Cad to Kit: SMS Deutschland Class

Down south.. is sluggers... not a good test of the upper super-structure being shot.. when its all 90% side-mounts. I want to see this stuff survive salvos from Bob, Tim, Chris, Andy, or a few others in their hard hitting triples, that most ships don't take unless they go to Nats. I am not sure if any of the 3D printed super-structure has been tested under those guys triples as all of those ships are Allied and I have not known an Axis ship at Nats that had any 3D printed parts.

I would love to believe that any ABS 3D printed part can stand up to combat but the data does not support it yet, so please print a super structure or something and send it to me and I will set it up with Jeff's Yamato and give you a real world test. If it can stand up to that then we will have some real world data to show the group.

 

Well.......
They all take damage. Printed or otherwise. As an example see. https://rcwarshipcombat.com/threads/sms-nassau.444643/ Carl's superstructure is in need of some serious work.

Most of of will battle a ship with superstructure damage. Greg & Nicks kit is supposed to get a new caption on the water. Once bitten by the bug the new captain should be expected to repair or replace as needed.

If it were me, I might make a simple foam structure, using the excellent 3D example provided, and let that one get beat up. I am looking forward to seeing one of these on the water.

Keith

 

Come on she is pristine! Those turret covers have three layers of heavy cloth and resin, not too durable. The covers I made for the Espana are Alumilite and heald up better even though they have no cloth? I would mold the parts that go into combat and keep the 3D printed plugs for future new molds.

 

My suggestion was only to alleviate your irritation as you believe any criticism of 3d printed parts durability is trolling. I wanted to have the opportunity to prove your point. I also did not realize that by spending a few hundred dollars on a home 3d printer would constitute opening a business. I thought this was a hobby but it seems instead of sharing our ideas with our friends we are charging them for it.

Good thing Foster didn't patent his gun design and charge a license for every gun.

 

Is the seat cover going to be 3d printed? I am not sure it would hold up to my use.. just saying. Thanks for offering!!

 

For the record my only issue with 3d printed parts is just that... they are 3d printed therefore time and labor intensive. If you battle with the part and it breaks I have to pay somebody in the hobby to take their time to print it and then pay them for time and materials or send it to shipways, neither of which I have done to date.

As it related to the kit in question, I would prefer wood that I can duplicate and repair myself without involving a '3d printer business' in order to maintain my ship.

This does not mean in any way that I am condemning the choice in the kit. I think its great that Nick and Gregg are putting so much time into the project to make nice looking ship. I know that the way I use my ships I will come under some serious guns and even in the Baden many of the guns shoot down into my SS and decks. So far my wood SS has held up just fine with chips to the fiberglass parts I used. Would 3d printed hold up? I HOPE SO!!! They look great! However as I said.. I don't have a printer to re-print the parts that break.

Nick has already said he would make us happy and that was good enough for me. I am sure I am not the only one with this concern but it does not mean we don't appreciate the time and effort these guys are making on the kit.

Ultimately this will be a very cool ship, with a unique history, of which I have requested for over a year now and am looking forward to.

Take care and have a great day!!!!

 

I think the other point to be raised here is not just the cost of the printer and filament and the time it takes to print stuff, but the enormous amount of time spent researching, the money and time spent buying plans and reference materials, and the time spent drawing in CAD the items to be printed.

For example, let's consider a fiberglass hull kit. When Charley creates a fiberglass hull kit, I'm sure he factors in all his costs, including his time. He may never get out of it what his time is truly worth, but no one here would expect him to just sell a hull kit only at the cost of the fiberglassing job itself with only a minimal markup plus shipping. That would be insane. Instead, we fully expect that he tries to recover the many costs incurred in producing plugs and molds as profit spread across many hull kits. After all, we want him to be rewarded for his hard work, and we definitely want him to stay in business.

The Deutschland project should be no different. To expect them to sell parts for the cost of the filament or to put their work in the public domain so everyone can print their own parts means that they never recoup their costs. And they, too, deserve to be rewarded for their efforts.

Many people here have been quite generous in posting 3D printer files for others to use freely, and that is fantastic. But it should never be expected of anyone...

 

I invented the piston gun, foster did the O ring breach.
Your royalty check is late!

 

The discussion was never about the justification of vendors charging for their services. Vendors invest time and money into products produced for resale. Their return on their time and money, if all goes well, are sales and profit. Creating and collaborating on the manufacturing of a ship kit would certainly fall under this definition in my mind. Once you begin to charge for a product then you generate a certain amount of expectations as to quality and performance however.

I don't see how we can compare BC, Strike, or Greg's ship kits to someone like myself downloading sketch-up and making a sketch of a ship part. I made videos and photoshop elements for the videos that took tens of hours to complete for 1 video, I did not sell the videos I made as they are available on youtube to be seen freely. Does that mean that I SHOULD have charged for the amount of time I spent? Does that mean that because my content is different. that my time and investment is any less valuable than the time spent drawing a smokestack in sketch-up?

There is a difference between operating a business and being sharing member in the hobby. For the record if you want to use any idea I have you are free to do so just drop a line or give me a call.

 

I never made them only used them!!! How about some fava beans and a nice chianti instead?

 

The wife wants a check, beans won't cut it!

 

I am just happy that 2 very talented individuals are willing to share their ingenuity with me by giving me access to things i dont exactly have access to or knowledge of. Jadfer has done the same for me as well via getting the Vdt ready and selling to me at a price i could afford. This is why i have always felt that this is the hobby i want to be involved in...the peoples!!!
Craig

 

Challenge accepted! As long as rcengr doesn't object, I propose that we use the stack from his excellent Dunkerque Super Structure. It's big enough that triples could be trained on it and small enough that it won't take forever to print.

@Tugboat, Thank you for the suggestion of using the resources available on the site.

@rcengr, I didn't see a license for that resource so, I'll just ask for your permission.

 

For the record I don't have an issue with paying for the files to print my own SS. Many people sell files to be used on 3d printers. I live on the other side of the continent in a different country. Shipping international is expensive.

 

My license is always "no restrictions" so print and shoot away. By the way, I would never have accepted a commission to draw the Dunkerque superstructure. I have more labor hours in that CAD model than in any of my kits. Perversely, since I did the superstructure only for myself, I enjoyed every minute of the task and I'm willing to share it.