Jump to content

Kingsman

Members
  • Posts

    4,011
  • Joined

  • Last visited

8 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    South UK

Recent Profile Visitors

11,929 profile views

Kingsman's Achievements

Very Obsessed Member

Very Obsessed Member (5/9)

4.9k

Reputation

  1. Ultracast in Canada seem to have them. Don't know if buying from Canada is any more advantageous for shipping and exchange rate than from the USA.
  2. Yes. Archer's casting marks sets. 3D printed decals. They have some pre-formatted casting marks plus foundry symbols but also some alphabets. But the small ones are awful wee....... Now the question is, where would you get them. Archer announced that they were closing in late 2023. Final orders, never again etc. And then earlier this year announced that they were staying open after all........ But they have been forced to stop their dry transfer range as the materials are no longer made. They are now waterslide only. The rub-downs were a PITA to use anyway. You can buy direct from the USA, but US shipping is notably expensive. Their "Dealers" page comes up Error 404. You may just have to surf likely stores. Modellbau Koenig in Germany used to be stockists but have little now, Historex Agents in the UK used to be stockists too, which is where I got mine. They claim to have a good range of Archer products including some of the 3D sheets, but not the casting symbols. Set AR88007 generic. This is about life size. Set AR88054 for HVSS Shermans (oversize image) Set AR88058 for Shermans (oversize image)
  3. Hi Kingsman, I am a new member inspired to join because of my interest in the RMASG, of which you seem to know quite a bit.

    Particularly interesting was your post (dated 26th August 2022 - on the RMASG Centaur and Sherman thread) listing all the known names of the RMASG tanks. I can add another 5 tank names which may be of interest. The provenance being, my late father, Captain S T Wigmore, was troop commander of G troop, 2nd battery, 1st regiment RMASG.

    So G troop tank names were:

    Garth - Sherman OP (my father’s tank)

    Gallant, Galvani, Gregorlach and Gypsy - Centaur MkIV with 95mm howitzers

    They all arrived on JIG section Gold beach somewhere around 8:00-9:00am headed west before turning south towards Bayeux and beyond to the Tilly-Sur-Seulles region over the following 2 weeks, blowing holes in things as they went. I am trying to piece together their journey from my fathers memoirs which are a bit short on place names and the chronological sequence of his tales is a bit suspect as one day seemed to blur with the next. At some point in their travels a further two centaurs (from F troop) joined the merry band, their landing craft having struck obstacles and lost power approaching the beaches. So for most of their tour of northern France they were a troop of 6 Centaurs. But hang on you say, I’ve seen pictures of ‘Fox’ surely the OP tank for F troop why didn’t they join up with him? I don’t know, but the situation seemed to be pretty hectic with every enemy tank being called a Tiger and any enemy gun an 88; much like Luftwaffe pilots were only ever shot down by Spitfires.

    Regards

    Huwgely

    1. Show previous comments  1 more
    2. Huwgely

      Huwgely

      O Contraire, you guessed Gallant. 1/4 must do better...

      And Gypsy may well have been spelt Gipsy (all the HMS’s I can find are spelt with the i)

    3. Huwgely

      Huwgely

      The 2 extra Centaurs  from F troop were commanded by lieutenant Bircher MC. His tale can be read here:https://samilhistory.com/2016/01/08/south-african-d-day-hero-lt-cecil-bircher-mc/

    4. Kingsman

      Kingsman

      Thank you again.

  4. Celluloid was being used for windows in soft tops - "California Tops" as they were first called - on cars in the US from about 1915.
  5. For anyone else thinking of this kit, or any other US WW1 kit, US Quartermaster's Olive Drab of the WW1 era was actually brown. Made from Ochre and White. Most preserved vehicles get this wrong too. The one at the US Air Force Museum is probably about right.
  6. 1/72 perhaps. Too small for 1/35 as it works out at only 12mm, 24mm in 1/72. Tiger track changing cable in 1/35 maybe. My micrometer says the twisted cable is 0.33mm and the single strands 0.09mm. Perhaps I was thinking engine bays, brake cables etc.
  7. Find stuff. Out of curiosity I did just that with an old Samsung cable where the plugs no longer connected reliably. And this is what I found. Under the outer vinyl sheath (cut with a scalpel point) was a wrap of incredibly fine wires (centre). Finest I've ever seen. Inside the foil inner screen were 3 strands of fine twisted wire, possibly strands of the same thing but pre-wound (top) and lastly 4 plastic-coated wires in red, blue, white and green. Must be useful for something. So they have joined a box of Things That Must Be Useful For Something....... Anyone remember Michael Macintyre's "Man Drawer" sketch? I know you're supposed to put things like this in for recycling but I struggle to see just how that would be done.
  8. I like etched brass ones from Aber, ET Model etc. I made a simple bending jig from 2 strips of plastic card. Place the etched piece over the jig and press the ends down with tweezers to make the loop. Dab of cyano etc on each end and apply. If you cut several loose from the fret at one end only you can do a few at a time. Then you can grip them with tweezers before you nip the other end off. The MJ Productions 3D US tool straps come with the Footman Loops attached. Easier than threading masking tape and very much easier than etched brass straps, never mind the buckles.
  9. There is some question over the correctness of the Airfix deck length, which therefore implies that the whole hull is a little short. The drawings we have pored over earlier say that only the 2 affected hatches each side changed, to allow better radiator access. Relocating the smoke candles on the dozer makes sense. I had forgotten the towbar.
  10. Have a look at Modelltrans Modellbau here https://www.modelltrans.com/ They do a Mk V* in both Male and Female and some other unusual WW1 subjects in your scale. With the increasing width of German trenches on the Hindenburg Line - 14 ft vs 8-10 ft - longer tanks became necessary to cross, even with the widespread use of fascines and cribs. The tadpole tail was a way of lengthening the already-built MkIVs and MkVs. But Central Workshops had their own ideas and they produced a "cut and shut" stretched Mk IV using parts from 2 salvaged tanks. With only 105BHP from the Foster-Daimler engine it was very underpowered but it opened the door to a better idea than the Tadpole. Men in a shed in France were inventing stuff too. As the Mk V was still in production it was possible to produce a longer version of it, much more successful because the entire body was also lengthened and not just the rear horns which were the downfall of the Tadpole. The Mk V*. This was 6 feet longer, but no wider. But did run on wider 26" tracks and had the 150BHP Ricardo-designed engine from the Mk V. However without making it wider or more powerful, steering was made more difficult. Despite this, 700 were ordered and 632 built, 579 before the Armistice. Mk V*s spearheaded the Amiens attack in August 1918. 21 were used by the US 301st Tank Battalion along with standard Mk Vs. 100 were supplied to the French Army but never used. The MkV** was made wider to help with the steering with the engine relocated to help with balance and output raised to 225BHP. But only 5 were built before the Armistice and cancellation. The last surviving MkV*, a Male, is at the US Armor and Cavalry Collection, Fort Moore, Georgia. The only surviving MkV**, a Female, is at Bovington. After WW1, many MkVs including V*s were converted to Hermaphrodites, with Male and Female sponsons on opposite sides. Some of these were supplied to the Royalist "White" Russians to aid them in the ongoing civil war.
  11. The only way to know if something worked in the WW1 era was to build it and try it. Men in a shed in Lincoln inventing stuff. The technical imagination and innovation is often overlooked in the shadow of WW2. I can see why it was done. Many hundreds of Mk IV and Mk V were available for Plan 1919. Yes, 632 Mk V* and 5 Mk V** were completed by the end of the war and the V*s were used, including by the USA. An unknown number of Mk VIII and Mk IX had been ordered with only a dozen or so of each completed. The factory in France to build US MK VIIIs had been completed but not fitted out. Despite well over 1,000 new longer tanks being commissioned the surviving older tanks were still needed, but with German trenches being widened could not necessarily be used. But the conversion was under-engineered and ultimately inadequate: probably not realistically usable without much modification. Looking at what was achieved at Cambrai by 370 tanks, unfortunately without adequate infantry support (hence the Mk IX), Plan 1919 would have been something quite epic had it come to pass. Blitzkreig in all but name.
  12. Only a handful of tanks were fitted with the tadpole units, including some MkVs. None saw operational use. Only 1 was ever fitted with the Stokes Mortar and it did not leave the Dollis Hill trials ground. 3 sets were fitted in France to a male, a female and an unknown between 6th and 23rd March 1918. The Female's set was strengthened somehow by Central Workshops to try to counter the flexing inherent in the weak design. These may have been prototype sets as the 300 production sets did not begin arriving in France until May 1918. Mk V Male 9001 was fitted at Central Workshops in August 1918 and issued to No3 Advanced Workshops. These are the only 4 sets known to have been fitted in France. Fosters converted a Mk IV in December 1917, probably the true prototype. Fosters also converted Mk V Female 9277. Unfortunately the painted numbers were always on the sections removed for conversion and were mostly not re-applied or noted. Quite apart from the weakness in the design and the consequent tail flexing and track shedding, by the time the conversion sets were ready trench warfare and the heavy tanks were almost over after the March German offensive and the only heavy tanks seeing very much use after that were the supply carriers, of which over 400 new builds had been commissioned. German forces were retreating faster than the tanks could keep up. Even if they had been useful, they were too late. Although that could not have been known at the time and I imagine they had a place in Plan 1919 alongside the Mk V*, Mk VIII and Mk IX. The conversions really needed the wider 23" tracks, which they did not get, and the fully-lengthened MkV* and V** were a much better solution. There are 3 photos of yours with the Stokes Mortar at Dollis Hill. I can't upload them here but the IWM photo links are: https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205249590 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205213163 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205249589 BTW, MkIV exhaust pipes behind the silencer were wrapped with white asbestos tape to the rear end.
  13. The centre flush screw on the towing eye mounts was to allow clearance for the shackle, and as far as I know was universal. Otherwise the shackle would not fit........ As for the smoke candle holders, Vidette does have them whereas the Saumur tank does not. No knowing when they were removed. Which circles us back to probably 50:50. In view of the mess Airfix made of the mounts and the corrective work required it might be as well to fit them. The final drive oil filler cap goes right back to the A13 and was used on A13s, Covenanters (yes, I know it's an A13) and Crusaders. Whether the style difference was a specific manufacturer thing or whether they were mix and match I don't know. I imagine the Army part number was the same as they were fit, form and function interchangeable. T185077 is part of a range of numbers allocated across EE, Fowler, Leyland and H&W. But "CS" tanks in that range are said to all be from Fowler, and the only "CS" tanks in the range are Centaur IVs. So yours is probably a Fowler. It appears that Fowlers may have built all of the Centaur IVs plus about a third of the Cromwell VIs. Fowlers jumped ship from the Centaur Group to the Cromwell Group, which may be the cause of the sometimes-seen (even Fletcher says it) statement that some Centaur IVs were completed as Cromwell VIs. Which may be correct - but none were converted. That myth is long dead, although the recently-republished older Fletcher Cromwell book still peddles it, as it has not been revised. If @SleeperService has any more definitive or granular information on A27 census numbers by manufacturer beyond that published in the Fletcher/Osprey and Tank Power titles I would be all ears/eyes. It is something I have been meaning to delve into at Bovington's archive, but one assumes that David Fletcher has picked that over as he effectively owned the information for many years. It may have been simplified for publication but other titles by him have more granular information: Valentines, for example. And we already know the Contract Cards to be unreliable without knowing about any Variation Orders. EE Cromwell I vs Cromwell VI for example. And you all thought that Shermans were confusing!
  14. Your top picture doesn't display and the lower one took several minutes to load up. But the top one does display if you click it. Smoke candle boxes were generally removed for wading IIRC, rather than being slathered in waterproofing compound that would have needed cleaning off before being used. In the RMASG's original role aboard LCTs and later as SP artillery after joining up with RA field Batteries ashore they would not have been needed. But rear photos are almost non-existent. There is the one with the Porpoise but it is so dark under there that you can't see anything. So I think it's perhaps a 50:50 choice. The vertical strips to which the smoke candle boxes attached would remain. This is the incomplete back end of a Centaur dozer. The cables are left over from the smoke candle boxes, which I assume the dozers had: I can see the usefulness. (No, I have no idea what the 4 groups of 2 strips on the upper rear hull are for. A central smoke candle box would be normal. Some drawings appear to show small stowage boxes. Not relevent to a Centaur IV anyway). The Porpoise towing eyes would be about where the outer pairs of upper strips are located and a bit lower down. So, in your annotated drawing we see that B are the firing cables for the smoke candles. A are a complete work of fiction for the smoke candle mounts. C, D and E are necessary. D needs some work to show the screw-on cap.
  15. Yes it's an M4A4 Sherman V. The number 229882 doesn't fit. The 1943 range stopped at 229451 and the 1943-44 range began at 231626. The 22 and 82 are clear, and with the 22 start it must fall between 228470 and 229451. 981 tanks, so there are a lot of possibilities for the 2 middle digits. I think the 3rd digit on the hull rear is an 8, which gives these possibilities: 228482, 228582, 228682, 228782, 228882, 228982. The last one is a simple 8-9 transposition and the penultimate 8 could have been confused with a 9. So I would say 228882 or 228982. Indian Army tanks were often, but not universally, re-numbered with a longer number preceded by the broad arrow mark. The name could be anything. There is the shadow of a much longer name burnt off below the hull rear census number. There has been an ammunition detonation. See how the sponson is blown out below the applique patch. So whatever went through the front did that. Japanese AT guns were notably poor and only 37 or 47mm calibre. The size of the hole suggests something like a 75mm Type 90 field gun, widely used as an AT weapon and fitted to the Chi-Nu tank and Ho-I SPG, or one of their larger-calibre AA guns. There is an unusual stowage rack on the engine deck and the remains of an odd (anti-magnetic mine?) structure on the left glacis. Like this one from the 9th Royal Deccan Horse, 255 Indian Tank Brigade on the road to Meiktila in March 45. Just where the round has penetrated the FDA in the original photo is a mark which could be the same as the one seen here. Same unit, perhaps? Photos online suggest that the front structure might have been unique to the Deccan Horse.
×
×
  • Create New...