_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
For Sabot (and anybody else)
ArmouredSprue
Visit this Community
South Australia, Australia
Joined: January 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,958 posts
Armorama: 1,003 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 08:58 PM UTC
Hi;
I think Rob is the man to help me here...
I saw this picture and I was wondering what vehicle is that, and if it has a kit in 1/35???

Any help is welcomed
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:01 PM UTC
Super HET (Heavy Equipment Transporter). I have a few pictures of one in my motorpool, but mine is NATO 3-color. (I am assuming you are talking about the truck and not the tank being loaded). The tank is an NTC OPFOR (opposing forces) M1A1 without side skirts to make it "look" more like a former Warsaw Pact tank, and to differentiate it from friendly M1A1s.

As far as kits, someone (Jan perhaps?) was talking of a resin kit of the Super HET. I bet it would be pricey, a Super HET would be about twice the size of a Dragon Wagon.
TreadHead
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 12, 2002
KitMaker: 5,000 posts
Armorama: 2,868 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:14 PM UTC
Oooooooooooooooooh........I gotta have one.
Being the huge fan I am of large scale kits, that looks like one I've just gotta have!!

Greyhunter, you mentioned AA had it planned for May/June? How accurate a time frame do you think that is?


Tread.

BTW, Rob, do they also paint the OPFOR's a different colour?
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:17 PM UTC

Quoted Text

BTW, Rob, do they also paint the OPFOR's a different colour?
Yes, they tend to paint them using sand instead of green. They end up with some pretty funky looking camouflage patterns. I don't think they have a "standard" pattern. They just paint them to look different than the desert sand colored US tanks that train there.
ArmouredSprue
Visit this Community
South Australia, Australia
Joined: January 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,958 posts
Armorama: 1,003 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:31 PM UTC
thanks for the help guys!
I do agree, if itīs an accurate news it gonna be very pricey...
And Rob, yes I was looking for the truck reference
TreadHead
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 12, 2002
KitMaker: 5,000 posts
Armorama: 2,868 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:33 PM UTC
Many thx guys!
Appreciate the link Grey, I see that AA is rereleasing the M114! I'll have to think about picking one of those up as well. Even though they weren't as popular as their bigger brother, I always thought they looked lower profile....but what the hell do I know!

Tread.

Rob, maybe they should have painted them with zebra stripes ...
210cav
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 10:39 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Super HET (Heavy Equipment Transporter). I have a few pictures of one in my motorpool, but mine is NATO 3-color. (I am assuming you are talking about the truck and not the tank being loaded). The tank is an NTC OPFOR (opposing forces) M1A1 without side skirts to make it "look" more like a former Warsaw Pact tank, and to differentiate it from friendly M1A1s.

As far as kits, someone (Jan perhaps?) was talking of a resin kit of the Super HET. I bet it would be pricey, a Super HET would be about twice the size of a Dragon Wagon.


Rob--I am glad you identified the vehicle as an OPFOR NTC one. For a moment, I though she was the infamous A-34. She burnt during ARTEPs at Fort Bliss. I still wake-up in a cold sweat over that one.
DJ
Ranger74
Visit this Community
Tennessee, United States
Joined: April 04, 2002
KitMaker: 1,290 posts
Armorama: 658 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 11:59 PM UTC
Appreciate the link Grey, I see that AA is rereleasing the M114! I'll have to think about picking one of those up as well. Even though they weren't as popular as their bigger brother, I always thought they looked lower profile....but what the hell do I know!

Treadhead - I have the AA M114 kit. One of these days I will build it However, The M114 sucked The nose hung out in front of the sprockets, giving it a tendency to dig into ditches, we had to back thru some ditches. It was so narrow and had such low ground clearance it would high center in teh ruts mage by the M60A1s. I belive the ones we had at Ft. Knox had a "327" gasser and could move out on a road, but sucked cross country. The M113, although much bigger, is a much better vehicle.
210cav
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 12:53 AM UTC
At first fora brief moment, I thought you were speaking of the M 114 Korean era 8" Howitzer. Alas, I find to my chagrin that you speak of that disaster of a vehicle the command/recon M-114. Curse the idiots who ever brought that into the inventory. I took great pleasure at Fort Bliss in destroying numerous M-114s portraying the threat platoon on Tank Table VIII. It ranks right up there with the M60A2 in my book.
DJ
Ranger74
Visit this Community
Tennessee, United States
Joined: April 04, 2002
KitMaker: 1,290 posts
Armorama: 658 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 03:11 AM UTC
Yea, I remember at Ft. Knox they had to pile M114s to get a decent target, they were so small. It only took a couple service HEAT rounds and they had to replace the pile

