Shipbucket

Been working away on a frigate for the past few weeks, in between assignments. Figured I'd still put it in Beginners though because still early days in my ship designing life. Originally inspired by the BMT Venator 110 concept, it sort of kept growing until I ended up with a basic design with a number of variants, split primarily into two batches:

Batch 1 (CEAFAR, SMART S MK2)




Batch 2 (CEAFAR2)



The primary difference between batches is, of course, the move from the original CEAFAR array (combined with SMART S MK 2) to the CEAFAR2 array proposed for the SEA 5000 RAN Future Frigate Program. Beyond that, CIWS is changed from the Thales/CTA SeaGuardian to Millenium Gun, and ECM and communications fitment have some differences.

Variants are created not through different ships, but the changing of modules (situated aft of the main gun and incorporated as part of the superstructure). The two above are fitted with a module that adds additional missiles to the design (32 ESSM Quad-packed/8 VLS, and 8 NSM for surface attack - hidden behind doors that help minimise RCS, to a degree). Other modules that can be fitted include an austere accommodation compartment, a cargo bed with crane (room for around 4 containers), and others I have yet to think of and add

Specifications
Length: 121m
Displacement: 4300 tons (Batch 1), 4700 tons (Batch 2)
Speed: 28 knots (Batch 1), 27 knots (Batch 2)
Range: 6500nm at 16knts
Complement: 110 (capacity for up to 180 with austere accommodation)

*Propulsion is in a CODLAG configuration, but if anyone can suggest suitable powerplants within this that'd be great *

Armament: Mk45 Mod 4, 2 x Thales SeaGuardian CIWS (Batch 1) or 2 x Oerlikon Millenium Gun CIWS (Batch 2), 4 x Rafael Mini-Typhoon, 8 VLS for 32 Quad-packed ESSM. With the addition of modules, missile armament can be increased to 64 ESSM and 8 NSM, MU-90 Lightweight Torpedo
Boats: 2 x 9m RHIB
Aviation: Hangar and deck capable of operating up to MH-60R, though best suited to Lynx Wildcat
Decoys: Nulka launcher mounted to both sides of hangar
Sensors and Radar: CEAFAR Radar Array in conjunction with SMART S MK2 (Batch 1), CEAFAR 2 Radar Array (Batch 2), Bridgemaster E Navigation Radar, Vampir NG both fore and aft, (if there are any suggestions in regards to ECM and other assorted systems fitout, please do tell, it would be greatly appreciated)

Different module variants will be coming soon
As always, constructive criticism is more than welcome, and I hope you like her!

I like it overall, even though photobucket has resized it a bit, one thing only seem to stand out. That prop I'm pretty certain is the most scorned part on SB, might want to grab one from another ship.

_________________
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

Nah, that screw is the ~40kshp controllable pitch propeller from the Spruance/Tico/Burke/Perry drawings (although I'm unsure if in reality the screws are so similar between these ships). As such, it's probably oversized for this design, which I wouldn't think would have more than maybe 50kshp split between the two shafts.

But that's getting lost in the weeds. This is a really excellent start to a lovely little frigate. I really appreciate the level of thought that's clearly gone into the drawing. I anxiously await a more careful study of a non-resized version of the drawing.

From a design standpoint, here are a few thoughts.

• It's not exactly tiny. I'd look toward survivability. Is there any chance of getting a substantial AMR forward, with enough power generation to keep the lights on and power a get-home auxiliary thruster?
• Where are the intakes for the gas turbine? Those are thirsty beasts.
• I am always howling about communications, and this will be no exception. I think the Batch II is a bit light on satcom. I am unsure on VHF/UHF, too (HF looks great).
• I don't have my copy of Friedman at work, but Thales' SABRE might be a reasonable ECM fit. If nothing else, I always recommend Thales products because their website is so helpful : )
• The complete lack of any sonar is sort of a bummer. What are you doing with the quarterdeck? Even a little baby unit like CAPTAS 1 would keep SSKs honest.
• For a general-purpose frigate, I think the pilothouse has a rather poor visual command.
• I'd work really, really hard to be able to accommodate at least a single H-60. Are you sure the hangar is big enough? Even if today's usage might only require a Lynx-class airframe, it's good to think about ten or even thirty years in the future. Steel is cheap, as they say.
• Since you're aiming for at least moderately low observables, I'd think about sketching a front-view or top-view cartoon to make sure the main radar mast 'fits'.
• The window colors are non-standard, although it's been a long time since I was a stickler for the official Shipbucket garish blue. From a drawing standpoint, I'd probably just make sure the helo and pilothouse windows were consistent in color.[/quote]

