froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
 | | 24 Feb 2011 06:05 AM | | We have a new project in the works. And this one will be a group project. With the exciting news that Strike Models is coming out with a fiberglass hull for the hypothetical battleship USS Montana, some of the folks in our group have decided to take on this project as a club boat. We will all pitch in to complete the boat, and maintain it so that it is available at our events for folks that may be flying in, or otherwise unable to bring their own boat. If there isn't someone dropping in that needs the use of the boat, then we will have the ability to take turns running this monster. In Treaty, it is the only allied 8 unit battleship. The equivalent of the Japanese super-battleships of the Yamato class. This should make for a very interesting build. And also perhaps a very interesting build-thread. As we are hoping to get all of the folks that are taking part in the project to keep this thread up-dated. So if those folks are already on here, please take the time to chip in, and post your thoughts, and plans. Perhaps a good starting point would be to look at the aspects of this very interesting ship and how it might compare to the ships that it might be pitted against, and how it might best fit into the overall allied strategy. Mikey | | | | Tags: USS Montana, USS Ohio, Strike Models, treaty, fiberglass | |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| | 24 Feb 2011 06:50 AM | | Some information on the Montana class.
Ships in the class.
USS Montana BB-67
USS Ohio BB-68
USS Maine BB-69
USS New Hampshire BB-70
USS Louisiana BB-71
All five ships were authorised for construction in July of 1940.
All five ships were suspended in April of 1942.
All five ships were cancelled on July 21 1943.
Standard displacement....60,500 tons.
Full load displacement.....70,500 tons.
925' overall
121' beam
4 shafts
28 knots
16.1" belt
Twelve 16"/50 cal guns (four triple turrets). Two forward, and two aft.
Twin rudders.
Mikey
| | | |
|
RichelieuBB
Veteran
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1419
| | 24 Feb 2011 09:21 AM | | To get an idea of the model size ...
Length is 77"
Beam is 10"
Std weight is around 51 pounds
So it is longer than a Yamato, slightly less beam, and slightly less weight. With four turrets, it might have some interesting gun layouts. | | Mike Mangus
Beware the French Revolution!
Operational:
HMS Erin DN
FN Richelieu BB
FN Verite PDN
Launched
Le Requin Xebec (AoS)
Under Construction:
FN Mogador DE
FN Gascogne BB (Treaty)
FN Bretagne (1/96) (delayed)
Mothballed:
FN Bearn CV
| |
|
Steve Tyng
Veteran
Ensign
Posts:245
| | 24 Feb 2011 04:25 PM | | To make it a true "club boat" consider adding auxiliary fire control where several members could man the guns while the caption pilots the boat. Should be easy to accomplish with a TX converted to push buttons (think optional plug-in tethered buttons).
Steve | | | |
|
Tugboat
Veteran
Admiral
Posts:4544
| | 24 Feb 2011 06:27 PM | | The Iowas aren't 8 units? | | | Battling: SMS Scharnhorst, SMS Baden
Building: HMS KGV (Drives, pumps water, guns are in but not plumbed)
MN Edgar Quinet (Hull done)
Drydock/Mothballed: Rus Evstafi, DKM Lutzow, HMS Invincible
Plus 20-odd other projects, according to my Boy Scouts who thoughtfully counted them for me. | |
|
Anachronus
Rear Admiral (RADM)
Posts:2286
| | 24 Feb 2011 09:04 PM | | Aw, come on. Do one that was actually built like BB-12!
Seriously a predread is probably a better loaner boat than a behemoth. | | | Vive la France! | |
|
Miller7D
Ensign
Posts:194
| | 24 Feb 2011 11:48 PM | | I saw the Montana available from Strike and I cheered. It may not ever have been officially built, but I look forward to the day when I can run my in-progress Iowa-class with one of them. Bonus points if there's a South Dakota and a South Carolina around to complete the modern US battleship quartet. | | | "I'ma learn you a thing or three real good-like..." | |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| | 25 Feb 2011 10:07 PM | | The Iowas are 7 units.
But they can easily outrun the Yamato class by several seconds.
