Doesn't seem some of youse guys are crazy about the idea of separate guns and crew. But to me that's no different from having infantry and cavalry in separate boxes. You need both, but they comes in different boxes. But you makes a better argument.
The next step is this:
1) Being that we can only do one thing at a time, the next step is to decide what to do next, cavalry or artillery. I'm of the mind that cavalry will sell more so that would logically be the next step.
There were a lot of excellent ideas on the Napoleonic Cavalry thread (started Oct 2/49 posts).
1) So the first step is to collate all the ideas on that thread.
2) Mike B suggested the idea of universal horses with separate saddles/shabraques. We already considered but discarded this idea due to bad fit and some other problems but he has given me an idea. The problem is this: all the universal horses will have the same tack (halters/reins/harnesses, etc) What do youse guys think about that? Will it be a deal killer to have the right shabraque but the wrong tack on the horses?
I loves crowd computing!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 comments:
for my wargames, that doesn't matter.
I assume that cavalry will be the logical choice and a much better investment.
If you have the right shabrasque, seems easy to me to have most other things right, just need to be added as in the last 1/72 cavalry sets. Adding a saddle in 1/32 is easyer than a shabrasque because is ticker than just a cloth and much smaller, even if it require to have some distorsion in the back of the horse to ensure a better fit.
Regardless of that, as I convert even 1/72 horses to be accurate, would do the same in 1/32, but guess HaT should keep the current standard of historically correct miniatures.
About crews and guns in separete boxes isn't different from what is being done with the new WW1 artillery crews and sets, so if HaT choosen this path in 1/72 seems that can be also valid in any other scale.
Hi
the cavalry would be a great start - if I ws making them I would play safe and go for the first box as French Cuirrassiers 1807-1815 and have spare heads to convert to Carabiniers 1810-1815 period if required as the rest of the uniform was the same shape/outline.
Most of Joe-Public have seen this type of cavalry and the uniforms are classical and eye-catching. Decent size horses are required though. I reckon this would be the best test for the 1/32nd cavalry market. Then could come all the other cavalry types as mentioned in earlier blogs if it prooves hat's worthwhile efforts
What do you all think
9th
Cavalry sounds like an excellent starting point.
I hear what H08 is saying about cuirassiers, and the head swap makes a good basis. For my money, I would prefer something more generic, and chasseurs would be good, or Guard cavalry, but in terms of popularity you may be right.
I would dearly love to see some Prussian cavalry, as they have not been available before, and that would tie in well with the new infantry and landwehr sets.
As to horses, a separate saddle/shabraque sounds interesting, but I would be curious how well that could be made to work in practice - if it fits badly then I would not be in favour.
But, misgivings aside, this is a great development, and I am now really looking forward to0 seeing where H takes this.
Oh, forgot. Artillery is separate boxes. No issue for me. The Italeri sets of limbers include guns and no crews, so I gladly buy lots of French and Prussian crews, and guns as necessary. Can I suggest you start with crews, so we can at least start to get the Prussians (and Bavarians etc) gunned up - they can use captured guns initially.
Some compagnies working in metal even manage to have generic horses without anything and the people on-top moulded with shabraque, sheep skin, whatever, and that in 1/72. To mould horses alone, and then shabraques etc. separately and then the rider again separately is asking for trouble. Also the shabraque will have to be in two pieces. Not even top producers of metal like metal modeles is able to do it without me reaching out for filler.
Horses in two pieces in 1/32 is not easy to get right. Maybe three pieces (or more): R&L body, a separate head (that could solve some of the problems having the right set of reins), and perhaps a separate tail. Then it can be interesting, if different heads can be mated to different bodies, and different tails to different horses. A lot of variety without too much investments. Even PSR would be happy if they were in 54 mm. (hey we need some smileys here).
Old Historex did a lot along such lines.
Lemche
It HÄT could produce a box of about four mounted cavalerists -- and that will of course say two sprues -- I wouldn't mind paying what it costs.
Hatblogger,
The AIP system doesn't work successfully, out of the five horses in the box you can only ever get 2 to plug-in correctly the others have gaps under the saddle and to get the piece to fit has to be glued. Their two-part moulds working front to back on the figure give very bad detail and block-ins around equipment and the saddle/shabraque shape are compromised. For toys this if fine but I see your product going a different direction, more accurate detail and human form.
