Pinned post for Q&A :)

@NightHeronProduction

4 жыл бұрын

HMS Hood in her original configuration, armoured conning tower, tower e.c.t but the machinery, engines and turbines have been replaced (humour me) in the late 30s on the eve of the war. What would be the best speed one could expect from such a machinery upgrade, would expect that the new machinery would be lighter and more efficient enough to have some positive effect on performance.

@LostBeaver

4 жыл бұрын

how do Chinese war junks compare to equivalent ear and/or size european vessels. In a similar line of questions what about Korean Panokseons and Turtle ships? Additionally, if any of the ships don't compare well, what european vessels would be a fair match for them?

@raptormaster666

4 жыл бұрын

What are the advantages and disadvantages of having main turrets on the sides of the ship as opposed to centre line? (HMS Dreadnought, looking at you) I was thinking if there was any other ship with a main multi-barrelled turret in each of the four cardinal directions, but with the two midship guns raised to fire over the end turrets, allowing more guns to be fired forwards and aft.

@littlemodelshop6125

4 жыл бұрын

How would the battle for the Philippine sea change if the shokaku and taiho were not sunk by US submarines

@toveychurchill6468

4 жыл бұрын

What uniform did the sailors wore in the Royal Navy in 18,19th century, could it be red ?the British army were famous for its red coat tho

Drach, it's important to note that the displacement Springsharp gives is *not* standard displacement, but *normal* displacement. To see your standard displacement, you have to generate and view the report, which will list light, standard, normal, and full load displacement. Also, I'd recommend using miscellaneous weight to simulate the weight of things like, say, aviation facilities. Springsharp's top speed is also often not accurate to the listed top speeds of real ships, if you use the locked-horsepower option. However, what it *does* generally match is the actual in-service speed, at typical displacement and with a typical level of bottom-fouling, as opposed to a clean bottom and light displacement for trials. Engine factor was never implemented, so note that if you're trying to build a destroyer in it, it *will* claim that the engines are too big or too heavy for the ship, because it's trying to put battleship engines of that power in there. Also, clicking the "Flush Deck" or "Mid Break" buttons on the freeboard tab sets the freeboard at each end of each section completely independently of what you've entered, based solely on the ship's waterline length.

@JevansUK

4 жыл бұрын

Use the sidebar to keep an eye on the standard displacement

Instructions not clear, destroyer with 12 inch guns broke in haft

@oldgringo2001

3 жыл бұрын

That sounds perfectly realistic. Germany tried arming destroyers with 5.9 inch guns in WWII and it turned out to be more than they could really handle. Japan did have three small cruisers in the 1895 war with China armed with a single 12.6 inch gun (French) but they couldn't be trained--they fired straight forward, period. Fortunately, the German-built Chinese battleships they had to fight had crews that had never done target practice, with many shells that were simply filled with concrete (The Dowager Empress sucked away most of the naval budget to improve her summer palace.)

@kieranh2005

3 жыл бұрын

That's because you were supposed to use 16" guns

@nicholas209

3 жыл бұрын

Sad Kiyoshimo noises

When I was a kid, I used to trace hull, superstructure and weapon outlines onto tracing (greaseproof) paper from E.H.H. Archibald's "The Metal Fighting Ship in the Royal Navy." When I was adult, I read David K Brown's books. My inner naval designer is excited that such a thing as Springsharp exists, and that ten year old kid is weeping tears of pure joy.

Drach, when you were adding the gun on both the knock-off New Orleans and the 9.2 County, you forgot to make the appropriate guns superfiring. They all ended up on the same deck.

@Drachinifel

4 жыл бұрын

Good catch

@nanotyrannus5435

4 жыл бұрын

@@Drachinifel I can only find a setting for a gun superfiring above a superfiring gun, where would I set a normal superfiring gun?

@rdfox76

4 жыл бұрын

@@nanotyrannus5435 If you just put the mount in an "elevated" position, it automatically will be set as superfiring. The tickbox is for gun mounts elevated two levels.

