Small Scale Military Headquarters

Why in the name of all things normal did they do TWO captured Fireflies??
Its not like there were that many captured examples either. I understand the T-34, but really, are these people completley mental ???

There are so many units that used them , why couldn't they have done one in the Guards or 11th Armoured divisional insignia.

Anyone else feel this way or am I just talking out my ****

Cheers for the rant

Gary

Dragon does have a strong German bias... Look how long it took them to make a Sherman or even a T-34 amidst numerous repaints and variations on German armor!

T-man hit the nail on the head. This has long been the problem with Dragon doing gobs of German stuff and no Allied tanks (untill recently). We would all love to see them take a break from the German stuff for a Year and do a series of all allied tanks. Just as we have seen with 21ST Century and others. Collecting is more fun when both sides are represented.

Mark

The Asians are Germanholics. Anything German, especially Wittman, is HUGE in Asia, which is their primary market. That's why we see so much German - except from Academy of Korea.

The only thing that Dragon/DML (Deutches Modeling League) would be happier with, is if they could have a Wittman version of captured T34's and Fireflies.

it's a complex for the japs, cause their own IJA sucked dirt soo much compared to the Super Happy Go GO Heer!

The western allies tanks and camo schemes are pretty boring so I can understand why we dont see a lot of those , theyre appreciated by collectors but are of little interest for those who just want a beautiful tank . And Dragon did make tons of russian t-34s from the 1940 version to the 85mm so this "german bias" allegation is kind of unfair .

Actually, the "German bias" is a fact. Any one in the military toy industry will tell you that German products sell better in Asia. Dragon has been making and repainting and re-releasing German products from 1/6th to 1/144th by the ton compared to any allied products. I would prefer to see more Allied product in all scales. And I also feel there are as many different types of interesting Allied tanks and paint schemes as German.

aktiger wrote:Actually, the "German bias" is a fact. Any one in the military toy industry will tell you that German products sell better in Asia. Dragon has been making and repainting and re-releasing German products from 1/6th to 1/144th by the ton compared to any allied products. I would prefer to see more Allied product in all scales. And I also feel there are as many different types of interesting Allied tanks and paint schemes as German.

You must remember that Japan isn't Dragons only market and they probably makes as much money over in the US (if not more) , but I think westerners also prefers the German stuff . Dragon have released tons of Sherman tanks , 4 US ones (2 M4A1 and 2 M4A3) , Polish 1st Armour , Free French and 2 British fireflies . But compared to the German tanks we see little variation in the camo schemes and the only tank that truly stand out is the captured Firely with the tri-color camo .

demonclaw wrote:

aktiger wrote:Actually, the "German bias" is a fact. Any one in the military toy industry will tell you that German products sell better in Asia. Dragon has been making and repainting and re-releasing German products from 1/6th to 1/144th by the ton compared to any allied products. I would prefer to see more Allied product in all scales. And I also feel there are as many different types of interesting Allied tanks and paint schemes as German.

You must remember that Japan isn't Dragons only market and they probably makes as much money over in the US (if not more) , but I think westerners also prefers the German stuff . Dragon have released tons of Sherman tanks , 4 US ones (2 M4A1 and 2 M4A3) , Polish 1st Armour , Free French and 2 British fireflies . But compared to the German tanks we see little variation in the camo schemes and the only tank that truly stand out is the captured Firely with the tri-color camo .

And that one is the most ridiculous of them all !!

What was someone smoking in the crack-pipe the day marketing came up with that little nugget !!!

Of all the Commonwealth units that used the Firefly , why do 2 Captured ones. What a waste of time and space.

gazzavc wrote:
And that one is the most ridiculous of them all !!

What was someone smoking in the crack-pipe the day marketing came up with that little nugget !!!

Of all the Commonwealth units that used the Firefly , why do 2 Captured ones. What a waste of time and space.

I bet that little nugget is the best selling one of the Sherman tanks . And as I said before , the allies have pretty boring camo schemes when you look at the sherman tanks . Show me one British Firefly that would truly stand out

I would imagine the US market is their largest overall, even over Japan.

Well, maybe the Allied camo schemes in Western Europe '44 and '45 were a little boring, but... there were captured German tanks used by Allies, too. There were more Panthers (two ones) used by Poles during the Warsaw Uprising 1944, than the tanks Maus (one) ever produced. The look of at least one Polish Panther is known, it had Polish signs on German camo.