Other problems with seperate saddles is that the bare horse has to be made thinner to accomadate the thickness of the plastic of the saddlery and that you would have to make test pieces of each type of saddle well before production to ensure that all saddle fit all horses. Seperate saddles have not been done successfully by ANY plastic manufacturer in 1/32 scale.
Seperate saddles also mean you would have to make extra molds to produce them which I believe is an un-neccesary outlay.
Riders attached to saddles is a deal breaker for me, I don't buy the AIP ones for that reason, the rider is too compromised for my liking. I wouldn't buy HAT cavalry like this.
For me it would be one piece Horse and saddlery.
My choice for the first Cavalry set is Uhlans.
If you don't mind some technical details then I see the next sets being Cavalry along these lines.
2 X Headless bodies with left arm attached.
With these pieces being placed at the top of the mold with the neck facing to the outside edge to enable rods to produce the holes in the neck more easily. If the holes are pre-drilled then this will not put off the average buyer to swap heads. The right shoulder to have a plug out, like you do in the 1/72 scale.
Sword scabbard with sword handle attached to left leg, but designed to allow for the sword handle to be removed easily should the collector want the figure to be using the sword. Does all this make sense so far?
2 X Right Arms holding lances, can be the same but would prefer two different for maximum use.
Couched position and held upright. No pennants.
4 x Right arms with swords/sabres. All different positions. Resting, extended forward, raised to shoulder and held low at side.
2 X Heads with covered Czapska
2 X Heads with Czapska with Plume and cords.
2 X Heads with Czapska with roundel only.
2 X Carbines, for those units that use them.
The Arms would have a hole at the top to plug into the body and the Heads would have a plug to fit firmly into the neck of the body.The fit here is important for younger modellers
especially as they could assemble the figure without the need for glue and additionally if they get bored, as they do, then they can re-assemble them in a different configuration.
I believe that all these parts would fit into the same size mold as you use for a six figure infantry set with extras.
If you don't want to make a second set for command then replace two of the sword arms with -
1 X Right arm holding Trumpet/bugle.
1 X Right arm for officer with sword and cords attached to the upper arm that lay across the figures chest when arm is attached, this is the main difference with an officers uniform they all seem to wear these cords on the right side.
The reason for two of each type of head is to enable the modeller/collector to make two figures from the same unit from each sprue.
2 X figure Sprue (4 figures) and 4 horses per set.
Sorry this came out a pretty long post, hope nobody got to bored reading it.
I guess this is a whole dollars worth instead of just my 2 cents worth.
Dave M
P.S. If all the arms were wearing guantlet gloves, which seem universal then this would cover any special unit distintions.
The universal tack is not a major problem. This would not cause me to have any doubts about buying the product.
I agree with Dave's comments on the AIP cavalry. One piece rider and saddle is not a good way to go unless it can be done much better than those sets. If the fit is wrong you don't even have the option of putting the rider on a mount from a different source.
The key to a separate saddle/shabraque would be how thin could it be made?
The Cuirassiers are a good choice. I would also have an opponent for them - Austrian or Russian Dragoons.
I agree with the last posts, that is why we discarded the idea of separate shabraques, but this will be a different method.
I agree with Rahway that French Cuirassiers would be a good pick, as well as Marc on the idea of French lights. My only request is that the heavy cav have slightly bigger horses and that HAT please make an officer figure and a trumpet figure. Since the cuirassier trumpet figure wore a radically different uniform from his comrades, a plug hand with a trumpet would not work. As to the same harnesses, I'm ok with the same harness for all cav.
The idea that most wargamers like to model figures is not correct. Most complaints about the plastic Victrix figures is that there are too many parts to put together and that is one reason that the new 28mm Prussian plastics have less parts. There is less variety, but presales of the Prussians appear to support the idea that many gamers like less things to glue on. For HAT, keeping various heads will work, but having cavalry figures with too many individual parts will turn a simple assemble operation into a Historex kit.
Hatblogger,
What will be a different method ?
Dave M
hi
I think hat are on the verge of something big here with 1/32nd Napleonic/Waterloo cavalry. I am thinking of the many members of the public who will buy them and not just us over excited enthusiasts. It is interesting just how many people collect/paint figures. It must be a large number as there are on average about 20,000 listings on ebay UK every day for toy soldiers of all types and scales and most do seem to sell. I would think that the ebay.com worldwide site has an even larger number of listings each week. Then some are also listed under the Model Kits section.
