Anatomy of the Ship Iowa/Stefan Draminski

Naval and military history books, recent releases, magazines, related documents, articles, etc.
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:30 am
Location: Finland

Re: Anatomy of the Ship Iowa/Stefan Draminski

Post by pasoleati » Sun Jul 26, 2020 6:30 pm

Steve Smith posted the following on Steelnavy Board on July 24 in a thread discussing the forthcoming AotS Scharnhorst by the same Draminski:"Your view of them is better than mine but you express the problem. AOTS has become a 3D rendering series.

3D renderings are great for illustrating concepts but they suck as an alternative to photographs. For something the scale of a battleship it would take a lifetime to do fully accurate 3D model. The renderings-in-place-of-photos are inherently inaccurate because some details (that would show up in photos) are omitted.

In the case of the AOTS Iowa, the internal renderings are frequently wrong in key details. They show decks where no decks exists. Climb down the ladder from the second deck to the aviation fuel tanks and you find there is no deck; just walkways attached to the framing. Go into the uptake spaces in the superstructure and there are no decks. But AOTS shows decks there. They show intake trunks where no such trunks exist. They omit the hull castings and replace them with framing. Repeat ad nauseum. These may look cool in 3d but they are wrong.

Much of the 3D is pointless. The deck plans in 3D show nothing. I can't tell anything about the vertical arrangement of the decks from the them. I'm not sure if this is because of they way the renderings are oriented or because the underlying model is wrong.

I've seen other renderings in which you can see the vertical arrangement of the deck.

The odd thing is that the 3D brings out many of the errors. If you look at the BGP for the Iowa class ships and take a look at the hold level at the bow. It shows lines in the deck. If climb down there on the ships, you find these lines are outlines of the keel plating. AOTS converts these into bulkheads. Thus, if they had just copied the BGP and left it in 2D there would be no error. The errors show up making things in 3D incorrectly.

Similarly, if you go down to turret one at the powder flat, the powder passing ring does not go all the way around because the turret support bends inward to account for the narrowness of the hull. In the other turrets you can walk all the way around.

The 3D in AOTS does not show this. Yet the would be the very type of detail that does not show up well in 2D but could be illustrated in 3D.
(I think someone posted a computer generated image on showing this feature.)"

So, Stefan Draminski's statements claiming that the limitations of space were the reason for the shortcomings listed are very wrong. It must be asked that did Draminski actually visit the actual ship to verify his drawings?

Post Reply