| Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
| USS John Kendrick class FFG http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3013 |
Page 1 of 6 |
| Author: | nighthunter [ April 30th, 2012, 8:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | USS John Kendrick class FFG |
Since it was part of the Nato ASW Design challenge, I felt this needed it's own thread, to show updates as well as foreign users (IE Ireland, Israel, Australia, Germany, Greece, Egypt, South Africa, New Zealand). Certain vessels will not have ASW capabilities, but instead have modified "low-tech" hulls for other duties. Enjoy! As commissioned, 1970's: ![[ img ]](http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b32/Donovan_NightHunter/FFG-3JohnKendrickclass.png)
|
|
| Author: | Thiel [ April 30th, 2012, 9:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
I still wonder how you're going to fit everything on board. You have the same amount of gear as a Perry (The new sonar and ASROC should more than make up for the Mk 13) on a much smaller ship. |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ April 30th, 2012, 12:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
also, you lack the NSSM director, the water inlets are positioned quite weird(you have none at all were the engines are, none at the weapon systems, and 4 of them underneath the hangar..... ) and I have doubts about the water coming over the bow, especially considering that huge sonar. you also didn't draw the entire praerie masker system and I have doubts about the harpoons in the mk 112: you have no space for an reloader, so that limits your ASROC quantity severely. as an last note, I find the mix of the old and the new perry drawing quite... well.... blegh. this would also solve that huge lines of credits you have now. this is an addition only to what I already have said about the powerplant, weight level and weight distribution in the ASW challenge thread, btw |
|
| Author: | nighthunter [ May 1st, 2012, 2:57 am ] | |||||
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG | |||||
also, you lack the NSSM director
Dude, the Egg is the director, and it isn't an NSSM, it is a SeaSparrow.
the water inlets are positioned quite weird(you have none at all were the engines are, none at the weapon systems, and 4 of them underneath the hangar..... )
Please, enlighten me about where they belong.
and I have doubts about the water coming over the bow
It's fine, a lot of other vessels had similar bows.
you also didn't draw the entire prairie masker system
What is that?
and I have doubts about the harpoons in the mk 112: you have no space for a reloader, so that limits your ASROC quantity severely. Same style as with the Knox class. Ace, please, if you think you can improve the vessel, please do so. I would appreciate all help, even if it involves lengthening the hull. As for the MACK, the OHP has turbine exhaust stacks forward, as well. |
||||||
| Author: | gordo8000 [ May 1st, 2012, 3:15 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG | ||
you also didn't draw the entire prairie masker system
What is that? |
|||
| Author: | TimothyC [ May 1st, 2012, 3:38 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG | ||
also, you lack the NSSM director
Dude, the Egg is the director, and it isn't an NSSM, it is a SeaSparrow.
NATO Sea Sparrow Missile. Sea Sparrow came in two flavors, the early Basic Point Defense Missile System (BPDMS), and the aforementioned NSSM. You have the NSSM system on this ship - BPDMS only used the bulky Mk 25 GMLS, not the lighter Mk 29 of the NSSM. It also was stuck with manual directors and sucked (as in a guy would stand at the mount and use the Mk 1 eyeball to guide the radar the missile would track on). ESSM (Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile) is a new missile with a name to make it look like it's an evolutionary development of what came before. |
|||
| Author: | erik_t [ May 1st, 2012, 4:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
I am unclear as to why there is both a gas turbine stack and a steam-plant mack. The SPS-49 would not be able to turn. 1970s is, IIRC, before SLQ-32 entered service. As for volume, there is one less helo and probably no ASROC reloads. I think it's plausible. |
|
| Author: | Clonecommander6454 [ May 1st, 2012, 6:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
COSAG Propulsion? |
|
| Author: | acelanceloet [ May 1st, 2012, 7:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
of course I know the egg can guide NSSM: BUT the aft of the egg is blocked by the mast. guess where your launcher is?  you get what I meanalso, the egg can only guide OR your gun OR the NSSM, especially when their fields of fire are so different and it is by that that they most likely would need to engage different targets. the perry has at least: (I name what you should have at each side) - 1 small one for the prop shaft cooling (you have that one correct) - 1 small one for the diesel generator - 2 around the engine chamber, of which 1 might also serve for the gun cooling water for your ship I would suggest: - 1 small one between gun and mk 112 - 1/2 large ones near the engines - 1 at the prop shaft (which you already have) I would suggest some wavebreaker on the bow, at least to protect your weapons and equipment over there, if not some bulwarks. look at my perry's and timothy's DG/AEGIS to see what the prearie masker looks like in it's 2 variants drawn in shipbucket the single exhaust of the perry just aft of the mast was the exhaust of the diesel generator  EDIT: ow and indeed, SLQ-32 was only fitted on the spruances in 1980, and phalanx in 1995-90 |
|
| Author: | Obsydian Shade [ May 1st, 2012, 6:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: USS John Kendrick class FFG |
Just some thoughts about the radar fit. Since you don't have SM-1 you likely don't need the high end long range search radar. I'm thinking as a cost cutting measure, that AN/SPS-40 would suffice for this role, especially as the Sprucans, which also didn't have an AAW mission also carried the same radar. Not certain what to do about the placement of the egg, one idea is to move it where the SPS-49 is currently, and locate your search radar where the SLQ-32 resides. With regard to the egg only being able to guide the missile or the gun, it depends on the exact period and model of the egg, doesn't it? I thought one half of the egg was a gun director, and the other half a missile one, but perhaps earlier versions were one or the other, or perhaps due to other issues, it could only act in one role or another at the same time. In any case, I wouldn't worry too much about that particuliar problem. This design is clearly ASW, and meant to do the job on the cheap, making as much use of off the shelf technology as possible, so to keep costs down, you skimp wherever possible, and secondary capabilities are a good starting place. Frankly, they are lucky to have any AAW capability, as some might just choose to have some marines with Stinger missiles to cover the role. Given the number of Knox class Frigates the USN had on hand, I don't see much need for this kind of vessel, but some smaller, poorer allies might like it. (Portugal, Greece, Turkey?) |
|
| Page 1 of 6 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|