meh. Just playing around.
The USS MC Perry at the top and the USS Independence at the bottom. The original image is at the bottom, of course.
The railgun up front is what I am least happy with but at least its to proper proportion. Not overly happy with the SPY-1F either.
The ship and class need a new name since there's already a USNS Matthew Perry.
The ship and class need a new name since there's already a USNS Matthew Perry.
Cool bit of redesign. It's a great idea for a ship too, based on that hull class. It'd be interesting to have lower powered "point defense" lasers, just powerful enough to knock out missiles so as to not run the whole risk of pulling more than the generators could supply, or needing really huge battery banks; while using the rail gun as the main armament (as it's a pretty huge game changer in the kinetic weapons department). At any rate, it's definitely a foundational design for the "next era" of naval ships.
ReplyDeleteReally enjoy all your muses.
My primary problem with the lower powered point defense lasers is volume. This will be stuffed to the gills with what I outlined.
ReplyDeleteAnd even if you could fit it in, then you'd have to pick and choose between what to fire: energy constraints are back. 35 MW at the generator, does not mean 35 MW in the beam or MJ in the projectile.
I'd also be hesitant to call this a redesign. Its a strawman idea: there's a lot of work to put in to make a design.
An alternate strawman idea: you could drop in a hull section in the middle and make this into an FFH. Add two more SH-60s and a couple more Firescouts and keep the full length flight deck.
However, you're likely to lose the speed which was part of the point.