Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
August 18, 2013
Image Size
920 KB
Resolution
1521×800
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
10,328 (2 today)
Favourites
186 (who?)
Comments
52
Downloads
102
×
Tambrian Carrier Group by wingsofwrath Tambrian Carrier Group by wingsofwrath
EDIT, 28.08.13: I updated the image by adding tactical markings to the ships, something I forgot to put in previously.

The Tambrian Carrier "Wrath of the Guide" with two escort cruisers (the Tambrian navy uses "escort cruisers" to cover the roles held IRL by both destroyers and light cruisers) "Luminary Tal Epehti" (top -named after a Tambrian war hero) and "City of Farfal" of the "City Class" (bottom) steaming at a leisurely 12 kts through the waters of the Outer Ocean.

The carrier is currently both launching and recovering aircraft for a routine patrol over the Marban/Tambr border area.
You can see the second of the outbound fighters just separate from the rail-mounted catapult, while the inbound flight is already hooked on the landing trapeze and one of the aircraft has already been stopped.

The inner space world uses this system of overhead trapeze and hooks for aircraft launch and recovery due to this world's lack of rubber or rubber substitutes, which precludes the manufacture of practical pneumatic tires. Since the trapeze-and-hook has a practical weight limit, larger aircraft tend to be seaplanes, especially since the wast majority of people in this world live either on the coast of the shallow Inner Sea or within easy access of it.

The ships all use oil-fired steam boilers and steam turbines, while the on-board weaponry is composed of anti ship rocket mortars and anti-aircraft heavy calibre cannons. The cruisers also mount a depth charge launcher near the stern.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconorenhofen:
Orenhofen Featured By Owner Aug 21, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Nationstates?
Reply
:icon844171:
844171 Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2014
Amazing ships! How would the planes cross the open space crisscrossed with rails without rubber tires?
Reply
:iconjankovic123:
Jankovic123 Featured By Owner Jul 26, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Very good! Im faving.
Reply
:iconwaltsland:
waltsland Featured By Owner Jun 26, 2014  Student Filmographer
OH MY GOOD, LOOK AT THE SIZE!!!!! IT,S BIG AS THE OLYMPIC!!!!
Reply
:iconjdunk1971:
JDunk1971 Featured By Owner Jun 8, 2014
The ships look a bit like French designs form the turn of the 20th Century.
Reply
:iconcid-vicious:
Cid-Vicious Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2014
The main ship looks a lot like the failed Nazi air carrier project, the Graf Zeppelin.
Reply
:iconwaffle0708:
Waffle0708 Featured By Owner Mar 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
This drawing is onr of the best in my opinion. :)

