New Federal Republic of Aznaiza Destoyers

Syzmo wrote:

As someone who works on museum ships the idea behind this appeals to me. Just to clarify these are completely newly built ships, not old hulls with new technology grafted on?

The idea of mission specific ships scares me, too much chance of not having what you need where you need it. It is much better to have a few ships that can do everything well, or a lot of ships that can do everything to some extent.

As for the design, should I assume that by deleting a smoke stack you have also deleted half the engineering spaces (limiting the speed to 20 knots or so) to try and help with all the top weight associated with all the new weapons and sensors?

Well there aren't really meant for replacing larger ships. They are only being built to support fleet operations more efficiently. if anything they are less modular than a regular destroyer. Also I don't intent to limit the engineering spaces so I will definitely have to add the second funnel back on or even pipe the exhaust to the single funnel. Also I think I will have to enlarge the hull to make the ship less top heavy.

LBraden wrote:

heuhen wrote:

LBraden wrote:

I noticed they are blurry, makes me a little irritated at image hosting sites for doing that, but the designs look interesting.

that because he have saved them as JPG-file and not as an PNG-file. but at the same time Photobucket have re sized the picture. but he need to fix that to by adjusting his settings in Photobucket.

Aye, it looks more like the photobucket resizing instead of jpg artifacting.

If it is photoshop doing this how do I correct it?

bezobrazov wrote:

My good friend, do you have any notion, even the basic inkling of how ships - real, functional ships - work?

I knew NationStates was a joke, and sadly your misfits seem to only confirm that impression.

(I know that was harsh, but someone needs to speak up against such abominations appearing on Shipbucket!)

Please, consider re-starting; maybe using a more modern hull, with a far better blanced outfit of weapons and sensors. Then I promise I will judge it in earnest.

I understand what you're saying. I have very basic knowledge of ship building but love to draw them. Sorry for posting such "abominations" on shipbucket I hope that I haven't caused any heart attacks. Maybe this is why there aren't that many people on shipbucket?

acelanceloet wrote:

other then the designs being horribly overloaded, there is not much wrong with them design wise, bezo?
I mean, no, the designs are not good, but for somebody just starting here that seems like an horrible reaction.

I would have to say that they don't look amazing. I do agree with you about the weight of the ships. They do seem to be very top heavy and just wouldn't sail right. However these are only my 2 attempt at ship building so I hope I can improve my future designs.

heuhen wrote:

if you open the drawing in an seperate link or just download it, you will notice that the drawing is called "something.JPG". That means the drawing is an JPG-file. remember I have been around a bit, so if I say an drawing is an JPG-file it is JPG-file. that it's!

and this drawing is both re-sized and an JPG-file. trust me I know this, I'm expert!

How would I correct the re-sizing problem?

acelanceloet wrote:

Overloading aside, the only severe error I really see is that the midships GMLS on the first drawing is sitting atop the machinery spaces.

Certainly my first ten drawings were far, far worse.

@ace: like when you used that word in a phrase? (horrible!)
I'm surprised that you - of all people - defends these. Yes, they are executed well. That can be deduced even with the .jpeg-format and shrinking. But how much is his and how much are colosseum et al.?
But is there much wrong with them? Yes, majorly so! There are severe inherent stability problems, not to mention almost unimaginable stressors on the hull and superstructure. The masts will most certainly collapse due to the sheer weight put on them; especially the ridiculously overloaded main mast.
And ace, if you read my post carefully, I did offer a carrot: redo these with more modest, realistic loads etc, and we'll take him seriously.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

erik_t wrote:

acelanceloet wrote:

Overloading aside, the only severe error I really see is that the midships GMLS on the first drawing is sitting atop the machinery spaces.

Certainly my first ten drawings were far, far worse.

Actually you make a very good point. It did not look into that. The Machinery Spaces are large and I guess that would mean you can't put a missile magazine there. It is also probably why these kinds ships never were equipped with these systems.

Also I want to thank everyone so far about the criticism. Most of you handled it in a very polite and professional way. I hope that these comments can help me become even better at this kind of design.

erik_t wrote:

acelanceloet wrote:

Overloading aside, the only severe error I really see is that the midships GMLS on the first drawing is sitting atop the machinery spaces.

