Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
LL_JuneBug

Italian battleship Dante Alighieri

34 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles

We need more Pasta in the game. Because I work at Olive Garden and have a nack for Navy history, and a penchant for 3D modeling I decided to look into doing some work on 3 paper ship designs that Italy. I am currently working on some other projects like the M class Plan Z German Cruiser design 1938. The USS Nevada BB36 in the 1942 configuration. The DKM Schwanevede which is a Hipper Class Heavy Cruiser, except equipped with 4 - triple turrets with 15cm (5.9 inch) main guns as this was slightly considered by Germany at one time.

I also have started to reconfigure the Giulio Cesar into the Andrea Doria. A few of these models have proven to be a little more work that what I had first thought but that is ok. 

Along the way to designing the Vittorio Class Battleships (also known as the Littorio class) Italy had looked at and considered 3 major designs that had led up to the 35,000 ton Battleships. It ended up in the end that Italy had chosen to modernize the two Conte Di Cavour class Battleships, and the two Caio Duilio sisters. 

The main reason of the reconstruction of the four old WW1 Battleships, and consideration of the new designs had to do with Germany building the Deutschland class. This spurred the French to build the Dunkerque's, which in turn put Italy in the position that they needed a viable counter. The WW1 ships had ok firepower but it wasn't up to the 13.5 inch guns of the French ships, and was probably at best near the equal to the 6 - 11.1 inch guns the German ships were equipping. They were only considered equal in the fact that the old ships carried 13 - 12 inch guns against the Germans 6 - 11.1 inch guns. 

The French was more of a plausible enemy in a future war though. The Italians also had the luxury of being more concerned about operating in the Mediterranean and didn't need ships that could sail for thousands of miles on one fill up of fuel. 

The Washington Naval treaty of 1922 allowed for Italy and France to build up to 70,000 tons of new capitol ship construction before 1932 and then another 112'800 tons after that. Neither country was real quick to start building programs and for some time the political situation didn't really provide any motivation to embark on new ship construction until Germany started ramping up and basically causing the need for France and Italy to follow suite.

There was also considerable political pressure that was directed towards the French and Italian governments to build battleships that were of smaller displacements and dimensions than what the major powers were planning. The Italian Navy actually didn't protest this to strongly and decided that Battleships weighing in around the 25,000 ton displacement should be quite adequate and that if they built 2 then the would still have 20,000 tons to either build two modern 10,000 ton cruisers, and or a Battle Cruiser, and or possibly a third 25,000 ton Battleship with the idea that it wasn't horribly over the limit and would be close to 1932 by the time it would be launched.

The simplest solution came in the form of the first serious design that was considered for a new Battleship class in 1928. The 1928 design was a ship that would weigh in at 23,000 tons. This would have allowed Italy to comfortably build 3 of these ships and not exceed the treaty limits. Also with the ships being smaller they would be easier and quicker to build. They would give Italy 3 modern ships that would operate better than the old WW1 Battleships (which were not modernized yet), and they would boast 6 - 15 inch modern naval rifles that would have a more significant offensive capability than the old 12 inch gun ships.

These ships were never designated with a class name as they were passed by to consider the other 2 designs, and with the final decision to rework the old gals of the line. In 1928 as part of the condition of the Washington Naval Treaty, Italy had to scrap its first Dreadnought Battleship Dante Alighieri. There is no documentation the ships name would have been reused on another ship, and considering that the name was not used on any of the Littorio's/Vittorio's, I think that it would be a proper and appropriate name for the 23,000 ton 1928 design that was being looked at the same year that they were scrapping Dante Alighieri.

DanteAlighieriRough1a.png

I took the hull of Giulio Cesar and lengthened it by 9.5 meters to fit the dimensions of the 23,000 ton 1928 BB design. 

DanteAlighieriRough1b.png

Top view: You can see where I separated and extended the deck from the bow as this ship was still designed similar to WW1 German, 

and British split deck designs. 

DanteAlighieriRough1d.png

I re fill in the main deck area in the fore midships area. I need to re rail it and figure the main and secondary gun placements

to get an idea of where the main bridge area will be placed. The rear mast is basically the same as the design shows and is close to 

the location of where it should be.

DanteAlighieriRough2a.png

A top view of Dante Alighieri bottom, and Roma top. the difference between a 23,000 ton ship and a 35,000 ton ship.

