Shipbucket

I come over a document when I was visiting a friend of my stepfather, they are both retired officer in the Navy. This friend had several documents from back in the day, in his personal archive. One of those documents was about the Oslo class, and what type of hull design they would start designing the ship on. There was only the two hull it was written about, it was the Dealey class hull and the Fletcher class hull.

As most of us know, the modification Norway did to the Dealey class hull was... a lot, Norwegian Navy engineer together with Horten Naval shipyard did this modification to the Dealey hull, to make it into the Oslo class.

- A more flatter and deeper aft hull section
- Adjustment on the underwater hull to increase it's max displacement.
- higher hull above water, with much higher bow.
- New bow with "some" flare.
- Strengthened double keel, that go in to a single keel.
- Increased thickens on hull in bow section, to better withstand, "just"-iced water
- Two new type of propellers (economy and Combat)

I took all that from Oslo class and Oslo class superstructure and armament and moved it over to the design bellow. They are also carrying the same radar set up, since I do not see the point of equipping it with bigger and heavier radar, specially since these radar was found by the Norwegian Navy to work nice in winter condition in Norway (bad weather and snow)

Armament:

V1:
1 single 5" gun
2 twin 57mm guns
2 single 40mm guns
Terne III ASW
2 triple torpedo launcher
depth charges
(possibility to carry mines)

V2, V3:
2 twin 5" gun
1 twin 57mm guns
2 single 40mm guns
Terne III ASW
2 triple torpedo launcher
depth charges
(possibility to carry mines)

V4:
2 twin 5" gun
1 single 57mm guns
2 single 40mm guns
Terne III ASW
2 triple torpedo launcher
depth charges
(possibility to carry mines)

V5:
3 twin 5" gun
2 single 40mm guns
Terne III ASW
2 triple torpedo launcher
depth charges
(possibility to carry mines)

V5:
3 twin 5" gun
4 single 40mm guns
Terne III ASW
2 triple torpedo launcher
depth charges
(possibility to carry mines)


Version 1.

It's armed similar to Oslo class, But 3" is replaced with 5" and 57 mm guns, Terne III is placed ot the rear (similar to Sleipner class), and the helipad is biger (Oslo class had original an helipad, in the are where she got here sea sparrow today).

Not here 5" guns have here cupola removed (US Navy found out that there was no point of them), instead of placing a 5" director on top of the bridge. I have gone for that the Navy somehow have combined two technology together, to make an director mounted on the turret (with it's problems...), the egg are the main director anyway.


Version 2.
Similar as above but with 3" twin guns. My favorite, and most realistic... (at least what I think).


Version 3.
Here I have placed the Terne III forward, and moved the superstructure aft. this give here that long bow look, and quit heavy armed forward. But as an defencive Navy as Norway... aren't perhaps so ideal, to have it all forward.


Version 4.
Same as above, but with a different 57mm (same gun as the coast guard)


Version 5.
Same as above, but with a three 3" twin guns


Version6.
Same as above, but with 4 single 40mm guns.



I see for me that these design have longer endurance than Oslo class, with just a little bigger crew due to that one or two extra gun and bigger machinery. the top speed would at least be minimum 5-7 knots faster than Oslo class standard speed of 25 knots (28 knots with combat propellers)

To compare, Oslo class as delivered to Royal Norwegian Navy in 1966:

Excellent work! I like these!) Somehow I believe the Fletcher class hulled designs would have more interested values for refits and conversions in later periods unlike the actual build ones.
Would have these ''Fletcher class hulls'' be new build or second hand, or are these details not known/noted?

A very interesting series. I am in agreement that V2 is most aesthetically pleasing, although I find myself wondering about whether Terne would be safe in this aft position without additional clearance from the flight deck.

I think all of the designs could use taller stacks.

Thanks

There are almost no information, all I have is that before they decided to go for using the Dealey class hull design and modifie it. They considered Fletcher hull design, to replace all old destroyer with a new destroyer instead of an destroyer escort.

