Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Weird Wars => Topic started by: eilif on July 01, 2017, 05:08:55 PM
-
My Google-fu is failing me. Anyone have any comparison comparison shots of Dust and konflikt walkers? Ideally the allied walkers that come in the respective starter sets but I'll take whatever you got.
Barring that. The height measurements would be good.
-
Based on comparison pictures of the infantry, I resized these two images so there's roughly in the same scale.
(https://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2017/7/1/887415_md-Size%20Comparison.jpg)
Work back from there for the other walkers. The Dust stuff's going to be a bit taller - much like the infantry being a head taller than the 28mm stuff. Use what you like.
-
Thanks!
That helps quite a bit.
-
I went ahead and ordered one of the Dust USA Sherman-style walkers from MiniatureMarket. It'll probably size up as a medium or heavy walker but even if I don't use it at all, at $10 it's not a huge investment.
-
Maybe keep in mind that the dust infantry are taller and slimmer than the bolt action stuff , So your dust mech is going to be a bit bigger than that pic makes out.
-
Maybe keep in mind that the dust infantry are taller and slimmer than the bolt action stuff , So your dust mech is going to be a bit bigger than that pic makes out.
Thanks. I had the same thought too. I'm expecting it too be on the bigger end of things.
-
I went ahead and ordered one of the Dust USA Sherman-style walkers from MiniatureMarket. It'll probably size up as a medium or heavy walker but even if I don't use it at all, at $10 it's not a huge investment.
They M3 Mickey seem more like an M5 Stuart on legs than a Sherman though the snub howitzer is more like an M8 Scott if it had an enclosed turret.(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8tmxipj1jfU/VLlWvpFy3fI/AAAAAAAAANg/rb7Y9o0U8CY/s1600/Dust_DTS00_Mickey.jpg)(https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3251%2F2699959136_8dd10e7cf0_z.jpg)(https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redditmedia.com%2Fqx8QJEvcM7XEvFsxAwC6wzPTmvq3SZjhhvzMKbNcjdU.jpg%3Fw%3D640%26s%3D6c1284f5685bab50762127ac3ba4dcf5&f=1)
-
I think you're right. I hadn't taken a close look at the model. Good to know it's historical predecessors!
I bought one from MM and it's in my customer hold section so when I eventually get to $100 (free shipping) and have it shipped I'll take some comparison pics. I considered buying several, but I'm trying to keep this project manageable and if I just get one, it will be a nice centerpiece for my British.
-
Not sure if we ever used the M8, but then we did not have walker's either ^__^.
-
British and Australians pulled the turrets off of M5 Stuarts to use them as ATV type battle taxis which they called Ram Kangaroos. So you can use it as that if nothing else.
M8 was sort of a replacement/alternative for the M7 Priest and they were used in Italy, western Europe, and the Pacific war mostly. British might have bought enough priests that they didn't need another infantry fire support.
That it is called the Scott suggests the British at least classified it at some point, since the US generally just called the thing an M8 HMC.
-
British and Australians pulled the turrets off of M5 Stuarts to use them as ATV type battle taxis which they called Ram Kangaroos. So you can use it as that if nothing else.
The Ram Kangaroo was a Ram tank (Canadian development of the American M3 medium/cruiser) with the turret taken off.
Company B do the turret for the Warlord Ram Kangaroo if you are interested.
Kangaroo appears to be the name of tanks converted to APCs (Priests however were "defrocked" when the Sexton production started teaching the front). Apparently there are also Churchill and Sherman Kangaroos.
Recce Stuarts removed the pointless turrets and added lots of machine guns.
-
The M8 was fire support for cavalry (equipped with M5 light tanks).
Tank names are an interesting, some were named by the British, others maybe by the Americans and others post war.
-
Recce Stuarts removed the pointless turrets and added lots of machine guns.
OMG the prototype Stuart was designed with 4 or 5 MGs. How many more would you want?
(http://www.strijdbewijs.nl/tanks/stuart/ST03.jpg)
-
OMG the prototype Stuart was designed with 4 or 5 MGs. How many more would you want?
(http://www.strijdbewijs.nl/tanks/stuart/ST03.jpg)
It depends what you are doing.
If you remove the turret then the crew can concentrate on operating the machine guns.
I do not have a photograph of a Recce Stuart but have a look at stage two of the instructions on this link.
http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=313.0 (http://forum.rubiconmodels.com/index.php?topic=313.0)
For more "excessive dakka", have a look at Michael, the earliest existing M4A1 at The Tank Museum. The original design had two fixed machine guns in the bow in addition to the hull machine gun and the coax.
There is a walk around on the Sherman minutia page.
-
Early versions of both the M3 medium (Lee/Grant) & M4 had driver operated, fixed bow machine guns (perhaps the designers assumed that the driver didn't have enough to do & might feel left out if he didn't get to shoot at anything - though given their fixed nature, hitting anything would've been a minor miracle).
As with the early M4 mentioned by UVS, Bovington's M3 also has the additional machine guns. Their M3A1 (light - Stuart/Honey) shows that it had the extra sponson mounted MGs & had the ports welded over once it was discovered that the extra firepower was largely useless.
-
Just to add my opinion - some of the Dust walkers are really quite big. Dust is advertised as proper 1/48th I believe, so expect some large walkers. They're pretty well done kits and quite cool, but yes much larger than the Konflikt models I'd imagine.