Shipbucket
https://418747.wb34atkl.asia/forums/

Grays Harbor Designs
https://418747.wb34atkl.asia/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2449		 Page 1 of 137
Author:  Zephyr [ January 10th, 2012, 2:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Grays Harbor Designs
So, I needed a cruiser, early/mid-70's vintage, for one of my Dominions, but couldn't think of any. I thought I might try another kitbash and came up with this, basically a version of the USS Ticoginia.

Wait, ... Ticoginia? Yup, I bashed bits of the Ticonderoga and Virginia classes together to give sort of a transitional type cruiser. Definately open to suggestions on this one, especially in the 'tronics department. As for the aft missile launcher, ... yes, I know that missile type was only ever used by Iran, and that its usefulness is suspect. But, I thought that for the "as built" version of this cruiser I would start with an indiginous missile designed in this Dominion, but later abandoned in favor of the "Viper" (NSM) I use for my own navy, when it is developed.

I am calling this the "Greensward" class.
[ img ]
Author:  acelanceloet [ January 10th, 2012, 2:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
to let any hangar fit over there, even one for just 1/2 lynxes, your ship must be quite beamy.... on which hull do you base it?
also, you have quite a lot outdated parts on board. you might want to take a look at the CSGN designs and of course the CGBL WIP.
some points/questions:
- on a ship this size, another phalanx arrangement would be chosen
- the aft funnel is blurring the directors view.
- IIRC, aegis always uses SPG-62, you have SPG-51 here?
- you have 2 SPQ-32 at each side, you only need 1
- you have no aft nav/helo control radar
- you have no heli control tower
- aren't the roles of you 2 types of missiles quite overlapping?
- I am not that content on those boats position
- why do you have the funnels out of the centerline, aka spruance/tico, on an all new hull?
- I miss most shading, and the masts can use some update ;)
Author:  Zephyr [ January 10th, 2012, 2:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
See, thats what I'm talking about. Useful, helpful, to the point, crap I missed/forgot about/didn't know about.

The hull is Virginia-based from the waterline up and Tico for the underwater bits. The superstructure is parts from both mashed together.

As for outdated equipment, this is an early 70's design. Now, later versions will have updated equipment installed during a late 90's refit, but I'm trying for an "as built" look here. However, suggestions such as yours are always always helpful to give me an idea of what should go where.

Which brings up a point.... Timelines in my "alternate universe" are somewhat fluid as to operational dates of ships and equipment, but I try to keep within a 5 year +/- range of the RW equivelents. Was AEGIS even available in the early 70's, and if not, what would be a good alternative?

Good point on the aft funnel arrangement. The director and funnel is actually in the same location as on the Tico, the only difference here being is that I made the funnel more solid instead of having the extended tops like on the Tico's. To give more space for the directors, and to expand the hanger, would extending the hull length, adding maybe 20 or 30 feet to the stern, be a viable solution?

Shading and other finer points I intentionally left off at this point until the basics are worked out. That way I don't have to always re-work that along with everything else. Those will be added for the finalized design.
Author:  acelanceloet [ January 10th, 2012, 2:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
first this:
the new virginia
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2208&start=40
[ img ]

the spruance update thread
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2140

with outdated parts I meant the drawings. sorry for not being clear. take a look at the USN parts sheets here:
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=20

for aegis being available... I do not know the date it was in use in the USN, but I know that in another AU I came to the conclusion AEGIS could not possibly be exported before 1985. in reality it was even later, AU circumstances might change it a bit but not before that, now you say so.

an good alternative would be the fit of the virginia's, or the one of the kidd class. SPS-48 + SPS-49 + FCS, if the dates make it possible to choose those.

on the funnels: an larger design is most of the time exactly to make systems fit better/easier, and arrangements like that should be avoided for that reason :P

you might want to go with just the virginia hull, to keep the cost down if not for nothing else. an kitbash like this is possible in sb, but most of the time it won't fit IRL ;)
Author:  Zephyr [ January 10th, 2012, 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
Excellent. I'll get to work on those changes tonight when I get home from work. I seem to be at my most productive then; winding down, having a cold soda, the cats not quite as destructive and active....

Of course, it is also 1 or 2 AM at that point, so things can get missed.

(god, I love the interaction and ideas thrown back and forth here. I should have joined ages ago instead of just looking at all the pretties as a guest.)
Author:  acelanceloet [ January 10th, 2012, 3:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
looking around now, if you want early 70's you might want to start with an california, or spruance instead of tico and virginia. more appropriate timeframe. also, look good at the systems carried before and after the NTU upgrade of the ships I named, as for example the kidd had no sps-49 and an different director setup before NTU. just watch the availability dates of the different systems and you will be all right.
Author:  bezobrazov [ January 10th, 2012, 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
If you hang tight there just for an eensie bitsy while, I'll have the USS Virginia as built (1976) posted too.
Author:  Scifibug [ January 10th, 2012, 6:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
the stacks look like they should be on another design, not in the same style as the rest of the ship. I've always thought the
USN's 70's designs were never as pleasing to the eye as some other navies ships.
Author:  klagldsf [ January 10th, 2012, 7:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
One of the most bizarre things actually is why this vessel would be carrying Sea Killer.
Author:  Zephyr [ January 10th, 2012, 8:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Ticoginia cruiser
acelanceloet wrote:
looking around now, if you want early 70's you might want to start with an california, or spruance instead of tico and virginia. more appropriate timeframe. also, look good at the systems carried before and after the NTU upgrade of the ships I named, as for example the kidd had no sps-49 and an different director setup before NTU. just watch the availability dates of the different systems and you will be all right.
Probably so, but I already use the Spruances for my navy ("Weapons" Class) so I wanted to go a slightly different route for the other one.
Page 1 of 137 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/