DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order (2 Viewers)

[joesgis]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

Will these be displayed at the Westcoaster?

Unfortunately Ed, I think this will be yet another Westcoaster w/out FL representation. I would love to hear otherwise though. Quite an untapped market, IMHO. A lot of collectors I spoke w/ at last year's show were hoping to see FL's work. Maybe next year?

Joe

 

[fmethorst]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

I do not collect WWII nor do I collect K&C, so don't take this to the bank - I believe I have read a review that indicated that the FL Russian & German figures were smaller than K&C figures. I don't know if this is true of their AFV's. Somebody on this thread with knowledge of both manufacturers AFV products should respond in more detail to this question.
:smile2: Mike

First Legion WWII figures are smaller than the other mainstream WWII figures but IMO this has more to do the other companies figures being slightly larger than 1/30 scale than with the FL range being smaller than 1/30 scale. The vehicles and equipment I have measured from the FL range has been pretty close to 1/30.

Here is a picture with a 1/30 Honour Bound Tiger with K&C and FL figures for comparison.

 

[sammy719]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

The tank in question is sporting the 21.Panzer-Division unit emblem so I don't see an issue.

I think both the tanks and infantry look excellent and I will now be starting to collect DAK for the first time.

Frank, I think I may be joining you!! these Dak releases bring some really great looking stuff to the table, where as before I had no interest at all in DAK campaign, so I think I will give them a go as well...Sammy

 

[Vezzolf]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

Frank, I think I may be joining you!! these Dak releases bring some really great looking stuff to the table, where as before I had no interest at all in DAK campaign, so I think I will give them a go as well...Sammy

I agree Sammy....It was my original plan to collect only FL Stalingrad and the Winter PanzerIII.....But now...I will have to re-think my purchasing strategy:wink2:....These AK Tanks and Soldiers are too good to pass up....I will definitely have to put aside some funds for these babies.

 

[Blowtorch]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

I agree Sammy....It was my original plan to collect only FL Stalingrad and the Winter PanzerIII.....But now...I will have to re-think my purchasing strategy:wink2:....These AK Tanks and Soldiers are too good to pass up....I will definitely have to put aside some funds for these babies.

If you have the Panzertruppen books by Jentz, there is some good writing about the Mark III Specials. Even these were merely adequate when compared to the British tanks. Makes me wonder how Rommel did what he did with such inferior equipment, and makes the DAK heavy losses so much more explainable now. The Germans were so incredibly behind in tank design it's crazy. So much has been written on the Tiger & Panther, but I'd like to see a story on the reason the PzIVF2/G was so late to the game. Anybody know of one?

 

[Mitch]

Blowtorch...

I think in terms of Rommell he deployed what he had with great skill and, used the 88mm with outstanding success. I don't necessarily agree about the germans being behind in the game with panzers. Once the 75mm was in the Panzer IV it was more than a match for allied tanks on the battlefield and, gun wise probably superior to allied tanks in terms of velocity etc.
Mitch

 

[Rob]

Blowtorch...

I think in terms of Rommell he deployed what he had with great skill and, used the 88mm with outstanding success. I don't necessarily agree about the germans being behind in the game with panzers. Once the 75mm was in the Panzer IV it was more than a match for allied tanks on the battlefield and, gun wise probably superior to allied tanks in terms of velocity etc.
Mitch

Yes, didn't the 88's take a very high toll of British armour as they went forward at Alamein, he really knew how to place them didn't he.

Rob

 

[Blowtorch]

Once the 75mm was in the Panzer IV it was more than a match for allied tanks on the battlefield and, gun wise probably superior to allied tanks in terms of velocity etc.
Mitch

No doubt Mitch & Rob, there was a huge tank battle in Russia (gets overlooked) at Voronezh in mid42 where the Rooskies got trounced by these things (plus there were StuGs &Marders too). What I mean is that they showed up after the window for German victory had closed. Had they been around in Barbarossa or early DAK, it would have been a very interesting turn of events in Russian & Egypt and a completely different war.

In Jentz's New Vanguard 39, he mentioned that considerations for putting the long 75 in the PzIV go back to October 1935, but the decision was never made until 11/41. What a boondoggle that was.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

If you have the Panzertruppen books by Jentz, there is some good writing about the Mark III Specials. Even these were merely adequate when compared to the British tanks. Makes me wonder how Rommel did what he did with such inferior equipment, and makes the DAK heavy losses so much more explainable now. The Germans were so incredibly behind in tank design it's crazy. So much has been written on the Tiger & Panther, but I'd like to see a story on the reason the PzIVF2/G was so late to the game. Anybody know of one?

At the risk of greatly oversimplifying the relative strength of German and British tanks, the British 2 pdr on the Matilda and Crusader tanks were effective against the German AK tanks up to about 500m. The German tank guns could stretch up to 1000m. Advantage Rommel.

The British 2 pdr could not fire an HE shell to take out the anti-tank screen in front of the German tanks and get within effective range to take out the Panzers. The German tanks could. Advantage Rommel

The Grant was a stopgap tank to address the problem of firing an HE shell, but it had only a 37mm high velocity gun and a limited traverse low velocity 75mm gun which could fire an anti-tank shell. It still had to get to 500m while the german 5cm L/60 on the Panzer III was effective at a longer range. And it suffered from a high sillouette Advantage Rommel

By the time the Shermans arrived, the Panzer IV "specials" had 7.5 cm L/48 and L/60 guns that could take out any British tank a 1000m (which is why the Brits called them specials. The low velocity 75mm gun on the Sherman had to get a lot closer. Advantage Rommel

Finally, Rommel got some Tigers.

I don't think the Brits ever had the best tank on the field. But they did have the advantage of numbers and the Germans were forced to complement their latest tanks with older, obsolete versions. But I really don't think the Germans were behind the British in tank design at any point in WW2.

Terry

 

[churchmouse1]

Terry's post reminded me of something. I hope, if Matt expands into an 8th Army line, that he makes iconic British tanks, instead of the American-made tanks everyone seems to be making now for their 8th Army troops. Just an idea. Plus, a 25lb gun and crew would be a nice start to such a series. Hint, hint.

Dave

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Terry's post reminded me of something. I hope, if Matt expands into an 8th Army line, that he makes iconic British tanks, instead of the American-made tanks everyone seems to be making now for their 8th Army troops. Just an idea. Plus, a 25lb gun and crew would be a nice start to such a series. Hint, hint.

Dave

The 25 pdr is an excellent idea, but it wouldn't fit at Stalingrad, so it couldn't benefit from being produced for 2 battles like the Panzer III. And by the time that version of the Panzer III was in North Afrika, the Matilda was gone and the Crusader was on it's last legs. The opposition was really the Grant and Sherman. Doing British tanks would mean an expansion of the AK series.

Terry

 

[sammy719]

I'm so glad to be part of a forum where there is alot of knowledge of history and we can actually discuss it, sometimes talking with friends/family/co workers etc...is a difficult task...Sammy

 

[Blowtorch]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

At the risk of greatly oversimplifying the relative strength of German and British tanks,

No, I am probably the one oversimplifying. I keep forgetting that both sides had mediocre tanks in Africa at one time or another. But still it seems that at first the Matildas, and later the Grants and Shermans could be true battle winners. The American 75 actually had pretty good performance against PzIII&IVs. What I often forget about is the Marders equipped with the captured Russian long 76.2mm AT guns. Those things were potent. Do you happen to know how many were in DAK?

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Re: DAK002-DAK009 Panzer III's and Infantry Pre-Order!!

No, I am probably the one oversimplifying. I keep forgetting that both sides had mediocre tanks in Africa at one time or another. But still it seems that at first the Matildas, and later the Grants and Shermans could be true battle winners. The American 75 actually had pretty good performance against PzIII&IVs. What I often forget about is the Marders equipped with the captured Russian long 76.2mm AT guns. Those things were potent. Do you happen to know how many were in DAK?

I don't think they had very many. In August 1942 the 15th Panzer Div. had only 4 Marder III. I don't have more detailed info on Marders in DAK - perhaps Frank does? But the Marder gives Rommel even more advantage as it was an effective tank destroyer - for most of North Afrika the Brits didn't have anything comparable.

Terry

 

[churchmouse1]

Terry,

I've been looking for a good history of the Eighth Army. There isn't much out there. Do you know if Robin Neillands' book is any good? Or do you have any recommendations? There's plenty of books on Rommel and the Germans, but I'd like to read the British and Commonwealth perspective.

Dave

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Terry,

I've been looking for a good history of the Eighth Army. There isn't much out there. Do you know if Robin Neillands' book is any good? Or do you have any recommendations? There's plenty of books on Rommel and the Germans, but I'd like to read the British and Commonwealth perspective.

Dave

I don't have any books on the 8th Army and don't know which ones would be the best. Probably some of the Brits or Aussies on the Forum who focus on North Afrika would know.

Terry

 

[graycap]

If FL are concentrating on "non-combat" roles for their first tranche of DAK figures may I suggest a walking MG team would nicely complement the first infantry figures the firm have already announced.

 

[Mitch]

three books I would recommend are as follows:

Monty's Marauders: the 4th and 8th Armoured Brigades in WWII
Patrick Delaforce

Combat and morale in the North African campaign. The 8th army and the path to El Alamein.
Jonathen Fennell

Battles with the Panzers Monty's tank battalions 1RTR and 2 RTR at war
Patrick Delaforce
Mitch

 

[nasirkasmani]

If FL are concentrating on "non-combat" roles for their first tranche of DAK figures may I suggest a walking MG team would nicely complement the first infantry figures the firm have already announced.

spot on, agreed

DAK tank riders will be nice too.

 

[churchmouse1]

Thanks, Mitch. I'll check into them. :salute::

Dave