I just used the same modification they did to Dealey->Oslo-class on the Fletcher->Oslo class design, since I believe they would most likely do the same. (mostly due to the same design time would do the Fletcher version as the Dealey version)

I have lifter the flight deck or giving it some clearance, but I do have alternatives (there are so many variants I can do):

1. lift the flight deck and the 40 mm more up, and extend the flight deck to full ship width.
2. move 3" twins and Terne III more aft.
3. If using the same layout as Terne III have on Sleipner class, I can mount it between funnels. but then I have to change location on other things... that can make it more difficult for an good all round fire coverage.

Or an nice idea I have "crazy version"

- Move boats an davits to the side of bridge structure, mount a Terne III right in front of the 40 mm guns on starboard and port side. eventually have one mounted forward of the 40 mm on starboard, and aft for the 40 mm on port side, next to the funnel. (mainly due to alternative location of turbines. port turbine are mounted forward and service port propeller, starboard turbine are mounted aft and....)



I wonder how big crew is needed.

boilers are gas powered. there are only 3 to 4 more guns, then Oslo class. Oslo class had a crew of 140, +20 for guns and 5-10 more for engine. so around 170+- crew


I have been looking at larger main gun that 3" twin, specially on the swedish made, but I didn't realy get the feel of it. and that almost half of the Norwegian Navy in the 60's was paid by the US government... so US-equipment.

The first drawing is:

Adjustment that I have done on Version 2, so I call it a V2-B:

- moved Terne III and 3" gun more aft.
- made Helipad more wider, now it is as wide as the ship.
- Funnels is higher.
- separate director for 40mm
- Ready magazine housing for the 40mm, in front and to the side of the aft of the funnel
- added an extra sonar, due for maximum performance of Terne III, a good sonar picture is quit helpful.



In the drawing below, I was looking into how she might look like at here late years in career and with here last upgrade, I tried to give here that Oslo class over armed look on a small vessel feeling:

- Aft 3" twin guns replaced by 40mm due to 3" guns in Norwegian service was totally worn out, and more dangerous to use than being hit by an Nuke!!
- Oslo class had lots of Penguin missile (8), this one have more.... (12), bigger ship, more missile.
- 40 mm flanking funnel landed and replaced by larger superstructure with magazine and director on both side for Sea Sparrow. there are also place for Penguin missile launchers.
- Sea sparrow director are also doubling up as 40mm director together with the egg.
- solid railings bellow helipad. for crew comfort.
- high power communication mast aft.
- Main radar would be upgraded to an improved version of the original radar, with a new radar dish and other electronic equipment, to increase is's range and detection of targets and tracking)


Armament V2-B upgraded:
1 X twin 3" gun (just for show, when kids are visiting the ship (family day))
1 X twin 57mm gun (most likely with upgraded electronic and system to today's standards) (This gun would most likely operate as the main guns instead of the worn out 3" gun that are just there for show.
1 X single 40mm (replacing worn out 3" guns aft)
12 X Penguin ASW launcher
1 X Mk29 Launcher for Sea Sparrow
2 X twin Manual Launcher for Simbad, fired by sight (...Eyeball Mk1)





Fast question: If the egg was to be replaced, what do you think is the most realistic thing it would have been replaced by, after Norwegian standards.

This is really well executed "personal design". Well done!

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

That's a great series of drawings Heuhen, somebody in the Norwegian Navy came up with some very good ideas that you have brought to life with your drawings.

Thanks.

When Norwegian Navy build Oslo class, they build them on the experience they had from trough WW2. We even can see it today.

An excellent "What if" of Oslo Class, definetely better from real in seakeeping of those notorious Norwegian seas.

This is an excellent series. I think you've brought to life the original idea very well and you've covered many different layouts and scenarios. I like to think had the Fletcher hull been chosen that the final result would have looked as good as these.

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