Pretty good effort.

Great start you've got here. A nicely executed and very modern-looking frigate.

To build a bit on Erik's comments, I would emphasize the part about forward visibility. I understand that this is carried over from the BMT design, so this is more a critique of the Venator than of your version
Not only does the built-up foredeck restrict visibility of the bow and surroundings from the bridge, but I'm wondering about its effect on the field of fire of the main gun.
Still, there is something to be said in favor of an enclosed forward mission space, and I'll make a note of that look for future design. The low systems density and completely above-deck character are a bit frustrating, but that might just be a sign that I should get away from Russian designs for a bit...

I'm also surprised by the 4000-ton displacement on a 120m hull, but there again, doesn't appear to be your fault.

Two things I would look into a bit more are 1) the propulsion plant, which looks more powerful and demanding than on the original, and would require more space and accommodation, and 2) the use of the space outboard of the funnel and hangar: despite the shaping, I'm not entirely clear about which part has which function, so you may have some free room to use there.

_________________
Soviet Century/Cold War 2020 Alternate Universe: Soviet and other Cold War designs 1990-2020.
My Worklist

Good call on the 5" firing arc limitations. For some reason, my eye saw the forward superstructure as substantially narrower than the hull (actually, such a narrowing might kill a number of birds!).

That's the idea, but then such a narrowing would cut down significantly on the space allocated to weapons. If you look at BMT's artwork, they often fit SSM quad packs all the way forward, which requires the foredeck to be full-beam or close. This is what thegrumpykestrel has reproduced here with the concealed NSM packs.
On the other hand, within the framework of a larger frigate, I could imagine adding some space between modular foredeck and turret, where the foredeck cover could taper into a half-pyramid shape, providing both weather cover to the mission modules and rotation space for the gun. That would require several meters additional hull length though.

P.S. just noticed the way the CEAFAR2 mast foot merges with the hull side right behind the bridge wings. Checking the proportions and slope of the mast here is one more reason to spring for a top view.

_________________
Soviet Century/Cold War 2020 Alternate Universe: Soviet and other Cold War designs 1990-2020.
My Worklist

I finally got my university assignments out of the way, so I've been busy working away trying to incorporate as many suggested improvements and fixes as possible:



Changes:
- Length increased to 130m (hangar and flightdeck can more easily fit MH-60, though I still have a Wildcat here)
- Bridge and mast raised, improvement of rearward visibility
- Minor re-shaping of forward superstructure
- New prop (still feel unsure about it)

Numerous additions and alterations:
- Sonar 2050 and CAPTAS 4 Compact
- 2 x Kelvin Hughes SharpEye Navigation Radar (Bridgemaster retained as a backup)
- Replacement of the aft .50 cal mounts with 2 x Nexter Narwhal 20mm
- 5in gun moved further forward
- Centurion Multi-Role decoy launcher
- Thales Sabre
- Airborne Systems FDS3 Inflatable decoys

Displacement is in the 4500-5000 tonne range. I still haven't gotten on to doing up a top view yet, and I have to redo the other modules, but I'll get there eventually.

You still need to get rid of Photobucket as your picture host. We would like to see your drawing full size in all its glory.

It does enable those who know about the systems on your ship to make learned comments (that does not include me).

Edit:
Aha - that looks a lot better full sized, well done!!

use http://imgur.com/ as your photohost for now