A Modern Battleship?

[FlyingCanOpener]

Situation: So you're sitting at your computer reading TankNet, and suddenly, agents burst into your room and taser you. Next thing you know, you're in an office across from a SE Asian ruler. He allows you to collect your senses, and tells you why you're there. You're there to build a battleship for his (toy) fleet. He's always wanted a nice capital ship to counter the Thai's (semi-vanity) carrier, and the pesky PLAN making inroads in SE Asia. He also tells you that no expense will be spared and no weapon on the market would be turned down if useable. Now you're thinking "Hmm... build him an arsenal ship full of missiles and that ought to keep him happy. Oh yeah, and tack on 4 155mm guns in 2-gun turrets to make it look nice." Of course, the ruler realizes this, and tells you that it must have large calibre guns (8" or above) because he wants a battleship, not an arsenal ship with symbolic guns. Your hopes dashed, you want to pull your hair out until he tells you the salary you'll be making whilst doing this. With the meeting over, you set off to work.

 

So, what would your design look like?

Edited December 31, 2005 by FlyingCanOpener

[Guest pfcem]

This is the ship I have designed for my own personal fantasy.

 

Intended for command (the LC designation part) & NFS (the BB designation part) of amphibious assault forces.

 

***

 

LCBB Lt. Gen. John A. Lejeune LCBB73-76

864' (263.35m)

112' (34.14m)

34' (10.36m)

 

??/?? tons

192,000 shp gas turbines + 24,000 shp closed-cycle steam turbines [may be nuclear-powered]

32+ knots sustained

16,000nm @ 20 knots ["unlimited" if nuclear powered]

 

9: (3x3); 16”/56cal (406.4mm) automatic {6 rpm} [400 rounds per turret] = 1,200 rounds

9: (3x3); 8”/56cal (203.2mm) automatic {12 rpm} [600 rounds per turret] = 1,800 rounds

4: modified Mk 41 VLS {only 8 [4x2] exposed with 48 [8x6] round magazine below}

(4x48 [8x6] = 192: 144; Tomahawk TLAM, 16; Tomahawk ASM, 16; Harpoon, 16; Sea Lance)

4: Mk 41 VLS (4x8 [4x2] = 32: 32(quad = 128); ESSM)

4: HCIWS (8; RAM + 25mm 6-barrel CTC gatling {4,500 rds/min} [8 bursts] = 32; RAM + 32; bursts)

4: (4x1); 35mm/??cal CTC {300 or 600 rpm} [? rounds per gun] = ? rounds

12: (4x3); 13.5" (342.9mm) torpedo tubes (4x12 = 48: anti-torpedo rockets)

 

helicopters: hanger for 6

 

These are the USMC's future Amphibious Command Battleships. They will be the command ships for amphibious task groups & shore bombardment/land strike vessels.

 

They have a 3-layer armor protection.

The 1st layer is the entire outer hull & weather deck intended to detonate incomming missiles & projectiles.

The 2nd layer is an "armor" deck & belt running from for to aft barbettes intended to prevent penetration.

The 3rd layer is an additional internal layer around vital areas for additional protection in case of penetration.

The turrets, barbettes & conning tower have the equivalent of all 3 layers.

 

16”/56cal (406.4mm) rounds

2720 lb heavy pennetrator

2048 lb general-purpose high explosive

2048 lb sub-munition (multi-purpose, anti-personnel & BAT anti-tank)

3232 lb ERGM heavy pennetrator

2560 lb ERGM general-purpose high explosive

2560 lb ERGM sub-munition (multi-purpose, anti-personnel & BAT anti-tank)

1616 lb sub-caliber ERGM heavy pennetrator

1280 lb sub-caliber ERGM general-purpose high explosive

1280 lb sub-caliber ERGM sub-munition (multi-purpose, anti-personnel & BAT anti-tank)

 

8”/56cal (203.2mm) rounds

336 lb heavy pennetrator

256 lb general-purpose high explosive

256 lb sub-munition (multi-purpose, anti-personnel & anti-tank)

400 lb ERGM heavy pennetrator

320 lb ERGM general-purpose high explosive

320 lb ERGM sub-munition (multi-purpose, anti-personnel & anti-tank)

 

Ship namesakes are famous USMC Congressional Medal of Honor recipients.

