Shipbucket

The river Thames is called the Isis when running though Oxford any they won't rename it...
Like how no-one has renamed the IS series of tanks in any game

As to your ship Voyager - the funnels are too big for a 100,000shp propulsion system. Hood has 144,000shp and your funnels are almost twice as big as the Hoods.

The drawing is fine, and like a lot of other 15" AU ships that have been drawn.

Five ships of the British Royal Navy would have been named HMS Isis when the purchase happened, after the Egyptian goddess Isis.

The first Isis was a 50-gun fourth-rate probably launched in 1744 as Colchester.
The second HMS Isis (1747) was the French ship Diamant captured in 1747 and converted to a 50-gun fourth-rate, continuing in use until 1766.
The third HMS Isis (1774) was a 50-gun fourth-rate launched in 1774, and broken up in 1810.
The fourth HMS Isis (1819) was a 50-gun fourth-rate launched in 1819, hulked in 1861 and sold 1867.
The fifth HMS Isis (1896) was an Eclipse-class protected cruiser in use from 1896 to 1920.*
*Would be renamed

Seven ships of the Royal Navy would have borne the name HMS Anne or HMS Ann:

HMS Anne (1416) was a ballinger in service in 1416.
HMS Ann (1417) was a ballinger in service in 1417.
HMS Anne (1654) was a 52-gun Speaker-class frigate launched as Bridgewater in 1654, and renamed in 1660. She was accidentally blown up in 1673.
HMS Anne (1678) was a 70-gun third rate ship of the line launched in 1678 and burnt after the Battle of Beachy Head in 1690.
HMS Anne (1702) was a fireship purchased in 1702.
HMS Anne (1798) was a 14-gun armed ship purchased in 1798 and sold in 1802.
HMS Anne (1804) was a 10-gun brig hired between 1804 and 1809.

See also HMS Anne Gallant and HMS Anne Royal.

As to the funnels, she's not Hood. Would that she was, then she wouldn't need more than thirty boilers! She's earlier than Nagato with another 20% power and an equal 80%/20% coal:oil propulsion mix as designed.

Thiel wrote:So an AU about Nazi Germany, probably the objectively most evil regime in modern history, or the CSA, who fought for chattel slavery, is okay but an au where one design shares a name with a terrorist organization is crossing the line?

Well I had no problem with it, it was just how recent ISIS is compared to Nazi Germany. And that for some it might be... But I don't care at all.

Voyager, I would not have bothered to comment at all if the funnels were not wrong. To you they may look cool or whatever your reasoning is. But the funnels are twice as big as they need to be to do the job they have to do. It seems to be very hard to get people to accept that designers do not make mistakes like that. Think of the monetary value and waste of resources.

Find a real life ship that has your ships kind of horsepower and check the funnel sizes compared to yours.

Krakatoa wrote:Voyager, I would not have bothered to comment at all if the funnels were not wrong. To you they may look cool or whatever your reasoning is. But the funnels are twice as big as they need to be to do the job they have to do. It seems to be very hard to get people to accept that designers do not make mistakes like that. Think of the monetary value and waste of resources.

Find a real life ship that has your ships kind of horsepower and check the funnel sizes compared to yours.

yeah he have almost HMS Warspite funnel

... HMS Tiger, 51.5 feet funnel length on broadside view, 85,000 shp.

Nagato, 47.5 foot funnel length on broadside view, 80,000 shp, +4 years technology advance

HMS Isis, 60 foot funnel length on broadside view, 100,000 shp.

Isis generates 117.5% the power of Tiger with the same laydown year. 51.5' x 117.5% = 60.5 feet.
She generates 125% the power of Nagato, 47.5' x 125% = 59.375 feet.

With a lozenge funnel profile, the stack area looks similar between the two.

That was my reasoning, not that it 'looked cool'.

Now that the Christmas rush of mail is over...

This is a rough draft, and I am looking for comments before I move onto details. The German 105 mounts need to be re-shaped into a boxier one, and 84mm RF mounts need to be added. Are there any other glaring errors?

hm... ther is possible to make superstructure look more busy, for example:
- stairs and ladder between the various decks, (more of them) but mainly between main deck and the next deck.
- more rafts.
- pipes.
- ventilation, a lot of them.

it's as you say a rough draft.
railing missing here and there, ropes, VHF. etc.

I would also perhaps consider make the bulb just a little les distinct. you can also experiment with having the main turret standing a little closer together, since they are most likely sharing magazine.

Stern, if it's a Vanguard style stern, then I suspect it should be looking more straight. if it's an ordinary BB stern, then it should be a little rounder, so it appears as an round stern, then a flat stern.

Voyager989 wrote:Now that the Christmas rush of mail is over...

This is a rough draft, and I am looking for comments before I move onto details. The German 105 mounts need to be re-shaped into a boxier one, and 84mm RF mounts need to be added. Are there any other glaring errors?

1. Why the German 105?
2. Why does the propeller arrangement look funky?
More ventilation, lifeboats, radar directors, and light AA guns.