Re: [TANKS] Re: Another Rule Change Proposal

[Dave D.]

Yeah Lee, unfortunately...

But you can build that Pillbug, as long as it's only armed with machine 
guns...LOL


Dave D.


- Original Message - 
From: "Lee Jackson" 

To: 
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 12:14 AM
Subject: [TANKS] Re: Another Rule Change Proposal


So, does this all boil down to my having to stop construction of an RC 
Cockroach armed with an industrial laser?


--
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[Dave D.]

What are we sending now, secret code...?
Wait, wait, I'll go and get my enigma machine...

Dave D.

uafoo 7ewa'a,dsmn83hafna78yfhbqakwk98 e e00a fna99na to you too!!


- Original Message - 
From: "jvragu47" 

To: "R/C Tank Combat" 
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 11:53 PM
Subject: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...


dfoijdrg0dfoerjoxdijfawwiq9i0iwdkpeicpwe0oc'x.

On Oct 14, 3:44 pm, Steve Tyng  wrote:

Dave,

Nice job on your analysis. This clearly shows that sloped armor should be
factored if the current defense ruling method remains. It be easy to setup
a tank list in Excel to perfrom all the needed calcs.

Now for something more radical.

IMO, any historic basis this hobby has needs to be thrown out. Basing
performance specs on actual vehicle datum IMO is counter productive IF you
want to open the playing field to all tanks from all eras. What I propose
is that we have three types of vehicle classes, heavy, medium, and light. 
I
vehicle gets thrown into one of these buckets by the designs intent when 
it

was introduced. Doesn't matter when it was built, how much armor, or how
big the gun is. If it looks like a medium, into the medium bucket it goes.
Even though a WW1 heavy would have its side ripped open by a 70's 
Sheridan,

it was a heavy when it was built so into the heavy bucket it goes. That
Sheridan was a light so goes into the light bucket. Each bucket would have
an assigned defensive rating, a max speed, and a max ammo load. For me,
this makes the most sense for the hobby IF you want to open vehicles from
all era's.

Steve Tyng


--
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

[TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[Phil]

Here's my two-penneth to the Great Rules Debate:

One of my other hobbies is role-playing games. Here rule-changes are
endemic- everyone changes them, including me. However there is one
pointer we use a lot, which is: does the rule change make the game
more fun? If it doesn't then it's probably not worth it.

I like Steve's suggestion. It's simple and it means you get WWI Mk IXs
or whatever fighting Abramses on an equal footing. It also makes for a
fair game as the only real difference between our tanks (apart from
skill in construction & relaibility which is down to the builder)is
size and that is compensated for by these rules.

I'm assuming that modern MBTs such as Abrams, Leopard etc count as
Heavies.

Phil P



On Oct 15, 8:15 am, "Dave D."  wrote:
> What are we sending now, secret code...?
> Wait, wait, I'll go and get my enigma machine...
>
> Dave D.
>
> uafoo 7ewa'a,dsmn83hafna78yfhbqakwk98 e e00a fna99na to you too!!
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "jvragu47" 
> To: "R/C Tank Combat" 
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 11:53 PM
> Subject: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...
>
> dfoijdrg0dfoerjoxdijfawwiq9i0iwdkpeicpwe0oc'x.
>
> On Oct 14, 3:44 pm, Steve Tyng  wrote:
> > Dave,
>
> > Nice job on your analysis. This clearly shows that sloped armor should be
> > factored if the current defense ruling method remains. It be easy to setup
> > a tank list in Excel to perfrom all the needed calcs.
>
> > Now for something more radical.
>
> > IMO, any historic basis this hobby has needs to be thrown out. Basing
> > performance specs on actual vehicle datum IMO is counter productive IF you
> > want to open the playing field to all tanks from all eras. What I propose
> > is that we have three types of vehicle classes, heavy, medium, and light.
> > I
> > vehicle gets thrown into one of these buckets by the designs intent when
> > it
> > was introduced. Doesn't matter when it was built, how much armor, or how
> > big the gun is. If it looks like a medium, into the medium bucket it goes.
> > Even though a WW1 heavy would have its side ripped open by a 70's
> > Sheridan,
> > it was a heavy when it was built so into the heavy bucket it goes. That
> > Sheridan was a light so goes into the light bucket. Each bucket would have
> > an assigned defensive rating, a max speed, and a max ammo load. For me,
> > this makes the most sense for the hobby IF you want to open vehicles from
> > all era's.
>
> > Steve Tyng
>
> --
> 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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat- 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

