Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
USS Iowa 1990 by Lioness-Nala USS Iowa 1990 by Lioness-Nala
The best and most powerful weapon in history - battleship USS "Iowa" (BB-61) in 1990.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconsmokeyandthebandit:
SmokeyandtheBandit Featured By Owner May 15, 2015
Can you help me with a question I got???
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner May 15, 2015
What question?
Reply
:iconsmokeyandthebandit:
SmokeyandtheBandit Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
Did the main guns even have AA guns on them in WW2???

Also, did you make all these ships?
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
1. I don't understand a first question. You mean AA projectiles for main guns?

2. Yes
My personal Webpage: www.warships.com.pl
Reply
:iconsmokeyandthebandit:
SmokeyandtheBandit Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
1. I mean in some pictures it looks like there were 40mm on the tops on the turrets.

2. And you site isn't in english I see. Do you take requests for ships?
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
1. Ah, yes, of course. ww2db.com/images/ship_iowa75.j…

2. Yes, it's in polish only for now, but you could see a gallery of drawings without knowledge of my language. 
As for the requests... on what terms?
Reply
:iconsmokeyandthebandit:
SmokeyandtheBandit Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
1. The picture isn't loading.

2. Terms, well I was hoping for some top and side views of some ships from ww1/ww2. If you want, I can do it as an art trade instead.
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner May 16, 2015
1. And now (look at the top of turret No.3)? 1.bp.blogspot.com/-FPArpGouT1M…

2. I am working for the Navy and Naval Design Center (sometimes for some naval newspapers like MSiO for example) and I have a set prices for my drawings and arts.
I could make for you any kind of drawings and ship you want, but on my terms. If you're interested in, please let me know on priv or by the e-mail: irbis@warships.com.pl
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
ColonelBSacquet Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2015
Incredible they still had this in 1990. :-)
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2015
What is better?
Reply
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
ColonelBSacquet Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2015
Smaller (whence less detectable), faster, cheaper to maintain ships like missile-armed frigates. Each one of those missile able to, if well-aimed, sink an Iowa-like vessel in one shot. It might take time to sink, but it would still sink.

Imho. :-)
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Edited Apr 19, 2015
No, no, no...
I'm sorry but after 20 years spent in Naval Bureau of Design I don't have a time for amateurs... even with your enthusiasm.
There is no way to sink a battleship or even badly damage the ship like that by standard missile systems.
Did you ever heared about sandwich protection system? Or... A class face harded armor? Or maybe at least proximity-fuze projectiles?
Or... maybe you know that battleship armament is capable to carry thermo-nuclear projectiles and missiles?
In fact, If I commanded the battleship, I even would not want to use the weapons against the canoe like the guided missile frigate.
By the way - Faster? Do you even know how fast Iowa class battleships are and how they sail on high sea in comparsion to a smaller ships? :D
This is the battleship USS Nevada after two nuclear explosions: www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zd115…
Think twice before you write another comment...
Reply
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
ColonelBSacquet Featured By Owner Apr 20, 2015
"I don't have a time for amateurs... even with your enthusiasm."

He who knows he do not know, tell him. :-P

If you don't share what you know, then that's a bit sad.

I do not know much about warships.
Which is why I added "imho" at the end. (In My Humble Opinion).


Okay, you have a point about armour and protection.
But despite all those strength, I have to recognize that we don't many warships like the Iowa, the Roma, the Bismarck, etc. around anymore.
What would be the reason?
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Apr 20, 2015
The peacetime economy - that's the reason why.
Reply
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
Peacetime economy?

Isn't a missile more flexible in use, since the guns with a caliber above 155 mm have been replaced by missiles, amongst the ground forces?

What about their roles? Haven't they - the cruisers and battleships - been practically put out of their "capital ship" status by aircraft carriers, during WW2?

Also, during the First Gulf War, I know such a vessel - maybe even the Iowa herself - was used to bombard Iraqi positions.
Though, it could be objected that this - or these - bombardments weren't exactly the most-crucial attack.
To put it in theatrical terms, it seems to me that, since the advent of missiles (and even before, during WW2, when the fates of great cruisers were sealed by - or with the help of - planes, like with the Bismarck and the Yamato), the cruisers and battleships have become second roles.

It makes me think of general Mitchell. If I remember correctly, he led a mock-up raid against a group of US Navy cruisers.
Had his planes been loaded with live bombs, most, if not all, of the vessels would have been sunk or gravely damaged.
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Apr 20, 2015
Media mythology - End of the battleships era.

www.warships.com.pl/index.php?…

Translator

translate.google.pl/
Reply
:iconmjbtb-3:
MJBTB-3 Featured By Owner Apr 18, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Awesome. Is it me or does it have the same body as Yamato?
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Edited Apr 18, 2015
... in fact, the Yamato class battleships were a poor-copy of US North Carolina class design.
Reply
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
ColonelBSacquet Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2015
Poor copy? The Yamato wasn't exactly to be neglected. Or so I've heard.
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2015
I didn't heard - I know. That's the difference. You could read my tech-analyst articles in some Naval pariodicals or books.
Reply
:iconcolonelbsacquet:
ColonelBSacquet Featured By Owner Apr 20, 2015
" You could read my tech-analyst articles in some Naval pariodicals or books."

