>From the Director of Cost Management M.A.G. Industries Based on the following figures, firing 500 rounds per 1 hour of battle, using one 12oz Co2 bottle, it costs approximately 2 cents US ,per round fired. Your price may vary, cost based on purchase of 2000 rounds @$60 and 2 Co2 fills at $2.50 each. Maintaining serious amounts of fire to harass the enemy, PRICELESS.
Mr. C. Non On May 16, 11:14 am, funkyne...@ntlworld.com wrote: > After great effort , determination and expenditure the Funky Tank > Foundry has developed a remarkable range finding system for not only > Neil’s leopard but any tank out there . > Here is the results:- > A shot is fired in the direction of the enemy and if it falls short of > the target the suggestion is to raise the barrel a bit , Ok you might > think that’s very simple , now comes the clever part, if the next > shot fly’s `over ` the intended target then the recommendation is to > lower the barrel again, but importantly not as low as it was > initially. If by this stage the target has still eluded a beating then > at this critical stage the advice is to move a bit closer to the > target and quickly return to the original plan. > Many lives were risked leaking out the results of this research , as > the FTF Managing Director is a bit of a nasty piece of work . use this > information wisely if anyone has read this far. > Over ! > > Mr A Non > > On May 15, 8:22 pm, Michael Clark <ironnerd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I was thinking about a range finding artillery solution. Set up the > > artillery piece at and create either a Forward Observers post that could be > > disabled or mount it on a location aware recon vehicle. > > > From there I was a bit lost. Either have the artillery be the second leg of > > a triangle. Or have the recon vehicle say "I'm here, the target is 15 feet > > to my west." > > > Michael "I'm building a tank. Honest" > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Jason R Schafer > > <jasonrscha...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > cool! I'd like to see it sometime. > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Derek Engelhaupt > > > <tan...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > >> Whoohoo...another Minnesotan. I'm way up north, but have an *almost* > > >> fully functional tank ready to paint someone.... > > > >> Derek > > >> T065 - Lutsen, MN > > > >> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Frank Pittelli < > > >> frank.pitte...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> Jason R Schafer wrote: > > >>> > Any current or ex R/C warship combat guys in the hobby? > > > >>> The tank hobby was founded by two ex-IRCWCC national champions with over > > >>> 20 years of combined warship battling experience. > > > >>> > Is anybody trying any sort of barrel stabilization systems? > > >>> > Would this be legal? > > > >>> Perfectly legal. There are very few restrictions on tank sub-system > > >>> technology. If it's not covered in the rules, you can use whatever you > > >>> think will give you an advantage. Moreover, if you are the first to use > > >>> a technology on the battlefield, you'll probably have your name > > >>> attached to the solution for all the world to see. > > > >>> > What about range finding etc? > > > >>> Go for it. > > > >>> > It seems your rules are very open to technological advancements ... > > >>> > how fun! > > > >>> Yes. See (1) and (2) above. > > > >>> Frank P.- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
