Diorama "The Longest Day"

looks good , somethings to note thow, the person who built this should have added track impressions in the sand showing the vehicle "in motion"

another thing the US infantry look vey sparse on field gear, first wave soldiers on the beach heads would have been maxed out with field gears and atleast 3 days worth of supplys on one individual.

other than that it looks pretty impressive. 

Additionally, the figures don't go together well.  The one at the front of the tank (flame thrower guy) looks to be casually walking along, while the others are running.  They would have life vests on too, like the Dragon 29th INF D-Day figures, which are much better.  The boots should be brown as well.  The US Army didn't transition to black boots until the Korean War in about 1952-53. 

The tank should not have the side skirts/fenders on.  They were an early feature which was removed in the N. Africa campaign since they were unnecessary and made daily maintenance of the tracks a real pain.  The tank would not have mud on the hull either.  For one, they were very new and clean before they crossed the channel.  Also, any dirt on them would have washed off in the surf.  Lastly, the gear, esp. the gas can on the rear, needs to be tied down.  It would be in the water long before the tank made it ashore like that.

As usual, it is a decent execution overall, but...  there is no real attention paid to historical accuracy or the small detail items.  It looks good from a distance, but not once you really look at it up close.

HeavyArty wrote:

Additionally, the figures don't go together well.  The one at the front of the tank looks to be casually walking along, while the others are running.  They would have life vests on too, like the Dragon 29th INF D-Day figures, which are much better.  The tank should not have the side skirts/fenders either.  They were an early feature which was removed in the N. Africa campaign since they were unnecessary and made daily maintenance of the tracks a real pain.  The tank would not have mud on the hull either.  For one, they were very new and clean before they crossed the channel.  Also, any dirt on them would have washed off in the surf.  Lastly, the gear, esp. the gas can on the rear needs to be tied down.  It would be in the water long before the tank made it ashore like that.

To follow on Heavy's & Manny's comments,  the tank & clothes are dry after wading ashore through the surf.  

As a minimum the tank should be glossy wet to the waterline +/- wave splash zone.   Future, brushed on gives that impression.

The soldiers' uniforms should have been painted a darker glossy green to their waist or higher to show that they just came ashore through the surf.   If they have been ashore long enough to dry off - what are they still doing in the obstacles? 

Lack of attention to detail upsets the story being presented 

the obstacles are facing the wrom way.. same mistake as in "private ryan"...   the long wooden pole should be sloping toward the dunes.. not the sea.

but aside from the accuracy things.. i kinda like the scene

Yeah, those GI's uniforms woulda been a dark brown semi-gloss/satin from the water, and about the only thing right on them is the web gear & leggings... Definately not Army uniforms, as was already pointed out.   And not near enough gear.  Every GI was weighed down with packs filled with rations, ammo, water, ammo, ammo, and ammo, mortar rounds, TNT, grenades, gas capes & masks, life preservers, and, oh yeah, ammo... Bandoliers everywhere...   Most of those guys waded in neck-deep water initially if they didn't sink to the bottom, first.... That cloth helmet cover on the one GI is a distractor as well... A Pacific Theater beachhead would be a better dio for the stuff used...    The Sherman is, well... ALL wrong...  Just out of curiousity and don't take this the wrong way, but does this guy, Art Instructor, ever READ here?  Seems that these types of errors are the norm, rather than the exception...  I mean, all one has to do to research these days is point & click (or in this case, watch Saving Private Ryan for about 5 minutes), and everything you wanted to know about everything is right there... (I wish there was such a thing as the internet 30 years ago, when I spent hundreds of dollars on reference books)  I'd think he'd be getting the message from the feedback by now, lol...

I apologize if my tone comes off as some kind of "authenticity Nazi", but having been an Air Force brat, career US Army NCO and a WW2 re-enactor, it's the cross I bear... (My wife suffers through my watching war movies and TV shows and howling at the TV screen about inaccurate stuff all the time... "Can't you ever just watch a movie?" is her lament...)   Hollywood drives me nuts at times... Hell, I'd do the military technical advising for free if they'd just do what I told 'em to... (Not really, but I'd work cheaper 'n Dale Dye, I reckon..)

Overall, the models themselves are well done, but the authenticity errors outweigh the pluses...

