Shop Forum More Submit  Join Login
A-150 Super Yamato class possible variant E by Tzoli A-150 Super Yamato class possible variant E by Tzoli
I've continue my possible A-150 "Super Yamato" design series with the second triple turreted design on the same idea I've done the B version here:

Like the A-150 B variant the hull was widened to 41 meters and lengthened to 263m on the waterline otherwise the same as the D version:…

My design has the following characteristics:
Dimensions: 262 (wl) 269 (oa) x 41 x 11m 
Displacement: 75.000tons (standard), 81.200tons (full load)
Armour: 250mm Deck, 460mm Belt  inclined at 20 degrees
Engines: 200.000shp, 4 shafts, Steam Turbines
Speed: 54km/h (29knots)
Range: 13.300km at 30km/h (7.000nm at 16knots)
3x3 51cm/45 Type 98 Cannons,
2x3 15,5cm/60 Type 90 Guns,
16x2 10cm/65 Type 98 DP-AA Guns
14x2 40mm/60 Type 5 AA Guns
22x3 25mm/60 Type 96 AA Guns
10x21 120mm Type 5 AA Rockets
7x Seaplanes (Aichi E16A Paul and Mitsubishi F1M Pete planes)
Type 13 air search radar antennaes (two set, both sides on the mainmast)
Type 14 air search radar (one set, on top of the aft range finder)
Type 21 air search radars (two set, on each arms of the main range finder fixed non rotating)
Type 32 surface search radars (two set one on each side of the bridge structure rotating ones)
Add a Comment:
battlestation445 Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
And where do you draw them?
Tzoli Featured By Owner Nov 13, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
battlestation445 Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Can you make a Carrier Variant of A-150? 
Tzoli Featured By Owner Nov 13, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
There were never an idea to finish them as carriers (As they never started building)
arlfm Featured By Owner Edited Oct 4, 2018
Probs the best A-150 Super Yamato design and the most applicable to be built. 
Japan designed Yamato to be of a wider/but shorter hull - all to ensure it held a tight 650m turning radius.
This design follows onto that with a slightly wider hull and longer length. A longer hull probably means more boilers for higher HP and speed.

The Japanese like dual turret designs - since they were lighter in top weight and simpler reload mechanisms.
Plus the biggest reason was "blast wave interference" of the two outer barrels - which caused the middle barrel to have its shell dispersion severely affected.
BUT this could be solved by Staggered Firing fcs.

I KNOW I SAID THIS IN YOUR Yamato class battleship up gun proposal - but ill say it again cause why not.

The wider 41m beam of the ship (compared to Yamato's 39m beam) - might mean a revised torpedo protection system.
BY placing the upper belt and lower belt as separate sections held by DS bulkheads - similar to that of Montana - with a much better TDS depth than before - solving her flawed torpedo belt. - hell maybe even add water filled bulkheads.

Since they realised, with the development of underwater belts connected to together with the upper main belt (which was designed to resist underwater plunging fire/ penetrations) - was too rigid to deform under torpedo strikes. In most cases the joints snapped/fractured and water would sip through unlike typical bulkheads that would deform and hold in one piece. 

This weakness applied to SD, Iowa and Yamato classes. 
Yamato had it allot worst with a major flaw in her TDS - since the outer bulkhead - the joint between the upper/lower belt & upper/lower torpedo bulge joint - were all in the same place. -all it had was a support bulkhead to keep it in place.
The result: a torpex torpedo from a sub (albeit having an explosive payload well above of Yamato's intended TDS) - exploded near the joint and snapped 2 bulkhead joints - the belt itself and the torpedo bulges. Thus having water directly sip through her gun powder magazines (which had 1 less bulkhead for protection than her engines/boilers)…:

For Iowa and SD Class - they had internal armour - shielded by 2 major bulkheads and torpedo bulge + water filled bulkheads, so the chances of suffering the same flaw as Yamato TDS was much less likely. The connection between the upper and lower belt was key welded for better strength - again it would still likely snap with a torpedo strike - causing flooding - however the key joint would have kept the the two belts in 1 piece at least (unlike Yamato's outright snapping in 2)
However it was considered the joint that held the lower belt to the keel was poorly connected - and could have easily snapped if put on strain causing major flooding.…:

This basically resulted in USN to convert back to the old North Carolina armour scheme which lacked an underwater belt - but had its main belt and 2 main bulkheads separated. The difference is with the Montana (other than thicker armour) was that they attached the underwater belt onto the outer STS bulkhead itself - and completely separated from the Main belt. Thus achieving underwater protection without sacrificing any TDS.

ok im done lol. 
Darksilver96 Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2018
thanks for this design and the many details on the ship ;)
would it be alright if I used it in the rewrite of a story of mine since this is one of the ships I want to use?
Tzoli Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Sure, just notify me
Darksilver96 Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2018
will do I have it in planning right now and once I have the first chapter rewriten I will send you a link to it :)

Tzoli Featured By Owner Aug 16, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Cosmoco Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2018  Hobbyist Writer
Very technical, I can get lost in the details. 
Tzoli Featured By Owner Aug 11, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Yes those are my aspects of the drawings I make
GAT-X139 Featured By Owner Aug 10, 2018
Have you imagined a Super Yamato with four guns per turret yet? I know that is mainly a british/French thing but...
Tzoli Featured By Owner Aug 11, 2018  Hobbyist Digital Artist
No such design exists only Fujimoto's dream battleship:
12x 51cm in either 4 triple or 3 quad turrets all forward
Add a Comment:


Submitted on
August 10, 2018
Image Size
2.3 MB


71 (who?)