Author Topic: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2  (Read 78636 times)

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #325 on: September 23, 2019, 01:14:23 PM »
I hope your location puts you near to SprueBrothers so you can visit their store in person.  I am told they have a lot of interesting items at reduced prices.  Other than that, be prepared for cold winters and hot summers.

Will have to look them up.  :smiley:  Extra thick underpants already prepared!
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #326 on: September 23, 2019, 01:18:04 PM »
Ok, so part of the reason I have been so tardy in getting anything done in the last month is that I have just moved house from the Highlands of Scotland to darkest Missouri of all places.  Just move in a couple of days ago and going to be here for the next 3 years, MoD and US DoD allowing.   :smiley:

Playing soldier with the Yanks, eh? :smiley:

Have fun, mate! 8)

And hope to see some models appearing soon! ;)


Maybe you can call in on Nicholas Moran (a.k.a. The Chieftain, from World of Tanks), I believe he lives in California, somewhere? ???

That’s me.  Not quite what I was expecting to be doing at this stage of my life but sometimes you just have to take what life serves up and roll with it.  Looking forward to the opportunities this posting will throw up.  :smiley:
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #327 on: September 23, 2019, 01:19:04 PM »
That's only some 1500 miles away, an easy trip (NOT!).

Anyway, welcome to the USA and I hope you enjoy your stay here.   If you manage to get down Fort Worth way, I'd love to meet up; alternatively, perhaps something splitting the distance, like Oklahoma City, would work better.

Thanks mate, something we might work out.  :smiley:
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Brian da Basher

  • He has an unnatural attraction to Spats...and a growing fascination with airships!
  • Moderator
  • *
  • Hulk smash, Brian bash
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #328 on: September 24, 2019, 05:17:25 AM »
I think they've got some pretty good BBQ out near you, Clay. Would be worth asking your new work-mates about.

Welcome to the U.S.A. and please pardon our various provincialisms such as "color", "flavor", and country music.

Brian da Basher

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #329 on: September 24, 2019, 08:39:20 AM »
I think they've got some pretty good BBQ out near you, Clay. Would be worth asking your new work-mates about.

Welcome to the U.S.A. and please pardon our various provincialisms such as "color", "flavor", and country music.

Brian da Basher

Lol, will check it out.  So much to do, see and experience.  Looking forward to it all!  :smiley:
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #330 on: September 24, 2019, 09:14:50 AM »
That close, you really ought to visit Branson, MO.  I'd recommend Ray Stevens show and, if he's still there, Yakow Smirnoff's show for the humor.

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #331 on: September 24, 2019, 11:22:51 AM »
That close, you really ought to visit Branson, MO.  I'd recommend Ray Stevens show and, if he's still there, Yakow Smirnoff's show for the humor.

Thanks, I will keep it in mind.  :smiley:
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #332 on: October 13, 2021, 10:49:37 AM »
I can't quite believe that it has been so long since I last posted anything on the thread.  I have no particular excuse other than being an idle old git as I have still been working on various AH AFV projects.  My only limitation whilst serving my time in the colonies is that I haven't invested in a second set of painting irons and, therefore, my creations have been parked until I get back home to Scotland (Aug 22).

Anyhoo, here is my first offering...

Phar Lap:

When Japan entered the war on 7 December 1941, Australia found itself with a powerful aggressor much closer to home than had been the case for the first two years of warfare. The Australian Army was renowned for its fighting spirit but was primarily an infantry-based force with next to nothing in the way of armoured assets and little in the way of home-based heavy industry to take up the slack. So it was that when the British started to withdraw the A12 Matilda from front-line service in late 1941 and replace them with the lighter and less costly Valentine tank, the Australian government was only too happy to take what it could get.

With no comparable opposition to the panzers they had faced in North Africa, the Matildas served the Australian Army well with their heavy armour being able to withstand just about anything the Japanese could throw at them. However, the Matilda was far from perfect. The heavily armoured side skirts made the vehicle heavier than it needed to be and any sort of track maintenance in the close terrain the Australians found themselves in was all but impossible. Indeed, breakdowns and unserviceability accounted for the vast majority of Matilda losses. To make matters worse, the long-standing problem with the 2pdr main gun and its lack of HE ammunition severely limited the Matilda’s effectiveness in prosecuting its primary infantry support role.

