Shipbucket

I have a few notes here:
- why the odd number of 3 for the gas turbines?
- apart from the Mk 13, the hull seems to be ridiculously oversized for the arnament
- steam turbines, but where are the boilers? I think the turbines are very much oversized for the heat we speak of here, imagine the steam coming from 2 boilers on my tartar design and the steam coming from this setup....
- electrical drive, did it exist at the time? (especially with so high voltages and powers as we are speaking of here)
- if you have Mk 26's, you have Mk 45's as well, so why Mk 42's?
- that is an very complicated loader for the NSSM, real life ones were a lot simpler IIRC, to the point of just an container. or is your target to stop manual reloading for all systems?
-

_________________
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

either I have two large top speed gas turbine, and two large cruise speed turbine, or I have three! What would you go for...?
hm! Mk13 is there just for the stupidity or awesomeness of weapon power/overload....
I feel to that it is a bit big...
- What if I cut out about 10-20 meters under the command and bridge section,
- move the funnel and bridge/mast section together
- remove the forward Mk-141 and it's area.
- Change the aft Mk-141 ti a 90 degrees version
- move the forward funnel more to the Hangar.

I think they shall be a bit smaller or I shall remove them. The idea was to have a heat exchanger on the gas turbine, But i see that I need also boilers for them, and that can perhaps be a bit much.

yes you are most likely correct, so I will go for a geared drive from either (2+2)/(3+3) gas turbine and Diesel as boost...
I will replace them.

- that is an very complicated loader for the NSSM, real life ones were a lot simpler IIRC, to the point of just an container. or is your target to stop manual reloading for all systems?

was just trying out something different, Btw. You doesn't happens to have the simple drawing of the loading system for the sea sparrow. I think it was Manual on the Oslo class, and it had it's ready magazine in the superstructure behind the Mk-29, with more missiles down in the mess and corridors. (Oslo class, once during an exercise it had some missile stored in the same magazine as the Terne ASW, but carrying a missile around the entire ship from the lower deck to the high deck...)


Thanks for you'r comments. what more....


oh is it possible to have the gun and the Mk-26 closer together, or shall I be funny and switch place between them....

Turbo-Electric drives have been around since at least 1913. (USS Jupiter AC-3)

_________________
“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.

Which became USS Langley CV-1

/anecdotal

yes, but like this?

anyways, I would revert to something like an conventional virginia class, to make things intersting...

and the loader is most of the time just an box or cabinet with missiles in it, IIRC.

_________________
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