Shipbucket

No, I believe that Montana’s career would have paralleled that of the Iowa’s so I’ll proceed accordingly.
I’ll begin the series with USS Montana (BB-67) as commissioned.

General characteristics (Design BB67-4)
Displacement:
63,221 long tons (64,240 t) (standard); 70,965 long tons (72,104 t) (full load)
Length:
921 ft 3 in (280.80 m)[2] oa
890 ft 0 in (271.27 m)[2] pp
Beam: 121 ft 2 in (36.93 m)
Draft: 36 ft 0 in (10.97 m)
Installed power: 8 × Babcock & Wilcox 2-drum express type boilers powering 4 sets of Westinghouse geared steam turbines 4 × 43,000 hp (32 MW)[2] – 172,000 hp (128 MW) total power
Propulsion:
4 × shafts
2 × rudders
Speed: 28 kn (32 mph; 52 km/h) maximum
Range: 15,000 nmi (17,300 mi; 27,800 km) at 15 kn (17 mph; 28 km/h)
Complement:
Standard: 2,355
Flagship: 2,789
Armament:
12 × 16-inch (406 mm)/50 cal Mk 7 guns
20 × 5-inch (127 mm)/54 cal Mark 16 guns
10–40 × Bofors 40 mm anti-aircraft guns
56 × Oerlikon 20 mm anti-aircraft cannons
Armor:
Main belt: 16.1 inches (409 mm) inclined 19°
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)
Decks: 2.25 inches (57 mm), 7.05–7.35 inches (179–187 mm), 0.63–1 inch (16–25 mm)
Aircraft carried: 3–4 × Vought OS2U Kingfisher/Curtiss SC Seahawk floatplanes
Aviation facilities: 2 × aft catapults for launch of seaplanes

USS Montana (BB-67) 1945-1949:


In 1952 with beginning of the Korean War the US Navy reactivated the Iowas and the Montana. Their 20mm Oerlikons and several 40mm Bofors were removed as they were rendered obsolete against jet aircraft. A refit of their Electronics was also required.

USS Montana (BB-67) 1952-1955:


With the advent of war in Viet Nam the services of US battleships (at least New Jersey and Montana) was once again required. The remaining Bofors were remover and their electronics suites once again updated

USS Montana (BB-67) 1968-1969:


In 1984, as a part of President Reagan’s 600-ship navy, Montana and New Jersey were reactivated. Montana was recomissioned in 1987. Her electronics were broth up to date along with her weapons.
She was outfitted with four standard Mk-141 quad Harpoon missile launchers and ten 8-cell (80 cells) Mk-41 VLS modules, as well as four 25 mm M242 Bushmaster chain gun 25 mm.

USS Montana (BB-6 7) 1987-1990:

_________________
My Avatar is
French Vice-admiral Louis-René-Madeleine Le Vassor de La Touche, comte de Tréville
The original spelling of my last name is: LaTouche.

The first Mk 41 VLS was operational in 1986, so this ship would have been fitted as one of the first with the Mk 41 VLS. Seems unlikely, as the Iowa's at that time received the Armoured box launchers. The Iowa's also had most of the gun tubs for their anti-aircraft guns removed, to allow for space for their new superstructures on which the ABL's, phalanxes, ECM systems, decoy launchers and harpoon launchers would be fitted. Most of the removal of these tubs, according to the iowa class shipbucket drawings, happened already in the 1960's. The Iowa's also did not retain all their searchlights, and received various ECM and decoy systems over the years which you have decided to all ignore.
So no, whatever you have drawn as 'progression', this is not an montana class that would have resulted when it followed a similar life as the Iowa's did.

Btw, You chose to retain your boat cranes but you gave your boats davids so the cranes are no longer needed.

And we have an quite a bit better looking Seahawk and harpoon launcher with less black pixel blobs on them.

And last but not least, your aft funnel is not build to support that mast that way in the 1952 and 1968 refits, your harpoons are literally burning your liferafts which are in not a great position anyways (the iowa's also never used that kind of liferafts IIRC), your C turret has a very limited firing arc due to literal fuel lines being in it's blast radius when turned a bit too far sideways in the 1987 refit, you removed all liferafts in 1968 without replacement.

I think you worked a bit too quickly here. All these don't really.... work.

_________________
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

Also, the SH-60 Seahawk should not be on the 1968 drawing.. far too early for the Seahawk.

I like the concept and think once the details are ironed out it will look good.

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

Have you considered doing her post-war with 3/50s?