airplanes

Discussion in 'General' started by lalimerulez, May 1, 2007.

  1. TRich19

    TRich19 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Posts:
    169
    lastly could someone possibly respond to the anti submarine warfare
     
  2. pew-pew-pew

    pew-pew-pew Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Posts:
    286

    I have to disagree With You on the surface fleet Only :) We Do have the Occasional Silent Service..... ( submarines )
     
  3. lalimerulez

    lalimerulez Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Posts:
    272
    u do have a point there
     
  4. TRich19

    TRich19 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Posts:
    169
    i think it would be dumb not to have them because they were there the whole war so you cant pretend they werent there
     
  5. crzyhawk

    crzyhawk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Posts:
    2,306
    Location:
    Alexandria, VA
    "I have to disagree With You on the surface fleet Only :) We Do have the Occasional Silent Service..... ( submarines )"

    Until I see one (or hear of one) in action for small gun, they don't work.

    " i think it would be dumb not to have them because they were there the whole war so you cant pretend they werent there"

    You are entitled to your opinion of course, however nothing will change the fact that any means of doing damage other then BB's delivered from the barrel of a gun is against the rules for many reasons, the most important of which is safety.

    Mike D
     
  6. Mike Horne

    Mike Horne Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Posts:
    233

    I second Tugboat... the energy in that cartridge is nothing to take lightly. We used to race them in middle school... you would build a little car around it if you were in shop class, then we'd have assembly and race them across the gym, *all* the way across the gym. They were on a string, and even then the landing at the other end was sometimes enough to smash the little cars to pieces. Sometimes the puncture machine didn't quite make a good punch, or a wheel broke off, and they'd strech the wire out some 10-15 (well, way way out... the track was in the middle of the gym, and my age advances)feet to the side.

    I have personally seen one odd/bad bounce out of a 1/4 ball,(I've always thought it hit a deck) it hit one of our guys in the face, on the cheek just beneath the glasses. Trust me, you don't want the rounds in this hobby to be any more powerfull. The surprise and pain were pretty bad, and the boats were well, well away from shore.

    You can't have any fun if somebody is hurt...

    Mike Horne
     
  7. TRich19

    TRich19 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Posts:
    169
    oaky it is dangerous or risky but if it was made so it could be done safely that would be sweet
     
  8. JohnmCA72

    JohnmCA72 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    No, it wouldn't.

    To answer my own question (that nobody else did):

    What happens is, everybody stops what they're doing & watches the go-fast or flyer. It's a huge distraction, that contributes nothing to the battle. People's attention is drawn to things that go fast, that's just the way it is. When there's something zipping around, almost everybody loses interest in the slow warships.

    JM
     
  9. lalimerulez

    lalimerulez Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Posts:
    272
    What happens is, everybody stops what they're doing & watches the go-fast or flyer. It's a huge distraction, that contributes nothing to the battle. People's attention is drawn to things that go fast, that's just the way it is. When there's something zipping around, almost everybody loses interest in the slow warships.

    JM

    [/quote]

    You got a big point. I would probly stop to see the other thing.
     
  10. TRich19

    TRich19 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Posts:
    169
    for that you have a point but whats wrong with actual torpedos
     
  11. Tugboat

    Tugboat Facilitator RCWC Staff Admiral (Supporter)

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Posts:
    8,295
    Location:
    Statesboro, GA
    Nothing is wrong with torpedoes. But don't look to play in a club that doesn't allow torps, wanting to use them. Play big gun, Battlestations, or Queen's Own. If you're not in the area that one of those groups are in, then I'd say torpsare off the table, and a better use of energy would be to figure out what you CAN do, within the rules.
     
  12. tomasa8

    tomasa8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Posts:
    20
    what if you put lasers (or infa red beams) on the planes and whan you hit the ship the ship cant do any thing for so many seconds. Its safe and could be put on a small plane.
     
  13. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2007
    Posts:
    920
    I have yet to see a 1/144 RC plane that could fly at all, let alone outdoors or carry any IR beams or bombs or torpedoes of any sort. I have heard there are 1/72 RC planes, but they are too light to operate outdoors. Even the slightest wind would simply make them unusable. Despite my doubts, I still think it's a very cool idea. If you can build it, I will find a way for you to try it out in my club.
     
