Thanks everyone for the positive feedback and the comments!
Before I address these specifically, I realize that a few general clarifications are in order:
1) My mentioning only the mockup picture above and off-handedly Sokolov's line drawing was a bit misleading. I actually drew a lot of assumptions in terms of shape and weapons fit from the drawing and A.N. Karpenko's write-up on the class, which
you can find here. I had written down the address as source but managed to bungle it up completely in my post...
2) As I noted initially, this drawing of mine is meant to represent the initial proposal as modeled, with hair, warts and all. Some of the weaponry don't look like anything known or don't fit the hull? Too bad, not my decision. The only adjustment was in selecting the most sourced/relevant system for that time period in case one was available and the model did not show anything recognizable. I will probably try to patch it up into something workable in the future, but it won't really be never-built anymore, will it?
OK, now for the specific points (grouped by topic when relevant):
I think you should actually keep shading to a minimum. while you then indeed get huge slabs of hull, this is exactly what this ships shape is. adding shading to show shapes not there is not how that would be solved, IMO.
Good point. Agreed that the shading doesn't look right as is. I reduced the shading significantly and removed the bow plate lines which don't show up in the model.
one thing I immidiately noticed. the large circular parts on the foredeck, are you certain those are missile launchers? I am asking because an VLS of such dimensions seems to be weird to be put amidships, between the 2 hulls. would they not be lift fans or something like that?
Yep, I fit-checked the S-300F and just the missile eats up half the height to the waterline... See my comment above about not changing the design from the original, and
Sokolov's drawing identifying them as Fort VLS as seen on the Pr.1164 Slava.
The role as BPK, era of design and that ridiculous planar array compel me to keep a significant long-range AA set, and there's nothing else in the model that fits with that.
Re. lift fans, no other hover-cat design I have seen features direct-intake lift fans, but rather a flush intake trunk without relation to the shape of the turbines. See behind the main mast of the Bora for example. To take another one, the lift fans on the Skjold are even mounted horizontally with a tangent exhaust. On this design, I have taken the assumption that the whole propulsion/lift plant is grouped astern and that the intake for the fans is behind some of the multitudinous grids on the machinery deck.
the funnels on the model look horizontally topped to me, not diagonal.
I think there might be a slight angle to the funnel tops, a few degrees at most.
The shape was taken from
Sokolov's drawing more than the model, where the perspective makes it hard to figure out the angles. Touched up to a lower angle.
the rudder aft seems very small, did you have good references for that?
The rudder looks small on the model but I think it might extended further towards the waterline.
1) That's not a rudder, and 2) you have seen the extent of my references on that topic in the OP
If you look closely at that part of the model, you will see what looks like a ducted prop. This possibly swivels or (more likely) includes a built-in rudder behind the blades. Or it looks like nothing concrete because it's just a preliminary model, who knows?
I have enlarged the ducts a bit so that they make more sense to push a ship that big.
do your have references for the shape of the knuckles below the waterline? I somewhat doubt they would continue all the way to the keel, and if they do I doubt they would end with an angle compared to it. I expect them to be following the shape.
Good point, I guess I got carried over following the curve.
The knuckle lines have been flattened and cut half-way to the bottom of the sponsons.
the ASW launchers forward look different on the model and on your drawing?
I'm not sure what the ASW weapons are near the bows, they look like twin-arm launchers rather than RBU-series.
Again, preliminary model. Granted, the RBUs look like they have only two tubes or rail launchers, but they are too small for RPK-1 launchers and that would make zero sense at that time anyway. Sokolov is noncommittal but Karpenko says RBU-12000, and this is the most period-relevant for the role, so RBU-12000 it is.
the model has a green underwater hull, why red on yours?
Force of habit, and best available SB palette. Fixed, it enhances the Black Sea Fleet look IMO anyway.
The gun should be A-190 tought if you look at the model, not Ak-100.
Again, see Karpenko's write-up, and keep in mind that the model is a preliminary small-scale job from the 80s. The A190 was not around, and I doubt that the turret shape was meant to be that specific. For comparison, tell me if the CIWS abaft the turret look like anything known. I went along with the AK-100 since it was the contemporary weapon for such ships (see Pr.1154, 1155 et.al.).
Granted, if development had gone along, the lead ship would probably have entered service late enough that an A-190 could have been fitted
but that's another story.
Also I'm bit sceptical about the Vodopad launchers, those which we see in the model can also be for Kh-35 or Medvedka (tough I personally suspect its the first).
I think the angled launchers are definitely for Kh-35.
OK, this part gets tricky. I know I have been harping on the necessary deviation from the model to add credible weapons and sensors, but in this case I feel that this version is the only one that sticks to the operational concept.
Let's lay down the line of thought I've gone with so far:
- This ship has an anti-submarine mission and a high displacement
- Though fast, it carries helicopters and therefore needs long-range weapons
- Karpenko mentions 2x4 Vodopad launchers
- No other ASM/AShM weapons of similar volume are mentioned anywhere
- No other probable emplacement for Vodopad launchers is clearly visible on either the model or Sokolov's drawing
- Other above-deck Vodopad launchers have featured extensively in contemporary unbuilt designs such as the Pr.11990 Anchar and the Pr.1156(0), though they do not appear angled and could work as torpedo tubes
- If such a project had gone forward, a specific deck launcher for the Vodopad might have been developed along these lines
Re. these tubes being Uran, they look too big and too close to horizontal for Urans, even though the KT-184 probably didn't exist when the model was built. Given the size, they could be notional quad-packs for Oniks, but again, BPK, so ASuW weapons are not a priority.
Re. another possible position for Vodopad launchers, see below.
Vodopad could be launched in similar ways as in the pr.10230 Tur, from fixed torpedotube launchers ála Project 1154.
Probably the little oblong panel in the lower hull is some kind of fixed torpedo position for Vodopad and torpedoes.
I'm far from certain that the width of the sponsons would allow for something bigger than a Paket in that configuration. How this would have worked on the Tur is a good question. I keep this point in mind for later, but so far I only changed the above-deck Vodopad launchers to a trainable torpedo-like horizontal launcher.
Here is the new version:
Note: I have added credit to Gollevainen, which was planned from the start but that'll teach me to rush and post drawings at that hour of night without double-checking... Behind the huge slabs of hull, this is mostly a shameless kitbash of Golly's latest Pr.1134B and a few others after all.