NEW SET - Check this out from Tom's Facebook page (1 Viewer)

It looks nice except for the helmet. It looks like a modern special forces helmet. Not WW2 American. Funny how the shape of the goggles have not changed since WW2. They look modern, but this is what they looked like in WW2 as well. Besides the helmet I think it is very nice figure. Love the face.
 
When I spoke to Tom about doing American Airborne, he almost doubted their success in the market. I told him I think they would do well.

This is not about Tom, but sometimes I wonder where the manufacturers heads are at. There are many collectors screaming about certain things they would like to see produced and the manufacturers stay away because they say they will not sell.

We discussed some pose possibilities in this section and I gave Tom some suggestions also, so far I have not seen any of my suggestions done by TG, but we only spoke a few months ago. There have been inaccuracies in almost all of the US Paras done so far by everyone.

With the prices being charged today I want my stuff right and I personally am not going easy on any goofs by any manufacturer I find, so far the above looks accurate......I went over this with Tom I think he will do it right.......

I rather not see the grease gun if this is a Normandy Para I think a Thompson would be better........Lets see what happens.

Alex
 
Don't like the helmet so much, but grease gun is possible .I attach a few pics of how the helmet ( and the rest of the equipment )should look like
guy:)
band of.jpg
 
Nice overall figure for sure. Don't want to sound a rivet counter, but another thing that seems wrong besides the helmet is the lack of extra magazine pouches for the Grease gun. No para would venture anywhere in Normandy nor any other front-line without having extra magazine pouches on his belt for his gun...{eek3}
 
Excellent figure, nice one Tom!{bravo}}

Rob
 
When I spoke to Tom about doing American Airborne, he almost doubted their success in the market. I told him I think they would do well.

This is not about Tom, but sometimes I wonder where the manufacturers heads are at. There are many collectors screaming about certain things they would like to see produced and the manufacturers stay away because they say they will not sell.

We discussed some pose possibilities in this section and I gave Tom some suggestions also, so far I have not seen any of my suggestions done by TG, but we only spoke a few months ago. There have been inaccuracies in almost all of the US Paras done so far by everyone.

With the prices being charged today I want my stuff right and I personally am not going easy on any goofs by any manufacturer I find, so far the above looks accurate......I went over this with Tom I think he will do it right.......

I rather not see the grease gun if this is a Normandy Para I think a Thompson would be better........Lets see what happens.

Alex
Alex, could not agree with you more! Well said !
 
Nice overall figure for sure. Don't want to sound a rivet counter, but another thing that seems wrong besides the helmet is the lack of extra magazine pouches for the Grease gun. No para would venture anywhere in Normandy nor any other front-line without having extra magazine pouches on his belt for his gun...{eek3}

Your absolutely right . I can't see any magazine pouches for the grease gun. The pouches you can see on the figure are for pistol ammo. Tom should put this right !!!!!!!
guy
 
As others seem to cut back on detail TG is doing the opposite IMO. I think its a great looking figure. Facial features look very good and, a great looking action pose
Mitch
 
As others seem to cut back on detail TG is doing the opposite IMO. I think its a great looking figure. Facial features look very good and, a great looking action pose
Mitch

Action pose is more than alright, just got a word from Tom: 'Helmet will be changed and extra grease gun ammo pouches will be added' fortunately it is not too late to make these changes.
guy:)
 
Your absolutely right . I can't see any magazine pouches for the grease gun. The pouches you can see on the figure are for pistol ammo. Tom should put this right !!!!!!!
guy

Men its fixed so relax! Ammo pouch added along with new bigger style helmet - who says we don't listen?!!!
Still a great looking figure even with all his technical faults. He looks like he wants to take on the whole Jerry army IMO and who needs ammo with all that testosterone just gushing out of him!
Tom
 
You all need to let up on TGM. I know for a fact that the toughest NCO in the US Army, Sgt. Chip Saunders, never wore magazine pouches for his Thompson. He always shoved his extra mags inside his field jacket. If it's good enough for Saunders, then...:wink2:^&grin -- Al
 
Hi Guys,

The magazine pouches werent always used some of the GIs just used a mussette bag or their cargo pockets to hold spare mag's The reason being the pouches were big, bulky and only held 3. The Helmet issue is resolved which is good but I have to say the goggles while correct would not have been left on the helmet in action they reflect light pretty badly and the last thing you want is someone drawing a bead on your head. The final thing I have an issue with is the pistol holster on the wrong side of the belt in a cross draw/wild west sort of thing. Only with that holster you arent drawing the weapon quickly due to the large flap. I carried one for a really long time and it isnt going to work out. Just some thoughts.

I also would love to see some plain jane Infantry and would really love to see some of the Infantry in Normandy in the camo uniforms they were issued. My Division, 2AD had them and they were effective but unfortunately made other GIs see Germans so they were taken out of issue and the plain GI wool/cotton uniforms were reissued but for a while they did sport some great camo and it would be fun to have some GIs in these uniforms. Of course the plain GIs arent as sexy as the Airborne but there were a lot more of them running around than the Airborne so perhaps we can hope to see some one day.

Dave
 
As others seem to cut back on detail TG is doing the opposite IMO. I think its a great looking figure. Facial features look very good and, a great looking action pose
Mitch

I agree, it is so good that I would hate to see anything not done right. I am impressed that Tom responded to the suggestions that were offered.

This can be a tremendous series I am very excited....Some Pathfinders would be nice. Alex
 
As others seem to cut back on detail TG is doing the opposite IMO. I think its a great looking figure. Facial features look very good and, a great looking action pose
Mitch

Well said, love the pose and the grease gun^&cool

Rob
 
Al..

Have to agree here and, from my reading ammo poutches were combat restrictive I.E. troops could not move as they were rigid around their midriff so, clips were stashed anywhere and everywhere. its not like he made the figure up or, missed a wheel from a tank!!! for me, looking across the board at figure releases old and new its a good figure.
Mitch

You all need to let up on TGM. I know for a fact that the toughest NCO in the US Army, Sgt. Chip Saunders, never wore magazine pouches for his Thompson. He always shoved his extra mags inside his field jacket. If it's good enough for Saunders, then...:wink2:^&grin -- Al
 
Good Figure...I just would like a Thompson better.....Yes the grease gun IS accurate, but I think they used them more in Market Garden...any thoughts ?

The figure above with the Grease Gun is a Pathfinder....Hey Tom PATHFINDERS !

Once again this line is fantastic, it will be the best US Paras ever made, and I appreciate Tom listening to our suggestions, that will make them that much better.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top