@jonathanevans4610

4 жыл бұрын

didn't add the 4 turret either

@robertparisi324

4 жыл бұрын

I believe he planned it as a single deck cruiser although he started with the New Orleans class in mind. The Baltimore Class would have given him a lot more leeway if he wanted to use something that passed for a Treaty Cruiser and the 'De Moines' class, over 20k tons, like the Saint Paul, would have made the software exercise much easier. Frankly, software is the starting point for building models for aqua testing. Then tweaks are added. At 580' feet in length the ship's speed would have been reduced and their would have been inadequate interior space for everything besides the engines. Berthing would have been impossible especially in war time conditions where a hundred 20mm and 40mm anti aircraft guns would have been added along with berthing for an additional ~300-350 anti-aircraft personnel. Simply not practicable on 10k ton displacement.

When designing a U.S. Cruiser.... select guns, check YES, under how many, check ALL. Submit!

@ethanhatcher5533

4 жыл бұрын

"You have 20 sq meters of unused space" Ahhh just slap some bofors there

@christopherconard2831

4 жыл бұрын

@@ethanhatcher5533 20M of open space? I see 30 sailors with bazookas.

@brotlowskyrgseg1018

4 жыл бұрын

@@ethanhatcher5533 Americans be like: "Unused space? Now that's a strange term for an empty gun platform. And what are those commie units you speak of?"

@MrPhil360

4 жыл бұрын

Walkway aloft: American Cruiser Designer: Let's put a standing .50 mount there.

@truckerallikatuk

4 жыл бұрын

Ah, I see you're related to the designer of the USS Second Amendment!

Long years ago, the former Imperial Navy, my very own battle fleet, converted a semi-derelict Airfix HMS Iron Duke into three funnelled battleship-carrier with sponson mounted wing turrets and twin mounted 13.5s on a barbette where the admiral's walk used to be. The design was a triumph, retaining all ten 13.5's all the 6' with an additional six 8' guns whilst ditching all the fire control. You could do a lot with leggo and glue in those days so it would be fun to replicate in Springsanp.

@glenmcgillivray4707

4 жыл бұрын

I suppose with air mounted radios you can get away with airborne fire control officers, a shame about night Fighting or bad weather mind.

@vespelian5274

4 жыл бұрын

@Chris_Wooden_Eye One of my favourites but too but the portholes are ridiculously large.

@vespelian5274

4 жыл бұрын

@@glenmcgillivray4707 Good solution. In bad weather just blast away and hope for the best.

Cool! I was always wondering how people submitted their designs, but I never bothered asking. Maybe I'll even play along in this design contest :)

@KorianHUN

4 жыл бұрын

I wonder what he would do if i sent in my entry as a 3d model...

@nanotyrannus5435

4 жыл бұрын

@@KorianHUN Probably give you a special price because that is a ton of effort.

The engine calculations in this thing are seriously bonkers.