Proper 1/32nd Cuirassiers chargggeeee!!!!!!!
9th
@Dave M, let us try this first before releasing the information because we have no idea whether it will work or not.
@helmet2008, you know one thing that HaT does not like doing is making a set that has already been made by other companies. Are the current set(s) of 1/32 cuirassiers so bad that you all will throw them away and completely replace them with new ones? On the positive side, their shabraques can be re-used with several other types of cavalries.
Hatblogger,
I'll be interested to see what you come up with.
On the subject of what has already been made by others in 1/32 ,I don't think it should matter to you as a business as your take will be better/different.
There are NO current sets of 1/32 scale Napoleonic cavalry on the market -
Timpo - out of production and are unlikely to be re-make as the molds are now in china.
Italeri - out of production at the moment.
ACTA - Not 1/32 scale, so not useable.
AIP - Don't make any yet.
CTS - Don't make Napoloeonics only Mexican which is not correct in detail, but could pass with alterations.
Britains - Don't make them anymore as they have lost the molds.
Don't think I forgot anyone, did I ?
Dave M
Anonymous,
You are generally correct on the figures out there, but Italeri still lists 1/32 Mamlukes in their 2010 catalogue and their dragoons and hussars are currently being carried by many dealers across Europe and the US. On the pricer side, Helmet figures make a variety of Napoleonic cavalry figures and recasts of Britains are being made by DSG in Argentina. So it is possible to find some Napoleonic cavalry out there.
And yes, the current 1/35 cuirassiers by ACTA are too small to use with 54mm figures and they do not have any command figures. If HAT made cuirassiers in 54mm I would replace the figures I currently have.
Adrian
Adrian,
I hadn't seen the 2010 Italeri catalogue, so wasn't sure what is still available. If the Dragoons and Husasars are avaiable in Europe do you think they are older stocks or Italeri only sells them in Europe not the UK.
The Napoleonics made by DSG, I forgot about them, are NOT copies of Britains figures they are original figures by that manufacturer created by converting Britains figures and making new molds. They are not actually Napoleonics representing Argentinian Cavalry for the Bolivar period, they just look Napoleonic. The Britains Napoleonic figures foot and mounted are not available as recasts as the molds are lost and the Argentinian company did not get them.
Helmet figures are more like a poor mans Historex kit and I didn't list them since they are not traditional plastic figures and you really have to be a modeller to assemble them to any good standard as you have to add belts, plumes, and other stuff yourself with 'greenstuff' or similar putty.
Thanks for the info.
Dave M
@ Dave M
I've found several Italeri cavalry boxes available, but if they are not produced again, realy is better not to count them :-)
The Italeri catalogue is on-line in www.italeri.it. Do you have a link for the helmet figures site?
Huno,
Thanks for that ,maybe there is more around than I thought, but are they still all listed as available or it just shelf stock. I'll check the Italeri link.
The helmet figures are here
www.helmetsoldiers.co.uk
It has the full list of what they can supply plus some very useful spare parts, although they are very expensive at 60p a head if you are doing a lot of conversions. I was going to use their British Stove Pipe shako head for conversions but it turns out to be cheaper to buy a box of AIP 95th Rifles and use their heads. They also have a blogsite which is linked from their website which is interesting as it shows conversions using Helmet parts.
Hope this helps.
Dave M
Thank you Dave :-)
Its always important to be aware of more options, even if they are expensive.
I've found several Italeri 1/32 sets, but are stock, not current prodution.
I can convert almost anything and need to do it because there aren't Portuguese soldiers with acceptable quality, according to my standards, being produced in plastic in 1/72 or 1/32.
Hi
yes the current and past issues of cuirassiers were pretty poor for several reasons as detailed above by Dave M.(Same initials as me as I am a DAVE M too!)
HAT 1/32nd Cuirassiers are the prime choice for general buyer interest and also commercial business option as they would be popular in my opinion.
I currently make many of the helmet kits and utilize them for converting standard polythene figures (hat. old airfix etc,,). I am currently work in progress with 10 of each of British 12th Light Drgoons 1812-15, French 2nd Young Guard Chasseurs a Cheval 1812-1814 and also French 1st Cuirrasiers (only x 2 so far but will make more) plus French Carabiniers 1815. I even have Prussian Hussars and Prussian Lancers. I am a modeller and they do take time to construct but are enjoyable and much less expensive than Historex which are nearer 60mm and too large scale for me.
