**Admin's note: This thread was created from a section of another thread. Please continue debate in this thread and not the original thread. Original Thread: https://rcwarshipcombat.com/threads/seydlitz-build-ircwcc.445029/ Thank You ** Are you sure what you got there is legal, Kevin? As I understand it, (and how rule has been interpreted by several members) you're allowed either a drag 'prop' or drag 'disk', and yours don't really fit in with that interpretation. More like a lopsided cylinder. You could probably get the same effect by just gluing a disk on angled. I don't mean to come across like I don't want you to have your cool drag props because I can't have drag props on the King Edward, because that's not my intent. But since there has been a lot of discussion on this subject as of late I'm genuinely curious if those drags are legal.
It's a disc with poor thickness tolerance. I think it is legal enough with respect to the way drag discs have been made/accepted as long as I have been in the hobby. You could put my drag props on a shaft and spin it as a propeller, not sure how efficient it would be haha. Mounting a flat disc at an angle would push the stern down when moving forward which is not desired. If anyone really has an issue with it I would change it, though I'm not sure what footing they would be using as the basis of an argument against.
I'll bite and play the other side for a post... that you put a non scale dive-plane on your hull and the rules don't say you can do that? designed to be so, created with the intention of achieving performance gains you would otherwise not have
All they have to say is it not with the Spirit of the rule. That seems to work for everything else. Much easier than actually correcting a rule, so that it actually says what the rule states. But I like it, and as the rule is now, and as Kevin said what has been accepted so far, I don't see a problem with it. My first IRC Nats I questioned Marty's drag disk's on his NC, they were huge, about twice the size of the drive props, full of holes around the edge so he could add nuts, and bolts and washers to change the amount of drag as needed. Both Marty and Carl said they were legal when I asked about what was allowed under the rules. Rick, Don and I could say nothing but, WOW, WOW really, ok then. I think I'm going to be adding the same to my ships, should help keep the stern up in reverse. Kevin did you try it without the slope, just flat disk's? Would be interested in the results. Another thought, angle both sides down to the bottom center, so that the down wash works both in forward and reverse. That way when moving forward your bow stays down, the stern does not dig in so much, and is not such a big target? Also I think the top and bottom edges of the rudder, being sloped like they are, are still allowing too much water roll off, its allowing a smooth uninterrupted flow off the top and bottom edges. A straight 45 will cause a vortex, and more of the water will roll back to the center, which puts more off the rear edge of the rudder. Been watching too many sims on rudder flow, lol.
Nick, so how are the effects of my setup different than having a flat drag disc on a shaft that is not perfectly horizontal? There are boats out there that use that method to achieve the same result. The impact is that the boat can drive backwards without sinking itself...not sure how much of an advantage is being gained there I think the point that most miss in regards to the IRC rules is that they work fine if there is a compliant membership. As I said, if an active member at a sanctioned battle has an issue with my boat, I address the issue as an adult and make a change if appropriate. What doesn't work / causes discontent is when a group of members says 'hey that is a little shady,' and the response is 'well the rules don't prohibit me doing it, so you better make a rule change.' I try to see both sides of an argument if an issue comes up. I think it would be great if the rules could be changed to make many issues more well defined, and I have actively submitted proposals and tried to facility discussions to reach an agreeable solution for most members. Unfortunately email isn't the best way to hash some of those changes out, and most members only want a small number of changes at a time so I try to prioritize. I build boats to have fun, not sea lawyer my friends. I work in an environment that is incredibly regulated and the amount of sea lawyering/ rule compliance only causes huge levels of discontent throughout the organization. General steps to determine whether something is in line with the 'intent of the rules.' 1) Be reasonable. How are most ships built? Do most ships have drag discs rather than drag props? This part really is not that hard. 2) Ask 'what is the impact of the deviation I am making from the explicit part of the rules?' Does it impact the amount of damage someone can do to your boat, or the amount of holes required to sink the boat (besides pump changes)? If yes to the last question, people will probably have an issue with it. The only times there are issues with this stem from veterans who are well aware of how most boats are built. I will always be willing to let you know my view on 'where the line has been drawn' in the past if you have a legitimate question, but trying to extrapolate that judgement on a separate issue probably won't work. Dave, I did not try with flat discs, I think there would be a change. I added them to the California as well which used to suck its stern under so I might test it out this weekend. My advice is to be reasonable with the angles. My discs have about a 15 degree angle from vertical, 45 might be pushing it. Kind of like fishtails, most people are fine with them if they are around 5/8" thick or less, the only issue is when the rudder is more of a box than a plane. Thanks for the tip on the rudder, I'm trying to keep it reasonable so fishtails don't get banned. Being reasonable really isn't that hard, and historically results in everyone in the club having more fun / better member retention / larger events.
I built that NC that you are talking about and here are the facts not the HYPE: Props are 2.125 inch and the drag disks are 2.5 inch. not twice the size. You sir are a Sea Lawyer and will distort the facts to make a point. NOT COOL.
Assuming 100% coverage on the prop blades, those drag disks had 2.72 square inches more surface area than the props!
