Thoughts on Overdone Weathering

Well worn tables, heavily chipped and burnished

.

Over recent years there has been an increase in the awareness of the various techniques used to weather models, some of these can really bring out the kits best, but some just look way too random and overdone.

Chipping seems to me to be the worst culprit here. Intended to represent areas where paint has been worn away, when done properly this can look very effective and adds a level of authenticity to the finish. But overdone and you get a model that looks like it has spent the past thirty years sitting in a wreckers yard. The same holds true for excessive rust, some look like an abandoned car body in a paddock.

Often times it seems that “the look” is more important than what would actually be realistic. A good way to quickly compare is to drive past a roading construction site and check out the vehicles around. They will have light wear, paint chipping and scuffing in areas where it isn’t worth dealing with while they’re being used, but you won’t see vehicles with half their paint worn down to metal and rust everywhere.

The same is true of vehicles in military service, they are looked after, they are maintained, and if they have a crew it keeps them alive and prevents them from having to walk so they care for it. When times are hard no doubt the care and maintenance periods will be further apart and more wear will be shown, but in times when the fighting is sporadic or non-existent then at best vehicles should have no more than light wear in heavy travel areas and general dust and dirt.

The following examples are my own views and are intended as a guideline and to encourage giving thought to the circumstances of the vehicle only ;

1. A vehicle during the battles in France or the Balkans in 1940. A period when the German army is still at the height of professionalism and are winning. Vehicles would be maintained at every opportunity. Supply levels are good, maintenance can be scheduled regularly and military doctrine is still strongly in place so that appearance is upheld. So you wouldn’t expect to see a battered, rusted vehicle that looks like it has sat outside for several decades. Perhaps light surface rust on the exposed metal parts of tracks if the vehicle has been in the fighting but certainly not massive chipping and large rust stains.

2. A vehicle during the initial advances into North Africa in 1940. If painted in Desert Brown these vehicles would have only recently been painted so you wouldn’t expect a great deal of wear. However desert storms did strip paint so DAK vehicles are much more likely to show heavier paint wear than their ETO counterparts, though photos still tend to show most have only moderate wear, mainly on the topcoats. Again the German forces were at that time well supplied and winning so the same applies as for example 1.

3. A vehicle during the initial stages in Russia in 1941. Pretty much the same as example 1 but add a lot of dust possibly as Russian roads were dirt roads so travel was dirty. However again while winning there was always time to clean them and maintain them. Remember that the German army had a lot of pride and belief in themselves and they were big on presentation. German divisions had workshops and maintenance units attached and these were used to regularly service and repaint vehicles ( as well as captured ones ).

4. A vehicle during the late stages in North Africa in 1942. During the later stages as time for regular maintenance wasn’t available and supplies were short then you could expect to see wear to the paint that has built up over the previous year, especially to the high travel areas of interiors and to the leading edges of vehicles exposed to the abrasive sand dusts from other vehicles travelling ahead of them. Light battle damage may also not have been touched up. Vehicles that spent the last year in North Africa before being evacuated into Sicily in 1943 and then again into Italy often showed extensive wear but were tidied up once they reached the rear.

5. A vehicle during the 6th Army’s encirclement in 1943. As above with the DAK vehicles. When you have no food, little ammunition and little morale no doubt care and maintenance of the vehicle beyond its abilities to function in its desired role would not have been paramount. Chipping from usage in built up areas, battle damage and day-to-day wear would be expected. But it should also follow a logical sequence so as not to look like the paint has simply been sandblasted with rocks for five minutes and then suffered no other damage. Wear builds up and has causes. Consider what they are and how that cause would affect the surface of the vehicle.

6. A vehicle during the battle for Normandy in 1944. At this point in time many of the German vehicles were new or had been refitted after being pulled out of Russia. So there should be little damage and surface rust on the bare metal areas of the tracks only. As the battle progressed and they took damage there wasn’t the benefit of stopping for regular repair so surface damage from small arms fire and shrapnel, the rock walls of the French countryside would add chipping but again as above, think it through logically.

