Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      PhotoBucket are no longer permitting 3rd party hosting   01/07/17

      As most of you are now painfully aware, Photobucket (PB) are stopping/have stopped allowing their members to link their accumulated years of photos into forums and the like, which they call 3rd party linking.  You can give them a non-refundable $399 a year to allow links, but I doubt that many will be rushing to take them up on that offer.  If you've previously paid them for the Pro account, it looks like you've got until your renewal to find another place to host your files, but you too will be subject to this ban unless you fork over a lot of cash.   PB seem to be making a concerted move to another type of customer, having been the butt of much displeasure over the years of a constantly worsening user interface, sloth and advertising pop-ups, with the result that they clearly don't give a hoot about the free members anymore.  If you don't have web space included in your internet package, you need to start looking for another photo host, but choose carefully, as some may follow suit and ditch their "free" members at some point.  The lesson there is keep local backups on your hard drive of everything you upload, so you can walk away if the same thing happens.   There's a thread on the subject here, so please use that to curse them, look for solutions or generall grouse about their mental capacity.   Not a nice situation for the forum users that hosted all their photos there, and there will now be a host of useless threads that relied heavily on photos from PB, but as there's not much we can do other than petition for a more equitable solution, I suggest we make the best of what we have and move on.  One thing is for certain.  It won't win them any friends, but they may not care at this point.    Mike.
Das Abteilung

First AFV Build For A While

70 posts in this topic

So, having sorted image hosting here's a pic of both E-10 and E-25 with red primer.  I elected to use the Model Air Brown RLM26 with a couple of drops of Red RLM23, which came out alright.  Again, the lighting and camera have made it appear somewhat more orange than is really the case.  Before applying this I sprayed a goodly coat of AK Wear Effects.  The red primer colour was applied a few hours later.  Hold that thought .....

iw3NMvZ.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in 2 minds whether to now apply another coat of chipping product before the Dunkelgelb or whether to mix some Washable Agent into the Dunkelgelb.  So I thought I'd have a go at seeing how well the Wear Effects product worked.  In 3 words, not at all.  Perhaps Worn Effects was the wrong product.  As I said, I'd applied a good coat: too much, I worried.  The unthinned Model Air was applied after a few hours thickly enough to give coverage, but not excessively.  It was about 24hrs before I got round to trying to achieve any effects.  On his video about his own products, MiG says the effect is dependent on time: it would appear to need to be done relatively quickly.

 

In that same MiG video he just applies some water with an ordinary brush and hey presto!  Instant effects.  I tried water with a range of tools on one of the E-10 wheels, and had almost no effect: the Model Air proved almost completely impervious - despite the chipping product supposedly preventing adhesion.  Here's what I did achieve.

4wgodQP.jpg

Using water, a stiff hog bristle brush had no effect at all, nor did a cotton bud or a paper stump.  Used dry a stump is too soft and used wet it turns to mush.  The J's Work scratching tool just bent over without doing anything - see between the bolt heads at 7 and 8 o'clock.  The effects here were largely achieved with a cocktail stick and the dental burr (see earlier posting of candidate tools), which is mildly abrasive.  I can't for the life of me remember where I got that, but I'd like to get more.  It was one of the supermarkets or cheapie shops - but not Tesco, Poundstretcher or Poundworld: I looked there today.  However, I suspect I could have achieved the same without using a chipping product.

 

So then I tried an even stiffer shorter-bristled brush with some Ultimate acrylic thinner on another wheel, and this was the result.  No other tools were used.

7NvqObL.jpg

 

I think this is better than with the water, perhaps not surprisingly.  But again, could I have done this without using a chipping product?  So, accepting that I may have done something wrong with paint thickness and timing, I'm distinctly unimpressed and using this product again won't give me what I want.  The question is, do I risk trying another chipping product such as Heavy Chipping and hope that works better or do I go straight to using the Washable Agent additive?  I think I'll go for the latter.  I don't fancy strong scrubbing around the delicate etched brass bits etc, which is why I tested a wheel first.  Let's see how that goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello friend,i use it also and the beginning is hard to find a way how to reach the best result.

 

First of all i use tamiya paints,the other paints like vallejo,humbrol,etc....doesn't work for me.

 

I try also heavy and worn effects,and you known what the best is??

 

HAIRSPRAY from a cheap brand.... funny he?

 

Step by step :

 

-1- Red primer with some sponge effects in black brown camo( 30' mins drytime)

-2- Hairspray (1 hour dry time) not to much just a shiny coat is enough.

