Your Nations Warships, MKII

[Kassaran]

Enemy catches you in a rainstorm (gee, those never happen at sea) and your fleet will be commiserating with Davy Jones pretty quickly.

most of the ocean is a desert

yes, I know, boggling

Well... there is a lot of sand...

[United Allied Earth Federation]

Primary Warship of the Neorian Naval Fleet is the Arthur G. Blake Class Destroyer

(Image)

Another Primary Warship would be the Andrew Cole Class Super Carrier

(Image)

I just want to say that you just stole this from the Zumwalt Class Destroyer, USA

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Primary Warship of the Neorian Naval Fleet is the Arthur G. Blake Class Destroyer

(Image)

Another Primary Warship would be the Andrew Cole Class Super Carrier

(Image)

I just want to say that you just stole this from the Zumwalt Class Destroyer, USA

I just want to say that that was a two year old post and people can have and name whatever they want on NS.

[United Allied Earth Federation]

The Type 22 Dreadnought, The Type 312 Dreadnought, The Trireme Class Cruiser, and the Intervenes Class Destroyer are all equally our most common warships.

Unfortunately, their statistics are classified.

Spamming!

[Anemos Major]

The Type 22 Dreadnought, The Type 312 Dreadnought, The Trireme Class Cruiser, and the Intervenes Class Destroyer are all equally our most common warships.

Unfortunately, their statistics are classified.

Spamming!

Get out.

[The Soodean Imperium]

- My naval doctrine at present is based on specialized destroyers (an ASuW class, an ASW class, and the AA class seen here). Is this acceptable, or would it be way more trouble than it's worth?

IMO, the development of standardized VLS makes multi-roles more attractive, since they can basically hold a ship's entire armament. Need SAMs? Store them in the VLS. Land-attack missiles? VLS. AShMs? VLS. ASW? ASROC in the VLS. Thus, it really comes down to sensors. I consider the advantage of flexibility worth it, especially once you're already paying for a full ship with a full crew, a full CIWS complement and deck gun, etc. Presumably if you're carrying ASW weapons, you have at least basic ASW sensors, so you've already paid for a full suite of air, surface, and underwater sensors, and may as well include the weapons necessary to engage the targets detected in these spaces. Otherwise your AAW destroyer will get to just sit and watch that enemy surface ship it's spotted that remains beyond gun range. With a multipurpose VLS, you could easily add some basic AShMs in to provide longer-ranged defense, especially if you're bolstering your detection range with the Ka-31 onboard.

AFAIK, Russian/Soviet VLS systems aren't standardized; the Shtil' seen here could only be used for the 9M317ME, the Kh-35 can only be fired from angled tubes above deck, and apparently the most recent ASROC-equivalents are fired from the above-deck torpedo tubes. Normally I'd take an opportunity to improve upon this, but (as with the shape of the superstructure) I'm aesthetically attached to these things, and I do find that intentionally including weaknesses in my designs makes for better RPing - so long as it's nothing stupidly obvious, ofc.

Also: just glanced at the picture again, and it looks like the rearmost launcher in the forward VLS will hit the bridge. Oops, will fix.

[The Akasha Colony]

AFAIK, Russian/Soviet VLS systems aren't standardized; the Shtil' seen here could only be used for the 9M317ME, the Kh-35 can only be fired from angled tubes above deck, and apparently the most recent ASROC-equivalents are fired from the above-deck torpedo tubes. Normally I'd take an opportunity to improve upon this, but (as with the shape of the superstructure) I'm aesthetically attached to these things, and I do find that intentionally including weaknesses in my designs makes for better RPing - so long as it's nothing stupidly obvious, ofc.

Also: just glanced at the picture again, and it looks like the rearmost launcher in the forward VLS will hit the bridge. Oops, will fix.

