Soviet BA Heavy Armoured Cars - BA-10 TS1 Painted 190322

[EarlyWarGamer]

Indeed, the C and D are very similar to each other. Other than what appear to be mostly small differences, the main big difference is that front panel. It is straight across on the C, and the driver and radio operator hatches line up on top. There is no MG for the radio operator to use.  On the D, the front panel is "crooked" for lack of a better word, with the driver still forward (same spot) but the front plate then angles back a bit before continuing across where the radio operator sits. The two hatches do not line up on top. And on the D model the front MG returns.

Could Rubicon give us a kit that covers C and D models? Without needing many new parts? I think they could.  And the B and C models are nearly identical, so really, if they give us a C they might as well give us the B as well. Which would give us a B/C/D combo kit.

It is the A model I don't think we will ever see. Lots of parts are different between the A and the other three models.

[tyroflyer]

We're in sync again EWG, as we usually are.

[Rubicon Models]

Please move the Panzer IV discussion to the appropriate post/topic.  Thank you!

We have already copied your Panzer IV related posts to here...
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=544.300

Thank you!

[elcee]

Well this is really hard to discribe for me. While i use english alot, i lack alot technical terms, aside from those i use in my field of expertise. I took a glance over the postings, but i havent seen if this has been mentioned.
Now i have not hat may sources to confirm, its more an impression i have when i look at pictures and drawings of the BA-6 in comparison to your model. Or better looking at the 3d prototype, i dont really have the same impression when looking at the 3d drawing. The proportion of the turret to the hull seems to be slighly off, i have the impression that the turret can depress the gun any further than shown on the picture (not even reaching 0° of "depression").
Looking at the pictures in ""Zaloga - Soviet Tanks and Combat Vehicles of World War Two, page 93", the turret seem to be smaller (or the vehicle seems to be bigger).
The picture here is similar https://www.the-blueprints.com/blueprints/tanks/ww2-tanks-soviet-union/15763/view/ba-6/ .
Even the Wikipedia article (although i don't really like using Wiki as a reference; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BA-3/6) , make me think your is either to "big" or not placed corretly.

This might be just an issue with the picture as well, but i wanted to share my impression.


A drawing of the BA-6 and the 3d Prototype for comparison.

[EarlyWarGamer]

I think the Rubicon model is fine. In their prototype photos, you are seeing the barrel pointing up slightly. Which is fine. You notice a "u" shaped metal bracket under the barrel, back by the mantlet? That does not move with the barrel up and down. It is fixed to the turret, and there to prevent the barrel from hitting the top of the roof.  So the barrel can be depressed down slightly, until it hits that bracket, which stops the barrel.

So I think you can have the barrel at 0 degrees and pointing straight out.

[ultravanillasmurf]

The shape of the rear mudguard on the comparison pictures above looks slightly different.
The Rubicon one looks like the photograph on Wikipedia.

[elcee]

I think the Rubicon model is fine. In their prototype photos, you are seeing the barrel pointing up slightly. Which is fine. You notice a "u" shaped metal bracket under the barrel, back by the mantlet? That does not move with the barrel up and down. It is fixed to the turret, and there to prevent the barrel from hitting the top of the roof.  So the barrel can be depressed down slightly, until it hits that bracket, which stops the barrel.

So I think you can have the barrel at 0 degrees and pointing straight out.

Again, this U-shaped piece looks, at least for me, as if it is to far over the driver's compatment. Looking at drawings (or photography on the wiki page) it ends where the sloping from the driver's compartment is angled down to the metal plate with the turret ring.

But again i wrote, that this impression might be due to the angle of the picture.

The shape of the rear mudguard on the comparison pictures above looks slightly different.
The Rubicon one looks like the photograph on Wikipedia.

Looking at the KV-1 and T-34 history, i assume that the exterior details of the BA-6 were tied to the factory where it was build. Für the larger tanks it was much more obvious with the various turret designs, but still it mig

[ripley]

Also notice that the turret isn't set flush to the hull on the 3d picture . I think its just the limitations of cut and paste 3d renders . I can remember one company who put the gun mantle on upside down on the 3d model  . I always assume that guys doing the computer modelling are not tank modellers , so I'll just wait until Rubicon actually show us the built up plastic kit . I don't think that after all the tweaking to fix the hulls and stuff in the T-26 kits , they would go all Dragon Black Label on this kit 

[Rubicon Models]

Our version of BA-10 after our BA-6 prototyping...
Someone must be very happy! 











Enjoy!

[tyroflyer]

Looking good. Although the poor old thing appears to have lost a wheel.

[ultravanillasmurf]

Nice.

Does Tyroflyer win a prize, good spot!

[Rubicon Models]

Although the poor old thing appears to have lost a wheel.

It was an overlook when we are hiding all the bits and pieces from the drawing... sharp eyes! 

Here a side-by-side image of the BA-6 and BA-10 for comparison:


Enjoy!

[ultravanillasmurf]

That certainly shows off the differences.

[Pinky]

As a vehicle, I prefer the BA-10.

Can they be done as a single kit?

[Rubicon Models]

Can they be done as a single kit?

Besides the wheels and maybe the lower frame, nothing is the same!