|
Santa
Dec 9, 2007 22:51:12 GMT
Post by John Tapsell on Dec 9, 2007 22:51:12 GMT
Nick, Speaking of intriguing figures, I've always thought this one would make an excellent model (stands outside the Staffordshire Fire and Rescue HQ). Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Jan 15, 2008 12:45:54 GMT
Neil,
The Priest Kangaroos were initially used by Canadian units in Normandy, but later by the British. Off the top of my head, I can't remember which regiments operated them, but remember that they wouldn't be operated by infantry regts - they were 'armoured' regts and carried troops from infantry regts.
Ram Kangaroos were used in the sameway.
Your reference to the bogie units as being 'US' is incorrect. Priests were fitted with a variety of bogie units during their production and the style reflects production vintage NOT nationality. More correctly, the Italeri bogies represent a late production feature that may have been more common on US-operated M7s, but were not exclusive to them.
There were no Sextons converted - quite the opposite. The Priests were available because they were being replaced in the Royal Artillery by the Sextons (it simplified British logistics because the Sextons had 25pdr guns rather than 105mm guns)
The Americans did not use Kangaroos - there may have been rare (unrecorded) occasions when American troops might have been carried in British/Canadian Kangaroos, but they had none of their own.
Regards, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Dec 1, 2007 17:34:32 GMT
Neil,
I was just curious about the markings - I'd do mine in Staffs Yeo markings for the same reasons you'd choose a Northants vehicle...
I hunted through my Dragon kits, but I don't have a spare to offer, otherwise I'd be happy assist.
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Nov 30, 2007 21:19:08 GMT
Neil,
I haven't seen any with the upswept roller brackets, but you need to be a bit careful.
Flat trailing idler brackets came in 'unpacked' or 'packed' versions.
The 'flat' brackets were introduced early on but the the return rollers sat slightly low. Therefore, small fillets were added to the axle mounts to raise the return roller up (the upswept rollers did the same thing in a different way and came later). A lot of the Sherman Vs I've photos of seem to have the 'packed' version, so this would seem a better option (where Shermans are concerned - never say never!).
The link you provided to the the PMMS site shows the 'packed' variation - where the return roller axle fits is raised slightly and there is another, similar fitting, moulded directly to the end of the arm below it (if that makes sense). Whether you use these Dragon parts or something else, you need to check that they have the packing.
Just out of interest - have you decided on the markings yet?
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Nov 30, 2007 18:33:56 GMT
Neil/Foxy,
Shermans are a nightmare of different versions and components.
One of the reasons for this is that unlike most tanks, the different versions of the Sherman were not sequential - several of them were in production at the same time (the different designations were as much about which factory was building them and which engines were fitted rather than which came after the other).
I think the first version into production was the M4A2, followed by the M4A1 and then the M4 (only by a month or so).
There are several different transmission housings, different suspension units, mantlets, wheels etc. It makes it very difficult to pin down a 'typical' vehicle.
A good example: The British used a varied range of M4A2 (Sherman III) in NW Europe in '44-'45 - You can see early, mid and late production versions in the same regiment, with the early versions actually being as 'new' as the late versions (shipped to the UK and kept in storage for more than a year before being issued 'as new' to regiments re-equipping for D-Day in feb/march 44)
Photos exist of M4A2s with early (M3 Grant) bogie units being prepared for the invasion, whilst other tanks in the same Squadron had later trailing-idler styles of bogie. Ditto for a mix of narrow and wide gun mantlets, three-piece and cast transmission housings and so on.
Having said that, the M4A4 (Sherman V) was probably the most consistent of the models, so the variations were less extreme - I think it was the only model 'exclusive' to a single manufacturer.
These 'extra' parts can be found in other Dragon Shermans as well - the M4A1 kit had two versions of the suspension bogies ('flat' and 'upswept', as does their M4A2 Red Army (no. 6188)
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Aug 9, 2007 16:48:40 GMT
Try this website: www.1999.co.jp/eng/10015444It is an online shop but it always includes scans of the instruction sheets with each online description of the model Regards, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Feb 6, 2007 21:12:21 GMT
Mike,
This is correct.
For the first part of WWII, pretty much all German armour was painted 'Panzer grey'.
When the Afrika Korps first arrived in North Africa, their vehicles were still dark grey and a number of expedient methods were used to change their colour (including the use of mud) daubed across the vehicles in anything from a solid coat to patchy blobs or stripes.
Later on, the vehicles were repainted with proper paint (and later vehicle deliveries would be painted before issue to the front line) but it would be quite normal to see the interior retaining the earlier dark grey.
Cheers, John
|
|
|
SPGs
Dec 30, 2006 14:23:21 GMT
Post by John Tapsell on Dec 30, 2006 14:23:21 GMT
Modern artillery is generally based on a highly mobile tracked (or occasionally wheeled) chassis with a fully rotating turret for a number of reasons. - It can keep up with other armoured vehicles (towing something behind a truck when travelling cross-country is not quick).
