NationStates Jolt Archive

With the sale of all 50,000,000 shares of Blue Star Incorporated, the company is now fully equipped to face the NationStates shipbuilding world. This thread is devoted to the design, discussion, and implementation of all future projects for BSDI, and as such is open to submissions from all shareholders. Submissions must include an estimated cost, and as much or as little detail as is felt necessary.

Current Funds Available To BSDI:
$13,000,000,000

Current Proposed Projects (7/25/06):
The Shipyard Production Project (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11438272&postcount=2)
Nuclear Powered Submersible (SSN) Project (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11438440&postcount=3)
Bullfrog Attack Carrier Project (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11439198&postcount=22)

[OOC: I'm doing this in a form that I'm making as I go, feel free to rip it off or ignore it completely.]

Official Project Name: The Shipyard Production Project
Summary: In order to maximize profit and minimize build time of future ships, it will be necessary to ascertain the availability of shipyards capable of building said ships. Creating our own shipyard(s) will allow us to reduce sub-contracting costs, as well as rely upon ourselves for the building of ships.
Special Requirements: Suggestions for cities capable/willing to have shipyards built in.
Estimated Project Cost: Approx. $2 billion/shipyard
Project Proposed By: James Arrington (5 million shares)

Official Project Name: Nuclear Powered Submersible (SSN)
Summary: In this age of lightning communications, speedy logistics, and blitz-esque strikes, the modern naval fleet has a need to disrupt and harrass as well as possible. Out of the three things stated above, logistics was once the easiest. Now, logistics ships sail far and wide, escorted by ships capable of nullifying any attack without special means. The SSN IS that special means. Capable of circumnavigating the world without surfacing (restricted by food source and other factors,) the SSN is the future of the hunter-killer submarine.
Special Requirements: I have created a Lineart of a submarine that is available for this project. Additional funds may be necessary. Would be necessary to contract out, unless BSDI shipyards are produced beforehand.
Estimated Project Cost: Approx. $13-15 billion
Project Proposed By: James Arrington (5 million shares)

In response to the first proposal;

Your proposal can be brought to the Imperial Parliament. I personally have a possibility running through my head that the Empire can sell Blue Star Incorporated a tract of our land on a small island in Whyatican territory for it's shipyard for a discounted cost paid out over several years. The Imperial Navy is prepared to offer you a fifteen kilometre by thirty kilometre block of land on Venture Island for two point five billion dollars, paid out over ten years at $250,000,000 per year. We can also offer you a twenty-five year payment plan at $100,000,000 per year, if Blue Star would prefer that. The Parliamentary Land Commission has tentatively approved either offer, so you may choose this as your possibility.

Grand Admiral Dan Aykroyd

Response:

The first question that comes to mind when talking about constructing shipyards at an estimated two billion per, is how many are we going to build? If we build a massive one or multiple ones it will cost nearly half of the total funds and then we will have much less to actually design our ship. That is why I feel that we should primarily focus on the products at hand and then when our funds have grown, we can build a series of shipyards on the lands Whyatica was more than nice enough to set aside for Blue Star Incorporated. Based on the estimated cost of the submarine proposal, I would say that we actually can't afford the shipyards in the first proposal... This is why I, after receiving proper authorization, am proposing that we use DMI shipyards for the first proposal and until we receive enough funds to construct our own.

General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

The Government of United Federation of Military Command is willing to place $200 Billion Dollars into the Company's funds to contructed these projects and is willing to fund a big poration of the projects as long as members of the board get a 75% off of per cost once they are built to either use or buy products.

Response to DMI representative:

I believe that the use of DMI shipyards for our first ship(s) would be a wise use of our (for now) limited resources. I am sure there should be a price however, and the use of DMI shipyards alone will likely cap production of the vessel to several per year. If DMI's yards could be complemented with someone elses as well, we can maximize profit and capability to meet demand.

James Arrington, Founder

The Government of United Federation of Military Command is willing to place $200 Billion Dollars into the Company's funds to contructed these projects and is willing to fund a big poration of the projects as long as members of the board get a 75% off of per cost once they are built to either use or buy products.

[ooc: It is pretty obvious that any of us could just pour in hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars, but I was under the impression that this wasn't supposed to be like that. I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem as fun if we just have trillions of dollars.]

The Government of UFMC would like to also allow the BSDI to use are naval shipyards to produce anyships to max out profit for the Company and it investors.