Here you can see another really interesting example http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v19/b ... 03de6b.jpg: the PzKpfw. III Js from the Polish Carpathian Lancers Regiment, Egypt, July 1942 and the 1/15 scale model of one of them http://www.network54.com/Forum/416501/m ... Karpackich.

There was also one captured Bf 109G-14 with markings of the Polish 318 Squadron with common British camo

Isn't it interesting?

Okay, so Dragon is well on its way to modelling every individual Tiger tank ever built. They will also have modelled every individual captured allied weapon and unproduced German proto- arche- type/imaginary vehicle considered by the German military psyche. We'll probably have early Volkswagens as they might have been armed.

So where the h*ll are the Stug IIIs??? The Panzer ("The Workhorse of the Panzertruppe") IVs and Pz ("we led Germany to all its great victories") IIIs?

Hi Itcbj,
I'm with you. I cant for the life of me understand why its taking this long to come out with the StuG IIIs when pix were unveiled two years ago. Heck, the Jagdpanthers with zimmerit (60037 & 60038) were announced for a January 2005 release, which makes their delay look mighty strange. With increased competition and customer's repressing a voracious appetite, you'd think they'd have something to announce by now.

Frankly, 2007 seems like a very strange year for diecast military products. Unimax has their 5th issue King Tiger coming out, Minichamps has a Greek Leopard, Corgi has their umpteenth 1:50 scale Tiger/Churchill/Cromwell, IXO is delaying their lineup, etc. IMHO, Hobby Master is perfectly poised to take over several segments of the market if they can deliver product on a timely manner, at an affordable price, and offer new and exciting products. If they were a public company, I'd be a happy shareholder.

Oh, and my last gripe. When is someone going to develop a 1:700 scale waterline series of warships? Everyone that's purchased Tamiya's recently released 1:700 Yamato is in love with this piece. Isnt someone going to satisfy the collector's needs or do we need to build our own factory?<g>

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.net

Our own factory...now thats a hell of an idea. Who's gonna put up the $$$. LOL Seriously, I wish that could be done. I know I'd make some cool $hit!!!

I thought that there were several 1/700 scale warship lines out there. Do you mean pre-made?

lightning: Dragon's prices have increased to the point that most of my wondering is academic at this point. I am very disappointed, personally, in what is available. If I were 40+ years younger I think I'd be thrilled at what is available and what must be on somebody's drawing table, somewhere but at 60+ I see far less range than what I had in the 1960s with ROCO. Then I had available and in fact owned several of each of: Tiger/Panther/PzIV/PzIII/Stug IIIB &G/M-4/M-41/M-47/M-48/M-60A1/M-103/M-109/M-113s
M-551/Chieftain/Centurion/AMX-30/T-34-76/85/JS-3/plus lots more.
With the wonderment of modern technology ROCO is still far and away (not counting micro-armor) the company with the greatest range.

Hi Itcbj,
Yes, I was referring to pre-built warships. I could see a range of 1:700 scale capital ships and 1:350 scale smaller/littoral ships doing extremely well at retail. Not sure if subs would light anyone's fire, but there's no harm in trying. Perhaps starting with a Type VII U-Boat and seeing how the collectors react.

As for pricing, the Dragon range is now roughly 100% above its original retail. The Wittmann tank originally carried an MSRP of $9.99. I remember going to one show as a vendor and no one was interested. When we were packing up, another vendor offered us $7 a pop to sell the 7 we had so I took it. AHHHH!!! <g>

I still think there's a strong market for 1:72 scale armor so long as it doesnt go above $19.99. Beyond that, and the customer starts to compare the item with the next scale up. For instance, you can buy a Hobby Master 1:48 scale King Tiger for roughly $27-$32. Its a lot bigger and more imposing and, if you're not into wargaming, would probably purchase it rather than the most exquisitely detailed 1:72 tank at say a few dollars less.

Anyway, I remember when someone remarked a year or two ago, that added competition would be a breath of fresh air. Sometimes it has the opposite effect. Manufacturers can be so afraid to plunk down money for tooling cause of the competition that no one wants to ante up first. Right now, we have a lot of gunslingers at the table with few willing to call the bet!

