Stalin's Steamroller Part II

Historical Background

The T-34 was a shock to the invading Germans when they launched Operation Barbarossa in 1941. The tank has a good balance between firepower, mobility and protection. The Germans initially responded by upgrading the guns of their primary tanks - Panzerkampfwagen III and IV. This was followed by the arguably the most iconic tanks of World War 2 - the Panther and the Tiger. The Panther was almost a direct response to the T-34 with sloped armour and wide tracks. For firepower the Panther was armed with the long KwK 42 L/70 75mm gun while the Tiger was thickly armoured and armed with the excellent KwK 36 L/56 88mm gun.

To counter these new threats, the Soviet Main Directorate of Armoured Forces ordered the Morozov Design Bureau to design a new tank with increased protection, torsion-bar suspension, new gearbox and a three-man turret. The new tank was designated T-43 and was intended to be a universal tank replacing both the T-34 and the KV-1. The project however received a low priority and the two prototypes were only delivered in December 1942 and March 1943. To help ease production, the T-43 was to be armed with the same F-34 76.2mm gun of the T-34. Mobility however was worse than the T-34, being slower and that the armour cannot withstand a hit from an 88mm shell. Nonetheless the T-43 has a better ride and gearbox and the larger turret was appreciated by the test crew. However, combat reports following the Battle of Kursk pointed out that the new German Panther and Tiger tanks are impervious to the 76.2mm shells except at suicidally close ranges while their guns outranged the Soviets'. An existing anti-aircraft gun, the 85mm 52-K has the firepower to match the German tanks but with the T-43 already suffering from mobility problems, plus the need to completely retool the production lines, the project was cancelled.

On 25 August 1943, the State Defence Committee met and decided to upgrade the T-34 with a new gun. To ensure minimal disruption, only the turret would be changed, The 85mm M1939 (52-K) was again chosen as it had a muzzle velocity of 792 m/s. One design team was assigned to convert it for tank use and it entered production as the D-5, and was first mounted onto SU-85 tank destroyers. Other teams proposed the S-18 and the ZiS-53 guns. The S-18 was dropped as it was not compatible with the D-5 mount. The D-5 was re-tested and was found to have some minor defects and limited elevation. The ZiS-53 showed mediocre ballistic performance and had to be redesigned as the Zis-S-53. The D-5 (as the D-5T) armed the initial batch of the T-34/85 while the ZiS-S-53 was chosen for mass production. The long gun (55 calibres) without a muzzle brake, now necessitates a large turret to contain the recoil. The turret was adopted from the T-43 and was large enough to accomodate three crew members. This additional crew member frees the commander from loading duties, allowing him to concentrate on locating targets and to have a better situational awareness in combat. The T-34/85 gave the Soviets a tank that with a better armour and armament against the workhorse Panzerkampfwagen IV tanks and Sturmgeschutz III assault guns even though it was still inferior against the Panther with its KwK 42 L/70 gun.

The T-34/85 did not totally replace the earlier 76mm-armed versions and both versions served side by side, although the -85 eventually outnumbered the -76. The early batches of the T-34/85 were issued to the elite Guards units and were first used during Operation Bagration in June 1944. Against the Germans, the T-34/85 was used until the final battle in Berlin. In the Far East, the T-34/85 formed the spearhead of Soviet armoured columns during the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation (alternately known as Operation August Storm) in August 1945. There, they totally outclassed the Japanese Type 97 Chi-Ha / Shinhoto Chi-Ha medium tanks. Although production stopped at the end of World War 2, the production lines was reopened in 1947 and apart from the Soviet forces, the T-34/85 was exported to allied and client states of the Soviet Union. The tank was used by North Korean forces during the Korean War, Arab armies during the numerous wars in the Middle East, numerous countries in Africa during the various conflicts there, North Vietnam during the Vietnam War and by the warring forces during the 1990s Balkans War. From 1944-1945, 22,609 T-34/85s were built with another 2,701 built postwar. Licence production in Poland and Czechoslovakia accounted for another 4,565.    