Since I saw this picture, I wanted to draw Carrier like this, and through the long thinking time, I finally created a rough design of ocean-based ships. And to draw the picture, I browsed many pictures for composition and finllaly I thought this drawing will be the best.
So before I start drawing I want to tell you I am going to draw picture based on it and say thank you. (Of cource it is not copying.)
Reply
:iconkunraven:
kunraven Featured By Owner Mar 3, 2014
I am Kun, member of a start up company ravenworks. We are planning to develop a turn base modern war game with a bit of manga twist. I will need to illustrate  15 types of units for each of the items such as BMT tanks, APC, infantry, attack helicopters, artillery etc. There will be a hundred of illustration needed. Can you contact me on ravenworks2014@gmail.com.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Mar 31, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I'm sorry, but due to a busy schedule I am not taking commissions at this point. Case in point, it took me a whole month to answer your message, because I had no time to sift through the backlog of DA replies.
Reply
:iconlemmy-koopaling:
Lemmy-koopaling Featured By Owner Feb 19, 2014  Student Digital Artist
Nice! :D
Reply
:iconariochiv:
AriochIV Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2014   Digital Artist
Great looking trio of ships! :D
Reply
:iconpandaren-chaplain:
Pandaren-Chaplain Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
:iconmegustaplz:
  So much details. Mmmm. Details.
Reply
:iconjailgurdnegative:
jailgurdnegative Featured By Owner Aug 27, 2013  Hobbyist
ohh how lovely the paint scheme on these ships are. 
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 29, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks! I cheated here also, basing the paint schemes on existing designs, although with the colours adjusted a bit.
Reply
:iconjailgurdnegative:
jailgurdnegative Featured By Owner Sep 15, 2013  Hobbyist
Ahh,  I see. 
Reply
:icon1wyrmshadow1:
1Wyrmshadow1 Featured By Owner Aug 22, 2013
It's so cluttered and industrial. I LOVE IT
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks! I tried to make them both believable and distinctive at the same time. I have a bit of knowledge about ships but I'm by no means a ship designer, so I'm glad you think I pulled it off.
Reply
:icondg-alpha:
DG-Alpha Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013
Really interestting ship designs. I also love the camo schemes.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thank you! The paint scheme is a mix of those used during WW2 by the USS Iowa ("Measure 32/Design 22D"), the British escort carrier HMS Avenger and the cruisers HMS Belfast and HMS Scylla.
Reply
:iconwaffle0708:
Waffle0708 Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
ohhhhhhh man I reeeealllly like the design of carrier!!!
I can't find word to write but just, great!
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks, glad you like it!
Reply
:iconpanzerfan93:
Panzerfan93 Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
awesome concept! i really love the design of the cruisers
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks! They do look nice, don't they? Awful seaworthiness, especially in a squall, but they look reeealy nice. :D
Reply
:iconryanlovelock:
RyanLovelock Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Professional General Artist
very interesting work, it looks like you really enjoyed working on it- nice!
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thank you! I did enjoy the design work quite a bit!
Reply
:iconkittyexplosion:
kittyexplosion Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013
Interesting. It looks like the pilots don't have much leeway when landing at all. Looks scary.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Not much scarier than a landing on one of our world's carriers would be. In fact, because the landing trapeze automatically slows planes down through a system of pulleys and weights and over a longer distance, it also means that the approach is made much faster than a deck landing would require and the aeroplane is not close to stalling, thus there is no danger of it losing lift and simply plummeting into the water if the approach misses. Also, the raised stern rail means that the approach path is level and a plane that missed the trapeze and keeps on going straight will overfly the bow catapults (although the norm is to pull up and veer towards the seaward side on a botched landing attempt) 
Still plenty scary though.
Reply
:iconkittyexplosion:
kittyexplosion Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
A landing trapeze?


Oh my god those are so scary looking. I guess after they get faster planes they will have to abandon that tech. 
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Exactly like those, the USS Macon and her sister ship the USS Akron were the inspiration I used.

And yeah, this won't be possible with jets, but hopefully, by the time they produce a reliable jet engine they'd had discovered synthetic polymers, including synthetic rubbers...
Reply
:iconhunter2045:
Hunter2045 Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013
Nice.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
thanks!
Reply
:iconbolo42:
Bolo42 Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Any reason for anti-ship rocket mortars vs. cannons?
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Originally, it had been a problem related to the lack of rubber and rubber substitutes in this world which made the inhabitants wary of attempting any high-pressure applications such as reliable shock absorbers, which also caused problems for controlling gun recoil, so instead the designers went with rocket projectiles and gyroscopic stabilization through angled nozzles for heavy artillery and recoilless rifle designs for lighter guns. (In the meantime they managed to fix this problem to an extent, so "true guns" also exist, but the military establishment, as ever, is slow to adopt these "newfangled devices")

But I digress. When it comes to shipboard artillery, in essence, they recreated the
RL German "Nebelwerfer 40" and derivatives (such as the air launched "Werfer-Granate 21", also known as "Bordrakete 21", and up to the massive 380 mm Raketen-Werfer 61 L/5.4 of the "Sturmtiger") and then took them the logical extreme, with monstrous battleships whose main guns are able to launch an initial salvo of six 600mm 2-ton shells in one minute out of each barrel (there are six barrels in the main turrets of this battleship and two such turrets on deck, to give you an indication of the volume of fire these ships are capable of) due to the guns' short barrels which allow for revolver style autoloaders for each gun. Sustained firing either then continues at a more leisurely 1 round per minute, or else the auto loaders are resupplied with ammunition, which takes about 10 minutes of back breaking work.

Range is pitifully short when compared with a RL battleship gun (a paltry10-12km compared to the usual 38), but since, in this world, the main naval doctrine is that of the carrier group and battleships were only ever designed as fast shore bombardment platforms (in essence our world's battlecruisers in terms of speed, lack of armouring and seakeeping, but crossed with WW1 British coastal monitors in terms of armament) it really doesn't matter.

