Time for a scissor lift - the Cent is a big beast:
Mounted on a "lazy susan" so that the model can be rotated, with a lock pin to fix it, when needed:
One of the great pleasures of this hobby is solving problems you didn't know you had. I was looking at this diagramme of armour thickness and angles to get the indentation of the lower and rear hull plates:
My eye was caught by the angle of the hull front top plate (marked 80 deg/30mm). The model hull sides didn't look like the 10 deg slope that this implies and the chamfer of the top of the glacis didn't quite form the correct angle with the back face:
This turned out to be the case:
So the hull side was modified and the correct angle milled into the glacis:
These Cent plates are pushing my small hobby mill to its limits and calling for some cunning with the work holding. If I hadn't corrected this, the glacis applique armour plate wouldn't have been the right size. I'll probably split the hull top plate in order to restore the relationship with the back edge of the glacis. It may be a small thing but sometimes the effect is cumulative and helps capture the image of the real thing. Hope this is of interest.
On Page 1, I included a photo of what I'd thought was a 2 Troop tank at the Battle of Binh Ba.
Bruce Cameron, author of the definitive record of Australian Tank Operations in Vietnam,"Cannister, On, Fire" has kindly pointed out that the photo isn't from the Battle of Binh Ba but is of a 3 Troop tank, taken a year later in May 1970.
For good measure, here are the correct photos taken from Bruce's exceptional book (highly recommended):
Just curious but the stowage boxes in the photos of the RPG damage don't have those reinforcing strips fitted. Was this left at the discretion of the crews or was it a later update, or just a mod that the fitters did as and when the vehicles came through the workshops? Very few of the surviving Aussie Cents seem to have them, but I guess the metal mice consumed them years ago!
Stephen White wrote:
One of the great pleasures of this hobby is solving problems you didn't know you had.
Amen to that!
For me a big part of the fun is the research and find out how to make things look more like the real thing.
I only have random knowledge regarding the Centurion as my focus is on WW2 but it is always interesting to follow a build and learn something new.
Your builds Stephen is always interesting, thanks for posting.
Thanks Kent, always good to hear from you. Fabrice - offer much appreciated. Re the reinforcment of the track guard bins with the rounded picket material, the story is involved.
There seems to have been a continual tension between getting the mods done at the Bandiana Base Workshops in Australia or in 106 Field Workshops in theatre. So the progression of the modification state of the 1 ATF tanks is very messy. Much of the intitiative understandably came from the Vietnam end and the RAEME craftsmen worked wonders to achieve local mods which were then incorporated into a build standard. I've seen copies of the correspondence between Australia and Vietnam, especially in 1969, around the time of Bihn Ba, June 1969. So the mod process was evolutionary and to portray a particular vehicle accurately, you really have to pin it down to a specific time and then find photos.
In April 1969, ARN 169077, one of the 4 Troop tanks, was modified with a trial set of mods to capture the standard. It must have been in this condition by the time of Binh Ba. These mods were accepted and written into a build standard. On 15 July, an EME instruction was issued with the full mod process, which included for the first time reinforcing the base of the hull bins with angle picket and welding the US picket material on the sides to protect the latches.
So the short answer is that the reinforced bins can be seen from the second half of 1969. It's useful for my research because "my tank" ARN 169007 Buku Boom Boom was damaged by a mine just after Binh Ba and was replaced by ARN 169067, Buku Boom Boom II. The latter had the bin reinforcment and it shows up quite well in photos, particularly if you cant see the registration number.
Oh, and post Vietnam, the tanks went through base overhaul and most of the Vietnam mods were removed. I believe Col Filtness found two with a full set. Paul Scott has done a painstaking restoration of one of them, ARN 169091 but in the process it has reverted to a post Vietnam standard.
Hi Stephen
Have to say Im almost in awe of what you achieve on these models. Have been reading your Centurion refernces and following your progress with interest. As a beginner, I find myself wavering between a build "straight from the box" and then spotting little details that might be nice - headlights, transparent periscopes, opening telephone box etc! I have no previous experience - so we'll see.
