Re: Maus? [TANKS]

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

Stacy Hilton wrote:
> AND, I simply cannot believe that you think I'll buy off on the idea 
> that it's just as easy to hit a 36" X 14" target as a 72" X 28" one.  It 
> flies in the face of logic.

Sure it's easier to hit something 6 feet long, but it's also possible 
for most gunners to hit something far smaller, so there is no real 
difference.  A paintball marker controlled by servos and/or motors is an 
amazingly accurate system in the hands of even a novice.  In fact, when 
novices attend battles, we usually hand them the controls of the 
Navarone Gun at some point and they have no problem hitting tanks at 
normal ranges (50-75 feet) that are stationary or moving during the battle.

You may want to consider the following facts:

1) Battlers had very little problem hitting the tiny mule (less than 2 
feet long and 1 foot high) on numerous occasions during the battle on 
Saturday.

2) Battlers consistently and successfully hit 1:6 scale "soldiers" in 
the head from a distance of 20-30 feet when attacking fixed artillery. 
Keep in mind, a soldiers head is less than 1 cubic inch.

3) Skilled gunners consistently aim at and hit small exposed items on 
tanks (such as gas tanks, mufflers and sloped sides of turrets) at 
ranges of 50 feet and beyond if the target is not moving.

4) A number of veteran battlers have "increased" the size of their next 
generation vehicles to be longer than the minimum 36" length to gain 
internal volume for systems.

You can certainly believe whatever you want about small vs. large, but 
the battlefield crucible tends to grind lots of myths into dust.

        Frank P.