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 ... 12
Work In Progress / Re: Digital Sculpts - Figure Casting 180316
« on: March 16, 2018, 07:55:28 PM »
That's very interesting.

Quite some time ago I made the following suggestion. I'm sure Pinky would prefer plastic to resin. Although resin is far better than nothing. I can imagine a game with a Tauchpanzer looming out of a river somewhere on the Russian front.

I'd like consideration to be given to including these items in an expansion kit. There appears to be a lot of items that could supplement a basic Panzer IV kit.

- raised louvers (DAK) variant
- Pz Bef Wg/Pz Beob Wg
- Tauchpanzer IV
- components to create earlier Pz IV's  :)
- Pz IV spare wheels, tracks etc

I continue to be impressed with Rubicon's willingness to revisit projects that are so advanced. The T-26 is another example.

With the debate about 3 versus 4 bolts and flat plate versus vision slit I neglected to add my congratulations to Rubicon. You've done well.

@EWG - The Ausf D wouldn't need too many changes to make a C to attack Poland. I hope Rubicon will give us those parts one day. Not that I've got anything against Poland!

Think you've cleared up the three/four bolt issue ripley. However I see pictures of Ausf C with a flat plate on the port (gunners) side without obvious bolts. This isn't relevant to Rubicon's kit.

It does, as you say, indicate all variants should have four bolts on the starboard (loaders) side.

Somebody has probably got a better reference than me but I've been counting rivets! My Chamberlain and Doyle shows a picture of Ausf D turret with two rivets above and below the forward side vision port. Not the triangular pattern above it shown here. Perhaps there is another explanation, different suppliers of the turret maybe. Quick search gives me images of Ausf E with both variants but haven't come across any D's with the triangular pattern. No big deal I think Rubicon have done a good job and something the pedantic can address (if it is wrong for a D)

I don't know the truth of when Kubelwagens were first deployed, however I agree with your basic philosophy EWG. I don't think their use in small numbers in the real world precludes them from the wargame table. Although I personally wouldn't use them in a setting that was too early for them. My reference confirms Stug Ausf A were operational with Sturmartillerie Batteries 640, 659, 660 & 665 during the French campaign.

Interesting niche. You might find a sizable market for 40mm or 54mm unpainted metal figures. A lot of people find enjoyment in painting.

Work In Progress / Re: Digital Sculpts - German Infantryman 180215
« on: February 15, 2018, 05:55:44 PM »
I could be interested in these. Depends on how they compare with the competition on both quality and price. I am probably in the minority as I prefer metal for figures.

Where appropriate I am happy with metal parts. I share ripley's misgivings about the pre-assembly but if done well I could get used to it.

Wish Lists / Re: Two fantastic kit ideas for Rubicon Models -
« on: January 24, 2018, 11:50:57 AM »
I agree with EWG on the early war issue. It isn't a before and after Pearl Harbour thing so far as I'm concerned.

Although I would personally prefer to see the Matilda than a revamped Panther I think Rubicon are doing the right thing here. Opportunities to upgrade kits should be taken. The fact some of us already have an older version shouldn't preclude someone else benefiting from the latest technology/research or whatever.

Wish Lists / Re: More Early War (1939-1940)!
« on: January 21, 2018, 09:19:30 AM »
I agree. I advocated for Fast Russians (the BT series) a little while ago. It's hard to imagine an early Soviet force without them. They were very numerous and to be found on the battlefield  throughout the war. Captured examples also used by the Germans and Finns.

Now Rubicon can market nine variants. I agree with Rubicon the reference material is not consistent. Whether you agree with it or not Wikipedia has a significant entry on the T-26 including the twin turret variants.

Good observation WeRT. It would appear most T-26's with twin turrets were only armed with machine guns. Nice response from Rubicon as well.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12