Tirpitz vs Bismarck?

Discussion in 'Vendor News' started by modelshipsahoy, Oct 21, 2018.

?

Tirpitz or Bismarck

  1. Tirpitz

    61.1%
  2. Bismarck

    38.9%
  1. Kevin P.

    Kevin P. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Posts:
    1,700
    Location:
    Chantilly, VA
    lots of keystrokes being expended here. Jeff Johhny and Carl really are becoming allied captains....
     
    jadfer, daisycutter and thegeek like this.
  2. NickMyers

    NickMyers Admin RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,404
    Location:
    Federal Way, WA
    And here i thought Johnny was quitting. So confused.
     
  3. Sinkazuki

    Sinkazuki Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2017
    Posts:
    179
    Location:
    Colorado
    That was evil johnny.
     
  4. djranier

    djranier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Posts:
    1,756
    All the builders made hulls much too deep. The rules have no limit, as long as you do not exceed the max weight. You can make a boat with hull 6 inches too high if you wanted too, just a lot more area to shoot it.
     
  5. Kevin P.

    Kevin P. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Posts:
    1,700
    Location:
    Chantilly, VA
    For those with the popcorn, please note that the following two statements were made by the same person:

    and

     
  6. warspiteIRC

    warspiteIRC RIP

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Posts:
    756
    Location:
    Annapolis, MD
    That's because they forced him to become Allied!
     
  7. jadfer

    jadfer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Posts:
    1,576
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I was but realized I don't have to have a boat to be in the hobby.. I have a KEYBOARD!!! YEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
     
    WillCover, Beaver, Panzer and 2 others like this.
  8. djranier

    djranier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Posts:
    1,756
    The hulls all were made too deep, True or false? True
    And only class 2 and below are allowed to have excess hull volume, True or false? True
    You can make a boat with hull 6 inches too high if you wanted too, just a lot more area to shoot it., True, no one seems to care that the boats are too deep
    Yet when cut down to the proper height, you are accused of cheating, called names and so forth.
    At least I was not using illegal drag disks, right?
     
  9. Iunnrais

    Iunnrais Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Posts:
    238
    Location:
    Texas
    Interestingly enough, we all routinely ignore the running gear part of II.C.3 when we install our drive systems. How many folks use props that are scale size (or within +/- 2% using the L/W tolerance as a guideline for 'relatively scale')? :)
     
  10. Maxspin

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

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    non-scale running gear does not reduce target area......
     
  11. NickMyers

    NickMyers Admin RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,404
    Location:
    Federal Way, WA
    i dont know, if your non scale running gear lets you get away from my guns faster, it certainly seems to reduce it
     
    Panzer likes this.
  12. Kevin P.

    Kevin P. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2015
    Posts:
    1,700
    Location:
    Chantilly, VA
    I like how 'non-conformance' with a statement that isn't actually in the rules is cited for blanket authorization to violate whatever the savants see fit...seems like a logical approach to fair play
     
  13. NickMyers

    NickMyers Admin RCWC Staff

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Posts:
    4,404
    Location:
    Federal Way, WA
    Honestly I'm entirely lost at this point as to what is and isn't in the rules and what those words that are there or aren't there even mean. I just want to play with toy boats.
     
    Panzer, WillCover, Beaver and 2 others like this.
  14. Lou

    Lou It's just toy boats -->> C T D <<-- Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Posts:
    2,090
    Location:
    Smyrna, Georgia
    Seems like the only time this all comes out is at Nats, I believe the local events are self governed.
     
