SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Longest Day GB

265282 views
2863 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2014
  • From: Michigan
Posted by silentbob33 on Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:14 AM

Looking good Bish

On my bench: Academy 1/35 UH-60L Black Hawk

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:25 AM

I haven't touched the panther in a few days as I have been working on the SS camo for the figures uniforms. But as I am about to take it back to the spray booth for the dust effects, I thought I would get a few pics up first. All of the tools have been attached along with the periscopes fitted and everything else.

The tracks will be added after the dust effect, still got some work to do on there. That's it for now. 

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Tuesday, April 15, 2014 2:44 AM

Some nice info there guys. I have heard of Hypershot, but didn't realise it was APDS. The whole gunnery aspect is not something I know a great deal about when it comes to German armour, something I think I need to study a bit more.

Nice work on the S Boat stik.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Monday, April 14, 2014 11:59 PM

And here is my latest update on one of my D-Day builds, the Schnellboot.. nothing major, just a coat of Future to get it ready for washes and decals

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Monday, April 14, 2014 11:46 PM

EB, I gree wholeheartedly agree about US artillery. Aside from VT fuses, they are not given the credit due for their contibution to the victory in western Europe in most histories. The US did not field a round for the 76mm gun worthy of it for anti tank work until the APDS (Armor Percing Discarding Sabot), AKA "Hypershot", which was primarily issued to Tank Destroyers due to doctrine. When it became available to tankers more widely in 1945 it levelled the playing field considerably having ballistics better than the 75mm KwK40. And the 90mm actually performed roughly equivalant to the 88mm Flak 36/Kwk 42, but was outdone by the 88mm Kwk 43 on the King Tiger & Jagd Panther. Yet it could still defeat both of them in standard combat situations. By the time of Korea, both the 76mm and 90mm US tank rounds had been improved enough to easily deal with the T-34/85, with the 90mm AP often going thru the frontal armor and exiting the rear.

I beleive that you mentioned the bazooka round as well. The initial Bazooka round was adequete for the Panzer Mk. IV, but had difficulty with the later heavies in 1944/45. Darby's Rangers were able to use it to great effect in 1943 in Sicily against German heavies, but that was under "most favorable conditions".  In Korea the same problem happened for Task Force Smith, which still had the original 2.36" launcher and initial US forces there as well, but the 3.5" bazooka had been developed duiring late WWI and was deployed to the battlefield by late summer 1950 and also helped to end the T-34's dominance on that battlefield.

BTW, I am no expert on weaponry either. But I do love to read up on it ;-)

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Monday, April 14, 2014 3:06 PM

Stik,

I don't pretend to be an expert on weaponry. Zaloga wrote a book on the Sherman for Stackpole last year and went into allied doctrine at great length. As I recall he said the US 76mm was "at best" equivalent to the L40 75mm. He also said the 90mm that came with the Pershing had less punch than the 88 on the Tiger I. Problem was the same in both cases. The US guns were strong enough at the breech to handle the powder required to get the equivalent punch. Now both sides were beginning to use shaped charges and I'm not sure how that figured in. Zaloga thought that the US was too quick to use something "good enough" that was there instead of developing something "better yet." In general US policy was probably a good idea, but it didn't help allied tank crewmen who all believed that the enemy had more powerful weapons. But as noted, the biggest problem facing the allies was normally being on the attack, no the defects of their weapons. So give the Army credit for putting so much effort into artillery and communications - that was an area where we were trumps and "fire kills."

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by SchattenSpartan on Monday, April 14, 2014 4:13 AM

Lovely Cromwell, Eric! It almost looks like a real bush! I love all the additional info you post with each build!

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Monday, April 14, 2014 2:41 AM

Great build Eric, and thanks for the write up, its nice to have some history to go with the builds. Its proudly displayed on the front page.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    April 2006
  • From: ON, Canada
Posted by jgeratic on Monday, April 14, 2014 1:19 AM

Eric, cool job with the Cromwell and the greenery.  Yes

As always, a pleasure reading your historical anecdotes that accompany your builds.

regards,

Jack

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Sunday, April 13, 2014 9:27 PM

Great job there Eric, the Cromwell looks fantastic and thanks for the write-ups both here and the armour side of the forum.

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Sunday, April 13, 2014 8:25 PM

Great looking build EB! And a very good rundown on the following campaign. Although I would debate the 76mm M1 gun vs the 75mm Kwk 40 ballistics & performance.

