_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Meng's M1A1
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2019 - 07:03 PM UTC

Quoted Text

A bit of "truth in lending" here... If you are totally detail oriented, be aware that all of the markings in the RFM ODS kit (3rd ACR, 1-37 Armor and the USMC 2d Tanks) are for units that had been equipped with M1A1 Heavy Armor variants, not the standard M1A1s that most units utilized in OPERATION DESERT STORM.

FWIW

John



So, then, John, what you are saying, in essence, is that the RFM 5006 kit doesn't provide a modeler with an accurate tank. So, if someone builds the tank per the instructions, the kit doesn't have proper decals? Or, alternatively stated, a modeler would have to modify the tank (per Gino's directions earlier in the thread) that one is building in order to be able to use the kit decals. Do I have that correct?

I'd really like to get this kit, and use the included T156 tracks, but then, apparently, I'd have to get some aftermarket decals. Right?
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Monday, January 14, 2019 - 12:59 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Based on your answers above, it would appear, then, that with the squared sight box, X fenders, and T158 tracks, if one built the tank that way, it would look exactly like the M1A1s that were used in Iraq in 2003, right? So, what would the visual differences between the ODS M1A1 HA, built as you suggest, and the M1A1s used during the Thunder Run on Baghdad?



OIF Abrams were M1A1HC (Heavy Common) tanks. They look basically the same as the HA tanks as you/I described. They did have some upgrades though such as the fitting for deep water fording kits (mounting flange around center exhaust outlet), a power connector in front of the loader's hatch, EAPU in the turret basket or at least the connectors for them, Blue Force Tracker antennas, and some smaller fittings. For a USMC tank, they also had the 8-shot smoke grenade launchers and most had the Missile Counter-measure Device (MCD) on top of the CITV cover.


Quoted Text


Also, I recall you saying in many older posts that the 'sand' color for ODS tanks were not the same CARC sand color used on circa 2003 Iraq M1A1s, rather, it was a darker sand color, as these tanks were painted in the field when arriving in Kuwait. Would that color be correct for this M1A1 HA? If so, what color would be correct?



Most tanks were painted quickly as they arrived in Saudi Arabia with a locally procured paint that wasn't to FS standards. It was a bit darker and more brown than CARC Sand. Testors Model Master makes a color called Army/Marine Gulf Sand that is a pretty good match, but just about any sand-tan color will do.
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 - 09:55 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Based on your answers above, it would appear, then, that with the squared sight box, X fenders, and T158 tracks, if one built the tank that way, it would look exactly like the M1A1s that were used in Iraq in 2003, right? So, what would the visual differences between the ODS M1A1 HA, built as you suggest, and the M1A1s used during the Thunder Run on Baghdad?



OIF Abrams were M1A1HC (Heavy Common) tanks. They look basically the same as the HA tanks as you/I described. They did have some upgrades though such as the fitting for deep water fording kits (mounting flange around center exhaust outlet), a power connector in front of the loader's hatch, EAPU in the turret basket or at least the connectors for them, Blue Force Tracker antennas, and some smaller fittings. For a USMC tank, they also had the 8-shot smoke grenade launchers and most had the Missile Counter-measure Device (MCD) on top of the CITV cover.


Quoted Text


Also, I recall you saying in many older posts that the 'sand' color for ODS tanks were not the same CARC sand color used on circa 2003 Iraq M1A1s, rather, it was a darker sand color, as these tanks were painted in the field when arriving in Kuwait. Would that color be correct for this M1A1 HA? If so, what color would be correct?



Most tanks were painted quickly as they arrived in Saudi Arabia with a locally procured paint that wasn't to FS standards. It was a bit darker and more brown than CARC Sand. Testors Model Master makes a color called Army/Marine Gulf Sand that is a pretty good match, but just about any sand-tan color will do.



Sorry it has taken so long for me to respond to your responses, Gino. Greatly appreciated! So, then, in summary, it looks like, for the tanks that have the marking supplied in the 1991 kit, the only visual differences would be a darker paint color and slightly different external loads. I'd really like to use the 1991 kit supplied tracks (the T156 tracks), the non-X braced fenders, the angled 'dog house'. It sounds like I would need to get different decals if I build a tank with those features, based on John's post (which he hasn't responded to). Would you agree with that, Gino?
Tankrider
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: October 07, 2002
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,208 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 - 10:21 AM UTC

Quoted Text


So, then, John, what you are saying, in essence, is that the RFM 5006 kit doesn't provide a modeler with an accurate tank. So, if someone builds the tank per the instructions, the kit doesn't have proper decals? Or, alternatively stated, a modeler would have to modify the tank (per Gino's directions earlier in the thread) that one is building in order to be able to use the kit decals. Do I have that correct?

