Ray_W Posted August 8, 2021 Posted August 8, 2021 I am planning my 1/35 Meng 1914 Pattern RR Armoured Car build and interested in the corrections necessary. I am across the turret error and was prepared to scratch build a correction and then discovered Friendship Models resin replacement, which also includes the corrected driver vision slot glacis plate. This simplifies matters somewhat. What other corrections are necessary? Realising that the period and location is important then best to use the image that inspired me to buy the kit. A couple of points that seem in variance to the kit. I can see no crossbar between the bonnet hinges. This seems a rarity judging by the period photos. Also the running board seems quite thick like a sizeable plank of wood. Any thoughts welcome. Thanks in advance. Ray 2
Kingsman Posted August 8, 2021 Posted August 8, 2021 The running board looks thick because it has the trench crossing board stowed underneath. This was relocated above the running boards on the 1924 Pattern, resulting in the squared-off rear to the front wings on that Pattern. These are often seen re-fitted to earlier Patterns in the interwar period as stowing the crossing boards above the running boards was more secure and convenient. Bovington's 1920 Pattern car has 1924 front wings. 1914 Pattern bodies were made by a number of factories and there are factory variations in minor details. The hinge crossbar may be one of these. The 1920 Pattern was the first fully homogenised Pattern as all bodies were built by Vickers. 2
Ray_W Posted August 8, 2021 Author Posted August 8, 2021 2 hours ago, Das Abteilung said: The running board looks thick because it has the trench crossing board stowed underneath. Thanks for the quick reply. In the mean time, I have been hunting for more photo evidence. The following image has given me some insight as to what may be going on with additional timber strapped to the top of the removable running-cum-crossing board. Looking at the earlier image again, the running board appears slightly wider, seemingly sticking out from the front guard when looking at the sitting gentleman's right leg and the wheel track and more evident at the rear looking at the dual wheels. The running board being flush with the dual rear wheels in the above image. Just to confuse matters the above vehicle has dual front wheels. Further, there seems to be a gap between the board he is sitting on and the front guard. I think mounting the running boards and strapping some extra timber on top may capture the look. I also note an inside chamfer on the rear pannier and no vertical guard at the front of the left rear wheels similar. Some vehicles have it, others not. You are certainly right about the variations. Ray 1
Kingsman Posted August 8, 2021 Posted August 8, 2021 Double front wheels were common in Palestine. Note also 3 different tyre tread types. The gap between running board and trench board under the soldier's backside is because the trench boards had chamfered ends, as your picture shows. They were held in place by a large bolt, just visible under the spare wheels and behind the can thing in the original photo. It looks very much as if your car in the 2nd photo has the running boards completely removed. The slim black objects at 90 degrees to the hull are the brackets, which you can just see in the first photo. The tread plate rear step looks like a local addition. The rear lights are missing from their brackets. I believe the object on top of the turret is a mount for a Lewis gun. 1 1
Maginot Posted September 12, 2021 Posted September 12, 2021 Good on you @Ray_W for pursuing the detail on the early version. The pic featuring the bloke hanging out the rear hatch with the massive movie camera and the twin front wheels is a beaut and worth modelling, I reckon. What a look! I too have this kit, but pretty much made a snap decision to model the early 20s version for convenience and the look of the painted flag. Perhaps you will inspire me to rethink. Hope it's not the Big Brother draconian Covid policies of this not-so-lucky country that are keeping you away from these fatal shores. Go for it! Cheers very much. 1
Ray_W Posted September 12, 2021 Author Posted September 12, 2021 6 minutes ago, Maginot said: Good on you @Ray_W for pursuing the detail on the early version. The more I study this subject the more I am looking forward to modelling it. I was going to order the Friendship Models replacement turret and driver's vision plate. However, it is just too expensive by the time I get it. So I will scratch build a replacement. I also plan to add the interior. One option is to cross-kit with Roden. However, I will enjoy the challenge of getting the Meng kit right. I know I am a sucker for punishment. This project was in my 2021 modelling pipeline but then I see there is a possibility of an Armoured Car GB in 2022 (currently in Bunfight!) so I will hold off and see the outcome. Plenty of other projects to proceed with and plenty more research on the 1914 Pattern RR Armour Car to do. Ray 1
