Thanks, Mike. I like the way it came out myself, too. I think I said it before, but I’m glad someone on another forum (who is very good at weathering models) told me the mud camo needed more work to look wornNearly missed this final reveal, and what a great job you have done with it.
I positioned it so that it wouldn’t block either of the hatches. The proper stowed position would be with the muzzle in the clamp on the opposite side of the cupola, in which case one of the two hatches can open but not the other. But it seems to me that if you’re the commander and you’re getting in, but expect to have to open your hatch sometime soon, you put it this way round.I like the little details like having the .50 cracked around and the escape hatch open.
As I mentioned in your thread, the various Sherman subtypes exist at all because of the need to use different engines. Those engines resulted in different engine decks and hull rears, and they’re always the best way to identify which variant you’re dealing with This, BTW, is a pretty early M4 — on later tanks, they did away with the cutout in the upper rear plate so the bottom edge was simply straight through, while on your M4A3, it extends down below that line. The “pots” under the overhang, BTW, are the engine air filters.It's also interesting to see the differences between this version and the A3 I'm building, the back ends especially are very different.
That’s the look I was aiming for, so I’m glad you think it ended up looking like thatExcellent finish, Jakko. A well used but not abused vehicle.
I think they are too, but then, I know a good deal more about Shermans than about SpitfiresAnd here I was thinking Spitfires were complicated.
For FULL Forum access you can upgrade your account here UPGRADE