Hello to everyone here. I'm Rick, living in Rhode Island. I've always had an interest in building model ships (built a wood tug when I was a teen), but never knew (or heard) of anyone fighting them. But I've always wanted to fight them. So last week, during a sleepless night, I find videos of exactly that on YouTube. Amazing-it's right up my alley! So, a week later, I've already contected the "local" squadron (NETF), and am seriously considering building an Alaska as my first combatant (and later, maybe the Rhode Island BB). I spent time in my workshop last night attempting to figure out the perfect workspace to build on. It's a bug; I've been bitten. And I couldn't be happier about it.
so im guessing ur going small gun with IRCWCC rule set if ur going with NETF. if so the like u have seen in the other posts the Alaska Class is not the greatest kinda ship for a rook to run but then again what do i know im running a Iowa class and im a rook too. but b4 my Iowa is going into combat i have a von der tann to learn on then im giving it to me dad. I would really sugest that you would go with a different ship cause in combat the Alaska Class is not forgiving cause she is huge. that being said if u really have ur heart set on the Alaska Class the go for it.
Hey Jason, I have been warned on the slower-turning aspect of the Alaska. However, one thing I am not clear on is the "Bonus" she reveives under IRCWCC rules regarding cruisers over 650'. Said cruisers receive a +50% rudder size to compensate. The real one could simply cut power to the inboard shafts in a turn, greatly assisting the turn rate, but apparently, that's a no-no for the models... So, accounting for the 4.5" vice 3.0" rudder, is the Alaska still a slow turner? She's certainly big enough to be forgiving of a beginner (construction-wise), and will certainly take a while to sink. Personally, Since Alaska was designed to be faster (and actually was) than the coveted Iowa class, IMO, her speed should make her a 23 vice a 24 speed boat, but I'm sure that's an unwelcome position at this time. Thank you for the warm welcome. I'm certainly glad to have discovered this group and activity. I hope to be blasting (nad getting blasted) by next summer. I intend on scratch-building my Alaska, vice going for fiberglass. I enjoy the challenge.
She'll still be a slow turner. Not really any way around it since she's long and skinny. This is not to say it's a bad ship, just be aware of the limitations and play with the strengths. Welcome to RC Naval Combat!
I will have to take another read through the IRC ruleset, but keep in mind that the Alaska and Guam are not cruisers, they are battle cruisers... different ship classes (per my understanding) I could be wrong. If you are just starting out, may I make a suggestion based on when I started out in this great hobby (I am fast gun). Get a ship like the Baden class or another 4-5.5 unit battlecruiser/battleship that turns very well. They are fairly easy to battle, some like the baden, can take quite a bit of damage, and they are nasty when playing sidemounts... Then build the more difficult to run ships after you build your first one and can take all the lessons you learned constructing the first one and apply it to the second... I fully agree with the love of scratch building too... I still do that (not usually with ships but other stuff). here is the IRC quote from www.ircwcc.org: "Single rudder Cruisers over 599’, single rudder Battle Cruisers over 700’, single rudder Battleships over 700' and all dual rudder ships get 50% more area" The alaska, being a battle cruiser (per the standard nomenclature) would get the 50% extra area either from the battlecruiser over 700' (800ish' on her) or from having two rudders (I don't know if she had two or not). As far as speed, there is absolutly zero chance of getting her sped up as she was slower than an Iowa (24 second there) and the 22,23 second slots are reserved for destroyers and smaller cruisers...
She had one but benefits from being looong I agree on the smaller BC idea. The Badens and Invincibles take a huge amount of pounding, properly built.
Alaska has a single rudder, and can take advantage of the extra 50% rudder. That being said, she's still going to turn slow/wide. It isn't legal to cut power to the inner shaft; I asked that when I first got started out in regards to my own "dog", HMS Courageous. As for building, she has enough room to be forgiving for building, yes, but she isn't forgiving of Axis ships. The Axis will see a huge target, and will be on you like white on rice. Trust me, they will lick their chop and say ohhhh look, an Alaska to snuggle with. My 65 inch Courageous knows the drill. I sincerely doubt you will have a lot of fun running an Alaska as your first ship. If your heart is set on it, by all means, do what you wish, but you will spend A LOT of time patching/sinking. You'll be much happier with something like an Invincible or a Von Der Tann. Mike D
Alaska does however, make an excellent big-gun ship. Fast, fairly well armed and quite good looking. She won't last long in a headbutting contest with a BB, but she is murder when used against merchants. Almost like an allied Graf Spee in some respects. Probably still not so good for a rookie, but if you love the ship you'll make it work.
One thing to consider is how you plan to transport the boat to the pond. Just imagine trying to get a Yamato to the pond on top of a Mini.
That is a good point. However, either of my two vehicles (Dodge Durango and Dodge Magnum) can accommodate fairly easily the 67" hull. After reading all this, I'm torn. I love the design of the Alaska, but am having some concerns about playability.
I feel your pain. I love the Alaska too. You WILL have playability issues with her. I'm not saying I'd NEVER build one, I'm saying I wouldn't built it FIRST. I'd recommend a simpler ship such as a VDT or an I-boat (von der tann and Invincible/Indefatigable) to get started. Once you have battled for a season or two, and have a better idea what plays into ship design, tactics and game play, then if you still want to build an Alaska, I say go for it. Frankly, I think it would be awesome to see one on the water; I just don't think it would be a FUN (and that's the most important part!) first ship. If I were setting one up for the IRCWCC (where she is 5 units), I think I would just put dual sides in "A" turret, dual sides in "B" turret and the best pump I could get. I wouldn't worry about a stern gun, because frankly, you won't turn well enough to use it well. Besides, everyone and their brother will try to sidemount you, so you might as well accept the fact that you will get plastered and try to take someone down with you. Mike D
Ok, if the Alaska is not a good design for a beginner, how about the Konig? (WWI German Dreadnought) She'd (uhh, "he'd") be slower (28) versus the 24 of the Alaska, but the model would be about 19" shorter (48.33" vs. 67.42"), permitting faster turn rate, correct? Hull also wider (8.08" vs. Alaska's 7.58"), and the model hasn't been "overdone".
Konig would be an excellent ship. Plenty of room inside, good weapon layout and excellent maneuverability. I think its a winner for you. Mike D