For Russia this is somewhat unique because their AShMs are huge and wouldn't fit in "standard" VLS tubes, but even the Russian Navy's current trend is toward multi-role ships with the Admiral Gorshkov and Admiral Grigorovich-classes. Again, you're already paying for the hull, engines, crew, and most of the same electronics. You even have most of the same weapons; you've already got the deck gun and ASW armament, so the only thing you'd need to turn it into a basic multi-role are AShMs.

If you had a hundred ships divided between AAW, surface warfare, and ASW, you'd still have fewer units available than a navy fielding half as many multi-roles. For your 33-34 AAW-capable ships, the enemy will have 50. For your 33-34 surface warfare-capable ships, your enemy will have 50. For your 33-34 ASW ships, the enemy will have 50. You will have more ships overall, so if you expect to engage in exactly 33-34 separate surface warfare, AAW, and ASW operations separately, you will have more ships to respond than a nation of multi-roles, but if you want to escort a carrier and cover the entire spectrum of operations, you need to send three ships for every one your enemy will send.

You'd come out ahead if your nation's doctrine and expected conflicts are very specialized, to the point where other capabilities are no longer deemed necessary. If you expect to engage almost exclusively in AAW, it makes sense to build AAW-focused warships and to reduce costs by removing unnecessary capabilities. But if (like most of NS), the expectation is for full-spectrum operations with a degree of unpredictability, then the marginal cost of adding the components necessary to make this destroyer capable of at least basic surface combat is worth it.

[The Soodean Imperium]

AFAIK, Russian/Soviet VLS systems aren't standardized; the Shtil' seen here could only be used for the 9M317ME, the Kh-35 can only be fired from angled tubes above deck, and apparently the most recent ASROC-equivalents are fired from the above-deck torpedo tubes. Normally I'd take an opportunity to improve upon this, but (as with the shape of the superstructure) I'm aesthetically attached to these things, and I do find that intentionally including weaknesses in my designs makes for better RPing - so long as it's nothing stupidly obvious, ofc.

Also: just glanced at the picture again, and it looks like the rearmost launcher in the forward VLS will hit the bridge. Oops, will fix.

For Russia this is somewhat unique because their AShMs are huge and wouldn't fit in "standard" VLS tubes, but even the Russian Navy's current trend is toward multi-role ships with the Admiral Gorshkov and Admiral Grigorovich-classes. Again, you're already paying for the hull, engines, crew, and most of the same electronics. You even have most of the same weapons; you've already got the deck gun and ASW armament, so the only thing you'd need to turn it into a basic multi-role are AShMs.

If you had a hundred ships divided between AAW, surface warfare, and ASW, you'd still have fewer units available than a navy fielding half as many multi-roles. For your 33-34 AAW-capable ships, the enemy will have 50. For your 33-34 surface warfare-capable ships, your enemy will have 50. For your 33-34 ASW ships, the enemy will have 50. You will have more ships overall, so if you expect to engage in exactly 33-34 separate surface warfare, AAW, and ASW operations separately, you will have more ships to respond than a nation of multi-roles, but if you want to escort a carrier and cover the entire spectrum of operations, you need to send three ships for every one your enemy will send.

You'd come out ahead if your nation's doctrine and expected conflicts are very specialized, to the point where other capabilities are no longer deemed necessary. If you expect to engage almost exclusively in AAW, it makes sense to build AAW-focused warships and to reduce costs by removing unnecessary capabilities. But if (like most of NS), the expectation is for full-spectrum operations with a degree of unpredictability, then the marginal cost of adding the components necessary to make this destroyer capable of at least basic surface combat is worth it.

Now that you put it that way, it looks like I really am shooting myself in the foot with this design... I'd been told that my dual-role cruisers (i.e., AA/ASW, ASW/ASuW, ASuW/AA) were viable, but going into this I suspected single-role destroyers were a step too far. Especially since (as you and others pointed out) with more modern equipment, specialization isn't going to save me as much space as I'd originally hoped.

