[chascbv]

The first two IS-2 tanks by HM are here, and they are very nice models indeed. My particular choice is the Soviet vehicle in Berlin at the end of WW2 (as illustrated using a picture from The Flying Mule site). Details, shape, and proportions are very good overall, as is the excellent paint job, which includes all the appropriate markings.

Only one error is readily apparent: the cone-shaped gunner's periscope on the left-forward corner of the turret roof should not be there. Only KV-85s and initial-production IS-122s had that style of periscope, and then the turret roof had a different design.

Also, photographs and blueprints show the long tool box on the left fender, rather than on the right one as in the model, but maybe its position was interchangeable? I do not know.

I hope HM will delete the offending periscope from their next IS-2 variants (and maybe place the tool box on the opposite fender?) as otherwise the model is an outstanding replica (and for a bargain price given its quality and scale!). Anyway, this is a minor fault, and should be easy to correct with some minor surgery if you just can´t live with it.

[Berkut76]

Originally Posted by chascbv

Only one error is readily apparent: the cone-shaped gunner's periscope on the left-forward corner of the turret roof should not be there. Only KV-85s and initial-production IS-122s had that style of periscope, and then the turret roof had a different design.

I have blue prints of February 1945 production IS-2 and the persicope cover is there. Perhaps. it was removed while in combat conditions, but I wouldn't go as far as to say that it's not supposed to be there

[chascbv]

Hello, Berkut76

Yes, you're right. Some IS-2s had the old-style periscope, and according to photos available to me such an occurrence is typically associated with early-style front hulls. Your blueprint is most interesting, as it shows a late front hull mated to an early periscope. No photos I know of show this combination, but such vehicles surely existed.

Regarding the model by HM, however, the old-style periscope is both too much forward on the turret roof, and redundant! It cannot be seen on the pic I posted before, but the model - a vehicle with a late-style front hull - already has the usual modern-style periscope on the turret roof. In fact, this "right" periscope is a bit too much to the rear of the roof, surely to make room for the cone-shaped periscope in front (wow, two periscopes in a row!). A truly correct periscope should be located just between these two, I believe.

[Berkut76]

Originally Posted by chascbv

Hello, Berkut76
In fact, this "right" periscope is a bit too much to the rear of the roof, surely to make room for the cone-shaped periscope in front (wow, two periscopes in a row!). A truly correct periscope should be located just between these two, I believe.

Yeah, you are correct. Hawk should bring this up with folks at HM as having two periscopes is definitely not right.

The problem that I have with many companies is that they rely on outdated refrence materials published in the mid-1980s. Situation is made wrose since the best reference books on the Soviet and Russian military equipment are being published in Russia / Ukraine and Poland sometimes without English text. From what I've seen Concord "borrows" heavily from such books, but the captions are usually incorrect in one way or the other.

That I think is the reason why we have very accurate models of T-34s and Su-100a from Dragon, but the captions (i.e. unit identification and theater of operation) could be off.

Regards,

Sergey

[ZS-VAN]

What scale is this guys? Doesn't look like 1/72.

[Berkut76]

Originally Posted by ZS-VAN

What scale is this guys? Doesn't look like 1/72.

It's 1:48. Hopefully corrections will be made for 1:72 version

[chascbv]

Yep, Berkut76, I fully agree with you. And the problem with picture captions is sometimes very misleading (shape similarities between IS-2, IS-1, IS-122, IS-85, KV-85, etc. also add to the confusion).

I too am praying that this issue will be corrected for the 1/72 version of this tank by HM!

[hawkonevoodoo]

This has been noted and I sent some line drawings and pictures that I used Paint to show the corrections on pictures of the model. As you mentioned I suggested that if these can't be done on the 1/48 because of cost involved with modifying a mold, that it should be corrected if they make the JS-2 in another scale. I'm sure they will do what they can.

[chascbv]

Pictures of a production-run white-washed Cromwell by HM have been posted in the Flying Mule site, and they show a King's Own Hussars Cromwell Mk.IV at the time of operation Blackcock. The Cromwell cruiser tank is a tricky, poorly documented subject (as compared to other better known types), and one prone to accuracy errors in model form. Now you'll see why.

Wartime pictures of white-washed Cromwells during Operation Blackcock show two distinct types of vehicles - with and without small tool boxes attached to turret sides. Those with tool boxes depict vehicles with F-type hulls; those without them depict vehicles with C- or D/E-type hulls. These boxes were added to F-type vehicles because "F" hulls lacked the forward stowage bin usually seen on the right fender, and this compensatory measure was deemed sensible. Unfortunately, HM's model has a "C" hull, the oldest of the three types mentioned, and so should have no turret boxes. An "F" hull had, besides a missing stowage bin, a different engine deck (different hatches to facilitate access), and no hatch on top of the driver's station. The driver had now a side-opening hatch that was nearly identical to the crew hatch on the left side, and that is why the forward stowage bin on the right side had to be deleted.

So, is the model wrong? Well, yes, I'm afraid. However, an envious sergeant might have borrowed those fine turret boxes from, say, a knocked-out "F" for his own "C", and HM's model could well represent the mount of such a scoundrel! In this "possible" scenario, the model is very, very good, and represents a high-quality addition to any collection. Of note, in the accompanying picture wheel tyres seem to be now correctly painted, which means that HM do their best to improve their products, and also listen to feedback provided on fora such as this one. Nevertheless, I feel HM should invest on an "F" or "C/D" hull if they are planning to expand their Cromwell range with later marks, as these no longer had "C" hulls. To represent a "D/E" hull the engine deck (identical to that on "F" hulls) and the driver's hatch would need retooling, the latter to represent the later diagonally split design with two triangular flaps (the hatch remains in D/Es where it was in Cs). The retooling needed for an "F" hull has just been discussed above.

Operation Blackcock was a British offensive to dislodge German divisions in the Roer Triangle, and push them across rivers Rur and Wurm so that the front line could be further moved, deeper into Germany. It took place in January 1945, and was a complete success. The Desert Rats of 7th Armoured Division played a decisive role in the fighting with their hastily repainted vehicles, with the white wash covering all markings and insignia.

[chascbv]

Another KV-1 by HM is now in the shops (picture borrowed from The Flying Mule). The model represents a KV-1 model 1940, and is appropriately a re-edition of the previous KV-1E minus the additional armour plates. According to my info the model is accurate and looks very good indeed. Some of the triangles attaching the track guards to the hull should be hollow frames rather than solid structures according to pictures - in fact both types are seen in any given tank, with the hollow triangles being much more common. Is this an error, or vehicles with only solid triangles did exist? I do not know, but that would represent a negligible error in this scale anyway.

The most striking feature of this model is its paint scheme. I had seen similar 3-colour patterns in Finnish KV-1s, but not in Red Army vehicles. However, the model is based on a solid source - the book "Kamufljazh Tankov Krasnoj Armii 1930-45" published by Exprint, which includes a colour profile of this tank (included) with the legend "KV-1, 124th Armoured Brigade, Leningrad front, 1942". Sadly, I have been unable to find any information on 124th Armoured Brigade during 1942 (activities, location, etc.). Any suggestions?

To conclude, I find this KV-1 a stunning model begging to be included in my collection (even if a bit more weathering would have been desirable!).