Here they are: II.A.5. Size of props are unrestricted. II.A.6. Not all props have to function, but all have to be similar in appearance. The pitch and number of blades of the props is up to the Captain. Deleted rule regarding drag props being illegal. II.B.3.c. There shall be no more than two stringers between any two ribs in the penetrable area of the hull (on each side of the hull). Deleted rule banning stringers on floating waterline. Deleted rule regulating current draw of pumps. Deleted rule requiring pumps to use a specific connector to allow use of ammeter (since above rule was removed). Changed cannon table to add a new category. 18" guns are to fire 5/16" diameter ball bearings with a 10 second fire rate. IV.A.2. Maximum gun depression is 20 degrees. Maximum elevation is no higher then level with the horizon. ********************************************************************* VI. Submarine Construction Submarine construction/operation is subject to the same rules as for surface vessels except for the following: A. Design 1. Submarines may use any method of depth control, so long as they are able to sink with all ballast tanks/buoyancy devices full of air. 2. Submarines using active depth control may evacuate their ballast tanks using air, Propel or CO2 or by mechanical means (e.g., piston method, bellows, etc.). Any method that evacuates water from the ballast tank(s) MUST NOT evacute water from the rest of the inside of the sub. 3. Submarine decks are allowed to be impenetrable down to the 45 degree line of the hull. 4. The sides of the submarine are penetrable as per the surface vessel construction rules 5. All functioning torpedo tubes must be located in scale positions. 6. Torpedoes must be 1/4" diameter by scale length. B. Operation 1. Submarines are not required to have the ability to dive/surface. These submarines will be considered sunk when their decks are fully awash, and are required to run at the scale surfaced waterline. 2. A sink is defined as the inability to surface, or the deployment of any recovery device. 3. Submarines must sink with internal spaces flooded and ballast tanks dry (if ballast tanks are used). ******************************************************************* That's it so far! Don't have a good drop test yet, but that'll be figured out soon. Some other changes to non-construction & Battling parts can be made (not really worried about ranks assigned under the rules as they are now). I figure we can worry about those changes ina little bit. I'm more interested in getting a ship on the water!!
Hi Tugboat, Not as bad as I thought it was gonna be, lol Just a few comments: Re: Unrestricted prop size/Drag Props I know the original rule had it's grounding in the fact that they wanted the ships to perform exactly like the prototype.The idea was if you make the ships more maneuverable then you end up with two ships parking next to each other 2 feet apart blasting it out.It was thought that if the rudder/props are left scale then the captains won't risk fighting in a "furball" type battle as they wouldn't be all that agile.It was thought that the ships would fight more like real ships did and lob in shots from a distance,so instead of 2 feet away they would duel from 10 feet away.My only concern would be a captain would take it to extremes and put a HUGE(ie: funny looking)set of props on that wouldn't look scale at all.Or people might cheat a little bit on shaft angles so they could fit the extra prop size in under the hull(better acceleration,more propwash=better turning) Re: 18" gun fires 5/16th w/10 sec fire rate I don't think this was every discussed by BS.I know I heard the Big Gunners discussing it once on their list way back in the day.Their thinking was that since the 18" jap gun was equal to or less then the american 16" gun it was unfair.Plus they had the fact that if it was taken in then torps would also go from 1/4" to 5/16".One could almost make the argument that 1/96 torps should then be 5/16" by scale length since most torps were 18,21 or 24". Re: Submarine Construction I know the BS rules were far from being set in stone.The reason they got put down in writing so early was because Keenan from Missouri was building the USS Nautilus.If you go to the BS page and click on photos there are a few pics of it there.I agree that subs shouldn't be allowed to have a pump to remove water,as if a real sub ever had a hole in the hull it sure wouldn't be diving.The only issue I would have with the subs deck and down to 45 degress being impenetrable is that I know Keenan had his sub almost fully operational and he could fire his bow tubes when he was submerged,and hit a target 10 feet in front of him.I could be wrong but my memory tells me he had 3 postions: surfaced,conning tower just below the water and max dive(2 feet I think)Now if a submarine can cruise around all battle submerged and not have to surface to fire weapons,it's going to be awful hard to hit those side panels if they're underwater.It was pretty cool,I know he used a ballast tank and soem kind of areosal can or something to blow it dry,adjust trim etc... he also had a few goodies that the sub committee boys use like a fail safe and he even had recharging ports for his battery,co2, mounted on the deck,so he didn't have to open the sub up unless something major went wrong(He was working on making his torps reloading). True enough,I need to get off my butt and get going on a boat or two. SRF
