Jump to content
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. :)

Churchill

The 'Stuff You Wouldn't Want To Go To War In' GB

Recommended Posts

Not so much Jones' s van was thinking of the Beverette or the Humberette.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Stevejj said:

Beverette

Just Googled that.

wpea405c46_05_06.jpg

 

At least the enemy would die laughing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd that Messrs @Stevejj and @Gorby have been looking at some of the rather desperate products of Home Guard ingenuity, because that's where Exhibit 3 from Bovington tank museum comrs from, and I think it tops the Beaverette for sheer daftness.

 

I give you the Thornycroft Bison: a concrete armoured lorry with less power than a Nissan Micra:

 

2019-04-07_09-04-44

 

2019-04-07_09-08-20

 

2019-04-07_09-07-26

 

From a modelling perspective, both the Beaverette and the Bison could be fairly simple scratchbuilds for supporting roles in a diorama. The gun on top of the Beaverette was sometimes a glazed gun turret from a bomber. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well never mind the exposed rad and exposed wheels the rest looks good ha ha ha. Have you seen the Morris Martel Tankette? It looks like a kiddies peddle car!!

Steve

Edited by Stevejj
Found another one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Bristol Brigand was mentioned, and having read the memoir of a navigator on them in a recent fly past i fancy a go

Unless I can find a we2 polish cavalry, there must be stuff from the Spanish civil war?

Or for maritime I'd offer pretty much any midget submarine

Basically put me down and I'll find something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mjwomack said:

I see Bristol Brigand was mentioned, and having read the memoir of a navigator on them in a recent fly past i fancy a go

Unless I can find a we2 polish cavalry, there must be stuff from the Spanish civil war?

Or for maritime I'd offer pretty much any midget submarine

Basically put me down and I'll find something

I shall put your name down for a midget submarine, a bomber, a cavalry unit or something in-between. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume it has to be a genuine fighting vehicle so desperate resistance fighters etc are ineligible, which will rule out corporal jones butcher's van

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mjwomack said:

I assume it has to be a genuine fighting vehicle so desperate resistance fighters etc are ineligible, which will rule out corporal jones butcher's van

We've ruled out fictional vehicles. But civilian vehicles that were pressed into service would fit the brief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2019 at 7:33 PM, Churchill said:

Oh wow, we've not had much maritime interest so far. I'm not familiar with this sub, but a quick search confirms that it's still in service and that the radiation shielding is poor, being based on 1950's technology. Scary stuff. 

Much like Huawei's security architecture, according to GCHQ today.  Another item I wouldn't like to rely on to support my warfighting capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2019 at 3:16 PM, Gorby said:

Just Googled that.

wpea405c46_05_06.jpg

 

At least the enemy would die laughing.

Just to add to the mirth level, that design of camouflage is generally (unofficially) known as Mickey Mouse Ear.................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Das Abteilung said:

Much like Huawei's security architecture, according to GCHQ today.  Another item I wouldn't like to rely on to support my warfighting capability.

Now let's be quite clear: No-one is making a scale model of a mobile phone for this GB, is that understood? :angrysoapbox.sml:

 

16 minutes ago, Das Abteilung said:

Just to add to the mirth level, that design of camouflage is generally (unofficially) known as Mickey Mouse Ear.................

Funnily enough, that's exactly what I thought when I saw it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Churchill said:

Now let's be quite clear: No-one is making a scale model of a mobile phone for this GB, is that understood? :angrysoapbox.sml:

And here was I thinking I might do this fella with the caption "Uh? Welcome to the home page of the International Intelligence Directorate of the People's Ministry of State Security? WT@"...................

XQ7E54w.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both has been mentioned before, but I'd be in with either one one of these: 

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04613-ba-349a-natter--130335

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04546-me-163-b-1a-komet--115211

 

Both have been in my stash for ages... at least I'll have some incentive to get cracking!

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First thing that came to my mind:

 

vehicle_t20_2.jpg

 

I'd never heard of it before (I don't pay much attention to targets) but saw a kit at a show last fall.  Wonderfully Soviet: we'll make an armored tractor (T-20), and then we'll put some nice comfortable bench seats high on top.  "Yeah, no.  I think I'd rather walk."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make things even worse, they have a Zis-30 which is the same tractor with an AT-gun on top... It was pretty high and small, so next to being glad to reach your position without turning upside down, you could be glad not to achieve this result after firing the main gun...

 

zis-30.jpg

 

Even the Germans in their most desperate hour weren't desperate enough to use these after capturing these

Edited by Silenoz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2019 at 6:49 PM, Hook said:

Both has been mentioned before, but I'd be in with either one one of these: 

 

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04613-ba-349a-natter--130335

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04546-me-163-b-1a-komet--115211

 

Both have been in my stash for ages... at least I'll have some incentive to get cracking!

 

Cheers,

 

Andre

 

 

Excellent choices both. Thank you for joining us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2019 at 9:25 AM, gingerbob said:

First thing that came to my mind:

 

vehicle_t20_2.jpg

 

I'd never heard of it before (I don't pay much attention to targets) but saw a kit at a show last fall.  Wonderfully Soviet: we'll make an armored tractor (T-20), and then we'll put some nice comfortable bench seats high on top.  "Yeah, no.  I think I'd rather walk."

I have to say the idea of riding that thing in the combat zone doesn't appeal. Were you proposing to join the GB with it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would a bouillon Paul defiant be acceptable or a Lagg-3?

 

The defiant was brutal in daylight but was decent at night.  The Lagg could barely do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beazer said:

Would a bouillon Paul defiant be acceptable or a Lagg-3?

 

The defiant was brutal in daylight but was decent at night.  The Lagg could barely do anything.

I might be misremembering, but I think both those aircraft have cropped up in the thread already. The Defiant, a fighter with no forward firing guns, and the underpowered Lavochkin of which Wikipedia has this to say:

 

"The LaGG-3 proved immensely unpopular with pilots. It was somewhat hard to control as it reacted sluggishly to stick forces. In particular, it was difficult to pull out of a dive, and if the stick was pulled too hard, it tended to fall into a spin. As a consequence, sharp turns were difficult to perform. Moreover, pilots reported a number of imperfections: badly made hydraulic systems, broken connecting rods, oil leaks, overheating engine. Moreover, the landing gear was defective, the tail wheel easily broke, the canopy was badly fitted, the metal sheet on the engine cowling and the stressed skin were badly finished."

 

They're both pretty awful although the Defiant I think found a role better suited to it, and they'd both fit in this GB. I'll put your name down if that's ok. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeh, the soviet pilots called the LAGG-3 the guaranteed varnished coffin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sure,  if not those I’m sure I’ll find something else that didn’t work. 😉

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very thought-provoking topic, there's also the thought of there's a good bit of kit in there struggling to get out...

The very first Mitchells had constant dihedral, and stability problems- nothing redesigning the wing couldn't fix and the rest is history.

My dad, who was almost certainly biased thought the Mustang wasn't up to much until re-engined with Merlins.

The Hawker Typhoon wouldn't have been a feared tank-killer while the tail kept falling off!

And so the list goes on...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've helped to boost the economy, and my stash by going for this.

https://www.kingkit.co.uk/product/valom-aircraft-1-72-72030-bristol-brigand-bmki

 

The wikipedia entry is a catalogue of flaws in the a/c until this, 'dammed with faint praise conclusion, 'When everything was working properly the Brigand was considered by its pilots to be a good aircraft'- that's a good aircraft, not remarkable or anything else but good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Mjwomack said:

I've helped to boost the economy, and my stash by going for this.

https://www.kingkit.co.uk/product/valom-aircraft-1-72-72030-bristol-brigand-bmki

 

The wikipedia entry is a catalogue of flaws in the a/c until this, 'dammed with faint praise conclusion, 'When everything was working properly the Brigand was considered by its pilots to be a good aircraft'- that's a good aircraft, not remarkable or anything else but good!

 

Interesting choice, the Brigand is a fascinating subject, would be interesting to see the Valom kit built here.

 

Regarding the comment, the same could be said for a lot of less than brilliant aircraft types. A British type that attracted similar comments was the Javelin, that yes, did the job. Kind of. Without ever excelling at anything...

A couple of US types with a similar role were the F-89 and the F-102.. they were produced in large numbers, did their job but none was spectacular. Would this makie them eligible for this GB ? Hard to tell, clearly anyone would have preferred an F-106 to a 102, but this doesn't mean that going to war in 102 would have been something pilots wanted to avoid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points, but I think the Brigand deserves a special place because of it's need for a LOT of maintanance and loving care- more than it's perhaps reasonable for a piece of front line equipment to receive. For example the undercarriage wouldn't always go down, even more alarming than a belly landing was the possibility of gas accumulation on the cannon blast tubes (under the cockpit) which would ignite the hydraulics. With fire in the hold you might opt to abandon ship' getting the crew of three into the cockpit was an exercise in patience and an orderly approach- annoying but trying to get out in a hurry? Not what you want to be faced with. The solution? No HE rounds and a signficantly reduced ammo load- hardly what you design a fighting plane for.

Oh, and it would shed propellor blades...

 

So yes, Giorgio, I think you make a good point, and there are plenty of examples; but I still think that the Brigand is a worthy example of stuff you wouldn't want to go to war in - indeed as I remember the navigator in the article in the Fly Past article positively refused!

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

×
×
  • Create New...