login   |    register
Campaigns
Where Armorama group builds can be discussed, organized, and updates posted.
Armored CARMax...
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 - 08:33 AM UTC
Thanks for the kind words Gabriel
Szmann
Visit this Community
Netherlands Antilles
Member Since: September 02, 2014
entire network: 643 Posts
KitMaker Network: 3 Posts
Posted: Thursday, April 19, 2018 - 03:02 AM UTC
Nice work there, Peter. Honestly, I am impressed.

Cheers!
Gabriel
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - 03:56 PM UTC
Items loose in fittings or Blu-tacked in place



Under side of Open hatches

petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - 03:28 PM UTC
Okay, where am I at?

Underside has missing details added - The body part where the fenders are bolted on has nuts, bolts on the diff bash plates and I replaced the undersized rivets on the front panel, which were incorrectly evenly spaced and the hole was missing and also on the side of the housing where IBG give you 6 undersized ones, in lieu of the larger 5.



I am not a 'hold it up to scale plans and measure' guy - unless I am scratch building - but there are very notable dimension errors in this kit. IBG gives you:
- The engine hatches that fit right up to the bottom of the 'windscreen' where they actually fit up to a band fixed to the firewall on the real Otter. That is the grey stripe seen in this pic.
- The gunner's window hatch which is too tall and sits flush with the bottom of the gun opening. The opening has been shortened in height by adding styrene strip into the frame and the hatch was cut down to suit.
- The side door openings and doors are too long. IBG would have them fitting up to the joint in plates, when there is a small section of the upper plate over the join. Just visible here is the added styrene to fill the lower part of the opening. Again the doors had to be shortened to match.



You will also note the grenade launcher has been replaced. The kit has a truncated cone, not a cylinder. It is also seen in this pic.

I have replaced the rivets along the side and rear in the correct locations and added the bolt heads for the fenders, as well as the weld seams from stretched sprue. This is in progress at the moment. Staples also added to the stowage boxes.



Then I have added all the lever mechanism and springs for the hatches, added clasp fittings to the engine/transmission access panel, etc



....and the same for the rear although this will barely be seen with the roof on and turret basket in the way.

The side panels also have fittings added for the Mk3 rifles, Bren spare barrel, plus the rack fittings for the Bren and Boys rifles, all of which are not included or are just blobs for the items to rest on. You can also just see the thinned aerial mounts where styrene strip has been added where the metal was bent around, not a solid thick piece of armour that the kit finish looks like.


petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - 06:30 AM UTC
Looking very nice Jesper. Those 234 kits do go together well.
Szmann
Visit this Community
Netherlands Antilles
Member Since: September 02, 2014
entire network: 643 Posts
KitMaker Network: 3 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - 01:08 AM UTC
It looks good, Jesper!

Waiting for more.

Gabriel
SGTJKJ
#041
Visit this Community
Kobenhavn, Denmark
Member Since: July 20, 2006
entire network: 9,434 Posts
KitMaker Network: 118 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 - 12:01 AM UTC
Thanks for the comment, Mark. I hope to do it justice.
md72
#439
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Member Since: November 05, 2005
entire network: 3,928 Posts
KitMaker Network: 531 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 - 11:55 AM UTC
Wow Jesper, that looks neat. I'm not inclined towards German armor, but that one is tempting. Keep up the good work!
SGTJKJ
#041
Visit this Community
Kobenhavn, Denmark
Member Since: July 20, 2006
entire network: 9,434 Posts
KitMaker Network: 118 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 - 09:09 AM UTC
Peter, I definitely understand why that shovel is too small! Looks ridiculous.

I have made some progress tonight on my armoured car. The flew together. As I will be using dot camouflage in decal form I will leave of the details until later.

More to follow soon





petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Saturday, April 14, 2018 - 11:05 PM UTC
Nice Choice Linus. The turtle always reminds me of a vehicle made from the front sections of two vehicles.... the Dr Doolitle 'Pushmi-Pullyu' car.

Off to a great start.

Well I have not been idle, and will have some progress pics soon. I noted some dimensional issues with the Otter that I just could not ignore. Here is one. The shovel in the kit is WAAAY undersized, as are the pick axe head and shaft. They are more akin to 1/48th scale.

I have started reworking one from the spares box. To give you an idea of the size difference of the kit one, I have placed it next to the arm of a 1/35th figure:



You would have to kneel to use this one.
d6mst0
#453
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Member Since: August 28, 2016
entire network: 437 Posts
KitMaker Network: 7 Posts
Posted: Saturday, April 14, 2018 - 08:51 PM UTC
Linus,

Nice choice. Looks like a pillbox on wheels.

Mark
LinusB
#462
Visit this Community
Western Australia, Australia
Member Since: March 21, 2016
entire network: 233 Posts
KitMaker Network: 3 Posts
Posted: Saturday, April 14, 2018 - 08:28 PM UTC
Hi here are my start and progress pictures on my Skoda Turtle.









petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 - 03:05 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Haven't even started, got a few other builds to clear off the table first .....



Excuses, excuses,.... that one is my usual one too
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberDirector of Member Services
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Member Since: November 29, 2006
entire network: 3,185 Posts
KitMaker Network: 347 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 - 10:22 AM UTC
Haven't even started, got a few other builds to clear off the table first .....
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 - 08:49 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Number of axles should not be a criterion, the M8 Greyhound is 6x6 and the SD.Kfz.234 is an eight-wheeler. Both are definitely armoured cars.



100% correct. The ADGZ was a 12 wheeled, 8 axle driven vehicle and is certainly an armoured car and a welcome build here.

Clayton's original intention was to keep the vehicles more or less car/light utility/SUV sized but with a main use purpose described as an armoured car overriding this. Hence the ADGZ fitting the bill.

Troop carriers/APC's, specialist vehicles,etc, were to be a subject for a possible future group build.

Okay, the soap box has been put away, back to more important matters - how is everyone's builds going?
LikesTanks
Visit this Community
Wales, United Kingdom
Member Since: May 07, 2013
entire network: 148 Posts
KitMaker Network: 5 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 11:15 PM UTC
Number of axles should not be a criterion, the M8 Greyhound is 6x6 and the SD.Kfz.234 is an eight-wheeler. Both are definitely armoured cars.
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 08:15 PM UTC

Quoted Text


The campaign rule was for a armor car from any conflict, there is nothing about size limits.



Thanks Mark,

Just to clarify for everyone who may be contemplating joining, the armoured car does not have to be from any conflict but can be from any conflict, i.e. a sci-fi armoured car was accepted by Clayton going back through the thread.


He also made a ruling on vehicle suitability where he accepted a Vodnik as it was less than truck sized.


these sections are on page 3
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 08:05 PM UTC
Nathan, that M-H fits perfectly and I would love to see it built. It is a kit I have contemplated buying myself.

Thank you for your understanding as well. Your gracious offer to change your selection is greatly appreciated.
md72
#439
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Member Since: November 05, 2005
entire network: 3,928 Posts
KitMaker Network: 531 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 02:57 PM UTC
Neat, ugly, but neat. Good luck with it.
d6mst0
#453
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Member Since: August 28, 2016
entire network: 437 Posts
KitMaker Network: 7 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 01:02 PM UTC
Nathan,

Nice choice, I have never knew about this type of vehicle and that it was developed in South Africa and used against the DAK.

Mark
Hangelafette
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Member Since: April 22, 2012
entire network: 269 Posts
KitMaker Network: 16 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 27, 2018 - 12:10 PM UTC
Hi Peter and Mark,

I am happy to withdraw the Kamaz Typhoon and replace it with a kit that better fits the requirements of the campaign. How about a Marmon-Herrington Mk.II?



-Nate
d6mst0
#453
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Member Since: August 28, 2016
entire network: 437 Posts
KitMaker Network: 7 Posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 11:40 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hi Nathan. There was discussion early on about trying to keep the builds strictly armoured cars and keeping the vehicle smaller than truck size. However, a few people have mentioned intentions of building Stryker and Boxer vehicles, and Clayton not being able to be here to moderate at the time, no comment was made on them. The Stryker is roughly 7m long, the Boxer 8m.

I have since taken up the baton on his behalf, but in keeping with fairness at the delay I have said nothing. So I guess, with that in mind, I'll open it up to the build members to vote on whether they object to the Typhoon at 9m long or not.

My personal preference is to encourage people to join, build, share with other modellers and have fun, as long as you keep relatively within scope of the build. My vote is therefore yes to your choice..

Gentlemen (and any Ladies) speak now or forever hold your peace.



The campaign rule was for a armor car from any conflict, there is nothing about size limits. This Typhoon is classified as a armor vehicle which could also mean a 'car'. I looked up the definition of a car and there is nothing in it that mentions size limitation but it does mention that cars only have two axles.
Has this vehicle been used in a conflict? I don't know. Is it being used in Syria?
I would say it does not meet the first requirement based on the axle limitation.
I feeling is that it does not meet the requirement for a car and should not be in the campaign.
With that said, I agree that we should encourage people to join the campaign and share the fun and would not have a problem being over-ruled on this question.
petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 09:00 PM UTC
Hi Nathan. There was discussion early on about trying to keep the builds strictly armoured cars and keeping the vehicle smaller than truck size. However, a few people have mentioned intentions of building Stryker and Boxer vehicles, and Clayton not being able to be here to moderate at the time, no comment was made on them. The Stryker is roughly 7m long, the Boxer 8m.

I have since taken up the baton on his behalf, but in keeping with fairness at the delay I have said nothing. So I guess, with that in mind, I'll open it up to the build members to vote on whether they object to the Typhoon at 9m long or not.

My personal preference is to encourage people to join, build, share with other modellers and have fun, as long as you keep relatively within scope of the build. My vote is therefore yes to your choice..

Gentlemen (and any Ladies) speak now or forever hold your peace.
Hangelafette
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Member Since: April 22, 2012
entire network: 269 Posts
KitMaker Network: 16 Posts
Posted: Monday, March 26, 2018 - 12:11 PM UTC
Some great builds coming along!

I'm in with Takom's recent Typhoon K.


There are a couple pictures out there with a remote weapon station mounted on top of the cab. I'm contemplating using the Live Resin Arbalet-DM RCWS kit, which looks similar but not identical to the photos.

petbat
Visit this Community
Queensland, Australia
Member Since: August 06, 2005
entire network: 846 Posts
KitMaker Network: 15 Posts
Posted: Thursday, March 22, 2018 - 09:04 AM UTC
Thanks Gabriel. This is my first IBG kit, and I was also impressed. The styrene is a little soft and 'rubbery' compared to other manufacturers and is reminiscent of kits I built in the 70's, like ESCI, but is not too bad. You can't trim up to the part without risk of pulling a section out, but careful shaving with a sharp knife and sanding remedy's that.

The only thing I don't like, and it is similar to Takom's styrene, is the lighter stress colour left on the part after cleaning off the attachment points. It makes it hard to see if you have removed enough.

Overall, very happy with the kit fit etc, so much so, I have bought another IBG kit - the Bedford QLB Bofors gun tractor. A partner to the AFV Club Bofor's gun I have in the stash. If that is as good as this one, I may be buying more IBG.