Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RC Battleship Combat

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the if-battlebots-had-fewer-limitations dept.

Toys 127

Tuna_Shooter writes "For you war buffs... These people have a LOT of free time on their collective hands...." I thought Slashdot had done a story on this hobby, but I don't see it in the archives. The RCWarships site is probably the best place to start.

cancel ×

127 comments

Ugh, popup laced website. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301759)

Follow this link [turkuamk.fi] for instructions on blocking popups in IE.

(I know that people know how to turn them off in Mozilla already, but people seem to be unaware of the hidden options that allow it in a default installation of IE.)

(We'll just ignore the holes in IE for the time being.)

Re:Ugh, popup laced website. (-1, Offtopic)

erik umenhofer (782) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301812)

ha! that's cool! What's worse, pop-ups or goat.cx

Re:Ugh, popup laced website. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302080)

using ie or something? i don't see any popups...

GET THE POPUP ADD FILTER (-1, Offtopic)

danny256 (560954) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302533)

you can still use IE and no popups
i'm not posting a link, look it up yourself
here's the cd key anyway: MP739343291188802719
changed my life

get the ducks! (5, Funny)

nunogawa (317931) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301761)

Forget sinking other RC boats, I wanna take on the ducks in the lake outside my office!

Re:get the ducks! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302416)

http://www.rideaunautical.ca/photos/DSC00022-1.JPG

/. effect (0, Redundant)

NETHED (258016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301764)

The Aussies are going to be mighty riled when they see thier bandwidth bill and their cooked server. Just LOOK at all those HUGE (1600x1200) pictures!

Oh no! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301773)

Oh no! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301766)

My car won't start!!!

Dammit.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301768)

You sunk my destroyer.

I hate when that happens.

*down with the ship*

rc boats (1, Interesting)

Raven42rac (448205) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301775)

rc boats are cool, especially when their frequency interferes with that of an rc plane, im sure that the results are predictable. true story

Re:rc boats (1)

Pontiac (135778) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302067)

There are seperate reserved frequences for ground vehicles (boats and cars) and Aircraft..

Re:rc boats (2)

MADCOWbeserk (515545) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302097)

Like the guy above said there are separate frequencies for land and air models. 75 and 78 mhz respectively. With 27mhz reserved for toy radio control models, like those sold at toys-r-us. In addition the frequencies are segmented into channels, (I think 100 now, they changed things in 91) model airplane and boat clubs use boards which list the frequencies everyone is on. Generally things work out, at my club most of us pick a certain channel and the other guys do the same. Still, I keep a second set of crystals in my field box.

Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that he himself could not eat it? HS

Re:rc boats (0)

lordkuri (514498) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302129)

*bzzzzzt* try 72 for air and 75 for surface.

I own both.

-LK

when... (3, Interesting)

skydude_20 (307538) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301776)

are we going to have these boats running linux, with a 802.11 connection, then you play Battleship on the computer and watch it happen in real life

Re:when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301785)

So that you can lose a 50-dollar wireless card with every ship that gets sunk? Great plan, fucktard.

Re:when... (2)

OneFix (18661) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301933)

Ever hear of Neoprene [thepouch.com] ? Actually, a Palm Pilot with specialized software should be enough to run the thing. All you'ld need is a custom controller. Don't forget, the Palm is a 68000 (DragonBall) CPU...The irony is that the origonal palm is about as powerful (cpu wise) as the first Amiga!!! And, if done right, it wouldn't take up much more space/weight than the current controllers.

Cheating? (3, Funny)

jhunsake (81920) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301777)

Would it be cheating if I bombed them from my RC plane?

Re:Cheating? (1)

Junior Barns (603816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301897)

What about making a replica Zero and crashing it into a ship? (I know...what a waste of an RC plane) Or better yet, what if someone were to build a submarine? I guess it might be difficult to figure out wether or not it sank though (you'll have to see if it will float back up).

Re:Cheating? (0, Informative)

lordkuri (514498) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302136)

why try to build a replica?

buy this [horizonhobby.com]

Submarines? (2)

joib (70841) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302752)

Umm, what's the point? The idea of a submarine is that it should be hard to detect. With that antenna sticking up from the water (or how are you going to control it) it kinda defeats the purpose.. although torpedoes would be übercool.

Great Idea! (2)

wirefarm (18470) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301918)

How about a sneak attack just after dawn, before they're all set up?
Get 50 or so RC Plane enthusiasts to help out -
Bomb then to the bottom of the pond!

Cheers,
Jim

Re:Cheating? (2, Funny)

Gerry Gleason (609985) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301926)

Yeah, let's see you get a 1/144 scale airplain fly, much less drop any bombs.

Was that comment about aircraft carriers launching planes for real? Maybe you could catapult them off the deck, but to what end? Hardly realistic if they are just projectiles.

Something's missing .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301780)

What, no torpedos?

Re:Something's missing .... (1)

Pontiac (135778) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302073)

There is a group out of seattle that does R/C combat.. A few of em run subs with torpedos.

You could prob meet up with them at the Northwest Model Expo [nwmodelexpo.com] in Puyallup Wa on Feb 1st & 2nd.

Re:Something's missing .... (1)

paganizer (566360) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302092)

Hrm.
How would you communicate with a RC sub? aside from cheating and putting a float antenna on...modify the freqs to use ELF? It would be a pain to have to take a backhoe to dig the antenna trench wherever you wanted to play....
I'm really encouraged to do something bizarre by this, BTW.

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301781)



I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Re:Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 54 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301793)

Don't forget to update your subject line tomorrow ... It's his 55th birthday.

Happy Birthday Stephen!

Stephen King was a great writer (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301887)

He entertained many. It will be sad to see hime go. :-(

good, i'm so sick of stephen king.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302065)

..dying every fucking week several times here on slashdot. just watch.. one day he WILL die and then it will be even funnier.

Re:good, i'm so sick of stephen king.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302126)

glad to see this not modded down i got taken in last week by obfuscation

Heh, it'd be fun to shoot the driver (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301782)

Peg your opponent with ball bearings as he stands with a remote in his hands LOL!

Re:Heh, it'd be fun to shoot the driver (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302120)

jimmy g jimmyg- hey i don't know you!

Battleshits!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301784)

My shit blew out my inner colon and sunk my turdboat!!!

This is great! (2, Insightful)

legoboy (39651) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301789)

That looks like an incredibly fun hobby, but...

What happens when someone straps tiny bombs onto a remotely controlled miniature replica of the B2 or some other bomber?

Re:This is great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301864)

Simple.

Anti-aircraft weaponry. :)

Re:This is great! (2)

Cryptnotic (154382) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302084)

How fast is your plane moving? How big are the RC ships? What is your targetting system? The rules specify the type of ammunition to be used (CO2-fired round steel pellets). So you have a steel ball launcher mounted on your B2 bomber. How do you track a moving target on the ground and launch balls at it with any kind of decent accuracy (hit/miss ratio)?

In short, it sounds like a fun but time- and money-consuming project.

Re:This is great! (1)

Catmeat (20653) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302716)

What happens when someone straps tiny bombs onto a remotely controlled miniature replica of the B2 or some other bomber?

It's in the rules that all models must be to the same scale (1/144), which is why nobody uses submarines as the models would be too small to be practical. If you can build an RC airplane 3 inches long then go for it!

Tesla Coils.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301795)

Would it be fair to attack with an rc rowboat equiped with a tesla coil?

It would certainly be interesting...

recompile.org [recompile.org]

B7 Hit.. (1, Funny)

Alec Varezz (583223) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301806)

You sank my battleship!!

Already Slashdotted. (0, Offtopic)

breon.halling (235909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301799)

I hope their server will to live fight again another day. ;)

Geez, these aren't real slashdot geeks! (4, Funny)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301801)

Where are the lego guys controlling the ships?

How do they reload? (2, Interesting)

GrendelT (252901) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301807)

are they one shot only cannons? or how do the cannons reload?

