A Small News Post: The Original Civ3 destroyer is a Jianghu class frigate

[unscratchedfoot]

Yes its true. Firaxis exactly based the original civ3 destroyer design on the Chinese-built Jianghu class frigate. Here's the picture for proof:

EDIT: Very sorry I put this in the wrong forum. Moderators please move this somewhere appropriate.

 

[Sarevok]

this is the wrong forum...

 

[unscratchedfoot]

this is the wrong forum...

Mr. Repicat.. woops.. I mean Sarebok, I kinduv already apologized in bold text in the first post, but no worries, thanks for your positive input and for re-reminding me of my folly.

 

[Al Zan]

someone move this to the right forum!

 

[Zeekater]

I'm still suspicious, I bet someone could also post a picture of a canadian or american destroyer that looks like the civ one, more proof!

 

[Rufus T. Firefly]

 

[unscratchedfoot]

Mr. Repicat.. woops.. I mean Rufus, I kinduv already apologized in bold text in the first post, but no worries, thanks for your positive input and for re-reminding me of my folly for the 3rd time.

 

[Longasc]

it really looks like the Civ3-Destroyer! But after all, I can hardly differentiate a dutch and a german destroyer... they all have basically the same construction scheme, one small gun in front before the bridge and the chopper landing pad in the back.

 

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Mr. Repicat.. woops.. I mean Rufus, I kinduv already apologized in bold text in the first post, but no worries, thanks for your positive input and for re-reminding me of my folly for the 3rd time.

Hey, I know that you have already said that you have mistaked but, you know, I have a personal challenge with Zulu

 

[IglooDame]

it really looks like the Civ3-Destroyer! But after all, I can hardly differentiate a dutch and a german destroyer... they all have basically the same construction scheme, one small gun in front before the bridge and the chopper landing pad in the back.

I can say with as much certainty as someone who had no involvement in the Civ3 development can have that the Civ-3 destroyer is a US Spruance class. I am biased, though, in having served on one.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

I second IglooDude. Not that I served on a Destroyer...

What's the generic Tank? A Sherman. Generic Modern Armor? Abrams.

And since the Spruance class is easily the most widely known (heck, about the only widely known) modern Destroyer class, you can be sure that one was the design base.

And, the Chinese (as well as all the German and Dutch ships btw) thingie is a Frigate, not a Destroyer - why should someone pick that?

 

[IglooDame]

Perhaps the Civ3 Aegis cruiser is modeled after that Chinese frigate? For the life of me I can't figure out what ship class they got it from.

 

[erickcid]

Igloodude: It's a modified Love Boat.

 

[unscratchedfoot]

Igloodude, you must have strong character after enduring an enlistment in the US navy. That picture of the Spruance is somewhat similar to the civ3 destroyer but it is a little hard to see the whole ship. Here is a photo of the Spruance's profile. Note the very long snout, raised helipad, twin towers, and far rear situated turret. Then look at the Jianghu frigate in my first post. You will see that the Jianghu is exactly the same design as the civ3 destroyer while the Spruance is actually fairly different and much larger. The Spruance is twice the size of a WW2 destroyer and the same size as a WW2 cruiser.

 

[trevor]

I believe you are quite wrong there, unscratchedfoot. If you look at the model in FLICster, you'll notice some things stand out as differences between it and the Jianghu-class frigate. Going from fore to aft...

1. Notice the bridge on the Jianghu, its pronounced and not flush with the rest of the superstructure. However when looking at the picture you posted of a Spruance you'll notice that, like on the model, the bridge is flush with the superstructure.
2. There are two masts both the model and the Spruance. There is, however, one mast on the Jianghu.
3. On the Jianghu, there is a large exhaust port amidships, while there is no such area on both the Spruance and the model.
4. The aft section: on the model and the Spruance there are three separate decks, but, on the Jianghu the aft section is level and a continuation of the main deck.

 

[unscratchedfoot]

Mr. Trevor, thanks for your input. I've noticed there are some things you seem to have left out to avoid weakening your argument such as:

1. There is a ladder on the civ3 DD located portside 33 cm away from the aft C-201 SSM allowing access to the officers quarters which is also on the Jianghu but is in a totally different place on the Spruance which proves the Jianghu & civ3 DD both have identical officer cabin positions and differ widely from the Spruance.
2. A fire extinguisher is fastened on the reverse side of a lifeboat support post showing only 8 mm of the handle from behind the post to your viewpoint of 1.436253 metres on a 37 degree angle running tangent from the communcations tower on both the Jianghu and the civ3 DD but is conspicuously missing from the Spruance which doesn't say much for either its backup fire control equipment or your theory Mr. Trevor.
3. If you zoom in on the civ3 DD you will see an automatic water pump, the ones powered by a Stewart & Stevenson Hi Shock generator set, located at 14 degrees on a cosine 68cm line based on a right angle from the 3rd window going along the starboard walkway and to the top left of the pump's stainless steel hydralic cover on a sunny day the reflection shows the corner of a box of tissue just inside the window sitting on a shelf. Sorry I can't be more detailed about the shelf but that's all of it I can see from the reflection on the pump from this angle. Anyways, that tissue box appears on both the civ3 DD and in the few available photos taken of Thailand owned Chao Phraya Jianghu frigate but the only tissue box on the Spruance I had a look at on the web was on the bridge used by the captain to wipe his runny nose.

Are you ready to stand down now Mr. Trevor or do you have something more substantial to support your theory with?

 

[erickcid]

The destroyer model clearly has a rear gun. Also two masts. The number on a side view, apparently 000 is located mid-ship. Although the general shape is similar, it is clearly not meant to be a replica of the Chinese vessel. The shape of the Destroyer does not appear to match that of the Spruance, nor does the layout under scrutiny, perhaps you are both wrong, or rather the Destroyer is generated as a composite of the general class. Based on its availability it might be correct to infer that it is modelled after a class available during the World War II period.

 

[thestonesfan]

Looks more like the Spruance to me - mainly because of the low-laying tail end.

Really though, both those Destroyers are more or less identical. China ripped us off.

 

[IglooDame]

Mr. Trevor, thanks for your input. I've noticed there are some things you seem to have left out to avoid weakening your argument such as:

1. There is a ladder on the civ3 DD located portside 33 cm away from the aft C-201 SSM allowing access to the officers quarters which is also on the Jianghu but is in a totally different place on the Spruance which proves the Jianghu & civ3 DD both have identical officer cabin positions and differ widely from the Spruance.
2. A fire extinguisher is fastened on the reverse side of a lifeboat support post showing only 8 mm of the handle from behind the post to your viewpoint of 1.436253 metres on a 37 degree angle running tangent from the communcations tower on both the Jianghu and the civ3 DD but is conspicuously missing from the Spruance which doesn't say much for either its backup fire control equipment or your theory Mr. Trevor.
3. If you zoom in on the civ3 DD you will see an automatic water pump, the ones powered by a Stewart & Stevenson Hi Shock generator set, located at 14 degrees on a cosine 68cm line based on a right angle from the 3rd window going along the starboard walkway and to the top left of the pump's stainless steel hydralic cover on a sunny day the reflection shows the corner of a box of tissue just inside the window sitting on a shelf. Sorry I can't be more detailed about the shelf but that's all of it I can see from the reflection on the pump from this angle. Anyways, that tissue box appears on both the civ3 DD and in the few available photos taken of Thailand owned Chao Phraya Jianghu frigate but the only tissue box on the Spruance I had a look at on the web was on the bridge used by the captain to wipe his runny nose.

Are you ready to stand down now Mr. Trevor or do you have something more substantial to support your theory with?

Those are excellent points but unfortunately for your theory I have the advantage in that it was actually my ship that the Civ3 destroyer pictures, as if you look closely you can see me waving from the portside bridge window.

 

[Longasc]

To spin the thread even farther, how about the BATTLESHIP?

Iowa Class? I guess so - at least from the looks. Or are the BB's a Yamato - Rip off?