However, I will still buy considerable amounts of hat 1/32nd Napoleonic cavalry if they are on sale, and I would utilize helmet spares to convert them of course.
9th (Dave M - England)
Ok, can I just add that in the UK, Italeri are out of stock. Websites that list them on google will, when opened, show nil stock. I know, because I have been buying the last few, and have ended up buying from Switzerland and currently the States - and wow, is postage getting expensive.
Then, back on topic, cuirassiers are "the" napoleonic cavalry (the Tiger tank of history?) and so may sell to non specialists - not sure what sells at Waterloo itself in gift shops, but I imagine Prussian reserve uhlans in ex-British shakos are probably not at the top of the hit parade ;-)
BUT, HaT used to be brave (I have boxes of your Mamelukes and Zouaves you know!), and so a big part of me really hopes you will step up to the plate and be brave again. The 1/32 market demand will probably buy whatever you make, but if you make something that fits your current ranges, then so much the better.
Which puts me back in for french guard cavalry (always fun to paint, and lancers can be used for other nations, and pointed shabraque is a popular choice, or guard chasseurs), line chasseurs, or Prussians - uhlans or dragoons.
Helmet - never tried those, but at £5 a figure, they are not looking good at (around) £15 for 8 italeri. Maybe for generals or the like.
Other types tend to be just as expensive.
So HaT, I think you are the market here. Good luck
Hi - the helmet kits are great but at £5 they are perceived as expensive but they are good quality and can be very useful to create an accurate figure. I dont use the old Britains horses in their kits and I flog these on ebay to Britains Collectors sometimes getting £3 for the horse. I do use the old Lonestar horses though found in some of the kits but they need new bases. I do utilize other makers horses though for variety. Also, I used to buy the kits years ago - they were first seen by me in the 1972 issue of MILITARY MODELLING - the good old days of painting soldiers. They are the only producer that you can buy mounted British Life Guards 1/32nd at Waterloo (which can also be painted as Royal Horse Guards in blue coatees) and heavy Dragoons - Inniskillings and these can easily be painted as the other regiments of Dragoons/Dragoon Guards - then there is the Brunswick Hussar in his shako with skull and cross bones - if hat make some Napoleonic Hussars then this head/shako can be bought as a spares part off helmet and you could easily convert to a unit of this regiment. Its the easy conversion that appeals. I will have to send in some photos of these conversions to hat when I have made some.
Regards
9th
Think horses "about right" and troopers "spot on" works for me. Liked the dragoon horses in your early set. The ancient cav sets have good horses as well.
Scott
If you cant decide what Nap Cavalry set to make then maybe a set of Australian lighthorsemen :)
Rob C,
Rob C,
If HAT can't decide on what Napoleonic Cavalry to make to go with figure sets they already make, who would buy other period Cavalry that don't fit with anything on the market. No one makes WW1 Turkish troops in 1/32 scale do they?
It's early days yet for a decision to be made on what they will ,hopefully, produce.
Dave M
Dave - I reckon the smiley suggested that was just a bit of fun.
Passions run high in 1/32 land :-)
Marc,
I hear what you are saying but no smiley appeared next to the post.
Is this a smiley :) ?
I've only come across the little round yellow faces before.
Presume your last comments with :-) after it is also a smiley. Right?
What is your opinion of having the cavalrymen with plug-in heads and plug-on arms, would it put you off buying them ? I would be interested to know if anyone apart from me, of course ,would buy cavalry as outlined in a previous post of mine(the really long one above).
Dave M
Dave M all just fun nothing serious.
but all kidding aside i did read somewear that AIP may have some turkish troops planned,
I dont mind the odd plug in arm but less assembly the better :) yes thats a smiley.
Rob C
Rob C,
No problem, now that I know what to look out for I will be more aware of how the comments are made. I'm just getting use to the way a Blog works compared to a Forum.
I believe AIP has master figures already for many periods and troop types, including Australian Light Horse and Turkish Infantry, but they just take soooo! long to make them and complete ranges. With no thought for the customer and their needs, example, they made 3 sets of Crimean War british cavalry when they could have made 3 sets of napoleonic Cavalry to fit the infantry they already made - French, Prussian, Russian. Everyone would have been happy, not me of course :), but the majority of customers.
