Hey Steve,
Me again...
Awhile back I heard some banter about return rollers on tanks, and how you made
the comment that they are every tank builder's nightmare...
But you did clarify that if one had to build return rollers on a tank, the JS
series of tanks had the best ones, because they are fairly large...
Question #1. Will the rollers somehow inhibit(screw-up) the "slack" needed in a
tank track that has an active suspension? Meaning, that the rollers won't
allow enough droop?
Question #2. I imagine that these rollers, no matter what tank they are built
on, will provide additional friction points, that will affect the speed of the
model.
As you can tell from the line of questioning, I'm still abit up in the air
about what to build, the JS-III (rollers) vs. the Jagdpanther (no rollers, but
limited traverse). Beginning to sound like a beer/tank commercial. Less
rollers, more traverse...
I'm just trying to look for any advantage that I can grab!! If the rollers do
inhibit speed and bring about droop issues, then the JS-III may not be a great
choice, saying nothing about a cramped turret!!
Part of me just wants to say *uck-it, and build the Jagdkitty and live with the
limited traverse and the non-ability of tackling a hill slope head on!! (Gun
length issue..LOL)
I guess the bottom line is, with all sincerity, which tank would you build, of
the two, keeping in mind all the things outlined above (and any other issues
you can fore see)?
Thanks Steve, I'm looking forward to hearing your wisdom and insight regarding
these matters.
Dave "I believe, Mr. Tyng, that you've built the ultimate R/C tank (the Crom)"
D.
Oh yeah...
My list of reasons for stating this; in order of most to least significance
(IMO).
Relatively compact design and silhouette...
I'm still a big proponent of smaller is better... Had the Hetzer been rated
a four defensively, I'd probably be building that as we speak. Small, and a
relatively simple build. Less gun overhang. Only four road wheels, although
it does have return rollers... WIth only one other one in the hobby, it would
seem like a good choice.
If the Pitellis would just see the light on the sloped armor argument... the
Hetzer would certainly earn a four defensively!! (I calculated 107mm frontal
armor for the Hetzer, if slope of armor is factored in). Could anyone really
believe the Germans would field an anemically armored vehicle at such a late
stage in the war (think Jagdtiger for proof that the Germans (or at least
Hitler) were thinking the BIGGER and MORE ARMORED, the BETTER!!), especially
after they finally grasped the significant lesson that the Soviets taught them
about slope design?!! Yes the Hetzer was tiny, and doesn't conform to my
BIGGER/BETTER side of the argument, but it certainly was no armor slouch!! And
the main reason for the Hetzer's existance is obvious... The Germans were
always at the forefront when it came to "borrowing" (read using) other
countries tanks and chassis. Look at all the FrancoDeutch anomalies that they
frankensteined together!! And the Czech 38(t) chassis was an absolute winner
that the Germans just couldn't ignore...
Getting back to my list of reasons why the Cromwell is such a superb build
choice...
Boxy turret, no side hit issues when faced head-on against opponent's tank.
Five large road wheels, relatively simple and straightforward.
No return rollers!!
Compact gun, no overhang worries.
Actually, this may not be the best "line-up" card, in terms of most-least
significant, as each issue can be argued as being just as important as the
next.. except for maybe the gun overhang one... How often, other than perhaps
at this last battle, do you guys encounter steep hillsides?! I'm answering my
own questions... a good sign!
I'll state it again for the record, you really did your homework on that one
Steve!!
Dave
--
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