-3- Repeat step 2

-4-Use the coulor you want (in your case dunkelgelb) [Tamiya mix with white+sand yellow]

    Don't airbrush the whole tank...(u dont have the time to remove your paint)

    Use small sizes and wait till it almost dry...touch with your fingers if your sure.(if it's sticky just wait ;) )

-5- A hard short wide brush and some tap water.

-6- Toothpick - toothbrush - sharp needle = all those things can give you a scratch on it.

-7- when it's done i use sponge technique on the wheels with some colours of vallejo air/model

 

]11l7z9g.jpg

 

You can find it step by step with photo's on my blog

https://rascarcapaco.blogspot.be/2014/10/hetzer.html

 

Hope you get what you want

cheers Razz

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.  I suspected that I had a time delay problem.  It's a very different way of working.  I could hairspray the next paint layer: I have hairspray - yes, cheap brands.  Problem is that I'm clearly not now going to get much or any bare metal wear-through because of the hardness of the red primer colour.  I believe the Washable Agent effect is permanent, not time-bound, so I'm going to try that rather than the hairspray.  It says to use "up to" 10% in the mix, but I might do 5% for the Mittelsand factory finish and a higher content for the locally-applied pattern colours.

 

So what happened to manufacturers giving you good old-fashioned instructions?  So now we need display devices on our modelling benches for YouTube videos?  Although watching and seeing it done is much better than just reading about it with static pictures, so perhaps this is the way.

 

On which subject, MiG has just posted a new YouTube video on chipped hard-edged camouflage here: https://www.facebook.com/MigJimenez/photos/a.726700927343617.1073741831.413684768645236/1676276359052731/?type=3&theater&utm_source=AMMO+News&utm_campaign=cdfb594293-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_06_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b508638084-cdfb594293-270253729

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Real life in the way of modelling for a few days.  Managed to get a coat of Dunkelgelb on tonight.  AK 714, the darker more traditional shade from their German Late War set.  I hadn't pre-shaded as such but did allow the red primer to bleed through in places.  I then lightened some areas with the lighter Dunkelgelb shade, AK 713 for some tonal variation: saved the leftovers. Doesn't really show in the photos except on the outermost wheels.  Both were thinned with Ultimate Airbrush Thinner.  First time I've used this: seems to work with AK paints - it's supposed to work with pretty much all brands.  I added a few drops of the AK Washable Agent, which was completely different from my expectation.  Quite thick and goopy, yellowy-green colour. Mixed up the paint, thinner and agent well.  The Agent is supposed to be max 10%, but I didn't measure the paint so it was very much a guess: 3 or 4 drops in a large airbrush cup half full.

 

Next, the camo and then we'll see how well this Washable Agent works for worn paint.  I  don't plan to be quite as extreme as Razzie.   Notwithstanding poor paint, poor application and lack of "bull" I don't think vehicles would have survived long enough in action to get into that sort of condition.  I'm actually hoping that I might get a bit of wear through handling. I note that he has correctly shown the weld metal as a much brighter colour than the darker metal plates and free of rust, a point often missed.

 

And I've just realised that I forgot to spray the schurzen.  Good job I saved the leftover mixed lighter shade .........

zcqMjTU.jpg

 

cYDd03m.jpg

Edited by Das Abteilung
punctuation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I thought I'd see how the Washable Agent performed.  Well it isn't exactly washable - at least not in the concentration I used.  A normal soft brush and water achieves nothing. However, wetting the paint does make it far easier to remove with harsher implements.  These 2 photos show the effects of a stiff brush used with a mixture of scrubbing and stabbing action.  I think I'll try using more washable gunk in the camo colours.  This is the sort of effect I expected from the wear and chipping fluid products, but this one doesn't seem to have a time-bar on use.  The paint itself is permanently transformed.

ZeX1wzf.jpg

 

oVynM7F.jpg

 

An annoyingly large amount of hairs, fluff and other bits of crap had got onto the paint.  But each of these became an opportunity for a bit of distressing, and their distribution was more random than I might have come up with.  My best tool for these was a pair of fine-nosed tweezers, pointed but not sharply so, taking care TO damage the paint while removing the various lumpy bits.

