Shipbucket

Even though I've been around for awhile I realized I never got around to making a thread to post my personal designs. Most of the time I've only posted stuff to discord or the accursed halls of the NS thread for pixel art. Beyond challenges I never get around to posting my personal designs, (I keep putting it off as most of my stuff is for my Endless Seas AU and while I plan to make a thread for that, it's going to wait until I've hammered out more lore.) In the meantime, never having bothered to make a thread for my one-offs, I never got around to posting them.


I'm going to start things off with my usual brand of mental illness and post what *might* have been a challenge entry had things gone different. Following the Self-propelled Air challenge, one of the options Kiwi put forward was for a Sea Plane tender. While the other challenges didn't interest me as much, it did set my mind to wandering to unusual concepts for tenders. Specifically what more modern tenders would look like,maybe something that would service a sea master or a US-1A. (Immediately rejected concepts included a Sea Dart toting submarine and something toting the SR.A/1). At some point someone in an unrelated chat as part of an unrelated conversation brought up MX basing schemes and a light bulb went off. A sea plane tender for the USAF's wacky ICBM toting sea plane proposals. I decided that I could tie it to some earlier drawings I did of improved MX submarines into an AU I've deemed "MXimum America" which is just going to be any random bullshit I draw based on the various awful ideas the USAF came up with to make their shell game Multiple Protective Shelter scheme look less terrible. I realize that it's not exactly a One-off thread when all 3 ships are from the same AU but it's not an AU I actively work on



In 1985 after years of debate, the USAF finalized what would be arguably be the most controversial decision it ever made, the choice to base it's next generation of ICBMs at sea. The high low mix that the USAF settled on fielding under the MX Program consisted of a fleet of small Ballistic Missile submarines carrying the full sized Peacekeeper missile, supplemented by a larger force of "Sea Sitter" flying boats. The two systems were designated as the B-3 LeMay and the B-4 Seafortress respectively. While the results of these programs as they relate to nuclear deterrence and the inter-service debate over the triad have been written about extensively, a lesser side effect of the decision was the fact that the USAF suddenly found itself in need of submarine and sea plane tenders. This new and unexpected requirement led directly to the development of the Mitchell Class MX Tender. To save development costs, the hull for the new tenders was derived from the US Navy's recently built Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship, albeit heavily modified for the mission of a sea plane tender. While primarily geared towards servicing the Amphibian MX "Sea Sitters", the ships can also function as submarine tenders for the MX Missile Submarines. Two ships were built out of an initial planned four, the USAFS Mitchell based on the East Coast, and the USAFS Doolittle based out of the West Coast.

The ships carried the prefix of USAFS (US Air Force Ship) instead of the usual USS or USNS. The ships were the property of the Air Force and it took every opportunity to remind the public of this via massive US Air Force and Strategic Air Command markings. Operationally, the vessels are manned by civilian crews, with Maintenance of the seaplanes and submarines performed by embarked detachments of airmen from the relevant Missile Wings (occasionally assisted by civilian contractors). A Squadron Commander and staff from the missile wing are also embarked. Command of the ship is held by a civilian Sailing Master however they are subservient to the Squadron Commander. The rear of the ships are taken up by a servicing ramp to allow for the servicing of a full B-4. An overhead gantry plane allows for replacement of the engines, missile or other components while at sea. Additional aircraft can be served by Floating platforms. These platforms are also used in the servicing of MX Submarines. The ships are capable of reloading both MX Missile systems at sea although in service this is rarely done. When originally designed the ships were envisioned as functioning as emergency command posts in the event of a nuclear attack as a revival of the "National Emergency Command Post Afloat." Budgetary cuts led to this role being axed however the ships did still receive extensive communications equipment in order to support squadron commanders. The ships are equipped with a helicopter pad forward complete with an extendable hangar capable of storing an MH-60 helicopter.

After the initial controversy that came with their commissioning the MX tenders interest in the ships died down only form them to again came to prominence during during the limited exchange of the One China Crisis in late 1998. As part of Operation Yuletide Cheer, NATO's per-announced Christmas Eve retaliation for the sinking of the USS Kitty Hawk, the MX submarine USAFS Rawlings and 5 Sea-fortresses,(from the 401st and 351st Missile Wings respectively) conducted missile strikes against the Chinese ICBM Force. Several months after the conclusion of the conflict, it was revealed that the Sea fortresses had rendezvoused with the Doolittle to be re-armed in preparation for additional strikes, and furthermore that the USAF Rawling had been en-route to the Doolittle for it's own reload of missiles prior to the signing of the Boxing Day Cease Fire. Controversy arose following this revelation both in public and behind the closed doors of the pentagon. The public was mad due to the implication that further strikes had been planned despite NATO's promise of a "limited exchange", inside the pentagon the accounts were angry as they viewed the exercise as an unnecessary waste of money. The land bases for both forces were fully intact and even had they been destroyed, over a dozen additional USAF submarines and nearly a hundred Sea-fortresses, collectively representing over 650 strategic warheads, were still at sea. When US Navy's nuclear weapons were factored in over 2000 warheads of all types were deployed, more than enough for a full exchange. The reloading of the sea sitters was seen, rightfully so, as having been done purely to help justify the continued existence of the expensive MX Tenders.

With the recent selection of a road based launcher for the "Next Generation Small Missile" program (NGSM) as the replacement for Midgetman, and the increased endurance of the new Enola Gay class MX submarines, this unusual chapter in USAF history seems to be coming to a close, leaving the future of the Mitchell Class in question. Transferring the ships to the US Navy to replace it's aging submarine tenders has been proposed but the US Navy has indicated it would prefer new build hulls. Currently the USAF plans to maintain the ships at least until the final Sea-fortress missile wings on their respective coasts coast stand down.



Data Card for the MX Sub Variants/History. I did this shortly after I drew the MX sub for the archive. The Write up needs to be edited, it's got typos galore and I never finished the service dates but here it is for now.


The Special Mission Refit on it's own:


And the Enola Gayclass the prior Writeups mention:

The Enola Gay Class was me answering the Question: "What if MX Submarine was a thing and they replaced it with a slightly less awful sub." The result was something that's still worse than Trident.


And lastly a Non-MX thing, a dumb cruiser I drew for a friend of mine a couple years back. He wanted something big and dumb so I drew something big and dumb. It's not that great, I didn't put any real thought into the design beyond "weapons here", "reactors there" and is very much just a hodgepodge of other stuff I've drawn kit bashed together but I figured I should have something other than the MX stuff here.

Well, I've always liked your think out of the box skills, as well as your drawning skills. There are people who think this is unreal, therefore not bother to reply or comment. Perhaps beyond the truth, but being able to imagine those, (and well executed) is a skill itself. So, go on; I can hardly wait continuation of these.

I comment only if I think there is something with the drawing it self


I have nothing to say about this drawing, except the idea is quite good and crazy. Any working ideas, always come from a crazy idea

I like that sea plane tender, however that seaplane seems a bit weird.

Are you sure that ICBMs fit vertical inside hull?

Love it - keep it up!

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

The sea plane is very weird. It's hard to tell from a side but it's actually a catamaran. The missile is stored horizontally in the main fuselage. For launch the missile launch tube pivots from horizontal to an upwards angle. If the aircraft is on the surface (Be it ground or floating at sea), the missile is cold launched up and out in front of the aircraft. If it's in the air, the missile is ejected down/out behind the aircraft instead.
If you scroll down, this thread on secret projects has some more info on it and related designs including a couple diagrams showing the launch configuration. I drew the smallest of the designs which would have carried the missile that became Midgetman. Other designs were big enough to carry the full sized MX Missile which became Peacekeeper.

Due to the nature of the MX program, it would have been clear from the start that none of these aircraft would ever actually be built. This leads me to have a sneaking suspicion that the engineers at Lockheed tasked with designing it decided to be as wild as possible rather than go for anything grounded in reality.

Sometimes crazy ideas are the best ideas!

Good to see some more unusual stuff in AUs.

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

Fort Necessity Class, America's Shield


Designed in the late 1980s and built in the 1990s, the Fort Necessity Class Cruisers were purpose built BMD ships. Created under the "SHIELD Ship" (Strategic Homeland Emergency Interceptor Launching Defense) Ship Program. The SHIELD Ship program's goal was to create a single ship capable of defending the US from either the middle of the Atlantic or the middle of the Pacific. The specifications drafted called for a large nuclear powered vessel with high endurance. A minimum of 6 ships were called for, 3 ships each to be stationed in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. This would allow both coasts to always have one ship at sea, one in port and a third under repair. An additional three ships were also planned to allow for overseas deployment to defend Europe, Japan or other US Allies as needed without sacrificing the defense of the homeland. These requirements were met in the form of the Fort Necessity Class BMD Cruisers. A total of 9 ships were planned but rising costs led to the three "extra" ships being cancelled. The final unit cost of each ship was in excess of 2 billion dollars, not including development costs for the Radar and TDI weapon systems.

