Shipbucket

So, having come to my senses, I stopped calling this a frigate. It wandered on up to 11,500 tons, which is a perfectly reasonable displacement for something to replace Burkes and Ticos and whatnot en masse.

Notable changes, in no particular order:

• It's sort of a DDH/DDG family now; the former is a plenty competent missile destroyer in its own right, but the sensor fit isn't great and the humongous mission bay/helo requirements mean it could fit more VLS than it does. And so we introduce a second version, carrying 14' AMDR-S rather than the MEADS search set. I will probably draw some frigates and big honking ABM cruisers and whatnot sometime, but in all honesty, I don't think a carrier battlegroup would really NEED anything but these two types of combatants.
• I'm still contemplating SQS-53C rather than L3's Tsunami set (which alleges the former's performance but makes some compromises in doing so). Not sure yet.
• Seeking better ESM, I went to a quad yardarm arrangement with some sort of notional UHF/VHF interferometric arrangement. This seems like something that can maybe be invented or something. All I really demand is Classic-Outboard-level capability, but of course more is better.
• SEWIP-III remains the primary ESM/ECM capability, although I've included some sort of cheap and cheerful (Vigile, maybe?) apertures far up the mast.
• With a bigger hull and then a long sigh, I've given up on the awesome VGAS installation in favor of AGS-L. Now that I can use a simple point-and-click interface to put dumb shells on within-visual-range targets, I don't care all that much about the Oto76. Everything is 30mm now for handling small boats, and I'm comfortable with that. Note we now have 360deg 30mm coverage.
• VLS has hugely expanded, for 72 Mk 57 cells on the DDH (DDHN? DDHF?) and 96 cells on the DDG. Note cross-sections to confirm I can fit these cells as far forward as I have.
• A secondary VLS has been introduced amidships, essentially the XM501, for Nulka... and some other goodies. Hellfire/Sea Griffin (both have their advantages, and they'll both fit, so pick whichever you prefer) is included, as well as LockMart's very nifty EAPS C-RAM missile (PDF), the latter quadpacked. Each pallet of XM501 holds fifteen rounds, so we have 90 of these little baby cells aboard each design. Critically, these could be reloaded by manpower at sea from a below-decks magazine (presumed elevator path indicated in bright pink). Given the potential load of, say, 40 Hellfire, 10 Nulka, and 160 EAPS rounds without even touching the main VLS, I declare the small boat threat officially dead. Hurrah.
• Aforementioned Hellfire and EAPS make me fully comfortable losing what rudimentary anti-aircraft/anti-boat capability was provided by the 76mm. We aren't going to reach out and touch someone, particularly in the air war, but really all I want from these systems is self-protection, and they should suffice for that.
• Centurion remains partially for flares and partially for training, but it's probably dead as a missile launcher now that we have XM501.
• With Hellfire becoming important, I reintroduced some traditional training-and-elevating optical turrets. There are three turrets: one above the helo control station, and one on each of the forward mast projections. I think I presumed something based on L3's MX-10MS. Of course, the main optical turret is still available for long-range observation and whatnot while it's not going zap zap zap and blowing up fools.
• EAPS is also our CIWS at this point, which is just great as far as I'm concerned.
• Now that it's a proper destroyer, the Burke-III AMDR-X array size is shipped. The surface search radar had to move down, but such is life.
• All satcom except UHF is phased array now, based largely on sizing from the fine folks at Phasor. 4'-equivalent faces serve the lower elevations, because that's all I could fit, but 7'-equivalent arrays view the zenith. This isn't as awesome as I'd prefer, but it's better than Burke and so I'll live with it.
• Obviously, midships got squished. You might note an expansion joint in the superstructure; this is above a cofferdam and so should keep all spaces (1) dry (2) not cracking. Ace asked me why I didn't use a central midships block as structure to decrease the weight of the hull. The answer is (1) I envision this being maybe a VAGUELY useful firebreak above the DC deck and (2) I couldn't imagine the hangar/mission bay being very structurally worthwhile with its many large cutouts. Better to isolate it from the girder entirely and then build it fairly light. I don't know if this was the right choice, but I think it was a defensible and reasoned one.
• As befits a destroyer, I split up the machinery layout so that we have two fusion plants, two pairs of waterjets, and a sort of unit system. MR and SG indicate motor room and steering geer on the internal drawing, respectively. Casualty kit is a pair of 1500kW rim-drive azipods and three 500kW diesel generators, the former also making this basically a self-docking ship. The vertical-motor propulsor died as being volume-inefficient.
• Current waterjets are 4x AWJ-21-207, for an alleged maximum power of 21.5MW each. This is good for 115kshp, which ought to achieve fleet speed without any trouble. If we need to, I can probably upsize them to the -242, for 30MW each. For what it is worth, Rolls Royce suggests that above 30 knots, these units should be more efficient in a knots-per-shp sense than a conventional screw. At lower speeds they are less efficient, but who gives a damn? We burn tritium, not dinos.
• If anything, this diesel setup seems excessive to me. Does anybody have a better feel for how much emergency power might be demanded? Certainly if we lose both reactor spaces, shit's getting real serious and I'd be happy to even be able to maintain steerage while help is on its way.
• A 5m ship's boat was added for plane guard duties and whatnot for when the 11m RHIB aft might be away.
• Personnel doors like on Bertholf were a tidier solution to my frustrating boarding ladder requirements. I chose to locate these further aft than ideal, but this is the shortest compartment on the boat. It's preferable to keep a less-than-super-watertight hole in the girder in a small compartment.
• UNREP gear moved into the mission bay, obviously. This is probably better anyway.
• Mostly ignore the internal cartoon on the DDG. It's somewhat out of date, particularly with regards to machinery.
• The following main-bay capabilities are retained on the DDH: two MH-60/AW-101/CH-148 and 8 20' containers OR 16 containers OR four helos. I don't know if you could operate two AW-101/CH-148 at once from the flight deck, but this capability exists with MH-60. Cranes are provided to self-load the containers as well as move them about the bay. The DDG can carry two helos of the same size, but cannot load containers (although I guess it could certainly carry them).
• I was able to introduce a small centerline block in the after part of the hangar, 30" wide. This suffices for a torpedo elevator to the magazine, as well as ladder access to the relocated helo control station just below the SPS-75 secondary air-search set (and, in turn, to the hangar roof as a whole).