Lt. Gen. John A. Lejeune (LCBB73)

Sgt. Daniel Daly (LCBB74)

Gunnery Sgt. John Basilone (LCBB75)

Lt. Gen. Lewis "Chesty" Puller (LCBB76)

 

***

 

If I feel up to it I may revise it for the specific purposes of this thread.

[Guest JamesG123]

Well, it he insists on a traditional big gun turret, ahead full BB, just happens to be a Nipponophile, and fan of Anime; you could locate the wreck of the IJS Yamato. Raise it, gut and rebuild it. Of course the big guns and turrets are restored. Replace the secondary batteries with modern guns and lots of both SAM and SSMs. And of course you would have to develop and install a massive energy weapon mounted in the bow.

 

Ok seriously,

I would tell him that a battleship is an absolute waste of money and there is no way he could build one without a huge industrial infristructure. And that building such would be a much better use for the resources than buying a huge ship made somewhere else.

His best bet if he insists is a super-submarine. Nuclear power and relatively slow, Largely automated with a small crew. Sound proofed and stealthy. large turrets with as big a guns as the Big Man wanted. again lots of missiles and what not.

Easy to hide when you want not be found, and big enough and well armored enough to take hits and survive when you do.

 

Leave the details to the engineers and sit on the beach drinking pina coladas until you can cash your check.

Edited December 31, 2005 by JamesG123

[gewing]

Well, it he insists on a traditional big gun turret, ahead full BB,  just happens to be a Nipponophile, and fan of Anime; you could locate the wreck of the IJS Yamato. Raise it, gut and rebuild it. Of course the big guns and turrets are restored. Replace the secondary batteries with modern guns and lots of both SAM and SSMs. And of course you would have to develop and install a massive energy weapon mounted in the bow.

 

Ok seriously,

I would tell him that a battleship is an absolute waste of money and there is no way he could build one without a huge industrial infristructure. And that building such would be a much better use for the resources than buying a huge ship made somewhere else.

His best bet if he insists is a super-submarine. Nuclear power and relatively slow, Largely automated with a small crew. Sound proofed and stealthy. large turrets with as big a guns as the Big Man wanted. again lots of missiles and what not.

Easy to hide when you want not be found, and big enough and well armored enough to take hits and survive when you do.

 

Leave the details to the engineers and sit on the beach drinking pina coladas until you can cash your check.

264782[/snapback]

 

 

 

that is probably a good idea, but if part of his goal is to use the development project to build a serious "Heavy industry" capability for his nation...

 

The sub idea is interesting. There are patents/diagrams out there for deployable guns that could be mounted in the missile tubes of Trident subs...

 

 

If he was convinced he wanted a surface ship... I don't know enough about ship armor. I'll make some guesses, but they may be damn laughable.

 

Catamaran hull, possibly using SWATH(is that it, the captive air cushion) for higher speed travel.

 

Armor would be a multi-layer system, with no pretense at stopping a 16-18" AP shell.

 

Instead I would do something along the lines of an outer layer of 1-2" VHS, with a space inside, full of something boyant, but NON-flammable. Perhaps a foamed polymer of the right nature?

Inside that would be a further layer about the same thickness, a combination of either titanium or VHS with ceramic overlay. Inside it would be a spall liner, re-inforced with Spectra or some such.

In the next spacing multiple cells with blow-out venting and nitrogen over pressure system that can be used as bunkerage.

There would be a final layer of armor, probably 3" VHS or titanium. The total spacing would be about 2 meters??? I don't really know whether this would be enough armor, it just seemed like a relatively feasible matrix.

 

 

In one proposal, The ship would be about th size of an LSD 49, 610 feet x 84 feet. The total displacement should be less due to the catamaran design, though armor would probably more than make up for that. I believe the catamaran design has less drag? If NOT, The engines would have to be increased. 20 knots is slower than I intended, a design speed of 28 knots would be the minimum goal, 33 would be better. While I like the idea of a pebble bed nuclear reactor, the odds of the US frowning HEAVILY on it are pretty high. Therefore I would use a turbine electric system(unless Diesels could be more efficient). I would use the Superconducting electric motors the navy developed. MUCH more compact.

Range would NOT have to be as great as US systems, more like the Italian BB in WWII. Instead of 8000miles, 4-6000 should be adequate. This is for a REGIONAL power, not a world strider.

 

 

The ship would use sloping and RAM to try to somewhat minimise the radar image, but it would NOT be a completely stealth ship. That wouldn't leave much deck usable.

 

I would give it a flight deck, with enough hanger space for 3 Seahawks. In addition, it would carry 6 Eagle Eye or somewhat comparable UAVs.

 

Ideally, the primary armament would be 2 twin turrets with 8-10 inch Electromagnetic guns. An evolved versiion of the Mk 71 8" mount, probably using a 60+ caliber barrel, possibly in a twin mount would be an option.

 

Secondary gun armament would consist of either 4 goalkeepers, or 4 35mm millenium guns with CIWS fire control. AN option of a couple 57mm might be useful, though not necessary.

 

On the sides of the ship, similarly to the 5" turrets on the New jersey would be 2 paired launchers (each side) Each would, in effect, be an autoloading Himars, reloading the launcher with 6 round pods of MLRS/Gmlrs, or single shot pods of ATACMS.

 

VLS cells would be provided, to give more total cells than the Ticonderoga.

 

In addition, there would be 4 RAM launchers, and possibly the independent box launchers for ESSM.

 

The Ship would have a Spy-1 radar, preferably.

 

THe EMG armament would be the most interesting, with a range of several hundred miles possible.

 

The 8" guns would have a range of at least 38km with standard shells, RAP/ Discarding sabot should be very effective. Anything that can be done in a 155 should be able to be fired from the 8" with the appropriate sabot.

 

At least two streamable torpedo decoys, as well as chaff/flare rockets would be fitted.

 

 

Finally, fitting a THEL would complete the anti-aircraft defenses.

[Guest pfcem]

gewing,

 

1st let me say that, overall, I do like your idea but do have a few "minor" issues with it.

 

1) I think you will have a hard time fitting all that on that "small" (610 ft) hull.

 

2) I doubt anything short of a nuclear powerplant will provide enough energy to power those EM guns, much less the rest of the ship.

 

3) Catamaran hull have shown to be quite good for relatively small displacement ships but there is no guarantee that it will work on larger displacement ships.

[FlyingCanOpener]

Well, it he insists on a traditional big gun turret, ahead full BB,  just happens to be a Nipponophile, and fan of Anime; you could locate the wreck of the IJS Yamato. Raise it, gut and rebuild it. Of course the big guns and turrets are restored. Replace the secondary batteries with modern guns and lots of both SAM and SSMs. And of course you would have to develop and install a massive energy weapon mounted in the bow.

 

Ok seriously,

I would tell him that a battleship is an absolute waste of money and there is no way he could build one without a huge industrial infristructure. And that building such would be a much better use for the resources than buying a huge ship made somewhere else.

His best bet if he insists is a super-submarine. Nuclear power and relatively slow, Largely automated with a small crew. Sound proofed and stealthy. large turrets with as big a guns as the Big Man wanted. again lots of missiles and what not.

Easy to hide when you want not be found, and big enough and well armored enough to take hits and survive when you do.

 

Leave the details to the engineers and sit on the beach drinking pina coladas until you can cash your check.

264782[/snapback]

 

Raising the Yamato or building anything other than a Battleship makes you crocodile food.

 

Now, the main thing I've had whilst thinking about this is how to mix the anachroistic guns with some real modern firepower. Following my boss' line of thought to a T, I'd go for something in the size of a Battleship, though nothing obscenely large, more in the line of Dreadnought (520ft). I'd dedicate as much of it as possible to VLS cells.

 

As you can see in the immaculate MS Paint image below (I can see Shipbuilding Corporations lining up for my Resumé now ), I laid out the main armament (not to scale, of course)

 

http://flyingcanopener.shackspace.com/Imag...rmamentidea.JPG (Image too wide to be practically displayed)

 

For some reason, I have a feeling that the best way to accomodate such a design would be something like HMS Rodney, with the gun armament (and a clear platform for SAM launch rails) pushed forward, with the superstructure more to the rear, and the VLS making up the aft portion of the ship

 

 

As for the guns, considering there's nothing else in the world with the armour to take on large-calibre guns, I went with 11" like the German Panzerschiffes and Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, as anything bigger is way overkill. My DPs would consist of an upgrade of the Russian AK-130 DP guns they outfitted on their later Cold War designs. Considering how money isn't an option, unless I've gone too far off my rocker, I think a 155mm mount would work nice, though I can easily be convinced that the 155 is too big for the role I'm envisioning for them.

 

 

Informative comments that make me look silly are welcome

Edited January 1, 2006 by FlyingCanOpener

[Hellfish6]

This is the ship I have designed for my own personal fantasy.

