Re: Tank warfare in CA [TANKS]

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

Barry Irick wrote:
> I guess the rules are loose enough so that theres is alot of flexibility 
> with regards to tracks.  It is allowable to have a different track/bogie 
> style than the prototype (i.e.  dual track teeth/single bogie vs. single 
> tooth track/double bogies).  If so, makes it easier for individual to 
> construct based on what is available to the builder and easier to 
> construct per builder's skills.

Yes. It's hard enough to make working tracks from scratch that can stand 
up to battlefield conditions, so modelers are free to solve problems as 
best suits their abilities.  Basically, if someone standing 50 feet away 
looks at your tank and recognizes it as the intended vehicle, you're 
"scale enough".

Note:  The overall length, width and height of the vehicle must be as 
close to the chosen scale as possible.  A modification here or there 
isn't going to matter if it's needed to work around some layout problem, 
but deliberately reducing or increasing one dimension in a significant 
way to gain an advantage (perceived or real) will result in some heavy 
peer pressure (usually in the form of Monty Python style taunting :-)

>  
> Durability:  How good are wooden wheels (like wooden toy wheels from 
> craft stores).  The Pz. IV looks it had them for a while.  Relatively 
> cheap and easily replaceable.
When sealed against moisture, wood wheels hold up very well.  The 
venerable Tiger-1 has been battling for 3 years on homemade wheels 
without any problems.  The hardwood toy wheels hold up even better.

The one problem with those toy wheels is that they are usually rounded 
over and a squared-off profile works a little better as a bogie.

> Motors:  I keep with the KISS method.  KCM looks ok, take some work to 
> find and mount to "sprocket" wheel (intend to use friction method track 
> style).  How have the other motors (drill motors, etc.) fared for 
> alternatives?  

EV-Warriors have far more power than the KCMs and are the standard to 
beat on the battlefield today.  Scooter motors (approx 300-400watt) seem 
to be a good alternative, are easier to find and usually come with small 
drive sprockets.  We'll know for sure if they equal the EVs only after 
some more battlefield experience with them.  High-torque drill motors 
have also worked well, but not as many vehicles have used them so far.

>  
> Lower hull intend to use 1/2" plywood to support weight adn provide good 
> platform for innards (coated with Solar-Ez).  I see alot of metal 
> framing, is this because the wood wears easily (even with 
> bushings/washers).  How necessary is the metal reinforcing?

There's clearly a design trade-off between using the wooden hull, a 
metal skeleton or composites as the primary load-bearing structure.

If you use wood, you'll need to make the hull out of at least 1/2" 
plywood, which increases the weight and decreases inner space.  You'll 
also need to bolt things onto the hull, which increases maintenance over 
time and the overall weight.  On the other hand, wood is cheap, easier 
to work with and requires less specialized tools.  If you're not already 
a wood worker, then it's not a good choice.

A metal skeleton allows you to build a much lighter hull because the 
skeleton takes the load.  Of course, the metal is heavier (steel) or 
more expensive (aluminum), but it is also more durable (when build 
properly).  Metal also allows you to weld parts together, eliminating 
fasteners that can come loose.  If you're not already a metal worker, 
it's not a good choice.

Composites provide the best of both worlds:  a strong, lightweight 
skeleton and hull (when designed properly).  But, composite design is 
not particularly easy, it's not easy to fix problems and move things 
around, and it requires more building steps than the other two 
approaches.  If you're not already a composite builder, it's not a good 
choice.

I've built large scale models (warships, sailboats and tanks) for over 
15 years now using each of the approaches and I can honestly say that 
they all work, they all have their advantages and disadvantages.  So, 
pick the material that suits your talents, tools and techniques.  That 
will result in the best model for you.

> Lastly, during battles - are ATG allowed to change facing if not fully 
> 360 rotation (love the PAK 40 shown on site)?

Field Artillery can be repositioned at any time, but they can't be fired 
while you are touching them or standing next to them.  We tell all 
artillery operators to stand 5-10 feet away .... and then we shoot at 
'them' with our tanks if they don't listen :-)

        Frank P.