Strelets Forum

Welcome to the Strelets Forum.
Please feel free to discuss any aspect of 1/72 scale plastic figures, not simply Strelets.
If you have any questions about our products then we will answer them here.

Strelets Forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Dear Strelets,

I too had not looked closely at these, rather appreciating them as lovely figures chiefly for others. Cuirasses indeed!

I shall keenly await the full set to see whether there will be a high proportion of lobster pots in these, or perhaps they will come in a later offering? (That is rhetorical, I am happy to wait. I enjoy surprises).

As Flambeau noted, we are gonna need more storage!

Regards, James

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Dear James Fisher,

thanks for pointing out the tacitus site, this is indeed a very good source of information!

Dear Strelets!

This is just getting better and better! I'm already afraid I'll have to sell part of my collection to make room on the shelves ... :grinning:

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

These are lovely, and I'm soooooo tempted. Great to see Strelets putting a real effort into this period.

However...I would really like to see some Imperial Cuirassiers in lobster pot and full kit. I have tricorn cavalry of various types. My next wargame rule writing project is WoSS, so I'm looking to flesh out my armies with some more non-Brits!

Trebian

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Agreed, Imperial/Bavarian cuirassiers with helmets would be great. And they could be used for earlier periods as well starting with 30YW and English Civil War.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Flambeau
Agreed, Imperial/Bavarian cuirassiers with helmets would be great. And they could be used for earlier periods as well starting with 30YW and English Civil War.
Also agreed. The Bavarian/Austrian cuirassier is 'different' in some respects from his predecessors in the TYW/ECW, notably in terms of details of coat, cuffs, pistol holsters and collar, additional armour (eg: bridge gauntlet) for some 1630s/40s cavalry and also in the case of the 1700 cuirassier looking more 'uniformed'. In terms of terminology of course, a WoSS 'cuirassier' is only a harequebusier/'light' horseman in Thirty Years War troop-type.

But even so, some trimming with a steady hand could fairly easily transform a WoSS cuirassier into a 1640s cavalryman.

Strelets have informed us that they have some armoured WoSS in preparation. If these happen to be wearing tricornes that is fine; good lobster pot helmets are available from the Waterloo1815 set of 'Cromwell's cavalry'.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

I looked at everything I could find to get some suitable cuirassiers for the WoSS. the 30YW/EWCW boxes available are very, very, poor in terms of their pose and equipment selection. The Waterloo 1815 set is an absolute joke. 3 cornets, 3 firing a harquebus from the saddle, three with pistols and 3 with swords. Not great for "Cromwell's Cavalry" famed for charging the opposition. As to using them for head swaps, I'm not inclined to buy a box just to get the heads and throw the rest away, pls they are all turned to the side and wouldn't make good fits for "normal" poses.

The early period kit is virtually the same ECW/30YW/WoSS, but even if there are differences this range really needs some of this cavalry. It is the big, big, gap in the market.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Graham Evans
The Waterloo 1815 set is an absolute joke. 3 cornets, 3 firing a harquebus from the saddle, three with pistols and 3 with swords. Not great for "Cromwell's Cavalry" famed for charging the opposition. As to using them for head swaps, I'm not inclined to buy a box just to get the heads and throw the rest away, pls they are all turned to the side and wouldn't make good fits for "normal" poses.

The early period kit is virtually the same ECW/30YW/WoSS, but even if there are differences this range really needs some of this cavalry. It is the big, big, gap in the market.
Agree with your points Mr Evans, and also with Mr Pickstock's expert view. The bottom line is WoSS cuirassiers are just that, and a dedicated good set(s) of 1630s/1640s cavalry is a dream for the future and a big gap in the market.

I also have looked at various options for WoSS cuirassier conversions and have held off starting any of these in the hope that Strelets might oblige. The Waterloo1815 set is certainly poor, and actually the helmet is not quite right for the Bavarian style, but heads are heads and can be repositioned to be facing forwards. And as I have a TYW project underway I have uses for this set ie: the horses, and some of the troopers (swordsman, pistolier) and body parts and can retrofit other heads or felt hats onto the torsos. It's a case of using one set to do more than one thing, in modelling terms.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Yes, if I was doing a 30YW project I might be a bit happier with chopping figures about. Alas my P&S figures are all 15mm, so I'm looking for figures IU can use within this period. I happily swap hats (my original 40 year old WoSS armies use Airfix Washington's Army, with spare tricorns swapped onto absolutely anything!), but I think that with heads the direction is important, if the sculpting is any good. Regardless of the possibilities, I think I'll hold on for a month or two and see what emerges.

