Accuracy, It's a Puzzlement (1 Viewer)

[Arnhemjim]

Gentlemen,
As discerning collectors/customers I would hope that all would have increased respect for an impresario who has to manage the skills, temperament and ego, of a world class tenor or baritone. Where is this leading? There have been several extended discussions recently on this forum regarding historical accuracy versus artistic license, which within the context of the current world economy, impacts both producers and collectors.

Having studied and collected militaria related to the British Parachute Regiment and Airborne Forces (including The Glider Pilot Regiment), more specifically the Battle of Arnhem (Operation Market-Garden), for over four decades, I have a reasonable knowledge of the uniforms, armament and equipment involved.

Suffices it was a delicate task, with some trepidation, to e-mail Andy Nielson regarding some rather fundamental details in the K & C Market-Garden Series, particularly in light of the following quote contained in the introductory brochure for the Market-Garden series; “Each of them has been designed, sculpted, cast and hand-painted with incredible attention to historical detail and military accuracy.”

MG001 The Reecce Jeep, does not have the weapons configuration used by the 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron at Arnhem. The actual configuration (single .303 cal Vickers K-gun) of the jeeps is shown in several photographs contained in the book Remember Arnhem, The 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron, J. Fairley, Pegasus Journal, Aldershot, Hants.,1978 (see between pages; 112 -113, 128 -129 ). Also see: British Airborne-jeep mods & trailer details: http://www.m201.com/abmods.htm. The K & C jeep is an accurate representation of the configuration used by the SAS in Sicily and Italy.

MG019 Airborne 6 Pounder Anti Tank Gun Set was produced with the original Mk I carriage not the correct Mk III (Airborne) carriage of the Airborne QF 6 pdr AT Gun. See Osprey New Vanguard Series No. 98, British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45 (Published in 2004); Plate D, Showing in specific detail the differences between the standard and airborne configurations of the gun.

MG023-027 Polish Paratroops. Officers and paratroopers of the 1st Polish Independent Parachute Brigade did not wear the British paratroop brevet (wings) on their Denison smocks. See the books, Poles Apart, the Polish Airborne at the Battle of Arnhem, G. Cholewczynski, Sharpedon, New York, 1993 and Osprey Men-at-Arms Series No. 117, The Polish Army 1939-45, 1982.

Up to this point I have acquired a significant number of sets from the original Arnhem ’44 Series, and all of the Market-Garden Series to date. That being said, I’m retired on a more or less fixed income. With the price of each new King & Country series incrementally increasing, combined with James Opie’s admonishment of not modifying a manufacturer’s issued configuration, what are the recommendations of members of this forum.

 

[Mike97]

Good topic and I "tip my hat" to your level of detailed knowledge in this area.
I suspect this is the 'eternal question' in this hobby for more than a few folks, with regards to relying on a company to bring an item to market based on a historical period for us, versus buying the 1:35 scale model kit and building/painting/detailing an item out ourselves to an exact level of accuracy that more closely represents historical accuracy.

In my case, I understand some items aren't crafted to exact historical standards or accuracy-but still marvel at the skill level it took to design, manufacture, finish and bring it to market. In short, I'm in it for the 'wow factor' related to a particular item and have no problem when the 'rivets' don't add up-but that's just me and my outlook on my toys.

 

[JAGCDR]

Having served in the military for 20 years, I would assume that any minor variations from perfection are the result of ad hoc modifications by field personnel necessary because of their particular tactical situation...

 

[kilted vampire]

Having served in the military for 20 years, I would assume that any minor variations from perfection are the result of ad hoc modifications by field personnel necessary because of their particular tactical situation...

Oh that was good. Nothing in this life is perfect but I do like a god explanation . I just ask myself do I like it? I think Andy does a great job putting out a great product. Or at the very least , one could say a reasonable product considering the cash outlay.

 

[Arnhemjim]

Gentlemen,
With all due respect, I believe if you will glance at the URL (http://www.m201.com/abmods.htm) I referenced regarding the required modifications incorporated into the airborne jeeps, in order that they could be loaded and carried in the Airspeed AS51 Horsa Assault Glider, that they significantly exceed, how did you phrase it; “minor variations from perfection are the result of ad hoc modifications by field personnel necessary because of their particular tactical situation...”

