Jump to content

Mike N's 1/35 Amusing Hobby Conqueror Mk II


Mike N

Recommended Posts

For my second submission I'll be tackling Amusing Hobby's 1/35 Conqueror Mk II:

 

IMG_20220227_170317_HDR

 

The Conqueror was developed to defeat the latest Soviet tanks being fielded in the 1950's. After 20 Mk Is, production switched to the Mark II. In all, around 154 Conqueror heavy gun tanks were available for service. They were intended to complement the more numerous Centurions, but as the latter were upgraded, the need for the slow and heavy Conqueror was weakened. The arrival of the Chieftain finally brought the curtain down on this behemoth in 1966, just 8 years after the last Conqueror left the factory.

 

IMG_20220227_170420_HDR

 

A closer look at the contents:

 

IMG_20220227_170447_HDR

 

As I knew nothing about the real thing, I invested in the Tankograd publication on it:

 

IMG_20220227_170252_HDR

 

This has quite a few good photos as well as a history of the vehicle.

 

I'm hoping this, being built straight from the box, will be my stress-reliever from the Nimrod AEW conversion - time will tell!

 

Mike 

 

Edited by Mike N
Change of image host
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever since I saw the Conqueror(s) at the Tank Museum over 30 years ago I fancied building one, but as of yet I don't believe anybody has brought one out in 1/72 or 1/76 (which the rest of collection is) at a price I can justify. The OKB Grigarov one looks good but at around £45 plus postage it is beyond my pocket. I believe there may be a "wargaming" one available from Ireland for around £20 but  am not sure how good that is. Maybe one day Millicast will get round to doing one as they seem now to be working their way through post war tanks. 

 

I do have the US equivalent M103, but not being British it does not qualify. I will watch your build with great interest Mike. What colour do they say it should be painted - Deep Bronze Green I suspect as it entered service in 1955 which was about the time the old wartime SCC15 was pahsed out?

 

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, PeterB said:

Ever since I saw the Conqueror(s) at the Tank Museum over 30 years ago I fancied building one, but as of yet I don't believe anybody has brought one out in 1/72 or 1/76 (which the rest of collection is) at a price I can justify. The OKB Grigarov one looks good but at around £45 plus postage it is beyond my pocket. I believe there may be a "wargaming" one available from Ireland for around £20 but  am not sure how good that is. Maybe one day Millicast will get round to doing one as they seem now to be working their way through post war tanks. 

 

I do have the US equivalent M103, but not being British it does not qualify. I will watch your build with great interest Mike. What colour do they say it should be painted - Deep Bronze Green I suspect as it entered service in 1955 which was about the time the old wartime SCC15 was pahsed out?

 

Pete

I know what you mean, Pete: once seen, they beg to be modelled. I've only do 1/35 stuff, so I'm fortunate to have this and the Dragon kit to choose from. I gather the Amusing Hobby kit is the better of the two, and managed to snag one for less than £30!

 

As for the colour, the kit helpfully only calls it 'base colour' and gives a mix of two A.MIG paints. I also couldn't see it mentioned in the Tankograd book: maybe I missed it, but it seems a strange omission if it's not there. Googling suggests that Deep Bronze Green is indeed correct though. I have a tin of Xtracolor X814 identifying itself that way, although I've seen mention of Humbrol 163 or 195, and Revell 65 as being good matches. Not being an expert myself, maybe someone will shout at me if the Xtracolor shade is the wrong one to go for!

 

Mike 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

When I first started building tanks I used the old Humbrol Authentic paint - HP4 Deep Bronze Green for all my British tanks of WWII and post war. When that stopped being available I used the recommended alternative Hu75. It was only about 15 years ago when I started building Millicast tanks that I did some research and discovered that DBG was only correct for pre war and a period from about 1955 onwards, until more modern colours were introduced. I can't remember if I ever used the Xtracolour version before I bought a load of Colourcoats paints, but it should be fine.

 

Pete

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Marklo said:

Not seeing any images. You're not using Village.photos by any chance? 

Erm, yes. I am looking around for an alternative host as a result.

 

Edit: Now using Flickr for the image host. Hopefully everyone can now see them!

Edited by Mike N
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Mike N said:

Edit: Now using Flickr for the image host. Hopefully everyone can now see them!

Yes I can.

