Ship List

Discussion in '1/96 Battlestations' started by rcengr, Jun 20, 2011.

  1. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    I had started looking into torpedo reloads, I think I got the Germans done, but I am not sure where I put the list. The information is really hard to find and takes some digging as I recall. I was using Groener.
     
  2. dietzer

    dietzer Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    739
    I have torp reload info for most IJN ships.

    I'll dig around for that and send it to you.

    Carl
     
  3. absolutek

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

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    If you just want to email it to me, I can PM my email to you and post it on the site somewhere.

    --Chase
     
  4. dietzer

    dietzer Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    739
    Well, I can't find my complete torp reload list for the IJN. That must still be in storage. :mad:
    But here's what I was able to find:
    SS I-400 class: 20 torps total (8 in tubes, 12 reloads)
    DD Akitsuki class, 8 torps total (4 in tubes plus 4 reloads)
    DD Kagero class, 16 torps total (8 in tubes, 8 reloads)
    DD Yugumo class, 16 torps total (8 in tubes, 8 reloads)
    DD Shimakaze, 20 torps total (15 in tubes, 5 reloads)
    CL Kitakami, rebuilt as torpedo cruiser, 40 torps total (40 in tubes, no reloads)
    CL Mogami class (as built), 24 torps total (12 in tubes, 12 reloads)
    CA Mogami class (rebuilt), 24 torps total (12 in tubes, 12 reloads)
    CA Takao class (as built), 16 torps total (8 in tubes, 8 reloads)
    CA Takao class (re-built), 24 torps total (16 in tubes, 8 reloads)
    In general, the IJN carried twice as many torps as they had tubes, unless there was a) no room for them, or b) if having 2x the torps would have put them over-weight.
    Carl
     
  5. pba

    pba Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2009
    Posts:
    213
    Location:
    dayton
    I dont want or care to be part of the torpedo police. In our local big gun we had unlimited reloads with 30 seconds between shots. This never caused a problem and is the way all of my ships will be setup. We did decide to limit ships to 6 tubes per side to stop the crazyness like the kitakami's. wwcc has done the same because the torpedo cruisers were dominating the matches
     
  6. Kun2112

    Kun2112 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Posts:
    710
    Mark, I never mentioned any dimensions on my build, that was Mike commenting on the H. It should fit in my Subaru.
    Never ask if someone is insane--the answer will be no if they are. :D
     
  7. Kun2112

    Kun2112 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Posts:
    710
    Ok, I have updated the list with Pump capacity, and primary gun caliber based on the rules listed on this forum. The Speed chart is set to 33=33 with a minimun speed of 22 knots = 44 seconds.I altered Mark's updated list to compensate. I do not see anything listed for max speed, so that has been left alone with the fastest speed listed at 47 knots = 19 seconds. I left torpedoes off as there seems to be some discussion on that topic, and I don't have data that is anywhere near complete as I do not have a copy of Conway's .
    www.rcnavalcombat.com/Portals/0/Use...ist(2).xls
    I didn't realize this, but there are about 125 ships listed with 1/8" mains. Will need to see if we can figure out a way to get 1/8" to fire from fast-gun or 3/16(+BB) big-gun cannons.
    Again, much thanks to Mark for his hard work on the Treaty list and re-caculating the dimensions on the Battlestations list.
    EDIT: I just noticed that there are some ships (SS & CV so far) that only have AAA guns--the calibur in column M is "0". That will show up as an error in the formula I used.
     
  8. dietzer

    dietzer Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    739
    I don't care to be part of the torpedo police, either. I will make sure I have the right number of reloads and I am happy to just trust others to do the same. However, I see no harm in providing the reload info for those that are interested.

    Carl
     
  9. rcengr

    rcengr Vendor

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Posts:
    1,291
    Location:
    Ohio
    Nice job Dustin. I'm sure we could modify the current guns to handle 1/8" but I'm not sure there will be a demand. For the submarines, the torpedo tubes are the main armament and I doubt anyone would arm the deck guns. For the most part, the ships with the small guns have torpedo tubes which would be used instead. The rules might need an interpretation as to whether to consider the torpedoes on the destroyers and protected cruisers as main armament.
    For the carriers, some other rule needs to be put in place.
     
  10. absolutek

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

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Well as the rules are right now, atleast half the main gun turrets have to be armed before torpedoes can be armed.
     
