Do 7/32" cannons penetrate better than 1/4"?

I never liked the hole counting. Its ok to count when there is an extreme number, whether high or low... but to count just to count? I can find better things to do with my time.

Personally, I say fight until one side is on the bottom of the lake. Then we know who the winner is.

 

Although it's time-consuming to count holes, if you put in the effort to spreadsheet the data then it's worth the extra time pondside. For example, by analyzing scoresheets from 2006, I discovered that 1/4" outlet bilge pumps in the WWCC can handle the damage of 3-4 large-caliber holes below the waterline, regardless of what motors were used to power them. I also discovered that each different class of ship (BB, CA, CL, etc) have distinct, vastly different average damage totals per battle. I just wish I could tell what size projectiles made which holes. Right now, all I can tell is Big Hole, Little Hole. If I could do that then I'd get statistical evidence about the penetration of 1/4" vs. 7/32" cannons.

 

I can beat that! Cumberland out doing it's thing against Pundua (convoy) he has a... different way with his pump outlet... out the side of the boat. Well... it became unstable and water started gushing in the hole, he noticed he was sinking and turned his pump on, moving the water through the pump and back into the boat again. Pundua, the unarmed transport, scored a sink during our mini-CANNATS...

 

Fortunatly the spreadsheets I did to record damage was easy. Since we all fire the same size caliber rounds in FGSG battles you can tell which ships scored the devasting holes just by visualing how the hole got there and what ship was in position to do that shot.

 

Curt I gotta ask... FGSG?

 

We don't count the size of holes either. oddly enough, holes by larger caliber shot aren't always the same size as the shell that made them. With really soft, fresh balsa, part of it merely gets pushed to the sides as the shot passes through, then moves back a little bit, giving almost rectangular holes, and with old hard balsa, it comes away ragged and larger than the shell that did it. Do determine who did what, I review the video and photos I take of the event and compare "before" and "after" photos. Of course, some ships have a signature (the turret depresses at an angle, the barrels aren't quite parallel, or only one or two ships firing quadruple cannons) which makes identifying individual damage easier as well.

As an example, I pulled 26 projectiles of various sizes out from my Spahkreuzer after the Last Man Standing battle. 12x 1/4" rounds, 13x 7/32" rounds, and 1x .177" round. I know that all twelve 1/4" rounds came from Scipione Africanus (he shot me twice at close range, leaving ragged chunky holes), the 7/32" rounds were a mix from Admiral Scheer and the shore battery (only 7/32" armed ships to shoot me without an oblique angle), and the .177" round came from Dunkerque's secondaries (only ship using .177" at the time). I am hanging onto these projectiles in the hopes of "return to sender, plus interest" from the business end of Spahkreuzer's torpedo cannons at the nearest opportunity.

 

Craig FGSG is FASTGUN SMALLGUN DOH!

 

Ah thanks for clarifying.... ummm... does that mean we are FGSGCWC? Just checking... I think only you have been using it frequently and I wasn't sure... FGSG works for me!

 

I believe it was Carl who put this idea in my head.
All guns 18" and over will fire 5/16" rounds with a rate of 10 sec. (opposed to 1/4" @ 8 sec.) This means there will only be 2 classes of ships in 1/96 scale club that can be so armed; Yamato class and the HMS Furious battlecruiser. This alteration was discussed with the other members here in MA and with Tugboat (our southern brother in arms) and will be posted in the rules section of the new web site that is comming soon. It will be interesting to see if the increase in size will compensate for the slower rate of fire.

 

Mark, just a little warning but every time the 18-inch caliber increase was proposed in the WWCC, it was voted down. The guy who came up with the idea even built a sample cannon after proposing it, ran a few tests, then voted against his own proposal. The cannon was so terrifyingly destructive that nobody in the club at that time wanted to be on the receiving end.

Personally, I think they're just cowards. I don't mind the idea (anything to encourage Yamatos, currently an extinct species in the WWCC), and in fact I'd like to see 24-inch torpedoes be armed with 5/16" balls. Jap cruisers and destroyers are really cool-looking, but also very rare in the WWCC. Just as a warning, 5/16 is a larger step up than the difference between 7/32 and 1/4. If anyone balks, or the cannons prove far too destructive, then consider going with 9/32" rounds. The difference between those and 1/4" is comparable to the difference between 1/4" and 7/32".

 

24-inch torps armed as 5/16 balls....HMS Rodney and Nelson both had 24.5-inch torps......

 

Carl, every one up here agreed on it already and we really don't have to worry about the other clubs not liking it because we're going to be the only 1/96 scale combat club out there. it really makes more sense to have a larger caliber gun for our scale, being 50% larger than the 1/144 boys. and as for the destructive power of the rounds, we'll be using the foam penatration test to calibrate all guns so I really don't see any problem.