markswihart

there is a debate over which would be better, computer control (using a wi-fi card and some other components like servo controlers and such found at robotic sites, or a fully loaded radio system. being one of the only guys in the group not to have a laptop and not so computer savy (i can't write code like most of these guys), i'm looking into a robbe f-14 loaded with all the bells and whistles, including a mcd switch-16 for cannon firing (trust me i'm going to need all those buttons for the 13 turret on the ship) just wondering what others have to say on this
Mark
P.S. these ships being constructed are heavily armed and camera systems along with other sensor like devices are encouraged.

Umi_Ryuzuki

Seems to me that if you load up a Robbe(futaba) F14 to the limit, you won't need the extra 8-16 switches that the MCD expansion can provide.
Harbor Models
http://www.harbormodels.com/Harborma...m20-radios.htm

ShipsNthings with 84 function diagram...
http://www.shipsnthings.com/HTML/radios.htm

kotori

I think you could simplify control immesurably by making your own wireless controller. We have a guy in the WWCC who has made and battled one. He put it in a 1/144 destroyer he bought so he could test it while working on his battleship, so we haven't seen any sort of cannon rotation control. There's a guy in the NTXBG who has a microcontroller project, and my brother and I are planning to start our own project soon, as well.

The most important thing a controller should do is simplify weapon control. Cut it down to designating the bearing and range to one or two targets and firing. Then make the cannons that are able converge on target one, while the others go for target two. When you press the fire button, only those guns that are aiming at the target will fire. Example: WW1 battlecruiser HMS Lion has turrets forward, aft, and one amidship. If you designate a target dead ahead, only the bow guns will move. If you designate a target astern, only the after turret will come aim. If you designate a target 45 degrees off the port bow, all cannon will come to bear. The same will happen if you designate a target 45 degress to port and astern. Compare to the standard method of linking the bow and stern guns and putting stops at the broadside. You would get much simpler control, as well as increased firing arcs, if you make your own controller.

Additional benefits of making your own controller: you can easily enforce rate-of-fire limitations (and tell when others are breaking them). You don't need to worry about taking up a channel or someone else being on your channel. You can include failsafes, such as releasing a float, stopping the guns from firing if signal is lost, etc. You can get data feedback so you can tell if your pumps are on, if water is coming out (not always the same as having the pump on), how much water is in your boat, current draw, battery voltage, signal strength, pressure of the guns, temperature of the regulator, possibly even target information such as range and bearing. Of course, it won't be much fun if you fully automate target detection and aiming (and most battlers I know want a human directing the guns, even if it is based on feedback from onboard sensors), so you've gotta draw the line somewhere. And, for safety's sake, always have a human push the fire button!

markswihart

Kotori,
this individual who made his own controller, did he need to bring a laptop to the pond when he used it? was it computer based? how big and what dose it look like?
Mark

kotori

[link=http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/album58/IMG_7621]Transmitter[/link] and [link=http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/album58/IMG_7620]receiver[/link], respectively. He built the radio, data transmission, everything from scratch and programmed several PICs to do most of the work. He then hacked a playstation controller for input. It's comfortable in your hands, but the sticks are so short it's difficult to control precisely. Either way, no laptop required. He's standing at the edge of the pond with all the other captains, walking from place to place as the battle migrates around the pond, without having to worry about delicate screens getting damaged by projectiles or people getting jabbed by transmitter antennas.

johnmCA72

What a lot of people seem to fail to consider is, how many functions can you keep track of & operate effectively while others are shooting at you!?! I've got a friend who has a fully-expanded F14 Navy, & he often gets functions mixed up even though he's got the controls labeled on the transmitter - & that's just for sail-around; he doesn't do combat at all.

JM

markswihart

now considering a "crew" option, where I can give control of several turret to different gunners.

Umi_Ryuzuki

You should come out and watch the two "old" guys run the twin Gearing destroyers in our club.

There was one time that Paul, (and I watched this) "drove HIS" Gearing nicely up toward the side of the pond, into the harbor, turned the ship port to land the starboard side against the shoreline. Then as he put down his radio and stepped into the water to pick up the boat, Pat asks him if he is going to pick up HIS boat?!?

Paul looks closely at the boat in the harbor, and looks out at the pond, and exclaims,
"Well where the he|| is MY boat?!?"

Paul's Gearing is clear across the pond heading for the opposite shore.
This is even funnier when someone is shooting up a Gearing, and each of them
think it's the other's boat.