Robbioo wrote:

the obstacles are facing the wrom way.. like in "private ryan" the long wooden pole should be sloping toward the dunes.. not the sea. but aside from the accuracy things.. i kinda like the scene

Well, with respect due to all the far-more-knowledgeable-than-I on the particulars of the D-Day landings, equipment, etc, my first impression was, WOW, the sand/stirred-up water effect is really cool!

We all know that A.I's attention to historical accuracy, and/or correct details is not necessarily that "on", but I think he did a great job on something different in the water effects.

mpkev31b wrote:

looks good , somethings to note thow, the person who built this should have added track impressions in the sand showing the vehicle "in motion" another thing the US infantry look vey sparse on field gear, first wave soldiers on the beach heads would have been maxed out with field gears and atleast 3 days worth of supplys on one individual.   other than that it looks pretty impressive.

Not all the GI's that made the landing that day made it with their full load of weapons and equipment they ditched them when the stuff was dragging them underwater. So they kicked them off to keep from drowning if anything they rarely came on the beach without their guns or their helmets. keeping on about their gear most of the GI's that died on UTAH beach died from drowning than from enemy fire.

I am no D-Day expert, but I noticed a few things:

1- The tank is "buttoned-up." This implies they are "taking fire." If so, then why is there no sense of urgency with the infantry? Also if they are under fire, wouldn't the infantry use the tank for cover?

2-Hardly any of the "funnies" made it to shore in the first wave. Most of them sank in the rough surf. Those that did make it, landed at the wrong beaches. If this was one of those tanks it would have the collapsable skirting, snorkels, and props attached.

3-This scene could be of a tank landing later in the day from a LST. Then the hatches would be open with the crew exposed, and the infantry would be walking along side.

No matter what the scenario, the whole scene just doesn't "feel" right.

MattSix wrote:

I am no D-Day expert, but I noticed a few things: 1- The tank is "buttoned-up." This implies they are "taking fire." If so, then why is there no sense of urgency with the infantry? Also if they are under fire, wouldn't the infantry use the tank for cover? 2-Hardly any of the "funnies" made it to shore in the first wave. Most of them sank in the rough surf. Those that did make it, landed at the wrong beaches. If this was one of those tanks it would have the collapsable skirting, snorkels, and props attached. 3-This scene could be of a tank landing later in the day from a LST. Then the hatches would be open with the crew exposed, and the infantry would be walking along side. No matter what the scenario, the whole scene just doesn't "feel" right.

The Duplex drive tanks had the propeller and collapsable skirts but no snorkel. The tanks that had the special wading gear came off of LCVPs or off of LST's.

Mikeym_us wrote:

The Duplex drive tanks had the propeller and collapsable skirts but no snorkel. The tanks that had the special wading gear came off of LCVPs or off of LST's.

Point of order Mr Chairman ...

At Normandy, the assault-wave Shermans with wading gear were launched off LCTs.

LCVPs had a cargo capacity of 8100 pounds.   A LCVP could carry 34 assault troops with gear ,  a Jeep-sized vehicle, or a similar weight of cargo.   A LCVP could not carry a Sherman (well it could,  but not for very long). :-(

A LCM-3 could carry 60,000 pounds which means that it could carry a Sherman.  However, if the Sherman was loaded for combat, with full ammo, full fuel,  plus other strap-on items the LCM would not have sufficient reserve buoyancy to land the tank on the beach through the surf.  (A myth foisted on modelers by Airfix and perpetuated by Dragon).   At Normandy, the assault-wave LCMs were troop carriers, capable of landing 50 to 60 troops ashore.

I'll quote MM's famous line "But Anything is possible"

I don't expect a reply, but I'd like to know how Art Instructor created the water effect.  Looks almost like a crystaline substance, salt perhaps?  It also reminds me of some gel that my bamboo plant used sit in in the clear vase.

Either way, it looks quite realistic and coupled with some future on the Sherman and wet clothes on the figures it would be primo....

Many thanks for your kind comments, suggestions, information and

compliments! I really appreciate them! I like the doog's comments

the most.

Glamdring wrote the following post at 09-07-2008 9:02 AM:

I don't expect a reply, but I'd like to know how Art Instructor

created the water effect.  Looks almost like a crystaline

substance, salt perhaps?  It also reminds me of some gel that my

bamboo plant used sit in in the clear vase.

Either way, it looks quite realistic and coupled with some future

on the Sherman and wet clothes on the figures it would be primo....


