Historical Accuracy (6 Viewers)

[damian]

My understanding is that the British and Commonwealth system is somewhat unique. Despite amalgamations and defence cuts over the years regiments hold onto their lineage. Tracing their ancestory back through the history of the British Army. For example the Royal Regiment of Wales is an amalgamation of several regiments one of which is the old 24 th regiment of Foot the Islandwana regiment. So the Battle Honor of Islandwana belongs to the current Royal Regiment of Wales.
I am not sure if the same system is part of the US military.
I am happy to be put right by more knowledgeable forum members.

 

[tullock]

Ken/forlonhoper
You seem to be nitpicking a little bit here.This thread is about the very innacurate K & C Wittmann Tiger (ie without zimmerit).There are numerous photos of Wittman's unit.Many have been posted recently on this forum.That was my point.You are beginning to sound like a K & C apologist.
Regards Jeff

 

[tullock]

Another very poorly researched K & C vehicle is the Normandy SDKFZ 251/22.The problem here is that these particular vehicles didn't enter service on the Western Front until late January/early February 1945! Another ludicrous K & C model is 'WSS103',the 88mm Flak mounted on a 12 ton chassis attributed by them to 116th Panzer Division.Again they are way out.The 10 vehicles that were made were issued to 8th Panzerjager Abteilung and fought in France in 1940.The last vehicles were destroyed on the Russian Front in 1941,a full three years before Normandy!
Jeff

 

[Phantom Warrior]

A perfect example of a totally inaccurate model is being discussed presently on the K & C forum.Their 'Wittman Tiger' has no zimmerit,which is totally wrong as all 501 Bn. tigers had it applied to their bodywork during the Normandy campaign.As this was probably the most famous tiger1 in history I cannot understand how K & C could get it so wrong.It's not that there aren't dozens of photos of this vehicle in existence!The same tank by Forces of Valor,retailing at one quarter the price is far more accurate.
Jeff

I agree, it should have had zimmerit. But I know of only one photo of 007 taken in a farmer's field after it was destroyed. I would love to see other photos of this tank and have looked for them, but never found any others.

Terry

 

[lancer]

Another very poorly researched K & C vehicle is the Normandy SDKFZ 251/22.The problem here is that these particular vehicles didn't enter service on the Western Front until late January/early February 1945! Another ludicrous K & C model is 'WSS103',the 88mm Flak mounted on a 12 ton chassis attributed by them to 116th Panzer Division.Again they are way out.The 10 vehicles that were made were issued to 8th Panzerjager Abteilung and fought in France in 1940.The last vehicles were destroyed on the Russian Front in 1941,a full three years before Normandy!
Jeff

This is a very informative thread. I knew about the half-track and its service date but had no idea that the flak piece was also inaccurate as to service date and location. I hope everyone keeps the information flowing. Thanks Jeff. -- Al

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Another very poorly researched K & C vehicle is the Normandy SDKFZ 251/22.The problem here is that these particular vehicles didn't enter service on the Western Front until late January/early February 1945!
Jeff

The Osprey publication lists the SdKfz 251/22 as being created from a personal order of Hitler in late 1944. I have seen other references to the 251/22. One reference shows the 24. SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment Danmark/III.Battalion/ 13. Kompanie had a platoon of 3 SdKfz 251/22 in late 1944. Two of the 3 anti-tank Zugs of the 5th SS Panzer Division Wiking were equipped with SdKfz 251/22, but no date is shown. And the 17th Panzer Division was using the 251/22 on the Vistula in January 1945. These units were on the Eastern Front. The 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich which fought in the Battle of the Bulge was also equipped with SdKfz 251/22.

I have the "Normandy" version but am using it for an eastern Front dio along with several other K&C pieces that fit there. (And Andy thinks he stopped making pieces for the Eastern Front

Terry

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Another ludicrous K & C model is 'WSS103',the 88mm Flak mounted on a 12 ton chassis attributed by them to 116th Panzer Division. Again they are way out.The 10 vehicles that were made were issued to 8th Panzerjager Abteilung and fought in France in 1940.The last vehicles were destroyed on the Russian Front in 1941,a full three years before Normandy!
Jeff

They were known as the 8.8 cm Flak 18 (Sfl.) auf Zugkraftwagen 12t (Sd.Kfz. 8) All ten were assigned to the first company of Anti-Tank Battalion (Panzerjäger-Abteilung) 8 which participated in the Invasion of Poland in 1939, the Battle of France in 1940 and Operation Barbarossa in 1941. They were grey. The company was redesignated as Anti-Tank Company (Panzerjäger-Kompanie) 601 in January 1942 and then as the third company of Anti-Tank Battalion 559 April 1942. According to Panzer Tracts, the last three vehicles lost March 1943. The 116th Panzer Division was not formed until March, 1944.

