pictures of my civil version of the AT-T Artillery Prime Mover im Maßstab 1/35 von Trumpeter, and metal tracks of MasterClub.
I hope that you like it!
Яusso-Soviэt Forum
Russian or Soviet vehicles/armor modeling forum.
Russian or Soviet vehicles/armor modeling forum.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Jacques Duquette
AT-T Artillery Prime Mover - 1/35 by Trumpete
elmarriachi
Joined: December 26, 2009
KitMaker: 813 posts
Armorama: 240 posts
Posted: Monday, October 09, 2017 - 06:14 PM UTC
Hello,
pictures of my civil version of the AT-T Artillery Prime Mover im Maßstab 1/35 von Trumpeter, and metal tracks of MasterClub.
I hope that you like it!
pictures of my civil version of the AT-T Artillery Prime Mover im Maßstab 1/35 von Trumpeter, and metal tracks of MasterClub.
I hope that you like it!
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Monday, October 09, 2017 - 07:03 PM UTC
Very nice one, thanks for sharing! I like the weathering and the cargo 
LKWMAN
Joined: April 13, 2014
KitMaker: 279 posts
Armorama: 279 posts
Posted: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - 11:12 PM UTC
What did you think about the chain? The vehicle would not be steerable in the state. An AT-T has chain links on one side 94.
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 12:10 AM UTC
Love the weathered red - perfect!
r2d2
Joined: April 13, 2006
KitMaker: 424 posts
Armorama: 419 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 12:21 AM UTC
Weathering is superb I like it a lot. One thing that draws my eyes away from the very well done finish is the tracks. The sag is over emphasise. It should have a more tension to it as I have not seen an actual photo with that kind of sag unless the tracks is being change.
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 12:52 PM UTC
That's right about the tracks. The thing is what Joachim/LKWMan talks about here: The AT-T prime mover and its sisters (BAT, BAT-M, BTM etc.) have the very early T-54/T-55 tracks (this means OMSH tracks without - and this is very important! - the outer connectors -> this way it looks a little bit like RMSH BUT much narrower in width). See also my build blog from long ago:
https://armorama.kitmaker.net//features/1857
So they have 94 track links on each side. If you count the track links right you will most probably end up with a heavy and often too heavy sag. I also had this problem (see the link above). This means: Either the tracks are slightly out of scale or the chassis or both... Anyway, you can't seem to do it right: Either you choose less track links for the model, then you'll end up with the wrong number (for all the rivet counters out there) or you'll end up with the right number and a too (no: tooooooooo) heavy sag...
Had this problem with a Panzershop hull and also with the Tamiya T-55 hull... don't know about Trumpeters but it pretty much looks like the same problem here...
https://armorama.kitmaker.net//features/1857
So they have 94 track links on each side. If you count the track links right you will most probably end up with a heavy and often too heavy sag. I also had this problem (see the link above). This means: Either the tracks are slightly out of scale or the chassis or both... Anyway, you can't seem to do it right: Either you choose less track links for the model, then you'll end up with the wrong number (for all the rivet counters out there) or you'll end up with the right number and a too (no: tooooooooo) heavy sag...
Had this problem with a Panzershop hull and also with the Tamiya T-55 hull... don't know about Trumpeters but it pretty much looks like the same problem here...
Frenchy
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 06:40 PM UTC
No real sag on this 1:1 one :
A bit more sag :
Even more sag :
But everything else regarding your work looks great
H.P.
A bit more sag :
Even more sag :
But everything else regarding your work looks great
H.P.
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 06:57 PM UTC
OK guys, let's just call it artistic license on the tracks, I vote to give this great model a break. What about the earlier comment about chains? I think it was incorrect but what about it?
berwickj
Joined: April 16, 2007
KitMaker: 352 posts
Armorama: 342 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 07:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
OK guys, let's just call it artistic license on the tracks, I vote to give this great model a break. What about the earlier comment about chains? I think it was incorrect but what about it?
I think he was talking about the tracks having 94 links per side. Great looking model, tracks are just a bit loose imho.
John
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 08:04 PM UTC
Someone in the fire department came across a connection offering a nearly new set of AT-T replacement tracks that the local base was willing to give away. The shop crew has run the slack adjusters all the way in prior to breaking track and starting the swap.
