Your Nations Warships, MKII

[The Peacekeeper Initiative]

The PeaceKeeper Initiative's Space Forces Command Operates the Samurai-class cruiser as its most common capital ship.
Size
Length: 215 Meters
Width: 21.5 Meters
Height: 10 Meters
Crew Compliment
Minimum: 2
Standard: 175
Plus another 100 Marines
Maximum: 450
Engines
Sublight: Unknown
Faster Than Light: Point Singularity Drive
Power Plant
Primary: Subspace Capacitor
Secondary: Naquadah Reactor
Secondary: Solar Panel
Secondary: Bussard Ramjet
Hull Composition
Hull: Naquadah, Trinium, Titanium, Beryllium, Neutronium & Carbon Steel Composite
Armor Plating: Carbon Steel, Titanium, & Ceramic Composite Plates (Easily removable to replace damaged plates)
Sensor Systems
Sensor: Oracle Drive
Target: Unknown
Defensive Systems
Nanitic & Composite Armor
Capable of limited self repair via nanites
Dual Shield Generators
One Primary, One Backup
Close in Weapons System
Directed EMP Generator (Designed to disable missiles & incoming craft)
Asgard Explosion Suppression System
Armaments
Mark III
(??) Anti-Fighter/Missile CIWS
(8) Arcturus Exotic Particle Beam Weapons
(8) 18-inch M-1000 Glaive Kinetic Impact Weapon Batteries
(30) 12-inch M-995 Glaive Kinetic Impact Weapon Batteries
(8) Vertical Launch Silos
(4) Torpedo Launch Tubes
(4) Type IIIb Ion Beam Cannon
(16) Type IIb Ion Beam Cannon

[The Corparation]

Why Phalanx and Goalkeepers?

I am gonna answer your question in two ways since I don't knwo exactly what you are asking for.

Why Phalanx and goalkeepers, well I use Phalanx for central CIWS duties, and Goal keepers for CIWS duties on starboard, and port

And

Why Phalanx and goalkeepers (In general)

Well I think the Phalanx is a pretty good CIWS, and the Goalkeeper is small, and is just as good in my own opinion.

That's a terrible idea. Hacing 2 redundant and completely incompatible systems doing the same job is a pain in the ass logisticly.Furthermores having goalkeepersthat that only cover port or starboard is ridiculous when your 2 Phalanxes have fields of fire that cover both port and starboard.
As for the goalkeeper being small, phalnax actually takes up less space than Goalkeeper. The Phalanx is pretty much self contained you slap it on the deck where there's some freespace and hook it to the ship's electronics, Goalkeeper on the otherhand has quite a bit of supporting equipment located belowdecks. keep in mind what I said last time you posted, when adding equipment like weapons systems, keep in mind that what you see is just the surface and that you usually have more equipment that goes with it below decks. The phalanx is one of the rare exceptions in terms of weapons systems in that its self contained.

[Connori Pilgrims]

So I'm guessing that a high speed AShM system would be better then for a Tarantul-like ship?

Quite. Tarantuls can already carry supersonic AShMs, to be precise 4 P-270 Moskit/SS-N-22 Sunburns.

[Post War America]

So I'm guessing that a high speed AShM system would be better then for a Tarantul-like ship?

Quite. Tarantuls can already carry supersonic AShMs, to be precise 4 P-270 Moskit/SS-N-22 Sunburns.

Excellent... I didn't think that the Moskits or Sunburns were hypersonic... but if they are that helps provide a Proof of Concept.

[Zerinfriom]

I am gonna answer your question in two ways since I don't knwo exactly what you are asking for.

Why Phalanx and goalkeepers, well I use Phalanx for central CIWS duties, and Goal keepers for CIWS duties on starboard, and port

And

Why Phalanx and goalkeepers (In general)

Well I think the Phalanx is a pretty good CIWS, and the Goalkeeper is small, and is just as good in my own opinion.

That's a terrible idea. Hacing 2 redundant and completely incompatible systems doing the same job is a pain in the ass logisticly.Furthermores having goalkeepersthat that only cover port or starboard is ridiculous when your 2 Phalanxes have fields of fire that cover both port and starboard.
As for the goalkeeper being small, phalnax actually takes up less space than Goalkeeper. The Phalanx is pretty much self contained you slap it on the deck where there's some freespace and hook it to the ship's electronics, Goalkeeper on the otherhand has quite a bit of supporting equipment located belowdecks. keep in mind what I said last time you posted, when adding equipment like weapons systems, keep in mind that what you see is just the surface and that you usually have more equipment that goes with it below decks. The phalanx is one of the rare exceptions in terms of weapons systems in that its self contained.

Yeah but the Zerinite version of the "goalkeeper" is different.

So your information is a bit redundant.

But I will implement some things too keep the design good, and you happy about my ship's, and navy's logistics.

[Connori Pilgrims]

Quite. Tarantuls can already carry supersonic AShMs, to be precise 4 P-270 Moskit/SS-N-22 Sunburns.

Excellent... I didn't think that the Moskits or Sunburns were hypersonic... but if they are that helps provide a Proof of Concept.

