Hey, this topic must be pretty controversial. Huge number of posts now. Today I played WoT, which I don't get to do very often because our computer graphics card is pretty much obsolete. My cousin and her husband came to visit and he's got a laptop he showed me the game on. I already knew about the game, yes, but I finally got to try it. And he has a premium account with no tank shortage.
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Jason <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think the fire risk is as great as its thought to be. Thousands of > weedwackers are used daily. I raced nitro powered rc touring cars for a > number of years and still fly rc planes powered by nitro engines and had > some truly terrific crashed with both, including shattered 10oz fuel tanks > from the planes and twisting tumbling crashes at around 60mph with the > touring cars. > nitro fuel is about 70pct alcohol 20pct nitromethane and 10pct oil and > I've never had a fire from any of them despite spraying it everywhere on > hot engines. > > Is there a fire risk? Sure there is, its there in the tanks using > electrical as well. Lead acid batteries emit hydrogen gas when charging, > charge then in an enclosed tank add a spark and boom, lithium battery > poweres tanks(LiPo specifically) have a significant fire risk and that's > one that is all but impossible to extinguish without burying it in sand. > > There are risks with all of the power sources, but I don't think they > should be blindly ruled out > > Jason > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile > > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Thomson <[email protected]> > Sender: [email protected] > Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 09:33:40 > To: R/C Tank Combat<[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > Subject: [TANKS] Re: I say we do allow.... > > I agree with Kurt. I will design and build my tanks to stay within the > rules. There are a number of reasons for this: > > 1. Safety. > 2. Between them, what you guys have jokingly referred to as The > Elders, > they have a ton of experience in this hobby that can be counted in > DECADES. > This means that if you think of it, chances are it has been discussed > or > tried already. I'm smart enough to listen and learn. :-) > 3. Because one day, the Central Alberta Division of The Northern > Barbarians > will arrive on the battle field down south. Call it *Invasion Plans* > and if > the tanks aren't compliant, ya can't battle. It would SUCK to drive > that > far towing a trailer full of armor, to have to watch from the > sidelines. > 4. Did I mention Safety? Hundreds of hours building your tank, $$$ > investment in components, + one spark in your gasoline powered beast = > A > Priceless YouTube video. > > > On the subject of "List of Approved Tanks", I can see problems. Who > maintains The List? Who decides on additions, deletions, etc? > > Why not shift the burden of proof to the prospective builder? It > would then be up to the builder to provide proof (which is easily > verified) that at least a "working" prototype was built when > submitting for a designation (min of rolling chassis, if memory serves > me). That should keep the signal to noise ratio (Hey I wann > designation for my Mech Warrior - 75Th level Wizard hybrid!!) down. > > Cheers, > Fred > > -- > You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. > To post a message, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] > Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat > > -- > You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. > To post a message, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] > Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat > -- You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected] Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
