Thoughts on Aircraft vs Armor

RESlusher

Rob Gronovius:

We called them Grunts, Earth Pigs, Mud Monkeys, Crunchies. When they switched to Bradleys, we called them "GIBS" or Guys in Back Sleeping. TC, gunner and driver were up, but as soon as the track stopped and the ramp dropped, they stumbled out like a bunch of sleeping drunks at a traffic stop.

 

Don't forget our favorite "Gun Bunnies"...artillery-men...Mike (Redleg12) and Gino (HeavyArty).  It's not a party til they show up!    Remember my #1 Rule for Survival on the Battlefield:  "Incoming fire has the right of way!"

 

But I was listing nicknames for infantrymen, not artillerymen. Besides, as an armor guy, our interaction with field artillery was solely with the FIST team. Although they are artillerymen, they weren't actual cannon-cockers. They basically were the call for fire experts that rode around in a track that looked different from everyone else with lots of antennas. In tanker terms, that means "shoot us first."

Yes sir!  Sorry sir!  It won't happen again, SIR!   

I've taken the liberty of giving myself 40 lashes with a wet noodle! 

I figured since we were talking about nicknames for our 11-BangBang brethren I'd throw in that of the Kings of Battle.  In their defense, they may have actually pulled a lanyard at some point in their careers.  OBC perhaps? 

Yeah, my team always tried to stay as far away as possible from the command tracks...or as we called 'em "artillery magnets".

Don't forget our favorite "Gun Bunnies"...artillery-men...Mike (Redleg12) and Gino (HeavyArty). 

Ahem... Spent the first third of my career as a "Gun Bunny" before going off to the Chemical Corps... M101A1s (Towed 105mm), M102s (Towed 105 mm), and M109A3 (155mm SP) .. Still carried 13Z MOS (E-8, Artillery Senior Sergeant, ) as my secondary MOS upon retiring (I was a "Dragon Soldier" then, 74Z, Chemical Senior Sergeant), although I've actually been awarded 3 different MOSs ( with none recinded) in the 29+years I served...  I was also a Recruiter (MOS 00E) for three years...

(I wish we had a salute emoticon)! 

Ask and ye shall receive..

Hans von Hammer

Ahem... Spent the first third of my career as a "Gun Bunny" before going off to the Chemical Corps... M101A1s (Towed 105mm), M102s (Towed 105 mm), and M109A3 (155mm SP) .. Still carried 13Z MOS (E-8, Artillery Senior Sergeant, ) as my secondary MOS upon retiring (I was a "Dragon Soldier" then, 74Z, Chemical Senior Sergeant), although I've actually been awarded 3 different MOSs ( with none recinded) in the 29+years I served...  I was also a Recruiter (MOS 00E) for three years...

(I wish we had a salute emoticon)! 

Ask and ye shall receive..

Hoo-ah!  Sorry, Hans!  Didn't mean to leave ya out!  Just didn't know your background!  

No sweat, Slusher... I haven't contributed an artillery piece for quite awhile... Got some M109s on the bench though, as well as scratchbuilding (sloooowly) a FAASV...

Glad you got the Salute..

And as they said in your neck of the woods (judging from the Avatar) "If you're gonna be one, be a Big Red One!"

Armor has'nt been a strong point of mine ,however I do appreciate a nice build regardless of wether it crawls or flies. The A/M P/E and resin debate has a great side as well as a dark one. Recently I used a vacum formed conversion kit for the first time , and it had its own set of unique challenges,along with some much needed P/E & A/M to pull the build off. Could I have scratched the conversion? Highly unlikely in this case ,at least not and make it even remotely true to scale and believeable. Yes scratch building is great and very rewarding if you get it right ,but lets face it it aint for everybody. When you sit back and think about it the trade offs for both sides of the debate are great and varied. The challenge is how high do you want to set the bar for yourself and still make the hobby rewarding and enjoyable without loosing the craftmanship of 'do it yourself' versus' buy it off the shelf'. Just my .02

Although I think some armor looks pretty cool such as the modern battle tanks, I don't build them much as they don't get my attention like aircraft do. I have been a plane nut all my life so that is what interests me most in modeling.

