Hey Mike,
Just started catching up on e-mails...
Wow, I see what you mean, about half way down the list... And I've seen
this photo set too!! I guess you learn something new every day.
As for a diagram for the JS-III (like the one for the JS-IV...), I have
scoured the Net pretty thoroughly and have yet to come up with same diagram.
And you would think the III would have one, as it is so much more "covered"
(lack of a better term) than the IV is. If I ever find it, I'll let you
know, and you please do the same.
Thanks for sharing, and enlightening me on the III's underside.
Dave "I'd build it square anyway.." D.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Butts" <buttsakau...@gmail.com>
To: <rctankcombat@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: [TANKS] Rules and other things
Dave,
I was under that impression due to the models I had seen. Scale
modelers are really anal for the most part. Also because of this site:
http://www.peachmountain.com/5star/US_Army_Ordnance_Museum_IS3_tank.aspx
The clearest picture shows the under belly of the tank. It is 2/3 of
the way down or so. You can tell this is all one set of pictures by
the lighting.
Also do you have a drawing with all the hull angles and whatnot like that
IS-4?
Mike B
On 8/22/12, Dave D. <degeck...@optonline.net> wrote:
Hey Mike,
Me again... I was rereading your post and you mentioned that you thought
the JS-III had sloped sides/bottom...
Hull: I like Steve Tyng construction methods and suspension. However I
wonder about "grime" affecting springs. That method would also call for
a
non scale hull shape for an IS-3. It is flat down the centerline at a
marginal width but angles up toward the road wheels/ sides. To
counteract
mines I would guess. His method need a "box" hull it would seem.
I think you may be confusing the JS-III with the JS-IV, which seems from
drawings to have sloped sides. I haven't any photos that show this
conclusively, but the diagrams do....
JS-IV
And here is a good close-up photo showing the JS-III's suspension and
side
wall, looks 90 degrees to me...
I wonder why the Russians put those five holes in each road wheel, access
points, I guess. The return rollers have 'em too!! And yet they don't
seem
to line up with anything on the inside... Hmmm. Excess weight reduction?
Additional enemy sighting portals? Vodka'ed up Russkie wheel die man
left
his signature mark? Any ideas, Chris-OS?
So you can go with the venerable Tyng suspension/hull design with
confidence... "Nothing runs like a Tyng..." I've seen the videos to
prove
it!! LOL. I think I've coined a phrase, with all due respect to John
D.
And even if it were sloped (I really think it isn't) I believe the hobby
would let you slide abit and build the hull bottom flat, to accommodate
the
wheel axles and such. I highly doubt they'll sacrifice a potential new
paint target - I mean member over a relatively minor build modification!!
Just my two cents worth...
Dave "Boy this forum is fun" D.
--
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
--
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
--
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
