Well, now that the cat is out of the bag, I thought I would post a build log on this one. In treaty, the Alsace is a 7 unit, 28 second ship. At over 700' long, she gets dual side mounts. Basically, an Iowa that doesn't turn as well with only one rudder. I am building from the JC White plans currently sold by Strike Models. The ship will have a 1 unit batleship pump at 1.25 GPM. and will be armed with six cannons. The lovely thing about this boat is that it has four barrel turrets, so quad sterns are an option. I haven't decided how to arm her yet. Right now, I have the ribs, keel, and subdeck cut out and have started attaching the ribs to the subdeck. Here is my progress so far: EDIT: fixed photo
I can't rememember ... isn't the Alsace like the Iowa and Yamato in that they get 8 units? It is a big ship. Nice to see someone building one. Good luck and I'm looking forward to seeing it come together.
Iowa is only 7 units in treaty. I'll look up the units, but I imagine that Dustin is correct. To get 8 units, you need a pretty monster ship. EDIT: at about 40k long tons (according to wikipedia), she's 7 units like Iowa.
Tonight I added the stringer to the bottom of the impenetrable area on the middle section, added some 1/4"x1/4" spuce between the ribs under the subdeck ( in treaty this section of the hull's penatrable area follows the line from the fore and aft sections), notched and added my water channel/keels. After spending a lot of time makeing sure everything was straight and square, I glued everything in this section together with thin CA for the capilary action and thick CA in the corners. I messed up and notched the wrong edge of one of my keels so I have the factory edge and bandsaw edges facing in opposite directions I also spent some time sanding and adding 1/32" plywood to try to fix imperfectections in the contours. Because of my keel error and mistake on a notch (not deep enough) I decided to hold off any more of this work until I can get access to a tabletop belt sander for the flat sanding surface. Since I had a little time left I started with my stern layout and tacked on ribs 17 and 20. Ribs 18 and 19 are about 1/8" narrower than the deck, so I am going to go back to the plans tomorrow and try to work out the descrepancies. Here is where I stand today: Mr. Mangus, I thought you would like this ship, and I look forward to running her with your Richelieu some point down the road. Your Bearn build thread has been a huge help in prepping for this project. Thanks! Oh, and Viva la France!
Can't wait to see the Alsace on the water. It will be an impressive ship in Treaty. I'm retiring the Richelieu. It was my first ship build and although worked well on the water there are some things I would do differently in constuction. In its place, I plan on building a buldged Jean Bart in time for this year's TreatyCon.
So how many units would Tillman Design #4 get? http://tacrn1.deviantart.com/art/Th...-287333659 80,00 tons, twenty four 16" guns in for sixtuplet turrets?
8 units is max. We didn't want anything that was never built to be more badass then the Yamato. The Tillmans aren't legal, because we have a requirement that the ship was actually ordered by a government, which keeps "design studies" off the water. @MikeM What ever happened to that Gascogne you were going to build?
You know, I forgot about the Gascogne. The hull is standing in a corner of the shop and hasn't been worked on since returning from Korea in early '09. I didn't like how the front rotate was turning out and decided to rethink it's construction. Guess the thinking process has been going on a while now. Heh. Although the hull is sound and ready for installation of the propulsion system, I would have to rework it a little for brushless motors and LiFE batteries. The superstructure is also way too heavy and would need to be rebult. The effot to finish it would only be a little less than building a new wooden hull from scratch. Still ... it would be a unique ship to have on the water.
The big advantage of doing the Bart would be that you can use her in the MWC and IRCWCC as well, whereas Gascogne is a little more limited in that Treaty is the only group that allows her.
Not to highjack Dustin's thread too much, but to add one last thing ... If I finish the Gascogne, I would probably offer it up for sale to someone that would battle it more often in Treaty than I am able to ... then I would build the Bart.
