Hello everyone, I have a few questions about weathering AFV's. I know that when building models, it is the builders "artistic license" on how they build, paint, weather etc. their models, and I do not mean to step on anyone's toes as your builds are probably better than mine will ever be.
I see a lot of model tanks weathered with alot of rust and rust streaks running down the sides.
1. Did a tank, especially a German, survive long enough in combat to get such heavy rusting?
2. With Germans known for their "tidiness" and pride would the crews really let their tanks get to this point, let alone the platoon and company officers?
3. When a tank was taken to the local field depot for repairs, esp Tigers and Panthers which were known for their frequent breakdowns, would not the tank have been "cleaned up"?
My next questions are on tracks as I also see these heavily rusted on a lot of models. I know that the tracks would quickly rust over night, especially in wet conditions, but when showing a tank in motion or combat, would not the thin layer of rust been knocked away by vibration, rocks, dirt etc.?
I am not trying to criticize anyone....just wanting to know for my own knowledge and modeling.
Thank you in advance!!!
Eric
AFV Painting & Weathering
Answers to questions about the right paint scheme or tips for the right effect.
Answers to questions about the right paint scheme or tips for the right effect.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Matthew Toms
Realistic weathering on Armor?
Floridabucco
Florida, United States
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 03:44 AM UTC
wedgetail53
Queensland, Australia
Joined: October 02, 2008
KitMaker: 658 posts
Armorama: 629 posts
Joined: October 02, 2008
KitMaker: 658 posts
Armorama: 629 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 03:56 AM UTC
G'day Eric
I agree with your thoughts. In response to your questions, my thoughts would be as follows:
1. In most cases, particularly towards the end of WW2, no. I know of some actions where the life of AFVs was only a few weeks. One tank abandoned by its crew, IIRC, in France, had less than 100km on the odometer.
2. No, I think the German equivalent of the Company Sergeant Major would have had a fit! The exception to that, generally speaking, would have been in the desert, where sand, heat and wind formed a very effective abrasive combination. Then again, rust needs moisture to form, and there isn't much of that in the desert!
3. I can't speak with authority, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, assuming the availability of supplies, which, particularly towards the end of WW2, was a major problem.
I think most tank tracks, particularly German ones, were made from a steel with a high manganese content, which lessened their potential to rust. Certainly, driving steel tracks on hard ground or a surfaced road would knock off the rust on the face of the tracks, but I don't know about the rest.
I've found Vallejo Panzer Aces "Track Primer" a good general purpose slightly rusty brown for such as spare tracks, and Tamiya XF84 "Dark Iron" a good colour for steel tracks.
Hope this helps.
Regards
Rob
I agree with your thoughts. In response to your questions, my thoughts would be as follows:
1. In most cases, particularly towards the end of WW2, no. I know of some actions where the life of AFVs was only a few weeks. One tank abandoned by its crew, IIRC, in France, had less than 100km on the odometer.
2. No, I think the German equivalent of the Company Sergeant Major would have had a fit! The exception to that, generally speaking, would have been in the desert, where sand, heat and wind formed a very effective abrasive combination. Then again, rust needs moisture to form, and there isn't much of that in the desert!
3. I can't speak with authority, but I think it's a reasonable assumption, assuming the availability of supplies, which, particularly towards the end of WW2, was a major problem.
I think most tank tracks, particularly German ones, were made from a steel with a high manganese content, which lessened their potential to rust. Certainly, driving steel tracks on hard ground or a surfaced road would knock off the rust on the face of the tracks, but I don't know about the rest.
I've found Vallejo Panzer Aces "Track Primer" a good general purpose slightly rusty brown for such as spare tracks, and Tamiya XF84 "Dark Iron" a good colour for steel tracks.
Hope this helps.
Regards
Rob
Bravo1102
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 04:49 AM UTC
Quoted Text
My next questions are on tracks as I also see these heavily rusted on a lot of models. I know that the tracks would quickly rust over night, especially in wet conditions, but when showing a tank in motion or combat, would not the thin layer of rust been knocked away by vibration, rocks, dirt etc.?
I am not trying to criticize anyone....just wanting to know for my own knowledge and modeling.
Thank you in advance!!!
Eric
Tracks rust in hours. you don't need moisture, you need oxygen. Rust is iron oxide. The bright reddish rust gets knocked off but a deeper maroon rust remains. Tracks are rusty. At the same time pieces of metal that wear on each other become bright shiny metal. Look at the first inner roadwheel of a Panther. The whole rim was bright metal. The teeth of a drive sprocket and the center guides of tracks would wear bright and shiny. So the outside of the track could be rusty and the inner drive teeth would be bright and shiny.
That's real life. Go to a construction site and look at the equipment left over night. Rusty, pitted, but nowhere near the big streaks on most models. The paint flaking is nowhere near that seen on many models on horribly worn train cars. However black paint can bleach to dark grey in bright sun. Train engines get filthy with soot and streaked dirt and grime. The same with real armored vehicles.
In actual service the only thing that is kept super clean is what kills the enemy. As said in the Sharpe series "Men dirty, rifles clean"
You can sweep off the tank, wash it down and then one guy walks up and climbs on and there's mud everywhere. Wipe your shoes before you climb up! Take your overshoes off before dropping inside! But that breech block is pristine. That's real life in the field.
There are all kinds of pictures of tanks being repaired and even repainted and the dust and grime is still visible on the unpainted bits! Shermans would get repainted by just spraying over the whole thing, sandbags, dirt and all!
I served on tanks where the replaced bit was bright and new and the rest of the tank was a rolling garbage pile. Or you'd strip off all the new paint removing the bolts to change a headlight. And then there was repaint in whatever was available. A sand and dark yellow colored tank with oxide red fenders and green air cleaners. And some idiot spray painted a ammo can on the back deck leaving a nice square red overspray...
There are more important things to worry about when training and especially when there are bad guys shooting at you. Does it work? Can it kill?
Drive a tank a kilometer on a dirt road and it's covered in dust. One mud puddle left over from a rain two weeks ago and there's a mud splatter all over the suspension. Spill some oil checking the levels, over flow the fuel and there's streaks. Make certain the road wheels are greased and there's grease on the wheels. And we're only a kilometer from the assembly area...
"Can't you tankers keep anything clean? Give you a brand new tank and you drive it a click and it's filthy!"
"Panzer Vor!" (Americans might say Armor rules. 11ACR might say "Black horse!" A little espirit de corps goes a long way. ) Yeah there's a reason the uniforms of the Panzer waffe were black...
Floridabucco
Florida, United States
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 06:32 AM UTC
Yes, I get the part of the fading, mud and dust, just look at pictures of the eastern front. I believe that you agree with my idea on the rust streaks on AFV's.
It sounds like you served on tanks (thx for your service)so I am sure you know more than I do, but it seems on construction equipment I see, the tracks are indeed rusty over night, but shortly after starting to move and work the rust is all vorn off.
Thank you for your replies everyone.
It sounds like you served on tanks (thx for your service)so I am sure you know more than I do, but it seems on construction equipment I see, the tracks are indeed rusty over night, but shortly after starting to move and work the rust is all vorn off.
Thank you for your replies everyone.
AgentG
Nevada, United States
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 11:20 AM UTC
brekinapez
Georgia, United States
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Joined: July 26, 2013
KitMaker: 2,272 posts
Armorama: 1,860 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 11:45 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Bovington's Pz III as she sits inside on display. Notice the tracks are a bit rusty even in a building.
After running around the track. Look close at the track and see how shiny it has become. This is after running through the dirt/mud of southern England.
G
Yes, but they certainly aren't as over the top rusty as some people make them, especially the spare tracks mounted on the hull and turret. Some builds have those painted so rusty looking I'd be afraid to use them for repairs, let alone additional armor protection. They look like they'll shatter into flakes.
AgentG
Nevada, United States
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 12:20 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextBovington's Pz III as she sits inside on display. Notice the tracks are a bit rusty even in a building.
After running around the track. Look close at the track and see how shiny it has become. This is after running through the dirt/mud of southern England.
G
Yes, but they certainly aren't as over the top rusty as some people make them, especially the spare tracks mounted on the hull and turret. Some builds have those painted so rusty looking I'd be afraid to use them for repairs, let alone additional armor protection. They look like they'll shatter into flakes.
Exactly my point.
G
Blaubar
Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany
Joined: December 15, 2016
KitMaker: 261 posts
Armorama: 246 posts
Joined: December 15, 2016
KitMaker: 261 posts
Armorama: 246 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 01:22 PM UTC
Crews basically lived with/in the tanks and negligence with regards to Tiger and Panther tanks was solved with the death squad. Don't you ever expect heavily rusty Tigers were driving around.
Tracks do catch "Flugrost" and alike within hours as had been stated numerous times, which would go away as soon as you drove a few metres but later returned once parked.
Chipping does also seem way beyond the edge for vehicles serving days to months. While many locomotives and other vehicles were painted by forced labour and people with "no interest and reasoning for the things they built" (understandably), which resulted in awful paint jobs and rust all over, the Wehrmacht mostly painted the tanks themselves and as such more skilled labour would suggest better paint jobs and more quality.
I had the chance to speak to a Tiger driver back in Canada some 15 years ago. Other than the stories above which were told by him, in the spare time (between battles and repair shop visits^^), the crews cleaned and readied the tank and gear, not only the gun, as inspection duties were serious!
/Stefan
Tracks do catch "Flugrost" and alike within hours as had been stated numerous times, which would go away as soon as you drove a few metres but later returned once parked.
Chipping does also seem way beyond the edge for vehicles serving days to months. While many locomotives and other vehicles were painted by forced labour and people with "no interest and reasoning for the things they built" (understandably), which resulted in awful paint jobs and rust all over, the Wehrmacht mostly painted the tanks themselves and as such more skilled labour would suggest better paint jobs and more quality.
I had the chance to speak to a Tiger driver back in Canada some 15 years ago. Other than the stories above which were told by him, in the spare time (between battles and repair shop visits^^), the crews cleaned and readied the tank and gear, not only the gun, as inspection duties were serious!
/Stefan
Scarred
Washington, United States
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 01:28 PM UTC
You have to remember that rust does provide some level of protection to exposed steel. Higher quality steel, such as that used in armored vehicles, would take decades or centuries to corrode away. Constantly removing rust without protecting the clean surface and allowing new rust to form will cause more damage than leaving a layer of rust alone. Exhaust systems that aren't made out of stainless steel corrode fast because of the constant heating/cooling and moisture. I see some of these weathering jobs that are over blown rust wise. Older vehicles, Korean War and older would probably rust at the drop of a hat but not to the extent as often depicted, some of these paint jobs look like the vehicle has been at the bottom of the ocean for decades.
Paint repair would be a lower maintenance priority than weapons and engines. A vehicle in combat is not going to be parade ground pretty. It's going to have nicks, dings, bullet scars, peeling or faded paint and scratches that aren't going to affect it's combat effectiveness. A tank coming in for repair may get new paint on the damaged area but they aren't going to waste time on aesthetics when it needs to be back out in combat.
Paint repair would be a lower maintenance priority than weapons and engines. A vehicle in combat is not going to be parade ground pretty. It's going to have nicks, dings, bullet scars, peeling or faded paint and scratches that aren't going to affect it's combat effectiveness. A tank coming in for repair may get new paint on the damaged area but they aren't going to waste time on aesthetics when it needs to be back out in combat.
Floridabucco
Florida, United States
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Joined: September 27, 2016
KitMaker: 117 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 05:15 PM UTC
Thanks for the replies everyone...I guess I was right on my thinking.
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 05:49 PM UTC
Artistic license certainly plays it's part. Folks want to hone and display their skills as they learn new techniques, so sometimes those effects get a bit more use than might otherwise be realistic. Then again, 100% realistic doesn't always result in a product that is pleasing to the builder's eye--again, artistic license.
But I think there is another very subtle factor at work. There are some fine examples of armor that are kept indoors out of the weather, but I think a large proportion--if not a majority--of examples of period vehicles and equipment that modelers have available for reference have been sitting outside for decades with little or no upkeep, and they show the effects. Even though we consciously recognize that is not how the vehicles would have looked at a younger age I think subconsciously that image gets implanted in our minds and it is what we tend toward as we work. While old photos of the vehicles in use tend to be monochromatic and fuzzy, new photos of old vehicles rusting away on a concrete pad are clear and in color so they have a more dramatic effect and thus make a greater impression.
Yes, I know: this is a modeling forum, not a psychology forum...
But I think there is another very subtle factor at work. There are some fine examples of armor that are kept indoors out of the weather, but I think a large proportion--if not a majority--of examples of period vehicles and equipment that modelers have available for reference have been sitting outside for decades with little or no upkeep, and they show the effects. Even though we consciously recognize that is not how the vehicles would have looked at a younger age I think subconsciously that image gets implanted in our minds and it is what we tend toward as we work. While old photos of the vehicles in use tend to be monochromatic and fuzzy, new photos of old vehicles rusting away on a concrete pad are clear and in color so they have a more dramatic effect and thus make a greater impression.
Yes, I know: this is a modeling forum, not a psychology forum...
Bravo1102
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,864 posts
Armorama: 2,497 posts
Posted: Thursday, March 09, 2017 - 07:12 PM UTC
You know I've seen more than my share of German tank photos and people wonder why "X" is that way and as a former serving tank crewman I realize the very practical reason it is stowed like that. (one example is the bucket on the back of the tank) Tankers are same whether "tankies" wearing black berets or "Panzermann" with a black uniform (but don't look too closely, damn that thing is filthy) There are things you only learn by being there that you take for granted that you think everyone knows. But they weren't there so they don't. There are things you do and learn to do that make total sense in the context of what you're doing that people who didn't do it can usually never figure out.
Veterans of all nationalities are notorious for employing hyperbole in their "war stories" No one got shot for a rust stain on a tank. Maybe hit up the side of the head, but look closely at some pzkpfw IV tanks on their way up to the front in Italy and the things are all beat up from travelling through heavy foliage. Bare metal is visible as is lightly rusted bits. But it looks nothing like the rusty monsters you see at model shows. The same divisions brand new Panthers already show the bright worn metal on the road wheels and torn up fenders while showing off for the photographer by running through the woods. Tank top sergeants being what they are he probably would have sighed and mumbled something about the fender getting messed up sooner or later... Then hit the kid tank commander up the side of the head.
I build my tanks to reflect that. Beat up and soldiering on the best they can but not overly rusty or paint chips everywhere. Paint chips where things get worn usually by the action of the crew. Not at random. Someone drops a wrench or walks all over a corner with hobnailed boots and you'll get a couple of chips. But nothing like the hairdryer technique so popular these days outside of the Western Desert. Even white wash didn't wear off like that. White wash doesn't really chip either. It scrubs off, wears off but doesn't usually flake like salt on an airbrushed model.
And tracks, even whole suspensions are so full of nooks and crannies that retain rust and dust and even wet muddy spots from a puddle you went through a week ago. It's a crewman's job to look at that track at every halt to make sure you catch problems before they start. You learn every bit of rust that doesn't wear off, every bit of dirt that won't shake off and that grease coming out the release nozzle is good. It means the wheel isn't dry and the bearing won't burn out.