The Fort Necessity Class was designed for a maximum of 120 days endurance, although most patrols are kept under 90 days. Power is supplied by two ____ MW reactors. Additional power is supplied by a backup diesel generator. The primary weapon of the Fort Necessity Class is 48 Trident-Derived Interceptors (TDIs). The TDI is a mid-course interceptor designed to carry any of a number of potential intercept payloads, as it's name implies the s booster is based on the Trident SLBM. The two primary payloads carried on the TDI are either three Multi-Laser Warhead (MLW) or 12 Kinetic Kill Vehicles (KKV). The MLW is an exacliber type nuclear-bomb pumped laser warhead with 60 independently targetable lasing rods. The KKV is a conventional Hit-to-Kill interceptor. Typically when deployed on homeland patrols a ship will carry a mix of nuclear and conventional interceptors, for political reasons on overseas deployments the ships will often embark with only conventional warheads carried. The ships "secondary" battery is a pair of 64-cell Mk41 VLS modules. These modules are used both to carry additional interceptors in the form of SM-3 and the ship's primary self defense weaponry, including SM-2, ESSM, ASROC, and Sea-Lance. While capable of firing Tomahawk missiles, they are seldom carried to allow for carrying additional interceptors. The Mk 41 VLS were also provided with a rearming mechanism.


As a further self defense measures the ships are fitted with Harpoon AShM launchers and a pair of Phalanx CIWS. A quartet of machine guns are carried for defense while in-port. The ship is also capable of embarking two LAMPS equipped SH-60 Seahawks. Ship's sensors included the NXB (Naval X-Band Radar), AN/SPY-1 and SPS-49. As part of the BMD mission the ships were provided with extensive communications systems. This initally included Link 11, 16 and STJ but was later expanded to also include JREAP and Link 22. The ship's extensive communications fit meant that they were capable of operating as command ships and they included limited flag facilities. The Ship's were highly controversial, the ability of a single ship to, at least on paper, shoot down an entire combined Soviet and Chinese first strike was seen as an existential threat to the concept of MAD. To help ease Soviet concerns the ship's unveiling was combined with an announcement that the United States was adopting a "No First Strike" strategy. THe fact this was concurrent with the United States pulling out of the ABM treaty meant that this policy change did little to cool tensions.


Pictured is the second ship of the Class Fort Sumter. Sumter entered service in 1999 and joined the 3rd Fleet the following year. Her first few years were relatively uneventful, she undertook regular defense patrols in the North Pacific operating out of Pearl Harbor, helping to validate the SHIELD Ship concept. Following the escalation of tensions on the Korean Peninsula in 2007 she was reassigned to the 7th fleet and forward deployed to Japan. This move was highly controversial as although the US Navy, in a break from policy, released a statement that the ship would not be carrying nuclear interceptors while stationed in Japan. The statement contained a vague implication that Nuclear Interceptors would be carried during future BMD deployments to Japan. A few years later further escalation of tensions in the western Pacific led the Japanese Diet to pass a resolution allowing for "the use of nuclear weapons for missile defense". This resolution coincided with the JMSDF's acquring the Nagato Class, a modified derivative of the Fort Necessity Class. While there were no public plans initially to acquire non-conventional interceptors for the Nagato Class, the Diet wanted to leave open the possibility of acquiring them in the future while also giving tacit approval for the US to forward deploy nuclear tipped interceptors aboard the Fort Sumter.

IN 2009 she returned to the US for her first refit, receiving updated EW and communications equipment.
In 2012 the Fort Sumter was deployed for operation Operation Temple Shield during the Iraq-Isreali war in order to relieve the USS Alamo. In this deployment she would achieve the type's first kill when she used her SM-3s to engage 3 Scuds that had been fired at Tel Aviv. She returned to Japan in 2013 and in 2014 as part of the opening stages of the Juche Conflict the Fort Sumter intercepted a Korean first strike against US Bases in Japan and Okinawa.



A typical Missile load consisted of
64 x SM-3
40 x SM-2 (Later SM-6)
48 x ESSM Quadpacked in 12 Cells
4 x Sea Lance
8 x VL-ASROC
32 x TDI-MLW
12 x TDI-KKV