Will do.
Reply
:iconinfiniterespect:
InfiniteRespect Featured By Owner Mar 4, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Never knew they removed some of her 5 inchers
Reply
:iconusszumwalt:
USSZumwalt Featured By Owner Apr 4, 2014
Not sure about that boat on the port fantail...
Reply
:iconfujin777:
Fujin777 Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Bad ass!
Reply
:iconsupermanlovesaspen:
SupermanLovesAspen Featured By Owner Aug 23, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
How do you make these?
Reply
:iconmidway2009:
Midway2009 Featured By Owner Apr 5, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
A shame the Iowas are all retired.
Reply
:iconflameheartredemption:
Flameheartredemption Featured By Owner Mar 1, 2014
Agreed! It's a cryin' shame. Battleships, in my humble civilian's opinion (and contrary to United States Navy doctrines) still have their place in the fleet, both as heavy fire support and as, well, symbols. Sure, they might not be needed all the time, but battleships have longstanding reputations, incredible firepower, and an unbeatable presence.  
 
Reply
:iconmechakingghidorah100:
They are still all kept battle ready as Congress was worried that the navy needed fire support which they were having trouble to find a replacement to (unless my info became outdated). So if their is a war that warrants the need they will bring back these mighty behemoths from retirement to battle.
Reply
:iconusszumwalt:
USSZumwalt Featured By Owner Apr 4, 2014
Nope, all are now officially retired and are museum ships.  They are no longer mothballed.  The Zumwalt's are taking over the Marine fire support mission now.
Reply
:iconmidway2009:
Midway2009 Featured By Owner Mar 1, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
They have indeed. :) :salute:
Reply
:iconfirevalkyrie:
Firevalkyrie Featured By Owner Jul 20, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Unfortunately the trained and skilled manpower to bring them to life just isn't there. The people who manned them in the 80s are in their 50s, 60s, and 70s; those who manned them in previous wars are in their 70s, 80s, 90s, and increasingly coming up with a terminal case of dead.

This wouldn't be a problem but for the fact that the Iowas' machinery is like nothing else in the fleet; their equipment technological relics from eighty years ago, and the powder bags for their guns are probably outright dangerous at this point (they were in the 1980s, which is part of why Iowa's center gun exploded in turret #2 in 1990).

If we were still building battleships in 2014 (or even 20 or 10 years ago), we might be able to have battleships now; as is, the best use of these ships is to remind us all of what our sailors suffered for seventy years ago in the waters of the Pacific and the Atlantic.
Reply
:iconmidway2009:
Midway2009 Featured By Owner Jul 20, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Indeed.
Reply
:iconhunter2045:
Hunter2045 Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2013
Nice job.
Reply
:iconzaku1986:
zaku1986 Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Łał, nie wiedziałem, że ma tak pojemny pokład lotniczy.

Och, a skoro jesteśmy już przy tym, czemu pancerniki są takie dobre, powinieneś zobaczyć 2 prace tego gościa w których obala mity na temat nieprzydatności pancerników [link]
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2013
Ja sam wydałem na ten temat szereg opracowań popularno-naukowych, a nawet jedną całkowicie naukową (na łamach Przeglądu Morskiego, wydawanego przez Marynarkę Wojenną).
"Nieprzydatność" pancerników to nawet nie jest mit, a totalna bzdura... :D
Reply
:iconwolfman-053:
Wolfman-053 Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
May I use this (and the North Carolina artwork) for the Red Dawn +20 Roleplay?
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2013
Hallo,

My artworks are available only for a price.
Reply
:iconwolfman-053:
Wolfman-053 Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2013
Damn...
Reply
:iconmacpaul:
MacPaul Featured By Owner Oct 1, 2012
No Osprey in 1990...
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Oct 1, 2012
I know.
It is only for example of landing capability.
Reply
:iconmacpaul:
MacPaul Featured By Owner Oct 2, 2012
So what? Your title reads "USS Iowa 1990" and there have been no Ospreys in 1990. Period!
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Oct 2, 2012
Do You have some problem with this?
Once again and last I tell You, that Osprey is on that picture only for illustrative purposes.
It is "Iowa" in 1990 because of her final configuration.
I can't write 1991 or 1992+ because she was deactivated then.
So I didn't draw Osprey on her top view.
Only showing Iowa's landing deck capability on longitual view.
Reply
:icontank50us:
Tank50us Featured By Owner Sep 30, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
-downloads to blueprints folder-

Sweet, a detailed picture of an Iowa Class Battleship. This will help alot when it comes to modeling one in the future.
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner Oct 1, 2012
It is one of my drawings from my article "Iowa vs Yamato" (polish naval magazine "Morze Statki i Okrety").
Reply
:iconajr568:
ajr568 Featured By Owner May 1, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Where were the tomahawk cruise missle launcher tubes on her? I cannot seem to find them.
Reply
:iconlioness-nala:
Lioness-Nala Featured By Owner May 28, 2012
8 x 4 ABL (Armored-Box Launchers) - 4 between chimneys 4 other near second main gun's director Mark 38.
Reply
:iconajr568:
ajr568 Featured By Owner May 28, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Don't know what that means.
Reply
:icontank50us:
Tank50us Featured By Owner Sep 30, 2012  Professional Digital Artist
those four boxes behind the #2 smoke stack, and the four between the main stack, and aft stack. Those are the Armored Box Launchers, each one contains four TLAMs
Reply
:iconajr568:
ajr568 Featured By Owner Oct 3, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Okay, thank you.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×
  • Art Print
  • Canvas
  • Photo
Download JPG 3000 × 1318




Details

Submitted on
June 29, 2011
Image Size
763 KB
Resolution
3000×1318
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
25,968 (24 today)
Favourites
192 (who?)
Comments
143
Downloads
2,303
×