|
Post by Graeme on Oct 27, 2019 15:19:32 GMT
We absolutely need to have that brilliant marching officer in 1/72 along with the rest of the greatcoated infantry.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Sept 9, 2019 2:14:42 GMT
For the 1/72 command set it looks like each sprue has 1 mounted officer and 2 officers on foot. With four sprues to a box that's 12 officers per box and it's a command set so you can buy as many sets as you need to get the officers you want. Does anyone really need the sapper to be replaced by an officer?
As the sapper is proposed to replace one of the drummers on the sprue I think the only issue is weather you want a sapper or two drummers. Personally I can live without drummers so a sapper would be great.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 26, 2019 0:15:24 GMT
I agree with Ironsides, the bent figure looks like a case of racking when the plastic cooled. Try this:
Boil some water, pour it into a cup, dip the figure into the hot water.
If the figure hasn't gone back into shape by itself mould it into shape by hand and run under the cold tap to set.
The backpack looks like it's sitting clear of the figures back which means the connecting pin is just a little long. Does the pack fit better if you trim the length of the pin a bit?
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 23, 2019 5:19:23 GMT
Very nice, I really like the blanket rolls.
The figures are looking very good, there will be some happy people out there.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 22, 2019 11:44:52 GMT
Will you take a full complement of helmets and shakos but less bodies? You surely weren't contemplating not having a full compliment of both heads? Buying 3 boxes to get 1 box worth of figures is not a good thing. I think a full compliment of figures with one head attached and a full compliment of alternative heads would be best, no need to sacrifice a figure and perhaps there might even be room for a few Grenadier heads. Half and half heads could work, buy two boxes and you get one box of each. That's OK but it only works if you want both types. If a figure has to be sacrificed it would have to be the standing at attention guy. Sorry to his fans but it would. I can see the attraction of both heads off in a set like this which depicts the same basic infantry before and after a uniform change. But you did say this was a general question so: In general terms spare heads are often for less needed variations. In that case it's better to have the most popular head moulded onto the body. I also wonder how a set of figures without heads is going to be received by the general market, some folks just don't want to assemble small fiddly parts. I suspect there will be less genuine resistance to the separate heads than there is mock outrage as an excuse for HaT bashing but still, the separate heads might have an effect on sales.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 19, 2019 1:12:35 GMT
My only comment is that I would prefer both the drivers to be wearing the same double breasted jacket.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 16, 2019 3:41:27 GMT
C.E. Franklin's "British Napoleonic Uniforms" says that the 73rd(Highland) Regiment of Foot, along with several other regiments, lost highland dress and distinction in April 1809 and was retitled The 73rd regiment of Foot. All online references I've found also say the regiment lost it's highland status in 1809. Apparently it was decided that the population of the highlands of Scotland was not large enough to support recruitment for all of the highland regiments (Perhaps they should have recruited in Canada). The second battalion of the 73rd, the one that was at Waterloo, was recruited in 1809 in Nottingham from local militia. One site I've seen even states that the "Battalion were ordered to discard Highland dress and no longer to be recognised as Highland – no vestige of tartan was to be worn, so that Englishmen could be encouraged to join the ranks", but they don't say where they got that from. The first battalion, which was originally Highland and might be more expected to retain a piper, went to Australia with their Colonel Lachlan MacQuarrie, when he replaced William Bligh as governor of the Colony after The Rum Rebellion. I thought it might be useful to look online for Australian references. There is mention of a civilian band master called Francis Detrich (or Dietrich), a band sergeant, Sgt Samuel Wiggins who was born in Bridport Dorset, and fifers and drummers who were paid 7d 3 farthings per day; but no mention of pipers (pipers would, off course, be listed on the books as drummers or fifers). There are several newspaper articles recording the band of the 73rd playing "God Save the King" and other patriotic airs on their arrival in Sydney, playing at various Government events and dinners, providing the music for balls, and being paid for playing sacred music in church; but no mention of pipers. Governor MacQuarrie was a very proud Islander, if he had pipers I think he might have made a show of them, but no mention. Ensign Alexander Huey of the 73rd kept a diary of the voyage to Australia; I haven't read every word but I had a good look through it. He makes several references to the band playing, to fifes and drums, nut no mention of pipers. Hueys diary is quite detailed, he seems to record every squall of wind, every flying fish, every man overboard and even seeing the unstockinged legs of a Princess all the way to the thigh; but I haven't found a mention of a piper. He does, however, relate how in Rio a Lieutenant and Ensign of the Regiment went ashore in their kilts, to the great wonder and amusement of the Portugese who came from all quarters to see them. I also searched for the first bagpipes in Australia but only found reference to the first sets MADE in Australia, which date to 1840 and 1850. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of course but the more I read the less likely it seems there was a piper at Waterloo. But as I said at the other place I don't mind if you include one, the regiment was originally the 2nd Battalion of The Black Watch and that's an impeccable Highland pedigree. One other point might be of interest to you. During the massed cavalry attacks the Duke of Wellington took refuge inside several of the infantry squares. One of which was the combined square of the 2/73rd and 1/30th. sydney.edu.au/paradisec/australharmony/register-british-military-bands-in-australia.php#Band-of-the-73rd-Regimentnla.gov.au/nla.obj-52775452/view?partId=nla.obj-89713793#www.bda-online.org.au/files/MR4_Military.pdf
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 15, 2019 2:47:47 GMT
These are not actual figures, just using them for purposes of illustration. Don't Panic! These are not pictures of the proposed Hungarians, they're just using pictures of the Austrians to illustrate the question being asked about spare heads or alternative hats. Don't be alarmed by the uniforms. The system of a complete figure with head attached and a spare head with a peg works fine for me and I'm happy to continue with that. It's also good for the many folks who don't want to do conversions or assemble parts as there will be figures good to go straight out of the box. I can't comment on alternative hats because I haven't tried them but the 7YW folks reported that they worked very well and they found all of the spare hats very useful. If it's a situation where you would want to change whole battalions e.g. early war in helmets and late war in shakoes I can see how alternative hats might be easier.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 14, 2019 13:38:21 GMT
We saw it in the film of course but "On the Fields of Glory also says "Maitland's British 1st footgaurds were lying in line four deep. Wellington was on horseback behind them. As soon as the 3rd chasseurs were 50 to 60 paces away, they saw a wall of redcoats rise from the golden cornfields in front". "On the Fields of Glory" also reports how Miss Charlotte Waldie, who visited the battlefield in July 1815 reported walking through patches of corn as tall as herself near the wood at Hougoumont, and how a howitzer shell that blew Sergeant William Lawrence of the 40th foot off his feet and killed two other men did not do greater damage because much of the force of the blast was soaked up by the soggy ground. "The Waterloo Companion" has panoramic photos of the battlefield as it is today. Every bit of ground not occupied by a tree, building or road appears to have been ploughed and is under crop of some sort. Adkin says that at the time of the battle "While much of the battlefield was covered in high standing crops of wheat, rye, barley and oats, there were also patches of potatoes, peas, plough, clover - even a low light green hemp with a pale blue flower. Adkin goes on to say that most of the area was devoted to arable farming, that the crops of wheat and rye had grown as high as the withers of the horses (about 1.5m), and thart after they had been trampled by men, horses and guns for a couple of hours they had been beaten flat into what one officer called the "consistency of an Indian mat" . He also says that the flattened crops retained the water of the previous night's downpour, which only ended shortly before dawn, and this and the lack of sunshine afterwards resulted in the battlefield being a quagmire of ankle deep mud. He proposes that the reason the French cavalry attacks did not even reach a canter was partially due to the fact that they had to travel uphill to reach the British position and that the ground was soft, soggy and mostly covered in wet corn.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 14, 2019 5:29:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 1, 2019 2:57:58 GMT
I was on the verge of voting in the 50-59 category when I realised that I'm not any more. Where do the decades go? I'm also pleased to see there are younger collectors it means the hobby has a future. And I hope you have a younger generation of manufacturers to keep you supplied until you reach the 60-69 bracket. No family legacy on the cards here. Perhaps I'll do the Terra Cotta Army thing... in plastic.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Aug 1, 2019 2:01:19 GMT
One of the heavy dragoons swords still looks too short, unless it's just the angle we're looking at it. And there are some holes in the figures where the mould has not completely filled.