You probably did not get exposed to AFVs enough as a child Mike

Yup... Nuthin' like being a 17-year old PV2 and driving an M109A3 down the hardball...

stikpusher

You probably did not get exposed to AFVs enough as a child Mike

Probably so Carlos.  That and the fact that my dad was crew chief on Curtiss SB2C Helldivers at El Toro back in '44-45 and he loved aircraft as well. His love of aircraft obviously passed on to me because I am the only one of four brothers and a sister who is an airplane nut. Dad's favorite bird was the F4U Corsair by the way. He saw a lot of them in the South Pacific Theater I am sure.

Aircraft is the most common and hence by default beginner category in modelling. It also has plenty of cheap kits for beginners to pick from, whereas in Armour you are looking at 1/72 scale if you are looking for things below $20.

With regards to aftermarket, I hoard them but don't use as much. My main issue with dedicated AM is it gives people false belief - AM is always better detaileded but the advantage ends there. In a way AM is viewed as superior to kit stock yet themselves are used unquestionaly much like a kit (where the AM instruction becomes reference subsitutes)

AM is in a way a cop-out. I build ships prodominately and one thing with ship PE is there are a lot of generic frets and you use them depending on referenes. There are no generic PE for aircraft aside from belts and tags.

GreenThumb

Although I think some armor looks pretty cool such as the modern battle tanks, I don't build them much as they don't get my attention like aircraft do. I have been a plane nut all my life so that is what interests me most in modeling.

Also, when I was a kid, back in the 50s-60s there just were not nearly as many armor kits as aircraft and the ones that were around were pretty limited.I built one or two "blueprint" kits and someones DUKW. My army miniatures were pretty much limited to a LOT of GAM (s).

Armor is what brought me back into modeling though. When I got out of college and went to work, I made friends with a guy who built lots and lots of Tamiya Panzer 4's. He was a part of a crazy group of wargamers who fielded motorized armor models and shot at each others with pellet rifles. He got me to building a bunch of T34's, which had the inherent advantage of the electric motor in the back, but I would never have let anyone shoot them.

My modeling sentiment, if it don't fly..... it don't fly .  That being said, I like looking at some armor, auto, heck even sci-fi but it's still the aircraft (WWII specifically) I like.  As far as AM, add-ons & whatnot, knock yourself out, it's your money.  I'm amazed at what some builders can produce and hope to continue to read, learn and build.

Get the best of several worlds.. Fer instance... I'm building a diorama of a crashed Soviet Spitfire, near a railroad track, and the Wirbelwind that shot it down is approaching the crash site, while the Infantry who've just been delivered via an Opel Blitz are fanning out, looking for the pilot..

Figures, AFV, Automotive, and Railroading, all in one place..

Here's a couple of pics of Dad's unit fighting the good war at Fort Grayling Michigan in 1950.

Please ID those artillery pieces.

M40 155mm Gun Motor Carraige, Bondo...

Danke... read a couple of reviews and gotta get the AFV kit, which is way beyond my abilities in armor anyhow. It would make the old goat happy for Christmas.

AFV Club makes a nice one in 1/35...

I have enjoyed reading this thread!  I can only speak from the point of view of an airplane guy and a rotorhead since I have only build three armor kits in my life so here I go:

My experience in the aircraft forum is of constructive criticism and encouragement.  The same holds true for the helo forum as well.  When it comes to PE and AM vs scratchbuilding, I haven't really noticed people taking sides other than making suggestions from their point of view.  I have seen a great deal of very good scratchbuilding in the aircraft forums and I have seen some beautiful results using AM products as well.

