Before the sanding:
After:
I still have work to do...
Figures
Military figures of all shapes and sizes.
Military figures of all shapes and sizes.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
German Machine Gunner (tamiya 1/16)
tomapaul
Joined: September 17, 2007
KitMaker: 425 posts
Armorama: 304 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 01:40 AM UTC
I started working on my first 1/16 and 8th overall figure.The kit is very nice and with a couple of work the plastic surface is sanded smooth.I'm really impressed, being a non resin kit.If this one turns good I'll think of more 1/16 figures.
Before the sanding:
After:
I still have work to do...
Before the sanding:
After:
I still have work to do...
Galwitz
Joined: June 12, 2007
KitMaker: 498 posts
Armorama: 406 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 01:48 AM UTC
I'm watching very closely as I was thinking about this series (and DML's as well) recently...
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 02:11 AM UTC
Hi
I have a couple of the Tamiya and Dragon ones and think they are good for the money. I haven't got this one yet but it's on my list of wants - what isn't
I'd like to try to get a texture to the woollen greatcoat on mine when I do it.
If it was me I'd ditch the machine pistol, the poor guy's got enough to carry with the MG 42 and possibly ammo for it ,so he wouldn't want that as well weighing him down.
Alan
I have a couple of the Tamiya and Dragon ones and think they are good for the money. I haven't got this one yet but it's on my list of wants - what isn't
I'd like to try to get a texture to the woollen greatcoat on mine when I do it.
If it was me I'd ditch the machine pistol, the poor guy's got enough to carry with the MG 42 and possibly ammo for it ,so he wouldn't want that as well weighing him down.
Alan
H_Ackermans
Joined: July 11, 2006
KitMaker: 2,229 posts
Armorama: 2,221 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 02:26 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Hi
I have a couple of the Tamiya and Dragon ones and think they are good for the money. I haven't got this one yet but it's on my list of wants - what isn't
I'd like to try to get a texture to the woollen greatcoat on mine when I do it.
If it was me I'd ditch the machine pistol, the poor guy's got enough to carry with the MG 42 and possibly ammo for it ,so he wouldn't want that as well weighing him down.
Alan
These aren't wimps, they can carry a LIGHT MP-40 along anytime.
Plus, if he gets shot at, what do you think he can do with that MG-42? Start firing back right away?
He'd be more than happy to have that MP-40 with him.
I'm going to follow this one too. Large scale figures are always great!
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 02:53 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Plus, if he gets shot at, what do you think he can do with that MG-42? Start firing back right away?
..and what's he going to do with the MG42 whilst he gets his machine pistol swung into action, balance it on his shoulder
Alan
Desmoquattro
Joined: September 10, 2008
KitMaker: 235 posts
Armorama: 168 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 04:08 AM UTC
What, you mean they didn't fire the MG42 from the hip like in video games? 
The recoil on them is ferocious. No Rambo-ing would be happening so he'd need something for close quarter defence.
The recoil on them is ferocious. No Rambo-ing would be happening so he'd need something for close quarter defence.
montythefirst
Joined: August 04, 2007
KitMaker: 1,055 posts
Armorama: 199 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 04:12 AM UTC
looking good, hope it go's well
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 05:04 AM UTC
Quoted Text
What, you mean they didn't fire the MG42 from the hip like in video games?
The recoil on them is ferocious. No Rambo-ing would be happening so he'd need something for close quarter defence.
That's why he has a hand gun on his belt, or in extreme cases his entrenching tool apart from the rest of his well armed infantry platoon around him, including his loader as they work as a team.
His responsibility as the machine gunner would be to ensure that this weapon is fully functional, probably a spare barrel in a container and a belt of ammunition to carry. Plenty to carry there without additional "baggage" just in case. Not forgetting the additional ammo pouches he'd need to carry for the MP40 if he had one.
In any case he wouldn't go into a situation that might involve close quarter fighting with the MG42 slung over his shoulder in the fairly relaxed manner as shown.
Funnily enough I've never seen a picture of a machine gunner carrying anything more than what is required, so if you have any images of one loaded to the teeth with weapons "rambo style" please do show them.
Of course tomapaul can do whatever he likes with his figure, that's up to him entirely and I'm not about to knock him for that, but even from a composition point of view I think it would be better without it ...in my opinion of course
Alan
keo
Joined: January 30, 2006
KitMaker: 613 posts
Armorama: 508 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 06:25 AM UTC
I agree totally, an MG gunner do not carry an additionally Mp; his job is to provide firepower for his platoon/squad, and the platoon/squad/s job is to protect their main/heavy fire weapons.
