Looks like a very fair appraisal of the set Pat. I can't see why the manufacturers always seem to put Commonwealth desert troops in the short putees either. "Anklets web" were commonly worn in the desert (Australian troops had anklets which press studded rather than buckled). It's also unusual to these troops without the small pack, which was part of "skeleton order" as I recall, & the braces therefore attach to the top of the ammo pouches not the belt.. I also suspect that the old No3 SMLE was more common in units in Italy in 1943, since most had served in North Africa. The old long bayonet could not be fixed to a No 4, so the one supplied in the kit would be useless. Shame a small extra sprue couldn't have been included with some "tribal" headgear in, e.g. Tamoshanters, Guards Service Caps, Aussie slouch hats or even cap comforters or Caps GS.

While these are marketed as Commonwealth troops Ron Volstad told me his drawing and research was based on Canadian troops in Italy. and Canadians are part of the Commonwealth so these figures (At least as Ron Drew them, not as Dragon made them) correctly depict Commonwealth troops in Italy in 1943.

While as you say the old No3 SMLE was more common in units in Italy in 1943 there is at least one photo of the Mk 4 in use in Tunisia so I suspect it was present in small numbers right from the start of the Italian campaign and I have seen photos of both the Mk 3 and Mk 4 in use in the same unit. I also remember reading that some soldiers retained the long bayonet as it was far more useful for a variety of jobs than the pigsticker bayonet. I'm glad it's in the kit as with the one in the 8th army set I now have two
I can live with the puttees instead of the anklets, web. I'll get over them being backwards. I don't really mind about the MK4 rifles. The small packs I can source elsewhere. The alternative heads you mention would be a nice idea but I can live without them too.

What I suppose annoyed me about the kit is that having an artist of the calibre of Ron Volstad on board supplying them with such excellent artwork and back up reference materials Dragon failed to make use of them.

Hi Guys,

What annoys me is that we have waited 3 years since the Great Figure Debate of 86 when a mass of positive ideas and suggestions were put forward and what we get is a a nice but badly researched set. It's not rocker science to look at a 37 pattern belt and see the buckles on the back nor look at putties and see the V facing backwards. The SMLE rifle was pointed out in the last set of the 8th Army. A look at a couple of pics of troops in italy would have shown the helmets covered with a net or hessian.


All these errors are fixable, but they detract from the figures and that's a real pity as these could have been tops.

Al