I will need to alter the heavy dragoon officers hat so it doesn't sit so high on his head but otherwise they look great.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 14, 2019 12:35:03 GMT
The explanation Wayne refers to is in the "First Look at Napoleonic Austrians" thread. Bottom of page here: hat.freeforums.net/thread/510/first-napoleonic-austrians?page=3HaT says: "the standing at attention figure is included in Set 2 for mold space considerations, i.e. fill up dead space which is not enough for another action figure but just enough for a slim figure". And Wayne is right, having another figure is definately preferable to blank space. ( I could use the same argument in the debate on command figs at another place ). I'm not fond of the standing at attention figure but other people want it and the set in question has good numbers of firing, loading, and advancing figures. The addition of the sedentary pose doesn't seem to have taken anything away from the set. (when it was suggested that two standing figures would be included on the sprue at the expense of one loading figure that was a different matter, I definately need equal numbers of loading and firing). If folks want a standing figure why not? No-one will force me to use it if I don't want to and I might find a use for them.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 5, 2019 0:25:16 GMT
Infantry: Napoleonic Prussian Infantry (Action). Why? they are just fabulously sculpted figures, I rate them nearly perfect because logic dictates there must be a fault with them; I haven't found it yet.
The Peninsular Brits, Nassau infantry, Belgian infantry and Prussian Landwehr are also very good.
Cavalry: French Horse Grenadiers, I like how they really look like big men on big horses. And the Celtic Cavalry, Dynamic and authentic looking with no excursions into fantasy land.
Perhaps my all time favourite set is the old Airfix ancient Britons. I think all of the figures I have at present came in HaT boxes.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jul 5, 2019 0:17:22 GMT
My choice was for Ditch/Belgian Carabineers and it looks like they are going to happen so that's great. Thank You HaT.
My next choice would be Prussian Uhlans/Landwehr Cavalry wearing kollets and with czapka head swaps please.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 8, 2019 3:48:46 GMT
It's intermittent for me. When I first read this thread I could access PSR, then later I couldn,t and now, I just got on without trouble a couple of minutes ago.
This happens occasionally; sometimes PSR goes down while he's doing maintenence on the site and sometimes it goes down for some other technical problem that gets sorted out in a day or two.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 5, 2019 4:28:37 GMT
If HaT made such a set I would definately buy it. It would be good to get some new Dragoons and it makes sense to include optional arms with lances, although I do like the current Uhlans set. Stovepipe shakos are also a good idea.
But one thing I'd really like to see is a set of Prussian Uhlans wearing collets with spare heads in Prussian style czapkas. This would give us the regular Uhlan regiments and a bit of head swapping between the various sets would give us most of the Landwehr cavalry variations. Then we just need the aforementioned stovepipe shakos, the British style braided dolmans (HaT's new light dragoon set perhaps), and maybe a bell topped shako (but I can live without that).
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 1, 2019 2:34:06 GMT
I have reported the two previous posts (post options button, top right of each post). The Russian one seems to encourage scale creep, we don't need that.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 18, 2019 3:47:56 GMT
I saw the previous comments about French Dragoon heads and the significance didn't really register.
These figures could give us French Dragoons in Bardin uniform! And they probably won't cost $40 for a set of 12!
You just sold me a few extra boxes.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 18, 2019 3:34:25 GMT
you could provide French dragoon heads. Good idea!
