Shipbucket

Well that got silly fast.

1) Yep. Oto Melara Compact has the same ROF as this gun, but it uses a very tiny shell. 80 RPM is fine for anti-missile duty, CIWS is mostly for show anyway if Phalanx is anything to by.

2) It's fine, considering you never mentioned this in your post, and it certainly wasn't obvious. You had me going for a minute as I furiously scoured naval references to try to find this mysterious limitation on the field of fire of the Mk 13 Mod 4 yet couldn't. I rolled with it, but it appears my initial analysis was correct. Sadly your only reasoning was a very boring "superstructure" argument. Meanwhile Perries have the exhaust plumes much closer to the superstructure.

3. They might if it's listing to port.

4. Ok, Tell that to Churchill.

5. This is all true. On the other hand, this ship has ASROC, and can probably take two helicopters as I have added the second one back due to considerations of the hangar layout. These aren't Seahawks, but they can probably be stored in a staggered arrangement as opposed to directly side-by-side or front/back. It would just make servicing the stub wings a real chore.



Certainly this has dual directors, so it's just as functional at shooting down planes and missiles as Perry.

And no, this ship is not smaller, it's actually quite a bit larger. It's comparable to Duke in tonnage, around 4,700-4,800 tons fully loaded.

re: 9292, if you have a better name, please suggest one. It has to be either Roman or Arabic numerals, though.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.

why is it heavier? the waterline length is the same, the draft is less, the beam should be about the same or the ship will be slower (but I suppose it is a bit more, 1 meter or so, because of the topweight which seems to be more then an perry) or the Cb is modified, which means it will be slower too. I estimate it about 4000 tons full load against the perrys 4200. note also that an steam drive takes more hull volume then the perrys gas turbines (less volume in the superstructure though) so do not expect the same fit on the same displacement as the perry.

the oto melara super rapid, the updated variant that is considered potent against missiles as well has an RoF of 120.

sorry for not being clear on the Mk 13 then. well, I think turning the Mk 13 around might give you about 30 degrees more field of fire, while structurally next to nothing changes. I would do it.

if you can show me an ship being refueled from astern I will take my words back. but I only know methods that refuel from astern. (taking the refueling on the bow)

an staggered layout on this setup might mean that you have no benefits of the second helicopter due to that one has to leave the hangar before the other can be moved. not ideal, if you ask me.

it has no dual directors because they are 2 different systems, making the egg serve only as gun director.

look up one if you require an name. it looks stupid to me to develop an new system doing exactly what an off the shelf system already does. 9292 is silly because it suggests there is an Mk 9291 and earlier, which is the case in Mk 92 but even when developing an new system for every single ship will not get you to 9000

a few of my suggestions drawn out, along with corrected hull shading (and removed overhang shading, because it was of no use, and you had sb shading next to it) to show that I am not trying to give you as much work as possible, but rather to make it an working ship (something you are quite close to as of now)


another suggestion I have is to put an SPS-48E on if you show it in relatively recent years. especially with the NTU director it makes no sense not to.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

I don't think topweight concerns would allow SPS-48. The addition of the system to the Forrest Sherman conversions made them awfully top-heavy.

I'm not sure where you got refueling from astern means the helicopter deck. "Astern" and "side" refer to the position of the ship being refueled, not the tanker.



I also appreciate the tonnage estimation, because I was really just eyeballing that.

Anyway, I've said it before, I'll say it again. The gun is an anachronism, we shouldn't focus on it. Instead of TAK 120, we should be looking at Cassard. I may, in fact, add a second illuminator much like it.

A fair enough argument, but I may possibly replace the forward ASROC launcher with a Mk 13 as well, with a slightly longer rail to accept ASROCs, as I'm sure that is reasonable. Thus it would completely shatter the bottleneck of the rear placed missile launcher and allow me to protect the entire vessel from air attack.

It's true one helo has to leave the hangar to launch the other. I'm not sure how this is a non-benefit, since you can only launch one helicopter at a time, which is the true bottleneck.

And yes, the broad intention was that the egg would serve as a gun director, which was the intention of it. It's quite redundant now since I made it fully Brookealike and moved the Mk 13 to the rear. Let me change it back to the Mk 37 so the confusion is cleared up, I guess.

The Mk 9292 refers not to Mark 9292 out of 9,000, but Mark 9, Modification 2, Revision of 1992. If it were a Mk 10 fire control system, it would be Mk 10292.