First ship and it mostly works: BIR Fortitude, Banana Islands Republic Fortitude Class Coastal Defence Ship laid down 1910 (Engine 1903) Displacement: 4,222 t light; 4,411 t standard; 4,500 t normal; 4,571 t full load Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep) (260.52 ft / 255.00 ft) x 50.00 ft (Bulges 55.00 ft) x (25.00 / 25.31 ft) (79.41 m / 77.72 m) x 15.24 m (Bulges 16.76 m) x (7.62 / 7.71 m) Armament: 4 - 8.00" / 203 mm 35.0 cal guns - 240.04lbs / 108.88kg shells, 100 per gun Breech loading guns in turret on barbette mounts, 1905 Model 2 x 2-gun mounts on centreline ends, evenly spread 2 raised mounts 16 - 4.00" / 102 mm 40.0 cal guns - 30.67lbs / 13.91kg shells, 150 per gun Breech loading guns in casemate mounts, 1908 Model 16 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread 8 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in heavy seas 24 - 1.50" / 38.1 mm 30.0 cal guns - 1.56lbs / 0.71kg shells, 200 per gun Quick firing guns in casemate mounts, 1903 Model 24 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread 16 hull mounts in casemates- Limited use in heavy seas 30 - 0.50" / 12.7 mm 45.0 cal guns - 0.07lbs / 0.03kg shells, 500 per gun Machine guns in deck mounts, 1909 Model 30 x Single mounts on sides, evenly spread Weight of broadside 1,490 lbs / 676 kg Armour: - Belts: Width (max) Length (avg) Height (avg) Main: 4.00" / 102 mm 165.75 ft / 50.52 m 8.49 ft / 2.59 m Ends: 2.50" / 64 mm 89.23 ft / 27.20 m 8.49 ft / 2.59 m Upper: 2.00" / 51 mm 165.75 ft / 50.52 m 8.00 ft / 2.44 m Main Belt covers 100 % of normal length Main belt does not fully cover magazines and engineering spaces - Torpedo Bulkhead - Additional damage containing bulkheads: 1.00" / 25 mm 165.75 ft / 50.52 m 19.25 ft / 5.87 m Beam between torpedo bulkheads 30.00 ft / 9.14 m - Gun armour: Face (max) Other gunhouse (avg) Barbette/hoist (max) Main: 3.00" / 76 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 1.00" / 25 mm 2nd: 1.00" / 25 mm - - - Conning towers: Forward 0.50" / 13 mm, Aft 0.25" / 6 mm Machinery: Coal fired boilers, reciprocating cruising steam engines and steam turbines Direct drive, 2 shafts, 11,998 ihp / 8,951 Kw = 20.00 kts Range 250nm at 16.00 kts Bunker at max displacement = 161 tons (100% coal) Complement: 274 - 357 Cost: £0.468 million / $1.872 million Distribution of weights at normal displacement: Armament: 286 tons, 6.3 % - Guns: 286 tons, 6.3 % Armour: 659 tons, 14.6 % - Belts: 439 tons, 9.8 % - Torpedo bulkhead: 118 tons, 2.6 % - Armament: 97 tons, 2.2 % - Conning Towers: 4 tons, 0.1 % Machinery: 1,621 tons, 36.0 % Hull, fittings & equipment: 1,656 tons, 36.8 % Fuel, ammunition & stores: 278 tons, 6.2 % Miscellaneous weights: 0 tons, 0.0 % Overall survivability and seakeeping ability: Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship): 2,939 lbs / 1,333 Kg = 11.5 x 8.0 " / 203 mm shells or 0.8 torpedoes Stability (Unstable if below 1.00): 1.34 Metacentric height 3.0 ft / 0.9 m Roll period: 13.4 seconds Steadiness - As gun platform (Average = 50 %): 84 % - Recoil effect (Restricted arc if above 1.00): 0.77 Seaboat quality (Average = 1.00): 1.96 Hull form characteristics: Hull has a flush deck, a normal bow and a cruiser stern Block coefficient (normal/deep): 0.449 / 0.451 Length to Beam Ratio: 4.64 : 1 'Natural speed' for length: 15.97 kts Power going to wave formation at top speed: 63 % Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 43 Bow angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 6.00 degrees Stern overhang: 3.00 ft / 0.91 m Freeboard (% = length of deck as a percentage of waterline length): Fore end, Aft end - Forecastle: 17.50 %, 24.00 ft / 7.32 m, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m - Forward deck: 32.50 %, 22.00 ft / 6.71 m, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m - Aft deck: 32.50 %, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m - Quarter deck: 17.50 %, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m, 21.00 ft / 6.40 m - Average freeboard: 21.48 ft / 6.55 m Ship space, strength and comments: Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 227.1 % - Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 120.1 % Waterplane Area: 8,127 Square feet or 755 Square metres Displacement factor (Displacement / loading): 94 % Structure weight / hull surface area: 104 lbs/sq ft or 508 Kg/sq metre Hull strength (Relative): - Cross-sectional: 0.84 - Longitudinal: 11.35 - Overall: 1.09 Extremely poor machinery, storage, compartmentation space Excellent accommodation and workspace room Ship has slow, easy roll, a good, steady gun platform Excellent seaboat, comfortable, can fire her guns in the heaviest weather

Decided to design a (slightly absurd) spiritual successor to the Sverige class of coastal defence ships. More of a gun barge than a ship, at 171 m loa (160 m lwl), 30 m beam and 5 m draught. With six 11-inch guns in two twin turrets forward and one aft, then eight 5-inch secondaries in four twin turrets, and finally eight 20 mm guns in twin mounts. With armour thickness to match the main guns. Slow speed, short range (suitable for a coastal defence ship, never far from its home bases). 14 500 t. :D

Naval Architecture student here. Im quite surprised this tool is quite extensive especially in part of the structural calculations and other naval architectural science. Im impressed.

Except you forgot to increase the number of mounts to 4, so it technically has 3 twins, one in front and two at the back, with 2 guns mysteriously finding their way on the front without a mount to be put into.

