I'm new to warship building, and was wondering if anyone had any advice on building a ship like the Austro-Hungarian predreadnouught Radetzky.
Hmm... well, welcome! Someone who is expert in Big Gun will doubtless be along shortly The limit of my big gun knowledge relates to planning the guns for my 1/96 Tirpitz.
The generic advice is to do a cruiser of some sort. The German Panzerschiffes are perennial favourites.
Problem being that I can't transport a ship with a scale length of over 3 1/2 ft. I'm also guessing that the beam is a bit narrow for a first boat.
A predreadnought is probably your best bet. Not so limited in big gun I would think. Fastgun PDN's are stuck with some rules disadvantages in MWCI I think. There are armored cruisers to think of too. If you want a premade hull there is Battlers Connection who make the SMS Scharnhorst, Tugboat lists some English Armored Cruisers on his site but I am not sure if the are in production yet. BC also has the USS Mississippi/Greek Kilkis hull, just on the market.
Yes in MWC fastgun, there is not much reason to build a predred, but I have posted a rules change and collected plenty of co-signers, so hopefully that will change soon enough, after the votes the end of the year. I posted to let them have 3 guns and a 1/2 unit pump, same as the large cruisers over 625 ft, due to the amount of fire power that they carried. I have had alot of people respond quite excited about it. They agree with me, that it should get some more of the predreds on the water, which is what I wanted to accomplish with the rules change.
As one of the supporters of your change I salute you. I ordered BC's Kilkis hull. I think it is going to be under armed until the rules change. I figure I can pop another gun in and put a restrictor on the pump later on.
Just curious NooNoo, why are you limited to 3.5 feet? I have seen some massive boats squeezed into tiny cars. I'll get my brother to help you decide on a first ship once he gets back from lifeguarding at the YMCA (what I'll soon be doing).
I have seen a Yamato transported in the back of a 3 dr Hyundai hatchback. it all depends on how you pack the vehicle.
The only reason that the HMS Warrior/DoE isn't in production yet is that I have been making the Kent hulls (wanted to have some in stock prior to putting buttons on the site), and prepping the Alaska mold for production (had 6 people email wanting one!). I myself badly want a DoE to run around on the pond with A cruiser to play with the PDNs
Because if I went to a battle, everyone else would want to come (which would occupy all the seating), and the trunk of the car is only 3.5 feet the longest way.
If everone else wants to go with to the battle they should get their own ride. Or make them hold the ship for 2 hours in the back seat.
I think Bart P also is getting a Mississippi, after I posted the proposal, as one of the original people in the hobby, he is very excited about the change, and plans on starting a predred, he co-sighed for the change. He says he may have it ready by 2010, or 11. He's a little slow, but then he's like in his 80's or so. So far only one person has not liked it, but then plenty have not said anything one way or the other. I have the Radetzky hull sitting in my garage, I plan on making it after I finish my Kumano. In region 3 we are willing to test it early, so it will have 3 guns as a test bed, if it does not pass I will just take 1 gun out, and change the outlet, so no big issues. For the original poster, I had Michael Raue in Australia make my hull for me, he had to make the mold for mine, so he can now make additional hull's to sell now. If you need his contact info, let me know. Here is a picture of it, with the Titanic in the background.
Can't fault the reasoning. The Kent and the Alaska have more general appeal. We PDN/CAE types are few and far between.
Wow, looks like folks got just a little off-topic here. I'll just get straight to the point, then. NooNoo, Let's take a look at the Radetzky. It is: 37.5" long 6.725" wide Approximately 4" inside height (as measured by eyeball) 2 shafts, 2 rudders, 20.5 knots 9" belt armor So, what does this mean? The Radetzky is one tiny little battleship. There is no way on earth that any human can fully arm that ship and expect it to fight. However, if you only arm one caliber of guns, the challenge becomes more reasonable. At that point, your armament choices become as follows: 4 ROTATING 7/32" cannons in two twin turrets -OR- 8 FIXED 3/16" cannons in four twin turrets (two off each side) -OR- 16 to 20 FIXED 0.177" cannons in single casemates, half on each side. I would highly recommend that you choose the 7/32" guns. The 3/16" cannons lack the broadside weight of the bigger guns, and you don't have the technical know-how to arm all of the small .177" guns. The two-shaft, two-rudder combo makes for excellent turning, although the slow speed means any opponent who wants to can run away and avoid fighting. All in all, it's not a bad boat to have. It won't be easy, but then again what boat is? While you're looking at the Radetzky, I am also obligated to point out the Radetzky's big sister, the Viribus Unitis. The Viribus is Radetzky's dreadnought sister, and she is a very worthy successor indeed. Her stats are: 41.39" long 7.625" wide About 4.5-5" usable inside height 4 shafts, 2 rudders, 20.5 knots 11" belt armor The BIG thing about the Viribus Unitis, when compared to the Radetzky, is that it gains two additional turrets and an additional 12" gun per turret. What that means is its broadside increases from 4x 7/32" guns to 12x 7/32" guns, tripling the number of balls it throws in a single pull of the trigger. It is also a bigger hull (still within your required dimensions, barely) and would make an excellent challenge to build. In battle, their tactics will be the same. The only real difference is how much steel you can throw. Construction-wise, the Radetzky has the advantage of fewer turrets to arm. That dramatically simplifies plumbing, rotation, and overall construction. Heck, you *might* even be able to fit in larger magazines in the Radetzky than in the Viribus. Radetzky also has only two shafts to worry about, which makes propulsion simpler. As for picking which one to build, that really depends on your own budget and technical skills. The Radetzky, while smaller, only requires two double-barrel turrets. The Viribus require four triple turrets, which is more than twice the cost of the Radetzky's guns. The Radetzky's guns alone would cost $320. The Viribus's guns alone would cost $660. Throw in the additional plumbing, linkages, etc and a Viribus could cost around $1500, as opposed to the Radetzky's $1000. If you're on a tight budget, then start with the Radetzky. Or better yet, build a transport to learn the basics of hull construction. If budget is not such an issue, then build a Viribus. Either way you're gonna need access to a decent wood shop and some good power tools.