  15. Iunnrais

    Iunnrais Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Posts:
    238
    Location:
    Texas
    Wow....Thanks for the extra words in my mouth giving permission to break rules. ;)

    I was just pointing out that we tend to selectively enforce what's there anyway. Last I checked, the rule requiring relatively scale running gear was still in the rules. The clause "such as skegs and bilge keels" does not constitute the only items on the hull that are part of the ship's running gear, but instead only provides two examples. So yeah, props and all the rest of the junk under the ship that provides drive and direction is still part of the running gear. We do have a rule that gives exceptions for additional size on the rudders. We also do have a rule that says props and rudders must be in the scale locations (both fore/aft and in relation to the centerline). We don't however have a rule that says props can be oversized :) Folks just do it anyway and I don't really expect that to change, rule or no rule.

    Not to mention the fact that we're modeling subjects that are 70+ years old with tons of poor and or conflicting source information which is a real issue on quite a lot of hulls. I've got a fiberglass Richelieu sitting next to me that is nowhere near the actual French Plans and needs to be well over max weight to float at the same waterline that the French sources list as the standard. It's also more than an inch too wide in the aft areas (whee! SoDak like stern - the main source of the excess displacement) even though it still meets the correct length/beam measurements. Just bonus target area for the fleet that gets stuck with it and what should have been unnecessary weight for the captain to haul around.
     
  16. WillCover

    WillCover -->> C T D <<--

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    658
    Location:
    Harrison, Michigan
    [​IMG]
     
    Panzer and Beaver like this.
  17. Maxspin

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

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    I feel like such a Mook.

    I have always put a lot of thought into the “toy boat” that I choose to invest a lot of time and effort into.
    I consider things such as:
    Rudders (duals being the best)
    Turret positions (4 super firing being best)
    Speed (faster is better)
    Free board
    · Lower in the water is better
    · Stringers add protection
    · Casements add protection
    One of the thing that I didn’t like about the N. Carolina I had been running was the amount of free board it had.
    Some clever Sea Lawyer found a loophole in the rules that allows us to ignore scale when it come to height of ship. If you don’t like the free board, just shorten it until it is where you like it….

    It feels like the Washington Treaty all over again (Only Toy Boats).

    The Allies get Rodney, S. Dakota, and Richelieu.
    The Axis get Nagato, Bismarck and Yamato
    It certainly gives me a lot to think about for my next build project.
     
  18. daisycutter

    daisycutter Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Posts:
    130
    What ship
    What ships are abnormally low in the water? Where are you getting your information? Would you like to discuss facts are just make general accusations? Again calling people names is not productive
     
  19. jadfer

    jadfer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2008
    Posts:
    1,576
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    This has always been an issue... Model builders want scales ships that go pop so they can get an idea what the real ship was like in combat, battlers want to build ships ideal for combat.. that doesn't make one side of the other 'EVIL' or sea lawyers or up to no good. It is a fundamental difference in the understanding of the core of the hobby. We all choose our levels of participation which is fine. Here are some examples...

    Some play with sketch-up and 3d-printer.. but are in the hobby
    Some play with keyboards and don't battle .. but are in the hobby
    Some build hundreds of ships and don't battle but are in the hobby
    Some build beautiful scale ships that are battle ready.. but never battle
    Some build beautiful scale ships that are battle ready.. and battle them... once.. and when the fine details are damaged.. complain about over-competitiveness
    Some build ships suited to combat not to scale looks.. and battle regularly

    Yet ALL groups listed above want to be legislators.. for rules.. that one or two groups have to follow.

    That does not make sense to me at all.

    WHO CARES ANYWAY!!!!
    If you are not an effective battler it wont matter what ship you build.. you will not beat the experienced battlers even if they drive the worst 'performing' ship.

    If we all learned to battle effectively... this would be a non-issue..

    Just one problem.. you have to actually BATTLE to learn to battle EFFECTIVELY

    I am enjoying my new keyboard hobby!!

    Banzai!!!!
     
    Panzer and daisycutter like this.
  20. Maxspin

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

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2014
    Posts:
    634
    Location:
    Yelm, Washington
    "If a tree falls in a forest and you are not around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

    Why do you assume that I don't battle?
    Why do you assume that I am not EFFECTIVE?