|
|
Post by Forum Admin on May 8, 2019 5:19:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by minuteman on May 8, 2019 11:19:22 GMT
These look very good indeed. My only observation is that there appears to be no obvious command figure (officer or NCO) ….unless the tommy gunner and/or rifleman without back pack are intended as NCOs . Is the intention to produce a second BEF set of support weapons which would also include such figures?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ironsides on May 8, 2019 13:34:14 GMT
If you can see the Officers so can the enemy  |
|
|
|
Post by stevo0113 on May 8, 2019 16:26:46 GMT
These figures look really great there is a need for BEF infantry that this set looks like it could fill quite nicely  |
|
|
|
Post by zirrian on May 8, 2019 17:48:30 GMT
My only comment is, when they will be available? I want a box or two  |
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 9, 2019 0:55:33 GMT
There are going to be a LOT of happy campers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris D on May 9, 2019 6:14:29 GMT
Lovely troops and great poses.
My understanding is that the Thompson sub machine gun was not standard issue in the BEF in 1940.
Indeed whilst the post Dunkirk army adopted it the huge cost soon meant that the Lanchester and more famously, the STEN replaced it.
Best wishes,
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by mikem on May 9, 2019 7:39:25 GMT
The Lanchester was not universally adopted by the army, as it was also quite expensive to manufacture. Lanchesters were the standard SMG for the Royal Navy, though. The Thompson remained in infantry service throughout the war in the Mediterranean and Far East theatres, and with Commandos in NW Europe. It was replaced in NW Europe by the Sten from 1943 in Infantry units (except commandos), and to some extent in other theatres.
The BEF certainly held some numbers of Thompsons, issued, I believe, at Battalion level as pool weapons for patrolling etc., in the same way that additional Stens were later issued, 12 per Battalion, to issue to Rifle Platoon Commanders, if required.
|
|
|
|
Post by minuteman on May 9, 2019 9:11:12 GMT
The Lanchester was not universally adopted by the army, as it was also quite expensive to manufacture. Lanchesters were the standard SMG for the Royal Navy, though. The Thompson remained in infantry service throughout the war in the Mediterranean and Far East theatres, and with Commandos in NW Europe. It was replaced in NW Europe by the Sten from 1943 in Infantry units (except commandos), and to some extent in other theatres. The BEF certainly held some numbers of Thompsons, issued, I believe, at Battalion level as pool weapons for patrolling etc., in the same way that additional Stens were later issued, 12 per Battalion, to issue to Rifle Platoon Commanders, if required. That's a useful insight! I didn't know the detail about additional Stens being held at battalion level. I have to observe that there is something very 'British' about the slightly reserved way that automatic weapons appear to have been allocated to 'ordinary' British (and probably also Commonwealth) infantry in WW2. Can you imagine the Red Army or later German army 'holding back a bit' on allocating infantry firepower at squad level? It's a bit along the lines of "well, the Lee Enfield and the Lewis gun served us well enough in 1917/18, so why not the Lee Enfield and Bren gun (and little else in terms of infantry squad firepower) in 1939-45?". I'm not sure that I have seen many (or any) BEF photos of troops with Thompson SMGs. I still think a figure in this new BEF set dressed and equipped pretty much as the rank and file, but in a 'leader' pose eg: beckoning to advance with left arm, and with two or three alternative right arms (one holding a revolver, one holding a rifle, one perhaps holding a Thompson) would be good. |
|
|
|
Post by mikem on May 9, 2019 11:39:40 GMT
It's all about the firepower concept at the time. The Brits issued the assault battalions in the Normandy invasion a second Sten per section, because the fighting was expected to be close-quarters in the beach fortifications. When fighting in built-up areas, more Stens would be made available by taking those issued to all the Battalion drivers and exchanging them for rifles in the rifle platoons. Generally, effective firepower was needed at ranges beyond those at which an SMG would be useful, and issuing more SMGs would reduce the medium and long range firepower of the section. On the BEF Thompsons, I once read an account of a patrol using them during the "Phoney War", when attached to the French in the Maginot Line. They shot up a Jerry patrol with them, only to find that most of the low-velocity .45" bullets were actually stopped by the Germans' heavy greatcoats or their equipment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moderator on May 9, 2019 11:56:39 GMT
Because of the limited availability of other alternative Thompson submachine guns were issued to the BEF in France from February 1940 but due to supply in smaller numbers than planned. The larger issue started after the Dunkirk evacuation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zaphod on May 9, 2019 16:31:39 GMT
They look really nice. Not too slim, not too chunky. Also the poses, esp the advancing poses, are superb for wargaming. Have a slight reservation about the figures standing on only one leg: great in terms of composition but slightly impractical for gaming, as the figure tends to bend and paint flakes off the single leg.
Looks like I might get a BEF platoon for Chain of Command after all!
|
|
Boom boom out go the lights
Guest
|
Post by Boom boom out go the lights on May 9, 2019 19:20:51 GMT
Excellent news, and about time, so well done HäT!
Having one Thompson is perfect for me. There is no lack of British officers but of BEF Tommies so fine with me having no Rupert included here.
Three advancing poses seem a lot for a unit that spend most of its tine staying put, withdrawing, defending and queuing.
The hands of some figures are way too big as so often with this sculptor. Faces show little definition.
