Rick Cooper takes a look at Allied Force ETO 1944, one of the latest sets from Dragon Models in their ''39-''45 Series with Gen2 gear.

Link to Item



If you have comments or questions please post them here.

Thanks!

Can I request some more pictures of the weapons and equipment supplied with this set, as I really like the look of the detail on the net covered helmet and I would like to see what the rest of it looks like. The lines on the torso you have pictured looks as if it is an actual line in the figure and will require filling; is this the case or is it just a discoloured line in the plastic and is it the same/as bad with the other two figures in the set?

Darren, out of the 2 DML figures I've ever actually completed, both had those cooling lines (or whatever they are) and painted up fine. I can't remember if I went over them with liquid cement like I did on the seam lines.

Thank you for that James. I have encounted lines on some AFV models but I could see that it was a discoloured line in the plastic, here it looks as if it is an actual indentation which is why I asked.

Darren,

I will get you a few more shots, but it will take me a couple days (no camera handy). I made a mistake on the review, not all of the weapons are Gen2, the sten gun is an old style Gen1 weapon. As far as the cooling lines, I will paint up the figure so you can see what happens when left alone. I have never done a thing to them but they seem to disappear under a coat of primer and paint.

Rick

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the review. These look to be quite nice figures and quite useable. Always good to see some more Allies.

Al

Some new photos added thanks to Rick

Thank you for the extra pictures. I have just noticed that the figure you have assembled for the review also has what you call "cooling lines" on his left arm.

I've had these "cooling lines" on some figures as well and they did show through after painting. So I'd recommend some Mr. Surfacer and a light sanding, just to be sure.

Cheers!
Stefan

I just bought this set and have a couple of questions for anyone who has some knowledge on the British commando figure;

1, Is the rucksack based on a real item or is it made up ? All of the reference I have (and the box art) suggests that this should be the GS Bergen although the actual part looks nothing like it. - Does anyone make an accurate bergen ?

2. The fastening straps of the gaiters/putees on the right leg are on the inside of the leg, not the outside. Is this a mistake or is there any evidence of this happening ?

I think I already know the answers but just want someone with some insight to confirm my doubts

Thanks,

Andy

As far as Im aware the gaiters are wrong,buckles should be on the outside.

I agree from what I can see the bergen looks rather misshapen. I understand accurate armour do a british infantry figure accessory set that includes a GS bergen.

My concerns were, based on the photos I've seen and not the real thing thatthe beret looks like a squashed chef hat rather than something worn by a serviceman. Would replace with a hornet head.

Also the use of a sten is odd as though there was some use of the sten by the commandos the most common smg by far was the thompson.

By the way from what I can gather, certainly by the end of 44 most commandos were wearing the para smock,so the dragon figure would be best suited for d day or before.

Jason,

Thanks for the info, pretty much confirms what I thought.

I am already with you on the beret, Hornet heads are on the way ! I didn't know about the AA set, thanks I will take a look.

I have replaced all of the personal equipment with Tamiya parts in this case because their British equipment is leagues ahead of the Dragon stuff. The other thing that is annoying is the lack of the Fairbairn-sykes dagger - clearly shown on the box art and an iconic symbol of the British commando - time to raid the spares box again.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the thought but why do Dragon spend so much effort researching their German stuff, give us ridiculously accurate models and then throw together an allied set with what looks like little research

Pity none of the "/reviews" picked up these obvious errors.

Thanks for the help,

Andy

Andy, you'll find the Accurate Armour Bergans spot on. Really do look the business and are correct.

One of the things I find with DML these days is while they spend time researching weird tanks that never went past the drawing board, producing figures for utterly obscure units and yet they still find it beyond their scope to actually produce any Allied figures which are really of any use these days. This box? The US troops would be okay for taking POW's. The Commando? I have no idea. The main SMG of Commandos as someone has already stated was the Thompson. Lets face it noone wanted the Sten and as Commandos had more say in what they used they went for the better SMG. Same as some Commandos preferred the SMLE III as it was more accurate and The Vickers K for it's better rate of fire (as documented in photos in Normandy).
Now DML is a company that has a worldwide audience yet they make such schoolboy errors as moulding gaiters on back to front?

Now to me research is the fundamental thing. Finding original 3rd Reich items to work from is a lot more difficult to finding Commonwealth or US items to work from. Ron Volstadt always does an outstanding job of doing the box art and them someone in moulding/design completely buggars it up. A comparison is ordering a steak medium rare then ending up with a bowl of tofu. It's not what's on the box.

How is it new companies such as Miniart and Masterbox can produce items that are (a) correct (b) interesting (c) dynamic (d) as on the box?

I'm currently working on a Normandy dio and have used some DML figs which I've modified using Accurate Armour, Miniart, Masterbox, Airfix, Hornet, Ultracast bits as the DML stuff was not suitable for what I had planned. They really need to up their game as far as Allied modellers are concerned.

When you've got companies like Bronco releasing 17lbers and Pheasants (deep joy!) Archers, Valentines etc they deserve to get left behind. What's there next development? A tank Hitler drew on the back of a bit of paper while on the toilet with a tank crew in space helmets for his invasion of the moon?

Thanks for the review Rick. Very concise.


I hear ya.
I have used the artwork for the US soldiers here as some equipment reference and posing ideas when sculpting, and knew that someday DML would have a crack at them in plastic and not be able to manage more than a passing likeness...

Karl,

Thanks for the additional recommendation on the AA bergens, I have some on order now. Some of the other bits in this set look useful too.

Why is painting one figure turning out to be so troublesome

Thanks again,

Andy

One good thing, is that in our search for detail we sometimes miss the obvious, this set reminded me that my Commandos should have Thompsons and not Sten Guns, so for that I 'm thankful.

Nice figs though.

Al

Thanks for all of the callouts on the relatively minor innacuracies and solutions. I picked up this set shortly after it's release and seeing the review, and now I have a better idea of what to do with them.

Cheers
Jeremy H

I just bought this set,

Adding to the review:
- The Commando has no Fairburn Sykes dagger, although this is present on the illustration.
- Only the US weapons are Gen2 .
- The US soldier with buckle shoes. The upper of these look more like British gaiters.

Hi Mark not trying to be pedantic, gaiters are designated anklets web, it's just when gaiter's are mentioned I get this picture of old vicar pushing a bike wearing gaiters, and the vision of one of our blackened faced commandos dealing death to our enemies disappears.

The double buckle combat boots did have a passing resemblance to British web ankets but in the US case it's one boot with a buckled top.

In 1/35 you really can pass one off for the other. Helps when doing conversions.