'Tis an exciting time to be alive, if you are a lover of 1/72 figures.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Graham Evans
I looked at everything I could find to get some suitable cuirassiers for the WoSS. the 30YW/EWCW boxes available are very, very, poor in terms of their pose and equipment selection. The Waterloo 1815 set is an absolute joke. 3 cornets, 3 firing a harquebus from the saddle, three with pistols and 3 with swords. Not great for \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"Cromwell\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'s Cavalry\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" famed for charging the opposition. As to using them for head swaps, I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'m not inclined to buy a box just to get the heads and throw the rest away, pls they are all turned to the side and wouldn\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'t make good fits for \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"normal\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" poses.

The early period kit is virtually the same ECW/30YW/WoSS, but even if there are differences this range really needs some of this cavalry. It is the big, big, gap in the market.
Just a point of order, the Waterloo 1815 set are not cuirassiers, rather, in the terms of the period they are harquebusiers or light horsemen.

In fact they are cuirassiers as well, in they wear a corselet or back and breast plate, but worse than that the corselets that the models wear are Napoleonic,(I've seen images of the 3-Up masters, they're French napoleonic cuirasses). The whole set is a 'cut and shunt' set using elements from other periods to make a not very good set of figures. Even the swords are French napoleonic heavy cavalry sabres. And don't get me started on the horse poses.

So there were two types of cavalry in the western european armies of the 30YW and ECW - Cuirassiers (3/4 plate armour) and Light Horse - back and breastplate/corselet and/or buff leather coat.

Cuirassiers were the preferred troops. In a 1620s list about an army that Charles I was trying to raise to support the war in the Palatinate, the aim was to raise 10 regiments of 1000 cuirassiers and a smaller number of regiments of Harquebusiers.

Both of these classifications were collectively referred to as Horse (as opposed to Foot or Dragoons), note not The Horse or The Dragoons as per the PSR review. That does happen in documents referring to them doing things but the term was simply Horse etc. (We don't talk about an army being made up of The Paratroops, The Commandos, and The Infantry) Sorry about the rant, that just irked me and spoiled an otherwise excellent review.

Dragoons in the early part of the 17thC were mounted infantry paid more than foot and less than Horse. By the end of the 1640s they were slipping into being a lower paid cavalry, effectively doing the jobs of both Horse and Foot.

The key event between then and the WSS was the absolutist monarchs like Charles II, and Louis IV. When they took up the reins of power, they also took over the running of the various war departments. As usual there was a need to control spending in the various conflicts. So the old form of cuirassier - lots of armour on big heavy (expensive) horses that required a lot of training to be the ideal weapon (watch the Spanish Riding School some time, what they do is what a 30YW cuirassier's horse was trained to do in action) was considered old fasioned and too expensive. They kept the term and applied it to elite troops, but euipped them more like light horsemen. Dragoons on the other hand were cheaper but still effectively cavalry (and very capable in terms of cost because they could do so much more) so "let's use more of them".

So by the end of the 17thC - certainly in Britain - cavalry are still known as Horse (elite and line regiments) and Dragoons (cheaper and IMHO more capable), there are other groups - Musketeers etc, (they were counted as Horse even though they functioned more like dragoons) and Horse Grenadiers, and we get eventually to Dragoon Guards in the British Army.

Sorry about the length of this, and thank you for reading so far, I hope this sheds some light on the various terms being thrown around.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

Steve Pickstock





Sorry about the length of this, and thank you for reading so far, I hope this sheds some light on the various terms being thrown around.
Thank you, Steve, for this really useful review of the development of cavalry in the C17th. The insight into the training of cuirassier horses related to the Spanish Riding School is something I was not previously aware of.

I was also not aware that Waterloo1815 had used French Napoleonic cuirasses in modelling the Cromwell's set!. It makes these figures even less good, although I will still use some of them, mixed in with many more of the much better Revell Swedish cavalry...with a judicious paint job and without drawing too much 'attention' to the 'Cromwell's figures they will just about pass muster.

Re: PSR review of British Cavalry (WoSS) Set 238

I'm not sure even judicious trimming would make figures from this end of the 17thC do for figures from the 30YW and ECW.

The main problem is that coats at the time of WSS were fundamentally different - bigger cuffs (much bigger cuffs) and the overall length of the coat itself. Much longer than the earlier coats.

Of course if anyone wants to do this, hey they're your figures, but I would rather this sculptor turn their skills and talents to a dedicated 30YWM/ECW range and turn out what I feel would be the definitive range in 1/72