70's-80's CSG

[TimothyC]

Sorry, but you are incorrect. This gun system never entered service. Therefore I don't find it feasible to show it on this drawing. Sabotage181 should remove it as it currently compromises the integrity of what is otherwise good, solid work.

S/F Tagger sends

The Mk 71 completed testing and got exceptionally close to deployment on the Spruances. Seeing it on CG when it was on all of the later CSGN designs is both reasonable and prudent. I would even argue that not having it would impede on the integrity of the work.

As an aside, while tone is exceptionally hard to properly convey on a board where many of our members do not speak/write/read English as a first language, It is easy to read a confrontational tone into your posts that you might not intend to be there.

Yes, I understand that this is a whimsical design created by boys in order to assuage a fantasy, but at the same time I would aim for maximum realism within the parameters. I am not sure what "for the LOL's" means but I can anticipate that it equates to a non-serious approximation of naval architecture that should not be posted on a forum like Shipbucket, where studious adherence to the rules of physics and historical realism should be observed at all times. Otherwise we are just children playing at creation.

There are, to my knowlegde, exactly four people on this board with known naval architecture training* above and beyond what would be gained as a part of a Mechanical/Aerospace Engineering degree (yes, this discounts those who have served on ships, but that's a whole different set of experience that while it should not be overlooked, is not directly relevant to the point I am making). Because of that, most of us are fanboys playing around with toys (relatively speaking).

This is Sabotage's thread and drawing, and he can do with it what he wants.

And frankly, I don't accept the construct of an international team to excuse rude behavior on your part. I would personally like an apology for your harsh words, else I will contact the moderators of this forum and ask for resolution. I hope we can resolve this constructively. Please observe the forum rules, specifically Rule #2 which specifically disallows flaming, baiting, and trolling.

Hey, I'm a moderator!
Having reviewed the thread, I find nothing wrong with what Heuhen has posted.

*I'm not one of them, but someone who is arguing that this is reasonable to have on the ship is.

[KHT]

Tagger 1-1, do you suffer from some kind of diagnose? As someone who does so myself, I recognize the signs.

[Tagger 1-1]

Hello Rhade,

I must first offer my sincere apologies for any offence suffered by my use of the word lunatics. I must point out, however, that my words are not nearly as harmful as those given me by the likes of members such as heuhen, acelancelot, and Colombia Mike. Frankly, their behavior would not be tolerated on another forum, but this explains the stigma towards this community seen outside its borders on other military-related message boards. I am not surprised that my frank and truthful comments were met with such derision and rudeness by otherwise knowledgeable and established community members. I have already requested that moderation action is taken against them in my introduction thread.

S/F Tagger sends

[Colosseum]

It's an AU drawing... it's designed to be fanciful???

[Rhade]

Hello Rhade,

I must first offer my sincere apologies for any offence suffered by my use of the word lunatics. I must point out, however, that my words are not nearly as harmful as those given me by the likes of members such as heuhen, acelancelot, and Colombia Mike. Frankly, their behavior would not be tolerated on another forum, but this explains the stigma towards this community seen outside its borders on other military-related message boards. I am not surprised that my frank and truthful comments were met with such derision and rudeness by otherwise knowledgeable and established community members. I have already requested that moderation action is taken against them in my introduction thread.

S/F Tagger sends

First, columbiamike. You insist that we use your full nick then please do the same.

Second, I have not seen any kind of aggressive or harmful comments from our community members. In other hand, your behavior is rather disturbing, it posses some strong signs of arrogance. As new, even very new member you should show some humility. Especially when you are engage with discussion with long terms members of high esteem. Instead you demand inquisitional action and punishment for those who dare have other opinion then yours. This is the role of Moderatii, if they see that rules are broken they react if not...

For now, you are only words. If you want to have any position or respect in this community you need to show your skills in pixels.

[acelanceloet]

Hello Rhade,

I must first offer my sincere apologies for any offence suffered by my use of the word lunatics. I must point out, however, that my words are not nearly as harmful as those given me by the likes of members such as heuhen, acelancelot, and Colombia Mike. Frankly, their behavior would not be tolerated on another forum, but this explains the stigma towards this community seen outside its borders on other military-related message boards. I am not surprised that my frank and truthful comments were met with such derision and rudeness by otherwise knowledgeable and established community members. I have already requested that moderation action is taken against them in my introduction thread.

S/F Tagger sends

ok, now first of all, I hate it when my username is spelled as acelancelot. write ace or do it correctly. I normally don't call anybody back for that, but for somebody who just asked me to use your full username, that's an pretty bad move which seems to be asking me to respect you, a new guy who I barely know, while you don't respect me, somebody who has been here significally longer then you.
also, please point out (preferably by PM, to not cloud these threads) where I have been showing bad behaviour to you other then saying you were wrong. if I find you are right, I will publicly apologise, but I don't think I have been doing anything like it.
shipbucket has an high drawing standard and an very high level of knowledge. every member over here learns every day from others. new members are often somewhat set aback by the hard telling their ideas are stupid, or their designs don't work. many leave. others come back, learn, teach, and form now the core of the ones drawing the high quality ships you were praising in the F-200 thread.

do not get me wrong, we welcome new members, especially if they are willing to do real designs. but that is why we are not so liked by the rest of the net

[Tagger 1-1]

I feel as though your comments about giving new members respect is simple lip-service; I am certainly not the only member here who has joined and been attacked over and over for having a different opinion from the rest of you.

I offer this, http://www.shipbucket.com/forums/viewto ... 13#p104313, my first posted drawing as a contributing member, as evidence that I am not "just words". Please take a look at that drawing and tell me what you think.

S/F Tagger sends

[acelanceloet]

please keep opinions and facts clear from each other. opinions are personal, welcome but will be discussed. facts are to be backed up by data if you want to disprove the general know-how.
I ask again to show me where I have attacked you. if I did, it was not my intention and I would like to adress that issue to stop it from happening in the future.
btw, do not expect respect if you do not respect others. counts in real life, but over here too.

[sabotage181]

Personally I don't see that 8" gun ever happening. By this time the focus of the USN had rightfully shifted away from guns to missiles, and I think we can look to the historical record as enough proof that the 8" system you depict was not feasible.

The shading below the bow knuckle is pleasing. Good work otherwise.

S/F Tagger sends

Thank you Tager 1-1. First of all I would like to point out that I designed this ship as an alternate history design. I would ask if you read this whole thread or just saw my latest post. I made a pretty clear back story for this design. The MK 71 is a very feasible gun system. My buddy who works at Dahlgren says they are always firing it and testing different rounds and what not. Many of the uppers in the USN wanted this gun deployed badly. There was a general consensus among these types that they wanted a ship that looked intimidating to the Russian and I'm positive that the MK 71 was foremost in their minds. I think the only downfall of the MK 71 is that it was born into a defense cuts type of atmosphere around the time of Jimmy Carter, which happens to be the same time a lot of other good weapons systems were put out to pasture.

Again, this is a fictional ship, but I'm trying to make it as real as possible with the help of the members of this board

thank you for your comments

[klagldsf]

The reason it was not used in real life is because of the rise of missiles

The Mk 71 was originally envisioned to provide naval gunfire support (otherwise known as NGS) where it was believed a gun would be cheaper and more efficient than lobbing missiles in an environment rich with small and disparate targets (namely troop concentrations, armor concentrations and small-scale, concealed defensive emplacements). It was canceled because the USN believed that the R&D investment did not justify the weapon system supplanting current systems used for that mission, but that is not the same thing as the system being under-optimized or obsolete for that specific mission requirement.