Messages

1486

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

« on: July 29, 2015, 09:22:06 pm »

That all sounds fine (oh, so it's a French tank name!).  I didn't find any photos of the US Armoured Division sign on tanks at any point in he war, but if you think it's right...

1487

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

« on: July 28, 2015, 09:16:13 pm »

That's a restored vehicle - you can't rely on what people do when they restore vehicles.

1488

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

« on: July 28, 2015, 08:53:50 pm »

Wow, that's quite a makeover.  Nice work.

You still have the US Armoured Division sign (the red, blue and yellow triangle).  This was a shoulder patch, and didn't appear on vehicles.

The large stars you had were good - they appeared on the glacis and turret roof of both M5A1s and M8s.  Oh well...

One of the names seems to be "Corse".  Is that correct?  Should it be "Carol"?

1489

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

« on: July 27, 2015, 10:00:27 am »

Any more changes?

Yes - replace the US Armoured Division symbol, for the reason I mentioned above.  I suggest you replace it with another British armoured formation sign (for a formation which served in NW Europe - 7th or 8th Armoured Brigade or 11 Armoured Division - since these might have used M5A1s).  And replace the Free French symbol, which is largely useless without all the other French markings.  How about the callsign for an M8?  "Laxative" (the most frequently photographed M8) is below.  Otherwise it seems to be a much more comprehensive set of decals (you sure work fast!).

1490

Work In Progress / Re: SdKfz 251/1 Ausf D - Expansion Kit 3D Prototypes!

« on: July 27, 2015, 09:36:03 am »

I don't think Warlord's upscaled PSC kits (and I think their Panzer IV was another one) really compete with most of Rubicon's in terms of detail or precision.  Italeri's kits are a different matter - especially their StuG and (judging from the photos) Panzer III; these are very good.  Although they don't always assemble quite as nicely as the latest Rubicon kits.  I'm building the Italeri Tiger I, and there are all sorts of gaps.  You have to clean up the parts quite carefully before you assemble anything.  The Rubicon Tiger I goes together much better. 

1491

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

« on: July 27, 2015, 12:59:41 am »

It's still a rather eclectic mixture...

- the 1st Armoured symbol wasn't used on tanks - US Army vehicles used a system of codes for divisional, regimental etc. markings.
- maybe get rid of the Free French symbols, and replace them with another large yellow callsign?
- most of those bridging plates are for soft-skins.  Will you really be including this set of decals with future soft-skin kits?

I agree with Laffe's suggestion.  Another British divisional sign, and a couple of sets of regimental markings would make the decal sheet more useful.

1492

Wish Lists / Re: Vehicle Name Wish List - for our Decal Sheets

« on: July 26, 2015, 10:21:55 pm »

US Sherman names (all types):

"Honky-Tonk", "Dixie-Belle" and "War-Daddy II" (M4A1s from 1st Armoured Div, destroyed at Kasserine Pass)
"Henry III" (M4A1 used by Lt. Col. Henry Gardiner of 1 Armoured Div in Tunisia - his third tank)
"Eternity T" (M4A1 from 2nd Armoured Div in Sicily)
"Fury" (M4 from 2nd Armoured in Normandy - yes, this is the real "Fury")
"Houston-Kid II" (M4A3 105mm, Germany)
"Thunderbolt IV" (M4A3 (76mm) used by Maj. Creighton Abrams of 4th Armoured Div - his fourth tank)
"Flat-Foot-Floogie" (M4A3 HVSS from 11th Armoured Div)
"First in Bastogne" (not a name, but a slogan, scrawled on an M4A3E2 Jumbo)

Some of these vehicles also had additional markings, like the thunderbolt symbol on "Thunderbolt IV".  Bison Decals does some very accurate decals, which are worth checking out.  Note that I've chosen quite a few early M4A1s - this isn't an accident (hint hint!)

1493

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

« on: July 26, 2015, 09:40:47 pm »

U.S. vehicle registration numbers were not in yellow or black, they were first painted on in blue drab, and then in 1943-1944  , they were painted on in white. It would be cool if there were a few of the registration numbers with the prefix letter 'w' on the sheet were in blue, for early war vehicles. Also , for early war vehicles, a few yellow vehicle identification stars would be good as well.

Some early war vehicles did have white or yellow serial numbers.  Some even seem to have been black.  Blue drab was introduced in 1942.  Units stationed in Britain prior to D-Day had white serial numbers because they didn't have any blue drab paint, then white seems to have become the most common colour.  The "W" prefix was dropped in 1944.

1494

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

« on: July 26, 2015, 02:28:20 pm »

Oh good - you're providing a mixture of US and Allied markings for these kits.

