This was my rough idea. It took 10min or so in paint. I forgot one part though a light extension spring coming up from the bottom to hold the cannons against the lobe. This will help keep the resiliency of tubing and whatnot from affecting gun angle. This would be roughly mirrored on the other side. Placement of counterweight, co2, etc is all flexible. Getting the counterweight toward the centerline would be better. All barrels ride on a common axis and are all linked together so the interaction of lobe and plate affects all of them. Das Butts
It is just a representation. The lobe is completely inaccurate in shape. I didn't feel inclined to do all the geometry and attempt to duplicate it in paint: ) i just know the crucial measurements are the distance between rotation axis and height above axis that lobe contact point is. All that is being done is trying to maintain the angle in the "point" of the triangle.
I've never been concerned about elevating the guns aboard a ship above parallel with the deck, so long as they don't go above true horizontal. is anyone else concerned about that?
That second drawing was how I was thinking of it. Das Butts will work just fine as long as the lobe doesn't go past "center" and work opposite as intended, but I'm sure he knows that and I know its a rough quick drawing. I'm just glad people work together here and think outloud. Its more collabrative and makes evolution faster.
My idea was to maintain the same (close!) range on both sides of the ship regardless of how much it is heeling. That way I can take effective shots even if someone does get the better of me position wise. Das Bütts
In the TTS concept there are shelves mounted port and starboard attached to the frames via a hinge at each end. These are the cannon mounting plates referenced in the drawing. The shelves are long enough to mount as many cannons as required. All cannon related hardware (guns, accumulators, solenoids, etc) can be mounted to the shelves. Cannons are mounted at any down-angle required on the shelves. When heeling, these shelves stay level with the horizon, thus maintaining any down-angles the cannons are mounted at. The lockout switches disable the opposite bank of cannons if the model heels farther than the tilt mechanism can compensate for (i.e. cannons are turned off if they tilt above the horizon). In larger models the weight system would work well. In smaller models, a servo and helo gyro may be required due to space limitations (can anyone say Bermuda Sloop ;-).
I think both would work, but Tyng's would require less space, what with it being just one weight that needs space to swing. It might have to be a weight controlling servo's, as it might require a larger weight to keep the cannons level than you can float with. Adds to the wiring, but cuts down on the lead weights... Infact, a weight on a transmitter stick style potentiometer might work pretty well, and the set up a servo or two to operate the cannon elevation... Could be self-contained, although I'm not too great on system wiring, it might take a bit of custom work...
I was thinking of using the batteries as the weight. The single weight system has the added advantage that as the weight lifts one deck, the weight of the windward side gun deck pushes down in equal measure. A small rc car shock sans spring may be needed to control the speed of the movement, its going to be an experiment.
Had my ship out in a big breeze, conceivably the only way I could get a clear shot would be with my head to the wind. My guns were in the water. I'm not about to add any gyro things now, but just so you know, this is a major issue for all of us. Granted even with my guns in the water, they would still blow a hole below the waterline if I was in range.
Steve, have you had time to test the TTS system.... My biggest concern was not the guns angled into the water, but the other side when heeled over... Safety is the main concern for those guns that are aimed at head height! Keeping the guns at either zero elevation or less, or having a cut off switch would be priority. The TTS looks promising!
Definitely need a system to keep the guns level, or prevent firing when heeled over. How did you handle ballast on your ship, Ponderous? A nice long keel with a bunch of weight at the bottom would probably reduce that heeling moment.
A good ballast will lessen the effect, but I have been sailing boats for some time... there is no way to completely eradicate the heeling over if you are using sails.
We've been testing square-riggers at lunch on battle weekends. It's not insignificant, but a large drop keel way under the boat helps.
don't forget that you can take in sail to reduce heeling, too. A good captain rigs his ship for the weather. A deep keel also improves stability and reduces leeway, and there are various mechanisms for angling the guns. But when it all comes down to it, I fully expect that how each skipper handles the wind and weather will have a large impact on the battle.
The heeling over is going to be part of the fun... think... you go broadside, take on damage... now you need to run or strike your colors.. oops cant turn to the wind.. we will heel over thus adding more holes below the water... Darn, up goes the white flag!
Yeah, heeling makes belows from aboves. Heh. One of the reasons I proposed not bothering with a waterline and eliminating special points for belows. We really need to get ships on the water and have a battle to really see how things pan out. Mark's CAD design is going to help a lot in that respect. Even so, we have one ship on the water (unarmed) and at least one approaching launching.
Yea, I'm going to bust butt and get the Constitution done by spring. I have to split my time between college, my Mutsu, and the AOS ships.