I prefer scratchbuilding, likely, because of when I started modeling.  All of the wonderful goodies just weren't around 30 years ago.  I think that if I were to have started 10-15 years ago, I would probably lean more toward the AM side.  There are times that I use AM stuff to accomplish something that I just don't want to tackle but that is just me.  I build models because it is fun and I do what I need to do to keep it that way.  I have recently been making an effort to challenge my self to do my own detailing but simply because I enjoy the process.

After digging through my fair share of helo kits, I can safely say that there is more scratch building there simply because there does not seem to be as much AM for the genre as there is for aircraft.  After scratchbuilding components for a rotor head or two, I am not surprised that AM my be more common in the armor world.  Those things have LOTS of little fiddly bits and I would go blind trying to do them all.

In the end, it is all about fun.  I will help people out based on my point of view and experience and others will do the same.  Hopefully, it ends up providing the help a fellow modeler needs.

I started doing motorcycles and have since developed a liking for aircraft .I enjoy G/B's and they have a great ability of mixing up the genre's and including just about every taste . I like the fact that even the most skilled and seasoned builders are gracious enough to share ideas and technics. Overall my experience with all the groups has been a positive one,unlike other sites that seem to be real clickish and flooded with rivet counting extremists. I do'nt think too much about kit price and like the cheap ones as much as the high dollar ones for the challenge they present. I do like both scratch building and a/m resin as well as p/e ,hey if its there and it enhances the build why not use it? Just my .o2 cheers Trey

i would like to adde my 2 cents here, if its styrene,resin,or has PE, and is of interest to me i wanna build it.i primarily lean toward the dark side because of the cool factor and diversity of subjects that catch my attention(broncos new "buffalo" for example,or the new dragonwagon in 35th)but i can hold my own with the wingy type folks.i'm not the best "assembler", scratchbuilder,or tin bender, but i have fun.the cost sometimes bothers me but thats what savings accounts are for LOL IMHO .as for any back biting or anomosity between the different subjects i think 99.99% of it is just good natured ribbing and hopefully no one takes it personnally.it does take skills to accomplish both aircraft and armor but we can learn alot from each other.

When I joined this site in 2007, I started out in the armor forum as that is what I was interested in at that time.   Looking back, I found a closed environment that while not overtly hostile to noobs, wasn't very welcoming to those with lesser skills and execution.  I was even met with some "why bother if that's what you've got" attitudes by some posters of position within the modeling universe.  Way to represent the hobby and encourage others. I still like to peruse the threads and learn from folks but I rarely use the reply button these days and I doubt that I'll ever post a build there again.

I find the aircraft section to be quite a bit more welcoming and accepting than armor but at the same time a little less homogenized than the armor forum.  I'll admit that there's a weird pride for old kits that runs strong in the aircraft section that I just don't understand.

Despite all of my own sour grapes, thin skin and odd ramblings, there is a wealth of knowledge here that is invaluable and that is why I keep coming back.

Dre

When I joined this site in 2007, I started out in the armor forum as that is what I was interested in at that time.   Looking back, I found a closed environment that while not overtly hostile to noobs, wasn't very welcoming to those with lesser skills and execution.  I was even met with some "why bother if that's what you've got" attitudes by some posters of position within the modeling universe.  Way to represent the hobby and encourage others. I still like to peruse the threads and learn from folks but I rarely use the reply button these days and I doubt that I'll ever post a build there again.

I find the aircraft section to be quite a bit more welcoming and accepting than armor but at the same time a little less homogenized than the armor forum.  I'll admit that there's a weird pride for old kits that runs strong in the aircraft section that I just don't understand.

 

Despite all of my own sour grapes, thin skin and odd ramblings, there is a wealth of knowledge here that is invaluable and that is why I keep coming back.

 

I guess we each have our own experiances. But i frequent and post builds in both sections and i can't really notice any difference in comments made or attitudes. Or maybe thats just me.

Bish

 I guess we each have our own experiances. But i frequent and post builds in both sections and i can't really notice any difference in comments made or attitudes. Or maybe thats just me.

