tigerman
Have to agree with Gino Hans. This new kit is going to be light years ahead of the Tamiya kit. .... in other words, buy the new kit.
Sorry if my rambling got you or anyone else confused, Tigerman.. It ain't about the "light-years" of details...
The question was, "A 'Must Have' for Redlegs?"... Well.. Speaking as a Redleg, the answer is "no" for this Artilleyman... Like I said, I don't care enough about Brit arty enough to shell out the bucks only a fraction of a field artillery section...
An Artillery Section includes the Prime-mover and ammo supply vehicle and that's missing from the Dragon kit, therefore making it "2/3rds a Section", since it only has the gun and limber... That makes the Tami-kit a superior offering as far as I'm concerned, since the Prime-mover is included, even if the kits cost the same amount of money... It's the same as a kit of the M109A6 Paladin lacking the FAASV (Prime-mover and gun, plus ammo-supply vehicle), or an M101A1 without the Duece...
So again, no.. It's not a "Must have" for Redlegs... More like a "Must Have" for detail freaks...
I doubt you can scratch the parts that will improve it.
Welll.... I'm a "Gizmologist", which precludes me from scratch-building that way ... Gizmologists go for "suggestion" rather than "duplication"... For instance, if I were to scratch-build a 105mm howitzer, I wouldn't make a 1/35th scale 105mm gun-tube for the M102 with all 36 lands and grooves when 26 will tell the viewer that it's not a smooth-bore gun... KnowwhutImean?
Like I said in the last post, Time is what I got lots of...
But it's a great debate anyway...