Shipbucket
https://111903.jhzobq.asia/forums/

Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
https://111903.jhzobq.asia/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=7595		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  wkstl [ March 24th, 2017, 5:08 am ]
Post subject:  Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990(Большой атомный противолодочный корабль проекта 11990) is the the successor of Project 1134B (Kara Class). First ship laid down in 61 Kommunara Zavod, but cancelled in 1990 because of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
[ img ]
Weapons:
AK-130 130mm naval gun.
S-300FM "Frot-M"(SA-N-20) long-range surface-to-air missile system, B-203 armoured VLS for 64 cells.
3K95 "Kinzhal"(SA-N-9) short-range surface-to-air missile system, VLS for 64 cells.
3M87 "Kortik"(CADS-N-1) close-in weapon systems, 2 units.
P-270 "Moskit"(SS-N-22) anti-ship missile, 8 units.
RPK-6M "Vodopad-NK"(SS-N-16) anti-submarine missile, 8 units.
Sensors:
MR-650 "Podberozovik"(Flat Screen) 3D air-search radar.
MR-760 "Fregat-M2A"(Top plate) 3D air-search radar.
MG-342 "Orion"(Horse Jaw) bow mounted LF sonar.
MG-335 "Polinom"(Horse Tail) LF VDS sonar.
Author:  RegiaMarina1939 [ March 24th, 2017, 10:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
It's a nice drawing, but it's missing crediting.
Author:  Rodondo [ March 24th, 2017, 11:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
Youll need to credit Gollevainen, (again) and RFZ as this seems mostly from the existing Udaloy drawing
Author:  wkstl [ March 24th, 2017, 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
Rodondo wrote: *March 24th, 2017, 11:23 am
Youll need to credit Gollevainen, (again) and RFZ as this seems mostly from the existing Udaloy drawing
rediculous, should I not use official part sheets to draw an original one?
Author:  heuhen [ March 24th, 2017, 6:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
wkstl wrote: *March 24th, 2017, 5:43 pm
Rodondo wrote: *March 24th, 2017, 11:23 am
Youll need to credit Gollevainen, (again) and RFZ as this seems mostly from the existing Udaloy drawing
rediculous, should I not use official part sheets to draw an original one?
Oh you do not understand what we are saying. Lost in translation.

We do not credit other artist, when we use only parts.

But when we use drawings of ships that other artist have drawn, then we need to credit the original artist.


It would look like this:

Country, ship class/type
(original artist/author, you)

So on you're drawing it should stand:

Soviet Union, Project 11990 BPK
(Gollevainen, wkstl)



Whenever you use large portion of other people drawing, you have to credit them. But when you use parts only, you do not credit them.


I also recommend to not use translation programs, due to that they can't translate text probably.
Author:  Rodondo [ March 24th, 2017, 6:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
wkstl wrote: *March 24th, 2017, 5:43 pm
Rodondo wrote: *March 24th, 2017, 11:23 am
Youll need to credit Gollevainen, (again) and RFZ as this seems mostly from the existing Udaloy drawing
rediculous, should I not use official part sheets to draw an original one?
Not ridiculous at all, the shaft and propellor, the bridge windows/outline, bilges and the deck below the helipad clearly come from that drawing. This would require crediting, as this didn't come from a parts sheet and isn't just a propellor or an anchor rather, actual sections of hull.
Author:  Colosseum [ March 24th, 2017, 6:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
The credit line should just say:

Soviet Union, Project 11990 BPK
(Gollevainen & RFZ & wkstl)

:)
Author:  citizen lambda [ March 25th, 2017, 12:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
I was going to say that it looked original enough at a glance, but that the red area between shafts and hull should be cleaned up, and then I checked Golly's legacy Udaloy and noticed that that red area was there for a reason in that case :D
The Pr.11990 above, for all its other qualities, reuses this element (at least) without good reason, which requires correction or crediting.

That being said, the drawing is not bad in and of itself. May I ask which sources you used? The layout seems credible, but the versions I have seen used other systems, like Uragan instead of Fort.
Author:  wkstl [ March 25th, 2017, 7:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
citizen lambda wrote: *March 25th, 2017, 12:00 am
I was going to say that it looked original enough at a glance, but that the red area between shafts and hull should be cleaned up, and then I checked Golly's legacy Udaloy and noticed that that red area was there for a reason in that case :D
The Pr.11990 above, for all its other qualities, reuses this element (at least) without good reason, which requires correction or crediting.

That being said, the drawing is not bad in and of itself. May I ask which sources you used? The layout seems credible, but the versions I have seen used other systems, like Uragan instead of Fort.
Uragan was older design, the last one use Fort-M
Author:  Rodondo [ March 27th, 2017, 12:28 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Large Anti-submarine Ship Project 11990
wkstl wrote: *March 25th, 2017, 7:09 pm
citizen lambda wrote: *March 25th, 2017, 12:00 am
I was going to say that it looked original enough at a glance, but that the red area between shafts and hull should be cleaned up, and then I checked Golly's legacy Udaloy and noticed that that red area was there for a reason in that case :D
The Pr.11990 above, for all its other qualities, reuses this element (at least) without good reason, which requires correction or crediting.

That being said, the drawing is not bad in and of itself. May I ask which sources you used? The layout seems credible, but the versions I have seen used other systems, like Uragan instead of Fort.
Uragan was older design, the last one use Fort-M
Fort-M seems drastic though for this sort of ship, Urugan at the time was well fielded and proven, unlike the Fort-M which was being put in only Pyotr Velikiy which merits a question why wasn't it repeated (probably wight and the collapse of the USSR but I digress)
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/