Thou, they did have a great crew compartment heater. It forced air across the exhaust manifold and could really warm up that small compartment But other than that, it was cow-dung!
210cav
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: February 05, 2002
KitMaker: 6,149 posts
Armorama: 4,573 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 03:17 AM UTC
My Friend--my sentiments exactly. That bugger could go on hard pavement, but it was nasty when that rubber band track snapped.
DJ
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 03:57 AM UTC
Ft. Dix has an M114 (with 20mm cupola) on display in front of the field house (gym for you non-military types). They also had an M46 that was nice to look at (except the torsion bars were all broke) and several other nice semi-old vehicles (M110, M60A3 come to mind).
salt6
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: February 17, 2002
KitMaker: 796 posts
Armorama: 574 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:01 AM UTC
Was at Ft Riley a few years ago and the hard target are now M 113s. Got to look through a couple that hadn't made it down range yet. They also were using 901s.

TreadHead
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 12, 2002
KitMaker: 5,000 posts
Armorama: 2,868 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:27 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Appreciate the link Grey, I see that AA is rereleasing the M114! I'll have to think about picking one of those up as well. Even though they weren't as popular as their bigger brother, I always thought they looked lower profile....but what the hell do I know!

Treadhead - I have the AA M114 kit. One of these days I will build it However, The M114 sucked The nose hung out in front of the sprockets, giving it a tendency to dig into ditches, we had to back thru some ditches. It was so narrow and had such low ground clearance it would high center in teh ruts mage by the M60A1s. I belive the ones we had at Ft. Knox had a "327" gasser and could move out on a road, but sucked cross country. The M113, although much bigger, is a much better vehicle.


Howdy Ranger,

No worries, you're 'preaching to the choir' with your accurate input regarding the M114. It's just a trip down memory lane for me, that's all. My apologies.
In fact, I genuinely appreciate your 'armour input', as I consistently do Rob's, regarding the real world application of the piece's that make up part of what memory I have left.
Thx,

Tread.
TreadHead
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 12, 2002
KitMaker: 5,000 posts
Armorama: 2,868 posts
Posted: Monday, May 13, 2002 - 08:29 AM UTC
Irreguardless, I fully INTEND to buy the super HET when it's released!!
shiryon
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: April 26, 2002
KitMaker: 876 posts
Armorama: 606 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 05:23 AM UTC
As far as the accuracy of the Osh kosh transporter it should be pretty accurate( excuse the pun) My understanding is that Derek From AA actually Signed a contract with Osh Kosh to build their vehicles :-)
drewgimpy
Visit this Community
Utah, United States
Joined: January 24, 2002
KitMaker: 835 posts
Armorama: 388 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 11:14 AM UTC
I haven't done a dragon wagon and don't have any plans to in the near future but that I would have to build with a nice abrams on the back. I am affraid there will be a huge sticker shock with it. Maybe Rob can win one for me somehow
Hollowpoint
Visit this Community
Kansas, United States
Joined: January 24, 2002
KitMaker: 2,748 posts
Armorama: 1,797 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 - 12:49 PM UTC

Quoted Text

My understanding is that Derek From AA actually Signed a contract with Osh Kosh to build their vehicles


Let me qualify my statements by telling everyone that I lived in Oshkosh (yes, it's a real city in Wisconsin) for several years and still have lots of family in the area.

Oshkosh Truck is very hush-hush about future projects and protective of current and past projects. Being a long-time defense contractor probably has something to do with it, but also they are defending themselves against corporate espionage from competitors. Photos are rarely allowed on Oshkosh Truck's property and employees face not only dismissal but prosecution if they even think about taking out drawings or photos. I have family and friends (some of them are even modelers) who worked at "Truck" and all said it was career and financial suicide to try to slip anything by security.

In other words, it's pretty rare to get accurate, detailed info out of them and if you do it's on Truck's terms. Guys who worked on Truck's HEMMT line chuckled when they saw Italeri's kit, but said it was a reasonable facsimile with intentionally vague parts. My guess is that AA's new offering isn't dead-on perfect either, if Truck was involved. But hey, you better have a battalion of lawyers ready if you plan to produce one of Truck's vehicles without permission.
Red4
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: April 01, 2002
KitMaker: 4,287 posts
Armorama: 1,867 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 - 03:46 AM UTC
I don't know what Osh Kosh is so afraid of. Its a fricking truck. I have the manuals for the tractor and the trailer and tons of pictures from various field problems. I have thought about scratchbuilding one on my own, but if AA is going to do one, then maybe i'll let them do the hard part and correct anything they dont get right. Will probably cost some serious $$ for it But thats part of the process I guess. I plan on doing the same with the BFIST and Linebacker version of the Bradley. oh well just my babbling....
 _GOTOTOP