RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] It's not real war... I don't get why someone would sap all the fun out of it, just because they're scared of a "competitive advantage"
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] More like losing what they perceive as their competitive advantages.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] The way Clark is putting the stringers into this ship is fine. The hull shape dictates two be used. The photo aboves shows a bb could pass between the stringers. It would have to be a pretty good shot. There are lots of casement decks that have the same barely bb size openings in them. There is one ship (maybe more), Konig I think, that has an armor belt right below the deck edge. In that case you can put the armor belt stringer right below the deck stringer to make a 1/4 solid two stringer section. Passing the drop test is about making sure the balsa is not too hard. Not about total hard area. Assuming Clarke uses the same sheet above and below the stringers you can just test that area to test the sheet. Clark have you tried to wet the balsa on the outside and bend it aroud the bluge so you don't have to cut all those sections? If you have good wood and take 1-3 windows at a time it should work. By the way, failing a drop test is worse for your ship than the other team. Guns that fire hard enough to get through a couple layers of pop cans will make holes in wood that is too hard. When the bbs make holes in the balsa you'll have larger than a bb hole. When you're getting 2 for 1 holes in your ship you tend to sink a lot faster. Learn how to select good wood, take more damage, patch more holes, need more good wood...
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Joe, That's a rather inflammatory statement, you don't even know me (I assume you were directing that at me) But I do agree with you! Too many times a 'rivet-counter' looked at our ships and some of the things they complained about were ridiculous. Stringers, deck thickness, and hard area are not trivial areas in the MWCI and if you don't regularly battle in the MWCI I can see why you wouldn't be aware of that. Granted very few folks seem to enforce the rules at local events.. .but that is another thread. HOWEVER, with all that said... - IF and I say IF the rules were mis-applied then enforcing the rules is not 'sapping the fun' but rather ensuring that everyone follows the same set of rules for the fun of ALL captains involved. 'Competitive Advantage' does not enter into it.. the rules should be followed regardless of your level of commitment, whether you intend to battle at Nats, or if you only intend to battle in your region. As Clark stated, he has put this out there to avoid drama and have discussion and that is what has been taking place. I had a question about dual stringers and Clark provided an email from Tim and a response from Bob. This has satisfied me that it would be allowed and would be fair. I can assure you that any ship that showed up at a battle with 2 stringers would be scrutinized regardless of where/who built it. As Clark said he put the build out here so that folks would know in advance what was going on and I commend him for that. J
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Posted By Anachronus on 02 Sep 2013 09:55 AM More like losing what they perceive as their competitive advantages. Really? I apologize I forgot your name, but are you the historian that comes to the brouhaha but has never battled? How can you make a statement like that? As you work with facts.. what are you basing this opinion on exactly? We have been having a discussion about boats and rule compliance and that question has now been answered. It was never about Clark 'gaining an unfair competitive advantage' but more about the interpretation of a rule, which can always be interpreted in multiple ways. I don't think discussing stringers with Clark qualifies as a personal attack.. if so .. some folks need to take a boat break. Your statement however..... Why not get more involved, build a boat, battle it, take it to Nats.. then get back to me.. because by then you will know me and will have a basis to work from. Cheers J
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Just commenting on human nature in general, people will get more riled up over something they perceive is detrimental to them out of proportion to the real harm. I meant to slight no individual. I've not met anyone in this hobby who isn't worth knowing.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] No Problem, I didn't realize we were having a general humanities discussion though... Overall I don't think a discussion about a rule interpretation that would ensure the rule was followed.. and the ship would subsequently be legal .. would even bring up that thought at all.. Smiley Face..... J
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] To be clear, it wasn't directed at you nor was it intended to be inflammatory. It was simply my thoughts on the situation. I just think that it is sad when someone gets discouraged enough to abandon such a beautiful ship... That said, in the same vein, I wouldn't be so sympathetic to someone who bends over backwards to get every legal advantage, just because they want to win. That is much like the "rivet counter," it just goes against the spirit of the game. In my opinion, that's what matters.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] If that gap is an issue, then the Verite will cause storm. The Verite has an armor belt that allows for a stringer. That stringer extends all the way to the stern (as does the armor belt). The open space between the stringer and the subdeck is around 1/16". The ship was built to the stringer rules, but there is no way that a BB will pass through that opening, much less a drop test rod. The rules are not perfect, but using one rule to bash a ship that was built to the rules is foul play. It is not the ship design fault. Nor is it the builder's fault. Using the rules against a legal ship is simply a political move and nowhere near the intent of the rules themselves. I realize some people just need an absolute cut and dried rule set to enjoy the hobby. It isn't going to happen. That leaves going with the intent of the rules to build and play with ships while trying to keep things fair. Stop the rules lawyering. It does nothing to add to the hobby and causes people to be turned off from participating. Clark, keep on building the ship. I highly doubt anyone in our area is going to get prissy about a drop test on an area of a ship that was built legally to the rules. I'd very much like to see one of these hulls on the water and battling. Besides, there will be enough shouting from the rules lawyers when I build that same ship with a three stringer casemented hull.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Edgar Quinet is going to be very disappointed, then, LOL He is next to get finished after Malaya, though.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Clark, Don't let the turkeys get you down. There are people out there who will never battle your ship, and whom the most they will every see of it is pictures on the internet ... And they will tell you all about how you have to do it this way or that way ... and you're doing it wrong ... or this is illeeeeeegal(!!!). They need to get stuffed. Even if they're right, an anonymous internet forum is not the place to be discussing these things. If they're so proud of their opinions (and we all know about opinions), they can at least sign their name to them. Or, they can have the courtesy to contact you personally rather than making anonymous accusations on the internet. I think your ship is fine, and I'm looking forward seeing the final results. Hopefully on the water somewhere, if scheduling allows. Consider that my "Seal of Approval" Signed, Chris Pearce, MWC board of directors (Noted because I don't want anybody to think that I'm being underhanded here. Anonymity can be fun, but sometimes we need to have the ... to be responsible for our words, and because if it came to a vote - and it won't - I want you to know that my vote is for you.)
