I think the biggest problem with this hobby is a "chicken or the egg" thing. I have to travel 4-6 hours to get to the nearest pond to battle. If there were people in my city battling there whould be more intrest and more new recruits. If i could tell people that they could buy a kit for $4-600 and in 15-20 hours they whould be on the pond it whould be an easier sell. That being said I think a middle ground kit whould be a good thing. Something where some of the dirty work has been done for you. Not everybody has a shop, so cutting fibreglass on the kitchen table is a messy endevour. Mabybee something where the hull already has the ribs cut, the rudder's in place, shafts in and a sub-deck attached. And maybee even a superstructure (I like building them but how much do you learn about the hobby while doing that?). Everthing thing else is fairly simple and clean (expept the skining, but you're going to have to learn one way or the other).
I agree and I think you nailed the things most needed to have in the ready to run ship but let's make a list. Also remember that if you don't have the ribs cut out, manufactures can sell it to a much broader market. (even though that's a pain) Basically what we are looking for is a basic rc ready 144 scale model which can be modified easily for combat. If we can get the basic boat made, the rest would be quicker/easier. 1. ribs cut out 2. subdeck and decks mounted 3. props and shafts installed 4. rudders installed 5. basic superstructure 6. possibly mounting locations for all necessary systems (motors, guns, pump, receiver, batteries, bottles)
isnt it interesting how a small philosophical discussion can envelope and tie together so many different subjects. I for one think that a RTR or (RTBattle) is a big key in expanding the hobby. Just add batteries, fill the bottle, tweak the guns and go. Sure some will captains will come and go just like in cars and planes. They come and go as builder/captains as well. In the end if you throw a larger net you will get more keeper fish.
This is the age that people do not really want to be consumed by building. I do this in the 1/16th scale infra-red combat tanks I am also into. I have 5 operational I spent money for two. I bardered for the other 3. R/C cars and planes are a prime example. When some good cars first came out they were just about all kits.Frog and Grasshopper come to mind. The hobby shops went into buisness putting these kits together. Now like Team ASSOC.cars can be kit form of ready to run. Our hobby lags behind. Figure from sat 1980 till now and one can not get anything at a hobby shop is truly pitiful.
Classic Catch-22: Nobody's building because there aren't any kits, & nobody's producing kits because there aren't any builders. I think the idea of full-time ship builders, who generally don't actually sail & fight, has a lot of potential. Especially if it leads to a high degree of standardization, so that every ship is more-or-less like every other ship. Figure that a ship that costs about $1000 in parts alone can probably double that or more in labor to assemble. This would pretty much force "professional" builders to adopt efficient methods & standard parts/assemblies. At the same time, overall quality is likely to improve greatly from the experience full-time builders gain through repetition. People are generally willing to pay for quality products. It's all part of the "value equation" that I've talked about in other discussions. If the value is high enough, a high cost can be tolerated. It's hard to beat the value of a reliable ship that you can just charge the batteries, fill the CO2, & go right into the battle. Millions of people are able to drive their cars, but very few are able to build one. Imagine what it would be like if, to be able to drive, you also had to be able not only to fix your car when it broke, but practically (if not actually) build one yourself, even to the point of fabricating parts? Cars were like that once. I think that confining R/C warship combat to being a "builders' hobby" guarantees that it will never become more than a tiny niche of a declining hobby. What's happened with aircraft & racing boats is that they've been transformed into "action sports", where the emphasis is on the "doing" rather than the building, by the availability of quality, manufactured products that are ready to use at the time of purchase. Once, you had no choice: If you wanted to fly an R/C aircraft, you'd bloody-well better be able to build one! Not so anymore, & anybody with the money & decent motor skills can fly one. JM
Even just getting a BC kit into a local shop whould be huge in my books. Could you imagine driving 20 min to your local hobby shop and picking up that 75 round gun? I live in Vancouver BC, I whould drive to Seattle for this. I had another thought today. Rumor has it that when the Ramones (and I imagine the Sex Pistols as well) went on their first tour they whould show up in a new town, play and then the next day 3 punk bands whould form in that town. What if this hobby went on the road? Planned a "tour" ? Exposing it to new people. The way I found out about this hobby/sport was an article in RC Boat Modeler 10+ years ago. I didn't have the money back then but it sat there in my mind for almost a decade until time and funds became availabe. I tracked the hobby down on the internet and whammy I was building a boat. But last I checked RC Boat Modeler dosen't have those articles anymore. So this hobby needs exposure!! First and formemost!! If someone is interested enough they will find a way. But they have to know about it first! Road trip!
JM, I plan on doing something along the lines of providing a wood ship kit for BS after I move in the next year. As for making sure every ship kit has a high degree of quality I think the solution lies in those new compucarve or carve-right systems where as one could have a data base of ship plans and could just push a button and presto, ship kit done. the initial cost of the equipment $1200 to $1600, but when one factors in the time saved you can recoop your expenses quickly. the quality of the kits would always be the same (the human element is really removed from the process) well this is just my idea and plan for the future, not reall intending to make a biz out of it or profit, just cover cost and help the hobby along.
A complete combat warship, even a kit, is liable to take up from 5-25 ft^3 of precious retail space. What else might a hobby retailer put into that space? A hobby shop's business is to sell products. Those that sell get the space. Now, if a hobby shop hears over & over again, from multiple people, that they'd be willing to pay good money - which to them means enough to justify their costs to acquire inventory, store it, and display it , then they'd be foolish not to find sources of combat warship products & offer them for sale. A hobby shop represents "hobby" only for its customers; to its owners, it's a business & needs to be run like a business. There you go! That's one way of generating the "buzz" necessary to get people asking their hobby shops for R/C warship combat stuff. That's not the only thing to do, though. I can guarantee you that it's not all the the Ramones did, either. JM
Okay, I would be happy to build a NC (IRCWCC ready) for $2000.00 FOB for anyone! But.... would I have any customers???? Marty I wish we had what R/C airplanes have. I remeber my father do what we do now scratch build. He would enlarge plans out of R/C Modeler and go from there. This hobby has been around since the 80s and what is there to show for it? Skunk is gone. There are no kits say like that Revell 1/144th kit that came out. That is not good example. This hobby is stuck in neutral because no one is making kits for this hobby. I am talking about Great Planes,Byrons,ect. [/quote]Classic Catch-22: Nobody's building because there aren't any kits, & nobody's producing kits because there aren't any builders. I think the idea of full-time ship builders, who generally don't actually sail & fight, has a lot of potential. Especially if it leads to a high degree of standardization, so that every ship is more-or-less like every other ship. Figure that a ship that costs about $1000 in parts alone can probably double that or more in labor to assemble. This would pretty much force "professional" builders to adopt efficient methods & standard parts/assemblies. At the same time, overall quality is likely to improve greatly from the experience full-time builders gain through repetition. People are generally willing to pay for quality products. It's all part of the "value equation" that I've talked about in other discussions. If the value is high enough, a high cost can be tolerated. It's hard to beat the value of a reliable ship that you can just charge the batteries, fill the CO2, & go right into the battle. [/quote]
It all depends. What is there for somebody to do with a $2000 warship, that they'd find worth the investment? So far, the only alternative that anybody seems to want to consider is to cheapen the hobby. The "Holy Grail" is a ready-to-fight warship for less than $100. First, does anybody really think that's going to happen? Second, if it did, who's ready for in influx of "idiots", & people who don't have enough skin in the game to feel committed? People decide with to do based on how much it costs them compared to what they get out of it. I call that the "Value Equation". On one side is everything that they need to spend or do to get & stay in. This includes the cost of equipment, time spent, learning curve, tools, ongoing costs for supplies, maintenance, travel, etc.; what you have to give up, to get in. On the other side is basically the "Fun Factor". In other words, if the Fun Factor is higher than the cost, then people will consider doing something. If the Fun Factor & cost are close to even, people will be luke-warm at best. But if the Fun Factor is WAY higher than the cost, then people will be willing to do what they have to, to get in. If the Fun Factor vs. cost is high enough, you'll have to beat them off with a stick. I've said this before & I'll say it again, because it's true: People will sell their own children, if they think there's enough of a benefit for themselves. The problem, that nobody seems to want to admit out loud, is that the Fun Factor of R/C warship combat isn't high enough to justify a higher cost. It's just barely enough to get & keep those few of us who are already committed. Since forever, the only way anybody has ever considered skewing the cost:fun ratio more favorably is to try to drive the cost down, to try to match the Fun Factor. There are several problems with this approach. It opens the door to those who aren't likely to stay long, since they don't have much committed. It also opens the door to anybody with enough money, even though they may not have the same sort of ethics that most of us do. Frankly, I'm glad that the cost of entry keeps certain people out! However, the biggest problem is that, with the Fun Factor as low as it is already, it's nearly impossible to drive the cost down far enough to get a very favorable fun:cost ratio. I think it's long past time to work the other side of the value equation, namely improve the Fun Factor. Plenty of other hobbies/sports/leisure activities cost a heck of a lot more than R/C warship combat, yet they get plenty of people to participate. The fact that thousands of people are willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars to do things like jet ski, snowmobile, water ski, snow ski, fish, & plenty of others should suggest to anybody that cost alone is not the prime motivating factor that people use to determine how to spend their leisure time & funds. Why is it that thousands of people are willing to pour $4/gal. gas into a $10,000 snowmobile or jet ski all day long, pay for all the gear & accessories to go with it (clothing, trailer, etc.), while only a couple of hundred or so cry & moan that $500 is too much to spend on a combat warship? I'll tell you why: It's because those other activities are a heck of a lot more fun than R/C warship combat. What we need to work on is not driving the cost down to match the fun; we need to raise the Fun Factor to the point where people won't mind the cost! Another thing that I've said before, & will say again: I'd much rather see a $10,000
JM and Marty Exposure has something to do with it also. At the Maker Fair it was amazing how many people had very little knowledge of this sport. No one new it exsisted. Again one can not go to a hobby shop and get this stuff. Reguard less of the internet,people want to see what they are getting. The shop I am near guys are bringing in their cars and planes to show and get parts. How about that computer generated R/C airplane simulation. I know most people play it like a video game but,it is advertisement and may convince a few to buy a plane. As far as the fun factor. It was not fun watching my dad build a plane and bring it home in a bushel basket. Still he pressed on. Why?
