Grays Harbor Designs

Post any drawings you have made that do not pertain to an Alternate Universe scenario and are not a never-built design.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
Carthaginian
Posts: 587
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 7:25 pm
Location: Daphne, Alabama, C.S.A.

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#31 Post by Carthaginian »

That is one SEXY ship!!!
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#32 Post by acelanceloet »

only one problem: the bridge structure is now very beamy or very angled. I do not know if that was your intention?
other then that, this is one good looking ship!
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
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#33 Post by Zephyr »

acelanceloet wrote:only one problem: the bridge structure is now very beamy or very angled. I do not know if that was your intention?
other then that, this is one good looking ship!
I'll fake it and say "Yeah, thats exactly what I had in mind!" ;)

And thanks for your assistance on the, well, everything.
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#34 Post by Thiel »

Are you carrying one or two SeaCats aft?
“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.
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#35 Post by Zephyr »

one aft and one forward. do you think there would be room for a pair of them in that aft position?
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#36 Post by Thiel »

Plenty. It was designed as a 1-1 replacement for the 4mm Bofors.
Oh and get rid of the liferafts and replace them with inflatable ones. They were invented during wwii, so they should be available.
“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.
User avatar
Portsmouth Bill
Posts: 3220
Joined: August 16th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#37 Post by Portsmouth Bill »

Interesting design; but you are showing beam 3-in duals on what looks like sponsons? I would say that would be impossible for these guns as they required a huge amount of hull space for the magazines; if you compare with the actual HMS Tiger you'll get a better impression. Overall, the design is overloaded with guns and missiles.
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#38 Post by Zephyr »

the turrets are on the hull, the sponsons are for the crew to get around the bloody things. ;)
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
User avatar
Portsmouth Bill
Posts: 3220
Joined: August 16th, 2010, 7:45 am
Location: Cambridge United Kingdom

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#39 Post by Portsmouth Bill »

the turrets are on the hull, the sponsons are for the crew to get around the bloody things.
Right. I'm not sure that this still makes sense. Insisting on large sponsons to faciltate pedestrian passage? :shock: I mean, what is the overiding reason to install these large 'carbunkles', just to allow people to stroll around them! I'm assuming you're being ironic here :lol:

That said, I still stand by my initial assessment, that this is a seriously overloaded hull, that, while being an interesting concept, just doesn't fit together as a workable design :)
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: Ticoginia cruiser

#40 Post by Thiel »

Having thought a bit more about it I have to agree with Bill.
I'd scrap the 40mm since it doesn't have a worthwhile firing arc anyway, remove the sponsoons since they're unnecessary and lastly I'd remove one set of 3"/70ies. The Tiger class only had three on a much fuller hull. I'd move the remaining set further aft to where the boats are now to even out the load a bit. The boats can be relocated to between the funnels.
Since you carry ASW helicopters you should consider a sonar.
Oh and I'm not sure the Type 992 radar was in service yet. In fact I'm fairly certain it wasn't.
“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.
Post Reply