HOME | DD
megalobo — Battleship
Published: 2009-06-22 17:39:38 +0000 UTC; Views: 5077; Favourites: 37; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
Before the 2nd world war, the navy had some battleships would be unbeatable. Powerful cannon of 380 mm as the Bismarck (Germany) or 460 mm guns of the Yamato (Japan) and with powerful shields ranging from 150 to 410mm thick, the vessels were true floating fortresses.The biggest project of a battleship was German , the H-44, this battleship move 141,500 metric tons (well more than the largest war vessel of the present day, nuclear aircraft carrier Nimitz) and have a total length of 360 meters (345 m at water line). With shield of 380 mm and 330 mm side on the deck, it would take eight to 508 mm cannon that fired bullets of two tonnes. Would be able to sail 20,000 miles without resupply - almost a round to the world.
But the H-44 never left the project, with the advent of the aircraft carrier and then the missiles was a revolution in naval warfare concept, and the battleships were obsolete.
I hope you enjoy my little ship, and please comment!
Related content
Comments: 49
Nice work, would be better still to have a Frontward view of HMS Furious (with her twin 18'' Gun Turrets), as her forward turret was never fitted, thus no photographs exist
Separately: I have to point out though that Battleships' (& their derivatives) were not directly supplanted (nor will ever be) by the Aircraft Carrier or Guided Missiles, rather by the 'Atomic Fission Bomb'.
After all before the advent of Nuclear Weapons, there was no Weapon System in existence with more sum total Destructive Power, or National Prestige, as the Battleship. Consequently this (more than any actual immediate tactical need) was why most Nations and Empires strove to have them, & to have the biggest and most powerful in the world (something Governments and Dictators still do today, and pretty much always have done).
As a Weapons System the Battleship is still a viable and contemporary concept (as a warship embodying the attributes of Firepower and Protection), abet one which hasn't evolved in the popular imagination. After WWII the Navies of the UK, France, US and USSR all experimented with the idea of "Guided Missile Battleships", and refitting existing ones with SSM's & SAM's to compliment their existing Armament, lack of political interest (Nuclear Weapon fever again) meant few of these plans were carried out, apart from the US's conversion of it's Iowa Class ships' to utilize missiles.
The Soviets however did produce the Kirov Class, which although more of a Battlecruiser proves the viability of heavily armed Capital Ships in the present tense, hopefully the tip of a maritime development iceberg, given the potential technologies currently available
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...wow, que monstruo!
¿cuando proyectaron el acorazado?
Recuerda algunos de los monstruos proyectados y nunca terminados, como los tanques de mil toneladas, bombarderos estrategicos para bombardear EEUU y muchos más!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
La fecha más probable es que después de febrero de 1942, cuando los ingenieros de completado el diseño de H-41 y que Hitler quería un barco más grande con las armas más poderosas, se diseñó el H-44.
Gracia por el comment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ohh! esas "wundrwaffen" realmente muchas veces eran simplemente pesadillas conceptuales, eh? XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Y lo más interesante de todo es que era un proyecto que nació obsoleto, no se observa la aparición de portaaviones de gran tamaño que han cambiado el rostro de la guerra naval.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
reminds me of the furious, before she got converted into a carrier, nice job.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
In fact this is the HMS Furious, when I did the drawing I made based on a photo that was sadly wrong with the legend, hence the mistake and I ended up taking her like a battleship. Thanks for comment!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i thought so i recognized the single barreled turret, but i didn't say in case it was another type of ship, its easy to make mistakes though yore welcome ^^
could you have a look at one of my ship drawings heres the link
[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Indeed. I saw, great work, thanks for the link!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
AM I right that this is the HMS Furious Light Battlecruiser?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's right, good old HMS Furious! I know the title of the work is inadequate, but I assure you, I was misled.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well her only part is the Guns that could make her a battleship
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He utilizado como referencia para este dibujo, una foto de un manual de los tiempos cuando estaba en la Academia Militar. En este manual tenía información de que era un acorazado Inglés, pero no citó su nombre, sin embargo, el manual fue mal, tienes razón, este es el HMS Furious, el tiempo que yo ya estoy para corregir este error, gracias por llamar mi atención sobre el hecho.
Gracias también por sus amables palabras.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Pero tu dibujo parece un crucero ligero de Clase Courageous, no un acorazado. Incluso me atrevería a decir que está sacado de una fotografía del HMS Furious.