internal cartoon

Sometime after Christmas I'll draw up all of the systems used for those interested in my envisioned system layout and/or kitbashing.

No outstanding issues really bother me about this drawing at this point, although nothing is perfect and I'm definitely all ears if anybody has any concerns or points of potential improvement. The DDG's aftermost Masker belt being "kinked" above the waterline annoys me, but it does not seem like it should be an actual problem.

I reiterate how much I love this drawing.

Mate, I love this design. The best looking modern warship to date.

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


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

Indeed, it looks very good.
I'm not sure you should go any bigger if you are tempted to grow further. This looks an extremely capable design.

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

I am definitely resistant to growth of this specific hull. I am extremely happy with how it's spiraled in on an attractive, capable, and balanced-feeling drawing. The only question is what a proper BMD cruiser looks like, with 24' AMDR-S and whatnot.

Simply outstanding! This one looks like a mean S.O.B. and packs serious firepower.

_________________
Republic of Lisenia AU - In progress
Republic of Lisenia in FD Scale - In progress

No major changes. I am still pondering a larger set of diesel generators for casualty usage. Magic fusion is certainly an
unknown quantity from a DC standpoint; I'd be sad if anything less than catastrophic damage limited us to only the
4x500kW emergency diesels. I have the volume; the argument against is that I don't really want to introduce a third substantially-sized power generation system if I can help it.

I've considered shifting to SQS-53C on the DDG (which I'd consider more of a dedicated blue-water fleet escort), but this
would force a complete rethinking of the forwardmost AMR, and a relocation of the forward azipod. In the interest
of commonality, I haven't made that change, although I'm still pondering it.

Upon consultation with a pal, I've deleted the 30mm mounts in favor of one of my favorite pieces of
is-it-real-or-napkinwaffe, the counterpart to LockMart's MHTK mini-missile, the
50mm (!!!!) Guide-to-Burst Bushmaster of Death, more formally titled EAPS.

I have scaled the mount from the HEMTT carrier, then enclosed it in a relatively reasonable sloped-face enclosure.
This should be approximately weight-neutral, and my goodness it's hard to ignore the awesomeness of guided
forward-detonating MEFP firing at 200rpm.

You can read a bit about EAPS here and here. It's definitely real enough
to feel worthy of inclusion, although who knows if it will ever receive the funding necessary to make it work reliably.
Even if it doesn't shoot down shells every time, well, boats are an easier target by juuuust a slight factor.


http://i.imgur.com/qOUe3hV.png

interesting, so with that one the world will have 30mm, 35mm, 40mm, 50mm, 57mm... why not just go together with Bofors and redesign there 57mm in to an more compact version with an higher rpm tah older 57mm. you get (in the shell/grenade):
- more tech
- more shrapnel
- more range
- more punch in every shoot
- more variety of ammunition.
- easier logistics, since it would use existing logistic chains.

The Bofors 57mm are already doing what the 50mm are doing, so why use money on something that will just make the already big logistic chain, even bigger...

That would be the main arguments, against the weapon system (think)

Many of the components in the 50mm Bushmaster are common to the 30mm. The weapon is staggeringly adaptable; changing from 30mm to 40mm Supershot is allegedly a modification that can actually be made underway, being only a bolt and barrel switch. I think the 50mm is a bigger change, but it's still keeping a lot of common parts in the supply chain. Anyway, it's definitely not a round as powerful as one would think given its caliber, as one can well imagine looking at the cartridge. The diameter is exclusively for the packaging of the electronics, divert motor, and the MEFP warhead, not to pack a ton of powder behind it. An analogous comparison might be the British Pom-Pom to the Bofors 40mm.

I do not know the exact weight of this system (perhaps nobody does yet!), but consider that this is a twin 50mm mount, with onboard guidance radar and electrical supply, on a HEMTT rated for 10 tons. A Bofors 57mm, with ammo but nothing else, is over 50% heavier.

That's not an attack on the Bofors by any stretch of the imagination, it's just a different cartridge for a different mission. Unitary armor penetration by the 50mm, for example, would be pitiful. Meanwhile I would argue that many of the (very real) advantages you cite, like varying types of ammunition, or more shrapnel, do not really concern me. As a secondary caliber aboard, I would never press this system into action attempting to deposit conventional HE onto a target, or pop the world's saddest starshell, or really do much of anything other than act as a CIWS. Any system that is specifically designed to engage artillery and mortar shells is going to be pretty nasty dealing with boats or the occasional subsonic leaker. I have no illusions about being all things to all people and the greatest gun system for any task ever, but nothing's perfect. Life is full of compromises.

yup

As much as I approve of those I-Masts I can't help but keep wondering what if it took a hit from something rather explodey-wodey?

_________________
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire