Hi all
Here's my version of Accurate Armours Conqueror mk2.
A hefty piece of armour and a nice kit.
The Centurion's bigger brother were designed to counter the soviet JS-3 but were only kept in service a short time. When the Centurion were up gunned to 105mm the Conqueror started to be withdrawn from service.
The kit were more or less built OOTB, I added the antennas and the head light lenses, and replaced the towing wires. The model were painted with Xtracryligs and weathered with acrylics and oil paints. The figures are MiniArt.
Lastly some in the works photos.
Regards
/Tomas
PS
Forum administrator: could you please correct the type O in the topic, I don't think I'm allowed to to that my self.
It should naturally be "Cold Cleopatra - Conqueror mk2".
Thanks
DS
Hosted by Darren Baker
Cold Cleoparta - Conqueror mk2
Miniam
Skaraborgs, Sweden
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 66 posts
Armorama: 65 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 66 posts
Armorama: 65 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013 - 07:16 AM UTC
Dimitar
Sofiya, Bulgaria
Joined: November 08, 2011
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 287 posts
Joined: November 08, 2011
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 287 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013 - 07:24 AM UTC
The Conqueror never fails to impress me with its' size and look.
And you did some very nice job to emphasize the nature of the beast.
It's an interesting way to weather with oils, could you please share your technique?
And you did some very nice job to emphasize the nature of the beast.
It's an interesting way to weather with oils, could you please share your technique?
retiredyank
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013 - 08:40 AM UTC
This is why you want to give your tanks steroids! That thing is a monster! The paint and weathering turned out very well. Please, do share your weathering technique.
Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013 - 10:55 AM UTC
Nice job Tomas.
I see it wasn't just my kit had the stereoscopic sight cover missing then...
I see it wasn't just my kit had the stereoscopic sight cover missing then...
mprobinson
Canada
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 - 09:37 AM UTC
Is there a step by step build of this kit anywhere on the net, I have one in the stash, have heard it was a tricky build and since I have covetted one in the cabinet for years now... it scares the hell out of me to bugger it up!
I want to build mine as well as the one pictured!
By the way there are some good pics of these if one digs around on the 3rd Carabiniers old comrades site, ditto for the 14/20th Hussars, who even have pics of one in camouflage stripes.
http://www.3rdcarabiniers.org.uk/index.html
http://www.1420h.org.uk/photos/album.html
Merlin
I want to build mine as well as the one pictured!
By the way there are some good pics of these if one digs around on the 3rd Carabiniers old comrades site, ditto for the 14/20th Hussars, who even have pics of one in camouflage stripes.
http://www.3rdcarabiniers.org.uk/index.html
http://www.1420h.org.uk/photos/album.html
Merlin
AngloSaxon
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: July 28, 2011
KitMaker: 31 posts
Armorama: 21 posts
Joined: July 28, 2011
KitMaker: 31 posts
Armorama: 21 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 - 09:46 AM UTC
I couldn't believe the size of the Conqueror when I saw it for the first time at Bovington, it's immense! Shame that was also probably it's downfall.
Great model, weathering looks spot on.
Mike.
Great model, weathering looks spot on.
Mike.
mprobinson
Canada
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 - 10:42 AM UTC
Size was part of it, the real problem was mechanical reliability, the complexity of the fire control system and the lack of real tactical doctrine for its employment.
By the time its systems were debugged and the RAC was comfortable in how to use it, it was the early 1960s. It would have been fine against the IS3 or T10, but easy meat for a T62 or a Sagger just like any Centurion it was meant to defend. Still, in competent hands it could have pulled a Villers Bocage against its opponents, and above all it is a really interesting subject for the modeller and historian. I am researching the markings seen on these old beasts and what a story they tell, changing completely through 3 marking systems during the Conqueror's career! I sincerely hope we see one in plastic.
Merlin
By the time its systems were debugged and the RAC was comfortable in how to use it, it was the early 1960s. It would have been fine against the IS3 or T10, but easy meat for a T62 or a Sagger just like any Centurion it was meant to defend. Still, in competent hands it could have pulled a Villers Bocage against its opponents, and above all it is a really interesting subject for the modeller and historian. I am researching the markings seen on these old beasts and what a story they tell, changing completely through 3 marking systems during the Conqueror's career! I sincerely hope we see one in plastic.
Merlin
Rauko_Din
Sevilla, Spain / Espaņa
Joined: February 28, 2013
KitMaker: 67 posts
Armorama: 19 posts
Joined: February 28, 2013
KitMaker: 67 posts
Armorama: 19 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 - 07:19 PM UTC
Wow!! Marc Antony (Marcus Antonius) would be proud of such cleopatra
Keef1648
South Carolina, United States
Joined: January 23, 2008
KitMaker: 1,240 posts
Armorama: 1,192 posts
Joined: January 23, 2008
KitMaker: 1,240 posts
Armorama: 1,192 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 - 11:27 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Size was part of it, the real problem was mechanical reliability, the complexity of the fire control system and the lack of real tactical doctrine for its employment.
By the time its systems were debugged and the RAC was comfortable in how to use it, it was the early 1960s. It would have been fine against the IS3 or T10, but easy meat for a T62 or a Sagger just like any Centurion it was meant to defend. Still, in competent hands it could have pulled a Villers Bocage against its opponents, and above all it is a really interesting subject for the modeller and historian. I am researching the markings seen on these old beasts and what a story they tell, changing completely through 3 marking systems during the Conqueror's career! I sincerely hope we see one in plastic.
Merlin
Merlin, Not certain, but I don't believe T62 was even in service when the Conquerer was in Germany mate.
I was lucky enough to stand on the decks of one at Lulworth (RAC Gunnery School) in 1966 as some of the last ones were firing during a firepower demo...
Keith.
mprobinson
Canada
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Joined: January 09, 2011
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 - 11:19 AM UTC
Believe it or not, the T62 was in production in 1962 and in service in 1963-64 and must have been in the Soviet Forces in East Germany prior to 1965-66, when the Conqueror left BAOR. The reason people think it came later was that it made its combat debut in 1973 versus Israel. I expect the Conq could have seen off a T62 without problem, but the 115mm gun, especially at shorter ranges, was a good hole puncher.