Con todo está muy bien
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He utilizado como referencia para este dibujo, una foto de un manual de los tiempos cuando estaba en la Academia Militar. En este manual tenía información de que era un acorazado Inglés, pero no citó su nombre, sin embargo, el manual fue mal, tienes razón, este es el HMS Furious, el tiempo que yo ya estoy para corregir este error, gracias por llamar mi atención sobre el hecho.
Gracias también por sus amables palabras.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Nice work!
I remembered a german paper with the project of Battleship KMS Fuhrer(which was never build up) , which had to have a displacement of 545.000 tons !
Obviously It was impossible to build, for the simpe fact that in that age(1940-1944 were the years project) , and neither in our time, did not exist shipyards big enough to allow the building of that ship.
One question, Is your ship the english battleship HMS Agincourt?
Why it looks like it.
However well done man
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
This is actually a question I have. I used as reference for this drawing, a photo of a handbook of the times when I was at the Military Academy. In this manual had information that she was an English battleship, but not citing her name. When you quoted the HMS Agincourt I did some research and found some pictures, the resemblance is really great, so I was in doubt in regard to the cannon in the bow which at Agincourt, looks like a double-barreled. Anyway, thanks for the comment and for the kind words, it's always good to find another fan of ships!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah,I was in wrong the bow-cannon did not belong to HMS Agincourt.
Now your ship looks like the RM Littorio of the Regia Marina.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do not know ... The RM Littorio has two chimneys, or at least that was commissioned in 1940 had two amidships. Do not know if there is another earlier with the same name. I think this is a battleship model prior to WW II
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OMFG, For the 2nd time you brutally owned me XD
I forgot the two chimneys , damn.
But I have in mind one ship, whose I do not remember the name, that is really similar to your ships.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No intention my friend, to be honest that doubts bothers me too. yesterday I stayed up late searching the internet for a picture that coincides with the one I have, unfortunately not found
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
? Don't worry I was not offended XD
On the contrary thank you for learning me
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Muito inrteressante o conceito seu do H 44 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Realmente se assemelha com a São Paulo. Mas na verdade usei como referência um esquema de um couraçado inglês, mais como um exemplo da classe, mas tarde até encontrei um esquema do H 44 mas ai ja tinha postado o desenho. Se não me falha a memoria esse é um canhão de 350 mm, e havia uma tripulação inteira dedicada a remunicia-lo, mesmo assim havia um lapso considerável de tempo entre um disparo e outro, mas a cada disparo o estrago era considerável. Obrigado pelo comentário!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ahn, ok! Realmente me pareceu familiar 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
...but this drawing shows a Lord Fisher's "super-heavy" light cruiser (Curageous class), not a battleship...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Really! Thanks for the information!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Whoa,those Germans are sure really desperate.If she were to appear during the WW2,both Yamato and Musashi will have a rival to defeat XP
(And the Americans will take advantage to sink them DX)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
in fact. But anyway, the Germans invested in the wrong equipment. At that time the aircraft carrier has dominated the scene with a wide advantage over the battleships. There was more a sense of nostalgic romanticism for battleships than real tactical advantage in a naval battle. Thanks for the comment!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Muito obrigado Carlos! Navios são uma de minhas paixões.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Também tenho um certa paixão por barcos...!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Luckily the Nazis have not succeeded in building it.
Wonderful work
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sounds like the H-44 would have truly gigantic if it had ever been built.
Marvellous work as usual megalobo - whatever the subject, the quality is there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The battleships were incredible machines of war, and somehow had a slim and elegant beauty that carriers not have. hehe Funny ... Is it appropriate to say that a machine of destruction is beautiful?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Entirely appropriate, the Spitfire and the Messerscmitt were beautiful aircraft and they were built for destruction.
Isn't it strange that some of the most beautiful machines are also the most destructive?
The crossbows and longbows of the 14th and 15th Centuries were the "super-machines" of their age - Leonardo Da Vinci's "tank" - the trebuchet - we've already mentioned the ornate galleons and "men o'war" - todays super-tanks - sleek, fast and powerful, and entirely destructive.
It's even stranger that the edifices of peace - our buildings - often appear to be stark and bland in comparison.
We seem to put more thought into our ways of dying than we do our ways of living.
People are strange.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Perhaps a way to scare the fear in the face of death. As the old warriors who are painted for battle, to intimidate the enemy, to look stronger. The fact is that humans are predators by nature, is a naive thought that some day there will be total peace in this world.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
megalobo, I absolutely 100% agree - it is a great pity, but a fact none the less.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1