nice work, and welcome back!
I have a few comments though......
The goalkeeper is AFAIK the most expensive CIWS system in the world, with 15M dollars per system. The goalkeeper also has bigger ship impact then bolt-on systems such as the Phalanx CIWS. I know of no frigate in the world that has 2 of them, except for some of the Dutch air defence command frigates (which are air defence and command ships, not really an frigate class as such)
keeping that in mind, I find it unlikely to find 2 goalkeepers on a frigate this size, but that is your choice. however, having them this badly placed seems off. On the last 2 ships, the foundations lack the space to actually place the goalkeeper (see the latest drawings of the goalkeeper and its related systems here: http://shipbucket.com/forums/viewtopic. ... 98#p121098
) note that you there also find the latest drawings of the goalkeeper.
for more likely locations and setups of goalkeeper CIWS, take a look at the dutch frigates or the korean destroyers.
furthermore, on the 113m ship, the underwater hull seems a bit crude. take a look how the skeg, bilge keel, and the bow are shaped on ships in the archive
it's not bad, just undetailed and a bit simplified as you have drawn it.
I am also really pondering why you have the lowered aft deck this way on your 113m ship. the radar placed there could much better be placed on the hangar, allowing you to have an larger helideck or to have an towed array there instead of this vulnerable and very low placed deck and radar. also, can she do her job? ASuW is not really an full time job these days, there are no ASW weapons and very little air defence...... so what is she supposed to do?
on the second ship, I am wondering a bit about some of the characteristics. the rudder looks to be sticking out quite far under the hull, as do the stabilisers. the engines seem to have no air intakes, or at least not very large ones, so I assume diesel power?
there are some strakes on the midship hull, what are they for? sponsons or something, to extend the width of the hull? again, not bad, just a bit odd in some places.
on the third ship, I repeat the comments on all kind of vulnerable stuff sticking out of the hull, I do wonder a bit about the non-stealth oto melara gun on this design (but the dutch LCF proves there can be reasons for this) and I do wonder about the weight balance when the heavy aft VLS is placed high in the hull, with only a small CIWS and an helicopter hangar (filled mostly with air and of light construction most of the time) you could offset this with other design elements, such as the radar masts or even the placement of fuel tanks, machinery and balast tanks, but non-symmetrical ships like that often have problems with using the available (hull) space efficiently, so you will end up with an bigger ship then you could have had with an more symmetrical arrangement...... which I think is exactly what you try to avoid.