While the larger weapons are more like "true" rocket mortars, firing in a rather high arc, the smaller calibre antiship weapons installed on "escort cruisers" fire more like AT or air launched rockets, with flat trajectories. They are still unguided though and provided with revolver style ready magazines.
Reply
:iconbolo42:
Bolo42 Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Oh, very interesting.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 29, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks, glad you think so!
Reply
:iconcthelmax:
cthelmax Featured By Owner Aug 18, 2013
Those escort cruisers are really pushing the limits on tumblehome lol; from the reverse sheer I'm guessing the Inner Sea doesn't get too choppy? (or is ramming still considered an important naval tactic?)
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
The Inner Sea is pretty much a millpond, the equivalent of our world's Mediterranean. The Outer Ocean, however, on which the ships depicted above sail, is the equivalent of the North Atlantic.

It's obvious from the images the Tambrian ship designers and their Marbanian colleagues went the way of the RL French "Jeune Ecole" of ship design, hence the reverse sheer and exaggerated tumblehome. Ramming was never even considered as a viable tactic, but this kind of ram prow slices through the water instead of riding over waves, creating a very stable gun platform, which was seen as a very desirable thing.
Unfortunately, the drawbacks of the tumblehome design- very poor righting momentum when compared with a slab-sided or flared upper hull with the same underwater lines and the catastrophic loss of stability which occurs in a damaged hull have not been discovered yet, because they lack the mathematical formulas to realise just how bad their chosen designs actually are from the point of view of stability and the ships are all peacetime designs who never saw action (yet).

Oddly, even though I went with style over functionality in terms of ship design, the results are actually pretty tame when compared with some of the weird creatures that came out in RL out of the "Jeune Ecole": "Charles Martel" , "Jaureguiberry" , "Massena" .
In our world, this style of ship design abruptly ceased in 1905, when three of the four brand-new Russian ships of the "Borodino" class engaged at the Battle of Tshushima capsized and sank with almost no survivors. These ships had been built by the Russians following the design of the French made "Tsesarevich", so they featured the same kind of exaggerated tumblehome. 
Other shining examples of just how bad the tumblehome design is were the capsizing of the French battleship "Bouvet" after hitting a mine during the Dardanelles campaign (she went down in less than two minutes, taking with her 660 of her complement of 710) and the sinking of several French manufactured torpedo boats, including the Romanian "Smeul" (built by "Forges et Chantiers de la Méditéranée" in 1888 to a design known as the "Large Torpedo Boat Type 35 m") which capsized in rough seas during a routine anti-submarine patrol off Sulina in 1917, taking with her 20 of her 28 crewmen, including three French naval officers....
Reply
:iconfrazamm:
frazamm Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013
Don't forget the new American Zumwalt class.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
heh. Oddly, I did think of it while I was writing this, but then again the tumblehome on that one is not as extreme, and the rationale behind it is reduced radar signature rather than simple aesthetics or clearing firing arcs for central casemate mounted guns. When they designed the class they went in knowing full well the hull design will give them poor stability, unlike the "Jeune Ecole" proponents, and deemed the risk as "worth it" considering the advantages it would give them. I still think the ship looks a bit high with that ridiculously oversized boxy deckhouse, especially considering how the hull shape affects stability, but I'm sure they knew what they were doing.
Reply
:iconfrazamm:
frazamm Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013
Let's hope so. It costs a lot!!
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 26, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah, let's hope the launching ceremony will go a bit smoother than this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lisV8W…
Reply
:iconfrazamm:
frazamm Featured By Owner Aug 31, 2013
Nice one!
Reply
:iconcthelmax:
cthelmax Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
Thanks for the history lesson; it was very educational :)  Now I know where Miyazaki got his inspiration from.

As for the reverse-sheer bow - the reason I thought the ships were designed for calm water is the way reverse-sheer bows tend to ship water over the foc'sle in heavy seas, which runs the risk of putting the forward gun turret(s) out of action

I think you're overlooking one benefit of that tumblehome though - you probably stand a reasonable chance of aerial bombs just glancing off and exploding in the water, rather than penetrating the armour, particularly if they hit on the reverse side of the ship.
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Welcome!

