Shipbucket

Few things that spring to mind;

VLS, why are there two types? It makes it logistically annoying and makes no logical sense either

Top weight, will be rather vast unless you're planning on using Aluminium or balsa above the weather deck, I'd recommend increasingly the draft or cutting a deck or two from the above waterline hull.

CIWS, Seems rather excessive for a vessel which will probably have an escort, especially odd is the placement of missile CIWS, which gives it less than 90 degrees of traverse which restricts the use of a good defense.

The four boats seem to hang over the side with no protection or well, rough seas could damage them easily, besides they also seem to be very high up

_________________
Work list(Current)
Miscellaneous|Victorian Colonial Navy|Murray Riverboats|Colony of Victoria AU|Project Sail-fixing SB's sail shortage
How to mentally pronounce my usernameRow-(as in a boat)Don-(as in the short form of Donald)Dough-(bread)
"Loitering on the High Seas" (Named after the good ship Rodondo)
There's no such thing as "nothing left to draw" If you can down 10 pints and draw, you're doing alright by my standards

The davits: are 10m up - a long way which is good and bad. Frame-type (?) davits handle long drops best. Yes exposed but having them out like that means they can just drop and go. Bear in mind this ship is intended for the Arabian Gulf rather than the North Sea and the boats can be craned inside in preparation. There would also be a mobile crane on board for shifting things like Bavar-2, RIB, VLS reloads etc. Not sure on this.

Top weight: Full load is 8000 +16,000 + cargo tonnes, that will be in the bottom. The top is fairly hollow. Rather like a feeder size cargo vessel but a lot more power and shallow draft. I will trim the front island - it is huge.

VLS, I wanted torpedoes and cruise missiles and S-300 doesn't do that. Flexibility and options (Russian or Chinese).
But investigating the world of very flexible Chinese and Soviet multi-pack VLS everything apparently seems to work in everything so you're right - definitely a need-fix.

This is an expeditionary cruiser so will often be by itself. Like the cruisers of old, but of necessity since IRIN doesn't have blue-water destroyer screens. Re: CIWS missiles, you mean the HQ-7 Launcher? I could add two more launchers on the bridge flanks. Hmm. The fire direction of the HQ-7 system is not realistic, but close - but it can also be completely split from the launcher.

EDIT: fixed things mentioned here in drawing. Now for the front view.

Front view:



Next fitting engines, VLS, cargo space, fuel, hangar and anything else important.

It is a really impressive vessel, however personally I would conceal the RHIBs into superstructure. And the HQ-7 faces wrong direction.

Considering the alternatives for better stowage of boats, at the moment alternatives are: side alcoves, storage on top, or on or near the stern (alcove).

Alcoves (retracting davits) left at the positions they are would cut into useful and important space (funnel vent paths, cargoway, hangar). If moved forward there is still front cargoway to consider and loss of crew island space.

Storage on top - too high in my opinion. But possible and there is lots of unused deck.

Off the stern directly - I want forward facing launching. Would flood if pooped.

Alcoves towards the back, under the helipad, but not open to the stern. Best option. More likely to be swamped than nearer the center. Loss of secondary personnel areas to the rear. Not as generally accessible.

Also there could be a ramp or a well maybe. But as to davits - San Giorgio class. - what other examples of large retractable tall davit setups are there?

Edit: updated and done. The overhang in the hull has to be overcome by over-sizing the alcove boxes wasting space.

Look at Dutch parts, there are some nice davits there.

You have a shit-ton of empty flat space between the fore and aft superstructure where you can put RHIBs on. Why the hell don't you?

The crane and ramp to starboard interfere, better to port over the air intake where Bavar-2 is. There could be demountable frames set up on both sides according to mission.

Problem with lengths though: only 7.5 meters per RHIB not including necessary clearance gaps given 2 each side, so the RHIBs are getting down to baby sizes and the ones drawn are already a bit small.

Going the other way and considering 2 big RHIBS - the 12.3m VLS reloads dictate minimum radius' for the cargoways. So a >=12.3m RIB isn't a good idea. What they are at the moment, 9.75m with engine is OK.

want to free up space:
- Remove the totally no idea what I am doing here aircraft you have between both superstructure.
- Remove cargo deck, no warship have that. except a supply ship. (if you can't afford an supply ship, then you can't afford this ship either)
- Use only one type of helicopter and have two of them, no need for more. or you become an helicopter carrier.

don't know about that radar, but so 60's
note shipbucket have a ton of top down view. USE THEM! so things start to look good.


Iran would never build a ship that doesn't work, and have a lot of wasted space. something this ship are. you are talking about not enough space for RHIB in superstructure, then draw a ship that have the similar equipment as an frigate wt 140 crew, while the ship size say 400+ crew. oh when an 80-90 meter corvette can have there RHIB on deck you can to.

A RHIB is never dropped down but lifter carefully down.


and if the ship is an expeditionary ship it will travel in the pacific ocean and in the Atlantic ocean even in the gulf. and at both place you can get waves from 10 meter up to more than 30 meters.