Shipbucket

a few comments on some of the designs again
@ hood: awesome. the only remark I can make is that you took an never build, but I saw you pick out the flaws later on..... any chance on seeing an modified or improved version?
@ nighthunter: I made a few questions and suggestions earlier, but here comes an short list what IMO are the shortcomings and the good points:
- the SPG-60 blocks the WM forward, the mast aft. you don't really need the SPG anyways, as the WM does gun guidance and could even do the NSSM guidance
- the mk 29 has quite an limited field of fire.
- the unmanned NSSM director was around by 1980, so you should be able to fit that one onboard
- some parts you took from the old perry are horribly wrong. for example, the stabiliser, the thing that represents the auxilary thrusters and the missing preary masker system(which you have drawn above the waterline only).
- if the powerplant isn't too heavy (and I am fearing for just that) you might get all these sytems on board, but it will be an even tighter fit than an perry. it is for certain the Mk 112 'matchbox' can have no reloader in the hull, nor in the structure, so you are limited to 8 rounds.
- this low bow might get quite some trouble at higher seastates. this will reduce your combat effectiveness and might even lead to damage to the bow weapons and equipment. bulwarks or more sheer might solve (part of) this problem
- you are gonna have an crew sized similarly to an perry, while you build an smaller ship with less space for the crew... hmmm

+ I suppose you still have 2 helicopters? this makes the weapons fit quite an good one, having both LAMPS, ASROC, torpedo's, an gun, and self defence AA.... the only thing I really miss are some harpoons, but those would not fit on this hull anymore anyways
+ the improved sonar would cost a bit more, making this ship the same cost as an perry, but gives quite an capability increase.
+ maybe apart from the powerplant (which I don't know a lot about, to be honest) the ship looks like it could have been produced in large numbers. always an good point, both for USN and export.
+ right now it could maybe work, which is an vast improvements over the previous version, which could most likely not
also keep in mind that without SM-1 it is no longer aan FFG, but just an DE or an FF

@Clonecommander6454
first question: what are bezo and I credited for exactly? I recognise the perry sonar, but that is an part... I recognise heuhens bridge, which IMO should be credited, so I suppose... the mast or something?
the AAW capability looks like self defence only, CIWS + NSSM? also the NSSM is the wrong way around
consider an double hangar. it should fit (I have 2 seakings in 15m beam, you have 16)
the beam might be a bit much though, but it is doable....
double funnel? otherwise it is an really beamy one
consider dropping the torpedo tubes one deck. right now the torpedo's have to be lifted 1 deck up before loaded (as the magazine is shared with that of the helicopters most of the time)
consider swapping your SLQ-32 and your chaff
I think you'd better raise the LW-08 a bit, so it can overlook your funnel(s)
the aft bilge keel should (IMO) run a bit more horizontal
with an second helicopter and an towed sonar I think you have an perfect, cheap and workable ship for ASW

also, I am really happy with how this is taking of...... about everybody is submitting great work with a lot of thought put into it. ow and, please notify me when I may put an ship as 'finished' on the first page

Hmm...thinking I might try giving this a shot. Never drawn anything beyond 1940 however and I have no clue when it comes to what sensors and radars can be used for what weapons. Let's just see how it turns out I suppose...

Mind you it's likely to be a compact design as I see a class useful for export as well as for NATO use.

the only thing I really miss are some harpoons, but those would not fit on this hull anymore anyways

Why not? The ASROC launcher will fire them. You have to ask yourself how many of things you are likely to fire on a single patrol anyway. Otherwise, why not add a reloading mechanism in front of the bridge?

acelanceloet wrote:first question: what are bezo and I credited for exactly? I recognize the perry sonar, but that is an part... I recognize heuhens bridge, which IMO should be credited, so I suppose... the mast or something?

Going to fix the credit tomorrow. I credit Bezo for the propeller part.

acelanceloet wrote:the AAW capability looks like self defence only, CIWS + NSSM? also the NSSM is the wrong way around
consider an double hangar. it should fit (I have 2 seakings in 15m beam, you have 16)
the beam might be a bit much though, but it is doable....

I am not sure about the beam as well because of the Bofors 350PX... But hanger can be fixed

acelanceloet wrote:double funnel? otherwise it is an really beamy one

Consider it's a drawing problem

acelanceloet wrote:consider dropping the torpedo tubes one deck. right now the torpedo's have to be lifted 1 deck up before loaded (as the magazine is shared with that of the helicopters most of the time)

That is quite hard due to the Bofors 350PX...

acelanceloet wrote:consider swapping your SLQ-32 and your chaff

Easy Fix.

I actually forgot about the anchors...

Obsydian Shade wrote:

the only thing I really miss are some harpoons, but those would not fit on this hull anymore anyways

Why not? The ASROC launcher will fire them. You have to ask yourself how many of things you are likely to fire on a single patrol anyway. Otherwise, why not add a reloading mechanism in front of the bridge?

only 8 ASROC, of which some would be the depth charged version.... and then you want to swap some for harpoons? no way
the hull would not fit the reloader, both in shape and in weight. keep in mind that the reloader is about the same size as an mk 26 mod 0..... the only option you would have on an hull this size is an horizontal reloader in the bridge structure..... which is cramped as it is, so that is out of the question.

