Shipbucket

In concept, yes, I think so. In practice, these were much larger and earlier (and liquid-fueled!) missiles, and I used the word "hangar" quite intentionally. It seems likely they needed a fair amount of TLC!

basicly the entire deck bellow the bridge and the after superstructure were for the missiles. In practice, the reloading/refueling was to be done manually, and was nearly practically impossible to conduct in outside calm and steady conditions of safe harbour. In following classes, the reloading method was discarded completely. But they were first of their kind and have to prove out many new working concepts to the suspicious traditionalists and also prove some ideas unworkable.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

Yeah, early missiles weren't so much launched as cuddled into flight

_________________
“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.

I hadn't thought it possible for you to seriously improve on the original drawing, but comparing it shows what a fine job you've done.

I hope this project doesn't mean that the Soviet carriers project has stalled/ been abandoned?

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

I just did them remember?

But I guess thats an everlasting program becouse I bet in a year or so from now I start to again consider of doing the carriers again. There are also few missing items still but for now I'm going to do the cruisers as they are in the must urgent need of redoing.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

Ah yes, my memory is jogged now. My bad for forgetting those!

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

Oh, here's one complaint. The after missile "barbette" goes right to the deck edge. I'd always figured the black-brown-black shows the pronounced camber of the weather deck of these ships, and the forward SSM launcher looks like it bears this out.

Shouldn't the aft one be the same way, or am I missing something?

Yea, thats proplem in interpting the source drawings. the idea is to show them somewhat middle of the three lines that presents the
slope on the weatherdeck. For some reason, the drawing I used as base pictured the front launcher differently than the other.
Her is somewhat middle ground between them, and propably the rigth way to show them:

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"

I think I'd do them both the way you had the bow launcher previously; now it looks like the deckhouse under the bridge is narrower than the SSM barbettes, which certainly is not the case!

As you say, it is a challenging task. There is no absolutely correct answer.

well basicly within those three pixels Im trying to show the slope from the edge to the centerline...now, the launcher, positioned in the centerline, would naturally have its edges closes to the edges of the deck, than the ridge of the centerline, thus looked from the side, it should also shown closer to the edge of the deck, than the center ridge. Within those three pixels, there naturally isen't much room for much alterations, Unless I would raise the ridge by some pixels, but that half a foot difference is Quite a step in the overexaggeration and It would most likely look crooked.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"