The Kit

This is the first incarnation of the Dragon T-34/85, being released in 1997. The kit then formed the basis for later releases of the T-34/85, adding PE parts for the 'Premium Edition' releases and figures for the 'Orange Box' value pack. The parts are moulded in the standard Dragon light grey styrene and are spread between 20 sprues and a one-piece lower hull.The parts are well-moulded although the biggest weakness is that solid transmission exhaust cover. 'Magic Track' is still in the future when the kit was released and the links would have to be cut off the sprue. Road wheels are of the 'full spider' type. The decals provide markings for five tanks, all in 4BO Green:

1. Soviet Army, Minsk 1944

2. Soviet Army, Berlin 1945

3. Polish Peoples' Army, Prague 1945

4. Soviet Army, Rosja 1944

5. Soviet Army, Eastern Prussia 1945

Construction

As usual, construction starts with the lower hull. I followed the construction steps to the letter (almost). The suspension were first glued in place. Then the running gears (idler and drive wheels) were added, but not yet glued to the chassis. This was followed by the road wheels but I left off the outside wheels at this time, to facilitate assembling the tracks. Since the T-34 used the Christie suspension with large road wheels and with no return rollers, assembly was quick, Also to ease matters, the completed lower hull was painted at this time. As this is the original release of Dragon's T-34/85, there are no Magic Track links. The separate track links were cut off their sprues, cleaned, painted and kept in a container. Once all of the track links have been so processed, they were assembled. The links had tight fit and hard to get together. Furthermore I think I have goofed up when assembling the left-hand suspension, This in turn affected the track assembly - the were uneven numbers of the toothed and flat track links and I can't complete the track loop. So, I have to trim two of the 'toothed' link to act as 'cheaters' and complete the track assembly. 

Attention was then turned to the upper hull. While the plastic grilles for the side and upper vents were acceptable, the grille for the radiator cover was solid, making it the weakest feature of the model. The rear panel have the wiring for the smoke generators but curiously, the generators themselves were not included. The exhausts and their covers were not installed at this moment to ease painting. At the front glacis plate, the hull MG fairing and the driver's hatch were cemented. Boxes on the fenders were also affixed at this time together with the mountings for the external fuel tanks. The tanks and the tankovy desant rails were however not cemented at this time. 

Finally (before painting, that is) the turret was put together. The upper shell of the turret have separate cheeks which need to be cemented carefully to avoid unsightly seams. The gun mantlet was then placed on its cradle and the upper and lower shells were cemented together. Afterwards turret fittings such as ventilation domes, viewing slits, turret lifting hooks and tie downs were cemented. The rail was left off to allow placement of decals first. The commander's cupola was assembled and the hatch was set in the closed position as I have no suitable figures.  

Painting and Decaling

Painting Soviet tanks was simple : 4BO green. What's not that simple is to get that 'correct' shade. The model was originally painted a mixture of XF-61 Dark Green, XF-3 Flat Yellow and XF-2 Flat White.Afterwards it was time for the markings. I'm a sucker for Soviet WW2 tanks with slogans and therefore narrowed the choice to just two - the first and the fourth options. The latter was more unique by having kill marks (I presume) on the gun barrel but I decided to do the more restrained first option - 'Chevronny'. The decals went on beautifully although I dabbed a bit of flat white over decals to simulate the hand-painted design often found on Soviet WW2 tanks. And that basically completed my build.

Years later (early in April this year actually) while I was removing dust from the display cabinet I accidentally dropped the -85. Thankfully only a number of the track links came loose. However the accident prompted me to do a makeover on the kit, just the painting would suffice. This time, I used the Tamiya 'recipe' of equal parts of XF-58 Olive Green and XF-4 Yellow Green. There was a bit of difficulty painting round the turret markings as before but they still look good (to my eyes). The model was then given a wash with the tracks now given a wash of AK Interactive Track Wash. After that, I applied a green filter layer (more or less).