Meanwhile back in Britain, the Vulcan Foundry – primary makers of the A12 Matilda – found themselves with dwindling orders but with the capacity and eagerness to do more for the war effort. Fortuitously, it was about then that a delegation from Vickers (designers of the Valentine) and the Royal Arsenal (designers of the Matilda) met over a particularly strong cup of tea. Both teams had been mulling over the reports coming back from the Australians and their experiences with the venerable Matilda. While Vickers would have preferred the Australians to adopt their Valentine tank (as New Zealand had done), they accepted some of the advantages highlighted of the more heavily armoured Matilda design. In turn, the Royal Armoury team praised its own creation but acknowledged the limitations, and cost, of its complex design and poor maintenance record. In a rare case of compromise through necessity, common sense prevailed and a new design, designated A23, Tank, Infantry, Mk V was proposed for Commonwealth use in SE Asia that would effectively meld the running gear of the Valentine to the upper hull of the Matilda. Noting the Australian Army’s preference for the few 3” howitzer armed Close Support Matildas they had in service the decision was also taken to produce the bulk of the A23s with the 3” gun.

By early 1943, the Vulcan Foundry was back in full production. In recognition that the new vehicle was to be used primarily in the SE Asian theatre (a few A23s were supplied to the USSR under the lease-lend programme), the Australian Army were given the honour of selecting a name. Called after the race horse of the same name, the ‘Phar Lap’, proved a great success and was well liked by both the tankers who operated them and the infantry they supported. A23, Phar Laps remained in service with the Australian Citizens Military Force until finally retired in 1960.

The model is made from parts of a Tamiya Matilda Mk III/IV, a Bronco Valentine Mk XI and the ubiquitous plastic card. Unfortunately, I won't be able to give the model its final paint scheme and weathering until I return to the Highlands from my tour in darkest Missouri in mid 2022. In the meantime, please enjoy the WIP pics.















« Last Edit: October 13, 2021, 12:32:29 PM by Claymore »
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #333 on: October 13, 2021, 10:59:56 AM »
Offering #2

Buzdygan:

Thanks to @horrorny for the initial design and inspiration. Sadly, there is no specific backstory other than the Buzdygan (Mace) being a medium tank in the service of an AH Poland sandwiched between a left wing Germany and a right wing Russia. Previous arms deals made to favour both sides has resulted in a line of AFVs influenced by each side but with a Polish twist.

The model is comprised of parts from a Tamiya KV-1B, an Academy Pz Kpfw IV, parts from the spares box and the ubiquitous plastic card. Given the lack of a detailed backstory, several changes were made mid-build before I settled on the final design - not ideal but such is life! Again final painting will have to wait until I get home.



















Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #334 on: October 13, 2021, 11:05:17 AM »
Offering #3

Zhukov's Babies:

History records that the T-34 was the most heavily produced tank of WW2 with some 84,070 coming off the Soviet production lines between 1941 and 1945. However, with 44,900 lost during the war, the T-34 also suffered the most tank losses ever. With the transition in production from the T-34/76 to the T-34/85 in Jan 44 all possible efforts were made to churn out the new design as quickly as possible in order to replace all the earlier models in the Soviet's combat formations. The fate of the earlier T-34/76 models was, ultimately, destruction on the battlefield or recovery, disassembly and recycling in the foundries. However, a few survivors, still in working order, were converted to other roles such as artillery tractors, recovery vehicles, etc; although most of these conversions were done in field workshops and, consequently, individual variations were common place.

One of the stranger variants to come out of the 1st Ukrainian Front was an attempt to produce a more effective reconnaissance/scout tank that could successfully operate on the mobile battlefield – both the T-60 and T-70 had their limitations. Based on a cut-down T-34 hull (0.945m removed forward of the engine compartment firewall), with the turret removed and only 4 roadwheels per side, the T-34 Бес (Imp) – as it was known to its crews – was fast, extremely manoeuvrable and, for a scout, was very well armoured. Indeed, such was the success of the few Imps produced that eventually their existence came to the attention of no less than Georgy Zhukov. Zhukov fully appreciate the importance of good battlefield intelligence and approved mightily of 1st Ukrainian Front’s initiative and he wanted more of these novel little T-34s. Unfortunately, there was just no way that the field workshops, even at Front-level, could produce more than a handful of Imps let alone match Zhukov’s demands. Their availability was further frustrated by the inherent structural fragility of a tank that had basically been chopped in two and welded back together again – the sad fact was that the T-34 Imps were falling apart just as fast as new ones were being cobbled together.

Realising that greater availability and quality control would inevitably mean factory-level production, Zhukov applied what influence he could. On a visit to the Krasnoye Sormovo Factory No 112 in Nizhny Novgorod in May 1944, he managed to secure a limited production run of what was now termed the T-34-Скоростная разведывательная машина (High Speed Reconnaissance Vehicle) or T-34-CMP for short. In all, only about 100 T-34-CMPs were produced before STAVKA shut down the operation and Zhukov had to acquiesce to their demands for the unabated priority production of T34/85s.

Although not a major T-34 sub-group, the T-34-CMP equipped Special Reconnaissance Units nevertheless served Zhukov well - following him from command to command as his own personal scouting formation. Given the diminutive size of the vehicle and Zhukov’s personal patronage, it was not long before the T-34-CMPs became known as Zhukov’s Babies.

The model is made from a Tamiya T-34/76 “ChTZ” version, a MiniArt DShK weapon mount, some odds and sods and the inevitable plastic card. As with my other creations built here in the Good Ol’ US of A, it will have to wait until I get home to Scotland before I can give it a proper paint job.















Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #335 on: October 13, 2021, 11:12:15 AM »
Offering #4

M9 Gun Motor Carriage (GMC) “Sheridan”

Nazi Germany’s opening offensives of the Second World War and their successful employment of concentrated armoured forces in fast moving offensives had shocked US military observers. Even to armies which had previously experimented with large-scale mechanized warfare, the effects were remarkable; the collapse of Poland in 1939, followed by the defeat of the French Army and the British Expeditionary Force in France in 1940, gave rise to an impression that massed tank forces were effectively invincible when used against unprepared defenders.

Mobile armour was, however, an expensive investment. Towed anti-tank guns were cheaper and dominated most armies as a default solution for enemy tanks and became organic parts of large units like corps, divisions and regiments. Standard practice was to place these anti-tank guns at the front line, spread out to ensure full coverage. Nevertheless, experience showed that neither infantry, anti-tank guns, or tanks, when used statically could withstand the deep envelopment manoeuvres of armoured "spearheads". While some anti-tank guns or tanks could help defend the area the enemy chose to attack en masse, they could never be enough to prevent the inevitable breakthrough. Moreover, anti-tank guns were vulnerable to infantry and artillery attacks, and even attacks from the tanks they were targeting.

To counter this threat, Germany built on the already existing Sturmgeschütz ("assault gun") range of armoured vehicles. These relatively inexpensive assault guns had no turrets and were under the control of the artillery branch, and were essentially armoured artillery cannons mounted on or in a tank chassis. Originally short barrelled, these vehicles were upgraded with longer, higher velocity cannons, which made them more effective against armour without taking much away from their direct fire infantry support mission. As a result, they were used effectively against Soviet armoured thrusts on the Eastern front. Additionally, Germany also developed the Jagdpanzer ("hunting tank") range of armoured vehicles, very similar in design to assault guns but with the main purpose being the destruction of enemy armour. They could also function as mobile assault guns when required, blurring the line between the two designs.

But by the time the US entered World War II, it had neither the quality nor the quantity of armoured vehicles capable of fighting a modern war, including the ability to deal with massed armoured attacks by an enemy on a narrow front.

In April 1941, a conference focused on the future of antitank operations. The immediate effect was to create an anti-tank battalion in infantry divisions, but this organic anti-tank capacity was not deemed sufficient. The conference gave broad support to the idea of creating mobile anti-tank defensive units which could be deployed to meet an armoured attack.

The first such units were deployed during the Louisiana Manoeuvres of 1941, equipped with towed 37 mm anti-tank guns (the largest gun that could be towed by a jeep) and surplus 75 mm M1897 guns mounted on half-tracks (the M3 GMC), and again in the Carolinas manoeuvres that September. Their employment was judged a success and on 27 September, General George C. Marshall ordered the establishment of a tank destroyer Tactical and Firing Centre at Fort Hood, Texas and the activation of 53 new anti-tank battalions under the command of General Headquarters. The term "tank destroyer" was used from this point on, as it was seen as a more psychologically powerful term. On 3 December, all existing anti-tank battalions were reassigned to General Headquarters and converted to tank destroyer battalions.

In the second half of 1941, the Medium Tank M3 was the US Army’s only effective medium tank and, therefore, it was this hull that was selected for the development of a new mechanised tank destroyer. The initial design, designated 3-inch GMC T24 used the M3 hull with the turret, sponson and hull roof removed and a redundant 3” M1918 anti-aircraft gun installed. Whilst trials proved the concept, the availability of the M1918 guns was an issue as was the open-topped fighting compartment which, given the vehicle’s intended forward fighting position was deemed to be too high a risk to crew survivability. Design adjustments led to the T25 which incorporated the new 3” M7 gun (intended for the cancelled Heavy Tank M6 programme) in a fully enclosed casemate not unlike Germany’s assault guns. In early-1942, the T25 was redesignated M9 GMC and rushed into production at the Baldwin Locomotive Works.

The M9 first saw action with the British Royal Artillery in North Africa during May 1942 with mixed results. There was no questioning the 3” M7 gun’s ability to destroy German panzers from all aspects but, as a non-standard ammunition type for the British Army, logistical issues often led to M9 units running short of ammunition and, consequently, the vehicle’s tactical availability was not always all that it could be – much the same issues were experienced with the 105mm M9 Priest in UK service. As was the convention, US lend-lease armoured vehicles in British service were named after US Generals and so the M9 GMC was called after Union general Philip Sheridan. The name also transferred, unofficially, into US Army usage.

A number of US Army Sheridans were deployed to the North African theatre but by late-1942/early-1943, the M9’s design and tactical limitations were becoming increasingly at odds with the rapidly evolving Tank Destroyer Command’s doctrine. In terms of vehicle design, mobile tank destroyers were to be heavily armed, but with speed given priority over armour protection – something the M9 could just not achieve.

In the end, in much the same way that the Medium M3 was only ever intended as a compromise until the more effective Medium M4 could be produced, it was always anticipated that the M9 would also be replaced by an M4-based tank destroyer. And so, the initial combat debut of the 3” GMC M10 on 23 March 1943 at the Battle of El Guettar in North Africa effectively spelled the end of the Sheridan’s short and none too glorious career as a tank destroyer. From that point on, all remaining Sheridans in US service were relegated to the ignominy of artillery towing tractor duties.

However, that was not the end of the M9 GMC. It is of interest that a number of Sheridans in British service, having initially been the cause of such logistical headaches, remained in active duty until the end of the war in the SE Asian theatre of operations alongside their M3 sisters. These vehicles had their US 3” M7 guns replaced by the QF 17pdr and were redesignated as the 17pdr SP Ajax.

The model is made from the hull of a Tamiya M3 Grant, the tracks from a Takom M3 Grant CDL, the Barrel from a Tamiya M10 and, of course, lots of plastic/styrene card. As per my other US-based projects, final painting will have to wait until I get back home to Scotland.

















Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #336 on: October 13, 2021, 11:18:49 AM »
Offering #5

Gavin Armoured Reconnaissance/Airborne Fire Support Vehicle:

The M551 Sheridan entered service with the United States Army in 1967. At the urging of General Creighton Abrams, the U.S. Commander, Military Assistance Command Vietnam, at the time, the M551 was rushed into combat service in South Vietnam in January 1969.

The Sheridan’s operational performance in Vietnam was problematic at best. It was armed with the technically advanced but troublesome M81/M81 Modified/M81E1 152mm gun/launcher, which fired both conventional ammunition and the MGM-51 Shillelagh guided anti-tank missile. In combat operations, firing the gun often adversely affected the delicate electronics, which were at the early stages of the transition to solid state devices, so the missile and its guidance system was omitted from vehicles deployed to South Vietnam.

The Sheridan had several advantages: it did not get stuck in the mud as often as the 52-ton M48 did, nor did it throw its track off as often. The light weight and high mobility proved their worth, and it was much appreciated by the infantry who were desperate for direct-fire support. The gun proved an effective anti-personnel weapon when used with either the M657 HE shell or the M625 canister round, which used thousands of flechettes as projectiles.

However, the M81E1 was not ideal in medium- and long-range tank engagements as its low velocity produced extended flight times, and made it difficult to lead moving targets. The gun also was criticized for having too much recoil for the vehicle weight, the second and even third road wheels coming clear off the ground when the main gun fired. Worse still was its paltry rate of fire. An average M48 crew could fire as many as seventeen 90mm shells during a "mad minute" (60 seconds with all guns firing-on command), the Sheridan was known to put out only two 152mm shells during the same time frame. To add insult to injury, only 20-25 rounds of 152mm ammunition could be carried.

In order to address these shortcomings, and to give its cavalry/reconnaissance units and their supported infantry more reach, a number of British FV433 105mm Abbot SPG turrets were procured in 1970 and rushed into theatre. Named after James M Gavin the Commanding General (CG) of the 82nd Airborne Division during World War II, this simple and expeditious conversion soon proved its worth. With a maximum range of 17.4 km the gun was able to elevate to 70 degrees and depress to -5 degrees, sufficient to engage enemy AFVs if necessary. Traverse and shell ramming were powered by electrical servo mechanisms, while elevation and cartridge ramming were by hand. Maximum rate of fire was 8-10 rounds per minute with 40 rounds carried in the vehicle.

The model comprises the hull of the excellent Tamiya M551 Sheridan kit and a scratch-built turret built mostly out of plastic (styrene) sheet, a knitting needle and some plastic tubing. Unfortunately, final painting and tactical markings will have to wait until I get back to Scotland next year.



















Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #337 on: October 13, 2021, 11:22:46 AM »
Offering #6

ARVN M41 Tiger’s Claw (Vuốt Hổ) Tank Destroyer:

The existence of the ARVN’s M41 Tank Destroyer (TD) programme is inextricably linked to the US Army’s less than successful deployment of the M551 Sheridan to Vietnam and the introduction of the Gavin Armoured Reconnaissance/Airborne Fire Support Vehicle (AR/AFSV). A somewhat rash and misguided decision in the late 60s saw the US Army deploy several hundred M551 Sheridan reconnaissance vehicles into South Vietnam where they generally replaced M48s in the infantry support role. With its complex gun/missile armament and lightweight aluminium hull, it was a role for which the M551 was manifestly unsuitable. Nevertheless, the operational deployment continued while the replaced M48s were passed on to the ARVN to bolster their armoured corps which up until that point was still entirely reliant on the 76mm armed M41. The M48s were a welcomed addition to the ARVN inventory as encounters with NVA T-55s were become more frequent and, against such an opponent, the M41 was severely outmatched.

Realising the Sheridan’s short comings, the US Army eventually introduced a limited number of 105mm armed Gavin AR/AFSV which, in turn, freed up an equal number of M551 turrets. It was then that an aspiring member of the ARVN General Staff put forward a proposal to utilise the spare M551 turrets. Although the US Army was transferring M48s, the ARVN was still heavily dependent on its numerous but inferior M41 formations. What was needed was a long-range punch that could reach out and interdict the NVA’s heavy armour before they could engage the M41s. The proposal would see the M551 turrets mounted on spare M41 hulls (it is ironic that this very configuration had been used as a test bed for the early M551 turret development) and the reactivation of the MGM-51 Shillelagh missile as its primary long-range armament. It is a further irony that it would be the ARVN and not the US Army that ended up utilising the M81E1 152mm gun/launcher in its intended AT role. As a TD, the M41 Tiger’s Claw proved itself most capable although it was never available in the numbers needed to make any significant difference to the eventual outcome of the war.

It should be noted that the gun/missile launcher’s slow breach cyclic rate (2 rpm) was less of an issue in the TD role as missile time of flight and a general shoot and scoot employment tactic made a rapid rate of fire less critical. Furthermore, the heavier steel hull of the M41 gave a steadier platform when firing the M657 HE or M625 canister round and thus there was less of an issue in throwing off the missile guidance optronics. Given its heavier reliance on missiles, the M41 TD’s standard load was 15 x Shillelagh missiles and a mix of 6 x M657/M625 rounds.

The model is made up from the hull of a Tamiya M41, the turret of a Tamiya M551 and, as always, some bits of plastic/styrene card.











Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #338 on: October 13, 2021, 11:34:46 AM »
You have certainly been very busy.  :smiley:

Excellent work and very inspiring!
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline Kerick

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #339 on: October 13, 2021, 12:05:05 PM »
Whot he said!!

You will have lots of painting to do!

