Hosted by Darren Baker
Some mistakes about BRONCO's M24 Chaffee tank
alanmac
United Kingdom
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 07:16 AM UTC
I still see the original posters pictures fine. Browser is Firefox 8.0.1 running on Windows XP.
Alan
alanmac
United Kingdom
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 3,033 posts
Armorama: 2,953 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 07:42 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Here are pics of an M24 where the weld line is not forward of the ventilator
http://www.modellismopiu.net/m+gallerie/main.php?g2_itemId=611477
http://www.modellismopiu.net/m+gallerie/main.php?g2_itemId=25577
I don't see the Bronco mistake when compared to these 2 samples. The bend is clearly a welded joint for two separate roof plates.
Sorry Roy, I actually do see exactly the same error, if it is one. There is a weld line which run just in front of the cupola meeting the ventilator cover etc. But forward of that is a bend in the turret roof. See how the streaks and shadows change direction.
Alan
toadman1
Vendor
California, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 07:44 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextThe bend is clearly a welded joint for two separate roof plates.
Roy,
I don't know how tanks are fabricated so this is more a question than a challenge, but how do you know those two sections are welded together, versus bent or formed that way? I would assume by the period they were making Chaffees that not everything was created using flat steel.
Thanks,
Jim
The turret of the M24 was fabricated from multiple plates welded together. Some, like the turret sides, were curved. The roof plates are welded at an angle as indicated by weld beads on the inside and outside of the turret.
*Correction* There is a bend in the plate about 1 inch forward of the weld.
Pictures from my M24 Photo Detail CD:
Also, the other ventilator type. Also from my CD.
Chris "toadman" Hughes
Toadman's Tank Pictures
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:10 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Can someone repost the original three images in something other than "red X" format, please?
Let's give it a try
It's OK with me ! (I'm using IE 9 and Windows Vista)
Frenchy
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I still see the original posters pictures fine. Browser is Firefox 8.0.1 running on Windows XP.
Alan
Curious and interesting! I'm running IE8 on Windows 7, and have the red X. One for Jim S to investigate?
Tom
PS: Sorry, Frenchy, still no go for me.
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:20 AM UTC
What Chris's pictures show is that there are variations and if building tanks has taught me anything it is that there are differences in the same vehicle make deppending on who and where it was made and when it was made. I would expect exactly the same with the Chaffee.
I didn't see the original pics just red Xs and I'm no expert on this vehicle but I've read a number of threads over the years where new kits get slated before they even reach the shelves. I've never yet seen the perfect plastic injection kit and I doubt I ever will. The Bronco kit is a vast improvement on the older Italeri kit but even that one can be done well if you take time and effort.
Personally I think there was a different agenda here, but if someone wants to take the time to research the issue fully and come up with a workable fix if one is needed then fine. Isn't fixing things up part of the fun and doesn't it keep AM producers in business?
I'll wait for the review and some well reseaerched data.
Al
I didn't see the original pics just red Xs and I'm no expert on this vehicle but I've read a number of threads over the years where new kits get slated before they even reach the shelves. I've never yet seen the perfect plastic injection kit and I doubt I ever will. The Bronco kit is a vast improvement on the older Italeri kit but even that one can be done well if you take time and effort.
Personally I think there was a different agenda here, but if someone wants to take the time to research the issue fully and come up with a workable fix if one is needed then fine. Isn't fixing things up part of the fun and doesn't it keep AM producers in business?
I'll wait for the review and some well reseaerched data.
Al
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:23 AM UTC
Spiderfrommars
Milano, Italy
Joined: July 13, 2010
KitMaker: 3,845 posts
Armorama: 3,543 posts
Joined: July 13, 2010
KitMaker: 3,845 posts
Armorama: 3,543 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:28 AM UTC
Quoted Text
What Chris's pictures show is that there are variations and if building tanks has taught me anything it is that there are differences in the same vehicle make deppending on who and where it was made and when it was made. I would expect exactly the same with the Chaffee.
I didn't see the original pics just red Xs and I'm no expert on this vehicle but I've read a number of threads over the years where new kits get slated before they even reach the shelves. I've never yet seen the perfect plastic injection kit and I doubt I ever will. The Bronco kit is a vast improvement on the older Italeri kit but even that one can be done well if you take time and effort.
