_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Axis - WWII
Armor and ground forces of the Axis forces during World War II.
Hosted by Darren Baker
Dragon Bergepanzer 38(t) HETZER mit 2cm Flak
CJ3B
Visit this Community
Puerto Rico
Joined: April 11, 2006
KitMaker: 245 posts
Armorama: 235 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 03:26 AM UTC
Hello Gents!

For this Blog and Build Review, I have selected the Dragon (6399)Bergepanzer 38(t) HETZER mit 2cm FLAK 38 kit.

A short background on this vehicle... as it is well known, the German Army was very creative when discussing the "variants" on their existing vehicles. The Hetzer 38t was a proven platform, and a AA variant was designed using basically most of the existing superstructure, except for the open top, similar to the recovery variant.

Being a simple, small and nimble vehicle, it was easy to move and conceal, important traits for a weapons platform that needed the aforementioned characteristics.

In place of winches and other recovery gear, a 2cm Flak 38 cannon was installed on a modified platform; as far as I know and read, it was basically a design that did not see action (if anyone can confirm for me otherwise, please feel free to do so!).

First pics coming up... Instructions. Typical Dragon instructions, B/W with some blue for specific annotations/highlights. Before the build, they seem pretty much straightforward... we'll see during the build phase.













Next up... sprue images... will try to post tomorrow!
johhar
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: September 22, 2008
KitMaker: 476 posts
Armorama: 447 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 03:47 AM UTC
As far as I know, you're the first to post with this kit, so I'll be watching and have the link bookmarked.
tatbaqui
Staff MemberNews Writer
ARMORAMA
#040
Visit this Community
Metro Manila, Philippines
Joined: May 06, 2007
KitMaker: 2,713 posts
Armorama: 2,451 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 04:28 AM UTC
Hmmm quite a number of unused parts. Will be following this. Thanks for starting this blog.
CJ3B
Visit this Community
Puerto Rico
Joined: April 11, 2006
KitMaker: 245 posts
Armorama: 235 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 04:32 AM UTC
Let's see how this goes... this is my first Blog/Build, and have a weird work schedule every now and then, so please bear with me!
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 07:14 AM UTC
Yep, will follow this one, for sure; I've the kit in transit from DragonUSA.com ("Black Friday" sale), so am interested to see how you progress.

Odd that the gun couldn't fire horizontally, not even in self-defense.

Looking at the unused parts, is there enough to build the flak trailer by itself?

TIA,

Kylie

panamadan
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 10:03 AM UTC
Interesting that it shows a hull escape hatch-hetzer's didn't have one.
Dan
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 12:02 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hmmm quite a number of unused parts. Will be following this. Thanks for starting this blog.


Hi, Tat & Everyone else!!!

Re: "Quite a number of unused parts"... Let's not forget that these "unused parts" will no doubt have their uses in the other "Hetzer"-based kits that DRAGON is putting into production- It's cheaper to keep molding these same sprues for the other kits in question, rather than designing, manufacturing and implementing new molds for the other kits.

It's called, "COMMONALITY", which is where DRAGON saves themselves A BIG PILE OF MONEY; just look at all their Tiger Is & IIs, Panthers, Pz.IIIs and StuG.IIIs, Pz.IVs and their derivatives, Shermans, and US Half-tracks, M1s, etc, that share the same parts within their respective vehicle-types...

OK, back "On Topic"- It looks like an interesting little kit. I LIKE the "link-and-length" "Neo-Tracks". Wish DRAGON would replace ALL of their "DS" Tracks" with these...

Re: "The gun that can't fire horizontally, not even for self-defense"... Who said that ANY of the late-war German AFVs, especially "Paper-Panzers", EVER had to make any SENSE..?
CJ3B
Visit this Community
Puerto Rico
Joined: April 11, 2006
KitMaker: 245 posts
Armorama: 235 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 05:13 PM UTC
Good Morning! Early AM post... here are the sprue shots. Mix of 2/3 kits, so you will see some duplicate sprue ID letters.

These is no flash on this kit, and details are sharp. A lot of small, fiddly parts, but nothing we haven't dealt with before, right?

Details on the tracks a bit simple, due to the nature of the track design, but good for a fast built.

A small PE fret and decal sheet completes the package.

Now the pics...



















panamadan
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Saturday, November 26, 2016 - 08:36 PM UTC
I Agree with you on the tracks!
Dan
CJ3B
Visit this Community
Puerto Rico
Joined: April 11, 2006
KitMaker: 245 posts
Armorama: 235 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 27, 2016 - 03:32 AM UTC
Started the build... sprockets and idler wheel completed; 3 parts for sprockets, 2 parts for idler wheels. pretty straightforward, but care with sprocket teeth is a must, since that is where the sprue attachment points connect.







HEADS UP on suspension instructions... Part labeled as K7 is wrong (suspension arm); correct part number is K5 (along with K4). The K4 and K5 are both suspension arms, but with leaf spring attachment points on opposing sides. K7 is a return roller.





That is it for tonight... Let's see if I can get some done during the week.

chefchris
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 1,544 posts
Armorama: 1,464 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 27, 2016 - 05:37 AM UTC
Interesting, the first sprue with the lower hull is from the old hetzer kits from the 90s. I have built quite a few of them! I would have thought they would have re tooled it.

Chris
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Sunday, November 27, 2016 - 08:12 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Interesting, the first sprue with the lower hull is from the old hetzer kits from the 90s. I have built quite a few of them! I would have thought they would have re tooled it.

