New 21st Armor Info Sunday 9 July!

Post by **aferguson** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:31 am

ah but the 'D' variant wasn't used in North Africa.....gotcha.

Yes, flexible imaginations are very useful in this hobby.

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:36 am

Jesse James wrote:I friggin' love that, I can't wait. I just hope the price is right and this isn't chiming in at hefty tank prices or anything... $20 for a halftrack is cool, $20 for a gun is... eh. I'm hoping it's coming in slightly less.

I'll certainly be buying this one in multiples though if the price is good there... It'll be great for my BotB Germans to stand around, to put in an ambush diorama with the French Farmhouse... I can't wait for this one.

Now we need that 88 and a Howitzer.

I'm hoping it comes with a complete crew. It would be cool to see formed legs and arms so they could be in the correct poses....

-Ski

digger · Post by **digger** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 7:41 am

I'm hoping it comes with a complete crew. It would be cool to see formed legs and arms so they could be in the correct poses....

Amen. I guess I have some Dragon guys with fixed legs that would fit the bill but a crew would rock.

Post by **aferguson** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:02 am

yeah, the crouching dragon dudes (no hidden tiger jokes please) are perfect for crewing artillery guns.

I have a hunch that the Pak will be crew-less. With the new wave of vehicles being crew-less i think this is a new trend with 21c, as a cost cutting measure, perhaps to fight the higher plastic costs due to oil increases and transport cost hikes.

The only problem with that is there aren't really any good generic german soldiers around to use as crewman. Only the BoB germans.

digger · Post by **digger** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:07 am

yeah, the crouching dragon dudes (no hidden tiger jokes please) are perfect for crewing artillery guns.

I won't mind no crew if it is $10 -$15. The three crates of shells alone are worth something imo, especially since one crate by Build A Rama is almost $10. Also a lower PP would be great for introducing other small pieces.

Another hope is that there are new Germans in the works. Germans haven't really seen new molds in about 3 years so we are due, and all we would need is one or two with a deep crouch and we would be in business.

flpickupman · Post by **flpickupman** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:24 am

aferguson wrote:I have a hunch that the Pak will be crew-less. With the new wave of vehicles being crew-less i think this is a new trend with 21c, as a cost cutting measure, perhaps to fight the higher plastic costs due to oil increases and transport cost hikes.

Keep in mind that the crewless vehicles are the re-releases. Also the re-releases are Vietnam era. I don't remember there being a large amount of those figures being produced to begin with. I imagine itt would be easier to pull out the German molds than the Vietnam molds. Especially if they're gonna do Platoon with completely new sculpts. Just a thought.

digger · Post by **digger** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 9:25 am

The WC-51 was also crewless, as were the re-release halftracks. Not good imo.

Tinman · Post by **Tinman** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:57 am

I'd prefer a crew but regardless I'm good for two of these. Finally some artillery! Good going, 21C!

Razor17019 · Post by **Razor17019** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:17 am

I think that 21C is just trying to cut costs and stay in the market with the re-releases - Halftracks and Mutts.

I would much rather see the drivers for these vehicles included. But for newer collectors who weren't around the first time for these vehicles, it enables them to get them now at a non-inflated ebay price.

It also creates a problem (if the Platoon figures never arrive) like I encountered for a toy for my son. I purchased a Buzz Lightyear spaceship (without Buzz) for 4.95 @ TRU. It had been 20 bucks - so a good savings on the vehicle. But I am having no luck in locating a figure to fit into the spaceship!

So, my poor son will really have to use his imagination with this toy

Back to the Mutts - great vehicles but hard to display them without the soldiers that use them. It seems like putting the cart before the horse in releasing the Mutts first and then releasing the Platoon figures.
TKO - Any word on the PLATOON FIGURES?????

tko211 · Post by **tko211** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 3:52 pm

I don't think that the Platoon figures will be out till the end of this year, perhaps Jan / Feb of 07. I wouldn't worry too much though, I think they are moving ahead and making progress.

KAMIKAZE · Post by **KAMIKAZE** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 5:46 pm

The reason the Pak 40 was not used in North Africa was that the Pak 38 (50mm) was able to deal with all the early British and American tanks with the exception of the Matilda. When the Pak 40 became available in 1941 it went to the Russian Front first where the T-34s and Kv 1 tanks could not be stopped except at close range. The few 88mm and new Pak 40 rectified the situation quickly. This new gun was also deemed more important to equip the new panzer IV F2s
which did serve in North Africa as well as
Russia in 1942. Rheinmettal-Borsig made
the Pak 40 while Krupp made the Pak 38.
While the Pak 40 was to replace the Pak 38, the smaller gun was still in front line service in 1945. As a comparison check out the armor penetration of these guns.