Maginot Posted September 12, 2021 Posted September 12, 2021 Quote So I will scratch build a replacement. That's the way. I reckon scratch building anything is taking modelling to the next step. 1
Massimo Tessitori Posted October 29, 2021 Posted October 29, 2021 Hi all, I'm building this kit and I've (unconsiderately) choosen the late version with the antitank gun and the Lewis mount on the turret. The problem is that this version has a large opening atop the turret, without any door to close it. Besides the internal detail is absent and not even known (I didn't manage to find any image of the inside of the turret, at least). So, I have a large opening, a void interior and the pieces of the turret are fortemost mounted. I've considered to make a figure to coverr a bit the inside, but the work is diofficult due both to the poor pieces I have and the strange position to assume due to the machine gun. I wonder, wasn't there a way to close the top opening to protect it from rain and sun? A small curtain, maybe? There are two trasversal trips, on the front and on the rear of the hatch, that seems just as the guides of a curtain. Is there any information on such thing? Thank you for any help Massimo
Orso Posted October 29, 2021 Posted October 29, 2021 When I was searching for information to build my 1/72 model I read that it wasn't a running boardwith a trench crossing board stowed underneath. Instead it was the running board that doubled as a trench crossing board. It was later changed to a trench crossing board under the running board to ease the access to it.
Kingsman Posted October 29, 2021 Posted October 29, 2021 I've had a look through the Haynes RR AC book and "In Every Place", the extensive history of the RAF AC Companies. They were the greatest users of RR ACs in the 1920s, 30s and WW2. It seems that fitting the gun ring made it impossible to use the standard hatch cover. There is no evidence in either book of any alternative hatch cover or any canvas cover being used. Vehicles in that configuration were only used in the Middle East so that was perhaps acceptable. I believe the strips you mention are the splash protection for the original hatch cover, which were solid strips. However it would not have been difficult to fit a cover over the gun ring. But it seems that these cars generally operated head-out for visibility. There are a few interior pictures out there on the web if you search "rolls royce armoured car interior". The turret interior is very basic but you will be looking down through into the main hull. 1
Massimo Tessitori Posted October 30, 2021 Posted October 30, 2021 Hi, for what I've seen, the inside details are limited to one seat for the driver and, on some cars, a second one aside it, and two big parallel boxes aside the rear access that were probably useful as footsteps for the man in the turret. I suppose that there have to be some ammunitions on the turret sides, and a frame to rivet the plates. On photos, one often sees a tool located hrizontally outside, on the rear big box over the wheel, that is missing in the kit. Unfortunately the kit that I received was badly damaged and bent by mailing, so I had to repair and glue the turret to give shape to it before making refinements inside. Besides, there was a large gap between the horseshoe side turret and its lower plate, so I suspect that the inside will be not fine. Thank you for your suggestions. Massimo
Kingsman Posted October 31, 2021 Posted October 31, 2021 Preserved RR AC hull interior. Preserved turret interior. Note taken from the bottom looking up. The black V bracket holding the Vickers MG fixed in place is not original. 1
Massimo Tessitori Posted November 4, 2021 Posted November 4, 2021 Excellent images, thank you very much. The inside would be simple to scratchbuilt, except for all those bolts fixing the plates to the frame that would be a nightmare. I am still wondering if scratchbuilding the inside ignoring them, maybe adding only the most visible ones, or introduce some type of fabric cover on the upper hatch,
Kingsman Posted November 5, 2021 Posted November 5, 2021 Yes, every rivet or bolt head on the outside has a corresponding one on the inside!. Looking down through the top hatch you wouldn't see any of those attaching the turret roof plates and probably not any on the inside of the turret or hull sides. Just those around the base of the turret. Don't forget that the inside would be pretty dark anyway with just the top hatch and driver's visor open. Those photos are lit with a bright LED torch. As you said before, a figure in the hatch would hide everything but then you would need a driver too.
Cometracer Posted November 8, 2021 Posted November 8, 2021 There's a lot of good information here. Thanks!
Massimo Tessitori Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 Hi all, the instructions sheet of the kit of Meng gives a three-shade camouflage for a Rolls Royce still in use in 1942. The colors should be: sand MC-013/N27 green MC-235/n78 dark green MC-411/N63. I've looked for images of these colors on the web, but with unsatisfying results, particularly for the second color that is represented as a light grey-green on the boxart, a grass green on the sheet and seems a dark grey-green on the chips seen on the web. Any help will be welcome.
Kingsman Posted July 12, 2022 Posted July 12, 2022 If you mean the "Caunter" hard-edged striped scheme, the colours were Light Stone BSC61, Slate BSC34 and Silver Grey BSC28. Slate is often confused with green and Silver Grey has in the past been confused with blue. Ignore the Meng colour call-outs. These colours are available from several brands: AK Interactive, Life Color and Vallejo. 1
Massimo Tessitori Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 (edited) Thank you. Is there some match for Tamiya or Federal Standard? Edited July 13, 2022 by Massimo Tessitori
SimonL Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 You can find mixes for Tamiya acrylics for the Caunter Scheme here: https://www.mafva.org/british-vehicle-camouflage-1939-45/?v=79cba1185463 i used them a while back on one of my first attempts at an armoured vehicle: 1
Kingsman Posted July 13, 2022 Posted July 13, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Massimo Tessitori said: Thank you. Is there some match for Tamiya or Federal Standard? No. Tamiya colours are, with a few exceptions, not matched to anything. They are just generic colours devised by Tamiya. You can of course make your own mind up whether any match the BSC colour swatches you might find online. British Standard Colours are a separate codification system and there is no read-across to the more extensive FS or RAL systems. Again, you might make your own mind up about matches. But when 3 companies have gone to the time and trouble to match the colours for you why would you think of using something else? In fact AK Interactive have even done it twice, in their normal range and in their Real Colors range. These brands are widely available. Tamiya acrylic paint is no better than anyone else's and since they changed the formulation a few years ago IMO worse than many. I haven't tried their new lacquers yet. My worry about mixing your own colours as with the Matilda linked above is that it will never be as accurate or repeatable as manufactured paint where the pigments are measured to the microgram and made by the hundreds of litres. Most of the mixes you find online date back to the "enamel era" days when only fairly generic colours were available and there was no choice, before the explosion of brands and colours in the "acrylic era". Although some are a response to the inability of paint manufacturers to get particular colours looking right, Edited July 13, 2022 by Das Abteilung addition 1 1
SimonL Posted July 14, 2022 Posted July 14, 2022 No worries, I must confess I am in the process of moving on from Tamiya Acrylics as I’m not a big fan of mixing paints (issues with consistency).
Torbogdan Posted November 5, 2023 Posted November 5, 2023 To me the ultimate armored car! Very iconic. The interior photos were very interesting.
Mike Starmer Posted January 24 Posted January 24 I have by curiosity looked at the pictures of the preserved car. That dark green on the rear floor in front of the doors and the small hatches look very like BS.381:1930 Middle Bronze No. 26. I read many years ago that a Brunswick green of some shade was used on vehicles pre-1934. This seems to be proof of that. Which begs the question was the exterior that colour too?
Kingsman Posted January 25 Posted January 25 I wouldn't take any of the RR interior photos as accurate colour references. They were posted for layout rather than colour. That car has a long and chequered history and has been worked-on many times, and is certainly not fully original. The Haynes RR book has a lot of detail about it, although mostly in recent times.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now