Chris


What! So would have I. Are there any real errors with the 90s hull?

thanks,
Tank1812
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: April 29, 2014
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 886 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 07:01 AM UTC
Following this one as the kit arrived tonight at the house.
What is your plan, w/ or w/o flak and camo or sand?
Tank1812
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: April 29, 2014
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 886 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 07:14 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Interesting that it shows a hull escape hatch-hetzer's didn't have one.
Dan


I agree it appears that may be the case but the exterior of the hull doesn't suggest that as it's recessed only on the interior. Wonder what the intent was on selecting this arrangement. At least they added the plug.
jps
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 147 posts
Armorama: 140 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 07:19 AM UTC
I think the rear firewall looks a little cheesy (I am from Wisconsin so I know cheese). The radios molded in one piece with the wall are not doing it for me that radio area is fairly deep arounf 10 inches.
jps
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: February 06, 2006
KitMaker: 147 posts
Armorama: 140 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 07:27 AM UTC
The Swiss version of the hetzer, the G 13, has a floor escape hatch. They were apparently added to WWII Production hetzers when they were sold to Switzerland. Possibly DML worked off a G 13 to design the kit.

If it is an escape hatch it doesn't belong on a WWII hetzer.
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 06:03 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The Swiss version of the hetzer, the G 13, has a floor escape hatch. They were apparently added to WWII Production hetzers when they were sold to Switzerland. Possibly DML worked off a G 13 to design the kit.

If it is an escape hatch it doesn't belong on a WWII hetzer.


Yeeeeah, but... Let's not forget that this is, after all, a "Paper-Panzer", and as we all know, ANYTHING is possible on a "Paper-Panzer". It's quite possible that DRAGON figured that the Germans would have figured out that their FLAK version of the Bergepanzer 38(t) needed an Escape Hatch in their design. I personally wouldn't quibble about such a relatively minor detail myself, but everyone is entitled to their own opinions- I don't think it would be too hard for any modeller with some experience to "fill in" the Escape Hatch, if they wished to do so.

Nice CATCH, though...
knewton
Visit this Community
New Zealand
Joined: June 19, 2013
KitMaker: 1,217 posts
Armorama: 1,092 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 10:47 PM UTC
Only thing is, this isn't a "paper panzer"; there were two known examples uses in the closing days of the war. The only thing that is open to interpretation is the mount for the gun, which Dragon covers with two options, both of which are equally likely. A re-purposed mount from another vehicle, or a fabricated mount from scrap steel...

Kylie
panamadan
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Monday, November 28, 2016 - 11:59 PM UTC
https://plus.google.com/photos/112836260861744321508/album/5432884113190258385/5432884203512873362
panamadan
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 12:08 AM UTC
It also isn't know if the Germans made this or the insurgents.
Dan
johhar
Visit this Community
Alabama, United States
Joined: September 22, 2008
KitMaker: 476 posts
Armorama: 447 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 12:29 AM UTC
Given the non-state of the Luftwaffe at war's end, why would insurgents make an SP that couldn't engage ground targets.
panamadan
Visit this Community
Minnesota, United States
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 1,513 posts
Armorama: 1,449 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 01:29 AM UTC
Show me a photo of this vehicle crewed by Germans.
The insurgents controlled the factory that made the hetzer and it would make sense that they would make a vehicle that couldn't engage ground targets due to their lack of knowledge and time.
Do you think a German would make this vehicle and have it not be able to engage ground targets?
Dan
Tank1812
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: April 29, 2014
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 886 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 02:58 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Given the non-state of the Luftwaffe at war's end, why would insurgents make an SP that couldn't engage ground targets.


Might be looking ahead to the next fight with the US or Russians.
M4A1Sherman
Visit this Community
New York, United States
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 01:01 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Only thing is, this isn't a "paper panzer"; there were two known examples uses in the closing days of the war. The only thing that is open to interpretation is the mount for the gun, which Dragon covers with two options, both of which are equally likely. A re-purposed mount from another vehicle, or a fabricated mount from scrap steel...

Kylie


OK, so it isn't a "Paper-Panzer". Mea Culpa. But only TWO vehicles..? Wow, that's really impressive...

OK, so at least it's an interesting vehicle, despite the awkward and misbegotten concept of a 2cm FLAK gun that can't be depressed to fight off Infantry... No "secondary armament", either... What WERE the Germans or the "Insurgents" thinking..?

BTW, the Germans were entirely capable of designing far-fetched goofs without outside help- There were quite a few reeeeally stupid concepts, i.e. "Paper-Panzers" and the like, PLUS "Paper-Aircraft" on their drawing boards. I don't need to list them, do I? There are already boatloads of books that deal with this kind of stuff...
Tank1812
Visit this Community
North Carolina, United States
Joined: April 29, 2014
KitMaker: 1,112 posts
Armorama: 886 posts
Posted: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 09:12 PM UTC

Quoted Text



OK, so it isn't a "Paper-Panzer". Mea Culpa. But only TWO vehicles..? Wow, that's really impressive...

OK, so at least it's an interesting vehicle, despite the awkward and misbegotten concept of a 2cm FLAK gun that can't be depressed to fight off Infantry... No "secondary armament", either... What WERE the Germans or the "Insurgents" thinking..?


Two known is better then none as most "Paper-Panzer" are.

A normal Hetzer only had a mg34. So a personal weapon would be good enough. In the one photo showed it deployed with a regular Hetzer, so being teamed up takes care of the opposing infantry need and allow the crew to focus on it's mission, aircraft. Yes, in a perfect world it would have been best to depress the gun level or lower. That also removes some crew protection, however limited it is. If they had time to move past a proof of concept, I am sure those and other items would be addressed.
 _GOTOTOP