In the case of the modifications required in the carriage of the 6 pdr AT gun to again achieve the ability to load/carry/off-load the gun in a Horsa glider, those changes far exceeded “field modifications”. As can be seen in a comparison of the K & C gun and the image I included in my discussion the following major (readily discernible in the included jpgs) modifications were accomplished:
1. The front splinter shield was modified to a new smaller reshaped shield.
2. The axle of the carriage was significantly shortened, resulting in a narrower wheel-base and a restricted traverse of 37 degrees, left or right.
3. The trail legs were jointed for ease of separation.
4. A breast drag eye was added to facilitate manhandling from the front of the gun.

In each case I believe that the requisite set of modifications exceeded the capabilities organic to even divisional level, namely the 1st Airborne Divisional Work Shops Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers.

 

[kilted vampire]

Well if you own it you can modify it to your specifications.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

And that is why I collect toy soldiers instead of Military Miniatures For me, a military miniature must be historically accurate with a story behind it - like how the gun was modified to fit a Horsa Glider, how many were at Arnhem, how much ammo came with, how they were used, etc. But that becomes limiting in where it can be displayed and with what other pieces.

I look at a piece as historically correct, historically plausable or historically Incorrect. Most fall into the latter 2 categories, so getting an historically correct piece is an uphill battle that can lead to frustration and take away from the enjoyment of collecting toy soldiers.

Terry

 

[desk11desk12]

And that is why I collect toy soldiers instead of Military Miniatures For me, a military miniature must be historically accurate with a story behind it - like how the gun was modified to fit a Horsa Glider, how many were at Arnhem, how much ammo came with, how they were used, etc. But that becomes limiting in where it can be displayed and with what other pieces.

I look at a piece as historically correct, historically plausable or historically Incorrect. Most fall into the latter 2 categories, so getting an historically correct piece is an uphill battle that can lead to frustration and take away from the enjoyment of collecting toy soldiers.

Terry

AMEN!

Carlos

 

[Rob]

And that is why I collect toy soldiers instead of Military Miniatures For me, a military miniature must be historically accurate with a story behind it - like how the gun was modified to fit a Horsa Glider, how many were at Arnhem, how much ammo came with, how they were used, etc. But that becomes limiting in where it can be displayed and with what other pieces.

I look at a piece as historically correct, historically plausable or historically Incorrect. Most fall into the latter 2 categories, so getting an historically correct piece is an uphill battle that can lead to frustration and take away from the enjoyment of collecting toy soldiers.

Terry

At last, here we have it in plain English.For example If someone produces a Jagdtiger for Alamein then no I would not buy it.But if it really is just about nuts and bolts then I like to give a little leeway.Everyone has the perfect right to put the most rigorous standards to their collection,but if its plausable then I will consider buying it,for me I want my collecting to be above all enjoyable.

Rob

 

[lancer]

And that is why I collect toy soldiers instead of Military Miniatures For me, a military miniature must be historically accurate with a story behind it - like how the gun was modified to fit a Horsa Glider, how many were at Arnhem, how much ammo came with, how they were used, etc. But that becomes limiting in where it can be displayed and with what other pieces.

I look at a piece as historically correct, historically plausable or historically Incorrect. Most fall into the latter 2 categories, so getting an historically correct piece is an uphill battle that can lead to frustration and take away from the enjoyment of collecting toy soldiers.

Terry

Good definition. I also want my collection to be as historically correct as I deem reasonable, ie., no glaring errors. I can pass on a missing button or bolt but wrong uniforms, camo jobs, markings, etc. will stop me from buying a vehicle or figure I might actually like. There are enough options out there so that I can pass on inaccurate offerings without worrying that I might have missed the boat. -- lancer

 

[Phantom Warrior]

At last, here we have it in plain English.For example If someone produces a Jagdtiger for Alamein then no I would not buy it.But if it really is just about nuts and bolts then I like to give a little leeway.Everyone has the perfect right to put the most rigorous standards to their collection,but if its plausable then I will consider buying it,for me I want my collecting to be above all enjoyable.

Rob

Actually, the Jagdpanther at El Alamein would come under my 4th category - historically impossible - I don't collect those.