DanteAlighieriRough2b.png

Front view. In reality they both would sit just a tad higher in the water if the green line were the water level. but they would still be 

near the same height on the fore deck considering that the smaller ship wouldn't ride quite as deep. 

DanteAlighieriRough2c.png

A side angle shot I need to move the forward screws and shafts more forward and slightly outwards. 

Edited by LL_JuneBug
Notate illustrations
  • Cool 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,362
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,374 posts
13,901 battles

Pasta is good, more pasta is even better and too much pasta is just enough.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
3 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Pasta is good, more pasta is even better and too much pasta is just enough.

I'll ad more pics tomorrow. Getting late and I've been modeling for about 12 hours now. Ty for the follow. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
12 minutes ago, pastore123 said:

Everything about this post was Italian except for Olive Garden...

Very True. We basically make 20 dollar a plate Hamburger Helper, LOL.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
482
[RM-I]
[RM-I]
Members
960 posts
8,769 battles
1 hour ago, LL_JuneBug said:

Very True. We basically make 20 dollar a plate Hamburger Helper, LOL.

At least the bread sticks are good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
6 minutes ago, pastore123 said:

At least the bread sticks are good!

Yea, I make them sometimes. I take my time with them. I like them soft, hot, I butter them just a bit more than they like but go light on the garlic salt. Some of the idiots we have put salt on them like they are blessing the Pope or some thing. 

DanteAlighieriRough3a.png

I put the front turret on, anyway. It took a while to alter the triple into a double, and reduce the width. The original modeler models them quite sporatic. I have to use quite a few tricks to clean up the topology and simplify it. but I think its coming along good. 

Edited by LL_JuneBug
Notate illustrations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
482
[RM-I]
[RM-I]
Members
960 posts
8,769 battles
18 minutes ago, LL_JuneBug said:

Yea, I make them sometimes. I take my time with them. I like them soft, hot, I butter them just a bit more than they like but go light on the garlic salt. Some of the idiots we have put salt on them like they are blessing the Pope or some thing. 

You definitely need everything in moderation. Too much kills it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
583 posts
76 battles
1 hour ago, LL_JuneBug said:

Yea, I make them sometimes. I take my time with them. I like them soft, hot, I butter them just a bit more than they like but go light on the garlic salt. Some of the idiots we have put salt on them like they are blessing the Pope or some thing. 

DanteAlighieriRough3a.png

I put the front turret on, anyway. It took a while to alter the triple into a double, and reduce the width. The original modeler models them quite sporatic. I have to use quite a few tricks to clean up the topology and simplify it. but I think its coming along good. 

It needs guns or is this to carry pasta?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
23 minutes ago, ___V_E_N_O_M___ said:

It needs guns or is this to carry pasta?

LOL its in Progress. Rome wasn't built in a day. I will ad more guns tomorrow. I probably have about a week of work to do to her. I hope War Gaming will consider using her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,590
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
3,407 posts
10,769 battles
6 hours ago, LL_JuneBug said:

We need more Pasta in the game. Because I work at Olive Garden and have a nack for Navy history, and a penchant for 3D modeling I decided to look into doing some work on 3 paper ship designs that Italy. I am currently working on some other projects like the M class Plan Z German Cruiser design 1938. The USS Nevada BB36 in the 1942 configuration. The DKM Schwanevede which is a Hipper Class Heavy Cruiser, except equipped with 4 - triple turrets with 15cm (5.9 inch) main guns as this was slightly considered by Germany at one time.

I also have started to reconfigure the Giulio Cesar into the Andrea Doria. A few of these models have proven to be a little more work that what I had first thought but that is ok. 

Along the way to designing the Vittorio Class Battleships (also known as the Littorio class) Italy had looked at and considered 3 major designs that had led up to the 35,000 ton Battleships. It ended up in the end that Italy had chosen to modernize the two Conte Di Cavour class Battleships, and the two Caio Duilio sisters. 

The main reason of the reconstruction of the four old WW1 Battleships, and consideration of the new designs had to do with Germany building the Deutschland class. This spurred the French to build the Dunkerque's, which in turn put Italy in the position that they needed a viable counter. The WW1 ships had ok firepower but it wasn't up to the 13.5 inch guns of the French ships, and was probably at best near the equal to the 6 - 11.1 inch guns the German ships were equipping. They were only considered equal in the fact that the old ships carried 13 - 12 inch guns against the Germans 6 - 11.1 inch guns. 

