Armorama :: Landships Campaign

Campaigns: Completed Campaigns
Campaigns that are completed should be grouped here.

Hosted by Richard S.

Landships Campaign

ltb073

New York, United States
Joined: March 08, 2010
KitMaker: 3,662 posts
Armorama: 3,078 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Friday, July 21, 2017 - 06:45 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Sal - Great looking KV-5. Did you have any trouble with the main turret colliding with the front MG turret during rotation? I had to hack some of the front mantlet to allow some clearance.

Thanks Paul...Not that I would be spinning the turret around but I just checked it and it clears without a problem

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Monday, July 24, 2017 - 05:29 AM UTC

Jesper - Your beast is starting to take the shape of a Landship. Lookin' good!

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Monday, July 24, 2017 - 05:31 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Quoted Text

Sal - Great looking KV-5. Did you have any trouble with the main turret colliding with the front MG turret during rotation? I had to hack some of the front mantlet to allow some clearance.

Thanks Paul...Not that I would be spinning the turret around but I just checked it and it clears without a problem

I can only guess that I got something wrong with my build. It seemed at the time to be an error for too large for the kitmaker to miss.

SGTJKJ

#041

Kobenhavn, Denmark
Joined: July 20, 2006
KitMaker: 10,069 posts
Armorama: 4,677 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Monday, July 24, 2017 - 11:19 PM UTC

Thanks for the comment, Paul. It is indeed taking shape. Hoping to get some progress next week.

More to follow

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Monday, July 31, 2017 - 10:29 PM UTC

With the close of the Poland 1939 campaign it was time to work on my Zvezda T-35 Landship again. It had been a long time since I last did anything so some refreshing was needed to figure out what the game plan was and where I had left off. Once that was done some more subs were tackled:

The metal barrel set was made for the Hobby Boss kit and the Zvezda plastic needed to be bored out to take the base. The Dremel made short work of this job!

Mrclark7

Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 477 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 - 10:47 PM UTC

I was going to do a m3 for the campaign.

Would it be any issue switching to a Abrams for this one?

Was wondering with its 4 MG's and its main. I have two more I just purchased last weekend.

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 - 11:57 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I was going to do a m3 for the campaign.

Would it be any issue switching to a Abrams for this one?

Was wondering with its 4 MG's and its main. I have two more I just purchased last weekend.

I'm not sure how an Abrams would qualify as a Landship. It has only a single turret as I remember and no sponsons or other Landship features. Am I wrong? Please make a case for it!

Mrclark7

Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 477 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 02:54 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Quoted Text

I was going to do a m3 for the campaign.

Would it be any issue switching to a Abrams for this one?

Was wondering with its 4 MG's and its main. I have two more I just purchased last weekend.

I'm not sure how an Abrams would qualify as a Landship. It has only a single turret as I remember and no sponsons or other Landship features. Am I wrong? Please make a case for it!

I might have miss understood the M60 comparison. The Tusk is running 1 more turret than the M60. The Tusk variant has two mg turrets and a main with an option to build with a crows also.

Shalta

Guangxi, China / 简体
Joined: August 23, 2016
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 160 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 03:02 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Quoted Text

Quoted Text

I was going to do a m3 for the campaign.

Would it be any issue switching to a Abrams for this one?

Was wondering with its 4 MG's and its main. I have two more I just purchased last weekend.

I'm not sure how an Abrams would qualify as a Landship. It has only a single turret as I remember and no sponsons or other Landship features. Am I wrong? Please make a case for it!

I might have miss understood the M60 comparison. The Tusk is running 1 more turret than the M60. The Tusk variant has two mg turrets and a main with an option to build with a crows also.

I think it would be more due to the TUSK MGs being more of a gun shield than turret IMO.
Though, I've never even had much of a chance to start that M60, Knowing it isnt 'really' a Landship was a pretty big deterrant for me... Hence why I've been trying to find something else.
Though, That seems to have thoroughly ruined my chance of completing anything for the campaign.

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 03:38 AM UTC

Kelly - OK, I think we can stretch the concept a bit more at this late date. We have a SciFi entry and Shalta's M-60 which I hope he does complete. If we were run off our feet with entries it might make since to hold a stricter standard . . .

Mrclark7

Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 477 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 03:46 AM UTC

I dont wanna rock the boat or anything. And I didnt mean to point at Shalta or have it sound like it was.

I was going off the info in the campaign section talking about the m48/60. I may have looked at it wrong, and in my head the abrams was a better choice than the m3 I have also to build.

I have two ideas that are in store for BOTH Abrams and once done I feel the word battleship will easily come to mind.

But again I dont want to upset anyone in the campaign.

Shalta

Guangxi, China / 简体
Joined: August 23, 2016
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 160 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 04:23 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I dont wanna rock the boat or anything. And I didnt mean to point at Shalta or have it sound like it was.

I was going off the info in the campaign section talking about the m48/60. I may have looked at it wrong, and in my head the abrams was a better choice than the m3 I have also to build.

I have two ideas that are in store for BOTH Abrams and once done I feel the word battleship will easily come to mind.

But again I dont want to upset anyone in the campaign.

For what it's worth I didnt feel offended at all. I'm just having 'incredibly bored might aswell add my thought" day. Lol... Though, In all honesty, I'm kinda eager to see some built up M1 pictures, as PB killed a hilarious number of buildlogs + my intent to get a new M1 kit someday soon.
So, In other words, good luck on your build!

Shalta

Guangxi, China / 简体
Joined: August 23, 2016
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 160 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 04:33 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Kelly - OK, I think we can stretch the concept a bit more at this late date. We have a SciFi entry and Shalta's M-60 which I hope he does complete. If we were run off our feet with entries it might make since to hold a stricter standard . . .