Terry

 

[binder001]

Arnhemjim - and there you have it. The reason that there are so many variations from the "truth" is that the market doesn't demand it. The average K&C collector just wants something that "looks good" on the shelf. There are voices crying in the wilderness, but most people don't care. For instance, K&C produced an M3A1 scout car for US service in the Battle of the Bulge. In all my years of reading about the battle and studying original photos I have never heard of one, BUT the thing sold quite well. Until the bulk of the collectors raise their standards then we will still have sloppy research in the models. Its supply-and-demand, the demand is currently for "cool looking" versus "historically accurate" so the models sell. If the models sell they will still be produced to the current research standard.

Andy makes a great product, so I have learned to tolerate some issues with the K&C stuff and if I want absolute accuracy I build my 1/35th models to as accurate as I can make them. I look at the K&C stuff as "art" versus "research".

Gary B.

 

[lancer]

Arnhemjim - and there you have it. The reason that there are so many variations from the "truth" is that the market doesn't demand it. The average K&C collector just wants something that "looks good" on the shelf. There are voices crying in the wilderness, but most people don't care. For instance, K&C produced an M3A1 scout car for US service in the Battle of the Bulge. In all my years of reading about the battle and studying original photos I have never heard of one, BUT the thing sold quite well. Until the bulk of the collectors raise their standards then we will still have sloppy research in the models. Its supply-and-demand, the demand is currently for "cool looking" versus "historically accurate" so the models sell. If the models sell they will still be produced to the current research standard.

Andy makes a great product, so I have learned to tolerate some issues with the K&C stuff and if I want absolute accuracy I build my 1/35th models to as accurate as I can make them. I look at the K&C stuff as "art" versus "research".

Gary B.

Good sum up, Gary. A collector like me does not have the money to pay for the perfect model with a staggering amount of detail, that, quite frankly, I couldn't see, appreciate, or even know if the bolt count is correct. I DO demand that my purchases are accurate to my requirements in terms of color, markings, correct time period, and dimensions. I am fine with what I choose to buy. A perfectly correct model is something that would require a lot more detail and research (money & time) on the part of the manufacturer, and as a result, it will be something I cannot afford. This is not to say that the manufacturer shouldn't produce the best product he can. There are different collector levels and a person who wants the best detail and accuracy possible and is willing to pay for it, should have options. There is a lot of room in this great hobby for all levels. To paraphrase, "If you make it, they will come". Fits all levels. -- Al

 

[uksubs]

Gentlemen,
As discerning collectors/customers I would hope that all would have increased respect for an impresario who has to manage the skills, temperament and ego, of a world class tenor or baritone. Where is this leading? There have been several extended discussions recently on this forum regarding historical accuracy versus artistic license, which within the context of the current world economy, impacts both producers and collectors.

Having studied and collected militaria related to the British Parachute Regiment and Airborne Forces (including The Glider Pilot Regiment), more specifically the Battle of Arnhem (Operation Market-Garden), for over four decades, I have a reasonable knowledge of the uniforms, armament and equipment involved.

Suffices it was a delicate task, with some trepidation, to e-mail Andy Nielson regarding some rather fundamental details in the K & C Market-Garden Series, particularly in light of the following quote contained in the introductory brochure for the Market-Garden series; “Each of them has been designed, sculpted, cast and hand-painted with incredible attention to historical detail and military accuracy.”

MG001 The Reecce Jeep, does not have the weapons configuration used by the 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron at Arnhem. The actual configuration (single .303 cal Vickers K-gun) of the jeeps is shown in several photographs contained in the book Remember Arnhem, The 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron, J. Fairley, Pegasus Journal, Aldershot, Hants.,1978 (see between pages; 112 -113, 128 -129 ). Also see: British Airborne-jeep mods & trailer details: http://www.m201.com/abmods.htm. The K & C jeep is an accurate representation of the configuration used by the SAS in Sicily and Italy.

MG019 Airborne 6 Pounder Anti Tank Gun Set was produced with the original Mk I carriage not the correct Mk III (Airborne) carriage of the Airborne QF 6 pdr AT Gun. See Osprey New Vanguard Series No. 98, British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45 (Published in 2004); Plate D, Showing in specific detail the differences between the standard and airborne configurations of the gun.