Anyway - your recent posts about the shape and angles of the bow sections (ok, front!) have me worried. Is the discrepancy down to the Mk 5-1 that you are building or is the kit generically slightly out? Your original dry fit seemed all ok. It's just that extensive structural mods such as you just made are beyond me, and possibly others, so I wondered how big a deal it was? Do you feel better because you know yours is right, or will we feel bad because we know ours aren't quite
Keep up the excellent work - hope you dont mind us newbies riding your shirt tails
Cheers
Kevin
The genius of Mark Watkins' production design of the Armortek family of models lies in the creation of robust, functional and relatively easily built out-of-the-box kits. This leaves headroom for those with the time and model engineering expertise to superdetail and refine their project to museum quality. This has allowed an ecosystem of craftsmen to offer detailing parts and, through this Forum, builders of all skill levels and asperations to share their experiences. It is a pretty unique, open and friendly place to share a pastime.
The fact that myriad tiny details can be added in no way detracts from the incredible value and quality of the models. Build and enjoy your model anyway you want, but please don't get the idea that this is p***ing competion. Most here are are in awe of the efforts of master super-detailers. None of it is a "big deal", really we are not like that at all!
Enjoy your build, ask questions, share photos (easy now!).
Stephen, sorry to jump in, but I remember how intimidating it can be to get started!
That's it in a nutshell. Mark designs world class kits to a standard not availabile anywhere else, easily assembled with hand tools to produce a model which is accurate, impressive, robust and functional. So have no fears on that score.
Painting makes all the difference to the finished model and you don't need an engineering workshop or a degree in fine art to do that - so masters like Simon show us all what is possible in that area with patience and skill.
Some of the things I do are made easier with machine tools but do have a look at what Kent Wiik and others achieve with hand tools, a Dremel or Proxxon hand drill, some burrs, milling cutters and drills. You can always practise on some scrap metal. I used a Proxxon to do the re-shaping of the hull sides.
Thers is no right or wrong in this, only enjoyment. As you build, you get to know what aspects of this great hobby are rewarding. I get a lot of pleasure from researching and trying to re-create a particular vehicle and through that get closer to real historical events and people. The "accuracy" thing is much over-rated and, I think, can easily become a rod for your own back. I should explain what I mean. It's to do with the effect of scaling something down to a model. You can never, despite what some would claim, fully miniturise a real object. So no model is a "perfect replica" - it's always going to be a representation, more or less convincing. I suppose you could liken it to an Impressionist painting in the art world.
Vehicles have distinctive features and I try to spot them and where I think I can emphasise them or enhance the kit, I give it a go. In some cases, it wouldn't make any difference to the apperance and I decide not to bother. In other cases, I do the mod and discover on completion that it didn't really make any difference. In some cases, the feature really stands out when you look and the satisfaction is seeing the finished model and realising that you've captured the image. I'd also liken it to a characature. So with this hull mod, I don't know yet whether it was a waste of time or not.
When soldiers are taught recognition, the lesson starts with idenfifying key recognition features that characterise a partiicular bit of kit. If you Google "Wren Oddentification" you'll see what I mean. Chris Wren did those fabulous cartoons of WW2 aircraft which were used to teach recognition. He certainly knew how to spot the things which stand out in looking at an object - which help the brain say "that's a .......Spitfire or whatever". That's how I view adding to Mark's great kit. If you take that approach, you don't get hung up on "accuracy" which can become an obsession (or so says my shrink).
Fabrice offered wise words - this is about doing what we enjoy, at all levels and all skills. We're all learning and the most rewarding and enjoyable thing about this Forum and the whole Armortek community is people's willingness to share their experiences and skills.
Apologies, if I've gone off on one, too much time in hotels in hot places. (Sorry UK winter sufferers).
