Shipbucket

You're welcome, my dear Swedish friend! I'm only telling the truth as I see it.

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

I still thank you, kinsman!
I have some updates in mind for the frigate though. Squeezing it in between studying and other things I'm also poking a bit on a replacement design for the Leionet from the late 70's/early 80's with a 12cm TAK and RBS15, along with one of the other large Cold War destroyers of mine. These designs will probably come sometime next week, if all goes well.

I really like your designs I think you background is some of the better out there and realistic and I cannot wait for more

_________________
Projects:
Zealandia AU
John Company AU
References and feedback is always welcome!

Thanks! I'm glad to hear at least some read the background to the ships(if it sounds like I'm implying someone who does not, it's not intentional). I try to look and read about similar ships as those I design when writing the backstory. Having an AU with a country that never engages in war also helps!

Why do you have your anti-sub rocket launcher amidships facing backwards? That's not how that weapon works!

Doesn't the Bofors RL rotate?

_________________
Republic of Lisenia AU - In progress
Republic of Lisenia in FD Scale - In progress

...and it's supposed to fire across the beams, hence the twin mortars on the German Type101 class, for instance, where they actually were angled off the beams, when in '0' position. Thus KHTs solution makes perfect sense.

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

Yeah but the actual operation of the weapon doesn't work like that!
Yeah but I was always under the impression that the most effective field of fire was dead ahead - you can detect the submarine and fire right at the spot of contact. I was under the impression that that's what made Hedgehog effective.

Firing off to the beams or firing aft is a lot more dodgy in terms of target acquisition. It wasn't so much an issue with depth charges because they were basically spamming a wide area with them anyway.

Oh, you may absolutely be right there, klags, about the optimal angle and field of fire, I'm not contesting that! I was merely mentioning the way that you can operate this mortar type; not necessarily meaning it was always the optimal. Here, it appears we have a relatively cheap frigate type, an economy version, suitable for a small, but technical proficient navy such as the Eirikian one. Thus with the requirements imposed, the solution that KHT selected, may be the best, unless, of course, he choose to redesign his ship, with the additional "cost" of reconstruction.

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

Simple. While designing the frigate I looked a lot on Swedish rebuilds from DDs to FFs. The IRL Karlskrona used the same position. The Mode class DE, which this(or rather, the original DE design) is partially based on, had her AURAK(anti-sub rocket launcher) placed aft of the aft superstructure, but fore of the aft 10,5cm gun mount.

And yes, there is at least one photo of IRL Munin firing of her ASRs at what appears an angle of about 100+ degrees.
This might not be the optimal arrangement, but as Bez said, this is a cheap frigate, and it's made in numbers.
There is probably going to be a larger one with an AURAK M/50 mounted above the A mount, somewhere in the future though.