Personally I think there was a different agenda here, but if someone wants to take the time to research the issue fully and come up with a workable fix if one is needed then fine. Isn't fixing things up part of the fun and doesn't it keep AM producers in business?
I'll wait for the review and some well reseaerched data.
Al
I agree
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 08:41 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
PS: Sorry, Frenchy, still no go for me.
OK...So I've uploaded the pics to my Picasa album :
This should work now
Frenchy
Wow - that's weird. Your upload produces a full-width box with red X (unlike the original tiny box with X), but if I click on it it opens up your picasa page where I can see the photos! Definitely something odd going on in the underlying code.
I can see the issue now, but I'll wait til the plastic hits the shelves before I formulate an easy fix.
Thanks Frenchy!
Tom
Removed by original poster on 12/16/11 - 21:11:30 (GMT).
ALBOWIE
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,605 posts
Armorama: 1,565 posts
Joined: February 28, 2006
KitMaker: 1,605 posts
Armorama: 1,565 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 09:07 AM UTC
Abraham, DML went down this road with a certain Blogger and it doesn't rub with modellers. It just makes your sponsor (I'm thinking AFV club here given your other two posts particularly the 25 pdr post) look really sad and desperate in the eyes of the modeller and will affect how they view your product. Seeding Forums with Shills is counterproductive (just ask DML where they devestated their sales of 1/6th figures to the extent that most collectors go out of their way to find fault in the DML product and regularly trash their latest release on forums).
AFV have a great product but they take so long from announcement to production it is invariable that someone may beat them too the release.
Please stick to what you do best and make kits, leave the critique to the modellers and stop rubbishing the oppositions product. Failure to do so will result in a far greater focus on your product where people will criticise it for the slightest imperfection. There is a great western saying that applies here;
"People who live in glass houses should not throw stones"
As for what you identified thanks but with the possible exception of the turret roof they are no great drama.
P.S. You may wish to wait until the Bronco kit is available before claiming to have bought one and found such glaring errors. Also, how many years before AFV club plan on offering one?
Cheers
Al
AFV have a great product but they take so long from announcement to production it is invariable that someone may beat them too the release.
Please stick to what you do best and make kits, leave the critique to the modellers and stop rubbishing the oppositions product. Failure to do so will result in a far greater focus on your product where people will criticise it for the slightest imperfection. There is a great western saying that applies here;
"People who live in glass houses should not throw stones"
As for what you identified thanks but with the possible exception of the turret roof they are no great drama.
P.S. You may wish to wait until the Bronco kit is available before claiming to have bought one and found such glaring errors. Also, how many years before AFV club plan on offering one?
Cheers
Al
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 09:13 AM UTC
For those having trouble seeing the image... quick tip: Upgrade to IE version 9 as it apparently (and likely newer versions of Firefox, Chrome, and others may as well) has support for CMYK .jpg files. Normally .jpg (or .jpeg) type files are RGB in format but these are CMYK. This is an old web issue that use to affect all sites, but apparently newer browsers must be supporting the CMYK format images now.
Cheers,
Jim
Cheers,
Jim
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 11:04 AM UTC
Hi Jim,
That makes sense of the sporadic symptoms! I just hate being driven to upgrade a MS product when I've finally got most of the bug-fixes for the one I've already got!
Regards,
Tom
That makes sense of the sporadic symptoms! I just hate being driven to upgrade a MS product when I've finally got most of the bug-fixes for the one I've already got!
Regards,
Tom
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 12:40 PM UTC
It looks to me as if Bronco put the weld seam on the kink rather than behind it. Hardly a catastrophic error.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/Tanks_in_France/chaffee_spicheren/imagepages/image12.html
KL
http://the.shadock.free.fr/Tanks_in_France/chaffee_spicheren/imagepages/image12.html
KL
Big-John
Ohio, United States
Joined: August 12, 2010
KitMaker: 731 posts
Armorama: 711 posts
Joined: August 12, 2010
KitMaker: 731 posts
Armorama: 711 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 12:47 PM UTC
Yeap, I agree with Kurt.
That won't stop me from buying or building this kit.
That won't stop me from buying or building this kit.
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 12:47 PM UTC
Quoted Text
To my eye, I can see a weld bead on photo 776, but I don't see one on the other example. To me it illustrates two ways of achieving the same result in production.
and
Quoted Text
What Chris's pictures show is that there are variations and if building tanks has taught me anything it is that there are differences in the same vehicle make deppending on who and where it was made and when it was made. I would expect exactly the same with the Chaffee.
