Really nice work, love the figures and plants but really love the groundwork. Great job! 

Great looking diorama. I like the detail

Mac

Nice job.  Love the colors on the ground work.

Mike

Nice dio love the action...

I like the groundwork too. The scene sort of reminds me of a USMC version of the movie Hamburger Hill.

The USMC didn't have the M-16 in 1965, AFAIK. They were equipped with the M-14, the various M-1's, at least the 3/3 was in Viet Nam.

In 1964, the Army was informed that DuPont could not mass-produce the IMR 4475 stick powder to the specifications demanded by the M16. Therefore, Olin Mathieson Company provided a high-performance ball propellant. While the Olin WC 846 powder achieved the desired 3,300 ft (1,000 m) per second muzzle velocity, it produced much more fouling, that quickly jammed the M16s action (unless the rifle was cleaned well and often).

 

Front cover - The M16A1 Rifle - Operation and Preventive Maintenance by Will Eisner

In March 1965, the Army began to issue the XM16E1 to infantry units. However, the rifle was initially delivered without adequate cleaning kits or instructions because Colt had claimed the M16 was self-cleaning. As a result, reports of stoppages in combat began to surface. The most severe problem, was known as "failure to extract"—the spent cartridge case remained lodged in the chamber after the rifle was fired.^[57] Documented accounts of dead U.S. troops found next to disassembled rifles eventually led to a Congressional investigation.^[58]

We left with 72 men in our platoon and came back with 19, Believe it or not, you know what killed most of us? Our own rifle. Practically every one of our dead was found with his (M16) torn down next to him where he had been trying to fix it.

— Marine Corps Rifleman, Vietnam.^[

Right Fausto, that quote is from a recounting of the Hill Fights which took place in mid 1967.

Yes, in 1965 it was still M-14s and Dungarees for the Marines and not M-16s and Jungle Fatigues.

as written and reported in the previous post in March 1965, a version of M-16 (XM16E1) free cleaning kit was also widely distributed to the marines. this first version of M-= 16 gave many problems.

as can be seen in the diorama there are ane the previous models of rifles (M-14 and M-1) that were gradually replaced.

"In March 1965, the Army began to issue the XM16E1 to infantry units. However, the rifle was initially delivered without adequate cleaning kits or instructions because Colt had claimed the M16 was self-cleaning."  your quote from Wiki

Ahh I see the confusion. Fausto the Army and the USMC are different organizations.

My old boss and friend Tad was in the Corps at Camp Pendleton in 1965. His weapon was the M1 Garand!

Your dio is cool though. Maybe rename it "1968"

Ok dialogue is always constructive.
I stand firm on my position it based on internet searches .......
When you give me a precise documentation on your theory I will be happy to change the date of my diorama, just click right?

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.aspx?id=936

No it's ok, do what you feel is right. But, in the various docs you picked from, there's a story about test firing M16A1's from the fantail of transport ships in late 66, at the earliest. The documentation isn't easy, but there's enough apocryphal information to suggest that the M16 wasn't adopted by the marines until at least 1967-68.

The provenance of those Pegasus green army men doesn't impress.

Actually, all you need to do is an image search for Operation Starlite (Mid 1965) and Operation Hastings, (Mid 1966). Make sure you confirm on the captions for the correct dates & operations. You can see for yourself how the Marines were equipped at those times. 

Btw, the M-16A1 came along later than 1965. It introduced several new features to the n basic M-16 to correct deficiencies that had been identified in combat in Vietnam. A forward assist to push the bolt closed which could occur with a dirty weapon, a new closed end flash suppressor to reduce the likelyhood of snagging on foliage, and a chrome lined bore.

First and foremost, nice work on the diorama. It tells its story well.

In reference to the time frame, the answers to the questions of the dates the United States Marine Corps began fielding the M-16 in the numbers depicted in the scene are in your own references, Fausto. Please understand that this is an attempt at constructive criticism - take it with a grain of salt.

You cite the quote by the U.S. Marine who had written about the failures of the the M-16 on the battlefields in Vietnam. Go back to Wikipedia where the material originally came from and click through the footnotes. The letter was first made public in February of 1967 when Time magazine ran the story which later inspired the Congressional Hearings over the issues with the rifles.

Congress is pretty weird. They like to document a lot of strange things, particularly where their money is supposed to be going. A hearing is even more important. Check the published results of that hearing here:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a953110.pdf

It's a long document, so here's the highlights -

The fiscal allocations for the various branches of the U.S. Armed Forces placing orders for the XM-16 and the later M-16/-A1 models are broken down. The United States Marine Corps placed its first order of 91,872 M-16 rifles in fiscal year 1966. As the report states, until late 1966, the use of the M-16 rifle platform was limited to United States Army's Special Forces, Air Assault/Air Mobile, Airborne, and Ranger units. Think of Hal Moore and the 7th Cav at LZ X-Ray because it was his testimony after the Battle of Ia Drang which convinced a lot of brass to acquire the rifle.

