Shipbucket

CATZ, I like this ship but would it be possible for a conventional version (with conventional props, w/o a conventional bow) for comparison? Might make another very different but excellent 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

I'd be more than happy to post a conventional version for comparison. However of course, the original is the best variant of the two for the intended purpose.

_________________
"All your base are belong to us"

XD of course, simply for comparisons sake

_________________
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

The conventional version. It differs slightly in that it only has two shafts. That's fine, since the previous version only had four shafts because the Voith-Schneider version needed more wetted surface volume in order to exert the same amount of force as a conventional propeller.

_________________
"All your base are belong to us"

The missiles looks like you've copied them from a low resolution jpg and pasted them, they aren't shipbucket style.

Bow torpedo tubes... Um... I'm not sure what to make of those.

Where is the termit launcher? Or for that matter, the launcher for the rear missile?

What are those stripes on the side of the below-waterline hull?

Where is the funnel? Is it nuclear?

I have a hard time believing that bow would work.

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.

Why The god awful Tumble-home hull?

And to be perfectly honest it's very hard to take someone seriously when they have "All your base are belong to us" and a sexually suggestive gif as their signature.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

It's the same kind of wave-piercing bow as used on the Zumwalt class.

The Termit launcher is below and forward of the barrel of the gun turret, and is a angled below deck setup, thus making it reloadable. The Goa's are in VLS to the sides of the helo-pad. I haven't decided if I'm going to draw them visibly, or simply leave them as is.
Extremely.

:-p
Why not?

See the link below for details.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zumwalt_cl ... _stability
That's not my problem. Afterall, I'm being polite and doing my best to follow forum rules. If you consider that suggestive, you must have lived a very sheltered life up until now.

_________________
"All your base are belong to us"

CATZ, do you mind if I have a go at doing some modifcations to it?

_________________
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

Tumblehomes suck, and the Zumwalt class is a perfect example of a ship designed by electrical engineers, not naval architects. To add insult to injury, with a superstructure that cluttered you lose the only real advantage of a Tumblehome hull - partially reduced RCS.

The Zumwalts have an active stabilization system that costs power, displacement, and money. It follows thus that that using similarities to the Zumwalts isn't a good idea when you are trying to make your case stronger.

You're also going to lose everything up to the gun (and maybe that even) when you hit a some rough seas with that bow.
While Klag can be brash your response to him was not polite.

As for your signature, just because there is much more suggestive content out there doesn't mean that what you have up doesn't come across as suggestive.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Impolite? Hmmm. You're right. I totally went into his thread, told him he had a poor understanding of some lesser known propulsion system, and then told him his design was crap from some awful website that only insiders know anything about. Oh wait, that's what he did...not me.

You know, it's okay.

I apologize Klag.

See Tim, I have no problem admitting I might have been rude, and am okay with apologizing for it. But I also have a pretty good understanding of the system in question, even if my drawing skills aren't so hot.

As for the Zumwalt, so far the electrical engineers are right. The Sea Jet has yet to demonstrate any of the inherent stability flaws that the so called naval architects said it would. It's 1/4th scale model, so I'm inclined to believe hard evidence over human assumptions. At any rate, that's enough for me at least. I prefer wave piercing designs for a multitude of reasons. In a 1970 design such as this, it has nothing to do with radar cross section. It's important to remember, that Tumblehome hulls have advantages aside from that, along with disadvantages.

I think the easiest way to address the issue, is to simply say that a lot of engineers have been arguing over the same points. And the issue is completely debatable. And with the Sea Jet now built and tested, the side favoring the wave piercing tumble-home design seems to be winning the debate, simply because they have a working model on their side now. That doesn't necessarily mean the dissenters are wrong of course...it just means that so far, the evidence we have points to a conclusion that doesn't favor their argument.

And as this is a internet forum, whether or not anybody takes anybody else seriously is mostly irrelevant.

_________________
"All your base are belong to us"