[Post Reply] [*]  Page 1 of 2  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 »
Author Message
TimothyC
Post subject: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 20th, 2013, 10:17 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3741
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
In the competition for the Australian Hobart class, the US entry was a truncated Arleigh Burke derivative from Gibbs & Cox. While the 2006 version is currently located on the main site (although hard to access thanks to an Ampersand), the later, definative, 2007 version is not.

I present that version to you now:
[ img ]

Rendering this ship properly required a total redraw of the ship forward of the aft funnel. The combat system is an export version of AEGIS, with 64 VLS cells.

_________________
Please don't call me Tim. If you don't want to use Timothy, use TJ.
MATHNET - To Cogitate and to Solve


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
heuhen
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 20th, 2013, 10:34 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 8319
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
the top weight is awesome in this one! but drawing is good!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
MihoshiK
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 20th, 2013, 11:10 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 1004
Joined: October 16th, 2010, 11:06 pm
Location: In orbit, watching you draw.
Contact: Website
Ugly beast.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...
[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Thiel
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 20th, 2013, 11:23 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 5375
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:02 am
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
You sure there aren't supposed to be an SVTT or two somewhere?

_________________
“Close” only counts with horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear weapons.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error

Worklist

Source Materiel is always welcome.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 20th, 2013, 11:42 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3741
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
heuhen wrote:
the top weight is awesome in this one! but drawing is good!
She's got a lot of top weight because of all she packs in - things like task force command spaces are volume intensive. Just for the record, her SPY-1 faces are about as high above the water line as Atago's are - on a hull that is about 2000 tons smaller.
MihoshiK wrote:
Ugly beast.
How dare you insult the Burkette :P.
Thiel wrote:
You sure there aren't supposed to be an SVTT or two somewhere?
If I had to guess, the other side of the hull. I don't have any rendering of the port side - only the starboard.

_________________
Please don't call me Tim. If you don't want to use Timothy, use TJ.
MATHNET - To Cogitate and to Solve


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Voyager989
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 21st, 2013, 2:22 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 142
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 8:43 pm
I suspect she should have a single two-tube launcher on each beam, but the G&C releases never indicated this was the case, or where it was to be located. Adding them would be very much a guess.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 21st, 2013, 2:46 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2766
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
Looks like they tried to see how much of a full Burke they can get on a hull with a waterline length to that of an OHP.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 21st, 2013, 8:07 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9099
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Contact: Website
Interesting, and great drawing, though not a beautiful ship indeed. ;)

_________________
My very neglected Deviantart page


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
graham
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 21st, 2013, 10:35 am
Online
Posts: 205
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:49 am
Its difficult to describe how stupid/idiotic was the decision by the Australian government (Navy wanted Arleigh Burke ) not to buy of the shelf Arleigh Burkes after building 50-60 of them the USN may have ironed out any problems / design issues, there is no weapon system integration risks, off course the government has to buy votes in South Australia / Victoria almost as smart as the LHD project build half the ship in Spain then move it half way around the world to Victoria to finish it of (read buy votes in Victoria) - talk about a pork barrel !!!

Apart from that a nice drawing :)

Graham


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
acelanceloet
Post subject: Re: Gibbs And Cox Australian Air Warfare Destroyer (2007)Posted: March 21st, 2013, 10:41 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 7214
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 12:25 pm
Location: the netherlands
re moving it around the world: that is what is done in a lot nations these days, and on 90% of all merchant ships.
the steel construction is most of the time considered too expensive to do it in an 'high tech' nation, so this is done in cheaper nations like china or romania. if we can consider spain such an country, that is another story, but I myself have worked on ships that were designed in the netherands, casco build in china and finished here in the netherlands. (and I have not worked on one but seen one that followed this line and then went to work in russia :P)

_________________
Drawings are credited with J.Scholtens
I ask of you to prove me wrong. Not say I am wrong, but prove it, because then I will have learned something new.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 1 of 2  [ 17 posts ]  Return to “Never-Built Designs” | Go to page 1 2 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]