Uh no, they're not hypersonic. Supersonic yes. If it's any consolation, the latest and faster BrahMos missiles are actually slightly smaller than the Moskit. And AFAIK, the BrahMos-II which is designed to be hypersonic is roughly the same size as the regular BrahMos. So they could certainly be mounted on small corvettes like Tarantuls.

[Zerinfriom]

That's a terrible idea. Hacing 2 redundant and completely incompatible systems doing the same job is a pain in the ass logisticly.Furthermores having goalkeepersthat that only cover port or starboard is ridiculous when your 2 Phalanxes have fields of fire that cover both port and starboard.
As for the goalkeeper being small, phalnax actually takes up less space than Goalkeeper. The Phalanx is pretty much self contained you slap it on the deck where there's some freespace and hook it to the ship's electronics, Goalkeeper on the otherhand has quite a bit of supporting equipment located belowdecks. keep in mind what I said last time you posted, when adding equipment like weapons systems, keep in mind that what you see is just the surface and that you usually have more equipment that goes with it below decks. The phalanx is one of the rare exceptions in terms of weapons systems in that its self contained.

Yeah but the Zerinite version of the "goalkeeper" is different.

So your information is a bit redundant.

But I will implement some things too keep the design good, and you happy about my ship's, and navy's logistics.

I know I said I was gonna be realistic about this design, but upon implication of zerintie versions, and logistics, doctrines, and policies it becomes what it is.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Yeah but the Zerinite version of the "goalkeeper" is different.

So your information is a bit redundant.

But I will implement some things too keep the design good, and you happy about my ship's, and navy's logistics.

I know I said I was gonna be realistic about this design, but upon implication of zerintie versions, and logistics, doctrines, and policies it becomes what it is.

Whatever Zerinite policies may be, a 30mm CIWS and a 20mm CIWS will still need 30mm and 20mm ammunition, respectively. If you really made a new Zerinite version of the Goalkeeper that has complete parts and ammo commonality with the Phalanx, why not just use the Phalanx?

I'm also rather curious about what is meant by a CIWS-heavy "doctrine." CIWS is not meant as a first line of defense against missiles, but rather, as an emergency last-resort tool for that one AShM that makes it past your SAM fire. For a ship this size, two Phalanxes would be more than sufficient, and indeed two Phalanxes make up the CIWS armament of an Arleigh Burke. This would free up the amidships areas for, say, RHIBs/motorboats, hatches, stairs, and all those other little details.

[Roski]

I know I said I was gonna be realistic about this design, but upon implication of zerintie versions, and logistics, doctrines, and policies it becomes what it is.

Whatever Zerinite policies may be, a 30mm CIWS and a 20mm CIWS will still need 30mm and 20mm ammunition, respectively. If you really made a new Zerinite version of the Goalkeeper that has complete parts and ammo commonality with the Phalanx, why not just use the Phalanx?

I'm also rather curious about what is meant by a CIWS-heavy "doctrine." CIWS is not meant as a first line of defense against missiles, but rather, as an emergency last-resort tool for that one AShM that makes it past your SAM fire. For a ship this size, two Phalanxes would be more than sufficient, and indeed two Phalanxes make up the CIWS armament of an Arleigh Burke. This would free up the amidships areas for, say, RHIBs/motorboats, hatches, stairs, and all those other little details.

Maybe he plans on invading a country who believes all naval warfare is is spamming cruise missiles.

[The Soodean Imperium]

Whatever Zerinite policies may be, a 30mm CIWS and a 20mm CIWS will still need 30mm and 20mm ammunition, respectively. If you really made a new Zerinite version of the Goalkeeper that has complete parts and ammo commonality with the Phalanx, why not just use the Phalanx?

I'm also rather curious about what is meant by a CIWS-heavy "doctrine." CIWS is not meant as a first line of defense against missiles, but rather, as an emergency last-resort tool for that one AShM that makes it past your SAM fire. For a ship this size, two Phalanxes would be more than sufficient, and indeed two Phalanxes make up the CIWS armament of an Arleigh Burke. This would free up the amidships areas for, say, RHIBs/motorboats, hatches, stairs, and all those other little details.

Maybe he plans on invading a country who believes all naval warfare is is spamming cruise missiles.

The best defense against cruise missiles isn't spamming CIWS, it's spamming surface-to-air missiles.

Indirectly, the best defense is to detect and destroy the launch platform before launch, but that's a different matter.

[Roski]

Maybe he plans on invading a country who believes all naval warfare is is spamming cruise missiles.

The best defense against cruise missiles isn't spamming CIWS, it's spamming surface-to-air missiles.

Indirectly, the best defense is to detect and destroy the launch platform before launch, but that's a different matter.

"Lolol i see naby spam 1000000747628664622936462819663682 cruise missiles"

I hate people do that.

[Mitheldalond]

The best defense against cruise missiles isn't spamming CIWS, it's spamming surface-to-air missiles.

Indirectly, the best defense is to detect and destroy the launch platform before launch, but that's a different matter.