Yeah, by the time I ran into Myazaki's work, a few years ago, I was well acquainted with the outrageous ship design of the "Jeune Ecole" (comes with growing up with a huge picture album dedicated to the French Navy which was edited in the 20s) and I cracked a really huge grin at the appropriate parts in "Howl's Moving Castle".  Turns out I like the same kind of mechanical designs he does - French pre-dreadnoughts, German self propelled guns, seaplanes, fortress turrets (that's where the domed turrets without protruding guns come from, in case you were wondering) etc. and this was developed before I even knew of his work, because, for the longest time, I refused to watch anime "on principle", due to the exaggerated facial features in the earliest ones I ever saw which really turned me against everything coming out of Japan.

It's true, and it happened quite a lot in real life especially to smaller ships, but let's not forget these are muscle and mechanically powered turrets - there's nothing there that can't take a little water...

Well, that and the fact they would react the same way if the shot was coming from the side, like a tank's sloped glacis. This certainly figured in the designers' thoughts somewhere.
Reply
:iconcthelmax:
cthelmax Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013
"It's true, and it happened quite a lot in real life especially to smaller ships, but let's not forget these are muscle and mechanically powered turrets - there's nothing there that can't take a little water..."

I doubt the sailors who have to man the turrets would be too happy about it though lol

The sloping armour is less effective against incoming shells, simply because of the much greater ranges that naval combat takes place at compared to tank combat - it pretty much guarantees that the opening phase of the battle will be plunging fire, and you'll only get within a mile or two if your opponent is immobilised.

Incidentally, given your tech level I'm surprised not to see any battleship clocks on your cruisers
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 19, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Most certainly they wouldn't like it, but then again , the turrets do have shutters and it's much better to be inside the turret than outside on deck, like the poor AA gunners...

umm... obviously, but we're taking about ships that are on the fence between small cruisers and big destroyers, and their small size and speed makes engagements at "knife range" (5000m) as pretty standard. This was the case for some cruiser vs cruiser engagements of the first world war, such as "The Battle of Cocos" and most destroyer vs destroyer fights, such as the 1917 "Battle of Dover Strait" (the latter included ramming and boarding actions), so direct fire is a distinct possibility.

What would "range clocks" be doing on a small cruiser? Their main roles are either solitary merchant raiders, scouting or, in this case, anti submarine escorts, NOT battle line fighting, so there's little point in mounting such a dedicated feature.
Besides, by this time Inner Space designers have come up with much more effective fire control systems and all the ships have radios and primitive radar.


Reply
:iconcthelmax:
cthelmax Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013
Ah, I thought from your comments about a lack of rubber and mechanically-operated turrets that fire control technology was closer to WW1 than WW2.

And AA gunners have always got the short end of the stick in terms of weather protection XD
Reply
:iconwingsofwrath:
wingsofwrath Featured By Owner Aug 20, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
The technology level zig-zags quite a lot between "late 20s" and "early 50s", depending on how difficult to recreate from photographs a certain technology is.

Let's not forget, the Inner Space people originally came from Earth as refugees led by the charismatic "Guide", and, while in cryogenic transit, they were reprogrammed to speak a new language and adopt a new religion and culture to "insure" the resulting civilization would be kept at a "reasonable level" in order to avoid a future repeat of the high tech wars they were escaping from. This means, that, even though plenty of people brought information about "Old Earth" with them, it became completely unreadable - electronic formats because of the lack of suitable readers and deadtree because of the incomprehensibility of the language. So when mounting internal tensions led to wars and kick-started an industrial revolution the engineers and designers were left with trying to understand from pictures how the technology of yesteryear functioned, all while filling the gaps in their knowledge with new experimentation. The worst hit scientific fields were chemistry and mathematics, since, while it's relatively hard to make out how a steam engine works from looking at a scketch or picture, it's nigh imposssible to make heads or tails of the specialised notations of the two afore mentioned sciences without a reliable "rosetta stone".

Of course. And they get the short end of the stick in terms of armour protection too.
Makes me glad I only recieved *some* instruction as an AA machine gunner and that wasn't my designated station... Although that 14.5mm machine gun does pack some ooomph, and being a ground-pounder behind a big machine gun (rather than navy) is bit better than being just another random grunt.
Reply
(1 Reply)
Add a Comment: