Messages

1471

Work In Progress / Re: M3/M3A1 Half-Track Personnel Carrier

« on: August 02, 2015, 07:02:09 pm »

Not much references on the Free French licence plate for the M3, only 1 picture (from reenactment) showing a single plate on the unditching roller.  Should be on the sides just like the American.  Did two plates with the same number... or should I do two plates with different numbers?

Here are paintings of 2 Free French half-tracks from Zaloga's Osprey book on the US half-track.  This book isn't 100% reliable (it's quite an old title now and Zaloga's artwork has improved since), but these paintings are based on photos.  There's also a photo of a French Foreign Legion half-track below.  The top painting shows how the serial number was applied to front of the winch version.  It looks as though the serial number was painted behind the roller on the other version.  Can't blame you if you're fed up with this though...

1472

Work In Progress / Re: M3/M3A1 Half-Track Personnel Carrier

« on: August 02, 2015, 04:59:00 pm »

Maybe drop the map of France symbol? It seems less important than the French serial number.  You did a nice job doing them for the M5A1/M8.  Otherwise your French version is a bit incomplete.  Don't let decal fatigue lead to corner cutting!

1473

Work In Progress / Re: M3/M3A1 Half-Track Personnel Carrier

« on: August 02, 2015, 04:33:43 pm »

OMG - more decals!  And the truly insane can even make up their own serial numbers!!

Only one real comment - as with the M5A1, the Free French markings should include their colourful serial numbers.

The bridge plate seems to have been 9 or 10, but there are virtually no photos of actual vehicles with them.  There must be a definitive reference for this somewhere!

1474

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

« on: August 02, 2015, 04:14:11 pm »

...Will probably going to create some additional decal sheets to cover general markings AFTER getting over the aftereffects of the waterslide decal sickness!

Yeah, it's easy for us to debate the contents, but you're the ones who have to change the actual decals!

I still think the bridge plate numbers are incorrect (if only because of the photo of "Skyraker" above) but there's not a lot to go on.  Great to see the Aussie markings

1475

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

« on: August 02, 2015, 01:23:08 pm »

Well, we've now descended into ridiculous levels of obscurity  

The problem is (apart from some conflicting information) is that none of this clarifies what actually appeared on tanks in service.  I guess you could just include 18, 19, 20 and 21, and cover every option.

1476

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

« on: August 02, 2015, 12:51:37 pm »

From what I can tell, by 1944 the British graded bridges according to a series of numbers, representing the highest weight they could carry: 5, 7, 9, 12, 16, 18, 20, 24, 30, 35, 40, 50, 60, and 70.  A vehicle's bridge plate would show the vehicle's bridge class by reference the closest number above its weight.  On this basis, the Crusader AA being "18" and the basic Crusader being "20" seems to make sense.  Where it gets confusing is where you see other numbers that are probably the vehicle's actual weight (like "19", assuming this is based on an actual vehicle).  When I was checking the M5A1/M8's bridge plate, I found bridge plates which didn't fit into this series, and I think that's because the US Army's showed the actual weight.  Or there's some other reason - it's an obscure topic.  I agree that these symbols didn't appear very often on tanks (British or American).  I guess you just assumed that a tank needed a pretty strong bridge!

1477

Showcase & Gallery / Re: M4A3 (76) W Sherman

« on: August 02, 2015, 10:49:50 am »

Superb painting - especially the weathering (I like the mud spray - very realistic).  And you didn't overdo the chipping.  Really impressive.  Are they Tamiya fuel cans?

1478

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

« on: August 02, 2015, 10:46:20 am »

Ripley - from what I could find, the British used American tons (kind of crazy that there'd be 2 different kinds of ton!).  What I was wondering is if there were different ways of designating the weight - either the vehicle's actual weight, or a weight class (based on the vehicle's weight, rounded up) that corresponded with a bridge classification.  That would explain apparent discrepancies in the numbers on bridge plates. 

1479

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

« on: August 02, 2015, 01:49:33 am »

Our Crusader Mk I & Mk II can be build with a 3 inch howitzer of the 2-pounder as "Combat Support".  We know they were used for that role in Africa hence included two infantry divisions.  But they can be replaced any time.

