Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 3  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Kattsun
Post subject: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 6:07 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 309
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:03 am
[ img ]

First SB boat.

A nuclear missile cruiser built in the 1990s.

I wonder how many things I'm missing.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.


Last edited by Kattsun on September 10th, 2012, 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Rhade
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 7:12 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2804
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Kattsun wrote:
I wonder how many things I'm missing.
First thing you miss is proper forum section. ;)

===> Beginner Drawings Forum

Second is not only you miss "couple" of things but you have a couple too much.

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 4:16 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7510
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
it is not that bad actually..... but I will return to this later on, when I have more time.

_________________
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


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
BB1987
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2818
Joined: May 23rd, 2012, 1:01 pm
Location: Rome - Italy
if the cruiser is built in the 90's you could switch all those twin arm launchers with VLS

_________________
My Worklist
Sources and documentations are the most welcome.

-Koko Kyouwakoku (Republic of Koko)
-Koko's carrier-based aircrafts of WWII
-Koko Kaiun Yuso Kaisha - KoKaYu Line (Koko AU spinoff)
-Koko - Civil Aviation


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
gordo8000
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 4:52 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 511
Joined: July 1st, 2011, 2:18 am
Location: Chillin with my wolf pack in Siberia.
If it was built in the 90's then it probably wouldn't have been built with arm launchers. I also assume that the smaller AAW missile is a version of ESSM, which would not be launched from a Mk.26 Arm Launcher. I might also add that you have absolutely no provision for any way to engage surface targets, most cruisers have at least a 5inch Gun. If you equipped VLS, you could carry SSM's such as the BGM-109. THe only SSM you can carry in the Harpoon.

_________________
Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid. - Albert Einstein
The only stupid questions are the ones that go unasked.
Korean AU


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Kattsun
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 5:30 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 309
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:03 am
BB1987 wrote:
if the cruiser is built in the 90's you could switch all those twin arm launchers with VLS
I certainly could, but I prefer arm launchers, since I've been told they're easier to reload at sea (I am not sure if this applies to Mk 26 and Mk 10, but presumably it is for Mk 7 Talos since it has a horizontal strikedown) and the firing rate of the Mk 26 is almost the same as VLS' sustained 30 RPM. Either way, I prefer the look of the arms as opposed to VLS.
gordo8000 wrote:
If it was built in the 90's then it probably wouldn't have been built with arm launchers. I also assume that the smaller AAW missile is a version of ESSM, which would not be launched from a Mk.26 Arm Launcher. I might also add that you have absolutely no provision for any way to engage surface targets, most cruisers have at least a 5inch Gun. If you equipped VLS, you could carry SSM's such as the BGM-109. THe only SSM you can carry in the Harpoon.
Both missiles are Typhon. The larger is RIM-50LR, the smaller is RIM-55MR. I couldn't fit all the details in SB scale so I had to sacrifice some. And surely RIM-50/55 could be used to engage surface vessels and targets in a similar way Talos, Standard, etc. have been for decades?

Really I'm mostly interested in finding out what systems are missing from the masts, what I should do about my obnoxiously flat deck, and if six arm launchers is workable with three illuminators assuming the missiles time-share since it's an AEGIS ship etc or if I should have one illuminator per launcher.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Clonecommander6454
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 6:06 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 760
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm
It is questionable for a ship from 1990s to be fitted without helideck and hanger especially a ship this size. I also recommend having AN/SPS-49 as the back up Air Search Radar and install 1 more AN/SPG-62.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Kattsun
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 6:23 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 309
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:03 am
It has an SPS-49 and I'm not sure where I'd put the 4th SPG-62 tbh. The only real open spots I can see are on top of the Mk 10 houses.

Also I'm not entirely sure a helideck is warranted on a AAW cruiser. Virginia had hers occupied by ABLs after all.

_________________
The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9.6 [million sq. km]. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 6:25 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
Welcome aboard Kattsun.
Kattsun wrote:
I certainly could, but I prefer arm launchers, since I've been told they're easier to reload at sea (I am not sure if this applies to Mk 26 and Mk 10, but presumably it is for Mk 7 Talos since it has a horizontal strikedown) and the firing rate of the Mk 26 is almost the same as VLS' sustained 30 RPM. Either way, I prefer the look of the arms as opposed to VLS.
There is no way a single Mk 26 can get a firing rate anywhere near 30 RPM, while a single Mk 41 8 cell pack can hit 24 RPM. While shooting full rate on adjacent 8 cell packs is something I (in a purely amateur opinion) would try to avoid (I keep seeing missiles hit each other as they leave the tubes), you can easily keep up a nice high rate of fire until you've shot your cells dry.
Kattsun wrote:
Both missiles are Typhon. The larger is RIM-50LR, the smaller is RIM-55MR. I couldn't fit all the details in SB scale so I had to sacrifice some. And surely RIM-50/55 could be used to engage surface vessels and targets in a similar way Talos, Standard, etc. have been for decades?
Ah! We have Typhon LR:

[ img ]

Typhon MR would be represented with a changed nose coloration on either Tartar or on Standard (Typhon being called initially Super Tartar/Talos).

And yes, targeting a surface ship that is in radar range would have been possible and a standard mission profile.
Kattsun wrote:
Really I'm mostly interested in finding out what systems are missing from the masts, what I should do about my obnoxiously flat deck, and if six arm launchers is workable with three illuminators assuming the missiles time-share since it's an AEGIS ship etc or if I should have one illuminator per launcher.
[/quote]

Well, this gets into some interesting problems because Typhon is a Track Via Missile System while AEGIS isn't. You'd be better off with more (6 or 8 face) larger phased arrays to provide the search and track capabilities. I've rolled the idea around in my head a few times, but It isn't the easiest thing to develop. So yeah, you are going to need some other form of air search (SPS-49* or some phased array set on the same bands), and you'll need to re-evaluate the guidance situation.

* Oh, hey, you've got the Planar version right there on the aft mast.

On other things: That bow is going to need a total rework, but you've got a good first drawing (certainly better than mine!)

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: AAW Cruiser v:Posted: September 10th, 2012, 6:31 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
There's also the minor issue that Typhon didn't work.

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 3  [ 23 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page 1 2 3 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]