NATO ASW Design Challenge

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
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#171 Post by Thiel »

Displacement: 3200 tons full load
Dimensions: 316.5 feet long, beam 47.5 feet
Gun Armament: Two 20mm Oerlikon L/75AA in GAM-BO1 single mountings
Missile Armament: One sextuple BAe Sea Wolf launchers
Torpedo Armament: Two triple 12.75in A/S STWS-2 torpedo tube mountings (18 Stingray or Mk 46 A/S torpedoes)
Aircraft: One Westland Sea King HAS.5
Electronics: One Type 967/968 air/surface search radar, one Type 1006 navigation radar, one Type 911 fire-control radar two chaff launchers, two Sea Gnat decoy launchers, one Type 2087 passive towed sonar array, one bow active/passive search and attack sonar
Propulsion: CODLAG, one RR Olympus TM3B 21.000 kW and two 5500 kW diesels turning two screws.
Performance: 30, 20 knots cruise; range 6000 at 15 kts
Complement: Good question
“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.
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#172 Post by acelanceloet »

ok. added to first post.
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
acelanceloet
Posts: 7512
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#173 Post by acelanceloet »

A little later then planned, but the challenge is hereby closed. Designs submitted after this post will not be judged

I am really content about all the great work submitted, and I look forward to the next challenge!
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
jabba
Posts: 1012
Joined: April 14th, 2011, 5:00 pm
Location: Under your kitchen sink...

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#174 Post by jabba »

Sweet, I'm looking forward to reading the results!

Is there going to be one overall winner, or different categories? e.g. Overall winner, best artistry, most innovative design, best value for money, original idea etc.
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#175 Post by TimothyC »

I'm not sure, but I'm going to do a write up.
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
nighthunter
Posts: 1971
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 8:33 pm

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#176 Post by nighthunter »

Since my entry was accidentally deleted due to it being an attachment, here is the Revised and correctly credited Kendrick class FFG:

Image
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me
User avatar
odysseus1980
Posts: 3607
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact:

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#177 Post by odysseus1980 »

Looks like a cross between Garcia and O'Perry.Good design though.
TimothyC
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact:

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#178 Post by TimothyC »

This weekend got away from me. I'm still working on the evaluations.
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆
User avatar
DER386
Posts: 41
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:36 am

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#179 Post by DER386 »

nighthunter wrote:Since my entry was accidentally deleted due to it being an attachment, here is the Revised and correctly credited Kendrick class FFG:

Image
This design is a bit confusing
You have the Mack structure associated with a steam power plant and the exhaust section associated with the steam turbine power plant of the OHP class frigates
What type of power plant/plants are you using?
User avatar
heuhen
Posts: 9104
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!

Re: NATO ASW Design Challenge

#180 Post by heuhen »

DER386 wrote:
nighthunter wrote:Since my entry was accidentally deleted due to it being an attachment, here is the Revised and correctly credited Kendrick class FFG:

Image
This design is a bit confusing
You have the Mack structure associated with a steam power plant and the exhaust section associated with the steam turbine power plant of the OHP class frigates
What type of power plant/plants are you using?
John Kendrick class FFG

Type: ASW with limited ASuW and AAW Capability
Displacement: 3160 Long Ton standard, 3560 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 384 Feet (117.043 meters)
Beam: 46 Feet 11 Inches (14.3002 meters)
Drought: 26 Feet (7.9248 meters)

Propulsion: Single shaft with variable pitch propeller COSAG
2 × General Electric LM2500-30 gas turbines generating 41,000 shp (31 MW)
2 × Auxiliary Propulsion Units, 350 hp (260 kW) retractable electric azipods for maneuvering and docking.

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 17 officers, 180 enlisted

Armament: (Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems)

1 x General Electric Mark 75 76mm/62 Dual Purpose Gun
1 x Mk 29 8 cell NATO Sea Sparrow Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
1 x Mk-16 8 cell missile launcher for ASROC and Harpoon missiles
2 x Triple Mark 32 ASW torpedo tubes with Mark 46 ASW torpedoes
2 x Browning M2 .50 cal (12.7mm) Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x SPS-49 LR 2-D Air Search Radar
1 x SPS-10 Surface Search Radar
1 x Mk. 92 Mod 2 Fire Control System
1 x SQS-56 Sonar
1 x SQR-19 Towed Sonar Array
2 x Mark 36 SRBOC
1 x AN/SLQ-25 Nixie Towed Torpedo Decoy
2 x SLQ-32(V)2, Flight III with sidekick

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: 2 × SH-2 Seasprite (later SH-60 Seahawk)
Post Reply