USS Kentucky BB 66 Drawings Wanted

[Oldeseadogge]

Enjoyed this place so much while on a Kentucky hunt that signed up.   

Am researching the configuration of the proposed BBG conversion of the Kentucky, but have had little success.  While Wayne Scarpaci's painting is a beautiful piece of art, it does not meet the known specifications:

Turret 2 deleted
6 5"/54 (6x1)
20 3"/50 (10x2)
minimum of 8 Regulus missiles with launcher
2 twin AA missiles (Talos/Terrier/Tartar/1 Talos & 1 Tartar)

His painting, nice as it is, assumes that the BBG conversion was primarily/solely AAW in nature, like that of the recently completed Boston (CAG 1).  However, all printed sources clearly state the primary missile armament was the Regulus.

Anyone out there have any ideas where I could find drawings/pictures?  Have scoured the internet and found only the usual suspects.  And some great models by folks on these pages.   

[Cliffy B]

I know of two Battleship books, one by Friedman and another by Garzke, that have some design sketches of the proposed BB conversions.  They are only inboard profile sketches (IE a cutaway down the centerline) with few if any overhead views.  They are by no means detailed line drawings but they'd still act as a good start for a build.  My library has both so if you want I can get some relevant scans for you.  Let me know if you want them.

[Oldeseadogge]

Cliff,

Thanks for the offer, but I have both books.  Said drawings are of the later Polaris idea, not the original.  Like you said, good for a start if I was going for the later version.  I have a feeling that sketches of the first proposal may not have been made, or survived if they were.

[Cliffy B]

Well drat, thought one of those had it    The one you want has Regulus as the main armament?  I can't recall one for the BBs with Regulus like that but I do recall some cruiser conversions that called for multiple Regulus, namely CGN-9 and I do have some concept art for that one.  I know of the ICBM, SAM (CAG-1 and CG-10 style), CV, and landing ship proposals.  Never heard of the Regulus one  

Also, are you sure the plans you read call for Turret TWO to be removed?  I've never head of Two being the sacrificial gun, always Three or all of them.  The whole point of pulling one of them is to gain space for new stuff.  Pulling Two doesn't give you very much since the bridge and One are in the way.  Pulling Three gives you the entire after third of the ship hence why it was always pulled first in any of the missile conversions.  Can you link me to any info you have on the Regulus version?  I'm very intrigued now  

[Oldeseadogge]

Cliff,

Robert Sumrall in his Iowa Class Battleships , published by Naval Institute Press 1988, page 48, states that in the original proposal turrets 1 & 3 were to be kept.  Interestingly, he is the only author I have found that comments on which turrets were involved.  Turrent 3 being sacrificed seems to be one of the changes coming around 1958.  Like you say, it makes the most sense.  He, Freidman, and Dulan & Garzke all mention the Regulus.  The idea was that the BBG was to be the long range strike componant of a battle group, with the carriers playing a supporting role.  The othe two books discuss in varying lengths the changing of magazines to fire nuclear shells, which reduced ammo loads - especially for turret 1.  The only logical thing I can think of is that eliminating turret 2 provides added magazine capacity for turret 1 so it would have abundant ammo of both types.  It would also enable expanded flag/CIC space a la Oklahoma City, the conversion planning of which was beginning around the same time.

Few ships got involved with the Regulus program, and the BB got canceled, so not surprised you didn't hear of it.  I have no idea what to link to, or how, so provided data on the book.  Hope that helps.