Shipbucket

The SPY-1F arrays have dreadful fields of view right aft, right forward and below the horizontal in the entire forward arc (although they're perfectly positioned to irradiate the bridge wings), and the SPY-1A arrays are an incomplete set. Aside from that, it's great.

Well here's the thing:

you've got six radar faces when you only need four. And the two superfluous ones are clearly a different type. But here's the kicker: those two faces are also SPY-1 (SPY-1A-C, IIRC, while the small faces are SPY-1D, which is a "mini" application).

A hull this large justifies the larger faces, four of them, and the two might be best suited on the aft superstructure for minimization of line of sight blockage.

Agreed with all the previous comments but this is a nice looking vessel. Gonna watch this one closely

_________________
There is no "I" in TEAM but there is a ME


______________________
Current Worklist:
Redrawing my entire AU after a long absence from Shipbucket

Alright, here are my CIWS options. Should I go with hybrid or separated missile and gun posts?

Go for hybrid if you ask me.

_________________
You can call me Andy.

depends. do you want your very expensive and vulnerable missiles to be exposed to the vibrations of the gun? then go ahead with the hybrid. also, it makes the mount heavier (and by that harder to rotate fast) and most likely makes you put your gun magazine belowdecks, creating a lot of deck penetration. so yeah, I am not an fan of hybrid mounts, which are IMO only usable if you have limited space.

_________________
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

SPY-1 and CIWS fixed.

Bridge crew is still going to be ravaged by cancer; fields of view fore and aft near the horizon are still poor. Even slight pitching in heavy weather will result in loss of coverage of the horizon.

I just don't "get" the combination of Russian and American systems. I guess I am too much of a dull person to really be on board with AU ships in general but I can never reconcile the strange mixtures of systems that get handwaved by the AU crowd.

Despite some style oddities the drawing is executed well-enough and I think might make an interesting concept once the aforementioned issues are sorted out.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

Ill try to re arrange the bridge to accommodate radio direction. However, the spy-1s are arranged on faces wider (would be more apparent with vertical view) to where the only real blind spots would be dead aft and forward. On a further note, have the Russians developed a system similar to spy-1? If so I plan to replace spy-1 with more feasible tech that could be found in South America. As for ship pitch, going to take a hurricane with fin stabilization and a width of 150 feet to rock the boat. Regardless, the spy-1 is appearing to be more of a handicap than help for tracking command.