Messages

151

Wish Lists / Re: early StuG

« on: April 06, 2017, 06:45:40 pm »

Thanks Patrick. Apparently they were Sturmartillerie Batteries 640, 659, 660 and 665. As the Ausf B only left the factory in the closing stages of the campaign in France it is possible they didn't reach the front line before the armistice (perhaps there is evidence to the contrary). In any event if I'm not misinterpreting my information A & B can be represented by the same kit.

152

Wish Lists / Re: early StuG

« on: April 06, 2017, 07:46:46 am »

My Chamberlain and Doyle suggests 320 Ausf B produced from June 1940 compared with 150 Ausf D. So perhaps the B would be a good starting point. However I'm not sure even these were early enough to take part in the invasion of France. However the main change from the A appears related to the transmission and ignition system so not a problem for Rubicon. Some B's apparently had different drive and idler wheels but not all (the proportion of each unknown to me).

So my suggestion would be an A/B (externally the same) so that vehicles invading France in May 1940 are covered.

153

Wish Lists / Re: early StuG

« on: April 05, 2017, 09:46:19 pm »

You make a valid case ripley however Rubicon are building an enviable reputation for producing first rate kits that are attempting to differentiate between variants (Sherman/Panzer IV). Surely that reputation would be damaged by going down the generic route. Perhaps a competitor will attempt to do that but I would be disappointed if Rubicon were to go that way.

154

Wish Lists / Re: early StuG

« on: April 05, 2017, 07:42:08 am »

Nice idea, although it will need to be a very early version if you intend to invade France in 1940.

Among German vehicles I would prefer to see Pz I, Pz !!, Pz38(t) & very early Pz III & IV come first.

155

Wish Lists / Re: Ideas for future tank kits

« on: April 01, 2017, 02:06:06 pm »

You beat me to it. A T-26 most likely and if that's the case I feel some Russian vehicles in my future.

156

Work In Progress / Re: HOLD this space (again)... Finally! 170330

« on: March 30, 2017, 04:03:59 pm »

I'll second that, Sd.Kfz.7

157

General Discussions / Re: Your Go To Tank Books

« on: March 28, 2017, 02:49:26 pm »

One of my books I failed to mention is World Encyclopaedia of the TANK by Christopher Chant published in the mid 90's. Although not WWII specific it's a good overview that includes the period between the world wars and post war. Worth looking out for in second hand bookshops.

158

General Discussions / Re: Your Go To Tank Books

« on: March 28, 2017, 01:43:14 pm »

Your book collection is making me envious Pinky.

I have the Chamberlain & Ellis book you mention plus the equivalent Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two by Chamberlin & Doyle. Also a few others including the odd Osprey, Bellona print and squadron/signal publication.

My interest in military history not only extends into the aviation and naval spheres it also goes back into recorded history. The book I'm currently reading is about Cannae (Hannibal was a military genius) and the Army I'm currently working on is from 1st century Rome. My collection of books is therefore somewhat diverse and explains my lack of in depth knowledge on the tanks. I find it all of great interest nonetheless and feel my enthusiasm for buying books on military vehicles growing. If only there wasn't so much other interesting stuff on military campaigns through the ages diverting the book budget!   

159

Wish Lists / Re: Ideas for future tank kits

« on: March 28, 2017, 09:40:04 am »

This discussion has made me think about how we decide what models we would like to see. I suggest the following either is, or perhaps should be, part of the thought process

- number built
- length of service (could be short because you are Polish or the design is poor/outdated )
- number actually used operationally (an example of this is the British Cruiser Mk V where a substantial 1,771 were built but never left the UK)
- presence in significant battles (Ferdinand's at Kursk for example)
- significance on the battlefield (Tiger)
- bang for the buck in points cost for the ruleset (personally I think if decisions are made on this basis then some things are too cheap or too expensive and the points cost is wrong)
- the aesthetics of the vehicle (doesn't affect me much but I could be in the minority)
- popularity of the army vehicle belongs to (German army more popular than Italian perhaps)
- use by more than one army

Just my thoughts. You might be motivated by something totally different

160

Wish Lists / Re: Ideas for future tank kits

« on: March 27, 2017, 06:55:26 am »

I'd like to add a note of caution on the 2 in 1 pairing of kits. Some might want to build a particular army and don't want to assemble its opposition. Perhaps they have a friend with the opposing force already. Perhaps in Pinky's example they want 3 Mk VI light tanks but only 1 dingo scout car or the other way around. I don't have any objection to it being used as a marketing tool much like you can buy a Spitfire and Messerschmidt 110 in the same box but can still buy them individually.

Of course making the price of the combined kits less than the sum of its parts would be an incentive. If some of these vehicles are too small Rubicon could simply have 2 in the same box. I guess there is no right solution.

I'm pleased these early tanks have attracted this support.

161

Wish Lists / Re: Ideas for future tank kits

« on: March 26, 2017, 07:39:01 pm »

All of Pinky's suggestions are good. The Valentine made me think of other British tanks used in North Africa, particularly early on.

Light tank Mk VI
Cruiser Mk I
Cruiser Mk II
Cruiser Mk III
Cruiser Mk IV

They have the disadvantage they weren't produced in large numbers (some quite small). However this might be offset from a wargaming perspective by their additional use by the BEF in France 1940 and in some cases Greece in 1941. I'm not advocating they appear high up on the priority list but it does highlight there is no shortage of potential subjects for the wargame table and/or display cabinet.

162

Wish Lists / Re: Italian M13/40

« on: March 26, 2017, 05:04:22 am »

Yes the original intent was to have Rubicon consider putting the M13/40 on their to do list. Whether or not that remains something worth advocating probably depends on the assessment of how good the rumoured Italeri kit turns out to be. I would like to see Rubicon make one eventually but there are other Italian tanks that could take its place on a priority list if an Italeri M13/40 proves to be very good.

163

Work In Progress / Re: GAZ-AAA 6x4 2t Truck - GAZ-AAA or GAZ-AA 170324

« on: March 24, 2017, 02:55:00 pm »

Of course the Germans were heavy users of captured examples as well.

164

Work In Progress / Re: GAZ-AAA 6x4 2t Truck - GAZ-AAA or GAZ-AA 170324

« on: March 24, 2017, 02:11:31 pm »

Yes. Variety is the spice of life! I think it's a particularly good idea when the new model has much in common with an existing one. In my ignorance I imagine it would require less investment on Rubicon's behalf than a completely different kit.

I think the AA was far more numerous than the AAA and deserves a place for that reason. I tend to agree with Pinky on the priority of armoured vehicles over trucks. Nonetheless the simple answer to your question is yes.

165

Work In Progress / Re: The Panzer IV Digital Library - Panzer IV Ausf D / E / F1 - 170323

« on: March 23, 2017, 08:23:11 pm »

Can I suggest having another look at the hinges on the hatches on the left and right of the glacis for the Ausf D. The pictures I'm seeing of the original vehicles at the time (and of other models) suggest a couple of distinctly separate hinges rather than what I am seeing on the images here.