But there is another problem with this figure. I’ve done service as an MG gunner with the post war variant of the MG42, and trust me; it’s not a thing you like to be bouncing on your shoulder. It’s heavy as h… and carves into your shoulder. There is a string from the pistol grip to the rear end that you fold up and over the MG and carries it in this way. I’ve seen many figures with the MG born in this way but to a user of the MG it just shows that the sculptor hasn’t done any service on an MG.
Kenneth
But there is another problem with this figure. I’ve done service as an MG gunner with the post war variant of the MG42, and trust me; it’s not a thing you like to be bouncing on your shoulder. It’s heavy as h… and carves into your shoulder. There is a string from the pistol grip to the rear end that you fold up and over the MG and carries it in this way. I’ve seen many figures with the MG born in this way but to a user of the MG it just shows that the sculptor hasn’t done any service on an MG.
Kenneth
GALILEO1
Joined: April 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,794 posts
Armorama: 1,431 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 06:38 AM UTC
Nice, very nice!!
I have this kit in the stash and this build log will certainly be helpful. I have not built any figures so trying to learn from others before tackling mine.
Thanks for the explanation here Kenneth. Had no idea it was carried that way...
Rob
I have this kit in the stash and this build log will certainly be helpful. I have not built any figures so trying to learn from others before tackling mine.
Quoted Text
There is a string from the pistol grip to the rear end that you fold up and over the MG and carries it in this way. I’ve seen many figures with the MG born in this way but to a user of the MG it just shows that the sculptor hasn’t done any service on an MG.
Thanks for the explanation here Kenneth. Had no idea it was carried that way...
Rob
CDK
Joined: September 24, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 07:56 AM UTC
keo
Joined: January 30, 2006
KitMaker: 613 posts
Armorama: 508 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 09:20 AM UTC
Those pictures shown, and there are many like them form the early stages of the war, are all MG 34's. Their barels are all round and much more comfortly to carry that way.
The trouble with the MG 42 is both it's squared barrel and the "opening" at the bottom where the cartridges are ejected. It's very difficult to find a conforting way to carry the MG at the shoulder over long distances - or maybe we have just turned cry-babies post war
After all they were carried by the master race, eih?
The trouble with the MG 42 is both it's squared barrel and the "opening" at the bottom where the cartridges are ejected. It's very difficult to find a conforting way to carry the MG at the shoulder over long distances - or maybe we have just turned cry-babies post war
After all they were carried by the master race, eih?
CDK
Joined: September 24, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 09:35 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Those pictures shown, and there are many like them form the early stages of the war, are all MG 34's. Their barels are all round and much more comfortly to carry that way.
The MG34 is also heavier than the MG42
but, I had a feeling someone would say that so I saved this one just in case...
Now what were you saying about post war soldiers ?
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 10:13 AM UTC
That's what I like, the "authority" of the photo expert compared to the person who's actually used, fired and carried one of these for a living relating their experience.
Excuse me Mr Carius but your Tiger and how you describe it can't be like that because I've have pictures of it.
How long they carried it like that before it started to hurt and they changed to the other shoulder and then maybe to the carrying strap we'll never know because there all dead now. Maybe that's why they lost the war, all those macho machine gunners were on sick leave with shoulder injuries.
Anyway perhaps we could now get back to the main thread of this post before poor old tomapaul gives up the ghost on us experts.
Alan
Excuse me Mr Carius but your Tiger and how you describe it can't be like that because I've have pictures of it.
How long they carried it like that before it started to hurt and they changed to the other shoulder and then maybe to the carrying strap we'll never know because there all dead now. Maybe that's why they lost the war, all those macho machine gunners were on sick leave with shoulder injuries.
Anyway perhaps we could now get back to the main thread of this post before poor old tomapaul gives up the ghost on us experts.
Alan
CDK
Joined: September 24, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 10:51 AM UTC
Quoted Text
That's what I like, the "authority" of the photo expert compared to the person who's actually used, fired and carried one of these for a living relating their experience.
oooh kitty's got claws !
You're right, his post war experience with a post war example does negate photographic evidence of the German soldier that the kit portrays, how silly of me !
Quoted Text
Anyway perhaps we could now get back to the main thread of this post before poor old tomapaul gives up the ghost on us experts.
Alan
This coming from the guy who was just arguing about the MP40 and it's likelihood, oh the irony !
Hello pot, meet Mr. kettle !
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 11:23 AM UTC
Oh come on Lamont, can't take a little joke, see the smiley face. After all it's you posting the images to play the game...
Sure I don't disagree as shown with the images that this was the way they could and indeed in many photographs are shown the MG42 & 34 being carried on the shoulder but that doesn't mean Ken's point about it being uncomfortable and there is a more comfortable way isn't without merit. After all he has carried one and used one. If it's anything like the weight of the Bren Gun I carried for a while then he's probably glad to see the back of it. I have fired the Bundeswehrs modern equivalent of the MG42 and can testify to its terrifying rate of fire but luckily wasn't asked to carry it around
As for the "arguing" no not really mate, although you may see it like that. Really just replying to comments made upon mine regarding the MP40 which was relevant to the figures composition, just it's starting to go a little off the track don't you think.
Anyway......... tomaspaul, do you intend fitting all his equipment on before starting painting ? Some say it's better to have everything in place except maybe the gun then start painting, or as I've done in the past added the painted equipment after painting the figure.
Sure I don't disagree as shown with the images that this was the way they could and indeed in many photographs are shown the MG42 & 34 being carried on the shoulder but that doesn't mean Ken's point about it being uncomfortable and there is a more comfortable way isn't without merit. After all he has carried one and used one. If it's anything like the weight of the Bren Gun I carried for a while then he's probably glad to see the back of it. I have fired the Bundeswehrs modern equivalent of the MG42 and can testify to its terrifying rate of fire but luckily wasn't asked to carry it around
As for the "arguing" no not really mate, although you may see it like that. Really just replying to comments made upon mine regarding the MP40 which was relevant to the figures composition, just it's starting to go a little off the track don't you think.
Anyway......... tomaspaul, do you intend fitting all his equipment on before starting painting ? Some say it's better to have everything in place except maybe the gun then start painting, or as I've done in the past added the painted equipment after painting the figure.
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 11:53 AM UTC
Here is a nice example of the figure done by Robert Doepp posted over on ML
machinegunner
Hope I can get mine half as good.
Alan
machinegunner
Hope I can get mine half as good.
Alan
CDK
Joined: September 24, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 12:30 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Oh come on Lamont, can't take a little joke, see the smiley face.
Your 'joke' read like backslapping sarcasm to me Alan since I never claimed to be an 'expert' .
I was actually trying to be helpful to the OP, my apologies for not getting your humor.
Quoted Text
After all it's you posting the images to play the game...
I posted the images so tomaspaul could see that it was indeed carried in the fashion his figure portrays, I have no interest in playing games. I found the third photo after posting the first two, with a simple google search, maybe three pages into it, I'd be willing to bet I could find more.
I'm also sure KEO has indeed carried the MG3 (that is what the post war version is called, is it not ?) and fired it and so on but the figure that this thread is discussing is a WWII German soldier and that is represented in the photos I posted.
Quoted Text
just it's starting to go a little off the track don't you think.
Yes I agree that the thread was going off track, that was another reason I posted the pictures. I thought they were very much on track, being actual wartime photos actually showing the MG in a similar pose as the figure, who doesn't appear to be marching but standing still.
If the photos aren't helpful to the OP, then I apologize to him as well.
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 02:17 PM UTC
I think its an excellent figure "straight out the box" as they say. Although once I get mine I'll probably do my usual on it with my scalpel blade when I get round to starting it.
Hollow out the sleeve and create detail to look like the jacket cuff etc.
Adding some undercutting to the various straps etc. to make them less moulded in than they are at present.
Maybe get some of the Mr Surfacer or even just use liquid glue brushed on and stippled to create the cloth effect on the coat.
If I had one misgiving about the figure it's that his faces reminds me so much of the UK actor Nicholas Lyndhurst. Doubt if many outside the UK have heard of him, so this is what he looks like. What do you think ?
Nic Lyndhurst
Alan
Tarok
Joined: July 28, 2004
KitMaker: 10,889 posts
Armorama: 3,245 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 03:09 PM UTC
Hi tomapaul,
This is a nice figure - I built one some years ago now. I think it may still be in my gallery.
There are 2 specific areas that I can remember which need a bit of attention.
1) Watch the MG placement on the shoulder. You'll want to get it in as close to the collar as possible, else it tends to sit unrealistically on the edge of the shoulder (imagine how uncomfortable that must be). Also don't forget to add the MG carry straps.
2) MG spares and pistol holster: IIRC these tend to "sit on" the figure, and so look rather unrealistic. You may want to make small indents in the spots where these will be placed and then sort of build up the coat indent around it. I hope that makes sense...
Next, about your addition of the sub-machine gun: to be honest I'd get rid of this. The MG gunner 1 and 2 in a squad were, IIRC junior/low ranking members of the squad. However, the issue of a sub-machine came with a NCO rating. So what I'm saying is although of course not impossible, perhaps a bit unlikely.
As to the above photos - how many of these were taken for propaganda purposes? On all sides. Those were not the days of (relative) free press we see nowadays. C'mon... such a small issue... let's not be a bunch of Nancys
Rudi
This is a nice figure - I built one some years ago now. I think it may still be in my gallery.
There are 2 specific areas that I can remember which need a bit of attention.
1) Watch the MG placement on the shoulder. You'll want to get it in as close to the collar as possible, else it tends to sit unrealistically on the edge of the shoulder (imagine how uncomfortable that must be). Also don't forget to add the MG carry straps.
2) MG spares and pistol holster: IIRC these tend to "sit on" the figure, and so look rather unrealistic. You may want to make small indents in the spots where these will be placed and then sort of build up the coat indent around it. I hope that makes sense...
Next, about your addition of the sub-machine gun: to be honest I'd get rid of this. The MG gunner 1 and 2 in a squad were, IIRC junior/low ranking members of the squad. However, the issue of a sub-machine came with a NCO rating. So what I'm saying is although of course not impossible, perhaps a bit unlikely.
As to the above photos - how many of these were taken for propaganda purposes? On all sides. Those were not the days of (relative) free press we see nowadays. C'mon... such a small issue... let's not be a bunch of Nancys
Rudi
Kuno-Von-Dodenburg
Joined: February 20, 2007
KitMaker: 1,453 posts
Armorama: 1,319 posts
Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 - 08:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I'm watching very closely as I was thinking about this series (and DML's as well) recently...
This one is the pick of the Tamiya 1/16 figure crop, IMHO (and Alan - thanks for the link to Robert's build, which is a stunning piece of work).
Personally I prefer the DML ones when it comes to injection-moulded 1/16 figures. Many of them make interesting subjects, are nicely done and fit together well. They date from the 1990s (most of them, anyway) but they're still pretty good, and are excellent for honing your painting skills before moving on to more expensive resin figures - or just as a relaxing, minimum-hassle and low-expense project.
I'm currently working on DML's "Hanschar" machine gunner (the pose of which is very similar to this one), and I have this Tamiya one in the stash.
tomapaul - please keep us posted with updates. I'd also say "ditch the MP40" for the same reasons that the other guys have already stated.
- Steve
PS: Alan - funny you should mention Nicolas Lyndhurst! Someone else over on HF also recently commented that this figure has a definite "Rodders" look about him!!
CDK
Joined: September 24, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 339 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2009 - 02:00 AM UTC
self edited.
My intent was to help, not to argue.
My intent was to help, not to argue.
alanmac
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2009 - 05:45 AM UTC
Hi Tomapaul
In case you need any reference for the equipment etc. I thought I'd post a link to this site.
http://www.mp44.nl/equipment.htm
Hope its of some help.
Alan
In case you need any reference for the equipment etc. I thought I'd post a link to this site.
http://www.mp44.nl/equipment.htm
Hope its of some help.
Alan
GALILEO1
Joined: April 18, 2006
KitMaker: 1,794 posts
Armorama: 1,431 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2009 - 06:15 AM UTC
You know I just have to say that I don't understand why some of you sort of downplayed, and right down criticized, those great photos Lamont shared with us. The subject of whether the MG42 was indeed carried that way is an important one and adds value to this thread as a whole. As mentioned in my previous post, I have this kit in the stash and, probably as Tomapaul, would really like to know if Tamiya got it right when it comes to the overall look of this figure. I for one am happy to learn that WWII German soldiers did indeed carry machine guns in the manner depicted, even if for short distances or for a photo opp.
