depending on when exactly, and if you are speaking German or English. Longer term readers of this blog (yes, Mum), will know that I have a 20mm soft spot for the Luftwaffe Field Divisions, and have occasionally gamed their tin and resin heroics, for example, here, and here. The poor, benighted FD(L) fellows struggled valiantly, mainly on the Eastern Front, but, I suppose, fought in vain. Their divisions were very weak in supporting arms (though sometimes accompanied by Flak 88s), but, from a toy soldier point of view, they did seem to utilise a wide variety of vehicles (interestingly, they did not depend on horse drawn transport, unlike most of the Heer). In terms of artillery and anti-tank support, they frequently used the Pak 97/38 - a interesting hybrid, being a modified French 75mm on a Pak 38 carriage. Previously, I have used Pak 38s to support my FD(L) chaps, but a good review of Plastic Soldier Company's Panther A with zimmerit on Leif's website led to something much better than having to use Pak 38s:
Yes, PSC's Pak 38!
Except that it has this option:
The lower gun barrel above is the modified French 75 that enables one to produce the FD(L) weapon of, well, perhaps not choice, but necessity.
Of course, I couldn't just buy a box of guns, I also took the opportunity to buy PSC's, three in a box, PzIVs:
With choice of F1, F2 or G, and H models.
Now, as we all know, PSC kit are very much a case of pros and cons (Skids' song, anyone?). In general terms, the pros are good ones: made in the UK, very good value for money with multiple units per box, easy build and sturdy for wargame use, and, usually, plenty of crew and bits and pieces like jerrycans. On the downside, there can be issues relating to detail that sometimes seem too noticeable (I previously reviewed PSC Crusaders in that light: here). However, on balance, PSC makes very useful table top hardware, and they certainly can't be faulted for thinking about putting the 75 barrel in the box:
even if the trails seem to be a tad on the short side...
And the first PzIVF1:
Destined for Rommel's desert fellows.
And, a nice touch:
the weighted track.
(Finally, a footnote on the Vampire. I have to confess that, somehow, horribly, I managed to make a mess of the cockpit - I plead the effect of my old, tired eyes. And, so it is in the shed, waiting until I feel buoyant enough to tackle it again. Sigh.)
I've been trying to justify spending €20 on a Hasegawa Panzer IV Ausf G (because it has too much stuff, one of the sprues being from a loader tank from a rail gun) in the local toy man shop, but I think I can more easily justify spending around the same on one and a couple of spare Mk IVs for later.
ReplyDeleteOn balance, I think the PSC might well be a better bet. A while back, I built the Hasegawa Pz IV anti-aircraft - Wirbelwind - and it had that extra sprue too, which I thought odd. The PSCs are very much 1/72 (like Hasegawa), and I suspect that there might be issues re the bolt on armour at the front end, and the arrangement of things at the rear end, but, nonetheless, they look the wargames table business.
DeleteI like PSC's Panzer IV and Stug III. There are smallish inaccuracies, but on the whole they are nice kits and no glaring errors.
DeleteI have some of their Russian Zis - 3 guns which went together very well. Their Shermans are deserving of praise, though I doubt I will add to my stock of Panzer III. My Matchbox fellows have been soldiering on so well.
ReplyDeleteYes, they are pretty smartly engineered, with no real fit problems at all. You won't remember, you youngster, but when the Matchbox Pz III came out it was 'joy that day to be alive' (not that I am in any way in favour of the French Revolution), until, as a North Africa type of fellow, I realised that the 'Special' saw very little service there. So, very much like Wordsworth on the delight and anti-climax front; although I must stress that I do not possess a sister.
DeleteI too like PSC kits - very good money for what they do, especially in the smaller 15mm range.
ReplyDeleteI pity the LwFD units. It must have been a rude shock for them, getting combed out of their comparatively comfy billets doing air force things, then getting cursory combat arms training and being sent somewhere horrible. Having spent some time serving in an Air Force posting and seeing how good life was there, I could only imagine the shock of such a reassignment.
Soldier on with the Vampire - it's time will come again.
Michael, your words on the Vampire front caused me to hang my head in shame, then retrieve the poor thing from the outer darkness of the shed.
DeleteYes, a bit of waste too one would have thought, given that many of those Luftwaffe fellows probably had technical skills.
Stephen, I agree with your comments regarding PSC. From memory I think there are a few nitpicks with accuracy on the Pz IVs (esp. the Ausf H iirc) but in this case I think it is fair enough given the flexibility and value of this kit. My most recent PSC purchases have been the SdKfz 251/D Variants, M5A1 Stuarts and Panther As-zim. I would rate all of these as excellent value and more than acceptable accuracy-wise. Otoh, I wouldn't touch the PSC US and Commonwealth halftrack kits.
ReplyDeleteCheers, Dave
Absolutely - they really are top hole when it comes to value for money. I've some of their Hanomags, and I really like them, not least for all the extra bits and pieces that one gets with them. I will take note, however, of the Allied half-track warning - what exactly is the problem with them?
DeleteI'll try to give you the Readers Digest version on the PSC allied HTs. There are quite a few minor issues eg the MG pulpit being the wrong shape (probably copied from Academy) that are relatively easy to fix. Then there are the crew figures in both sets which are bizarrely wearing German style "Y" webbing. This can probably be concealed on the seated figures but forget the MG gunners. But worst of all is the ugly panel line and rivet detail which is both excessively exaggerated and worst of all totally incorrect as it replicates the error of the infamous Airfix US halftrack in having the fold-down side flaps of an ex-AA variant. This is wrong for any US M3 version and the standard IHC lend-lease M5/M9, plus any lend-lease AA HTs that were subsequently converted for other uses ended up with a completely different internal layout. HTH...
DeleteCheers, Dave