If you are only expecting a sub threat, there is no need for the Harpoons, granted. If you are, however, anticipating a mixed surface/sub threat, then 4 x Harpoon, 4 x ASROC should be acceptable. I see no reason the depth charge version should be deployed on these vessels. The reloader I was thinking of was the one forward of the bridge of (I think) one the Brooke class, but you may be right regards the size of the vessel not accomodating it.

on the brooke class the reloader was inside the structure
but you are correct in the fact that the harpoons are not neccesary for an purely ASW ship.... but saying that, you also could say there is no need for ESM, NSSM, the phalanx, the main gun etc. I said this from the perspective that about every USN ship carries/carried harpoons, + the fact that they (I read that somewhere on the forums a few days ago) were designed originally to take out surfaced SSBN's........
I also see no reason why the depth charged version would not be used + nighthunter has drawn them so I suppose it will.

Well as this is my first modern warship, I have no idea really where to go with it. Here's a rough idea of what I've got at the moment;



So far the only things I know is that she'll have most likely exocet missile launchers amidships and an OTO Melara 76mm on the foredeck. Whilst she'll have a small landing platform aft, no hangar facilities will be available as far as I can think. Propulsion would be twin screw CODAD. Other than that I have no idea what I'm doing. I don't even know what weapons are out there today that are Anti Submarine. As I mentioned earlier I've never drawn anything post-WW2 so I'm unfamiliar with systems, weapons, layouts, etc.

And yes it is a small design designed to be cheap to produce and maintain.

San Andreas NATO ASW Frigate
Type: ASW with ASuW and limited AAW Capability
Displacement: 4100 Long Ton standard, 4400 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 411 Feet (125.3 meters)
Beam: 52 Feet (16 meters)
Drought: 20 Feet (6.1 meters)

Propulsion: 2-shaft CODOG
2 x General Electric LM2500 Gas Turbines (40 MW Total)
2 MTU 20V956 TB92 Diesel Engines (9 MW total)

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 180-220

Armament: Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems.
1 x Oto-Melara 76mm
1 x Mk 29 Octuple NATO Sea Sparrow Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
2 x Quad RGM-84 Harpoon Launcher
2 x Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes
2 x 40mm Bofors 350PX
2 x 12.7mm M2 Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x Decca Surface Search Radar
1 x WM-25 Surface Search & Fire Control Radar
1 x STIR-180 Illuminator
1 x LW-08 Long Range 2D Air Search Radar
1 x AN/SQS-56 Sonar
1 x AN/SQR-18 or AN/SQR-19 Towed Sonar
2 x MK 36 Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff
2 x AN/SLQ-32(V)2 Electronic Warfare Suite

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: 2 × SH-2 Seasprite/ SH-60 Seahawk

-REMOVED, CHECK THE NEXT PAGE-

San Andreas NATO AAW Frigate
Type: AAW with ASuW and limited ASW Capability
Displacement: 4250 Long Ton standard, 4550 Long Ton Full Load
Length: 411 Feet (125.3 meters)
Beam: 52 Feet (16 meters)
Drought: 20 Feet (6.1 meters)

Propulsion: 2-shaft CODOG
2 x General Electric LM2500 Gas Turbines (40 MW Total)
2 MTU 20V956 TB92 Diesel Engines (9 MW total)

Maximum Speed: 30 Knots
Cruise Speed: 18 knots

Range: 6,000 NM (11,000 km) at 18 Knots; 3,600 NM (6,600 km) at 30 kn

Complement: 180-220

Armament: Can be equipped with most American and European Weapon Systems.
1 x Oto-Melara 76mm
1 x Mk 13 Missile Launcher
1 x Phalanx Close-In Weapon System
2 x Quad RGM-84 Harpoon Launcher
2 x Mark 32 Surface Vessel Torpedo Tubes
2 x 40mm Bofors 350PX
2 x 12.7mm M2 Heavy Machine Gun

Electronics and Counter Measures:
1 x Decca Surface Search Radar
1 x DA-05 Targeting Radar
1 x LW-08 Long Range 2D Air Search Radar
1 x AN/SQS-56 Sonar
2 x STIR-240 Illuminator
2x MK 36 Super Rapid Blooming Offboard Chaff
2 x AN/SLQ-32(V)2 Electronic Warfare Suite

Armor: Kevlar Armor installed in Critical Areas

Aircraft: Helicopter Deck

-REMOVED, CHECK THE NEXT PAGE-

Crediting will be changed soon

ASW version: you might want to change the aft arrangement a bit, right now the hangar looks cramped
AAW version: doable, even likely, apart from 1 point: when you have LW-08 available you also have DA-08 available, those work better together. you also might be able to move the mk 13 a bit more towards midships, but that depends on your belowdeck arrangement.