  14. tomasa8

    tomasa8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Posts:
    20
    I have no clue of how to do it i just threw it out there. I know they do it for air to air combat. We also ram each other with our planes(thats fun to).
     
  15. admiraljkb

    admiraljkb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Posts:
    145
    OK, ignoring everything else, R/C 1:144 planes are nearly impossible to make without DARPA level tech. Then they can't fly in a room with the air conditioning or ceiling fans turned on. Have you ever seen a 1/144 scale plane? Where are you going to put the extremely small but low capacity lipoly battery, extreme micro servos, Infrared Kit, microprocessor and radio? Oops, I forgot needing the motor. :) The electronics kit alone is going to suck down much of the limited power, without even having a motor on it.

    Ignoring the above, it's a hobby geared around Warships from 1900-1946 which is considered the Big Gun era (ala the era of the Battleship). If you want to build aerial combat, great, but the scale involved to make it work right, involves scale Battleships large enough to need a state issued boating license and a reasonable sized lake. Those would be too big to sink as well, which goes against our nature (Big Gun and Small Gun) of wanting to put holes in hulls! We want real damage, we want REAL sinks! woohoo! AR AR AR.

    Anyway, this subject comes up a lot, and it's nearly impossible to reason out, even pointing to older discussions on the subject. This comes up at least once a year, along with on the Big Gun mailer about exploding self propelled torpedoes. Generally the desire to have planes seems to be more an an emotional thing, which generally can't be logically reasoned with. :) So be it. No problemo. Cause hey, I'm just as big of a tech geek as the next guy which is why I'm in Big Gun, but sometimes you just have to know when to when. :)

    Cheers
    Jeff
     
  16. Evil Joker

    Evil Joker Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Posts:
    563
    thats like a 3 in plane you would lucky to get a - aa battery in there
     
  17. PreDread

    PreDread Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Posts:
    209
    Location:
    Houston, Tx.
    I think planes would be cool,

    But they would be an even bigger technological huddle than some of the stuff I propose. In 1/72 scale, they might work but you'd still be limited to largest availible aircraft.

    For my club idea, and its 1922 cutoff date, building a Handley Page O/400 or a Zepplin Staaken bomber might be possible, the Staaken with its almost 140 ft. wingspan was nearly as large as a B29.

    But what would you do with it? It might be possible to set one up to drop a Propel powered torpedo or try to drop "mines" near the stern of ship to snag the props. Not historically accurate, but neat.

    Either method of attack would require skimming just above the water, leaving the planes vulnerable to hits with current weapons, or you could simply try hitting the water in front of them and creating splashes to bring them down.

    But as said before, even something as large as these would require expensive "micro" components and you'd still be counting ounces. Not to mention you could forget about trying to take off and land a O/400 off the flight deck of the HMS Furious....
     
  18. admiraljkb

    admiraljkb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Posts:
    145
    "thats like a 3 in plane you would lucky to get a - aa battery in there"

    That's kinda the point of my saying "DARPA" level technology. There are itsy bitsy LiPO batteries that will fit BTW, but won't leave much room for the rest of the Unobtanium(r) components. To even fly and be armed with even IR is going to require all of the little aircraft to be constructed of different varieties of nearly pure "Unobtainium"(r). :) I'm not saying it's impossible, just highly improbable at this current juncture, but anyone is quite free to prove me wrong, and it wouldn't hurt my feelings a bit. I'll even buy the first round.

    Cheers
    Jeff
     
  19. admiraljkb

    admiraljkb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Posts:
    145
    "But as said before, even something as large as these would require expensive "micro" components and you'd still be counting ounces."

    We are already counting ounces with our 4 foot long Cruisers and smaller. We start counting even smaller for the few combat subs that are out there and they're around 3 feet long themselves.

    For this, it's going to take a switch to something a little more scientific for measurements, ala metric, and we are into milligrams, possibly micrograms for each component. :) Too small for me to contemplate.

    Course, I just reviewed that post and realized we were in 1:72 scale on it instead of 1:144. But overall, it still holds. Weight restrictions are going to be a problem.
     
  20. Evil Joker

    Evil Joker Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Posts:
    563
    its possible but we dont have NASA money