Those Shermans were all built by the same modeler. I believe the Nats are in VA beach, VA in '08. That was my first model show and I had a great time, many impressive builds.
Oh, and the elephant was part of a diorama.
It’s the sheer variety of patterns, profiles, and possibilities.
There are so many different shapes, each unique in its own way, whereas much of American armor follows the simple “turret-on-hull” theme.
There are oodles of varieties in color schemes, zimm patterns, and markings. Most US tanks were boring OD,[zzz]
And let’s not forget the coolest-looking crewman outfits around! I mean, the very prototypes of the classic, black leather motorcycle jacket!!! I just have to type “bbbbbrrrrAAAAPPPP!!!”
The figure are also just as varied and cool, with huge “wardrobe” possibilities.
And lastly, though some have mentioned the annoying number of road wheels on the Panzers, the Shermans also have those extremely-annoying (to me, anyway![:-^]) “bogie assemblies”!
I don’t know, but in the end, the thing that seals it for me is the mythology that surrounds them–deserved or not,–I just know that when I add one to my display case, the Shermys and OD soldiers shudder![}:)]
You’re right, Soviet armor with the Christie suspension (4 or 5 large wheels on each side) is the way to go. [:D]
…well put, doog…something about a Tanker Man in his “Panzer Wrap” that says: I’m gonna whip some butt…and the German babes dug 'em too…
“What the @#!$! are you looking at?”
[8D]
I enjoy making German Armor for all the reasons stated here. But I also enjoy making Allied and other Axis Armor as well. Recent research has been very illuminating as far as Allied Armor schemes go and camoflage appears to be far more widespread on American Armor than many would have you beleive. And Russian Armor green it would appear is hardly a “standard” color. Japanese and Italian armor, while not impressive machines in reality, have very interesting paint schemes and intricate looks about them. British Armor, especially in the Western Desert Campaign had a great variety of markings and vehicles. BTW, American bumper codes are very easy to decipher once learned, and provide very poor security to unit identity, which in theory you dont want your enemy to learn. The Brits had a more secure and flexible system.
However when it comes to the personality side, I think Allied tank heroes do not have the press machine lionizing them in the way that the Nazi’s did, and have not been as well remembered. On a note of this, Col Abrams successes, in an “inferior” tank, while commanding a battalion as well as his tank, during less than one year of combat certainly is as impressive as anything achieved by German “ace” tankers in their “superior” tanks. I certainly would love to learn more about Soviet tankers and to find out if there were lower echelon level tanker ace/heroes in their ranks. They definately had the machine for it in the T-34.
Weapons used by “the other side”, usually have a fascination for their opponents, particularly if they are good, as German armor was. In the future, as the last veterans and civilian survivors of WWII die off, and with them, the personal “hard feelings” agains the German War Machine fade away,more than likely the fascination will grow. Fueled by books, movies, video games, etc. there will no longer be folks who were on the recieving end of them to give the counterpoint to their story.
…no doubt that the German’s had a well-oiled propaganda machine, but for the most part, claims made of their “tanker aces” seem to be credible…a lot of exhaustive research has gone into verifying fighter ace scores of all sides during WW2, particularly German scores, and for the most part, they can be verified within reason…the top scoring ace of all time was German and he claimed 352 a/c shot down in about 2.5 years of combat…taking this into account, it doesn’t seem at all unreasonable that a German tanker could tally up over 150 AFV’s in six years of combat…part of the reason there aren’t any American counterparts to these German aces is simple: they spent much less time in combat in the European theatre…and for the most part, (both armor and aircraft scores) the bulk of these super-aces’ scores were “fattened up” on the Eastern front…
I agree very much so. In almost any case, one does not want to lionize a hero who can not be verified. So yes, claims will be checked out before being given to the propaganda machine before sent out to the nation and later the world. 150 AFVs destroyed by one crew associated with a particular commander in 4 years of combat is quite understandable. Especially when after a certain point, their machine is superior to most if not all on their battlefield. Put in perspective, a well trained deadly superior veteran crew in a target rich environment with a weapon better than that of their enemy will score highly. Add to this a policy of not rotating those victors home or to training assignments and their scores will continue to climb until fate catches them. With death in Wittmans case or the end of the war in Hartman’s case. I am not minimizing their achievements, because they can not be. But I am trying to place those who scored lower on the Allied side in a proper light. Abrams was in a Sherman! At best a late model Sherman, which Abrams did not get until late 44 just before the Bulge, was equal to a Mk IV in firepower and armor, but outclassed by Panthers and Tigers in most every respect.
