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
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#781 Post by Zephyr »

A few, I believe, improvements on this thing.

Image
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
User avatar
Clonecommander6454
Posts: 760
Joined: August 8th, 2011, 2:35 pm

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#782 Post by Clonecommander6454 »

I think the opening at the bow is very strange and it will get the interior wet very fast so I suggest remove it
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#783 Post by Zephyr »

I don't seem to recall any reports of the Illustrious class carriers being flooded. They had those bow openings as well, thats where I got the idea. Perhaps move it back some, but not remove it is as far as I go on that one.

edit: ok, moved aft some, and reduced in size a bit.

Image

EDIT: Skua/Roc switcheroo fix'd
Last edited by Zephyr on June 9th, 2012, 9:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
"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: Grays Harbor Designs

#784 Post by Portsmouth Bill »

I like the overall look of the design, but the air wing is a bit puzzling; I'm not sure what the value is in having the Blackburn Roc, as it was a very flawed design, maybe better to have the Skua instead, or even better a USN dive bomber? :)
Blackbuck
Posts: 2743
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#785 Post by Blackbuck »

I concur, Skuas over Rocs. I'd imagine by the end of 1940 you'd be transitioning towards something like F4F-3s, SBD-1s and retaining the Devestators until being able to procure the Avenger or Barracuda?
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#786 Post by Zephyr »

Portsmouth Bill wrote:I like the overall look of the design, but the air wing is a bit puzzling; I'm not sure what the value is in having the Blackburn Roc, as it was a very flawed design, maybe better to have the Skua instead, or even better a USN dive bomber? :)
ummm .... that is the Skua. At least, it was supposed to be. Its what I got off the British aircraft sheet anyhow, unless my 20-ohmygod eyes have failed me even more than previously thought.

EDIT: AH-HA! I have uncovered the problem. On the sheet the Skua and Roc are lumped together, and at this scale I didn't notice the turret and grabbed the wrong bloody one. That needs fixin' I do believe.
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#787 Post by Zephyr »

Blackbuck wrote:I concur, Skuas over Rocs. I'd imagine by the end of 1940 you'd be transitioning towards something like F4F-3s, SBD-1s and retaining the Devestators until being able to procure the Avenger or Barracuda?
I'm still working on my exact aircraft line-up, mostly trying to work from memory (which, according to my wife is rapidly approaching alzheimers stage. I love my wife. :lol: ) as I had it all worked out previously, but it was on the hard drive that crapped out on me. The IT guy where she works has got it and is slowly recovering some of the data, I think.

Anyhow, the way I have it right now, at least for the 30's-40's is:
(my designation followed by the RW equivelent. Dates are when it was in "front line" service.)

fighters:
Porter Sparrowhawk Mk I = Grumman F2F (1933-40)
Porter Sparrowhawk Mk. II/III/IV = Grumman F3F1/2/3 (1935-42)
Schaeffer Falcon = Brewster F2A Buffalo (1939-43)
Porter Goshawk Mk. I/II/III/IV= Grumman F4F1/2/3/4 (1940-46)
Schaeffer Tigershark = Vought F4U (1942-50)

I kinda skipped the F6F and went straight to the Corsair. I like Corsairs.

Bombers:
Porter Kingfisher = Blackburn Skua (1936-41)
Schaeffer Banshee = Douglas SBD Dauntless (1940-45)

Torpedo:
Simpson Aviation Mantaray = Douglas T2D (1927-38)
Simpson Aviation Stingray Mk. I = Martin T2M (1925-30)
Simpson Aviation Stingray Mk. II = Martin T4M (1928-34)
Simpson Aviation Stingray Mk. III (also used as an experimental dive bomber)= Martin T5M (1930-34)
Schaeffer Dragonfly = Douglas TBD (1934-42)
Porter Halberd = Grumman TBF Avenger (1942-56)

Scout/Observation:
Simpson Aviation Observer = Avro Bison (1922-33)
Porter Goblin = Grumman FF (1933-40)
Schaeffer Valefor = Fairey Fulmar (1940-46)
Schaeffer Venom = Fairey Firefly (1943-58)

Paint schemes for carrier aircraft
1921-34: Overall LtGrey, yellow wings, tail in squadron/ship colors
1934-40: Fuselage Grey-Green, yellow wings, undersides Sky Type S, tail either grey-green or squadron/ship colors at squadron commanders discretion
1940-46: Continental Theater - Extra Dk Sea Grey/Dk Green, underside Sky Type S. Equatorial Theater - Overall Dk Blue
Last edited by Zephyr on June 10th, 2012, 4:59 am, edited 2 times in total.
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
APDAF
Posts: 1508
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:42 am

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#788 Post by APDAF »

No swordfish?
User avatar
Zephyr
Posts: 1587
Joined: November 22nd, 2011, 4:47 am
Location: Marietta, Georgia - USA

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#789 Post by Zephyr »

No swordfish. I love the old stringbag, but I like the Devastator better. Don't know why, just do.

and ... an example of carrier aircraft of the 30's, this one the Sparrowhawk fighter. (not my drawing. Got it someplace else and recolored and re-marked it)
Image
Last edited by Zephyr on June 10th, 2012, 6:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor
Hood
Posts: 7234
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am

Re: Grays Harbor Designs

#790 Post by Hood »

The forward 4.5in turrets are too far forward, the flare of the hull and the shape of the bows would not make such layout possible. In fact the whole ship would probably look more balanced if you moved the island further aft and swapped the positions of the forward 20mm and 4.5in mounts.
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft
Post Reply