I'd really like to get this kit, and use the included T156 tracks, but then, apparently, I'd have to get some aftermarket decals. Right?



Curt
Sorry, I just saw your post. You have read my post correctly. The RFM ODS M1A1 builds into a non-DU armor equipped M1A1 out of the box. The decals (D Co, 3ACR, 1-37 Armor, and the USMC's 2nd Tank Battalion) all used DU armored AKA Heavy Armor M1A1s during the 100 hours of combat. If you are detail oriented, then a set of T-158 tracks (I recommend AFV Club or Trumpeter T-158 tracks) are needed to use the kit decals or build the model with the kit tracks and get different decals. IMHO< the easiest option is to use Echelon's D356025 Set to do a M1A1 from 3-67 Armor, 1st (Tiger) Brigade 2nd Armored Division) which was served under the control of the 2nd Marine Division. you could also borrow some markings from a couple different Tamiya M1A1 kits - with mineplow (2nd ACR vehicle) or the one without (3-35 Armor, 1st Armored Division), both options work for tanks that were shipped from Germany based units.

Ultimately, the choice is yours. I look forward to seeing your work.

John

long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 - 02:17 PM UTC
I did think of doing an Iraqi military M1A1 and have the kit, and wondered if the kit would work for one of their tanks.
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 26, 2019 - 02:26 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I did think of doing an Iraqi military M1A1 and have the kit, and wondered if the kit would work for one of their tanks.



Not out of the box w/the T-156 track. The Iraqi M1A1SA is basically an M1A1HA w/out DU armor (w/T-158 track), just as the tanks depicted on the decal sheet were, as John described well.
system
Visit this Community
England - East Anglia, United Kingdom
Joined: November 24, 2008
KitMaker: 364 posts
Armorama: 363 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2019 - 03:06 AM UTC
This is useful info! My current project is an ODS M1A1 HA, trying to knock the ancient Dragon M1A1 w/Mine Plough kit into shape (after all, why make things easy?).

Re: the fenders, there are pictures of even the earliest M1A1s in REFORGER 88 with the 'X-stamped' fenders along with T-156 tracks, early 'doghouse' etc. - lots in this book:
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Sunday, January 27, 2019 - 01:15 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


So, then, John, what you are saying, in essence, is that the RFM 5006 kit doesn't provide a modeler with an accurate tank. So, if someone builds the tank per the instructions, the kit doesn't have proper decals? Or, alternatively stated, a modeler would have to modify the tank (per Gino's directions earlier in the thread) that one is building in order to be able to use the kit decals. Do I have that correct?

I'd really like to get this kit, and use the included T156 tracks, but then, apparently, I'd have to get some aftermarket decals. Right?



Curt
Sorry, I just saw your post. You have read my post correctly. The RFM ODS M1A1 builds into a non-DU armor equipped M1A1 out of the box. The decals (D Co, 3ACR, 1-37 Armor, and the USMC's 2nd Tank Battalion) all used DU armored AKA Heavy Armor M1A1s during the 100 hours of combat. If you are detail oriented, then a set of T-158 tracks (I recommend AFV Club or Trumpeter T-158 tracks) are needed to use the kit decals or build the model with the kit tracks and get different decals. IMHO< the easiest option is to use Echelon's D356025 Set to do a M1A1 from 3-67 Armor, 1st (Tiger) Brigade 2nd Armored Division) which was served under the control of the 2nd Marine Division. you could also borrow some markings from a couple different Tamiya M1A1 kits - with mineplow (2nd ACR vehicle) or the one without (3-35 Armor, 1st Armored Division), both options work for tanks that were shipped from Germany based units.

Ultimately, the choice is yours. I look forward to seeing your work.

John




John,

THANK YOU so much for replying to my post! It so happens that I have a Tamiya kit (from which I used the mine plow on a Dragon M1A1 for my 'Answer To This' model for the Ft. Stewart Thunder Run exhibit), but I don't think it's the kit you're talking about with the correct decals. I also have an older 5 in 1 Trumpeter M1A1/A2 kit which has a mine plow, which, to my eye, is identical to the plow on the Tamiya kit. However, I like your idea of using the Echelon decals (I have used many of those in the past). I've just ordered the Echelon set that you recommended. I'm thinking that going that route will be the best way to use the T156 tracks, which I think will be a nice contrast to the Iraq era M1A1s and A2s that I have plenty of kits of, Dragon all, save for the Rye Field M1A1/2 with interior.

I'm definitely getting the 5006 ODS kit, now!!
razor500
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: January 30, 2019
KitMaker: 6 posts
Armorama: 6 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 29, 2019 - 01:08 PM UTC
The Paint for ODS vehicles was slap shod. No primer was used. Depending on when the vehicles were painted they could take on a pink hue instead of the desired sand color. For tanks use a regular sand color and for thinner paint jobs sand wear on the front slope of the hull and front top of the turret is good. Less weathering on the skirts and sides than normal. The tanks had fresh paint and where only in the desert for 6 months. The usual grease stains around the field caps and rusty exhaust.

My tank came back from DS looking near new. 2AD Tiger Brigade tanks were pulled from POMCUS and painted in theater and issued to units arriving with 105mm M1s.
long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 03, 2019 - 12:34 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I did think of doing an Iraqi military M1A1 and have the kit, and wondered if the kit would work for one of their tanks.



Not out of the box w/the T-156 track. The Iraqi M1A1SA is basically an M1A1HA w/out DU armor (w/T-158 track), just as the tanks depicted on the decal sheet were, as John described well.


Funny, I examined the kit tracks and it shows flat chevronless tracks, like I saw on the Wikipedia page on the M1A1's with Iraqi flags on them. I thought those were the T-158 track. Am I mixed up?
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 03, 2019 - 01:34 PM UTC
Which kit are you referring to? The Rye Field M1A1 1991 (ODS - #5006) kit has the T-156 tracks with chevron pads. I believe all of Meng's kits come w/T-158 or T-158LL tracks square pad tracks.
long_tom
Visit this Community
Illinois, United States
Joined: March 18, 2006
KitMaker: 2,362 posts
Armorama: 2,005 posts
Posted: Sunday, February 03, 2019 - 02:44 PM UTC
Meng as mentioned in the title. Until I started this thread, I never even heard of Rye Field!
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Monday, February 04, 2019 - 01:23 AM UTC
By the way, though totally off I topic, yesterday I started working on my RM-5007 (M1A1/2 with full interior) tank. I got anxious, after all the discussion here, to see how a Rye Field model goes together, since this my first one. I figured I’d start with the tracks. All my prior Abrams tanks were the Dragon 3535, and I used the Bronco aftermarket tracks for all of them, and had been pleased with them (hate Magic Tracks!). I really wanted to see how easily the Rye Field tracks built up. The tracks come with 2 seven part templates, which work reasonably well. Cutting the upper and lower track pads from their sprues is a huge pain. I decided not to clean up the area where I cut the parts from the sprue, which would have taken FOREVER! I think those spots will look acceptable after painting. The track pins, which are the parts that connect the pad parts together, do have a very nice, fine sprue connection, and really don’t need any cleanup, if you carefully trim them from the sprue. I found that the lower track pads don’t sit in the templates very well, particularly at first, until the templates ‘wear in’ a bit. The templates (guides) allow you to put up to 7 sets of lower pads in place at one time. I found that it was best to put the track pins in place one at a time, as you get ready to put the top track pads in place, or the pins wouldn’t stay in place. A small amount of Tamiya extra thin cement works well, just before the upper pad goes down. Be careful with the amount of cement!! I was able to get both sets of tracks done, without the guide horns, in one day. I eventually got into a rythym, and I’d say it took about 90 to 120 minutes per track, not including breaks. I just started to work on the guide horns, and they are the hardest part, in terms of trimming the parts from the sprue. Two attachment sprue points per horn, and the point at the top of the horn is too thick, and really requires cleanup, which is difficult and time consuming, and the result is not the greatest. I hope, again, that paint will help cover up the imperfect sanding. Also, gluing the horns in place is not that easy, and requires some fiddling. The tracks, overall, look fine, though, and if you are careful with glue, they should end up being mostly workable, or at least flexible enough to go around the drive sprockets and idlers. I hope the RM-5006 with the chevron pads are this easy, or even better, if possible. I’d say these tracks are about on par with the Bronco tracks, in terms of easy of construction, but definitely look a little better, particularly on the ends of the track pins, which are solid with a mold line running through the Bronco parts, but have the hollow axle look without the mold line on the equivalent Rye Field parts.
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 14, 2019 - 01:51 AM UTC
Just a follow up on the Rye Field RM-5007 tracks, in case anyone cares. I finished the tracks, then painted them. They came out looking fine, though the guide horns are not as consistent in appearance as I would like, due to the sprue connection points and necessary trimming/cleanup. To make them perfect would take more time than I was willing to put in, and I know the horns won’t be noticed too much when the side skirts are in place. I really like the pin end pieces, with the hollow connectors where the axles, on the real tracks, go, far superior to the Bronco tracks I’ve used on my Dragon M1A1 tanks.
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Friday, March 01, 2019 - 02:44 PM UTC
One last post in this thread (unless others chime in). I just received the rather hard to find Tamiya 35141 Modern Military Accessory set, with the old style MRE boxes (lower, less square than the current boxes, which is all I needed to be able to build an ODS Abrams, plus, I got the Model Master paint, the darker brown paint, that Gino had recommended as a good color for an ODS Abrams. So, I have the RMF RM-5006, the Echelon D356025 decals, the right paint, and, now, the proper stowage parts! I've got so many models 'in progress' though, that it will be a while until I get to this, but just knowing I've got all the pieces/parts ready to go makes me happy!
ivanhoe6
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 02, 2019 - 01:07 AM UTC
Congrats Curt ! My builds usually stall at these multi part indy links. My Panda M1 finally arrived yesterday. Their indy links look to be a bit tedious to build but how they're situated on the sprue makes removal/clean up easier. One thing they failed at is nowhere in the instructions are how many links per track run. How many do you use on your #3535's ?
Have a good weekend !
Tom
cabasner
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: February 12, 2012
KitMaker: 1,083 posts
Armorama: 1,014 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 02, 2019 - 03:06 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Congrats Curt ! My builds usually stall at these multi part indy links. My Panda M1 finally arrived yesterday. Their indy links look to be a bit tedious to build but how they're situated on the sprue makes removal/clean up easier. One thing they failed at is nowhere in the instructions are how many links per track run. How many do you use on your #3535's ?
Have a good weekend !
Tom