"Panzer vor"
Veterans of all nationalities are notorious for employing hyperbole in their "war stories" No one got shot for a rust stain on a tank. Maybe hit up the side of the head, but look closely at some pzkpfw IV tanks on their way up to the front in Italy and the things are all beat up from travelling through heavy foliage. Bare metal is visible as is lightly rusted bits. But it looks nothing like the rusty monsters you see at model shows. The same divisions brand new Panthers already show the bright worn metal on the road wheels and torn up fenders while showing off for the photographer by running through the woods. Tank top sergeants being what they are he probably would have sighed and mumbled something about the fender getting messed up sooner or later... Then hit the kid tank commander up the side of the head.
I build my tanks to reflect that. Beat up and soldiering on the best they can but not overly rusty or paint chips everywhere. Paint chips where things get worn usually by the action of the crew. Not at random. Someone drops a wrench or walks all over a corner with hobnailed boots and you'll get a couple of chips. But nothing like the hairdryer technique so popular these days outside of the Western Desert. Even white wash didn't wear off like that. White wash doesn't really chip either. It scrubs off, wears off but doesn't usually flake like salt on an airbrushed model.
And tracks, even whole suspensions are so full of nooks and crannies that retain rust and dust and even wet muddy spots from a puddle you went through a week ago. It's a crewman's job to look at that track at every halt to make sure you catch problems before they start. You learn every bit of rust that doesn't wear off, every bit of dirt that won't shake off and that grease coming out the release nozzle is good. It means the wheel isn't dry and the bearing won't burn out.
"Panzer vor"
TopSmith
Washington, United States
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Joined: August 09, 2002
KitMaker: 1,742 posts
Armorama: 1,658 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 11, 2017 - 09:36 PM UTC
The issue is art verses reality. Seldom does a painting look like the real thing. The artist adds a feeling by using different techniques. The same with modeling. You want the impression that this vehicle has been through a lot so you bend the fenders, add gouges from enemy hits, rust the heck out of it and rub off half the paint. To be honest that is not the norm. Bland with some dust or dirt would be a lot closer to the truth. I see some of the gallery postings and I think that the builder tried to use every technique developed to demonstrate mastery. The only problem is that it just adds to the belief that is what the real vehicles looked like so more is better.
Posted: Saturday, March 11, 2017 - 10:06 PM UTC
I agree with the everyday wear and tear.
Heavy equipment is a bad example, as that gets maintained, but not to the level of a tank, and it has a very different use.
Correct me if I am wrong but those tanks we are modelling got at least three paint jobs a year. Winter white wash, spring white wash and the yearly repainting.
So I would expect to see weathering, and chipping in places that the crew would be active, hatches, and such, and mild on other spots.
But there are always exceptions, just look at the photos of abandoned tanks, all those M26's in a field in Germany, couple look like they just got there, while a few look very well used.
Heavy equipment is a bad example, as that gets maintained, but not to the level of a tank, and it has a very different use.
Correct me if I am wrong but those tanks we are modelling got at least three paint jobs a year. Winter white wash, spring white wash and the yearly repainting.
So I would expect to see weathering, and chipping in places that the crew would be active, hatches, and such, and mild on other spots.
But there are always exceptions, just look at the photos of abandoned tanks, all those M26's in a field in Germany, couple look like they just got there, while a few look very well used.
Scarred
Washington, United States
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Joined: March 11, 2016
KitMaker: 1,792 posts
Armorama: 1,186 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 12, 2017 - 08:40 AM UTC
Not all tanks were whitewashed. Only those that were in snowy conditions and then many weren't, look at the western front, the majority of the Shermans were still O.D. You can often see the original paint thru the whitewash and it was applied with whatever the crew had handy such as rags, brooms, mops and brushes often done in patches so it looked rough and it wore off easily. Tanks in garrison vs tanks in combat are two different monsters. With a life expectancy that could be measured in hours a tank in combat isn't going to get 3 paint jobs a year, in fact I've never heard of that. They'll do touch ups if needed and if the camo pattern is changed than they'll repaint, after major repairs they'll probably repaint the damaged area. But they aren't going to take a tank off the line just to repaint it and it was up to the crew to maintain the camo/paint along with the rest of the tank. Today it's not uncommon to see tanks in battle with miss-matched paint. Look at the "Bad Blessing" build and you can see a great depiction of such a vehicle.
