Shipbucket

yes, indeed, the antenna. this does not take into account the stabilisation foot which makes exactly the difference between mine and yours.

_________________
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

Sorry, I didn't understand what you mean about use the standardized parts.. If the parts are not adjusted to the realism are not our propose to correct them?

Yes you are right.. I forgot to correct the liferafts and lifegard boys, I already updated the corrections..
About the shading of underwater I did it on purpose to understand the underwater hull is red..

looking forward..

Many of the parts have been generated from a wide variety of resources, and without seeing your resources, the default action would be to use the parts that are already drawn.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Hmmm.. So you are suggesting to defend why I think the standardized is wrong and take the initiative to improve..
If this is worth to be discuss I think yes.. If I losing time to don't get any answer I think is a excused effort..

But as I'm new here.. I have to follow your idea..

Lets start

1 - Super Lynx Mk95
I didn't found in any of this version drawn and the closer version are less realistic, lets see why..

1.1 - the engine part is round and higher then the drawn
1.2 - the side door is larger
1.3 - the wire antena under the tail isn't there
1.4 - the tail has a down angle superior of the drawn
1.5 - the under nose radar is not round but flat
1.6 - the drawn make the rear fuselage so large and big that makes the tail shorter and the chopper completly diferent from lynx versions..
Some draws of lynx versions..
http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu14 ... ations.png

2 - Harpoon Launchers

2.1 - The upper left suggestion don't appear nothing with tubes, almost appear missiles with that sharpen ends.
2.2 - the shading makes the draws to much confuse, don't let us understand the support or where it is fixed.
2.3 - The upper right version is easy to understand that is tubes, however the bottom disappear the tubes end..don't understand what kind of support is it.
2.4 - As shown in the photo, the supports are inside of tubes, so they are cover by the tubes outline.
2.5 - My representations appear to be more easy to understand, accurate and simplify.

3 - Phalanx
3.1 - I just copy the sensor and camera from the USA DDGs and insert in the Block 1 phalanx.
3.2 - The Upgrade made in the Meko is the Block 1B

4 - Air Radar DA08

4.1 - the radar presented is very big and from the specification of the radar and the scale rule in the forum don't match.
4.2 - I've done the maths and reduce the dimension of the radar without destroying his characteristics.
4.3 - The upper receiver of the radar isn't separated from the radar but gadder to the top of the antena, as this picture shows.


So I presented my reasons why I choose to modify the draws.
Now I'm looking forward the counter argue and opinions..

I'm sorry for not making this clear, I have no issues with the Lynx or the Phalanx, and I'll leave the radar to Ace, who has studied the the Dutch radars. As for the Mk 141 launcher, I could easily see a recolor of the end caps being in order for this ship, but I will let another staff member make the actual call.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

I am willing to take an look at the DA-08 if you can post some pics of the portugese version, as the IFF bar can differ somewhat. I disagree about the size and shape change though: you have taken the antenna size for the size of the entire installation.

_________________
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

MavGaz,

I've no complaints about your desire to draw real-ships and seek perfection.
However, you are still a newbie and unless you've scoured the Parts Sheets and other drawings for up to date parts your going to miss them and re-invent the wheel. The Harpoon lanchers I'm sure have already been redrawn at least once. We can't keep on redrawing the same parts, the whole idea is to have a set that everyone can use and that is good enough at our scale to represent the real thing. I leave the radar issue for you and Ace to sort amongst yourselves.

Here is the Lynx, already redrawn (by I think Darthpanda) and further modified by me to better represent the British version and which is miles better than the old one you've stumbled across. You should be able to re-colour this into a Mk95 with few problems.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft

Hi

Here are some pictures..
http://xmp.com.pt/inteligenciaeconomica ... a-gama.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... e_Real.jpg
http://xmp.com.pt/inteligenciaeconomica ... a-gama.jpg

Information here
http://books.google.pt/books?id=l-Dzknm ... ar&f=false

If you compare the size of the antena with the mast plataform of the ship you see has to be lesser than the monster that was in the previor model.

Has I send you the information, send me the information you have where you say that is the only the size of the antena.
From the aproximation math the size is near what I said before. Let me the information that says otherwise..

_________________
“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.

found your problem! you put the radar too high! it is on top of the railing on the platform instead of partially behind it.
also, there seems to be an different stabilisation foot.
antenna size is taken as everything above the stabilisation foot, as that part, as shown here, can vary between different ships, even within the same navy (the dutch ship rotterdam carries an DA-08 with an different stabilisation foot then the one carried by the heemskerck class, which is shown in my drawing)
then, looking at the measurement you gave, my version is actually correct.

for the IFF bar. I think you are right that the IFF bar could be one pixel lower. BUT not 2 pixels, as you have done. placing it one pixel lower though, creates an double black pixel line, which is frowned on in shipbucket. it is allowed in cases like that to overstate parts sizes, and that is exactly what I have done here.
the bar should be a bit lengthened for the vasco da gama drawing though, as you have done.
also, http://www.areamilitar.net/directorio/IM_sys/da08_1.jpg this picture shows an different version of the radar then what is depicted here. that version can be found on the dutch parts sheet as well, and as you can see I have there shown the IFF bar as you have shown (although that bar is an smaller type, as again these can vary between ships )

EDIT: also, an measurement based on the official plans of the dutch L-frigates, which used the same radar, gave me 33 pixels, effectively making my drawing 2 pixels too small!
so, case closed, the main radar, apart from the IFF, stays as it is.

EDIT 2:
here, doesn't this look better?

also, please lower the STIR's one pixel, as right now they form black blobs, which, as told above, are considered ugly in here. same for the phalanx.

_________________
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