7. A vehicle during the battle of the Bulge in 1944. Again the majority of these vehicles had been brought up from the rear, supplemented with new or brought in from less hostile locations so you should expect only light day-to-day wear and maybe some moderate chipping if your back story supports it. As the battle progressed scuffing from trees, rock walls, small-arms fire and shrapnel etc can add to damage and wear but once again keep it real.

8. A vehicle during the battle for Berlin in 1945. This one will depend on what you are portraying, some vehicles only entered service in the last four to six months of the war, so they didn’t have time to become battered, rusty wrecks. Others had been sitting in the towns and cities of Germany waiting for the enemy and being looked after every day till that day came. Still others were survivors of lost battles pulling back for one last fight that may have been through urban battles, air attacks and pitched battles along the way so may look quite beaten up. So consider where it has come from, when it entered service and how it has been used.

In short if you can’t explain how the chipping and rust got there then don’t add it, and always keep in mind that an army with the time and the resources on hand will look after its equipment and keep it well maintained.

.

Burnt and heavily rusted drum

A Cautionary Tale On Researching

.

Some of you who have followed along on my main site, MilitaryModels,  will be aware that one of my builds that stalled last year was an Academy Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.H which was been backdated to a final production Ausf.G. One of the key reasons for that build stalling was that I encountered a problem with the markings that I had planned for it.

My original wish was to depict a vehicle in February 1944 on the road back after the rout at Korsun and so I started with the unit factbook pages on Feldgrau to find a suitable unit. I didn’t want to do yet another SS unit so when I came across this one HERE at Feldgrau it seemed perfect. The 3rd Panzer Division took part in the battles around Tscherkassy in the opening months of 1944. So far so good.

Then I moved to Axishistory factbook pages for a little more info and found THIS. Things were looking better, the 3rd Panzer Division was known as the Bear Division, and the bear emblem was something I liked so now I had my unit based on the images at the bottom of the page in that link. Much more reading followed and other images cropped up identifying several 3.Pz.Div vehicles and I found that they belonged to the 6th Panzer Regiment which used a shield made up of an old 4th Panzer Division emblem above crossed swords on a shield. The most common explanation given being that this emblem was taken to 6.Pz.Reg.3.Pz.Div from 35.Pz.Reg.4.Pz.Div by a commander who moved from one to the other.

Seems all good right ? So I ordered the appropriate markings from Archer but while waiting for them someone gave me a set of decals from the Tamiya Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.H kit which includes decals identified as 3.Pz.Div with the shield and bear included. So I put those on. And then the Archer decals arrived and here began the problem. The Archer decals titled these as 4.Pz.Div. I consider Axishistory to be reliable so I was a little confused. I asked on Armorama and had it confirmed that the bear was indeed 3.Pz.Div.

And here then is the problem. It isn’t. Of the three vehicles identified on the Axishistory page only the middle one is 3.Pz.Div. The top and bottom are 4.Pz.Div. They both have a bear emblem, 3.Pz.Div has a white one on a black shield and it’s small and usually located toward the rear. 4.Pz.Div has the simplified rearing bear which is red with a white outline for the 1st Abteilung and white for the 2nd Abteilung. There is no evidence of a blue or a black one used by 4.Pz.Div.

I learnt this after several days of solid research while taking the new tack that everything I knew was wrong and starting with a view that I would look into the history of each unit. Quite evident really when you find there is a well recorded unit history for 4.Pz.Div. with plenty of validated photos.

On top of all that I learnt that the shield usually identified as that of 6.Pz.Reg.3.Pz.Div is actually that of 4.Pz.Div which was added to all divisional vehicles in March 1944 after the Division Commander Dietrich von Saucken was awarded the Swords to his Knights Cross ( awarded in January, accepted on February 20th 1944 ). He returned to command 4.Pz.Div on the 1st of March at which time the shield was adopted.

