Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 2 of 12  [ 118 posts ]  Go to page « 1 2 3 4 512 »
Author Message
heuhen
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:28 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 9062
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 10:13 pm
Location: Behind you, looking at you with my mustache!
TimothyC wrote:
If you are using MS Paint, the best suggestion I have is to not use the brush tools. Use the pencil, line, and fill tools. When you save, you need to save the WIP files as bitmaps, then open them in Paint.Net, and save them as PNGs, that will solve some of the discoloration problems.

At this point, I would get an image shack account and use that instead of Photobucket.
you can save it directly to an PNG file without damaging the drawing in MSPaint I do that always.
sabotage181 wrote:
first things first, I was thinking for battle damage purposes that I should move one of the CIWS's from the forward deckhouse to the rear so there are two on each deck house
I wasn't talking about that. but if you insist. If I was you I would go to the proper part sheet and get the proper part from there and place it in a much better spot than you have done now.
sabotage181 wrote:
ok then. A couple questions. We are using a scale of two pixels equals one foot. So I'm wondering, what's the standard naval deck height, is it eight feet?
As in one deck would be 16 pixels?
two pixels equals one foot. correct.

for deck height: you have to calculate in hove much head space a crew member need, you need also think about all the electronics and pips (ventilation) that is hanging up under the roof on each deck. when I draw a ship I use from 18 to 19 pixels for each deck.



But now I have to get to work here in Norway!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sabotage181
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:29 am
Offline
Posts: 181
Joined: May 16th, 2013, 9:23 pm
Colosseum wrote:
I am not sure why I am credited... I have drawn none of the parts you've used. ;)

I used your Long Beach Aegis Upgrade mostly as a length guide and the waterline down from about midships back is yours


Last edited by sabotage181 on May 22nd, 2013, 3:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:30 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
sabotage181 wrote:
ok then. A couple questions. We are using a scale of two pixels equals one foot. So I'm wondering, what's the standard naval deck height, is it eight feet?
As in one deck would be 16 pixels?
Yeah, we use between 16 and 19 pixels depending on the ship.

Please understand, I think you've got a grasp of the ship's design (she's not overloaded), so I just want it to look good in shipbucket scale, if that makes sense.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sabotage181
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:40 am
Offline
Posts: 181
Joined: May 16th, 2013, 9:23 pm
TimothyC wrote:
sabotage181 wrote:
ok then. A couple questions. We are using a scale of two pixels equals one foot. So I'm wondering, what's the standard naval deck height, is it eight feet?
As in one deck would be 16 pixels?
Yeah, we use between 16 and 19 pixels depending on the ship.

Please understand, I think you've got a grasp of the ship's design (she's not overloaded), so I just want it to look good in shipbucket scale, if that makes sense.

Makes total sense Sir. That is why I came here. I have seen your guys drawings way before I joined and have wanted to be able to draw them also. I realize I'll get creamed a bit before I figure it all out.

So I've used paint.net before, but I thought MSpaint would be better because paint.net uses antialiasing and "de-pixilates" your lines, which is something I thought you guys didn't like.

I also realize the drawing I'm posting right now is a mess, and I hope I don't offend anybody with it. I merely wanted to get the process going. I will re-draw this the proper way.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sabotage181
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:49 am
Offline
Posts: 181
Joined: May 16th, 2013, 9:23 pm
heuhen wrote:
I start the ball with:

1. the picture is JPG it must be PNG.
2. Color.
3. double black line is a big no no.
4. You need to redesign the underwater hull
5. And if I am correct, The US Navy have stopped to use the SPS49 together with SPY-1
6. The entire drawing looks like you just have stretched it in paint instead for doing proper work and draw it correct after SB rules.

I appreciate these suggestions and I will implement them as I'm making my new drawing. Thank you
You are correct, the navy has stopped using SPS-49 on some ships with SPY-1. This is because they are so confident in SPY-1 they think it needs no back up. I have worked on radar and I know they break. So since this is my design I am choosing to have SPS-49 as a back-up for SPY and for battle damage reasons. Also The US Navy doesn't use the MK-71 (except at Dahlgren for testing) but I have it anyway :) Also your comment about moving my CIWS' are you talking the ones midships or the fore and aft ones?

Again, thank you for the suggestions


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
TimothyC
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:50 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3765
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 3:06 am
Contact: Website
sabotage181 wrote:
So I've used paint.net before, but I thought MSpaint would be better because paint.net uses antialiasing and "de-pixilates" your lines, which is something I thought you guys didn't like.
Paint.net actually has the ability to turn it off:

[ img ]

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sabotage181
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 3:54 am
Offline
Posts: 181
Joined: May 16th, 2013, 9:23 pm
Awesome, that's the next question I had in mind haha. I thought you could turn it off, but wasn't sure. Thank you Timothy

I have to get up early for work, so I will get after this again tomorrow after work


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Colosseum
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 2:06 pm
Offline
Posts: 5218
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 9:38 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact: Website
Ah - well in this case I'll waive my "right" to be credited as I think you've done the majority of the work here. :)

_________________
USN components, camouflage colors, & reference links (World War II only)


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
klagldsf
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 4:23 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm
It just occurred to me that 23,000 tons is way too big, and I have doubts that the original photoshopped images would achieve that displacement anyway. Hell that's in the Kirov range. The vaarious non-flight deck CSGN designs (and Slava/Moskva, which is of comparable size) are more like 12,000-15,000 tons. You might be looking at a max of 19,000 tons which is going to be the upper limit of practical utilization anyway.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
sabotage181
Post subject: Re: CG(X) option two 23,000 ton BMD CGN(X)Posted: May 22nd, 2013, 11:19 pm
Offline
Posts: 181
Joined: May 16th, 2013, 9:23 pm
klagldsf wrote:
It just occurred to me that 23,000 tons is way too big, and I have doubts that the original photoshopped images would achieve that displacement anyway. Hell that's in the Kirov range. The vaarious non-flight deck CSGN designs (and Slava/Moskva, which is of comparable size) are more like 12,000-15,000 tons. You might be looking at a max of 19,000 tons which is going to be the upper limit of practical utilization anyway.

The 23,000 ton is just a guideline I took from the CG(X) study. It talks about the Zumwalt option, which personally I don't like, then it talks about a more conventional option. this is the option I went with. The Virginia was just shy of 600 feet and about 60 foot beam. She was right around 12,000 tons. Long beach was 721 long, 71 wide at 15,000 tons. this ship is some what bigger than Long Beach so I'm guessing somewhere about 18,000 tons

Everything is just estimated at this point


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 2 of 12  [ 118 posts ]  Return to “Beginners Only” | Go to page « 1 2 3 4 512 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests


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


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