The subject around whether the MG42 was carried that way came out after Kenneth remarked (rightfully so due to his experience) that machine gunners would have probably not carried the weapon in such manner. Lamont's pictures simply proved that Germans did, in fact, carried them this way. What's wrong with showing pics proving facts. After all, when someone asks if this or that color is right, or if that sprocket has the right number of teeth, etc., don't we all say "make sure to check reference pictures just to be sure"? These types of statements imply that, unlike Alan's sarcastic remarks, pictures ARE authoritative, at least for the most part since pictures are all we have.
Geez, can we just all be thankful to have people who are actually willing to provide not circumstantial but factual evidence that certain things did indeed occur?
Rob
The subject around whether the MG42 was carried that way came out after Kenneth remarked (rightfully so due to his experience) that machine gunners would have probably not carried the weapon in such manner. Lamont's pictures simply proved that Germans did, in fact, carried them this way. What's wrong with showing pics proving facts. After all, when someone asks if this or that color is right, or if that sprocket has the right number of teeth, etc., don't we all say "make sure to check reference pictures just to be sure"? These types of statements imply that, unlike Alan's sarcastic remarks, pictures ARE authoritative, at least for the most part since pictures are all we have.
Geez, can we just all be thankful to have people who are actually willing to provide not circumstantial but factual evidence that certain things did indeed occur?
Rob
tomapaul
Joined: September 17, 2007
KitMaker: 425 posts
Armorama: 304 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 29, 2009 - 06:43 AM UTC
20+ posts, and mine's are only ... only 1.
Hmmm....I see my figure sure got a lot of attention.
I can't quote all of what you guys said , but I'll try to reply.
I'll say a big THANKS to all of you guys.Really helpfull to see that this project is watched.
So I'll respod to all of you:
First: In the WW2 my girlfriend's grandfather sometimes carried 2 or 3 riffles to help others.It wasn't modern war...so sometimes they really had to carry all they could grab.It was really bad.But I am thinking of ditching the MP40.I'll build a vignette (I think) so I can place it on the ground.I don't know at this stage.
2nd:I like the DML 1/16 US soldier.He is on my list of future builds, together with the tamiya 1/16 modern US soldier.Maybe I'll jump to resin kits if this one turns OK.I don't know...we'll all see.
3rd:For reference I'm using "Motorbuch Verlag - Deutsche Uniformen 1939-1945" .But thanks for the links Alan.Really helpfull(the belt attachment mode)...thanks.I know about Robert Doepp's Machine gunner...very nice one.I hope that my figure turns as nice.
4th:@Rudi Richardson-> 2nd point makes sense.1st point is OK.The MG42 sits very nice.An eternity of shoulder pain awaits the poor guy.
5th:I knew about the MG42 grabber for shoulder carrying.
I'll let the guy hold it like this.I really want to start painting so no changes to the hand and no belt for it too.
Except the major parts, all the other aren't glued(Greatcoat,arms,equipment,head,helmet,collar).All is smooth and filled.This is just before the paint.
Hmmm....I see my figure sure got a lot of attention.
I can't quote all of what you guys said
, but I'll try to reply. I'll say a big THANKS to all of you guys.Really helpfull to see that this project is watched.
So I'll respod to all of you:
First: In the WW2 my girlfriend's grandfather sometimes carried 2 or 3 riffles to help others.It wasn't modern war...so sometimes they really had to carry all they could grab.It was really bad.But I am thinking of ditching the MP40.I'll build a vignette (I think) so I can place it on the ground.I don't know at this stage.
2nd:I like the DML 1/16 US soldier.He is on my list of future builds, together with the tamiya 1/16 modern US soldier.Maybe I'll jump to resin kits if this one turns OK.I don't know...we'll all see.
3rd:For reference I'm using "Motorbuch Verlag - Deutsche Uniformen 1939-1945" .But thanks for the links Alan.Really helpfull(the belt attachment mode)...thanks.I know about Robert Doepp's Machine gunner...very nice one.I hope that my figure turns as nice.
4th:@Rudi Richardson-> 2nd point makes sense.1st point is OK.The MG42 sits very nice.An eternity of shoulder pain awaits the poor guy.
5th:I knew about the MG42 grabber for shoulder carrying.
I'll let the guy hold it like this.I really want to start painting so no changes to the hand and no belt for it too.Except the major parts, all the other aren't glued(Greatcoat,arms,equipment,head,helmet,collar).All is smooth and filled.This is just before the paint.
 |
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.