I am just grateful that we have an imaginative company in Strelet.I may not be interested in all the various eras but I take my hat off for the variety like the colonial and FFL etc. It would be much easier (probably more profitable) for Strelet to churn out third reich stuff as the majority of the plastic model and manufactures do. Thank heavens for Boer War, Napoleonic, ACW sets than more of those dreadful fantasy jets, flying saucers and tanks which companies produce under the banner 1946 (have they never heard of the atomic bomb?)

How many other companies have produced artillery sets with full crew? As for accuracy yes there are mistakes but you only have to look at sites like 'hyperscale' to realise that most/all models are inaccurate and there are vast number of companies producing expensive replacement parts!

..... and as for HaT- they may sometimes act on comments but I will probably be long gone before they get around producing the BEF set!

Preach it, Brother RCD!

There are quite simply people who do care about accuracy and those that don't.
I personally wont buy this set.
Not because I don't appreciate Strelets as a 1/72 plastic manufacturer, not because of the high output of the sets released, not because of the themes and periods they cover,...etc.
I wont be buying this set, because I do care about accuracy.
Why Strelets is struggling with research in this day and age, when there is plenty of material available at the hands reach I do not know.
In the end, it's their decision if they want to reach out and sell their products to both groups.

Parrots always do. You (ie humans) always learn to never put a finger between yourself and the parrot. Good tip as the alternative really hurts.

Model railways now have things called "freelance" models and I call them toys.

In model figures there is a snobbery about accuracy which can be described in accuracy percentages.

19th c Colonial -80%
WW2-75%
Napoleonic-210%
18th c -90%
Carthaginians-10%
Zombies - 2%
WW1-74%

The safest periods are when both armies are reduced to rags or wearing local clothes with rags. The English Civil War is good because they used to dress just like the Sealed Knot blokes (no messing now) but off piste they looked like Worzel Gummidge.

Accuracy is the perfection that only Praxiteles could achieve and I think Freud said something about annual retentiveness for those mortals who seek it. Close enough is never good enough but panache and male bovine ordure work wonders to convince sceptics. "Aiming to be generic" or "capturing the essence" are phrases that spring to mind.

BTW hasn't the Austrian chap got a Marks and Spencer shirt on. I bet they actually wore them in reality - make me feel small.

And now back to the essentials of life.





:relieved:

"BTW hasn't the Austrian chap got a Marks and Spencer shirt on. I bet they actually wore them in reality - make me feel small."

Well done David, you definitely passed the WW1-74% accuracy percentage (although I'm not entirely sure, if that being a Marks and Spencer brand shirt is accurate :wink:). But for being a real WW1-100% accuracy snob, you'll have to look even closer. :laughing:

It always makes me laugh when I watch discussions about standardisation in armies and listen to "button-counters". I took a picture of a nine-man infantry section of the Black Watch battlegroup in Iraq in 2003 - in an age when standardisation might be expected because of the relative ease and uniformity of supply sources. No two of them are dressed exactly the same. I'd wager it was even worse during the 18th and 19th centuries. Armies tend to wear what's available in the field. I've 30 years' experience of wars and I've never seen troops turned out in a war zone in parade-ground order. They adapt. They have older kit and newer items in a mix which suits them. Or because it's all there is. That's reality. It was ever thus. :slightly_smiling_face:

"All men have their frailties; and whoever looks for a 1/72 scale friend without imperfections, will never find what he seeks."

Cyrus the Great
















(Okay, maybe I edited the quote a little)

A wise fellow hobbyist whom I haven't heard from in some years (at least in the forums I tend to inhabit) used to use a 3-foot rule in 1/72 scale figures - if it wasn't visible or actually noticeable from 3-feet in full scale it wasn't important enough to bother with.

I like a certain degree of accuracy in my figures. At the same time, though, as with Alan Buckingham, I grew up in the era where we "made do." The first actual "Napoleonics" I ever saw were from the Hong Kong company "Giant" - They made some nice looking figures in 1/72 scale, but they were basically French uniforms in blue for French, red for British. But we played with them nonetheless. When I discovered Airfix I was in heaven.

So we live in a great time to be a toy soldier collector.

I have discovered that most of the errors in uniform can be corrected with a bit of paint or even an x-acto knife slice here or there. If there's an extra strap? Paint over it. But that's me. Weapons length can be a different matter, but still can be rectified - or ignored if one chooses. Particularly since it seems too late to rectify it for this set.

