Shipbucket

Hmm, maybe the Brahmos missiles could go in those slanted areas of the deck on either side of the superstructure. You can't put much there anyway.

And, yeah, I don't think your superstructure is too massive. It fits well with the size of your ship and it'll just give you more room for electronics for all the phased array panels on it.

Not sure what to tell you about your propulsion system. Waterjets and conventional screws both have their advantages and disadvantages. Your design is so radical that it almost begs for a departure from the convential screw propulsion systems, so why not just stick with what you have for now?

I did some updates:

Mostly were small details and fixes on the fucked geometry of the tower and hull. I also followed acelanceloet's suggestion and changed my peripheral VLS to a central MK41 cluster... two actually. And I got rid of the Brahmos, they are neat but they offer a significant enough advantage over conventional missiles combos to bother with its bulky. Now I'm at 152 cells, enough to turn most small countries into ash. The exhausts are on the Akas, hidden away between the Vaka and Amas; sure it will be smoky and it will suck to whoever is working on the stern, but the thing will be on a wind tunnel and will have a cooling/diluting system so I guess it will be manageable while the ship is moving and it's worthy in order to reduce the IR signature. I put multi-purpose air intakes on the roof to have plenty of air for the turbines and electronics. I will stick with my pump jets unless you guys think it would seriously cripple the performance of my ship.

Now the radars. I understand that my electonics must match my ordnance and that everything must be concealed in order to keep the stealthy profile, but other than that I don't even now where to start... any advice or suggestion?

PS: I think I will try the underwater section of the Zumwalt, I like the ship it's training and if I do a good work I mighty add something of value to the project.

there exist a Norwegian cooling system for exhaust gas from jet turbines, I don't remember the name but I know the Visby class have them, and I think France Fremm has them.

Interesting, and not entirely mad.

Looks like you've gotten most of the issues worked out. Your idea for concealing the exhaust the gas turbines is pretty unique, but it puts the exhaust fairly close to the waterline, which may be cause problems in heavy seas. I know other ships have stern exhausts for gas turbines, but I don't know how they deal with that problem.

As far as radars, it looks like you need to go with a variation of the Aegis Spy-3 or some sort of similar system like the Zumwalts since you want it to conform to your stealthy design.

Is the Spy-3 compatible with Euro ordinance, or I will need an Euro radar for them? I know a good lot of stuff can be compatible, but for strategic and commercial reason they aren't or aren't willing to make it so.

On the exhaust: A sturdy IR suppressor, a U-turn on the exhaust piping, a sealing valve and an emergency drain should do the trick. So if the thing is engineered correctly it will work fine unless the damn ship sinks.

Q: What is still mad on the design, the wave piercing bow, the tumblehome outriggers (It's only the external side, the internal side and main hull will have a conventional flange) or is the Super Shitter?

Since the Spy-3 isn't even in service yet, I have no idea how compatible it is with missiles other than US-manufacture. Since it's a new system, I would imagine they've built in the ability to upgrade it to use new weapon systems that aren't in service yet. Sensor, fire-control, and weapons compatibility has a lot to do with software these days, so I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to make the Spy-3 compatible with whatever weapon system you want, and as long as you're willing to pay Raytheon to do it, they'll make it compatible with whatever you want them to.

travestytrav, that just sounds wrong.

SPY-3 = the system of the zumwalt. and you about everything works together, as long as it is made for the job. for example: aegis can not guide aster because aster requires an different guidance system.

@ canopus: now we're getting somewhere!
first of all I'd like to ask if you could use the mk 41 from the belowdeck parts sheet thread. I suppose the aft one is meant to be mk 57 PVLS? the only thing I have against that would be that you use 2 systems on one ship, and it might be better to put an 8 cell mk 41 module at both sides for part commonality.

for the radars. what nation would you like to follow? the dutch have some stuff that would fit on this thing, so have the US, so have more or less the brits......and maybe some others too. after you decided that, I will be back on that for ya

and, if I see some free time, may I have an play with it this weekend? I have some details and shapes that might become better looking or working with some mods

_________________
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

Actually, it sounds exactly right. The SPY-3 is a brand new design and is in no way related to the AEGIS SPY-1, which, as you say, cannot guide the ASTER missiles. Like I said, the SPY-3 isn't even in service yet, it doesn't even exist except in computer models and laboratories. The version of the SPY-3 that's going on the Zumwalt destroyers probably can't guide Asters because, as far as I know, the US has no plans to buy Aster missiles. But, if you're willing to pay Raytheon enough, I guarantee they could make it compatible with whatever weapon system you want to use. You would just wind up with SPY-3B Mod 1, or something like that, that's slightly different than US version of the SPY-3.

Or, Canopus, you can just come up with an indigenous radar system that's similar to the SPY-3, but can work with Aster missiles. It's an AU design, so you don't have to use something that actually exists. Just realize that an indigenous sytem would require all your own research and development, which would make it more expensive. Or, you can just use the off-the-shelf SAMPSON system that Aster-equipped ships use, but you may not like how that fits with your design.

you are missing my point.
I say you are wrong because you say:
- the zumwalt's radar fit and SPY-3 are different systems
- you say it is just software what binds radar and missile

both are wrong. aegis, and most likely SPY-3 because it is designed for the same family of missiles, works with semi-active missiles. the aster is an active missile that requires uplinking. it is possible that SPY-3 will support this uplinking, as the US work on active missiles themselves, but this might just as well be done with another method. because I should do research on this before saying anything definitive, I took AEGIS as example instead of SPY-3.

I think I have said this before, but would you please do some research before you post?

canopus, I advice to discard the advice given by travestytrav25 as there are just as many wrongs as there are rights in it, IMO it will just confuse you I await your reply

_________________
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