*BSD is dying (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301811)

It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

uh... this is a dupe (0, Redundant)

jaxdahl (227487) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301831)

I found a story *exactly* like this one in the archives: here it is [slashdot.org]

Oh come on, are you going to mod me down for not trying to be funny? Or should you do the reverse? This is certainly insightful, interesting, and funny, and is not intended as flamebaiting or trolling.

Re:uh... this is a dupe (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301845)

I found an arsehole *exactly* like yours in the archives: here is is [goatse.cx]

Re:uh... this is a dupe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302033)

chicken or the egg?!

Interesting Hobby (4, Interesting)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301834)

An interesting hobby, and one that must indeed take alot of time. I was curious so I looked at the rules [rcwarships.com] , and I found out a number of interesting things:
  • Only ships constructed between 1900-1946 may be used
  • Must be constructed exactly like originals
  • basically the ships armor must conform in size and purportion, with the original (model) ships
  • 1. No means of delaying, or slowing down the sinking of any ship is allowed.
  • only electronics may be protected by watertight compartments
THe last two rules in particular are very interesting. Most battleships where constructed as to be divided into multiple watertight comparments (much like the titantic.. only better =)) and were almost impossible to sink. Take the battleship Yamato, the pride of WWII japanese Fleet, when it went on its suicide mission against the US fleet at Okinawa it took, IIRC, somewhere around 12 torpedo hit plus a large number of bombs before she finally went down. Personally, if they are going to all the detail of building the ships why not use watertight compartments like the real ships? Sure, it would take longer to go down but at least it would give a more fair battleship vs. battleship game. The battles would likely last alot longer, yes, but at least it would be far more realistic.

Otherwise, this entire exercise is fascinating, including model aircraft carrirs that can launch aircraft (!), torpedos, and the like, although it appears as though submarines have not yet been sanctioned.

Re:Interesting Hobby (4, Insightful)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301858)

I hate replying to my own comment but I also thought of a british battleship, I believe she was the Prince of Whales, that was constructed during the late 1920's-early 30's. To get around the provisions of the Washington Naval Treaty (which limited the tonnage a battleship could have thereby decreasing the amount of armor it could carry, etc), they used a system by which the ship could be 'flooded'. Basically a double hull was constructed and the outer hull could be flooded with water in effect adding alot of armor as water can quite easily absorb the blast impacts while staying under the tonnage restrictions (as long as her outer hull wasn't flooded). I wonder how/if it would be legal to construct this battleship?

IT'S PRINCE OF WALES YOU DUMBASS (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301953)

Hey idiot, learn to spell.

Re:IT'S PRINCE OF WALES YOU DUMBASS (1)

jbottero (585319) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302785)

Jesus. Yet another tool with nothing better to do then YAP about spelling...

Re:Interesting Hobby (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301862)

They allow bilge pumps, and by not having watertight compartments, it makes it fair. If you had a Yamato thats impossible to sink, thats basically it for everyone else.

Funny I have been thinking about getting into this hobby really recently, then this story pops up. Weird.

Re:Interesting Hobby (2)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301878)

The yamato wasn't impossible to sink, that was kindof my point. You would have to defeat her using your wits, not just a slugfest. Find out her weak points (particularly her keel wasn't protected very well). What I should've said was that this hobby, to me, would be far more exciting if the ships where more detailed and more strategy was involved (finding out the weakness, exploiting them, etc).

Re:Interesting Hobby (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302124)

From the surface in a ship to ship engagement, the Yamato would have pounded seven shades of crap out of anything else on the high seas. Period.

Even the Iowas were no match for the Yamato class.

"The world wonders..." (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302863)

I doubt that very much. Sure the Yamato had biger guns 18" to the Iowa's 16", but the Iowa had much better gun control. The US Ships would have scored far more hits and done far more damage because of their more accurate gun control. Of course nothing is a sure thing in war -- a lucky hit can alter the balance in a heartbeat. Overall, however, Halsey was eager to take on the Yamato and Mushai with his battle fleet -- and I'm guessing he would have been the victor. If he hadn't fallen for the bluff at Leyete Gulf, we would know for sure.

