View Full Version: KMS Hindenburg class supercarrier(WIP)

Shipbucket - Archive Forum! > Own Designs > KMS Hindenburg class supercarrier(WIP)

Pages: [1] 2

Title: KMS Hindenburg class supercarrier(WIP)
Description: ww2 era aircraft carrier(WIP)


MitcheLL300 - December 1, 2009 08:38 PM (GMT)
What if germany created a carrier out of the h class carriers?
A friend did one on paper, and looked pritty cool.
So i thought lets give it a try.
The one i create is based on the hull from the H41 (16'' tripple x3 version of the h class)
It is aprox 296 up to 306 meter long.
I made mine to 304 meter long.
Stats of the carrier.
It's a aircraft carrier above 300 meter, so can be seen as an ''supercarrier''
It has four dual 5'' dual cannons as main armament.
Next to that it has four single 5'' single cannons in the hull (compared to the 8'' singles x8 from gz thats quite less)

The ship has also one edge elevator, on the portside.
And two deck elevators.
It carriers about 110-130 aircraft (non jet)

It's not finished yet.

user posted image
* a little bit bigger then the graf zeppelin, she stil has four hull guns, but doesnt lose as much as hangar capacity as the GZ does whit her 8x 8'' singles*

Oh, her conningtower is on the deck, but she also has an build out structure.
Above that structure is a passage wich will be filled up whit anti air guns, and a lookout bridge.

Any suggestions?

CanisD - December 1, 2009 09:03 PM (GMT)
Interesting concept. Now, I wonder how one based on an H-44 hull would look like?

MitcheLL300 - December 1, 2009 09:07 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (CanisD @ Dec 1 2009, 09:03 PM)
Interesting concept. Now, I wonder how one based on an H-44 hull would look like?

Bigger then any other exicsting carrier's today.
That would just be insane, just like habbakruk carrier.
The h44 carrier can be like.
350meter long
60meter wide.

Whit todays technolegy, that thing can be like 80-85 meter wide i quess.

That is just insane.... <_<
H44 itself whas already insane whit its 20'' x8 barrels.
*btw off topic question, anybody knows where the h44 would have been build?
Does there even exist a dry dock so big at that time?*

Oh btw, i ment the h42 hull in the 1st post.
H41 would have been 275 meter (Little bit larger Graf zeppelin size)


Mitch ;)

meyer - December 2, 2009 09:18 AM (GMT)
I think Vierling mountings instead of single 20mm ones would fit better.

Demon Lord Razgriz - December 2, 2009 09:19 AM (GMT)
Mitch, you gonna do a top view of her?

MitcheLL300 - December 2, 2009 09:33 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (meyer @ Dec 2 2009, 09:18 AM)
I think Vierling mountings instead of single 20mm ones would fit better.

The 20mm's are the one on the lowest platforms right? :P
Anybody has an vierling that has nice details?
And i dont think i will be doing a top view.
Maby, when i got the time...
Mitch ;)

Portsmouth Bill - December 2, 2009 12:40 PM (GMT)
Very Interesting :) The bridge? Maybe you should also be looking to raise it a little, no?

MitcheLL300 - December 2, 2009 02:29 PM (GMT)
Hmm, is it possible by 1945 to make an overhang bridge?
Because then the guns can be more to the inside then the bridge.
Otherwise i just modify and add an huge bridge :P
And maby one radar per side, instead of after each other.

ALVAMA - December 2, 2009 03:15 PM (GMT)
dead image link ;)

MitcheLL300 - December 2, 2009 04:24 PM (GMT)
Hmm. ill reupload then.
user posted image

The newest update will come in post 1, soon Very soon.

Sauragnmon - December 2, 2009 05:51 PM (GMT)
Bridge needs to be raised some - it's essential for the view from the bridge over the full area of the ship that can be seen. As it stands, the bridge sits below the roof level of that 15cm turret in front of it.