Hey Tug, I think Scott has a valid point about the props, the idea is to keep the scale look, speed and turning radius (or just overall performance of the origional ship) I'm powering all 4 shafts and using 2" three bladed props for the Yamato (we need to ket a scale speed chart together at some point here). As far as the guns go, the 18" were something like 150% or more massive that the 16" guns, so having bigger rounds makes sense. As for the torps, if the size was to be increased, then the use of arizona type TT's shouldn't be allowed. Only "scale" torps fired from the launchers (somewhere in one of these treads someone mentioned that the larger torp would not only be easier to make but also more effective). As for the subs, I say build them to scale, get them in the water then we can "fine tune" them as time goes on, but the main thing is to get them in the game
One more thing: maximum gun depression shouldn't be based on a set value but instead represent the actual depression the origional guns had...ie, Yamato's mains -5, 2nd -10, 3rd -8. this goes with the "scale" part of the hobby and makes it a more skilled game. the real ships didn't exchange broadsides 10' apart
To address concerns: I can see the validity of the scale props rule. I'll put it back like it was originally (scale size required), unless either of you wants a different wording than the original. I have problem going with scale depression, if we're all in agreement on it. I could change the wording to bascially what you just said What's your take on it, Scott? Scott, the 5/16" was added for the 18" guns because we thought it'd be entertaining for the biggest naval guns in history to get the extra kick. I did not intend for torpedoes to get bumped up to 5/16"... I was assuming that they'd stay 1/4", for the reasons Mark gave. As far as the submarine rules, it's going to be difficult, if not impossible, to use a submarine effectively while it's submerged. It will be very difficult to see, even with the periscope sticking out of the water. In MWCI we've had a couple of submarines operating, and they are really really hard to see. More often than not, the owner will have to surface them to find them. Also, given that the torpedoes still have to pass the foam test just like cannons do, I'm not convinced that they'll be really effective from more than a foot or so, submerged. They'd bleed too much energy underwater to go a great distance. Finally, regarding the penetrable deck, it's not fair to ask a sub to run with a penetrable deck, but allow surface ships to have solid bottoms Also, we're asking a lot of 1/32" balsa to withstand submergence pressure as it is, and adding another set of vulnerable panels doesn't help the equation. I'm certainly of a mind to revise the rules if a sub is built that slices through the surface fleet with ease. If someone does that, it's time to build a minelayer with loops of fishing line that go deep enough to snag them Personally, if I build a sub, I want to build either one of the American ones that had 2 deck guns and run around like that, or build Surcouf with 2 8" guns But realisitcally, I am building a large surface combatant, as having a visible presence will help me recruit better (i.e show the flag) Maybe I'll start a 'what'cha gonna build' thread... Clark
Hi guys, If you go to: http://www.kutz.com/combat/ ,it is Joe K's old Fast gun page.At the top it has a link for a story called "Coversation between an Old Timer and a Rookie". Joes first(and I think only) Fast Gun boat was an Invincible. This story is basically why he wanted to start Battlestations.It kind of illustrates the unrealistic part of fast gun. That sounds fine for the props. As for the 18" gun,it just seems a little bit like shiplist inflation(to steal a term from IRCWCC)to basically give one boat a bigger cannon.I don't know anything about the 2 types of guns(18" vs 16") I just thought I remembered something from the Big Gun discussion about how the 18" was bigger,and fired a bigger shell,but in terms of performance,penetration,damage etc... they were almost equal(I could be wrong). I'm not to worried about it as I'll never build a Yamato,and if I fight one it's not gonna matter what it hits me with(1/4" or 5/16") cause if one turret lands 3 hits, my DD will sink like a rock.Thats one reason BS allowed 1/32 balsa for the small ships.The Big Gun guys back in the day use to have that thcikness too but they got rid of it as one dual or triple 7/32 or 1/4" hit would blow out a whole panel.Which is pretty realistic,as if a Yamato smacked a Fletcher with 3(or 6 or 9), 18" in real combat that Fletcher would be a wreck. As per the torps, it just makes no sense to me to allow 18" guns 5/16",but then say a 21" torp or 24" jap torp should only get the width of a 15-16" gun. Torps before had to be fired from scale looking launchers in the scale location with the scale elevation/trajectory,and scale length tubes.Most people building torps before didn't