Landships II

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Emhar sponsons

PDA · Legend

I don't have the 1/35 kit, so these comments may not be 100% accurate as they are based on the 1/72, on the assumption they just scaled up. Or down.

Our friend Mr Hansen (moderator here) has pointed out that the row of rivets along the top of the female sponson should be a double row. See this article.

And, looking at the pictures on this page, it looks like she has Hotchkiss machine guns, which is just wrong. (Although there are some people who say that some Mark IVs used Hotchkiss, I've yet to see any contemporary photos of such. It'd be great to see them; it'd make the kit a little more accurate.)

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Thanks for the link.
This is the one I am looking to replicate but wasnt sure how the Emhar compared, that link it useful, cheers.

Mark Hansen · Legend

PDA wrote:

...And, looking at the pictures on this page, it looks like she has Hotchkiss machine guns, which is just wrong. (Although there are some people who say that some Mark IVs used Hotchkiss, I've yet to see any contemporary photos of such. It'd be great to see them; it'd make the kit a little more accurate.)

The only photos that I've seen where a Mk IV had the Hotchkiss is on the supply tanks / tenders.

�If the sponsons are the same as on the 1/72 scale kit there is another problem. The sponsons and lower side pieces were left and right-handed. Emhar has given us 2 starboard sponsons and 2 port lower pieces. The pistol ports had the attachment point pointing to the front of the tank. There is a simple remedy. Remove and replace the pistol port covers on the affected pieces.

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Took this pic down at Bovi but cant remember what tank it was on lol, think a IV or V.

LincolnTanker · Commander in Chief

Hi T140,� the photo is of the Whippet, I've attached a side�view�photo of the same.

LincolnTanker · Commander in Chief

T140 wrote:

Does anyone know how accurate the male and female sponsons are on the MKIV kits in 1:35 scale. I know on the male the rear is at 90 degrees and should be angled, but other than that? I've no idea on the female so be interested to know how that rates.
Cheers

The female sponsons don't slide into the hull as per the males. On your photo you can see a vertical strip down the middle of the sponson, this is bolted in position. This can be unbolted, as it appears to be in your photo,� other fitting are removed and each sponson half is swung into the hull. Hinges are on the front and rear edges of the hull�aperture. So the angles you were asking about arn't needed.

�

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

LincolnTanker wrote:

Hi T140,� the photo is of the Whippet, I've attached a side�view�photo of the same.

Aha, cheers, Brain fade there on my part, dont even remember taking pics of the whippet lol. Think I might have for a close up on the ball mount.

�

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

LincolnTanker wrote:

T140 wrote:

Does anyone know how accurate the male and female sponsons are on the MKIV kits in 1:35 scale. I know on the male the rear is at 90 degrees and should be angled, but other than that? I've no idea on the female so be interested to know how that rates.
Cheers

The female sponsons don't slide into the hull as per the males. On your photo you can see a vertical strip down the middle of the sponson, this is bolted in position. This can be unbolted, as it appears to be in your photo,� other fitting are removed and each sponson half is swung into the hull. Hinges are on the front and rear edges of the hull�aperture. So the angles you were asking about arn't needed.
�

Cheers for that. Still not decided which to go for yet, male or female. Decisions decisions biggrin

�

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Well, as you can see here deciding on the type of sponson is a way off yet biggrin

One hull side cut, 3 to go !!� The fun bit will be making them all the same........

PDA · Legend

Aha! As it is a Mark five 2-star you are making, the Emhar Hotchkiss MGs won't matter, as they are what would have been fitted, if they ever were fitted (the V** never saw action).

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Never saw action but for me one of the most interesting tanks as it was the first ever bridge laying tank. There were the 2 systems trialed and thats where the decision comes. One system was on a male and one on a fremale, so that decision really gets driven by choice of laying kit. Will worry about that later as lots and lots to do yet !!

PDA · Legend

Certainly a very interesting tank, no doubt about it.

Just to be mischevious; when did the French have their Renault 75BS available, as that was also a bridgelayer.

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Whats a 75BS ?? lol

Well no idea but no doubt my bubble just got burst. Maybe I should have said first RE tank, and does something as small as a Renault actually count as a tank, I always thought of them as battlefield toys lol smile

PDA · Legend

T140 wrote:

...�but no doubt my bubble just got burst...

Maybe not, mate. I genuinely don't know when the Renault 75BS came into service, and if the bridgelaying gear it was supposed to carry was ever actually fitted, and used.

Maybe I'll start another thread on it (or someone else can) as I don't want to hijack this one; I've done enough diverting already (sorry).

�

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

No probs, divert away, makes the thread more interesting.
I am not familiar with the 75BS at all so will see what I can find. Did google for images but nothing popped up, maybe wiki has something on it.

Next trip for me is down the road to the RE library and museum and try and find any info on the 2 types of mechanism, but thats needle in a haystack there. The female at Bovi Ol'Faithful is the very machine used, and still has some of the gear on the rear end, but i cant fathom out what it did. Of course it maybe that no info exisits now so it will be a case of educated guesses.

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

PDA wrote:

Aha! As it is a Mark five 2-star you are making, the Emhar Hotchkiss MGs won't matter, as they are what would have been fitted, if they ever were fitted (the V** never saw action).

Are you saying they wont matter as would be correct? Just a bit unsure what you meant.
I see Panzershop do the 26.5" tracks, plus 6pdr and vickers guns as a set, but would that mean vickers are not suitable for�my project�?

�

Mark Hansen · Legend

PDA means that the Hotchkiss are just fine for a Mk V** (or Mk V or V*). You can see the particular type of mounting they used on the photo you posted, which does differ from Emhar's but shouldn't be hard to model. Vickers definitely would not be suitable.

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Cheers, thats what i thought but just wanted to clarify.

kieffer · Commander in Chief

PDA wrote:

�
I genuinely don't know when the Renault 75BS came into service, and if the bridgelaying gear it was supposed to carry was ever actually fitted, and used.

Maybe I'll start another thread on it (or someone else can) as I don't want to hijack this one; I've done enough diverting already (sorry).

the 75BS had, or at least some? an attachment for a 4m Orthlieb bridge, according to David Fletcher it isn't sure these were used on larger scale if any were used in action at all. I think there has been another earlier experimental, a Char Poseur de Pont, see picture.

�

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Good grief, how did that not fall over when launching the bridge lol.

On a different note, I understood that the V** used the wider 26.5" tracks. However measured the one at Bovi and they are 25" !! Where the heck did 25 come from ?

PDA · Legend

1/72 model kit of the Renault FT75BS Bridgelayer, made by Solfig, and available from Tracks n Troops:

http://tracks-n-troops.eu/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=14_1&products_id=9480

T140 · Lieutenant-Colonel

Now why did you have to go and show me that, got to make it in 35th now ! biggrin

Nice looking little vehicle.