All of the pictures show the same thing: The turret roof plate was asymmetrical. On the left it ended shortly behind the kink, and was welded to the TC hatch plate. On the right the turret roof plate went back uninterrupted to the loader's hatch.
Let's not create any new myths about factory variants or production types, OK?
KL
toadman1
Vendor
California, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,141 posts
Armorama: 950 posts
Posted: Friday, December 16, 2011 - 02:01 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextTo my eye, I can see a weld bead on photo 776, but I don't see one on the other example. To me it illustrates two ways of achieving the same result in production.
andQuoted TextWhat Chris's pictures show is that there are variations and if building tanks has taught me anything it is that there are differences in the same vehicle make deppending on who and where it was made and when it was made. I would expect exactly the same with the Chaffee.
All of the pictures show the same thing: The turret roof plate was asymmetrical. On the left it ended shortly behind the kink, and was welded to the TC hatch plate. On the right the turret roof plate went back uninterrupted to the loader's hatch.
Let's not create any new myths about factory variants or production types, OK?
KL
Hey Kurt,
With regards to the turret ventilator, I haven't found any WW II era pics of it with the bullet splash guard welded around it. Would you happen to know if they were added as some sort of post-war MWO or rebuild? Maybe added only to MDAP vehicles?
Chris "toadman" Hughes
Toadman's Tank Pictures
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 05:38 AM UTC
Quoted Text
With regards to the turret ventilator, I haven't found any WW II era pics of it with the bullet splash guard welded around it. Would you happen to know if they were added as some sort of post-war MWO or rebuild? Maybe added only to MDAP vehicles?
It might be, or it might have been added later in production. I haven't examined M24s at all and there is very little with regards to change documents like TBs or MWOs. (The only one I've found added handles to the driver's hatches.)
KL
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 06:02 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextWith regards to the turret ventilator, I haven't found any WW II era pics of it with the bullet splash guard welded around it. Would you happen to know if they were added as some sort of post-war MWO or rebuild? Maybe added only to MDAP vehicles?
It might be, or it might have been added later in production. I haven't examined M24s at all and there is very little with regards to change documents like TBs or MWOs. (The only one I've found added handles to the driver's hatches.)
KL
Sorry KL,
But if you haven't examined the M24 at all how do you know there are not production diofferences? I'm not going down the road of half truths from 2 pictuers. Many people with much more knowledge than me insisted the British didn'nt have the M4 DV in Normandy only to be proved worng and there are many other examples form 'experts' gettiing it wrong - so please don't patronise me.
As I said I'll wait and see what proper in depth research comes to light, not jump to conclusions based on 2 pictures that I can''t see.
Cheers
Al
jowady
Joined: June 12, 2006
KitMaker: 1,027 posts
Armorama: 683 posts
KitMaker: 1,027 posts
Armorama: 683 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 08:19 AM UTC
Personally I am looking forward to new kits of the M24. Nothing that I have seen dissuades me. Different kits have different problems, no kit seems perfect, nor are reviews perfect. I can remember reading two reviews of a P-51D, one praising the simulated plywood cockpit floor, one deploring it as a mistake.
meaty_hellhound
Alberta, Canada
Joined: July 23, 2010
KitMaker: 786 posts
Armorama: 753 posts
Joined: July 23, 2010
KitMaker: 786 posts
Armorama: 753 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 08:19 AM UTC
subterfuge, disinformation... maybe clandestine motives... in a military modeling forum... ahhhh the irony.
Abraham raises some issues with a kit that i am interested in as well as the AFV Club release as i have always liked this vehicle. whether there is an agenda or not it created a good dialogue that i have enjoyed reading about the potential for variants on the chaffee.
i can understand that depending on the modeler's skills, these errors could be a pain or a breeze to fix and as Alan, i believe, mentioned it is fun to tweak kits to make them better.
i hope that a more balanced and less sensationalized topic is made available for us to see what the chaffee kits have to offer. i do hope that companies don't use the "Abrahams" of the web to etch out a bit more profit for their yearends as this may have me doubting everyone's threads as i see "Chaffee kit X has major errors" popping up in an all out war for my dollars. bd
Abraham raises some issues with a kit that i am interested in as well as the AFV Club release as i have always liked this vehicle. whether there is an agenda or not it created a good dialogue that i have enjoyed reading about the potential for variants on the chaffee.
