Shipbucket

I'm don't want to compromise, but I might as well. What if I removed the top 14" turret and replaced it with an 8" twin or removed the front lattice mast and replaced it with a... Well, not a cage mast. Basically as shown here.

Alright. I'm trying to get back into drawing now that I've graduated and I decided to work on a Large Zubr sized Hovercraft, of which the navy has 4.

Still a WIP
I blended some elements from both the Aist and the Zubr hovercraft and this is what I have so far. Yes, it is larger than the Zubr. I wanted to give it the capacity to carry 3 MBTs.

Built: 1986-1989
Builder: East Haven National Shipyard
Displacement: 380 tons (lt), 595 tons(ld) 655 tons(ovld)
Length: 205ft
Beam: 93ft
Propulsion: 5x Brittany/Eclair Motors EM-135TP-H7GVH 13500hp Turboprops
Speed: 55kts sustained, 61kts
Range: 230-310 miles at 55kts
Complement: 29 (4 officers, 25 enlisted)
Capacity: 3 70ton MBT, twelve armoured vehicles with 160 troops, 9 armoured personnel carriers, or up to 550 troops.

Comments?

Nice hovercraft.However,Zubr has 50.000hp for 130tn and it has 3 X 5.5m diameter props (overall diameter of the ducted fam 6m).So,as long as the Brittany/Eclair is more powerful than NK-12 derived engines of the Zubr,the ducted fan props should be larger than Zubr's.Moreover,in Zubr only 3 engines are used for propulsion and other two for lift,I think something similar about the Denton hovercaft.

Thank you! Yeah, I was thinking of reconfiguring the turbines to something like the Aist, and use 4 turboprops for propulsion rather than 3 (I don't want to have a prop larger than 18ft for noise reasons). 2 turbines will be used for lift, powering 3 lift fans on each side. I think it should work out pretty well.

EDIT: Maybe like this?

Nice! The lower design could be the "first generation of Denton Large LCAC" and the upper one the improved design with many improvements from previous.Comparing your rear wing with taht of the Aist,yours is a bit taller but narrower.Try to enlarge it,you need more steering area (adding two-three pixels at Aist's wing in width).

Thanks! That is a good idea. Concerning the layout of the craft, I could move the production date back a few years, because it takes mostly from the Aist, and then for the next batch, build it around the same time or a little after the Zubr.
I'll make that rudder bigger as well.

Earlier in this topic, I posted a Dreadnought heavily based on the Texas and due to placement of the middle turret and the problems with the subsequent shortening of the ship, I couldn't get it to work. So, earlier tonight, I pulled it back out and compared it with theTexas, changed a few things(all I had to do was move the entire superstructure and A B turrets forward about 20px), thus making it essentially the exact same layout as the Texas. Here it is.

I still need to add details, but before I do that I would like to make sure I did not miss anything critical.

Also, a few posts above I worked on a hovercraft based on the Zubr. One of the final changes I was going to make was the addition of a slightly large rudder.
Here it is.


Hopefully, if I can get some positive comments I can start the ball rolling again and slowly start to work on new ships, and revamp and complete older designs, such as the CGH and the Frigate on the first page. I have a long way to go, especially when it comes to detailing, but in the recent 6 month hiatus, I really missed drawing ships, so hopefully that will change.

I do not know much about dreadnoughts, but personally I would design something like the German ones, if I want 5 turrets.

The hovercraft still is more Aist than Zubr. But is good, has the larger fins suggested before. First generation of Large Hovercrafts of Denton Navy is ready.

Your Texas-derivative is a nice looking one and shows great promise. However, and I'm not sure you're aware of this; but the U.S. contemporary designs that opted for a flush-deck configuration had a discernible "bent" hull-form; i. e. the foreship was higher in the water than the aft-section, similar in concept to the IJN practice of "wavy" hulls. This was made the hull stronger by lessening the natural longitudinal stressors inflicted by wave movements, roll and pitch. You can solve the issue by adding a focs'le for instance. But a completely straight upper-deck line, I think may weaken the hull strength of your otherwise great design - especially considering the weights imposed on it by the turrets etc.

As for the forward casemate guns from what I've seen a lot of navies had that problem with forward-mounted guns being too "wet" during the dreadnought era, and a design from that era would probably have them mounted there. The RN removed those guns in some of their modernizations between the wars (to save weight due to the modernizations among other reasons) and a Denton update could do the same when the ships are modernized.