- It is quick to deploy when reaching a firing position (no unhooking of a field piece, staking out the firing plate and preparing the ammunition before firing)
- It allows a reasonable amount of 'on board' ammunition to be carried for immediate use
- Most importantly of all, it allows the gun to be moved very quickly someplace else after a fire mission (before the bad guy's counter battery fire can be directed to where your gun fired from - all modern armies have highly specialised radar systems that can track shells back to their firing point).
- The (lightly) armoured chassis and turret provides a reasonable amount of protection from shrapnel and small arms fire (generally equivalent to most APCs - without enhanced armour packages). An SPG is not armoured to the same degree as a tank and it would be impractical to do so (weight, performance and the need for larger access doors for sustained operation).
- They can also be sealed against NBC attack for a limited period (as per most modern AFVs)
- Finally - just because it has tracks, never assume it can do the same job as a tank. Artillery has a completely different purpose to a tank - tanks are precision killing weapons designed to take out individual targets at relatively close quarters. Artillery is an area denial weapon designed to destroy or suppress whole units by blanketing a map reference with explosives from a long way away (even so, some artillery ordnance can be used for precision work).
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Oct 15, 2006 17:45:36 GMT
You don't want to go building one of them!!
Seriously - it's not a bad kit but it requires a bit of patience to line everything up properly (not difficult, just needs care). Also, you'll need to add some plumbing around the launch cradle to make it look better.
Finally - the photo of the model you included depicts an early production type - the Dragon kit is a late production one. I back-dated it (yes it's my model) because I wanted something slightly different.
As T'other John said - if you can get to Duxford, then there's a real Scud sitting outside the land warfare hall (unless it's been moved).
BTW - the Scud is many things but 'shoot and scoot' isn't one of them. It takes around 60-90 minutes to prepare the missile for launch - raising it into position, fuelling it (it's transported empty) and then inputting the coordinates.
You wouldn't see one of these 'dug in', so don't worry about that.
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Jul 27, 2005 16:03:19 GMT
Nick,
Hands up who doesn't read his IPMS Magazine?
Try Issue 4/2004 (the one wiv the big yellow wingy thing on the front ;D).
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Jul 22, 2005 15:46:42 GMT
Guys,
I'm after the upper hull from a Tamiya Chieftain. I want to salvage some features from it (fuel caps, grilles etc).
If anyone out there has built one of the Accurate Armour Chieftain conversions, the Tamiya upper hull should be surplus to your requirements ;D.
Any assistance gratefullt received.
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Jun 12, 2005 21:27:43 GMT
Chris,
For the Academy Tiger, all the outer surfaces would be painted a base colour of dunkelgelb (dark yellow). This was how they left the factory.
Once they arrived at their units, the unit would paint them with disruptive patterns of red-brown and olive green (2 kilo tins of concentrated paint of each colour being supplied with the tank).
Depending on the local terrain/climate, units might use one of these colours or perhaps both. They might spray them, hand paint them, dilute the paste with water or petrol - all leading to markedly different coverage and intensities of colour and coverage.
Unless you want to portray a particular vehicle or unit, then you can pretty much do as you want (as long as it looks reasonable).
Feanor,
I think you're thinking of Villers Bocage (about a week after D-Day). Wittmann's Tigers were 1s not 2s and 55 tanks is an excessive figure. I'm no expert of this incident, but 15-20 would be more likely - plus some half-tracks.
If you wanted to turn the tables somewhat, you might consider a Sherman belonging to Staffs Yeomanry. On D-Day, they knocked out some 7 Panzer IVs (and damaged two others) in a single incident. Sgt Joyce of A Sqn accounted for four of them using his 75mm gun Sherman. One fell to the Firefly of Sgt Billings from C Sqn and the other two fell to the Fireflies of B Sqn.
Cheers, John
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Jul 18, 2005 20:18:19 GMT
Dave, You mean this one? Contact me directly - I have a copy of the article I did for Military in Scale a while ago. In fact, if you're really unlucky, I might just re-publish it in the IPMS magazine ;D Cheers, John (editor@ipms-uk.co.uk)
|
|
|
Post by John Tapsell on Mar 16, 2007 19:52:34 GMT
Name: John Tapsell
Age: nearly 40 (in June - eeeeek!)
Location: I live in a small village near Stafford (or it's near Uttoxeter, depending on my mood).
Job/work: work for Staffs County Council as an admin officer
Modelling Preferences: 1/35 armour, with occasional forays into 1/32 aircraft and 1/43 rally cars.
Modelling dislikes: trophy hunters
Favourite model you have built: usually whatever I've finished most recently.
Which model has given you the most grief: Anything I've touched over the last 18 months - can't seem to finish any of them...
Cheers, John
|
|