Certainly my first ten drawings were far, far worse.

indeed, mine were far worse too.
for the purpose of not overloading the ships, look at what is placed on real designs and the belowdeck parts thread : http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =16&t=2755

bezobrazov wrote:

all you say can be submitted to the simple point: putting too much on top. top weight.
I don't think the 'we' speeks for everybody here. I for one already take these serious. whatever the looks of them, there went actual thought into these drawings.

also. yes, I have once called an drawing horrible. I did that to an drawing of an member who should be able to do better than draw that what he drew. in this case, what would help is constructive critics. this, I quote:

Quote:

consider re-starting; maybe using a more modern hull, with a far better blanced outfit of weapons and sensors.

is bullying, not cricism. more modern hull? why. better balanced? whatever that means for somebody new? restarting? I have seen drawings of yours having worse faults, bezo.

all in all, Ruterra, you are on a good line, and your replies show promise. I can't wait to see the improved set of drawings.

_________________
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

Welcome aboard Ruterra. You've got a promising start.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

bezobrazov wrote:

I know I'm not the only one who has grown tired of your blustering replies... please tone it down a bit and think how YOU would respond if someone had said this to you. From prior experience, I know you wouldn't handle it nearly as well as Ruterra has done...

[quote="acelanceloet"][quote="erik_t"][quote="acelanceloet"]other then the designs being horribly overloaded, there is not much wrong with them design wise, bezo?
I mean, no, the designs are not good, but for somebody just starting here that seems like an horrible reaction.[/quote]
Overloading aside, the only severe error I really see is that the midships GMLS on the first drawing is sitting atop the machinery spaces.

Certainly my first ten drawings were far, far worse.[/quote]
indeed, mine were far worse too.
for the purpose of not overloading the ships, look at what is placed on real designs and the belowdeck parts thread : http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =16&t=2755

[quote="bezobrazov"]@ace: like when you used that word in a phrase? (horrible!)
I'm surprised that you - of all people - defends these. Yes, they are executed well. That can be deduced even with the .jpeg-format and shrinking. But how much is his and how much are colosseum et al.?
But is there much wrong with them? Yes, majorly so! There are severe inherent stability problems, not to mention almost unimaginable stressors on the hull and superstructure. The masts will most certainly collapse due to the sheer weight put on them; especially the ridiculously overloaded main mast.
And ace, if you read my post carefully, I did offer a carrot: redo these with more modest, realistic loads etc, and we'll take him seriously.[/quote]

all you say can be submitted to the simple point: putting too much on top. top weight.
I don't think the 'we' speeks for everybody here. I for one already take these serious. whatever the looks of them, there went actual thought into these drawings.

also. yes, I have once called an drawing horrible. I did that to an drawing of an member who should be able to do better than draw that what he drew. in this case, what would help is constructive critics. this, I quote:
[quote]consider re-starting; maybe using a more modern hull, with a far better blanced outfit of weapons and sensors.[/quote]
is bullying, not cricism. more modern hull? why. better balanced? whatever that means for somebody new? restarting? I have seen drawings of yours having worse faults, bezo.

all in all, Ruterra, you are on a good line, and your replies show promise. I can't wait to see the improved set of drawings.[/quote]

Thank You for the support ace. Also thank you for the link to the belowdeck parts thread. This will definitely help with fixing these drawings. I think I will lengthen the hull a bit so that the beam can be wider to allow for the missile pods on the third drawing. Should they be reclassified as light cursers possibly when I lengthen them? Also in concern to the masts being overloaded, I found the drawing with those masts the way they were so I had not idea that they were overloaded. How would I fix them?

TimothyC wrote:

Welcome aboard Ruterra. You've got a promising start.

Thank you TJ. It is a pleasure to be welcomed aboard.

I made a drawing previously on ship bucket last year if any one wants to check it out (keep the criticism professional)

http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... =14&t=4408

This is a bit modern for my usual area hence I cant offer much in terms of help, So instead Welcome Aboard!

_________________
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

that is exactly why I created the belowdeck parts thread.
the mast don't look too bad to me, only that they are somewhat high and heavy for the ships size. lowering them or widening the ship would fix that (for spead reasons, widening would also implicate resizing of the other dimensions)
reclassifying is not needed. I mean, compare these with the spruance class of slightly later date and you see what I mean

also, just a tip, read TimothyC's signature

EDIT:

this might help with the space you have underneath the deck on the gearing.

_________________
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

Shipbucket

Who is online