[OOC: Yes, MC, while the offer is very generous, for myself atleast I would rather that BSDI would be a company built from the ground up, in order to keep it fun. Thank you though, and if others would rather it, we CAN accept the money.]

[ooc: It is pretty obvious that any of us could just pour in hundreds of billions if not trillions of dollars, but I was under the impression that this wasn't supposed to be like that. I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem as fun if we just have trillions of dollars.]

Well if would be for starting fees to get the company of the ground floor. I would be willing to make it a loan if you would like to do it that way. I was be a graceful member of the board. So we could compete with other Shipyards out there. If you would like to I can take the money back. Because the funds would be an investment into the projects and future profits of the company.

Response to Military Command Representative:

Your offer of shipyards is generous as well, but it would not be fair without a price per ship from both yourself and DMG. This can be better established once a ship price is determined.

James Arrington, Founder

Response to Military Command Representative:

Your offer of shipyards is generous as well, but it would not be fair without a price per ship from both yourself and DMG. This can be better established once a ship price is determined.

James Arrington, Founder

Well then I think that we should sit down and talk about prices for the ships that we are going to produce. We might think about placeing requests for ship designer to join the team.

[OOC: I myself am a beginning ship designer, and I believe that others in our group are as well. I think we should probably let others responds to the actions right now, and I will work on getting some stats for the Lineart SSN I have.]

DMI I would like to know if you plan allowing BSDI the use of your naval tech and other tech that your company has because we could see ship on your storefront to start off with. If you are I would be willing to buy the tech from your company and make it a purches in the BSDI. If that is ok with the Chairman and yourself. I would put the use of the money that I offered earlier to do this.

Response:

Unfortunately, as per regulations, we are not selling our technology or our ships to be modified, even to a company that is partly owned by us. Sorry.

General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

Response:

Unfortunately, as per regulations, we are not selling our technology or our ships to be modified, even to a company that is partly owned by us. Sorry.

General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

Thank you very much. Then I think that we should start to get down to work on get this company up on its feet.

The Imperial Navy has decided to hold the land in preparation for the BS-I naval yards, and Parliament has also approved allowing Blue Star to contract to Whyatican shipbuilders until Blue Star's own shipyards are complete.

Grand Admiral Dan Aykroyd

In order to create a bit of anticipation as to my SSN in the works, here is the lineart that I propose it use if the project is accepted. If anyone else has proposed projects to submit, please do.

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g237/Zanziik/1st-3.png

In order to create a bit of anticipation as to my SSN in the works, here is the lineart that I propose it use if the project is accepted. If anyone else has proposed projects to submit, please do.

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g237/Zanziik/1st-3.png

I think that it looks nice and I think that we should be able to sell them. It looks as if you have three members of the board willing to give you use of their shipyards until BSDI gets off the ground.

The Empire would be more than willing to lease some of our shipbuilding facilities at the port city Harange for a yearly price to be decided upon. This is one of the few facilities in Cravan that can accomadate supercapital ships, and is the largest naval facility in the nation next to the North Point Naval Complex.

We also have an interest in this SSN project, and would be willing to contribute some funds to it. We are looking to rebuild our navy to the strength and might it once was many years ago, and would like to work with you to accomplish this, hence one of the reasons we invested in your corporation.

Daniel N. Fieldson
Adm. Daniel N. Fieldson
Chief of the Department of the Imperial Navy

The Imperial Navy wishes to propose that the Blue Star company produce a helicopter assault carrier. This design is primarily for moving troops long distances as well as carrying ASW/Attack helicopters in anti-submarine operations.

Bullfrog Class Assault Carrier
http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3879/bullfrogcvlaxo7.png

Length: 353.2m
Beam: 44.15m
Displacement: 68,500 tons
Crew: 105 Officers/1,250 Enlisted
Marine Detachment: 2,250
Speed: Cruising Speed of 26kts, Maximum Speed of 33kts
Range:
@ 26kts, 4,000nm
@ 33kts, 2,850nm
Aircraft: 46 Assault Helicopters or 25 Attack Helicopters
Power Plant:
Oil Fired Boilers
2 Geared Steam Turbines
2 Shafts
Total Output of 85,000 shaft horsepower (63 MW)
Armaments:
4 RAM Launchers
2 StA Missile Launcher, Box Mount
4 30mm CIWS

Armour:
The armour is mostly HSLA steel with titanium added in to strengthen it. This is laid out in a honeycomb pattern, with occasional amounts of tungsten or depleted uranium rods for extra support. There is a 'layer' of spaced armour as well as extensive use of ceramics and boron.
Deck: 225mm
Side: 350mm

The estimated development cost for this vessel is $1.5bn, and each unit will cost somewhere between $950 million and $1.1 billion.

