WesWorld

I went and did it now! Tried my hand at Shipbucket drawings and immediately went for my Holy Grail, my pet project: CNS Constitucion.

I can't yet equal Hood's or Alvama's awesome drawing prowess, but I guess she looks okay for a first try:

I´d say it´s a great drawing! ;o)

Throw your hats in the air, another shipdrawer is born !! It looks great !!!!!

By the way ..... do you take orders ?

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Realistically, using the air and surface search radar sets for gunnery control isn't going to give good results. The sets will have low frequencies and low update rates. You want a high frequency to give better precision (i.e. target range and bearing) and high update rate for fast, close moving targets. Radars of the time have difficulty in giving accurate bearings, even high frequency ones. You can do some cool tricks to get around this but the human eye is better.

For surface gunnery you'll initially have a limited range system that can give target ranges, but the directors would still be used for bearings apart from over the horizon, though with early radar, ranges aren't going to be much over the horizon. You also want to look at where the shells are landing in relation to the target. Later systems with higher frequencies have higher accuracies and longer ranges with the ability to spot shell splashes.

For AA gunnery you really want the radar as a ranging system giving rapid updates to the fire control system. For a tachymetric system like the Mk 37 you want a high frequency to measure the target position accurately. Otherwise you just use the eyes to follow the target, probably with similar accuracy. Postwar you have higher frequency types that automatically scan and track targets.

I understand all of that. Currently, Chile has two Atlantean-built YPBM-model DRADIS sets and - possibly - another radar set aboard Santiago. (The Nords had a radar set aboard Den Norske Love prior to her sale: I don't know if it was removed and replaced by an Atlantean YPBM set.) YPBM is the Atlantean equivalent to CXAM, and that's what I intend to install aboard Constitution. I'm well aware that CXAM and it's contemporaries are poor fire-control radars for both surface and AA gunnery.

As I have said several times, I'm not expecting the Sorcery RAGS to deploy in 1939. I'm expecting parts to come into play as the Chilean technicians learn "this will work, this won't, let's rip off this idea, let's buy this one piece foreign, maybe if we try this one idea..." The point is that the Chileans have a goal of what they want, and are trying to figure out how to get there. Currently, they're thinking they can make a metric search system double as fire control, which isn't obviously going to work. It's going to take the development of something like SG or SCR-584 to get what they want.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
We're currently some years away from the blindfire system as postulated on Astraea. You can't spot shell splashes from 130mm guns without high frequency radar and some processing so you need target illumination from searchlights or starshells. You're also unlikely to get an accurate target position with such radars. No PPI either so you'll still be using split screens. The scene is more likely to be "fire at the big moving squiggle on such and such a bearing at such and such a range. Oops, looks like that was just a wavetop, fire at this other squiggle instead."

That is precisely what I said Astraea was doing at Barranca. Astraea's performance was, in the opinion of the Chilean Navy, astonishing and probably un-repeatable; but as the naval leadership sees it, Astraea *hit something* 1.8% of the time, while the other cruisers had a 0% hit rate.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
In terms of directors, you probably want two main battery directors, fore and aft. Then two or more heavy AA FC directors, though you could use the same for the main battery. You might also want some simple directors for the light AA guns.

Okiedokie. Good to know! I'll make those changes.

Looks very good for a first attempt.

There are a few shading errors here and there but overall it looks better than most average first-timers work. I like it and you've some interesting turrets!
Maybe tone the yellow down a little, you'll find a suitable shade in SB somewhere but at the moment its a little bright (unless its dazzle camoflauge!).

hey what the fuck!!! IT'S GREAT !!! nice job!

hahah Do you really think the enemies Think you come to them with a disquise passagier vessel.....It's seem not

(Joke)

Great drawing

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Looks very good for a first attempt.

There are a few shading errors here and there but overall it looks better than most average first-timers work. I like it and you've some interesting turrets!
Maybe tone the yellow down a little, you'll find a suitable shade in SB somewhere but at the moment its a little bright (unless its dazzle camoflauge!).P

Thanks. I agree, the yellow's not precisely what I wanted, sooo...

The turrets are modified from one of Alvama's drawings (CA Sumatra, IIRC). I merely enlarged them as I liked the look.



The paint scheme, for what it's worth, is what this ship will wear for her commissioning ceremony and the inaugural world cruise. Though perhaps I should use an even darker red... The scheme is obviously not intended as a combat operations paint scheme, but as I said on the Shipbucket forum, "tux and top-hat".

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Throw your hats in the air, another shipdrawer is born !! It looks great !!!!!

By the way ..... do you take orders ?

Thanks, but not at this time. This drawing took me a three-day holiday weekend to put together, and I doubt I have the time necessary to take requests.

Quoted

Originally posted by ALVAMA
hahah Do you really think the enemies Think you come to them with a disquise passagier vessel.....It's seem not

(Joke)

Great drawing

Thanks!