The French was more of a plausible enemy in a future war though. The Italians also had the luxury of being more concerned about operating in the Mediterranean and didn't need ships that could sail for thousands of miles on one fill up of fuel. 

The Washington Naval treaty of 1922 allowed for Italy and France to build up to 70,000 tons of new capitol ship construction before 1932 and then another 112'800 tons after that. Neither country was real quick to start building programs and for some time the political situation didn't really provide any motivation to embark on new ship construction until Germany started ramping up and basically causing the need for France and Italy to follow suite.

There was also considerable political pressure that was directed towards the French and Italian governments to build battleships that were of smaller displacements and dimensions than what the major powers were planning. The Italian Navy actually didn't protest this to strongly and decided that Battleships weighing in around the 25,000 ton displacement should be quite adequate and that if they built 2 then the would still have 20,000 tons to either build two modern 10,000 ton cruisers, and or a Battle Cruiser, and or possibly a third 25,000 ton Battleship with the idea that it wasn't horribly over the limit and would be close to 1932 by the time it would be launched.

The simplest solution came in the form of the first serious design that was considered for a new Battleship class in 1928. The 1928 design was a ship that would weigh in at 23,000 tons. This would have allowed Italy to comfortably build 3 of these ships and not exceed the treaty limits. Also with the ships being smaller they would be easier and quicker to build. They would give Italy 3 modern ships that would operate better than the old WW1 Battleships (which were not modernized yet), and they would boast 6 - 15 inch modern naval rifles that would have a more significant offensive capability than the old 12 inch gun ships.

These ships were never designated with a class name as they were passed by to consider the other 2 designs, and with the final decision to rework the old gals of the line. In 1928 as part of the condition of the Washington Naval Treaty, Italy had to scrap its first Dreadnought Battleship Dante Alighieri. There is no documentation the ships name would have been reused on another ship, and considering that the name was not used on any of the Littorio's/Vittorio's, I think that it would be a proper and appropriate name for the 23,000 ton 1928 design that was being looked at the same year that they were scrapping Dante Alighieri.

DanteAlighieriRough1a.png

I took the hull of Giulio Cesar and lengthened it by 9.5 meters to fit the dimensions of the 23,000 ton 1928 BB design. 

DanteAlighieriRough1b.png

Top view: You can see where I separated and extended the deck from the bow as this ship was still designed similar to WW1 German, 

and British split deck designs. 

DanteAlighieriRough1d.png

I re fill in the main deck area in the fore midships area. I need to re rail it and figure the main and secondary gun placements

to get an idea of where the main bridge area will be placed. The rear mast is basically the same as the design shows and is close to 

the location of where it should be.

DanteAlighieriRough2a.png

A top view of Dante Alighieri bottom, and Roma top. the difference between a 23,000 ton ship and a 35,000 ton ship.

DanteAlighieriRough2b.png

Front view. In reality they both would sit just a tad higher in the water if the green line were the water level. but they would still be 

near the same height on the fore deck considering that the smaller ship wouldn't ride quite as deep. 

DanteAlighieriRough2c.png

A side angle shot I need to move the forward screws and shafts more forward and slightly outwards. 

Very nice work don't forget to post the final results !!! 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,101 posts
17,896 battles
6 hours ago, LL_JuneBug said:

Very True. We basically make 20 dollar a plate Hamburger Helper, LOL.

Ma che ne sapete voi americani della pasta!!!! :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
1 hour ago, clammboy said:

Very nice work don't forget to post the final results !!! 

Oh Yes, I will post as I go along. Make sure to click on follow so it will notify you when I post. I have a few others in Creative Content that I am working on, but I think I can nail this one down first even though I started on it late. I am writing a second volume of a book about ships that Germany didn't build, but designed. I am adding chapters about Italy, Japan and Spain as they collectively had around at least 8 designs of Battleships/Battle Cruisers, and who knows about smaller capitol ships, and DDs. 

Anyway this is one of the ships I need to model so I can texture it, and 2D map it for illustrations, and or to write/augment Wikipedia articles, and a chapter in the book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,362
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,374 posts
13,901 battles
12 hours ago, pastore123 said:

Everything about this post was Italian except for Olive Garden...

