A new single screw 3.5” SD?

[Slats]

Rick's idea is great.

I like the concept of letting the end user in kit fashion come up with their own custom SD using tried and tested SD components.

This too would allow a different drive train to be installed, should you like it, by the supply of a motor end cap with no motor installed. You could still include and sell within the package the graupner motors - IMO - good rock steady unit.

However, I would like to see the supply - and obviously at higher cost, installation of the ballast unit (should the buyer want it), and redesign of the ballast unit bulkhead to incorporate the conduit tube to the forward battery section.

So in effect Mike, its more or less a kit form - with some new features and options. I think we would all want the new snort fittings too.

Best

John

[Kazzer]

Eventually, but it will be a few days/weeks/ etc.

[toppack]

Mike,
I remember you saying something about SD components were going to be offered separately. (bulkheads, end-caps, lexan-tube, valve-assemblies, etc.)
'Roll yer Own' stuff. ;)
Is that still going to happen?

It seems that would be better than increasing the number of SD kit variations available?
That will certainly come in Handy for my next project I have planned.

[Nuke Power]

feel free mike

[Kazzer]

Good points ... mind your own business, bilge-rat.

David,

BILGE RAT???? Oh! That's neat! Maybe I can change his signature to that! (Oh! Dear - my sides hurt from laughing!)

[Slats]

And as some have mentioned in the turning circles post those with big SLAs forward not suprising have discovered great mass momentum to overcome and turning problems.

A new 3.5" SD can assist with this.

[Slats]

I am for the addition of a battery compartment to the 3.5 drivers. I, like you slats, have just been using an aditional wtc for the battery. Why not offer the variant. If you make it a double ended endcap it would be a pretty simple improvement for you to make david. Ofcourse you would lose the solid tube design, which in my opinion is a major bonus with your cylinder..Oh options options.
As for the gear train. I would like to see the gears move into the dry space. Especially on the mod 2. I am a rickover fan, minimize the hull penetrations.

Yes that would be the easiest way - double end cap- and you could even downsize the forward battery compartment diameter like David has suggested and I have done in Trenchant. What I am for though is the conduit through the ballast tank. You get a neater result and less to worry about if all your electrics are inside. Also - I do like the idea of being able to have the ESC up with the battery and or other gear - servo for planes / torpedo activation etc.

The gearbox inside is not a bad idea although I still like to see it offset, so the final drive is above the centre line of the WTC, this means you can mount the SD lower and get away with a smaller BT. In large 72 scale subs USN nukes etc you would still have clerance under the SD to the bottom of hull so you would not be mounting the SD on the base of the hull, which I have demonstrated last year in my Oberon to be the worst thing you could do - parking air (boyancy) of an empty tank at the lowest possible point! (Massive instability problems resulted).

A solution to the gear box situation is that David supplies the motor end cap as is, OR blank for the end user to fit their own gear box / motor internally and use a conventional shaft seal where ever you want it.

[Nuke Power]

I am for the addition of a battery compartment to the 3.5 drivers. I, like you slats, have just been using an aditional wtc for the battery. Why not offer the variant. If you make it a double ended endcap it would be a pretty simple improvement for you to make david. Ofcourse you would lose the solid tube design, which in my opinion is a major bonus with your cylinder..Oh options options.
As for the gear train. I would like to see the gears move into the dry space. Especially on the mod 2. I am a rickover fan, minimize the hull penetrations.

[Slats]

"Anyone else want to pile on with suggested 'improvements' to our product line here in, CaswellWorld?"

Hmmm silly torpedoman. ASks for ideas then gets angry. Its not like I said "fire david" or "start over from scratch..without david"
Sheesh. If you want to hear what I have to say about the drive train drop me a pm. Some people I swear.

Have PM'd you re the drive train - got me curious.

I love the gear box and its flexibility to be removed - reorientated etc.

But seriously will this new SD happen? Is there a market for it. Just seems like a normal evolution re battery technology to have the dry space up front for the batteries.

[toppack]

Man, Am I the Only one on this forum that's Not in a Bad Mood? :D LOL :D

It must be time for everyone to change their medication. :D

[Nuke Power]

"Anyone else want to pile on with suggested 'improvements' to our product line here in, CaswellWorld?"

Hmmm silly torpedoman. ASks for ideas then gets angry. Its not like I said "fire david" or "start over from scratch..without david"
Sheesh. If you want to hear what I have to say about the drive train drop me a pm. Some people I swear.

[He Who Shall Not Be Named]

I have an idea or 2 David.
How about modifying the aft equipment tray to include a snort specific mounting point. Just like a sub driver has it cradles why cant the snort. Mine is in there all crooked and it tends to bend the airlines.

A thicker lip on the motor endcap would be nice for strength. That way dumb mechanics can use their screw drivers to pop the end off without damaging the cap.

Also have you ever thought about redesigning the gear train?

Good points ... mind your own business, bilge-rat.

David,

[Nuke Power]

I have an idea or 2 David.
How about modifying the aft equipment tray to include a snort specific mounting point. Just like a sub driver has it cradles why cant the snort. Mine is in there all crooked and it tends to bend the airlines.

A thicker lip on the motor endcap would be nice for strength. That way dumb mechanics can use their screw drivers to pop the end off without damaging the cap.

Also have you ever thought about redesigning the gear train?

[Slats]

Mike good info in that file,
AND along the lines of my post here its notable that for the 3.5" SD kits you mention that you might need a forward battery compartment, but believe me its a far nicer unit with this connected to the SD with a conduit through the BT.

The ballast tanks are really massive 9" in length could drop that into a 1/72 scale LA and still have to cut it down. The rear compartments are a nice size.

Now getting back to the post - how many out there would like a 3.5" SD with a forward section - or is it just little ol me?!

I am also thinking that the section might also accommodate (if diameter was large enough) forward push rod / servo for bow planes / or that torpedo firing system.

J

[toppack]

Wow! Great Info!
I'm going to do a Print-out of that one and hang it on my wall. ;)
Move over Pin-up Calendar! :D LOL

It's Okay Lance, we forgive you. :D