Guns: Muzz Velocity MM Armor
Penetration
Pak 40 3,250 f.p.s 154mm@500
Pak 38 3,925 f.p.s 120mm@500

Six 2,693 f.p.s 80mm@500
Pounder

U.S.
57MM 2,700 f.p.s 80mm@500

Russian 4,200 f.p.s 100mm@500

Check out the penetrating power of the Pak 40 as well as the 38 and both had very respectable range. Of note is the Russian 57mm gun. Look at the velocity of that thing! Without the use of a tunsten core, the shot would have disintergrated on impact. You begin to see the reason our guys in Europe were sand bagging their tanks.

Mark

Post by **aferguson** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:43 pm

i thought the sand bags were to stop hollow charge weapons like the panzerfaust and panzerschreck. Sand bags have little stopping power for a high velocity solid shot, like an anti tank round.

Interesting info about the pak 40 in North Africa. Makes sense..

flpickupman · Post by **flpickupman** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:30 am

Did the PaK 38 use the same carriage/shield as the 40?

The reason I ask is because I was watching Battle Plan (?) on the Military Channel last night. It was discussing what Pershing in WWI and Monty in WWII faced in attacking a defensive line. While the show was talking about Rommel, I saw what looked like a PaK 40. It was only a glance, but the AT gun's shield looked remarkably similar to the PaK 40's. Anyone know how the 38 was configured?

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:40 am

flpickupman wrote:Did the PaK 38 use the same carriage/shield as the 40?

The reason I ask is because I was watching Battle Plan (?) on the Military Channel last night. It was discussing what Pershing in WWI and Monty in WWII faced in attacking a defensive line. While the show was talking about Rommel, I saw what looked like a PaK 40. It was only a glance, but the AT gun's shield looked remarkably similar to the PaK 40's. Anyone know how the 38 was configured?

No, it doesn't look like it. It's too small.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PaK_38

-Ski

Post by **aferguson** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:54 am

However, the pak 40 was essentially a scaled up pak 38. The Pak 38 was an excellent design, just didn't have the punch needed, so they basically copied the design and made it about 20% larger and produced the Pak 40. That's why they look so similar.

KAMIKAZE · Post by **KAMIKAZE** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:20 am

I only referred to sandbagging the tanks as general " up armoring their tanks'. I guess it would have been more appropriate to mention the addition of armored squares to the sides of the Sherman.

Mark

supersonicfifi · Post by **supersonicfifi** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:42 am

hi evrybody !

i just received the BADCATAVIATION news letter with this part :

"On a brighter note, the vacuum left by this event rippled quickly throughout the industry. Within hours, we were contacted by the other, 1:18 manufacturing powers and secured exclusive production agreements for three new aircraft that were either backburnered or in initial development. With the 'Cats weight behind the production of the new birds, things are rolling now. We can't disclose the new planes yet but are scheduled to receive these in October, November and January, respectively".

so i guess ther will be 3 new planes coming !!!!!!!!! i can't wait to know !!!!

Threetoughtrucks · Post by **Threetoughtrucks** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:57 pm

Now is that good news or what.

If it takes BCA to move three "bacl burner" 21C planes, then if they make a success of it, can 21C vehicles on the "back burner" be far beyond.

Now, I wonder what planes 21C has put on the "back burner" that BCA liked?

Warthog maybe?

TTT

digger · Post by **digger** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:02 pm

TTT, it is the opposite I believe - I read it to mean 3 AC from other companies.

tko211 · Post by **tko211** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:22 pm

I am guessing that the F-18 "Red Devils" scheme will be one of the 3...

As for the other 2? Not sure.

Anoyone else have guesses?

Quixote511 · Post by **Quixote511** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:38 pm

I see the HellCat comming.
Aaron

Website · Post by **Teamski** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:04 pm

Yep, this could be big! We'll see what bbi has up their sleeve this time! I eagerly await news........

-Ski

digger · Post by **digger** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:15 pm

Its amazing how other companies announce products, and then very quickly get the products in the consumers hands.

Like the bbi Hellcat or A-10? Or you must be talking about the AT Zero. I agree the Avenger was a debacle but let's not pretend these companies don't all face the same issues.

Quixote511 · Post by **Quixote511** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:41 pm

Yeah, I haven't heard anything about the AT Zero in a long time. What's the deal?
Aaron

Small Scale Military Headquarters

New 21st Armor Info Sunday 9 July!

pak

pak

crews

3 new planes ?

no

?