Armourfast Stug II - Part 2

Errata: I said in my previous post on this project that Armourfast kit that I had was an earlier version of the Stug, without side-armour 'skirts' ('Schürzen'). Well, I lied!

The box instructions make no mention of the inclusion of side-armour plates, but, in actual fact, they are included on the sprue (I just over-looked them). So you can make a later war (mid-1943 onwards) Stugs with the extra armour, though be aware Armourfast supply you with early 'Schürzen', the design evolved and I suggest you pop over to this website for a detailed explanation: (Stugiii.com) Sturmgeschütze vor!

Right that out the way...
Er, I have another confession. I also suggested that I will be keeping this build simple so I could concentrate on the painting (which was the purpose of this project). I fibbed again.

Having discovered that I now had the chance to add the side-armour, it seemed fitting just to add a few other later model Stug furnishings. I mean, it would be rude not to...

My Stug with it's skirts on! I'm also in the process of adding a few bits of bling.

However, I'm not doing masses of research (which will lead me onto tinkering even further with my Armourfast 'Easy Build' kit) and everything I'm doing is suitably simplified in keeping with the kit's theme.

The Great 'MG Shield - Up or Down' Controversy
And here's where I accidently stumbled into a piece of essoteric war game modeller's controversy. :)

The Stug's roof mounted MG, operated by the Loader from atop his hatch.

The 'G' variant Stug III (onwards) was given a roof mounted machine-gun. Initially, this was simply a metal sheild with a MG34 (but sometimes a MG42)mounted in it, but later in the war it was fitted with a 'remote' fired MG34 so that the crew could safely fire the machine-gun from inside the Stug.

But, here's the problem...The early shield mounted MG was not a 'fixed' solution (like the shield protected .50 cal on Allied tanks), instead the MG34/42 was carried inside the Stug and only fitted in place on the shield when needed. This, admittedly inconvienient, arrangement was due to a badly thought through design by someone who obviously never actually had to use a roof mounted machine-gun under fire!

A terric view of the Stug's MG in action! You can clearly see how the Loader's
roof hatch is proping up the MG-shield. Without this support the shield would
just flop about and is normally stored foded forward, flat.

Now, this arangement - of shield 'up' when in use, shield 'down' when not - causes modellers who don't do thier research properly a lot of problems. Quite a few model thier Stug's with both the shield up and teh Loader's hatch closed (what would hold the shielf up, then).

But, in wargaming, it causes additional bamboozelment. Gamers may wish to have the Stug's MG on display - to indicate it has a secondary armament - but might not want to model a Loader figure poking out the roof of their Stug...So, basically, they 'cheat' and model the shield up as if it were a fixed accessory, as in this lovely example of a 28mm 'Bolt Action' Stug by Aodhan Bunny Burrows and featured on the Bolt Action Facebook Group...

Loader's hatch closed, but MG & shield up! Cool looking, but not accurate.

OK, this may be one of those modeller's 'mountain out of a molehill' issues, but things like that matter and I really can see some people being as pedantic enough to take issue with this inaccuracy during a game (tongue in cheek maybe). This is because, with the shield proped open only by the MG - as in the above example - the Loader could not open his hatch (easily) so how could he man the gun? Hmmm...

My solution to this rivet-counter's conundrum was to mount a shield on my Stug BUT to have it attached in the 'down' (folded) position. In a game, it would be my contention that the MG is available for use as - were it needed - the hypothetical Loader would hypothetically deploy the MG34 in it it's shield which could be - hypothetically - rased into place!

My Stug with it's MG shield folded forward, but ready for deployment if needed!

Welcome to the world of war gaming! :D

Stash addition - Armourfast 1/72 Sturmgeschütz (StuG) III

Model addition: Armourfast StuG III quick-build model in 1/72. Cost: £7.95 (for 2 in box)

Right, this is a bit of an unusual subject for me and bears some explanation. First off, as a general rule, I DON'T do WW2 German subjects - it's a little personal quirk based on my staunch anti-nazi beliefs (I won't bore you any further on this subject). However, of late - through my interest in WW2 Soviet armour - my imagination was caught by the role played by Finland during it's WInter War and it's later Continuation War against the Soviets.

Suspect friendships aside, Finland gained a lot of respect for it's steadfast defence of it's independence against an invading Soviet army, which incurred humiliating losses before a peace treaty was agreed. Later Finland entered into a marriage of convenience with the Nazis in order to conduct it's aptly named Continuation War against the Soviets. The Finnish armed forces punched well above their weight against the might of the Red Army, fighting the best that the Soviet Union had with a rag-tag inventory of beg, stollen or borrowed equipment.

