SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Silent Hunter 3 - 4 - 5 > SH4 Mods Workshop
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-09, 08:12 PM   #1
Emperor_The_Silent_Hunter
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default Montana Class Battleship

Hey guys i thought of this but it will be nice to have USN Montana Class Battleship in Silent Hunter 4 what do you think?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-09, 09:11 PM   #2
LukeFF
Silent Hunter
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Riverside, California
Posts: 3,610
Downloads: 41
Uploads: 5
Default

Pointless. They never existed.
__________________


ROW Sound Effects Contributor
RFB Team Leader
LukeFF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 07:14 PM   #3
ivank
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,426
Downloads: 284
Uploads: 0
Default

They will be in TSWSM V3
__________________
Head of The Surface Warfare Super-Mod Team

Leutnant z. S. David U. Ziegler
U-105 IXB On Patrol 1

ivank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 09:11 PM   #4
Sledgehammer427
PacWagon
 
Sledgehammer427's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Drinking coffee and staring at trees in Massachusetts
Posts: 2,908
Downloads: 287
Uploads: 0
Default

werent they part of the Pennsylvania class BB's?
__________________
Cold Waters Voice Crew - Fire Control Officer
Cmdr O. Myers - C/O USS Nautilus (SS-168)
114,000 tons sunk - 4 Spec Ops completed
V-boat Nutcase - Need supplies? Japanese garrison on a small island in the way? Just give us a call! D4C!
Sledgehammer427 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 09:20 PM   #5
Torplexed
Let's Sink Sumptin' !
 
Torplexed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,823
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427
werent they part of the Pennsylvania class BB's?
Basically they would have been an enlarged Iowa class battleship with a fourth 16" gun turret, more armor and a bit slower speed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana_class_battleship
Torplexed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 09:58 PM   #6
Emperor_The_Silent_Hunter
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

well thanks guy for information can't wait try out TSWSM v3 out
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-09, 11:42 PM   #7
Sledgehammer427
PacWagon
 
Sledgehammer427's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Drinking coffee and staring at trees in Massachusetts
Posts: 2,908
Downloads: 287
Uploads: 0
Default

yeesh. my minds in second gear.
i have some detailed descriptions about the Montana Class.

I assumed that the Montana Class Emperor was talking about was the Montana which survived Pearl Harbor...our BB classes were really effed up until Iowa
__________________
Cold Waters Voice Crew - Fire Control Officer
Cmdr O. Myers - C/O USS Nautilus (SS-168)
114,000 tons sunk - 4 Spec Ops completed
V-boat Nutcase - Need supplies? Japanese garrison on a small island in the way? Just give us a call! D4C!
Sledgehammer427 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 12:00 AM   #8
peabody
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New York State, USA
Posts: 2,390
Downloads: 126
Uploads: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427
yeesh. my minds in second gear.
i have some detailed descriptions about the Montana Class.

I assumed that the Montana Class Emperor was talking about was the Montana which survived Pearl Harbor...our BB classes were really effed up until Iowa
Montana at Pearl Harbor?

Peabody
__________________

System Spec: Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3, PentiumD Dual Core Presler 945 3.4Ghz, Gigabyte Geforce 7600GS, 2-1GB Corsair XMS2 800Mhz in Dual Channel, 2-WD 250 SATA 3Gb/s, Onboard Realtek HD 7.1 Audio, DVD ROM, DVD burner, Hiper 580 Watt Power supply, WinXP SP2.

peabody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 12:00 AM   #9
Emperor_The_Silent_Hunter
Stowaway
 
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
Default

Well not that type there little bigger then Iowa class battleship and had 12 '16' inch guns and lot of anti aircraft protection
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 01:04 AM   #10
Torplexed
Let's Sink Sumptin' !
 
Torplexed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,823
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427
...our BB classes were really effed up until Iowa
As far as I know there was nothing effed up about the North Carolina and South Dakota classes which preceded the Iowas. They were excellent, fast carrier escorts unlike the older BBs at Pearl.
Torplexed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 02:03 AM   #11
Orion2012
Commodore
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 611
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torplexed
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sledgehammer427
...our BB classes were really effed up until Iowa
As far as I know there was nothing effed up about the North Carolina and South Dakota classes which preceded the Iowas. They were excellent, fast carrier escorts unlike the older BBs at Pearl.
If they were not good BB's then the montana class may have been built, instead before the keel's were even laid, the brass decided on building more Essex class carriers.
__________________
RFB Tester - "Deviance"
http://hosted.filefront.com/Orion2012/
Orion2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 08:19 AM   #12
Te Kaha
Navy Dude
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Austrian landlubber
Posts: 178
Downloads: 75
Uploads: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torplexed
As far as I know there was nothing effed up about the North Carolina and South Dakota classes which preceded the Iowas. They were excellent, fast carrier escorts unlike the older BBs at Pearl.
The 2 North Carolina's were in the Atlantic and the South Dakota's not yet completed.

And all six of these were too slow for the carriers, that's one more reason why the Iowas were built.
__________________
"E hoa, ka whawhai tonu mātou, Āke! Āke! Āke!"
(Friend, we will fight on forever, forever and forever!)
Rewi Maniapoto's reply to British calls for surrender, Orakau, 1864
Te Kaha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-09, 08:44 PM   #13
Torplexed
Let's Sink Sumptin' !
 
Torplexed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,823
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Te Kaha
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torplexed
As far as I know there was nothing effed up about the North Carolina and South Dakota classes which preceded the Iowas. They were excellent, fast carrier escorts unlike the older BBs at Pearl.
The 2 North Carolina's were in the Atlantic and the South Dakota's not yet completed.

And all six of these were too slow for the carriers, that's one more reason why the Iowas were built.
Didn't seem to deter them from taking part in every carrier battle after Midway.
Torplexed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-09, 01:22 PM   #14
jmardlin
Soundman
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Millington, MI USA
Posts: 145
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 8
Default

Yes they were slower than the Iowa class. But at a top speed of 27 to 28 knots the were used as escorts. Later in the war both NC class ships were in the Pacific. USS Washington and USS South Dakota sank the Kirishima at the battle of Savo island.
jmardlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-09, 10:53 AM   #15
AOTD_MadMax
Seasoned Skipper
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bremen/Germany
Posts: 749
Downloads: 71
Uploads: 1
Default

Hi,

i have build the South Dakota-Class BB´s.:rotfl:

You can get them in the next FOTRS Upgrade.









I also have a reworked Tennessee after her rebuilding in 1943.









And here you can see the New Jersey.









They got special colored guns

Update for FOTRS is coomin soon.

Greets

AOTD|MadMax
__________________
AOTD is gone, iam the last survivor ........
AOTD_MadMax is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.