For the modellers out there

[ArtistsRifles]

Hope I got this in the right board!! :-)

 

Just got the latest bulletin from "Accurate Armour" and there some things that might be of interest to those here:

 

For Karl and possibly Clive:

K083 British Humber 'Box' FWD 4x4 Heavy Utility £55.31+VAT

LR009 SAS 110 DPV (gpmg+40mm M19 Op'Telic) £59.57+VAT

FS011 SAS 110 DPV Crew Set #1 £18.30+VAT

 

For myself, John, Richard Simon and other FV6xx owners:

 

Future Releases

 

We have many more 35th and 48th scale product releases scheduled for later in the year, but we have recently updated our forthcoming projects on the web site COMING SOON page.

 

The Alvis '6-wheel' vehicle family finally get the model treatment they deserve, starting with the STALWART and SALADIN, and we continue to develop the 48th scale Airfield & military range with some new 'classics'. We will have some cracking new projects to announce in a few weeks time!

 

 

If any is interested the URL is http://www.accurate-armour.com

Firm is nothing to do with me - but I've had stuff from them in the past and it's always been first class with equaly good & helpfull service.

 

[fv1609]

Neil, yes they look very nice, good quality & detailed. Inevitably I was drawn to the Pig FV1611, now I know this is very nit-picky but we all have our favourite vehicles & can savour the various details, but there are two significant inaccuracies.

 

It has 2 rear steps! All Pigs on manufacture were fitted with a single step on the offside. It changed over to the nearside when a FV1611 APC was converted to a FV1613 Ambulance.

 

Now I know some Pigs have fittings for what appears to be a step on both sides. These were Pigs used in N.Ireland that were fitted with a fold-down armoured skirt at the rear to protect the feet of troops stood behind the vehicle. The armour was supported by the mountings for the rear step. To support the armour on the other side it was logical to duplicate these fittings. But still it was only one step. The rear step was originally provided on the offside, as it was the offside door that opened first & could be used as the only door to be opened.

 

If this is a FV1611 APC then it should not have 4 antenna mounts, only 3. All Pigs on manufacture had only 3 antenna mounts whether they were FV1611 APC or FV1612 FFW (FV1613 Ambulance was a later modification).

 

In 1964 a modification was introduced to change FV1612 from FFW to FFR amongst the many modifications was the fabrication of a 4th antenna mount fitted on the rear offside. There was no indication to do this to an APC, with all the rear crew seats, there was not enough room to store up to 4 radio installations nor had the single-speed generator the capacity to supply the batteries for all this kit. Nor had an APC the room to store all the extra batteries.

 

As I say being very nit-picky but we all zoom in on the detail of our favourite vehicles. There is another company that make a Hornet. Now the problem with this is that although it accurately reproduces what has been seen on official photographs, one side is based on a prototype & the other side based on an in-service vehicle. This gives dramatic errors to the model, but it is fine if you only look at it sideways!

 

 

 

[Richard Farrant]

As I say being very nit-picky but we all zoom in on the detail of our favourite vehicles.

 

 

Clive,

 

Me thinks you are a bit of a rivet counter :-D :-D :-D :whistle:

 

Richard

[fv1609]

Clive,

 

Me thinks you are a bit of a rivet counter :-D :-D :-D :whistle:

 

Richard

 

Yes!

But it is rather obvious two rear steps not one! I have seen a restored Pig with two rear steps. As it was a converted Mk2 the additional mounting seemed irresistable, unfortunately he fitted a pair of Saracen steps which added to the embarasment.

 

Again 4 antenna mounts instead of just 3 is a glaring embellishment.

 

Now if we had a close up on the hooks for the rear canvas I could have seen which of the three types were fitted. Some are straight, some lean to the left some lean to the right & have seperate FVRDE numbers. Now many Pigs I see have been wrongly assembled on manufacture. I have a good (or rather bad) example of this on my FV1612 Mk1, where they differ each side. The welders obviously had not fixed the correct components. There is also a difference in the way that the studs for the tool kit is welded to identify ROF or Sankey manufacture. Well I grant you I suppose that is rivet counting :-D

[Richard Farrant]

Yes!

But it is rather obvious two rear steps not one! I have seen a restored Pig with two rear steps. As it was a converted Mk2 the additional mounting seemed irresistable, unfortunately he fitted a pair of Saracen steps which added to the embarasment.

 

 

 

Clive,

 

I remember you mentioning the Two-Steps Pig recently. Actually it is usually the modellers who criticise the owners of real vehicles for their details.

 

One instance, was a certain owner of a Half track, at Beltring some years ago, we watched the guy look it all over then he turn and came over to us, asking who the owner was and putting his point of view on some details, saying it was not the same as his. The owner, now getting a little annoyed asked where his was, "oh, its at home in the display case" was the reply.

 

The owners reply was not repeatable on a family forum

 

Richard

[fv1609]

Richard, it’s a terribly touchy subject. But was the modeller actually right?

 

The dilemma is when you see something 'wrong' on a vehicle & the owner doesn't realise. Should you say anything or let them continue to have a cringe factor on their vehicle. It is like not having the guts to tell someone they have a bogey on the end of their nose, because you are too embarrassed to mention it.

 

Generally owners will get shirty because raising a query is automatically assumed to be a challenge & a criticism, it should not necessarily be taken as that. I am delighted if people are interested in my vehicle & ask me because I can explain & they will learn or maybe I will learn something! There are tactful ways where people can say "Interesting looking vehicle I've never seen such & such before"

 

What frustrates me is when people don't raise a query & go off muttering amongst themselves. When I first showed the RUC Pig I was parked next to a Mk2 Pig. Mine was glanced at but the Mk2 was looked at closely & I heard the comment "Oh this is a Belfast one". I felt like saying "What the h*ll do you think the registration plate 2996 OI means if that is not a Belfast one?"

 

I remember the Shorland prototype at one show, an established MV owner warded off a couple of visitors saying "That’s not real its just something he made" Well if I was asked or they read the my board they would see that funny little vehicle is the mother of all the Land Rover based APCs that we see in most of the worlds trouble spots.

 

Once I was stood beside a Pig with a lot of nonsense fixed to it & was berated by a veteran for its lack of authenticity. At that moment I spotted the owner & I said in Basil Fawlty style "Ah here is the owner who will give you a perfectly logical explanation" & I made my exit.

 

I remember looking at an ambulance & wondering whether to mention that the markings were in the wrong place & the fact he had paid tax when he could have claimed exemption. An expert had told him where to put the markings & the tax he wasn’t sure about. I was able to quote the marking regulations & explain about taxation. The next time I saw the vehicle the markings were correct & he was delighted that it was now tax exempt & he had been given a refund & presented me with a bottle of Champagne! So a good result for all!

 

[John Pearson]

I have a Pig Mk2. It never left the Army so far as I know (not even as a Mk 1 in the 1960s) and ended its service on a plinth at a barracks where I collected it. Now to be honest, I got it in a deal and have no great interest in it and I tend to use it for storage but it has two rear steps, not one. Certainly no civilian ever fitted the extra step, it can only have been the military, no matter what the paper records may show.

 

Surely the point about model kits is that they are two things at the same time: a box of bits that build up into a fair miniature of a general type of vehicle and also the basis of a 100% accurate model of a specific vehicle, so long as you do some scratchbuilding and/or fit alternative parts. Does not the Accurate Armour's inclusion of left and right steps and a fourth aerial base fall into the second category rather than be an error in the first category?

 

Without wishing to sound arrogant, I think you would have to go a fair distance to find anyone that knows more about the Valentine DD than me put that does not stop 'experts' at every show telling me that this or that on my tank is wrong: should have a 2 pdr gun, should have an AEC engine (sometimes stated as a mistake in marking it as a MkIX because DD's were only ever built on MkIII and MkVIII hulls), should have 2 headlights, should have tail light(s) markings are wrong etc etc. I always try to put these people off politely but it does sometimes get a bit wearing. It is always worth listening however, particularly to veterans.