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #340 on: October 13, 2021, 12:14:01 PM »
MA-A-A-ATE! You're back! 8)


Where to start? How to start? :-\

Certainly a busy, lad! Left me in your dust, even working away from home! ;D

The Aussie Phar Lap was, obviously, an attention grabber but not for the name alone. That is one awesome combo that looks "right"!

The Polish Buzdygan looks nothing quite like anything else, ever, but equally as good.

While the Imp just looks Soviet-functional & practical. Again, really good!

Whilst imperfect for its role, the Sheridan is the perfect intermediate TD! The more central casemate is brilliant!

The Gavin ... ;D ... That turret's killer, man!

The Tiger's Claw is an elegant compromise that looks better than the original (M551), whilst having an unfortunate Soviet vibe (which may have seen it suffer an excessive number of Blue-on-Blue incidents, methinks).


Seriously, good to see you back, mate! :smiley:
« Last Edit: October 13, 2021, 12:15:45 PM by Old Wombat »
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Buzzbomb

  • Low Concentration Span, oft wanders betwixt projects
  • Accurate Scale representations of fictional stuff
    • Club and my stuff site
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #341 on: October 13, 2021, 12:31:01 PM »
As Womby said...your back  :D

Most excellent. For my take the Phar Lap is the star. That will be a total head scratcher and dare I say it, have a couple of observers, scouring Wikipedia for this obscure tank they have never seen before.

The Gavin rocks as well.

Great to see you back again.

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #342 on: October 13, 2021, 12:41:48 PM »
You have certainly been very busy.  :smiley:

Excellent work and very inspiring!

Whot he said!!

You will have lots of painting to do!

Thank you!  :smiley:
« Last Edit: October 13, 2021, 12:43:39 PM by Claymore »
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #343 on: October 13, 2021, 12:47:07 PM »
MA-A-A-ATE! You're back! 8)


Where to start? How to start? :-\

Certainly a busy, lad! Left me in your dust, even working away from home! ;D

The Aussie Phar Lap was, obviously, an attention grabber but not for the name alone. That is one awesome combo that looks "right"!

The Polish Buzdygan looks nothing quite like anything else, ever, but equally as good.

While the Imp just looks Soviet-functional & practical. Again, really good!

Whilst imperfect for its role, the Sheridan is the perfect intermediate TD! The more central casemate is brilliant!

The Gavin ... ;D ... That turret's killer, man!

The Tiger's Claw is an elegant compromise that looks better than the original (M551), whilst having an unfortunate Soviet vibe (which may have seen it suffer an excessive number of Blue-on-Blue incidents, methinks).


Seriously, good to see you back, mate! :smiley:

Good to be back, I don’t know what came over me… I’m glad you like what I’ve been up to - the Gavin (Abbot) turret was a head scratcher but fun.  ;)
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #344 on: October 13, 2021, 12:50:04 PM »
As Womby said...your back  :D

Most excellent. For my take the Phar Lap is the star. That will be a total head scratcher and dare I say it, have a couple of observers, scouring Wikipedia for this obscure tank they have never seen before.

The Gavin rocks as well.

Great to see you back again.

Thanks.  The Phar Lap’s lower half almost drove me to despair - you only need to look at the Valentine tracks and they fly apart!  ;D
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Offline LemonJello

  • MARPAT Master
  • Member number 100...WooHoo!!!
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #345 on: October 13, 2021, 09:12:50 PM »
I'd say "inspiring" is the right word to describe your return to BtS! Welcome back!

The primer coat makes them all look like OOtB kits, but the real inspiration is looking at the raw plastic as you put it all together. 

Awesome display of skills and creativity.

Offline Claymore

  • It's all done with smoke and mirrors!
  • Alt Hist AFV guy with a thing for Bradley turrets
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #346 on: October 13, 2021, 09:16:50 PM »
I'd say "inspiring" is the right word to describe your return to BtS! Welcome back!

The primer coat makes them all look like OOtB kits, but the real inspiration is looking at the raw plastic as you put it all together. 

Awesome display of skills and creativity.

Thanks mate, good to be back.  :smiley:
Friendly fire isn't and suppressive fire rarely does!

Online GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Claymore's AH AFVs: Take 2
« Reply #347 on: October 14, 2021, 01:29:42 AM »
Love the all.  :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.