But once again, and admittedly with poetic license on the camo, it becomes another member of the German Eastern Front AFVs I am secretly assembling behind Andy's back Just need a few Russian AFVs. Hope Figarti makes the JS2.

Terry

 

[fmethorst]

This brings up an interesting point. Unless one intends to accurately depict a specific unit why even bother marking vehicles with unit emblems. Case in point that half track mounted 88. The 116th "Windhund" division unit emblem immediately allows people to say "Hey, that vehicle never served with that unit". By removing the unit emblem, which wasn't always present anyway, the vehicle becomes generic and more versatile. I admit that the camouflage and accompanying figures (weapons, uniforms, equipment etc.) can still date a piece and raise questions of veracity but at least it wouldn't be so blatent.

 

[Phantom Warrior]

This brings up an interesting point. Unless one intends to accurately depict a specific unit why even bother marking vehicles with unit emblems. Case in point that half track mounted 88. The 116th "Windhund" division unit emblem immediately allows people to say "Hey, that vehicle never served with that unit". By removing the unit emblem, which wasn't always present anyway, the vehicle becomes generic and more versatile. I admit that the camouflage and accompanying figures (weapons, uniforms, equipment etc.) can still date a piece and raise questions of veracity but at least it wouldn't be so blatent.

I look at the models as you do - Historically Accurate, Historically Plausable, Historically False. But if I became too fussy, there are lots of nice AFVs I would never be able to own. The half-track mounted 88 is historically false. It could have been done in grey for Fields of Battle. It is Historically Plausable that it could have the 3 colour camo in Russia. But the 16th "Windhund" division unit emblem is historically false. I don't know why K&C chose that unit designation when the correct ones are known, or just left it as a generic grey or 3 colour camo piece? But right now, this is the only way I can do Eastern Front - use 6 K&C pieces that fit the Russian steppes in summer, even though some are mis-labeled as being from other theatres.

Terry

 

[forlornhoper]

Tullock,sorry you feel i was "Nitpicking",that was not my intention,perhaps you are being over sensitive ,again, as previously discussed this is an open forum for open views and opinions and people can and will differ.Your comment on "K&C Apologist",why would i need to make apologies for K&C,i just collect the pieces i like and have posted critical comments in the past,in particular the scale of some of their armour,but i collect for enjoyment ,not for arguement,but never fearful to express opinion,as you well know.

 

[tullock]

The Osprey publication lists the SdKfz 251/22 as being created from a personal order of Hitler in late 1944. I have seen other references to the 251/22. One reference shows the 24. SS-Panzergrenadier-Regiment Danmark/III.Battalion/ 13. Kompanie had a platoon of 3 SdKfz 251/22 in late 1944. Two of the 3 anti-tank Zugs of the 5th SS Panzer Division Wiking were equipped with SdKfz 251/22, but no date is shown. And the 17th Panzer Division was using the 251/22 on the Vistula in January 1945. These units were on the Eastern Front. The 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich which fought in the Battle of the Bulge was also equipped with SdKfz 251/22.

I have the "Normandy" version but am using it for an eastern Front dio along with several other K&C pieces that fit there. (And Andy thinks he stopped making pieces for the Eastern Front

Terry

I have done quite a bit of research into the 251/22.Initially this vehicle was intended to equip the 3rd Coy of the Panzerjager Abteilung of the new streamlined 'Type 45' Panzer Divisions, intended to come into play in January 1945.As it turned out existing Panzer Divisions did not begin converting until March 45.
The first 251/22s were recieved by the GD Panzergrenadier Division on 30th Dec 44.The following units were then in receipt of them....
JAN 45...9th PZ,7th PZ,11th PZ,12th PZ,24th PZ,25th PZ,25th PG,Fuhrer Begleit.
FEB 45...4th PZ,17th PZ,19th PZ,116th PZ,12SS,Schlesien,10th PG.
MARCH 45..8th PZ,16th PZ,21st PZ,PZ Lehr,Juterbog,18th PG.
Jeff

 

[tullock]

Ken/Forlonhoper
It was done 'tongue in cheek'.No offence intended.Who's being over sensitive now?
Jeff

 

[fmethorst]

In order to demonstrate how "flights of fancy" in regards to painting, emblems, markings can unnecessarily make pieces historically inaccurate lets look at Winter Tiger WS070.

