It looks like I finally have my rotates working pretty well. We have them installed in both Don's and my Iron Duke class, and Rick's Super Scharny. I posted a video on utube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S998xlCpxD4 Enjoy. Hopefully I did this right.
May want to check this (from the CBS rules section 7): Classes 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 may have sidemounted cannons (any cannon which is angled more than 15 degrees from the longitudinal centerline of the model). Warships in these classes are allowed sidemounts as follows: a) Ships under 720': These ships may carry a maximum of two sidemount cannons with a maximum of one firing cannon covering any specific side. On these ships, one specific fixed quadrant shall be left unarmed at all times. The definition of quadrants are: forward and stern quadrants are 30 degree segments arranged 15 degrees either side of the ship's longitudinal centerline; side quadrants are those extending from the end of the bow quadrant to the beginning of the stern quadrant on either side. d) Rotating turrets (turrets that traverse from one quadrant to another) are allowed on classes 4-8 provided that they do not violate the above restrictions. The way I see the rotates, all quadrants may be armed and there is no specific quadrant which is unarmed. But that's my interpretation, there may be others. Still a pretty awesome setup though.
Although now that I think about it, the bow quadrant may technically be unarmed because of the down angle of the cannon, though an armed cannon is traversing through it and could theoretically fire into the bow quadrant. Also, both cannons could be considered as covering both sides (hence meaning more than one cannon per side is armed), though only one at a time. That's a pretty big grey area for me, and I tend to resort more towards "tie goes to the rules." But like I said, my interpretation may not be the only one, and its a lot to think about only having 11 secs of youtube video to go by. Still, I think the system works really really well.
The set up is fine. The guns are not on the same side at the same time. If they were to stick towards the bow then sides would be uncovered. I'm supprised Dave could fit all that stuff in that little ship. I can't wait to see how he did it. Rick's Scharny sounds like a good way to set up that ship too.
I checked with just about everyone in the MWC on this for the last 2 years, started asking about it during the Minnesota Nats in 2008. My region 3 Bods were fine with it, and all the higher ups in the MWC that I asked. I have not looked at the other rule sets, so don't know if they are legal or not with them. We do plan on going to the IRC regionals in the fall, but if they decide they are illegal in their rule set, I just wont use the rotate function for that battle, so it should be fine also. Some of them came down to our last battle up in Savannah, and they saw how well the Dukes did, at the time the rotates were installed but I was still not happy with how they worked, so did not use them, heck they were installed out at the Denver Nats also, I had just left the servo's out at the time, and I don't think anyone even noticed. The ship that really has me interested using this kind of setup is the Kongo. She is 729 ft, and I think she will gain the biggest advantage, making a Ok ship, into one of the elite ships. Dual forward rotates like Rick's Scharny, and a 75 round rotate haymaker in the stern, with a full unit pump. I may be purchasing a hull soon from Strike models, too bad I had not thought of it earlier, I had my hands on a Kongo last year, and told Rick I was interested in purchasing it, but was kind of busy with the ID, and told Rick to sell in to John since he wanted it. Bummer. But good for John. Also it would do wonders for the Hood if you think about it. But then anything that helps that poor ship would be a improvement.
I don't forsee any IRCWCC issues with it. They do rotate beautifully and yes you need to post pictures of the underneath also. My only concern is they don't go enough over. I would want mine closer to 90' I might be planning on getting my stern guns on the bis to do a 15' sweep on the back... Let's see what makes them tick...
I don't know that there would not be issues in the IRC. The system does work really well but.... the swapping of forward and stern coverage effectively give the ship capabilities that many other ships could not copy. US ships with only three turrets would not be able to utilize the system effectively. It certainly is a creative use of the rotating gun! Marty
I thought that more then one rotating gun was illegal, at least in the IRCWCC. Then again, my memory could be faulty as well.
I can not see anything in the online ircwcc rules that would prohibit it, so long as the bow quadrant was left undefended.. the single rotate is a reference to theline below from section 11 b. Any ship over 40,000 tons standard displacement or 60" scale length (in 1/144 scale) may have one rotating turret with one cannon. When so equipped a ship may have no more than two side firing cannons, one rotating and one static, covering the same side quadrant. That is a somewhat poorly worded rule that I have always taken to mean that if the ship is large enough and has a rotate, it can have two cannons in two separate turrets shooting into the same side quadrant, whereas one that is not large enough must make certain there is only one cannon in a side facing quadrant at a time... the rotate rule initially is in section 10... g. Ships in Class 4 and above may have rotating turrets. Rotating turrets are those that are able to traverse from one quadrant to another, including from one side to the other. A ship with rotating turrets may not violate section 11.b or 11.c, below. Some may have issue with it, but it is not illegal per the posted rules at this time. As far as the "it ain't fair, US ships can't copy it" line of thinking.... all ships are different. this is merely another strength/weakness depending on your point of view, that is directly related to the turret layout of the original ship... Now if somehow it actually becomes a serious game play issue, I might change my mind on that, but until that is proven, I preferr to tread lightly... I look forwards to seeing the mechanism, it certainly looks quite sweet.
Actually the guns do go 180 deg, a full 90 to each side, I just have them dialed back using the end point adjustment in the video. I will try and take some pictures of the underside this evening, I resheeted her this weekend, and still need to paint, but have not had the chance the last couple of days getting home late from work.
We talked about the US ships this weekend at Rick's. And in the MWC, the NC could use the dual forward rotate setup that Rick's Super Scharny is using since it's over the 720 ft rule. The rotates are pretty compact, its really just a matter of having the room for a coil gun under the deck, with nothing interfeering with the rotation.
hmmm interesting, does that mean Bismarck's, Hood's and Vanguard's could have dual rotates bow and stern switching sides?
In MWC the Bizmarck already has two bow sidemounts so you could rotate the haymaker which would be awesome. Adding a rotate to the stern guns allowing them to move 15 degrees left or right or dead center would be nice too.
In ircwcc anything over 800 feet is allowed dual sidemounts in the same turret, allowing Bismarck to have a dual haymaker switching sides and a dual sidemount in the bow switching sides opposite the haymaker would be a nice set up(for Vanguard and Hood too!)
Your rules list exactly why it's illegal, Greg. b. Any ship over 40,000 tons standard displacement or 60" scale length (in 1/144 scale) may have one rotating turret with one cannon. When so equipped a ship may have no more than two side firing cannons, one rotating and one static, covering the same side quadrant. His set up has two rotating turrets with one cannon each. Regardless of the number of cannons per quadrant, by the letter of the law, that's not a legal set up in the IRCWCC.
That is not right crazyhawk, that is a clarification allowing more than one cannon in a side quadrant. if you read it the way you do, no ship under 40,000 tonnes or 60" could have any rotates, even though the primary rule says class 4 and up can have them. Or, it can be read as: the Iron duke class is under 60" and less than 40,000 tonnes so that rule does not apply to it, meaning no override of the 1 cannon per side quadrant rule.