So I found myself with a vehicle that was supposed to be with 8th Army as part of Army Group South leaving Korsun in late February bearing markings of a vehicle that was with 9th Army as part of Army Group Middle in March at the earliest. Bummer. Time to find a new unit, new markings, or a new scenario. Build on hold :-(

So the moral of this story ? Never take one source as gospel, no matter how learned it seems, even the best get it wrong from time to time. Check, double check, tripple check, and if there seems to be contradictions go back and do it all again.

.

Adding Sling Swivels To 1/35 Scale Weapons

.

If you’re like me you’ve been through the whole evolution of the scale rifle sling. First it’s no sling, just glue the gun to a hand ( or a back ). Then it’s the single strip of whatever material with one end going to the back and the other end going to the front. Then you get fancy and fold the sling over for 2/3 the length to make it look a bit closer to the real thing but it’s still a couple of blobs of glue fore and aft that hold it in place.

And if you’re really like me you end up making semi workable slings with sliding keepers and the whole blob of glue attachment point just doesn’t cut it anymore. I used to glue tiny little plastic swivels on but they looked too oversize and these days with failing eyesight and sausage fingers that was becoming more and more difficult. Magnifiers help the eyesight but I’ve yet to find a tool to deal with sausage fingers ( a good range of tweezers helps ).

So these days I do my sling swivels like this :

You’ll need fine fuse wire, a small drill bit ( I use a #80 ), a strip of 0.25×0.8mm styrene strip and some superglue. And if you’re like me a good freestanding magnifying glass or Optivisor.

First drill a hole through the point where the swivel will mount. Then loop your wire over and feed both ends through the hole. Pull the wire through until only a small loop is left, then insert the end of the styrene strip into the loop and finish pulling it tight from the other side. Make sure the strip is hard up against the weapon. Pull the wire tight and twist it around to hold it in place.

Then add a small drop of superglue, enough to fill whatever hole is remaining and keep the wire in place. I use a shaved down toothpick for this. Leave it to dry then shave away the excess wire ( you can add a drop of Mr. Surfacer 1000 to cover up any hole that remains ).

Now remove the styrene strip ( if it’s too tight just cut it as close to the swivel as possible without cutting the swivel ) and use a pair of broad nosed tweezers to slightly flatten down the swivel. There you have it, one swivel.

Now just feed your sling through and finish it off however you normally do ( I usually make workable slide keepers so that once everything is dry I can then slide them up to secure the sling at the swivel as the real ones do ).

Know Your U.S. WWII Ammo Tins

1 m2 50 cal ammo tin small

One thing I’ve noticed with model kits as well as with a number of built models is that it is quite apparent that many manufacturers and modellers alike aren’t aware of the difference between World War Two era and modern era .50 calibre and .30 calibre ammo tins ( ammo cans, ammo boxes, call them what you will ). While a WWII era ammo tin can be explained in a modern setting it’s a little harder to explain the presence of a modern ammo tin in a World War Two setting. So here is a very brief, simple guide to help to identify which are the right ones for your WWII era model.

The .50 Calibre Tins : The World War Two era M2 is distinguishable by the side opening hinge as opposed to the modern M2A1 with the hinge on the end and the latch on the other. The M2 has a hasp and staple type closure with a retaining pin, the M2A1 uses the latch which hooks under a lip and then is pushed down till it clips into place. The M2 also has strengthening ribs pressed into the sides where-as the M2A1 does not.

 

               .M2 .50 Calibre Ammo Tin                            M2A1 .50 Calibre Ammo Tin

The .30 Calibre Tins : The main differences are that the older World War Two era M1 and M1A1 tins have the strengthening ribs pressed into the sides as well as a flat lid. The later M19 and M19A1 have the tapered lid and no side ribbing. All of them have the hinge on one end with the push down latch on the other though the M1 latch is narrower. The M1 and M1A1 also have a toe at the base on the hinge end which is used to lock it into place on mount frames.