The Marines received their first shipments from Colt in March of 1966 and the initial production was used in testing at USMC posts in the States. Congress notes that during '66, Colt was able to maintain production levels to meet contractual demands, but ammunition shortages and the fouled powder you have already pointed out limited the widespread issue of the M-16 for Marine combat units deploying to Vietnam. The rifleman you quoted received his rifle in Okinawa in late January of 1967.

If you want to stay with the 1965 date, open the manual you have in your post. My dad had given me his 1967 issue in its plastic wrapper when I was just a kid and I used it a few times in my college ROTC days to teach younger cadets how to clear a jam, why it was important to maintain a clean rifle, and to give little glimpses into the history of the weapon. It's a great resource because it has diagrams of every single variant of the M-16 the United States military had played with to that date. If memory serves, the version fielded in 1965 had a different flash suppressor/bayonet lug set-up, no forward assist assembly, and a very distinctive magazine with a stamped waffle-iron pattern on the side. Cheap aluminum construction of those mags led to feed issues detailed in the Congressional report.

Research is one of those subtle skills in modelling, Fausto. If your goal in creating such elaborate dioramas is to capture faithful details of specific moments in time, good research is everything. Be careful of the older fellows who haunt this site - they grew up before Google and Wikipedia. If you ask for a website, we'll make you read Congressional hearing reports in pennance for posting the weak nonsense with the Pegasus figures. You'll learn more that way.

hello, I do not say that you are not right, but to build a historical diorama I have read. I was not in Vietnam at that time. The documents that I had in my possession, he says that in March 1965 the Marines have started to have this type of rifle for the rest I can not tell. Carry down high wordings that give value to my thesis. then being wrong or not I can not tell you but for a diorama I can not build a time machine to go back.
I feel I did my work as always in the best research. My way of doing modeling is tied closely to represent very specific historical events. I can not do more

On November 4, 1963, Colt was awarded a contract worth $13.5 million dollars for the procurement of 104,000 rifles … the legendary "One Time Buy." Of those rifles, 19,000 were M16s for the Air Force and 85,000 were the XM16E1 (with the bolt closure device/forward assist assembly) for the Army and Marines. The XM16E1 was adopted as the M16A1 rifle. Steps were taken to procure ammunition.

fonte: http://www.gundigest.com/article/the-ar-16m16-the-rifle-that-was-never-supposed-to-be

Sure I agree. But it's not an accurate diorama if so labeled, and there are a lot more reasons than the rifles.

That year, the Marines, it all had a very distinctive "look and feel". It's just kind of the overall impact. The references Stik gave tell the story. Those guys went in equipped for a 1950's war.

Change the "5" to an "8" and it's much better. I just feel like there's no reason to defend the manufacturer for mislabeling a product, that's all.

Fausto your skills are super, esp. at 1/72.

Exactly. In 1965 the Marines in Vietnam were clothed and equipped the same as earlier with the standard sateen cotton dungarees/fatigues, M-14 rifles, all leather boots, etc. the same as was seen a few years prior in places such as Guantanamo Bay, or other hot spots. By 1966 the new ripstop poplin cotton jungle fatigues and canvas topped jungle boots had begun to be issued. In 1967, the Marines started getting the M-16 rifle. BTW, the whole company would be issued the rifle, not just part. Ammo re supply for two different caliber rifles and magazines at that level would be a supply sergeants nightmare otherwise. US involvement in Vietnam, including uniforms anequipment has been a favored area of interest for me since the mid 70s. 

Yes the diorama is nicely done. But inaccurately labelled. It's like putting a T-34/85 at the battle of Kursk, or Panzer IV H at El Alamein. The times are slightly off.

I agree with you....manufacturer's do not take the time to make sure their product is  100% accurate. That is what make's our hobby or lifestyle so great....taking time to research your build. Be it reviewing articles,books or photos or being able to sit down and talk to an individual that was present during that era or conflict.

A whole lot of hair-splitting going on here.... I greatly appreciate the effort put into building this very nice diorama. I can only hope to build one as nice one of these days.... I know the Army was using m16's in november of 65. Apparently the USMC got them later, but who cares! If you are entering it in a contest, you will hear this kind of stuff for sure, but if you built it for YOU or a friend, who cares.  Great work!

 Rudy

I completely disagree, but we'll leave it at that. Through no fault of the modeler, Pegasus puts a bunch of post-67 Marines in a box and calls it "circa 1965". That is their mistake, not the modelers, and absolutely no criticism was leveled at him for it.

It's no different than if Tamiya sold a P-51D boxed as "Battle of Britain" edition.

Yes the USMC gets everything late, that is a crucial part of their story. Like I said, my friend George in the Marines in 1965 had an M1 Garand.