Re:Interesting Hobby (2)

timeOday (582209) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301902)

OK, cool, I'm bulding mine from solid styrofoam.

Re:Interesting Hobby (1)

nostromo_42 (130573) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301937)

that's probably because submarines would be incredibly difficult to implement within this system. i mean, you have to know where your ship is in order to control it, right?

They are pragmatists (5, Informative)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301943)

The entire exercise is to have fun with relative merits reproduced, not anal realism. You go on about water tight compartments; why not fuss and bother over so many other wrongs?

Real battleships seldom fought at less than 10,000 yards (5 miles). These things are fighting at less than a ships length apart! Long range duels involve long delays between aiming/firing and results, plunging fire, precise aiming, radar, haze and good or bad optics, weather conditions, multiple ships and the fog of war. Why not require optics and radar and relays to shore based units to duplicate all these?

Different forms of armor. Real battleships had different thicknesses of armor in different places, at different angles, and different materials. There was side armor, sometimes one armored bulkhead, sometimes several. There was deck armor, sometimes several layers, sometimes a single one. Conning towers, turret armor (which differed on the front, sides, top, and backside, not to mention the barbette), there were magazines, fuel oil to catch on fire, boilers to explode, damage control parties. Heck, throw in crew expertise, training, naval doctrine, individual commander's expertise.

Unrealistic ammunition and guns. Battleship guns usually could fire one or two salvoes a minute, more or less. There were full charges which wore down gun barrels faster, low charges, high explosive vs armor piercing shells, delayed action fuses, duds. The Japanese developed a shell with a better underwater trajectory which got hits which otherwise would have missed. They also had the long range oxygen powered Long Lance torpedo which had the side effect of killing several Japanese cruisers when their torpedo storage was hit in battle.

In short, watertight compartments miss the point. The rules are designed such that small ships have a proportional chance of sinking bigger ships, and that's about it. It's all about reasonably cheap and accurate fun, not about realism down to the nth degree. Once you start worrying about watertight compartments, you are lost. My carrier, USS Midway CV-41, missed WW II by 10 days and would be eligible for these contests. She has 4000 watertight compartments, 12 boiler rooms, 4 engine rooms. How much of that do you want to duplicate?

Watertight compartments (3, Interesting)

Ian Peon (232360) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301951)

I was thinking the same thing looking at this shot [rcwarships.com] of the interior of a hull. When I was stationed on a ship, we were trained that the ONLY thing that kept a ship afloat in combat was watertight compartments.

The ship I was on (DDG-56) even had cross-flooding zones so if a compartment on the port was compromised, a compartment (non COMBAT essential) on the starboard would cross-flood to keep the ship level (important for guns a missle launchers).

Re:Interesting Hobby (2, Funny)

Lord_Slepnir (585350) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301998)

Most battleships where constructed as to be divided into multiple watertight comparments (much like the titantic..

and it worked soooo well on the titanic

Re:Interesting Hobby (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302113)

Yeah, well, the hull of the Titanic wasn't even remotely similar to the hull of a battleship.

And these are *watertight* compartments, not high bulkheads. An iceberg collision doesn't sink a battleship.

accepting jesus christ into your life (-1)

SweetAndSourJesus (555410) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302050)

The Bible teaches that you must:

1) Recognize we are sinners and need forgiveness

2) Then, admit our sins to Jesus, If confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)

3) John 1:12 says we must personally receive Him, But as many as received Him, to them He gave the power to become the sons of God. This means your life is going to change! He who has the son of God (Jesus) has the life; He who does not have the Son of God does not have the life.

4) Romans 10:9-10 says That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raiseth him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

5) Eat a hearty manchode [oralse.cx] [ 8===D ] sandwich.

AMEN!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302380)

Take me to the Lord now, brother... for I am much hungered for the holy manchode meal, and I must eat.