 

Intended for command (the LC designation part) & NFS (the BB designation part) of amphibious assault forces.

 

264779[/snapback]

 

Heh... a Marine's wet dream. I don't suppose you've got a drawing of it laying around anywhere?

[DougRichards]

First point is I don't think that there exists the capacity, or even a residual capacity, anywhere in the world to build any conventional rifled gun tube larger than 8 inches.

 

So, what are the alternatives?

 

Possibly the heavy mining industry could come up with smooth bore 12" to 16" tubes that could be reinforced to fire suitable fin stabilized projectiles, probably at lower velocities than traditional large calibre naval guns, or there may be the possibility of using 20" tubes firing 12" sabot rounds at around 2000ft/sec. Mounting these tubes would be a problem, let alone finding someone who has a clue about large turret design.

 

The heavy construction industry may be able to come up with some thick plate for armour, I know that when Australia's only nuclear reactor was being built back in the 1960s it was the naval dockyard that constructed the steel cointainment vessel, using standard warship armour techniques, so perhaps some reverse engineeering may be possible.

 

For propulsion a fairly standard super-tanker engine outfit may be suitable, there would certainly be enough power.

 

So, using some currently available components with some new design concepts, what could be achieved?

 

How about 50,000 tonnes, with sufficient power for 30kts? Two major turrets, each mounting two 20" smoothbore tubes.

 

Secondary armaments being standard current naval turrets, 4.5" or 5", in a lozenge pattern around the superstructure.

 

Various SAM and SS missile systems, with a tertiary 76mm gun armament, Otto-Malera perhaps?

 

Belt armour around six inches, as this is about the max that anyone could probably provide, and that would stop virtually any contemporary projectile. Deck armour around 2".

 

Helo deck and hanger for 3 aircraft.

[Tony Williams]

Reminds me of some ideas I played with some decades ago - with a slight difference.

 

In my case, I envisaged the guns as primarily firing guided missiles (we're slowly getting there...) with dumb munitions as an option. The main guns would be perhaps 250 mm in calibre, in two twin turrets fore and aft. These would fire long-range AA, anti-ship and shore bombardment rounds. The secondary armament might be of 130-150mm guns in single mountings, still mainly firing guided shells and dealing with smaller/closer targets. My concept didn't bother much with armour. I forget what displacement I envisaged but it would have been a lot less than a WW2 battleship.

 

Some of these ideas I later put in this: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BigGuns.html

 

Looking further ahead, you could do the same thing with EM guns as suggested. Power the ship with a hybrid system in which the powerplant is basically a huge electricity generator. It can deliver power to the engines or switch it briefly to the EM guns as required.

 

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

[Rickshaw]

A trimaran hull. Large CODAG powerplant for speeds of at least 30 kts. Well sloped superstructure with moderate armour for stealth. A large number of CIWS systems. A large number of VLS for assorted missiles combining anti-shipping, SAM and anti-shore attack. At least four retracting small turrets, mounting a single 230mm Russian gun with autoloader, capable of firing smart and dumb rounds. A helicopter deck with UAV launching/recovery facilities. A big surface/air search radar with multiple track while scane facilities.

 

If, however, he preferred a more conventional and traditional approach, I'd make one with four big turrets (still only mounting a single gun), at least four funnels (to impress the natives) and all the rest hidden under armour.

[Guest pfcem]

Heh... a Marine's wet dream. I don't suppose you've got a drawing of it laying around anywhere? 

264873[/snapback]

Of this peticular design, no. It has been >10 years since I had the time/inspiration to go so far as to make drawings of such things.

 

I will have to see if maybe I do not still have one of my old drawings of an earlier version (from back when I did make drawings of such things). I doubt it but who knows.

 

I can tell you that the overall design of the ship has evolved from ideas on how to modernize the Iowas by replacing all the 5" guns (& the area between them) with Mk 41 VLS.

 

The 16" guns would be in the same general arragement as the Iowas with the the 8" turrets in superfiring positions. Forward would be 16", 16", 8" & aft would be 8", 8", 16". One of my greatest concerns with this arrangement is the amount of length it would take (just another reason to consider making them nuclear powered - saving space that would otherwise be taken up by the funnels). The distance between the 16" would be similar to that of the Iowas so the lower portion of the superstructure would be similar but for the upper superstucture I was thinking of something along the lines of the Nimitz class island structures but with phased panel radar arrays (not necessarily SPY-1 but more likely an APAR) reminiscent to those once fitted to CVN-65.