 

I liked flicker as a host but they limit the number of photos you can host for free, which wa why I moved to village photos.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, sardaukar said:

Nice choice, I wish there was a 1/72 kit.

There are possibly two 1/72 or 1/76 models available as I mentioned earlier. One by Hobby Den is a "wargaming" model so probably not many pieces but may look OK and I seem to remember it was about 18 Euros and comes from Ireland - may be wrong about that, and the other is the OKB Grigarov resin kit which looks very nice but was selling for just under 50 Euros plus postage from Bulgaria! In fact I did think of buying the Hobby Den one but at £23 inc. postage for a ready built model it did not appeal to me so I will do without unless Millicast bring one out soon, not that theirs would be any cheaper I suspect but it would be 1/76 not 1/72 so would be a better fit with most of my other tanks - the difference between the two scales should only be a few mm but in reality is often much greater -the difference in length between the slighty underscale Millicast Crusader and the seriously overscale Airfix one is over 1cm!

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PeterB said:

There are possibly two 1/72 or 1/76 models available as I mentioned earlier. One by Hobby Den is a "wargaming" model so probably not many pieces but may look OK and I seem to remember it was about 18 Euros and comes from Ireland - may be wrong about that, and the other is the OKB Grigarov resin kit which looks very nice but was selling for just under 50 Euros plus postage from Bulgaria! In fact I did think of buying the Hobby Den one but at £23 inc. postage for a ready built model it did not appeal to me so I will do without unless Millicast bring one out soon, not that theirs would be any cheaper I suspect but it would be 1/76 not 1/72 so would be a better fit with most of my other tanks - the difference between the two scales should only be a few mm but in reality is often much greater -the difference in length between the slighty underscale Millicast Crusader and the seriously overscale Airfix one is over 1cm!

 

Pete

 

I have the Hobby Den Model I have to say I'm not happy with the moulding of the tracks other issues I can deal with. The OKB G. model isnt currently available on the website, where I've been eying the T-44 too. None of the 3D printers seem to do a Conqueror yet, hopefully that will change or better still how about a plastic model in 1/72 from the likes of Takom. While we are at it maybe an A39 Tortoise too :). 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/02/2022 at 08:15, Mike N said:

As for the colour, the kit helpfully only calls it 'base colour' and gives a mix of two A.MIG paints. I also couldn't see it mentioned in the Tankograd book: maybe I missed it, but it seems a strange omission if it's not there. Googling suggests that Deep Bronze Green is indeed correct though. I have a tin of Xtracolor X814 identifying itself that way, although I've seen mention of Humbrol 163 or 195, and Revell 65 as being good matches. Not being an expert myself, maybe someone will shout at me if the Xtracolor shade is the wrong one to go for!

 

As you mention, the colour should be Deep Bronze Green.  I mostly use acrylic paint; rarely enamel.  Xtracrylix provide Deep Bronze Green as XA1814, which is the acrylic equivalent of X814.  However, I have always found this colour to be too dark - sort of.   On the cover of one of the books that you have shown, there is a very shiny vehicle. Conquerors were usually kept very clean and "bulled up" and I think that X814/XA814 would match this quite well.  For other vehicles which were maybe not as well looked after, I find that Xtracrylix XA1815 Mid Bronze Green is a better choice.  This is certainly the colour I use on British airborne munitions.

 

It also seems that Conquerors did not routinely carry tactical markings on the turret.  I think these were applied for exercises and then removed afterwards.  I will be building my Conqueror to represent one on exercise, so I will be using mid Bronze Green, tactical markings and a modicum amount of weathering. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Enzo Matrix said:

 

As you mention, the colour should be Deep Bronze Green.  I mostly use acrylic paint; rarely enamel.  Xtracrylix provide Deep Bronze Green as XA1814, which is the acrylic equivalent of X814.  However, I have always found this colour to be too dark - sort of.   On the cover of one of the books that you have shown, there is a very shiny vehicle. Conquerors were usually kept very clean and "bulled up" and I think that X814/XA814 would match this quite well.  For other vehicles which were maybe not as well looked after, I find that Xtracrylix XA1815 Mid Bronze Green is a better choice.  This is certainly the colour I use on British airborne munitions.

 

It also seems that Conquerors did not routinely carry tactical markings on the turret.  I think these were applied for exercises and then removed afterwards.  I will be building my Conqueror to represent one on exercise, so I will be using mid Bronze Green, tactical markings and a modicum amount of weathering. 

@Enzo Matrix, thank you for this. I see what you mean about the colour looking darker on some vehicles. I hadn't noticed about the tactical markings only being for exercises, but I'll be going that way too to break up at least some of the green. The Amusing kit includes markings for the vehicle on the cover of the Tankograd book, though neither identifies the unit it belongs to. The kit includes a yellow circle marking toward the rear of the turret sides, so not visible in the book photo. The lack of info in the kit for the markings is a disappointment. The rest of it looks great though!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Mike N said:

@Enzo Matrix, thank you for this. I see what you mean about the colour looking darker on some vehicles. I hadn't noticed about the tactical markings only being for exercises, but I'll be going that way too to break up at least some of the green. The Amusing kit includes markings for the vehicle on the cover of the Tankograd book, though neither identifies the unit it belongs to. The kit includes a yellow circle marking toward the rear of the turret sides, so not visible in the book photo. The lack of info in the kit for the markings is a disappointment. The rest of it looks great though!

If you send me a copy of the pic I might be able to identify the unit from my reference books on British tank markings.

4 hours ago, sardaukar said:

 

I have the Hobby Den Model I have to say I'm not happy with the moulding of the tracks other issues I can deal with. The OKB G. model isnt currently available on the website, where I've been eying the T-44 too. None of the 3D printers seem to do a Conqueror yet, hopefully that will change or better still how about a plastic model in 1/72 from the likes of Takom. While we are at it maybe an A39 Tortoise too :). 

Seemed to be available when I looked today but maybe out of stock if I had tried to order it? I have seen a Tortoise kit but I believe it was in 1/35 - doubt anybody will ever do one in 1/72 or 1/76 except maybe Millicast - they already do a Black Prince. Thought I had seen a T-44 somewhere and sure enough Millicast do a resin kit of one, but not a T-10 unfortunately!

http://www.milicast.com/shop/home.php?cat=28

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, PeterB said:

If you send me a copy of the pic I might be able to identify the unit from my reference books on British tank markings.

Hi Peter, here's the painting guide, followed by the decal sheet:

 

IMG_20220303_185557_HDR

 

IMG_20220303_185633_HDR

 

It would really seem that the paint scheme guy wasn't talking to the decal sheet designer as there are no ident numbers on the guide! Anyway, it looks like the scheme I'm going for calls up decals 3, 4, 5, 12, 13 & 17. Looks like 2nd Armoured Division, from what I can gather.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

Close but perhaps not quite - AFAIK the crossed keys was the sign of the 2nd Infantry Division from WWII until about 1976 when it became the symbol of 2nd Armoured Division. The yellow circle on the turret indicates C Squadron and the Arm Of Service marking 2 on a red yellow background indicates the senior armoured regiment in the division. Unfortunately, the AOS use of seniority is confusing as I have yet to find a list showing seniority. There could be up to 3 Armoured Regiments in the Division when in BAOR, so you will need to find out which they were and then which was senior, and there my books are not helpful. It would be helpful to actually have a date but I will dig a bit deeper and see what I can find.

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Mike, I am going to admit defeat on this one. A few years ago I was working with a friend in the States who was "drawing" aircraft skins for the old European Air War game - he drew them and I researched the British ones. I found that for whatever reason it was difficult to find much online about the RAF squadrons, unlike US ones where there is a lot more info - Squadron Association web pages etc. Bit like my father who preferred to forget about the war - he certainly would not talk about it. It seems that the British Army is nearly as bad. I can track most units throughout WW2, but once the war ended details become very sketchy (except if they were in Korea). Sometimes you get a hint from the badges if they use their own, but in most cases it is the divisional badge plus the AOS badge. Now the problem with the Arm of Service badge is that it was "coded" to fool the enemy and during WWII changed with theatre and also date.  So lets say we have an Infantry Division. In 1962 that would have an HQ, together with one or maybe more Armoured Regiment,  3 Infantry Battalions, various artillery units, a recce unit with armoured cars, engineers, ambulances, workshops, catering etc and each type of unit has a different coloured background to its AOS - Armoured was red over yellow, Infantry red, R/A Red over Blue and so on. On that background was a white number indicating their function and seniority if applicable, so 1 was HQ, 2 Armoured, 7 Senior Infantry , 8 and 9 less senior and so on down to 29 on a black background for "Postal & Courier" if they had one! Seniority is dependent on age of the Regiment and things like that and there is a historical hierachy as in the Guards - No 1 Guard is the Grenadiers, No 2 Coldstream, No 3 Scots etc, so if our hypothetical Division had a battalion each of those three Foot Guards as their infantry they would be given an AOS of 7 for the Grenadiers down to 9 for the Scots - hope that explains it. I dare say anybody with an Army background will pick me up on some of the above but that is how I am reading it from Dick Taylor's Warpaint books. Tactical markings came in 4 different shapes - triangle, square and circle for A-C Squadrons plus a diamond for HQ, and 4 different colours depending on seniority - red, yellow, blue and white

 

Anyway, if I am reading it correctly and that is quite a big "if", this was a tank of C Squadron (circle) of 2nd most senior Armoured Regiment (yellow)  which was serving as part of the Second Infantry Division at the time, but that probably changed from time to time and we don't know the date. If you had a specialist publication on either BAOR, 2nd Infantry Division, or the various Tank Regiments you could probably decode it but I can't - it might even have been 2RTR after all! The problem is made worse by the fact that like the wartime Firefly, the Conqueror was only supposed to be issued in small numbers - 6 to a regiment seems normal perhaps split between 2 of the "Sabre Squadrons".

 

Conqueror’s were apparently operated by the following units in the BAOR according to a webpage I found: The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 7th (The Desert Rats), and 8th Royal Tank Regiment (RTR), 9th Queen’s Royal Lancers, 16/5th Queen’s Royal Lancers, 17/21st Lancers, 9th/12th Royal Lancers (Prince of Wales’), 3rd Kings Own Hussars, The Queen’s Own Hussars, 8th King’s Royal Irish Hussars, 10th Royal Hussars (Prince of Wales’ Own), 11th Hussars (Prince Albert’s Own), The Queen’s Royal Irish Hussars, 14/20th King’s Hussars, 13/18th Royal Hussars (Queen Mary’s Own), 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards, 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards, 3rd Carabiniers (Prince of Wales’ Dragoon Guards), and the Royal Scots Greys (2nd Dragoons). During the period several of the above merged with other units or were disbanded - I have looked at a few of them and found nothing helpful. Incidentally, Decal 7 is clearly 7 RTR and if it goes with the red triangle it would be A Squadron of the senior armoured regiment, whilst the white triangle with the number 4 in seems to be the 4th tank of A Squadron of an "Unbrigaded Regiment" whatever that is!

 

 Sorry - a bit long winded, but now you know as much about the subject as I do!

 

Cheers

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

Firstly my apologies to Mike if this looks like I am trying to take over his thread - perish the thought! I may be making some progress. This quote from Wiki explains part of the problem - 

"British Army of the Rhine

After the defeat of Germany, the 21st Army Group became the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR), and 1 Corps, under the command of Lieutenant-General Ivor Thomas, was transformed into a corps district, with an administrative, rather than combat, role. It was disbanded in 1947.

However, in October 1951 the corps was reactivated to become the principal combat element of the BAOR, with its HQ based in Bielefeld. In March 1952, following the reactivation of 6th Armoured Division, its component formations were:

2nd Infantry Division

6th Armoured Division

7th Armoured Division

11th Armoured Division

4th Division was reformed from 11th Armoured Division on 1 April 1956.

In a following 1958-60 reorganisation the Corps was formed into three mixed armour/infantry divisions including five brigade groups, which were in 1965 brought together into three centralised divisions (1st, 2nd, and 4th). In 1958, the "infantry" designation was dropped from the 2nd Infantry Division's title as part of this reorganisation."

 

Following the end of the war the army shrank rapidly. Units were merged or disbanded, names changed etc. so tracking them down is problematic, but Enzo may have given me a lead. The markings in the first pic are unclear but I had a look at 5 RTR and noticed a link to regiments.org. This site is no longer active but is archived and seems to have some useful info on UK regiments. If I find anything I will let you know, and at the same time I will brush up on the structure as I am a bit rusty. Best I can say at the moment is that for example 8th Army was made up of Divisions (eg 7th Armoured Division), each division was composed of Regiments, which in turn were made up of Battalions. At the start of the war my Dad was in the mechanised Battalion of KOYLI but they were split off to become 149 RAC when they arrived in India, and by the end of the war Divisions were often composed of armour and infantry and support units as a self sufficient force.

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

 

OK, probably my final comment on this you will be pleased to hear. I had not realised just how complicated this was going to be. Firstly,  it seems that 2nd Infantry Division did have elements of 2 Armoured Regiments attached, and I gather that whilst Infantry units were changed every 2 years or so, armoured ones probably served up to 4 years at a time in BAOR. As we don't seem to have a date this means that there may have been tanks from at least 4 or maybe 6 tank regiments in the Division during the period the Conqueror was in service!  Secondly, I mentioned the way units were merged/disbanded after the war and this certainly applies to the old cavalry units - Lancers, Hussars and Dragoons. Some of then went through mergers, and then were merged again with other units which had also been merged if you follow me, so over the period I am looking at they could be up to 4 units merged into one!

 

Anyway I have looked at all the units on the list of Conqueror users, and found a good few that were part of 6th, 7th and 11th/4th  Armoured Divisions at some point. Several others just say "BAOR", "?" or are blank, but one does say "6 Brigade 2 Division". The unit in question was then known as the Queen's Own Hussars though it has merged again since then and is now The Queens Royal Hussars, and Wiki confirms it was part of 6th Infantry Brigade based at  Munster in 1960, transferring to Detmold two years later as part of 20th Armoured Brigade. They also note that during WWII 6th Infantry Brigade was part of 2nd Infantry Division so it looks promising! Assuming the decs are in fact correct and also that we are talking about 1960-1962 then one of the two tank regiments in 2nd Infantry Division was probably this one. However as I don't know which was the other one I cannot say which one had seniority - the Queens Own Lancers constituent parts date back to 1685 so it was pretty senior - for example the most senior regiment is the Life Guards who date back to 1658 though in fact the Grenadier Guards may actually be a couple of years earlier I believe but the Royal bodyguard take precedent apparently! Some of the Dragoon Guards units that used Conquerors were just a few years senior to the Lancers so there is perhaps a 50/50 chance that one of them was the senior regiment in 2nd Infantry division and that the Queens Own Lancers were the second senior as in the decs.

 

Sorry, that is all I could come up with and as the build starts tomorrow I think I best leave it at that. Now if you decided to use the 7th Armoured decs instead that might be another matter! Oh, and I don't think I mentioned that the "80" on a yellow circle was the Bridge Classification/weight limit, which you probably already know, as at 73 long tons it was too heavy for the 70 ton bridge limit that had been the normal WWII maximum.

 

Good luck to you and Enzo with your builds

 

Pete

Edited by PeterB
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete, your contributions have been most welcome, please continue to share your findings! I know nothing about armoured regiments, and the above has shown how complex the decoding of a given unit is! I've chosen this scheme on the basis of a photo of the vehicle, plus it has a few splashes of colour. I was wondering what the '80' indicated, I guessed it  was certainly not maximum speed :)

 

I'll probably be starting work on this one during the week, happily sat in front of the TV...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I've done a bit on this while allowing the Nimrod's fuselage to harden.

 

I won't go into detail about the kit contents as such, there is a review right here. Suffice it to say it looks nice in the box, although my opinion changed a little as I got stuck in.

 

First off, as usual I guess, the instructions have you build the lower hull and the running gear. Amusing Hobby offers alternative approaches to the main suspension units. You can either assemble a working unit using a metal spring, or use a single plastic part:

 

IMG_20220312_164040

 

I was thinking of copping out and going for the one-piece affair, but it is a bit too simplified, and the spring option doesn't look too much trouble.

 

IMG_20220312_172349_HDR

 

The trouble with these is they have a huge sink mark in every :swear: one of them:

 

IMG_20220312_174543_HDR

 

I was also surprised at how much clean up all the parts required, like the mould tools weren't quite aligned. Anyway, I realised that the springs can be added later to simplify painting.

 

So, here's where I am after just a few hours of work, and a good chunk of that time was cleaning up the parts. The lower hull is pretty much there, just the suspension units to attach:

IMG_20220312_212542_HDR

 

And here is the running gear. Whenever there are small, loose, or delicate parts I pop them in a container like that shown below to keep everything together and safe.

IMG_20220312_212448_HDR

 

Thanks for looking.

 

Mike

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting that you're given the option of working suspension, Mike.  Will the track be flexible enough to accommodate movement?

 

Cheers

Link to comment
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...