Please make them in the same size and colour as your 8228 WW2 British machine guns sets.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesaprattiii on May 9, 2019 22:34:23 GMT
Good! I will buy a set one day. I do think at least one officer figure with a revolver would have been better.
|
|
vmc
Quaestor
Posts: 19
|
Post by vmc on May 10, 2019 20:01:05 GMT
I have to observe that there is something very 'British' about the slightly reserved way that automatic weapons appear to have been allocated to 'ordinary' British (and probably also Commonwealth) infantry in WW2. Can you imagine the Red Army or later German army 'holding back a bit' on allocating infantry firepower at squad level? It's a bit along the lines of "well, the Lee Enfield and the Lewis gun served us well enough in 1917/18, so why not the Lee Enfield and Bren gun (and little else in terms of infantry squad firepower) in 1939-45?". I'm not sure that I have seen many (or any) BEF photos of troops with Thompson SMGs. I still think a figure in this new BEF set dressed and equipped pretty much as the rank and file, but in a 'leader' pose eg: beckoning to advance with left arm, and with two or three alternative right arms (one holding a revolver, one holding a rifle, one perhaps holding a Thompson) would be good.
Not just British, as contrary to Hollywood myth, the US Army infantry issued SMG's in the same way: just six per company HQ - not enough to have one in each squad. Unfortunately this is a phenomenon I call "Thompson's Curse" where miniature soldier manufacturers seem compelled to make sets of figures armed like the cast of Kelly's Heroes or the Dirty Dozen rather than historical reality.
Yes, while a handful of Thompsons were available to the BEF, the numbers actually used don't really justify including one in this set. Such a figure would make a superb early war Commando though!
|
|
|
|
Post by Zaphod on May 11, 2019 15:15:33 GMT
I think the hands are fine as they are. Much, much better than the minute hands of one current plastic figure manufacturer, which look like little blobs. Remember that people were shorter in those days, and hands look proporionately bigger on shorter bodies. I think it is often underestimated how important hands are in defining the human figure.
Also, advancing figures are BY FAR the preferred type for wargaming. And, if you're making a diorama they add energy and drama to an otherwise limp, static scene.
I agree with @boom boom, that the faces seem to lack definition. But perhaps this is a problem of photography?
|
|
vmc
Quaestor
Posts: 19
|
Post by vmc on May 11, 2019 16:49:33 GMT
Very nice figures indeed! Seems to be a slight problem with the Bren though? I can't tell whether the bipod or the gas tube ('piston group' to those who learned it all in basic training  ) it should be attached to is missing - something just doesn't look quite right in the photo |
|
|
|
Post by Tommy Gun on May 12, 2019 22:09:52 GMT
At Least !!! Really 10 figures - wonderfull !!! If only 8 - plaese do two last as a part of platoon/company command set. We have Boyes AT rifleman with BEF'40 big gasmask bag. So need 2in mortar, oficer. Anyway if Thompsons were not used in France, We can use this figure [and othesrs] for hipotetical Sealion, Africa, Greece, Crete. I love these figure with gangster's magazine, and is perfectly cooperated with Bren gunner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tommy Gun on May 12, 2019 22:12:00 GMT
At Least !!! Really 10 figures - wonderfull !!! If only 8 - plaese do two last as a part of platoon/company command set. We have Boyes AT rifleman with BEF'40 big gasmask bag. So need 2in mortar, oficer. Anyway if Thompsons were not used in France, We can use this figure [and othesrs] for hipotetical Sealion, Africa, Greece, Crete. I love these figure with gangster's magazine, and is perfectly cooperated with Bren gunner. BTW - I wait command set for 1WW Scots. I like to use them as a BEF'1940 too. |
|
|
|
Post by waynew on May 12, 2019 23:59:18 GMT
I guess there weren't that many "Happy Campers" after all; at least those who are pleased seem to be keeping mum. The problem with the Bren seems to be the barrel looks to be too short. I don't know if that's a trick of the camera or angle of the shot. The piston is there, it just looks shortened in the picture - as does the barrel. But the entire weapon was only about 42 inches or a little over a meter long so...
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlin on May 13, 2019 4:27:10 GMT
Meh! I want the WWII US squad. For myself. Not my grandchildren! ;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Admin on May 13, 2019 21:02:10 GMT
Suggested additions to the set:  |
|
|
|
Post by zirrian on May 14, 2019 5:47:32 GMT
Ammo bearer and prone riflemen would be nice, pistol toting officers, while a nice bonus, not exactly needed...maybe in more relaxed poses, hands on hips, or holding a binoculator would work better.
|
|
|
|
Post by SOTCW Mark on May 14, 2019 16:54:30 GMT
This is shaping up nicely - but please include a 2 inch mortar team in lieu of one of the officers.
By the way, when WW2 Brits were first mooted I remember a proposal (I think roughs were posted) at the time for later war British infantry as well as the BEF. Perhaps these later war offerings got cancelled because of the new proposed Airfix set around that time ? In view of the lack luster Airfix offering, any chance Hat could resurrect their proposal?
|
|
|
|
Post by bongman on May 14, 2019 17:10:58 GMT
I never bought the Airfix set but what was lack luster about it?
|
|
) it should be attached to is missing - something just doesn't look quite right in the photo