Bismark sunk by 8-year-old Timmy (5, Funny)

raehl (609729) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301854)

In an unfortunate turn of events for Bismark captain Luke Simmons and crew, the german battleship was sunk in friendly waters just off the Bismark's home port, the dock extending 12 feet into the lake behind Capt. Simmons' summer cottage.

"He just refused to honor the rules of combat," Capt. Simmons lamented, referring to Timmy Levendowski's complete disregard for weapons conventions when forgoing mounting cannon on his own ship in favor of divine intervention from the sky in the form of airborne boulders measuring up to 3 inches across.

The Bismark was simply unable to withstand the continued barrage and sunk despite Capt. Simmons' best efforts, including a desperate call to Timmy's parents.

Timmy did not escape the encounter unscathed, however, as international condemnation from his parents after the sinking landed him trade sanctions which, among other things, withheld Timmy's weekly 6 AUD in international aid.

"It's not fair," whined Timmy, "I wanted to play and they wouldn't let me, and now I have to wait a whole 'nother week to get my new action figure. He wouldn't even let me try on his hat", referring to a replica German mariner's headpiece worn by Capt. Simmons whenever commanding his vessel.

Re:Bismark sunk by 8-year-old Timmy (1, Offtopic)

Zork the Almighty (599344) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301912)

Haha this is great, mod this up

move to the missle age (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4301855)

we had non sanctioned competitions when I was younger. We floated a regular model battleship in my friends pool, then simulated a missle attack on it using bottle rockets and jumping jacks. It took those pretty well although one jumping jack did some major damage to the superstructure. Then we upgraded to roman candles - those things cut through the hull like a hot knife through butter. It still took a while to go down - we had to get a couple of shots close to the water line to get her to the bottom.

I don't believe it! (0, Troll)

Kredal (566494) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301865)

A Slashdot editor actually checked the archives before posting a story?

Way to go Michael! Teach timothy how to search the archives, please! (:

Mandatory Simpsons Quote.. (1)

octalc0de (601035) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301894)

Homer: You sank my scrabbleship!

Hey i do that.. (4, Interesting)

linuxbert (78156) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301917)

Sort of.. i dont sink my ships. RC Boats re a very geek friendly hobby. i am part of a club in Ottawa, and a majority of our members are in (or retired from) Hi Tech Proffessions.

Check out www.ziobrowski.net [ziobrowski.net] or Rideau Nautical Modelers [rideaunautical.ca]

A few Neat things you will see - a 10ft 1/72 scale aircraft carrer - with taxing airplanes, underwater submarine photos, constrction photos and a 1/4 scale 2 person tub boat.

Re:Hey i do that.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302034)

So are All of these Membres of Hi Tek Profffesions as badd at speling and CapitaliZation as U, fag?

Loser.

It had to be said.. (-1, Redundant)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301920)

You sunk my battleship!

Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.

I work on a real one of these ships... (2)

Akardam (186995) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301955)

I work as a volunteer aboard the SS Jeremiah O'Brien [ssjeremiahobrien.org] , a liberty like this one [ausbg.org] . The site from the story, and the things the people do, is just cool. Too bad they couldn't arm the civilian ships. There are a few documented cases of Liberties and Victories giving as good as they got during WWII.

- Akky

P.S. Please for the love of Hod forgive us for our webmaster. He's a nasty old man who thinks he's All That.

Are these.. (1)

Shant3030 (414048) | more than 11 years ago | (#4301997)

SSDS or ACDS Ships? Are they running SNEATT?? Do they have passive or active acoustics?

These are very important questions....

And for those outside Australia (1, Informative)

Jouster (144775) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302016)

Check out your local "Big Gun" groups [ausbg.org] .

Jouster

Re:And for those outside Australia (1)

Jouster (144775) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302082)

"Big Gun" refers to the type of RC boat combat occuring here.

I hope someone M2's the moderator who mod'd it offtopic without visiting the link.