Finishing

The rest of the parts can now be finally fitted. There weren't many of them, just the rails and the external fuel tanks. I also noticed that the hull MG barrel has broken and I replaced it with a length of plastic rod. Once the glue has dried I touched the paint at the contact areas. Finally the lower hull was slathered with a mixture of Mig Production Rubble Dust pigment and water. The excess was removed with a stiff brush once dry.

Conclusion

This is the granddaddy of Dragon T-34s, especially the -85 versions. The kit is fairly simple but have adequate details. Sure, it has its shortcomings and that it wasn't really a Model 1944 and all but it definitely has its charms. The kit has since been upgraded somewhat with later releases which fixed some of the issues and also add PE parts for modelers to have a better-looking T-34/85. Hate it or love it, the re-issues also include Magic Tracks, reducing further workload.

Extreme Makeover : Tank Edition

Historical Background

In 1939, the United States Army was equipped with 400 tanks, including 100 M2 Medium Tanks. The M2 was armed with a 37mm gun and seven .30-cal machineguns and protected with 32mm of armour. The success of the Blitzkrieg, spearheaded by the Panzer III and IV tanks came as a surprise, and led the US Army to order a new tank armed with a 75mm gun. That tank eventually turn out as the M4 Sherman. However, although the design was ready in mid-1940, the US industry was incapable of producing the required items such as a large enough fully-rotating turret (and the turret ring) capable of mounting a 75mm gun. An interim solution was found in the T5 medium tank design. The T5 was basically a scaled-up M2 design with a thicker armour. The new tank has a higher and wider hull to mount an offset75mm gun in a traversable sponson on the right side. A fully-traversable turret was placed on top of the hull, mounting a 37mm gun. The 75mm gun was intended to deal with hardened targets (including tanks) and infantry while the high-velocity 37mm gun was intended solely to deal with enemy tanks, A cupola armed with a .30-cal machinegun was placed on top of the turret, completing the 'battleship' looks of the tank. A further one to three .30-cal machineguns compeleted the armament fit. The hull mounted gun allowed the M3 (as it was officially designated) to be developed in the shortest possible time. This was further aided by using the tracks, roadwheels and most of the suspension system of the M2.

The interior of the M3 was roomy and protected by up to 51mm of armour. Power was provided by a Wright (Continental) R975 EC2 radial engine rated at 400hp allowing a speed of up to 16mph (off-road) and 26mph (road). The vertical volute suspension system include a self-contained return rollers, allowing easier maintenance in the field. The sponson gun was provided with 46 rounds, the 37mm gun with 178 rounds and up to 9,200 for the machine guns. Overall the M3 was tall, 10 ft high, earning it the nickname 'iron cathedral', and later, appropriately enough by the Germans as 'splendid targets'! The Russians meanwhile has a more poignant-sounding nickname - 'a grave for seven brothers'.

Back in Europe, the British Army found itself without many of its heavy equipment, abandoned after the evacuation from Dunkirk. The British armaments industry was unable to adequately supply the Army with enough armoured vehicles to defend the British Isles and the Empire and so the UK government had to turn to the US. Although not yet at war, the United States was willing to sell war materials to the UK, including armoured vehicles. The British had requested that the American factories build the Matilda and Crusader tank, but these were rejected. The M3 was offered to the British Purchasing Commission, but they were not entirely satisfied with the design, namely with the height, insufficient armour, sponson-mounted main gun, riveted hull and hull-mounted radio. However, since the production was ready to commence and lacking other alternatives, an initial order was placed for 1,250 M3s. The British however required some modifications:  a cast, rather than riveted turret  with a bustle at the back mounting the radio, a  thicker armour and a simple hatch replacing the cupola. The British-spec prototype was completed in March 1941 with production commencing July 1941. To make up their losses in North Africa and Greece, the British realized that they need to accept both types of M3s. When the British received the American tanks, confusion rose because of the 'M' designation of American vehicles as M3 was the designation for both a light tank and a medium tank. To avoid this, the American tanks were given American Civil War General names. The original M3 Medium Tank became General Lee (or just 'Lee') after General Robert E. Lee and the modified M3 as 'General Grant'/'Grant' after General Ulysses S. Grant. To help the UK (and later, other Allies) in securing the weapons from the US, the Lend-Lease Act was passed.