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - 08:20 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextOK guys, let's just call it artistic license on the tracks, I vote to give this great model a break. What about the earlier comment about chains? I think it was incorrect but what about it?
I think he was talking about the tracks having 94 links per side. Great looking model, tracks are just a bit loose imho.
John
I counted the links in the images above and get the sum 98 or possibly 97. Counting links makes me cross-eyed ...
Even if it is only 97 links it would still be 3 too many.
The rest of the model looks very nice
/ Robin
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Thursday, October 12, 2017 - 03:31 PM UTC
Well then he's having a few too many indeed... Anyway as said before: Great model and I bet it looks impressive in reality (model reality that is)! So my hat's definitely off on that one! 
Concerning the tracks: Let's call it artistic freedom and the rest is for all the rivet counters out there
Concerning the tracks: Let's call it artistic freedom and the rest is for all the rivet counters out there
LKWMAN
Joined: April 13, 2014
KitMaker: 279 posts
Armorama: 279 posts
Posted: Friday, October 13, 2017 - 12:23 AM UTC
This has absolutely nothing to do with rivet counters, as there are here in the forum quite different things, which are among what you mean. But the visual of the vehicle as it is in the original must be right.
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Friday, October 13, 2017 - 09:51 PM UTC
?
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 15, 2017 - 05:36 PM UTC
Well that's the thing: It has to look right! And if you have the right numbers but it just doesn't look right then you leave out one or two for a better (i.e. more original) overall look.
And almost no one would even recognize... only the hardcore rivet counters would count the track links and then say: "Yeah but..."... So it most definitely is for the rivet counters in my book.
And almost no one would even recognize... only the hardcore rivet counters would count the track links and then say: "Yeah but..."... So it most definitely is for the rivet counters in my book.
LKWMAN
Joined: April 13, 2014
KitMaker: 279 posts
Armorama: 279 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 15, 2017 - 11:19 PM UTC
Hallo Marian Günzel
Um das Thema hier jetzt mal abrunden zu können, schreibe ich jetzt mal in deutsch. Es geht nicht um jede Schraube, die hier bei dem Modell vergessen wurde, aber der Durchhang der Ketten ist so gross, das es das gesamte Modell in ein schlechtes Bild setzt. Wo der Modellbauer das Original so gesehen hat würde mich mal interessieren. Technisch ist es am Original nicht machbar. Er hat sehrgute Metallketten verwendet, aber sie nicht richtig eingesetzt. Wer diese Kritik nicht versteht, da brauch man seine Meinung zu gezeigten Modellen auch nicht mehr schreiben. Ausserdem ist meine Kritik nicht nur aus der Sicht als Modellbauer, sondern auch als Praktiker mit der BAT. Fahrgestell sind das gleiche, das Fahrzeug wäre so nicht zu bewegen. Und, Nietenzähler sind was gans anderes, die haben die allerwenigste Ahnung. Gutgemeinte Kritik sollte nicht negiert werden.
Um das Thema hier jetzt mal abrunden zu können, schreibe ich jetzt mal in deutsch. Es geht nicht um jede Schraube, die hier bei dem Modell vergessen wurde, aber der Durchhang der Ketten ist so gross, das es das gesamte Modell in ein schlechtes Bild setzt. Wo der Modellbauer das Original so gesehen hat würde mich mal interessieren. Technisch ist es am Original nicht machbar. Er hat sehrgute Metallketten verwendet, aber sie nicht richtig eingesetzt. Wer diese Kritik nicht versteht, da brauch man seine Meinung zu gezeigten Modellen auch nicht mehr schreiben. Ausserdem ist meine Kritik nicht nur aus der Sicht als Modellbauer, sondern auch als Praktiker mit der BAT. Fahrgestell sind das gleiche, das Fahrzeug wäre so nicht zu bewegen. Und, Nietenzähler sind was gans anderes, die haben die allerwenigste Ahnung. Gutgemeinte Kritik sollte nicht negiert werden.
retiredyank
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, October 15, 2017 - 11:46 PM UTC
@Michael:
Being metal tracks, would you be able to remove a couple of links to create greater tension? I know it is a pain, but possible.
Being metal tracks, would you be able to remove a couple of links to create greater tension? I know it is a pain, but possible.
165thspc
#521
Joined: April 13, 2011
KitMaker: 9,465 posts
Armorama: 8,695 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 02:59 AM UTC
Referencing H.P's first photo above:
The ditch digger version is a little too rare and too complex for my tastes but I wish they would come out with the bulldozer version with all that front cabling equipment and whatever is in the load box needed to control it!
The ditch digger version is a little too rare and too complex for my tastes but I wish they would come out with the bulldozer version with all that front cabling equipment and whatever is in the load box needed to control it!
RobinNilsson
TOS ModeratorJoined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 12:32 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Referencing H.P's first photo above:
The ditch digger version is a little too rare and too complex for my tastes but I wish they would come out with the bulldozer version with all that front cabling equipment and whatever is in the load box needed to control it!
Less complex? Maybe a little but not a huge difference
Resin conversion by PanzerShop
Adding all those hydraulic lines ...
/ Robin
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 02:35 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Referencing H.P's first photo above:
The ditch digger version is a little too rare and too complex for my tastes but I wish they would come out with the bulldozer version with all that front cabling equipment and whatever is in the load box needed to control it!
You're probably talking about the BAT (not the BAT-M shown by Robin). The BAT looks like this (missing the dozer blade in the pic):
Also nice: See the sag on this one (still up and running today as you can see).
-> Joachim will recognize "his" BAT I guess I can't help it to show my model of the BAT-M again... sorry for hijacking the thread
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 03:00 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Hallo Marian Günzel
Um das Thema hier jetzt mal abrunden zu können, schreibe ich jetzt mal in deutsch. Es geht nicht um jede Schraube, die hier bei dem Modell vergessen wurde, aber der Durchhang der Ketten ist so gross, das es das gesamte Modell in ein schlechtes Bild setzt. Wo der Modellbauer das Original so gesehen hat würde mich mal interessieren. Technisch ist es am Original nicht machbar. Er hat sehrgute Metallketten verwendet, aber sie nicht richtig eingesetzt. Wer diese Kritik nicht versteht, da brauch man seine Meinung zu gezeigten Modellen auch nicht mehr schreiben. Ausserdem ist meine Kritik nicht nur aus der Sicht als Modellbauer, sondern auch als Praktiker mit der BAT. Fahrgestell sind das gleiche, das Fahrzeug wäre so nicht zu bewegen. Und, Nietenzähler sind was gans anderes, die haben die allerwenigste Ahnung. Gutgemeinte Kritik sollte nicht negiert werden.
Hallo Joachim,
wieder kurz auf deutsch: Ja, dann sind wir uns ja einig, sprich wir hatten ein Missverständnis: Es darf nicht so viel Durchhang der Kette geben, da sind wir uns vollkommen einig. Und nur, weil vielleicht damit die Zahl der Kettenglieder stimmt, macht es das nicht besser, wenn es zu viel Durchhang gibt. Völlig Deiner Meinung! Und genau wie Du denke ich: Nietenzähler sind dann hier fehl am Platze und haben sicher kaum Ahnung davon, wie so ein Gerät in Wirklichkeit läuft (von wegen: "Das ist aber nicht original!" -> Nun ja, ich denke wir beide wissen, dass "Original" immer das war, was funktioniert hat, auch und gerade bei der NVA...)
Viele Grüße
Marian
RobinNilsson
TOS ModeratorJoined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 03:07 PM UTC
Aha! I didn't know that there was an earlier model 
I Googled "BAT-1" and found some images with the blade attached (Google still tries to give me images of the BAT-M though ...)
(Note BAT-M further down the line-up)
/ Robin
I Googled "BAT-1" and found some images with the blade attached (Google still tries to give me images of the BAT-M though ...)
(Note BAT-M further down the line-up)
/ Robin
elmarriachi
Joined: December 26, 2009
KitMaker: 813 posts
Armorama: 240 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 05:37 PM UTC
Hello @ all...
being not here a few days and missed a wonderful funny conversation ... going on and on and on .... always about the same topic... and everybody telling the same again and again and again Wonderful.
Ok - after having read all comments I finally understood that the tracks are not correct ... maybe I try to correct that.