(With apologies for offtopic meta-ness. :<)

Jouster

Re:And for those outside Australia (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302132)

you gots qowned like a little bitch. tells you about the fucking sorry ass moderators (not all) that are here. what a dumbfuck system.

Found! (1)

HappyPhunBall (587625) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302018)

For anyone who has only heard of it's legendary power, you may find an actual blink tag [ausbg.org] on the site. I thought those were gone for good!

Re:Found! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302040)

Now if we can only get rid of the next biggest annoyance on the Internet -- uneducated morons, such as yourself, who don't understand the difference between "its" and "it's".

Oops, I forgot... this is Slashdot, the meeting place of uneducated morons. My bad!

I don't know what's more amazing... (4, Funny)

billbaggins (156118) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302024)

I don't know what's more amazing, the amount of work & time they've put into these ships, or the fact that such a graphics-heavy page is still viewable after having been posted on /. for almost an hour...

You Sank My Battl^H^H^H^H^HWeb Host (1, Funny)

TWX_the_Linux_Zealot (227666) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302027)

Damn Slashdot Effect...

Warships are interesting but ... (1, Funny)

mystery_boy_x (322417) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302028)

Normally warships would make me drool but presently I'm watching Miss Teen USA on television so I've just about run out of saliva.

Up Scope - Ready Foward Tubes 1 & 2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302032)

Flood 1,
Open Outer Door 1,
Set run depth to 25, run time to 50.
Bearing mark, 3 2 0,
Range mark, 15,000,
Down Scope, ......
Up Scope,
Bearing mark, 3 2 5,
Range mark, 14,000,
Down Scope
TAO - Compute Solution,
Verify Passive,
Solution Ready,
Stand by 1,
Fire 1
Time to target - 45

Heh (0, Flamebait)

Vanguarde (605695) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302077)

Perhaps they are trying to make up for their pathethic showing in WW2.... Silly aussies. /. the server.

rc sea war (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302085)

what about subs? when is the next announced conflagration?! don't count the stealth 'what happened' approach out!!

http://datamax.servehttp.com

http://www.datamax.servehttp.com/PHP-Nuke-5.6.ta r/ html/index.php

http://www.datamax.servehttp.com/phpBB2/index.ph p

*warchalktroll* beta mod me down

what happens after they sink? (3, Informative)

nocent (71113) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302096)

very very cool. after looking over the photos and reading about some of the battles, my first question was "What happens to the sunken ships?" Of course, this is answered in their faq [ausbg.org] :

How do you recover a sunken vessel ?

Each vessel carries a float which is attached to the vessel's hull by a long line. When the vessel sinks, the float will (normally) pop to the surface, bringing one end of the line with it. As the other end is securely attached to the hull, pulling in the line will retrieve the vessel from the depths. Sometimes the float does not fully deploy or the line is too short and the vessel has to be dragged for. No vessel in the AusBG has ever been permanently lost and vessels have sunk in water more than 20 feet deep.

Let me get this straight... (2)

ottffssent (18387) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302100)

You spend tens to hundreds of hours constructing a faithful replica of a WWII battleship. You paint it, you fuel it, you wire up the controls, you test and refine it. Then you go wreck it. So, it's sort of like RC planes?

Hmmmm. (-1, Redundant)

Brendor (208073) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302115)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those.

Re:Hmmmm. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302128)

holy shit. that would be something. wooT!

ps, first post?

Poor choice of club name (1)

bwoodring (101515) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302269)

Perhaps NAMBA wasn't a very good choice for the association name.

boop boop be doop (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302294)

RC Battleship Combat
Posted by michael from the if-battlebots-had-fewer-limitations dept.
Tuna_Shooter writes "For you war buffs... These people have a LOT of free time on their collective hands...." I thought Slashdot had done a story on this hobby, but I don't see it in the archives. The RCWarships site is probably the best place to start.