OOC:I just statted this now, and I hope you guys like the design. Picture done by Aralonia

Proposal #2 - Belushi Class Frigate
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/8239/ff01gj0.png
Belushi Class Frigate

Length: 157.9m
Beam: 19.73m
Displacement: 15,000 tons
Crew: 17 Officers/337 Enlisted
Speed: Cruising Speed of 28kts, Maximum Speed of 35kts
Power Plant:
Oil Fired Boilers
1 Geared Steam Turbines
1 Shafts
Total Output of 46,000 shaft horsepower (34 MW)
Armaments:
1 Double 5" ETC Naval Gun
1 RAM Launcher
3 30mm CIWS
4 Below Waterline Torpedo Tube


Armour:
The armour is mostly HSLA steel with titanium added in to strengthen it. This is laid out in a honeycomb pattern, with occasional amounts of tungsten or depleted uranium rods for extra support. There is a 'layer' of spaced armour as well as extensive use of ceramics and boron.
Deck: 275mm
Side: 400mm

Costs: Development cost for this vessel will be essentially nil, as the detailed construction plans for this vessel are already completed. Minor modifications may be needed, and the hull can be modified for guided weapons support and other duties. Unit cost is 860 million per unit.

Short Response:

Why not use nuclear reactors, especially in the carrier?

[signed]
General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

It is my belief that a nuclear reactor will needlessly raise the cost of shorter-ranged vessels like the frigate. The assault carrier design can be further modified to use a nuclear reactor, however this will drive development and unit costs up, and if we wish to keep those down the simpler boiler construct is necessary.

R&D Wing, Imperial Whyatican Navy

It is my belief that a nuclear reactor will needlessly raise the cost of shorter-ranged vessels like the frigate. The assault carrier design can be further modified to use a nuclear reactor, however this will drive development and unit costs up, and if we wish to keep those down the simpler boiler construct is necessary.

R&D Wing, Imperial Whyatican Navy

I would have to agree with DMI that we need to have a nuclear reactors in any surface ship unless it is a patrol craft. I would also place money in the Company's account so we can develope the designs that are up for concedartion. I would also think that a nuclear reactor for certain subs.

My feeling is that a nuclear reactor is obligatory for a submarine and quite useful for a surface ship. Even if it is not meant to go long distances, you never know what it will be called on to do. Also, in this day and age, the cost of a nuclear reactor would not be that overwhelming...

[signed]
General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

My feeling is that a nuclear reactor is obligatory for a submarine and quite useful for a surface ship. Even if it is not meant to go long distances, you never know what it will be called on to do. Also, in this day and age, the cost of a nuclear reactor would not be that overwhelming...

[signed]
General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

The cost of a nuclear reactor is alot cheaper then the cost for fuel for a ships. It would then only be limited by it supplies and the crew but with a proply trained crew it could be months before it would need to resupply or can supply underway.

For a long range patrol submarine, yes, a nuclear reactor would be advisable and similarly, for large displacement long-endurance surface vessels nuclear reactors would be advisable; however they are not necessarily so for all surface vessels nor for all submarines. The decision to use either fossil or fission fuels must be made first with respect to the relative availability of either; if a nation or other end consumer of the products does not have a steady and secure access to uranium - why would they want to fuel their ships with uranium. The same goes with fossil fuels, if not more so. However, nuclear reactors require much more training to operate and often require much greater skill in repair if damaged in battle. Furthermore, nations run the risk of environmental damage should a nuclear ship be sunk and its reactor containment vessel breached. Additionally, some nations preclude the visits of nuclear-power or nuclear-armed vessels to civilian (and even military) ports. Nuclear powered submarines can also be far noisier than diesel-electric submarines in certain situations and for that reason the Royal Navy of Oceania operates diesel submarines within its Home waters or other foreign littoral seas. Similarly, diesel-electric propulsion can be of much greater assistance to frigates and other vessels tasked with the tracking and subsequent elimination of quiet submarines as reactors produce much more noise than batteries.

Nigel Paddington,
VSNE plc

Nuclear reactors in every surface ship is wasteful. There are ships where putting a nuclear reactor in it will make it too expensive for mass use (frigates, destroyers), and submarines that do not need nuclear reactors. Putting in nuclear reactors in every ship, no matter if it needs it or not, is wasteful and frankly bad designing. We can understand the need for an all-nuclear fleet if a nation does not have easy access to oil, but there are also nations that do not have easy access to uranium. Blue Star can easily provide ships that are nuclear and that are not, and sticking to one is bad design and bad for business.