[fv1609]

John

 

That’s very interesting about the second step. I have never seen that on any in service pictures. What would be particularly interesting if it still has the rear armoured skirt & would had to have the appropriate slots in it on both sides. If the rear armour is missing, then it leaves the possibility that this was seen by someone in the Army, saw the fittings were identical to the step fitting so assumed there must have been a step on the other side & fitted one.

 

But the model in question is not a Mk2 it is a Mk1. But I take the point that a modeller can use any kit to make embellishments or omissions that they feel appropriate.

 

Yes I am sure you can tire of endless inappropriate questions from visitors. Your exhibit is more likely to attract a higher through put of visitors than most of us with more modest vehicles. Having tracks & a gun will attract a higher rate of silly questions. Which I appreciate can wear a bit thin.

 

Although sometimes what seems a silly question is just an intro for someone to start talking about the exhibit & useful info can sometimes be exchanged.

 

Understandably we all develop some expertise in our vehicles & my very rare Humber has a few things that are not quite 100% correct. I would have been delighted if someone was so interested that they spotted the errors. By this summer those errors will be corrected, nobody will probably know or care, but I will know & that makes me feel good.

I once met a chap with a US lorry rebuilt by the French; he had removed all the metric fasteners & fitted the US equivalents. Nobody would know but he felt good & I admire that.

 

As for rivet counting I once had to make two Vigilant boxes, yes & wait for it there should be 256 rivets per box :shake:

 

[John Pearson]

I have to admit I was once caught out once by a genuine query: had a veteran visitor question why I had an auxilliary propellor lifting handle. He did not remember one being fitted. He was quite right. The propellor on the DD's were lifted by hydraulic pressure from the drivers position but I added an auxilliary lift so I could demonstrate it from outside!

I think I might have already written this on this forum but it fits here: my son once got his own back on a know it all. We were showing our 1952 Saracen with a .303 curved magazine bren on the anti aircraft mounting when someone asked what vehicle it was. ' Saracen' says no.1 son. 'It shouldn't have that gun there' says visitor, 'should be a Browning'. 'How do you know?' says son, '30 seconds ago you did not even know what sort of a vehicle it was!'. Lots of laughter from other viewers and know it all slinks off.

[sas pinkie]

A ha...... fantastic looking model of the Pinkie, cheers Artists........ for pointing it out. I have been after a Pinkie model for some time but have until now been only able to find 11a versions. any one know of a model of an early spec 11o pinkie like mine?

 

Any one know what the brass etching malrky is all abot, is it assembled just like the plastic, I have never used it and would be nervous of ruining a £75 model......

 

As to know it alls. When the pinkie is at a show, it is amazing how many people were apperently in the SAS and used these, yet they are keen to point out where I have gone wrong. I always keep copies of Pics so I can educate them in the error of their ways. I am always very kenn to hear from people that really do know about my beast, and will always willingly accept constructive critiscm, but I find it hard to tell who is tellong the truth some times, though other times it is glaringly obvious!!! :dunno:

[fv1609]

Yes it can be difficult to evaluate legitamite info. Extreme or obviously wrong BS can be spotted. But the borderline stuff is more tricky.

 

Last year with my pig I was discussing pig topics with a vet. It turned he served in pigs in Cyprus. I showed him an IWM pic of a Cyprus pig with with the wrong bridge classification. He explained that Makarios made a fuss about certain types of vehicles using bridges in key areas. So miraculously the pigs bridge weights were reclassified to permit them to cross the bridges!

 

Now should I believe that? Well I did eventually because later on in the conversation on a couple of occasions he said "I am sorry I don't know". That made me feel he was genuine, a real BSter would know the answer to everthing & would feel "not knowing" was a weakness.

[Snapper]

Maybe we should have a BS Detector board on the site for such stories...

Walter Mitty Versus The Bullsh$t Detector sounds like a Marvel comic in the making.