Urban Armor GB, May 1-Dec 31, 2008

Townsy11 wrote:

Anyway.. so does this look like a tank to you?

Tracks...check,  road wheels...check, barrel...check,  turret...check.  YES, looks like a tank to me.

Now you need some photo proof of that bad boy in an urban setting, or do a dio' and describe the "scene" you visualize this within an urban setting and then build it!

Townsy11 wrote:

SMJmodeler wrote: Guys:  Just wanted to chime in here...and hey townsy11 thanks for those definitions.  I'm not an armored fighting vehicle expert by ANY stretch of the imigination, I just wanted this GB to be for tanks.  When I made that guideline I asked for photos/proof to help imagine the setting/history...if it looks and sounds like a "tank" to me, I'm for it!  This is not a technically accurate GB, just for some kick-*** tank modeling!!! Sorry if I was being a bit of a rivet-counter back there SMJ, I understand now what you meant for guidelines. Anyway.. so does this look like a tank to you?

It has a roughly similar look to a tank, but that all changes when the rear door swings open and infantary come piling out of it.  It probably wouldn't engage any enemy tanks either, especially while the troops were inside. 

The BMP was designed based on the Soviets vision of the modern battlefield in Europe in which infantry would need to be protected from nuclear, chemical and biological threats.  

It is not designed to take on enemy armor in armored formations......

SMJmodeler wrote:

Guys:  Just wanted to chime in here...and hey townsy11 thanks for those definitions.  I'm not an armored fighting vehicle expert by ANY stretch of the imigination, I just wanted this GB to be for tanks.  When I made that guideline I asked for photos/proof to help imagine the setting/history...if it looks and sounds like a "tank" to me, I'm for it!  This is not a technically accurate GB, just for some kick-*** tank modeling!!!

Sorry if I was being a bit of a rivet-counter back there SMJ, I understand now what you meant for guidelines.

Anyway.. so does this look like a tank to you?

FastasEF wrote:

Just out of curiosity. I looked up BMP and it looks like a tank to me(?). Honestly, the 234 is the furthest thing from a tank as can be as it has no tracks. Now, just to learn something new as i'm clueless when it comes to armor. What classifies a tank, a tank?). Thanks, Josh

Hey Josh, the BMP is designated as an IFV (or Infantry Fighting Vehicle) it still has anti-armour capabilities and in most aspects is a tank, but it differs because it's purpose is to carry a squad of infantry into battle and is technically designated as an IFV, not a main battle tank.

According to Wikipedia, a tank is defined as this:

"A tank is a tracked, armoured fighting vehicle designed for front-line combat and combines strong strategic and tactical offensive and defensive capabilities. Firepower is normally provided by a large-calibre main gun in a rotating turret and secondary machine guns, while heavy armour and all-terrain mobility provide protection for the tank and its crew, allowing it to perform all primary tasks of the armoured troops on the battlefield."

and here's Wiki's definition of a tank destroyer/ self-propelled gun to show the difference:

"A self-propelled anti-tank gun, or tank destroyer, is a type of armoured fighting vehicle. Tank destroyers are used primarily to provide anti-tank support in combat operations but do not fit all the criteria of a tank. They may mount a high-velocity anti-tank gun but have an open turret, no turret at all or run on wheels instead of tracks. Vehicles which carry an anti-tank guided missile launcher are referred to as ATGM carriers.

Tank destroyers are smaller, faster and cheaper than main battle tanks. While they have the necessary weapons to destroy MBT's, tank destroyers are too lightly armored to withstand direct hits from MBT cannons, and can be destroyed by other weapons (like explosives) that would not destroy an MBT. Tank destroyer crews are always trained to primarily hunt down enemy tanks."

Hope that helps, and sorry for any inconvenience.

Eh, i'll follow the tank rule and just build the 234 as a seperate build.

I think I may have jumped the gun when I saw "Urban Armor" and instead of reading every last piece of the rules I just assumed all armor that saw urban warfare was allowed.

Oh well, maybe next time.

Josh

(Edit: Just out of curiosity. I looked up BMP and it looks like a tank to me(?). Honestly, the 234 is the furthest thing from a tank as can be as it has no tracks. Now, just to learn something new as i'm clueless when it comes to armor. What classifies a tank, a tank?).

Thanks,
Josh

FastasEF wrote:

I also Google Image searched all the entrants vehicles and they all seem to be tanks.

Not really, if you get technical...

ISU-122/152= SPG's

M10= TD

Sig33 Pz.III= Assault gun

SturmTiger= Assault gun

M18 Hellcat= TD

Stug IV= TD

SU-76M= SPG

Sd.Kfz.234= Heavy Recon Vehicle

(SPG= Self Propelled Gun, TD= Tank destroyer)

I'm not saying that you can't be a part of this GB Josh, SMJ already said that you can. I'm just whining that my BMP isn't allowed

( I deleted my posts as sometimes I am quite slow on the uptake and am not part of this GB with my 234. Sorry if this caused any problems).

I also Google Image searched all the entrants vehicles and they all seem to be tanks.

Josh

Well, not to tread on any toes here or anything, but then why was my BMP dissallowed? it seems to me that it's as much of a tank as the 234 is. I was planning on making an urban dio for it too.

EDIT: In actuality, only 5 of the 14+ participants in this GB are entering actual tanks?

I mean, it's your GB so do with it what you please, I'm just saying...

dupes wrote:

Like how you've painted the tires...what is that stuck in all of the holes? Rolled up paper? Going to have to try that one.