 

               .M1 .30 Calibre Ammo Tin                           M1A1 .30 Calibre Ammo Tin

 

M19A1 .30 Calibre Ammo Tin

.

Panzer 101 : A Brief Introduction To Understanding German Tanks

.

This isn’t mean to be an in depth history lesson on German tanks, but more an attempt to provide a brief outline that will hopefully be useful to the total novice in explaining some of the terms and references used when naming and describing German second world war tanks. So for now I’m going to limit it to just the actual tanks and likewise I won’t be going into the visual variations of the various ausfuhrung but rather just a general outline including stuff like when and where they were used.

So firstly a few terms to become familiar with.

Panzer

The most commonly known term used to refer to a German tank, from the german panzerkampfwagen. You’ll hear or see tanks refered to at times as a “Panzer Three” or Panzer III ( or Panzer Four, Panzer II, etc ). Generally only used with the Panzer One through Four as the five was the Panther and the six was the Tiger I and Tiger II which are more often refered to by those names.

Pz.Kpfw.

The german written abbreviation of Panzerkampfwagen, used in conjunction with the numerical model number of the tank in question, as in Pz.Kpfw.III or Pz.Kpfw.VI. The Germans being a nice orderly lot were good enough to name their tanks from one through to six. Each number usually representing a larger , more advanced tank over the previous with the odd exception that the Kongistiger ( or Tiger II ) wasn’t numbered VII but kept the Pz.Kpfw.VI designation of the original Tiger I. Also in terms of chronology the Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger I entered service before the Pz.Kpfw. V Panther.

Ausf.

Short for the german ausfuhrung. If the I, II, III, IV etc are thought of as the models then the Ausf. is the variants within the model. Over each tank’s lifetime they went through a continual process of improvement and upgrades that every now and then these were standardised as a particular model variant or ausfuhrung, for example the Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf. N would be thought of as an “N” variant of the Panzer III. Usually the higher the Ausf. lettering the more recent and advanced the model variant, though there are the odd anomaly such as the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf. J which was a simplified version of the preceding Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf. H.

Initial, Early, Mid, Late Production

These aren’t official terms and won’t be found in german military nomenclature. Rather they are terms more frequently used by modellers to refer to a particular phase in a variants life cycle. Some variants stayed in service for a year or two and constantly underwent modifications and improvements. Most of these could be dated and as such are used to identify a vehicle as being an initial production, or early in the production run, or late in the production run etc. Most commonly seen with vehicles that had a particular Ausf. with a long lifespan, notably the Pz.Kpfw. IV Ausf. H, The Pz.Kpfw. V Panther Ausf. G, and the Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger I Ausf. E.

Porsche, Henschel, “Production”

Again these aren’t official terms but rather contemporary descriptions to differentiate between the two types of turret seen on the Tiger II. Porsche and Henschel both competed for the Tiger contract and Porsche produced a number of turrets which were then used on the winning Henschel body rather than throw them away ( oddly both turrets were actually built by Krupp ). There were only something like 50 of these. The Henschel, or “production” turret refers to the usual Tiger II turret. The Porsche turret was more rounded, particularly under the mantlet, the Henschel was flared out all around with flat angled sides.

Berge and Behfels

These are added to the name to denote that the vehicle is either an engineering version ( Berge ) or a command version ( Behfels ). For example a Bergepanzer IV is an engineering recovery version of  Pz.Kpfw. IV and a Behfelswagen Tiger is a command version of the Tiger tank.

Sometimes there will be more descriptive names as the Germans had a tendency to like to name something as precisely as they could and then abbreviate the whole thing down, but those terms will help you understand the basics of what is being refered to.

And so to the tanks themselves.

