1943, under the supervision of numerous high-ranking Ostellan Navy personnel, several changes would once again be made to the "finalized" design of the Defiance-class battleship. These changes included the refinement and lengthening of its hull, the addition of several dozen 20mm anti-aircraft guns, 16 inch sized cannons for its four main-battery gun turrets, and the addition of two more 5-inch dual-purpose turrets. Multiple changes would also be made to its internal configuration, curiously being the enlargement of the spaces for its Admiral and Captain's quarters, and more luxuriously equipped kitchens and pantries. While these changes would increase the price of both ships substantially, the design would still be approved for production with few complaints from high-ranking Ostellan Navy personnel.

By February of 1943, work had finally begun on constructing the first of the two battleships, though now bearing little resemblance to its 1941 design. Despite having a crew of approximately 8,000 workers continuously working around the clock, the first of the Defiance-class battleships would be launched in late 1947, nearly a year and a half after the end of the war in the Attelan ocean. Due to rather demanding labor and few breaks for its shipbuilders, worker strikes were common at the North Superna naval yard, often leading to week or even month long delays in finishing sections of each vessel. The naval yard also lacked the safety features of most Ostellan Republic shipyards, and as a result worker death or injury was a common occurrence caused usually by either collapsing cranes, falling equipment, debris, or more often than not personnel falling off the sides of the ship or dock walls due to a lack of issued safety harnesses. This would in turn cause more worker strikes and delays, with replacement personnel often choosing not to show up or apply to transfer to a safer, less overbearing shipyard. Despite all of this, the two battleships would continue to be built at the North Superna naval yard, as due to the size of the vessels (292.7 m) the North Superna naval yard was the only available and capable yard in Ostella large enough to both build and service the two warships, as well as keep the price of production relatively affordable. With the end of the war and the continuous worker strikes slowing production, the Ostellan government eventually opted to forcibly transfer personnel from other naval yards in the country to speed up the production of both of ships, nearly tripling the amount of active shipbuilding personnel from 8,000 to 22,000.

After nearly four years of continuous labor and technical difficulties, on December 21st of 1947, the first of the two commissioned battleships, BB-52 Defiance, would be launched from the North Superna naval yard at 9:43 AM. While it would eventually pass its shakedown trials successfully, due to a rather sudden oil shortage, the ship would quickly be sent back to its naval yard in March of 1948 and remain there until early February of 1949. The sister ship of Defiance, BB-53 Triumphant, would never reach full completion due to the 1948 oil shortage and would eventually be scrapped due to the Ostellan Navy ultimately never having the funds to operate more than one Defiance-class battleship at a time.

By the time BB-52 would officially be commissioned into Ostellan Navy service and begin patrol operations in Ostellan territory, the single operational Defiance-class battleship would quickly become obsolete with the developement of guided missiles and more advanced warships built by other countries.

Specifications:
Length (overall): 960 feet 6 inches (292.7 m)
Draft: 35 ft (10.66 m) (full load)
37 ft 9 in (11.51 m) (maximum)
Beam: 115 ft 6 in (35.23 m)
Displacement (standard): 70,000 tonnes
Speed: 31 knots
Complement: 2,633

Armor:
Main belt: 16.7 inches (424 mm)
Lower belt: 7.2–8.5 inches (183–216 mm) inclined 10°
Bulkheads: 18 inches (457 mm) forward, 15.25 inches (387 mm) aft
Barbettes: 21.3 inches (541 mm), 18 inches (457 mm) aft
Turret face: 22.5 inches (572 mm)
Conning tower: 14 in (355 mm)
Decks: 3.36 inches (85 mm), 8 in (203 mm), 0.63–1 inch (16–25 mm)

Armament (1952):
4 × triple 16-inch (406 mm)/50 cal turrets
10 × twin 5-inch (127 mm)/54 cal turrets
26 × quad Marloni 40 mm (1.574 in) anti-aircraft guns
74 × twin 20 mm (0.787 in) Konsa anti-aircraft cannons

Aviation facilities:
2 × aircraft catapults (1947)
4 × helicopters (1949)
Related content
Comments: 125

BlastWaves In reply to ??? [2019-10-15 14:22:23 +0000 UTC]

Cheers!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

r9specter528 In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 23:28:31 +0000 UTC]

No problem.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Rob-Cavanna [2019-10-14 17:07:04 +0000 UTC]

DAAAAAAAAAAAAMN! 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Rob-Cavanna [2019-10-15 00:48:53 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CodyLabs [2019-10-14 15:36:25 +0000 UTC]

Excellent. So detailed. Beautiful. I just wasted about twenty minutes looking though the cross section, it's like a maze down there.

Wait a minute... Is it CEC, Combat Engagement Center, or CIC, Combat Information Center? I always thought it was CIC...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to CodyLabs [2019-10-15 00:48:49 +0000 UTC]

Thank you, Cody! I believe it varies between ships. With the USS Iowa, according to the schematics and most images I could find, it was labeled CEC as opposed to CIC. I think modern ships use the term CIC and older ships CEC, though they both probably mean the exact same thing.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

CodyLabs In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 15:43:54 +0000 UTC]

Interesting. Guess you learn something new everyday.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

runewuff In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 10:54:41 +0000 UTC]

Neat! I always liked cutaway views like that, I could look at them for hours...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to runewuff [2019-10-15 00:48:04 +0000 UTC]

Glad you like it!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

VArtistry In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 08:42:06 +0000 UTC]

Awesome! ☺

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to VArtistry [2019-10-15 00:48:01 +0000 UTC]

Kind thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Farooqbhai007 In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 05:41:43 +0000 UTC]

And with this Blast waves has officially entered the Madmans club .