RE: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[Guy Gregoire]

I Totally agree with Phil.
 
 
Guy
 
 

 

> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 05:00:16 -0700
> Subject: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...
> From: sasquevane...@aol.com
> To: rctankcombat@googlegroups.com
> 
> Here's my two-penneth to the Great Rules Debate:
> 
> One of my other hobbies is role-playing games. Here rule-changes are
> endemic- everyone changes them, including me. However there is one
> pointer we use a lot, which is: does the rule change make the game
> more fun? If it doesn't then it's probably not worth it.
> 
> I like Steve's suggestion. It's simple and it means you get WWI Mk IXs
> or whatever fighting Abramses on an equal footing. It also makes for a
> fair game as the only real difference between our tanks (apart from
> skill in construction & relaibility which is down to the builder)is
> size and that is compensated for by these rules.
> 
> I'm assuming that modern MBTs such as Abrams, Leopard etc count as
> Heavies.
> 
> Phil P
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 15, 8:15 am, "Dave D."  wrote:
> > What are we sending now, secret code...?
> > Wait, wait, I'll go and get my enigma machine...
> >
> > Dave D.
> >
> > uafoo 7ewa'a,dsmn83hafna78yfhbqakwk98 e e00a fna99na to you too!!
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "jvragu47" 
> > To: "R/C Tank Combat" 
> > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 11:53 PM
> > Subject: [TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...
> >
> > dfoijdrg0dfoerjoxdijfawwiq9i0iwdkpeicpwe0oc'x.
> >
> > On Oct 14, 3:44 pm, Steve Tyng  wrote:
> > > Dave,
> >
> > > Nice job on your analysis. This clearly shows that sloped armor should be
> > > factored if the current defense ruling method remains. It be easy to setup
> > > a tank list in Excel to perfrom all the needed calcs.
> >
> > > Now for something more radical.
> >
> > > IMO, any historic basis this hobby has needs to be thrown out. Basing
> > > performance specs on actual vehicle datum IMO is counter productive IF you
> > > want to open the playing field to all tanks from all eras. What I propose
> > > is that we have three types of vehicle classes, heavy, medium, and light.
> > > I
> > > vehicle gets thrown into one of these buckets by the designs intent when
> > > it
> > > was introduced. Doesn't matter when it was built, how much armor, or how
> > > big the gun is. If it looks like a medium, into the medium bucket it goes.
> > > Even though a WW1 heavy would have its side ripped open by a 70's
> > > Sheridan,
> > > it was a heavy when it was built so into the heavy bucket it goes. That
> > > Sheridan was a light so goes into the light bucket. Each bucket would have
> > > an assigned defensive rating, a max speed, and a max ammo load. For me,
> > > this makes the most sense for the hobby IF you want to open vehicles from
> > > all era's.
> >
> > > Steve Tyng
> >
> > --
> > 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 athttp://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat- 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
  

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Another Rule Change Proposal

[Lee Jackson]

I  guess not Frank.  Although it would rid us of the telemarketers.

Lee

--
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

[TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Cobra]

Also, this may be a new fronteer... driving on ceilings I mean.

