Tiger I 'initial'

  • Finish1
  • Finish7
  • Finish4
  • Finish10
  • Finish11
  • Finish9
  • Finish8
  • Finish5a
  • Finish3
  • Finish5

About the Author

About Bill Plunk (wbill76)

Like many, I started out in the hobby as a kid building airplanes to hang from my bedroom cieling. I took a long break from the hobby, returning in 2001 with an interest in armor inspired mostly by online gaming. WW2 armor, 1/35 scale, is my preferred genre with a special taste for the stranger vehi...


Very nice Initial Tiger, Bill. A really clean build with subtle wearthering a effects. A "safe" build of this vehicle! Good job, Mike Kirchoff
MAR 11, 2007 - 04:41 PM
Milan, This photo is for discussion purposes only. They surfaced a while back as part of a collection of photos on e-bay and showed #100 in winter scheme similar to that of #121 as depicted in the DML instructions. Jesper, Mike, comments are appreciated.
MAR 11, 2007 - 06:47 PM
Excellent rendition of "100" Bill. If you do not look closely you can miss the stowage bins on the side, how well camoflaged is that Regards from the Swamp Eth
MAR 11, 2007 - 11:53 PM
Eth, Funny that you mention that, when these first surfaced there was some debate over whether it really was #100 or one of the others with the bin on the rear. It does square with the Moscow Gorky display photos and the remnants of whitewash still visible in those, but there was always doubt as to the exact pattern that should be used. As soon as I saw this I got the inspiration to tackle it. The kit had sat in the stash for close on to 2 years before this happened, so the timing was perfect.
MAR 12, 2007 - 12:10 AM
In the Frontline Illustrations book on Early Tigers, there are two photos of "100" in the jagged whitewash pattern too. They were taken shortly after its capture in 01/43. By the time of its display at the captured weapons fair, it's clear that the whitewash had been scrubbed off. The only thing that I would add is that the photos show that the white was brushed on and not sprayed. However, Bill's got the general characteristics right! Nice job Bill!
MAR 12, 2007 - 12:20 AM
Great work and interesting camo!
MAR 12, 2007 - 12:58 AM
Looking at that picture I'd swear the track is narrow like the transport track. It looks like that Tiger is fitted with ostketten. The outer front road wheel is missing but you can't make out the other outer wheels because of obstructions. I've never seen a Tiger with ostketten fitted. If I'm correct does anyone produce AM ostketten for Tigers?
MAR 12, 2007 - 01:25 AM
Good to know Roy, wasn't sure if there were other photos out there or not showing #100 in full winter get-up, do those photos also show some of the "missing" gear as compared to the Gorky photos? James, Thanks as well for your comments.
MAR 12, 2007 - 01:26 AM
I was mistaken as to when they were taken Bill. The caption says the photos of 100 were taken in spring of 43, before the captured weapons display. It was being tested at Kubinka where the two photos were taken. The first is a shot from the right side, cropped and only showing the front right side. You see the horseshoe on the glacis and the spare tracks on the nose. It was taken from ground level so you can't make out any fittings atop the hull. The second show is a closer shot from the right rear corner. You fully see the rear hull as well as most of the length of the right hull wall. Here's where you see the "jagged" whitewash scheme well portrayed. You can tell it's brushed because one blob on the rear shows quite a bit of white dripped paint. On this shot, the fittings match the bareness of how it appeared when displayed e.g. no equipment or racks visible -- only the few nubs -- it's possible that some of the jack bracket is still extant. The spare torsion bar is in place on the right rear upper edge. No rear mudguards are present either. THe blackout light is also missing. HTH
MAR 12, 2007 - 02:11 AM
This is an illusion created by the fact that the outer edge of the tracks has picked up snow and gives the look of ostketten. It's the standard track just packed with snow in the space outside of where the sprocket teeth engage the track. Roy, That's too bad. The pre-capture shots are from a distance and don't show the rear, so it's hard to determine the exact tool layout #100 had vs. the others in the unit. I can definitely see why the side-bin layout didn't continue, makes for a lot of surface area to snag on and of course, totally destroys the profile of the turret. :-)
MAR 12, 2007 - 08:30 AM