Strategic Assault Ship, A water based PMT Missile destroyer

itt total lack of understanding of block or prismatic coefficients. There's a lot more at work than just that, but there's your fast/dirty answer:

you don't have your full draft
you don't have your full beam
you don't have your full length
there is structure you need
there are crew spaces and corridors and stores and electronics and ducts and etc you need
you have too much missile volume

:/

well, yeah it kinda is my first time designing a ship,
so can you help me wrap my mind around the calculations for this particular ship?

8m, drought is draft is drought... from keel to waterline

26m

LOA of 200m

crew spaces, already given out as below galley, corridors leading from there are two main walkways that go from the crew area to the bow and crew area to the stern where the hanger is. Electronics are installed behind the bridge which is manned by the helmsmen, radar/sonar officer, weapons control officer, comms and a neat little glass covered 1mx1,7m LCD screen for tactical planning and real-time strategic emplacement; captain and 1st officer are here as well. computers for calculating trajectories in 3D space are in the electronics room as well. below the bridge is a tactical launch port for loading and offloading goods/supply's/speed boats.

if you suggest that I increase the hieght of the ship, then please help me with the calculations then..

most, if not all other things for crew living and control of the ship are at the middle section.
the total volume of missiles is dispersed to 8m in height by 60cm by 5184...

sorry, I mucked up on the calculations, 5184 is the TOTAL number of missiles on board, each missile uses 2.9 cubic metres of space.

TOTAL VOLUME OF EVERY MISSILE: 15033.6 cubic metres...

and the only thing under them are the reactors and atomic batteries that are in line with the keel, pitting most of the weight on the centre line for stability.

please, show me the math that says the volume and capacity of the missiles is too big for this vessel.

No, what I mean is you can't use them. You have structure in the way, and you don't fill in the entire box formed by L*B*T.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticonderoga_class_cruiser
By scaling, you get ~200 missile tubes tops.

Of course, since you're using a different design:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SC-21_(United_States)
128 missile tubes.

You might get lucky and double that number by claiming omgFT, but not likely. Displacement per weapon has been going up historically, because weapons are getting better/heavier/more resource intensive.



Really, you should show us the math proving you can fit that and all of your other things, via a full schematic. The numbers you're suggesting fly in the face of all conventional capacities. Fantastic numbers require fantastic proof. Also, your crew is tiny.

Those things aren't used these days because of weight and efficiency concerns. If you're claiming omgFT on that one, that's fine, you just have to state you're expecting that tech to take off.

my skills at drawing are not at all good.. but you say that structure is in the way, such as cross beams and ribs to support the vessel. but why can't the ship inner structure accommodate such a large amount of missiles?

here have a look from a vertical view
5200m^2 is what we start off with is we use the length and beam of the ship and just make it into a big rectangle
2540.16m square for missiles (that's 0.80^2 by (5184) and includes the launching system for each missile)
3640m square of space after you deduct the tower section (galley, bridge, fast-boat launch area)
2800m square of space after you deduct the front rail-gun and four torpedo launchers (not to mention the ammunition supply rooms, hanger and such that are included)

2800-2540.16=259.84 square meters... 259.84m^2 of room to fill with structure form and cross supports after you deduct the missiles, tower section, hanger, railgun, and torpedo launch And the ammunition storage for them that is fully automated. meaning you can design the structure support around the missiles instead of the other way around. I know that is cutting it close and that the calculations for the tower section and weapons and hanger are just rough estimates.
I also know that this limits the design a bit in terms of stuff being put in, meaning that the ship could be wider by another 4m.

what the hell is omgFT? is this where we say "oh cool! technology! LOLz! XD" and explain in detail how it can be?

how is the crew Tiny when most of the systems are automated and require a small crew of 56?
I mean you have the technicians to do the grunt work of the engineers and maintain systems and repair missile launch systems that have no moving parts; you could train a few of them to service the aircraft while the rest help out the engineers in repairs of key stems (weapons and propulsion).
what is so wrong about a small crew?

yes I am using using a combination array of Betavoltaics, Alphavoltaics and Thermo-photovoltaic cells because you can make a reactor lighter and more efficient this way... and I do expect this to take on and advance ten fold in the coming years. since steam turbines have pretty much climaxed at 50% energy loss, research into new forms of transference will lead into greater potential.

and I should clarify, when I ask to show the math I mean to show me your calculations; my fault entirely. and I can see where it might have shocked you or made you think I was Mad/insane.
the cross section (Ax) I have no idea how to calculate.. so please help..

