Battleship of the Future

Whenever people think 'battleship' the first thing that springs to mind is big guns. The second is 12"-16" armour plate. With todays precision cutting tools the big guns are achievable without having to spend too much for infrastructure. However the same cannot be said for producing large thicknesses of armour plate. Nowhere in the world does the infrastructure for producing large slabs of armour plate still exist. It would cost billions in todays money to set up the infrastructure to produce belt armour. Quite frankly why would you want to.

I have done a lot of reading lately on armour. The only large scale armour around today is fitted to tanks. So I have been reading about Chobham, Burlington, Dorchester, Reactive armours, Electric and Explosive versions, all very easy to understand. Each armour type is designed to influence the effect of a hit on the tank by different types of ammunition. Exactly the same type of problem you have with a battleship. There is no doubt that the armour types fitted to tanks could be adapted for use on a battleship scale and would need no more infrastructure than what is already available.

How many types of munitions are available today that will be able to hit and damage a battleship? You have missiles in various modes, ASM, SSM etc. The main damage that can be caused to shipping is still the torpedo. A torpedo still carries the heaviest explosive to the most vulnerable part of a ship, the hull below the waterline. The other munition that could be a problem to battleships in an upscaled version is the depleted uranium shells. From what I have read the armour penetration ability of those shells is quite good.

The sheer size of a battleship allows for different types of armour to be fitted in different places around the ship to achieve different levels of protection for the type of munitions you may expect to hit the ship. A large mouthful of a sentence but it does describe what modern day armour capabilities can do in different places. You have two types of torpedo explosion to take care of. 1 direct contact via the hull side, 2 magnetic exploder that sets off the torpedos explosive underneath the hull. Number one is the same as any other munition hitting the side of the ship and the armouring of the area is built to withstand that type of explosion. Number two is a compression explosion that also uses the ships own weight against itself. A composite armour that flexes to absorb that explosion and returns to its original shape afterwards is now achievable with the armour types available. Something of that nature is probably already on the bottoms of the large US Nuclear carriers as that is the type of attack that they are most vulnerable to. Reading Janes Fighting Ships gives no indication of the levels or types of armour fitted to today carriers and cruisers. For the Ticonderogas all it says is that there is kevlar armour over the vitals.

Rocket Assisted Projectile: is an artillery or cannon round incorporating a rocket motor for independent propulsion. This grants the projectile both greater speed and range than an ordinary shell, which is propelled only by the ballistic force of the gun's exploding charge. Some forms of Rocket Assisted Projectiles can be outfitted with a laser-guide for greater accuracy.

Extended Range Guided Munition was a precision guided rocket-assisted 5-inch (127 mm) artillery shell development by Raytheon for the U.S. Navy.

From what I can find these have been produced for 6.1" / 5" guns. While from other bits and pieces on discussion boards it seems the Des Moisne class had an RAP produced for its 8" and possibly the Iowas had them for their 16".

My forte is not modern day warships so I have no idea if the RADAR and weapon systems I have fitted match each other. Please excuse any errors. I have gone for a gas turbine installation rather than the nuclear route to try to keep the cost of the beast within reason.

Why a mix of big gun and missiles? I have given this ship six 20" guns. Using rocket assisted projectiles to increase the speed and range of the projectiles should mean that whenever a call for fire support arrives the shells should arrive in minutes. Using the longer range Tomahawk cruise missiles could take many more minutes to arrive due to their subsonic speed. The difference between life and death. The projectiles with a 20" diameter would certainly give enough room for whatever electronics may be necessary for any given mission. This could include laser guidance packages where the laser designator would give the arriving shells awesome accuracy.

With a ship this size (1022 x 124 x 34 ft) the sheer amount of weaponry that can be fitted is huge. From the aircraft hangar aft that can house up to 8 aircraft of different types (a selection is shown at the stern of the drawing). VLS missile systems to carry all the different classes available and under development. Anti-missile systems are fitted in the form of the four Phalanx weapon systems plus I think (maybe?) I have fitted a missile and launcher for this as well.

I have fitted an automatic 3" weapon as a low tech solution for CIWS against the likes of the high speed combat boat that is deployed by those countries without the resources to have more capable vessels. The Phalanx is capable of this duty as well but the 3" has a longer range.

The all big gun battleship makes sense with the VLS tubes available to replace the rocket launching systems I have put on the ship above. The VLS fires virtually all of the rockets currently available and those that arent are probably under development to be used by the VLS tube system. This then gives twelve 20" in four triple turrets to fire the rocket assisted projectiles. There is room in the design to add a further 40-50 feet to the end of the ship to increase the hangar size which would increase the number of aircraft carried by three.

I hope I have given the people that follow my Alternate Universe site some things to think about in the way of what could be possible for building a Future Battleship. People say "Why build a dinosaur?". It is because the sheer power of a battleship will always give your enemy pause for thought before he commits the act of war. When you have a battleship parked off your coastline and you are literally staring down the barrels, the first thing you reach for is the toilet paper, the second thing is the peace treaty papers.

All of the above could only be built by a conglomerate of CSA/CUS defence budgets as to build the 5 ships necessary for deployment world wide would be a huge undertaking. Why five?, 1 in Mediterranean, 1 in Persian Gulf, 1 in China sea, 1 working up (Pacific), 1 under refit (Atlantic).

For other countries much reduced ships with greater multi-role abilities would be required as the expense would be beyond most. The battlecruiser below is meant as a ship that the United Kingdom could build to fulfill the role of Fleet Flagship, Shore Support, Long range support, plus other roles.

With the extended flight deck the ship is just on 700 feet, with a beam of 88 feet and draught of 24/25 feet. At standard the ship would be 24,500 tons with a full load displacement of 29,750 tons. Propulsion is modest, 4 shafts Integrated electric propulsion (IEP); 2× Rolls-Royce WR-21 gas turbines, 21.5 MW (28,800 shp) each, 2× Wärtsilä 12V200 diesel generators, 2 MW (2,700 shp) each, 2× Converteam electric motors, 20 MW (27,000 shp) each, wich gives a total of approx 60,000shp for a speed of 24 knots. With the Albion/Ocean types only making 18 knots this ship would be fast enough. The ship is not a monster but carries enough weaponry to be able to fulfill the roles asked of it. Armour is placed to cover the machinery spaces, shell handling rooms and the aircraft refuelling tanks. The UK's favourite 15" guns are fitted to the ship with two twin turrets carried forward.

I had a query on modernising a Vanguard type battleship into the 20th century. I gave a reply and then decided to do an attempt myself using the ideas from the BC Tempest above. A similar armament with the 100 year old 15", ASROC between the funnels, with sonar in the bow, 4x4.5" replacing the 5.25", 5 Phalanx, 2x16 tube launchers for AA missiles, and lastly I have left half a dozen 40mm Bofors that are very good for shredding Zodiacs that the terrorists use against Allied Naval forces. Low tech solution against high tech vessels.