login   |    register
Dioramas
Do you love dioramas & vignettes? We sure do.
1/35 Jagdpanzer IV Diorama Feedback needed
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2018 - 06:32 PM UTC
Recently made a diorama depicting a Jagdpanzer IV.

Although it was my original intention to depict a Jadgpanzer IV from schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 655 in latre Autumn, Ardennes. But soon I found I did not do my homework after it was completed.

1. Did it snow in late Autumn, Ardennes or the muddy ground (caused by the rain) is reasonable?

2. I think the rust is unfortunately excessive given the unit only received the new Jagdpanzer IV in Sep and there was no combat in between Sep and Dec.Generally an AFV would not rust like this unless sitting in the junkyard for a quite a few years.

3. I may choose the wrong figure as the NCO holding MP40 is wearing M42(M43?) fur-lined "Kharkov" jacket,which is not seen in Ardennes.

4. Some people in other forum also pointed out two small details, being
the gun sight and gun point at different directions + Germans dont pile up so many stuffs on a Panzer IV engine deck, coz it would block the ventilation grills and cut off the cooling air intakes.

Now the questions are

how can I make amends for the rust? make a new set of side skirts?

If I take out the Panzer and leave the figure, which year (season) and which theater of war does the diorama most closely represents? Late Autumn Ukraine 1943 or Hungary 1944?





















k_mero4
Visit this Community
Sofiya, Bulgaria
Joined: November 26, 2017
KitMaker: 116 posts
Armorama: 107 posts
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2018 - 09:38 PM UTC
Hello,James!
My opinion is as follows:
1. The machine is produced since august 1944, so Ukraine 1943 should be dropped. Rather, the second option. I personally would have changed the L / 48 cannon and would have repainted it in a variant used in eastern Prussia in late autumn 1944.
2. Rust transform it into adhering mud. Can by paint, can through pigments, oil paints ... The options are depending on how you picture it.

redcap
Visit this Community
England - East Midlands, United Kingdom
Joined: November 06, 2005
KitMaker: 630 posts
Armorama: 338 posts
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2018 - 09:47 PM UTC

James.

As you say yourself, the rust is excessive for a relatively new vehicle (in any event by this stage, they often didn't last long enough to rust at all!) but the rest of it is superb. Particular credit for the groundwork which blends tremendously and is some of the best groundwork on a dio I have seen on this site. Kudos mate!

Gary
Naseby
Visit this Community
Slovakia
Joined: October 15, 2010
KitMaker: 731 posts
Armorama: 229 posts
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2018 - 10:18 PM UTC
First I have to say that this is a very fine work and the mentioned issues are just very small and easily adjustable.

1. It did not snow all around Ardennes on December 16th 1944. There were parts of the battlefield without snow.

2. The rust can be changed to light mud easily

3. The Kharkov parka can be repainted into the Telo Mimetico Italian camo parka used in VERY LIMITED numbers by W-SS.

https://fjm44.com/product/waffen-ss-camouflage-parka-in-telo-camouflage-material/

The NCO has Muster 44 Trousers so the Kharkov parka is incorrect anyway.

4. Gun sights should be turned, thats true, but the stuff on the deck is ok, see for example pictures here :

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Sturmgeschutz-III.php


Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,197 posts
Armorama: 1,891 posts
Posted: Monday, May 14, 2018 - 10:44 PM UTC

Quoted Text



The NCO has Muster 44 Trousers so the Kharkov parka is incorrect anyway.

4. Gun sights should be turned, thats true, but the stuff on the deck is ok, see for example pictures here :

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Sturmgeschutz-III.php





The Pzkpfw IV had intakes on the engine deck that shouldn't be covered. The Pzkpfw III had the intakes on the sides of the engine deck.

The big thing for me is what looks like broken elevation. Not a good idea to have a tube drooping like that if you want to use it. Could get fouled way to easy especially in mud because mud splatters. Ypu keep the tube clear and clean. That means elevated with a cover.
jrutman
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: April 10, 2011
KitMaker: 6,740 posts
Armorama: 6,734 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 02:31 AM UTC
Change the scenerio to Hungary 1945 and it would all be cool except the rust. Brand new vehicle. Like others have said,change the rust to mud and dirt=all good !
I have seen pics of guys wearing the erbsenmuster with karkov parka but not in ardennes,only Hungary.
The terrain and overall model and figures is quite good actually.
J
obg153
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: April 07, 2009
KitMaker: 775 posts
Armorama: 761 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 04:33 AM UTC
Very well done scene with some great groundwork. The "fixes" should be easy to accomplish as others have noted. One more thing to fix,,, the skirts on the front are hung on the wrong side (see the Tank Encyclopedia link offered by Jacob). Just swap sides and they should be OK. Overall though, fine work.
RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 3,995 posts
Armorama: 3,440 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 01:42 PM UTC
The gun could be traversed 10 degrees left and right (20 degrees total arc). Not sure about the sight but I think that the sight is angled way too much. Since the figures and the gun seem to be focused in the same direction it would look strange if the gun was aligned with the sight (which it can not be due to the limited traverse). The other option is to align the sight with the gun (and elevate the gun to horizontal or above).
Having it depressed like that could be realistic if the tank was on a reverse slope so that the gun is horizontal, aimed at a target, while the tank itself is in an uphill position.

Alternatively: Don't let a lot of self proclaimed experts get too close
Kraftstoff
Visit this Community
Canada
Joined: September 06, 2002
KitMaker: 93 posts
Armorama: 37 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 03:35 PM UTC
I would just leave it as it is
Life is too short to get hung up on getting everything perfect on something that has already been finished.
Start another project.

hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 05:29 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hello,James!
My opinion is as follows:
1. The machine is produced since august 1944, so Ukraine 1943 should be dropped. Rather, the second option. I personally would have changed the L / 48 cannon and would have repainted it in a variant used in eastern Prussia in late autumn 1944.
2. Rust transform it into adhering mud. Can by paint, can through pigments, oil paints ... The options are depending on how you picture it.




What about taking out the panzer,leave the figure, would the 1943 Ukraine do then? What about foilage?

I think two best options are either 1943 Ukraine or 1944 Hungary, late autumn before snow fall


Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,197 posts
Armorama: 1,891 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 05:37 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I would just leave it as it is
Life is too short to get hung up on getting everything perfect on something that has already been finished.
Start another project.



This.

Unless you feel you can learn something new by tweaking something finished, once you're done let it go.

As an artist it took me years to get to that point. A work of art is never finished only abandoned. But there are times when you have to walk away and put the lessons you've learned into something new.


Oh and never get hung up on a certain piece of uniform "not " being at a certain place. For every guy photographed there are hundreds who weren't. And there's always that replacement from who knows where with the old ball uniform. There were guys wearing captured US coats. If you got it wear it. I've seen some equipment issues for divisions in Normandy and the polyglot of gear issued was mind boggling.
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 05:58 PM UTC

Quoted Text

The gun could be traversed 10 degrees left and right (20 degrees total arc). Not sure about the sight but I think that the sight is angled way too much. Since the figures and the gun seem to be focused in the same direction it would look strange if the gun was aligned with the sight (which it can not be due to the limited traverse). The other option is to align the sight with the gun (and elevate the gun to horizontal or above).
Having it depressed like that could be realistic if the tank was on a reverse slope so that the gun is horizontal, aimed at a target, while the tank itself is in an uphill position.

Alternatively: Don't let a lot of self proclaimed experts get too close



I have lifted the barrel above the horizon, now the sight.

See the photo below, does the position of the rail mean the gun is supposed to be positioned as approx. 5 degree to the right?

Bonaparte84
Visit this Community
Hessen, Germany
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 277 posts
Armorama: 271 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 07:35 PM UTC

Quoted Text



I have lifted the barrel above the horizon, now the sight.

See the photo below, does the position of the rail mean the gun is supposed to be positioned as approx. 5 degree to the right?




Absolutely not! The gun sight only used a fraction of that half moon shaped thing you circled. The major part of that rail was to fit in the cover plates surrounding the sight which covered the opening for the fun sight. Otherwise the gunner would have had to move through the entire fighting compartment, including climbing over the gun breech, when using extreme traverse.
The sight has the exact same traverse as the gun, as the two were coupled together. You should simply slide the gun sight construction in its rails until its optical piece points in the same direction as the gun...
I hope that helps!

