Shipbucket

I'm not really convinced about the placement of the funnel on the Batch II. It's got all its piping coming right through your C&C for one.

Yes if you are old school like you, that don't understand how a ship work, where you can have C&C, how big it need to be for this type of ship and so one. but stop derailing my topic with you'r always stupid comments.

not choosing any sides here, but heuhen, I am still not certain those ship designs work xD

_________________
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

Oh hello ace... always nice to have you around:


let us see:

Batch 1:

- Small hangar forward aft of superstructure, flex deck behind it 2+ deck height (strengthening beam weight... yeah, see that problem I do)
- can lower the superstructure and move gun and VLS to main deck. or just move the superstructure forward a bit. and use Mk-57 VLS (time period is there.)
- I noted down in the story text problems with the design, where it also stand that it was moved out to home-guard use in home water and as school use. (or as I like to call it: a sitting duck)

Perhaps the Batch 1 should have an more conventional power-plant. Thus the full effect of that water cooling system of exhaust can work.


Batch 2:

- made the superstructure as small as possible but still us full beam.
- Hangar take up most of the 2+deck, except under superstructure and forward.

design is not totally different to other ships destroyers, frigate. Except:
- LM2500 close to superstructure low in hull.
- Diesel a little more aft
- Electric drive
- two+ deck under main deck goes to hangar and flex, deck. the weight should go down somewhat, but then strengthening beam and the load take it up again!
- crew around and under Hangar-flex deck.
- similar or smaller VLS than destroyers-frigates
- unconventional Navy hull... an cross between an Naval hull and commercial hull

bigger hangar, smaller superstructure, "but higher hull". that might be the problem

what I can do is:
- off-cent Island.
- C&C moved bellow deck.
- VLS and gun moved to main deck. thus can lower the superstructure down an deck.
- VLS reduced to 2x16 cell with only self defense and ASROC (or greater)
- move Hangar more aft.
- build the radar dome around an conventional funnel and just hang an bridge on to it (Where is the super clue!), or we have to think out of the box. well yeah... Batch 1... funny little thing!
- ... ideas?


It's not that I ignore you all, but when I have an concept in my head I try to stick to it as long as possible, but in end change mind (sometime in the future when you work on ship design in the real world, and meet an designer that have his own idea, that you know doesn't work... well see me as an test bed!)

BTW. what is the difference of the Enforcer series (8000 I think and this one. except smaller superstructure because I moved that all down in to the hull, bigger armament and power-plant. or these one (note some of them is similar to mine original idea. except of powerplant and radar!):

Spruance, yes it's longer, but not as wide is mine Batch 2!, not the funnel placement there shall be some turbines down there!:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachme ... 1153436969

The Germans in an vessel 15 meter shorter than mine Batch 1... how the h*** (might be that beam, uhh I loos beam for speed...or stability, yeah stability!):
http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachme ... 1153611665
Internal:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachme ... 1153611665

and these (Look's like those British one, it stand that some of them can take VTOL..so)
http://forum.keypublishing.com/attachme ... 1153673682

where have I gone wrong?

You think I'm some dumb Amerifat, I get it.

A very interesting design (more especially the aft flight-deck and the stealth-bridge amidships), close to the very famous BVT - UXV Combatant design







Hopefully to see two larger version :
- one DDG(X), with a 155mm AGS Lite, around 60/100 VLS & helico/UAV aft
( It could be the next joint U.S/Japanese fleet-destroyer design by late 2020s.... )
- one LHD(X) with a full flight-deck

The possibility is there. Original I was going for 5 different size. but I had to stop and think. Because getting jet engine in a small vessel is not an walk in a park. specially when it's not normal, I bet that for 30 years ago that if someone said Norway was going to build the world fastest twin hulled boat, floating on air, in composite (plastic) and give it 15-20.000hp jet engine. people would said it is stupid. but in the end it is all about where the engine is placed, and how the power is transferred.

just like The new British aircraft carrier. they have there main engine (jet engine) in platform right under the flight deck, hanging out over the hull.