Pz.Kpfw. I

The Ausf. variants being the A, B, C, D, and F. The first and smallest tank, armed with two 7.92mm machine guns and seen in the opening stages of the war mostly, in Poland, France and a few of the Fs also saw service in Russia. They were also used in limited numbers in the Spanish Civil war. After 1942 these were mostly turned into donor chassis for other vehicles such as ammunition carriers and platforms for light anti-aircraft guns.

Pz.Kpfw. II

The Ausf. variants being the a,b,c,A,B,C,D/E,F,G,H,J,L and M. Bigger brother to the Pz.Kpfw. I this was a bit bigger and was armed with one 7.92mm machine gun and one 20mm cannon. It was a still a bit small for a serious tank of the time so ended up mainly doing reconnaissance work and served in all the early arenas such as Poland, France, the Balkans, North Africa and Russia. By 1943 they were pretty much relegated to donor chassis for self-propelled guns.

Pz.Kpfw. III

The Ausf. variants being A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,J,L,M and N. The first of what could be considered a proper battle tank and having the shape that would become most synonymous with the German Panzer. Armed initially with a 37mm gun that changed to a 50mm with the later produced Ausf. F at which time the Ausf. E and earlier Ausf. F were upgunned too. The A-D were prewar variants that didn’t see action, the E-H were involved in all the early war arenas and the J-N in the mid war period. After 1943 what was left were mainly converted to other roles or used as donor chassis for other vehicles.

Pz.Kpfw IV

The Ausf. variants being A,B,C,D,E,F,F2/G,H and J. The true workhorse of the german tanks and the most common. Starting life with a short barrelled 75mm gun changing to the much more effective long barrelled 75mm gun with the Ausf. F2 ( aka the Ausf. G as it was redesignated later on ) in early 1942. Seen everywhere throughout the war though only the A-D were in the early battles and only in small numbers. The Ausf. H was the acme of the Pz.Kpfw. IV variants and the most numerous. This would have been the most likely version to be seen in 1945 onwards other than the J which was just an H dummed down by losing a few bits to simplify production, most notably the turret motor. Not just the most numerous tank but also the most commonly used chassis for other vehicles.

Pz.Kpfw. V Panther

The Ausf. variants being D, A, G and F. One of the most recognisable with its sloped armour, and probably the best German tank of the war.  These entered production as the Ausf. D in early 1943 and saw action first in russia. Unusually the Ausf. A followed the D, then the G which was the most common variant, then finally the Ausf. F which never went into production. The chassis was also used for the Jagdpanther mounting the 8.8cm gun with no turret, Bergepanthers for recovery, and Behfelspanthers which had fake guns, as well as several planned ( but never produced ) versions mounting twin anti-aircraft guns ( known as the Flakpanzer V Coelian ), quadruple AA guns, and an 8.8cm gun ( to be known as the Panther II ).

Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger I

The most recognisable name, and one often ascribed to any and every german tank. Only coming as the Ausf. E and entering service in late 1942 at Leningrad, also seeing service elsewhere in Russia as well as being sent to Tunisia to support the AfrikaKorps. Armed with the 8.8cm gun this was formidable but was never really around in large enough numbers and had a lot of mechanical reliability problems. Towards the end of their life around mid 1944 they were replaced with the Tiger II, the remaining ones rather than being rebuilt as Tiger Is were converted into command Befehlswagen Tiger I Ausf. E and Sturmtiger Sturmmorser.

Pz.Kpfw. VI Tiger II

Also known as the King Tiger, Royal Tiger or Konigstiger. Easily recognisable from its size and angular shape with it’s sloped armour. Entering service at the start of 1944 as the Ausf. B and seeing out the war though only ever in small numbers. Also armed with an 8.8cm gun but a longer one firing a bigger shell at a higher velocity. Also used as the chassis for the Jagdtiger mounting a 12.8cm gun.

.

I hope that this has been of help to anyone overwhelmed by the nomenclature for World War Two German tanks. If there is anything that people feel should be added to this please feel free to sound off and I’ll add in anything that seems appropriate.

.