Shipbucket

uhum.... read again:

_________________
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

As he said, he's using layers. Deactivate the layer and you can't see what's on them. I use a similar approach, though not to the same extend.

_________________
“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.

update, and the start of the top view

_________________
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

Interesting... fairly narrow but I gues when you add the lifts and some overhangs there will be a pretty wide deck.
I think you have too many sonar systems though, carriers don't tend to have many sonars except for torpedo-warning and long-range search in some cases.

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

it looks quite narrow, because the landing deck is less angled then on most modern carriers. it is +/_ as wide as an nimitz, while it is slightly shorter, and there won't be much added to the sides.
the sonar originates from the original concept: the ship was originall build as an aircraft carrying cruiser, but finished as an full aircraft carrier. (this is also the reason for it's deck layout)

_________________
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

update again

comments?
(please comment if you see ANY mistake, as in this undetailed stage I can change it quickly)

_________________
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 presume the thicker lines are the cats?

If so, then the second one is way too long.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

They are indeed the cats. I use an similar arangement as on the second vikrant class carrier: 2 short ones on the bow, and an third one next to the second, but longer, for heavy loads. I am still a bit playing with their arrangement thoug, so it might end up with the third one parralel with the landing strip

_________________
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

The issue is that the really long cat is in a place that could near-fatally weaken the strength of the deck.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Indeed. One too many bumpy landings and you've got a straight decked carrier.

_________________
“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.