Shipbucket

You know, I didn't actually notice this until now (I'm modding the proposed bow bulb for the DDG-51, and thought it might look nice on the Castle too) but your Castle class is HUGE.

At nearly thirty meters longer than a DDG-51, the displacement really shouldn't be the same. She's damn near the size of a cruiser, and if they've got extended C&C flag capabilities (and on that hull there's plenty of room) I think the USN would quantify them as Cruisers.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

Very nice change to an already superb drawing. However Miho, though you're perfectly right about the probable classification in the USN, this here is a smaller navy, with a far more stringent purse. So, the way I see the IFA designation as DDGs, it's a sop to a probably rather thrifty, parsimonious Parliament, maybe where the Labour has a big influence. (I gather, maybe rather naïvely, that the political structure of Australia would remain in place, together with traditional party's, such as the Labour Party, the Liberals and the Conservatives (national Democrats?)).

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

What? Where? The Castle? I didn't change anything, I'm still working with Ace hashing out the exact shape of the sonar bulb.
I'm not complaining about the classification, I'm complaining about it being a huge ship for what it is. It's thirty meters longer than a Burke, with the same beam and draught, what does it have that a Burke does not? It carries LESS weapons than a Burke on that hull. So what's the extra displacement used for?

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

Thanks for your valued interest in the Castlemaine Class.

The length has been an ongoing concern for me and have contemplated shortening the design as both the RAN and IFAN AU have no requirement for a cruiser sized combatant.

To do this I am going to remove 10 metres midships between the fwd exhaust stack and the AEGIS superstructure and then amalgamate the two (as per F-100 class). The aft exhaust stack will also be reduced in size by removing one of the directors (the 3 x AN/SPG-51 system has been replaced with 2 x CEAMOUNT directors in an updated drawing) and then lowering it by 1 deck. Once this is done I can remove a further 5-10 metres of the deck space aft of the aft exhaust stack. I am also going to remove 5 metres from the forecastle between the gun mount and missile deck, 10 metres from the flight deck, redraw the transom so it is flush with the flightdeck, reduce the height of the main mast and recolour the ship to USN Standard Grey.

_________________
There is no "I" in TEAM but there is a ME


______________________
Current Worklist:
Redrawing my entire AU after a long absence from Shipbucket

Hahaha...ok, I was wrong there, Miho! I earnestly believed you had modded the bulbous dome of the Castlemaine. I hope I'll detect it next time. I guess the work quality here is so darn high, that it's easy enough to commit such an error.
And, Miho, I never claimed you were complaining. I merely pointed out the altruistic fact that sometimes curtains of fog and white lies are necessary to appease election- wary politicians - such, of course, that happened in the Netherlands with regards to the Tromp-class DDGs, in the 1970s, which were classified as FFGs. That said, I believe Leut_East is on the right track, in his endeavor to create a realistic AU.
And, speaking of the artist, please, please, retain the handsome proportions of your Castlemaine. Just keep your DDG classification!

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Yet it's only got a single strike-length VLS bay with a little self-defense-length bay shoved aft. I really think he should find a way to fit another 32-cell strike-length bay back there too.

Okay, I have put her on a diet and I think I have hit a balance now. There has also been the inclusion of a 24 cell VLS aft.



Updated specs to follow...

_________________
There is no "I" in TEAM but there is a ME


______________________
Current Worklist:
Redrawing my entire AU after a long absence from Shipbucket

Better, but you should stick to your original plan of moving the forward stack into the superstructure: You get more seperation of your engine rooms, a good thing, and the ship will look a bit less squashed if you have more room amidships.

Also, if you keep the longer bow, you've easily got room for a 64 cell VLS there. furethermore, a slightly larger ship with rather more operational range than a Burke might fit the Aussies well. Your navy simply doesn't have the huge logistical train the USN has.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

I'd like to see more space between the engine rooms, yes. Lengthening the bow for a 64-cell VLS feels like it would also make the situation a bit finer; she feels sort of husky right now, and the superstructure seems awfully far forward.

I'd also like to see the bottom sill of the side-bays be above the main deck level; right now, it feels like they're cutting into the main girder of the ship for no particular reason.

The quality on the drawing surpass me with not only one mile but a... to say it this way. I'm on earth, you are on Mars!

oh could you one day do an version of what if the Norwegian frigate Fridtjof Nansen class got stuck in an copy-machine on X% re-size, and come out in an destroyer size++ what would it look like. just for fun!