Yet another masterpiece in the series of masterpieces .

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Farooqbhai007 [2019-10-15 00:47:55 +0000 UTC]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Abey64…

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Aikouku In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 04:10:25 +0000 UTC]

they calleed you a madman..

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Aikouku [2019-10-15 00:47:24 +0000 UTC]

They're not wrong.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Binarygrid [2019-10-14 03:46:40 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Binarygrid [2019-10-15 00:47:18 +0000 UTC]

What about them?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Binarygrid In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 11:22:16 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

darklord86 In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 03:15:33 +0000 UTC]

I want two please!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to darklord86 [2019-10-15 00:47:07 +0000 UTC]

What do you intend to do with them? Launch a full strike on a small island nation?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

darklord86 In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 03:37:50 +0000 UTC]

I haven't decided yet...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Jared1994 [2019-10-14 01:06:29 +0000 UTC]

That is one beautiful battleship!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Jared1994 [2019-10-15 00:46:57 +0000 UTC]

Glad you like it!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Jared1994 In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 01:54:16 +0000 UTC]

Btw, are you gonna do more military-related art? Maybe an aircraft carrier?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Jared1994 [2019-10-15 14:29:29 +0000 UTC]

There will certainly be more of these, and I do plan on making an aircraft carrier in the coming future.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Ghostshrike1 In reply to ??? [2019-10-14 00:43:38 +0000 UTC]

It's regrettable that weapons platforms such as this went the way of the dinosaur.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

BlastWaves In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-15 00:55:18 +0000 UTC]

If only those damned missiles hadn't been invented...

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-14 06:42:44 +0000 UTC]

Don't you like smaller ships using cruise missiles to obliterate things from many miles away?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-14 07:37:57 +0000 UTC]

Nah. Don't get me wrong, that fewer sailors are in danger if a ship is attacked because of smaller ships requiring smaller crews and fire control systems that can identify and destroy incoming ordnance almost before the crew is aware that there's a threat is a good thing. At the same time though the days of battleship duels seem much more human, the actions of the crews, the disposition of each combatant, the weather; all of these mattered. Nowadays it's more a missile's guidance computer versus the target's fire control system, or sometimes just the CIWS device's own on-board computer. It's sterile, like a set-up-and-run simulation but with real bodies.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-14 09:34:07 +0000 UTC]

But the enhanced lethality makes it all the more exhilarating!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-14 20:43:12 +0000 UTC]

Nope. A pair of two-hundred fifty to two-hundred seventy meter long mobile gun platforms, each peopled by thousands of men, lobbing tons of steel-encased explosives at each other until one combatant is incapacitated or sunk is so much cooler. Maybe it's just the case of blueballs from which likely almost every naval history enthusiast of any intensity suffers at having never seen the IJN Yamato and one of the Iowas go at it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-14 23:56:27 +0000 UTC]

I honestly couldn't imagine anything more yawn inducing... Well, besides a certain series of risk analysis lectures delivered by a man who could barely speak English...

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-15 04:00:35 +0000 UTC]

You had one of those too, then? Mine was algebra though.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-15 04:15:04 +0000 UTC]

It was an awfully dreary subject. Didn't even bother with lectures after week two. Learnt about half the course in two days before the final exam and it ended up being my top subject that semester.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-15 08:20:14 +0000 UTC]

I ended up failing twice and eventually dropping out, because as it turns out I'm a horrible mathematician.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-15 08:56:27 +0000 UTC]

Awwww. I tutored mathematics at my old high school not that long ago.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-15 10:01:44 +0000 UTC]

Oh, this was ten years ago or more. I'd do perfectly fine until quadratic equations, then my grades would fall off a cliff. Failed algebra twice, then eventually dropped out of college altogether because there's not much of a future for an aspiring astronomer who can't do basic college level maths.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Brijeka In reply to Ghostshrike1 [2019-10-15 11:04:12 +0000 UTC]

Um quadratics are basic high school stuff...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-15 11:08:32 +0000 UTC]

Not for me. I didn't see them until nearly the end of my junior year, and I barely squeaked by once my class go there. My senior year was spent in geometry, which I can actually do.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BlastWaves In reply to Brijeka [2019-10-15 02:15:07 +0000 UTC]

I think it's worth noting that the Iowa class battleships were eventually equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Ghostshrike1 In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 07:52:05 +0000 UTC]

And harpoons, our answer to the Russian Kirov. It's too bad they were seen as too expensive to keep afloat as the Cold War wound down.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

GethEngineer In reply to ??? [2019-10-13 23:55:46 +0000 UTC]

Beautiful :0

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to GethEngineer [2019-10-15 00:46:54 +0000 UTC]

Cheers!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

GethEngineer In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 15:14:07 +0000 UTC]

Cheers! *drinks water*

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Avarus-Lux In reply to ??? [2019-10-13 20:22:07 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Avarus-Lux [2019-10-15 00:46:51 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! It was pretty time-consuming to make, but I plan on doing more of these in the future with the same multi-view format and definitely more cutaways.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Avarus-Lux In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 06:17:41 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Midway2009 In reply to ??? [2019-10-13 20:12:44 +0000 UTC]

Awesome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlastWaves In reply to Midway2009 [2019-10-15 00:46:22 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Midway2009 In reply to BlastWaves [2019-10-15 00:52:10 +0000 UTC]

you're welcome

👍: 0 ⏩: 0


| Next =>