I have found the difference between single and dual rudder to be quite significant. Out of curiosity..... What ship do you run?
I have a Derfflinger, one of those infamous inline rudder ships. The bonus is a huge help. With it I have 3.75 sq inches to form my rudders out of. I use 1.5" props. My props are close together. In order to capture maximum propwash off both props, my main rudder is a semi-balanced design of approximately 1.5inches in height and 2 3/8 inches in length. Approximately one inch from leading edge to pivot point. This allows me to capture a large majority of my prop wash. If I did not have the 50% bonus my main rudder would be a much more paltry 1.5" x 1.6ish" (for 2.5sq inches after you add in a little stub for the forward rudder) affair with which i would be much less able to capture and redirect my propwash. That extra bit allows me to cover nearly an entire prop with my rudder vs what I would be able to otherwise. Dual rudders immediately aft of the props would be more optimal, but I would say that the inline rudder with the bonus is closer to 'marginally worse than duals' than it is to 'marginally better than no bonus on a single'
Rookie ship was a scharnhorst(ww2), not the best for turning though it is dual rudder. Ran a Nagato for a year, but I prefer German. Currently just getting back in, and my active ship is a hipper (single rudder). Not turny, but it's a cruiser. Building a Bismarck cause that's the ship I wanted to build ten years ago when I found this hobby. I always though the allies had a much better selection of ships in the higher end, since they had much bigger navies. It interesting to see another perspective, but at the end of the day, at 28 seconds, a Baden can only eat someone that lets it. I think that's a negative not adequately calculated here.
I believe it still breaks down to 3S/2R > 4S/2R >> 4S/1.5R >>>>> 4S/1R >>>>>>>> 2S/1R. I dont know where 2/2 falls in there, but it only occurs on a couple oddballs so it hardly "unbalances" a fleet.
Regarding Treaty format, the speeds based on actual ship speed changes a lot. The fast battleships actually do very well Treaty (such as the Richelieu) mainly due to the greater speed and water flow over the rudder(s). The barn burner turning ships in fast gun do not turn as well in Treaty because they are usually slower than fast gun speeds. The upshot is the good fast gun ships are still pretty good while the "dogs" in fast gun are actually competitive also. One ship I didn't see on the list is the Erin for 4.5 units. I'd rank it up there with the I-boat and possibly even better due to low profile, favorable gun placement like an ID, and half decent turning.
Erin is on my list. In fact I put in on a list of ships that I wish the hobby had a fiberglass hull for.
I like this . Well done. Agree with your summarizations. I seen Yamato classes turn on a dime and Bismarck's as well. I have operated both Yamato and Bismarck in combat. I can tell you at Nats in 2010 with Bismarck set up with Dual sidemounts and a Death Y aft with C has a down angle below waterline and D as a single sniper I was able to fight very effectively against smaller more maneuverable battleships.I could turn with them absorb tremendous damage however most of the time I got a lot less in return than I dished out. That's with primitive Old school Poppets and pneumatics and an ordinary pump and regular batteries and just TX sticks against the advanced technology and still kicked butt. Bismarck is sometimes underestimated in what you can do with it.
I agree with wmemlo. The main reason I pick ships is based on 'have I seen one on the water in my area?'... secondarily, they must be pretty.
In my comment above, I should +have been more specific... I don't build a ship if I've seen one on the water recently.
It just occurred to me why nit make a CEF chart for Dual Rudder ships a chart for single rudder ships and a chart for inline or Tandem Rudder setup. Be interesting to see how the single rudder ships and the tandem rudder ships stack against each other.
We all battle on the same pond. If I am going to spend hundreds & hundreds of dollars on a toy boat, I want to start with one that stacks up at or near the top of all toy boats available.
Mangus' Erin was a pretty tough bugger. Would be nice to see it on a smaller pond though, I only recall him on the big open one in NC. Except under the dock being chased around by about 5 ships (including me) and making us look like chumps. That was awesome. I've battled and built all the big Jap boats except Yamato. They are all solid, but they all have weaknesses. I built 2 Fusos. Awesome boat, does not turn as well as QE, which I always rated as its allied equivalent. However I don't have to maneuver to get a haymaker to bear because I've got one on each side. Still turns pretty well though, those bulges are large. Nagato is also very solid, preferred mine with the 2 pump setup for the same reason as I loved the Fuso, I didn't have to think when backing into combat. Guns on both sides, lets do this! Kongo was fun to battle, (needed more prop though!) similar style to Fuso but more speed slightly less turny turny. I did like that you have to expose so little target area when using the stern-most sidemount. Moltke was fun to battle. Turned very well for an in-line ship and had the all-guns-aft setup. Stern gun was only of marginal use but the sidemounts were primo. And I could push 'n play with the class 5s. Derfflinger was my first sidemount boat so wasn't built all that well. I recall enjoying the haymaker against the I-boat that a local guy battled for a couple years. Great boat, Tyler's was maximized and very much a threat. I'd imagine Tiger would be a very battle-able ship and bring a 24 sec Allied haymaker to the mix would be fun. Hulls I'd like to see (Capital ships): HMS Hercules SMS Kaiser HMS Erin Oktobyr Revolution (Soviet rebuilt dreadnought) USS Florida/Utah/Wyoming (Cruisers) IJN Sendai MM Zara SMS Blucher
Even absolute 'dogs' like the Courageous and Furious can perform better under Treaty rules, being among the fastest capital ships. If I remember correctly the only ships that can keep up with them are the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. They can out-run everything else that can destroy them, but still have to use 'run and gun' tactics. Another advantage in Treaty is that Furious and the Courageous Class can use two 1.5 unit sidemounts, the best armament when I ran the Courageous under NABS local rules. Dual stern guns were useless due to the large turning circle; unless the target was crippled it was gone before the guns could be brought on target. Being a fan of quirky ships I have a Furious hull awaiting completion for Treaty combat.
I actually own the Courageous. I think it's the one your talking about there Bob. In Treaty it can be an effective ship if battled correctly. I found that when I pushed the engagement I got hammered. If I went defensive and let them come to me I did much better. Where that ship earns its keep is when someone goes on 5 or is damaged. As long as I don't have to do a lot of maneuvering it will do well. It has a 180 degree rotated with a 1.5 unit gun and a 1.5 angled stern gun ( at about 45 degrees). That stern gun is deadly. If I remember right it has about 4 kills in Treaty, but I still prefer my Markgraf instead. But it is fun to be fast!
