Thanks for your comment, Chris. Yes, that is the new shed. Still needs a few bits sorting. In "real life" I am a fairly organised person but I allow myself a bit of latitude in model-making!
The key-fobs are not perfect- one of the relays is very poor at responding, which gives rise to some driving-round-in-circles issues- but I am working on that. Phil On Jan 25, 10:26 am, Chris Malton <chr...@cmalton.me.uk> wrote: > Phil, > AMAZING! Great idea on those keyfobs. I'd love to see how they > perform. I've got enough to worry about before I can go spending on > that (namely T027, and FA006, which have already cost me enough!). I'm > hooked though, so what does it matter. Can't wait to see these in action. > > By the way, is that your new tank shed? If so, well done on finishing > that. I get the impression you've got a lot of *half* finished projects > (so have I mind you). Time to finish them, I guess! > > Well done, I look forward to seeing what else you have to offer. P.S. > Did hot glue solve the castle's "self-dismantling" issue? If so, I'd > like to take credit for that. > > Chris "I want to get building again, but these damned exams are in the > way!" M > > > > Phil wrote: > > It lives! > > > At last I can reveal my secret project for the winter: radio- > > controlled infantry! > > >http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff13/sasquevaneach/SV202839.jpg > > > Older members will recall that I spent some time trying to get this > > working a year or so ago. > > > THE DREAM > > My original concept was this: A half-track would rumble up; 4 > > infantrymen would debus from the back, and march (yes, march as in > > walking) to attack an enemy tank. 2 or 3 of the chaps might be shot, > > but 1 or 2 would get through to beat up the enemy. Yeh, right. > > > I spent some time trying to get a walking robot to work, and I got as > > far as this:http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/ff13/sasquevaneach/ > > Robot1001.jpg This would walk- just about- if you held it up so as not > > to put any weight on it, and might be developed into something that > > might work- just- on a nice flat table. However, working on a bumpy > > field, and in conjunction with heavy radio-controlled tanks which > > might occasionally bump into it, was clearly going to be impossible. > > > I found a walking figure for £600, but I it looked fairly fragile. Not > > the thing with Neil’s “challenged” driving skills anyway. Oh, here’s a > > silly picture: > > >http://www.robothut.robotnut.com/atomicbat.html > > > Not entirely suitable. > > > I tried various layouts for soldiers with wheels instead of legs, or > > even tracks, but nothing that didn’t look, as my wife put it, “like a > > tank with a head stuck on top”. > > > I then went on to building tanks, but still pondered on infantry… > > > ON THE ROLE OF INFANTRY ON THE RADIO-CONTROLLED BATTLEFIELD > > On a real battlefield, infantry have always been able to attack and > > destroy tanks. A rifle bullet inside a tank will ping around until it > > hits something sticky. An anti-tank rifle, bazooka, panzerfaust or RPG > > can attack it through armour. In WWII a Japanese officer leapt out of > > the jungle, jumped on a tank and got the commander and gunner with his > > katana. He was poking around inside for the radio operator when the > > latter shot him (My father was a tank radio operator in Burma, and > > told me the story- it wasn’t him though). > > > From the point of view of a tank crew, infantry are virtually > > invisible when hiding on cover; easy to kill when moving; and > > dangerous when close. From the point of view of rc tank combat, that > > translates as equivalent to a self-operating mine- a stationery single- > > shot weapon with a degree of aiming- as envisaged in the rules. > > > Trouble is though, I’m not interested in stationery things. I want it > > to move. The one thing I didn’t want was to have a figure standing on > > a powered base, like a wargames figure. > > > The figure > > OK as you can see I went with a powered base. The motors are these : > >http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=43357&DOY=23m1#specifi > > motors- the 30:1 ones similar to those we usually use for traversing > > and suchlike- and the batteries will be 8 x 1.5 V 2,300 mAh > > rechargeables. These are stacked inside the figures legs- in later > > models I might try to get them under the base, which will increase > > stability (and appearance) at the expense of ground clearance. I > > considered having a separate 12V mini-battery for the radio, but > > haven’t at the moment. > > > ON RADIO CONTROL > > I went for these key-fob > > transmitters:http://www.maplin.co.uk/module.aspx?ModuleNo=30323&doy=22m3 > > You’re probably wondering why I didn’t go for a straightforward rc > > unit using servos (adapted for continuous movement) for power. The > > point is that I don’t see infantry on the RC battlefield as just tiny > > slow single-shot tanks. To put it another way, I don’t want to play > > with one soldier, but a whole army (well, say, 2 or 4) bwahahah! OK > > sorry about that but with these controllers- which are coded- I can > > have 4 separately controlled figures each with a separate controller, > > and a 5th master controlled keyed to all 4 so that I can control them > > separately or together (SQAUD left turn!) This was 1 or 2 can get shot > > but the rest can carry on. A little- just a little- like real life. > > > WEAPONS SYSTEM > > My first thought was a spring-loaded bazooka. Springs are much less > > trouble than compressed air, I think. The only trouble is that I > > didn’t feel that a bazooka would really look right- I couldn’t see a > > standing figure charging across the battlefield with a shouldered > > bazooka, and if he was in the kneeling position then my opponents > > would say that he wasn’t really a big enough target. Another problem > > is that it could only be single-shot. > > > Now, the rules assume single-shot but while that is fine for static > > models but imagine going to the trouble of creating a squad of moving > > infantrymen who charge up in a half-track, debus, charge tanks/guns > > Somme-style, losing 3 of their number, then arrive within their (very > > short) range then oops miss so let’s go home again. I think he should > > get a 2nd shot. I had an idea based on a medieval trebuchet- a > > spinning arm with 3 or 4 paintballs inside it- but having realised > > that that would never work I went for torsion-power, using pieces of > > luggage elastic. > > > If you look at the left arm, it’s got a piece of elastic attached to > > the base. This is the “just fired” position. If you imagine winding > > the arm anti-clockwise about 340 degrees, the elastic will tension and > > a trigger (in his chest) will hold it in position with the arm held > > low in front of his body. Put a paintball in the hand (it had a hand > > but it fell off last time I test-fired it- the elastic is quite > > strong) let it go and the figure bowls it underarm at the target. Fit > > another arm on the other side (I’ve got an idea for the trigger- I’ll > > explain that later) and you’ve got a 2-shot figure that bowls > > paintballs (representing grenades or sticky-bombs) at about groin > > height 3-4 inches from the ground. That, by the way, is much better > > than bowling overarm 15-16 inches from the ground, where the shot is > > likely to sail over the target. > > > So that’s were we are so far. The “head” is just a screwdriver > > inserted to give an idea- I can model heads. Action Man (who, oddly, > > appears to have joined the Village People) is there to show the size. > > The figure will have cotton clothes to hold everything in place (wool > > would be more authentic but I’m not taking a dry-clean-only figure to > > a paintball battle and anyway, wool looks a little fluffy at this > > scale). > > > Hopefully we will end up with a 1/6th scale figure that can cope with > > a reasonably flat field, will be reasonably rebust, cheap enough > > (about £70) and simple enough that I can field several, repairable, > > and moderately authentic both in terms of appearance and (more > > importantly) function. > > > What do you think? > > > Phil “Generalissimo” Palmer- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
