Well, I did get some bench time in today. I began adding parts to the top deck- some fender braces, the side armor beneath the turret ring, and some engine deck hatches

I also painted the lower hull sides and road wheels using Mission Models Faded Russian Olive, and then I assembled the lower track runs and formed them to the running gear. So far, so good...

Hopefully I can get more bench time in tomorrow...

It was indeed. Something like 200,000 Warsaw Pact troops were involved. And my take is that they used the lessons learned from Hungary 1956 as a guide. The vehicles were distinctly marked in case of combat, and there was no half hearted first attempt. It was not "bloodless" as characterized by some, but casualties on both sides were minimal.

I was away at Boy Scout camp at the time, but I always followed the news.

So I heard about it when we returned to civilization. It seemed to be a full scale Soviet Invasion.

Thank you my friend. I think in the West, this is a long forgotten event now, along with Hungary in 1956. 

Way cool subject. 

But I really liked using Friuls on my Tiran 5. That long free return run hung down just right.

As for the AA, a couple of sites say it came back "after 1970". The reason for not having it sounds like what you said- useless against jets.

Bish

GRUNTs are much better at brute force and sweat

Finesse however is another matter.

 

Finesse is only required for precision shooting on occasion... well, I suppose on the controls of certain anti tank missiles too... a very light touch there

GRUNTs are much better at brute force and sweat

Finesse however is another matter.

Bish, I honestly can't say which has more effort involved, scale tracks or the real ones.... LOL! One certainly requires more muscle, brute force, and sweat, while the other requires more fine motor skills and finesse. 

And yes, on those pin marks... my ESCI T-55s we're bad for that!

Bish

 

 

Gamera

Bish: Lol, and I guess you don't need to handle them with tweezers!

SP: That's great to hear. I've had to fill and sand pin marks in each and every track link with some kits- well isn't a hobby supposed to be fun and stress relieving!?!?! 

 

 

 

 

Certainly not, but use of a sledge hammer is highly recomended.

 

Lol, sounds about right! 

Gamera

Bish: Lol, and I guess you don't need to handle them with tweezers!

SP: That's great to hear. I've had to fill and sand pin marks in each and every track link with some kits- well isn't a hobby supposed to be fun and stress relieving!?!?! 

 

Certainly not, but use of a sledge hammer is highly recomended.

Bish: Lol, and I guess you don't need to handle them with tweezers!

SP: That's great to hear. I've had to fill and sand pin marks in each and every track link with some kits- well isn't a hobby supposed to be fun and stress relieving!?!?! 

Like the idea of the base Stik and nicework on those tracks.

personally, i find doing real tracks a lot easier than these kits ones. At least you don't have to paint and weather the real ones, and no glue involved

Hunter,,, Indy tracks like this remind me too much of doing that for real in the motor pool...

Gamera, it is a good track set. No ejection pin marks to worry about and they fit nicely. I've certainly encountered worse...

Looks like a neat set, they're going to look cool on the tank. 

Stik,

Thank you for the information, it's always nice to learn something new. Now...enjoy putting your tracks together one piece at a time LOL.

Hunter, when you think of the design period for the T-55 onto an "atomic battlefield" the lack of a AA MG for the TC makes sense. The tank hunting helicopter was a few years off, and tactical air support at that time was fast movers volley firing rockets in a few seconds... dedicated mobile AA platforms like the ZSU 57-2 would give cover to the lead elements. Even Western designs for the most part were in similar straights with most NATO MBTs that were not US designed having only a 7.62mm MG.

Today was just working on the indy track links. I am using this Trumpeter set

I take the links and build small batches

And then build up long sections from the sub assemblies

I have built up the bottom runs for both sides now

stikpusher

Hunter, I don't know what the exact reasoning was for the Soviets not to have the AA MG on the T-55 originally.  Supposedly they thought it would be useless against jets of the era. But then NATO started deploying helicopter tank hunters in large numbers, and in the 70's the T-55s and T-62s received the Dshk machine gun that they did not have originally have, but the older T-54s and T-10s had already. 

Stik,

That makes sense. I dug into it a little more and could not fing a solid answer as to why the Soviets left it off for that time period. The Dshk displaced a 12.7 x 108mm round. Until the late 1950's most AAMG's displaced a round between 20mm to 150mm. The Dshk has had a long history of seeing action from 1938 to Iraq. It is widely used by many countries i.e, Asia, Europe and the Middle East. Just curious if it was due to rushed production, economics or like you said just pointless for the time.

Bish, from the photos of the real ones, you can see what I am aiming for. And just a nice simple city street base.

Gamera, no love for them here either. But just while working on the suspension and lower hull, I sure was thinking about the engineering of just that area on the real tank. Tamiya really did sweet work capturing the detail.

Bill, I'm with you on the T-54/55 family. It was a worthy successor to the T-34. I hope that you enjoy this build.

Mike, give yourself to the Dark Side... your Tiger is calling you...

Hunter, I don't know what the exact reasoning was for the Soviets not to have the AA MG on the T-55 originally.  Supposedly they thought it would be useless against jets of the era. But then NATO started deploying helicopter tank hunters in large numbers, and in the 70's the T-55s and T-62s received the Dshk machine gun that they did not have originally have, but the older T-54s and T-10s had already. 

Stik,

I was looking over your kit photo and the photos you posted and noticed that the T 55 did not have a antiaircraft machine gun mounted near the port opening. Was this something the Soviets felt unnecessary?

I'm getting an armor itch, Stik. I'm blaming you and Baer.

Still have an incomplete Tiger waiting for some love....

I have always liked the T-54 and T-55 line of tanks.  I will follow this thread with great interest!

Bill Morrison

Looks great SP and you're making great progress. 

No love for the USSR or communism here but they built some badass looking tanks.

Will be looking forwardto see what you do with this.

Ok Hunter. I hope you like it.

Hey Stik,

Very cool subject for your charter GB. I will be along for the entire ride sir.

All the photos that I can find of T-55s there are early model- flat loaders hatch, no AA MG, no anti radiation shielding visible, snorkel stowed with the fuel drums and not on the turret. I have some Trumpeter tracks that I will use. They won't fit my Trumpeter T-54s without narrowing the sprocket. Go figure. 

Yes so many options to chose from. Are you going to do the A model with the anti radiation stuff or the standard version? I don't know which one they used in the quelling of that uprising. What AM tracks are you going to use? 

Griffin, that is one reason we chose the T-54/T-55 family for our chapter GB. There were so many built and they have served in so many locations, for so many years, that the possibilities to build something different are vast. 

Aside from back dating mine to an earlier version, and replacing the kit tracks, the only add on I currently plan on is adding the plumbing for the external fuel tanks.

Very cool. I'll be watching. I have that kit with plans on making an Ethiopian version during the Ethiopian Eritrean war. I look forward to learning some tips! 

SprueOne

Yeah, those are nice color ref pictures. I'll be hangin around this thread, if you don't mind.

 

 

 

Please do!