Gawd !! Firstly thankyou both for your impassioned and helpful input. Secondly, apologies as I may not have expressed my concerns very well.
I am in no doubt whatsoever as to the quality of the Armortek tanks. Before investing my hard earned ready's I went to vist Gill and Mark so that I could see their wares first hand. I found 2 very nice people, a professional and enthusiastic operation and a superb product. To the brief dismay of "her indoors" I went from nonchalant enquirer to "where do I sign" pretty well in the blink of an eye! (She's over it now and looking forward to building tracks).
I think where I was coming from was in trying to understand the varying degrees to which modellers on the forum go in completing their kits. I understand that painting and detailing adds much to the kit and that just how much one does is a matter for personal taste and ability. I was less able to understand what seemed to be fairly dramatic re-machining of the kit - a process which would scare me!
Having read your comments my mind is at rest and I am even more impressed with the work that you, and others, undertake. Clearly the more one is absorbed into the history and detail of these tanks, the more personal touches one will want to include.
Taking your most important advice, yes I will definitely enjoy my build once I get over the anxiety of trying to do it right!
Forgiven?
Incidentally - Mark / Gill..... if you're reading this you know no offence was intended, just finding my way
As a first time builder of an armortek model i can see how some could be hesitant/ worried about the task of building and detailing that lies ahead. I for one have built models (plastic tanks, aircraft etc Tamiya, Hasegawa, Airfix) for most of my life on and off when i have got the urge to get out the glue and paint.For most of this time i have been pleased with the overall standard of my kit builds and always been pleasantly surprised by comments others have made about the good standard of painting i have achieved etc. Then the photo etch,resin and white metal parts started to come on the market for those that wanted to add extra detail and all of a sudden i felt 'inadequate' and found myself going over and over what others had done, looking at close up photos in glossy magazines showing amazing skill that i just didn't feel capable of doing myself.So what happened? i slowly got so worried about achieving that 'perfect' build that i never actually got as far as getting the kit out of the box, i would spend hours and hours looking up reference books etc but never actually got round to building a kit !
I ended up with a loft full of unstarted kits and eventually no kits were ever built. Now this may seem extreme to some but it happened to me and i know it affects other friends i have who are into building model armour/ aircraft etc. I have found reading these forums the same feelings creeping in as i look at how the most skillful of model builders and those who have all the engineering skills and workshop tools add, alter, and super detail their armortek models. I have learned so much from reading the reviews while waiting for my centurion to arrive and just know that as i go along there are others only to keen to help if i have a problem. I would say this to others like me who are new to this large tank building hobby, just build the model to your skill level, don't worry about what others may say just get on with it and when done stand back and admire what you have in front of you, a superb piece of model engineering, as it came from mark watkins at armortek. A straight 'out of the box' kit is already perfection as far as im concerned. If you can add just one extra detail of your own it will make it 'personal' and even better.
This is like any other hobby,you will always find people who can do things better than yourself. As clint eastwood in dirty harry says, 'A man has got to know his limitations, I am on holiday next week, i dont care what the weather is doing i will be in my freezing cold garage building a centurion tank !
First stage reducing the blank to scale thickness. After a lot of research posted earlier (and some misleading references) it turned out to be 44mm or 1.73 inches in old money. Some fly cutting and milling later:
Then to mill the cut-outs for the bollards:
Then the chamfer to help the driver see the ground close to the tank:
Just remains some detail to finish such as the mountings for the spare roadwheels.
Happy to share measurements for anyone contemplating this mod.
Continues to look fab Stephen. Does the applique sit flush with the lower front plate now? In the first photo it looks proud but in subsequent shots I cant quite make it out - failing eyesight!
Kevin
It doesn't sit flush with the bottom plate. On the real thing, the applique stood about 22mm proud of the bottom plate, ie half its thickness. The diagramme from the original trials which I copied on the previous page is misleading - it isn't drawn to scale.