Mikey
| | | |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| | 25 Feb 2011 10:09 PM | | I have considered the idea of having a multi-user boat as well.
One person to drive the boat, and perhaps control one turret. And another person (perhaps the kids) control some of the other turrets.
This large ship would certainly be a good one to try it on.
Perhaps down the road though.
My kids want to drive and shoot.
Mikey
| | | |
|
Stokamoto
Stokomoto
Admiral
Posts:4019
| | 26 Feb 2011 08:58 PM | | I thought the Iowas are class 7 with 8 units. | | | Bismarck
Yamato
Roma
Missouri | |
|
Tugboat
Veteran
Admiral
Posts:4544
| | 26 Feb 2011 09:58 PM | | Maybe they changed it for Treaty? I'm speculating, I'm still making the transition from MWC to IRC and not up on other clubs' rules  | | | Battling: SMS Scharnhorst, SMS Baden
Building: HMS KGV (Drives, pumps water, guns are in but not plumbed)
MN Edgar Quinet (Hull done)
Drydock/Mothballed: Rus Evstafi, DKM Lutzow, HMS Invincible
Plus 20-odd other projects, according to my Boy Scouts who thoughtfully counted them for me. | |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| | 28 Feb 2011 09:52 AM | | When we started Treaty, we kept the shiplist from the BBS pretty much intact.
That club had the Yamato class as 8 units, and 26 seconds.
The Iowa class was 7 units, but 24 seconds.
I think the fast-gun clubs had both ships listed as class 7 ships, with 8 units.
Mainly to counter each other.
In Treaty. As the speeds are by historical ship's speeds, we decided to keep the
Iowa class at 7 units as it has quite a speed advantage over the Yamato class.
So one has the extra unit, and the other has the extra speed.
Mikey | | | |
|
RichelieuBB
Veteran
Rear Admiral (RDML)
Posts:1419
| | 28 Feb 2011 01:26 PM | | Using a speed chart based on the actual ship speed really changes the dynamics of battling. Ships that would rarely be considered built in the MWC or IRCWCC, such as the Alaska and Richelieu, are viable in Treaty because of their greater speeds than some of the popular fast gun ships. For example, during a 2008 Treaty battle, I was able to battle more effectively against Bismarks with a Richelieu because the Richey had a couple seconds speed advantage. The Bis had better turning and better stern gun layouts, but I had the speed. With each ship battled to it's strength, the ships are pretty even. During the same battle, the Richey tried to sink a slower scale speed Lutzow. Although I could catch the cruiser, the Lutzow turned better and managed to get away time and time again. By the time I got the Richey turned around to chase the Lutzow, the cruiser had gained some space and it took me another minute to chase it down again. It will be itneresting to see an Iowa vs a Yamato in Treaty. I suspect they will be eveny matched in spite of the speed differental and turning abilities.  | | Mike Mangus
Beware the French Revolution!
Operational:
HMS Erin DN
FN Richelieu BB
FN Verite PDN
Launched
Le Requin Xebec (AoS)
Under Construction:
FN Mogador DE
FN Gascogne BB (Treaty)
FN Bretagne (1/96) (delayed)
Mothballed:
FN Bearn CV
| |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| |
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| |
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| |
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| |
Stokamoto
Stokomoto
Admiral
Posts:4019
| | 20 Mar 2011 09:01 PM | | Oh lord, now I want one. | | | Bismarck
Yamato
Roma
Missouri | |
|
Miller7D
Ensign
Posts:194
| | 20 Mar 2011 09:32 PM | | I love the detail on those range finders! Also, Stockamoto, I agree with you; I want one, too. But, the Iowa-class is monster enough for me, at least for now. Still, having that extra main battery aft is a beautiful thing for symmetry.
I really can't wait to see this monster finished! | | | "I'ma learn you a thing or three real good-like..." | |
|
froggyfrenchman
Vice Admiral
Posts:3011
| | 21 Mar 2011 07:48 AM | | Haha.
The range-finders are from Mark.
I just threw them in the photo to make you all salivate a little more.
Mikey
| | | |
|