The Lee/Grant first saw action during the Battle of Gazala on 27 May 1942, where their presence surprised the Germans, who were unprepared for their 75mm gun. The Lee/Grant's primary armament allowed them to engage Afrika Korps tanks and anti-tank gun emplacements beyond the range of the KwK L/42 gun arming the Panzer III and Pak 38 50mm anti-tank guns. Despite the earlier misgivings, the Lee/Grant provided the British 8th Army with a sturdy, reliable and adequately protected and armed tank. The drawback of the Lee/Grant was its height, coupled with the low mounting of the 75mm gun, preventing them from fighting in the hull-down position. The use of riveted armour caused 'spalling' when impact of enemy shells caused the rivets to break off and caroming inside the tank with grievous results. Nevertheless, the lessons learnt were applied to the design and production of the M4 Sherman. The British Lee/Grant were joined by American M3s following Operation Torch in November 1942. The M3 Lee/Grant was used in North Africa until the end of the North African campaign in May 1943.

When the British received the Shermans, approximately 1,700 Lee/Grants, which were by now outclassed by 50mm L/60-armed Panzer III and 75mm L/43-armed Panzer IV, were transferred to South-East Asia. 800 were received by the Australians with the remainder used by the Indian Army. The Lee/Grants gave excellent account of themselves during the campaign, most notably during the Battle of Imphal. Japanese armour in the area, consisting mainly of Type 95 Ha-Gos and captured M3 Stuart light tanks found themselves totally outclassed by the M3. The Lee/Grant was used in this theatre until the end of hostilities, mainly supporting the infantry.

The Kit

Academy released a new-tool 1/35 M3 Lee in 2006 and was followed by the Grant in 2008. While they feature vast improvements over the ancient Tamiya kit, both of them suffer from 'too-tall' bogies. The Grant was more regrettable as the bogies were corrected in the M7 Priest kit released in-between the Lee and Grant in 2007. Apart from the bogies, comments on the internet include issues with the turret, being too high and of the wrong shape (others digress about the shape, however). Anyway in 2009, Academy re-released the Grant kit as 'M3 Grant El Alamein 1942'. The re-release finally corrected the bogies although other issues remain. The kit comes in 486 parts and two one-piece vinyl tracks. As with the original release, the tracks are still the T51 type rather than the more usual WE210. The plastic spare track links however were of the WE210 type...hmmmm. As with the original release the kit featured a fairly complete interior details. Three gun barrels were provided for the main gun. Academy also included the complete figure set from Miniart's British Tank Crew set. While a nice addition, they weren't really suitable for North Africa as the set depicted them in European theatre-style uniforms (they however would be very useful for other British AFVs in my collection). Markings are the same with the original release - T24334/Atlanta II, Royal Army (sic), North Africa 1943 and Fosios II, 'Royal Army', 8th Army, El Alamein 1942.  

Construction

The bogies were assembled first. They have simpler construction than some other companies (plus the real thing is also a bit simpler than the M4 bogies). Just a little cement was deposited on the contact points of the suspension arms to allow free movement of the wheel. The completed VVSS suspension and the sprocket wheel was then set aside. Academy included some interior details, including part of the transmission but since I'm going to close all the hull hatches, I decided not to add them. The hull floor was then cemented to the lower hull shell and was followed by the rear panel and the transmission cover. Academy has you add Parts G7 and G8 to the transmission cover but I found that the fit is better if the parts are glued to the hull instead. The internal bulkhead was inserted although I didn't add the ammunition included. The addition of the front fenders finished the construction of the lower hull.