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 14, 2019 13:01:36 GMT
I don't mind doing head swaps but some people just don't want to do that. If HaT want to make two sets don't put them off.
The 1815 regulations mean that perhaps we need more helmets than you might think, but the Belgian uniform remained unchanged I believe, so no problem with this set.
I like cavalry figures to be in action and I like horses to be moving, I'll use standing figures but they're not a selling point for me.
Spare arms for trumpets, carbines, alternative sabre poses, etc are useful.
Re the blanket roll, am I right in thinking that cavalry invariably wore this on the shoulder of the non-sword arm to give some protection from sabre cuts? Wearing it on the shoulder of the sword arm might impede the movement of the sword arma and. also, this side of the body was (theoretically) adequately protected by using the sword to parry.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 14, 2019 12:12:02 GMT
Ideally we would have:
Belgian Carrabiniers in double breasted jackets with helmets. Dutch Carrabiniers in double breasted jackets with bicorns, for the pre 1815 uniform; and, Dutch Carrabiniers in single breasted jackets with helmets, for the 1815 uniform.
I believe the 1815 regulations changed the uniform of the Dutch Carrabiniers but it's likely that not all of the men in both regiments had been issued the new uniform by the time of Waterloo, so both uniforms may have been present; I thought of doing one regiment in each.
I don't expect HaT to make three different sets, I suppose the original idea was to make a set of Dutch in bicorns and a set of Belgians in helmets, both in the old double breasted jacket. that would be fine by me, I'd be happy to get Dutch/Belgian Carrabiniers that look like Dutch/Belgian Carrabiniers and I won't foam at the mouth over Dutchmen in the hundred days, perhaps, wearing a uniform that's a couple of months too old. Also, I don't mind doing head swaps and conversions.
Another option might be a set of Dutch in double breasted coat and bicorns with helmeted head swaps for Belgians; and another set of Dutch in single breasted coat and helmets. But this would not be helpful to the folks who don't want to convert figures.
Another option is a single set with interchangeable heads in bicorns and helmets, but, again not much help to the non converters.
As for poses, I want cavalry that look like they're attacking the enemy. Espescially heavy cavalry, because that was their job. I realise a lot of folks want Geriatrics who need to rest their sabres on their shoulder, and I'm prepared to use such figures to fill the rear rank where they can't be seen; but I don't want a whole box of them.
I like galloping horses too, but briskly moving ones will be fine. Again, I know a lot of folks want standing horses, but I think they look like they're auditioning for dog food.
Spare arms for trumpets, guidons, carbines, alternative sabre poses, etc would be handy. (Spare legs would be footy, but that's a different story).
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 1, 2019 15:53:38 GMT
Hi Bessiere.
I can report that in the latest HaT sets I bought, the Unmarried Zulus and Prussian Landwehr, the rubbery plastic has been replaced with a new plastic that cuts easily and cleanly, no furring. Also, it's not brittle.
In fairness to HaT when they first made the other plastic they asked for opinions on the old forum and people voted overwhelmingly in favour of this new paintable, gluable plastic. After complaints started to appear about this "rubbery" plastic HaT has changed the formula again in an effort to give customers what they want. The latest plastic is good to work with.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on May 1, 2019 2:41:04 GMT
If the backpack is too high there could be a problem making the mold close between the roll and the shoulders or neck. An ugly piece of fill plastic would probably be needed in the gap. That takes us back to the poll on should backpacks be seperate or moulded on. Seperate packs might havce more detail without undercutting problems, moulded packs may be seen as being more convenient and use less space on the sprue but might have undercutting problems. People made their choice on that score, but I think maybe the top of the pack could be level with the shoulders without too many problems. One important thing to note: In reality the cartridge box was not connected to the backpack by a strap. It was worn on a cross belt and the pack was put on over the cross belt. Attaching the visible part of the crossbelt to the pack was just a clever way of moulding the pack and cartridge box in one piece when the packs were seperate. Which means that, with moulded on packs, the cartridge box can be placed in the correct position and will not move regardless of whether the pack is placed high, low, sideways or upside down. No problem, raise the cartridge box a bit, then either raise the pack, or leave it where it is, whatever works best.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Apr 25, 2019 18:51:49 GMT
Malcolm. the baggage wagon here is different to the four wheeled generic wagons we usually think of and would have had drivers mounted on the horses.
Most Royal Artillery wagons and equpment, and indeed all of the first line equipment (which is what we are talking about here) was based on either the standard gun carriage or the standard gun limber, it was all about interchangeability of parts. The baggage wagon referred to here is probably either the storage wagon which is the same as the ammunition wagon but carrying artificers tools; or it's similar to the officers curricle, which carried the officers kit.
Ammunition/storage carts were doubled standard limbers carrying two ammunition (or tool) boxes rather than one, with towing elms that hooked onto a standard limber to form an articulated four wheel wagon, and towed by a team of four horses.
Mercer described the curricle as a box like structure with a pitched roof and folding doors at the rear mounted on a pair of wheels about the same hieght as a gun. It was probably based on a standard limber, or perhaps on the ammunition cart. All of these were driven by drivers mounted on the near horses.
The mobile forge was modified from a standard ammunition wagon and the spare wheel carriage was a standard gun carriage with three spare wheels mounted on it, towed behind a standard limber, by a team of four horses; thus it was a spare gun carriage, a spare limber, a spare four hourse team, and up to 7 spare wheels.
There were larger ammunition wagons in the second line that looked more like the large four wheeled vehicles we're used to thinking of as Wagons and there were civilian wagons further back carrying the bulk of the baggage and supplies, but the front line wagons looked pretty much like limbers towing big limbers.
Mercer's "Journal Of The Campaign Of 1815" has a complete run down for his command in Belgium just prior to Waterloo. It lists the number of horses and what equipment they were drawing or who were riding them. It also lists the number of personel. Pretty much the same as Mike's list except Mercer says he has only 80 Gunners, only 6 Bombadiers, but a massive 84 drivers.
Horses in draught 120, the same, and the same breakdown of equipment. Officers horses, 6 loaned to them by the Board of Ordnance plus each officer had two of his own and the Surgeon 1. "Horses unaccounted for above, spare, etc-30". Also 6 Officer's baggage mules.
Riding horses; 2 staff sergeants, 2 farriers and a collar maker 5. And 6 mounted detachments with 8 horses each 48.
Putting two men on each of the limbers towing the guns and ammunition wagons accounts for 30 gunners, but it still leaves me short of mounts for 14 gunners, 2 shoeing smiths, 1 collar maker, 1 wheeler and a trumpeter. Oh! And 1 acting Do. (don't ask me). Two things to note, when preparing his troop for foriegn service Mercer said: "another troop, then in the same barracks, was broken up, and we got the picked horses of both, thus making it the finest troop in the service". Also when he changed his 6 pounders for 9 pounders apparently they arrived with extra horses and drivers but without any extra gunners that , perhaps, 9 pounders should have had. Therefore I don't think there can be any chance that he was under strength in regard to horses.
The interesting thing here is his mention of six mounted detachments of 8 horses each. That's 8 mounted crew per gun. This coincides perfectly with the illustrations in Franklin's book. The mounted gunners are the No.s 1, 2, 3, 9 ,10, 11, 12, and 13. The No.s 1, 2, and 3 are the horse holders, the No. 1 being the bombardier; The No.s 9, 10, and 11 are the ventsman, portfire, and NCO in charge of the gun; and the No.s 12 and 13 carry ammunition from the limber to the gun. As I said before the spongeman and loader, No.s 7 and 8 ride on the limber; and the No.s 14 and 15 are assigned to the ammunition wagon and ride that limber.
Which means, all of Gerd's figures look excellent!
|
|