Edit: typos
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,197 posts
Armorama: 1,891 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 08:06 PM UTC
Are we absolutely positive that the gunner's sight could not be disconnected from the slave linkage to the main gun so the gunner could scan the horizon independent of moving the vehicle? I know the commander had his own binocular sight but it would nice to have the gunner be able to scan for a target without moving the whole vehicle. Just thinking out loud as a former tank gunner and thinking about sitting in there with so little situational awareness.
Naseby
Visit this Community
Slovakia
Joined: October 15, 2010
KitMaker: 731 posts
Armorama: 229 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 - 11:07 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Oh and never get hung up on a certain piece of uniform "not " being at a certain place. For every guy photographed there are hundreds who weren't. And there's always that replacement from who knows where with the old ball uniform. There were guys wearing captured US coats. If you got it wear it. I've seen some equipment issues for divisions in Normandy and the polyglot of gear issued was mind boggling.


Im not sure that this is the way that our hobby should go. Take for example a dio called Luftwaffe 1945 with a Me-109E in it. Well there were some left overs for sure, but being accurate is what I as a modeler try to achieve. And a winter 1942/43 Parka in 1944/45 in most parts just isnt accurate. Simple NCOs didnt have the luxury of preserving these items during 2 war summer seasons. And if we say everything goes - then what is the point of making research ? For example I saw a picture of discarded M1891 or M1895 Pickelhaube amongst discarded Wehrmacht helmets in Berlin 45, so somebody was using it there and then. So should we portrait german soldiers with Pickelhaubes during WW2 ?

RobinNilsson
Staff MemberTOS Moderator
KITMAKER NETWORK
Visit this Community
Stockholm, Sweden
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 3,995 posts
Armorama: 3,440 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 01:44 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Oh and never get hung up on a certain piece of uniform "not " being at a certain place. For every guy photographed there are hundreds who weren't. And there's always that replacement from who knows where with the old ball uniform. There were guys wearing captured US coats. If you got it wear it. I've seen some equipment issues for divisions in Normandy and the polyglot of gear issued was mind boggling.


Im not sure that this is the way that our hobby should go. Take for example a dio called Luftwaffe 1945 with a Me-109E in it. Well there were some left overs for sure, but being accurate is what I as a modeler try to achieve. And a winter 1942/43 Parka in 1944/45 in most parts just isnt accurate. Simple NCOs didnt have the luxury of preserving these items during 2 war summer seasons. And if we say everything goes - then what is the point of making research ? For example I saw a picture of discarded M1891 or M1895 Pickelhaube amongst discarded Wehrmacht helmets in Berlin 45, so somebody was using it there and then. So should we portrait german soldiers with Pickelhaubes during WW2 ?




Not a single pickelhaube to be seen, lots of other headgear though ...














If someone wants to put a Pickelhaube on a member of the Volkssturm then they better find a picture to use as evidence first.
/ Robin
Removed by original poster on 05/16/18 - 21:22:04 (GMT).
Bravo1102
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: December 08, 2003
KitMaker: 2,197 posts
Armorama: 1,891 posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 - 02:30 AM UTC
I know the photo. That is a ridiculous analogy. The pickelhaube was someone's grandfathers that had been worn in 1870 and was a family heirloom. However there were 1916 helmets in there that had been worn.

Me109 E were still flying in 1945, just not in the German Luftwaffe. Piles of equipment was reissued and shows up in reports of gear issued and descriptions of POWs. German soldiers in Normandy had tropical uniforms and equipment because it was surplus and had to be used. If it's there it will be used. War is a come as you are party, though so many uniform people would have you believe it was formal wear only.
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 17, 2018 - 02:49 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text



I have lifted the barrel above the horizon, now the sight.

See the photo below, does the position of the rail mean the gun is supposed to be positioned as approx. 5 degree to the right?




Absolutely not! The gun sight only used a fraction of that half moon shaped thing you circled. The major part of that rail was to fit in the cover plates surrounding the sight which covered the opening for the fun sight. Otherwise the gunner would have had to move through the entire fighting compartment, including climbing over the gun breech, when using extreme traverse.
The sight has the exact same traverse as the gun, as the two were coupled together. You should simply slide the gun sight construction in its rails until its optical piece points in the same direction as the gun...
I hope that helps!

