Shipbucket

Just gonna throw this out: Springsharp works best for battleships and cruisers. Destroyers and other escorts tend to be hard to get workable, and aircraft carriers are very messy, since it essentially involves guessing the correct values for misc. weights to simulate plane, equipment, flight deck etc. weight, and the effects these have on the seakeeping and stability.

Some of the Alliance's pre-dreadnoughts and Armoured Cruisers

I like nearly all your designs, my only question being why the carriers have such low freeboard, in contrast to nearly all historical examples?

_________________
We can't stop here--this is Bat country!

If it's close enough to cast a shadow, I think the flying house wins initiative.

Bronies are like the Forsworn. Everyone agrees that they are a problem but nobody wants to expend the energy rooting them out.

"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way."

They look fine to me, I'm not quite sure what you mean.

What I'm saying, is your flight decks are rather closer to the water than most historical carriers. Look at HMS Eagle, by way of comparison: http://www.shipbucket.com/images.php?di ... 201942.png That extra built up space between the hull and flight deck is the hangar deck, which must be very minimal on your designs.

_________________
We can't stop here--this is Bat country!

If it's close enough to cast a shadow, I think the flying house wins initiative.

Bronies are like the Forsworn. Everyone agrees that they are a problem but nobody wants to expend the energy rooting them out.

"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way."

intresting I'm not sure how I'd rectify that with out compleatly redesining the entire carrier(something I'm not willing to do at this juncture)

well, here we are at an interesting point. to make your design correct and loose all the work you did on it, or keep it incorrect. the latter is easier, the first is more satisfactory. it's an choice we all make countless times.......

anyways, especially on this ship you lack a lot of freeboard http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/4029/b1dc.png
the other carrier, http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3390/bcv3.png, has enough freeboard but lacks hangar height.
note that you should compare with the US carriers when you have 'open' hangars and to the british if you have 'armoured' hangars. every aspect of the designs comes from those simple design starts.

also, obsydian shade, please note that the freeboard is not the height to the flight deck on a carrier, but the height from the waterline to the main deck, which is the first deck which is 'open' and thus is no longer part of the hull over at least part of the ships length. freeboard can thus be calculated by the hull depth (height from keel to main deck at midship) minus draft (at the keel, with 0 trim).

on the Roanoke, this might mean that the main deck is even the deck with the casemate guns on them, but even when it is the deck on top (which I suppose is the maindeck, which it is if the casemate guns are enclosed watertight) you have an very low freeboard for a ship this size, especially an carrier. this ship also seems to be underpowered, if we take in account the speed requirements for carriers and the single funnel (but 4 props!) of this ship.

on the non carrier ships, note the lack of sheer, which might require you to have a bit more freeboard then comparable ships with more sheer. the destroyers look a tad top heavy to me.

_________________
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

I think the main reason the Roanoke has such low free board is that it was originally a battleship and was converted to a carrier and I wanted to keep some of her battleship like features. The Empire on the other hand was my very first attempt at drawing a carrier, it was drawn back when I was new to ship bucket and rather inexperienced so essentially what I did was I took an image of the Yorktown, cut it down to the waterline and went from their. Later on I modified the funnel and Island to make it resemble the Lexington-class Carriers more. I'll probably keep the Roanoke as is but I feel that it's high time the Empire could use a major overhaul to its design.

You are of course, correct on that point, something I have a bad habit of forgetting regards historical carriers, probably because of modern ones where it is the same. (At least I presume)

_________________
We can't stop here--this is Bat country!

If it's close enough to cast a shadow, I think the flying house wins initiative.

Bronies are like the Forsworn. Everyone agrees that they are a problem but nobody wants to expend the energy rooting them out.

"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way."

yes, on modern carriers it is the same, as the flight deck is the strenth deck since, IIRC, the forrestal.

_________________
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