As for the M60 thing, I'm having an AWFUL time getting started on that kit... I just remember what I paid for it + how nice it looks, and then I just start on a more 'expendable' kit... I know that's a bit silly. But I'm waiting to know I wont mess it up!

Though, might I ask your opinion on whether a Maus would qualify for the campaign?
I bought the Takom kit last week, and aside from the week's worth of tracks (Probably 75% of the kit minimum.), I 'think' I could get it done in time.
... But, Even if, I'm not 100% sure I'd have time to paint it (I'm currently working on something for a friend that's messing it up a little bit). I planned on going a bit what-if on that part... So, at most, I'd just drop a pic of it in base coat here.

Mrclark7

Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 477 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 05:03 AM UTC

Now as far a Maus goes. I think it applies towards landship because of is design. Although its simple and low on gun numbers. I think it falls into this campaign because of the silhouette looks .

And if it was not for this campaign. I wouldnt be aware of the short barrel M60, or the reactive armour version which both I want to build.

Shalta

Guangxi, China / 简体
Joined: August 23, 2016
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 160 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 - 05:52 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Now as far a Maus goes. I think it applies towards landship because of is design. Although its simple and low on gun numbers. I think it falls into this campaign because of the silhouette looks .

And if it was not for this campaign. I wouldnt be aware of the short barrel M60, or the reactive armour version which both I want to build.

That's what I thought TBH... Weighs a massive amount, massive, it has 2-3 guns (Not sure if it actually got a machine gun?), and, not sure if I remember correctly, but it was atleast planned to be able to travel underwater... Sort of. Yet again, I'm not honestly sure if that was on the prototypes.
Not to start about the 'original' plans for it... I seem to recall an AA turret planned when it was still around 100-120 tons.
And the Takom kit seems like an 'easy' build. So, that's a plus.

And I've got to agree, I've been planning on getting an M60 w/ERA (To a lesser extent the 'A2) for a while, it looks pretty nice... I'm certainly just going to get one of the older kits and save myself the 'worry' though, lol.
Not that I'd ever tell someone to avoid the AFV Club kits, they are REALLY nice. But, if youre as self-conscious as I am? Expect it to take a while.

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Friday, August 04, 2017 - 04:14 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Now as far a Maus goes. I think it applies towards landship because of is design. Although its simple and low on gun numbers. I think it falls into this campaign because of the silhouette looks .

And if it was not for this campaign. I wouldnt be aware of the short barrel M60, or the reactive armour version which both I want to build.

Do you want to build a Maus for this campaign? If so flesh out your thoughts a bit. How does it fit the concept?

Shalta

Guangxi, China / 简体
Joined: August 23, 2016
KitMaker: 165 posts
Armorama: 160 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Friday, August 04, 2017 - 06:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Quoted Text

Now as far a Maus goes. I think it applies towards landship because of is design. Although its simple and low on gun numbers. I think it falls into this campaign because of the silhouette looks .

And if it was not for this campaign. I wouldnt be aware of the short barrel M60, or the reactive armour version which both I want to build.

Do you want to build a Maus for this campaign? If so flesh out your thoughts a bit. How does it fit the concept?

Actually, it was me who wanted to build a Maus for the campaign. Frankly, I can tell I'm not going to 'chance' the M60A1 untill I'm doing well enough to make sure I dont mess up... Too nervous with it.
But, To me, the Maus is a 'bit' off from a landship, but in my opinion, it's as modern as the concept got.
Sure, it doesnt have extra turrets / sponsons, but it has two high-caliber guns, and it's entire design is intended to be as big and heavy as physically possible. In general, it just seems to fit the theme to me. Not directly a Landship, but it's close, and it certainly feels more right than the M60, IMO.
... And it 'looks' like I'd be physically able to build / paint my Takom Maus before the campaign ends.

Mrclark7

Texas, United States
Joined: June 04, 2017
KitMaker: 503 posts
Armorama: 477 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Friday, August 04, 2017 - 08:46 AM UTC

I am going to withdraw my request for the Tusk.

I started my other Abrams doing a hydro dip and want to focus on it before I start my Tusk. And for what I have planned for both would run over the allowed time I think.

Will still check in on the finished builds later.

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Sunday, August 06, 2017 - 09:16 PM UTC

Both the Maus & the Abrams would be a real stretch for a Landship. I recommend going back to the opening page or two where we laid out the concept and have many examples.

We are inside a month to go on this campaign. My T-35 is snailing along, pics of the latest work will follow soon. How are your projects coming along?

Ramanathan

#477

Pest, Hungary
Joined: March 21, 2007
KitMaker: 133 posts
Armorama: 131 posts

PROFILE

WWW

Posted: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 - 01:03 PM UTC

There is no better motivation than an approaching deadline. After a few weeks away from the bench I've started the turrets. HB made a good job, the parts fit perfectly, details are crisp and it is a joy to build this kit, really. I hope I'll finish in the next 3 weeks.
Cheers,
Zsolt

Hudson29

#460

California, United States
Joined: September 16, 2014
KitMaker: 1,156 posts
Armorama: 1,024 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 - 09:10 PM UTC

Yup, nuthin like a deadline to get your priorities rearranged. You look to be about as far along as I am and I can see some differences. The HB kit has a muffler on the exhaust where the Zvezda version runs straight stacks. Your tow cables are also a bit different also.

SGTJKJ

#041

Kobenhavn, Denmark
Joined: July 20, 2006
KitMaker: 10,069 posts
Armorama: 4,677 posts

PROFILE

Posted: Friday, August 11, 2017 - 02:08 PM UTC

Some more progress on my Forgeworld Mastodon. It is a beast!

Coming along nicely, but will be difficult to keep momentum due to some busy weeks at work.