Portsmouth Bill wrote:I don't usually commnet here, but I always look in; so I'd like to say that your skills are developing and that is most evident in the latest design
Thank you. It is always nice to hear I may be on the right track.
Moderator: Community Manager
Portsmouth Bill wrote:I don't usually commnet here, but I always look in; so I'd like to say that your skills are developing and that is most evident in the latest design
eventually, yes. My list of "things to do for my navy" (also known as the table of contents for my naval database) is right here. You'll see a number of CV classes through the years I intend to get to eventually. Of course, that list is not comprehensive, especially with the smaller ships and auxilleries, which I add as I get to them, and changes for other classes already listed are subject to change if I get a better idea or suggestion.Biancini1995 wrote:ah ok i was only wanting to know if you was going to make some carriers;)
Hadn't thought of that. Thanks.Thiel wrote:I really like this design, however it does have a few issues.
On the artistic front, the gangway is (hopefully) intended to carry people and as such is should be three pixels thick.
Yeah, that part always gives me fits.Thiel wrote:The bottom of the bow where it meets the keel could do with some smoothing over.
Hnh. I'll relocate it to someplace where it can actually be useful.Thiel wrote:On the technical side, your High Angle director is too close to the mast to turn properly. Right now it's only usable against targets coming from the front. I also wonder about the aft mast. It's much too heavy to be carried on the hangar roof, so it'll have to penetrate the hangar spaces below. It's not an impossible setup, but it's worth bearing in mind since it provides a potential bottleneck.
This ship is assigned to the RFA because of its role, and has a "hybrid" crew ... RFA for ships operations, RN for the guns, FAA for the floatplanes and aircraft maintenance/repair crew. My RFA is a little different from the British RFA, at least up until about 1948-49. Then it starts looking more like what we would consider the British RFA we know about.Thiel wrote:Also, I really doubt the RFA has the skills to operate a ship like this, unless they're trained to the same standard as the Navy, at which point you might as well merge the two. And that's ignoring the political implications for the navy. After all, if the RFA can operate half a cruiser, what's stopping them from operating a whole one?
When I did the SS report, I did it before I actually placed the guns. And yeah, I forgot about adding weight for the aviation facilities. oops.Thiel wrote:Also, you need to ad a ton of misc weight to the SpringSharp report since right now it's ignoring all the aviation facilities. The location of the guns on the drawing doesn't match the SS report while we're at it.
Not as yet, but mail from outside the US takes its own sweet time getting here anymore. Some stamps I bought on ebay took 5 weeks getting here from Canada, and a package from the Netherlands with some coins took nearly as long.Thiel wrote:BTW, have my packet arrived at your place yet?