CGBL

Post any drawings of planned or conceptual ships.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
MihoshiK
Posts: 1035
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#11 Post by MihoshiK »

Hm, Tim, considering the location and the fact that they appear angled to the front/back in the lineart, I think that's not a smaller set of intakes on the forward superstructure above the regular ones, but rather a location for chaff launchers.
Would you please not eat my gun...
Image
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#12 Post by TimothyC »

MihoshiK wrote:Hm, Tim, considering the location and the fact that they appear angled to the front/back in the lineart, I think that's not a smaller set of intakes on the forward superstructure above the regular ones, but rather a location for chaff launchers.
Quite possibly.

One issue I am having is that the uptakes are just not big enough. I may add a second row below the current ones.
πŒπ€π“π‡ππ„π“- 𝑻𝒐 π‘ͺπ’π’ˆπ’Šπ’•π’‚π’•π’† 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
Hood
Posts: 7234
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am

Re: CGBL

#13 Post by Hood »

Overall its looking good. A very purposeful design that somehoe reminds me of those unbuilt early 1960s Soviet cruisers in overall appearance.
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#14 Post by TimothyC »

πŒπ€π“π‡ππ„π“- 𝑻𝒐 π‘ͺπ’π’ˆπ’Šπ’•π’‚π’•π’† 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
ghost792
Posts: 34
Joined: September 8th, 2010, 12:09 am

Re: CGBL

#15 Post by ghost792 »

Nice work. I found out about the CGBL a few years ago and I've been fascinated with it ever since. One peculiar thing, though, not with your work, but the design itself. Why only three missile directors instead of four like the Ticos? It seems odd that the Navy would hamper a CG's capabilities in that way.
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#16 Post by TimothyC »

ghost792 wrote:Nice work. I found out about the CGBL a few years ago and I've been fascinated with it ever since. One peculiar thing, though, not with your work, but the design itself. Why only three missile directors instead of four like the Ticos? It seems odd that the Navy would hamper a CG's capabilities in that way.
I'm presuming that the forward directors are side-by-side, just as they are on the Ticos themselves. It really does contrary to the idea of building built to Burke standards (something that Erik just said to me, and I happen to agree with it). I am looking at tracking down where the painting is so that a higher resolution image might someday make it online. Until then I'm stuck with what I've posted here (and on a couple of other forums).
πŒπ€π“π‡ππ„π“- 𝑻𝒐 π‘ͺπ’π’ˆπ’Šπ’•π’‚π’•π’† 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
Karle94
Posts: 2135
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 3:07 pm
Location: Norseland

Re: CGBL

#17 Post by Karle94 »

Nice ship and good work. Should`t the Harpoon launchers face outwards, instead of inwards?
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#18 Post by TimothyC »

Best guess I have is that they cross fire across the bow.
πŒπ€π“π‡ππ„π“- 𝑻𝒐 π‘ͺπ’π’ˆπ’Šπ’•π’‚π’•π’† 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
ghost792
Posts: 34
Joined: September 8th, 2010, 12:09 am

Re: CGBL

#19 Post by ghost792 »

The Navy started positioning the Harpoon tubes to fire across the opposite side they were mounted on so that the missiles' exhaust could be directed overboard. It made protecting the ship from the exhaust far easier.
Morten812
Posts: 282
Joined: September 16th, 2011, 7:02 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: CGBL

#20 Post by Morten812 »

looks great, apart from the aft funnel being the tallest, just my humble opinion.
Morten812

Morten Jensen
Randers
Denmark

Traffic Manager
Post Reply