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Looks very good for a first attempt.

There are a few shading errors here and there but overall it looks better than most average first-timers work. I like it and you've some interesting turrets!
Maybe tone the yellow down a little, you'll find a suitable shade in SB somewhere but at the moment its a little bright (unless its dazzle camoflauge!).P

Thanks. I agree, the yellow's not precisely what I wanted, sooo...

The turrets are modified from one of Alvama's drawings (CA Sumatra, IIRC). I merely enlarged them as I liked the look.



The paint scheme, for what it's worth, is what this ship will wear for her commissioning ceremony and the inaugural world cruise. Though perhaps I should use an even darker red... The scheme is obviously not intended as a combat operations paint scheme, but as I said on the Shipbucket forum, "tux and top-hat".

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
Throw your hats in the air, another shipdrawer is born !! It looks great !!!!!

By the way ..... do you take orders ?

Thanks, but not at this time. This drawing took me a three-day holiday weekend to put together, and I doubt I have the time necessary to take requests.

The red does look nice...

Give it three months and he'll be unstoppable!
Some folks dislike Shipbucket for its "Lego brick" approach but really there's as much scope to do your own thing as any other. You can draw entirely new turrets, directors, aircraft etc. There's no limit to waht you can do (as long as it remains realistic).

In general, looks very nice.

Depending on the date she's going to be sailing, the number of radar antennae might be excessive. I'm also a bit uncertain about the director layout: I'm gussing that the directors mounted fore and aft with the radar dishes on their roofs are the main battery directors, but if that's the case, what is the director mounted atop the bridge roof? If the director atop the bridge roof is the main battery director, is the ship equipped with a backup director, in case it gets knocked out?

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
In general, looks very nice.

Depending on the date she's going to be sailing, the number of radar antennae might be excessive. I'm also a bit uncertain about the director layout: I'm gussing that the directors mounted fore and aft with the radar dishes on their roofs are the main battery directors, but if that's the case, what is the director mounted atop the bridge roof? If the director atop the bridge roof is the main battery director, is the ship equipped with a backup director, in case it gets knocked out?

SFAICT, the only real radar array is the big one on the mainmast.

Point taken on the gunnery directors: I think the big one on the bridge top should be the main director, but agree it needs a backup. The smaller directors, IMHO, should be for the secondary battery. All radar and director gear is probably Atlantean, or maybe US/British.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

SFAICT, the only real radar array is the big one on the mainmast.

Point taken on the gunnery directors: I think the big one on the bridge top should be the main director, but agree it needs a backup. The smaller directors, IMHO, should be for the secondary battery. All radar and director gear is probably Atlantean, or maybe US/British.

All three of the directors seem to have radars of some type on them: the secondary battery directors have those dishes (clearly a ranging radar of some sort), and the main battery directoer has an array of some sort.

Also, what are the units atop the spotting tops?

You know Brock, you and ALVAMA are really getting me quite interested in Shipbucket....

I prefere the smaller template I use but you can get alot more detail in the Shipbucket drawings.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
I prefere the smaller template I use but you can get alot more detail in the Shipbucket drawings.

Honestly, I do too. The Shipbucket drawings spread things out over a narrow screen; heck, I've got a 22" widescreen at home, and most of the big Shipbucket drawings are a lot wider than my screen! (And I *hate* scrolling left and right on a webpage.) That's one of the reasons I've stuck so long with your drawing style - it doesn't deform my page widths. (Additionally, I'd gotten very fast at using it.)

I'm thinking I might just use a "Ship Images" thread in the appropriate encyclopedia; use the smaller images in the relevant post, but then link to the Images thread, which has all the oversized images.

GASP!!! it looks like QUEEN MARY (pass liner) with the red funnels .....!!!!
What about a tri colour camouflage! do i have the permision to post here this drawing with a new camouflage!
Also let us know about the armament of this doll !!!
great job again!!!

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

SFAICT, the only real radar array is the big one on the mainmast.

Point taken on the gunnery directors: I think the big one on the bridge top should be the main director, but agree it needs a backup. The smaller directors, IMHO, should be for the secondary battery. All radar and director gear is probably Atlantean, or maybe US/British.

All three of the directors seem to have radars of some type on them: the secondary battery directors have those dishes (clearly a ranging radar of some sort), and the main battery directoer has an array of some sort.

Ah, I... see.

Let me state what I designed to see if you can give me better advice on what directors and such I need.

Constitucion was designed with radar-directed gunnery control in mind, for the 10", 5.12", and 3" batteries. As I stated a year ago when I first posted this design, I also said the Chileans were working on a radar-guided automated gunlaying system ("Sorcery AGS"). The Chileans figured out that radar-AGS is going to be developed, and so Constitucion had weight and room dedicated for it. Odds are that the Sorcery AGS won't deploy before the Constitucion commissions (mid 1939): but she is going to get a RAGS sometime soon.

