G'day Nick

Looks great. The hard edged camo would seem to indicate that it's a fairly late production vehicle (although I stand to be corrected on that), in which case there should be two fuel tank vent pipes visible on each side.

I can supply the required info if required.

Regards

Rob

I am curious why you didn't try to emulate the camouflage pattern in the photos since you were going for a specific vehicle?

Quoted Text

---

I am curious why you didn't try to emulate the camouflage pattern in the photos since you were going for a specific vehicle?

---

Thanks Shell for commenting.
I did try to emulate the camo, its hard to determine the original camo due to the fact that it was repainted, or at least, partially repainted once it was in the states. The color photo above shows it partially repainted from what i understand.

Quoted Text

---

Quoted Text

---

I am curious why you didn't try to emulate the camouflage pattern in the photos since you were going for a specific vehicle?

---

Thanks Shell for commenting.
I did try to emulate the camo, its hard to determine the original camo due to the fact that it was repainted, or at least, partially repainted once it was in the states. The color photo above shows it partially repainted from what i understand.

---

Well, that certainly makes a strong case for how we shouldn't let all this stuff wind us up so much, as it all seems to come down to where-when-what was going on with the vehicle when your references were collected. Here's an older Dragon kit that I did as 332 according to an Osprey manual on the Tiger II:



Pretty different. Who is right? Is anyone wrong? Who knows? Did we have fun building it? Only one answer should be yes.

Wow, it really looks appealing! The archer dry transfers look a lot better than decals. Gonna look them up.

Thanks,

Gaz