Edit: typos



Thanks I have aligned the gun sight with the barrel now.
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 17, 2018 - 02:59 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Oh and never get hung up on a certain piece of uniform "not " being at a certain place. For every guy photographed there are hundreds who weren't. And there's always that replacement from who knows where with the old ball uniform. There were guys wearing captured US coats. If you got it wear it. I've seen some equipment issues for divisions in Normandy and the polyglot of gear issued was mind boggling.


Im not sure that this is the way that our hobby should go. Take for example a dio called Luftwaffe 1945 with a Me-109E in it. Well there were some left overs for sure, but being accurate is what I as a modeler try to achieve. And a winter 1942/43 Parka in 1944/45 in most parts just isnt accurate. Simple NCOs didnt have the luxury of preserving these items during 2 war summer seasons. And if we say everything goes - then what is the point of making research ? For example I saw a picture of discarded M1891 or M1895 Pickelhaube amongst discarded Wehrmacht helmets in Berlin 45, so somebody was using it there and then. So should we portrait german soldiers with Pickelhaubes during WW2 ?




I would say modellers should have some level of historical accuracy here. i.e. if you have a dio saying Stalingrad 1942, with Germans holding MP44 and Panzerfaust, then this is no good. To what extent, it depends on each individual's personal preference. I also advice against digging into details too much. But my standard is if I have a 1944 dio showing a solider wearing 1942/1943 Winter uniform, then we have an issue here.

Given the foilage and soil colour, can I say calling the dio 1943 Ukraine or 1945 Hungary is more appropriate?
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 17, 2018 - 03:01 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text



The NCO has Muster 44 Trousers so the Kharkov parka is incorrect anyway.

4. Gun sights should be turned, thats true, but the stuff on the deck is ok, see for example pictures here :

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Sturmgeschutz-III.php





The Pzkpfw IV had intakes on the engine deck that shouldn't be covered. The Pzkpfw III had the intakes on the sides of the engine deck.

The big thing for me is what looks like broken elevation. Not a good idea to have a tube drooping like that if you want to use it. Could get fouled way to easy especially in mud because mud splatters. Ypu keep the tube clear and clean. That means elevated with a cover.



Interestingly, re": the engine deck, I came across this photo today.

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Panzerjagers/Jagdpanzer-IV/photos/Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1976-039-09,_Ungarn,_Jagdpanzer_und_Grenadiere_auf_dem_Marsch.jpg
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Friday, September 14, 2018 - 07:17 PM UTC

Quoted Text

First I have to say that this is a very fine work and the mentioned issues are just very small and easily adjustable.

1. It did not snow all around Ardennes on December 16th 1944. There were parts of the battlefield without snow.

2. The rust can be changed to light mud easily

3. The Kharkov parka can be repainted into the Telo Mimetico Italian camo parka used in VERY LIMITED numbers by W-SS.

https://fjm44.com/product/waffen-ss-camouflage-parka-in-telo-camouflage-material/

The NCO has Muster 44 Trousers so the Kharkov parka is incorrect anyway.

4. Gun sights should be turned, thats true, but the stuff on the deck is ok, see for example pictures here :

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/Sturmgeschutz-III.php





Hi Jacob

Based on the painted figure's Kharkov parka (assumed M40) and the camo pattern on the pants, which year and which front it most closely resembles?
cheyenne
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 05, 2005
KitMaker: 1,657 posts
Armorama: 1,285 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2018 - 12:04 AM UTC
No expert here but a similar question was asked about Kharkov parkas in the BOB on an Italian modeling site and this was one of the answers .

cheyenne
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: January 05, 2005
KitMaker: 1,657 posts
Armorama: 1,285 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2018 - 12:17 AM UTC
James , my apologies , I forgot to compliment you on your build . Aside from the rust issues and the misaligned sight , everything else looks great . I think your figures are well painted also .
hj1985
Visit this Community
New South Wales, Australia
Joined: May 15, 2018
KitMaker: 15 posts
Armorama: 15 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 15, 2018 - 02:29 AM UTC

Quoted Text

No expert here but a similar question was asked about Kharkov parkas in the BOB on an Italian modeling site and this was one of the answers .




Thank you for your photo reference here.

Is the above-mentioned "attack" Operation Spring Awakening or Ardennes Offensive?

Also do you know what is the camo pattern on the NCO's trousers.