It appears there is a difference of opinion as to whether these weapons were used during the time frame these figures are supposed to cover. From the arguments pro and con it seems to me it is quite possible these weapons might have been in issue for at least some of the period. Having served in the military I can understand how it takes time for new equipment to "filter down" to the line units. Just because this item was adopted in such and such year doesn't mean every unit was issued the uniform or equipment immediately. Even in today's military (and I think of the US Army as an example) when the uniforms were changed (again!) there was a "wear out date" to allow troops and the supply chain time to get the new equipment. So for the past few years it has been quite possible to see troops standing next to each other in two completely different uniforms as the old uniforms are phased out and new ones phased in.

If I may give an instance from my personal experience: In the 1980s the US military was trading in the old tried and true M1942 "Steel Pot" for the then-new "Kevlar" helmet. The plan was to gradually introduce the new helmet through wear-out of the old helmets. That plan was changed when the 82nd Abn Division got hit with the worst Airborne disaster in the Division's (or US Army's) history in Joint Training Exercise Gallant Eagle 82. Hundreds of troopers were seriously injured (I was one and declared dead at least three times) with six killed due to high winds blowing across the desert as we jumped. The investigation discovered that many of the injuries (including mine) were caused by the age of the World War 2 era helmets causing the webbing to give away and instead of protecting us -actually injured us. The Army made the decision to instead of gradually issuing the new helmet throughout the force to send EVERY Kevlar helmet in inventory to the 82nd to help prevent such injuries in the future.

Flash forward a year or so. In 1983 US troops were ordered to the Island of Grenada to restore order and rescue US medical students who were stuck there during a coup. At that time the only US unit in the entire US military to have the Kevlar helmet were 82nd Division troopers as we were still receiving all of them. The other US troops there, Army Rangers, US Marines, support troops all wore the "steel pot." But if you'll do research on the battle you'll find all sorts of pictures mislabeled. For instance, there's one picture that comes to mind of a "US Marine searches Grenadian House." The picture clearly shows an 82nd trooper with a Kevlar - and an 82nd patch on his arm. There are many more like that. Another picture in a book I have shows "US Army tanks" on the island. The ARMY only had Airborne (Ranger and Paratroop) forces on the island - no tanks. The heaviest thing we had during the battle were the 1 1/4 ton six wheeled "gamma goats" to pull our weapons and haul ammo. Marines had some tanks landed amphibiously in the North of the island. So if a guy is doing research...

So bottom line I guess is it's not always clear cut.

I think it's great that some of the companies listen to our advice and feedback. But there's the old proverb of "too many cooks spoiling the broth..."

I know this is getting long, but I'll close with a story I think of when talking about getting customer input.

There was a painter one time who had a commission to paint the royal family. The king told him if he did a great job of painting a completely accurate portrait of the family he would be richly rewarded. If the painting wasn't accurate...

So the painter went to work. He discovered his job was going to be harder than he thought as each member of the royal family came in and made different demands of THEIR portrait. One wanted to be painted thinner, another more muscular, this one wanted a wart removed, another a mole. This one wanted more hair. All the time the King would check in and demand total accuracy.

When the day came to reveal the portrait the entire family gathered and each reminded the artist of their desire and what would happen if he didn't meet it. So the artist pulled the sheet hiding the painting off and revealed -

an empty canvas.

The entire family was outraged. When the uproar subsided the artist was allowed to explain. He told of the King's demand for total accuracy and then recounted the individual demands and explained there was no way he could please everyone so he left the canvas blank. That way EVERYONE could see what they wanted to see and EVERYONE could be pleased.

The King realized the truth of what the artist said and paid the artist.

Our friends at Strelets have had to make a decision based on their research and it appears it's too late to go back on this set. Will this make a difference in future sets? We'll have to see.

In the meantime we vote with our wallets. I, for one, seeing the beauty of this series am wholly tempted to expand my self-imposed boundaries of collecting to WSS. JMO

I enjoyed your recounting of how your 82nd upgraded from the old Steel Pot to the new Kevlar helmets. I read also how WWII tank crews wore early NFL type football helmets inside their tanks to protect them from hard impacts. We know so much more these days about how to protect our heads. Again, fascinating information and thank you!

Dear Wayne,

thank you very much for your message, the bit about the helmets was especially interesting.
If you look at this research, it looks as if the new helmets can in certain respects be even inferior to WWI ones!
https://dropmefiles.com/0tRx2

Best regards,

Strelets