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.
Funnily enough I don't expect any plastic range to be ever fully complete with every troop type for all armies involved done. But in the case of this 1877 range it is one of the two totally essential troop types that is not being produced. Limbers would be great but it is possible to game without them. You can't do a wargame with one side missing 75% of its forces....
I think its a case of within reason... and i dont consider the lack of turkish infantry to be reasonable, a shame really this range looked promising I thought the Russian infantry were a notch above the usual strelets fair... but i wont be buying without any Turks...
So angry we have to keep starting the same thread from below
usually I am quiet on the forums discussions since last year. But this is a topic, I want to give my two cents.
When I bought the Crimean Turks (well 10 big sets, sorry guys) I saw the different sprues and recognised the sense behind. There was no French style Turkish infantry in the Crimean war!!! These figures are for 1877 and would be useful for the 1897 campaign in Thessali. The ones in greatcoat are for the CW and 1877. So I hoped to see them released in a single box as Strelets did with the French Cuirassiers before. When I saw the politic of Strelets this way I thought myself "well, every other Zouave would work".
It would be better to have enough boxes of Strelets Turks to match the style of the sculpting. But if they would not be available, buy any other set of Zouaves. Emhar, HAT, Italeri, lots of metals. The only difference is the ammunition box on the front. So in case you want to mix your armies (head-conversions of Emhar 1870 Prussians would go for the Russians) than you have enough Turks for the Russo-Turkish war.
Uwe , i am not following this very clearly.Can we refer to VMS Vanson (they move again to new archive link)then i can follow you.
i can also see big misunderstandings by poeple mistakingly crossing Egyptian and Turk and Tunisian uniforms. (each of these are all Ottoman as you know).They are 3 different armies and had own uniforms serving the Ottoman empire. tehre were Turk talles(light) and regular just like teh others.Infantry and cavalrie trained by French .Artillery trained by teh Germans.
Turks also brake down agan to the ordu's below 1-5 corps/army with variant regional charateristics.
Just like teh brittish have the english trouser line rifles and scotlanders with skirted material.teh albert shako replaced.etc
just like the French have Light/legere Infantry Zouaves Regualr Line Infantry.
which vanson french stle are we refering to vanson 6 or 7 sketch circa 1854 Balaclava.August new uniforms apprear and...for French also.
(sr Legere /light bye bye shako hello kepis)etc
So turks have new uniform also.
Paris: Ernest Bourdin, 1854 Raffet, Auguste (artist)
PER wARFARE AGE OF STEAM.
this BACKS and verifys VANSON image number 6...yes
only difference blue pants white pants
Vanson Figure 7 , says convoy in th e new french line uniform (that had kepis replace shako).
all this trouble,hah .You know why i do Kalafat 1853 now.And you know i am bias to Egyptian style( straight pants waist jacket taller fez/tarbouche) in Ottoman service.tehn we have the waist jacket and baggy pants too for egyptian talles.ETC ETC
vansons 7 is only OBSERVED AS "convoy duty" ,to appear as french perhaps not to be mistaken for russian.IS HOW WE COULD INTERPRET THIS.Englissdh and french of the day has changed and modernised in thought yes.
This happened alot in all wars to dress liek your ally and wear similar equipment in you get case shot at.or supply ships sunk(many as we know) shortage of coats etc.french surplus at eupatoria.oh such fun ...