The upper hull consists of a single upper panel and separate walls. Although fit is excellent, care has to be taken to ensure that the separate hull panels align correctly. I cemented parts F6 and F7 and checked the alignment by dry-fitting it over the lower hull. The bulkhead installed earlier helped in aligning the upper hull panels. Once I was satisfied, the rest of the panels were cemented together, The hull machine guns were painted first and then inserted into place. the main gun was then assembled, even though I didn't paint the parts inside the hull. Academy provided three barrels : short, long and long with counterweight. However Academy did not mention which barrel to use for the tanks depicted in the kit. I used the short barrel just because I like it, ha! The completed gun assembly was placed in position and the upper hull was then cemented to the lower half. The stowage boxes were then assembled and cemented onto their places.

Moving on to the turret, I believe the Academy Grant is one of the few tank/AFV kits which include a turret basket. Although not comprehensive, it does include a whole bunch of 37-mm rounds. The turret basket was assembled but I decided not to paint it, and neither did I add all the ammo parts. The gun was assembled and placed into the front plate. Some online build reviews mentioned that the gun sits too low (or was it too high?) and suggests that the gun assembly from Tamiya's Grant, which despite its age, is more accurate. While I do have that old kit (now serving as a weathering technique test-bed), I couldn't find any difference between the two. Anyway, the kit parts was used, cemented onto its place and it was off for painting.

Painting and Decaling

The colour options for the kit only depict the Grant in the theatre where it was well-known: North Africa. The basic colour recommended by Academy was Sandy Brown (or Gunze H66). The article written by Mark Starmer stated however that British tanks in North Africa were painted Light Stone. Using the mixture given by him (7 parts XF-2 Flat White + 2 parts XF-59 Desert Yellow + 2 parts XF-3 Flat Yellow) the model was painted so. To make it less boring, I decided to finish the model as 'Fosios II'. The camouflage colour was Khaki Green as per the instructions but I painted it XF-62 Olive Drab (it didn't look like OD as I was using the 'wrong' batch of Tamiya XF-62). The tracks were painted the usual red brown/flat black mix. Afterwards it was time for the decals. As usual I was quite apprehensive about Academy decals but this time only the decals for the tank's nickname misbehave by silvering, and not even Mr Mark Softer can rectify that. The model was then given the usual wash.

Before weathering the model further, I added some stores. A pair of folded canvas from Tamiya Aliied Vehicle Accesories Set was hanged on the right-side hangers while two 4-gallon flimsies from Bronco were placed on the rear deck. I also robbed the tow cable from Tamiya's Grant and placed it on the engine deck. The model was then subjected to an overall application of Mig Productions pigments; thicker on the lower hull and thinner elsewhere. For figures, I chose two from the Masterbox 'Commonwealth AFV Crew' set: a sitting figure set inside the turret hatch and a leaning and eating figure which I put next to the turret.

Conclusion

After a wait of more than 30 years, modelers finally have a successor to the ancient and mainly inaccurate Tamiya Grant. The Academy Grant however received rather vicious reviews on the internet, with many so-called experts bashing the kit of a number of inaccuracies. Cooler heads however prevailed and pointed out that the worst features of the kit were the too-tall bogies and some contour issues on the turret. Academy however listened and released this revamped version (and throw in the Miniart figure set for good measure). The Academy kit is a nice kit anyway and can be build by anyone. My true grouse with this kit are the less-used T51 tracks and the too-small selection of markings and the lack of information about the markings provided.

The Tiger Tamer

Historical Background

In 1942, US Army Ordnance began an upgrade program for the M4 Medium Tank. The prototype, known as the T20, shared the same features of the M4 although with a lower silhouette and a more compact design. It was armed with a 76mm gun, has a 3-inch thick frontal armour and used an early version of the HVSS suspension system. The T20 was equipped with a Torqmatic transmission system which proved troublesome and the follow-on T22 prototype reverted to the Sherman's transmission. The T22E1 tested an autoloader system and eliminated the loader's position by reducing the size of the turret. With no apparent need to replace the M4, the Ordnance Department decided to test an electrical transmission system, similar with the one used for the Porsche Tiger (later completed as Ferdinand/Elefant tank destroyers), in the T23 prototype. The Ordnance Department championed the electrical transmission at it has performance advantages in difficult terrain. Additional 250 T23s, armed with a M1A1 76mm gun was built, but since it would need a separate training, maintenance and logistical facilities, it was rejected for combat operations. The larger cast turret, designed to be interchangeable with the M4 turret ring, was however used in 76mm gun-armed M4s as the original turret was too small to accommodate the 76mm gun.