- the star in yellow circle was very rare, as it only featured on (some) vehicles involved in the invasion of Sicily in 1943.  I'd query whether it's worth including it.  The US flag was also pretty rare after 1943.
- you only need the bridging plates (black number in yellow circle) for the M5A1 and M8 - which seems to have been "15" and "16" respectively.  These plates were pretty rare on tanks, so you could drop them.
- if you're including French markings, you also need French-style registration numbers.  Maybe drop these to make more space?
- given that the moulded-on grouser stowage on the turrets makes placement of markings difficult, is it actually worth including the British squadron markings?
- I assume you've decided to omit formation signs and numbers for space reasons, but a couple of British formation/arm of service signs would be nice. The Guards Armoured used the M5A1, for instance.
- many US Army M5A1s in Normandy had their length, weight etc stenciled on the angled armour on the right side.
- maybe include more callsigns (the big numbers in yellow)?  These seem to have been pretty common.
- the only name you've included ("Hothead") is a USMC vehicle.  Some more vehicle names would be nice.  Here are some suggestions:
US Army M5A1 (mid production) names included "Sloppy Joe", "Mickey Georgiana", "Cognac", "Carol" and "Destruction"; USMC names included "Nannie" and "Hunter".
US Army M5A1 (late production) names included "Brig", "Dingbat" and "Dagwood".
British Army M5A1 names included "Halcyon" and "The Black Bear"
M8 names included "Laxative" (it also had a large yellow callsign "3-9").
Recce names (including Recces based M3 and M3A3 hulls) included: "The Curse of Scotland", "Havoc" and "Hornblower".

Hope that helps.

1495

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

« on: July 24, 2015, 10:33:47 pm »

Very cool to see these kits painted.

Inevitably, I have a couple of comments (although I know it's rather late to make any changes):

- overall, the level of detail is really good, and it looks very crisp and well moulded.  These are obviously quite small vehicles, so they're probably going to look even better in the flesh.  The way you've done the M8 turret in relatively few parts is also very impressive.

- I still think omitting the .30 cal from the mid-production M5A1 is unfortunate.  The late production M5A1 has the wrong .30 cal cradle, but I doubt anyone will care.

- the mantlet on the M5A1 sits way too low.  The upper edge was almost flush with the turret roof.  Can you correct that?

- The M8 mantlet sits too far forward.  It shouldn't be possible to see the gun tube etc.  Is that a construction error?

- Does the M5A1/Recce kit come with British decals?  The Recce wasn't used by the US Army.

1496

General Discussions / Re: NEED HELP - What is this ??

« on: July 24, 2015, 12:10:29 am »

These tubes appear on every photo of an /16 that I've seen.  They're not related to the portable flamethrower, because they still appear on versions produced after the handheld weapon was deleted.  I think they were drains of some kind, but I can't find any mention of them in the references I have.

1497

Work In Progress / Re: SdKfz 251/1 Ausf C & Expansion Kits

« on: July 23, 2015, 11:36:11 pm »

Since the interior of the Ausf C and D are very close.  It is sometimes very confusing with historical photo regarding the seats - leather vs wood bench.  We know they were leather to start with, but later switched to wood bench (probably to save resources) that was carried forward to the Ausf D production.  Is this correct?

According to the Osprey book on the SdKfz 251 and "Schutzenpanzer", by Uwe Feist, the wooden slat seats were introduced with the Ausf D, as part of the process of simplifying production.  They were far quicker and cheaper to manufacture than the combination of metal tubing, leather and horsehair required for the Ausf C's seats.  I'd suggest it makes sense to provide the leather seats with the Ausf C, as it's another feature that distinguishes it from the Ausf D.

All parts in the Engineer variant (251/7) are of a new design - the bridges, wood planks and support.  We've also included a sPzB 41 (with wheels for offloaded use) with the kit.  Even though taking up a lot of sprue space, we have decided to include two upper hull pieces (Ausf C & D) with the Stummel kit; it will be a pity not to!

Excellent! 

Incidentally, I also really like the "Flivo" version you've done (Flivos were Luftwaffe forward air-control personnel) - the retractable antenna looks especially cool.  As I mentioned previously, the frame antenna was much more common on the Ausf C.  This version would make a very nice subject for a diorama.  Especially accompanied by some armoured cars (hint hint!).

1498

Work In Progress / Re: SdKfz 251/1 Ausf C & Expansion Kits

« on: July 23, 2015, 09:03:05 am »

Cool - a Rubicon SdKfz 251 Ausf C.  Hopefully with the correct (leather) seats, unlike Warlord's.  Good to see you've also omitted the rivets - only a few Ausf Cs were riveted.

The Engineer variant looks great.  Will it have new parts?  I like the "Flivo" too - especially the extendable antenna.  That would make a great diorama subject.  And the "Stummel" - one of my favourite variants.

A production version of the Kanone 51 on an Ausf C?  We went through this before.  The Ausf C was out of production by the time this mounting for the L/24 was introduced.  As your list indicates, it should be D only.

1499

Work In Progress / Re: SdKfz 251/1 Ausf D - Expansion Kit 3D Prototypes!

« on: July 22, 2015, 08:36:26 pm »

Warlord's early kits don't compare well to Rubicon's.  But I have to say that the Italeri-designed kits are generally pretty good (they don't assemble quite as precisely as Rubicon's later kits though).  And (sorry Rubicon!) the forthcoming Panzer III looks like it's much more accurate that Rubicon's.  Maybe it's time that one got a makeover?

1500

Work In Progress / Re: German Armoured Vehicle - RESERVED...

« on: July 22, 2015, 08:32:58 pm »

I love the hetzer, but whatever it is i might buy it anyway, as long as it is mid to late war. Im addicted to plastic kits....(and i hate working with resin).

I share that addiction...and your dislike of resin.

there are some kits that could use the hetzers hull, but those were not produced en masse. (stummel, etc.)

The Hetzer shared very little with the Pzr 38T, and the only variant (apart from the flamethrower version) was the Bergepanzerwagen 38.