Well then, if it's all or nothing, complete ban or unlimited use, then I favor a ban. To me, nothing kills any sense of realism more than the idea (never mind the sight) of seeing multiple warships traveling at ridiculous speeds in reverse. If it were up to me, I'd allow reverse only in the following situations: - To slow or stop forward momentum (must stop reversing when forward motion stops). - Maneuvering in port, unlimited. - Get out of "stuck" situations, such as nosed-in, moss, etc. only as needed to clear for forward maneuvering. - If that's all you can do (i.e forward disabled, badly holed in bow, etc.). - Station-keeping, limited to own ship's length distance. - No firing of weapons while traveling in reverse. JM
JohnmCA72, I fully agree. I can see using reverse in combat situations such as if you have to do a crash stop to avoid a collision and back away from the ship you almost collided with. But to blindly go in reverse shooting your guns that just is alittle too arcade style. Also I agree that I probably would wish I had it setup to go 25 knots when im getting passed up by other battleships while im only able to go 22 knots. But its no biggie to me. I did order this morning some 1/144th scale plans and I think im going to build a WWI Troop transport first cause when I checked out on some online stores im looking at $800 for 5 turret assemblys and I think to get a hang of the whole thing first would be for the best, let me see if I want faster speed or slower or if i can handle more than 4 turrets or if i want fewer than 4,ect and would be going the simple route, and follow the KISS rule lol. Only thing is the troop transport was able to go 23 knots, not sure if a troop transport is considered a warship or a cargo ship.
Good idea. I always recommend to 1st-time builders that they start with a transport of some type. Everybody learns a lot on their 1st build. If you're like all the rest of us, by the time you're finished you'll have a list as long as your arm of things you'd do differently the 2nd time. Put all of your "rookie mistakes" into something that won't cost as much, or be as important to you. Put the knowledge you've gained from the transport into that warship as a 2nd build. You're likely to end up with a much better warship than if you hadn't done the transport 1st. Of course, I would probably never have followed my own advice, had it been offered... Speed: Check with specific clubs for accepted rulings. Troop transports are usually considered to be transports, not warships. In general, the "minimum" speeds for warships & transports are to help those that otherwise would be too slow, not set a maximum. Most transports could only do about 8-12 kts, which scales out to just about nothing. 1:144 scale is pretty small, & even a moderate breeze is more than enough to stop a ship that small & slow dead in its tracks or even move it backwards. If a ship is able to do more than the allowed minimum, then it's welcome to do so. Say, if the club's transport minimum is 20 kts & you have a transport that was able to do 23 kts, then you could do the 23 - you wouldn't be restricted to 20. The rule is there to allow those that otherwise wouldn't be able to do much of anything at all to be usable. JM
I know that ship! It's the what's-it-called, you know, with the boat, and the propellor, and a little bit of wood. I think it even had a mast! You know which ship I'm talking about, right? []
JohnCA72, I agree. Once I priced the cannon assemblys and I was looking at $800 for 5 double barrel turret assemblys I desided either build a troop transport or go with 4 double barrel turret assemblys. Only problem is I would most likely have a hard time transporting a 6ft long ship though but oh well Ill cross that bridge when I come to it. The nice thing about the transport is that Ive been in a message board about that ship and its two sister ships so I know the layout and how everything looked without having to have plans. But I will still need to get plans. I remember the plans that they had came in 1/144th scale Given its not the RMS Olympic its one of the newer sister ships to her but they didnt change much the length only changed about 1/2" to 1" between them and the only major change was that the Olympic had an open sub deck where as the others had enclosed decks. The great thing also is I know that for the ship she had 23' 6" diameter 3 bladed props that had a 34' 6" pitch and a 17' 0" 4 bladed center prop that had a 14' 6" pitch. So I most likely can scale that down and then all I would have to do is gear it so the props would spin at the correct revolution. The two main engines should spin no more than 80 rpm so the outboard props would have to spin a max of 80 rpm in scale and the center prop would have to spin a max of 190 rpm. Shouldnt be hard to do for a first ship, only down side is I have to figure out how to set it up where the center prop wouldnt spin unless the outboard props were spinning at a specific speed and have it where when the engines were reversed the center one didnt spin. Im sure it wouldnt have to have the motors work just like the real ones did but I feel being the design of the ship it might effect the handling for the worse.
Don't expect original ships' prop speeds to scale. Also, don't feel that you need to match pitch to the original. Set your prop pitch & reduction gearing such that they get your motor(s) running at their happiest speed. After all, you've got a drastically different powerplant than what the original had! I'd run only the center shaft. You really don't need the outer shafts for anything - you can get plenty of speed out of only 1. Running center only puts 100% of the propwash over your rudder for better turning. It also means that you don't have to monkey around with any weird schemes to have different motors running at different times. JM
True, Would be easier to just run 1 prop. Only thing is I could just have the center prop run all the time and say forget about it cause I should have enough room to either run three props off two motors or run all three off one motor. But then again I should go the simple route to cut on spending.
The point of running center only is for better maneuvering. Running 1 vs. running 3 only saves about $10 (2 motors). In a ship that size, internal space won't be an issue. There's really no good reason to run all 3, & powering the center will give you the sharpest turning. JM
Ahh ok. I was just kinda wondering cause I wouldnt mind running all three. Only thing is im limited to size of the prop cause the center prop fits into a oval hole cut into the hull infront of the rudder.
You might consider putting in the two outside props, and just leaving them free-spinning. Just for kicks and good looks. I'm not so sure that building a very large liner is the best ship to start out in. They generally are big and unmaneuverable, and have the unfortunate tendency of drawing fire (and holes!) from across the pond. They also tend to weigh a lot, which makes recovering one after it sinks more difficult. On the plus side, they tend to not sink very often. All that big empty space inside takes a long time to fill up, and big boats (in biggun clubs) get big pumps, too. There's a S.S. Normandie liner in my club, that has seen extensive action in the past 2 years. I torpedoed that ship to smithereens several times, and once I even had it settling low in the water and pumping like mad, but it never sank. Always took too long to fill up with water, by the time it'd be ready to sink, her skipper would have it back in port and pulled to safety.
Oh I understand its going to take alot of fire I would suspect any unarmed ship to take fire. The website that sells the plans he said the model will weigh 45 - 50 lbs, but the plans are for building a 1/144th scale display model with detail so I should expect mine to be considerably less. Then like you said will take alot of water to sink one and I would be allowed to run a 90 GPH pump so basicly I would need to lose 1/4 of my side before the pumps are overtaken. I am going through the illustrated directory of warships I have to see if anything catches my interest that would be bigger than the New York class. Im just keeping options open and going the cheapest route. The plans for the troop transport is made by only one guy and their $200 for the plans. I was also thinking about having freespinning props for look.
My brother and I made a CAD model of a small oiler, and made a set of plans from the model all ready for use in a combat model. It has the keel, subdeck, and ribs already sized and prepared for you. It is in electronic form, ready to be emailed to you and printed at Kinkos. They are free for all, you just need to ask. a shrunken version of the plans: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/CAD-Mehosi-Maru/Mehosi_Maru_Plans_little more screen shots of the CAD model: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/CAD-Mehosi-Maru?page=1 a construction thread about some similar transports that Carl and I are currently building: http://www.rcnavalcombat.com/rcnavalcombat/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=585
Gascan, they look like good simple ships to build. I think I have a simple plan of a C2 cargo ship but I doubt it would be easy to build a scale model from just a profile plan. I have one email im waiting on a friend has alot of plans since he builds all kinds of models and he has to check but he said he thinks he has some plans for building tankers and warships. Not sure which ones but should have a email reply from him this evening.
Fair warning to ya, Rusty... The big liners are wretched to operate in even the slightest wind. They are like big billboards, but without a convenient support; they go over very easily in a stiff breeze with no combat damage. A midsize would be a great choice, though.
I failed to think about wind tossing the ship around. Got a email reply and friend said he had a 1/144th scale builder plan to a T2 tanker or a C3 cargo ship. Im thinking about going that route since I can get a copy of the plans for free
If the ribs are off, then you get to learn about drafting. I hope you're a hot hand with a #2 pencil...