Scale issues aside when I look at this piece my first impression is "cool, a "Das Reich" Tiger from the Kharkov battle". (The whitewash over grey paint implies the winter of '42/'43). As I look a little closer, however, problems arise.

The first digit of 4 implies 4th company. The only Tiger units that were designated 4th companies were 1.SS.Pz.Gr.Div. "LSSAH" (later redesignated 13th company) and 3.SS.Pz.Gr.Div "Totenkopf" (later redesignated 9th company). The Tiger company for 2.SS.Pz.Gr.Div "Das Reich" was designated 8th company. This means that the first digit needs to be an 8 (ie 821). Pictures of this company during Kharkov show solid black numbers on top of the whitewash. The second problem is the last digit "6". Since a Tiger platoon only had 4 tanks this doesn't make sense.

Now, since the markings along with the grey paint covered in whitewash place this vehicle in the winter '42/'43 timeframe another problem arises, the cast cupola.

This first appeared on turret number 392 (chassis number 250391) in July 1943 which means this tank couldn't have existed in the winter of '42/'43. Since Dunkelgelb replaced grey as the panzer colour in Feb '43 the grey doesn't work with the cupola. "Das Reich"'s native Tiger company only received 6 Tigers with the cast cupola in Feb '44

 

[Phantom Warrior]

I have done quite a bit of research into the 251/22.Initially this vehicle was intended to equip the 3rd Coy of the Panzerjager Abteilung of the new streamlined 'Type 45' Panzer Divisions, intended to come into play in January 1945.As it turned out existing Panzer Divisions did not begin converting until March 45.
The first 251/22s were recieved by the GD Panzergrenadier Division on 30th Dec 44.The following units were then in receipt of them....
JAN 45...9th PZ,7th PZ,11th PZ,12th PZ,24th PZ,25th PZ,25th PG,Fuhrer Begleit.
FEB 45...4th PZ,17th PZ,19th PZ,116th PZ,12SS,Schlesien,10th PG.
MARCH 45..8th PZ,16th PZ,21st PZ,PZ Lehr,Juterbog,18th PG.
Jeff

The summer camo 251/22 was not available at Normandy as stated in the K&C advertising and may or may not have been at the Battle of the Bulge, although your data doesn't show when the 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich which fought in the Battle of the Bulge got their 251/22s. The winter and summer versions would have been in use in 1945 in western Germany and in Eastern Germany and beyond.

Terry

 

[Phantom Warrior]

In order to demonstrate how "flights of fancy" in regards to painting, emblems, markings can unnecessarily make pieces historically inaccurate lets look at Winter Tiger WS070.

Scale issues aside when I look at this piece my first impression is "cool, a "Das Reich" Tiger from the Kharkov battle". (The whitewash over grey paint implies the winter of '42/'43). As I look a little closer, however, problems arise.

The first digit of 4 implies 4th company. The only Tiger units that were designated 4th companies were 1.SS.Pz.Gr.Div. "LSSAH" (later redesignated 13th company) and 3.SS.Pz.Gr.Div "Totenkopf" (later redesignated 9th company). The Tiger company for 2.SS.Pz.Gr.Div "Das Reich" was designated 8th company. This means that the first digit needs to be an 8 (ie 821). Pictures of this company during Kharkov show solid black numbers on top of the whitewash. The second problem is the last digit "6". Since a Tiger platoon only had 4 tanks this doesn't make sense.

Now, since the markings along with the grey paint covered in whitewash place this vehicle in the winter '42/'43 timeframe another problem arises, the cast cupola.

This first appeared on turret number 392 (chassis number 250391) in July 1943 which means this tank couldn't have existed in the winter of '42/'43. Since Dunkelgelb replaced grey as the panzer colour in Feb '43 the grey doesn't work with the cupola. "Das Reich"'s native Tiger company only received 6 Tigers with the cast cupola in Feb '44

That is exactly what I mean. Historically False - but it is my favourite piece

And there are many AFVs in the same circumstances. Modelers have it easier - they can choose their unit emblems and camo to suit a particular vehicle. A mass producer like K&C tries to be generic but adds some eye-candy to make the tank look better and inaccurately describes where and when it fought, and the result is an Historically False model.

Terry

 

[fmethorst]

That is exactly what I mean. Historically False - but it is my favourite piece

And there are many AFVs in the same circumstances. Modelers have it easier - they can choose their unit emblems and camo to suit a particular vehicle. A mass producer like K&C tries to be generic but adds some eye-candy to make the tank look better and inaccurately describes where and when it fought, and the result is an Historically False model.

