UVS models: Salute 2021 11/12/2020

[ripley]

Yes your 1st hull picture is right . It does look weird though, like somethings missing . It looks like the M5 was designed using  the old style  M3 lower hull and adding an angled glacis which over hung the transmission housing  creating more room in the hull. Never noticed it before , as I never really cared for this tank . Your build has given me some inspiration , so I should get at least one to add to my Canadian or Polish troops . 

[Pinky]

I agree with Ripley.  Can't you prise the glacis off?  BTW - you also need to re-shape the lifting eyes on the glacis, as they should be rounded.  The brackets for the driver's windshield are "L" shaped, not flat.

Ripley - despite these small detail issues, the Rubicon M5A1 is a lovely kit, and really captures the look of the actual tank.  I've bought 5 of these kits so far; 2 are being built as gun tanks, and the other 3 will be built as the Recce version.  I'm looking forward to covering these with stowage from the Allied Stowage Set.

[ultravanillasmurf]

Ripley - despite these small detail issues, the Rubicon M5A1 is a lovely kit, and really captures the look of the actual tank.  I've bought 5 of these kits so far; 2 are being built as gun tanks, and the other 3 will be built as the Recce version.  I'm looking forward to covering these with stowage from the Allied Stowage Set.

I agree it is a nice kit, for me there two idiot proofing failures, a more positive location for the glacis plate and the main gun mount, mine is a bit squint. There are two detail issues, the lifting rings and the turret lamp. I am looking at fabricating the rings. When I build a second tank I will use the turret light off of an M4. Two improvements would be separate grousers and the spare track (and the .30 for the earlier turret - so I do not have to wait for the Allied stowage set).

The Hetzer is now undercoated, between the showers yesterday.

[ripley]

The BA Sherman needs lift rings as well . I think molding them on as bumps  was easier than casting them as separate bits . Each tank has 7 plus towing shackles , more tiny parts taking up sprue space and annoying those who are gamers in the crowd    .  I replaced them using 1.5 / 2 mm Plastruct  rod . It would be nice if the light guards and lights were separate pieces, but again more tiny parts .    I know as modelers we want more detail , but as a gamers , we want quick , low parts count builds that can take handling on the table .  As Rubicon push forward with each new release , they are adding more built in detail and figuring out how to make the small parts look more realistic . I would like to see more options for open hatches though . I agree the molded on grousers don't look right , should have been a separate piece not unlike the turret track pieces on the Tiger kit . Should be easy to remove from the turret  and make some with Plastruct plastic rods .

[ultravanillasmurf]

Not so much an issue with the BA Sherman, at least on the front:

http://ultravanillasmurf.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/bolt-action-m4-sherman-i-lift-rings.html

I drilled the front ones through with a 1.2mm drill (the right rear one is obscured by tools but the left rear one is pretty easy to do).

Must dust the models ^___^.

I agree that simplicity is the watchword for gamers, I am now building up a collection of BA shackles that I have not fitted (saying that two part shackles are on my next stowage wish list, to attach the loops from the first set to the tank).

The Crusader has the option of wire brush guards, I still have to try and fit one set (having lost the one piece plastic version). The option of one piece and more complicated but accurate separate components is a great idea and is to be commended.
 

[ripley]

I replaced all 4 on the hull and 3 on the turret on the BA Sherman . As well the BA Cromwell needed them added to the turret , which I did then promptly covered in cammo netting  . Also added new ones to the Crusader AA , the ones on it are way too small and bump like .  I like to add more 3D style tools , either building them up with green stuff or removing the plastic bit and totally remaking a new part . For example the Crusader AA needed a 5 foot pry bar and shovel on the rear left side stowage bins and my early Tiger needed a long handled square shovel on the nose plate .

[ultravanillasmurf]

I had not noticed the lifting rings on the Cromwell turret. I have just undercoated mine...

The left rear turret lifting ring on at least one of my M4s ended up being removed as I thought it was a mould problem.

The representation of tools etc are variable, the ones on the BA Panther being a bad example.

Something for Rubicon to add to an accessory sprue?

[ripley]

There are no lift rings on the Cromwell turret , totally missing    The Crusader turrets have them represented  but very small and just look like bumps . An easy fix ,triangular in shape with a hole , the trick is getting 4 the same size  . I do think we could use a Allies / Axis tool set . I've added some tools to tanks by kit bashing / making my own , but a complete set would be much easier to use .   For example the BA M4 Sherman should have a sledge hammer , large wrench and a engine crank on the rear hull plate . All M4 tanks ( & M4A1 ) with the radial engine had the crank ,its one of the ways to identify that tank version from the rear , a real oversight  IMO .  We could also use the  British style fire extinguishers that were found on Brit Sherman  turrets or rear engine deck .  Some of the German tanks could benefit  by a separate jack , the ones molded on are too small in structure , as well we need  loose  S or C hooks to attach tow cables to panzer III , IV and Stugs  . All in all I think that those of us who are more modelers in this scale would get some if they were released . I know I have 2 or 3 sets in 1/35 scale , even though almost all kits in that scale come with complete tools . You can never have enough choice in detail parts .

[ultravanillasmurf]

That is what I meant - I had not noticed that the photographs and drawings showed turret lifting rings.

A market for photo etch accessories?

[ripley]

The " rings" are attached to the big upper bolts on the turret sides , hard to see in some photos . And I think photo etch would be way too small in this scale , I don't even like the 1/35 stuff . Maybe fenders on the Tiger or Stug / Pzr IV side skirts

[ultravanillasmurf]

When you see them, you cannot unsee them ^___^.

I have used photo etch, but not on AFVs, they have tended to be larger pieces.

If this was a Rubicon model I would suggest they put them on an accessory sprue with a locating peg, remove the existing bolt and replace it with a bolt with attached lifting ring (having drilled a locating hole).

The original Leopard 2 always reminded me of the Cromwell.

[Pinky]

I solve the missing lifting ring issue with stowage.  Helmets, usually.

[ultravanillasmurf]

I am still thinking of what to do with the lifting rings.

It distracts me while I am painting spots, lots of spots....

[ultravanillasmurf]

Well on the M5A1 front I have removed the two lifting ring "things" from the front glacis and replaced them with 0.7mm brass rod bent to shape (well some shape). I was going to use 1mm, but I was not able to bend it into the required radius with the tools available.

Photographs to follow.

By the way, too many spots?

I can imagine at the end of the week the BMM supervisor seeing the finished vehicle and saying "very nice, but what about the rest of the week's production?".

[Ballardian]

"By the way, too many spots?" - maybe a few but It's hard to say  - once the colours have been muted a little (filters, weathering etc) the effect will be less strident. Certainly most of the images I've found of models tend to have fewer, but pictures of actual period vehicles are ofter not very helpful, being faded, over/under-exposed or damaged in some way - the clear pictres I've found often turn out to be re-enacters atrfully aged (as is probably the case with this one).