A

-- 
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

[TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Steve Tyng]

Ryan,

To my keen eye that looks like a very good looking A7V Sturmpanzerwagen.  I 
can't wait to see it "rolling" onto the battlefield.   ;-)

Steve

-- 
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

[TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[Cobra]

The downfall in this idea that all heavy tanks of all time periods
begiven the same stats is the scale at which they are built. A modern
MBT Leopard built to the 3ft scale rule should not be entitled to 40/4
stats when a Panzer III built to 1:6 (3'2") would have 30/3. Common
sense tells us that Heavies are big, Lights are small, and Mediums are
somewhere in between. Any asset built to a smaller scale than 1:6
would then for game fairness be demoted to the next class down. A mini
Maus would be a Medium at best.

I would support a Heavy/ Medium/ Light /Tankette classification
system. It seems fair and would allow anyone to choose a class and
then build anything they want without fear that they will suffer in
stats. More over, it would not likely changge the play of the game, or
change current tanks stats in dramatic ways.

Heavys  (Tiger)  40/4
1:6 scale or 4ft

Meds  (Sherman)  40/3
1:6 scale or 3ft

Lights   (T-70)  30/3
1:6 scale or 3ft

Tankettes (TKS)  30/2
1:6 scale (obviously already smaller than 3ft)

TDs classified by it's parent chasis. Example: Hetzer=Pz38t=Med=40/3

I have said before that the rules do not nessecarely need to be
changed. They work and work well as they are. I plan on having fun no
mater what. But as an academic discusion of possible alternitive
rules, I feel this would have the fairest drawn lines.

Aaron (cant help but share ideas) Freeman

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Ryan W .]

I'll worry about my Sherman at the moment. But you have a keen eye for tanks!

Ryan w.


On Oct 15, 2011, at 8:06 AM, Steve Tyng  wrote:

> Ryan,
> 
> To my keen eye that looks like a very good looking A7V Sturmpanzerwagen.  I 
> can't wait to see it "rolling" onto the battlefield.   ;-)
> 
> Steve
> 
> -- 
> 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

[TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Cobra]

Ryan,
Do you have any recent photos of progress on your Sherman? Mine is all
but done, but maybe I could use some inpiration seeing annother in the
works. Being an electrical idiot, as I am and not near any Pitellis, I
can find no hands-on help in sorting out my electrical issues. I have
a lead on a robotics club that meet bi-weekly but have missed the last
couple meets due to family emergencies.

Aaron (have not given up on my Sherman) F

-- 
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

[TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[neroc]

So what rating do 1/3 rd , 5 foot + tanks receive ?
should T078 not be 40/5 .

Neil " call it the hit per foot rule " R



On Oct 15, 6:32 am, Cobra  wrote:
> The downfall in this idea that all heavy tanks of all time periods
> begiven the same stats is the scale at which they are built. A modern
> MBT Leopard built to the 3ft scale rule should not be entitled to 40/4
> stats when a Panzer III built to 1:6 (3'2") would have 30/3. Common
> sense tells us that Heavies are big, Lights are small, and Mediums are
> somewhere in between. Any asset built to a smaller scale than 1:6
> would then for game fairness be demoted to the next class down. A mini
> Maus would be a Medium at best.
>
> I would support a Heavy/ Medium/ Light /Tankette classification
> system. It seems fair and would allow anyone to choose a class and
> then build anything they want without fear that they will suffer in
> stats. More over, it would not likely changge the play of the game, or
> change current tanks stats in dramatic ways.
>
> Heavys  (Tiger)  40/4
> 1:6 scale or 4ft
>
> Meds  (Sherman)  40/3
> 1:6 scale or 3ft
>
> Lights   (T-70)  30/3
> 1:6 scale or 3ft
>
> Tankettes (TKS)  30/2
> 1:6 scale (obviously already smaller than 3ft)
>
> TDs classified by it's parent chasis. Example: Hetzer=Pz38t=Med=40/3
>
> I have said before that the rules do not nessecarely need to be
> changed. They work and work well as they are. I plan on having fun no
> mater what. But as an academic discusion of possible alternitive
> rules, I feel this would have the fairest drawn lines.
>
> Aaron (cant help but share ideas) Freeman

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Ryan W .]