Following the invasion of Normandy, after encounters with improved Panzer IVs and the formidable Panther and Tiger tanks, the M4 was shown to be not up to the job. The T25 prototype was built, with a larger turret able to accommodate  a 90mm gun. The T26 prototypes added a thicker (4-in) armour and overall weight increased to 36 tonnes. Mobility and reliability issues arose because the power train  and the engine were not improved to cope with the added weight. The T25 used VVSS while the T26 used the torsion bar suspension. The T26E1 was the design upon which the production T26E3 version was based on. Production was however slow, with only 10 built at the Fischer Tank Arsenal in the first month of production in November 1944. The figure raised to 30 in December, 70 in January 1945 and 132 in February. In March 1945, Detroit Tank Arsenal joined the effort, with a combined total of around 200 per month, with over 2,000 produced by the end of 1945. The main cause of the delay was resistance by the Army Ground Forces, headed by General Lesley McNair. Historians generally agree that the factors delaying the American heavy tank were:

- The tank destroyer doctrine. Under this doctrine, tanks were primarily for infantry support and exploiting breakthroughs. Enemy tanks were to be engaged by fast, but lightly armoured vehicles armed with powerful anti-tank guns;

- The need for a streamlined and simple logistics. The M4 was the main US combat tank and many other vehicles were based on its chassis, sharing many components. The introduction of a new tank would impose a new set of problems;

- State of complacency. The M4 was seen as superior to German tanks of 1942 and was considered an even match for Panzer IVs armed with the long 75mm gun. The more powerful Panthers and Tigers, with their smaller numbers, were not seen as major threats. Many field commanders, including Patton were satisfied with the M4, especially after it was upgunned.

Eventually, General George C. Marshall, the US Army Chief Of Staff overruled Mc Nair, authorizing the production of the T26E3.

The T26E3 was a radical departure from previous American tank designs. The Wright engine gave it a lower profile than the Sherman. The individually sprung torsion bars gave a smoother ride while the wider tracks lowered the ground pressure and gave better traction on soft terrains. The tank was made up of cast sections with the frontal armour the thickest yet on an American tank up to that time. Crew was five with the assistant driver acting as the bow machinegunner. He was also provided with a complete set of driving controls, should the driver be incapacitated. The main armament was a 90mm M3 tank gun, developed from an anti-aircraft weapon. However the muzzle velocity of the M3 gun and the standard M82 APC-T tungsten-cored shot (2,650fps) was inferior to the comparable German KwK 43 88mm gun. To counter this problem, a limited quantity of 90mm HVAP rounds were sent to Europe. The HVAP rounds have a muzzle velocity of 3,350fps. Combat experience however showed that the basic M3 gun was not powerful enough to tackle the monstrous King Tiger tanks. It was therefore modified into the T15E1 variant with a longer chamber to fit a more powerful ammunition and the barrel was lengthened to 73 calibres. A single vehicle armed with this gun was sent to Europe as the Super Pershing.