use any type of gun,they were basically using straight tubes with the air hose at one end,so a quad launcher would be 4 tubes,side by side,looking like they would on the real boat,with the air lines coming up through the deck to the back.To load you just shove a torp down the muzzle and keep it in by putting a little bit of cotten ball or vaseline in front. No reloading allowed if the real boat carried no reloads. As to depression, I think we should aim to keep it as simple as possible.I like the idea of scale depression,however it might be hard in some cases to find scale depression for some ships/gun types.Also it's going to take a lot of work for a technical director to check everybodies ships for scale depression(on top of props,rudders etc... especially if you have ships coming to battle that have 20-30 guns on board) I think it would just be easier to say, for example: main guns 10 degress, secondaries 20 or something. As to subs,those are some good points.However I do think a 1/4" x scale rod will travel farther underwater then say a 1/4" ball would.But I'm probably never going to build/battle a sub so I''m not to picky about the rules for them.That's a very good point about how our ships don't have penetrable bottoms so it is unfair.I know they originally wanted penetrable decks because they wanted Escorts/DD to be able to field some kind of straight downward firing cannon off the stern to simulate depth racks,pass over the sub firing your depth charges(cannons) and hope you get a hit. The only issue I can see was that with the 45 degree rule they're basically only going to have a 1" high penetrable window running the hull on either side,as rule 4 states the window must go 1" below the waterline,so a sub technically has no waterline so only has to have a 1" high window(Bob Pottle up here has an 1-400 in 1/144 that can submerge and his is the same way,a 1" high window running down either side as per fast gun rules.)which might make it kind of a small target to hit if it's running around on the surface. One idea to this might be to go like the WWCC does and allow subs to be rammed. Anyways, I talk to much but just trying to throw things out there,help get it going again. SRF
You raise good points, Scott. I can go either way on gun depression, you and Mark can hash it out For scale torps, I think 1/4" is fine, as you look at the relative size of the warheads, even a 16" shell has more kick. My plans for torpedoes were about as simple as you're saying... I was going to try and build one-shot (per tube) spring-powered launchers for whichever surface ship I end up building, not too fancy there.
From what I understand the performance of the two guns was pretty much the same. One thing though --- it is my understanding that the 18" shells were so much bigger that there were only 100 rounds per gun, whereas the normal load for a 15 or 16 inch guns would be in the 200 - 250 rds per gun. Soooo.....if you want to factor in the the extra kick then you should also factor in the limitations that the extra kick imposed and limit the ammunition capacity. As well as slowing the rate of fire...... And this opens another huge can of squiggley worms....
Not clear in the rules: Armour: Is the balsa sheeting a uniform thickness all over the hull or does the armour location match the armour belt on the ship? This matters because the thickness of the armour belt has to be accounted for when building the hull and it is also a lot more difficult to bend a 1/8" thick piece of balsa round the bilge. Penetration rules: I don't see any limitations on gas pressure of gun penetration. Did I miss these?
That really wouldn't be a problem. 100 rounds/gun =300 rounds/turret (I don't even think there's room in the mag for that many) For me to run out of ammo, I would have to fire every 10 sec. for 16min + 40 sec. strait. Thats a lot of shooting as for the real shells, the Jap 18" used an explosive with a higher det velocity and more of it than the standard 16' shell. funny thing about explosives, a few pounds differance in either direction can vary the results greatly (I use explosives on a daily basis, so I'm not talking "out of my ass")
The armor is the same all around the ship, unless the builder wants to thin it out. as for making 1/8" balsa bend, its a pain, I'm working on the torpedo bulges on my ship. the guns will be subject to the standard "foam penetration test", with no pressures to exceed 150psi.
In terms of armour I think it will have to be the same as depression,that is to try and keep it simple.While it makes sense to have different thickness for different parts of the hull,it will also mean everybody will have to lug around references for their boat,and it will cause a headache for technical directors trying to check that everything is as it's suppose to be(not to mention the fact it could be a real pain trying to resheet if you get really shot up at a battle) However with that said,I think the best plan of action is to just get a guideline for construction(which we have)then once we actually have people battling we can work out all these other rules.That way we can test them all in an actual battle and see what works,what doesn't and then put them in the rulebook.