 

12 hours ago, LL_JuneBug said:

Very True. We basically make 20 dollar a plate Hamburger Helper, LOL.

As a mass market restaurant they are pretty good and you know that you will get a decent if not great meal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
482
[RM-I]
[RM-I]
Members
960 posts
8,769 battles
4 hours ago, BrushWolf said:

 

As a mass market restaurant they are pretty good and you know that you will get a decent if not great meal.

I’m not sure about that. As far as authenticity goes, they are not Italian. As far as quality goes, it’s a hit and miss. The pasta isn’t good and they can’t pull off or even know what al dente means. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
3 hours ago, pastore123 said:

I’m not sure about that. As far as authenticity goes, they are not Italian. As far as quality goes, it’s a hit and miss. The pasta isn’t good and they can’t pull off or even know what al dente means. 

I make Pasta at mine for 2 days a week. I can get it al dente. I think that our food is a tad overpriced. I think, and I'm talking about My resteraunt in Cheyenne that for the most part we have pretty good food. We always seem to be packed and our regular customers give us pretty good reviews. 

I just think the food that I make at home is better. Of course I have been cooking and baking since the age of 5 so its not fair for me to judge resteraunts. 

Anyway, a few more shots of the model.

 

DanteAlighieriRough3a.png

DanteAlighieriRough3b.png

DanteAlighieriRough3c.png

DanteAlighieriRough3d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles

So I did some more work on the Secondary 152mm (6 inch) gun turrets. I moved the main tripod mast and funnel. I will most likely have to move them again. It depends on how the bridge and main superstructure come out. I have to reconstruct a higher deck platform area in the mid ships. This ship starting out wouldn't have had a lot of AA guns I have to be careful to not over gun it on the smaller aa guns as in 1928 to 1938 they still didn't recognize or would know how the airplane would evolve yet. So ships of this era, even large ones were not overloaded with the aa guns yet. 

Of course I could always config the ship to reflect 1940 where it would have at least a few more than it would have in 1930, the most likely year of launch and commission. 

DanteAlighieriRough4a.png

Angle shot with the guns and funnel highlighted in orange. I may still need to reposition the funnel and or Main Mast, and possibley

the rear main gun to fit in the catapult plane area.

 

DanteAlighieriRough4b.png

Interestingly enough the top view shows how reality differs from the basic sketch line drawing of this design. the turrets and guns 

are longer than what the sketch shows, but these are the guns and turrets that they would have received from the manufacturer. 

Germany ran into similar design issues. 

DanteAlighieriRough4c.png

I find it interesting also that these ships would have been like small Scharnhorst's yet started out their lives with 15 inch (381mm)

guns, as was intended on the Scharnhorst sisters. These ships could have also been designed to carry 8 or 9 of the 12.5 inch guns that 

had been relined and placed on the WW1 ships, which in essence could have been a similar scenario to the Scharnhorst's. 

Edited by LL_JuneBug
Notate illustrations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

The interwar projects were based on reusing the 381/40 rifles already available not the 381/50. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
47 minutes ago, Sparviero said:

The interwar projects were based on reusing the 381/40 rifles already available not the 381/50. 

LOL, Then I can shorten them by 10 caliber lengths. TY Ill look up those barrel dimensions. It could also re considered on rebuilds as soon as the gun became available due to them being used not that much later. I dont know when they were developed. I'll research that ;-)

Edited by LL_JuneBug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
13 hours ago, Sparviero said:

The interwar projects were based on reusing the 381/40 rifles already available not the 381/50. 

Well, after checking about 5 sources, I can not conclude that your statement is correct. Since the design was proposed in 1928 and the 381/50 gun design came out in 1934 it would be logical that the gun intended was either the 381/40 design from 1914 in which about 50 barrels were produced, or a new design that would be proposed to be designed for this ship class. 

Now you claim that the 381/40 1914 model was available. Yes and No depending on how you look at it. these guns by 1928 were at least 10 years old, in which that isn't really old, however every one of them had been mounted as coastal defense guns, or on pontoon artillery and a few on a monitor. So if Italy really wanted to it could take 6 of these guns from various places to put them on this new Battleship if constructed. 