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    February 2014
  • From: Michigan
Posted by silentbob33 on Sunday, April 13, 2014 7:26 PM

Great Cromwell Eric!  The weathering and foliage look fantastic.  I've really enjoyed watching you put this together, and I've learned quite a bit along the way.

On my bench: Academy 1/35 UH-60L Black Hawk

  • Member since
    February 2010
  • From: Berkeley CA/St. Paul MN
Posted by EBergerud on Sunday, April 13, 2014 7:16 PM

1/48 Tamiya Cromwell MK IV

Paints: Tamiya, Vallejo Model Color, Vallejo, Golden mediums

Weathering: Iwata Com.Art acrylics; Vallejo Acrylic Game Washes; Ranger “Distress Crackle”, Sennelier pigments; various oils

Foliage: Scenic Express “Super Trees”; Scenic Express Matte Medium

Okay, the Cromwell is finis. I have a build log in the armor section if anyone is curious about how the kit was made. Instead of modeling war stories I'd like to give a little note on why there's foliage on this model. It says a lot about a very violent campaign.

After the war Ike said “Plans are useless; planning is invaluable.” That's a good description of the Normandy campaign. In May allied planners predicted the liberation of Paris in D +90 days and did it in +85. Montgomery did indeed plan on drawing German armor toward his sector to facilitate an American breakout to the West. On paper a work of genius – in practice things were one screw-up after another and it took a valuable assist from Hitler to help the allies sweep through France. The screw-ups started at the top. SHAEF planners feared dreadful losses on D-Day and the next week but assumed that allied air and naval support would force the Germans to begin a phased withdrawal toward Paris soon. Nobody was thinking of a six week attrition slugfest in Normandy itself, but that's what happened.

Amazingly although the allies knew almost everything about the German order of battle on June 6, the “brass” paid little attention to the tactical implications of the bocage. Neither, ironically, did the Germans. But within 48 hours of D-Day (the invasion itself had been far less bloody than allied estimates) it was obvious to everyone that the allies had chosen a defensive paradise for a battlefield. This in turn amplified every error made by Americans and Brits concerning the nature of armored warfare in the ETO and there were many.

By 1944 the Americans had seen – correctly – that the kind of “cavalry charge” blitzkrieg as found in 1940 was obsolete and put all their emphasis on “combined arms.” In general a good idea, but one with a steep learning curve. (The learning curve was inherent when you consider that the US had rearmed starting from nothing in 1940 and most of the British Army was “green” in 1944.) US thinkers thought of armored divisions as units to exploit a breakthough – not to create it. OK. They believed anti-tank guns and tank destroyers would take care of enemy armor. Not so good if the enemy was standing on the defensive. Independent anti-tank and armored battalions were originally given to Corps – by fall all allied divisions had both armored and anti-tank battalions attached to divisions but it took weeks to work out proper tactics combining tanks with infantry. The Brits were a little brighter. They saw the need for an “infantry tank” and the Sherman and Cromwell fit that bill well. The short 75mm gun carried by both – supported by machine guns – was an excellent weapon for use against defensive strong points. The Brits had also seen the need for a more powerful tank gun – hence the Firefly. It was an odd division of labor. The US never developed a good anti-tank gun (the 76mm intended for the job was far less powerful than the German 75mm equivalent found on the Panther and didn't match the 75mm German anti-tank gun also carried by the Panzer IV and Stugs). The Brits never developed a good tank until 1945 and then they never made a bad one. So putting the splendid 17 lb gun on a Sherman should have been a no-brainer. It wasn't. (Not sure if it's in the gene pool, but the Abrams carries a German made120 mm smoothbore after the original British designed 105mm was found wanting.)

All German guns – whether 88mm, or one of the 75mm types had one thing in common – they could kill allied tanks. To make matters worse, the Panzerfaust and Panzerschrek were coming into wide use: they didn't kill a lot of tanks but the threat slowed tank movement until infantry had checked things out and thus giving German armor and anti-guns more time to deploy. (Only heaven knows why the US Army didn't develop a more powerful bazooka – it would have come in handy in the ETO and Korea for that matter.)

