Hello all,
I am in the planning stages of an Ardennes Front KT with all the works. I was wondering if anyone has accurate camouflage pictures of the 008, 204, 555, and/or 332 KTs? Google images doesn't return very useful results, on average, either B&W photos or completed models. Are the camos hard-edged out of the factory or field-painted?
Thanks in advance!
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
King Tiger Question
KruppCake
Ontario, Canada
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:00 AM UTC
Headhunter506
New York, United States
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:28 AM UTC
Camouflage schemes were factory applied from mid August 44 onward.
KruppCake
Ontario, Canada
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Camouflage schemes were factory applied from mid August 44 onward.
Thanks! That's one piece of the puzzle. Now I need to figure out when the above vehicle numbers were produced as well as to see the actual camo schemes. I'm personally a bigger fan of free-handing the camo with an airbrush than masking. But if they were all factory-applied, I just might have to resort to masking tape and sticky tack.
Headhunter506
New York, United States
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:48 AM UTC
Use Blue-Tac.
KruppCake
Ontario, Canada
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:53 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Use Blue-Tac.
I've heard that from others as well. What is the difference between the two? I've used sticky tack previously to protect periscopes when I spray the entire model and I haven't run into problems, but many do seem to prefer blue-tac.
Headhunter506
New York, United States
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Joined: December 01, 2007
KitMaker: 1,575 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 04:56 AM UTC
No real difference. I just didn't pay attention that you mentioned sticky tack. It's a slow brain day.
KruppCake
Ontario, Canada
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Joined: July 13, 2015
KitMaker: 401 posts
Armorama: 387 posts
Posted: Saturday, July 02, 2016 - 05:01 AM UTC
Quoted Text
No real difference. I just didn't pay attention that you mentioned sticky tack. It's a slow brain day.
Haha no worries! For a second I became worried that there might be a difference, as one of my in-progress models has its periscopes still covered in sticky tack while I debate it's fate.