many of us when we build armor tack on extras (road wheels, ammo boxes, tents,etc…) but i notice it seems more often than not we don’t pay attention to 1 detail. HOW does this stuff stay on the tank?
all this stuff would have to be tied down with rope or chain so it would not fall off going over 1 good bump on the real thing
so why don’t i see more (chain-rope) on the models?
ps i am guilty of the same thing too! until today!
Actually, in the Army we are issued super glue in 55 gallon drums. We dip our gear into the drum and glue our gear to the sides on the tank.
You don’t see a lot of chain on a tank because it is not really useful. Any size of chain that would be useful in pulling a tank would be too heavy to manhandle. I’ve seen modelers place chain on tanks that would be more appropriate for a 1/35 scale battleship anchor chain than a tank.
Most gear is attached using commo wire or web straps.
Back when I started building armor and adding stuff on (packs, gear, stowage, etc.) I didn’t really give much thought to this. In many cases (WW2 vehicles at any rate) where there are “field mod” things done such as grab handles or tie-down points that get welded onto the sides of a turret and are there so that things can be used to secure them down, in these cases ropes/chains aren’t needed. Additionally, some things like spare tracks were actually tack welded directly to the hull for “up armored” purposes and so have the appearance of being “unsecured” when in fact they really are.
Flip side to that though are the things that appear to be “loose” items. This can range anywhere from small items such as a random canteen or helmet up to big stuff like loose ammunition, roadwheels, etc. Some of that depends on whether or not the vehicle is in a dio or on a base, standalone, etc. but the fundamental fact remains that they were still powerful vehicles and not static, so things lying loose, when the vehicle started moving, likely wouldn’t stay where they are very long just because of simple physics. To me, it all depends on context and aesthetic and that then in turn drives whether or not it’s actualy “real” or “accurate” in the depiction. If I’m going to add stuff to the rear deck of a vehicle, it will be secured/tied down in some way. If I’m going to add stuff to the side of a turret, it will depend on the vehicle in question (see comment above about welded handles/tie-points) and the context I’m depicting.
One last comment because this is related to the question of “realism” and that is the scale of the rope/chain should be proportionate if it’s going to be used. It’s very easy in 1/35 scale to use something like twine or jeweler’s chain and have it scale out to the equivalent of logging chain or ship hawser rope instead of the smaller stuff easily to hand that would’ve been used as an “ad hoc” type of tie-down. 1 mm in diameter = 35 mm diameter on the scale vehicle, 3.5 cm = 1.38" so it’s possible to go overscale very easily when this isn’t taken into consideration.
when building or just looking at models i look at this in two ways, first the items that are defying gravity do indeed look out of place i.e. stuck on the side of turrets and so on should look as though something is securing them. secondly items that are laying on flat surfaces, these i see differently and sometime i secure them and sometimes not, i agree anything not tied down on a moving tank would not last long but vehicles did not move all the time and there would be times when things were not tied down and not all models are nessesarily depicting moving vehicles so i usually take this into concideration when building or viewing models.
I’ve ranted and raved about this very subject before. I call it the “Verlinden” style of model clutter. Loose pistols, holsters, Panzerfausts, canteens (Always in their holder and not removed for drinking of course), binoculars, etc.
I attribute this to modellers mimicking what they see in other models and not thinking logically about what it would be to operate/live/fight in the enclosed space of a military vehicle. If I’m in a firefight with a section of T-34s rushing at me through the tree line and I’m trying to shove Pak 40 rounds of my Marder II’s cannon, I sure don’t want a Panzerfaust or an MG42 ammo can near my feet!
This loss of perspective also occurs whenever I see the continuous snaky camo line finely airbrushed over the sides and roof of an AFV. Easy to do on a 1/35 model as one is aiming from above. But try to paint a REAL tank, hauling around an airhose. See how long your camo lines will be – the width of your arm going from side to side with the paint gun. Not 30 feet.
Something about wrestling 5 ton weapons over a 5’ lip into a below grade basement hole that will fill with rain (and has no sumps), to have a 2-3º field of fire . . .
No, a real tank (Actually, the one pictured), along a real road.
Basically, engine died, reverse up to its nose with another tank, hook the chain to one tow hook, the other tank’s cable onto the other hook, and away we went back to base.
No, I wouldn’t want to try to pull a tank out of a ditch with the chain. Trundling up the road, however, it was fine.
We did a fair bit of stuff that we were told afterwards couldn’t be done. Most recently, one of my drivers won a bet with his instructors at an MOSQ course when they said they didn’t believe that we basically got a tank to jump by running full speed over an AA gun, and didn’t break track. Cue a 'phone call, resulting in a video emailed out.
my tiger has a chain on it— it is welded to a tow bar – the clevis pin attaches it to the central tow point— on the other end, is a hook— this arrangement my not pull another tank nor was it intended to, but it would pull a stuck kubelwagon, oxcart, log,etc-- sorry pic is so ‘red’ , — thats not supposed to look like rust- (thats why i have never used this pic)- it actually looks like mud in ‘real life’ – lol[:D]–tread–