In that case, do you think I could get away with saying that I'd modified the Kh-35 so that it can be fired from a VLS tube? Last time I asked about this, I was told I would just have to add a booster, change the control surfaces, and modify the guidance software for the initial stage. Come to think of it, this would also make it easier for me to give my current ASuW destroyer additional AA capability...

[Gallia-]

Sadly VLS makes your dick fall off.

Twin arm master race.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Sadly VLS makes your dick fall off.

Twin arm master race.

There was a time when I had a ship with sextuple-arm SAM launchers.

I don't like to talk about that time...

[Cardaran]

A typical Warship in the Cardarai fleet most closely resembles an entire fleet rather than a single compact unit. It comprises a central command centre (complete with generous shielding, defensive-level weaponry, living quarters and the main engines) along with numerous semi-autonomous sensor and weapons platforms. Each sensor platform has high-level sensors which are constantly streaming data back to the command centre, as well as its own defensive weaponry, secondary engines and light shielding. Weapons platforms have their own secondary sensors which also relay information to the command centre, as well as heavy shielding, huge amounts of firepower and engines capable of serious bursts of speed.

When travelling, all these components will assemble with the central command centre, before being deployed out again when the warship(s) reach their destination. Usually, only the command centre is manned, with other components being remote-controlled from the centre. There is at least one warship in full deployment around each of our colonised worlds, and there are several around Cardaran itself.

[The Corparation]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/21/world ... us.html?hp

Meanwhile in Iran. I'm curious as to if this is going to be a lol guize we have our own carrier like we had our own stelf fiter., or if its going to be a lol qe can blow up a carrier.

[Antarticaria]

Everyone go home i found it.... A ultimate for LOLz and Coolfactorz I made a unrealistic very large and un-textured dual hull super battle ship... (This image is for jokes, was created in 5 Minutes 15 Seconds)

[San-Silvacian]

[img]http://s25.postimg.org/8hziwtdcr/frenchcruiserbig.png?noCache=1395370968
[/img]


Which one should I use? Biglolwtfradar or more conventional radar?

[Postapocolypta]

The Postapacolypta navy consists of mostly merchant and tanker ships that were hijacked and converted to pirate ships.

[San-Silvacian]

I fucking love ship camos so much.

changed out the nuclear cruise missile for a more stealthy design.

[Roasaria]

Roasaria has only a palm full of ships as its navy. Though we have 2 classes of ships, unfortunately, with no pictures, so just imagine their design.


Predoux class destroyer: main armament= 48 cell vertical firing system


Corbin class cruiser: main armament= 5.25 inch gun


nuff said.

[The Soodean Imperium]

After spending the last few months making modern-era designs, I figured I'd take a step back and lineart a destroyer from my nation's "WWII canon," when the Dai Oukou Teipang set off to conquer the world... and failed.


Amur-Class Destroyer
- First ship commissioned: 1944.

Statblock:
- Length: 103m overall, 96.6m waterline
- Draft: 4.8m
- Maximum Speed: 36 knots (67 km/h)
- Complement: 21 officers and 180 enlisted sailors
- Aircraft carried: none

Armament:
- 2x1 125mm naval gun in enclosed turret
- 3x2 50mm AA autocannon in enclosed turret
- 3x1 50mm AA autocannon in open mount
- 9x1 12.5mm AA machine-gun
- 1x5 500mm deck torpedo tube
- 20x depth charge

Description:
The concept of the Amur-class destroyer was conceived in 1943, at the height of the Great Conquest. Around this time, the tide of war was beginning to turn against the Dai Oukou, and Naval High Command was beginning to realize that the fleet could not secure the upper hand in its current state. Hoping to boost the striking power of Oukou squadrons, they began work on a high-speed torpedo-launching destroyer. The original plans called for a vessel capable of making 45 knots, armed with 16 torpedo tubes in four launchers (two 5x fore and aft, and two 3x port and starboard).