(And please - sorry and please understand that I will not answer to every comment in this topic as every comment would be nearly the same too ) Only one issue I have to comment directly ... (maybe I understood wrong, maybe not) ....
Hierzu würde ich dann mal auf Deutsch antworten .... für besseres Verständnis. Also an den Schreiberling des obigen Kommentars - ich bin der "Modellbauer", der das Original so nicht gesehen hat und somit auch nicht sagen, wo dieser "Modellbauer" das "Modell so gesehen hat". Woher der Schreiberling des Kommentars allerdings die Info hat, dass wohl der "Modellbauer" keine Kritik vertragen könne, würde mich nun mal gerne interessieren... ? Da ich - als "der Modellbauer" noch keinen Kommentar hier abgegeben habe, wäre das doch recht interessant .... na?
So far for now .... 
Cheers
Michael
being not here a few days and missed a wonderful funny conversation ... going on and on and on .... always about the same topic... and everybody telling the same again and again and again
Wonderful.Ok - after having read all comments I finally understood that the tracks are not correct ... maybe I try to correct that.
(And please - sorry and please understand that I will not answer to every comment in this topic as every comment would be nearly the same too
) Only one issue I have to comment directly ... (maybe I understood wrong, maybe not) .... Quoted Text
Hallo Marian Günzel
Um das Thema hier jetzt mal abrunden zu können, schreibe ich jetzt mal in deutsch. Es geht nicht um jede Schraube, die hier bei dem Modell vergessen wurde, aber der Durchhang der Ketten ist so gross, das es das gesamte Modell in ein schlechtes Bild setzt. Wo der Modellbauer das Original so gesehen hat würde mich mal interessieren. Technisch ist es am Original nicht machbar. Er hat sehrgute Metallketten verwendet, aber sie nicht richtig eingesetzt. Wer diese Kritik nicht versteht, da brauch man seine Meinung zu gezeigten Modellen auch nicht mehr schreiben. Ausserdem ist meine Kritik nicht nur aus der Sicht als Modellbauer, sondern auch als Praktiker mit der BAT. Fahrgestell sind das gleiche, das Fahrzeug wäre so nicht zu bewegen. Und, Nietenzähler sind was gans anderes, die haben die allerwenigste Ahnung. Gutgemeinte Kritik sollte nicht negiert werden.
Hierzu würde ich dann mal auf Deutsch antworten .... für besseres Verständnis. Also an den Schreiberling des obigen Kommentars - ich bin der "Modellbauer", der das Original so nicht gesehen hat und somit auch nicht sagen, wo dieser "Modellbauer" das "Modell so gesehen hat". Woher der Schreiberling des Kommentars allerdings die Info hat, dass wohl der "Modellbauer" keine Kritik vertragen könne, würde mich nun mal gerne interessieren... ? Da ich - als "der Modellbauer" noch keinen Kommentar hier abgegeben habe, wäre das doch recht interessant .... na?
So far for now ....
Cheers
Michael
guni-kid
Joined: July 21, 2007
KitMaker: 521 posts
Armorama: 514 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 05:45 PM UTC
Now it's gaining speed...@Michael: Ich glaube, er meinte mich mit der Kritik, deswegen auch meine Klarstellung (s.o.). Ich denke, es war alles nur ein Missverständnis
Now again in English and to everyone (especially Michael as the builder of the AT-T): It's a great model and imho you just present it as you like! With sag or without, in the end it's totally up to you! As I said: I like the superbly done weathering and the cargo on the bed...
elmarriachi
Joined: December 26, 2009
KitMaker: 813 posts
Armorama: 240 posts
Posted: Monday, October 16, 2017 - 06:20 PM UTC
Na dann Is ja alles gut, sagt der Modellbauer.
I will try to rework the tracks a bit ... when seeing some photos of the original one it is absolutly clear that there is "something wrong" a little bit ....
@Robin: Did you really sit in front of your computer and counted the links on the pictures? I would go crazy ... 
Cheers
Michael
Is ja alles gut, sagt der Modellbauer. I will try to rework the tracks a bit ... when seeing some photos of the original one it is absolutly clear that there is "something wrong" a little bit ....
@Robin: Did you really sit in front of your computer and counted the links on the pictures? I would go crazy ...
Cheers
Michael
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.