TacticalPainter01 | 02 Sep 2019 7:40 p.m. PST |
Inspired by the results with my Cromwell I decided to try and be a little more ambitious with this 1/72 PSC Firefly and try some hessian cammo this time. As before I used medical gauze bandage as the base for the netting and the hessian strips were made from paper. The crew are both from AB. The PSC kit is as it comes straight out of the box.
|
Unlucky General | 02 Sep 2019 7:45 p.m. PST |
|
shaun from s and s models | 03 Sep 2019 6:00 a.m. PST |
|
BillyNM | 03 Sep 2019 8:31 a.m. PST |
Superb, the camo really lifts these plastic kits into another class. But it's not on your blog? |
deadhead | 03 Sep 2019 8:55 a.m. PST |
Oh yes….that is what I meant when I saw your Cromwell. The dangling hessian strips, esp along the gun. That is a brilliant model for "straight out of the box". Your painting of the tracks, the chipped edges on the hull, the crew faces….. PSC? I had often seen them in model shops but was always put off by the idea that they were a bit simplified, for rapid snapping together, but were "Good enough for wargamers". That is a superb model and you have made a great job of enhancing it Now I am a Napoleonic buff. Is that a Firefly VC? |
Kropotkin303 | 03 Sep 2019 1:31 p.m. PST |
Excellent model. That is a very British crew. Time for a cuppa I'd say. Well done.Oh! one has a cuppa I think. |
TacticalPainter01 | 03 Sep 2019 8:43 p.m. PST |
Superb, the camo really lifts these plastic kits into another class. But it's not on your blog? Thanks, glad you like it. Given how the build was so similar to the Cromwell I didn't see the need to put up something close to identical so I didn't both taking step by step pictures this time. I have posted something today but it's fairly brief. |
TacticalPainter01 | 03 Sep 2019 8:48 p.m. PST |
PSC? I had often seen them in model shops but was always put off by the idea that they were a bit simplified, for rapid snapping together, but were "Good enough for wargamers". That is a superb model and you have made a great job of enhancing itNow I am a Napoleonic buff. Is that a Firefly VC? PSC are probably the best of the quick build models when it comes to details. That said there are a few scale issues – their PzIII are the same size as their PzIV for example. Some of the detail can be a bit chunky, but at least it is there. All up I've found them fairly decent models that serve their purpose and benefit from some extra detail. This Firefly is what the British called a Sherman Vc. It's a V because it is based on the M4A4 (the most common in British service and what the British called the Sherman V) and the 'c' means it has the 17pdr gun. The 17pdr was also mounted on the M4A1 which the British called the Sherman I and so the Firefly version was the Sherman 1c. However the Vc was by far the more numerous. |
TacticalPainter01 | 03 Sep 2019 8:52 p.m. PST |
Excellent model. That is a very British crew. Time for a cuppa I'd say. Well done.Oh! one has a cuppa I think. Indeed he does. If you can carve out a global empire drinking tea then you can certainly take on Jerry doing the same. To be honest they are a bit too casual for the ranges in Chain of Command but I'll put it down to sangfroid and a stiff upper lip LOL. |
MiniPatton | 03 Sep 2019 9:24 p.m. PST |
Definitely fits the part – nicely done! |
Marc33594 | 04 Sep 2019 4:29 a.m. PST |
The 17pdr was also mounted on the M4A1 which the British called the Sherman I and so the Firefly version was the Sherman 1c. Close but not quite. You are correct on the Sherman V being an M4A4. The Sherman I was the M4 chassis, not the M4A1 (Sherman II). The 17pdr was also mounted on the M4 (Sherman I), hence the Ic and the M4 Hybrid for the Sherman Ic Hybrid. The M4 Hybrid did have the cast front hull like the M4A1 (source of the confusion perhaps?) but welded to the M4. Of note the US never officially adopted the term "hybrid" for these tanks with them being popularly, but not officially, known as "composite" tanks in US service. The British did adopt the term Sherman I Hybrid to differentiate them from the standard Sherman I. |
TacticalPainter01 | 05 Sep 2019 4:45 a.m. PST |
Close but not quite. You are correct on the Sherman V being an M4A4. The Sherman I was the M4 chassis, not the M4A1 (Sherman II). The 17pdr was also mounted on the M4 (Sherman I), hence the Ic and the M4 Hybrid for the Sherman Ic Hybrid. The M4 Hybrid did have the cast front hull like the M4A1 (source of the confusion perhaps?) but welded to the M4. Ah, okay, good call. The cast hull is what threw me. Sherman variants can get confusing as the differences can be quite minor at first glance. |
Asteroid X | 08 Sep 2019 8:58 a.m. PST |
|
deadhead | 08 Sep 2019 10:31 a.m. PST |
Better than that. It has set me thinking, as one who has almost never thrown dice (a long story), but seeks inspiration for a new collection on my shelves that is not Napoleonic. After seeing the Cromwell I knew what I wanted to see. This is 150% more like it……great work, if you want to show Hessian net camouflage. |
Legion 4 | 10 Sep 2019 6:37 a.m. PST |
|