Dupes,

Yup, its the Stug IV... I think it is kit #6043.  Like I said, I am pretty happy with the kit, but I do think they over did it a bit.  Some of the assemblies seem overly complicated... but I guess that is part of what you get with Dragon.

The outer road wheels are on wooden skewers.  The inners (which have smaller diameter mounting holes) are on q-tips.  First time I used them for this purpose, but it sure does make working with them easy.

Hey Boyd! Is that the "smart kit" release by DML, or one of their older kits?

EDIT - counted the roadwheels, it's a IV...

Like how you've painted the tires...what is that stuck in all of the holes? Rolled up paper? Going to have to try that one.

Hey guys,

 Sorry I have not been participating for awhile, but I wanted to post a couple of in-progress shots of my Stug.  Generally I am pleased with the kit, though I think Dragon over-engineers some of its stuff a little much.  Originally I had toyed with the idea of doing some sort of interior detail, but have now chosen against that decision.  Still, I will have a couple of open hatches because I want a fig or two, so I went ahead and painted the interior black.  I actually may do the base coat in black as well, we shall see.

The pics aren't great, but they do give you a general idea for where I am at.  I am going to try the 'template' method for painting the road wheels, which will be a first for me.  I also think that I will try to do something with the articulating tracks - maybe have it climbing up on curb or driving over a small pile of rubble.  OK, enough idle chatter, here are a few photos...

Hope to have some more (and better) updates soon.

.

Actually, they're both 234's.

The top one is a 234/2 (commonly referred to as a "Puma"), and the bottom pic is a 234/1. I think you mentioned already having a kit? If not, Dragon makes the whole line (234/1-4) in 1/35 scale. Italeri also did several of them, at least the 2 and 3? I'm sure there's a pile in 1/72 as well.

.

I should think that that 234 would qualify...can you post that pic you're looking at?

A wee 1/72 dio would be pretty nifty.

Had to get away from the PE airplane for a little so I picked up an 1/72 Airfix SD.KFZ.234 and on the box it shows it driving through an African city as per the directions say it opperated in. Would I be able to join this GB?

This is my first armor build and i'd like to join if possible.

Josh

dupes wrote:

Man, nice save! I've certainly never tried that technique before...how well does the wax hold it's shape? And does it paint easily?

The wax holds it shape quite well, but it depends on what type of wax you use. I tried making pieces with two types of wax. After waiting a few hours, one wax remained greasy and soft( but that was the type of wax). The other wax dried nicely and was quite hard after drying. Note: YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL in handling the piece of wax because it can crack easily, even after drying, if your to rough.

Painting is something I have yet to do. I heard acrylics don't hold well to wax. So in a day or so I'm going to practice painting pieces of wax with enamel paint. Hope it works or I'm screwed.

I'll have an update on painting wax soon.

My work is still continuing on this model. The fenders are finished and some details are done.

Some problems arose because I was missing a muffler/exhaust piece. I don't think I lost it to the carpet monster, but I couldn't find it after an exhaustive search. So I decided to make one out of wax. Made a mold of the piece needed in the Silly Putty, poured in the wax, let in sit for a few hours, then cut off all the extra wax. Took a few molds to finally get one almost perfect.

Here's pics of some work I've done on my SU-76M:

Front Hull pieces went together nicely but some sanding was needed.

The suspension arms had MAJOR problems with fitting into the hull. So the hole for the suspension arms had to be enlarged.

Upper hull panels were snug, but that wasn't something a little trimming & sanding couldn't fix. 

The gun still under construction, you probably could tell I did some drastic trimming and sanding to the top of it, because it dosen't fit into the outside armor covering. One of my many useful tools, along with a roadwheel I was testing some color on.

An example of some of the flash I have to deal with.

The level I was using to make sure the suspension was perfectly articulated.

The grill on the SU-76 and it's replacement the black mesh/screen. Or in other words what I'll be covering up the original grill with.

For those wondering the black screen/mesh is simply the stuff you use in screen doors to keep bugs out.

Finally the tracks, it took quite a while to cut each one out. And some were faulty, they were molded badly and they simply cracked, so those had to be glued back together.

All comments, suggestions, and questions welcome!

Well, it depends on what gloss or flat coat you're using (great answer, huh? ). If you're talking about future, you can shoot it straight out of the squeeze bottle. Personally, when I use the Model Master Dullcoat (or whatever they call it) I put a few drops of thinner in there, but I'm not 100% sure it's necessary - just seems to help it mix a bit and lay down a bit smoother.

As for the wash right on top of the paint, you shouldn't have an issue putting an OIL wash down right over acrylics (or an acrylic wash over oils). If you're trying to do oils over enamels you MUST seal them in first with an acrylic (or I think a lacquer) coat first or you run the risk of your thinner in the wash eating into your paint.

dupes wrote:

So long as you give it enough dry-time (24 hours is sufficient), your decals can be laid down right over the future. For step 3, I think you mean a gloss coat, not a flat coat? After your decals are dry, you can use another coat of future to seal them in pre-weathering. Some people dislike the added gloss layer and head straight to the flat coat to seal them in, although certain washes behave differently when applied over a flat vs a gloss. Did that help?

Helped out a ton, but do you have to thin the gloss or flat coat? Oh yeah one more thing can you do a wash right on top of the paint without a coat of Future or a flat coat first?