Lightning2000's comments are not to be taken as gospel or rule of thumb. Sometimes he just needs to lay down and count sheep, if of course, he's lying down in a dewy pasture...<g>

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.net

it's a complex for the japs, cause their own IJA sucked dirt soo much

Maybe it had something to do with the fact that after Midway the Japs were in almost continuous retreat.

Don't forget.
The Japanese had an unbroken series of victories starting in the early(?) thirties in China that stretched through June 1942 (Midway) and included pushing all the European powers (except Russia) out of all of East Asia and sinking The United States' battle fleet at Pearl. The IJA was involved directly in all of that including the landings in the Phillipines and the Pacific islands.

The Germans had an unbroken string of victories starting in 1939 that also effectively ran through June 1942. By August 1942 we had invaded Guadalcanal and the Germans were beginning their investiture of Stalingrad. Both Stalingrad and Guadalcanal proved defeats for the Axis powers in February 1943. After that there were local successes but not another major offensive victory for either power.

So no- the Japanese army didn't s*ck. Its combat record was as good as the German, much as their POW care was even worse. They did lack armor and that may be the reason the Japanese are so entranced with German tanks. First- the Germans actually had decent ones. Second- the Germans had two of the best in the Tiger and the Panther that anyone had, through the early fifties. Third- the Japanese never got the Tiger they had purchased during the war and this current uber production of Tigers may be a way to make up for that loss.... Finally thanks to their MacArthur dictated constitution they have lacked a real army of their own since the end of WW2 but they have produced one of the greatest toy armies in the history of mankind- led by the Tiger(s) that they never received when they actually needed them.

So no- the Japanese army didn't s*ck

Yes and no. Many of the Japanese victories were against mostly third rate opponents, or in the case of the British in Southeast Asia or the Americans in the Phillipines where they had an overwhelming superiority in men and equipment, they got their asses kicked by the Russians at Khalkin Gol in Mongolia in 1939 for example. On the other hand, their equipment and tactics were generally as good or better than some western nations, and the troops themselves were usually fanatical in their fighting qualities and resistance, even to the point of utter suicidal stupidity. The thing that doomed the Jap army was this...Japan is/was an island nation almost entirely dependent on imports, this fact became even more critical once they decided to wage war against Britain and the US. The almost total annihilation of Japan's merchant fleet at the hands of the US navy's submarine force was probably one of the single most decisive factors in the ultimate defeat of Japan.

Yes. That "island nation in need of raw materials" thing is what led them to war in the first place. If they had had better tanks and more of them they might have put up a better show against the Russians. I don't think quality of opponent or overwhelming strength is necessarily considered when reveling in victory.

Look at the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan today and in Viet Nam. In both places the quality of opposition was/is dismal and our strength is overwhelming. It is the quality of will of the nation behind the army that I think often determines victory or defeat.

Yes. That "island nation in need of raw materials" thing is what led them to war in the first place. If they had had better tanks and more of them they might have put up a better show against the Russians.

Agreed. The sprawling island empire with it's dense jungles and rugged mountains that Japan conquered was not well suited to large scale armored warfare in the first place, and possibly that's one reason the Japs never pursued a highly developed armored force.

Look at the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan today and in Viet Nam. In both places the quality of opposition was/is dismal and our strength is overwhelming. It is the quality of will of the nation behind the army that I think often determines victory or defeat.

Very true. The US Army is a "seek and destroy" force, not particularly well suited to insurgent hit and run type warfare. It's difficult (and frustrating) to fight an enemy you can't see.

But China was suited to armored warfare and certainly the Russians used lots of armor to advantage in Mongolia. While the jungle warfare was not an armor friendly venue that (including the islands) was only one in which Japan fought. It is easily conceivable that the lack of armor on the part of the Chinese and the relative newness of armored warfare conspired to lead the Japanese into thinking that tanks would hold a secondary role to well trained and highly motivated infantry. I just don't think that Japanese doctrine gave armor the role it earned.

As for our current military. They finished off the third biggest army in the world twice in only a few weeks. I remember the pundits predictions of thousands of body bags with no end in sight in the first weeks. I think it is really more the RoG than any innate inability that has created the mess today. In VN it was clearly the politicians.