Tried to use this and ended up designing basically a tillman but a practical one

@ryanh2621

3 жыл бұрын

Basically a 73000 ton monster that it said as a good seafaring vessel

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

@@ryanh2621 The Tillmans would've been good seaboats in any case; the impracticalities were in things like "cost" and "drydock space".

Awesome, thank you very much Drach. Been eagerly awaiting this.

I eagerly await when you'll make a video on the Cleveland class. Great content, btw!!!

i did not even finish watching last video . :) you spoil us Drach :)

I have noticed that if you select 1850-1860 the Springsharp software assumes a coal consumption of 11 lb/hp-hr for 1860 and a whopping 23lb/hp-hr for 1850 - way above the real figures for ships such as Warrior, Great Britain, Great Eastern, etc.

Yes finally the springsharp video from drach

My rough idea for a troll battlecruiser... HMS Beatty, pretty much a 1930s KGV derivative with with the armour thinned down to Invincible levels and flash doors removed to improve reliability of the quad guns, and of course weight savings put into extra machinery for speed.

The video I've been waiting for 🤗

Please do a video on the Kongo class and it's long unique history. Recently found your your channel and must say I have loved every video I have watched so far.

Having read the video title, I thought _Springsharp_ was a nautical term that I hadn't been previously aware of (wouldn't be surprised). Now I understand it's a bit of software (a program, not tavern maid). EDIT: I would have expected for any particular ship / class, it would display some sort of default entry in the boxes, which the user can then change, or have a reset icon to undo changes. I guess knot.

Excellent work you do here and I truly appreciate what you do regarding explaining naval history and the elements of naval architecture. I have actually been involved in developing contingency plans for adding armor to the unarmored present day fleets of the U.S. so a thorough study of armor history was a prerequisite. The British 9.2", which I totally like and wish the British Navy built once Japan notified the Washington and London Treaty participants that Japan was withdrawing. It was common knowledge that they were building battleships heavy cruisers, like the Mogami that began as 6" gunned welded hull vessel that was planned for 8" conversion and already weighed over 12k tons. So, your 10k ton Heavy Cruiser had one problem unresolved at the end unless because of the size of my smartphone's screen I missed your adjustment. That is the ship's length reduction to increase its strength of structural integrity. Besides being to small for a crew of ~1000 sailors and more in wartime (including 20mm & 40mm Anti-Aircraft crews and weight of guns when increased by a factor of 10 post 1939 which are absent). The reduction in length would in inevitably, in naval architectural terms, caused the ship's speed to fail to meet your expectations. That's why the Iowa class were 883' long. Despite having 212k shp, the added length, (about 65-80') mostly in the bow made 33 knots attainable versus ~30.5-31 knots at 800-820'. Just a suggestion - if you use the Des Moine, class, say the 'Saint Paul', (used in the 1963 John Wayne film "In Harms Way") you would have had a realistic and nearly perfect design for your upgunned 9.2" nemesis for the Graf Spee and its class without expanding in size and cost to something akin to the WW2 French Strassberg, an improved 'Dunkirk' class Battlecruiser designed specifically for the Graf Spee, Admiral Scheer and Deutchland 6- 11" main guns plus 12 150 mm cruiser guns and 88s and 37 mm, (pocket battleships @14-17k tons displacement depending on which ship and before and after retrofits which added weight). All 8 of the French main 13" guns were in 2 quad- or 4 gun (not sure off hand if each of the 4 gun-mounts had seperate controls for each gun) were mounted to forward with no main armament aft. Excellent armor coverage against 8-11" guns in a greater than "All or Nothing" system. I prefer protection first as in the Merkava Tanks which were originally not much different from an excellent British Centurion tank with the engine in the front for better crew protection and easier, safe exiting through the rear which is imperative in desert warfare. I was a strategic planner for 34 years and am retired and overage but still subject to recall due to the scarcity of people with my particular skill sets. Thank you for bearing with me.

If you're just starting like me, downloading the previous Beta 2 will give you some sample ships as well. The .ssr files won't open in Beta 3, but the .ship files do. I find it slightly less intimidating when I can see some existing designs. (Alas, only one treaty heavy cruiser though: Algerie)

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

The .ssr files are ordinary formatted text documents; you should be able to open and read them using the word processor of your choice. (Source: has eleven different SSR files open in LibreOffice Writer at the moment.)