I will post some photos later when I'm home  So what's wrong with your 
Sherman. I always watch your sherman's videos for inspiration. I mean my m4's 
motors are nearly ready to mount. The I'll make a mount for my drive shafts. 
Then after that I'll make my return rollers. Theoretically after this has take 
place over many weekends I will have made at least one track during the 
weekdays. Like I said theoretically this could happen. I'm a little short on 
funds and school isn't helping so no promises. 

Ryan w.


On Oct 15, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Cobra  wrote:

> Ryan,
> Do you have any recent photos of progress on your Sherman? Mine is all
> but done, but maybe I could use some inpiration seeing annother in the
> works. Being an electrical idiot, as I am and not near any Pitellis, I
> can find no hands-on help in sorting out my electrical issues. I have
> a lead on a robotics club that meet bi-weekly but have missed the last
> couple meets due to family emergencies.
> 
> Aaron (have not given up on my Sherman) F
> 
> -- 
> 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

[TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Cobra]

I can design and build, but I have great troubles sorting out how
wires are to be run and how devices are to be programed. I am using
the new C6C reciever and PS2 controler as well as the new C12C ESC.
Pluging components together is easy enough but getting them to talk to
each other is not. It is especialy difficult to have time to
concentrate on the problem when the wife barely tolerates my
indulgences and insists I do trivial things instead, such as raise my
kids and go to work.

A

-- 
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

[TANKS] Re: Fw: T-70...

[Cobra]

100/10

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[Ryan W .]

Ah my parents also encourage me to do trivial things like homework and chores 
and study for tests.

Ryan w.


On Oct 15, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Cobra  wrote:

> I can design and build, but I have great troubles sorting out how
> wires are to be run and how devices are to be programed. I am using
> the new C6C reciever and PS2 controler as well as the new C12C ESC.
> Pluging components together is easy enough but getting them to talk to
> each other is not. It is especialy difficult to have time to
> concentrate on the problem when the wife barely tolerates my
> indulgences and insists I do trivial things instead, such as raise my
> kids and go to work.
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> 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

Re: [TANKS] Re: Re rule change proposal

[OdysseySlipways]

 
 
In a message dated 10/15/2011 9:06:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
steve...@gmail.com writes:

Ryan,

To my keen eye that looks like a very good looking A7V  Sturmpanzerwagen.  
I can't wait to see it "rolling" onto the  battlefield.   ;-)

Steve


where did i miss this?
 
Chris,
_Odyssey  Slipways_ (http://hometown.aol.com/odysseyslipways/index.html) 

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS]

[OdysseySlipways]

oh, the shoe box i thought it was an actual A7V being built (okay,  
i did see this)
 
Chris,
_Odyssey  Slipways_ (http://hometown.aol.com/odysseyslipways/index.html) 

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS]

[Chase Hargraves]

I actually want to build one of those (an A7V), just have a few projects
that have to get finished first.

--Chase

On 15 October 2011 14:19,  wrote:

> **
> oh, the shoe box i thought it was an actual A7V being built (okay,
> i did see this)
>
> Chris,
> Odyssey Slipways 
>
> --
> 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

Re: [TANKS]

[OdysseySlipways]

 
 
In a message dated 10/15/2011 4:17:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
absolu...@gmail.com writes:

I  actually want to build one of those (an A7V), just have a few projects 
that  have to get finished first.

--Chase


i was also thinking of it again and thought of a way to do the tracks  and 
suspension without getting complicated
 
Chris,
_Odyssey  Slipways_ (http://hometown.aol.com/odysseyslipways/index.html) 

-- 
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

[TANKS] Stug III update

[Gettysburg114th]

Got the motors mounted and the chain cut and installed today.
Bob
 
Red Lion, Pa.

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS]

[Chase Hargraves]

Maybe you could post your idea here if you like, I know I'd appreciate
reading it.

