Rudder Study IRCWCC Fast Gun

Discussion in 'Ship Comparison' started by Maxspin, Dec 5, 2014.

  1. Maxspin

    Maxspin -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    Let’s see what the rudder options would look like for a class 5 ship.

    A class 5 ship is allowed 3” of rudder. Multi rudder ships are allowed a 1.5 rudder bonus or 4.5” of rudder. In our hobby, our boat turn due to prop wash over the rudder, so the more prop wash you can direct the better your boat will turn.

    Single Rudder = 3” rudder

    Dual in line = 4.5” rudder

    Dual = 2 X 2.25 “ rudders

    Drag Disks are allowed in our hobby, and are placed on non running props. For the sake of argument I will assume drag disks in place of “super reverse”.

    Since I do not have access to cool drafting software, you have to make do with my cartoon drawings. Any of you engineer types who would like to jump in and SHOW why I am wrong. Please do.

    I am not going to attempt to show the difference made with “Pate” or “Schilling” style rudder. All rudder options can do this.

    First let’s look at single rudder ships
    [​IMG]
    Why do we hate American ships?
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    First thing to note is that you are limited to 1.5” props. There is no chance of covering 1.75” props with that silly little rudder.

    We then look at “in line rudder”
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    It looks much better on a 1.5” prop but will still have difficulty covering 1.75”
    [​IMG]

    Now for dual rudders The vectoring does a fair job covering the 1.75 props.
    [​IMG]

    Most interesting is the single prop. With dual rudders
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    Dual 1.75” props cover a width of 3.625”. A single prop is only 1.75” this is easily covered by dual props. It even easily allow a 2” prop with better coverage that dual props gets with 1.75” props.
    [​IMG]

    Interesting to note that only Axis have these "super" boats

    Keith
     
  2. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    Interesting. But why do you say "super"? They turn better. It's a difference in the makeup of the fleets and ships that we have available. I see the differences in the ships and fleets as a feature, not a bug. You're not going to out turn a Baden with one of the U.S. ships. I guess my question would be what do you want? If you like the U.S. ships, build one. I saw your thread on the barham you're building, and I imagine that you'll do quite well with her, even against the occasional Baden. If I ever build a U.S. ship, I'd build the Oklahoma, cause I was born there and I like those ships look better than the NC/sodaks. If you want to change the rules cause x ship isn't as good as y, then eventually we'll end up with a spec fleet on both sides with identical ships. Personally, don't like that idea. What are the stats as far as nats, regionals, etc. when it's axis vs allied? If the allies are getting skunked all the time, you may have a point. But a lot of battles are flag/ no flag anyway. If you want the best 28 sec hug and slug ship, build a Baden. The best triple stern ship? An NC or Sodak, etc.
    Back when I was going to nats, it was NC country. I hear that's changed these days, and I bet it'll change from what it is now.
    I think some ships are better than others, but there are not any "super" ships. Every ship has strengths and weaknesses, and a niche in the pond where they can do well (for the most part).
    I assume you'd like to change the rules? Either cut down dual rudder or add to the singles? Aside from wanting to make the singles more attractive to build, is there a rationale? Are dual rudder ships historically better or worse than single turning at1:1? Does anyone know why the rules were set up the way they were for rudders? That may have some bearing here.

    - mike t
     
  3. Maxspin

    Maxspin -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    Skunked would be an understatement. When was the last time it was even close?
    Nats Scores as posted from IRCWCC.

    Year Axis Allied Winner
    2006 94850 67055 Axis
    2007 109960 73320 Axis
    2008 64804 37584 Axis
    2009 97015 63685 Axis
    2010 118599 76194 Axis
    2011 117980 99050 Axis
    2012 111580 67890 Axis
    2013 91920 49655 Axis
    2014 97495 58315 Axis

    Keith
     
  4. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    Wow, that's pretty rough. But what was the fleet mix? Does everyone wants to be axis in the irc? And how do you change that? If you give single rudders a bonus, they still aren't gonna match a Baden, I imagine.
     
