Shipbucket

Ok, ace, I did understand you then, and yes, those points were valid indeed. But seriously, I am considering how I should do it both wih the Talos and Terrier versions. I've got all the schematics concerning it, but it's just *groan* the drawing part..

Edit: dude, I wasn't aware that you already did the Talos! That's awesome!

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

well, you see how simple my drawing of the talos system is that is good enough just show it's size and what that size is filled up with. it should not be as detailed as some of mine, if you don't want to

_________________
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

Well, I can definitely use that as a model! Thanks!

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

@ the launcher: it is not about the entire launcher, it is about the bottom part. the Mk 10 had 2 versions, which used the same launcher but with an lengthening part for the diagonal one. you have used that lengthening part in this drawing, which had most likely not that part, but had an longer 'pole' underneath the actual launcher, like my drawing of the Mk 4 GMLS has, for example https://dl.dropbox.com/u/63276563/GMLS% ... od%200.png , or even slightly different...... you most likely have better pics of the launcher, but in the pics I found, of which one is posted on the previous page, I saw the launcher 'pole' as one piece going entirely to the deck.

_________________
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

It's a good drawing but I went and double checked the class names (as I've never seen the nomenclature that you've been using before), and the only reference to any class name for the six CLGs in DANFS was one single line:
I think this fits with the conventional differentiation of the six ships into the Galveston Class (that had Talos) and the Providence class (that had Terrier). I'll recheck Friedman's but I'm fairly sure he uses the same nomenclature.

Edit: A quick check of the Naval Vessel Register shows Topeka as "CLG 6" class, which would be Providence.

Edit 2: The NVR entries for Springfield and Providence list them as "CG 6" class while Little Rock and Oklahoma City are listed as "CG 4" class. If I were to speculate the reason that the last two are not referenced as "CG 3" class is because Galveston (referenced as CLG 3) was struck prior to the 1975 realignment. This would still tend toward the use of simply the "Galveston" and "Providence" classes - IE differentiation based on the type of missile, not the presence of command spaces.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Thanks, ace, for that info. I'll look into it, and if warranted, then I'll change it, of course!

Tim, I know all that already, facts that really are confirming what I've been saying the whole time: there's a lot of confusion and conflicting systems as to how to classify these ships. Yes, I could've chosen to emphasize the weapons systems, instead of their command facilities, but I chose the latter, simply because I felt it more justifiable: to categorize the vessels according to the degree of rebuilding, and thus commonality, hence the Little Rock-class and Galveston-class respectively, and, like it or not, that's what I'm sticking with. It's only one of the many various classifications in use, however, so I don't object anyone from calling the classes something else!

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

ace, guess what!? You were right! I checked my version against some very detailed images of the USS Springfield (CLG-7), and your launcher arm suggestion is what shows up. I don't know how I overlooked that. But it's fixed in the updated pic! Thank you again for your astute observation!

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

Perhaps add a S-58 to the drawing since there's a Helideck?

Excellent drawings. Both classes are very impressively handled.

you sound surprise bezo you should know by now that when I push further on an subject, I know 95% certain I am right

_________________
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