United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

Post drawings from any Alternate Universe scenario here.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#21 Post by Prizyetsa »

Alright, good evening! I apologie for not posting earlier, but I had two exams today and a concert to attend. I did however, update the Yossotten class and make a new ship, an OPV which I would really apreciate it if you guys would critisize it and give me pointers to improve my shipdrawing.

Also, I'm thinking of doing a RL ship sometime soon. More on that a big later though.

Updated Yossotten class:
Image

Kjerra class OPV:
Image

I really tried to learn from the mistakes I made with the Yossotten class, and also use ships which I imagine to be the equivilant of what I wanted this ship to be, mainly the ITS Comandante Foscari (P-493). Source

Questions:

1. Using the I-MAST 50, is the equipment above the hangar redundant?
2. Is the missile launcher aft of the main turret in the right place? I kept in mind the firing arcs, and I think it should work.
3. Should I raise the bow up higher?
4. Is the heli-deck too big?


Thanks :)

PS: Just notice the OPV lacks an anchor... -_-'
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#22 Post by Thiel »

Prizyetsa wrote:1. Using the I-MAST 50, is the equipment above the hangar redundant?
Technically, but redundancy can be a good thing. In this case you've added additional com gear which is fine. You can never get enough of that. Plus lets face it, whip antennas just looks cool.
Prizyetsa wrote:2. Is the missile launcher aft of the main turret in the right place? I kept in mind the firing arcs, and I think it should work.
It's sited OK, but the choice of missile is a bit odd. The I-Mast puts this design no earlier than 2007 or so at the earliest, while the Sea Wolf is a 1980ies design that's at the very end of its development curve. Hence why it's not included in the Type 45 or the Type 26.
Prizyetsa wrote:3. Should I raise the bow up higher?
Depends on how rough the waters it's intended to work in are. That said, it never hurts.
Prizyetsa wrote:4. Is the heli-deck too big?
There's no such thing as a too big helo deck.

A couple of suggestions:
  • Raise the two cut-outs in the side of the ship to the same level as the flight deck. You'll soon learn that freeboard is the best thing since sliced bread.
  • Find another missile. Something like the Crotale would fit perfectly, especially if you use the Sylver A35 VLS.
  • Searchlights and machineguns. You'll need both. You're an OPV so chances are you'll have to fire a warning shot or ten during your career and 12.7mm rounds are a lot cheaper than 57mm 3P rounds (About $1200 a pop)
“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.
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#23 Post by Prizyetsa »

Updated Kjerra class OPV
Image

1200 USD per shell?! O_O
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
Blackbuck
Posts: 2743
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 9:15 am
Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#24 Post by Blackbuck »

The gun doesn't have to fire 3P. I'm sure it can fire legacy rounds as well but yeah... A 12.7mm or even light cannon would suffice for warning shots and most stuff that actually needs some fire support.
AU Projects: | Banbha et al. | New England: The Divided States
Blood and Fire
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#25 Post by Prizyetsa »

I've added 2 12.5mm HMGs on the starboard side, so 4 in total on the whole ship. Anything else I should change or keep in mind? Any tiny detailing rules or anything?
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
User avatar
Thiel
Posts: 5376
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#26 Post by Thiel »

What's behind the roller door?
“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
Demon Lord Razgriz
Posts: 446
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 1:18 am
Location: Eastern North Carolina

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#27 Post by Demon Lord Razgriz »

I'd also clean up the JPEG mess if I were you....
95% of my drawings are destined for NS, 4.9% for fun, & .1% serious.
Worklist:
Space Shuttle
Atlas V
Delta II/III
Project Constellation
Soyuz series
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#28 Post by Prizyetsa »

The roller door is just an easier way to get material such as provisions and ammunition onboard. Is this redundant since I have a hangar onboard?

Ayayay, I thought I saved it as .PNG. I'll have to fix that... (luckely I save my ships in stages)
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#29 Post by Prizyetsa »

Image

There. :)
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
Prizyetsa
Posts: 99
Joined: June 30th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: United Federation of Prizyetsa Navy

#30 Post by Prizyetsa »

Okay, I have a new project. I feel that a propper command ship is needed to lead my fleets, aside from a carrier, since carriers may not always be available when you need them to command a fleet, or simply unnescesary due to their maintenance costs and the cost of deploying one in the first place.

What I propose is a guided missile cruiser fitted with perhaps AEGIS equiped, unless there is a better system for mass information gathering, targeting, guidence, etc. The reason I shose the GC classification is that it gives me enough space to fit all of the computer systems, propulsion, weapon systems and provisions for deployment.

Is this reasonable? Keep in mind that like all of my ships, this is for RP use on NS, although I do not by any means intend to go overboard as some NS'ers might.
Worklist:

Currently working on engines for the bellow deck parts sheet
Post Reply