Page 4 of 7

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 5:07 am
by erik_t
Minor revisions and updates. Also, top views are not pleasant.

Image

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 8:14 am
by Philbob
such a ship would of led to world war III but it would of been glorious.

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 9:54 am
by Blackbuck
Top views are fine if you're only doing them to show placement of stuff etcetera, one as detailed as this though... Yeah. Still It looks aweosme :]

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 10:41 am
by Hood
I must admit this ship is growing on me more and more...

The top-view is excellent.

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 11:21 am
by MC Spoilt B'stard
Great ship i realy like it , only weird thing i think are these goalkeepers on a US ship,but great to see a top class ciws in US service. only one question : why you make this ship a cruiser? i would class it more as a battlecruiser or even battle ship.

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 12:01 pm
by TimothyC
MC Spoilt B'stard wrote:Great ship i realy like it , only weird thing i think are these goalkeepers on a US ship,but great to see a top class ciws in US service. only one question : why you make this ship a cruiser? i would class it more as a battlecruiser or even battle ship.
That gets into the nature of what is a battleship and what is a battlecruiser. I tend to use the battleship definition of "A large ship with a main gun armament, and the armor to resist her own guns inside the majority of her own guns' range." Battlecruisers tend to be ships similar to battleships, but slightly smaller and with armor exchanged for speed. Just a reminder - the last battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class.
Philbob wrote:such a ship would of led to world war III but it would of been glorious.
Why would a ship with less range and striking power than a carrier lead to World War 3?

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 7:42 pm
by klagldsf
TimothyC wrote: the last battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class.
Correction: the only battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class. We never actually got around to commissioning any proper battlecruisers ever.

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 7:56 pm
by Colosseum
Why is everyone using this really bad quality USN naval jack? IIRC, there's a perfectly acceptable one with stars properly aligned etc on the Alaska.

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 8:45 pm
by Mitchell van Os
klagldsf wrote:
TimothyC wrote: the last battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class.
Correction: the only battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class. We never actually got around to commissioning any proper battlecruisers ever.
Alaska class is also battlecruisers right?

Re: Crazy huge CGN du jour

Posted: January 3rd, 2011, 8:58 pm
by TimothyC
MitcheLL300 wrote:
klagldsf wrote:Correction: the only battlecruiser the USN ordered was the Lexington class. We never actually got around to commissioning any proper battlecruisers ever.
Alaska class is also battlecruisers right?
Nope, Alaska, Guam, and the unfinished Hawaii were large cruisers, hence the CB designation, not a BC designation.