MG023-027 Polish Paratroops. Officers and paratroopers of the 1st Polish Independent Parachute Brigade did not wear the British paratroop brevet (wings) on their Denison smocks. See the books, Poles Apart, the Polish Airborne at the Battle of Arnhem, G. Cholewczynski, Sharpedon, New York, 1993 and Osprey Men-at-Arms Series No. 117, The Polish Army 1939-45, 1982.

Up to this point I have acquired a significant number of sets from the original Arnhem ’44 Series, and all of the Market-Garden Series to date. That being said, I’m retired on a more or less fixed income. With the price of each new King & Country series incrementally increasing, combined with James Opie’s admonishment of not modifying a manufacturer’s issued configuration, what are the recommendations of members of this forum.

Great post
Are wait & see what the next batch of K&C Market garden figures are like before buying & for there money they should be right

 

[Spitfrnd]

Gentlemen,
As discerning collectors/customers I would hope that all would have increased respect for an impresario who has to manage the skills, temperament and ego, of a world class tenor or baritone. Where is this leading? There have been several extended discussions recently on this forum regarding historical accuracy versus artistic license, which within the context of the current world economy, impacts both producers and collectors.

Having studied and collected militaria related to the British Parachute Regiment and Airborne Forces (including The Glider Pilot Regiment), more specifically the Battle of Arnhem (Operation Market-Garden), for over four decades, I have a reasonable knowledge of the uniforms, armament and equipment involved.

Suffices it was a delicate task, with some trepidation, to e-mail Andy Nielson regarding some rather fundamental details in the K & C Market-Garden Series, particularly in light of the following quote contained in the introductory brochure for the Market-Garden series; “Each of them has been designed, sculpted, cast and hand-painted with incredible attention to historical detail and military accuracy.”

MG001 The Reecce Jeep, does not have the weapons configuration used by the 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron at Arnhem. The actual configuration (single .303 cal Vickers K-gun) of the jeeps is shown in several photographs contained in the book Remember Arnhem, The 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron, J. Fairley, Pegasus Journal, Aldershot, Hants.,1978 (see between pages; 112 -113, 128 -129 ). Also see: British Airborne-jeep mods & trailer details: http://www.m201.com/abmods.htm. The K & C jeep is an accurate representation of the configuration used by the SAS in Sicily and Italy.

MG019 Airborne 6 Pounder Anti Tank Gun Set was produced with the original Mk I carriage not the correct Mk III (Airborne) carriage of the Airborne QF 6 pdr AT Gun. See Osprey New Vanguard Series No. 98, British Anti-tank Artillery 1939-45 (Published in 2004); Plate D, Showing in specific detail the differences between the standard and airborne configurations of the gun.

MG023-027 Polish Paratroops. Officers and paratroopers of the 1st Polish Independent Parachute Brigade did not wear the British paratroop brevet (wings) on their Denison smocks. See the books, Poles Apart, the Polish Airborne at the Battle of Arnhem, G. Cholewczynski, Sharpedon, New York, 1993 and Osprey Men-at-Arms Series No. 117, The Polish Army 1939-45, 1982.

Up to this point I have acquired a significant number of sets from the original Arnhem ’44 Series, and all of the Market-Garden Series to date. That being said, I’m retired on a more or less fixed income. With the price of each new King & Country series incrementally increasing, combined with James Opie’s admonishment of not modifying a manufacturer’s issued configuration, what are the recommendations of members of this forum.

Very well researched and written post. I can only observe that unless your interest is solely in resale value, I think you should modify whatever you like. It may reduce the resale value of some items and frankly increase it for others but in any event, I find that a small price to pay, relative to the initial cost, of getting these items the way I think they should be. So certainly if you think you may need to sell an item the conservative play is to not modify it; otherwise why not make it suit your expectations.

 

[uksubs]

Very well researched and written post. I can only observe that unless your interest is solely in resale value, I think you should modify whatever you like. It may reduce the resale value of some items and frankly increase it for others but in any event, I find that a small price to pay, relative to the initial cost, of getting these items the way I think they should be. So certainly if you think you may need to sell an item the conservative play is to not modify it; otherwise why not make it suit your expectations.

