Ahh yes, the mighty Collossus, this ship that got me thinking of predreads to begin with. What the hell, BB's can put two sidesmounts in the same turret BUT they must be parrallel to each other (no sighting on a single point).
This all sounds very interesting. Has someone started piecing all of this together? Looks like it would be a easier and fun way to start out.
I'm not smart enough to train them together. My printed barrel holder will be parallel. I was one of the people on Kickstarter that paid for paper copies of the plans in 1/96, and I get 3 months' early access to the digital format But they won't be ready for a while, giving time to get a cruiser ready. I have enough stuff laying around to build it (assuming I use old-school 12AH 6V lead-acid batteries). I'll just make the motor mount such that I can swap out the one I use for whatever the spec motor is, and then I'll have 2 for demos at fast gun battles, or for starting a local club. Maybe sell some of the scale hulls that clutter my shop.
Kinda to piggy back on Mark's post about speeds ... Like him, I'm an R/C airplane and car guy who used to race/compete in spec classes. Items like battery, motors, tires, props, etc were all specifically limited to a certain brand or part number. The idea of course was to try to equalize the planes/cars while keeping costs down. Unfortunately, it didn't work as intended. Any given motor, either electric or fuel, is not equal even if it is the same make, model, brand, etc. Manufacturing variances inevitably made some batches better than others. To find those better motors, competitors would buy a large batch of motors, break them in, test each motor, and pick/use the top performers. The other motors were then sold off to help fund the next batch purchase. The same process is used for selecting batteries in electric racing. Trying to regulate the means of propulsion usually fails to accomplish the "spec class" intent. It really is better to regulate the result, i.e. speed. In that respect, Treaty nailed it perfectly. Speed testing is easy to do anytime anyplace versus inspecting motors to ensure they have not been tampered with or are illegal. Admittedly, speed testing isn't working perfectly either in the various formats. Prop variances such as curved or foiled blades change acceleration even if the ship is on speed. Some ships have backwards mounted props to force higher rpms to make speed while vastly improving reverse speed and acceleration. Perhaps a compromise between the two ideas is the way to go. For instance, direct a specific prop (making sure it is easy for everyone to get). Then set a speed limit on the hull. The set prop spec removes the prop silliness we have been seeing while still allowing captains to use power and drive systems they have on hand. Speed is still limited to a set specification.
Add a Thrust test and you can easily get rid of pretty much all the acceleration/reverse silliness. It is quick, easy, and cheap to do. Simple physics takes care of a lot of problems!
Build a Benbow on a type 4 hull and put two guns in the barbettes. This is no longer a scale format. Your free to build waterever you want above the waterline (within the few and simple guidlenes that are evolving). Worst case, you won't win the best scale award (but you might win best Punk!).
It's understood that any installation can be gamed, even the simple one being proposed for Steampunk. IMO, the simpler the installation, the less areas there are to be gamed. We have identical hulls, set battery chemistry, handout motors, spec a prop, and what's left? Beef up and shorten the wiring runs, put slicker grease in the stuffing tube, spit shine the prop. All options a competitive captain will want to do but the options are limited, cheap, and any gains minimal (as compared to a stock Strike or BC fastgun boat and a Ming or Magnus wonder!).
I've put together some of the basic points mentioned here together into a sort of "Discussion Rules". What do you guys think about the points mentioned here? Discussion Rules
Rib spacing is 2", and Steve acquiesced to my plea for BBs to mount two cannons in the same turret. I started crawling through the list today at work during some downtime, but I haven't typed in my handwritten notes yet. Got involved out in the shop, battle is in 2 days! To answer Steve's earlier question, my pumps are a hair over 2" in diameter, and 3.75" tall, counting 550 motor and leads.
Beaver, Good to start documenting the discussion. A few changes to what you have though. 1: There's no 96 scale per se. The concept now is three hull design choices. The three hulls are being based off the average length and beams for ships of the era. A builder must stick to the underwater design, but above the WL, can build whatever they want as long as there's a minimum of 1" penetrable area. Builders will be encouraged to build Victorian era designs with awards being provided for best scale adaptation, or for more whimsical builds, best Punk award. I'm thinking there will be a minimum superstructure requirement so we won't see a plywood board with some cannons slapped on top. 2: Rib width and spacing will be the same for all three classes. 3: BB's can have there sidemounts in the same turret.
Totally planning a steampunk cruiser carrier with ornithopters and small steampunk airships on deck, with secondary turrets and detailing under the flight deck, riffing on early age of flight shifted into the Vitorian era It'll fit the cruiser, just remove the cruiser decks and slide on the carrier Looking forward to printing riveted girders to support the flight deck
Made some revisions. I also added TB's to the rules. Have we decided on anything with propulsion yet? What do you guys think of rules C,3 and D,2, and everything pertaining to the TB's? Discussion Rules Revised
So as to make things clear in my mind when we are talking about scaling the hull, if I were doing the HMS Camperdown, the basic hull would be scaled to fit the 1/96 dimensions of the prototype ship or the standard hull would be used and I would alter the upper works accordingly? Also how are we working with low freeboard hulls vs. high freeboard hulls ie. HMS Royal Sovereign 1891 vs. HMS Hood 1891
Upperworks would be scaled to fit a stock hull. Minimum 1" penetrable freeboard. You can build higher freeboard above that.