Photo source: Wikipedia - 'Finnish Armoured Division'

The Sturmgeschütz (StuG) III was perhaps one of the more potent weapons in the Finn's armoury as they bought 50 plus from the Germans. This ambush tank destroyer seems to have suited both the Finnish tactics and geography as even in the late war when the Soviets brought to bear increasing numbers of more modern designs the Finns still managed to inflict a frustrating number of losses on them.

This model will join the small fleet of Finnish vehicles and artillery I have planned and - importantly - it will also give me another chance to get to grips with a multi-coloured camouflage paint pattern.

Four T-34 'quick build' models compared - Part 4

QUICK BUILD T-34/76 (M43) TURRET COMPARISONS

I didn’t know that much about the ’76 (m43) version of the T-34 before getting back into modeling. Like most I was more familiar with the original T-34/76 (model 1940) and the later large turreted ’85 variant. So this is all new to me and for base line for accuracy I will have to rely on the Zvezda turret because I have read several reviews that have complimented it on it’s dimensional and detail accuracy.

ARMOURFAST T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 11

Obviously simplified but still contains a rather surprising amount of components for an Armourfast. This model is advertised as being 're-tooled' and a major improvement over the original HaT model on which it was based. This model seems to be based on the Autumn 1943 'Laminate' turret version.

Pros:
- Unlike the Armourfast '85 turret this one isn't oversized
- Generally favorable rendition of all the major components
- Hatches can be modelled open or closed
- Mantlet is accurately off-set
- Sharply moulded, ideal for 'accurizing'
- Has correct 'stepped' bottom for 'Laminate' version

Cons:
- Lacking in most of the fine detail, including weld/cast marks
- Major rivets are excluded, particularly on the gun mantlet
- No side view port
- Gun mantlet is not exactly the right shape and is symetric
- Main periscope & vent are not exactly right

PLASTIC SOLDIER T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 6

Once again the Plastic Soldier turret is the model simplified example among these M43s. However, on the plus side it is far better than their attempt at the '85 turret! It is a 'generic' M40 turret, but I would guess it is *based* on the ChTZ 1942 production model.

Pros:
- Cleanly moulded and what detail there is is crisp
- At least you can tell it is a M43 turret!
- They got the gun a feasible size this time!

Cons:
- Slightly over-sized
- 'Stepped' element of laminate turret missing
- Periscope, rails and side port are feeble
- Top mantlet cover is all wrong

[img]http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7145/6517117285_dcd2ee1784.jpg[/img]

ZVEZDA T-34/76 (MODEL 1943) TURRET
Number of parts: 7

Most impressive snap together design - you really don't need glue (unlike the other 'quick builds'). This feature does explain why it actually has less components than the Armourfast turret! Like the Armourfast this appears to be based on the Autumn 1943 'Laminate' model.

Pros:
- Nicely crisp moulding
- As far as I can determine it's of good scale
- Does include some amount of weld marks and rivets
- Good periscope and air vent
- Nice gun and mantlet (nicest of the group)

Cons:
- Obviously still somewhat simplified
- Side rails missing and side port is poor
- 'Stepped' element of the laminate turret appears to be a little shallow.
- Again, mantlet has been made symmetrical in shape

CONCLUSION:
Well, a bit of a surprise conclusion this time. I did expect the Zvezda M43 turret to be easily the best of the three I looked at, but the Armourfast actually gave it a real run for it's money. Of particular note is the fact that the Armourfast has 3 more components than Zvezda!

Another pleasant surprise was that the Plastic Soldier turret was not as dismal as their T-34/85 turret was. In fact, simplification and slight over-size aside, it is a passable stab at the M43 turret - certainly as good as I would expect from a 'war gaming quality' model.

In the end you should not be shocked that I consider the Zvezda turret the superior of the three BUT not by as much as I expected. In fact, in terms of pure value for money I would have to say that the Armourfast is the bargain of these three. It would make a good subject for a cheap accurization project.

In the end it is so close to call between the Armourfast and Zvezda turret that I will have to reserve comment on the best until I have examined the rest of the models' components in order to decide whether the Zvezda really is the King of the quick builds...

It seems that Armourfast's marketing about their re-tooling and 'improved' T-34/76 (M43) wasn't all hype!  :D

NEXT: The T-34 quick build hull comparisons