Everybody might already know about this, but just in case: there's a game that's currently in development called Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts, and if there's going to be an aesthetically pleasing game that caters to naval nerds (pre-dreadnought era to end of ww2 more or less), it's probably going to be this game. I've high hopes for it

@gokbay3057

4 жыл бұрын

Addendum: with no carriers or submarines. But yeah looks cool.

@tommeakin1732

4 жыл бұрын

@@gokbay3057 yeah I'm a bit nervous about that. I hope they do add them when the game is released

@SnprMk7

4 жыл бұрын

​@@tommeakin1732 I believe they did mention they plan on adding them, but that of course the current stuff is more important. As well, submarines would be nifty but within the realm of UA:D designer there wouldn't... really be much you could, well, DO. You'd just be recreating historical hulls or gimping them, and this probably wouldn't include cruiser subs (although along the lines of my 2" 1940 battleship design, it would be sort of fun to see one loaded to the brim with 3" trip mounts and see chaos ensue) As the only things they'd have a hope of realistically engaging in the quite mobile nature of UA:D would be TRs, which you can't design, I can safely assume they consider anyone seeking submarine gameplay is better off looking at Silent Hunter or similar games, rather than adding that to their workload for something that won't have a terrific purpose and could simply be reduced to weighted RNG calculations for the campaign for simplicity's sake.

Oh my God it's almost XPlane's Plane maker but for ships🤯👍 outstanding!

Ah, finally, I can submit my design for a loaded 5000 KM radius Italian super heavy cruiser "Italia Eterna" designed to bully the Mediterranean for her lunch money. P.S. Not joking.

@mrsteamie4196

2 жыл бұрын

Do you mean operational radius? Or... Radius of a circular warship?

This is an odd looking warship

Programs out there for almost anything isn't there? Thanks for the sort tutorial. sm

Thank you

This program reminds me of the BattleMech editors for BattleTech. I know it's a lot more in-depth, but visually speaking its similar in a lot of spots. I'll have to see if there's mobile version of this👌👍

@michaelpfister1283

4 жыл бұрын

Agree! I used to spend hours making 'mechs for my lances. I still have one called Skunkworks on my PC somewhere. And in all honesty, the level of complexity isn't really that different, just a different focus. :-)

@mr.gunzaku437

4 жыл бұрын

@@michaelpfister1283 If there's a Mac port or a mobile version of this, or another one that is on mobile, I'll definitely check this out. I wonder If they have a Tank Builder as well🤔🤘. As a matter of fact, if Gundam had actual, meaningful stats for which they build their templates, I'd like a Mobile Suit Builder program! LOL! (No seriously Bandai, get on that $&#+). I'd do the same, spending hours in the different tech eras optimizing my loadouts with as little explosive potential as possible.

18:11 Obvious question on second thought: Isn't trying to build a 9.2-inch-gunned cruiser on a Washington Treaty displacement limit a contradiction in terms?

@Shenaldrac

4 жыл бұрын

No, however building a *good* 9.2 inch gun cruiser on Washington Treaty displacement would be a contradiction.

@ravenwing199

4 жыл бұрын

Yes. Drach built a shitty Battlecruiser!

@JevansUK

4 жыл бұрын

Breaking two rules would be rude

Have I missed the launching of a new design competition? Which vid is it announced on?

@jonathanevans4610

4 жыл бұрын

Drydock 79

I seem to be having some issue right from the get-go. No matter what I do, some stats like the "Max Draught", or the "Minimum main belt length to cover machinery and magazines" always remain as "n.def.".

@JevansUK

4 жыл бұрын

It's normally that you are missing something for it to work out the mag or machine space. Make sure you have set the fuel type, speed, cruising speed, engine, drive, shafts and range as well as the mount type and placement for any weapons. I recommend setting the engines and range first, then guns and then armour. Then it's tweaking

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

@@JevansUK Thanks, I'll try that order.

Well Drachinifel, an inch is 1/12 of a foot, so... you could account for the inches in terms of decimals.

@ShadrachVS1

4 жыл бұрын

Just use .08333' for each 1"; it's sufficiently close to reality and plenty precise for anything but machine work, or other fiddly bits

Can you please do a video on HMS Barham?. I know the Pathe film of its destruction is harrowing and maybe it was an unlucky ship, but its still important in Naval history and British Naval history

Hey Drach, for the treaty cruiser competition, will breaking treaty limitations in certain ways send a design straight to the blooper reel or will the overall quality and plausibility of convincing people the design meets limitations be considered? just asking for a friend

@aurictech4378

4 жыл бұрын

Is your friend, by any chance, affiliated with the Imperial Japanese Navy?