 

So then I thought I'd have a go at the engine bay hatches, which are likely to be opened and closed on a regular basis.  These were done with a mixture of cocktail sticks, the afore-mentioned tweezers and a funny little pointed tool mounted in a paintbrush handle and ferrule which came with a set of long-bristle nail art brushes.  Again using water applied as a softening agent.  Quite a lot of paint debris is created and frequent blowing and brushing off is needed.  This is really just a first experiment and it still needs tidying-up.  I haven't done the camo yet, so some will need to be re-done.  And any bare metal wear through and rust effects will come later.

1a03hLt.jpg

 

VXvlWSO.jpg

 

It still seems necessary to use mostly metal tools, so care is needed to avoid doing too much damage.  Cocktail sticks do work but don't last long before they soften and lose their point with the water. The J's Work "scratching stick" did absolutely nothing again.  In fact it just flexed, bent over and snapped after a few minutes.  The rough broken end was no more effective.  I tried a couple of very small ball-ended burnishing tools but these were too smooth.  A finger nail is quite useful.  There doesn't seem to be any handling wear as the paint is durable even with the washable agent.  A higher concentration might change that.  I might try handling by holding the wheels with damp fingers to see if I can get any high point wear effect thus.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distressing the dunkelgelb proved to be more absorbing than I expected.  So much so that I completely forgot about the camo.  I'm tempted now to leave the E25 in dunkelgelb.  Cocktail sticks actually proved to be more useful tools than I expected.  Allow one end to wear down/soften up but keep the other dry and sharp.  This gives broader and narrower ends in one disposable tool.  You can also use the flat side of the point for broader effects.  The wood absorbs water, so provides its own wetting - which can be useful.  Most of what was done in the photos below was done with cocktail sticks and a bit of stiff hog brush.

 

I have to say that I've come to like the Washable Agent.  To my mind it does what I expected the chipping fluids to do, and I don't have to rush to do it.  It can be chipped dry, and a fingernail work well.  Applying water does soften it and allow a variety of attacks including rubbing through.  But once the water has dried the finish hardens up again.  You do get a bit of sludge and lumps from dissolved paint, but that is easily cleaned off with more water or kitchen roll or left to dry and brushed or blown off.

 

This is what I've achieved in a couple of hours, concentrating on wear areas.  As I said, in 2 minds now whether to apply camo.

5LTE3p5.jpg

 

1CE6gZ0.jpg

 

kOdhcBX.jpg

 

4wCz7PM.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice work Peter, thanks for the tip about the cocktail sticks too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So.  camo or no?  It does look a bit plain in overall dunkelgelb.  I just got carried away with the distressing.  But I have a plan - or at least an idea.

 

I came across a picture of a German tank crew "painting" a PzIV.  I use the word loosely because they were using "brushes" made from rags or fabric of some sort wrapped around bundles of straw.  And we take such care with our masking stencils, tape, putty and finely sprayed finishes........  I've often wondered what that would really look like, so here goes.........

 

The Oberfeldwebel  has deposited cans of paint concentrate with his E-25 crew, mumbling that there are no brushes so they'll have to improvise.  He has "helped" his crew by chalking outlines on the vehicle of the areas he wants painted before nipping off to an "urgent O group" that might involve hot coffee and a nip of schnapps.  His Gefreiter scratches his head and works out the straw-and-rag idea, mixing the paint up with petrol thinner in a handy bucket.  He longs for hot coffee, even ersatz, and a nip of schnapps - but is stuck with kraftstoff  fumes and a mucky uniform, for which he will doubtless be told off by the new uber-zealous Leutnant.  The Gefreiter realises that you can't actually paint in the conventional sense with those tools: it's more like daubing.  So he thinks dots - i.e. improvised disc scheme.

 

So that's what I'm going to do.  Or at least try to do.  After raiding Hobbycraft for a variety of white pencils, pens and real chalk  I think I have the chalk answer: a Conte white pastel pencil.  As for the "brushes", cotton buds seem to be the most likely easy answer.  In my decal box I discovered some ancient Letraset (yeah, that old!) rub-down German national, tactical, divisional and number markings, which should work well with chipping - assuming they still adhere at all!  Wish me luck ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the best we could, herr Oberfedwebel .....

 

Not sure this turned out as I intended, but then I didn't know how it would turn out.  I wanted it to look crudely applied as described above, and it does.  But does it look like a 5-year old did it?  Used a mixture of cotton buds and micro brushes for the smaller places, and left the chalk visible in a few places.  I used a lot more washable agent in the camo colours, probably about 20%.  Too much, as it made the paint far too washable and too soft.  At that concentration it literally does wash off.  Let's see what it looks like after some washing and streaking etc. The horizontal lines of chipping just up from the lower hull edges are where the tow cables will sit.

 

I left the markings at just the outline crosses.  With the cleaning rod tube on the right side there isn't anywhere to put ID numbers, and the use of divisional and tactical markings declined towards the end of the war.  I managed to lose 2 schurzen brackets completely, both for the same plate.  So the middle plate on the left will be missing, although I toyed with having it hung by wire from the tow cable brackets

LmIrLuB.jpg

 

5BY0Bwl.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually turned out pretty good for rags and straw with petrol thinner.  Bet there was no smoking when this was being applied.

It's a little bright for the orangey brownish but you should be able to tone that down some.

 

Otherwise good job and hope the feldwebel got his schnapps.

 

Sure glad it's not red..............

 

Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That's the supposedly later-war browner shade of Rotbraun, notwithstanding any controversy over whether it actually existed, which is very different from the redder earlier-war shade.  In this case it's applied quite thinly, which doesn't help.  Might look different on the E-10 if I spray it.  Schokobraun was the other alleged late war colour change, but I felt this just looked too dark.  But I did use the darker of the 2 Resedagrun shades.  AK suggest that the lighter brown and darker green were used together, with the darker brown and lighter green together.  Not sure what their evidence is, but in the field I imagine things varied.  But I might try their other combination on the E-10, which has a lot less real estate to cover.

 

The trouble with trying to model something that looks badly applied is that it just looks like bad modelling.  Not sure I'm on the right side of that divide.  Anyhoo,  looking a little different after a filter wash and some streaking.  I used Wilder's wash for German camo as the filter wash, which is quite brown and more highly pigmented than, say, MiG washes.  It dried with more of a sheen than I would have liked and took several hours to dry, remaining sticky to the touch for probably 5 or 6 hours even in today's high 20's temperatures.  Odd for a wash.  

 

For dark streaking I used AK Interactive Streaking Grime For Dark Yellow, which is a very dark brown shade.  Curiously, my unused pot of AK's OIF Streaking Effects that I first turned to had actually dried out to a rubbery solid chunk.  But it was a very grey shade, which probably wouldn't have worked here.

 

For light streaking I thought I'd try MiG's Oilbrushers for the first time, although I nearly tried one of Wilder's quick drying oil paints - also for the first time.  I only bought shades of both products that I thought would work for weathering, although MiG himself recommends Oilbrushers for shading and highlighting his style of zenithal lighting effects (which just looks too contrived and artsy to my eyes).  Dust seemed to be about the right shade here.  While the brush idea is useful and less wasteful and saves the faff of soaking the oil out of conventional oil paints, their consistency is somewhat thin and can't be made thicker.  Which is perhaps no bad thing for streaking and blending.  I've never done "conventional" oil dot streaking, so I can't compare.

 

I'll do a pin wash once I've painted the tools etc, but I did apply a little of AK's oil and grease washes around the wheel hubs just now.  I quite like Abteilung's grease effect oil paint, as you can make a wash from it but it also has texture for lumpy accumulated grease.

 

It was hard to stop chipping effects on brass pieces going straight through to the brass, thus needing touching-up, and I found the same with some resin parts.  I had primed all the large brass parts with Gunze Sangyo's Mr Metal Primer, which is a clear lacquer or varnish-like substance, before primer paint.  Maybe I didn't de-grease well enough.  Maybe it just doesn't work......

 

w77qZuG.jpg

 

GdFe6pv.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that looks better. The streaking and washes blend it together and tones down the orangey/brown. I like the way you have scuffed up the hull behind where the tow cables are stowed.  That's another great idea I hadn't considered.

So what if it's missing a couple of schurzen hangers, it looks completely natural that they would be ripped of with the plate they supported. You will have to ding or scuff up the plates before and after the missing one and it should look great.

 

Wonder how much bigger it is than a Hetzer as it sure does resemble one.

 

Lloyd

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I am going to scuff up the schurzen a bit, but I sometimes think this is overdone.  They weren't sheet metal like fenders, they were armour plate several mm thick: not easily bent or crumpled in the way that some people portray.  The weakest point would be the sheet metal hangers in this case, or the mounting hooks in the case of other types of Schurzen.  So, more likely to get torn off than significantly distorted IMHO.  An impact sufficient to bend armour plate is unlikely to leave the sheet metal hangers intact.  On the Hetzer, the schurzen hangers had keyhole slots hung over a single bolt head, so not strong.  E-25 seems to be the same although the kit has 2-bolt hanging pads but only single-bolt hangers.  The mesh screens on the E-10 will be significantly more distressed as they were much flimsier.  They have a 2-bolt hanger fixing on the hull top: stronger fixing but flimsier screen, so far more susceptible to damage.

 

As for size, E-10 was the Hetzer replacement whereas E-25 was the JPz IV/70 successor.  Same firepower as their predecessors, but simplified high-commonality chassis.  Still petrol engined, apparently. I never cease to be surprised at the German inability to embrace diesel power for AFVs, although UK and USA were majority petrol too.  Unless I'm much mistaken Herr Diesel was in fact German ...........  I don't have a Hetzer to compare, and authoritative data on the Entwicklungsfahrzeug is hard to find.  The model's hull dimensions are 150L x 105W x 57H mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks great to me Peter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tow cable chipping wouldn't be appropriate everywhere.  The E-25 doesn't seem to have had a stowage layout for them.  I made up some simple U brackets from spare brass, with the cable eyes sitting over the end ones.  I think they're heavy enough for gravity to keep them in place, but might add some wire or twine ties at the ends.  But they will wiggle about and rub on the paint.

 

On other German vehicles with "proper" cable stowage there probably wouldn't be such wear.  I won't be doing in on the E-10.  Other nationalities where tow cables perhaps tended to be draped, attached to shackles or eyes rather than firmly held in specific stowage would probably display wear at contact points.

 

I wanted to clear the spray booth away as it occupies most of my bench.  When not in use it lives on my garage racking.  So I thought I'd better spray up the E-10, then I have my bench free for detail painting etc.  So here it is, basic colours.  I used the other combination from the AK Late War set, Shokobraun and the lighter Resedagrun shade.  I didn't make a particularly good job of the camo: airbrush trouble.  Using the same mix as for the E-25  - AK paint with 10% (+/-) AK Washable Agent and Ultimate Universal Thinner - seemed to produce airbrush-clogging lumps this time. I managed to split both the head seal rings cleaning one brush last time, which didn't help.

 

Tz3yvPC.jpg

 

3EnyD7j.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That turned out pretty good, I think I like it better than the E-25.  When you weather and streak it up it will look impressive.

 

I get what you mean about the cables and yes most of them were pretty tied down on the German vehicles so they wouldn't rub all that much so best to leave things alone. 

 

It's strange that about 99% of the German WW2 tracked vehicles had the drive sprocket at the front and a driveshaft running from the engine at the rear to the transmission

at the front but both of these have the sprocket at the rear.  Even my Hetzer model has the front sprocket and the half-tracks also.  Wonder when/why they changed.

 

Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK no fielded German tracked AFV was rear-drive.  The larger Entwicklungsfahrzeug projects were still stubbornly front drive too, although it must by then have surely been realised how difficult gearbox and final drive maintenance was on Panther and King Tiger (as similar shapes - Pz III and IV had some glacis access).  An experimental PzIV mit Hydrostatischem Antrieb (hydrostatic drive) was rear-drive, although the testbed conversion still retained the toothed front sprocket.  Had it gone ahead I presume an idler would have replaced it.  It still exists in storage at Anniston, Alabama having been on the Mile of Tanks at Aberdeen for years.

 

These 2 smaller E series had completely hinged drop-down rear hull plates, at least according to the model research that Trumpeter has depicted.  That would have simplified maintenance no end, and potentially allowed complete pack removal in the way that is now almost universal, although rearwards rather than upwards.  On the E-25, Trumpeter have depicted that almost the entire engine deck also unbolted.

 

Most UK and Russian tanks were rear-drive, whereas the US persisted with front drive until the M26.  Not having driveshafts and gearboxes in the fighting compartment certainly gave more space and allowed a lower profile as well as simplifying maintenance.  Even when the Chaffee came along the final drive and steering unit was still at the front, even though the gearboxes were relocated to the engine compartment.  That led to the large access panel in the glacis for maintenance.  The national differences in engineering philosophy are interesting.  Of course, no-one was really doing design for ease of maintenance in the WW2 period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info.

 

 I never even thought about maintenance on the Panthers and Tigers.  Must have been a nightmare and 

no wonder so many were abandoned when the transmission or final drive failed, especially on the early Panthers.

How would you ever get a transmission out of that access panel around the driver's hatch on a Tiger II, probably have to 

break it down into small enough pieces to fit the hole.  What a job!!

 

Your E series look so good it's hard to remember they were only paper panzers after all. 

 

Lloyd

Edited by BlackMax12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now