The idea for the Sorcery RAGS is simple. Constitucion will carry either an Atlantean YPBM or YPBC-F "DRADIS" surface search Y-range and an equivalent air-search array. The YPBM set feeds range and bearing information to the gunnery computer, which calculates shell flight time and lead; the guns then fire on that calculated trajectory. This will initially only apply to the 10" guns, but it's likely a secondary RAGS will be installed for AA control, particularly when someone invents the proximity fuse.

This system is not being prepared for use aboard smaller ships at this time: Constitucion is the testbed ship for Chile, mostly because she's big enough to handle the miscellaneous weight for a RAGS setup.

Post-Peruvian War, the Chilean internal performance review will point out that in the Battle of Barranca, only two Chilean ships scored gunnery hits in the opening half of the battle (prior to the arrival of Memnon and the Scouting Force). Nevado Ojos del Salado scored one 8" hit on Almirante Grau, and the flak cruiser Astraea scored thirty-four hits against two targets, using her Atlantean YPDM metric DRADIS set to keep track of the maneuvering Peruvian ACRs and CLs. Her gunnery, however, was not automated and she fired 1,872 rounds nearly blind, with her DRADIS officer feeding range and bearing verbally to the gunnery director. By comparison, the other ships in First Cruiser Squadron fired at ships illuminated by starshell and spotlight and obscured by night and smoke, wasting their ammo without scoring any hits. To say the Chileans were impressed by Astraea's performance is an understatement: the Technical-Tactical Requirements for the Armada were completely re-written to state that all new ships of 4,000 tons and above shall have radar. They haven't yet mandated older ships be modified to carry it, nor destroyers... but they're privately imagining what they could have done if only Nevado Ojos del Salado, Atacama, and Maunga Terevaka had their own DRADIS set at Barranca.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Also, what are the units atop the spotting tops?

*Consults quickly with the Naval Engineering Systems Directorate.*

They're Blinding Awesomeness Emitters.

Quoted

Originally posted by Navarchos
GASP!!! it looks like QUEEN MARY (pass liner) with the red funnels .....!!!!
What about a tri colour camouflage! do i have the permision to post here this drawing with a new camouflage!
Also let us know about the armament of this doll !!!
great job again!!!

Sure, go ahead. The liner look - or, for that matter, the late 1800s steam battleship look - is precisely what I was aiming for.

I also have an all-gray drawing if you'd like to make use of it:

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
I prefere the smaller template I use but you can get alot more detail in the Shipbucket drawings.

Honestly, I do too. The Shipbucket drawings spread things out over a narrow screen; heck, I've got a 22" widescreen at home, and most of the big Shipbucket drawings are a lot wider than my screen! (And I *hate* scrolling left and right on a webpage.) That's one of the reasons I've stuck so long with your drawing style - it doesn't deform my page widths. (Additionally, I'd gotten very fast at using it.)

Same here; I've got a 20.1" monitor. The huge-ish shipbucket images somewhat lose their appeal to me if I can't get a good overlook at the ship without mouse-scolling.

It should be possible to resize larger images without too much loss in quality, with the proper software tho.

Realistically, using the air and surface search radar sets for gunnery control isn't going to give good results. The sets will have low frequencies and low update rates. You want a high frequency to give better precision (i.e. target range and bearing) and high update rate for fast, close moving targets. Radars of the time have difficulty in giving accurate bearings, even high frequency ones. You can do some cool tricks to get around this but the human eye is better.

For surface gunnery you'll initially have a limited range system that can give target ranges, but the directors would still be used for bearings apart from over the horizon, though with early radar, ranges aren't going to be much over the horizon. You also want to look at where the shells are landing in relation to the target. Later systems with higher frequencies have higher accuracies and longer ranges with the ability to spot shell splashes.

For AA gunnery you really want the radar as a ranging system giving rapid updates to the fire control system. For a tachymetric system like the Mk 37 you want a high frequency to measure the target position accurately. Otherwise you just use the eyes to follow the target, probably with similar accuracy. Postwar you have higher frequency types that automatically scan and track targets.

We're currently some years away from the blindfire system as postulated on Astraea. You can't spot shell splashes from 130mm guns without high frequency radar and some processing so you need target illumination from searchlights or starshells. You're also unlikely to get an accurate target position with such radars. No PPI either so you'll still be using split screens. The scene is more likely to be "fire at the big moving squiggle on such and such a bearing at such and such a range. Oops, looks like that was just a wavetop, fire at this other squiggle instead."

In terms of directors, you probably want two main battery directors, fore and aft. Then two or more heavy AA FC directors, though you could use the same for the main battery. You might also want some simple directors for the light AA guns.

It's not too bad resized, but on the original size you've got black used as an outline for everything. On the reduced version the is eliminated as you've got an image that isn't as sharp.