- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Vader’s Model Desk: British A34 “Comet” Cruiser Tank
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:00 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:00 pm to Darth_Vader
I agree with Shifty. This could be your best. Nice job.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:06 pm to Darth_Vader
You don't do it much, and I understand , it's a lot more work, but adding model soldiers like that really makes it pop.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:07 pm to Darth_Vader
Great work. The gunner looks like he has seen some things.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:12 pm to Sticky37
quote:
You don't do it much, and I understand , it's a lot more work, but adding model soldiers like that really makes it pop.
Thanks. Not all kits even come with crewmen. Sometimes I feel like doing them, others I don’t. I never put them in aircraft because I like to see the cockpit details. Overall I’m happy with how these turned out. I may start doing more of them this way.
Posted on 3/16/25 at 7:30 pm to Darth_Vader
Michael Wittman feasted on those at Villers Bocage. Very impressive build. I’ve noticed that your skills improve with each build you post. Well done!
Posted on 3/16/25 at 8:11 pm to Stonehenge
quote:
Michael Wittman feasted on those at Villers Bocage.
Close. Whitman feasted on Cromwell tanks at Villers Bocage.

They are very similar in design and appearance. But the Comet would not enter service another six months after this battle.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 6:54 am to Darth_Vader
Fine job, good sir!!
I'm going to build a M48 and have it in a Vietnam dio. The last tank I've built was that Tiger years ago. I'm afraid I'm not much on US armor colors from the 40s to 70s eras. I know its an olive drab, correct? But its not the same OD used on planes? Wouldn't armor and helos be the same OD?
As a kid I built Tamiya's 1/35 M48 and saw the same kit a few years ago. Still have that old model but wanted to try it again with all I know now.
I'm going to build a M48 and have it in a Vietnam dio. The last tank I've built was that Tiger years ago. I'm afraid I'm not much on US armor colors from the 40s to 70s eras. I know its an olive drab, correct? But its not the same OD used on planes? Wouldn't armor and helos be the same OD?
As a kid I built Tamiya's 1/35 M48 and saw the same kit a few years ago. Still have that old model but wanted to try it again with all I know now.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 8:28 am to Darth_Vader
Great work on a great tank.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 8:41 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
I'm going to build a M48 and have it in a Vietnam dio. The last tank I've built was that Tiger years ago. I'm afraid I'm not much on US armor colors from the 40s to 70s eras. I know its an olive drab, correct? But its not the same OD used on planes? Wouldn't armor and helos be the same OD?
As a kid I built Tamiya's 1/35 M48 and saw the same kit a few years ago. Still have that old model but wanted to try it again with all I know now.
I was unaware Tamiya has a M48 kit. I built the Monogram M48 several years ago. Like most Monogram kits, the quality was poor.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 8:52 am to Darth_Vader
FYI, there is a meticulously restored FT17 at the Museum of the American GI in College Station, TX if you want some reference material for that kit. I believe it may be is US Army livery, as the French gave them to us.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 8:54 am to Darth_Vader
Nice work on the tow cables. A little rust and dust showing. Great job as usual.
I don’t recall, have you done a Matilda?

I don’t recall, have you done a Matilda?

Posted on 3/17/25 at 9:00 am to Darth_Vader
The issue with both the Matilda and the Churchill is that they are painfully slow. They were intended as "infantry tanks" and thus moved at infantry speeds. In reality, the Brits used more Shermans with the short gun as infantry tanks than anything else.
Ironically, the British infantry didn't really work well with their tankers, tending to go to ground or retreat at the first signs of resistance often as not. For that reason, British tankers often preferred to work with American infantry, who would both fight and call in artillery/air support immediately.
The Comet was arguably one of the first "main battle tanks" like we have today, and arguably was one of the best overall tanks of the war. It led to the excellent Centurion MBT.
Ironically, the British infantry didn't really work well with their tankers, tending to go to ground or retreat at the first signs of resistance often as not. For that reason, British tankers often preferred to work with American infantry, who would both fight and call in artillery/air support immediately.
The Comet was arguably one of the first "main battle tanks" like we have today, and arguably was one of the best overall tanks of the war. It led to the excellent Centurion MBT.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 9:14 am to TigerHornII
Good points on the Churchill and Cromwell’s speed. One thing I find ironic is the British had the best anti-tank gun on the Allied side, the “17 pounder” in service by early 1943, but was unable to produce a tank that could mount it during the war. Instead, they had to modify American made M4 Shermans and M10 tank destroyers to use the 17 pounder. And even the Comet had to use a shortened, less powerful version of the 17 pounder.
It wasn’t until the British finally put the Centurion into service in 1946 that they could truly mount the 17 pounder in a tank. Which by then, it was obsolete as an anti-tank gun and was replaced by the 20 pounder only a few years later.
It wasn’t until the British finally put the Centurion into service in 1946 that they could truly mount the 17 pounder in a tank. Which by then, it was obsolete as an anti-tank gun and was replaced by the 20 pounder only a few years later.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 9:16 am to Darth_Vader
This is the one I built as a kid. First released in 1964.


Posted on 3/17/25 at 9:20 am to Spaceman Spiff
Cool. I want to build an M48A5 with the 105mm main gun. Looks like Takom has released a kit…
There was still a few of them in service when I first enlisted.

There was still a few of them in service when I first enlisted.
Posted on 3/17/25 at 10:14 am to Darth_Vader
Never have built any Takom kits or know that much about them. I do want to get a1/35 Rye Field Miniatures M1A2 and an Asuka 1/35 M4
Posted on 3/17/25 at 10:44 am to Darth_Vader
British tankers weren't especially fond of the 17 pounder. Its muzzle back blast was so bad that Firefly commanders often dismounted and called in fire corrections from 30-50 feet away so they could see due to all the dust it kicked up. Other Sherman CO's weren't fond of the stirred up cloud giving away their position either.
Popular
Back to top