The sudden and heavy German attack, spearheaded by Panther and King Tiger tanks during the Battle Of The Bulge settled once and for all whether the T26E3 heavy tanks were needed. Twenty of the T26E3s were shipped to Europe, arriving at Antwerp in January 1945. By VE Day, 310 T26E3s were in Europe but only these first 20 would see combat. To test and evaluate the T26E3s and other new weapons, a technical committee called Zebra Mission was sent to Europe, headed by General Gladeon Barnes, arriving on 9 February 1945. A decision was made to take the T26E3s into action and they were assigned to the First Army and divided between the 3rd and the 9th Armored Division. After a short period of training, the T26E3s faced their first combat on 25 February 1945 during the fight for the Roer River. On the next day a T26E3 nicknamed 'Fireball' from the 3rd AD was knocked out by a Tiger I, but was made operational again by 7 March. On 6 March 1945, a T26E3, also from the 3rd AD duelled with a Panther outside the Cologne Cathedral, resulting in the destruction of the Panther. Four of the 9th AD T26E3s took part in the dash to the Ludendorff Bridge at Remagen, providing fire support to the attacking infantry. They were however unable to cross the damaged bridge because of their weight and had to be ferried across in barges. The Super Pershing was assigned to the 3rd AD, where it was given additional armour to the gun mantlet and hull front. The Super Pershing saw some action in April 1945. In March 1945, the T26E3 was accepted for standardisation and was designated M26. It was nicknamed Pershing after General John J. Pershing. In May 1945, as fighting raged, and M4 losses mounting on Okinawa, plans were made to send the M26 to that island. A shipment of 12 M26 was sent on 31 May 1945 but only arrived at Okinawa on 4 August, long after the island was declared secure. The M26 continued to be used in the Korean War, where it proved to be superior to the T-34/85s of the North Korean army.

While too late for World War 2 and not really suitable for the Korean terrain, the M26 left a lasting legacy by starting a new generation of US tanks, from the M46 to the M60 and were commonly known as 'Pattons' during the Cold War.

The Kit

In 2002, after the release of the 1/16 M26 Pershing, Tamiya came up with the 1/35 version. I personally very much welcomed this kit as the Dragon M26/T26E3 was getting harder to find. Anyway, the kit comprised of parts spread over seven olive drab-coloured sprues, one one-piece hull bottom, 22 poly caps, a few screws and bolts, springs, a pair of T81 vinyl tracks and a decal sheet. While the breakdown of parts are fairly conventional, Tamiya provide articulation for the suspension by having the axles separate and held by poly caps. The front idler and rearmost suspension arm have notches at the end of the axle into which the steel springs are inserted and were then screwed onto the hull. The arrangement allowed the completed model to conform to a diorama surface features. In addition, a nut-and-screw can be placed on at the bottom of the hull in order to secure the model in a diorama. Surface features are nice with cast numbers moulded in. Decals provide markings for four tanks:

1. Yellow B41, B Company, 1st Tank Battalion, US Marines, September 1950, Inchon, Korea.

2. #9 'Alles Kaput/Bugs', A Company, 18th Tank Battalion, 8th Armored Division, 1945 Czechoslovakia.

3. #10, E Company, 67th Armored Regiment, 2nd Armored Division, Germany April 1945.

4. #5 'Fireball', 2nd Platoon, F Company, 33rd Armored Regiment, 3rd Armored Division, February 1945, Elsdorf, Germany.  

Construction

As usual construction started with the suspension. The difference is that Tamiya made them workable. I did not drill the holes in the hull bottom as I'm not a diorama builder anyway. The springs were screwed into place using tweezers as they are tiny. Luckily I have a small Phillips head screwdriver in my home (not for modelling!) tool kit. The suspension parts were then fitted to the model, with the first and the last suspension arms being secured by screws (and poly caps) while the rest of the suspension arms were secured by poly caps. When completed, the suspension system allows the model to follow the terrain it is placed in a diorama (although superfluous in my case, and just about any other standalone Tamiya M26s). All the wheels were assembled but I left them off at this time. The rear panel and its associated parts were then cemented to the lower hull.

The upper hull assembly started at the back with the engine covers and I gradually moved forward, adding fender support, crew hatches, lights, lifting and towing hooks and the hull machinegun. This was followed by the fender-mounted boxes, brush guards and infantry phone box. The latter should not be attached really as it was a postwar addition. Having realised this fact, I carefully cut the box off the rear hull panel and smoothed the contact surface. The side skirts were left off as the wheels and tracks have not yet been mounted onto the model.

