Re: Maus? [TANKS]

["Stacy Hilton" <stacyj-at-defnet.com>]

I WOULD like to see a Maus in 1/6 scale.  I don't think that I'd even mind 
if it killed my BT-7 in two shots.  I don't even think that I'd mind if it 
took 10 shots for me to kill it.  But a 3 foot Maus is another story.  I 
think this scale "thing" will need to be tightened up in the future.  I 
understand the reason for having the "either or" option.  But as more tanks 
are built, it would seem fair to stick to 1/6 scale as a rule.  I would 
agree that a BT-7 with a 45mm gun and 1/2" of armor would stand little 
chance with a Maus with a 128mm gun AND a 75mm gun AND 8'' of armor.  But to 
go after a monster such as this that has all of the benefits of the original 
vehicle and none of the disadvantages (size, speed) ......  well, I hope you 
get my point.  If someone built a tank the size of a BT-7 (3 feet at 1/6 
scale) with 8" of armor, the crew and drive train would have to be on the 
outside with the crew and drive train pushing to no avail.  I would like to 
see the "prototype" thing relaxed just a bit as well.  The Polish 10TP would 
be a fun tank, as would several others.

Clark, as Frank P. would say, "build it, I'll shoot at it".

Paul "1/6th" Hilton


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clark Ward Jr" <ki4gyt-at-gmail.com>
To: <tanks-at-rctankcombat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 8:28 PM
Subject: Maus? [TANKS]


> Does the Maus count for our purposes?  It was in production, and one
> was dispatched to defend Berlin, albeit not making it in time and
> being blown up by the crew to prevent capture...
>
> -- 
> Clark
> M60A1 "the Beast" under construction
> FT-17 "Frenchy" also U/C
> www.rc-artwerks.com
> KI4GYT
> --
> Why do tankers call infantry "Crunchies"??? Because they ARE!!!
>