Shipbucket

In 1938 the Siamese navy ordered two light cruisers from CRDA of Trieste. This order followed the successful completion of several torpedoboats for the Thai Navy, and after requesting designs from (at least) Vickers and CRDA, the Thai Navy purchased the 2 ships from the Italian yard.

Displacement: 4,300 metric tons standard

Dimensions:
• Total Length: 153.8 meters
• Beam: 14.47 meters
• Draught: 5.25 meters

Propulsion:
• 3 Boilers
• 2 Parsons reduction geared steam turbine groups
Power: 45,000 shp
Top Speed: 30 knots

Armament: 6-152/53 Ansaldo 1929; 6-76/40 Vickers/Ansaldo 1917; 8-13.2 Breda 1931; 6 533mm TT

2 aircraft, one catapult

Protection:
• Horizontal: 35mm
• Vertical: 60mm



The first ship, Naresuan, was laid down in Trieste on August 26, 1939. Taksin was laid down about a month later, on September 23, 1939. Work progressed until both ships were launched, and Italy requisitioned both on August 6th, 1942. The Italians redesigned the ships into a combination AA escort and fast cargo ship. Standard displacement increased to 6,000 tons, and the ships were renamed Etna and Vesuvio.

By the time of the Italian Armistice, the ships were roughly 60% completed. On the day of the armistice, the ships were sabotaged and fell into the hands of the Germans. They were recovered and scrapped postwar.



These ships resemble the Montecuccoli class of Italian cruiser, but without B turret and the aft funnel. The ship is depicted as ordered, but without aircraft. It is currently unknown what type of aircraft would have been included with the ship.

Hello and welcome to the Shipbucket.
Sorry for not replying earlier (and sorry for other fellows who also didn't made a comment here, I know how disheartening it can be).
First thing, is that this drawing is not on a standard template (merely on one that resembles it). Otherwise, I don't know how accurate (with the caveat that it's a never-were, of course) it is, so I won't comment, but I have a feeling that You have used unnecessarily bit too much black in some places (like some antennas/1-px-thick masts(?), walkways etc. should be 3-px-thick, the aft mast crane seems to have the lines also made black), and shading in some places looks bit dizzy (funnel, for example).

Revised version.

For the design, you could look at how Italian cruisers from that time period looked like. Since the ship was supposed to be build by CRDA in Trieste, so it would obviously have that Italian design.

The most obviously for me is that, the deck shape doesn't match the illustration, and the superstructure doesn't match it either, The main superstructure looks like it is an tower structure, some Italy did on many of there cruisers. I would say it's important to draw your drawing as close to the illustration you have, it do tell you a lot of information about the shape of the ship.

For me it looks like it share design elements from "Duca d'aosta class" light cruiser, I think Taksin class is a shortened version of that class with a single funnel then two funnels:
http://shipbucket.com/drawings/4059/file

Yes, I based the SB scale drawing on this drawing from Gii Incratore Italiano:



As well as this drawing from a Thai source:

I would say, one of the two is incorrect, one is an artist illustration of how the artist think it would look like and one is the same but is probably based on some source.

I would based the drawing on the illustration from the book and it have the classic Italian tower-structure with overhang "balcony" around it.

the later on might be one version of how it would look like after the negotiation between Thai-Navy and the shipyard.

So basically what you have is one drawing that is the proposal drawing and one drawing that is the final draft.

But the hull shape do still not match those drawing either!

In addition to issues raised by Heuhen, I'd like to add my 3 cents on "formal" side.
One is that the ship itself is too high on template - that orange horizontal line across the template (http://shipbucket.com/wiki/index.php/Fi ... 0x385).png ) on which you put the keel, should be on the waterline instead.
But more important are double black lines (which ought to be avoided) and another thing is that any walkways etc. that are meant to support a man (with exception of ladders etc. that are marked in grey without black outline) should be 3-pixel thick (black-color-black).

Most significant double black lines marked in green, elements that should be 3-pixel thick marked in red (that also applies to that vertical thing that supports (?) the searchlight or director on the aft mast)

V3

To me the brochure does show a tower-like superstructure, the parts in the back are not stepped down structures but walkways supported by struts open inbetween them.

Here is a rough sketch overlayed on the image. Everything marked green sould be white.

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation

I would agree with huehen and BB1987 regarding the bridge superstructure. Those are definitely overhanging platforms around a smaller tower.
The second source image does seem incorrect in its depiction, so go with the drawing in the book.

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