  11. Kun2112

    Kun2112 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Posts:
    710
    Subs already get Torpedoes as primary armament without the "arm 50% of turrets" rule, so I might change the formula to read the class type as SS and place TT as a value. I seem to recall some discussion on carriers, but cannot find anything online. Perhaps take a page from 1/144 big-gun rules on this? I know MBG armed carriers with fixed 1/4", and I think it was based on aircraft compliment to get the number of barrels, but I am not sure. MBG rules are hard to find right now, and NTXBG, AUBG, and WWCC have them posted and appear to be the most active clubs.
    I think that would be a good starting point on carriers with lots of active discussion to come soon afterwards. :)
    I like the 50% rule to get torpedoes personally. I understand the reason it was put in place, and I think the last thing anyone wants is to turn the format into an arms race for the best torpedo platform. Perhaps a waiver on the 50% rule if displacement is below a certain tonnage or if guns cannot be armed due to small caliber ( If anyone can build/arm a torpedo boat (US PT, UK MTB, Schnellboot, V-109, etc...) those are allowed IIRC.
     
  12. absolutek

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

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    I also like the 50% rule to get torpedoes as well. I believe a few exceptions are acceptable to that rule though, like for submarines, and perhaps for ships with very low displacement like maybe under 2500 tons (just an arbitrary figure).
     
  13. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    Here is what I was able to discover. It only goes back to the Deustchland Class PDN's and was drawing form only one source so take it as that may.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2014
  14. dietzer

    dietzer Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    739
    I think a 50% rule is way too restrictive for small DDs and DEs. In addition, I don't like the all or nothing nature of this rule on the torps. A 50% rule really favors DDs with few gun mounts and many TT mounts.
    Smaller DD's, like Benson/Gleaves or Fletcher's, had 5 single 5"/38 mounts. 50% means you have to arm 3 of them to get torps. That could be difficult with their smaller displacements. In addition, different ships within the same class had different numbers of gun mounts. Many Benson/Gleaves were only completed with 4 mounts, and many 5-gun Benson/Gleaves and Fletchers had a gun mount removed as the war progressed. So some DDs would need 3 guns armed to meet a 50% rule while other DDs in the same class only need 2 guns armed. Not very fair. Few people would want to build the 5-gun versions as they incur an extra penalty to arm torps according to a 50% rule. There were also some German DD's that would have the same problem.
    Here's an alternative that I think make more sense for DDs/DEs, and it won't penalize the 5-gun DD unfairly: the number of gun barrels armed must always exceed the number of torp mounts armed. Note that this is mounts, not tubes. The torp mounts could be duals, triples, quads, or 5-tube mounts; all would be counted equally.
    This means you'd have to arm 2 gun barrels to get 1 torp mount, 3 gun barrels to get 2 torp mounts, 4 gun barrels to get 3 torp mounts, etc. Now every DD can have a torp mount, but a super-DD can't go crazy on torp mounts without incurring an extra gun penalty...
    What do ya'all think?
    Carl
     
  15. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    Why not guns must equal or exceed the number of armed torpedo mounts?
    I can't decide which side to short change on a Clemson.
     
  16. absolutek

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

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Posts:
    1,807
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Some ships just get short changed by their very design, its just something we have to live with if we want to build them. I like that the rules focus more on the guns than the torpedoes, but still allow the torpedoes if so desired. That being said, I can see carls point that the 50% rule is too restrictive on the very small ships. So, unless somebody objects, lets add an exception for the lighter ships to arm torpedoes on a 1:1 ratio with guns.
     
  17. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    It was never my intent to try and fully arm a Clemson. Should we have a maximum displacement to qualify for the 1:1 rule? Say 1500 tons max? That should cover the DE's and Flushdeckers.
     
  18. duckie2045

    duckie2045 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Posts:
    34
    I'm thinking about putting the artimas up for sale.
    Is there anybody out there interrested? I'm still waitting on needed items from one of our vinders to finish her up and i'm getting frustrated and about to give up on her and just stikeing to 1/144th!
     
  19. Kun2112

    Kun2112 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Posts:
    710
    All,
    I found an error on the shiplist speeds from the original Treaty spreadsheet it is based off of. I originally forgot to scroll up on the speeds worksheet and speeds under 22 knots were listed at TREATY speeds. I have since corrected and re-uploaded the spreadsheet. This resulted in a 7 knot ship listed six seconds faster than a 22 knot ship. Sorry for any trouble.
     
  20. Anachronus

    Anachronus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Posts:
    3,085
    Location:
    Natchez, MS
    That's one fast monitor.