Author Topic: Anti-tank guns - what next?  (Read 330 times)

Pinky

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,203
    • View Profile
Anti-tank guns - what next?
« on: February 15, 2017, 11:15:34 AM »
Rubicon now has an extensive range of German vehicles and anti-tank guns in the pipeline (and I'm guessing that an 88mm and SdKfz 7 is also planned).  I'm now hoping to see something similar for the Allies.  I'd suggest that Rubicon not try and cover as many types as they have for the Germans, but focus on the really important weapons.  Here's my suggested list: 

Soviet M1937 / M1942 45mm anti-tank gun
Soviet ZiS-3 76mm infantry gun
British 2-pdr anti-tank gun
British 6-pdr / US 57mm anti-tank gun 

I'd suggest that the US M1 3 inch gun isn't worth doing, as it wasn't that widely used.  A 17-pdr would be cool though.  Of course, it would also be nice if we also got tractors for these weapons, although some (like the ZiS-3) can be towed by existing models (i.e. the Studebaker). 

I'd suggest that Rubicon holds off for a while before doing any field guns [edit: although as UVS said, a 25-pdr would be pretty good].



« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 05:04:17 PM by Pinky »

ripley

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2017, 12:25:55 PM »
PSC have a very nice 28mm  2 gun kit   of the Soviet 45mm gun ( M1937 / M1942  and M1943 76mm howitzer ) , comes with  a  8 crew figures ::)  . While Rubicon would IMO, really do a fantastic job of this gun , I would rather they tackle other kits no one else has produced The other kits Pinky mentioned are all kits I want   ;D

Pinky

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,203
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2017, 02:37:36 PM »
Is the PSC kit good?  I've read mixed comments on it.  If you say it's good, then I'm going to get one.  And yes, scratch that from the list.  Let's add the 17-pdr, because it's so awesome (and because it might mean Crusader gun tractor conversion kit at some point).

ultravanillasmurf

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 881
    • View Profile
    • Blog:
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2017, 04:30:27 PM »
I have one assembled PSC gun, and a complete sprue somewhere. When I spoke with a member of the PSC staff a Colours many years ago they said it was an upscaled version of their smaller scale kits.

I will see if I can find either and post some photographs on my blog (and a link here).

I would say a 25 pounder (though technically a field howitzer) would be a good model to add to the list. It was used in the direct fire and anti-tank role.

Six pounder and Carden Loyd carrier models would be nice.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 04:33:04 PM by ultravanillasmurf »

ripley

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 590
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2017, 09:34:38 PM »
Its not bad , Ive built 2 guns and have another set in my stash pile . It needs a couple of things , a sight  ( I used the sight off sniper rifles ), cleaning rods strapped to the trail leg , a case for the sight on the gun shield and a tow ring . Really not nessesary , unless your a little over the top   ::) . The omissions really don't get noticed in game play . The crew need a little TLC , Bolt Action heads , weapons and spares , but not too bad to start with ( I've seen worse )





I've got a 5 man crew for the 45mm gun and I am going to use the 76mm and scratch built limber as a scenery piece with dead horses and crew . The other 2 guns will be built in the M1942 version as well when I get more Russian figures ( maybe one with the Winter Plastics ). Some kits that get up scaled look pretty funky , but this kit IMO , except for the crews , turned out well . And another vote for a 25 pounder  :D
« Last Edit: February 15, 2017, 09:37:58 PM by ripley »

ultravanillasmurf

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 881
    • View Profile
    • Blog:
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2017, 12:55:14 AM »
Cool, that means I do not have to find mine.

tyroflyer

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2017, 06:06:00 PM »
I agree field guns shouldn't be high on the priority list. Generally wargaming at this scale should prioritise direct fire weapons in my view.

Ballardian

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 119
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2017, 12:28:53 AM »
I'd also put a vote in for a 17pdr, as thanks to Pinky, visions of the Crusader based tow he mentioned have taken up residence & may have to be acted upon.




ultravanillasmurf

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 881
    • View Profile
    • Blog:
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2017, 01:27:46 AM »
I agree field guns shouldn't be high on the priority list. Generally wargaming at this scale should prioritise direct fire weapons in my view.
There are exceptions, a bit like anti-aircraft guns.

The 25 pounder did valiant (your mileage may vary on effectiveness) service as a direct fire weapon, the 88 flak gun  was scary in direct fire as well.

ultravanillasmurf

  • Sergeant
  • ***
  • Posts: 881
    • View Profile
    • Blog:
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2017, 01:28:54 AM »
I'd also put a vote in for a 17pdr, as thanks to Pinky, visions of the Crusader based tow he mentioned have taken up residence & may have to be acted upon.



And the M5 tank based tractor as well.

Pinky

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,203
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2017, 07:58:38 AM »
Theoretically, the sprue for a 17-pdr could include the parts to convert the Crusader kit into a tractor...

tyroflyer

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: Anti-tank guns - what next?
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2017, 09:17:17 AM »
I didn't mean to exclude from any priority list weapons used in a direct fire mode (the 88 being a classic example) or for that matter light mortars. I just feel weapons like artillery should be a long way from the front line unless they are being over run. I realise not all rule sets agree with this view.

Personally I'd prefer Rubicon concentrate on the vehicles.