@Em3s125

4 жыл бұрын

@@aurictech4378 I don't know actually, but the other day I think I overheard him mumbling something about replacing structure with torpedo tubes....

I wonder if you could make an ocean liner or an aviation battleship on Springsharp?

Can someone test all paper ships in world of warships and see if they are possible to build (lets see about soviet supers ships😁).

@mpetersen6

4 жыл бұрын

Build? Of course they could be built. Would they meet the tonnage, would they be any good? Or would they just turn turtle in the first breeze. Just name the Vasa Class

@willyjimmy8881

4 жыл бұрын

With enough money and willpower of course. None of them are beyond possible. Professional ship designers penned them based on current or evolving technology. It was money, politics, better designs, world events, etc. That kept them from being realized.

@molybdnum

4 жыл бұрын

Offhand, I've heard repeatedly that Kremlin's 60mm deck would result in an unsustainably high topside weight / roll point, the turrets would weigh far too much to be able to rotate at 30s for 180, etc. ... but I've also heard that Dunkerque is so wildly efficient that it is impossible to recreate in springsharp with the known historical values.

@jwenting

4 жыл бұрын

@@willyjimmy8881 you mean people at Wargaming sucked them out of their big thumb based on preliminary sketches drawn up by some officer with wishful thinking about what he'd like to have at some point, then embelished on those dreams to make them look more impressive...

Episode suggestions: Operation Pedestal, operation Chariot and cruise of the commerce raider Atlantis

I thought the USS New Orleans in its treaty Config had 8 Single 5 inch mounts not Dual mounts?

@peterson7082

4 жыл бұрын

In all refits or configurations they only had 8 single 5"/25-caliber gun mounts.

I can't find Springshop Beeta. Is there a link? ;)

@tomhsia4354

4 жыл бұрын

Wait till Spring sharp Beatty comes out. You can now remove flash protection all you want.

Well maybe I missed this, but does anybody have setup files posted out on the web that we new sharps can load up? Say West Virginia 1944? Alabama 1944? Yamato? well, you get the idea. I am blaming myself for now but I think that underwater protection might have been simplified - I spent a silly amount of time designing a set of improvements to the underwater protection of the 3rd generation US dreadnaughts - 4 bulkheads #3 being bottom of tapered inclined armor, compartments 2 and 3 fluid-filled, compartments 3,4 and 5 protected b a glorified system similar to the leakproof tanks on WW2 US aircraft. My attempts to build a 300-foot test section in the backyard ran into some building code issues besides the city council got all pissy over the idea of a 1200 lb torpedo charge being set off in a residential neighborhood.

What challenge? Where? When? How? I want to try too!

Can anyone tell me what he ment by... The voice of the mine... Never heard such a thing before

One thing to note is that the Engine Factor dose nothing, they guy was planing on implementing it's functionality to better allow smaller ships with lighter built engines (I.e. Destroyers), but he stopped working on the program before he got to that part, so all we have is this slider that dose nothing.

Ah, now I see where I went wrong. I tried downloading the wrong version. Also, where can I find current contest rules/treaty restrictions?

@Drachinifel

4 жыл бұрын

At the start of the last long Drydock :)

@Ebolson1019

4 жыл бұрын

Drachinifel thanks drach

@Ebolson1019

4 жыл бұрын

Oh god it’s a rabbit hole to get composite strength to 1.00 and keep certain features!

Bismark was dead right. Better to learn from others mistakes than your own

What about aviation facilities using Springsharp?

@Drachinifel

4 жыл бұрын

This is usually a fudge factor of miscellaneous weight added at the bottom line of the torpedo and other weapons tab.

@nebfer

4 жыл бұрын

Back when it was in development (over a decade ago) they generally used the miscellaneous weight entry's in the weapons tab, at about 25 tons per plane with a square root of the ships tonnage as a maximum allowed IIRC, it's been awhile so I do not remember quite exactly.

I dont entyerly get for it is?. Does it generate a 3d model? Is it joust t play around with? Is it to see theoretical performance of a theoretical ship?

Spreadsheets? Is this Eve Online?