interesting arguement. I agree with both sides of that. I think a warship has to come in cheap. Not $100 dollar cheap but maybe $500 dollar cheap and yes the fun factor must be increased. I didn't see any ideas for doing that in your post but I would think more meets, more open water, more ideas for combat (like scenario games) or other things could "increase the fun factor" The limiter I feel is the water equation. We have so little usable water and it's seasonal. You must find more ways to have this hobby and do it safely around the public. Getting exposure to people makes the hobby grow.
We must of posted at about the same time. Exposure. People will come into this hobby. We got a few people from the Maker Fair. Hopefully a few more again this year.Other R/C combat groups might have cross overs.The problem I find is not the cost. It is all abut finding people who are interested and expose them to it. One has to sell this hobby to them. I started WWCC in the 80s. I was able to convince a few and I did not use any weapons to do it. The group has survived since then and got a half dozen more people to join for the 2009 season. We are though in a large populated are. We also were able to secure a city/water municipality to do this. Marty I know you did the same for your group.
I agree. Most people that see it, like it. The flying bb's are what prevents most places from allowing it. Anybody will let you sail a rc boat around. Everybody is thinking (with good reason ) insurance, people getting hurt on their property and suing them. The flying bb's are what draws people to it also. Catch 22 [B)]
That is the truth about insurance. Each year when the WWCC applies for the use of the pond there are always hang ups between San Jose,the Santa Clara water district.and NAMBA. We have to have individual insurance and site insurance. It is a hassle but,to play it is well worth it. We are just lucky to have this.
Where, exactly, the price point is, is irrelevant. I've seen plenty of posts where people seem to think that $100 is the "sweet spot". Whether it's actually $100, $500, or something else isn't the point. The point is that there's a whole other side to the equation that's being ignored. That's because I wasn't trying to promote any particular "solutions". I'm not looking for knee-jerk reactions or quick-fixes, whether they be mine or anybody else's. What I want is to provoke some deep introspective thinking. I'd like people to see that there are other ways of looking at a problem than what they've traditionally used (with less-than-spectacular results, I might add) & see where it leads. A big problem that I see with a lot of people's reasoning, whether it be about promotion, technical issues, or whatever, is to dwell on the limitations & use them as an excuse for not trying. Forget limitations for now; they're just obstacles to overcome. Focus on what you want to do , not on why you think you can't do it. It took Edison over 10,000 failed attempts before he succeeded in creating a working incandescent light bulb. Had he focused on the limitations instead of the possibilities, I doubt he would have gone past a handful of failures before giving up. Once, people thought that manned, powered flight was impossible without flapping wings. Birds do it that way, therefore everything else would have to do it that way, too. But somebody looked at the problem from another angle, & figured out a way to get it done. Exposure to what? The problem isn't how to show the hobby off; there are plenty of examples of how to do that. The problem is, what to show them? What is somebody going to see, that makes them want to spend their excess time & money on R/C warship combat instead of something else (that probably costs about the same, or even more)? THAT's what we need to take a long, hard look at. JM
"What" is the easy part. Good looking ships shooting at each other and sinking in real life. Not on TV, not on YOUTUBE or in magazines. Those outlets are fine and ok exposure, but they don't do the ships justice. Seeing them performing in the flesh ignites the imagination and impresses with the size of the ships. And like I said before, flashy good looking ships are good PR, as far as showcasing is concerned. A smart looking Iowa should sell itself. It's the "how" I whould be concerned with. How do you get crowds with BB's flying around?
You would have to restrict entry. Rope off the Pit area.Provide safety googles. At the Maker Fair even with all the safety devices a person got hit and I believe drew blood. The game in some ways reminds people of Soft Ball. Good to play and lousy to watch. People come down and watch and have no idea at what is going on until a vessel sinks. They do not know in most cases which side is which and no knowledge of ships and classes. So we are trying to convince these people to join. Good luck.
So we need an announcer to explain it all real-time, someone with enough flamboyancy to make it dramatic & fast (mentally) to figure out what is going on.