The 3-inch howitzer-armed Crusaders were part of the armoured units - for example, they might be attached to squadron headquarters.  They weren't fielded as separate support weapons in infantry divisions.

The Polish Crusader AA - Skyraker (together with its corresponding markings) is basically on every decal sheet that we came across... we will pass!

"Skyraker" was from 22nd Armoured Brigade, but fair enough.

Pretty sure the desert version of the Crusader has a bridge number of 19 and the AA version is 21.

Tamiya's Crusader AA has an 18.  Osprey's Crusader book has paintings of a Crusader III and an AA, both with a 20.  The restored Crusader III at Bovington has a 19.  It looks as though Tamiya are right about the AA (see the photo of "Skyraker" below). 

1480

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

« on: August 01, 2015, 11:00:45 pm »

I edited my earlier post - I raised a query about the two infantry division symbols you included.

I was the only one who entered?  That's rather disappointing.  Still, I'm sure it's no reflection of the popularity of this kit.

I found a cool name, if you're interested - "Skyraker", a Crusader AA.  And the only photo of a Crusader with a bridge plate I could find has the number "20".

1481

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

« on: August 01, 2015, 10:33:15 pm »

Well that's very impressive.  Looks as though everything anyone could need is there.  Who won the decal design competition?

You've included the 46th and 51st Infantry Divisions (the tree symbol and the "HD").  Would they have had Crusaders?  Crusader AA's were issued to armoured units, not infantry units, so these markings wouldn't be appropriate for them.  Just checking.  I don't recognise the marking beside 1st Armoured's - is it Polish?

It's rather obscure, but is there any chance of including the 9th Australian Divisional Cavalry?  Apparently they used Crusaders as well.  It looked like this (although noone seems to be sure if the tanks actually wore it):

1482

Work In Progress / Re: Opel Blitz - Updated 150729 - Sample Painted

« on: July 31, 2015, 11:02:30 am »

The model looks very nice, although the doors seem to be very thick.

True, but probably a result of the slide-moulding process.  Should be fairly easy to thin down the edges.

Hurry up and release this, Rubicon! 

1483

Work In Progress / Re: M5A1 Stuart / M8 Scott - Updated with Painted Plastic

« on: July 31, 2015, 10:54:33 am »

Having a decal doesn`t really matter, those who think its not historic can skip the decal, for those who want to use it can do so. Its not that the decal is wrong, it worse if something would be missing.

I don't agree.  In the case of a kit of a historic vehicle, I think the decals supplied should, like the kit, be as accurate as possible.  Many people who buy this kit will expect the markings to be accurate, and will be disappointed if they discover that they're not.   After all the effort that Rubicon are now making to get their kits as accurate as possible (look at the discussion that's gone into recent projects like the M8, the M10/M36 and the SdKfz 251 variants, for example), it doesn't make sense to skimp on details like decals.  In fact, with the amount of reference material now available on WW2 armour, it should be possible to avoid most errors (unlike 25 years ago, when model kits contained all kinds of fundamental mistakes, many of which were based on mistakes by military museums).  Modellers can, of course, do what they like with their kit - that's where the artistic license comes in.

Of course, we're now debating the inclusion of a single decal, and it's highly unlikely that anyone would criticise Rubicon for including it even if it never actually appeared on an M5A1 or an M8.   

1484

Work In Progress / Re: Opel Blitz - Updated 150729 - Sample Painted

« on: July 30, 2015, 02:48:17 pm »

That looks like a great set of decals.  My only very minor comment is that maybe the Afrika Korps symbol should be in a grey rectangle rather than a black one, as they often masked off the markings when they sprayed the vehicle with a sand colour, leaving a dark grey patch behind the markings.  I haven't checked the tactical symbols, but I assume they're all appropriate for a truck. 

1485

Work In Progress / Re: Opel Blitz - Updated 150729 - Sample Painted

« on: July 30, 2015, 12:24:12 am »

Lovely!  I bet you sell a ton of these!

I guess it'll be easier to do the decals for this than it was for the M5A1/M8.  Number plates, and a few tactical markings. 

There is a number plate under the rear of the cargo bed, right?