well, said. did Joe K. say anything about the old web site BattleStations? whats he plan on doing with it? if he's still interested does he have any boats
Mark, He just replied to my message that he was still interested in 1/96. I replied back that you guys were looking to speak with him about the website,name etc... so hopefully he'll come over here and chat. As to his boats, I know he had purchased hulls from Scale Shipyard for the Gearing DD and Cleaveland Class CL and had started building the Gearing. SRF
I know I'm new here, but can I chime in? I like the scale props, for all the reasons mentioned. However, I do think drag props are OK. I like the new stringer rules. Some of the torpedo bulges could be really hard to do with only one stringer (especially a Roberts class monitor). I'm cool with eliminating the current rules for pumps. I really never liked this rule, as I thought it was too difficult to measure, let alone obey. I'm not sure the 5/16" BB for the 18" gun is worthwhile. As has been mentioned already, it was roughly equivalent to the US 16" shell in performance. And since only one ship class could carry this turret, it could not be re-used in another ship. I would be against having Torps larger than 1/4". 1/4" is already bigger than the scale size of everyone's torps except the 24" IJN Long Lance, which would be exactly to scale. Besides, having a 5/16" torp makes it hard to build the quad and quint launchers in a credible size, not to mention grouped bow and stern tubes in subs because of the larger size. In fact, I'd recommend allowing the torp to be either 1/4" or to be scale in size, which is often smaller. A 21" torp is roughly 7/32" in this scale, and I've considered building the smaller 7/32" torps in order to have more room inside the bow of a Gato... I like the new sub rules (I want to build an I-400 some day, as well as a Gato or a Surcouf). I like having more choices in ballast systems, as subs will be hard to build and fight. I'm torn on the new deck rule, as I can see both sides of the argument. So I'll stay out of that discussion. [] Anyways, that's my 2 cents. Take it for what it's worth! [] Carl
HMS Furious carried 18" guns for a short while durring a refit, so there would be two classes of ships that would benifit from the 5/16" rule one axis and one allied. This is only a "test", and since the other members and Tug agreed on it already the cannons are already being made to these specs. If its found not to be worthwhile either because of ammo supply, no real difference in performance, or if the rounds are too destructive, the guns will be shrunk down to 1/4". as for the TT's I don't care as long as we all can get an effective, scale looking torp that can be fired from both underwater and deck launchers.
Dietzer, I appreciate your input and your line of thinking about the stringer rules is exactly why that one got changed. For the torpedoes, I beleive that 1/4" is fine, and actually in 1/96 scale is exactly in scale diameter-wise for a 24" torpedo. My thoughts on the ballast systems being "anything that works" is that if someone really really wants to do a titanium bladed nuclear powered steam turbine lift engine for their 1/96 sub, more power to them. It won't affect combat power or greatly aid maneuverability over more conventional systems. The current-limit rule on pumps was abolished based on we already have restrictor plates on the outlets to control how much water can be moved. Limiting current draw just makes the rules more complicated for no benefit to the club.
Hi guys, One other thing to mention.How do you guys feel about having a different chart for convoy ship pump rates? It just seems to be that right now a convoy ship can pump as much as a warship of the same size.I would assume that a warship would have a lot better damage control then a merchant ship. I was thinking keeping it simple and maybe do something like this: 0-14999 1/4 pump 15000-29999 1/2 pump 30000+ 3/4 pump Give me your thoughts, SRF
It's not that I'm opposed to Yamato getting 5/16" guns. I just know some of the headaches involved when you make a rule that really only benefits one ship class.True,Furious also had 18" guns, however having seen Bob Pottles HMS Courageous(near sistership)battle in NABS I can tell you that in 1/96 she'll need about 2 miles to make a turn =)(and no armour to boot),the likelyhood of anybody wanting to build her is just about nil. I just know that when you make a rule for one ship class then you'll get everybody else wanting rules for their ship class because it had better fire control then anybody else,or because german steel was way better then anybody elses,or it goes faster then whats in conways and they have 15 references to prove it etc,etc,etc... SRF
And one more post, lol We use to have a speed chart, the link to it on the Battlestaions site is broken.I'll have to see if Joe K has a copy saved somewhere. The chart(correct me if I'm wrong Carl)was pretty similar to the Big Gun speed chart however minimum speed was not capped.It went right down to like 8-9 knots.Now I know Big Gun has min warship speed at 24kts and Convoy min at 22kts.My only issue with not having a min speed would be mainly with convoy ships,in that some of the slower ships like Liberties etc.. that only made 14-18kts might not get built and we'd end up with a zillion speedy little APD(converted 4 stackers)types running around,or a bunch of HUGE fast ocean liner types(which can't even be sunk in 1/144 Big Gun I'm told by those who have tried)So I was thinking we could cap the speed chart at say 20kts or something. Give me feedback, SRF