"Lolol i see naby spam 1000000747628664622936462819663682 cruise missiles"

I hate people do that.

The MNS Inconsequential, an Inconspicuois-class destroyer, detects the presence of the element Wankanese in the enemy missiles. This particular form of the mustard-yellow Wankanese, known as Number Wankanese, causes the objects to which it is applied to multiply uncontrollably.

Upon detecting the enemy wankanese missiles, the MNS Inconsequential sweeps down from the sky, and opens fire on the missiles with its main battery. The sound of the massive 60 inch guns is deafening — only slightly quieter than a butterfly sneezing — as they blast 4,200 shells made of solid ignorite down range every second.

A copper-colored element, ignorite has the unique property of neutralizing both wankanese and the purple-colored godmodium.

With all the Wankanese missiles destroyed, the MNS Inconsequential dives into the sea, leaving behind no sign nor recollection of either its presence or the presence of the wankanese missiles.

[Zerinfriom]

Maybe he plans on invading a country who believes all naval warfare is is spamming cruise missiles.

The best defense against cruise missiles isn't spamming CIWS, it's spamming surface-to-air missiles.

Indirectly, the best defense is to detect and destroy the launch platform before launch, but that's a different matter.

I know it isn't the first line of defence.

Its the missiles.

Then the smaller missiles.

And then the CIWS

If it is a carrier then the first line of defence is fighters

[Roski]

The best defense against cruise missiles isn't spamming CIWS, it's spamming surface-to-air missiles.

Indirectly, the best defense is to d

Beautiful

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

The simple fact of the matter is we're telling you what you're trying to do isn't going to work and you're completely handwaving our advice. Please either swallow your pride and admit you made some mistakes, or stop posting here.

[Zerinfriom]

The simple fact of the matter is we're telling you what you're trying to do isn't going to work and you're completely handwaving our advice. Please either swallow your pride and admit you made some mistakes, or stop posting here.

Okay,

Tell me how making a pretty realistic destroyer isn't going too work?

And why?

I am getting rid of the goalkeepers per request,

[Oaledonia]

The simple fact of the matter is we're telling you what you're trying to do isn't going to work and you're completely handwaving our advice. Please either swallow your pride and admit you made some mistakes, or stop posting here.

Okay,

Tell me how making a pretty realistic destroyer isn't going too work?

And why?

I am getting rid of the goalkeepers per request,

The point was it wasn't realistic.

[Zerinfriom]

Okay,

Tell me how making a pretty realistic destroyer isn't going too work?

And why?

I am getting rid of the goalkeepers per request,

The point was it wasn't realistic.

So it's isn't just because it had more that one CIWS on it, that is now removed.

[Oaledonia]

So it's isn't just because it had more that one CIWS on it, that is now removed.

It didn't because it had more then two, and two different kinds.
I'm also a stickler for naming conventions.
What are your ship names ans why? Just curious.

[Zerinfriom]

So it's isn't just because it had more that one CIWS on it, that is now removed.

It didn't because it had more then two, and two different kinds.
I'm also a stickler for naming conventions.
What are your ship names ans why? Just curious.

Yeah I know, should have worded that better,

It is now down too only three gun CIWS, and three Missile CIWS

Well I have now begun renaming a few classes to go along with my just finalized Zerinite language, witch will not come out due too limitations atm,

but this class is called the Mogami, as a sort of Pseudo Honoring of one of my favorite Japanese ship classes of WWII the Mogami class.

[Mitheldalond]

So it's isn't just because it had more that one CIWS on it, that is now removed.

It didn't because it had more then two, and two different kinds.
I'm also a stickler for naming conventions.
What are your ship names ans why? Just curious.

I intend to name a carrier Death From Above. Accompanied of course, by the submarine Death From Below.

I also like the name Traffic Cop for a carrier, in reference to the "speed limit enforced by aircraft" signs.

[Zerinfriom]

It didn't because it had more then two, and two different kinds.
I'm also a stickler for naming conventions.
What are your ship names ans why? Just curious.

I intend to name a carrier Death From Above. Accompanied of course, by the submarine Death From Below.

I also like the name Traffic Cop for a carrier, in reference to the "speed limit enforced by aircraft" signs.

Lol epic,

We have a carrier almost ready for production called the Four Twenty Class

420 Meters long

It is named after the Archduke of Byzantium's blazing habits

[Nirvash Type TheEND]

I'm also a stickler for naming conventions.
What are your ship names ans why? Just curious.

Classes are assigned by positive characteristics on the field of battle, such as the Stoic Class, Fervor Class, and Visionary Class. Individual ship names are supposed to sound cool but ultimately mean nothing, such as the HMS Inner Vison, HMS Aesperience and HMS Inverse Motion.

[Oaledonia]

my favorite Japanese ship classes of WWII the Mogami class.

Mogami was a garbage cruiser.

[Zerinfriom]

my favorite Japanese ship classes of WWII the Mogami class.

Mogami was a garbage cruiser.

It was one of my favorite,

I just don't know why I like it but I just do,

Just as my liking for Sushi

I can't really explain it, I just do.