Most American and British pilots were rotated off line duty after a certain amount of missions, no matter what their score. Once Americans broke Rickenbacker’s record of 26, rotation home for war bond tours was almost certain. Nazi Germany’s need for their men to remain on the front would not allow for this. Only the Soviets had a similar policy amongst the Allies. Most likely explaining why they had the highest scoring air aces of the Allies. Probably many tank “aces” as well, but their exploits are relatively unknown in the west.
I really like the look of German armor,Favorite King Tiger+Jagdpanther,but I Think Soviet armor has a great look also,I like the agressive fowardsitting turrets,like The T-34/85 and IS series.also the bruttish look of the slab sided KV-2
Bwaaahaaahaaaa!!! [(-D]
**“…oh?..so you think I’m funny? Do I make you laugh…?..am I a clown to you?”–**in your best Joe Peschi voice…
What’s with you guys? There is no politics in modelling. I build models because I love to build models. Tanks, planes, figures, cars I even build model houses. We build models because we love to build. That is the plain and simple fact. Does it mean that when I build german armor I am now a nazi? Or if I build american stuff, does it mean I hate germans? Cmon, you know better than that. I am a devout catholic and when I build german airplanes or armor, do I commit sin in my religion?
This issue should not have been brought up at all. Let’s keep the hobby pure and simple and let’s continue to enjoy it with no mental reservations.
To constructor, I think you misinterpreted the previous posts. They were agreeing with what you just said, about how nobody should judge someone’s political point of view if they build a bust of Hitler, or calling them a nazi for building a tiger. That would be like calling an artist a communist for painting a masterpiece portrait of Mao Zedong, or Che Guevara.
…uhhhhhh, take it easy…might be helpful in the future to read the entire thread before you jump in with a comment that is totally out of context with the discussion…
[#offtopic][%-)] Man, call me crazy but it seems to me that if there’s an issue that “should not have been brought up at all” it’s your whole comment here, constructor! TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT![soapbox]
[#ditto]
more than one person has asked my why I like the FW 190, and I just tell them I like they way they built it. No different from a P38 or an F16. With armor the Germans presented us with so many differnt kinds to choose from. But in the end (the way I look at pieces of machinery) “it’s all bearing shafts & gears.” If you put a star on it I wouldn’t think any differently of it.
In the game of mortal combat the very worst thing you can do against yourself is to hate your enemy. When you loose respect for him you loose respect for his abilities, and in the end your gonna die. You must learn to “love your enemy” to get into his heart. Think like he does, and do as he does. Yes I hear people say things about why would you only want to build a “Kraut plane or tank?” I just avoid them cause I’ve learned not hate anybody (but Jimmy Carter). Most people that make comments on this course have never been eye ball to eye ball with the other guy who really dosn’t want to be there either. Ignorance is not a virtue.
gary
Hmmm…didn’t see one political comment in the entire thread till you jumped in…I digress!
Up until about 3 years ago the “big” manufactures production was focused mainly on German “stuff” hence it was more popular…in recent years with the release of so many varietys of allied armor, we have caught-up. Don’t believe me check the postings on sites like Armorama, Track-Link etc where there are a lot more Allied builds now.
I do not agree with the argument that people build it just because it looks cool, if that were true everyone would build Japanese armor, which had some of the coolest camo schemes in the war…right?
IYAAYAS,
I beg the differ. Some people (including myself) build certain kits because of the way it looks. Not all the time, but some times. When I go to my LHS and brouse through shelves, I tend to grab German armor over Soviet/Japanese armor kits. Japanese armor? YUCK[yuck].
Awww…come on now! Japanese armor had some of the most intriquing paint schemes around, they weren’t the toughest, but they were by far the coolest looking!
Gotta admit, there were some “adventurous” paint scemes by the Japanese!
Al lot of them remid me of the early French schemes. There were some cool WWI schemes on the early Brit and German tanks too…