Shipbucket http://67.205.157.234/forums/ |
|
100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate http://67.205.157.234/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=5649 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Charwhick [ October 8th, 2014, 9:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
Now with new intro text! The 100m Generica Multirole Corvette provides a strong backbone for greenwater navies. Equipped with anti-air, anti-submarine and anti-surface equipment as well as an unmanned aerial vehicle for large-area surveillance, the Generica Corvette is an adaptable surface combatant fully capable of peace-time and war-time roles. Doubling as a Mission Bay, the climate controlled hangar provides space for special operations insertion forces, mine laying, cold beer storage and more for unprecedented flexibility in a 100m package. Basic outline: Propulsion
|
Author: | Rhade [ October 8th, 2014, 9:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
76mm is too low, bow block out forward fire sector. |
Author: | Blackbuck [ October 8th, 2014, 10:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
I like it. Off the top of my head I'd do the following.
|
Author: | Thiel [ October 8th, 2014, 10:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
To ad to what Blackbuck said, I'd move the gangway aft to about midship and I'd move the big sat dome to the top of the bridge or on to the hangar roof. Having sensitive electronics as your widest points is generally considered a bad thing. I'd also raise the torpedo tubes so they're both on the hangar level. That said it seems like a solid little design. As a design exercise you could try and make a topview. Side views like these are perfectly fine, but it's easy to draw something that looks good on one but can't really fit. |
Author: | Charwhick [ October 8th, 2014, 11:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
Thanks all for the advice, working on the changes now. @Theil's suggestion of a topview, I actually did have to put together a topview of the bridge area because it turned into a mental cluster!@#$ with all those odd angles. I will do a top view though! I just want to get any major changes out of the way first so corrections aren't double-work. Edit: |
Author: | heuhen [ October 8th, 2014, 11:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
to fix what you don't like with the bridge. just make the windows not so tall. And lower them by 1 or 2 px. |
Author: | Thiel [ October 8th, 2014, 11:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
You might also want to do an overlay with the internal decks marked on it because they don't seem to line up right now |
Author: | Charwhick [ October 8th, 2014, 11:54 pm ] | |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate | |
You might also want to do an overlay with the internal decks marked on it because they don't seem to line up right now
I see what happened, the landing pad (and thus hangar) is about three feet higher than it should be (https://i.imgur.com/LwHXBjT.png). Everything else seems to align. I don't want to lower it (reducing freeboard at the stern significantly) but obviously raising everything else three feet doesn't seem right either. What's the solution? Just an internal stair case?edit: Sorry Huehen, I'm not ignoring you, I've actually made the change you suggested on the .pdn file but it didn't make it over to the .png I used for this overlay |
Author: | TimothyC [ October 9th, 2014, 5:21 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate |
I'd consider moving the SPY-1K faces to a single structure. This will reduce the back-end equipment costs, which right now is duplicated between the fore and aft faces. Nice start. |
Author: | Charwhick [ October 9th, 2014, 6:11 am ] | |
Post subject: | Re: 100m Multirole Corvette / Frigate | |
I'd consider moving the SPY-1K faces to a single structure. This will reduce the back-end equipment costs, which right now is duplicated between the fore and aft faces.
I agree in principle but I'm a bit leery for a few reasonsNice start. 1. If I go the Nansen route with a SPY mast, I get a better radar horizon, but I'd be really questioning the top-weight issues. 2. Duplicated back-end equipment is redundant back-end equipment. I might be chasing a wild goose with this line of thought, but even if something big and not easily repairable failed I'd rather have one radar hemisphere still operational. 3. I like the look of it. This is a really weak argument and personal design taste means very little when designing a combat system, but it's just sleek looking to my eye. If you have some really pressing point that I'm missing (maybe duplicating the system would make the ship unaffordable to small countries it's aimed at?) I'd strongly consider it. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |