British Army Helmets? (1 Viewer)

[steveo]

Well its my first post ,only recently started collecting King and Country ,love their figures so many excellent subjects.

Anyway have decided to get one of the new sets of montys 8th army,but just a question do you think the helmets look right?

To me they look a little deep maybe,the ones with the netting seem fine ,but the ones without just dont seem to sit or look right,or is just me?

Have a look at SET EA15 RETURNNING FIRE to see what im getting at.
Anyway keep up the good work ,id be lost without this forum

 

[sceic2]

Steveo, I'm glad you spoke up. Good to hear a new voice from the wilderness. I do not have an answer for you, I just wanted to welcome you to the nut house.

 

[bricoleur]

Hi Steveo;
Welcome on board! You sure will enjoy this forum. So far I'm only collecting WWII Western Front and Napoleonics. I have no valuable info about the 8th Army for you. I also love the new HB Panthers. I'm waiting now for panther 3 and the winterpanther. You will very soon find out that there are two kind of collectors on this forum. Collectors that want everything so accurate as possible and historically 100% correct. I call them the dioramabuilders and I have the impression that you could count yourself to this group. The other group is collecting toysoldiers. They simply love the (K&C)figures such as they are (toy soldiers) as small pieces of artwork with a high collection value. Even if the historical background is less important for this group, both groups are learning about uniforms and history and only a few forummembers are extreme dioramabuilders (to say it with the words of our member Firebat: "to get it real") or extreme investors in what they hope to score on ebay in a few years. In my opinion most of the forummembers are balancing between the two groups: they love the toysoldiers and when those pieces even are accurate, it's a bonus for the suppliers to sell more of this stuff. I don't believe that much K&C collectors will take the initiative to repaint or change their figures to gett them more real. Speaking about myself, sometimes I feel the need to weather the K&C Jagdpanther but finally I keep my hands off because the collection value will be destroyed. So I only brush it a little bit with washable paints as I kind of experiment, to get back to the original after a few days. I believe most of the members are wrestling with this problem and that's why the forum is a real support to see how others see the hobby.
Eddy

 

[panda1gen]

Welcome to the madhouse Steveo - none of us are sectioned, we are all here voluntarily - Afraid I don't know the answer to your question ..

Kevin

 

[CannonFodder1971]

Welcome on board Steveo.

On the 8th Army headgear I've had some nagging doubts myself. Certainly the classic Mk I "Tommy" helmet had many variations, and in the Far East the Mk IV "Turtle" helmet saw most use. However, they Andy has a wealth of photographs to analyse the numerous variants in use at the time of the North African campaign. I think one thing that perhaps adds to the confusion is the reference which is sometimes made to the 'pudding bowl' helmet design. The term of course has hugely different connotations for everyone, depending upon their background, i.e. some think reference is being made to the classic dessert bowl with brim whilst others imagine Christmas pud and thus perhaps the para helmet.

My own guess is that the figures are wearing a variation on the Mk II helmet rather than the classic 'Tommy' Mk I:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~gastein/ukca_mk1_mk2.htm

 

[Alexdakar]

Good job Cannonfodder on the research.

 

[steveo]

Thanks for the welcome,have been collecting toy soldiers for about 10years ,got started or influenced by my uncles Trophy zulu war collection.Must admit i like gloss figures still do and never thought i would have matt figures in my collection,in fact i proably hated matt figures (maybe hates too strong a word),but looking over my recent purchases in say last 2-3years most are matt .Ok not all are King and Country,but Del prado a sprinkling of Conte and Britains certainly adds to the fun!But its funny how your tastes/collections change My only wish is that maybe just maybethat King and country release a Zulu war line,its under represented in todays figure ranges
keep up the good work.

 

[boot51]

Welcome to the forum Steveo, it's nice to have new members with different interests join in the madness.

Fred

 

[Dragoon]

Steveo, I too started collecting about 10 years ago with Trophy's Zulu War series. Over time I've collected several hundred Imperial's as well as a great number of Soldiers of the World Napoleonics. A few years ago I felt that the Matt figures were an unwelcome intrusion into the hobby, they didn't have the charm or color of the glossies while at the same time no where near good enough to be military miniatures. Since then some matt finished figure makers have greatly improved and sadly some of the great makers of glossies, like Imperial have stopped production. Ken

 

[ucla1967]

Thanks for the welcome,have been collecting toy soldiers for about 10years ,got started or influenced by my uncles Trophy zulu war collection.Must admit i like gloss figures still do and never thought i would have matt figures in my collection,in fact i proably hated matt figures (maybe hates too strong a word),but looking over my recent purchases in say last 2-3years most are matt .Ok not all are King and Country,but Del prado a sprinkling of Conte and Britains certainly adds to the fun!But its funny how your tastes/collections change My only wish is that maybe just maybethat King and country release a Zulu war line,its under represented in todays figure ranges
keep up the good work.

Welcome aboard. I am not sure that I agree with your comment about the Zulu War being under represented. In gloss, Trophy has an extensive line. Imperial had a very decent line, but is out of business and becoming harder to find. However, Frontline Figures has a great matte finnish 54mm line. Check it out at www.frontline-figures.com.

 

[steveo]

Sorry mike, i should have said under represented in Matt figure ranges.
My mistake .
steve