Hi Tom!
I have used the Bronco aftermarket indy link tracks for the 3535 builds I have done thus far, though not sure that the Bronco version would be the same as the Panda tracks for the Panda kit. That stated, 76 links works really well for the Bronco tracks on the Dragon 3535 M1A1 AIM, just about perfect tension on the tracks to keep them taut, but not overly stressed. Hope this helps!
Curt

P.S. Now that I've built the Rye Field tracks for the Rye Field RM-5007, I have to tell you that I would go with the Rye Field aftermarket tracks (which, I assume, are the same as the Rye Field kit tracks). I think the Bronco tracks blow away the Dragon Magic Tracks (which I have never used), but the Bronco tracks have some significant problems, the biggest of which is that the end connectors are solid, rather than hollow, as they are on the real tracks, and taking the time to drill out the end connectors, as some have done, seems like WAY too much work. Overall, the Rye Field tracks are the best out there, in my opinion, and you can see a great comparison between all of the manufacturer versions of tracks (and the real thing) on Vodnik's page, though he didn't include the Panda version, and, again, I have no idea how Panda stacks up against the others. Good luck!

P.P.S. I just found this https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/builds/panda/build_panda_35030.shtml review of the Panda kit, where it is stated that 77 links is the proper count for your kit. I just checked the tracks the 156 version in the Rye Field ODS 1991 version, which are link and length, and they are going to be a nightmare to clean up. They have large ejector pin marks on the inside pads, and the connector ends are solid (not sure if those were hollow or not on the real tracks), but there are mold lines that will need careful cleanup on each end connector and on the pad edges, so I expect that will take many hours of careful scraping... Ugh!!
ivanhoe6
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts
Posted: Saturday, March 02, 2019 - 12:30 PM UTC
Thanks Curt ! That will be a big help knowing the right amount. I was just going to build a bunch, dry fit and see where I was at.
This is one of the things I like so much about Armorama, the knowledgeable folks and the willing to help other modelers.
Thanks again !
 _GOTOTOP