Glamdring, what Art Instructor used was not salt but clear resin
and he had revealed the technique to do the water long time ago.
Please take a look at his older work on the same subject, the water

was deeper then and at that time I took all pictures in direct

sunlight and wet clothes were better shown:







For the link to more pics and his technique please try this thread:

/forums/609702/ShowPost.aspx

Have fun! 

Many thanks for your kind comments, suggestions, information and

compliments! I really appreciate them! I like the doog's comments

the most.

Glamdring wrote the following post at 09-07-2008 9:02 AM:

I don't expect a reply, but I'd like to know how Art Instructor

created the water effect.  Looks almost like a crystaline

substance, salt perhaps?  It also reminds me of some gel that my

bamboo plant used sit in in the clear vase.

Either way, it looks quite realistic and coupled with some future

on the Sherman and wet clothes on the figures it would be primo....


Glamdring, what Art Instructor used was not salt but clear resin
and he had revealed the technique to do the water long time ago.
Please take a look at his older work on the same subject, the water

was deeper then and at that time I took all pictures in direct

sunlight and wet clothes were better shown:







For the link to more pics and his technique please try this thread:

/forums/609702/ShowPost.aspx

Have fun! 

Many thanks for your kind comments, suggestions, information and compliments! I really appreciate them!

Blah, blah, blah....more of the same drivel. 

I like the doog's comments the most.

Of course you do, it was pure atta-boys.  Thats all that you are really looking for here anyways.

Don't mince words, Gino... How do you really feel?

HeavyArty wrote:

Many thanks for your kind comments, suggestions, information and compliments! I really appreciate them! Blah, blah, blah....more of the same drivel.  I like the doog's comments the most. Of course you do, it was pure atta-boys.  Thats all that you are really looking for here anyways.

HeavyArty...I'm just wondering why you would even comment to MM's post...you must really dislike this indivdual...isn't what your doing here "trolling", trying to elicte negative repsonses from other forum members?  Weren't you once a spokesman for the "no more trolls" campaign?  Tisk, Tisk!

...it also has no special wading gear attached...

 I agree. 

...you must really dislike this indivdual...isn't what your doing here "trolling", trying to elicte negative repsonses from other forum members?

I don't see it that way.  I don't dislike him, just his atitude and how he presents himself here.  I'll keep the pressure up too, we are all allowed to have our opinions.

Gino ain't no troll.

There's a long history of these threads around these parts

EDIT: nm, don't wanna stir that pot anymore.

I have always been curious as to why people are allowed to slam others without remorse and the mods take no action. And yet, whenever even the hint of politics comes up, they come down with an iron fist. Presumabley because it will drive folks away if their favorite political party takes a little flack. Wouldn't having your work degraded drive folks away as well? I am not saying that critisism/critiques should not be allowed. Everyone asks for it myself included.

I fully realize that MM's projects are done by someone else, he doesn't ever present them any other way, however, I have seen other folks come on here with a first post of a model and been run through the wringer. Granted, members will rush to the defense of people but still, the mods never come in?

So it's ok if I post a *WIP* and get my *** handed to me and never post again but, If I get butt-hurt over a political comment and leave, all of a sudden It's a situation that must be dealt with quick, fast, and in a hurry?

I'm not sure exactley where I am going with this. Just something I have noticed more and more.

Regards,

Jeff

There's a "report abuse" button, Navy.... Have at it...

Sorry man, but I don't see any political ranting in this thread. Those discussions are all too different.

The major bane in these posts, if I gather correctly are as follows:

1) MM does not post his own work, and the original builder never posts a single word.

2) Only replies to "great job, atta boy" comments, and not to criticisms.

3) Never attempts to acknowledge less-than-ideal criticisms, those that are leveled in an effort to make the work grow, and become something better the next time around.

4) Does not promote a sense of community that all others on this site do; particularily in listening, and giving, advice and suggestions.

Political ravings are an entirely different issue. And I am glad that there is a definite variance in severity when dealing with different types of topics. That is how it should be. We are all adults (for the most part ) and there is nothing said in this threads that is slanderous, offensive, or otherwise unequitable. So why should it be locked down?

As for n00b posters posting their work once and getting slammed, well you yourself pointed out that for members that do this 'slamming', there are many who jump in to the defense, and even the 'aggressors' (really poor term) usually state that it is nothing personal, and that they are merely pointing out areas of potential improvement.