Shipbucket

Looks interesting! I like the fact that you're going to limit the number of masts to one only (cf HMS Neptune!), but don't forget to add the conning tower beneath your bridge! Also, your current set-up and funnel spacing precludes the fitting of a secondary conning tower aft. Have you considered that? Otherwise I cannot see any major flaws in your design. You're absolutely entitled to use your own configuration, with both strengths and drawbacks! That's how I do AU-designs! Oh, Use the set of RN boats that I posted in the parts sheet section, and don't forget derricks for their handling! One more thing that I just laid my eyes one, and this is for both hydrodynamic efficacy and, perhaps more a personal taste: make your stem (prow) more pronounced curved. As it is now, the angled 'flat-iron' appearance, does not really conjugate with the rest of the else very elegant hull!

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

The Neptune had two masts! I will too, the aft one won`t be as massive as the fore one. I will see if I can work in the conning towers without a major redesign. I will work out the kinks in the stern and the bow since neither has really been customised for the hull yet. I usually use the Victorian age Royal Navy boats for ships built before mid 30s`.

Edit: Upper or lower prow curvature?

Ehhh, I believe the Neptune only had one...but, never mind, I don't have R.A. Burt's book on the RN dreadnoughts at hand. I still like the idea of shipping only one mast though, so that was no criticism on your design. As for the boats, yes, that the sheet I was referring too, so you're good there! - And it's the upper - above water - curvature that seems a tad 'stiff'.

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

What about the stern now? I changed it a little, or did you like the old style better?

As far as I can see, there's nothing wrong with your stern design. It's functional, though in choppy seas it may add pitch to your stern, which will have the potential of making your vessel less stable as a gun platform. But I don't see that that issue should be too important, since dreadnoughts were never intended to fight in stormy seas anyway! So, it's more of a personal preference!

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

I believe that the ships of Norseland has to be more seaworthy than the ones built by Britain and Germany as neither has oceans as wild and untamed as the Norwegian and Barent seas. The ones thats built for the Baltic won`t ever see so much as a wave and won`t need any sort of sea worthyness.

It seems a bit stubby for my liking.

I have returned to the old stern, but a rounder one. Should I have the aft mast in front of the funnel or in front of it?

- said by the acknowledged master of stubby ship designs!

Well, the ships need to be every bit as seaworthy as the British one, so, maybe study various stern designs by the RN?
Why a second mast in the first place? But if you chose that, then aesthetically it should be placed forward of the aft (main-) mast.

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

I could have a stub for a mast like the Dreadnought.

Edit: The stern is partly modelled after the stern of the König class and other German rear ends