Shipbucket

Ok Here are some parts:

1. The domed TACAN on the old versions is out of date - Ace just drew one and got it approved on his Spruances.
2. The SPQ-9A (ball looking radar) is way to shaded.
3. Mk-45 NGS has been recently drawn and is on the USN parts sheet.
4. On the SPS-49 you should have left the black pixels black.
5. Phalanx mounts need to face fore or aft, they should not be facing out. The Iowas were a rare exception.
6. The SLQ-32 EW set is out of date and is sitting inside the railing, when they usually set outside of railings.
7. I can evaluate the SPS-48 for inclusion on the sheet going forward, andthe back half may very well be accepted but I want to hear what Erik has to say first, because the front probably won't.
8. A lot of your shading is overdone.

Don't backseat moderate.
Snark doesn't suit you, but he's right.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Updated the Golden State Bucket and the Palmetto State Wagon per most of the suggestions.

You're right, Tim, I did miss both the newer Tacan and the actual position of the SLQ-32 (v3). Also, somehow I missed out on the update on the Mk45 54 cal 5" gun, so all those have been updated. I did, however, decide to keep the shading of the SLQ-9, since I've shaded it according to the photos.

Also, I'm not going to change the position of the Phalanx (Mod0), since they are in their natural zero-position now! Any change per, in my mind, an outmoded rule, when SB still was in its infancy, would render a very bizarre impression, as can be seen as evident on Colosseum's original - and that, it must be emphasized, is none of his fault, since he only followed the rules. As for these ships, I possess a huge collection of photos from various periods of their active service life, and in none have I ever seen the Phalanges be positioned as per this SB-rule.
My 5 cents in the soup cup, and this is only a modest, humble suggestion/petition from a simple member, is that this rule ought to revised as to permit the depiction of realistic positions as per actual installations.

When it comes to the SPS-49, yes, I can see your point in your suggestion of the retention of the black lines; however, do remember, that IRL, this installations were always painted in the same light Haze Gray tone as the ship itself, not black as was usual on conventionally powered ships (including gas turbine-powered ones) - that's what I've tried to more accurately represent, since IRL, they would show up this way.
As for the front of the SPS-48, I've pent hours with it, and, I think, with all due respect, I managed to come very close to its actual appearance.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

Then push for this to be changed in a different thread, not in a drawing thread.
And now it looks blurred. I'll wait to see what others say, but I'm not convinced. At the very least you need to seriously tone the effect down.
Yeah well I don't think you have. Every images I have seen shows a much darker front than what you have shown.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

Well, I think your last remark may be in the category of "what's in the eyes of the beholder, Tim" I submit a few photographic evidence to that effect. In those you clearly can discern that the planar dish and installation as such is, indeed, painted the same shade of grey as the rest of the ship. What makes it, at times appear darker (or lighter!) is the angle of the sun's rays hitting the dish, and for this we cannot really adjust.

_________________
My Avatar:Петр Алексеевич Безобразов (Petr Alekseevich Bezobrazov), Вице-адмирал , царская ВМФ России(1845-1906) - I sign my drawings as Ari Saarinen

What the hell is it with that GMLS with the funky looking left side that is used so often? I know it's on the USN sheet, but to my knowledge that thing just doesn't exist, and there is only one kind of GMLS. There may be internal differences, but AFIAK there aren't any external ones.

_________________
Would you please not eat my gun...

The recoloring on the front face of the SPS-48 needs to be reduced, the CWATs added to the NTUed SPG-51s (this is a modification to the SPG-51 that has not yet been drawn) and you need to revert to a standard SPQ-9 dome.

This does not touch on your overzealous shading of the superstructure that should be massively toned down. Until these changes are made, I say the ship should not be uploaded, and I know that I am not the only one.

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆

I see that the left side has a round cover for the trunion instead of an oval one on the right side. A quick look on the net actually supports this.





Looks like the sheet is right?

I would guess the right trunion houses a pulley that's actually responsible for the launch rail arm's elevation.

Actually I think I see the problem MihoshiK is referring to. On some of the CGNs the left side of the Mk 13 launcher arm has the proper round trunion support but on some it has a few un-connected lines that don't mean anything. Looks like half of the right side trunion support has been cut in half.

I'm impressed by your eyesight!

Also the Seasprites used are my earlier version where the tail rotor isn't quite lined up and the retracted landing gear is made up and doesn't look like it should. Also the blue is too light. The accurate and final (!) version is in the Planebucket.

At bezobrazov's Semi-request, I'll take these over with the final edits. I'm not sure when I'll get them done, but I'll do them.

I've also fixed the Mk-13 with the SM-2MR missile:

_________________
𝐌𝐀𝐓𝐇𝐍𝐄𝐓- 𝑻𝒐 𝑪𝒐𝒈𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝑺𝒐𝒍𝒗𝒆