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

Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs
https://111903.jhzobq.asia/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=8204		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Deskjetser [ January 7th, 2018, 5:40 am ]
Post subject:  Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs
Tentatively completed, only my second shipbucket ever.

HMS Conqueror, Great Britain BB. Note: Based on the world of warships ship.

Armament:
4 x 3 16.5"/45 Mk II A&B
8 x 2 5.25"/50 Mk I
11 x 6 40mm Bofors Mk VI
12 x 1 40mm Bofors Mk VII
4 x 2 40mm STAAG
4 x 1 20mm Oerlikon

Dimensions:
Length: 288m overall; 283m waterline
Beam: 37m hull; 39m bulges
Draught: 10.15m normal; 11.03m deep
Displacement: 70,750 t standard; 80,025 t normal; 87,500 t full load

Machinery:
Oil fired boilers, steam turbines,
4 shafts, 219,183 shp / 163,511 Kw = 29.70 kts

[ img ]

Special thanks to the folks on the discord for their helping efforts!
Author:  Shigure [ January 7th, 2018, 8:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
Well done!
Author:  Hood [ January 7th, 2018, 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
This looks pretty good. Some nice detailing on the turrets, superstructure and hull.
All the weapons and radars etc. look spot on to me. Pretty good for only a second drawing.
Author:  odysseus1980 [ January 7th, 2018, 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
If this is your second drawing, what we will see next?
Author:  adenandy [ January 7th, 2018, 5:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
FANTASTIC work :!:

Would love to see what upgrades you could come up with as she ages and new technology develops...

But Jolly Well Done Sir :D
Author:  Deskjetser [ January 7th, 2018, 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
Thanks for all the compliments. :D

I honestly have no idea what I will do next, but this was certainly enjoyable and challenging for myself; So who knows!
Author:  Kannevets [ January 8th, 2018, 3:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
I love British superstructures


They're gorgeous monoliths
Author:  Colosseum [ January 8th, 2018, 2:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD
This is really well done for a first drawing - if this is based off the World of Warships model, I would put a disclaimer in the first post though ;)
Author:  Krakatoa [ January 10th, 2018, 11:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs
Added to Colos disclaimer, I would add Bombheads name to the credit line for the amount of his original drawing you have used. I have done enough clones of Vanguard to recognise the bits.

Your drawing is good for a first effort, but their are several things that look a bit odd to me.

The MkVI director you have used is a big heavy director and would need a decent mounting size under the director to hold it steady when it is performing its duty. If the ship is in any sort of seaway the mounting will be moving/shuddering which will make it a bit difficult to operate with the mountings you have given it. The only mounting that would work properly is the aft one. From what I see on the forward superstructure there are two MkVI directors? one on either side of the bridge?

The best AU drawings are those that look like they could be put into the real navy sheets and look like it belongs there. Your drawing is close to that. But with the details you give the main armament as 12 x 16.5". While a nice armament, the Royal Navy never contemplated a 16.5" gun - that is a size that was a German gun. The RN always had the 16" MkII for its later gun sizes. If WOW has given it a 16.5" then it is just another slack bit of research among the hundreds of other errors WOW has made.
Author:  erik_t [ January 11th, 2018, 12:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Conqueror class BB 1949 DOD WoWs
It's hard to justify two forward directors in any case; they'd block each others' field of view to an extent, and it's not obvious how you'd split eight mounts among five directors.

1-2-1 or 2-2 makes much more sense - the former gives better crossing handoff over the bow and stern, and the latter would more effectively control the mounts in quarters in a close-in dogfight.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/