 

The modified Mk 41 VLS would be in positions generally similar to where the outer 5" gun mounts are on the Iowas & the Mk 41 VLS with ESSM would be placed in positions forward & aft of the main guns.

[gewing]

gewing,

 

1st let me say that, overall, I do like your idea but do have a few "minor" issues with it.

 

1) I think you will have a hard time fitting all that on that "small" (610 ft) hull.

 

2) I doubt anything short of a nuclear powerplant will provide enough energy to power those EM guns, much less the rest of the ship.

 

3) Catamaran hull have shown to be quite good for relatively small displacement ships but there is no guarantee that it will work on larger displacement ships.

264869[/snapback]

 

 

iirc they are talking about 75MW of power generation for DDX. That was the realm I was aiming for, maybe even more.

 

True, the hull is not all that long, but the deck area is very broad. It might work to make it even wider, or make it longer. THe dimensions were just a guess as to what would fit. I looked at the deck of the LSD 49, and went... That MIGHT be big enough.

 

Trimaran hulls are testing out fairly well. That might be an option too.

 

I thought about making the whole thing a Hydrofoil, but that would be a little TOO much. Probably difficult to conduct Air operations.

 

 

Oh, one thought I forgot about. The MLRS launchers could be optional, I just always thought it would be interesting to replace 2 of the 5" turrets on each side of the New Jersey with MLRS.

 

Instead, I wonder what kind of export deal the Russians would give on Iskander? COmbined with UAVs for targetting...

[Guest pfcem]

iirc they are talking about 75MW of power generation for DDX.  That was the realm I was aiming for, maybe even more. 

264928[/snapback]

That is about 100,000 shp. On LSD-41/49, 41,600 shp = 22 kts. So 100,000 shp might get you 28 kts.

 

I am more concerned about powering those four 8-10 inch Electromagnetic guns. IIRC they had to drop the idea of using EM guns from the DDX because they needed like 150MW to fire a single 155mm gun (maybe it was 150MW for two single-barrel 155mm guns). Your four 8-10" EM guns would require 4 times that (twice as many guns & twice as much power per gun - assuming roughly the same rate-of-fire per gun) or something like 600MW (the equivalent of 804,600 shp). That is roughly 3 times the power of a Nimitz class CVN (the nuclear powerplants may actually be capable of more than 190MW each but the steam turbines which actually propel the ship are rated at 280,000 shp)!

 

[If anybody hase more accurate power requirements, please let us know]

 

 

 

True, the hull is not all that long, but the deck area is very broad.  It might work to make it even wider, or make it longer.  THe dimensions were  just a guess as to what would fit.    I looked at the deck of the LSD 49, and went... That MIGHT be big enough. 

264928[/snapback]

I think it would be a tight fit, similar to pre-dreadnaught BBs, which would make for rather poor seakeeping.

 

 

 

Trimaran hulls are testing out fairly well.  That might be an option too. 

264928[/snapback]

Yes, they have proven quite successfull on Frigate & Corvette size hulls but many are sceptical if the same would be true for larger hulls. A Trimaran would be great for a CV if it works!

Edited January 1, 2006 by pfcem

[Burncycle360]

I'll play!

 

My battleship gun fires a 54" diameter RAP shell.... namely, a BLU-82 with a Polaris I first stage strapped to it. They're almost exactly the same diameter... don't ask me why I know that

 

We'll shoot it out of 54" diameter pipe to give it that gun feel. You could always fire saboted ATACMS too... I guess

Edited January 1, 2006 by Burncycle360

[Yama]

A modern battleship? Good, we need more artificial reefs...

[Guest JamesG123]

Raising the Yamato or building anything other than a Battleship makes you crocodile food.

 

I am thinking of something rediculously huge and ornate. Like the Nautilus from the movie "league of extraordinary gentlemen".

 

 

A submersible to be able to sneak up and appear and disappear at will, that should have great MU-HAHAHAHAHA appeal to Fearless Leader.

 

Faired in full armored turrets or dissapearing carrige style retracting mounts for the requisit big guns. VLS boxes for the missile systems of all capability. Lasers and particle weapons (all with smooth, faired emission points in the hull or superstructure).

Torpedo tubes of course. The entire hull and superstructure covered in a passive and active radar/sensor array.

