Jump to content

Das Abteilung

Members
  • Posts

    2,248
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Weymouth

Recent Profile Visitors

5,217 profile views

Das Abteilung's Achievements

Very Obsessed Member

Very Obsessed Member (5/9)

2.4k

Reputation

  1. The problem with any colour involving the word "khaki" is the word "khaki", which as a colour reference is entirely useless. It is no more useful than "dark", "light" or "pale". As I'm sure you all know it just means "dust" and originally meant North-West Frontier dust: Afghanistan. Even in the British Army there were many shades of "khaki". The WW1 "khaki" uniforms were distinctly green whereas the WW2 "khaki" battledress was distinctly brown and the 1908 and 1937 pattern "khaki" webbing was very much sandier than both. For what it's worth I like the Vallejo Model Air Green G3 OOB, as below. A distinctly brownish green. Other opinions are available of course......... The G4 here is Hataka's.
  2. LifeColor have a set of Italian military colours, as do Hataka. Patterns varied considerably and could be single, 2 or 3-colour, depending where they were deployed. The CV33 and M14/41 in the Bovington museum, captured in Libya and still in (very grubby) original paint AFAIK would both seem to be in overall Giallo Sabbia Scuro with patterns of Rosso Ruggine.
  3. The Thompson SMG drum magazines stowed on top of the 37mm shell rack would be semi-gloss black. The fixed 0.30 Brownings in the hull front were either reduced to 1 in the outboard location or removed altogether and the holes plugged. Miniart got the radio all wrong. The US SCR 528 radio installation was replaced with a British WS No19 located closer to the driver, as in this photo. In the Lee the driver was also the radio operator, unlike the Grant where the radio was located in the turret for the commander.
  4. Only until there are dead people. The children clinging to the T-55 is outrageous.
  5. The Alvis Stormer had high-hardness steel (i.e. armoured) stowage bins as a means of adding additional protection to the aluminium hull armour. I don't think the CVR(T) series, from which the Stormer evolved, did. I know we looked at the idea for the FRES Utility Vehicle when I was working on that project, which has morphed into the Boxer Medium Infantry Vehicle. Stowage bins are usually clearly identifiable as such and yes, they can add a little to the protection of lighter vehicles. They would do little for an MBT. Open stowage racks would do nothing for protection but could be loaded with something more solid. Or could be skinned with sheet metal/armour plate. Cages specifically made to hold additional protection such as sandbags go back to WW2, a not uncommon practice on Shermans for example. A problem facing AFVs since late WW2 are hand-held shaped charge launchers. MBT guns moved on to shaped charge munitions in the mid-60's with the T-62's 115mm gun, and they are now fairly universal. However, being relatively low velocity - compared to APDS etc - they can be defeated by detonating them at a stand-off distance or catching them without detonating. And this is where the various manufactured and improvised cages, slats, nets etc come into play. But they are often - even usually - open at the bottom and not designed to take the weight of stowage. And any stowage inside them is likely to be destroyed in action. So while a stowage bin or rack might deliberately or inadvertently become part of the protection suite, protection devices are not intended to become stowage. And soldiers tend not to like their kit being incinerated by RPG hits. Which is essentially what stopped the idea on FRES. The Type 59 and 69 are evolutions of the T-54, starting out as straight licensed copies. China did not transition to the T-55.
  6. These are not the Marylands you're looking for, they can go about their business................. Now you know why I do tanks! But the Wellington is the little-seen Merlin-engined MkII. In that photo there's a Morris Quad in the background, all of which suggests a reasonably close degree of Army-RAF co-operation. I don't imagine the RAF had anything powerful enough to haul the crash-landed Beaufort out of the way. And it's clear how boggy the outfield could get when it rained. I thought some of the Miniart sitting figures might be adaptable to the Bofors layer and trainer. I guess it depends what you want your crew doing. In action or stood-to, after-action maintenance and clearing away the empties or stood down having a well-earned brew and bully beef sarnie. Adapting the figures to be in the act of manning the gun at stand-to would be very dynamic.
  7. The rock wall camo would make no difference in the middle or environs of an airfield, and might in fact make the truck stand out more. The aircraft camo certainly stands out when on the ground. I didn't realise that Marylands had operated from Malta but I discover that the first unit to be equipped with the type was at Malta. So this photo may well be Luqa airfield. The trucks are almost certainly US origin but I can't place them exactly. The headlights in the fronts of the fenders suggest Ford, but the door not coming all the way to the bottom of the cab side doesn't. However, the RAF were supplied with over 500 civilian-pattern Ford trucks through Ford Egypt in Alexandria in 1940-41. So a Ford does look like a strong possibility. As for which one, there was a confusing variety of models and cab types. US G8T or Canadian FC60 are strong favourites but there are detail cab differences with the photo like the door length and side mouldings, although they changed regularly and differered from country to country. Even enlarged, a lot of details are still unclear. For the figures, could you do something with the Bronco 17pdr "Pheasant" crew or some of the desert Miniart sets? Some plastic surgery will be required.
  8. RB Models and DEF Model are companies who also make aluminium gun barrels. Much cheaper than Aber equivalents for no less quality. Although Aber do some things they don't: Matilda CS barrel springs to mind. But Aber stuff is on the expensive side where alternatives are available. At least here in the UK and in Europe, I imagine it's the same over there. RB use brass muzzle brakes whereas DEF tend to use resin or have you use the kit-supplied brake. The RB range is huge - must be nearly a couple of hundred different barrels - and they also do brass antennas and bases, a whole range of brass ammunition and other useful items. On your side of The Pond, the Barrel Store (unsurprisingly, perhaps!) used to stock RB but I believe they were taken over by Sprue Bros a few years back. DEF now have a large range of all sorts of useful stuff, mostly in resin. If you've never heard of either you should check them out. When I started out modelling, the after-market parts situation was easy: there weren't any! Now there is a huge and confusing variety of manufacturers and new products almost daily. https://www.rbmodel.com/index.php?action=products&cat=news http://www.defmodel.com/
  9. And many photos of track links on the turret sides, so clearly it was more common than I believed. The photo with the 2 Russian officers even appears to show mounting brackets. For my own education, how can those tanks be identified as MNH-built?
  10. A feasible idea but more common on less well protected Allied tanks than on German. King Tiger did have spare link carriers on the sides of its more substantial turret, but only for 8 per side. But spare links were in short supply and with German forces pretty much always on the retreat after the Panther appeared in service most knocked-out and disabled tanks to scavenge quickly ended up in Allied hands. KTs are rarely seen with them in their racks, for example. You'd be more likely to see the engine deck stand-off armour as per the JP and perhaps the matching turret-top piece as air attack with an absent Luftwaffe was a more dangerous and ever-present threat than most Allied tanks. Even 20 and 23mm cannon were lethal to engine decks and top armour when fired from an aircraft diving at 400mph. Before you break out the pigments I suggest a filter or wash or two to "bring it all together" followed by some drybrushing and perhaps a bit of oil dot streaking/fading. And don't forget some oil stains from some of the wheel hubs: they leaked. Pigments will help you add dust and dirt effects but don't help you weather the basic vehicle finish or highlight and bring out shadows and details.
  11. Factory painting is factory-dependent. MNH were still turning out Panthers and JPs in overall Dunkelgelb right up to the factory's capture, for example, despite instructions to the contrary. It is questionable IIRC whether it was ever implemented anywhere, but that is a continuing vociferous debate. The use of unpainted red primer in lieu of rotbraun has been discredited by Thomas Jentz, reversing his older opinion. Spray painting of camo is unlikely this late in the war. While each vehicle was supposed to be issued with a kit, in reality only workshops had them - and then not enough for mass painting. Vehicles were generaly individually painted by crews in patterns they felt appropriate, most usually by hand. Such guidance as there was had advocated not more than 1/3 of the vehicle painted in any single colour. Many were clearly deployed in overall dunkelgelb as there was no paint paste available. Issuing the tank was more important than painting the tank, and there are stories of units turning up at MNH and just taking tanks. These would have had no gun sights as they were fitted elsewhere, not at the factories. Might I suggest that before you complete the painting you get rid of some of the more prominent mould and join lines, like those on the Panther barrel and mantlet. And armour plate is very hard to scratch and gouge without significant impact, BTW. Face hardened plate like the schurzen would snap rather than crumple or bend. How are the spare links attached to the turret sides? Panthers did not have spare link carriers on the turret sides. Those links are about 30kg each, so you've added about a tonne to the turret, which would have compromised the balance and thus stressed the traverse gear. Which is why they didn't carry them there. Spare links also became increasingly rare later in the war as there were not enough to go round and lack of them was the cause of many tank abandonments for the want of a spare link or two.
  12. The moderating team have sent you a PM, can you please read it and respond.

     

    Thanks

  13. My mistake. Op Vitality at South Beveland, not Op Infatuate at Walcheren. Staffordshire Yeomanry DDs and Buffaloes of 1st Assault Brigade RE landed near Hoedekenskerke.
  14. The V DD MkIs would almost certainly have been fully repainted in SCC15. Likewise the later III DD MkIIs used at the Rhine and Walcheren. The M4A1 Sherman II DDs passed over by the US to cover the UK DD shortfall (no III DDs were ready in time) were built as DDs in the US and would have been and remained OD.
  15. This photo has come up and been discussed before, on Missing Lynx IIRC. The commander's MG mount is indeed the rear legs of an M3 tripod welded to the cupola. The mount for the M2 HMG has been moved forward between the hatches too. As noted the Tamiya "Korea" kit pretty much represents this tank's build standard OOB, which is the final one to see WW2 service. Their other one does not quite, but the biggest difference are the T66 tracks - which doesn't matter if you plan to replace them anyway - along with things like the torsion bar engine access hatches. It is a perfectly adequate kit but needs detail improvements, as do most: solid grab handles, poor tool holders etc. I've just built one. The RFM E8 kit is excellent, probably the gold standard and much better in many respects than Tamiya, and comes with their lovely clip-together indy link tracks. By the time you've bought the Tamiya kit and the RFM tracks you might as well buy the RFM kit: costs about the same, at least in UK/Europe - might be different in N America. However, none of those kits have the mantlet with the cover fittings but without the cover fitted as per the photo. They all offer plain or covered mantlets. You could add these fittings yourself from plastic rod and strip. Tiger Model Designs do one in resin, along with a whole wealth of other M4 detail parts. In Canda you can easily get TMD directly from them in the US. The MJ Productions 3D printed light guards are nice: probably the best out there. Don't know where you would get these in N America: Sprue Bros? Their M4 detail set is quite expensive but if their other sets are anything to go by it should be good. For preference I would use an RB aluminium barrel with brass muzzle brake. The DEF barrel uses the kit brake.
×
×
  • Create New...