Terry

I suspect it is one of the most popular K&C pieces ever released. I totally understand why it is so popular. It's a great looking piece/set. For me the inaccuracies are too great of a distraction to make it desirable. The puzzling thing is that with a little effort it could have been done accurately and STILL looked cool and then it would have appealed to both people who are fussy about accuracy as well as those who aren't as fussy.

It doesn't help that the real vehicle, the Tiger, is famous and enormous amounts of information are available down to the individual vehicle and crew level. If this was one of 58,000 T34s produced I suspect it wouldn't receive as much scrutiny (although identifying T34s to the factory and year of production is challenging and fun )

 

[tullock]

The summer camo 251/22 was not available at Normandy as stated in the K&C advertising and may or may not have been at the Battle of the Bulge, although your data doesn't show when the 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich which fought in the Battle of the Bulge got their 251/22s. The winter and summer versions would have been in use in 1945 in western Germany and in Eastern Germany and beyond.

Terry

The King and Country website advertises the 251/22 in the 'Normandy' section,hence my argument.2SS Das Reich never recieved these vehicles.Only those units shown on my list acquired them.The only units in the Ardennes to recieve them were the 9th Panzer and the Fuhrer Begleit Brigade,and this was towards the very end of the campaign.
Jeff

 

[forlornhoper]

Jeff no offence taken,youre entitled to express your opinion like the rest of us ,i like reading your posts, in the main they are interesting in content. ken

 

[Phantom Warrior]

The King and Country website advertises the 251/22 in the 'Normandy' section,hence my argument.2SS Das Reich never recieved these vehicles.Only those units shown on my list acquired them.The only units in the Ardennes to recieve them were the 9th Panzer and the Fuhrer Begleit Brigade,and this was towards the very end of the campaign.
Jeff

I agree, the 251/22 should not have been described as being a Normandy (unless you count the penetration of German armoured units during the Battle of the Bulge ), but the book Waffen SS Divisions 1939 - 1945 Chris Bishop - shows the 2SS Das Reich having the 251/22. But aside from that, you say the 9th Panzer and the Fuhrer Begleit Brigade did have them towards the end of the Bulge battle. So the K&C error was saying they were in Normandy, implying an earlier introduction to battle than was actual. Otherwise, the winter camo or 3 colour camo versions could have been at the Bulge and were valid for the Winter and Spring/Summer of 1945. I am OK with ignoring the K&C Normandy description - it wouldn't be the first time.

Also in error is the division symbol on the rear of the summer camo version which is that of the 4th SS Polizei Panzergrenadier Division which was never near Normandy or the Battle of the Bulge, and was retreating from the Balkans in 1944 then was fighting in Hungary, Slovakia and eventually in Prussia in 1945. The Division was equipped with Panzerjager Batallion with 2 Kompanies of 14 Jagdpanzers each, and a motorized Kompanie of 17 towed Pak 40 anti-tank guns to which I believe were added some 251/22 in 1945. So the K&C 251/22 summer camo could be from the Polizei Division in 1945 east of Germany and would be correct there. So the model is ok but it's description is wrong.

I don't have the white version, so I cannot comment on it as to division symbols.

Terry

 

[fmethorst]

I agree, the 251/22 should not have been described as being a Normandy (unless you count the penetration of German armoured units during the Battle of the Bulge ), but the book Waffen SS Divisions 1939 - 1945 Chris Bishop - shows the 2SS Das Reich having the 251/22. But aside from that, you say the 9th Panzer and the Fuhrer Begleit Brigade did have them towards the end of the Bulge battle. So the K&C error was saying they were in Normandy, implying an earlier introduction to battle than was actual. Otherwise, the winter camo or 3 colour camo versions could have been at the Bulge and were valid for the Winter and Spring/Summer of 1945. I am OK with ignoring the K&C Normandy description - it wouldn't be the first time.

Also in error is the division symbol on the rear of the summer camo version which is that of the 4th SS Polizei Panzergrenadier Division which was never near Normandy or the Battle of the Bulge, and was retreating from the Balkans in 1944 then was fighting in Hungary, Slovakia and eventually in Prussia in 1945. The Division was equipped with Panzerjager Batallion with 2 Kompanies of 14 Jagdpanzers each, and a motorized Kompanie of 17 towed Pak 40 anti-tank guns to which I believe were added some 251/22 in 1945. So the K&C 251/22 summer camo could be from the Polizei Division in 1945 east of Germany and would be correct there. So the model is ok but it's description is wrong.

I don't have the white version, so I cannot comment on it as to division symbols.

Terry

The unit emblem on the summer camo version could also be 19.Pz.Div.

http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=1292

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Panzerdivisionen/Gliederung.htm