Dave M
The :-) smiley is used when an actual "picture" is not available - you can use a frown instead :-( (surprise has an "0" - :-0 etc) and so forth. Anyway, glad we are all friends again.
I am happy with plug in arms. the HaT 1/72 Prussian cavalry (and the artillery sets) are much more useful with the arm addition, and in 1/32 that should be even easier. It gives the manufacturer the opportunity to have a bugler actually blowing the instrument "face forwards", plus some variety. Much prefer that to the twin trumpeters I get with Italeri's dragoons.
Plug in will be a compromise of sorts, but variety in figures is always desirable (to me), and I see it as useful as plug in heads
Hatblogger,
Just acquired the Histoire and Collections(H&C) books on the various Napoleonic battles. With the computer graphic nature of the illustrations ,similarities and differences of uniforms and horse furniture are easier to spot.
So with my newly acquired knowledge, some thoughts to add to my Cavalry post on that thread.
4 X Horses in one mold.
With the following;
1 X Shabraque with pointed end
2 X Full Sheepskin with wolfsteeth
3 X Prussian Light Cavalry saddlery
4 X Russian Light Cavalry saddlery
These four types will give horses for opponent forces. Now the innovation here is in line with what you have done in 1/72 scale with your WW1 cavalry, seperate 'portmanteau'.
Looking through the various illustrations similar types are changed by the shape of this item, example - Russian Hussars have #1 saddlery(as above) however they have a mess tin/pot attached to the end of the rolled portmanteau giving them a unique appearance.
By making this item seperate and having it in the mold with the figures then the molding of the horse becomes easier and the shape of the object is not compromised in any way and the unit has the correct item. Additionally the plug to hold this item could be utilsed to hang some campaign 'neccesities' off of, mainly feed bags for the horse and rider.
These horses would support infantry already produced from - France, Prussia, Russia, Bavaria, Wurtemburg.
On the uniform side it would seem that campaign uniforms would give possibilities for a more generic body to be made ,with the head and paint work changing the use. Example - 1812 uniformed French Line Lancers,French Chassuers and Bavarian Chevau-Leger wearing campaign overalls are the same apart from the headgear and armament. Well close enough for us :)
With this proposal a cavalryman would be made of the following components;
1 X Horse with saddlery
1 X Portmanteau
1 X Body with left arm and sword scabbard
attached.
1 X Right arm with weapon
1 X Head with headgear.
Five parts,plug together. I don't think this would be too many parts but maybe some giys would like to comment. With these parts and a compatibility of size between sets then the smaller countries cavalry could , most likely , be able to be made for the completist.
I have more thoughts on the Artilery but I'll leave that for another post, don't want to bore the folks on here too much :)
Dave M
@ Dave M
When you talk about 4 horses in one mould it means that people will get 4 different horses? And if people just want one horse model? And all horses with a specific saddle/shabrasque are to be identical?
And how many parts for the horse? Moulding tick parts is expensive and prone to errors when the part goes out from the mould.
I don't have problems with 3 parts riders and this was proposed several times before, but remember that holes need to face the mould.
@Dave M, magnificent!
@Dave M, shoot an e-mail over to the HaT e-mail address, would you?
Dave,
Are you thinking that the plug type parts would work something like the swap it figures from the 1970s? Or will the parts require glueing and pinning?
For me, I will probably not buy figures that will require more than one or two parts to be glued together. I have done head swaps and arm replacements, but do not want to spend my time cutting, drilling, pinning and glueing. I would rather that HAT release a finished set with a few extra heads (ie carbiniers and cuirassiers) and then if I needed a particular type of figure, I would cut and build what I needed.
Another advantage of having completed figures is that small kids, like my son and daughter, can play with the one part figures (like the extra Italeri buglers) and I do not worry about them swallowing small parts.
Adrian
Nuno,
4 horses in a mold is to make it cheaper for Hat to produce them. When you buy a set of figures you would get 4 of the same horse in the set NOT 4 different ones.
The horses would be the same pose to make it easier for sculpting, just changing the saddlery. The Horse and saddle would be one piece except for the portmanteau which would be a plug-on part.
