Howdy all,

Have a question for the group. Just saw some really great pics of British Challenger tanks that served in the Iraqi Freedom campaign. They show the Challenger with very nifty 'skirts' or mud flap-like coverings hanging below the reactive armour appliques that are attached to the sponson sides. They almost go all the way to the ground.
O.K., my question is two-fold. First, do U.S. vehicles (M1-A1/2s, etc) utilize such skirting? Secondly, has anyone modeled any armour with that bit of detail? And lastly (oops, I did say two-fold didn't I? ) does anyone know what material these are made of so I can try to scratchbuild them?

Many thx all,

Tread.

Hi Tread,
A couple of quick answers, no the US vehicles didn't use the "dust-skirts" (I have also read they were attached to help reduce the tanks thermal image) There are a few companies who are making conversion kits for the Trumpeter Challenger 2, AEF Designs, Cast-Off, and Accurate Armor. Lastly I'm not 100% sure but from one close-up pic I have they appear to be made of a canvas material.

HTH
Mike

Howdy Mike,

Many thx for the quick reply. What you say about the 'dust skirts' makes sense. But I've also noticed that both British and U.S. MBT's leave the rear wheel exposed. What reason would that serve?
AEF makes a conversion kit huh? Well it just so happens that the AEF office's are just down the road from me here in Denver, Co. The only potential problem I have with that is that most 'skinny' I hear about AEF is that most of their molds are warped. Assuming that the prices are comparable, I might check out Accurate Armour and see what they have.

Thx again,

Tread.

I am not as familiar with the challengers, but the Abrams had a huge problem with mud build-up behind the drive sprocket and the rear side skirt. This would cause a thrown track. The quick fix was to remove the last (no. 7) side skirt. It was later re-designed, but even that wasn't a cure all. Now Abrams crews will often remove the last skirt just to keep it from getting in the way.

Rob

Howdy ......Rtwpsom2 ? :-)

Thx very much for that input. I thought it was something like that. Makes you wonder tho, with all the advanced technology at our disposal, we can't come up with a better way to get rid of mud! #:-)

Tread.

P.S. While I have your ear (hope I still do), do you think it's a matter of which track type is being used that afffects the mud/earth build-up? Seems I remember someone talking about the rubber track pads that are in standard use now tend to 'attract' mud.

Well most of the time the #7's on a M1 series tank get removed because the tank threw track and damaged the skirt. During OIF though I think we only had 2 or 3 tanks in our company that didn't have a #7 skirt. I do remember though that all tanks had them when we drew them from Doha. As far as the Challenger 2's, the one I saw at Udari range in kuwait had a rubber skirting that was about 1/4 inch thick . The Challanger's also had cammo nets rolled up around the top of the skirts and front and backs of the tanks. The British guys were really cool about letting us check out their tanks but I gotta say that I don't envy the loader in the Challanger. Hope some of this rambling helps you guys.

Stephen Magee

Tread, just a couple of pointers re. the Chally 2 side armor. As your question revolves around the Chally, try and get yourself a copy of Military Modelcraft International (August edition) I picked it up in the U.K. in July and there is a very useful article (plans included) on working with the Trumpeter kit. Particular attention is paid to the side skirts the modification to build a 'Telic' Chally is very straightforward. If you don't fancy the scratchbuilding then CASTOFF models have produced the side-skirts in resin... Hope this is of some use...Jim

jim,
cast off also do a complete uparmour for the chally 2 in the gulf a few people have done up armoured challys recently best bet for the sirt wolud be to use an old take way carton for it

Tread, I haven't heard that from anyone yet, about the type of track. I would think not because they both have the same surfaces through which the mud would be pushed out, although the older chevron tracks might have dug up more mud, so I see arguments for both ways. Maybe SabotShooter or Rob Gronovius has some experience that could help.

Rob

Howdy Jim?

Thx for you reply. I seem to remember an article on the Challenger as well. But I checked the shelf, pulled out a copy of Military Modelcraft International Vol 6. No. 6. (August 2002).......damn, wasn't in there!
I'll have to check around, see if I can track that article down.

Regards,

Tread.

Regarding the AEF conversions: Before AFV Club produced the M35 2 1/2 ton truck in plastic, there was only the Monogram early series truck with single wheels on the rear axles. AEF used to make an updated complete kit, and in my innocence, I oedered one.

What arrived was a resin re-pop of the monogram kit, except for the rear axles which were narrowed to accept dual tires rims and tires. Even the engine hood reverse side had the regular Monogram trademark and date removed and replaced by the AEF design.

I sent a letter inquiring into this, and was not pleased by the reply.

Since then (1988), I have purchased the M728 CEV turret conversion for the Academy M60, and had to exrensively re-work the parts, due to warped parts. Several of the smaller detail parts were incompletely cast, and when I wrote for replacements, they were promised but never delivered.

"Buyer beware,,,,,"

The article is in August 2003 issue!

Rgds,
Pawel

.............oops, Vodnik. please pardon my Alziemer's.

I might be able to still get that one here at Newsland..............if I hurry!

Whoooooooooooooooosh!!!!!!

Thx.

Tread.