Nothing huge, I promise. Or maybe they are. Gascan, Kotori, and I were having a build session this past weekend, and Minerva was brought out to look at. I held a sheet of 6" wide balsa against the hull, and it covered from well below the legal solid area, up over the deck. They agreed that 6" sheet is plenty enough target area, whether the ship is heeled or not. My thought is this: I looked at plans for a 74-gun 3rd-Rate and several 1st-rate ships. They are not much wider nor much taller than Minerva, but the hull curves quite a bit (looking at the frames drawings). I would propose that for penetrable area (previously-agreed to 3" above down to 2.5" below) be tweaked to: 45 degrees, or a window parallel to the waterline big enough to fit a 6" wide sheet of 1/32" balsa, centered on the waterline . I propose this because with the curvature of the larger hulls, there is more than 6" vertically along the hull surface (what the sheeting is glued to), and the point that we agreed on slightly less than 6" before is to not have horizontal gaps in the balsa sheeting that would be caused by having penetrable area greater than the width of available balsa sheeting. Please discuss. The exact verbage could be improved/modified/nuked. Second: Instead of allowing people to cut the cannon # in half and double the rate of fire, we tlaked (at the build session) about simply cutting the number of cannons in half on the chart. Thoughts?
A third proposed chage: Eliminate different scoring for belows, ons, and aboves by making any hole in the penetrable window count for 10 points each. Waterlines are fluid on these ships which makes it hard to lay a realiable waterline. It'll also make counting FAR easier. Sheeting proposal sounds sound. It might be a good idea to wait on the cannon proposal until after we actually have armed ships on the water. If not that, then perhaps a readjustment of # of cannons other than a straight half cut. Kinda concerned that the small boats that do not have squares (aka Requin and sloops) would only then get 2 cannons total.
I am totally cool with not worrying about the waterline for hole location. Getting holed below is enough of a penalty in and of itself when the allowed damage control pump is 1/2 gallon per hour...
How about "The penetrable area shall be 3" above the waterline to 2.5" below the waterline (or 45 degree turn of the hull), measured along the outside contour of the rib." Some of us need a little margin to sheet, covering a 6" hole with a 6" piece of balsa just isn't going to happen for me. On the left In the picture below you can see how a center rib of the USS Constitution would fall under the various proposals. On the right side is a graphic to depict my suggestion. On the Requin - two guns sounds about right, equivalent to a light cruiser.
While I worded it poorly (and didn't mention space to glue to), my intent was basically 'a window no taller than a 6" piece would fit (centered on the waterline), minus an eighth or quarter inch top and bottom to glue the balsa to'. My concern is that with 3" above and 2.5" below, and the curvature, that leaves precious little solid area to glue the balsa to.
I like the changes for hole scoring and penetrable area. Still not sure about the cannon count, we really have to try that one out before deciding. Until then I'd prefer to keep the flexibility.