I don't believe he was intentionally exaggerating to make a point in this case. My guess is that the larger drag disc simply looked much bigger than it actually was compared to the smaller props because of a common optical illusion. Because the propeller isn't a solid disc, it will always look smaller than a solid disc (even one the exact same size) because the propeller blades take up less area compared to the solid disc. The fact that the propeller blades curve in three dimensions makes this worse since part of the blade is farther away and thus looks smaller, whereas the brain perceives the disc as a solid 2D object. Unless you get down low enough to view both the propeller and the disc from the same angle (with the line of sight exactly perpendicular to the prop and disc) , your brain will always trick you into believing the prop is much smaller than it really is...
I will only be there on Saturday. I have final exams Friday night and Monday night so I will battle when I can!
So why not just have the same props and no disks? For me a disk has a lot more coverage than a three or four bladed prop. What I have is a prop with a disk behind it to show they are the same size.
Really lets see who's the Sea lawyer. Drag disks, 2.5 inch, area is 4.9 total inches. Props, 2.125 inch, area is 3.55 inches. OK, the props have quite a bit smaller area than the drag disks. Add them together, and the drag disks have over 9.8 sq inches of total area, the props 7.1 sq inches. So, the drag disks are over 35% larger, now that's really following the spirit of the rules, what more do I need to say? When you look at them they appear to be much larger than the props. So what is the magic spirit of the rules percentage number that is allowed? Who knows! Maybe re-write the rule so that it is actually is followed? Without all this spirit of the rule nonsense? As the rule is written now, drag disks are not even allowed, all it says are drag props. And no matter what anyone says, they are not the same thing. My conclusion, You sir are the Sea lawyer. Make up what ever you want to fit the moment? Since no rule spells it out! Really not cool.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_lawyer Mr. Camurati's and Plumer's points about "spirit of the rules" is specifically mentioned in the definition of a "Rules Lawyer". Its the polar opposite of being a rules lawyer. Most folks here in the NE can talk to each other and come to a gentleman's agreement about what is reasonable and within said "Spirit". The IRC has had the discussion of limiting the drag disks before, and the club deemed that it was unnecessary. If you find yourself unhappy with the ruleset I propose 3 possible solutions. 1. Propose to change the rule through the proper channels. 2. Get over it and just play the game without trying to find every loophole in the ruleset. 3. Find a club who's ruleset is more suited to your needs. It really get's old seeing "It's not in the rules". A gentleman doesn't need the ruleset to play fair. Regards, Trey
It is getting old, so what is the size limit on how much bigger a drag disk can be, following the spirit of the rules, and still be allowed? No one knows till a CD makes his arbitrary ruling right? This year its legal, but next year its not! Or 4. Follow the rule as it is written. I know that's asking to much.
No size limit but there is a limit in quantity. Did you account for the holes Dave, your math looks very complete except for that (15 1/4" per). Maybe you should have voiced a objection at that event.
My folks taught me the difference between right and wrong. If I think about doing something and start thinking "this is a bit overboard" then I typically don't do it. I know its a crazy concept asking grown men to act like grown men right? I value being respected as a fair player. I don't need to compensate for my shortcomings (to which I have plenty) by winning at boats. At the end of the day, they are toy boats and the respect others have for me is more important than twisting every rule to my advantage. I also know I build a good enough boat and battle well enough I don't have to use the ol' "Well the rules don't define hull depth" so I can shave my hull. Every man has to decide whether or not they want to be a gentleman. I have made my choice, and clearly so have you.
Whoa! Wikipedia says the outboard screws on a NC were 15'4" in diameter and 4 had four blades. That's 1.27" in 1:144 scale. Those 2.5" discs are nearly twice the diameter and probably 4 times the cross sectional area of the scale propeller. Since the rules say "drag prop" and, elsewhere, "relatively scale", I believe people were right to complain that this setup violated the "spirit" of the rules. PS. Estimating the real props had about a 75% solidity ratio, their cross sectional area in 1/144th scale is 0.95 sq-in so, the 2.5" discs have approximately 5 times more area to generate drag force with. I'll bet it turned nicely and I see, now, why no one builds 2 shaft ships. They can't take advantage of sea anchors like these!
Gents I think it's time to let this discussion die off. Let's have a good battle this weekend for those who can attend.
Trey, Kevin I agree This started with what I thought was a simple question--- could you drag disc a drive prop? I---- thought the answer was simple --- no. How the heck does THIS HAPPEN. I love that Kevin is doing a build thread to help builders I hate that they would have to read through all of this to build a boat. I love a hobby that if I disagree with someone I can shoot a BB at their boat kas
Yes we did, I think we should follow the rules are written, and you don't. Spirit of the rules=What you want the rules to say. Very Gentlemanly. So no size limit on drag disks, really? And I did voice my concern, but since it was my first IRC Nats, and you were CD and said it was within the Spirit of the rules I let it drop at the time, but I still consider them to be excessive, even if you don't. Appears others also think the same. At the time, even Chris K said we needed to correct the rule, and you said no we don't. 1. I happen to agree with the rule, you need to propose a rule change if you want to continue doing what you are doing, since you are not following the rules in this case. 2. What loophole? Again I said follow the rule, it says drag props, nothing else. You are using drag disks. Saying you are following the Spirit of the rule, is nothing but a way to justify your loophole. I was just having a civil discussion, but then others, because they did not agree, decided they needed to start name calling, questioning if I was a gentleman? When all I said was, we need to follow the rules period. If you don't like the frigging rule, then you need to propose a rule change, instead of saying but we say it falls under our Spirit of the rule clause, which I cannot find anywhere in the rules. Here an idea, why don't we just follow the rules as written. Then there will be no grey area's at all.
