Thank you all for your kind praise!
---
Hood wrote: * | February 14th, 2018, 9:03 am |
*snipped*
The early LRS-1 directors as shown on the John Roberts plan are on the RN Radar sheet, look for the Long-Range System (LRS-1) on the gunnery director column, its the one with the two dishes (shown face on). It is the same mount but the dishes hide the sloped sides of the central structure that Roberts shows.
*snipped*
I am no expert on British fire control gear, so ignore me if I talk gibberish, but with an all DP armament, the main directors look wrong; they resemble the battleship main artillery type. Shouldn't they be HA directors??
I did a bit more reading and from what I gather you're totally right; I feel a bit silly for not doing my research properly!
Since I have never seen these directors before, would it be acceptable to just plop them onto the mounts I already have for the directors, or would the mounts need re-profiling to be thinner? Also which of the LRS1 do I use? (examples below)
---
Tempest wrote: * | February 14th, 2018, 12:04 pm |
*snipped*
I’m not sure detailing the individual panels does anything for the drawing however, if you look at other drawings the majority they don’t have them I think it’s because it goes against the rules. Some shading and highlighting at the bow and stern would help in giving them depth.
heuhen wrote: * | February 14th, 2018, 12:19 pm |
*snipped*
yeah, you would not be able to see those paneling from long distance. and the hull would be welded, so there would be no visual panneling
Yeah I know welding lines are not strictly necessary, however I felt it breaks up the vast open areas better. I left below the waterline free of them because I figured the paint used down there would be substantially thicker. From what others have said on the discord server, it seems to be either a love or hate affair!
Also, yeah it could use some highlighting on the bow, I missed that.
---
*snipped*
My only minor suggestion would be to make the rigging color the same as the railing (right now it's kind of hard to see).
I will be reworking my colour palette for the next drawing since this is the same basic palette I used for Conqueror.
---
erik_t wrote: * | February 14th, 2018, 3:14 pm |
*snipped*
Very nice work, although IMHO the number of portholes is somewhat anachronistic. It's worth noting that neither the Tigers nor Vanguard had portholes below the second deck.
Yeah, I went a bit ham with the portholes.
---
*snipped*
I'm curious to ask what you're going to do next, more proposals for the Minotaur or other designs entirely?
No idea!
Glad it's been well received!