This should be on TV, not Boringbots (4, Funny)

spun (1352) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302321)

Actual projectile weapons and the threat of sinking, woo-hoo! You wouldn't need hot chicks to keep that interesting. Not that hot chicks would make it less interesting. Hot chicks... water... Yeah, I see definite possibilities here.

rc scripts are even more interesting.. (0)

tcmardoc (556771) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302351)

ummm... just thinking about which runlevel should i run the script rc2.d/rc3.d is more entertaining.

Model Warship Combat, Inc. (5, Informative)

Volzeron (560605) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302369)

Imagine my shock at seeing the "magnificent obsession" on Slashdot! You may say I'm into this hobby a bit. For more information, be sure to check out Model Warship Combat, Inc. [mwci.org] . Easily the most organized and largest group of model warship combat enthusiasts on the planet. The only organization with a national rule set so people can battle each other under the same rules no matter where they travel from. The MWC even has their own insurance and they're incorporated to boot!

For anyone who is curious, the hobby actually started in Abilene, TX during the summer of 1978 when two bored yokels decided to see if they could sink a plastic model of a ship by taking turns firing at it from shore with a BB gun. Needless to say, shortly after that they were successful in mounting a cannon on a radio controlled ship. The rest is history.

-V

More like Napoleonic era fighting! (1)

StormForge (596170) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302559)

The ships look like WWII vessels, but the battles and the tactics involved (very close range slug-fests) seem much more like the days of wooden ships and iron men. In fact, the ships are wood and the BB's are simply tiny cannon balls. Would be fun to try this with sailing ships I think!

they've been at this for years and years (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302608)

The coolest thing is the bb firing guns... really cool designs. I espically like the o-ring system that if you nail it with enough air pressure you can "machine-gun" your opponents.

In Decautr Illinois they have these battles every summer in one of the county parks that has a large calm and shallow pond. It's really neat to watch.

luckily they dont allow ramming, otherwise a larger ship could easily kill off everyone without too much trouble.

Impressive (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4302700)

I'm impressed - not by the ships but the fact that a /. editor admitted to searching the archives before posting!!

Forget This--I want FIGHTING SAIL (3, Informative)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302721)

If you ever read the Hornblower books, you know how exciting they made fights of sailing warships in the Napoleonic Wars.

WWI/II era ships are too easy. You can steer them in any direction you want, and the damage is probably too tiny to see (it's confined to the small hull).

Why not build some serious fighting sail, like the HMS Victory (in history, commanded by the most famous and victorious commander in his day, Admiral Horatio Nelson), and pit it against America's jewel, the USS Constitution. Constitution never lost a battle, and, in its last battle against two British ships, did such incredible manoevers such as putting a sailing ship in reverse, and going on to disabling and capturing both ships (War of 1812, Constitution v. Cyane and Levant). For the Star Trek geeks, why do you think that Gene Roddenberry called the original USS Enterprise-type starships the Constitution Class? Gene knew history.

Fights like these would show holes in the sails, masts getting blasted off, and your weapon choices would be better--some cannon can be armed with chain shot (two cannonballs connected by a chain to rip a mast off) or even doubleshotting (two cannonballs shot from the same cannon for short-range destruction). Too bad you can't simulate men on board, or you could even have a boarding and have men duke it out topside.

I loved a PC game that simulated great sail battles pretty accurately--Age of Sail II. [talonsoft.com] A RC version would kick serious ass.

Sailing ships? (0, Redundant)

Catmeat (20653) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302746)

I wonder if anybody's tried RC sailing ship combat. It would be more realistic as sailing ships often battled at point blank range. Even a one-against-one battle in a smallish pond could be quite intense, the winning captain would need a lot of skill to make best use of the wind to manover into the best firing position for the killing shot.

RC War (1)

pornaholic (242268) | more than 11 years ago | (#4302862)

You know, I'm just getting started out in RC plane flying and am interested in learning about dogfighting. With planes they try to cut each other's streamers. Maybe, and I don't wanna be a spoilsport, we could get the ships to work with streamers of sorts too, that way it won't cost so freakin much every round. Imagine a lake covered in ships and aircraft all trying not to (or to) crash into each other. Sign me up.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...