Thank you for removing the bow shading near the sonar bulb, as that was indeed an oversight I had missed. However, the hull is too dark in my opinion, it's not that slanted, nor is it covered by any serious overhang.



For a while I considered SPS-48E, but I was afraid it would be too big or something, since it was never installed on air defence ships except the Mahan. My assumption was that even SPS-48 was too big and nasty, but I wanted a full 3D search radar.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.

That picture shows the USS Arizona being fuelled by the USS Kanawha. This is perfectly doable and IIRC it was standard practice in the RN for many years. However AFAIK nobody does it any more, not even civilians, and I'm not sure any current tankers have the gear to do so.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.

If converting Mk 13 to fire ASROC would have been easy, don't you think it's something the US Navy might have at one point considered?

As for astern fueling, sure, you can do that... at two or three knots.

for refueling: we mean the same but call it different. you will still need the connection points for that though, and bow refueling is used less and less in the atomic age the confusing on the refueling method was simple, I looked from the ship being refueled, which's equipment we were discussing, not the refueler.
Mk 13 cannot use ASROC. the magazine, loader, arm and rail should all be enlarged, creating effectively an new system.
for tonnage: L*B*T*Cb= displacement
what do you mean with look at cassard?
the benefit of having 2 heli's is 1. being capable of keeping an helicopter in the air at all times. this is almost never done by escorts unless you use LAMPS. for this the staggered layout would work
but 2. getting an helicopter in the air for ASW work at any time, one helicopter being refueled or repaired blocks the other from launching when required. for this the staggered hangar layout is very bad.
the shading I added is my standard hull shading (albeit with your shading colour, you might make that a bit lighter) which makes everything below the 45 degree point of the bilge curve shaded. but this is correct as well, as what I always try to say about parts et all, use it correct or don't use it at all, which was why I replaced that blob at the bow with the 'below 45 degrees' style.
the egg gave you full 360 degrees cover by taking out the black spot due to the mack. (as the missile can bend it's trajectory a bit and the director can't) hence why I suggested an fully integrated FCS. I have no idea which year your ship was build at though, so I cannot say which system is best.

it is a bit confusing, those Mk numbers which still look quite silly compared with 'Mk 13 Mod 4' as the USN uses. your insistence on creating new stuff instead of off the shelf equipment makes me wonder too, but hey, it's your ship

why not keep the modified Mk 13, liferaft racks and darker hull colour? (also, there are some spots of the original hull colour on the helideck railings, or better said on the hull underneath it)

good thinking on the 48E, I didn't even think of it's weight.

EDIT: thiel, the amsterdam, build in 1992, did have the ability. it will soon be decommissioned though, and I cannot think of any ship that can do it.

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.
Shipbucket Wiki admin

1) No, because it's also the branch that made LCS. The US Navy lost all credibility around 2000 when the naval aviation arm suffocated under the choking grasp of Dumb in the form of Super Hornet. The Navy only had a middling amount of respect after the cruiser realignment. All sense of sanity and clear thinking left the small ship fleet circa 1975, and the cruisers and carrier groups died in 1998-2002 or so. I seriously doubt they considered the efficacy of their surface fleet against submarines to be at all a consideration, much less a priority.

2) Try six or seven.
1) Then it's probably there but not something you can easily distinguish at 100-200 yards from a waterline profile view.

2) Then I suppose this isn't Mk 13.

3) I know. If I had the inclination to bother drawing a more accurate hull bottom to find the block coefficient, I would have. I didn't. Who cares? I don't, it's not very important on my list of making a fairly reasonable ship drawing that is plausible for an early 1980's timeframe.

4) It has two illuminators.

5) It has LAMPS, unless I need external equipment like antenna or something that I haven't drawn, but I assumed it used existing infrastructure.

6) Probably 1978. WM-25 should be workable then. I'm still not sure what benefit SPG-60 would offer over SPG-51, besides gun direction, if any. Cassard doesn't bother, for one.

7) Indeed, it's not new. It's actually quite old.

8) The darker colour was clashing with my aesthetic. It can be explained away as shading from the railings on the helideck, though. The life rafts are fine, since there is an overhang that extends outboard over the railing, and the Mk 13 is OK because I replaced the ASROC launcher. But if it makes you feel better, I'll switch it around.



This should be the final revision now that it's suitable for all roles.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.

Is this a single-screw design?

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)