Well let's see, currently I have. 1/144 DKM Scharnhorst 5.5 units. USS Michigan iirc 3 units. USS Montana 8 units. 1/96 Mogador Prinz Eugen Soon to be added. 1/96 Potemkin I may be new, but I've got a fleet. So I can choose whatever tickles me at that moment. And not to be a jerk, as I know you are trying to give good advice, but I just wanted to know if there was a good reason why the above mentioned setup on the Montana wouldn't be advisable. It annoys me when you try to steer me away from a boat that I ALREADY OWN, into something smaller rather than answer the question.
I am not qualified to give you advice about Treaty boats, I have not battled that format at all. Only some advice, I did battle one for 13 years.
Carl also plays a doctor when one of us gets a boo-boo (I call a smack up side the head with a stick, "doctoring")
Like I said, not trying to be a jerk. Just want to know if the setup I asked about will work or if there is a reason why it would be inadvisable. I am not looking for a pissing contest, lol. I am in this hobby for fun and to escape the grind of daily reality, not to constantly be told that since I am new, I can only do this a certain way with certain boats, armed a specific way. I have the starter boat, armed the recommended way, now I'm expanding my fleet. And I did score two sinks with the aid of a team mate in my first 3 sorties at my first battle. Not that that makes me an expert, but it does show that I am up to the challenge of more complicated ships.
Sorry for the confusion, I'll just build it and find out I guess. As far as the caps goes, I was just trying to get the point across that I am tired of being told what I need to build and how I need to set it up, I already have been given that "advice" at least 10 times. For the record I did heed it. Ala, my Scharnhorst. As well as the Michigan. I just wanted a simple question answered without being told that I should be building a cruiser again. Been told that enough times that I'm just completely tired of hearing it. Oh and Carl, as far as I can tell, a fire control setup is a fire control setup. It shouldn't matter what formats you have or haven't battled as to whether you know how a system works. Just saying, lol.
Double sided servo horn. Two mav 2s on each side of the servo. I'd draw a picture but that's one thing this fancy smancy phone don't do, or at least I ain't figured out how yet, lol.
For a tighter footprint you could probably also stack the MAVs and push them with a common bar, though i suspect you wont be short on space have you see this done with success somewhere? I haven't personally built a MAV system, just refit a few. Your mounts will need to be solid downside to ganging all these poppets up vs solenoids or MPA actuated poppets is you're likely introducing longer runs between guns and valves
The setup in my very crude drawing would be mounted directly under and between the two bow turrets firing two twin side mounts. Then a twin stern setup the same way but with just two popits. Also placed directly under the aft turrets. So maybe 3-4" Max between the valves and guns?
I agree Nick, space should not be an issue, haha. I have seen a single servo pushing 2 mavs alternately, just figured on doubling it up.
I am not sure that I have ever seen a single servo push two poppets at the same time. It probably all depends on the torque available. I have seen folks run a splitter to a pair of servos running in tandem. But then you have a second servo. Mikey
I'm sure that a standard servo will have enough torque, but if not, I have some big torque digitals that will break your fingers if you try to stop them from moving, lol. I just can't see wasting money on parts that can replaced with $.50 cents worth of scrap plywood.
ho boy, not thinking you'll need something is the first step to buying stock in the company that makes it