I finished framing out the stern section tonight. I didt't put in the window stingers because I ran out of time before 10:00 and I will want to carefully consider placement for the area where 1" below waterline and 45 degrees start to merge. This is my first scratch build, so I spend a lot of time staring and thinking. I have to say I am proud of how square and straight I got the two sections joined. That really worried me. This weekend I tackle the swept bow, which I haven't figured out how I'm going to do yet. If that goes well the bow and stern deck and contours will come next, then shaft placement. If that works well, I will finish rib profiles and sheet the bottom with 1/32" plywood. I don't have shafts yet, but I think I will order some from BC instead of building them this time--at least the inner shafts. I might prototype the stuffing tubes just to make sure they are parallel and the fit is right. I keep going back and forth on brushed vs. brushless for this boat. I will be running it with a 12V SLA because I have two of them and weight will not be an issue. Plus Strike Models' small pump at 12.2V is rated at 1.26GPM with the 1/8" diamater outlet and their 12V motor, so that should really simplify tweaking it to 1.25GPM. Enough yappin'! Wherz da purty pictures? EDIT: You might notice the rib spacing difference at the deck step. Rib 16 was located 1" forward of the step on the plans. Spacing from 15-16-17 was three inches edge to edge, so I moved 16 back to the edge of the step. I am allowed around 33ish ribs for this ship under Treaty rules, but am only using 23 so I don't think anyone will mind.
I know a lot of the guys are in love with the brushless motors, but I am not sure they are worth the hassle for what we do in Treaty.
Gorgeous work so far Dustin. Agreed with taking your time and double checking everything. There is no need to rush and possibly make a mistake which will cost extra time to fix. The Alsace is going to be awesome! @crzy: I think I am the only person so far that uses and battles with brushless in their boat, though I know of a Bismark in NC that is going brushless this year. They can be very beneficial for a big boat ... the massive torque they put out helps with acceleration and deceleration as well as improved speed while turning. I noticed quite a difference after putting brushless into the Richelieu last summer.
Ah I had heard they were all the rage in the MWC, perhaps that was a large exaggeration. I can certainly see where they would be of benefit with the MWC; the style of battling requires you to eke out every advantage you can get. Since we are a bit slower, I'm not sure if we'd really take advantage of the benefits of brushless. That would really determine whether the extra work and expense for brushless make it worth it. If I still battled fast gun, I'd certainly be considering my options with brushless.
I wouldn't say it is extra work really. The brushless motors and escs work like brushed motors and escs. In most cases, they drop right in place of a brushed motor. Brushless does require dilligent maintenance such as oiling motor bearings after each day of use, but then again many people do that anyway with brushed motors. Did I mention that brushless is more efficient than brushed? Big Gun ships would benefit from that. The thing all the rage in MWC right now is LiFE batteries. I'd wild guess about 50% of the ships this year will have LiFE in them.
Duntin, how are you planning on putting together the bow? Ship sitting flat on it's bottom and building up?
Right now planning to clamp the keel to a machined level for the straight edge then mark, notch, and attach the ribs. I haven't figured out exactly how I am going to get the curve in the subdeck piece yet. Cut part-way through the bottom of the subdeck, maybe? I was making notched tabs to attach the stern and bow subdecks to the ribs in the middle section, but I messed up and cut out the wrong part of the tab on the right side of the bow subdeck. BTW, my LHS owner talked me into bearings for the stuffing tubes instead of bushings. We shall see how those work out. I finally broke down and purchased a proper battery charger today, so I might go with the 10Ah LiFe cells when I place my next order with Strike Models. I really like LiFe in that you don't have to cycle them as often as you do for packs with other chemistry. I will be using solenoids with 1cu.in. accumulators instead of poppets for this build, so I need to do some research on firing boards before too long.
Bearings might not be a great idea. They will require more maintenance than a bushing. For our application where speed is limited, we do not really need to go out of our way to reduce shaft resistance at the cost of more maintenance. Sounds like you are going to put the bow on the same way I did the Richelieu, except more precisely. Heh. I ended up with a twist in the forward half of the hull by not making sure the bow half of the subdeck was level with the building surface. It sounds like your subdeck should be flexible enough to make the long gradual curve without relief cuts. Looking forward to seeing pictures when you do it.
I was debating remaking the bow subdeck, but the LHS only has 1/4" in 12"x48" and 6"x12". I called down to Dayton (about an hour and a half away) to some of the shops there, but one only had lite-ply in 12"x24". I figured it was not worth the hassle. I will not be gluing the bow section to the rest of the ship until I get the bow contours done. Ok, lesson learned on the bearings. I guess I will place an order with BC for their stuffing tubes. I prefer brass shafts, so I will be replacing their steel ones.
