Shipbucket

I was inspired by by Hoods Sea Slug series, and started to think what about a Type 12 with Sea Slug ? This would give you an potentially all type 12 RN.... (well all the surface escorts at least assuming no 14,DDGs,Tigers..)

My WIP for anybody to advise and critic.

I have the following problems,
- How to fit the Sea Slugs, I have cut the installation to fit with the OTL/AU ones from RN sheet. Does it look ok size wise and will it fit with the bottom corner v engine room (and should I more it forward a bit) ?
- To fit the SS director on stern or bridge ?
- Like the idea of the 3" for AA defence rather than 4.5" leave the older none AA ships to go after NGFS duties but might go 4" DP?
- will recolour to Hoods style later
- Have added a T12 hull to compare mine is slightly longer will that work v engine powers ? (maybe have all the units a bit bigger from the start ?)
- any other comments ?

Ambitious, very ambitious. I'm not wholly certain that you could get away with such an installation, mainly on weight grounds.

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire

Do note that the broad beam leander was an design originating in the use of tartar on board a leander hull. in that case it would replace the main gun.
keeping that in mind, having sea slug on board could have some issues, since that system is much heavier and apart from that, has quite some requirements on ship size and shape. but let's get more into details and look at the issues.

so, thinking aloud.....
- more then one director seems to be clearly impossible
- your helicopter is currently microwaved. in addition, landing on a pad in that position seems hellish to me.
- the engine rooms on board of the leander seem to be laid out as following: boilers from funnels towards mainmast. from the mainmast onwards the turbine rooms reach to the bulkhead also supporting the back of the hangar. this is just aft of the stabiliser position.
- on weight grounds.... do we have any data on sea slug? I do know that the ship you modified the loader from (one of the early county class proposals IIRC) was twice the displacement of an leander, 5400 tons.
- looking at that, I think you'd loose all guns (apart from maybe a 40mm) and will have to accept an 27 or so knots top speed as any growth in powerplant will really fast get you near an Y.102 county class plant.
- as far as I can see in a quick glance trough the missile destroyer chapter in friedmans british destroyers & frigates, the RN wanted an much smaller sea slug ship, but they ended up with the county class. that might say enough about the possibilities of this working, to be honest.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

Agreed not totally convinced it will work without a bigger ship 1/2 way to OTL DDG
Yes one OR other position that might argue for forward director and the pad is cut from OTL Tribal class Hum will have to think about

Thanks for the comments

It also lacks a Type 965 radar...

I would suggest using only the aft director then, as in the other positions the firing arcs of director and launcher differ and thus make the firing arc smaller.
as for the helicopter: you have an very small pad 4 deck levels above the waterline. the pad on the T81 is about the same size, yes, but has no high objects nearby and is only 2-2.5 deck levels above the waterline, making it's movement about half that of that on your ship. you could make the pad larger, let it fill up the entire top of the structure, and it would still be hellish to land on it in anything but a dead calm sea. you will also have a hard time getting torpedo's to that deck, so the potential of the helicopter is severy limited too.
what I just thought off: the aft magazine is quite a bit smaller then you would think here, because there need to be supports and systems under the launcher that will cut at least part of the magazine in half.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

As Ace has pointed out, the RN tried a similar concept and just couldn't get it to work given the weights involved, even for the smaller Tartar system on a Leander hull.

My main criticisms are the same as everyone else's above,; magazine space, helicopter, location of the Type 901 plus the space needed to man this ship and have acceptable habitability. I think 12 missiles would be the maximum that would fit.

I have one crazy idea that might work (but it won't be a Type 12 anymore, and will be heavier and slower), what about a flush-deck hull stretching the forecastle deck all the way aft (or a lowered quarterdeck keeping the launcher where it is now) and giving you another full deck? You could then run the tube magazine forwards from the check room to just aft of the 3in. With two tubes you can go around the uptakes etc. This will deepen the hull and raise the superstructure, you'd need more beam to counter the topweight and the speed would probably drop at least 2-2.5kts and add a hefty amount of tonnage.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft