Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - tyroflyer

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
1
I continue to be amazed Rubicon didn't want to include Panzer IV Ausf C in their digital library. I think it reflects a relative lack of interest in early war vehicles. The point I would make yet again is the early variant didn't retire after the Polish campaign and was the most numerous variant during the invasion of France. It should therefore interest a lot of WWII gamers.

2
That looks much better than what was originally intended. Thank you.

I think it's important that customers can take it for granted a Rubicon kit will always be an accurate representation of the vehicle in question. For a while that looked to be doubtful. Thanks again.

3
Work In Progress / Re: T-26 Soviet Light Infantry Tank - T-26 Turret 171229
« on: December 31, 2017, 08:42:16 AM »
All that extra space gives Rubicon room to add the correct  flame thrower hull and assorted bits to complete those 2 versions  ;D
To maximize utility:

The proper hull bits to allow the Kt-130 and Kt-133/134 flamethrowers to be built correctly would be ideal. A person could then get as many kits as desired to make any of the 8 different varieties. Would make this kit a killer deal!  No "later, when they get around to it, resin pack" needed.


I agree

4
Unconfirmed source suggests it was a one of a kind field conversion with 19 Panzer Division, Bohemia April 1945. Therefore not total fantasy. Does make me wonder if Lady Penelope's roller is on the drawing board. ;D

5
Work In Progress / Re: T-26 Soviet Light Infantry Tank - T-26 Turret 171229
« on: December 29, 2017, 05:59:24 PM »
Nice.

That close it does show dust specks ^__^.


Importantly, does it have the right number of rivets? ;)

6
Work In Progress / Re: T-26 Soviet Light Infantry Tank - T-26 Turret 171229
« on: December 29, 2017, 03:28:11 PM »
Nice job.

7
1 rivet. 2 rivets. 3 rivets....
Gotta love those rivet counters. Of course people are entitled to models that look vaguely like a Sherman, Churchill, Tiger and so on. Or better yet a playing card with the tanks name on it. For me this forum is absolutely full of people either pointing out quite small errors or asking for a relatively insignificant vehicle. More power to them. The forum thrives on it.

However, I'm not very keen on rivet/button counters pointing out the mistakes in another modellers paint job (unless in a competition setting). I hope our hosts find the rivet counting of some use and not just a frustration. 

We know how pernicky armour fans can be...

Not just armour. It's everywhere and brings out the best.

8
[
I suspect that more people who buy a kit like this will care about an issue like this than would be the case with, say, a Tiger.  But it's obviously very difficult to rectify it now.  I think a note in the instructions would be a good idea.  Mind you, I'm not sure if that particular variant is going to be used much.

Presently Rubicon's reputation is very good. It would be a shame to tarnish it. We would all be quick to jump on a Tiger kit with the turret in the wrong place. I believe Rubicon would be wise to promote the six variants in its packaging and treat the other two as an incomplete bonus that can be used as is, or for kit bashing perhaps. Less likely to have an unrealistic expectation of the kit that way. I'm interested in buying it nonetheless.

9

 Making an educated risk, most people will not care...  :D

I suspect your assessment is correct. Or possibly will assume you've got it right, which is a bit of a worry. Some could be a little disappointed if they find out later. Makes you wonder if it should some how be made clear to the purchaser these 2 variants are a compromise.   

10
Looks nice. Although I don't think I would contemplate building OT-130 and OT-134 on the wrong hull.

11
Work In Progress / Re: T-26 Soviet Light Infantry Tank - TS1 Sprues 171223
« on: December 24, 2017, 06:19:53 AM »
I was thinking 7TP and Vickers.

These would be a nice addition but Rubicon have done so well this time I think they can be forgiven. Maybe and hopefully later.

Does make me wonder how the new moulds would improve existing products. Probably too late to apply them to unreleased kits in the pipeline.

12
General Discussions / Re: Another first in 1/56 scale...
« on: December 22, 2017, 06:17:55 PM »

I can see that being useful. And making Tyroflyer's year.

Well thanks for thinking of me uvs! Any advance is to be welcomed. We'll see what use is made of it.

13
Work In Progress / Re: Jagdpanzer 38 Hetzer - NEW Expansion Kit?? 171218
« on: December 20, 2017, 07:25:24 AM »
I posted the following during the Panzer IV discussion. If this is the sort of thing you have in mind I'll be very pleased.

I wonder whether it would be possible to modify it via an expansion kit to make an Ausf C. I think 3 small pieces would correct the turret (new mantlet and side access hatches). The hull machine gun would need to be removed and replaced with a plate that is flat with the driver's. The real tanks were a centimetre different in width (nothing in 1/56 scale).

14
Work In Progress / Re: Jagdpanzer 38 Hetzer - NEW Expansion Kit?? 171218
« on: December 19, 2017, 05:20:54 PM »

I just don’t get the hatred for this on here and the Facebook pages.

Hatred is a strong word. People are usually expressing disappointment with Rubicon's choice of subject. My support for this choice is more about supporting the concept than this particular vehicle. Panzer 38(t) Ausf A being more numerous and fought for a long period.

15
Work In Progress / Re: Jagdpanzer 38 Hetzer - NEW Expansion Kit?? 171218
« on: December 19, 2017, 11:28:38 AM »
I bow to your great knowledge Pinky. However I think Rubicon's expressed intent to create different variants of their products is to be encouraged. I was particularly interested to see the Panxer IV mentioned in that context.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11