MitcheLL300 - December 2, 2009 05:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Sauragnmon @ Dec 2 2009, 05:51 PM)
Bridge needs to be raised some - it's essential for the view from the bridge over the full area of the ship that can be seen. As it stands, the bridge sits below the roof level of that 15cm turret in front of it.

Result of that:
user posted image

MitcheLL300 - December 3, 2009 07:50 AM (GMT)
First pic updated.
But again the question.
Is an overhang possible at 1945-46?
Just like this, or less.
user posted image

Bobtdwarf - December 3, 2009 07:55 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (MitcheLL300 @ Dec 3 2009, 07:50 AM)
First pic updated.
But again the question.
Is an overhang possible at 1945-46?
Just like this, or less.
user posted image

certainly an overhang is possible, there was steel strong enough.

MitcheLL300 - December 3, 2009 08:02 AM (GMT)
Ok, because then my idea whas to place the bridge on an overhang.
And the 5'' duals ''maby'' aswell.
And then making smaller overhang's whit the .50cals and other AA weapons.
Instead of using the small overhang i created for the hallway, and above that the aa gun positions.

Philbob - December 3, 2009 08:05 AM (GMT)
anyway you can post the one your friend did on paper?

Sauragnmon - December 3, 2009 08:24 AM (GMT)
Equally to note, it's Germany, home of Krupp Steel, which was infamous for its strength in all truth, so yeah, the overhang's possible.

MitcheLL300 - December 3, 2009 01:50 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Philbob @ Dec 3 2009, 08:05 AM)
anyway you can post the one your friend did on paper?

He did it whit a pencil, its not seeable unfortuantly >.<
But i am doing his version right here..
This is his idea, whit some modifications from me.

Mitch ;)

*edit*
Edited the first pic.
Right now all details are coming piece by piece.
And also some other stuff like the bridge.

The back end is finished, also the front end (where the superstructure stops and the flight deck contineus)
Under here you can find the updated pic, if you dont want to go back to page one.
Updated pic

Novice - December 3, 2009 08:30 PM (GMT)
A nice concept.
Two things though
1) raise the bride more. The captain need to view the ship and beyond.
2) the gun turrets in front of the bridge, are they the same? If so why do they look different?

MitcheLL300 - December 3, 2009 08:54 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Novice @ Dec 3 2009, 08:30 PM)
A nice concept.
Two things though
1) raise the bride more. The captain need to view the ship and beyond.
2) the gun turrets in front of the bridge, are they the same? If so why do they look different?

One of the 5'' is the one whit the range finder, the other is not.
I remember a person said once about the km 5.9 duals.
That per set only one needs rangefinders.
I dont know if this is true.
But when i look at my bismarck class model, and some other ships from the kriegsmarine whit 5.9'' duals.
I do see it.
Bismarck, 4x whitout, 2x whit.
*for example*
And as for the bridge.
What if i add from those bridges to look to the back.
Like the bismarck,scharnhorst had?
*exept for deck inwards, there only a little one*

Cobra Kebab - December 12, 2009 10:50 AM (GMT)
Is this going to be finished?

scharrenberg - December 23, 2009 10:37 AM (GMT)
Good Morning
I am a newcomer in the the shipbucket forum and read the different topics with great interest. By reading the topic “KMS Hindengurg-class supercarrier (WIP)” I remember myself of an article in the journal “WARSHIP”, volumes No. 31 and No. 33, published by Convay Maritime Press Ltd. in 1984 and 1985. Especially the article in vol. 33 describes a follow-on study of the carrier “Graf Zeppelin”, performed by the Kriegsmarine in 1942.
This fact encourages me to reply for the first time to a topic of shipbucket’s forum. Please excuse my bad english but after the retirement from the German Navy in 1997, I have lost a lot of language experience.
Back to the topic of a follow-on carrier of the Kriegsmarine I have some remarks and questions adressed to Mitchell300:

1. The question:
Is this carrier proposal Your own idea from scratch or do You know the german study from 1942, described by M.J. Whitley in “WARSHIP No. 33, page 31, middle of the right column (Quote: In fact, the SKL [SKl= Seekriegsleitung or Naval War Staff] envisaged two roles for carriers, whose size was defended upon tactical considerations. Paralleling the role of the cruiser/ carrier was a small carrier of about 15 000 tons. ......
The second type was a large carrier which was seen as indispensible for operations with the fleet. A ratio of small-to-large types of 5:1 was proposed. ...
The design specifications, code-named “LILIENTHAL”, which featuires in the 1943 war games at the KRIEGSAKADEMIE (War Academy) invisaged a 58 000 tons vessel, armed with twenty 12,7 cm DP guns, able co carry 100 aircrafts and incorporated a 100 mm armored flight deck”. unquote). Comparing Your drawing I have the impression that You came very near to this preliminary proposal of the Kriegsmarine.

2. Some remarks:
a. Size of the carrier island:
You should increase the size of the carrier island. In Your proposal You copy more or less the size and structure of Graf Zeppelin’s bridge. If this carrier had become operational, the Kriegsmarine would have noticed very early the lack of space for the planning, performimg, contol of flight operations, the management of the flight deck activities anf crew briefings, etc. The whole bunch of special facilities to operate flight activities from a carrier are missing. Look at the book, written by Ulrich H.-J. Israel “Graf Zeppelin, einziger deutscher Flugzeugträger”, published By Koehler Verlag, Herford 1996, ISBN 3-7822-0602-9”, which gives detailed plans of the different decks. Therefore the island must be hightens by a second superstructure deck and over the navigational bridge a second area with windows has to be installed, used for the control of all flightdeck operations.

b. AA-weapons:
If we assume that the large “LILIENTHAL” carrier will become operational after 1945 the AA-gun equipment will be different compared with Your proposal. The Kriegsmarine had developed a 30 mm AA-gun, called “3 cm Flak 103/38” as replacement for the 2 cm Flak 35, for details see http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=70&p=149163
and the AA-gun with the calibre 5,5 cm, called “5,5 cm /77 Gerrät 58”, see www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNGER_55_Gerät58.htm.
Therefore I recommend to replace of all single-barrel 2 cm AA-guns by a combination of double-barrel and four-barrel AA-guns of the 30 cm calibre. This system was operational end of 1944 and all 3,7 cmm AA-guns by the 5,5 cm single-barrel AA-gun, operational in 1944, too.

Mitchell300, Your proposal is an excellent work and I may encourage You to prepare the top vew of Your carrier propodsal “Hindenburg”.
Hoping that my comments will help You I wish You and all other discussing members of this topic

Merry Christmas
Scharrenberg

rickdog - December 23, 2009 12:02 PM (GMT)
Well, scharrenberg my friend, first of all let me tell you that this is not the right place for making an introduction (there is a topic for this issue), but what the hell, welcome aboard my friend, I really hope to see more of your contributions here in the forum. Let me congratulate you for a very nurturing post as the one you just gave us about the topic, I`ve learned more about it, with your post, than what I ever knew about it before. Really, thank you very much for it. B) . About your bad english, it isn`t bad at all, specially when you are sending it to one of our "Masters on english grammar", as our friend Mitch here :D , who can really learn about this issue, with your post here, too.

:) :)

MitcheLL300 - December 23, 2009 04:24 PM (GMT)
Scharrenberg...

''Information''

You are not authorised to read this forum.

Im not authorised to view the forum, even when registered...

Eeo - December 23, 2009 07:17 PM (GMT)
...what? That makes no sense what so ever. Mitch, have you started early on the eggnog this Christmas?

MitcheLL300 - December 23, 2009 07:43 PM (GMT)
Hmm, i have no idea what you are trying to tell Eeo...
But no i did not drink eggnog.

Anyway, now im home i will start soon again on the drawings from hindenburg.
I might also do the ww2 deck, but anybody else has to modify the deck to angled deck (since i mess it always up..)

scharrenberg - December 25, 2009 07:57 AM (GMT)
Mitchell300
Good Morning
I am a registered member of this forum since April 2009, otherwise I would not be able to read one single word of Your post! Therfore I do not understand Your reaction.
I am still hoping that my little informations help You to develop Your excellent idea of a follow-on carrier of the "Graf Zeppelin".

MitcheLL300 - December 25, 2009 08:11 AM (GMT)
I said, im not able to read the post because im not allowed to.
While im registered... <_<

Novice - December 25, 2009 10:25 PM (GMT)
scharrenberg
Being a member since April 2009 and still can't read Mitch's post? amazing!
What he means is that he can not read the post in the link you send "http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=70&p=149163" even when he is registered there.
BTW I can't read it also.

scharrenberg - December 26, 2009 04:24 PM (GMT)
Mitchell300
I see that I have to learn a lot of things to take part in the discussion of Shipbucket’s forum. Therefore I do not understand how it could happen that my posting for Your proposal of the carrier Hindengurg becomes a part of this curious forum "Axis history", a forum of which I definetely never will become a member!
I started my information for Your proposal by using the replay buttom. The text is now a part of this topic.
If You need the informations directly to use them for the further development of the drawings, send me Your E-Mail-adress and You will get the complete text. My E-Mail-adress You can find under the member informations. Hopefully this way will provide You with the informations.
By the way, a little bit later I will be able to give You additional informations about the naval radar systems which may have been operational about 1944/ 45, interested?
Good luck for Your further work
Scharrenberg

Cobra Kebab - December 27, 2009 08:59 AM (GMT)
Axis history forum = Hitler fan club?

colombamike - December 27, 2009 10:52 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Cobra Kebab @ Dec 27 2009, 08:59 AM)
Axis history forum = Hitler fan club?

NO...

Only a forum for axis history :
- German, Italian, Japanese forces during WW2:
(aircraft, ground vehicles, tanks, warships, gun, pistols, uniform, bases, bunker, troops, life-troops/soldiers, war event, battles).

Great to see a forum with this view, for historical purpose.

For understand the REAL history, you can view the 2 sides

;)

MitcheLL300 - January 2, 2010 01:06 PM (GMT)
user posted image
I created a bigger superstructure.
And also a bridge around the funnel...
*also putted everywhere a vierling, where those 30mm's where*
Im stil trying to give her more Anti air capabilities, so she can match the essex/midway class.
But i fail to do it :roll:

Mitch B)

madmike - January 2, 2010 01:45 PM (GMT)
Now we need a b-side for charachteristics...


MitcheLL300 - January 2, 2010 02:02 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (madmike @ Jan 2 2010, 01:45 PM)
Now we need a b-side for charachteristics...

I can make it, but will take a little time ;)


*edit*
hmm, this is something like it...
user posted image

Demon Lord Razgriz - January 2, 2010 07:59 PM (GMT)
Very nice! B) Now make a top view and she'll be epic!

Edit: Oh, you need to edit the meter bar, it keeps switching between 50 & 100

vossiej - January 2, 2010 08:08 PM (GMT)
Dear Mitch, I think Madmike meant with a ''backside'' some additional information and characteristics about the ship.
Example: http://www.shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=R...8Details%29.gif

MitcheLL300 - January 2, 2010 09:48 PM (GMT)
Pfoe, that would be insane i know.
But how to create that black small pic?
And how much would this ship weight :blink: (60.000 tons?)
And i made a reply, but it isnt here, probaly didnt press add reply again (wich caused the ban last week)
But the metric line is so i can see how long the ship is.

madmike - January 3, 2010 10:58 AM (GMT)
Dear Mitch, I think Madmike meant with a ''backside'' some additional information and characteristics about the ship.

That is.

Portsmouth Bill - January 3, 2010 11:51 AM (GMT)
Very impressive Mitch; and its starting to look more authentic. I'm sending you images of aircraft as promised: one's adapted for shipboard operations.




* Hosted for free by zIFBoards