Posted: Sunday, March 12, 2017 - 09:28 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Not all tanks were whitewashed. Only those that were in snowy conditions and then many weren't, look at the western front, the majority of the Shermans were still O.D. You can often see the original paint thru the whitewash and it was applied with whatever the crew had handy such as rags, brooms, mops and brushes often done in patches so it looked rough and it wore off easily. Tanks in garrison vs tanks in combat are two different monsters. With a life expectancy that could be measured in hours a tank in combat isn't going to get 3 paint jobs a year, in fact I've never heard of that. They'll do touch ups if needed and if the camo pattern is changed than they'll repaint, after major repairs they'll probably repaint the damaged area. But they aren't going to take a tank off the line just to repaint it and it was up to the crew to maintain the camo/paint along with the rest of the tank. Today it's not uncommon to see tanks in battle with miss-matched paint. Look at the "Bad Blessing" build and you can see a great depiction of such a vehicle.
Pardon my error, I was talking about the yearly paint job and the twice yearly white wash, one on and one off.
Tanks are not like heavy equipment, in my humble opinion, because your life depends on your tank. I think if the crew could, they would do their best to maintain it. Heavy equipment is used on a regular basis and not likely to get a repaint every year, from what I have seen that is rare.
srmalloy
United States
Joined: April 15, 2012
KitMaker: 336 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Joined: April 15, 2012
KitMaker: 336 posts
Armorama: 298 posts
Posted: Monday, March 13, 2017 - 10:15 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Tracks rust in hours. you don't need moisture, you need oxygen. Rust is iron oxide. The bright reddish rust gets knocked off but a deeper maroon rust remains. Tracks are rusty. At the same time pieces of metal that wear on each other become bright shiny metal. Look at the first inner roadwheel of a Panther. The whole rim was bright metal. The teeth of a drive sprocket and the center guides of tracks would wear bright and shiny. So the outside of the track could be rusty and the inner drive teeth would be bright and shiny.
That's real life. Go to a construction site and look at the equipment left over night. Rusty, pitted, but nowhere near the big streaks on most models. The paint flaking is nowhere near that seen on many models on horribly worn train cars. However black paint can bleach to dark grey in bright sun. Train engines get filthy with soot and streaked dirt and grime. The same with real armored vehicles.
The National Geographic Channel did a program on the process of refitting and rebuilding M1 Abrams tanks. Business Insider had an article with screenshots from that program that are relevant. The tracks are rebuilt and reassembled in preparation to be put back on the tank when its own restoration is done, but in the time between reassembly and remounting, you can see the coating of rust that they acquire, but once they're remounted and the tank is taken out for testing, the thin layer of rust is rapidly scrubbed off.
Another illustration of how fast unprotected steel will rust comes from the hull itself; when they come out of the bead blasting chamber, they're bright and shiny, but they sit outside for a couple days waiting for a special train to carry them to Lima, Ohio, giving them time to pick up a rust layer.
Quoted Text
In actual service the only thing that is kept super clean is what kills the enemy. As said in the Sharpe series "Men dirty, rifles clean"
And, in the end, this is what it comes down to. Outside of components like exposed mufflers and tailpipes that get exposed to extreme conditions even for a tank, you're not likely to see the level of corrosion on an actively-used tank that you might see on a vehicle sitting in a depot waiting for repairs. Wearing the environment, yes, and rusting where scrapes have taken off paint down to the bare metal, but save the extensive rust for warships on extended cruises.
marcb
Overijssel, Netherlands
Joined: March 25, 2006
KitMaker: 1,244 posts
Armorama: 1,226 posts
Joined: March 25, 2006
KitMaker: 1,244 posts
Armorama: 1,226 posts
Posted: Monday, March 13, 2017 - 11:28 PM UTC
British and German troops wore hobnailed boots/shoes. I would think that these would cause scratches on the paint...