The ship design itself could have caused them to manufacture the new versions of this  gun and some spares, and or it may have prodded the Italians into designing the 381/50 six years earlier. 

The other possibility is that it could have caused them to come up with a new gun that could have been a 381/45 1928 design.

looking at the sketch, and I do mean SKETCH of the 23,000 ton 1928 design the turrets look blocky like the main turrets on the Littorio except smaller slightly. The gun tubes are shorter if compared to the Littorio. Now with that being said it is still a sketch and I cant find any source that has an actual line drawing for this ship, and I dont believe they ever got to that point of planning with the design. The 770 design for the Pocket Battleship was more evolved and you can get a real sense of what the turrets and guns would have measured out at. Some what the same with the 1933 Battle Cruiser design. 

So, I am modeling the ship with the oversized double 381/50 1934 gun design, and designating it as Dante Alighieri 1940, and in a variant of 1930 with the 381/40 1914 gun model and more of a WW1 turret design based from the turret that is being used in coastal defense. 

1268082333_ita23000.jpg

So at 195 meters between perpendiculars over all length, when compared to my 3D model the thinned Turrets taken from Roma, and the 381/50 guns seem to large for the ships dimensions. The 381/40 guns and WW1 turrets seem to fit better but dont look as blocked and modern as the turrets in the sketch do. 

My choices are to use on or the other, and or model new turrets with the old barrels. LOL, I'll figure it out :-)

Edited by LL_JuneBug
Notate illustrations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

You do realize where the 320/44 came from? The purpose of many of these studies was to utilize available construction allowances. In such they relied on reusing the 305mm(modernized or rebored 320/44 due to inefficiency of 305/46 against modern designs) and 381/40 were meant to reuse available armament. Not waiting for 1940 to have them ready. Taking the guns from Genoa and Venice would have been highly unlikely. However all the support ships could have easily covered the couple of ships that would have been ordered. After all the desire was to have ships available before the treaty limit battleships appeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
3 hours ago, Sparviero said:

You do realize where the 320/44 came from? The purpose of many of these studies was to utilize available construction allowances. In such they relied on reusing the 305mm(modernized or rebored 320/44 due to inefficiency of 305/46 against modern designs) and 381/40 were meant to reuse available armament. Not waiting for 1940 to have them ready. Taking the guns from Genoa and Venice would have been highly unlikely. However all the support ships could have easily covered the couple of ships that would have been ordered. After all the desire was to have ships available before the treaty limit battleships appeared.

well They only had one 381mm until 1934, so I have taken your advise and modeled a couple of turrets, one being somewhat like the Sketch, even though I still only give it credit for being a rough outline idea. 

see what you think. Is it better?

I do want it to be as accurate as possible.

DanteAlighieri1932Rough5a.png

DanteAlighieri1932Rough5b.png

DanteAlighieri1932Rough6b.png

DanteAlighieri1932Rough6c.png

DanteAlighieri1932Rougha.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
678
[UFFA]
Members
2,068 posts
75 battles

I’ll be honest I don’t have an artistic bone in my body so I’m impressed by anyone who makes an effort. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
165
[WULUF]
Beta Testers
522 posts
9,554 battles
2 hours ago, Sparviero said:

I’ll be honest I don’t have an artistic bone in my body so I’m impressed by anyone who makes an effort. 

I was asking about fixing the guns to a more realistic set, instead of using the 381/50's. there isn't a lot of info on some of these ships so I sometimes have to wing it. I dont mind at all if some one points out historical facts, and or plausible facts that would affect their construction. I'm way more versed in the German Plan Z designs. I wrote and published a book about them, and am working on a second volume. This is going to be one of the ships in the chapter about Italy, Spain, and Japan having alternate designs. 

Also to illustrate my point, I have found line drawings, and art that were produced by other people that are just basically mixing what is known from the sketch with turrets from the Littorio class.

Below are the 770 design, the 23,000 ton 1928 that I'm working on, and the 26,800 1933 Battle Cruiser design and all 3 have the Littorio Turrets due to the lack of information, and or the lack of understanding about the guns that might be used or their dimensions. So I welcome your comments good sir.

6b6677af9a3133835a976c110d7802f5.jpg

1928_23000tonItalyBB1a.jpg

battlecruiser_littorio_style_by_tzoli-d4ul8va.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×