Think it would be easier just to buy a model kit of the shelf & cheaper

 

[tullock]

Good sum up, Gary. A collector like me does not have the money to pay for the perfect model with a staggering amount of detail, that, quite frankly, I couldn't see, appreciate, or even know if the bolt count is correct. I DO demand that my purchases are accurate to my requirements in terms of color, markings, correct time period, and dimensions. I am fine with what I choose to buy. A perfectly correct model is something that would require a lot more detail and research (money & time) on the part of the manufacturer, and as a result, it will be something I cannot afford. This is not to say that the manufacturer shouldn't produce the best product he can. There are different collector levels and a person who wants the best detail and accuracy possible and is willing to pay for it, should have options. There is a lot of room in this great hobby for all levels. To paraphrase, "If you make it, they will come". Fits all levels. -- Al

I don't think we are talking about a 'staggering amount of detail' here.I can live with minor faults on my models.What I object to are vehicles and soldiers that are so innacurate as to be useless in certain scenarios.I will cite just one example so as not to bore you all....the 'Normandy 251/22' (Presently being discussed on the General Toy Soldier discussion thread).Not only are its markings wrong but this vehicle did not enter service on the Western Front until late January 1945,almost 8 months after the Normandy Campaign started!(Almost,but not quite as bad as the Jagdpanther at Alamein scenario).Huge amounts of money did not have to be spent by K & C in the research of this vehicle.If I am spending £140+ on models I want them to be very accurate.After all,if Forces of Valor can turn out reasonably accurate tanks and halftracks for around £50 I'm sure some of our top manufacturers can make exceptionally researched and detailed vehicles considering that they charge three times the FOV price.
Jeff

 

[fmethorst]

.

Up to this point I have acquired a significant number of sets from the original Arnhem ’44 Series, and all of the Market-Garden Series to date. That being said, I’m retired on a more or less fixed income. With the price of each new King & Country series incrementally increasing, combined with James Opie’s admonishment of not modifying a manufacturer’s issued configuration, what are the recommendations of members of this forum.

I think this paragraph sums up the crux of the issue. While it appears that the inaccuracies bother you they are not significant enough to preclude the purchase of the figures in question. So to Gary's point, where is the incentive for the manufacturer to do anything differently?

Personally I find I have been drifting away from K&C for a variety of reasons but one of the primary ones is the lack of rigor in regards to reseach. Contrary to what some may think this is not because I have a fanatical expectation of absolute authenticity down to the smallest detail because I don't. I just have a reasonable expectaction that the manufacturer will do sufficient research to avoid some of the more significant errors discussed on this forum.

 

[forlornhoper]

“Each of them has been designed, sculpted, cast and hand-painted with incredible attention to historical detail and military accuracy.” It seems clear that a "Growing " number of collectors are having some difficulty in realising the accuracy of this quotation or is it a mission statement of future intensions? K&C products are not "Cheap" and they are seemingly regarded by many as a "Sound Investment" and all this without "Accuracy" ???,would their "Values" increase if there was a higher degree of accuracy? or do most collectors not interest themselves in "Values" and "Accuracy",and buy them for the hours and hours of sheer enjoyment they bring .

 

[damian]

This hobby is called toy soldiers. It started off when lead was banned and hollow casting stopped.So the old WB stuff suddenly became collectible. The New Old Toy Soldier industry was pioneered by the Scruby's and others whose intention was to make toys that were compatible with the WB hollowcast figures. As things progressed so the New Old Toy Soldier changed. Initially he was still a glossy toy. Trophy, Marlborough, Steadfast etc were definitely in the toy side of things.

Military modelling was by and large a separate hobby. It had it's own publications like "Military Modelling Magazine" Here accuracy was essential and vigorous debate was associated with all the models that were featured in the pages of that magazine. By the mid 1990's the military modelling crowd were noticing the toy soldier crowd and there was a two page feature each month in MM on new toy soldier releases. What K and C lead the way with was blurring the distinction between toy soldiers and military models. The old toy soldiers had not really embraced WWII. The focus was colonial and ceremonial stuff. K and C changed that around and today it is the colonial themes that are niche products not WWII. WWII with it's mass of photographs and information was always the main feature of the military modeller. As the modelling type collectors moved towards the toy soldier collector so accuracy issues became more and more important.
As I have said before the toy soldier industry is the victim of it's own success. It would appear that the demand for accuracy is not going to go away and I see no reason why it should. So the new frontier in toy soldiers is the accuracy one. Who is going to win that battle remains to be seen.