The frigate will not be changed from it's original boiler design, and the assault carrier can be designed into a nuclear variant if it is deemed necessary by the majority of Blue Star shareholders.

R&D Wing, Imperial Whyatican Navy

Nuclear reactors in every surface ship is wasteful. There are ships where putting a nuclear reactor in it will make it too expensive for mass use (frigates, destroyers), and submarines that do not need nuclear reactors. Putting in nuclear reactors in every ship, no matter if it needs it or not, is wasteful and frankly bad designing. We can understand the need for an all-nuclear fleet if a nation does not have easy access to oil, but there are also nations that do not have easy access to uranium. Blue Star can easily provide ships that are nuclear and that are not, and sticking to one is bad design and bad for business.

The frigate will not be changed from it's original boiler design, and the assault carrier can be designed into a nuclear variant if it is deemed necessary by the majority of Blue Star shareholders.

R&D Wing, Imperial Whyatican Navy

Why not offer a variant of both a non nuclear and a nuclear ships so nations can have a choice of the two.

Why not offer a variant of both a non nuclear and a nuclear ships so nations can have a choice of the two.

I agree. Choice is always best.

I disagree. Choice is not necessarily best for a smaller corporation looking to establish a foothold somewhere (anywhere) in the shipbuilding market. While eliminating choices does cater to a smaller demographic (either those looking for non-nuclear powered vessel, or nothing at all,) I believe that it will be in our best interests financially to keep projects as simple as possible for the time being.

James Arrington, Founder

With the option between Nuclear and boiler, Waldenburg suggests boiler. In the event that the consumer may choose between the two we should have to produce some of each kind which may end up wasting valuable resources. Or we would lose on construction time if the ship were made after the consumer ordered. Waldenburg suggests that all ships under the classification of Battlecruiser be powered by boiler\electric power, at least for now.

I disagree. Choice is not necessarily best for a smaller corporation looking to establish a foothold somewhere (anywhere) in the shipbuilding market. While eliminating choices does cater to a smaller demographic (either those looking for non-nuclear powered vessel, or nothing at all,) I believe that it will be in our best interests financially to keep projects as simple as possible for the time being.

James Arrington, Founder

Response

Ah, perhaps you are correct in this situation. However, I still must insist that using a nuclear reactor would be best for the carrier.

[signed]
General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

Response

Ah, perhaps you are correct in this situation. However, I still must insist that using a nuclear reactor would be best for the carrier.

[signed]
General Graham Thompson Richards, Ret.
DMI Appointee to Blue Star Incorporated

Response:

I am pleased that we came to an agreement here.

James Arrington, Founder

Well I would have to agree to that anything under a curiser should not have a nuclear reactor.

[ooc: This going anywhere?]

[OOC: Yeah, sorry I've been on vacation for the past week.]

Official Share Sale Announcement:

I would like to take this chance to welcome Aralonia, our newest shareholder, who recently purchased two million (2,000,000) of my personal shares at $250/share. I believe that his addition to our company will strengthen us in many ways, and I hope there are great things in our future together.

James Arrington, Founder

Azrael Class SuperDreadnought



Design

The design of the ship incorporates stealth features with emphasis on reduction of radar cross section, infrared, acoustic, electrical and magnetic signatures. Watertight compartments, insulation, redundancy of vital systems, power distribution, and routing, blast and fragmentation retaining structures provide a very high level of survivability against missile attack and fire hazards. For nuclear, chemical and biological warfare protection the ship is subdivided into two gas citadels and a sub citadel. Automation and integration of systems has enabled a significant reduction in crew.

The Armour for the ship is contrusted from a new alloy created by UEMS. Named Cartanconium, this alloy is some of the toughest metal known to man. Able to take massive amounts of punishment from both KE Rounds and HEAT rounds. Cartanconium was designed to take massive amounts of heat energy and not lose its structure. Any Modern or Future Missile would be hard pressed to dent a hole in the Armour of the Azrael Class. Cartanconium is also designed to stop KE Rounds, even DU rounds are unable to pentrate more then a inch of Cartanconium Armour. Rest assured, Cartanconium will become the standard Armour of the future for all nations.

