I got the USS Alaska mold Looks good, but I need to get it prepped before I try any manufacturing (hasn't seen wax yet). I will also shortly be posting the Kent hulls for sale. So if you're going to Nats (MWC guys) you will see the Kent. If you're coming to the April battle in Savannah, you'll see the Australia on the water But I wanted to announce that Alaska has arrived. I think she'd kick butt in big gun, but regardless she'll be pretty
She should be pretty awesome in Treaty combat as well, as she'll have a speed advantage over nearly all Axis ships.
Crazyhawk, what's Alaska get in the Treaty rules? I'd like to post it on the webpage (alongside the IRC, MWC, and stats for big gun & Battlestations).
She'd be 4.5 units (as in the MWC), and 33 knots = 27 seconds. Our speed chart is basically 30 knots = 30 seconds and 1 knot/second either in either direction.
The Alaska is not as strong of a ship in Big Gun as you might think. Take a look: Displacement, 27,000 Tons Dimensions, 808' 6" (oa) x 90' 9" x 31' 9" (Max) Armament, 9 x 12"/50 12 x 5/38AA Armor, 9" Belt Speed, 33 Knots Machinery, 4 shafts 1 rudder (from www.navsource.org) The Alaska's strength is its armament and speed. It's got 9x 7/32" guns (small battleship size) packed onto a 33-knot hull. 33 knots is faster than any comparable Axis ship, and its 7/32" guns are bigger than those of any Axis ship that can catch it. It can literally outrun anything that it can't outgun. Its downsides become apparent when you compare the Alaska to its Axis equivalent, the Scharnhorst. Scharnhorst's three-shaft-two-rudder arrangement is much more maneuverable than Alaska's four-shaft-one-rudder arrangement. The Scharnhorst is also only 1/2 knot slower than the Alaska, which combind with the agility advantage means that the Alaska would have a hard time escaping from a determined Scharnhorst. In addition, the Alaska's 9" armor belt translates to middleweight balsa, while the Scharnhorst gets the thickest armor allowed. What all of this means is that you can't build an Alaska and expect to trade broadsides with the best of them. The Big Gun Alaska will find its success in the role of cruiser-killer and merchant raider. It's fast and well-armed, and can easily slug it out with cruisers and merchantmen. If you have to fight another capital ship, use the Alaska's speed to choose where the fight takes place (preferably near friendly fire support, a terrain advantage, or shallow water). If you're up to the challenge of coordinated teamwork, the Alaska would make a good complement to an Iowa or another Alaska.
I agree totally on the roles of Alaska, but the only source that gives Scharnie 33kts is Wikipedia, which contradicts itself by giving both 33 and 31.5 knots, whereas most give 31.5 and many only 31 (still pretty quick!). I think the heavier armor is a significant plus, with the much bigger secondary battery, and the 6 torpedo tubes. Even with the slower speed, I would not care to tangle with a Scharnie up close if I were an Alaska driver. But, there are lots of 1/144 scale Scharnies (I know, I own one and love it so even with the one rudder syndrome, I think an American battlecruiser would be cool. Note that single rudder ships do much better than conventional wisdom dictates. I wish I had a video of Mike's Richelieu doing donuts in my pool to show off. Brian K's Vanguard turns well, even with only one rudder I don't think it'll be that big a deal, especially given the shallow draft of the Alaska.
Oops! off by a knot. For some reason I was thinking 32.5 knots when it's actually 31.5. There's definitely something to be said for having a UNIQUE ship, even if it's not the best in its class. Besides, most of the Scharnies I've seen are several years old. With the recent advances in Big Gun weapons and electronics technology, I'd take a modern Alaska against any of those old geezers any day.
I think the differences between them make for a nice flavor. If they were functionally the same, it wouldn't be nearly as interesting
I will always go for the more aesthetically pleasing ships. Even if they are not the most "killer" ships. Quirky wins the day for me. Now where did I put those Popovka plans? Not that I find the Popovka's aesthetically pleasing. Just VERY quirky.
Hey I have a question? What is the price going to be for the Alaska and the Kent? I like both and am very interested.
Alaska will likely be about $175 (with plans). That's guessing with no good numbers on how much cloth and resin it'll take me to make one. Might be less. No main turret plug yet, let alone superstructure. I will announce when I have the mold in production; I still have several coats of wax to apply before I can make hulls. 2 coats are on so far, and I'm not working tomorrow so several more will get applied then. The Kent hulls are in production and are $130 (including plans), turret set will be $12. No estimate on foam superstructure or stacks, yet. I'm working out the crap on getting a "Buy It Now" button for paypal on the website.
Hey Tug thanks I have a very nice set of plans for the ship includeing a lot of the super.My Uncle served on the ship! MY father was on the South Dakota and my uncle on the Alaska!I was thinking about makeing a wood hull but if you are coming out with the fiber I might just have to get one. I have plenty of blue foam I might just make the super for it.
I am in fact going to produce the hull Otherwise, the mold's going to waste I got your email, and I'll reply to it tonite when I'm at work