Heavily armored and compartmentalized to be able to take multiple penetrating hits and still have submergance capability.

Edited January 1, 2006 by JamesG123

[KingSargent]

Heavily armored and compartmentalized to be able to take multiple penetrating hits and still have submergance capability.

264965[/snapback]

If you have multiple penetrating hits you won't have to worry about 'submergence capability', you'll have to worry about Emergence capability...

[DougRichards]

I am thinking of something rediculously huge and ornate.  Like the Nautilus from the movie "league of extraordinary gentlemen

 

That was a DOG of a movie: even Sean Connery couldn't save that one - just like its competition "Van Helsing"

 

Dogs of movies both.

[Guest JamesG123]

Yeah, but it was a cool ship...

[zakk]

That was a DOG of a movie: even Sean Connery couldn't save that one - just like its competition "Van Helsing"

 

Dogs of movies both.

265005[/snapback]

 

I liked Van Helsing...

[Guest pfcem]

That is about 100,000 shp.  On LSD-41/49, 41,600 shp = 22 kts.  So 100,000 shp might get you 28 kts. 

 

I am more concerned about powering those four 8-10 inch Electromagnetic guns.  IIRC they had to drop the idea of using EM guns from the DDX because they needed like 150MW to fire a single 155mm gun (maybe it was 150MW for two single-barrel 155mm guns).  Your four 8-10" EM guns would require 4 times that (twice as many guns & twice as much power per gun - assuming roughly the same rate-of-fire per gun) or something like 600MW (the equivalent of 804,600 shp).  That is roughly 3 times the power of a Nimitz class CVN (the nuclear powerplants may actually be capable of more than 190MW each but the steam turbines which actually propel the ship are rated at 280,000 shp)!

 

[If anybody hase more accurate power requirements, please let us know]

264947[/snapback]

Still assuming the power requirements for the EM guns is correct & assuming 225MW powerplants (Nimitz reactors rated at 190MW so you would need 4 Nimitz reactors, not 6 [twice the power - not triple] - it was late & I incorrectly based my calbulation on the steam turbines power rather than the reactors), it would take 3 reactors (675MW total). Using 600MW for the guns & 75MW [~100,000 shp] for propulsion [~28kts] & everything else.

[p620346]

"First point is I don't think that there exists the capacity, or even a residual capacity, anywhere in the world to build any conventional rifled gun tube larger than 8 inches.

So, what are the alternatives?

Possibly the heavy mining industry could come up with smooth bore 12" to 16" tubes that could be reinforced to fire suitable fin stabilized projectiles, probably at lower velocities than traditional large calibre naval guns, or there may be the possibility of using 20" tubes firing 12" sabot rounds at around 2000ft/sec. Mounting these tubes would be a problem, let alone finding someone who has a clue about large turret design."

 

Sounds like the Bull 36-in smoothbore "Supergun" which could possibly have fired sattelites into orbit. There were reports of small improvised versions using 12-in oil pipe wire wound with red hot iron wire.

 

As to armor, possibly the best bet would be to try and salvage some from sunken battleships. I once had the idea for a story in which the USSR tried to match the Iowas by building a battleship using salvaged armor from Scharnhorst and other sunken battleships.

 

(\__/)

(O.o )

(> < ) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination!

[Rick]

Possibilities: Buy an Iowa class from the U.S. or a Newport News class CA. Modify with the plethera of electronic stuff, SAM stuff, surface-surface missiles, etc. that are available.

Way out there: Buy an Ohio SSBN and apply the appropriate guns and missiles to one's tast. The French had a SS with, IIRC a twin eight inch turret.

[Guest JamesG123]

Possibilities: Buy an Iowa class from the U.S. or a Newport News class CA. Modify with the plethera of electronic stuff, SAM stuff, surface-surface missiles, etc. that are available.

 

I hear there are a pair of them just rusting away in port...

[Ivanhoe]

Given the insanity of the initial premise, my plan for survival would be to kill Dear Leader with a drafting pencil rather than try to satisfy the design objectives.

 

Failing that, I would propose a fleet of monitors acting like a "virtual battleship". Arm with a combo of 200mm howitzers and TLAMs. Add in exceptional missile defense and minesweeper versions so that they can close into the shore.

 

If that doesn't fly, tell Dear Leader to kidnap a few dozen battleship critics to hold a symposium on why a BB isn't wise. If my head's going on a pike, I ain't going alone.