Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 2  [ 13 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 »
Author Message
Carnac
Post subject: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 1:34 am
Offline
Posts: 310
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 11:59 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada
A personal proposal for the Common Hull Combatant. (I know this has been done before, but seeing as they are both personal designs that happen to fill the same RL role, I see no problem)
http://i.imgur.com/G45IY.png (1)
http://i.imgur.com/f83ZW.png (2)
http://i.imgur.com/RY8ys.png (3)
http://i.imgur.com/4QAiA.png (4)
http://i.imgur.com/kdabX.png (5)
[ img ]


Weapons:
1 x Mk 32 SVTT (Internal)
64 x Tactical-Length Mark 41 VLS
32 x Self-Defense Length Mark 41 VLS
1 x RAM Launcher
1 x Mark 3 57mm Bofors
2 x RHMG

Sensors:
5 x Mirador EO
APAR
SMART-L
2 x Navigational Radar

Decoys:
Nulka (From Mark 41)

Aviation:
1 x Medium helipad
Room for one CH-148 Cyclone or similar

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.


Last edited by Carnac on May 8th, 2011, 8:26 pm, edited 7 times in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 4:23 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
Good Start, I have definitely seen worse (I've drawn worse too). You still need uptakes and exhaust for the engines, and I only see 24, maybe 48 VLS cells with the midship array. I might chose to accept 32 cells forward (maybe 48), and two 8 cell SD length packs on each beam on the main exhaust.

Please don't let my critiques discourage you, as I see some great potential here.

Oh and thank you for using the most up-to-date versions of all parts. It really warms my heart to see that after all of the old versions of the Standard Missile that I see still being used.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 6:10 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Underwater exhausts and gas turbines really turbines really doesn't mix all that well. The only ship I'm aware of that uses it is the Swedish Visby class corvette.
In order to power your ship along, you'll need quite a bit more power, so the exhaust has to be quite a bit larger, which will take up a lot of space in the hull, right were you'll need it the most.
If you have CODAG propulsion you're also likely to see some "interesting" situations in heavy weather when external pressure becomes higher than the exhaust pressure from the diesels.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carnac
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 7:35 am
Offline
Posts: 310
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 11:59 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada
@Thiel, If Wiki is to be believed the South African Valour class uses it, and it uses CODAG. I'd also assume that
A. The exhaust has a pretty high pressure, making that situation unlikely
or
B. There is a no-return valve in the exhaust system.

@TimothyC, It's supposed to be 64 cells in the mid, 32 front. I'll fix that.

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 8:01 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
The Valour class has its exhaust at the waterline, something your ship can't have because it has to deal with sea ice. They also had to make some significant sacrifices in terms of internal volume to make it work.
The exhaust pressure from a gas turbine is high. On a turbo diesel, not so much.
You can't install a no-return valve in the system. In bad weather it would close up all the time and kill your engines. (Getting rid of the exhaust is just as vital as getting air in.)

Anyway, the HMG is in a very bad position since you can't get to it without a moveable ladder.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carnac
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 8:18 am
Offline
Posts: 310
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 11:59 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada
OK, so adding exhausts. VLS has been enlarged, rails added (I opted for solid rails to reduce RCS) and various other minor changes.

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carnac
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 6:16 pm
Offline
Posts: 310
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 11:59 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Major update.
http://i.imgur.com/4QAiA.png

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Gilles
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 7:40 pm
Offline
Posts: 8
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 8:35 am
Location: Liège, Belgium
it's just my opinion but i think the hull is a bit to small because you can't do big upgrades or put more weapons in the future
i would see a 150M hull for a ddg


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Carnac
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 8:07 pm
Offline
Posts: 310
Joined: April 28th, 2011, 11:59 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada
It's true it would be difficult to expand the weapons suite, but any future weapons that fit in a tactical length Mk 41 VLS would fit in this ship, giving it a moderate amount of future-proofing.

_________________
Probably posting from and iPhone and naval terms befuddle it. If I say a ships' hill, you know what I meant.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Replacement for Canadian Frigates and Destroyers (WIP)Posted: May 8th, 2011, 8:23 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
I doubt those funnels are going to be big enough. Take a look at some similar sized turbine powered ship.
You also need to ad air intakes.

_________________
“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.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 2  [ 13 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page 1 2 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]