avatar_frank2056

1/35 Articulated tank

Started by frank2056, February 20, 2024, 07:27:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

frank2056

While building the Apocalypse tank I considered articulating it, but it just wasn't feasible with the location of the turret and the thickness of the plastic. Still, I liked the idea of an articulated tank.

I considered the Meng Toon tanks as a source for an articulated tank, but I wasn't sure of their size; some looked a bit too small for a 1/35 crew. In-box reviews of the (probably a type 99) Meng Kids New "Chinese Main Battle Tank" showed that it was pretty big model.



I found a great build on Armorama showing that - in the right hands- this kit can be made to look very nice.

During a sale at Sprue Bros, I got two of the tanks and sure enough, the tank is about 3/4 the length of the Tamiya M41. As seen in the Armorama link, it would have been easy to slap two of the tank hulls together, articulate them, modify one of the turrets and call it a day.

Yeah, well, that's not what I did. I didn't like the (not very visible) simplified Russian/Chinese style road wheels, so I modified the tracks to accept 1/35 M1 Abrams wheels, provided by Jeff Fontaine. That was a pretty easy mod, but the tracks now looked like crap... so I cut off the track connectors from several runs of the Abrams tracks and made cutouts in the Meng tracks (very soft plastic, so easy to do) for the connectors.

For the articulation, I had a ball joint that I designed for a movable LED light for my Optivisor, so I modified the design and printed out a version to connect the two tanks. It worked well:



I extended one of the kit turrets and used one of the left over barrels from the Apocalypse tank and got this:





Ehhhh... meh.

I thought an unmanned turret might look good, and I found this image in a Secret Projects Forum thread:



So I started cutting plastic while watching a marathon of old episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000 on Youtube. I also modified the turret connection to bring the turret up a bit:



Climbing the piles of junk on my desk:





This is where I am today. The M113 hatch is just a place holder :





 I have to figure out a crew layout - the tracks are pretty wide, so the crew will either need a tandem seating arrangement (driver, tank commander, gunner) in the front half or driver and tank commander side by side with the gunner behind them. Moving the gunner to the rear hull may also work. The space between the turret and hulls looks like a nice shot trap and the turret support looks like an RPG magnet. I may try to mitigate that by adding an RPG screen to the turret support.

Jakko

Quote from: frank2056 on February 20, 2024, 07:27:43 PMI thought an unmanned turret might look good, and I found this image in a Secret Projects Forum thread:


That's a picture from the American Combat Vehicle Handbook for the second edition of the old Twilight: 2000 roleplaying game by GDW. It's an entirely fictional vehicle made up for the game at a time when crew-in-hull tanks were widely seen as a very possible future for the MBT. There was also a similar Leopard 3 in the NATO Combat Vehicle Handbook.
... I know all this and more ...

zenrat

Looks promising although IMO its looks would have been improved if the two halves had been joined back to back.
Fred

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..

Dizzyfugu

Quote from: zenrat on February 21, 2024, 02:26:59 AMLooks promising although IMO its looks would have been improved if the two halves had been joined back to back.

Agree. The front overhang from the rear section as is looks odd.  :o

NARSES2

Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Old Wombat

Quote from: Dizzyfugu on February 21, 2024, 02:54:28 AM
Quote from: zenrat on February 21, 2024, 02:26:59 AMLooks promising although IMO its looks would have been improved if the two halves had been joined back to back.

Agree. The front overhang from the rear section as is looks odd.  :o

Me three.

But, hey, it ain't my build, so I'll just come along for the ride! :thumbsup:
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

frank2056

Thanks guys, I tried back to back and it looked weird with the drive sprockets facing each other. Flipping them around was not easy because the track mount tabs aren't symmetrical. It also looked a bit like this:



I'll post some images - nothing is glued down.

@Jakko - the Secret Projects forum link also has the Leopard 3 image.

frank2056

I managed to reverse the running gear and printed a new articulation. Not sure if this is better or not; the gap between the two hulls seems excessive:





I can try shortening it by 10mm or so, or move the turret support over the end of the rear hull; that will reduce the gap by quite a bit. I'll try it tomorrow.

kerick

If I were going to do this I think I would go with the original turret attached to the front tank. That leaves the rear tank for the engine, fuel and maybe extra ammo. Just my $0.02 worth. Your proposal is looking good too. Nice state of idea evolution.  :thumbsup:
" Somewhere, between half true, and completely crazy, is a rainbow of nice colours "
Tophe the Wise

Old Wombat

I had a thought ... Put that gun down! :o ... I know it's dangerous but that's just over-reacting! :rolleyes:

What about a "bridge" structure, between the two turret-mounts on the hulls, into which your turret is fitted, rather than the ball-joint? :unsure:
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

frank2056

I put down a layer of Stynylrez primer - looks close enough to the various desert sand colors.





I'll probably add another layer (especially on the turret) and add some stripes/blobs of middlestone, dark green or both. I thought about doing a digital camo pattern... but I'm not (that) insane. I wanted to add a M1151 Remote Weapons Station, but despite all those flat surfaces, there really isn't much room - best place would be on the box at the rear - like a "stinger" it just barely clears the turret.

Wardukw

 ;D  ;D
Like it Franky ..looks very cool ...you could still mount the remote weapons system on that hatch at the rear of the turret .
Would look even more modern and hell they mount them on the M1A2 and dude that looks just wrong..it'd look good here and you'd still have a stinger  ;)
If it aint broke ,,fix it until it is .
Over kill is often very understated .
I know the voices in my head ain't real but they do come up with some great ideas.
Theres few of lifes problems that can't be solved with the proper application of a high explosive projectile .

frank2056

I may have gone a bit overboard with the digital-ish camo... it's also not very straight, but most of the sins will vanish with the weathering:

The colors are Badger Stynylrez neutral (a sand color), AK Interactive middlestone and Tamiya NATO green. The colors seem greenish in these pictures:





I'll photograph it against the trees tomorrow. The camo is pretty effective at hiding the outline of the tank against the trees. Gaudy, but it seems to work.

I also plopped a RWS on top, just to see how it would look. A MK 19 grenade launcher will ruin anyone's day:


Rick Lowe

"A 40mm HE round means never having to say you're sorry."  ;)

NARSES2

Quote from: frank2056 on March 06, 2024, 09:01:50 PMI'll photograph it against the trees tomorrow. The camo is pretty effective at hiding the outline of the tank against the trees. Gaudy, but it seems to work.


It certainly does seem to do what it's intended to do.
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.