The turret is a simple affair, construction-wise. The main turret shell was made up of two parts, split lengthwise. The front of the turret is simple, with just the trunnion (secured via poly caps) and the opening for the gun. No breech was included, not even a basic shape. The gun barrel and muzzle brake are two-piece affairs and need a bit of care when cementing them to avoid visible seams. The turret shell halves however has very visible seam which needs to be eliminated (I didn't do a good job on this). The turret face was cemented first onto the turret shell and was followed by the barrel/mantlet assembly. This was followed by the various turret fittings although the stowage rack and spare track hangers were left off to ease decal application process. The commander's cupola is solid plastic so painting would be needed to simulate the glass of the commander's vision blocks. Although Tamiya provided two crew half-figures, I decided not to use them and glued the turret hatches shut.

Painting and Decaling

From December 1941 to August 1945 (and beyond), you can paint US Army vehicles in any colour, as long as it's Olive Drab. For the Pershing, I used Gunze H53 Olive Drab (1). The tyres were painted XF-63 German Grey and the tracks a mixture of XF-69 NATO Black and XF-64 Red Brown. The commander's vision blocks were painted XF-8 Flat Blue. Once the paints have dried, it was time for the decals. Already narrowing down my choices at the start of the build to 'Fireball' and 'Alles Kaput/Bugs', I eventually chose 'Fireball'. The decals were applied as usual. However I screw up the star on the front plate and a replacement was sought from the spares box. I found a similarly-sized one from the ancient Tamiya M4A3 kit (35122). It was so old that part of the decal broke - I should have applied liquid decal film or at least sprayed clear paint onto it (the latter worked during my build of Tamiya's P-47 Thunderbolt). To compound that, I placed the star slightly off-centre and I didn't dare to move it back to its place. Argghhh!!! After I have applied the turret markings, I placed the spare track hangers and stowage bracket and retouched the contact areas. The model then received the usual black-brown wash.

Finishing

First the tracks given the AK Interactive track wash treatment and once dry were placed on the model. The fit is loose for the upper run but since the Pershing is fitted with sand shields, I left the tracks as they were. The shields were then cemented to the model. Fit was a bit off, I'm not sure why although I'm pretty sure it wasn't Tamiya's mistake. The spare tracks were hanged onto their places on the left side of the turret. For stowage, Tamiya provided 7.62mm and 12.7mm ammo boxes (four for each type), an M1919A4 machinegun tripod and two K-Ration boxes. I only use two of the 12.7mm ammo boxes with the rest went into the spares box. I added bags from Tamiya Allied Vehicle Accessory Set and hanged them on the right-hand side of the turret. Two sleeping bags of unrecalled origin were placed in the stowage rack. at the rear deck I placed a duffel bag, canvas and jerricans (from the same Tamiya set), two ration boxes (also from Tamiya) and the aforementioned ammo boxes. Another ration box was placed on the right rear mudguard. 

The machineguns were painted flat black. Once dry I applied graphite powder on them to get that metal look. The weathering was done using Tamiya Weathering Set 'Mud' and also Mig Productions' Euro Dust pigment was sprinkled on the lower half of the model and the tracks and set with Mig Productions' Pigment Fixer. I decided not to heavily weather the model and just add AK Interactive Earth Effects wash after the pigment has properly set. Finally, a length of copper wire was cut, painted flat black and set in the aerial base with superglue. 

Conclusion

Another winner from Tamiya without doubt. The parts fit nicely while generally having good detail. While most of us would display our models in a display cabinet without diorama setting, the moveable suspension certainly helped those who do dioramas by allowing the model to easily conform to the modeled terrain. While separately moulded axles can do the same job, modelers do not need to position and glued them beforehand. The decals provide markings for vehicles from both World War 2 and Korea, catering for modelers with specific tastes; however Tamiya should have indicated which parts were applicable for the respective eras. Anyway, overall it is a good kit that is recommended to all.