EDIT... AGAiN!_NOV_8-10:

I found out that Ax=Beam(width)*draft(submerged hull)

the Exocet missile is 4m long by 35cm diameter, so if I resize my missile, it can be 40cm instead of 60 which is what I have done.

Vertical View (same thing as before):
5200m^2 is what we start off with
-1866.24m^2 for missiles (that's 0.60^2 by (5184) I add 20cm to the missile width for the cold launch system of railguns; meaning 5cm for the groove/fin, then another five for the rail on one side
-3640m^2 (that's 5200-(60m L. * 26m W. tower section))
-2840m^2 (that's 3640-400-400 for "pop-up" weapons)
________________________________________________
=973.76m^2 remaining vertical space (that's 2840-1866.24 for the missiles)

this also means that the tower section is the one thing that takes up the most amount vertical area of the ship

Horizontal view (same thing as above, rough estimates):
200m×35-(35×60m tower section)=4900m^2
2.6m missiles staked*3times=7.8m
-(7.8m*0.60)(24missiles*6sets)=672m^2
-4reactors(3*15m)=180m^2
-2battery(2m H* 8m L)=64m^2
-2 azimuth pods + servos for steering(27m H * 6m L)=324m^2
-((20*6)+(40+6m)) for hanger and weapons=360m^2
_________________________________________________
=3300m^2 of remaining horizontal space

Cross Section Area view
CSA:208m^2
-Missiles(7.8m*(60cm*12):56.2m^2
-Reactor(3*3):9m^2
-armour perimeter of uni-body at 16m^2+26m^2: 42m^2
-structure support at 2(40cm*15.5cm): 0.124m^2
_________________________________________________
=100.676m^2 of remaining CSA space

in conclusion, there is enough space for not only the missiles and everything else; but you can add more stuff then what is required.. the armour perimeter is the beam times 50cm plus the draft times 50cm times 2; and this is at the extreme of armour plating. the struts/cross beams and ribs that cross this to give it rigid support would be in between the 6 rocket sets, and the could be up to 1m each. but, again that is the extreme! and the Titanium/Osmium alloy is very heavy, so since it is a strong material, you don't need half a meter of material to hold the the sea back on top of Another 0.5m.. sure, it could stop multiple H.E.A.T. rounds and not leave a scratch if you have 20mm of ceramics (which this ship does since the last update of my OP), but that is quite a bit of weight.

I am sorry but I am laughing at the fact that there is enough space here for anything else you would want to add! I mean I haven't even thought of nor considered what else to add to the 60m(L)x70m(H)x26m(W) tower/bridge section!
I took that out in order to calculate the dimensions shown above.

Credit goes to wolfram alpha, without it, this would not be possible

i am sorry but the ship design can take it, look at the math yourself; by this account a 200m long ship by 26m wide with a depth of 30m to 35m can and will hold 5184 missiles that are 2.6m long by 40cm wide.

Volume of ship:459,183,149.568m^3 of space for for everything else if you keep it in its basic shape!
and that is with not even touching the bridge section space of 109200m^3...

also you could use a low velocity rail-gun system for launching the missiles out of the tubes right now with current technology. Sure it would be a weight issue if you use heavy materials, but then again why would you? your not firing this at Mach 8, your just giving it the 2 to 3m kick in the pants it needs to ignite its engines and fly away. the system that I use for this vessel is 3 rail-sets per tube for each of the 3 missiles, meaning you fire them one layer at a time. this both reduces size and prevents premature detonation damage of the missile if it ever fails to ignite. which is why I also designed the missile with a 10m rule arming system that prevents arming the missile until it is 10m away.

Now, again if you have any other issues with this ship point it out and support it with math or evidence or both. so far the criticism given has actually strengthened the design and opened new possibilities! Thank you goes to no endorse and Thank you Praetonia

plainly you have no idea what the inside of a ship actually looks like

Like a submarine?

Don't try, not worth it.