Man, I'd love to mess with this but I can't get it to work at ALL in Win 8.1. I have the .net framework and everything, but it just will not open. Just keeps telling me to go download the .net framework again. Sad, I would have loved to tried to make some old ironclads in this. :( Anyone got any ideas?

@hughfisher9820

4 жыл бұрын

I have Windows 8.1 on my laptop and SpringShartp beta 3 is running, so it can be done. Hmm... Did you just double click the .zip file? I did an Extract All, and then moved the .exe into a different folder. Are the various .NET files installed in one specific application folder? Mine are system wide

Drachinifel I tried springsharp after watching this but I can't run it for various reasons, can I ask do you know of any other websites or software that can be used to build the ship? Thank you

Does this work on windows 10?

Wait...a design contest? What design contest?!

I spent last 2 hours trying to make "Treaty" mogami but i am failing miserably:p

@jasonduncan8286

4 жыл бұрын

lol! I gather that naval intelligence services did this during the 30s as well and came up with similar results as you! From what I've read, no one believed the quoted Japanese displacement figures.

I'm pretty sure the Engine Factor isn't implemented

@Warriorcat49

4 жыл бұрын

You are correct.

Does springsharp have a github? What is the license?

OK, hold on a sec, getting coffee...

Armament: 24 - 23.62" / 600 mm guns (4 mounts), 6,590.56lbs / 2,989.43kg shells, 1950 hehehehehe

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

Top speed 5 knots?

I like designing warships but i build them with cardboard

@CaptRye

4 жыл бұрын

i like designing warships too, but i build them with Lego.

@toveychurchill6468

4 жыл бұрын

Capt_Rye what a coincidence, I build my ships’ superstructure out of lego while the hull is made of cardboards and plastic bags

@toveychurchill6468

4 жыл бұрын

:)

Navalism.org has its history in Springsharp.

i cant even install it! tells me a need .net which i already have

@aarongrahn3776

4 жыл бұрын

Probably an incompatible version. They need to convert it to portable ANSI C, and release the source code.

@eatthisvr6

4 жыл бұрын

@@aarongrahn3776 the installer doesn't work but the. Exe file does. It doesn't look quite the same as drachs video though

I still can't get this to run with linux, because I'm a dummyhead. Has anyone had success? Got some hints? :-)

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

You'll need to install Wine first; after that, you should be able to run Springsharp (and most other Windows applications) just fine.

@Deipnosophist_the_Gastronomer

Жыл бұрын

@@vikkimcdonough6153 Thanks Vikki. I did try running it through Wine, but I didn't manage to get it working. 🙂

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

@@Deipnosophist_the_Gastronomer In that case, color me stumped. 😐

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

@@Deipnosophist_the_Gastronomer Actually, on second thought, what distro are you using? Apparently a lot of distros include an out-of-date version of Wine that doesn't work well.

@Deipnosophist_the_Gastronomer

Жыл бұрын

@@vikkimcdonough6153 At the moment I'm using Manjaro - XFCE. 😅 I do have a bit of a tendency to distro-hop.

lol googling springsharp this is the first video already listed on google

HISTRIOGRAPHER REALLY? Fix the seal. An O-ring is missing. The sub will sink.

@fuuryuuSKK

3 жыл бұрын

He has mentioned that the spelling is intentional, and a slightly archaic version, as to not tread on a different KZreadrs search results

Is there a version of Springsharp that runs on MacOS? I'm sure I'm not the first person to encounter this problem.

@sebsmith2

4 жыл бұрын

It's a small and well behaved program, so it runs in emulation well.

Baffeled. Just wanted you to know. Baffled. Wut?

Huh. Looks like I'm the very first one in here.

Appears to be Windows only software? (sad face mac user...)

@vikkimcdonough6153

Жыл бұрын

If you install Wine (it's a software compatibility layer for Windows applications on Linux and macOS), you should be able to run Springsharp on any compatible version of macOS that supports 32-bit x86 applications (Mountain Lion through Mojave, inclusive).

Wow... Am I the only one that's absolutely lost right now

Shame Springsharp is abandoned..

Forget that, imma do it manually, pixel by fucking pixel >:0

Ok?

Great, now it's time to go make something really stupid. HMCS Almost Sorry here I come!

Puts a spring's sharp tutorial. No link to spring sharp. 99% of people click off. This is a KZread tutorial after all. Not the most dedicated learners.