Yes, the holes in the arms would have to face the mold . I did think of that and don't see any problems with this.
Hope this answers your points.
Adrian,
Yes. I was thinking that the parts should fit like a ,swoppet?, which is why the fit is so important. The parts would fit together without the need for glue, but you could glue them if you wanted.
I do understand what you are saying about too many parts would put you off buying them ,but I think this is the way to go to get the maximum value from the mold and to get as many sets of Cavalry on the market without a huge outlay. Why would you prefer to pin and glue a part that you could have as a plug-in piece?
I do not see the size of the parts as an issue as they would be no smaller than a 1/72 scale figure and certainly bigger than the Italeri Artillery accesories. You will just have to be careful with what you give your kids to play with.
Your comment about extra Italeri buglers is one reason I hadn't picked Cuirassiers as the first set ,as their trumpeters have a different uniform from the regular troopers, the types mentioned in my last post all have trumpeters with reversed colour jackets(french) and different jacket detail(Russian and Prussian) which could be painted on.
Having Trumpeters and Officers in ever set puts collectors off, as has been commented already.
Dave M
Dave M - those H&C books are fun aren't they.
Taking your point, campaign unifomrs definitely make somethings easier (ie cavalry in overalls suit most nations, and a head swap will deal with the remianing key differences (esp hussars, but cheveau leger types across many nations).
I would prefer the figures to be mostly complete, with head swaps and the odd loose arm - maybe 5 parts per man is too many? And you did not show where the legs were - are these to be part of the horse? I do not want HaT to get into the hard plastic kit market (actually, now I type that, I am not sure why not. Hmmm, I will ponder more on that), so I think we will need to be mindful that each extra piece adds to cost, and limits the mould. I like the separate portmanteau idea though, if nothing else than that most officers' horses would not have one, and 1/72 cavlary sets often suffer that particualr defect.
And a request for an email - you must have struck lucky :-O
Marc,
Yes, I am enjoying going through the H&C books. I like the graphic style which makes using them for painting guides easier than most.
A little misunderstanding here, which is why the posts become so long trying to explian the thing fully. By body I am referring to - Torso ,legs and left arm as one piece.
Head seperate - one piece
Right arm with weapon - one piece
So the complete rider would be three pieces.
The Horse and saddlery is one piece and the portmanteau another piece, So that's two pieces for the horse.
Horse AND Rider is 5 pieces in Total.
I hope this clarifies this for you.
Each extra piece does the exact opposite of what you said, it adds to the usefulness of the mold. Initially, yes, the cost would be greater than a solid figure, but the ongoing usefulness is enhanced. Here is an example which may help understand what I mean.
French Light Cavalry -
Body for Chassuer and Lancer are the same.
So you put a Lancer Helmet head and a Chassuer Shako head in the mold and the body can be used for both.
Then you put a Lance arm and a Sword/sabre arm in the mold and you can produce first and second rank lancers, chassuers with sabre and even one with a standard bearer by using the lance arm. A trumpet arm creates the trumpeter for both as generally they wore reverse color tunics. So only the officer to think about.
So from one mold, you can cover most of the Line Lancer and Chassuer regiments. With a couple of extra right arms and heads even more types and poses can be made.
If the figures were one piece then the usefulness of a set would be lessened and the cost to HAT would increase.
Does this make sense to you.
If you are buying Italeri sets then you are already into the hard plastic kit market :)
I would prefer a softer plastic personally and the plug-in/on concept should give a good fit without gluing everything ,although if you are a wargamer I expect you would want things more permanent anyway.
I haven't read of any complaints with multi-part figures and accesories by the 1/72 scale manufacturers, and they are small parts, in 1/32 scale it would be easier. I do know of the complaints about the Victrix 28mm, but I believe this is because they are so small and plug-ins are not used so lining up all the parts does require THREE!!! hands. 54mm guys are bigger so should be easier to handle. Perry Nibiatures mounted figures seem to be well recieved for there usefulness in creating other types due to the extras inthe set.
Just trying to look at this from a manufacturers point of view as well as a collector/wargamer/modeller one. So it will all be a kind of compromise as not everyone will be happy.
Dave M
Wouldn 't it be cool to have some 1/32 french (or other) hussars? I like the hussar uniform very much. Italeri produces some 1/32 hussars but I would like to have much higher detailed multi part figures with different options for poses, heads, swords, muskets etc
Then buy a historex kit, it has all the options you would ever need.