As everyone on both sides knew all German armor was superior offensively (sparing Fireflys) and the “Cats” better armored. The allies were also up against some elite German units. The German static units surrendered or were removed early in the game. In their place came units like the Hitlerjugend facing the Brits and the Panzer Lehr facing the Americans. And all deployed in an area thick with places to hide. Had the battle been entirely between ground units, the Germans would have held out for months. Allied naval gunfire – a bust on D-day itself barring USN DD heroics at Omaha – proved lethal throughout the campaign just as it had in Italy. Allied tactical airpower earned its reputation, but while in the bocage it was hard to find a clear target. Arguably one of the biggest errors was the refusal of RAF Bomber Command and US 8th AF to devote long term resources to learn the art of carpet bombing despite the certainty of “friendly fire” casualties. (The USAAF bombers botched air attacks on June 6 so badly as to be considered useless.) When it was done right, the “heavies” could annihilate German positions and it was just such a raid that finally sprung US armor during Cobra.

But nobody has ever fought a perfect war and the allied units grew better as the campaign went on. (I think the allied ground forces peaked around September 1944 – after that they kept going to the well too often and were running out of gas by early 45. Luckily the Wehrmacht collapsed first.) And above all regardless of any and all errors it was the terrain in Normandy that necessitated a long and ugly campaign. True Shermans and tanks like the Cromwell did not match Panthers. But when US units were on the defensive in the Ardennes, German units found out how dangerous were ambushes sprung by determined enemy and any tank. T-34s are usually given kudos but they also lost far more than they killed because they were usually on the attack. In tank warfare, the side that shot first had a huge advantage and the defenders shot first. And because this was self-evident and the European countryside one giant farm and forest it was a simple matter to make a potential target look like a bush. So webbing, netting and camo of all kinds helped keep allied units hidden from German air reconnaissance and hence relatively safe from counter-battery fire. And who knows, perhaps a camouflaged vehicle might throw off the first shot of the defender and help even the odds. German units, fearing Jabos, were even more heavily decorated. I saw a photo of a Panther very well disguised as a barn.

So Cromwell crews earned their supper. They could kill tanks during the frequent “battles of encounter” that punctuated the Normandy campaign. Indeed, the lengths to which both sides went to camouflage vehicles, artillery and even infantry made surprise encounters inevitable. And heaven help a German strong point that had been identified by allied tanks – annihilation was soon to come. And once out of the bocage they proved very effective until they ran into the forrest and river lines near the French border and had to slug it out again.

Anyway, the Cromwell will not make into the AFV Hall of Fame but it was good enough to help crush Europe's best army and destroy history's most wicked regime.

More pics below.

Eric

 

A model boat is much cheaper than a real one and won't sink with you in it.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Sunday, April 13, 2014 4:52 PM

Yes, the H+/- times are all in minutes. The DDs were supposed to beach 5 minutes before the assault infantry hit in order to neutralize strong points and provide fire support as they disembarked. But seeing how almost all of the 741st DDs sank in the Channel on the run in to the beach, the plan started unraveling before then. On the other four beaches the schedules were pretty well adhered to. Even at Utah, where ocean currents pushed those troops laterally to the wrong beach area.

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Sunday, April 13, 2014 3:27 PM

I take it the timings are in minutes. Interesting that the first waves are all tanks.

And of course, we all now just how long a plan lasts.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Sunday, April 13, 2014 3:22 PM

Bish, you know on something big like that everything is thoroughly planned. How closely reality and plans match ... well...

Jibber, if the question had been asked sooner, I gladly would have dug it up sooner...

Have a look at this guys, it is the landing table plans for one sector of Omaha beach, for the 29th Division. The other sector from the 1st Infantry and the Utah beach for 4th Infantry were pretty much identical. Just remove the Ranger Force elements and change the sub unit designations. You can see exactly what type and how many of each type of landing craft and ships were scheduled to hit on what sector at what time in minutes off of H-Hour Tanks in  LCTs, Infantry in LCAs & LCVPs, Engineers in LCMs, HQ & Medical units in LCIs, Artillery in DUKWs etc.

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    January 2013
Posted by jibber on Sunday, April 13, 2014 9:24 AM

BD welcome aboard, love your choice.

Stik great info, I wish I had that a while back.  

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Sunday, April 13, 2014 7:49 AM

stikpusher

Bish

Stik, those sets look really nice, how many troops would that landing craft carry.

OK, I know that I could find it somewhere- this is how the US set up their assault teams in LCVPs for Normandy

You can rely on the army to think of everything. I never thought they would actually have a load plan for these, but it makes complete sense. Thanks for posting that.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Sunday, April 13, 2014 7:47 AM

SP: Interesting, I knew there was some sort of system set up but it's something to actually be able to see it written down there.

Greg: Looks good, I've only recently been trying to replicate the rough cast texture myself.

Duke: Very cool! Welcome aboard!

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Sunday, April 13, 2014 7:39 AM

Glad you choose this as your first build. Ye, I did google it and found some images of the kit. Will be an interesting one to watch. Look forward to seeing the build pics.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    March 2014
Posted by BarrettDuke on Sunday, April 13, 2014 6:30 AM

Bish: Great. Thanks much. Yes, it's 1:35. As soon as I have some of the major components assembled so it actually looks like something, I'll post a pic. And I'm glad this will be my first badge.

Here's the box art for my build:

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, England
Posted by Bish on Sunday, April 13, 2014 5:29 AM

BarrettDuke

I wasn't at FSM when this GB was started but I would like to join if possible. I have been working on a Bronco Models 10.5cm LEFH18(SF) auf Geschutzwagen 39H(F) for a couple months. The cannon was mounted on a Hotchkiss H39 chassis. It was with the 21st Panzer division at Normandy. The model is about half done. I believe I can have it finished by the June deadline. Any chance I can join the build?

Half way through a build is normally to much, but seeing as you haven't been on the site very long, I think I can make an exception. I take it it's 1/35th scale. I will add you to the roster. Welcome aboard.

Greg, really nice work, looking good.

I am a Norfolk man and i glory in being so

 

On the bench: Airfix 1/72nd Harrier GR.3/Fujimi 1/72nd Ju 87D-3

  • Member since
    May 2005
Posted by pyrman64 on Sunday, April 13, 2014 4:06 AM

Bob: thanks for the kind words.  BTW, I just realized your LCVP is the Lindberg kit....WOW!

SS: thank you.

Shiv: I used Mr. Surfacer 500 in the jar.

Greg H

"There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all hell." Gen. Wm T. Sherman (11 April 1880, Columbus, Ohio)

  • Member since
    March 2014
Posted by BarrettDuke on Saturday, April 12, 2014 8:11 PM

I wasn't at FSM when this GB was started but I would like to join if possible. I have been working on a Bronco Models 10.5cm LEFH18(SF) auf Geschutzwagen 39H(F) for a couple months. The cannon was mounted on a Hotchkiss H39 chassis. It was with the 21st Panzer division at Normandy. The model is about half done. I believe I can have it finished by the June deadline. Any chance I can join the build?

  • Member since
    April 2013
Posted by SchattenSpartan on Saturday, April 12, 2014 6:45 PM

Nice looking texture on the turret, Greg!

I really like that landing craft, Bob!

  • Member since
    February 2014
  • From: Michigan
Posted by silentbob33 on Saturday, April 12, 2014 6:37 PM

Great info Stik!  Unfortunately I wasn't able to find any figures at the show I went to today.  I'll try again next month before I scour the internet.  That turret is looking pretty sweet pyrman.

On my bench: Academy 1/35 UH-60L Black Hawk

  • Member since
    April 2003
Posted by shivinigh on Saturday, April 12, 2014 6:24 PM

Greg- looking good. What did you use to get that texture?

 

 

 

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2005
Posted by pyrman64 on Saturday, April 12, 2014 3:40 PM

Well, managed to get a little time to work on the turret today.  I even took a step outside my comfort zone and textured the turret. Surprise  Here's a few pics.

 

I still need to take some 200-grit to knock down some of the high points.

Tags: M4 , Sherman

Greg H

"There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all hell." Gen. Wm T. Sherman (11 April 1880, Columbus, Ohio)

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • From: Sonora Desert
Posted by stikpusher on Saturday, April 12, 2014 1:11 PM

Bish

Stik, those sets look really nice, how many troops would that landing craft carry.

OK, I know that I could find it somewhere- this is how the US set up their assault teams in LCVPs for Normandy

 

F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

N is for NO SURVIVORS...

       - Plankton

LSM

 

  • Member since
    November 2009
  • From: SW Virginia
Posted by Gamera on Saturday, April 12, 2014 7:58 AM

Eric: Great job there, pretty darn close to the photo you were going off of. I've tried just sticking the foliage to the model but the way you've added the camo nets and then stuck the foliage into that looks much more like what the crew would have really done.

Bob: I like Bish's idea about doing figures for the last few guys coming off the ramp, seems more action packed and a lot less work than showing thirty or so men packed shoulder to shoulder!

"I dream in fire but work in clay." -Arthur Machen

 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.