Shipbucket

now I'm beggining to wonder if I would need more than two screws
there are actually two SEARAM's on board. the other is directly opposite. I have the two SEARAMS for battle damage purposes. If the radars go down for whatever reason, I would still have a pretty healthy close in protection capability.


I dont know a lot about praerie masker other than the end result. I will look at the others, but courious as to why these would not be as good. Also I'm wonering on placement. I assumed one in front and in back of each engineering space. Is that the idea?

mast:The mast is up in the air, punn intended, for now. Untill I figure out if I even need a mast with the radar suite in stalled (AMDR? VSR? SPY-2? SPY-3? or SPY-4) I will porbably have some sort of mast, because it just looks horrible to me without one

Torpedo Tubes:I thought these were universal on surface ships, but know I see I'm wrong. I have changed it to the MK 32, and I'm couroius as to why the one I had was actually bigger. confusing

Thanks for the info and suggestion and for humoring a newbie

That is pretty much the impression I've always gotten about Colosseum. In a way, I agree...I practically grew up on Ticonderoga class cruisers (those are the ships I have any real memories of), and love them, but there's something about those older ships, all the little details, it's not something I've been able to get a firm grip on drawing, but those old gun cruisers and destroyers sure did look a hellova lot more impressive than modern ships.

_________________
World's Best Okayest Author and Artist

I don't think you need a seperate platform as you have plenty of deck space. All those protruding platfomrs aer a PITA for preservation and impact radar cross section. I assume you were going to put a 25mm on tht deck? If so I think you can probably go without them as those four 30mm guns are more than enough to cover FAC defense.

Speaking of the 30mm guns I don't like the current aft setup. For one those cuttouts into your flight deck make it too small to safetly land helos in my opinion. You could do it, but it would be a tight fit and. Secondly they have lumited fields of fire forward due to the cutout and neither can cover the stern since to clear the five inch and VLS they can't depress the barrel at all. Since you have that large stern area that is now empty once you remove that small VLS I would mount both of them as aft as possible in either corner of the stern. That way they are on top of the deck instead of in an cutout and can slew forward until they are masked by superstruction (looks like you can get 15 degrees better coverage forward than the current setup) as well as complete DOUBLE coverage of the entire stern aspect which is important because many FAC attacks are going to end up on your stern.

They are the old ones, but someone fund out they was totally wrong and give us the one you can see in the US part sheet.

I am not "unimpressed" with modern ships. They serve a purpose and role and I am not serious when I say that "missiles are cowardly, all ships should have guns". If you couldn't tell that was sarcasm then well... I feel sorry for you.

My area of interest has always been "World War II" - whether it's ships, aircraft, firearms, personal equipment... what have you.

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)

One Word:


Elan.

ok, latest update. Im really not liking this without the mast....I know its the way things are going, but.....I'm going to have to see if it grows on me



as usual comments, suggestions or otherwise greatly appreciated

Joe

With the whole stealthy RCS design, shouldn't life rafts etc. be stowed internally, hatches in the superstructure?

_________________

Jabba's Worklist

He should do it like on the Fridtjof Nansen class frigate. have solid rails (Normal rails even the Burks rails isn't that stealthy!) then put the LR behind the railings, as you can see on the picture bellow:

heuhen, the entire bucket has seen that drawing about 20 times now, would you mind just linking to the one in the archive from now on? it feels like 'ow, there he is with his amazing nansen drawing again' and if that is true or not, it begins to become irritating now and then

_________________
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