My question was if the head had a pin, not the arms, as this is being done. The problem is the hole for that pin. Apart from that, three part riders, with one arm with peg and swapable head, who need do be glued, is acceptable to me.
Then, I already noticed that the idea is to use one part horses, thus cannot be hollow. This is expensive and prone moulding problems, as shrinkage.
In the end, either we have 4 x 4 horses, to have different poses for each set/type or every rider have an identical horse. This defeat the univeral horse concept and prevent parts swap.
Nuno,
Yes, pin on head to fit into hole in the neck made in the mold.
It is cheaper to do solid horses than hollow, as hollow would need to be done in two halves which would need 2 cavities to be created for one horse. A solid horse only needs one cavity.
I believe that more problems would be created with hollow horses as each half would have to fit perfectly to the other and the saddlery would still be a problem as it would have to be molded on, but if you mean no saddle on the horse then a lot more molds would be needed to produce all the differnt saddlery. So more expensive.
If you have 4 horses in a mold with the same saddlery then they can only be used for a few sets. If you have 4 horses with 4 different types of saddlery then the one mold will be used for many more sets. Making it cheaper to produce the cavalry sets. I agree that it defeats the purpose of a universal horse but personally I don't think that would work as it hasn't been done successfully yet by any manufacturer.
Dave M
I like the idea.Versatile
Dave M - my gripe with H&C is that they very rarely show the back of the troops. I actually bought these in the hope of getting my kidfs interested - no luck yet with Naps (they like WW2 etc).
Good clarification on the body issues, and yes, I think as much universality as possible will be good. My point on the mould and number of parts was just an echo of something HaT themselves have said, so it will be important to get the right balance.
And PSR (and others) sometimes moan about Zvezda - I think the impression is that sometimes Zvezda take things too far. Me, I like them, and have no issue with multipose figures. As I said before, the HaT 1806 Prussian cavalry (and new artillery sets) really work for me, as they provide some poses ready to go, and some to play with.
So I think we are broadly the same wavelength here :-)
Marc,
I agree that the H&C big 'battle' books don't show all the details, finding the right side view of the horse is a problem as well, I am trying work out how the carbine/musket can be attached for those troops that would need one. The smaller paperback range has a lot more detail but ,as yet, don't deal with the other countries only France.
Maybe you should show your kids a couple of episodes of 'Sharpe' to get them interested :)
Yes, I totally agree that it is possible to go overboard with the number of pieces to put in the mold, however many of them will be interchangable between sets, so the variety may be practical to do over several of them.
Of the Zvezda sets ,that I have seen, they seem to have got it right as far as the balance of troop types is concerned, number of each pose.
Their Napoleonic 'Russian Foot Artillery' set is excellent for the design of the Gun which is totally usable to be upscaled to 1/32 and may be the way to go for HaT.
I'll have to have a look at the new Hat artillery sets.
Would anyone have an issue if a cavalryman with head swap ended up with a straight sword instead of a sabre or vice-versa, if the overall 'look'was right ?
Dave M
Dave - I am tempted to replace the 1/32 scale swords with metal (I have had success hammering and filing brass rod before) so shape is not an issue - curved is my preference as straight is an easier replacement :-)
Back to artillery - I have recently bought the Italeri and AiP sets, and they are pretty close to each other size wise, so much so that barrels can be interchanged. But both sets use a cannon carriage, rather than the shorter howitzer body, so if HaT wanted to sell things other people do not make, and the size was good, then that could be a useful starting point. But I am probably being too wishful with that :-)
Some right side views of mounted men in the H&C books:
French Dragoon, Jena-Auerstadt, page 26
French Hussar, Jena-Auerstadt, page 27
French General, Jena-Auerstadt, page 57
French Carabinier Officer, Eylau to Friedland, page 103
French Major General, Wagram, page 59
French Brigadier ADC, Borodino, page 57
Rahway,
Thanks for that I'll check, I have all the five volumes they made.
At the moment I think that carbines/muskets may have to be a glue on item because of the variety of ways they are slung on the horse.
Some are attached to the sling on the man, others are on the side of the horse butt up and other butt down, NCO's don't have them at all. Minefield :) I can work it out it just takes a little extra thought.
Dave M
Post a Comment