  5. absolutek

    absolutek -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I know the last IRCWCC nats the allies were badly outnumbered. I think that has happened a number of times.
     
  6. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    Just a took quick look at the mwc site, and they don't look as one sided there. Perhaps more a factor of relative fleet sizes/ mix than something like rudders? It's pretty obvious there is an advantage to a 1 prop 2 rudder set up, I'm just not convinced that it's a killer strategically axis v allied.
     
  7. Maxspin

    Maxspin -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    It only takes a little research to determine that we have litigated an advantage to axis boats. It only takes a couple of battles to see OOoooowww:woot:. I want one of those.
     
  8. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    How was it litigated?
     
  9. Maxspin

    Maxspin -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    The rules tell you what size your rudder can be..........
     
  10. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    Ok, but there has to be a standard, right? How would you change it?
     
  11. Maxspin

    Maxspin -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    I liked Nicks suggestion.
     
  12. absolutek

    absolutek -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Its not so much the rudder issue that is the problem. Axis ships tend to have better and more numerous sidemount options. The last time I went to a nats the axis side had a significant advantage in side mounts. Side mounts as we all know are more likely to do below the waterline holes which are worth significantly more in points as well as more likely to cause sinks. I think the better solution to the axis has better ships problem is to either make all holes count the same or to just count sinks.
     
  13. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    I don't see that that changes anything, though, does it? I'd imagine that the relative maneuverability of the ships isn't going to be changed enough to justify the bloody rules fight I bet it'd be. And I'm still not really convinced there's a problem to be fixed (not at the end of the day, that MY opinion matters). Not saying it's a bad idea, per se, I just don't see it changing anything. Wouldn't really bother me if it got passed, but doubt I'd back it either.
     
  14. absolutek

    absolutek -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Who are you replying to?
     
  15. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    Max spins comment regarding nicks idea.
     
  16. Bob

    Bob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Posts:
    1,318
    NATS is won by the fleet that has the most vet captains with ships that don't fail. If your ship works and your brain works its really hard to sink you. If one side loses NATs it almost always is due to that fleet having more ship failures.
     
  17. NickMyers

    NickMyers Admin RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,404
    Location:
    Federal Way, WA
    So for the past decade, IRC allied captains have been largely noobs or incompetent?
     
    Panzer likes this.
  18. DATDAVFred

    DATDAVFred Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2014
    Posts:
    86
    Location:
    cincinnati ohio
  19. Wmemlo

    Wmemlo Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Posts:
    81
    Location:
    Longview, tx
    I would say rather that they have been outnumbered perhaps, and once the fleet is sinking a lot at the start of the week, things tend to go downhill. And if folks see that the allied side is getting clobbered, you end up in a positive feedback loop as more decide to go axis. Don't know for sure, as I've never been to an irc nats. But the less lopsided mwc nats would seem to me to argue against it being a solely rules based bias.
     
  20. Bob

    Bob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Posts:
    1,318
    Nope, just didn't have enough high class ships. If the same group of people keep showing up with the same ships, or new ships built in the same way you're going to get the same results. I bet if you went over the IRC NATS scores you see the same people on each side every year. Until the Allies get more quality ships they are not going to win. It's not just more ships, it has to be good ones. There's a pretty big gap between a new guy and a 5 year guy.

    I think part of your point was that the Axis have all the best ships. Then why in the MWC is NATS basicly even over the same time. It's about the people not the ships. In the MWC there's a group of guys who only go Axis, another group that only go Allied, a third group that changes sides every couple years. Things have stayed pretty even year to year. The last 2-3 years the group of guys who flip sides has become smaller and the Axis only group has gotten bigger and younger. The Allied group has started getting smaller and older. If the trend continues the Axis will win every year.

    I don't know the age demo in IRC or numbers in the IRC maybe the same thing happend 10 years ago and never changed.