Tinkering with Shah Jahan

Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 12:59am

Tinkering with Shah Jahan

Just curious; the upper pic is Shah Jahan as originally drawn. I've since gone back and done some fiddling with the profile to produce three variations. I'm curious to see if y'all happen to like any of the variations more than the original. If so, I may introduce the changes officially, as modifications made during construction to reflect operational experience.

Variation one, the uppermost in the bigger pic, has a somewhat more delicate pagoda.

Variation two, in the middle, has an enclosed central tower replacing the pagoda; I'm terming it a "minaret", referring to a part of mosque architecture. A smaller feature appears aft.

Variation three modifies the pagoda such that it's asymmetrical.

Thoughts? Just ignore the top view.

Original...

Variation...

Go to the top of the page

Hrolf Hakonson

Scooby-Doo

Posts: 6,178

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 1:53am

I'd say a slightly modified "minaret" version looks best to me: connect the minaret more solidly to the main structure and you'd have something that looks a lot like a German ship would have.....

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 3:52am

Aft superstructure of the first one, forward superstructure of second with Hrolfs recomendations.

The support structures for the wing mounted dirrectors could stay the same as in #1, for some reason it looks better to me, either than or extend them in #2 one deck lower to the main superstructure.

Go to the top of the page

1Big Rich

Intermediate

Posts: 180

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 4:08am

Rocky,

I say stay with the original. Main battery fire control is up there, and it needs to be protected from vibration and movement. Pyramids are more stable than towers, even in the form of a septapod. If a change must be made I would say enclose the pagoda. That will take you visually closer to the USN's historic wigwams, which might or might not be something you want appearance-wise...

I particularly don't like No. 2 because the after director is too close to the top of the after funnel. If the exhaust coming from the after tower were be pulled down at all by the draft behind the funnel or even the most minor downdraft, it will interfere with the operation of that director.

Now for a Swampy question: Which one has the 8 x 15" guns?
:-})

My thoughts,

Big Rich

Go to the top of the page

Hood

Ugly Aircraft, Inc

Posts: 8,155

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 10:28am

I would go for Minaret for the front and keep the after director the same as it is, as 1Big Rich points out smoke could be a problem. I'd go with the rasied bow of No1 to improve seakeeping if you think that it is neccessary.

Go to the top of the page

Red Admiral

Italian Stallion

Posts: 7,019

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 11:56am

The minaret looks kinda ugly.

The small pagoda really looks too light to support the load.

I fiddled around with her somewhat.

I cut down the bridge entirely. It was somewhat overkill. Now there is an enclosed bridge for conning, an open bridge for conning and a "battle bridge"/ flag bridge above this. I built up the directors somewhat with the 150mm director now being able to train on all bearings. A small tripod mast for the flag behind this. I'm not entirely happy with it, something still looks wrong.

Go to the top of the page

thesmilingassassin

The Chosen One

Posts: 13,513

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 12:35pm

Layout #2 definately would make her look more like her half sister Osmanieh....

She may get an enlarged tower though as it seems abit narrow.

Go to the top of the page

Marek Gutkowski

Professional

Posts: 1,280

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 2:07pm

I say second or third the aft director is higher in those.
The forth or last looks strange and I think I know why.
Its looks like it got a haircut the towers is to low.
Most people are acostomed to higher superstructures.
So its just an estetic thing

Go to the top of the page

HoOmAn

Keeper of the Sacred Block Coefficient

Posts: 7,417

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 4:16pm

I´d go with #2 but keep aft director #1. I´d also cut down the forward part of her bridge a bit....

Go to the top of the page

Ithekro

Sage

Posts: 3,661

Sunday, June 4th 2006, 6:53pm

There is allows one

Being for more firepower my thoughts would be to remove the cats and add wing mounted twin turrets amidships to bring for and aft firepower to six or sight guns and broadside to ten.

As for the designs I go with #2 for the forward structure and #3 for the aft structure. Though I expect services to be called from the forward structure and the direction to Mecca allows indicated for the Islamic members of the crew.

Go to the top of the page

The Rock Doctor

Old-School Heel

Posts: 5,310

Monday, June 5th 2006, 2:35pm

I appreciate the feedback.

Variation#1 looks to be a no-go with respect to forward superstructure, but its cut-down aft superstructure seems to work for folks. I'll probably use that and the modified bow (as the original Akbar class is wet forward, this may be a reasonable modification).

I'm still pondering the minaret and the variation three pagoda; I may look into Gavin's notion of stacking a secondary director up top and seeing what that's like. Could be odd-looking, but nobody's ever claimed SJ was a beauty queen.

No versions with 15" guns, and I can't say wing turrets were being considered.

I'd be curious to see how the Muslim prayer schedule is incorporated into warship schedules (particularly those in or expecting action), but have no idea where I'd find such info.