As the war progressed, however, the situation changed. While enemy naval forces remained a threat, aerial attacks were increasingly taking the highest toll, especially after much of the Imperial carrier fleet was trapped and annihilated at the Hollow Throat strait. Desperate to safeguard their larger ships against the numerous and well-armored planes, the Oukou fleet revised the designs of the new Amur-class craft, removing all but the sternmost torpedo mounts and mounting as many anti-aircraft guns as they could fit on the fairly small hull. This new armament included the new 50mm AA autocannon, which could fire proximity-fused rounds. Several ships were also fitted with an experimental radar array, which became standard equipment in 1946.

Refitted in this manner, these ships proved a formidable defense against enemy aircraft, and the new 50mm AA gun proved its value at sea just as it proved its value on land. Unfortunately, by this point the Dai Oukou Teipang was decisively losing the war, and no number of new destroyers could turn the tide. Many of these ships were lost on mass suicide missions, serving as escorts for larger battleships; others fell while patrolling the vast and poorly defended coast. By the Empire's capitulation in 1948, only half a dozen were still in service, and four of these were severely damaged. However, even as the Great Conquest ended and the Great Occupation began, small bands of resistance fighters kept the survivors in operable condition, occasionally employing them in hit-and-run raids in poorly patrolled areas of the country.


Also: this is my first time linearting a WWII-era ship, so if there are any features I've missed (or any I've included that don't belong), feel free to bring it to my attention.

[San-Silvacian]

It feels a tad undergunned, but since its supposed to be a torpedo boat/destroyer hybrid, doesn't seem bad at all.

[The Soodean Imperium]

It feels a tad undergunned, but since its supposed to be a torpedo boat/destroyer hybrid, doesn't seem bad at all.

I probably could have fit more weapons on there if I'd scooted the bridge forward and used a more conventional boiler layout, but I kind of like the look of it this way. And given that it's mostly there for background historical canon, I doubt it'll see action in any RPs.

Still, I think I'll switch the single 125mm guns to dual mounts. Two deck guns for a destroyer is awfully light in that era.

[Connori Pilgrims]

From the way you've described your destroyer's history, it seems like its an AA-focused vessel ala the British Barfleur or Battle-Class Destroyers, although yes it could use a dual 125mm turret. If the 125mms are dual-purpose as well, it would be even better at its job as an AA destroyer.

[Anacasppia]

Does cold-launch VLS make for any significant increase in safety over hot-launch VLS?

[Antarticaria]

Does cold-launch VLS make for any significant increase in safety over hot-launch VLS?

From what I gather Cold launch requires more components and a sort of actual launching mechanism on the ship to get the missile to leave the tube, on the flip side Hot launches ignite within the tube which means the tube will get hot and have to be pretty tough to withstand the heat as well as some way to vent out the gases from the ignition. Cold launch is safer in terms if the missile will malfunction it can just pop it out into the water instead of the missile blowing up and wiping out your tube.

Example of Hot Launch:

Example of Cold Launch:

Note the hot launch has hot gasses and the cold is injected by some sort of gas/ejection system.

[Tule]

"Tea kettle" nuclear submarines. Y/N?

They're nuclear submarines that use very small nuclear reactors to charge the batteries instead of driving turbines, as little as a few hundred kilowatts.

They're cheaper, safer and quieter than standard nuclear subs while being air-independent, but they are not as fast as nuclear subs and not as silent as diesel subs.

[Pharthan]

"Tea kettle" nuclear submarines. Y/N?

They're nuclear submarines that use very small nuclear reactors to charge the batteries instead of driving turbines, as little as a few tens of kilowatts.

They're cheaper, safer and quieter than standard nuclear subs while being air-independent, but they are not as fast as nuclear subs and not as silent as diesel subs.

My Navy uses a similar concept. You can actually keep the reactor the same size and play it out far better than just batteries. Either way, you'll still need a steam system to produce the electricity in the first place; it's far more effective if you make your electrical turbines large enough to provided the electricity that also drives your shaft. Keep batteries as a backup.
Still quieter than nuclear subs, but just as much power and more space (or smaller submarine overall).