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Mike Who did all that? There was no rule bashing.. just a discussion on stringers. The rule is ambiguous at best and based on Bob's response.. cleared it all up .. at least for me. Are we in this hobby above having a discussion about the builds? Should the rules not be followed? Folks are taking this waaay to personally. It was just a discussion about the stringers.... Smiley face... J
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Heh. My point was that Clark is following the rules for the stringers in intent and literally, and someone else is trying to interpret another rule about penetrability between legal stringers. Why was it even brought up in the first place? If there was a question, then it should have been sent to the BoD and they would make a determination. It also tweaks me that some people takes the literal interpretation of rules and ignore the intent. That is the type of player that will take a loophole and exploit it just because a rule did not explilcitly say not to.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] For the record, I am not mad at my tooth-pulling friend nor Jadfer at this point. I ignored my own intarwebs advice (If a given post can be taken as mean, or not mean, assume it's not mean and you'll be happier). They were honestly warning me of what they perceived as a problem before I got to the lake. Was I mad yesterday. Yeah. Am I now? No. And I agree that it is important to build to the rules, regardless of whether you're going to battle beyond your local pond. My talking about not battling at a Nats was more that I didn't have to worry about rules interpretation beyond the local ones I'd gotten. I was quite serious about being disappointed by stuff that I've heard about Nats (on both sides, not getting into it in a build thread and I'd just as soon never hear any of it again), and I am immensely grateful that my surgery schedule prevented me from going. I'm not sure my blood pressure medication would've been up to the task I want to thank everyone who jumped in And I will now get back to posting pictures of Malaya, which escaped the hangman's bandsaw. Er.. Noose.
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] Chris, Clark was never 'accused' of anything, it was a discussion about stringers. Bob answered the questions and cleared it up.. all this other stuff is totally unnecessary. I don't think folks on the forum should be discouraged from asking questions and/or attempting to clarify compliance with the rules. The forum is for discussion and we should be able to have these discussions without personal attacks and hopefully in a mature manner. And WOW.. your response.... Smily Face.... Johnny Adams
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] I am glad to hear it Clark. And may I share a story regarding your statement on building to the rules regardless of the battle location (nats, local, regional). It has NOTHING to do with Clark.. but it relevant given some of the discussion. I spoke a a Region 3 guy whom I am sure you know. He said that they had been lax in enforcing the rules at local battles and as a result when a new captain went to Nats.. he was told about many things that were not done right. I am not sure if he got 'chitted' or not but the end result was he quit the hobby 'because of Nats'. Does that mean that the guys at NATS were big mean gorillas for showing him the violations? Was NATS too competitive BECAUSE they enforced the rules? I don't think that would be a fair assessment. I don't like all the rules and think many of them are silly but I do make every effort to follow them. I think its important that folks realize that the rules are for the entire organization and not just for Nats. If I had a nickel for every time I heard someone say they didn't want to go to Nats because they didn't want to get chitted OR they wouldn't worry about this rule or that rule because they would never go to Nats... I could buy 4 new kips from BC. My first question is why would you build your boat, as a member of an organization with a known rule-set, that would result in violations at a sanctioned event? If we all strive to get it right the first time.. there would be nothing to worry about. I really like the procedure in NTBG (If I am correct that is) in that each ship has to be approved ... correct me if I am wrong.. at each stage of the build. I think their Technical officer checks each new ship for compliance or something like that. I doubt they would allow a ship to be non-complaint with the rules and participate in the local battles, because the 'don't intend to attend the national competition' .. I believe they would say come back when you fix it.. (my guess) While we don't have that in the MWCI.. the type of build thread that Clark has posted is a good step in the right direction so that folks can see the progress and discuss it. When folks see this ship at the pond they will know what it is and how its built. Personally I wish we had a Technical officer that was responsible for signing off on new ship builds in the MWCI. Perhaps in the future..... The overall point is that I don't think MWCI Nats is 'too competitive' just because they enforce the rules. Rules should be enforced in any club as I am sure they are enforced in Treaty and Big Gun clubs. Now if you think Nats is too competitive because you have poppets, SLA batteries, single brushed motors, stock 550 pump, and your main interest is to build a beautiful ship that occasionally goes bang.. you are right.. Nats might not be the place for you. And that is ok we all have different levels of involvement. I feel bad that so many folks have been 'trashing' Nationals and needlessly so. Clark I hate for you to be grateful that you didn't attend Nats.. I didn't encounter anything that would keep me from going and I was in attendance. I had a great time and encourage others to go. Those that didn't go to Nats missed Convoy history .. I think.. It was a blast. The action was intense and overall was very entertaining. That's all I have to say about all this so. Have a great day! Smiley Face Johnny Adams
RE: HMS Malaya [BUILD CANCELLED] So the build is still on? Can't tell how cool your build threads are Tug! Keep it going