Chase

On 15 October 2011 16:39,  wrote:

> **
>  In a message dated 10/15/2011 4:17:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> absolu...@gmail.com writes:
>
> I actually want to build one of those (an A7V), just have a few projects
> that have to get finished first.
>
> --Chase
>
> i was also thinking of it again and thought of a way to do the tracks and
> suspension without getting complicated
>
> Chris,
> Odyssey Slipways 
>
> --
> 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

Re: [TANKS]

[Cobra]

With talk WWI landships like the A7V Monster, I got to thinking of the
Mark I tank series. I know other have started building them with the
idea if 2 guns, one each side, but with only 1 being able to fire at a
time. Seems a bit complicated. So my question is: Would anyone be
opposed to a Mark I with a single gun sticking out the front and
having it play as a TD. Purely for playability's sake.
I'm not saying I am going to build one, but would the powers-that-be
forbid such a hybrid to participate in the hobby?

Aaron F

-- 
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

[TANKS] WW1 tank question

[Ryan W .]

I forgot who asked about the hybrid British tank but here's my two cents-
I think it would be fine if no barrel extended from the tank. Just a hole in 
the front of the tank. That is my opinion. 

Ryan ( make it look real) w.

-- 
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

[TANKS] Stug pics

[Gettysburg114th]

Added 3 pics in my Photobucket Stug album showing the motors mounted and 
the chain installed.  Let the track work begin...
Thanks,
Bob
Red Lion,  Pa.
 
_http://s956.photobucket.com/albums/ae43/Gettysburg114th/StugIII/_ 
(http://s956.photobucket.com/albums/ae43/Gettysburg114th/StugIII/) 

-- 
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

[TANKS] Re: My König and Ferdinand 1:6

[Francisco Garcia Melero]

http://profile.imageshack.us/user/pacomerlo/ for more imagens




2011/8/13 Francisco Garcia Melero 

> Sorry for my English, I'm using the googel translator.
>
> Have helped me your ideas in the construction of these "animals".
>
> When I saw in the network that you panzer to 1:6 you build, I could not hold
> in a manufactured one and now I am three, König, the Ferdinand and Hetzer.
>
> The biggest problem I face is that living in a small island not find many
> of the materials needed, so I must do so by the network.
>
> I put some pictures for you to see the progress,
>
> Health and luck to all.
>
>

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: My König and Ferdinand 1:6

[OdysseySlipways]

 
 
In a message dated 10/15/2011 9:37:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
frj...@gmail.com writes:

_http://profile.imageshack.us/user/pacomerlo/_ 
(http://profile.imageshack.us/user/pacomerlo/)  for  more imagens


that link isn't working for me - anyone else (or is it just me)
 
Chris,
_Odyssey  Slipways_ (http://hometown.aol.com/odysseyslipways/index.html) 

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] WW1 tank question

[Gregory Kampjes]

You could always just have only one of the guns functioning, maybe only with
elevation change but not rotation.

-Gregory

On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Ryan W.  wrote:

> I forgot who asked about the hybrid British tank but here's my two cents-
> I think it would be fine if no barrel extended from the tank. Just a hole
> in the front of the tank. That is my opinion.
>
> Ryan ( make it look real) w.
>
> --
> 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

[TANKS] Re: WW1 tank question

[Cobra]

If you cant get traverse AND elevation with your gun, then your never
gonna do well. Unless you are an S-tank.

-- 
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

Re: [TANKS] Re: WW1 tank question

[Gregory Kampjes]

Or a StuG. The idea is simplification. You could make a Mark I tank with 2
guns that move (only 1 can fire at any one trigger press), which would only
be feasible to have individual control of both guns by having 2 "crew", or
you could make it with only 1 functional gun on the side, so it'd be just
like a StuG in operation, but with the gun on the side instead of the
centre.

-Gregory Kampjes

On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Cobra  wrote:

> If you cant get traverse AND elevation with your gun, then your never
> gonna do well. Unless you are an S-tank.
>
> --
> 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