Messages

16

General Discussions / Re: On the Drawing Board - UPDATED May 27, 2015

« on: May 29, 2015, 06:53:28 am »

If so it would be great if the additional 17lbr gun could be included to make a M10c Achilles for all of us commonwealth players.

Of course I suppose it could also be an M3 Lee/Grant, which would be great alongside the upcoming Crusader.

17

Work In Progress / Re: Tank, Cruiser, Mk VI (A15 Crusader)

« on: May 14, 2015, 03:27:06 pm »

Given the similarities with Crusader (same tracks, wheels[though only 4 pairs each side] and turret), will we see the A13 Covenantor any time soon, or am I going to have to convert an A15 for my upcoming Home Guard force?

18

Work In Progress / Re: Proposed Project: SdKfz 250 Alte or Neu ??

« on: May 14, 2015, 03:20:17 pm »

I also prefer the look and flexibility of the Alte version, so that's what I voted for.

19

Wish Lists / Re: Modern Military Vechiles

« on: April 22, 2015, 10:42:14 pm »

MBT not so much, but I can see the appeal of APC/IFV type vehicles such as BMP, Warrior or M113 for some more urbanised/CQB modern warfare games. I'd also like to see a Centurion mk3 or 5 for some Korean war action, it was only 5 or so years after the end of the war in Europe after all.

20

Wish Lists / Re: Panzer 38t/Marder

« on: March 03, 2015, 04:14:07 am »

What about a specialist marderIII kit to do A, F, and H (I think )models, then a pz38(t) kit with panzerjager 38(t) "hetzer" parts?

21

Work In Progress / Re: Proposed Project: Tiger II

« on: February 04, 2015, 05:10:03 pm »

I'm not convinced there is a need for Tiger 2, and voted accordingly. I don't think it is anywhere near as well known as Tiger 1, T-34 or Sherman.

However, if you are set on including both turrets with a Tiger 2, what about an optional approach. Would it be possible to make the hull side and upper glacis plates separate components and double sided, with all the relevant details moulded onto them on each side, except that one side has zimmerit and the other doesn't. Make one turret with and one without (I think the flat fronted turret, I keep forgetting which manufacturer that is, had zimmerit more than the rounded one. Though I could be wrong, don't have my references to hand) and people can choose whether they want to build with Zim or without.

Double siding the parts would of course take up no extra space on the sprue compared with separating the parts anyway.

22

Wish Lists / Re: British Tanks? What British Tanks?

« on: February 03, 2015, 05:17:02 pm »

I guess the little Vickers MK VI could be interesting, but maybe a little limited in appeal.

23

Wish Lists / Re: British Tanks? What British Tanks?

« on: January 30, 2015, 11:40:37 pm »

Back on topic though, I think its a shame that Comet seems to have been almost forgotten when it comes to late WW2 tanks. It's short service life means I think a dual kit is the best chance we have of getting one in anything other than resin

24

Wish Lists / Re: British Tanks? What British Tanks?

« on: January 30, 2015, 05:11:01 pm »

Ripley: I concede your point re: track width, I misread my references, though cromwell also used the 15.5in track. The track width I dont see as a problem for a dual kit though, at this scale, the 2.5inch difference (assuming cromwell mark with 15.5 inch track) amounts to just 1.1mm each side, the 8inch length difference (according to my sources) is less than 4mm difference, representable with a new overlayed rear hull plate.

Regarding the suspension however, British tanks have never, to my knowledge, used torsion bars owing to maintenence problems (though some light armoured vehicles, such as APC's do). Comet I believe was the last of the British tanks to use Cristie suspension as on all cruiser tanks from the A13 onwards, I would be interested to know what source you have that states that Comet used Torsion bars.

25

Wish Lists / Re: British Tanks? What British Tanks?

« on: January 30, 2015, 04:31:12 am »

How different do you mean. It was a little wider than Cromwell, had a different turret, gun and front hull, and the tracks had return rollers. As far as I can tell from reading David Fletchers book on the two tanks, most of the other changes were internal to do with ammo stowage, transmission and so on. The suspension units, wheels, engines, etc were mostly interchangable between centaur, cromwell and comet.
Rubicon have already shown that they can fit two turrets and two track units into one model with the T34/76

26

Wish Lists / Re: British Tanks? What British Tanks?

« on: January 28, 2015, 08:58:59 am »

Comet was essentially a revised Cromwell, so it should be possible to dual purpose a Cromwell kit to make Comet as well. Some Cromwells did have the revised type D hull with the Comet style hatches and 15inch tracks, so that's not a problem. So you need an extra turret, extra gun, and separate upper track runs to include the comet return rollers. Given that Cromwell/Comet is quite a bit smaller than Sherman, I would imagine there would be room on the sprue.

From a commercial PoV, dual kitting would cut down on tooling, and widen the appeal of the kit.

Cromwell single kit = Uk 7th armoured, 1st polish, and armoured recce units of UK Armoured divisions
Comet = Guards armoured post Battle of the Bulge
Dual kit = All of the above

Edit: Actually, include the parts for the 95mm Howitzer as well, and you'll also get some of the Royal Marine players.

So that's two turrets, three guns, 1 mantlet and a pair of track runs. should fit fine I would think.
Of course ideally I'd like to see that most widely exported of british tanks, Centurion, but seeing as we are focusing on WW2 vehicles, I'll accept that I won't see one in any scale other than 1/35 for a long, long time.