i can understand that depending on the modeler's skills, these errors could be a pain or a breeze to fix and as Alan, i believe, mentioned it is fun to tweak kits to make them better.
i hope that a more balanced and less sensationalized topic is made available for us to see what the chaffee kits have to offer. i do hope that companies don't use the "Abrahams" of the web to etch out a bit more profit for their yearends as this may have me doubting everyone's threads as i see "Chaffee kit X has major errors" popping up in an all out war for my dollars. bd
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 09:12 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Sorry KL,
But if you haven't examined the M24 at all how do you know there are not production diofferences? I'm not going down the road of half truths from 2 pictuers. Many people with much more knowledge than me insisted the British didn'nt have the M4 DV in Normandy only to be proved worng and there are many other examples form 'experts' gettiing it wrong - so please don't patronise me.
As I said I'll wait and see what proper in depth research comes to light, not jump to conclusions based on 2 pictures that I can''t see.
Cheers
Al
While I haven't examined M24s turrets in person, from all the photos I've seen via this thread, all the photos I've found on my own, and from reviewing the Hunnicutt photos in his Stuart book (I have copies of the originals) there is nothing to indicate any differences in the configuration of the front turret plate to turret roof joint. This was the area, after all, originally discussed that led you to make the statement:
"What Chris's pictures show is that there are variations and if building tanks has taught me anything it is that there are differences in the same vehicle make deppending on who and where it was made and when it was made. I would expect exactly the same with the Chaffee."
And it was your statement - making a broad declaration based upon a non-existent difference - that lead me to caution people about creating myths.
Was the M24 absolutely uniform over time and between both Cadillac and Massey Harris? Absolutely not. Has anyone compiled a list of those changes? Not to my knowledge and least of all me. However, I can say that nothing has surfaced indicating that the turret roof ever changed, so let's not start paving the way for fantasy by making blanket statements, OK?
KL
KurtLaughlin
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Joined: January 18, 2003
KitMaker: 2,402 posts
Armorama: 2,377 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 09:21 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Well this guy [Abraham] probably works for AFV Club, but whatever.
If true it would be ironic, considering that AFV Club has used an (incorrect) M3A3 turret for their M5A1 kits, and the magnitude of the error is about the same as the misplaced weld seam on the Bronco M24.
KL
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 09:33 AM UTC
Quote
Was the M24 absolutely uniform over time and between both Cadillac and Massey Harris? Absolutely not. Has anyone compiled a list of those changes? Not to my knowledge and least of all me. However, I can say that nothing has surfaced indicating that the turret roof ever changed, so let's not start paving the way for fantasy by making blanket statements, OK?
Unquote
Well I rest my case Kurt. As to paving the way for fantasy by making blanket statements, any researcher worth their salt would consider, manufaturer, time and place.
Clearly little evidence has yet been brought forward to consider, and I personally hate these post designed to slate a kit before it''s even on the shelves.
I imagine for the large majority this will be a very welcome release and where useful further data can be added by the community well that's a plus.
Please don't try and put an inferance into my words that is simple not there OK.
Look forward to developments.
Al
Was the M24 absolutely uniform over time and between both Cadillac and Massey Harris? Absolutely not. Has anyone compiled a list of those changes? Not to my knowledge and least of all me. However, I can say that nothing has surfaced indicating that the turret roof ever changed, so let's not start paving the way for fantasy by making blanket statements, OK?
Unquote
Well I rest my case Kurt. As to paving the way for fantasy by making blanket statements, any researcher worth their salt would consider, manufaturer, time and place.
Clearly little evidence has yet been brought forward to consider, and I personally hate these post designed to slate a kit before it''s even on the shelves.
I imagine for the large majority this will be a very welcome release and where useful further data can be added by the community well that's a plus.
Please don't try and put an inferance into my words that is simple not there OK.
Look forward to developments.
Al
CB1000h
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: March 01, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 304 posts
Joined: March 01, 2006
KitMaker: 358 posts
Armorama: 304 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 17, 2011 - 09:34 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It looks like a chaffee to me....
You said it Belt_Fed
Looks like a Chaffee to me as well and a dam nice one at that.