I would attribute that difference to my own paranoia/neuroses; that or you're easier to get along with than I.   I had a critical head injury at age 13 that damaged the part of brain that controls emotional perception and response, further concussive damage along the years hasn't improved it any.   For good or bad, I'm nuttier than a holiday fruit cake.

O i am far from easy to get along with, in the flesh anyway. And the world needs a few more nutters.

Dre

I'll admit that there's a weird pride for old kits that runs strong in the aircraft section that I just don't understand.

Perhaps it's because many of us are old farts and we have a soft spot for the oldies but goodies.

Besides, if I mess up a 30yr old $10.00 Revellogram, eh I go buy a new one.  But if it's a $50.00 Tamigawa...

Reasoned

 

Dre:

 

I'll admit that there's a weird pride for old kits that runs strong in the aircraft section that I just don't understand.

 

 

Perhaps it's because many of us are old farts and we have a soft spot for the oldies but goodies.

Besides, if I mess up a 30yr old $10.00 Revellogram, eh I go buy a new one.  But if it's a $50.00 Tamigawa...

But wouldn't that same logic apply to armor? 

Personally, I find the $50 Tamigawa provides a mighty incentive to slow down, take my time, and NOT mess up. The builds I've lost due to stupid mistakes and foul ups have both been older kits - a Monogram P-47 killed by the ancient decals and attempts to get them off, and a Tamiya Ki-84. Then there's the Academy P-38 my lummox of a Lab shot down, but that's outside forces.

Speaking of which...which $50 Tamigawa are we talking about? The only Tamiya or Hasegawa kits I've paid more than $40 for have all been 1/32. Every single one of my 1/48 Hases I got for less than $25, save the precious AU-1. The only Tammy 1/48s I've paid more than $30 for were a P-47M (got a second for $30) and their Fi 156 Storch. 

DoogsATX

Reasoned:

 

Dre:

 

I'll admit that there's a weird pride for old kits that runs strong in the aircraft section that I just don't understand.

 

 

Perhaps it's because many of us are old farts and we have a soft spot for the oldies but goodies.

Besides, if I mess up a 30yr old $10.00 Revellogram, eh I go buy a new one.  But if it's a $50.00 Tamigawa...

 

But wouldn't that same logic apply to armor? 

Personally, I find the $50 Tamigawa provides a mighty incentive to slow down, take my time, and NOT mess up. The builds I've lost due to stupid mistakes and foul ups have both been older kits - a Monogram P-47 killed by the ancient decals and attempts to get them off, and a Tamiya Ki-84. Then there's the Academy P-38 my lummox of a Lab shot down, but that's outside forces.

Speaking of which...which $50 Tamigawa are we talking about? The only Tamiya or Hasegawa kits I've paid more than $40 for have all been 1/32. Every single one of my 1/48 Hases I got for less than $25, save the precious AU-1. The only Tammy 1/48s I've paid more than $30 for were a P-47M (got a second for $30) and their Fi 156 Storch. 

Eh, maybe I was a little strong in the $50 example (although I did spring for a $45 1/48 Hase Betty) but the point was more from nostalgia defending the "older" kits than anything else and sure the same holds true for armor, although I don't do tanks etc. I guess as an example, is a $5-$10 40yr old Monogram P-47D RB going to be as as detailed and well fitting as a newer $40 P-47D RB Tamiya?  It shouldn't be but luckily (thus far) I haven't botched a kit so bad I couldn't finish it.  I will admit, since starting up building again, those more expensive kits are staying in the stash until I'm a little more confident of my trade.  That's why they (old kits) are needed and defended..... at least from my perspective.

I built airplanes for years as a kid.  Then I made Tamiya's M16 halftrack and realized that there is more "detail per square inch" in armour kits and converted to them.  I'm relearning that now.

I still like planes, though.

But wouldn't that same logic apply to armor? 

You can drop a crate of C-Rats, a tarp, or camo-netting over a bunged part or even a whole area on a tank or track...  Aircraft are a little tougher, since pilots and crews didn't live in their planes...