Lets get some background stuff down.. As I mentioned in my introductory post I have some prior experience in RC mainly in cars and to a lesser extent planes (now considered I guess "nitro planes"). I know I have a MWC chapter near me that meets I think in Lansing. So it would seem that would be the route I should be going if I jump into the water. But at the same time I see that IRCMWC has "meets" that are more often closer to me. So in my typical fashion I was looking to the rules for both groups and see that there is a potential to make a boat that could be legal in both formats. It starts to get similar when you get into the 4+ speed wise. Only does MWC get faster in the lower classes. Would it be feasible to do some of the lower classes in typically set for MWC and try to lower their speed? The speed controlers I used back in the late 80 was a simple mechanical switch set up to the servo. Are the newer electronic speed controllers capable of "lowering" your max rpm of your screws (ie. and electrical limitor?). Or would it be required to deal w/ drag screws, changing out of gear ratios (if that is feasible). Do you think this is feasible? I have seen many a posts on peoples thoughts on a good starter boat.. here are some observations Some say around a class 4 some say class 3s. There is that rookie build thread that talks about a French CL a 2 I think. I have heard people extoll the virtues of having a good size ship. Some reasons are a good sized hull is easier to fit things in (thus I would assume easier to balance correctly) as well more forgiving on weight. Some mention that keeping the components as simple as possible (ie. less props and rudders). Then the next thread mentions say go twin rudder for more manueverability. Some facts about me.. Money is it a big problem? No the wife supports me an my hobbies. Does not mean I am going out to drop 3k on a USS Missouri.. I am looking my first something built rather easily and quick (ie. looking at BC and the like out there..). I realize that doing so does not mean open a big ACME box and add a few screws and viola have a neat ship (only Wiley Coyote has the capability to do that granted his succes ratio is up to debate). These are the ships I seem to be looking at.. in the 4s Lion (doing as a Queen Mary maybe should not be a big stretch), Andrea Doria, and Von der Tan. Now if if the 3s or less are feasible I am thinking Suffren (practical good for both sides), my old love as a kid Graf Spee, maybe the Atlanta Class. Now the concerns is how difficult is it for a new comer to deal w/ mutiple screws, multiple rudders and such.. most of the crew near me seems to be a bit away so it will be a learning experience.. My next project will be a wood one.. but I want to learn the basics first. Is going 4+ thinking to big? Is it feasible to slow down the 3 or less classes to comply with IRCMWC rules? Am I trying to much to be able to stradle to rule sets?
Excellent Post. Using an electronic speed controller it is rather easy to slow a ship down or speed it up to get to the legal speed, even without taking the boat out of the water. So building a class 3 ship and running it in either ruleset won't be a big issue. However the class 3 boats that go 24 sec in IRCWCC have a pretty big disadvantage in IRCWCC since they cant out run or out turn or out gun a lot of the big battleships, in MWCI they are faster and can run when needed. There has been some rumbling about changing that but that remains to be seen. If you are planning on battling IRCWCC mostly or even half the time I'd still reccommend a class 4 boat. If you're mostly going to be battleing MWCI I'd probably go class 3. I use my VDT in both formats without any issues and thats pretty easy to do with the majority of the boats. Also how soon do you think youd want to build another boat? If you think you wont want to build another one for a while then a class 4 will let you "grow" more in the hobby. If you're the type of person that will build a new boat every year or every other year then it doesnt really matter and a class 3 would give you valuable building experience before going on to something bigger, and youll have a secondary warship which is useful. Going smaller also slightly reduces cost, mostly because you have one less cannon system, that also makes it slightly easier to build/maintain. Do you have any preference for nationality or which team you're on? Pick something you'll be happy building that makes it a lot easier. Never having built a ship with only one prop I dont know how that compares to dual propswell technically quad but only the inner two are powered). As for the rudder, two are harder than one but not twice as hard, I wouldn't let that stop you, there are a lot harder things to do than dual rudders. BC hulls are a good way to get started, if there is a build meeting or battle near you anytime soon going to that will help answer a lot of questions and get you thinking about stuff you didnt even know you needed to. Good Luck & Welcome!
Hello Since I am just a new guy as well. I have found the DVD sold by Bob H. is excellent. He goes into building a class 2 cruiser for MWC rules. But that applies to the class 3 as well. If you goto the port polar bear website you can get the order information. He does the complete build up from a bare uncut fiberglass hull to the finished fighting ship. I live in Wisconsin and they are my closest group. Hope this helps a little. Kim
Thanks for the response! It is good to know about the feasability to use the electronic speed controllers to help with speed requirements. After some more thought it would be prudent if I were to go smaller to go for a 2.5 unit since I could use a 1/2 unit pump in it in MWC while in IRC I can not. As well the issue of being the same speed of the big dogs w/ a chihuahua's bite. A 3 unit in MWC is required to have a full size pump unless it is a cruiser greater than 12,000 standard tons. "a) Predreadnoughts (PDN) greater than 12,000 tons standard (as built), and Class 3 Cruisers of greater than 12,000 tons standard (as built) and 625 feet in length may use their extra half unit as either a cannon or a pump. b) All Class 2 and smaller ships are allowed to split off a separate half unit to use for a single pump. For example, a 2-unit ship could have a 1/2 unit pump, a 1 unit cannon, and another 1/2 unit cannon; or a 1 unit ship could have a 1/2 unit pump and 1/2 unit cannon." So that would mean the Des Moines (3 stern) or the Adm Hipper/Prinz Eugen (2 Stern maybe a Bow). Which wouldn't be bad in MWC less so in IRC but both have nice lines. They are nearly the same size or often bigger as a Lion, Van der Tann or Andrea Doria. 2.5s it would be Atlanta Class or Leander. I think that the 2.5's or the 4.5's may be the ticket. It seems that alot of people point to the VDT for the "edge". But not always going for that. How bad of moving target would the AD be being a 26 speed? If she could be used on the axis or allies would be nice but not sure if you can do that w/ Italian ships as you could maybe with french ones. It seems Tugboat does a Leander it would be neat to do an Ajax. It is getting tempting to do an American ship more and more.. How difficult would it be for a new comer doing a light cruiser as in the Atlanta or Ajax? I have more play in weight it seems for MWC oddly has max weight being just under 10 for the Leander and IRC has it at 7.5 which gives up to just over 8 w/ the 10% rule. Which would be in line with MWC the max for Atlanta is 6.5 in IRC which would mean just over 7 max. Is that going on the end of too light for a begginer? Both would require 2 screws (leander 2 dummy most likely since it is 4). Then what is peoples take on the Des Moines, Lion or Andrea Doria? Even though not as effective in IRC I am leaning to the Des Moines. The idea of 3 stern guns might be a good starter to learn to use them effectively but the prospect of having side mounts is tempting thus the Lion.. Out of all those it appears that Atlanta and Des Moines seems the simplest in design and it will get the 50% rule for rudders like the duals would.
