Shipbucket

you know, if you just follow the standard it will no longer be something that makes my eyes hurt every time I see 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

On the contrary, she'd be very handy against most individual USN warships in many scenarios. The strike helicopters for one thing. She'd fall down against the US Navy as a whole though. And there would likely be only one of her type.

She's a flagship, a soft-power ship. Used like the Kirov class is being used for now, what countries can have when they can't afford aircraft carriers. Turns up at international regattas to show the flag. Has multiple other uses in low-level conflict situations; this one is better than the Kirov for that. If I were Iran I'd seriously consider building this. Similar to their space program - gain national prestige from launching monkeys into space. So what if its not a Soyuz or mars rover, its still impressive.

Ok, please try to do her at SB-scale. Since I have search a lot about Iran, I know about the Persian gulf depth and bottom layout.

Everyone is saying it is not at proper scale - do you mean scale or some other standards or colours? I'm pretty sure its at scale. 2 pixels 1 foot? 15 cm? Of course some of the bits have been rescaled. But this is alternative universe stuff and if I bring to standard they wouldn't resemble anything actual built.

confusing to say, but shipbucket scale is more then just the scale, it is an set of standards.
for example, no double black lines, no pixelated lines or area's and the use of an standard railing and window colour.
it also defines the use of our parts, but I keep that separate because it is possible to make an shipbucket drawing without using any parts (about all sailing ships drawn, for example) but in your drawing that is not the case. many parts are still recognisable, although horribly deformed.
your drawing, as it is, thus is not in shipbucket standards, even if it is sized correctly.

_________________
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

As a show of goodwill and in apologies for sore eyes and horrible deformities here's Bavar-2 for the parts bin. Is it enough to just post it and say - "free to take and use"? To the best of my knowledge the colour and size is accurate.

Past the crediting and style issues, it not a bad start at all. I like the Bavar-2 a lot its a nice cute little plane.

_________________
Projects:
Zealandia AU
John Company AU
References and feedback is always welcome!

Agree with Trojan, your design is a good effort, but she would be much nicer in shipbucket standards.

Adding top view:



I tried to take the many suggestions made into account, thank you. Be assured shipbucket standardization is now recognized and kept in mind. Still bumping hull sizes around for displacement calculations so seems kind of pointless to be adding gradients at the moment. Note the window colors

SH-3 is rather large, the hangar had to grow. Shuffled weapons positions, radars still need reconciling with reality. There is containerization! (50?) - the crane may be replaced with an actual one, same for countermeasures. The crane isn't for containers its for lowering stuff over the side. As for missiles possibly the local-produced Hawk, but NB Iran have their own Crotale knockoff called Shahab Thaqeb. The 630-type CIWS: if buying Kilo submarines and trying forever to get S-300 missiles IRIN would probably go for Russian CIWS. The alternative is Oerlikons or Chinese. I would like 8000 tonnes of bunkerage, interesting to see if it will fit.

The top view is informative, but I have a question: The RHIBs are hang out like this?My opinion is to design a space into the superstructure to conceal them and avoid being swept by waves.