The Ship Model Forum

I'm not a big fan of what-ifs, however I'd like to pick up a spare Heller/Airfix Gneisenau kit and modernize it. For arguments sake, lets say Gneisenau survived the war and Germany was allowed to keep her. Fast forward to 1980 (or even today) and Gneisenau still exists, but modernized with the latest weaponry. She keeps her forward two 11" mounts, but I'm looking for suggestions about what should take place aft. I'd assume a helicopter pad would be a good starting place. What kind of suggestions do you have about secondary armarment? Discuss.

_________________

She would have 15" mounts, not 11", unless you could revert to 11".

Marco

To get the good progression, it's good to start at the beginning... so here we go.

Assuming the Big G survived the war, she would have gotten the bow extension and 15's up front that would have survived the war. Either way, she would have kept the bow extension that would have helped to solve her bow flooding problems because of how wet in the nose she was. Probably an additional flare added to the bow just for good measure. Secondaries would likely have been 128mm Flak guns at the end of war, with other late-war designs ostensibly. Three twins per side with her mid deck altered to accomodate.

Come to modernization. Hangar and Seaplane facilities were rather well sized, one could yank the catapult and potentially build a widening platform around the upper works to turn that into the helipad. Depending who's doing the modernizing, she could also in the end fit be given two Mk13's on the upper broadside twins. Her aft turret with the new helipad concept might be retained, or it could have been removed to accomodate some heavy missile system, though it would have shifted her ballast heavily to the nose again. The original twin 15cm mountings likely could be turned into 5" positions, Mk42 or Mk45, take your pick on which, it depends on your timeframe. Alternately, they would be Oto Melara Compact 5's, or Oto 3's. If it's European, there might be provisional space given for the 40mm twins, or another CIWS - Goalkeeper, AHEAD 35mm, or what have you. Radars would likely be upgraded as well. Soviet upgrade, she would likely have been given missiles on her aft deck to replace the turret, 76/100/130mm guns in the secondary mounts, helipad as above is still likely, main guns retained is equally good chance.

The best trick is to find out where the story differentiates, and go from there. What happens in the progression, and move along the plan line from one to the next, to where your model is.

_________________
Die Panzerschiffe - Putting the Heavy in Heavy Cruiser since 1940.

It's not Overkill, it's Insurance.

If you think my plastic is crazy, check out my Line Art!
http://s37.photobucket.com/albums/e58/S ... %20Images/

For arguments sake lets say he keeps the 11" instead of the 15" due to treaties placed by allied powers. The ship will remain German, not be seeded to another nation. Lets delete the hanger completely and put the helipad there. The cranes will need to be removed I think. Bow extension is a must for the mentioned reasons. The area where the SK C/33 flak cannons are could be replaced with Goalkeepers. I think it would be safe to retain the twin 5.9" mounts, however the singles could be removed and replaced with harpoon like ship-to-ship missiles. I'm confused about what to do aft though. The third turret could be retained, however retaining the third turret was even questioned on the Iowa's in the 1980's. The space could be put to good use for a large V/STOL pad.

_________________

Alright, so let's look at where you've started this - the backstory can really help you draft what goes on with regards to the ship.

Treaties force the retention of the 28cm guns - this would mean that likely the Coup d'etat happened, and rather than be entirely out for blood, the allies accepted a German armistice. The fact Gneiseau isn't ceded in the treaties suggests they retained some actual footing, so maybe the French weren't out to forcibly de-nut the Germans like the Last time they were out for an armistice. So, Gneiseau gets some effective upgrading in the post-armistice period. Let's look at a few of the upgrade proposal points and see from there:

The 15cm L/55's were slated to be RNR with the 12.8cm Flak guns. Twins retained, singles removed, the 10.5cm on the broadsides were to be merged with the new 12.8cm battery, likely to the tune of two additional twin mountings on each broadside. Post war, likely would have continued - Aircraft were becoming a big thing, AA is not likely to get replaced.

Aft 10.5cm gun - Likely this might have been removed if we're looking at upgrading the platform into a hangar and Helipad facility. It's really the best option, as the aft section IS already optimized around the aircraft operation. For argument's sake, one could also go for an alternate explanation and turn the hangar and catapult into a UAV observation system. If that's the case, this would be a Great position for a slightly elevated mount to operate a new superfiring secondary mount in theory.

Secondary battery - let's face it, the old mounts could be modernized, in theory - this is Germany, they do like to upgrade and refit systems. They might have retained the 128mm guns, and for a defensive mount, it depends on the timeframe - they used the 40mm on a number of their ships, the Model 1958. They've also used other guns, but the question could stand - how much has the German Arms Industry been reduced post-armistice? They could have retained their own 55mm mountings that they were starting to develop, and modernized them in further use.

Missiles - There's a lot of concepts you could employ, and an interesting observation is, if you yanked the boats off their positions and put them on davits, as we're removing the cranes as well, you could ostensibly put in positions for Harpoon or a similar mounting between the tower and the stack. Some kind of SAM might well be fitted as well, as the question of guns vs aircraft almost always gets raised, though it might not be as soundly argued in the Kriegsmarine where the carrier-humpers never really got their feet so soundly in the door.

Aft Turret - you Could yank it, this is true, but the question is, how much are you going to gut the structure of the ship and sacrifice in order to provide this VTOL capacity? They have problems with nose weight already unless you extend the bow, you're yanking a lot of weight off the stern removing that gun, and if you don't ballast it right, she'll be wetter than an Irish Wake. The Scharnhorsts don't lend themselves particularly towards the commando conversion in my opinion.

_________________
Die Panzerschiffe - Putting the Heavy in Heavy Cruiser since 1940.

It's not Overkill, it's Insurance.

If you think my plastic is crazy, check out my Line Art!
http://s37.photobucket.com/albums/e58/S ... %20Images/

I've been studying the 1/400 plans I have and I think you're right the V/STOL is a bad idea. I think Gneisenau would serve as a fleet flagship (being that Germany has no heavy vessels currently?) It's role would be flagship duties as well as a presence in multi-national training exercises, etc. I'm going to try to scan in these plans or find a decent enough uncolored image online and modify certain areas in photoshop to give us a better idea of what there is to work with. I really like the idea of the hangar area becoming a helipad, as a helicopter would greatly enhance the capabilities of the ship.

_________________

That it would, and in considerational theory, two helicopters could be carried on board if they are compact enough. Flag and C3I is a good primary role. BC maybe BCG, is the theory you want to entertain more than anything else. The big key is retaining functionality and operational role service. Standards on the upper wing is one concept, with a launcher like the Mk13. Fore and aft CIWS is equally a decent concept. The biggest core is to figuring out the developmental timeline that the ship would have.

_________________
Die Panzerschiffe - Putting the Heavy in Heavy Cruiser since 1940.

It's not Overkill, it's Insurance.

If you think my plastic is crazy, check out my Line Art!
http://s37.photobucket.com/albums/e58/S ... %20Images/

I think what makes this What-if difficult is the fact that we're talking about "40 years later," so it's hard to imagine what other upgrades the ship could have had over time.

I uploaded the plans I have onto my work computer and began editing in Photoshop. So far I've deleted much of the secondary armament and the aircraft facilities.

_________________

It is difficult on that premise to a point - and that is they key to making a good, well grounded what if. It's all about the progress and consideration with regards to where you divert from history, what changes, and such - it's actually a great way to start with more backstory and a good point to diverge and do a number of conceptual models in the same theme.

Looking forward to seeing your concepts in action too.

_________________
Die Panzerschiffe - Putting the Heavy in Heavy Cruiser since 1940.

It's not Overkill, it's Insurance.

If you think my plastic is crazy, check out my Line Art!
http://s37.photobucket.com/albums/e58/S ... %20Images/

Treaties not necessary, she never received the twin 38cm upgrade, replacing the turrets postwar would require more expense and manufacturing of the needed equipment (only 2-3 turrets for 1 ship is quite expensive, they wouldn't be exact copies of the Bismark's) With only 2 turrets, in the modern era, she would still out-gun anything but an Iowa. the replacement of triple 28cm with twin 38cm sacrificing RoF for shell weight & range is dubious.
As to the Helipad, replacing the existing hanger/catapult would place the Helipad too high, the higher something is on a ship the greater the effect of the ships pitch and roll on it, this can be calculated in, for a radar, but not a landing helicopter, especially in the rough North Sea. It would also interfere with Radar and Mast placement (cant just have long metal bars and Microwave beams crisscrossing the landing area, especially with it pitching back and forth on the North Sea). the Hanger/Helipad should replace the aft superstructure/FC which should be moved forward in-place of the Hanger/Catapult. This would also place the Hanger where (if you like) you could extend back over the aft turret position.
This is right, like the US CAGs you could also replace them with the twin arm Mk-11, depending on time of refit. another alternative would be to replace them with Mk-10 ERs with the horizontal Mag where the existing mount is and the launcher mover forward (or aft for the aft pair). I quite prefer 2 Mk-10s aft, along side the aft (extended hanger) and Mk-11s forward in-place of those 15cm twins (8 rails!). you could also place a Mk-10 in the position of 1 of the twin 15cm and the horizontal Mag in-place of the 3-10cm/2-15cm midships. (Note: if Mk-13s are use then there is no need for Mk-141 Harpoon Racks as the Mk-13 can fire those.)
The Twin 10.5cm or single 15cm could all be replaced by Mk42s so any combination of 5'/54 or 76mm/Breda 40mm would be valid (especially if the aft FC is moved inboard of this area midships) Goalkeeper/Meroka/Phalanx could replace any large AA positions in the fore or aft superstructure (subject to Radar/Helipad positioning).
(Thought this was new, For some reason it was listing Ascending instead of Descending , I Would like to know how it came out though.)