AEGIS COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM

The Azrael Class is equipped with the lastest Aegis Combat System which integrates the ship's electronic sensors and weapons systems to engage anti-ship missile threats. The Aegis system has a federated architecture with four subsystems – the AN/SPY-3 multifunction radar, the Command and Decision System (CDS), Aegis Display System (ADS) and the Weapon Control System (WCS).

The weapons control systems include a SWG-1A for Harpoon, SWG-3 forTomahawk, Mk 99 Mod 3 missile fire control system, GWS34 Mod 0 gun fire control system and Mk 116 Mod 7 fire control system for anti-submarine systems.

MISSILES

Each ship is fitted with Four Mark 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS) containing a total of 256 cells, each cell can be either armed with Boeing/Raytheon Tomahawk cruise missiles, Lockheed Martin ASROC vertical launch anti-submarine systems, armed with the Mark 50 or Mark 46 torpedo. The Mark 46 anti-submarine torpedo has a range of 10km, Mark 50 has a range of 15km. (Note: As always the number of missiles of each type can be varied.) In the anti-ship role the Tomahawk missile uses inertial guidance and active/passive radar homing to a range of 250 nautical miles. The land attack (TLAM) version uses a Tercom (terrain comparison) and inertial navigation system (TAINS). Range is up to 2,500km.

The Mark 41 launchers are equipped with new Lockheed Martin AN/ALQ-70 computers and the ability to launch Evolved Seasparrow (ESSM) missiles and Tactical Tomahawk (Block IV) missiles. ESSM has been developed by Raytheon and is designed to counter high-speed anti-ship missiles. It has the same semi-active radar guidance and warhead as the Seasparrow but has a new rocket motor and tail control to provide increased speed, range and manoeuvrability. Tactical Tomahawk has the capability for mission planning onboard the launch vessel, in-flight targeting and loitering.

The ships Mark 41 launchers are also armed with the Raytheon Standard Missile 3 surface-to-air missile which uses command and inertial guidance and semi-active radar homing and has a range of 70km. The SM-3 is designed to intercept ballistic missiles outside the earth's atmosphere. The missile has new GPS/INS (global positioning / inertial navigation) guidance and kinetic warhead. Lockheed Martin has developed the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) 3.0 capability for the Aegis combat system to engage ballistic missiles with the SM-3 missile.

Twelve four-cell launchers for the Boeing Harpoon surface-to-surface missile system are installed on the gun deck at the stern of the ship. Harpoon has a range up to 125km.

GUNS

The ship's main guns are nine 18.1 inch/45 caliber Rail Guns capable of firing a 1,460kg shell out to a target range of 250nm or 450km at a maximum firing rate of 6 to 12 rounds per minute.

Secondary guns are six 6.1 inch/62 caliber Advance Gun System or (AGS). Each gun is capable of firing a 102kg Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) out to a range of 100nm (180km). It is also able to fire a 90kg Ballistic Long Range Projectile out to a range of 24nm (44km).

Four Raytheon Phalanx Mark 15 close-in weapon systems are installed. Phalanx has a 20mm/53-calibre six-barrel gun capable of firing 3,000 rounds/min to a target range of 1.5km. Phalanx Block 1B is fitted with a thermal imager and can fire 4,000 rounds/minute. Two SGE-30 Goalkeeper close-in weapon system (CIWS) are also installed, each one consists of a 30mm seven-barrel gun providing a rate of fire of over 4,000 rounds/min. Range is 200m to 3km.

COUNTERMEASURES

The ship is equipped with the AN/SLQ-25 Nixie towed torpedo decoy and six to eight Mark 36 six-barrel launchers for SRBOC from Lockheed Martin Sippican, which fire infrared decoys and chaff. The ship's electronic support measures and countermeasures system is the Raytheon AN/SLQ-32.

HELICOPTERS

The ship can support up to four helicopters which provides search-and-attack capability for ASW and surface surveillance and over-the-horizon targeting for anti-surface warfare.

SENSORS

The radar suite will consist of a dual band radar for horizon and volume search, an L-band volume search radar (VSR) integrated with the AN/SPY-3 multi-function radar. The two radars are to be integrated at waveform level for enhanced surveillance and tracking capability. The AN/SPY-3 Multi-Function Radar (MFR) is an X-band active phased-array radar designed to detect low-observable anti-ship cruise missiles and support fire-control illumination for the ESSM and Standard Missiles.

