Iceman
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1186
 | | 24 Feb 2010 09:54 PM | | Posted By Greg McFadden on 24 Feb 2010 07:14 PM
I'm with you crzyhawk. I think it needs to be clarified soon, as there are enough ships with novel rotating systems under construction, that it would not be good to wait till someone shows up and there is an argument about it. Anyone have the contact info for the current e-board for the IRCWCC handy?
You have two current members of the IRCWCC eboard in this discussion. Marty and I...
Rob A. IRCWCC VP | | Rob A.
USS Alabama
USS Arizona
USS Saratoga
DKM Bismarck
USS John Brown
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYBG/ | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 24 Feb 2010 11:21 PM | | Well, rob, there is a bit of a rules disagreement, which I believe, is the purview of the e-board to decide and publish an opinion on. It would be nice to have that interpretation settled and published on the website so that there is no later disagreement on the rules pond side. | | | |
|
Iceman
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1186
| | 24 Feb 2010 11:25 PM | | I agree and it will be discussed. I am inclined to think that it will be allowed until a resolution can be put forth at rules meeting and a revised version can be voted upon. I will update further as it progesses. | | Rob A.
USS Alabama
USS Arizona
USS Saratoga
DKM Bismarck
USS John Brown
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYBG/ | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 24 Feb 2010 11:30 PM | | excellent, thanks rob and marty! I hope one day to make it all the way from west coast to east...
| | | |
|
Iceman
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1186
| | 24 Feb 2010 11:43 PM | | Strike models came out to visit. I put Stephen in the Arizona and he had a good time. I couldn't sink him. i would love to see some of your machine work firsthand... | | Rob A.
USS Alabama
USS Arizona
USS Saratoga
DKM Bismarck
USS John Brown
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYBG/ | |
|
Greg McFadden
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1416
| | 24 Feb 2010 11:55 PM | | Just wait till I get the baden done.... that thing will have probably my best work to date. I plan to document it copiously. Heck, if all its bits work out right I will probably detail the parts so others could copy them... now I just have to get my speeds and feeds right for 303 stainless
-Greg | | | |
|
RichelieuBB
Veteran
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1345
| | 25 Feb 2010 01:31 AM | | Rereading the MWC rules, there doesn't seem to be anything that prohibits more than one rotating turret. In fact, it specifically states that turrets may rotate as long as they do not violate the sidemount or unarmed quadrant rules. Dave's ID rotates do not violate any of the MWC rules as they are written.
| | Mike Mangus
Beware the French Revolution!
Operational:
HMS Erin DN
FN Richelieu BB
FN Verite PDN
Under Construction:
FN Mogador DE
FN Gascogne BB (Treaty)
FN Bretagne (1/96) (delayed)
Le Requin Xebec (AoS)
Mothballed:
FN Bearn CV
| |
|
djranier
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1447
| | 25 Feb 2010 07:59 AM | | Thats the way I read it also Mike
My setup I think, does not violate rule 7a. At no time do I exceed 1 cannon covering any specific side. I think it says any, instead of one specific side just to allow for rule 7d, which is the rule covering rotates, which is also plurl, allowing more than 1 rotate.
But as we all know, and have seen many times on this forum, there can be multiple interpertations by different people of the same rule. This is my interpertation of the rules which says I think it is legal. | | | Its better to give than to receive.
Southeast Attack Squadron | |
|
Renodemona
Lieutenant
Posts:325
| | 25 Feb 2010 08:21 AM | | Copy/Pasted from the CBS Rules: Classes 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 may have sidemounted cannons (any cannon which is angled more than 15 degrees from the longitudinal centerline of the model). Warships in these classes are allowed sidemounts as follows: a) Ships under 720': These ships may carry a maximum of two sidemount cannons with a maximum of one firing cannon covering any specific side. On these ships, one specific fixed quadrant shall be left unarmed at all times. The definition of quadrants are: forward and stern quadrants are 30 degree segments arranged 15 degrees either side of the ship's longitudinal centerline; side quadrants are those extending from the end of the bow quadrant to the beginning of the stern quadrant on either side. d) Rotating turrets (turrets that traverse from one quadrant to another) are allowed on classes 4-8 provided that they do not violate the above restrictions. As I stated previously, the rule states that a maximum of two sidemount cannons with a maximum of one firing cannon covering any specific side may be carried. It does not say "at a time" or "at any one point in time." The bow sidemounted cannon fires into the port side quadrant as does the stern sidemounted cannon. Maybe I'm going crazy on this, maybe I've spent too much time in the report room, maybe my interpretation is an interpretation of one. If the region 3 BoD guys have seen this and made a ruling already, awesome, I'll drop it. If not then I'd like some other BoD and/or experienced battlers to take a look and put in their opinions and I'll go by what they think. | | | IJN Nagato
IJN Chokai
IJN Kawachi | |
|
jadfer
Lieutenant Commander
Posts:570
| | 25 Feb 2010 09:24 AM | | So what is the definition of a 'specific fixed quadrant'? That seems to be the key term in the rule affecting all of this. My first interpretation is that it is a quadrant that is unarmed and being fixed it means it is a quadrant that is NEVER armed therefore you wouldn't be able to rotate a cannon into the fixed quadrant. What is actually meant by that term? | | | |
|
djranier
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1447
| | 25 Feb 2010 05:16 PM | | I actually discussed this with everyone at the Minnesota Nats, and only 2 people out of the 50 that attended had any issues with it at the time. I think thats when you had to miss Nats due to your trooper training. I did clear it with region 3 Bod's and neither of them saw a problem with it, the President, and Vice Pres at that time had no issues, also other area Bod's at the time were ok with it. Don't know who else I needed to talk to, to get a ruling on it. | | | Its better to give than to receive.
Southeast Attack Squadron | |
|
Renodemona
Lieutenant
Posts:325
| | 26 Feb 2010 02:41 AM | | Well then I'll consider it blessed. I'll see you under the bridge.  | | | IJN Nagato
IJN Chokai
IJN Kawachi | |
|
jadfer
Lieutenant Commander
Posts:570
| | 26 Feb 2010 10:24 AM | | Well I think its great work. I am really inspired by your awesome gadgets and goodies. Thanks for sharing. | | | |
|