Thought I'd check in. I think SPA and I'm thinking mean and ugly. So I bought an Academy M-12 just for this build. I may turn it into another crime against the hobby of scale modelling, but the object it represents is mean and ugly. The M-12 was a 155mm howitzer stuck on a M-3 Lee in lieu of its two turrets. The Army didn't plan to use it but on a whim sent a few to Italy. They soon found out that having a mobile 155mm was most helpful in a pinch, so about 100 served with armored corps in the NW France in 1944-45. The US Army did not lack for artillery - indeed, as the war went on towed 155mm batteries proliferated and were supported by even nastier things like the 240mm "Black Dragon" which earned a fearsome reputation among Wehrmacht gunners. However, as the drive across France started the US armor began running into strong points that couldn't be taken out by the standard Sherman 75mm (a very good support weapon) or the wonderfully adaptable and numerous 105mm Priest. The M-12 only carried ten rounds which meant a tracked ammo carriage was usually required to make it worthwhile: in practice two vehicles, not one. It also fired a 100 lb projectile: three times the weight of the Priest's 105. And, because it was armored, it was very capable of employing direct fire. This proved very valuable during the fighting along the Siegfried Line and later when very powerful concrete bunkers were commonly encountered. One was used against Peiper's tanks during the Ardennes - which no doubt left some confused tankers - if any lived. The M-12 was so useful that the Army developed the M-40 which arrived late for the ETO dance but appeared in Korea.
It shows the confidence the US had in it's undeniably good indirect fire system that the Army didn't forsee the need for a large number of armored 155s. The Germans deployed about 400 Hummels which carried a similar gun. (But only about 800 Wespes which their answer to the nearly 4,000 US Priests - and that doesn't count what the UK was using. As all US artillery was mobile, one can see why the Germans found it very dangerous business fighting the Americans. One thing did not change between the two world wars - artillery killed and wounded the most soldiers. And no matter what defects in the Sherman, or US armor doctrine in general (it was very good in many ways actually), US artillery was the gold standard of WWII. The M-12 was simply a rather visible manifestation.
The Academy kit has been very well reviewed. In general I agree. The part count (about 300) is about where I like it. In most cases fit was very good. Detail I think is perfectly adequate. (There's even an interior which I plan to display.) When you got to the "fiddly" bits I found myself appreciating Dragon. Many of the small parts were attached with far too much plastic. The biggest problem was caused by my inability to anticipate weak points in a kit. The rear end of the vehicle is held on with a elaborate set of wire and pullies. It's exactly things like this where that splendid Dragon precision shines and Academy doesn't. Both the pulles and the housings were a little too thick. Had the instructions advised against gluing the pullies into their housings - which was not necessary - things would have been okay. Done that way, thread would have slide right through I think. I should have seen that and I didn't. Academy should have seen it and they didn't. Driver error with extraneous circumstances. The result is that the thread that emulates the wire is not going to fit through the pullies: the glue shut the passage. The only way to have fixed it would have been to dismantle them: I tried one but it was most obvious that the parts would disintegrate. I'll figure out a "kludge" that will work perfectly well (haven't decided what: it'll be the last thing done) but this problem marred what would have been a very nice build. Better modelers will no doubt not have the problem. I'd certainly recommend this kit. I'm on the look-out for a Kursk Tiger I and don't think DML makes one. If not, Academy does. It's tempting. Not sure about the tracks because they're not on.
Some pics. First, lets check out the M-12 as it existed in 1944 in NW Europe:
My land-lady in Berlin in 1972 would have described that vehicle as "sehr, sehr schmutzig." Might translate that as untidy beyond description but it sounds wonderful auf Deutsch. (My wife still uses the phrase - usually in reference to someplace I'm camped.) Below are some very nicely done versions of the M-12:
If anyone's still with me, the "Academy" photo shows a weathering style that reminds me of Tony Greenland. It also raises a serious question of how to paint and weather the barrel: note the smoke rings around each section. It looks good and makes the point. But I'm not sure it's right. Unfortunately, I've never fired an artillery piece. I'd guess that you'd see grease and grime around the sections of the barrel but not powder residue. If anyone knows, I'd appreciate a heads up.
Then there's this build. If I could ever make a model this good, I would die happy:
Lastly, we've got one of where my M-12 is of this moment. The build is done although the tools and tracks are off and the wheels stuck on with Pledge - my favorite temporary adhesive - for priming. The hatches are closed with Pledge but will be displayed open all around.
Frankly, I'm not at all sure what to do from here on. I want this cute little guy to look as though it was shelling German positions in late 44 or early 45. So we're talking fall/winter 44-45. NW Europe is incredibly fertile and it is so because it gets so much rain. In fall that means sleet and snow. The soil is also very rich: I know that kind of land from some of the primo farm lands of southern Minnesota and northern Iowa in the general neighborhood of the Mississippi. The stuff is dense, thick, and usually dark. The stuff sticks to man or machine like sludge. No question, this kit is going to get some heavy weather. Just not sure what. Time to look around this list and others. I'll check AK's new forum and look again at some of Mig Jimenez and Adam Wilder's DVDs. My inclination would be to start with a prime of Golden carbon black which leaves a surface blacker than anything I've seen: Floquil Engine Black, Tamiya Flat or NATO Black, Gunze Black: blacker than Stalin's soul. But maybe not. The new deal in "modulation" from what I can gather is to prime in gray and than add a very dark kind of preshade and then start to build up lighter and lighter. I haven't even decided which OD to use. Tamiya's is a good color (US armor wizard Steve Zaloga is a fan) although if the color samples I have of US OD are right, a batch I made out of neutral grey, ochre and sepia is closer to the money. And I have two Vallejos, and two Gunze ODs. We'll have a "paint-out" on stock tomorrow.
I'll check in soon.
Eric