The sonar suite is the Lockheed Martin SQQ-89(V)15, which includes Edo Corporation AN/SQS-53C bow-mounted active search and attack sonar and the AN/SQR-19B passive towed array. The SQQ-89(V) allows deployment of the Lockheed Martin AN/WLD-1 Remote Minehunting System. AN/WLD-1 includes a Remote Minehunting Vehicle (RMV) that tows the AN/AQS-20A variable depth sonar (VDS).

PROPULSION

The ship's propulsion system consists of two A5W nuclear reactors driving four steam turbines of 260,000shp. The turbines drive four shafts with fixed pitch propellers. The propulsion system provides a maximum speed of over 30+ knots. An single gas turbine of 40,000hp can be used for emergencies.

SPECIFICATIONS
Ship's complement: 1,250
Displacement: 71,659 tons standard displacement or 78,291 tons full load
Dimensions: Length (887.2 ft), Beam (121 ft); Draught (34 ft)
Armor (Cartanconium): 16.1-inch belt, 7.9-9.1 inch deck, 21.5 inch barbettes, 25.6 inch turrets, 19.7 inch CT

This ship was designed for me with the help of United Earthling Military System. I have full production rights to the ship and its armor and I am willing to sell it to members of Blue Star Company. But I am sorry to say that the Production Rights are not for sale. The Price for the ship is $250 Billion USD. That is for complete building and anything that you might want on it.

1.) Phalanx is a completely outdated weapons system – the Aralonian government is willing to release some of its older RAM-77 systems based on a heavily modified Vympel R-77 airframe for use as an anti-missile missile system.
2.) What are inches? Our researchers had to look around in other nations' history files and it appears they are a horribly outdated form of measurement. Please use the metric system.
3.) Railguns are fully out of the reach of what we can have in a modern environment. If you were to change these to standard chemical reaction-based cannons, they would be absolutely tiny guns. Aralonian battleship design LB-B-04 Prince of Aralonia, our first design, used 460mm/L70 naval rifles, which are fully inadequate for this environment. Which brings us to...
4.) This ship is far too small to be a true “superdreadnought” class battleship. It's even smaller than design LB-B-04 Prince of Aralonia, which is classified as a light battleship or pocket battleship at best.

We will be sure to have more comments eventually.

This ship is far too small to be a true “superdreadnought” class battleship. It's even smaller than design LB-B-04 Prince of Aralonia, which is classified as a light battleship or pocket battleship at best.

We will be sure to have more comments eventually.

We would have to agree. It isn't even three hundred meters. It is, at most, a regular battleship.

1.) Phalanx is a completely outdated weapons system – the Aralonian government is willing to release some of its older RAM-77 systems based on a heavily modified Vympel R-77 airframe for use as an anti-missile missile system.
2.) What are inches? Our researchers had to look around in other nations' history files and it appears they are a horribly outdated form of measurement. Please use the metric system.
3.) Railguns are fully out of the reach of what we can have in a modern environment. If you were to change these to standard chemical reaction-based cannons, they would be absolutely tiny guns. Aralonian battleship design LB-B-04 Prince of Aralonia, our first design, used 460mm/L70 naval rifles, which are fully inadequate for this environment. Which brings us to...
4.) This ship is far too small to be a true “superdreadnought” class battleship. It's even smaller than design LB-B-04 Prince of Aralonia, which is classified as a light battleship or pocket battleship at best.

We will be sure to have more comments eventually.


Well a superdreadnought is what is done by the armor and weapons size. It is done of the Yamato Class Ship from the Japaness Imperial Navy. Well this what I asked for a design to be made off of. So if you don't like it then don't buy it. I am not forceing anyone to buy my ship at all. I don't see you posting any your ships on here to get ideas for new ships and other ways to employ new tech on my ships and fleet. Thank you very much.

Well a superdreadnought is what is done by the armor and weapons size. It is done of the Yamato Class Ship from the Japaness Imperial Navy. Well this what I asked for a design to be made off of. So if you don't like it then don't buy it. I am not forceing anyone to buy my ship at all. I don't see you posting any your ships on here to get ideas for new ships and other ways to employ new tech on my ships and fleet. Thank you very much.

Chill out... we were offering criticism and our opinions. There is no need to get defensive.

Very well. The Aralonian government has authorised the blueprinting of a new class of battleships to be sold directly through the Blue Star Corporation, based off the Aralonian "Duke of Saris" design.

Statistics and build data for this vessel will be available... eventually

[ooc: bump?]

[ooc: I am removing this from my subscriptions; if this ever gets back on pace... send me a TG.]

[Removed from Subscriptions]