Re: re-draft the prototype rule ?

[Frank Pittelli <frank-at-rctankcombat.com>]

paul needham wrote:
> 
> But I think a discussion is needed as to why the prototype rule was 
> added in the first place.
> 
> lets face it you are not sticking rigidly to any time scale or size 
> scale [ i.e 36" or 1/6 scale]  so slightly re-writing the no protoypes 
> rule may get some different shapes onto the battle field.
> 

As anyone will tell you, I love a good rules debate, so here's a little 
background/history on the rules in question.  To place yourself in the 
right frame of mind, picture Martin Sheen (not Charlie) in the opening 
scene of Apocalypse Now ... laying on the bed in a dream state, 
wondering how the madness could be contained.  That's how you have to 
think when developing rules ;-)

All of the rules have been formulated with regard to both *sport* and 
*historical* aspects.  After 20 years of rule evolution in the R/C 
warship hobby, it is clear that both aspects are important and neither 
can be allowed to dominate the other in the rules.  Otherwise, fun 
starts to be reduced very quickly.

So, to the main question, why limit vehicle types to "production" 
vehicles?  Clearly, if we don't put any limit, the historical dimension 
will quickly disappear as people literally invent vehicle designs out of 
thin air.  So, we have to draw the line somewhere for both historical 
and sport reasons.  But, given any limitation, we have to think of the 
downside as well.   We don't want to limit the types of vehicle so much 
that it prevents people from building lots of different things (bad for 
the sport).  That is, we need a limit that provides a wide range of 
possibilities (good for the sport and historical), without letting in 
everything (bad for sport and historical).

Given that our hobby spans over 100 years of armored vehicles, there are 
literally many hundreds of production types to choose from.  That's a 
pretty large assortment to choose from, so our "sport" aspect is well 
served by the rule, as well as the "historical" aspect.  As Paul N. 
stated, lots of production vehicles have multiple variations and even 
look-alike versions from different countries (e.g. Tiger-Comet).  If you 
can't find something you like in the production family, you probably 
just need to get some more books and look some more.

If we increased the limit to include "prototype" vehicles, the number of 
vehicle types significantly increases (probably 10 prototypes for every 
production vehicle), but many of those were not much more than "concept 
vehicles".  Sure, some contractor got paid lots of money to make a 
couple demonstration models, but by definition, such vehicles weren't 
considered good enough or practical enough to invest the money needed 
for production purposes.  In short, prototypes get a pretty low 
"historical" rating ... they didn't even survive the development 
process.  Much like Detroit's concept cars, there primary purpose was to 
inspire customers, not to win the war.

Prototypes also represent a fairly significant risk to the "sport" 
aspect, in that you can probably find a prototype to fit just about any 
bizarre concept you want.  If you want something that was really short, 
really wide, really large, really small, well armed, well armored, or 
anything else in between, I'm sure there is a prototype to suit the 
bill.  Production vehicles had to conform to practical realities, 
prototypes did not (or could not).  As the hobby increases in size, that 
will almost certainly lead to one or two people who search high and low 
for the strangest, most "rule-bending" vehicle they can find, which will 
send the "sport" aspect into disarray.

So, as I see it, there are enough production vehicles to satisfy our 
"diversity" goals, while providing an extremely solid historical and 
sport foundation.  Prototypes certainly increase diversity, but decrease 
the historical aspect of the hobby, while representing a risk to the 
sport aspects.

On a related note, don't confuse the vehicle type limit with the "scale" 
rules.  To accomodate our historical members, 1/6 scale is allowed for 
any vehicle, allowing members to leverage a wide assortment of existing 
parts and plans.  To accomodate our sport, the 3ft rule allows virtually 
any size tank to be built and still be effective.  In practice, we have 
seen very little battlefield advantage for the small vehicles ... they 
get hit just as often as the large ones.  Some historical members may be 
horrified to hear that WWI tanks are battling alongside of modern tanks, 
but they need to resign themselves to the fact that history needs to 
take a back seat to the sport on that aspect.

Hope that helps give you all some background.  Now, back to our 
regularly scheduled debate.

        Frank P.

PS. John's and Steve's desire to build Comets is nothing but pure "Tiger 
Envy"  ... their existing tanks simply aren't big enough ;-)